Wednesday, December 24, 2008
(Looks like the economy is bad and is going to get much worse for everyone except the Obama family and their friends!)
Drudge.com didn’t join in on the MSM /Obama love fest, but chose to display Obama’s picture above a similar bare chested picture of Vlad Putin. Then Drudge ran a poll. Poll title “Shirtless.”
I'd say the poll is asking 'Putin or Obama, who is more buff?' Or, even better, as Rush Limbaugh put it, it is the “Drudge's hunkiest authoritarian socialist poll.”
At this moment, Putin has doubled Obama in votes.
OBAMA 34% 39,900
PUTIN 66% 78,089
Total Votes: 117,989
But not for KOS writer “manoftheearth.” This author is saying Drudge is anti-American for taking this poll!
Doctor! Possible case of ObamaDelusion! Let’s explore, and search for the cure. I recommend reading the full article to see all the symptoms.
Here is a money paragraph from the article:
“However as a side note, I would like to address the people who simply want to talk about who would win in a fight, Putin or Obama - I didn't even see that element in the poll in the first place, but since its been brought to my attention it is quite obvious that Obama would pull a Buddha-esque feat and completely dissolve Putins aggression with his awesome-like grasp of the true workings of reality, and the interactions of order to chaos. By the time the fight was over, Putin would have joined Obama's quest for true change, and spread compassion and hope all around the world.”
Is everyone done throwing up? Is it time to sing Kum Ba Yah yet?
No? Ok. Let’s continue…
The KOS author is saying Drudge is Anti-American for running a “shirtless” poll??? Anti-American???? Wow!
If the author is really sincere about the concern for someone who will be the United States of America’s President, why didn’t the author bring this accusation forward just a few short days ago when two shoes were hurled at the CURRENT President of the United States of America and DailyKOS writers were applauding and celebrating the attack????!
Quote in italics from DailyKOS.com Article By: girl
"So while I didn't get to personally shove my Christmas tree up George W.'s ass, watching the shoes whiz by his head was almost as good. "
Quotes in italics from DailyKOS.com Article by: Bill in Portland
"CHEERS to the sole man. "
"You know what they say: "That's shoe biz!" "
"P.S. Seven years ago today, Richard "Yeah, I'm A Dick Alright" Reid tried to light the most famous shoe bomb in history. He's the sole (ha ha) reason we all have to take off our Buster Browns at airport security checkpoints. The National TSA Screeners Guild has a message for passengers to commemorate the anniversary: "Foot powder, foot powder, foot powder!. " "
Ohh ha ha ha… I forgot that it was funny that all our lives have been drastically altered by selfish Islamic radicals interested in killing us and taking away our freedoms… What a riot that it is the anniversary of the shoe bomber right around when our President is attacked by a reporter with shoes. Oh yeah, each time we stand in line for hours to ride a plane we get an extra laugh out of that one. Pass the freaking powder.
Ho ho ho ho. Heh.
The President of the United States of America was attacked and could have been injured or even killed depending on what that shoe was made of, and the KOS author’s home base website was glorifying it! Celebrating it! Enjoying it! Laughing about it! Along with too many in the pathetic MSM.
Where was the author's disgust then?? When did the author say THAT was Anti-American?? Complete silence about the celebration of a real physical threat to a current President of the United States of America! President elect Obama had his PR picture on Drudge, and a harmless poll was taken, and that rises to the Anti-American threshold??? Please! No one was throwing weapons at Obama. There was no threat to his well being!
I’d like to think that Rush was right in his description of the poll. I'd like to think that Drudge was making a statement about how both Obama and Putin use propaganda like these pictures, and how both have totalitarian socialist goals. Because that is the TRUTH!
(Want to learn more about totalitarian socialism? Great 4 part video here (1) (2) (3) (4). Make sure you sit down, you will see the truth of what is going on in America far more clearer than you ever have before.)
And the TRUTH is what we all need right about now!
We all need to face it! We all need to wake up!
Wait a second? Wait just one second! Something is not making sense with this whole Obama/Putin/Shirtless/Anti-American accusation.
Comparing Obama to Putin bare chested is anti-American??? Why?? Does that tell us that the KOS author really doesn't like Putin too much??
If so... I am shocked that anyone on the left would not like Putin or would think Putin is bad?
