So you may recall - Obama used the unions to get Obamacare though. Now they're having second thoughts.... I using my shocked face.....
Right at the top of the list..... The NETU - mostly The IRS, yep the group that's charged with enforcing this disaster wants to be exempt - well so do all the congress critters and their staff. Once again, the political elites show their unwavering disdain for the rest of us.
Read the Bill BEFORE you vote. You moron.
Monday, July 29, 2013
Some times Ignorance is Bliss
I generally go out of my way to avoid learning the politics of actors - first off, just because they're actors doesn't make them smart, or logical, or knowledgeable. It just means their opinions get more press.
So generally when I find an actor has a particularly disagreeable viewpoint (to me) I stop watching anything they're in. I'm OK with them saying nice things about some liberal candidate - they're entitled to like any idiot they want - for example I, by accident caught a comment by Bill Macy, praising Obama. I'll still watch Bill's movies. Michale Douglas on the other hand - no. Sadly I own at least one DVD of his - acquired before I found out he wants to take away my rights.
I tend to pay a bit more attention to companies that I deal with in this regard - I'm not perfect by any means but I do put some effort into it. Which is why I was so unhappy to read this article about Costco. I'm particularly annoyed by companies that use eminent domain to steal property from it's owners. This is also a problem with some NG companies that run pipelines, many times they just though the room of lawyers at the recalcitrant land owner and force them to either sell at the price the pipeline is willing to pay or spend the next year in court (and they'll still lose). I understand it, I just don't like it.
I'm not crazy about Costco - it's a bit of a pain in the butt, always too busy, but Damn. We'll I'm going to have to do some business with them (really the only source for supplies on a current project), but once that's done - I guess we'll go our separate ways.
Sometimes it SUCKS having principles.
So generally when I find an actor has a particularly disagreeable viewpoint (to me) I stop watching anything they're in. I'm OK with them saying nice things about some liberal candidate - they're entitled to like any idiot they want - for example I, by accident caught a comment by Bill Macy, praising Obama. I'll still watch Bill's movies. Michale Douglas on the other hand - no. Sadly I own at least one DVD of his - acquired before I found out he wants to take away my rights.
I tend to pay a bit more attention to companies that I deal with in this regard - I'm not perfect by any means but I do put some effort into it. Which is why I was so unhappy to read this article about Costco. I'm particularly annoyed by companies that use eminent domain to steal property from it's owners. This is also a problem with some NG companies that run pipelines, many times they just though the room of lawyers at the recalcitrant land owner and force them to either sell at the price the pipeline is willing to pay or spend the next year in court (and they'll still lose). I understand it, I just don't like it.
I'm not crazy about Costco - it's a bit of a pain in the butt, always too busy, but Damn. We'll I'm going to have to do some business with them (really the only source for supplies on a current project), but once that's done - I guess we'll go our separate ways.
Sometimes it SUCKS having principles.
Sunday, July 28, 2013
Maybe they should be worried
Apparently some republicans are feeling threatened by a libertarian point of view in Congress. Good. They should be. When they're not pointing at the Dems for selling us out, they're busy doing it themselves. Maybe they should stop trying to be the other Big Government Party.
That Chris Christie is worried is even better. Maybe the Republicans will be lucky and he won't run (yeah wishful thinking) even with his self-serving grandstanding the republican party will probably still give him support - then he'll sell them out. Poetic justice, but in the end they'll get together and sell the citizens out.
That Chris Christie is worried is even better. Maybe the Republicans will be lucky and he won't run (yeah wishful thinking) even with his self-serving grandstanding the republican party will probably still give him support - then he'll sell them out. Poetic justice, but in the end they'll get together and sell the citizens out.
Friday, July 19, 2013
Bite me, Chris
What and enormous Asshole.
I'll tell you right now, I'm white and Chris Matthews DOES NOT SPEAK FOR ME!. I have never done anything to ANY race that requires an apology.
Chris, screw you.
Does this guy ever say anything that isn't stupid?
I'll tell you right now, I'm white and Chris Matthews DOES NOT SPEAK FOR ME!. I have never done anything to ANY race that requires an apology.
Chris, screw you.
Does this guy ever say anything that isn't stupid?
Saturday, July 13, 2013
I love irony
There are some people that are just irony incarnate.
From the Obamasiah we have THIS - thanks Heroditis I needed that laugh.
From the Feminists - I'll just let JB tell it.
