Sunday, October 2, 2011

Richard Dawkins - "The Magic Of Reality"

From Richard Dawkins' new book, The Magic Of Reality.  The book is obviously for children, or possibly for those of us with a religious fundamentalist upbringing who need little reminders from time to time to avoid slipping back into religious tribalism. 
Those are the two reasons why I'll probably buy it. 
Parts of this fable that Dawkins shares in his book might sound familiar.  Names, characters, gods, and incidents are the products of the pre-civilized imagination.  Any resemblance to actual events, characters, gods and incidents, living or dead is entirely coincidental.   


Utnapashtim told Gilgamesh of an occasion, many centuries earlier, when the gods were angry with humankind becase we made so much noise they couldn't sleep. 


The chief god, Enlil, suggested that they should send a great flood to destroy everybody, so the gods could get a good night's rest.  But the water god, Ea, decided to warn Utnapashtim.  Ea told Utnapashtim to tear down his house and build a boat. 


It would have to be a very big boat, because Utnapashtim was to take into it 'the seed of all living creatures'. 


Utnapashtim built the boat just in time, before it rained for six days without stopping.  The flood that followed drowned everybody and everything that was not safely inside the boat.  On the seventh day the wind dropped and the waters grew calm and flat. 


Utnapashtim opened a hatch in the tightly sealed boat and released a dove.  The dove flew away, looking for land, but failed to find any and returned.  Then Utnapashtim released a swallow, but the same thing happened. 


Finally Utnapashtim released a raven.  The raven didn't come back, which suggested to Utnapashtim that there was dry land somewhere and the raven had found it. 

Eventually the boat came to rest on a mountaintop poking out of the water.  Another god, Ishtar, created the first rainbow, as a token of the gods' promise to send no more terrible floods. 


So that is how the rainbow came into being, according to the ancient legend of the Sumerians..... In fact, it is obvious that the Jewish story of Noah is nothing more than a retelling of the older legend of Utnapashtim.  It was a folk tale that got passed around, and it travelled down the centuries.  We often find that seemingly ancient legends have come from even older legends, usually with some names or other details changed. 

Go here to read a story about a Dutch Creationist who built a full-size "replica" of the ark from the Noah story.  
Go here to read what percentage of Americans believe that this story is literally true.  (Noah's, but not Utnapashtim's.)


The pics of Utnapashtim came from here and here and here and here and here. 

Saturday, October 1, 2011

If Ron Paul has lost Barry Manilow, he's lost the nation

From The Daily Caller:

Grammy award-winning musician Barry Manilow says he is not endorsing Republican Rep. Ron Paul in the 2012 presidential election, despite telling The Daily Caller he agrees with “just about everything” Paul says. A representative for the musician says Manilow “loves” President Barack Obama.



“Although I agree with some of what Ron Paul says, I am not actually endorsing him in the 2012 presidential race, nor have I ever told anyone that I was,” Manilow told The Washington Post in a statement.

In 2007, Manilow contributed $2,300 to Ron Paul’s 2008 campaign. He confirmed the donation in an interview with TheDC on Capitol Hill on September 15.

“I think he’s solid,” said Manilow. “I agree with just about everything he says, what can I tell you?”

“He loves his president,” a representative for the artist also told The Washington Post. The Post also reported that Manilow plans to vote for Obama in 2012.

Real quick question...  How in the hell can you "agree with just about everything" Ron Paul says, and still vote for Barack Obama?  You can agree with Ron Paul and vote for Gary Johnson, maybe.  You can agree with everything Jimmy Carter said, and vote for Barack Obama.  The earth won't stop rotating.  
But to agree with just about everything Ron Paul says and vote for Obama?  How is this possible? 
I'm floundering around to come up with a "vegetarians for meat" or "Kosher Nazis" - type of analogy.  I'm failing. 
The mind recoils. 

Just trying to be helpful.

If you're a fan of my schtick and haven't friended me on FB yet, why not? 

Thursday, September 29, 2011

Barack Obama is the greatest president ever.

Barack Obama, if judged by current standards, is the greatest U.S. president EVER. 
I've made that proclamation before, but it was premature.  That was nothing more than a wild prediction based on incomplete evidence. 
Obama is the greatest.  There is no competition. 


George W. gave the military industrial complex a beautiful gift in Iraq and Afghanistan.  If your aircraft, helicopter, defense contractor, or bomb-making company gave to George W., he gave back to you.   

Clinton, if judged by those standards, was a total failure.  I challenge anyone to name a major boondoggle that Clinton gave a supporter.  (To qualify as major, it has to be tens of millions, BTW.)

George the 1st had a preliminary Iraq excursion, but it was in-and-out and over too quickly.
 
Reagan spent money like a drunk cowboy, with the stated goal of bankrupting the Soviets.  He did well for his supporters.  He gets an honorable mention, but was no more than a John The Baptist wandering in the wilderness telling the politically connected to get ready for the real thing. 

Carter?  He created the Department Of Energy, which is a sort of venture capital firm that loans out your money to companies willing to paint their machinery green.  Carter truly paved the way, rolling out the red carpet for the Teleprompter Jesus.  Carter is first runner-up. 

But Obama has retired the trophy. 

If politicians are to be judged by the pounds of pork, slop, loot and graft they can hand a supporter, and this seems to be the standard for most voters, then Barack Hussein Obama is the greatest president who ever lived. 

Go here.  Hit that link.  It's beautiful.  (And green.)  Fans of Chicago-style graft, kickbacks and corruption will get down on their knees and thank God they were alive to experience something like this.  Seriously.  Here's THE LINK again.  Hit it. 



The definition of a boondoggle came from here.  The picture of a boondoggle came from here. 

We will never see another one like him, and we should enjoy this while it lasts.  We are like beginning musicians getting to watch Beethoven compose symphonies, or amateur artists watching Van Gogh paint.  Because you are lucky enough to be alive at this moment, you can tell your grandchildren that you got to watch Barack Obama hand out money.

Wednesday, September 28, 2011

From the people who want to control the economy, your health, police the world, and lower sea-levels

Here are the press credentials for the next Teleprompter Jesus campaign trip. 
The states where the Teleprompter will be installed are shown in white. 


Note to the Brits, Aussies and Canadians who visit this site regularly:  Denver, the last city on the list of Teleprompter stops, is in Colorado.  The Obama team highlighted Wyoming instead. 
Hey, a square state is a square state. 

Tuesday, September 27, 2011

Confessions of libertarian revenuer

About three weeks ago, I started corresponding with an IRS agent.  Yes, a living breathing IRS agent. 

After he convinced me that he wasn't going to try to audit my dachshund manure business, we started talking about the problems he saw within his agency.  After a while, I started feeling like a priest in a confessional. 

After I asked him to flesh out his story a bit, I got this gem of an email. 
Enjoy. 
For many years, I have been living a lie.

I have kept my orientation a secret from all but the most trusted of friends. I carry on my duties, day after day, knowing that if my peers knew my deepest feelings, they would hate me. I know that if my employer found out who and what I was, I might get fired. I bear the hidden guilt of someone who took an oath to do things contrary to my own conscience.

No, I am not a gay soldier recently liberated by the end of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. I am a libertarian who works for the federal government.

More specifically, I'm a Senior Revenue Agent for the Internal Revenue Service.