Is Putin bad because he is a communist by any chance???? Is that where the whole Anti-American lingo came from?? If so, I am even more shocked!
Why am I shocked?? Because, if someone didn’t want the communists running the United States of America, and they voted for Barack Obama, they voted for the wrong person and they voted for the wrong party!
The illusion of Obama as a Budda-esque savior against communism is wrong. Obama wants to lead us down the same rat hole Putin is keeping his people in, Castro is keeping his people in, Chavez is keeping his people in..etc..!
They have just dressed the new model communism/socialism up with pretty words like ‘change” and “hope” and “saving the Nation's soul.” And with hoaxes like "Man Made Climate Change" and "Global Warming."
But, no, Barack Obama wouldn’t turn Putin in any other direction if he was put up against him in a fight! He will join him! You are fooling yourself if you think anything different!
Again, if someone wants to tack in a direction away from Putin, they voted in the wrong man and the wrong party if they voted Obama!
When was the last time anyone heard Obama speaking bad about communism?? He surrounds himself with socialists and communists! If you haven't heard the name Ayer's yet, look him up! He is not just some guy from Obama's neighborhood!
Messiah Obama has more in common with Putin, than the media lets on. The MSM media isn't going to tell! Everyone must go and look and find the truth for for themselves. But the sooner everyone looks for themselves, wakes up and deals with that, the better it will be for the rest of us!
Final note on this subject: Not long after opining that Drudge is being anti-American, manoftheearth made this statement: “extreme behavior whenever it is present, in republicans, in democrats, in human beings its unhealthy for anyone who comes in contact with it.”
Why doesn’t manoftheearth point out and accuse KOS peers, before accusing others, if that statement is really believed??
Rebuttal to DailyKos.com Article: drudge acts anti-american imo - by manoftheearth
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Your only option is the protection of the court and the compassion of friends and family that make the effort to ease your pain. You go to food kitchens, join the roles of welfare and apply for unemployment. Your pride is laid bare to the world. Now assume the situation is a worse case. Your house is sold and any equity is used to pay off debts, you sell all your family possessions, jewelry and keepsakes. Forget the kids going to college or the retirement fund, thats gone as well. You're essentially left with nothing, except the clothes on your back. But even at this low point in your life, there is someone or some entity there to help you. A church, a family services organization, at least something that can help you to make a new start.
But what if you are a company or organization. You don’t have the obligation of the family, or for that matter, any family at all immediate and extended. So what happens when a company gets to the same point in its existence? Well, one major point of difference between us and an organizational entity is a soul, a conscience, a basis for emotions or feelings. Without that, a company does not have the survival instinct inherent in the human pysche. If it falls to bankruptcy, its demise is just the normal order of business. It effectively ends, it dies. The assets of the company are sold off to others and the entity that was there is no longer.
Today we are considering the bailout of the big three auto makers. I say WE because its the American people that have to pay the money. We are that person being ask to help that neighbor. But before we can help its important to ask ourselves a very personal question, ‘do we have the financial wherewithal to provide help without ourselves becoming bankrupt?’ This is a question that the people of America need to sit down and consider deeply. The reason why is the fact that we as a Nation, are similarly disposed.
The Washington Times is reporting a story where the White House Budget Office has released a report on the financial health of US, and I mean us, not U.S. We collectively are the U.S. We exist as a hybrid entity. The government is a soulless construct save for the conscience afforded it be the hearts of it people. We can have a common desire and speak as one body, such is our want to do when there is a natural disaster . But the government itself is devoid of emotions and an extended family, a parental entity that cares for our continued existence. That my friends is something of which we should fear.
Why? Because American is bankrupt. The report shows that our debts are outpacing our income and with the current expenditure of the bailouts not being included in the current report, our situation is all the graver. The report said that our debt obligation is $56.4 trillion, while the collective net worth of the public is $56.5 trillion. When the bailouts are included, we have a negative balance sheet. We are broke. As the example at the beginning of this blog shows, we should be worried. We do not have time to consider the ramification of a Big 3 bailout/bankruptcy when we ourselves face and even more dire situation.
