Sun came up and is tracking as it has the last two days. Power is still on. I was able to get two Egg McMuffins (Marcis Registradis - did I spell that right?) at 0800 today. I spoke with Dell about the keyboard issue and they seemed certain FedEx would be operating over the next few days. TV appears to be broadcasting and the newspapers were published.
Maybe because it's Sunday and all the Federal Workers and teachers are off?
Sunday, March 3, 2013
Saturday, March 2, 2013
Sequestration - Day 2
The Beer: I brewed with my nephew several weeks ago. The beer was undrinkable and I hoped it would age into something that was better. It has not.
The Bicycle: Goes up on the trainer today for riding until it is warm enough for outside.
The VRWC: The sun came up and appears to be moving across the sky toward the west and an almost sure sunset. As I drove to and from work, I came across Law Enforcement (not in a bad way) and the traffic lights appear to be working.
I am certain the proof will be Monday when schools do-or-do-not open.
The Bicycle: Goes up on the trainer today for riding until it is warm enough for outside.
The VRWC: The sun came up and appears to be moving across the sky toward the west and an almost sure sunset. As I drove to and from work, I came across Law Enforcement (not in a bad way) and the traffic lights appear to be working.
I am certain the proof will be Monday when schools do-or-do-not open.
Thursday, February 28, 2013
Sequestration
Republicans will cave, fearing the repercussions of taking blame for sequestration.
$85 billion in "cuts" (no other entity describes a reduction in the rate of increase a a cut) is nothing in a trillion dollar budget. The fiscal armageddon described by the government is just another fear tactic. Federal employees will not need to be furloughed, but they will be for political gain. Sequestration would spell the end for the GOP and conservatism generally. Why? Because for decades, Republicans have described themselves as "conservative", but helped continue down the Big Government path. Any time the Democrats blamed Republicans, the GOP failed to defend itself or they caved to the pressure. Bottom line, no one believes Republicans anymore. No one believes what the Party says. $85 billion in cuts. The end of government funded research, teachers and firefighters laid off. Cats and Dogs...Living together....Mass Hysteria!
It's all bullshit. It's a lie, yet the Republicans have again failed to defend their position to the public.
Tomorrow, the sun will rise and just as predictably, the GOP will have caved and government will continue its inexorable climb to control your life and your wallet.
$85 billion in "cuts" (no other entity describes a reduction in the rate of increase a a cut) is nothing in a trillion dollar budget. The fiscal armageddon described by the government is just another fear tactic. Federal employees will not need to be furloughed, but they will be for political gain. Sequestration would spell the end for the GOP and conservatism generally. Why? Because for decades, Republicans have described themselves as "conservative", but helped continue down the Big Government path. Any time the Democrats blamed Republicans, the GOP failed to defend itself or they caved to the pressure. Bottom line, no one believes Republicans anymore. No one believes what the Party says. $85 billion in cuts. The end of government funded research, teachers and firefighters laid off. Cats and Dogs...Living together....Mass Hysteria!
It's all bullshit. It's a lie, yet the Republicans have again failed to defend their position to the public.
Tomorrow, the sun will rise and just as predictably, the GOP will have caved and government will continue its inexorable climb to control your life and your wallet.
Wednesday, February 27, 2013
Scalia and the Voting Rights Act
I'm sitting here late, with a beer in front of me and the cycling season not far off. I also have a new computer with a "chicklet" keyboard that routinely misses th "s" and the "e". So if you se a missing lettr, I got tired of chaing it. The ber is a Porter, Home Brewed.
I've needed to get back to this because the thought left on Facebook are incomplete. They are snippets of idea that I never really fleh out. It is a corruption of the creative process.
Onward.