To some, that might sound a lot like a Vegan working for a meat packing plant. Although I accept your visceral revulsion at the apparent hypocrisy, I respectfully disagree. Most libertarians are for minimal government, not no government. Most libertarians are for lower, flatter, more fair, and more consistent taxes, not zero taxes.

I support a flat tax out of the principle of fairness. If that means that some of my coworkers (or me) gets laid off, so be it. I do worry about my ability to find a job, but I am not so unprincipled that I would alter my beliefs because they might impact my wallet. Even with a flat tax, the government and firms will still need accountants.

I will not provide too many details about myself or my duties, because I still want to keep my job. Also, my responsibility to my work demands confidentiality. So I will speak in generalities, and I pray that you will listen to my tale without requesting personal information or enlightening details. I remain in the closet.

I began working for the federal government not out of some sense of civic duty, but because it was a decent job offer at a tough time. I graduated with a Bachelor's degree in Accountancy, and scored a junior position with a Big Six accounting firm. I worked mostly on accounts for medium-sized firms, but eventually graduated to big accounts. Unfortunately, my esteemed private employer had some rather large difficulties with one client you might have heard of, and I found myself looking for other employment.

I don't believe the ethical stain of my previous employer transferred much to me, but finding work in our profession was difficult at that time. I was offered and accepted a job with the IRS. At the time, I considered myself a Republican with some socially liberal beliefs. I wasn't politically active, and I didn't find much joy in seeing the guys in the red jerseys win. Several scandals involving Republicans in my home state turned many people against the GOP, and an inexperienced, little-known Democrat from Chicago joined the Senate that year. I was more interested in women, sports, fast cars, and other things that young men like.

Earlier, in my sophomore year of college, I had taken an economics course in which the professor talked about Austrian economics. It would be more accurate to say he ridiculed them. But his contempt for their species only made me want to learn more about them. I discovered the Von Mises Institute in Auburn, AL, and applied for a scholarship to attend one of their summer sessions. I was accepted, but I had to cancel my trip at the last minute because a water line broke and flooded my apartment. I did, however, receive all the books which sat on my bookshelf, unread, for many years.

While applying for work, I began to read the works of Von Mises, Hayek, Rothbard, Bastiat, and others. I was enthralled with their prose, thinking to myself, "YES!, this is EXACTLY what I believe!"

Still, I didn't harbor any ill will toward my government. I didn't feel oppressed as a citizen or a taxpayer - yet.

I met a wonderful woman in Chicago and, shortly after I took the IRS job, we got married. We had a beautiful daughter together, and I bought a house near the federal building. Little did I know that my American Dream was going to turn into a nightmare of self-discovery and disillusionment.

For the first time in my life, I had to pay high income, sales, and property taxes. Fees for state services were high, and the cost of living was incredible. I was well-paid by the standards of mere mortals, but the vast majority of my income was consumed by my mortgage, taxes, insurance, and retirement savings. Even with a dual-income family earning into the six-digits, we struggled to pay our bills. Despite the large bills for taxes, the services we received were substandard by the measure of any other state I've lived in.

In my early years with the Service, I treated the accounts like nothing more than files to review. When I found tax delinquencies or suspected fraud, I reported them to Collections or Investigations. I didn't recognize that there were HUMAN BEINGS on the other end of my work. I didn't merely do my job with diligence, I thoroughly ENJOYED being a petty bureaucrat and prided myself on being the best there was. Happiness was an empty In-Box. I received awards almost yearly for the zeal of my examination efforts and subsequent collections. I was doing the Lord's work.

Things fell apart. First, the Service began to outsource some of our duties to private firms in order to save money. In order to protect my job, I joined our labor union. The union promised to "fight" to maintain our jobs, our pay, and our benefits. Indeed they did. A few years afterward, the government finally relented and brought Collections back into the government fold. They claimed that our system of Collections was more efficient, and that every dollar spent brought in $7 of revenue.

The following year, I was blind-sided with a spurious allegation of professional impropriety based on an anonymous complaint. After a deeply disturbing investigation that turned up no evidence, I was essentially cleared; but no one survives such an anal exam without scars. I ceased to be regarded as the "Golden Child" in my Division. The awards stopped even though I worked as well and harder than ever.

Once I became persona non grata, going to work was painful. But we had just begun this terrible recession and accountants were having difficulty finding work or retaining their jobs. I know, because the moment I was threatened with being fired, I began a new job search and no one was hiring.

The union was of little help to me. Sure, they sat by my side as the Service probed me, but they didn't do much to help. As we moved into the election season, I began to notice that the union was hell-bent-for-leather to elect Democrats to office. Although they are prohibited by law from contributing directly, they had a PAC that gladly accepted voluntary donations, and we received requests for donations frequently. Almost all of the letters from the union president spoke in bellicose rhetoric of "fighting" for more pay, more benefits, more employment, and she directed anger squarely at Republicans. There wasn't even a facade of impartiality. Their priorities were JOBS, PAY, BENEFITS.......... and every other facet of employment far behind.

I recall a story - perhaps apocryphal - of the head of the US Patent Office who suggested the office be shut down because everything that could be invented had already been invented. History has proven him to be short-sighted, but think about that for a moment! The head of a US government agency recommended that his OWN OFFICE be shuttered - that all of the staff be fired and his claim to glory and power be incinerated.

Do you think that the Secretary of Education would ever say, "Our work here duplicates and interferes with the work of the states, and we should close the Department of Education."?

Do you think that the head of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation would ever conduct a research study into deposit insurance that might conclude it causes moral hazard in the banking system, and therefore the FDIC should be disbanded?

Would a Secretary of the Navy suggest he had too many aircraft carriers, or would the Postmaster General ask that mail service be privatized?

Do you think that the head of ANY government organization would take a sober, independent, logical, and reasoned look at the work they do and conclude that it is a waste of taxpayer money?

Would any public sector union agree that their employee retirement plans were unsustainable and employment or wages were too high?

If you answered "yes" to any of these questions, you must be smoking dope (which I do think should be legal).

Earlier this year I was planning on attending a research conference in Washington, DC, but it was canceled because of budget cuts. In fact, most of our conferences this year were canceled. Most people would think that eliminating conferences to Vegas where $16 muffins and $10 boef bourginon appetizers are served is a good thing. Not so fast.

Conferences are often the ONE TIME per year where colleagues in our organization across the nation get to meet, face to face, to discuss our work. In a single line item, conference expenditures look enormous by layman's standards, but it is a tiny fraction of our operating budget. By far, the most important expense for a federal agency is employee pay and benefits. Even the combined expenditures on daily or weekly trips adds up to more than any 5-star resort conference. I submit that the attention given to conference travel lately is a red herring, designed to distract you from the real problem - excessive government.

I was watching Fox News last week and heard the commentators making fun of an Obama official's signature. I ignored the empty rhetoric and focused on the subject line in the memorandum: Eliminating Excess Conference Spending and Promoting Efficiency in Government.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/memoranda/2011/m11-35.pdf

The letter explains that President Obama asked all his federal agencies to review conference expenditures and other "unnecessary" expenses in order to make government more efficient. It proceeds to list the numerous steps The Chosen One has taken to reduce federal expenditures (notwithstanding an enormous increase in our deficit). The memo reads more like a campaign ad than a presidential directive.