So what is to become of a country when it needs the protection of a bankruptcy court? Unfortunately, there is no established court to preside over the division of assets. Even more worrisome, the bankruptcy court for countries is usually at the point of a gun barrel. And not necessarily at the hands of its people, but by the creditors demanding their due. Having hundreds of thousands of people laid off because of the ineptitude of the Big 3 is nothing compared to the destruction at the hands of our government mismanagement. We as Americans need to decide what we do next. We are near that point where our shirt will be all we have left. The tipping point is about to be reached. We hear Change is coming to Washington, but for once, we need to seriously consider the change we get.
Democrats relish the opportunity to bash the Bush administration for the collapse of our economy. This argument is less than ingenuous. Our current situation started not long after America became an operational entity, but certainly has suffered the most going back to the Wilson administration and moving forward to today. We need to concentrate on the future and not the past. The past is done and cannot be changed. So remember this point; John Keynes, Karl Marx, Benito Mussolini, and Bernard Shaw's theories have been proven wrong. Ludwig Von Mises, Adam Smith and Thomas Jefferson have all foretold our predicament correctly. Maybe we should listen to what they have to say.
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Those Washington politicians who repeat the mantra that "bankruptcy is not an option" probably do so because they want to use free taxpayer money to bribe Detroit into manufacturing the green cars favored by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, rather than those cars American consumers want to buy. A Chapter 11 filing would remove these politicians' leverage, thus explaining their desperation to avoid a bankruptcy.
Ralph Peters, New York Post
When an Arab heel aimed those shoes at our president, it showed the world the extent to which Bush loosened the laces of Middle Eastern tyranny.
If an Arab journalist had thrown his shoes at Saddam Hussein or one of his guests, the tosser would've been beaten, then tortured, then killed. Today's Iraqi
government is considering whether the man should be charged under the state's
democratically validated Constitution.
Bush won. Even if shoe-thrower Muntadar al-Zaidi (who works for an Egypt-based media outfit) walks out in his stocking feet and becomes a hero to dead-enders, he unwittingly showed what a great thing has been accomplished in Iraq.
John Bresnahan, Politico
In a recent conversation with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Rahm Emanuel offered
some advice on a Democratic House leadership race. Pelosi’s response, according to several Democratic sources: It is “an internal House Democratic Caucus matter, and we’ll handle it.”
Democratic insiders say there’s no animosity between Pelosi and Emanuel, who’s leaving his post as chairman of the House Democratic Caucus to become the next White House chief of staff.
But the speaker is laying down the law nonetheless.
In response to: Abbreviated Pundit Round-Up
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Doing nothing really seems to work for Barack Obama. He's already won the highest office in the land without ever having Done anything. And Now MSNBC is reporting that America Likes Obama "Doing Nothing" in his current role in the "office of the President-elect". According to the folks over at First Read who cited the lastest NBC/WSJ poll, "75% believe that the level of his involvement in making policy has been exactly right" Considering there is no such thing as his current office, he can't Do Anything.
As TobyHill explains at Free Republic:
President-elect Barack Obama is looking very presidential these days. When he makes an announcement, he is ringed by American flags and stands behind a lectern that has a very presidential-looking placard announcing "The Office of the President-Elect."
But the props are merely that. Under the Constitution, there is no such thing as the Office of the President-elect. Technically, Obama will not even become the president-elect until the Electoral College convenes after the second Wednesday in December and elects him based on the results of the Nov. 4 general election, as stated in the Constitution.
Therefore Obama can not legally 'involve himself in policy', so he's been Doing Nothing, and America thinks that is "Exactly Right".
Wonder what Obama's poll numbers will look like when he actually Has to Do something?I mean 25% of the country is already disatisfied with him and he hasn't even been sworn in yet. Nearly 80% of those polled believe Obama will face bigger challenges than other recent presidents, yet at least 52% of them voted for someone who has No experience that would help him handle these challenges. In fact 90% of those polled said the economy is worse now than it was 12 months ago. (I have no idea what is wrong with the other 10%) Yet, 52% of them voted for Obama knowing that Small and Large Businesses alike promised to downsize to avoid the onslaught of Obama's Tax Plan.
I thought it was interesting that 67% are "pleased with his early appointments". Since Republicans are pleased to see that Bill Ayers hasn't been appointed Sec. of Education yet, I'm guessing the 33% disaproval rating comes from the Left.
It was not all about the Challenges for PE Obama. They also found out that even with a sample that leaned left, Democrats only recieved a favorable rating of 49%, which is probably because 60% of them thought the Republicans controlled congress which has had an approval rating in the low teens for about a year.