Scalia spoke truth about racial entitlement. How do I know it was truth? It brought out the race-baiters. All of them, claiming to be "Civil Right Leaders". Indignant that anyone would claim that there is racial entitlement in this country. At the front of the line, those "great protectors" of "Civil Rights", Jesse Jackson, Ben Jealous (what a perfect name for him). "They spit on me" John Lewis, coward and liar. And let's not forget Al Sharpton. He of the Tawana Brawley lie. They ride around in their fancy limos, wearing their $3000 suits, claiming to protect Black folks from Whitey who wants them back in servitude. These guys don't care about other Blacks. They don't care about Civil Rights. They care about how much money they make and how to ensure that gravy train continues.
Racial entitlement? Plenty of that. Race-based defacto quota systems at Universities and in hiring. Race-based academic achievement standards. Race-based voting requirements. Voter ID. Funded and directed by the Democrat Party, these race-baiters and their programs help drive more dependence, bigger government and more unthinking, uncritical generations of Democrat voters.
Scalia spoke truth. It's obvious.
I've needed to get back to this because the thought left on Facebook are incomplete. They are snippets of idea that I never really fleh out. It is a corruption of the creative process.
Onward.
Scalia spoke truth about racial entitlement. How do I know it was truth? It brought out the race-baiters. All of them, claiming to be "Civil Right Leaders". Indignant that anyone would claim that there is racial entitlement in this country. At the front of the line, those "great protectors" of "Civil Rights", Jesse Jackson, Ben Jealous (what a perfect name for him). "They spit on me" John Lewis, coward and liar. And let's not forget Al Sharpton. He of the Tawana Brawley lie. They ride around in their fancy limos, wearing their $3000 suits, claiming to protect Black folks from Whitey who wants them back in servitude. These guys don't care about other Blacks. They don't care about Civil Rights. They care about how much money they make and how to ensure that gravy train continues.
Racial entitlement? Plenty of that. Race-based defacto quota systems at Universities and in hiring. Race-based academic achievement standards. Race-based voting requirements. Voter ID. Funded and directed by the Democrat Party, these race-baiters and their programs help drive more dependence, bigger government and more unthinking, uncritical generations of Democrat voters.
Scalia spoke truth. It's obvious.
Monday, February 25, 2013
Corporations and Government
This contains some serious absurdity.
The very idea that anyone other than the consumer pays the tax is ridiculous on it's face. Taxes are a cost of doing business. The cost of doing business is always passed on to the consumer. If it is not, the business goes bankrupt. The author claims that all economists reject this idea. They might, but they're wrong. He uses the example that if a "corporation" raises prices due to increated corporate tax, a small company will undercut them. That is true until there is no where to go.
(Corporations) are legal entities that exist only because governments permit them to and are artificial vehicles through which sales, wages and profits flow. I submit this is one of the greater absurdities in the column. Corporations are not "allowed" by government. Their incorporation provides them with certain tax treatment, but they are not "allowed".
People will do business with each other, regardless of what government does or does not allow. It is either business done in the open or "underground". you have something I want or need and rather than take it from you by force, it is much more simple to trade for it. I can trade my labor to my employer for something of value (money), then give you that money for something you have that I want. We both retreat alive and have something of value that we did not have before. What I provide you can be anything agreed upon as having a value equivalent to that which you are supplying me. We can pay the government for the "privledge" of doing business (taxes) or we can be far enough underground to avoid them.
The very idea that anyone other than the consumer pays the tax is ridiculous on it's face. Taxes are a cost of doing business. The cost of doing business is always passed on to the consumer. If it is not, the business goes bankrupt. The author claims that all economists reject this idea. They might, but they're wrong. He uses the example that if a "corporation" raises prices due to increated corporate tax, a small company will undercut them. That is true until there is no where to go.
(Corporations) are legal entities that exist only because governments permit them to and are artificial vehicles through which sales, wages and profits flow. I submit this is one of the greater absurdities in the column. Corporations are not "allowed" by government. Their incorporation provides them with certain tax treatment, but they are not "allowed".