Look, I have been examining corporate accounts for years, and I never saw a single company with negative earnings that could get back into the black by switching to Kyocera printers, reusing coffee filters, selling the corporate jet, switching to single-ply toilet paper, or by making the CEO work for free. A company awash in red ink has problems too large to be solved by small measures. And even after earnings resume, it takes years for a company to dig itself out of the hole it was in to restore customer, supplier, and investor confidence.

This nation is awash with red ink, and cutting nickels and dimes is like holding a bake sale to retire our national debt. Don't get me wrong, I don't condone waste no matter how small, but we need to think BIG if we're going to attend to our problems. If $16 muffins gets people angry enough to march on DC with torches and pitchforks, then show me my place in line. I think this anger will soon subside as attention turns to the next American Idol and the next two World Series teams. When a federal agency cancels a conference, it doesn't send the cash back to the Treasury - the canceled expense goes back into the agency budget where it is SPENT ON SOMETHING ELSE - something far less transparent and far less useful than a conference of professional employees. Trust me, I don't shed any tears over canceled conferences, but doing so accomplishes very little.

I believe that many of my coworkers and I are diligent and capable public servants, but I'd be lying to you if I said we were all necessary. I'd be lying if I told you that there weren't government employees who sit at their desks reading books. I'd be lying if I said there weren't too many layers of middle management where "good ol' boys (and girls)" were promoted just to keep them happy and in the government service. I've even seen the revolving door between the regulators and the regulated.

I remember a defining moment when I began to realize that I was referring PEOPLE to Collections. It's true that many of these people were tax cheats or incompetent at managing their finances. But I forgot about all the cases where we collected taxes ahead of all the employees, suppliers, customers, and creditors to whom the business owed money. Uncle Sam always jumped the queue. I forgot that many of these businesses fell on hard times, and their business' survival very well could have hinged on the amount of taxes they paid; but for onerous taxes, they might have made it.

Many of my colleagues never left bureaucrat mode. To the ingratiators, their primary stakeholder is their boss, not the taxpayers. Some are "Retired on Active Duty," coasting to an easy pension. Others don't bother to approach even a minimal standard of duty performance, and managers are too spineless to counsel them much less fire them. If they receive a middling evaluation, they'll still complain they are being poorly treated. It's tough to get HR to do their jobs in processing personnel actions swiftly and correctly. When you do outperform your peers, there is a lingering air of contempt for having raised the bar. Supervisors are notoriously risk-averse, adding their veto to anything that is even remotely innovative (and hence disparaging or disturbing of the status quo). Nevertheless, the official propaganda is focused on high performance and institutional change - you're just not supposed to believe it.

I've spent my own time (not taxpayer time) reading those Austrian books, and I'm impressed now more than ever. I clearly see the government stacking the deck for favored constituents. Now, I clearly see the strings holding all the puppets, making them dance for other people's amusement. I've seen various government programs which tried and failed to drag us out of recession.

But more importantly, as the housing and financial crisis inflated, I saw the government "profits" rolling in. At the IRS, we work closely with states since they usually base their taxes on federal taxable income. We monitor and research revenues from all sources. From the late 1990's through the mid-2000's, government revenues were pouring in everywhere. Tax authorities were ebullient - flush with revenues from artificially-created wealth. We knew the good times wouldn't last, but we didn't care. Taxes were our business, and business was GOOD!

After the crash, we continued to cruise on the momentum we had built. Friends of mine who worked for other federal agencies were working overtime (for additional pay, of course). When a recession strikes, the demand for government services skyrockets. Federal and state employees were never so loved and hated, feared and respected as when millions of people NEEDED our assistance and cooperation to take their turn sucking at the teat of government. Through two presidents and an accommodating Congress, life was still good for the federal employee.

But a funny thing happened on the way to the Colosseum to see the gladiator fights and the lion feeding. When the recovery didn't go as smoothly as planned, the taxpayers of this great nation began a quiet revolt. It was the sound and sight of millions of locusts, still in the distance, but heading straight for the harvest. Government entered panic mode. Managers in various divisions and agencies went into overdrive to justify with data the reasons for their continued existence. From bogus investigations and committees, to frenetic leadership, to pointless cheer leading, to political rent seeking. Values gave way to toeing the party line. It seemed that the only job of a government employee was to retain their job.

As the TEA Party gained momentum and Republicans stole Nancy Pelosi's gavel, the Earth shook in Washington, DC, and I'm not referring to the recent tremor. When Obama finally conceded that greater expenditures were no longer politically feasible, he embraced faux austerity. It was now no longer a matter of whether he would make cuts, but how much. And he was too beholden to labor unions to concede too much; this had to be a controlled release of pressure.

I remain in the eye of the storm. The changes to the payroll tax have kept us busy. I quit the labor union, refusing to donate one more dime to an organization that puts themselves above all other interests. It's their sense of ENTITLEMENT that is most repugnant. They can't fathom the idea that we could ever serve the American people with fewer employees and at a lower labor cost. In my position, I'm relatively underpaid as Accountants go, but I have a non-pecuniary benefit of relatively secure employment. I"m not complaining about low pay. There are many people at the IRS, though, who serve no useful purpose.

I empathize with anyone who has or will lose his job, and I hope I don't have to face that - but I already have once lost a job, and I may yet again have to stretch my neck for the executioner's axe. I have faith that my investment in human capital will see me through.

If I were the Head Guy in Charge, here's what I would do:

- Eliminate either the corporate income tax or the tax on dividends and capital gains
- Implement a flat tax with an exemption of one-half the national median income, adjusted annually
- Start from the top of Whited Sepulcher's list of government agencies and see which ones we could do without
- Have my Vice President start at the bottom and work up, meeting me in the center.
- Privatize social security, making each person responsible for their own retirement savings and ending redistribution
- Eliminate public sector unions for every purpose other than ensuring fair processes and procedures for employees.
- Privatize most government services wherever feasible
- No taxes on blood, sweat, or tears

I would end all forms of corporate welfare. I'd end the federal minimum wage. I'd require states to have a balance budget on a multi-year cycle with stress tests on their budgets.

I would move our national capital to Salina, Kansas, making the surrounding area as inhospitable to lobbyists as possible. Congress would become a part-time job. Remaining government agencies would be located in areas where land is cheap and high-quality labor is available. Washington DC would be renamed "Monument City," representing the monumental waste of resources and its role as a monument to monolithic government power and authority.

Barry Obama would be forced to take Amtrak back to Chicago, although I'd rather run him out on a rail in its original sense.

I'd make our military leaner and meaner, setting a more modest agenda for our role in international diplomacy and defense, but wielding a terrible swift sword against any enemy who dares to threaten us or our allies.

I'm not sure which Republican I support for the nomination yet. It's doubtful Ron Paul could win, and if he did he'd likely get chewed up by both parties.

Ladies and gentlemen, our government is rotten to the core. From the Civil War to the Great Depression and WWII and through the Civil Rights era and the Post-911 world, our government has taken on enormous power and eroded our liberty. It will take decades (not four or eight years) and extraordinary leadership by many people to unwind it. The entire culture of government must be changed.