One bright spot for the future of our Country, Sarah Palin's place as a rising star in the Republican party is confirmed where she has a favorability rating of 73% among those polled. Condi Rice polled the strongest for Republicans across all parties coming in with a 49% favorability. That's just 18 points behind The One and Dr. Rice has actually been Doing Something for our Country for the last 8 years. Just think what her numbers will look like after she Does Nothing for the next 4 years!
We as American do not normally see the practices of pure democracy in action except for small forums like union meeting, committee meetings, public townhalls, and social media sites. Its the latter that has caught my attention as they have the ability to demonstrate the speed and power an organized bully pulpit can have on the censorship of free thought. Most of you reading this are more than likely familiar with the website Digg.com. It is by far one of the most popular social media site on the Internet. Yesterday, I submitted to Digg for discussion the following article;
There is NO Global Warming Crisis
Within a few hours, it had become the most commented article in the Environment section of Digg. It also rose to the top 10 Upcoming stories and made number four on the Hot Topics list for Science and the Environment. It was possibly poised to reach the front page of Digg, reserved for only the most collectively interesting stories. But as fast as it was moving up, it suddenly disappeared from any Digg list. Effectively, it was removed as if it had never existed. It had been Buried. Digg has two features available to the democratic masses that prevail its site; you can DIGG a story or BURY it. At some point in time, the algorithm of justice and fairness built into the site decides that enough people have chosen to Bury the story and that is exactly what happens. It is a form of collective censorship. If you don’t like something, get rid of it, bury it.
Now, as the author of the previous story, I cannot blame Digg. They are not trying to be a government nor are they required to be fair, they are a business and in business to make money. What they do try to do is improve the fairness through the front page algorithm. Where my previous story got caught was with a simple process of discounting collective voting blocks. This means if you group together in like minded fashion to form a collective interest group (a party lets say), your votes in quick succession on an article submitted by a member of the group is discounted as artificial popularity. Digg demands diversity in the votes to show that one particular group is not trying to promote a theme that really has limited appeal among the people. Quite a nobel attempt at countering a detrimental side effect of pure democracy.
However, the same is not true with Burying an article. Many blog posts have expressed concern with what is called “Bury Brigades”. A collective organization of people use the options in the choice to bury an article so that the algorithm is distorted to quickly censor information the group wishes hidden. The Digg algorithm is private so no one knows for sure the actual way it works, but the article from yesterday was obviously a casualty of this attack. What it points out is the power of Fascism to obscure the minds of the masses and allow the militaristic means of the controlling group to censor what would be considered an opposing view point. The article from yesterday was with out a doubt controversial. The comments alone showed the heated opinions on both sides. But in the end, a Bury Brigade had its will do.
What angers me so, is not a personal reason since I was the author, but the subject matter. It was an opposition piece to the idea of man made Global Warming. The proponents argue that the debate is over, that everyone agrees our climate problems are our fault. Well, that is obviously true when dissenting opinions are crushed and censored so that people can not be exposed to an alternate truth. As long as organizations like “Bury Brigades” can squelch the opposing commentary, topics like Global Warming will be lead by fascist regimes of like minded social media denizens, using their collective power to suppress open discussion in modern and traditional media. But having an authoritarian governmental organization (the IPCC) with substantial financial resources backing these pawns of the punditry, is truly terrifying for the future of free thought and our Republic.
With that I leave you with this:
“The press [media today] should be not only a collective propagandist and a collective agitator, but also a collective organizer of the masses”.
- Vladimir Lenin
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
The main problem with the Global Warming argument is fairness in reporting. Any argument requires facts from the proponent and opponent, presented in heated debate, with the final victory decides in the mind of the observer. A one sided argument, does not an argument make. Unfortunately, that is exactly where we are today with the agents of importance using their bully pulpit to decide the direction of the discussion. Anyone in disagreement is summarily disposed.
But before we do that, let me express a couple thought about common sense. All of us watch politicians and observe the use of their power to benefit themselves. We know in our heart that an honest politician is difficult to come by. We know they tow the party line and the people be damned in their quest for extended power. When a politician is infused with the mindset of a communist or socialist, the endgame goal of control, wealth, power and authority supersedes any well being for the people. Welcome to the world of the United Nations.