From the Racists at the DOJ we have THIS: which essentially is using our taxpayer dollars to support a Black lynch-mob looking to subvert the rule of law. - yes The Justis department sponsoring Lynch-mobs that's pretty ironic - even more ironic is that Zimmerman apparently a Racist and a Minority - which if you believe the MSM is about as likely as a Unicorn. Unless it fits with their agenda of the moment - in which case he's Whitey, which makes him Inherently racist unless he's also a Radical Feminist and devout Democrat.
The total lack of critical thinking, self awareness and logic seems to be a defining trait of Politicians, Feminists, Educators, and the main stream media.
From the Obamasiah we have THIS - thanks Heroditis I needed that laugh.
From the Feminists - I'll just let JB tell it.
From the Racists at the DOJ we have THIS: which essentially is using our taxpayer dollars to support a Black lynch-mob looking to subvert the rule of law. - yes The Justis department sponsoring Lynch-mobs that's pretty ironic - even more ironic is that Zimmerman apparently a Racist and a Minority - which if you believe the MSM is about as likely as a Unicorn. Unless it fits with their agenda of the moment - in which case he's Whitey, which makes him Inherently racist unless he's also a Radical Feminist and devout Democrat.
The total lack of critical thinking, self awareness and logic seems to be a defining trait of Politicians, Feminists, Educators, and the main stream media.
Thursday, July 11, 2013
Prepair to repel rioters
The Zimmerman case is coming to a close and the New Black Panthers have already put a bounty on his head. There are plans to strike against random White neighborhoods. Yep we're talking about contract killing and inciting to riot and no arrests - because BLACK. Arrests for Hate Speech? Nope - because BLACK.
I've said before - I think Zimmerman was an idiot - he should never have followed anyone. I'm not on the Jury so my opinion of his guilt or innocence is moot. But being an idiot is not a crime, beating the crap out of someone is a crime, shooting someone who is beating the crap out of you may or may not be a crime.
Personally - I'd go with not guilty as I don't think it meets the requirements for manslaughter - it does either meet the requirements for self defense under stand your ground. Or, at least there is reasonable doubt - in my mind anyway.
But then, this hasn't been about his guilt or innocence, since the media got involved - it's been about RACE. When the DOJ is spending tax payers money for rallies to encourage conviction it's about RACE - because that asshat in charge of the DOJ is a Racist.
So if he gets acquitted - which may happen, I fully expect to see riots in every major city with a significant black population. So, get ready. Hopefully I'm wrong - but I don't think so.
I've said before - I think Zimmerman was an idiot - he should never have followed anyone. I'm not on the Jury so my opinion of his guilt or innocence is moot. But being an idiot is not a crime, beating the crap out of someone is a crime, shooting someone who is beating the crap out of you may or may not be a crime.
Personally - I'd go with not guilty as I don't think it meets the requirements for manslaughter - it does either meet the requirements for self defense under stand your ground. Or, at least there is reasonable doubt - in my mind anyway.
But then, this hasn't been about his guilt or innocence, since the media got involved - it's been about RACE. When the DOJ is spending tax payers money for rallies to encourage conviction it's about RACE - because that asshat in charge of the DOJ is a Racist.
So if he gets acquitted - which may happen, I fully expect to see riots in every major city with a significant black population. So, get ready. Hopefully I'm wrong - but I don't think so.
Wednesday, July 10, 2013
The First Amendment doesn't protect your jokes
Apparently if you say something on the internet and add, jk or lol at the end of it, our Governments and apparently our courts which now seem to be owned by the Governments will still treat it as terrorism.
To prove the point - there are two teens sitting in prison right now for making joking threats on the internet. So, no more jokes people. We have to take EVERYTHING absolute seriously. Zero Tollerance. I'm guessing print comes next, then radio, finally they'll get around to TV - even the ubiquitous laugh track won't save you from a charge of Making terrorist threats. - Be really careful which parts you accept, go help you if you play a Bad guy in next summers blockbuster - you might find your self going to prison for it.
Which begs the question - when do we ban Standup comedy, and sitcoms which just loaded with Hate speech "I Hate you!" "I Hate my ex-wife".
What the hell is wrong in Texas (and they're not alone in making STUPID arrests). When we can't count on the courts to inject a little sanity into the process anymore, I think we're screwed. We're like a bunch of lemmings walking off the cliff.
To prove the point - there are two teens sitting in prison right now for making joking threats on the internet. So, no more jokes people. We have to take EVERYTHING absolute seriously. Zero Tollerance. I'm guessing print comes next, then radio, finally they'll get around to TV - even the ubiquitous laugh track won't save you from a charge of Making terrorist threats. - Be really careful which parts you accept, go help you if you play a Bad guy in next summers blockbuster - you might find your self going to prison for it.