I'd recommend a Constitutional Convention to rewrite our beloved laws in a way that even retarded lawyers could understand it, but to me they already possess crystal clarity for anyone willing to study the history of our great Republic. Could the Ninth and Tenth Amendments be made any more clear?

I don't claim to have all the answers, but I know in which direction I want to go. Thank you for your patient and kind attention. I'm spent. Rant concluded.

A libertarian revenuer.

Sunday, September 25, 2011

Top Ten reasons why the rich should be allowed to keep even more of their money

Here are the Top Ten Reasons why the rich should be allowed to keep even more of their money than they're currently keeping:

1) Because if The Federal Government takes their money, The Federal Government will probably do harmful things with it.

There are no other reasons. 

Saturday, September 24, 2011

If you really want to be ruled....

From an excellent comment on Libertarian Reddit, in response to "who will protect us from evil corporations if we don't have a massive government?"

Here are a few "corporate overlords"


•Bill Gates (Microsoft)

•Jeff Bezos (Amazon)

•Richard Branson (Virgin)

•Alan Mulally (Ford)

•Steve Jobs (Apple)

How do you see this group compared to politicians of the same era (selected at random)?

•Bill Clinton

•George (W. or H.W.) Bush

•Dick Cheney

•Donald Rumsfeld

•Janet Reno

•Chuck Schumer

•Dick Armey

One group are productive, imaginative, innovative people who made billions serving others by producing products people actually wanted. The other group is dominated by paternalistic, officious narcissists who are remembered most for what they did through the arbitrary deployment of force, whether anyone wanted it or not.

You bet your bottom dollar I'd rather be "ruled by corporate overlords"!  They rule -- or more accurately, they are ruled -- by the daily democracy of the marketplace. Politicians rule by the barrel of a gun.

Well said, sir. 

"Nobody Messes With Joe" - But Dead people don't count

WASHINGTON (AP) - The federal government has doled out more than $600 million in benefit payments to dead people over the past five years, a watchdog report says.
Such payments are meant for retired or disabled federal workers, but sometimes the checks keep going out even after the former employees pass away and the deaths are not reported, according to the report this week from the Office of Personnel Management's inspector general, Patrick McFarland.

In one case, the son of a beneficiary continued receiving payments for 37 years after his father's death in 1971. The payments—totaling more than $515,000—were only discovered when the son died in 2008.

Last year, government investigators found that more than 89,000 stimulus payments of $250 each from the massive economic recovery package went to people who were either dead or in prison.

This video is only 37 seconds long. Worth watching.

Friday, September 23, 2011

Elizabeth ! Warren !! is back !!!!!!!!!!

Back in 2010, a writer named Brent Budowsky almost put himself in the hospital from just thinking about the nomination of Elizabeth ! Warren !! to a Consumer Protection boondoggle of some sort. 

Most of the rational world had a great time with his piece, an editorial in which Budowsky imagined peace in Israel, justice in this life, the lion laying down with the lamb, the Democrats rallying behind Obama, and other unlikely scenarios - all from the nomination of Elizabeth ! Warren !! to a bureaucracy. 

Elizabeth ! Warren !! is back, and she's running for the Senate.  Here's something she had to say a few days ago at a political rally:
There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody. You built a factory out there — good for you!


But I want to be clear. You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that maurauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did. Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea — God bless. Keep a big hunk of it.

But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.
Ok, let's look a little closer.....
Tax units in the lowest quintile (20%) pay 0.4 percent (of the total tax burden), while those in the second, third (or middle), and fourth quintiles pay 2.3 percent, 7.7 percent, and 17.6 percent respectively.


The top quintile pays 71.9 percent. The top 10 percent pays 55.9 percent while the top 0.1 percent pays 12.3 percent.
What it boils down to is that some very rich people have a lot of money, and Elizabeth ! Warren !! wants more of it.
Here's the pic that's currently making the rounds on Facebook, which I think sums up the situation nicely:


But wait !!!    It keeps getting better.  I found this parody here
Enjoy. 


Thursday, September 22, 2011

Giving credit where credit is due: Barack Obama deserves credit for allowing gays and lesbians to openly serve in our military

Even a blind hog can find an acorn now and then. 
Barack Obama deserves almost all of the credit for allowing gays and lesbians to openly serve in our military. 
Good for him. 
Here's a map of all the countries that realize that sexual orientation is as relevant to military service as, say, hair color, right-or-left handedness, ethnicity, or preferance for NFC vs. AFC teams in Super Bowls.  In 30 years, it won't make any difference at all. 



Think of the countries where you'd be willing to live. 
I bet they're all red. 
It took us a while, but we got there. 
Now all we have to do is bring 'em all back home. 



Cartoon came from here.   

Bill Clinton thinks Climate Change Deniers make us look like a joke

From Politico:
Bill Clinton turned up the heat on the leading Republican presidential contenders Tuesday, saying their opposition to acknowledging climate change makes the country “look like a joke.”

“If you’re an American, the best thing you can do is to make it politically unacceptable for people to engage in denial” about climate change, the former president said on the first day of the Clinton Global Initiative’s seventh annual meeting in New York City.

“I mean, it makes us — we look like a joke, right?"

Here's the pic of Clinton addressing the Climage Change conference, which I assume he flew to on a green plane powered by green hamsters on recyled treadmills.  I remember the last time he wagged his finger like that, don't you?


Speaking of jokes, here's a U.N. map from about 10 years ago, showing all the places that were supposed to be underwater by now if we didn't give Clinton, Gore, the U.N. and Climate Scientists lots and lots of money.  And set up a carbon credit exchanges through one of Gore's companies.  And stayed home a lot more, unlike Clinton and Gore. 


This is a beautiful map.  I love it more than life itself.  Go here for the original post. 
Speaking of other jokes, here's Clinton's Vice-President, Al Gore, The Goracle Of Music City Tennessee, claiming that THE POLAR ICE CAPS WILL BE GONE BY 2013 if we don't give him and his venture capital firm, Kleiner Perkins, a whole lot of money.  Enjoy.  It's a real knee-slapper, but not as funny as the map.  This is from back in 2008.  Hit the link. 

Finally, here's a post about some crazed Brit named David Parker, at the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research in Berkshire claiming that snow is going to be a thing of the past in England.  Hit the link.  He made this statement in 2000.  The pics of the snowstorms are from 2010, and are hilarious.  Funny, funny, stuff.  Some might even call them a joke.   

Wednesday, September 21, 2011

I want to sell muffins

I want to get out of shipping, warehousing and logistics. 
I want to get into muffins. 
Yes, muffins


Muffins create jobs.  They stimulate the economy.  I can dye them green in order to help fight Global Warming.  Whatever it takes, I want to sell muffins to those clowns. 
Yes, muffins. 

Tuesday, September 20, 2011

Quote Of The Day, from Daniel Hannan

Via Samizdata, here's British M.P., Daniel Hannan:

The Tea Party, perhaps more than any other contemporary movement, brings out the 'Yeah, but what they're really saying…' tendency. The 'tea' stands for 'Taxed Enough Already' but, if you relied on the BBC and the Guardian for your information, you might not know it. Many Lefties pretend – or perhaps have genuinely convinced themselves – that the Tea Party is clandestinely protesting against immigration or abortion or the fact of having a mixed race president; anything, in fact, other than what it actually says it's against, viz big government. The existence of a popular and spontaneous anti-tax movement has unsettled the Establishment. They'd much rather deal with a stupid and authoritarian Right than with a libertarian one. Hence the almost desperate insistence that the Tea Partiers have some secret agenda.