Karl Marx wrote that democratic capitalist regimes could not change unless faced with a crisis, which in turn is used by the leftist to alter the perspective of the people. Saul Alinksy and his followers expanded on the idea with the Cloward-Piven Strategy, whereby a crisis is manufactured. And the dupes of all dupes, the Media, play their hand unbeknowningly in their quest for sensationalistic journalism. This leave us with a detrimental situation, where an activist organization(s) can delivery propaganda in the form of a news briefing, picked up by the media tingling with the excitement of reporting a catastrophe all with the hopes of expanded their ratings (source of power and wealth).
Unfortunately, that “organization” is the IPCC. Its power is paramount in the world of Global Warming dogma. Its priest and clerics preach from the televised soap box the word according to science, supposedly. It controls the sources and methods of its scriptures and excommunicates the fallen brethren who no longer follow the holy writs. And it does this with money. $32 Billion, and that is just the United States. Citigroup is promising another $50 Billion. The IPCC wants the total research dollars raised to $60 Billion a year from the world’s governments. The life blood on any research scientist is the sourcing of grants and other funds to conduct their experimentations. Without it, they starve or the collegiate enterprise in which they work suffers bankruptcy.
But scientists are not inherently an evil people, quite the contrary. However, the availability of funds from a source predicting the outcome of their studies before they are actually conducted leaves the scientist in a precarious position. If they find empirical evidence that the opposite is true and the funds will more then likely dry up, what do you do? If you present your findings and are resoundingly criticized to the extent you are blackballed from any further research grants, especially since you are paid behind the scenes by some “nefarious source”, what do you do? Survival is human nature and providing for your family is a tenet of survival. You know what they will do. An honest scientist will neuter the conclusion, making an innocuous statement that can be taken in any direction a determined politician wants, while at the same time providing the opposition the fodder for criticism, without exposing themselves to the suffrage of the argument. Those who seek power and fame however...
The good news is, eventually someone stands up, takes the slings and arrows of the ruling pundits, bleeds upon the alter like William Wallace and gives voice to the opposition. It emboldens the people (scientist) and allows the slow discovery of the alternate and sequestered data. Like a boulder rolling down hill, once it starts it picks up momentum. As of today, the Petition Project has gathered the signatures of 31,000 scientist (9,000 with Phd’s) to counter the accepted consensus argument that is expressed by the devote 2,500 scientists in the IPCC chapel. More and more scientists are speaking out, particularly the actual examiners of the IPCC studies, who testify to the deprived process of discovery within the halls of the Global Climate Change inner circle of bishops.
Its time to educate yourself. Its time to learn the truth of the opposing argument. Its time to stand up and present yourself before the acolytes trolling the social media sites of the internet, the coffee shops and cafes, the street corner bakery or anywhere else this “man-made” crisis has spread. But as I said earlier, you need the resources. So here you go:
List of Opposition (Denier) Scientist:
Top Videos on YouTube:
Peer Reviewed Studies: (the proponents claim none of these studies exist)
Blogger Developed Education Material:
Why Rising Temperatures are Good!:
And Lastly, I love this study. It shows that to effect global warming reversal we need to reduce CO2 emission to zero. Yup, zero. That means everyone needs to stop breathing and duct tape the posteriors of every animal on the planet. Even then it would be above zero.
In response to: Obama can change the path of Climate Change
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
No high-quality study done to date can document that having an abortion causes psychological distress, or a "post-abortion syndrome," and efforts to show it does occur appear to be politically motivated, U.S. researchers said on Thursday. [...]
"The best quality studies indicate no significant differences in long-term mental health between women in the United States who choose to terminate a pregnancy and those who do not," they wrote.
"...studies with the most flawed methodology consistently found negative mental health consequences of abortion," they added. "Scientists are still conducting research to answer politically motivated questions."
Ok Barbin, when it suits your case you have no problem using anecdotal evidence. I dare you to read a few of these letters.
"Unfortunately, I chose to have an abortion last November. It was the worst mistake of my life. I knew it was wrong, but I tried to cling to the pro-choice rhetoric and believe it would be all over in an hour. To think I could do something so horrific and believe I could just sweep it under the rug emotionally."
"Hi, I guess I've never done this before. Like tell someone about my problems without even knowing them. But I feel like I need to get this off my chest. The pain I have been feeling ever since I got an abortion. It's not a physical pain its just an emotional pain that I have inside me. I had my first abortion at 18, I never knew I would remember this for the rest of my life."