Which begs the question - when do we ban Standup comedy, and sitcoms which just loaded with Hate speech "I Hate you!" "I Hate my ex-wife".
What the hell is wrong in Texas (and they're not alone in making STUPID arrests). When we can't count on the courts to inject a little sanity into the process anymore, I think we're screwed. We're like a bunch of lemmings walking off the cliff.
Saturday, July 6, 2013
I can walk today, mostly
Did something to my back, mostly likely muscle strain, on the 4th. Got up late last night to recycle some old coffee and found I couldn't stand up. Well I could, and eventually did, but it wasn't any fun at all. Took 4 Advil and hobbled back to bed. This morning was much better. I might actually do something useful tomorrow.
Friday, July 5, 2013
Free College Education
Oregon is Doing Free Higher Education Obviously the author and editors need a bit of Higher education themselves - If you're paying 3% of your salary for 24 Years - IT'S NOT FREE.
There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. On the other hand the only people who will suffer under this system is - well the system, which makes some very grand assumptions about the economic future of the graduates, and the idiots who take them up on it.
If I had paid 3% of my annual income for 24, years my education would have cost - well none of your damn business but WAY more than I paid.
If you look at the unemployment numbers for those under the age of 25 - it's not pretty, and I suspect a large percentage of those who are employed are part time, minimum wage. 3% does't seem like much until you realize they're talking about 3% of what is already not enough to live on. Gee aren't you glad you went to college to get that worthless degree now? Ah maybe you are - because it's likely that 4 year degree only cost you $36,000 instead of the roughly $84,000 it will cost an in-state student - today*. It's a bargain, assuming you ever get above minimum wage. Given that 76% of people live paycheck to paycheck - I'm betting you'll wish you still had that 3% and had headed off to a 2 year trade school instead.
If you're going into one of the STEM fields, it may still be a bargain but not nearly so much. Assuming you average $100,000 a year over the next 24 years (probably low) Your education cost you $72,000. If you land an IT job at say $90K and average about 3% a year in raises (don't bet on it) Your education cost you $92,951 or an $9,000 premium. If you started at $115,000 then it cost you $118,771 or a $35,000 premium. There is actually a good chance that you'll be subsidizing the idiot working in HR with the degree in feminist studies.
Now since I can do the math - one might assume that the folks at the Universities, and possibly even a Congressional Aid or two can do the math - it doesn't bode well for the System. Roughly 25% of degrees granted are STEM - which means 75% of the graduates don't have the ability to pay back the costs. So, perhaps we need to move to a different set of assumptions**.
Given these numbers, your Underwater Basket Weaving degree will still cost you $36,000 instead of $42,000 but your STEM degree? Well you still pay the same amount - call it $105,000 but what they gave you was only $42,000. So Yeah that works very well for them. Lots of subsidizing of 17th Century Lesbian Studies degrees. Yep Keep all those idiots who couldn't get a job in the real world employed teaching kids useless information, so they can create more over educated, useless people. Brilliant.
I can see one possible alternative to this - Adjust the salaries of the professors & staff to reflect the probable income of their students. The STEM folks still get screwed, but then I expect the number of professors willing to work for $18K*** a year for teaching Native American Lesbian History, might cause a few to retire. Which might reduce the number of useless degrees in the world. Another possibility to increase the payback % and or lengthen the period.
Now if your Matt (see article above) you like the FAIRNESS of the whole thing so much your willing to overlook a few issues - like loosing money - or forcing one set of students (the smart ones) subsidize the a larger set of students (the lazy or not so bright ones).
He has another article here that show's he really has put some though into this - and it could possibly work but he seems to think that the folks who are smart and work really hard should subsidize the rest. Even though his math works better then the Oregon Governments, he still thinks it FREE - it's not FREE Matt! Doesn't mean it's a bad idea - I just don't care for the implementation. It doesn't take into account future value of the money you spend today and will continue to spend until you have a crop of graduates. So there's a lot of money tied up with NO return on investment for 4 or 5 years and even then the ROI is pretty low - so low that only a Government is going to do it (which should tell you something right there). It doesn't take into account that a Degree in Chemical Engineering is considerably more difficult that a degree in Art History. Or that it's going to cost the CE a lot more money. There's an awful lot of socialist/communist type Fairness going on here - You're smart and worked really hard so of course you should subsidize those of us who aren't or don't. That's not fairness - that's slavery.
If you want it to be fair then everyone should pay the same amount, rich/poor, hard working/lazy. The product is the same right? It's a college degree. If your going to charge considerably more for STEM degrees because they have a significantly higher intrinsic value then perhaps that should be reflected in the school budgets and salaries?