I get especially p.o.'d about the race angle, especially when people like Alan West or Herman Cain or Bobby Jindal or Nikki Haley were elected or are supported by a massive number of Tea Partiers. 

It's really hard for The Left to change their script.

On a totally unrelated note, here's one of my favorite Daniel Hannan rants. It really gets crankin' at the 1:50 mark.

Pure, undiluted, nasty Brit greatness.
 






Monday, September 19, 2011

On the care and feeding of recessions

Congratulations on your new recession ! 
Here's how to care for and feed your new economic downturn.  Just think....  By applying the right policies, you may be one of the lucky few to turn your baby downturn into a full-blown depression. 
Maybe, just maybe, you can follow in the footsteps of FDR and grow A Great Depression !   But for now, let's start small. 

1) The best way to grow a recession is to try to kill it.  Get Congress, the President, the Unions and the courts involved in killing the recession.  These are the people who couldn't run a profitable whorehouse, so your recession is bound to thrive and prosper. 

2) Take money from one group and give it to another group.  Claim that it is for our own good, and that this will help kill the baby recession.  If this doesn't scare away economic growth, nothing will.  Then sit back and watch your baby recession grow to maturity. 

3) Apply various Keynesian stimulus measures, and apply them deeply and throroughly.  Stimulus, stimulus, stimulus.  Prevent consumers from spending their own money as they see fit.  YOU are the one who is trying to save a recession.  Those selfish Tea Party Bastards are trying to reward vendors and suppliers who fill consumers' needs.  The State wants to reward donors and unions.  Which group do you want spending the money ?  Doh!!  You have an infant recession to take care of. 

4) Take a bunch of people who have never had to hire anybody, fire anybody, or produce a profit, and give them the responsibility for "creating jobs".

5) Let governors get away with bragging about how many jobs that they created.  This confuses the electorate, and continues the illusion that a larger, more active government helps an economy.  In reality, this just helps your baby recession grow.  

6) Like many other living things, recessions grow best in mounds of bullshit.  Apply it liberally.   

This chart showing ideal recession growth came from Reason magazine.  Anyone wanting to grow a recession should avoid this magazine at all costs. 

Sunday, September 18, 2011

Maureen Dowd on Rick Perry's and Barack Obama's college transcripts

Here's an excerpt from Maureen Dowd's latest editorial in the New York Holy Times:
Traveling to Lynchburg, Va., to speak to students at Liberty University...., (Rick) Perry made light of his bad grades at Texas A&M.


Studying to be a veterinarian, he stumbled on chemistry and made a D one semester and an F in another. “Four semesters of organic chemistry made a pilot out of me,” said Perry, who went on to join the Air Force.

“His other D’s,” Richard Oppel wrote in The Times, “included courses in the principles of economics, Shakespeare, ‘Feeds & Feeding,’ veterinary anatomy and what appears to be a course called ‘Meats.’ ”

He even got a C in gym.

Perry conceded that he “struggled” with college, and told the 13,000 young people in Lynchburg that in high school, he had graduated “in the top 10 of my graduating class — of 13.”

It’s enough to make you long for W.’s Gentleman’s C’s. At least he was a mediocre student at Yale.
Yeah, bad grades are a problem.  Going to Jerry Falwell University to address the Baptists in Lynchburg is a bigger problem, but not for most Republicans. 
So how do Perry's college grades stack up against those of our current Commander-In-Chief?  Let's got to the Occidental College website.....
The 1974 federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (34 CFR Part 99) protects the privacy of student education records. We, therefore, cannot disclose students’ classes, grade point averages, majors or other such information. President Obama's transcripts and other student records have not been released by Occidental.

Nor will they ever be.  They're too damn embarrassing.  Based on my own research, I've been able to determine that teleprompters were not allowed in the classroom in the early 1980's.  Therefore, Obama's college grades sucked. 


I suspect that Barack Obama failed Economics, he failed American Government, he got a "D" in Political Science, a "D" in Speech, and a "Fails" in a couple of simple "Pass/Fail" basic math courses.  Those are just suspicions on my part, though, based on the current evidence. 

Enough about Rick Perry vs. Obama.  We don't have Obama's transcripts to hold up to one of Dowd's pitiless investigations. 

Here's another section from Dowd's editorial, which is primarily about how Republicans disregard college transcripts in choosing who to put at the top of the ticket:
The Republicans are now the “How great is it to be stupid?” party. In perpetrating the idea that there’s no intellectual requirement for the office of the presidency, the right wing of the party offers a Farrelly Brothers “Dumb and Dumber” primary in which evolution is avant-garde.

Well, yeah, the Republicans might have difficulty finding their way out of a sack.  That's why they aren't Libertarians yet.  But who are the scholastic giants that the Democrats put on the ticket prior to the Scholar From Chicago/Kenya/Indonesia?

Here's an evaluation of the college transcript of St. Albert, The Goracle Of Music City Tennessee:
Gore arrived at Harvard with an impressive 1355 SAT score, 625 verbal and 730 math, compared with Bush's 1206 total from 566 verbal and 640 math. In his sophomore year at Harvard, Gore's grades were lower than any semester recorded on Bush's transcript from Yale. That was the year Gore's classmates remember him spending a notable amount of time in the Dunster House basement lounge shooting pool, watching television, eating hamburgers and occasionally smoking marijuana. His grades temporarily reflected his mildly experimental mood, and alarmed his parents. He received one D, one C-minus, two C's, two C-pluses and one B-minus, an effort that placed him in the lower fifth of the class for the second year in a row.


For all of Gore's later fascination with science and technology, he often struggled academically in those subjects. The political champion of the natural world received that sophomore D in Natural Sciences 6 (Man's Place in Nature) and then got a C-plus in Natural Sciences 118 his senior year. The self-proclaimed inventor of the Internet avoided all courses in mathematics and logic throughout college, despite his outstanding score on the math portion of the SAT. As was the case with many of his classmates, his high school math grades had dropped from A's to C's as he advanced from trigonometry to calculus in his senior year.
Here's how The Goracle performed while going through the seminary associated with Vanderbilt:
(Gore) took the religious studies courses while also working full time as a journalist at the Nashville Tennessean, and after getting off to a strong start with an A-minus in Ethics, he failed to complete any of the three courses he took in the fall of 1971, and those incompletes eventually lapsed into F's. He returned for another semester in the spring of 1972, when two more incompletes turned into F's.

In the meantime, George W. Bush, our first president to earn an MBA, was knocking out a 2.75 GPA in a Harvard MBA program while, by all accounts, he was partying his ass off. 

I repeat.... While The Goracle was flunking 5 out of 8 courses at a freakin' seminary, Bush was doing ok in a Harvard MBA program. 

W. was not a good president.  Until The Teleprompter Jesus came along, George W. Bush did more to increase the national debt than any other president.  But I can assure you that George W. is not the anti-intellectual dolt that the Maureen Dowds of this world have portrayed him to be.  While I was running bookstores in Dallas, GWB was a regular visitor, purchasing Current Events, Politics, Sports, and lots and lots of history.  I don't know if he read 'em, but he sure bought 'em and knew how to talk about them.  Ask anyone who worked at the Dallas Preston/Forest Bookstop back in the day. 