I had an abortion last month, and if I had had any idea I would feel how i did, no way on earth would I have gone through with it.
It goes on and on like that.
Even planned parenthood has to MENTION the emotional stress.
YOUR FEELINGS AFTER AN ABORTION
You may have a wide range of feelings after your abortion. Most women ultimately feel relief after an abortion. Some women feel anger, regret, guilt, or sadness for a little while.
Serious, long-term emotional problems after abortion are about as uncommon as they are after giving birth. You may be more likely to have emotional problems after abortion for certain reasons. Some of these reasons are
- having a history of emotional
- problems before your abortion
- having important people in your life who aren’t supportive of your decision to have an abortion
- having to terminate a wanted pregnancy because your health or the health of your fetus is in danger
If you want to talk with someone after an abortion, abortion providers can talk with you or refer you to a licensed counselor or to nonjudgmental support groups.
I wonder if those women who feel relief are just plain evil, or have they been brainwashed into thinking that Abortion is just another medical procedure. It is not the Abortion debate, or the Pro-Choice debate any longer, they call it reproductive health now. What a nice clean way to refer to baby-killing, I feel so warm on the inside now.
In Response To: Not Breaking News
Monday, December 8, 2008
BROKAW: Your vice president, Joe Biden, said during the course of this campaign it would be patriotic for the wealthy to pay more in taxes. In this economy, does he still believe that?
OBAMA: Well, you know, I think what Joe meant is exactly what I described, which is that, if -- if our entire economic policy is premised on the notion that “greed is good” and “what’s in it for me,” it turns out that that’s not good for anybody.
It’s not good for the wealthy; it’s not good for the poor; and it’s not good for the vast majority in the middle.
If we’ve learned anything from this current financial crisis, think about how this evolved. You had a situation in which you started seeing home foreclosures rise. You had a -- a middle class that was vulnerable and couldn’t make payments. Suddenly, all the borrowing that had been -- and -- and all the speculation that had been premised on those folks doing OK, that starts evaporating. The next thing you know, you’ve got Lehman Brothers going under.
People used to think that, well, there’s no connection between those two things. It turns out that, when we all do well, then the economy as a whole is going to benefit.
In response to: "Absolutely Confident" We Can Get Economy Back On Track
Al Franken, the Democrat candidate for the Minnesota Senate seat that is still up in the air, just will not give up on trying to steal the election. Mark Elias, a Franken campaign lawyer, announced that election officials have "found" 12 "uncounted" ballots while "searching for 133 ballots gone missing during the hand recount in the urban center's 3rd ward, 1st precinct." These are ballots from uniformed and overseas voters that were "previously unopened and counted". The Franken campaign also said it would withdraw its challenges to 425 other ballots.
Franken claims that his campaign's internal count gives him a four-vote lead over Senator Norm Coleman, the Republican incumbent.
The Minnesota Secretary of State has issued an order that county election officials sort out absentee ballots into five categories. Franken's campaign is in favor of this plan because it might garner more votes for Franken. These votes are in the fifth category, which the campaign believes were "improperly disqualified". Not all counties have complied yet.
Per the Briefing Room, the campaign has "not seriously thought about options to order those ballots be counted, including lawsuits or appealing to the U.S. Senate." Franken previously announced, in November, that the Senate could decide the outcome of the election.
As Josh Kraushaar writes in Politico.com, Saxby Chambliss' win in the Georgia Senate race likely significantly reduced Democratic support in the Senate for Franken's cause:
Kraushaar quotes Vin Weber, former Republican Congressman from Minnesota, on this topic:
In Response To: MN-Sen Events v. 21.1
Saturday, December 6, 2008
You see, a couple years ago I too started a company. A hardware products company, which turned out to be very hard, hence the name “hardware”. I have faced, as you say, the banking and investor usury, the issues with getting loans, spending every waking hour wondering how to make payroll, or how to pay the other creditors. Making phone calls to creditors asking for a little time to make ends meet, asking friends, family and fools to invest more money to keep the company going. I would describe the difficulty of starting a business similar to passing through the Eye of a Needle.
So, Scribb, I understand. I understand what family, especially wives, have to put up with in our quest for accomplishment. But I believe, both of us need to look at where the world is heading and what that means for us. As for myself, I believe there are a number of things that could change in this world of finance, which would greatly improve our position and the positions of other small businesses like ourselves. Bailing out Wall Street is not one of them.
The issue today with the current market collapse is the historical reverence to the keynesian model of government interference in the market. The collapse may have started as far back as the 30’s and some people argue it started even before that. What’s at issue is the governmental policies of interference to bring about market balance. Well the dilemma with that plan is the suspension of when and increased size of the collapse. So here we are today.
We need to reconsider how small business - the backbone of America - can get what it needs to survive and flourish. One thing it doesn’t need is a tax burden. Thank God, Obama is reconsidering that plan. One other thing small business needs is access to credit, as you point out quite well in your article. Here is where it really goes south for small business. You see, and Scribb I am sure you will understand this, you cannot have people invest in your company unless they qualify as “accredited investors”. Effectively this means the government has decided that the average person in America is too stupid to make a decision about investing in small businesses, therefore only qualified, rich people can. These rules, established by the SEC, protect the banks, venture capitalist and the rich. They get the freedom to invest in businesses and the rest of us get 401K’s.
As a colleague of mind pointed out, imagine if you will a scenario where anyone could invest in whatever they wanted. There is a store just down the street from me that has been there forever. It is well liked by the community and could do well in other communities if they could expand. But, you see, they make only the money they need to live on, much less grow. What if they could ask their loyal customers to invest in them, get them the money they need to open another store, hire more people. But we can’t. I am not allowed and they cannot offer it to me by law. What’s wrong with bartering, micro loans, and support for one’s community. Look at the Grameen Bank. They proved that non collateralized loans to small business (very small business) can work successfully if the credit is there for them to grow, even if that business is in the third world run by the poorest of the poor.
But again, the “system” here in America has been set up by the banks, the Federal Reserve, politicians and the large financial houses to control “how” money gets lent as credit. This needs to change, starting with the elimination of the Federal Reserve. Then any laws governing what would be called micro loans here in the states need to abolished. Yes it is true, there will always be the con artist waiting to take advantage of people, so education needs to change as well. People need to be taught finance in high school, but more importantly, they need to be taught basic Ludwig Von Mises Lassiez-Faire economics. We need to purge the concepts of socialism from the minds of the young. Real education in the true tenets of capitalism and the dominate power of the consumer to effect change, not the pseudo government controlled socio-capitalism we have been practicing.
This topic alone could fill many books, but in the end what this comes down to is the ability of people to interact in a free market where we can determine for ourselves what opportunities we wish to pursue. You Scribb might have a software product that I need and I might have a hardware product that would benefit you. But our ability to deal on terms for sale or barter has restrictive rules. Even more so, I may find that your product is really good and I would like to get in on the action because I might trust you to make your company a success, but I can’t. You and I cannot come together to help each other grow through investing and mutual concern for one another. That has been given to the financial institutions that have led us to where we are today. Maybe, just maybe, we can have Hope for Change, real change. Change that leads to a new world dominated by open and free capitalism.
In Response to: Killing the Soul of the American Dream
Friday, December 5, 2008
Bar Stool Economics:
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that’s what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day the owner threw them a curve.
“Since you are all such good customers, he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.”
Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes, so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men – the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his “fair share”?
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
“I only got a dollar out of the $20,” declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, “but he got $10!”
“Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I!”
“That’s true!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!”
“Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison. “We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor.”
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill.
And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works.
In response to: Brother, Can You Spare a Job
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Those “exposed” to Fox News voted 70-29 for McCain.Ziegler was on Hannity Colmes earlier this week:
Those “exposed” to CNN voted 63-37 for Obama.
Those “exposed” to MSNBC voted 73-26 for Obama.
Those “exposed” to network newscasts voted 62-37 for Obama.
Those “exposed” to national newspapers voted 64-36 for Obama.
Those “exposed” to talk radio voted 61-38 for McCain.
Some of the highlights:
35 % of McCain voters got 10 or more of 13 questions correct.One of the other more interesting tidbits from this survey is that only 48% of CNN Viewers surveyed got the "congressional control" question correct. They had a 50-50 chance just by guessing. Yet, CNN is still considered a viable source of "news" by some Americans.
18% of Obama voters got 10 or more of 13 questions correct.