People will do business with each other, regardless of what government does or does not allow. It is either business done in the open or "underground". you have something I want or need and rather than take it from you by force, it is much more simple to trade for it. I can trade my labor to my employer for something of value (money), then give you that money for something you have that I want. We both retreat alive and have something of value that we did not have before. What I provide you can be anything agreed upon as having a value equivalent to that which you are supplying me. We can pay the government for the "privledge" of doing business (taxes) or we can be far enough underground to avoid them.
Tuesday, January 1, 2013
Monday, December 31, 2012
Abandon the Constitution?
Louis Seidman in today's NYT wants us to abandon the Constitution. His reasoning is that fealty to the Constitution is the cause of our current social and financial predicament. He is dead wrong.
Consider, for example, the assertion by the Senate minority leader last week that the House could not take up a plan by Senate Democrats to extend tax cuts on households making $250,000 or less because the Constitution requires that revenue measures originate in the lower chamber. Why should anyone care? Why should a lame-duck House, 27 members of which were defeated for re-election, have a stranglehold on our economy? Why does a grotesquely malapportioned Senate get to decide the nation’s fate?
This is not a result of Constitutional provisions, but of the decision to abandon them. Because the federal government has become all things to all people, it makes economic decisions that run counter to the Constitution. There is no provision in the Constitution for anything that is not "Common Defense" or (directly connected to) "Interstate Commerce". the bastardizing of the "General Welfare" clause is anathema to the intent.
Seidman's inference that it is outdated (a group of white propertied men who have been dead for two centuries, knew nothing of our present situation, acted illegally under existing law and thought it was fine to own slaves might have disagreed with this course of action. Is it even remotely rational that the official should change his or her mind because of this divination?) is patently absurd. In fact, they were deeply divided on slavery, most believing it was evil, but in the interest of the nation would have to stand for the time being. Further, they did not need to know our present situation. They understood well human nature.
Seidman's insistence that we abandon the Constitution because it has been ignored (early and often, admittedly) is a horrible reason. It is a near-perfect document which, if followed, protects our Natural Rights. It keeps the Federal government small enough that it cannot infringe on our Natural Rights. It is the bastardization and abandonment of Constitutional principles that has brought us to the brink of ruin. the "civil disobedience" of insisting on Constitutional fealty and dismantling of those institutions not authorized by the Constitution will make this country strong and free again.
Consider, for example, the assertion by the Senate minority leader last week that the House could not take up a plan by Senate Democrats to extend tax cuts on households making $250,000 or less because the Constitution requires that revenue measures originate in the lower chamber. Why should anyone care? Why should a lame-duck House, 27 members of which were defeated for re-election, have a stranglehold on our economy? Why does a grotesquely malapportioned Senate get to decide the nation’s fate?
This is not a result of Constitutional provisions, but of the decision to abandon them. Because the federal government has become all things to all people, it makes economic decisions that run counter to the Constitution. There is no provision in the Constitution for anything that is not "Common Defense" or (directly connected to) "Interstate Commerce". the bastardizing of the "General Welfare" clause is anathema to the intent.
Seidman's inference that it is outdated (a group of white propertied men who have been dead for two centuries, knew nothing of our present situation, acted illegally under existing law and thought it was fine to own slaves might have disagreed with this course of action. Is it even remotely rational that the official should change his or her mind because of this divination?) is patently absurd. In fact, they were deeply divided on slavery, most believing it was evil, but in the interest of the nation would have to stand for the time being. Further, they did not need to know our present situation. They understood well human nature.
Seidman's insistence that we abandon the Constitution because it has been ignored (early and often, admittedly) is a horrible reason. It is a near-perfect document which, if followed, protects our Natural Rights. It keeps the Federal government small enough that it cannot infringe on our Natural Rights. It is the bastardization and abandonment of Constitutional principles that has brought us to the brink of ruin. the "civil disobedience" of insisting on Constitutional fealty and dismantling of those institutions not authorized by the Constitution will make this country strong and free again.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)