Well what about John Kerry?  Surely he outperformed Bush?  Naw.  He didn't.  Here's CBS News:
Senator John F. Kerry's grade average at Yale University was virtually identical to President Bush's record there, despite repeated portrayals of Kerry as the more intellectual candidate during the 2004 presidential campaign.
No, their grades weren't "virtually identical".  Bush's grades were 1 point higher. 


Kerry had a cumulative average of 76 and got four Ds his freshman year - in geology, two history courses and political science, The Boston Globe reported Tuesday.

His grades improved with time, and he averaged an 81 his senior year and earned an 89 - his highest grade - in political science as a senior.
"I always told my dad that D stood for distinction," Kerry said in a written response to reporters' questions. He said he has previously acknowledged focusing more on learning to fly than studying.

Under Yale's grading system in effect at the time, grades between 90 and 100 equaled an A, 80-89 a B, 70-79 a C, 60 to 69 a D, and anything below that was a failing grade.

In 1999, The New Yorker magazine published a transcript showing Bush had a cumulative grade average of 77 his first three years at Yale, and a similar average under a non-numerical rating system his senior year.

Bush's highest grade at Yale was an 88 in anthropology, history and philosophy. He received one D in his four years, a 69 in astronomy, and improved his grades after his freshman year, the transcript showed.

Kerry, a Democrat, previously declined to release the transcript, which was included in his Navy records. He gave the Navy permission to release the documents last month, the Globe reported.
So the best Dowd would be able to say about Kerry is that he wasn't quite as sharp in the classroom as Bush. 

How about Republican John McCain, another Republican dunce?  He barely passed

How about current Vice President Joe Biden?  How did he do in school
Biden graduated College in 1965, with a Bachelor of Arts and a double major in Political Science and History.  He was 506th in a class of 688.

At Syracuse University of Law, 1968, Biden graduated 76th in a class of 85
Wow. 

I couldn't find anything on Ron Paul's GPA or his college transcript.  But if grades really are that important, let's point out the obvious....  Ron Paul did well enough to get into medical school.  But then, he's not really a Republican.  He's a Libertarian.  And a genius


I'm with Maureen Dowd on this one.  Grades matter !!!

Saturday, September 17, 2011

Their faith is in the legislator, not in mankind; ours is in mankind, not in the legislator.

Stephen Smith, of the Beginner's Guide To Freedom blog, left the following Frederic Bastiat quote underneath my previous post. 
Here's the whole thing:

"But, by a deduction as false as it is unjust, do you know what economists are accused of? It is, that when we disapprove of Government support, we are supposed to disapprove of the thing itself whose support is discussed; and to be the enemies of every kind of activity, because we desire to see those activities, on the one hand free, and on the other seeking their own reward in themselves.

It really is possible to love things like art, medicine, compassion, education, and jobs and still be opposed to government support of art, medicine, compassion, education, and jobs. 

Thus, if we think that the State should not interfere by taxation in religious affairs, we are atheists. If we think the State ought not to interfere by taxation in education, we are hostile to knowledge. If we say that the State ought not by taxation to give a fictitious value to land, or to any particular branch of industry, we are enemies to property and labour. If we think that the State ought not to support artists, we are barbarians who look upon the arts as useless.

And if we think that government shouldn't be trying to create jobs, we are nihilists.  Or nihlists, depending on which spelling Google likes the most. 


Against such conclusions as these I protest with all my strength. Far from entertaining the absurd idea of doing away with religion, education, property, labour, and the arts, when we say that the State ought to protect the free development of all these kinds of human activity, without helping some of them at the expense of others, - we think, on the contrary, that all these living powers of society would develop themselves more harmoniously under the influence of liberty; and that, under such an influence no one of them would, as is now the case, be a source of trouble, of abuses, of tyranny, and disorder.

Yeah, if you blow $538,000,000.00 of Other Peoples' Money on a company that is supposed to turn sunbeams and fairy farts into electricity, that's $538,000,000.00 that those people can't use for other, more productive purposes.  The same goes for all other subsidies, set-asides, prevailing wage regulations, earmarks, stimuli, and the like.  Some authorities are even thinking that this behavior might prolong recessions. 

Our adversaries consider, that an activity which is neither aided by supplies, nor regulated by Government, is an activity destroyed. We think just the contrary. Their faith is in the legislator, not in mankind; ours is in mankind, not in the legislator."

It's been 150 years, but I don't think anyone can improve on those 3 sentences.  No interpretation necessary. 
Here's a picture of Frederic Bastiat the economist along with Fred Bastiat the dachshund.  You're welcome. 



Friday, September 16, 2011

What Ron Paul said vs. What people think Ron Paul said

Here's something from the recent debate:

Wolf Blitzer: You’re a physician, Ron Paul, so you’re a doctor. You know something about this subject. Let me ask you this hypothetical question.


A healthy 30-year-old young man has a good job, makes a good living, but decides: “You know what? I’m not going to spend $200 or $300 a month for health insurance because I’m healthy, I don’t need it.” But something terrible happens, all of a sudden he needs it. Who’s going to pay if he goes into a coma, for example? Who pays for that?

Ron Paul: Well, in a society that you accept welfarism and socialism, he expects the government to take care of him. … But what he should do is whatever he wants to do, and assume responsibility for himself. My advice to him would have a major medical policy, but not be forced …. That’s what freedom is all about, taking your own risks.


I practiced medicine before we had Medicaid, in the early 1960s, when I got out of medical school. I practiced at Santa Rosa Hospital in San Antonio, and the churches took care of them. We never turned anybody away from the hospitals.
… And we’ve given up on this whole concept that we might take care of ourselves and assume responsibility for ourselves. Our neighbors, our friends, our churches would do it.


This whole idea, that’s the reason the cost is so high. 

The cost is so high because they dump it on the government. It becomes a bureaucracy; it becomes special interests. It kowtows to the insurance companies and the drug companies, and then on top of that, you have the inflation. The inflation devalues the dollar; we have lack of competition. There’s no competition in medicine. Everybody is protected by licensing. And we should actually legalize alternative health care, allow people to practice what they want.


Here's what the Lamestream Media is reporting that Ron Paul said:

Ron Paul: "Let 'em all die !!!   Die, die, die !!!"
*********

I think there's a difference. 

Thursday, September 15, 2011

Clint Eastwood is obviously secure about his sexuality

From The Raw Story:

Don't expect to see him marching in a Pride parade anytime soon, but gays may have found an unexpected ally in Oscar-winning director Clint Eastwood.

Why is this "unexpected"?  Eastwood is a libertarian.  Small L, but a libertarian. 

In the October issue of GQ magazine, Eastwood said that Republicans were making a big mistake by opposing same sex marriage.

What Eastwood doesn't point out is that Barack Obama's position on gay/lesbian marriage is identical to that of most Republicans.  Obama is just as opposed to gay marriage as, say, John Boehner, Newt, or Rick Santorum.  Obama will usually yap about how his position is "evolving".  Primates evolved opposable thumbs at a faster rate.   