* Some assumptions - OSU suggests that Tuition and Books will cost the average (in state) student approximately $10,500 per year. If you add in room and board that's another $10,587 THIS YEAR, anyone seeing these costs going down? So depending on what they cover, and let's assume its tuition, books, supplies, and boarding then the layout is about $21,000 a year. - Four years - $84,000.
**They're only going to cover Tuition and Books - so $10,500 You still need to come up with the rest. - using OSU's numbers that's only another $10,500 a year - piece of cake right?
*** Yes - I just made that number up - I did no MATH - you should be used to that by now, it's what Congress and the Media do all the time.
There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. On the other hand the only people who will suffer under this system is - well the system, which makes some very grand assumptions about the economic future of the graduates, and the idiots who take them up on it.
If I had paid 3% of my annual income for 24, years my education would have cost - well none of your damn business but WAY more than I paid.
If you look at the unemployment numbers for those under the age of 25 - it's not pretty, and I suspect a large percentage of those who are employed are part time, minimum wage. 3% does't seem like much until you realize they're talking about 3% of what is already not enough to live on. Gee aren't you glad you went to college to get that worthless degree now? Ah maybe you are - because it's likely that 4 year degree only cost you $36,000 instead of the roughly $84,000 it will cost an in-state student - today*. It's a bargain, assuming you ever get above minimum wage. Given that 76% of people live paycheck to paycheck - I'm betting you'll wish you still had that 3% and had headed off to a 2 year trade school instead.
If you're going into one of the STEM fields, it may still be a bargain but not nearly so much. Assuming you average $100,000 a year over the next 24 years (probably low) Your education cost you $72,000. If you land an IT job at say $90K and average about 3% a year in raises (don't bet on it) Your education cost you $92,951 or an $9,000 premium. If you started at $115,000 then it cost you $118,771 or a $35,000 premium. There is actually a good chance that you'll be subsidizing the idiot working in HR with the degree in feminist studies.
Now since I can do the math - one might assume that the folks at the Universities, and possibly even a Congressional Aid or two can do the math - it doesn't bode well for the System. Roughly 25% of degrees granted are STEM - which means 75% of the graduates don't have the ability to pay back the costs. So, perhaps we need to move to a different set of assumptions**.
Given these numbers, your Underwater Basket Weaving degree will still cost you $36,000 instead of $42,000 but your STEM degree? Well you still pay the same amount - call it $105,000 but what they gave you was only $42,000. So Yeah that works very well for them. Lots of subsidizing of 17th Century Lesbian Studies degrees. Yep Keep all those idiots who couldn't get a job in the real world employed teaching kids useless information, so they can create more over educated, useless people. Brilliant.
I can see one possible alternative to this - Adjust the salaries of the professors & staff to reflect the probable income of their students. The STEM folks still get screwed, but then I expect the number of professors willing to work for $18K*** a year for teaching Native American Lesbian History, might cause a few to retire. Which might reduce the number of useless degrees in the world. Another possibility to increase the payback % and or lengthen the period.
Now if your Matt (see article above) you like the FAIRNESS of the whole thing so much your willing to overlook a few issues - like loosing money - or forcing one set of students (the smart ones) subsidize the a larger set of students (the lazy or not so bright ones).
He has another article here that show's he really has put some though into this - and it could possibly work but he seems to think that the folks who are smart and work really hard should subsidize the rest. Even though his math works better then the Oregon Governments, he still thinks it FREE - it's not FREE Matt! Doesn't mean it's a bad idea - I just don't care for the implementation. It doesn't take into account future value of the money you spend today and will continue to spend until you have a crop of graduates. So there's a lot of money tied up with NO return on investment for 4 or 5 years and even then the ROI is pretty low - so low that only a Government is going to do it (which should tell you something right there). It doesn't take into account that a Degree in Chemical Engineering is considerably more difficult that a degree in Art History. Or that it's going to cost the CE a lot more money. There's an awful lot of socialist/communist type Fairness going on here - You're smart and worked really hard so of course you should subsidize those of us who aren't or don't. That's not fairness - that's slavery.
If you want it to be fair then everyone should pay the same amount, rich/poor, hard working/lazy. The product is the same right? It's a college degree. If your going to charge considerably more for STEM degrees because they have a significantly higher intrinsic value then perhaps that should be reflected in the school budgets and salaries?
* Some assumptions - OSU suggests that Tuition and Books will cost the average (in state) student approximately $10,500 per year. If you add in room and board that's another $10,587 THIS YEAR, anyone seeing these costs going down? So depending on what they cover, and let's assume its tuition, books, supplies, and boarding then the layout is about $21,000 a year. - Four years - $84,000.