McCain voters knew which party controls congress by a 63-27 margin.
Obama voters got the “congressional control” question wrong by 43-41.
Those that got "congressional control" correct voted 56-43 for McCain.
Those that got "congressional control" wrong voted 65-35 for Obama.
Maybe Ziegler's effort will change that.
Monday, December 1, 2008
It is also unfortunate that our fledgling country of only 232 years, which has seen its fair share of fascist, totalitarian attempts made against the people, has not learned the lesson of the past and seems eager to repeat it. Some of you like myself, finished school with what we would consider a quality education, but yet are unaware of the attempts made by the few to rest control away from the many. It began early with military actions against citizens by the likes of president’s Washington and Adams. Or military incursions into foreign lands (Mexico and Spanish Florida) without Congressional approval from President’s Madison and Monroe. But it was our beloved Lincoln, considered to be one of our best presidents, that made use of para-military organizations against the people a new art form.
Lincoln’s Secretary of State Seward stated “I can touch a bell on my right hand and order the imprisonment of a citizen of Ohio (Vallandigham); I can touch the bell again and order the imprisonment of a citizen from New York; and no power on earth except the President can release them.” In the end, Lincoln’s “domestic defense force” arrested close to 18,000 citizens for dissenting against the war. He also suspended Habius Corpus, our writ of liberty. But Lincoln paled in comparison to President Wilson.
A group known as the American Protective League (Created in Chicago. How convenient) was used under Wilson to find and arrest “slackers” and dissenters of WWI. This citizen brigade was known to violate most civil liberties “for the good of the people." Sociologist Robert Nisbet commented, “the West’s first real experience with totalitarianism, came with the American war state under Wilson.” In the end, more than 16,000 americans were arrested and jailed for such crimes as “mouth-to-mouth propaganda."
What is particularly unnerving is the term “slackers." Mussolini’s fascist civilian defense gangs used this term to refer to citizens that disagreed with “their” official message of the day. Even George Bernard Shaw, socialist extraordinaire and spiritual mentor to the Alinsky training brigade from which Obama came, was impressed with “the good works” of the Soviet Secret Police in dealing with “slackers." Saul Alinsky and Frank Davis (mentor to Obama) both found reassurance and comfort in the Shaw belief of a State mandated “Unified Front” (thought police) created through organizational change and Soviet style grass roots re-education (Community Organizing).
And the list goes on; President Roosevelt trying to stack the Supreme Court with four extra judges that would side with him so he could impose his extended “New Deal” initiatives, wiretapping from Nixon to Bush the second (Clinton did it too with Operation Carnivore), the japanese internment camps of WWII and not to mention the myriad of examples from Chinese, Cuban, African, Nicaragua and Russian communist regimes to the “Hitler Youth."
So, with example after example of government’s foray into domestic, sometimes civilian, usually para-military, defense forces going horribly bad, we look to the Messiah’s mandatory service in a civilian defense force and laud its benefits to the betterment of our youth, who will be indoctrinated during a four month or longer “training program." Don’t mistake what this means. Who decides the “topics” for training in this new state run community education program, Bill Ayers? Who trains the new recruits on community action, ACORN? And WHO ever said that my active membership to the country required my mandatory servitude. Remember the lesson of Wilson’s American Protective League; just “thinking different” could get you arrested for propagandizing. If you think the Fairness Doctrine is scary, well...
In response to: Open Thread
"With our economy in distress, we cannot hesitate or delay. Our families cannot afford to keep on waiting and hoping for a solution. They cannot afford to watch another month of unpaid bills pile up, another semester of tuition slip out of reach, another month where instead of saving for retirement, they're dipping into their savings just to get by. " Barack Obama
"Yesterday, we woke to more sobering news about the state of our economy. The 240,000 jobs lost in October marks the 10th consecutive month that our economy has shed jobs. In total, we’ve lost nearly 1.2 million jobs this year, and more than 10 million Americans are now unemployed. Tens of millions of families are struggling to figure out how to pay the bills and stay in their homes. Their stories are an urgent reminder that we are facing the greatest economic challenge of our lifetime, and we must act swiftly to resolve them." Barack Obama
"For even as we celebrate tonight, we know the challenges that tomorrow will bring are the greatest of our lifetime - two wars, a planet in peril, the worst financial crisis in a century." Barack Obama