"These people who are making a big deal out of gay marriage?" Eastwood opined. "I don't give a f*** about who wants to get married to anybody else! Why not?! We're making a big deal out of things we shouldn't be making a deal out of."

"They go on and on with all this bullshit about 'sanctity' -- don't give me that sanctity crap! Just give everybody the chance to have the life they want."

Although he is a registered Republican, Eastwood doesn't consider himself a conservative. He has supported California's former Democratic Gov. Gray Davis and Democratic Rep. Sam Farr.

"I was an Eisenhower Republican when I started out at 21, because he promised to get us out of the Korean War," he told GQ. "And over the years, I realized there was a Republican philosophy that I liked. And then they lost it. And libertarians had more of it. Because what I really believe is, let's spend a little more time leaving everybody alone."

I'm always amazed at how many of the chuckleheads who blather on and on about the "sanctity" of marriage and "The Defense Of Marriage Act" are unwilling to defend marriage by making divorce illegal. 
So please....mind your own business.  Go away.  Dirty Harry is on our side. 

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Do you feel lucky?

About a week ago, I was minding my own business in my favorite bar. A guy came in who looked to be a few years older than me, but with a lot more mileage. He had a Neon Tan, complete with the Bourbon spiderweb/vein marks on his nose. We made some small talk, and then he started harassing one of the ladies at the bar. He eventually asked her if she was a lesbian, which didn’t go over well. She got very angry and gave him a five minute harangue that I’d pay good money to have on tape. It was a brilliant beat-down.

The guy retreated and started talking to me again, and asked if I wanted to shoot some pool. I said “Sure”, mostly because that lady was going to go Postal on him if I didn't get him away from the bar.

I walked over to the pool table and the guy said “How about we play for a pitcher of beer. Loser buys.”

I’m not a great pool player. I can hold my own, but not against a legit shark. However, I knew that I wanted to beat this clown, and I wanted it bad. So I agreed to the bet.



The guy (who I’ll call Morton from now on) watched me rack the balls, and he was getting ready to break. Morton looked over at me and said “You know I’m broke, right? I don’t have any more money on me. Just thought you should know.”

A seasoned pool player or gambler would’ve sat down at that moment, or asked someone else to play. But I wanted to beat Morton so, so, so badly. In public. In front of the lady that he had called a lesbian. I wanted his broke, deceptive, beer-hustling ass to retreat from my tavern owing me a pitcher of Shiner.

I told Morton that if I won we could work something out on his next trip to the bar.

Then we started playing. I spent more time lining up some of those shots than I did filling out my home mortgage paperwork. I made some two-cushion bank shots that I’ve never even attempted before. And I also got lucky. Morton flubbed a few easy shots. Throughout the entire game, I heard Morton’s voice in my head saying “You know I’m broke, right? I don’t have any more money on me. Just thought you should know.”

It came down to the 8-ball. I made it with nothing else left on the table. (Graduates of North Sunflower Academy or Ole Miss won’t be surprised that I heard the marching band fight-song version of “Dixie” playing in my head when I sank the 8-ball. I’ve never made a touchdown in my life, but a marching band plays “Dixie” in my head whenever I win anything, including Tic-Tac-Toe, coin flips, and pool games.) I shook hands with Morton and we both went back to the bar, where I explained to the bartender that Morton didn’t have any money for the pitcher she was about to pour at somebody’s expense.

The bartender was almost as pissed as the lady who wasn't a lesbian. 

The more I talked with Morton about meeting him at the bar some other time for my pitcher of Shiner, the more uncomfortable he became. He left before the lady who wasn't a lesbian got involved in the discussion.

“You know I’m broke, right? I don’t have any more money on me. Just thought you should know.”

I don’t care what Morton does or did with his paycheck. I'd feel sorry for the guy if he hadn’t tried to hustle me. He’s probably an alcoholic. I’ve never come close to having a drinking problem, and I can’t imagine what it would be like to have a thirst strong enough to try a stunt like Morton tried that afternoon. I didn’t think much more about the incident.

Three nights later, Thursday night, Barack Obama gave his Jobs Speech. I didn’t write much about it, mostly because I suspected it would be a re-hash of Porkulus One. And it was.

But certain phrases started reminding me of something, and I couldn’t quite put my finger on it until today….. And then it hit me.

Barack Obama and the George Bushes and Reagan have spent us into a hole that we’ll probably never get out of. (Clinton was fairly restrained by comparison.)

Obama has already added 4 trillion dollars to the national debt. Obama threw $800 billion in Porkulus at the unions and government employees. He destroyed about 600,000 automobiles to “stimulate” Detroit. Businesses and Doctors are acting like ObamaCare will make Death look like a reasonable alternative. Obama fired up another war in Libya. And now our economy is behaving like we owe $15 trillion dollars to somebody, which we do. Very few people want to take the risk of bringing on more employees. The piper must be paid.

They have blown it all.  Every cent of it. 

So here are some excerpts from the Obama Jobs Speech, the way that I now hear them.

*********

Pass this jobs bill, and we can put people to work rebuilding America. Everyone here knows we have badly decaying roads and bridges all over the country. Our highways are clogged with traffic. Our skies are the most congested in the world. It’s an outrage. “And you know I’m broke, right? I don’t have any more money on me. Just thought you should know.”

*********

There are private construction companies all across America just waiting to get to work. There’s a bridge that needs repair between Ohio and Kentucky that’s on one of the busiest trucking routes in North America. A public transit project in Houston that will help clear up one of the worst areas of traffic in the country. And there are schools throughout this country that desperately need renovating. How can we expect our kids to do their best in places that are literally falling apart? This is America, and by the way “you know I’m broke, right? I don’t have any more money on me. Just thought you should know.”

*********

Ask yourselves -- where would we be right now if the people who sat here before us decided not to build our highways, not to build our bridges, our dams, our airports? What would this country be like if we had chosen not to spend money on public high schools, or research universities, or community colleges? Millions of returning heroes, including my grandfather, had the opportunity to go to school because of the G.I. Bill. Where would we be if they hadn’t had that chance? “And you know I’m broke, right? I don’t have any more money on me. Just thought you should know.”

Barack Obama is like an old drunk trying to hustle one more round of drinks for his union and government cronies. He's got a strong need.  He's getting the shakes.  But he's blown it all. 

You know he’s broke, right. He doesn’t have any more money on him.


Just thought you should know.

So do you feel lucky?

Tuesday, September 13, 2011

A dream about last night's Republican/Tea Party debate

I watched some of the CNN/Tea Party debate.  Mitt Romney can't bring himself to say that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme.  And other than some great Ron Paulishness, that's all you need to know about the debate.   

All I could think of is this....  Imagine that Mitt Romney or Rick Perry get the nomination.  Imagine that one of them picks the other for Veep.  Or even better, he picks Santorum or Huntsman as Veep.   

Imagine Ron Paul deciding that he's not finished Speaking Truth To Power, and running at the top of the Libertarian ticket.  Then imagine that Gary Johnson gets the #2 spot. 

Imagine the debate between Romney, The Teleprompter Jesus and Ron Paul, in the unlikely event that the Republicrats or Demoblicans would allow an outsider to appear in a discussion of what they now think of as "their" election. 

We can only dream....