**They're only going to cover Tuition and Books - so $10,500 You still need to come up with the rest. - using OSU's numbers that's only another $10,500 a year - piece of cake right?
*** Yes - I just made that number up - I did no MATH - you should be used to that by now, it's what Congress and the Media do all the time.
Tuesday, July 2, 2013
Obama vs Obama It takes one to know one
Here's a nice little bit of Obama vs Obama Sort of the definition of Hypocrite.
Hard to believe Obama ever said anything positive about the Constitution but - apparently he did. One has to wonder, was he being a politician, and just saying with no conviction, what he thought people wanted to hear, or was he hiding his real agenda. I'm going to vote for the latter.
Specifically - It's OK when I do it, but not when You do it.
Hard to believe Obama ever said anything positive about the Constitution but - apparently he did. One has to wonder, was he being a politician, and just saying with no conviction, what he thought people wanted to hear, or was he hiding his real agenda. I'm going to vote for the latter.
Specifically - It's OK when I do it, but not when You do it.
Trying to save the 2014 elections
So Obama has decided to hold off on the employer portion of the mandate for ObamaCare. No doubt because now everyone is starting to see the effects - Most companies are cutting hours to get as much staff below the 30 hour cutoff. Color me unsurprised. A significant percentage of the U.S. doesn't even realize they're going to get clobbered on their taxes because they didn't understand they needed to get insurance - on their own. Because the individual mandate is still scheduled for 2014.
Obsensibly this is done because they (the Administration) realized there is NO WAY they can roll this train wreck out this fast. And they're hoping that this will delay the staggering effect that the employer mandate is already having on full time employment. The real reason is to get folks to not spend time thinking about how badly they're being screwed until AFTER the elections. Now the question is - will the Democrats believe their own bullshit and go into the 2014 elections with the ObamaCare Sword swinging for their necks or will they realize that voting for something no one ever read is perhaps a bad idea. Will they understand that, all the people who've already had their 40 hour jobs turned into 30 hour jobs, are going to understand (because their employers told them) that it's ObamaCare's fault. And ObamaCare was the Democrats baby.
So - on the one hand you can expect companies to stop cutting hours -- or not. I'm betting NOT. On the other hand, you can expect a lot of folks to see their cost of individual insurance climb, kind of significantly. My insurance company tells me I should know sometime in September. I'll be a bit surprised if the increase is less than 30% and not at all surprised if it's over 50%. Why? because I have what is essentially classified as catastrophic coverage. Really high deductible, no prescription coverage.
I'm wondering who in fact who; besides perhaps young single moms who don't want to work more than 20 hours a week because it screws with their benefits, will actually see any of this as a good thing come April.
I guess we'll see if anyone is paying attention - the Democrats have more than a few things to answer for, and one would hope that the Independents at least will remind folks of just what the Democrats did - with the help in a lot of cases of the Republicans. My guess is that lots of liberals will blaming the downsides of ObamaCare, the IRS, Benghazi, Fast&Furious, NSA problems on Bush. Because... BUSH.
Obsensibly this is done because they (the Administration) realized there is NO WAY they can roll this train wreck out this fast. And they're hoping that this will delay the staggering effect that the employer mandate is already having on full time employment. The real reason is to get folks to not spend time thinking about how badly they're being screwed until AFTER the elections. Now the question is - will the Democrats believe their own bullshit and go into the 2014 elections with the ObamaCare Sword swinging for their necks or will they realize that voting for something no one ever read is perhaps a bad idea. Will they understand that, all the people who've already had their 40 hour jobs turned into 30 hour jobs, are going to understand (because their employers told them) that it's ObamaCare's fault. And ObamaCare was the Democrats baby.
So - on the one hand you can expect companies to stop cutting hours -- or not. I'm betting NOT. On the other hand, you can expect a lot of folks to see their cost of individual insurance climb, kind of significantly. My insurance company tells me I should know sometime in September. I'll be a bit surprised if the increase is less than 30% and not at all surprised if it's over 50%. Why? because I have what is essentially classified as catastrophic coverage. Really high deductible, no prescription coverage.
I'm wondering who in fact who; besides perhaps young single moms who don't want to work more than 20 hours a week because it screws with their benefits, will actually see any of this as a good thing come April.
I guess we'll see if anyone is paying attention - the Democrats have more than a few things to answer for, and one would hope that the Independents at least will remind folks of just what the Democrats did - with the help in a lot of cases of the Republicans. My guess is that lots of liberals will blaming the downsides of ObamaCare, the IRS, Benghazi, Fast&Furious, NSA problems on Bush. Because... BUSH.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)