A Green Energy Update

From The Washington Examiner:

Solar panel company Solyndra, which went bankrupt after getting a half-billion subsidy from the U.S. government, is largely owned by Obama fundraiser George Kaiser, who has visited the White House 16 times.

And the Feds are raiding the homes of Solyndra's top execs as we speak.  Do you think some of your half-billion might have wound up in the wrong pockets? 




Al Gore acolyte Cathy Zoi was Obama's assistant secretary for energy efficiency and renewable energy while her husband was an executive at a company that received direct subsidies from the Obama administration and profited from the Cash-for-Caulkers bill Zoi's division implemented. Zoi has since left DOE to run a clean-tech hedge fund owned in large part by Democratic mega-donor George Soros.

A group of Democratic operatives have formed an investment company called U.S. Renewable Energy Group, or US-REG, which seems to exist for the sake of buying green-tech companies, and then helping them get subsidies. In at least one case, US-REG appeared to be a U.S. beard for a Chinese company seeking U.S. dollars to make wind turbines in China.

The Department of Energy's inspector general has repeatedly found that a loan program created by the 2005 energy bill and expanded by Obama's stimulus falls short on transparency and accountability.

The company with the biggest investments in green energy is General Electric, whose CEO is a top Obama advisor.

And last year, G.E. paid absolutely no taxes.  As The Aggie would say, "Good people to know, that Barack Obama." 

Treasury Department chief of staff Mark Patterson was a Goldman Sachs lobbyist advocating susbidies for cellulosic ethanol while Goldman was buying up a cellulosic ethanol company. Patterson never received a waiver from the administration's restrictions on former lobbyists, but the adminstration has never explained how a Goldman lobbyist could work at Treasury without working on issues affecting tax law, finance, banking, or Goldman.

Sometimes I have to sit back and admire The Ethanol Trifecta, as I've heard it called.  The government has subsidized it, mandated it, and now, protected it from foreign competition.  One day, I swear I'm going to start a "green" dachshund manure company and see if I can get some of the same loot. 

A Soperton, Ga., ethanol plant -- founded by major Democratic donor Vinod Khosla -- sucked up more than $162 in federal and state subsidies before shutting down without ever producing a drop of ethanol.

But with the same net benefit to the world as if he had done so.  You've got to love it. 

Monday, September 12, 2011

8 Steps For Revitalizing The U.S. Economy

Industry Week  has a piece in their online edition by Dr. Ken Mayland, an economist who covers manufacturing and business trends. 
Here are Dr. Mayland's "Eight Steps For Revitalizing The U.S. Economy".  I've been ranting about seven of these for years, and I don't even have a Doctorate in Economics.  Or a Masters.  Or a Bachelors.  I do, however, work in the shipping and logistics industry, and that qualifies me to comment on these things. 

1.  Kill the 2010 health care reform bill.

Well, duh, of course.  Nobody knows who exactly wrote it.  Nobody knows what it is supposed to accomplish.  It's too long for anyone to know what is in it.  A lot of people who lobbied for it have now been exempted from it.  But everyone fears it. 

2.  Do a "reverse course" on developing domestic energy and ease access and permitting for all forms of energy production.

Yeah.  Drill, Baby, Drill.  The Green Energy Scam is slowly being exposed.  Within a year and a half, it'll be dead as a doornail.  Drill, Baby, Drill.  Now.   

3.  Eliminate the minimum wage. Mayland said: "Economists have long know that politicians cannot legislate the productivity of a worker. If you raise the minimum wage above the basic productivity of the worker, the worker will be fired or not hired." Mayland said since the minimum wage was last raised, the biggest increase in unemployment has been among teenagers -- "exactly where you would expect a minimum-wage increase to hurt."

The minimum wage is zero.  The higher you set an artificial price floor for unskilled workers, the more of them you condemn to earning the true minimum wage - zero. 

4.  Repeal the Frank-Dodd financial reform law and Sarbanes-Oxley, which he said put U.S. businesses at a disadvantage compared to businesses in other countries.

I know absolutely nothing about this.  Some might say that this shortcoming has never prevented any of my other rants, but there you have it.  I know nothing about SarbOx.  But this guy does. 

5.  Rein in EPA and the National Labor Relations Board.

Or we could continue to allow the NLRB to tell businesses where they can and can't operate.  Pick one. 

6.  Pass free-trade agreements with Panama, Columbia and South Korea.

This is great as long as it is Free Trade and not Managed Trade.  Any Free Trade Agreement that's 900 pages long is automatically suspect. 

7.  Pare back overly generous unemployment benefits from the current 99 weeks. Mayland cited a scholarly study that if unemployment benefits were 26 weeks, the unemployment rate would be 2% to 2.5% lower.

Yep, and it wouldn't be pretty.  But combine #3 and #7, and you would rapidly approach full employment.  Companies would accomplish more with less.  But it wouldn't be fair !  So we're going to continue to borrow from our fetuses ! 

8.  Trash the tax code and install a flat tax. Mayland said once the appropriate tax rate was determined, taxpayers could fill out their tax return "on a postcard."

Go here for a picture of the Hong Kong tax postcard. 

There you have it.  If Obama and Congress knew that they were going to be propped against a wall and shot if the economy didn't improve within one year, they would implement all of Ken Mayland's Libertarian-ish suggestions tomorrow morning.  Hit the labels below if you want to read earlier rants on any of these topics.

Why Didn't They Attack Switzerland?

A common-sense answer to an unusual question, from the Strike The Root website:

Switzerland has not been in a war of any kind since 1815. It has not been in an official foreign war since 1515. This would be astounding, even miraculous, for any nation. But Switzerland borders Germany . And France . And Italy . And Austria . And Liechtenstein . Now the Prince of Liechtenstein has rarely lashed out in Blitzkrieg in a desperate bid to reign uber alles, but ALL of Switzerland 's other neighbors have devoted a lot of effort to invading other countries.

In addition to the encircling foreign marauders, Switzerland itself is composed of several different ethnic groups that get along as well as, e.g., Germans and French. But they haven't ethnically cleansed each other for two centuries, either.

You would think that peacekeeping performance of this kind would make Switzerland an object of study in every political science and civics course worldwide. "WHY Didn't They Attack Switzerland ?" should be the title of many a textbook. This is not the case. Very few political scientists study Switzerland .

Switzerland is of no interest to politicians, because the features of the Swiss system that keep the peace are the same features that make Swiss politicians unimportant. Do you know the name of the Swiss President now serving out his nonrenewable one-year term? No, you do not (it's Samuel Schmid, but you won't remember tomorrow). His name doesn't matter, and he doesn't matter to the defense of Switzerland . There is no central location of Swiss defense, no Pentagon or NORAD into which you can crash a 757 or a black-market Kazakh nuclear weapon. The defense of Switzerland is the entire people of Switzerland itself.

The features of the Swiss system for keeping the peace are simple. They mind their own business, and they have very strict gun control. By which they mean that every Swiss male must have a gun, except for those who have to carry a mortar or missile launcher. Females are not subject to universal military training, but if you go to a Swiss rifle range, there are always girls blasting away too. After 9-11, teh Swiss carried on as usual, somewhat different from the US response of panicked victim-disarmament. (You are aware that 99% of US pilots are STILL disarmed?)

Hit the link up top to read the whole thing. 
This pic is from Hammer Of Truth: