Sunday, March 31, 2013

China the Debt Holder : Progressives' Straw Man of Fear

It seems that China has become some what of a 'straw man' used to scare the population into believing they are the problem and not us. I wonder who has been spending the money that the investors in our debt have given us, and what have we brought with it?

From the looks of it, the money has been wasted, lost to the politics of power and control. Now we have figure out how to pay the money back before the bill comes due and we're broke. Think about this before you decide who to vote for in the next election. It's simple decision. One side says 'we can fix this' and the other side says 'we don't care about fixing this'.

The Role of China in the U.S. Debt Crisis
Source: James A. Dorn, "The Role of China in the U.S. Debt Crisis," Cato Journal, March/April 2013.

March 29, 2013

The United States' gross public debt exceeded $16 trillion in 2012, with nearly $4 trillion in spending each year. The myth is that the Chinese own a large amount of the public debt of the United States and are continuing to add to the debt in large amounts each year. The reality is that the Chinese own a very small amount of the debt. The Chinese have, however, made an impact on the U.S. debt crisis through their own financial repression (China's capital markets are tightly controlled). There are ways China can reduce this impact by advancing the role of the market and limiting the power of government, says James A. Dorn, editor of the Cato Journal.

Entitlement programs, overspending and the stimulus programs of the 2009 financial crisis are the real causes of the U.S. debt crisis. The United States should adhere to its first principles and practice the ideal of liberty under the law while also restoring economic freedom and personal responsibility. Both the United States and China have to work on solving their own problems while jointly avoiding protectionism.
Owners of the U.S. debt:
  • Intragovernmental and Federal Reserve Holdings: 39.9 percent.
  • Foreign Holdings (not China): 22.4 percent.
  • China Holdings: 8.4 percent.
  • Domestic Holdings: 27.3 percent.
China's financial repression and unbalanced economy is leading to:
  • Major distortions in the price system (interest rate controls, a pegged exchange rate, capital controls and credit quotas).
  • Persistent trade surpluses and capital inflows leading to massive foreign exchange reserves.
  • Low consumption with high levels of investment and net exports.
The United States' lack of economic freedom and personal responsibility is leading to:
  • Rapid expansion of the federal government.
  • Excessive private and public debt due to overconsumption.
  • High marginal tax rates on capital.
  • Growing redistributive state.
  • Low saving rate.
  • Highly leveraged financial sector.
  • Rising health care costs.
  • No concerted attempt to reduce government spending.
  • No progress on meaningful tax reform.

Block Grants : Workable Alternative to Exchanges (ACA)

The talking heads continue to demonize the Republicans and Conservatives for not having a comprehensive program to that can replace the mandated socialists welfare programs that are currently driving us all into poverty. Social Security - Medicare - Medicaid. ObamaCare.
But only the deaf and or blind would have to be the only ones that haven't been aware of the more the thirty bills sitting in the Senate that have never been voted on that would have direct effect to solve many of our financial problems, but Harry Reid will not bring them to the floor for a vote. Yet it's the Conservatives that haven't done enough to save the country. It's the Republicans that have fallen short.

What's even worse, many of these talking heads are supposed Republicans. Go Figure.

Welfare Block Grants as a Guide for Medicaid Reform
Source: Daniel Sutter, "Welfare Block Grants as a Guide for Medicaid Reform," Mercatus Center, March 21, 2013.

March 29, 2013

President Clinton reformed the nation's welfare system by replacing the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program with the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) program, which gives block grants to states. TANF also eliminated the entitlement to cash assistance and imposed work requirements on recipients. The success of welfare reform suggests that block grants should be experimented with in addressing other entitlement reform, says Daniel Sutter of the Mercatus Center.
  • Since welfare reform was passed, the number of recipients has decreased by more than 66 percent, while benefit levels and child poverty have remained relatively constant.
  • Welfare reform encouraged AFDC recipients to transfer to the workforce, which has permanently reduced the number of recipients and workload.
  • Between 1996 and 2002 the welfare caseload fell by 59 percent, and by 2006 there were 10 million fewer recipients than in 1994.
  • During the Great Recession, the welfare caseload rose by only 10 percent.
Welfare reform has been successful primarily because of block grants, which have provided flexibility to states so they can reform the welfare model to adapt to their specific needs.
  • Block grants incentivize states to create programs that are more effective and efficient at spending tax dollars.
  • Block grants also allow each state to act as a mini-experiment that can be replicated on a nationwide basis if successful.
  • In the case of TANF, caseload declines varied significantly from state to state due to a variety of different policy innovations that were tested.
Because block grants create a better incentive for states to spend tax dollars more efficiently, they can be extended to Medicaid. If block grants are broad, they would minimize the possibility that recipients switch between one of the federal government's 80 poverty assistance programs. Most importantly, states need to be given the ability to experiment with Medicaid waivers and block grants.

Saturday, March 30, 2013

DHS Buys 1.6 Billion Rounds of Ammo : Why? A Video

Ever wonder why the Department of Home Land Security bought so much ammo, 1.6 billion rounds? Here is a good video, sound only from a phone call, but still very informative - there probably are other reasons, but this one seems right -

What ever you decide is right though, believe there can other explanations as well, some that we can't even comprehend.

Progressive Socialists Liberals : Norman Thomas Legacy?

Why isn't this news? I guess it's only been in the last several years that the progressive socialist Democrats have decided that they didn't need to pretend to be anything but socialists or worse.

And since the media has joined the progressives as their link to the public, the Democrats believe they have closed the loop once and for all on the 'right' to rule, they never intended to govern, not ever.

The complicated aspect of this is why so many citizens are unaware of what happens when they vote for dependency, and then vote again for more dependency and finally abject poverty.

To contemplate this nearly incomprehensible phenomenon for any length of time is very stressful as there doesn't seem to be any rational answer to why someone would actually vote for personal decline? And not just once, but twice.

I hope Mr. Thomas is wrong about how so many people of this country could be so easily lead into their own destruction.

Age IS Making Life Fun and Funny : Good Humor

Even if you aren't in the age bracket that needs to write everything down to remember what the hell they will be doing next, this is funny.
Couple in their nineties are both having problems remembering things.  During a check-up,
the doctor tells them that they're physically okay but they might want to start writing things
down to help them remember.
Later that night, while watching TV, the old man gets up from his chair.
'Want anything while I'm in the kitchen?' he asks.
'Will you get me a bowl of ice cream?' she replies.
'Sure,' he says.
'Don't you think you should write it down so you can remember it?’ she asks.
‘No, I can remember it.'
'Well, I'd like some strawberries on top, too. Maybe you should write it down, so as not to forget it?'
He says, 'I can remember that. You want a bowl of ice cream with strawberries.'
'I'd also like whipped cream. I'm certain you'll forget that, write it down!' she says. 
Irritated, he says, 'I don't need to write it down, I can remember it! Ice cream with strawberries
and whipped cream – I got it, for goodness sake!'
Then he toddles into the kitchen.  After about 20 minutes, the old man returns from the kitchen
and hands his wife a plate of bacon and eggs.
She stares at the plate for a moment and says, 'Where's my toast?'

ObamaCare Cost to Sky Rocket : Who Knew?

Political Cartoons by Gary VarvelWhat was Mr Obama talking about when he said that health care cost will be reduced by $2500 when in reality they will be going up by $7200?

Is it that he had no idea what he was talking about, that he didn't know, like the rest of us, what was in the bill, worse, didn't care what the bill all entailed?

Was his agenda for a 'single payer' health care system the real important message that he wanted to make clear?

"What difference does it make anyway" that his 2700 page ObamaCare bill does not work and can not work to bring 30 million more people into the health care system and it won't cost more money. So what!

What's going on with our president? Is he for us or against us?

Blacks Say Gay Right Not the Same as Civil Rights

The debate rages on - but the question that remains is, why has this issue become so vital now and that it requires so much media coverage? What is being shoved under the rug or hidden away from public view?

Poll: 55% of Blacks Say Gay Rights Not the Same as Civil Rights
By Melanie Hunter

( – A new poll commissioned by Black Entertainment Television (BET) founder Bob Johnson and conducted by Zogby showed that 55 percent of African-American adults do not agree with the LGBT community’s claim that gay rights are the same as civil rights for blacks.
“There weren’t any real surprises. On the issue of gay rights, African-Americans are far more conservative on that issue than I think the general population, so that wasn’t a surprise,” Johnson, who is also founder and chairman of The RLJ Companies, said Tuesday at the National Press Club when asked what findings surprised him most.
“We had another question that we … didn’t put in the speech: Did African-Americans believe that gay rights are the same as equal rights for African-Americans, and surprisingly they shared the view that gays can make the argument that their rights are tantamount to African-Americans, equal with civil rights,” Johnson, who is also founder and chairman of The RLJ Companies, said Tuesday at the National Press Club when asked what findings surprised him most.

Johnson’s remark on gay rights contradicted the section of his own poll on equal rights for gays, which found that in fact, 55 percent of those surveyed said no when asked, “Do you believe that equal rights for gays are the same as equal rights for African Americans.” In contrast, 28 percent said yes. That’s almost two to one who said that equal rights for the gay community is not the same as equal rights for blacks.

However, respondents were basically split on the issue of gay marriage. When asked, “Do you believe marriage should be restricted to between a man and a woman or do you believe that persons of the same sex should be allowed to marry and receive similar benefits as heterosexual couples,” 42 percent said marriage should be between a man and woman, while 40 percent said same-sex couples should be allowed to marry with benefits.

Respondents were also asked: “Do you believe ministers who oppose homosexuality, including the rights of gays and lesbians to marry are right, wrong, or no opinion.” A majority of respondents (35 percent) had no opinion, but 34 percent said ministers were right to oppose homosexuality and gay marriage, and 31 percent said ministers were wrong.
The poll was conducted through online survey of 1,002 African-American adults, and calls were made Feb. 14 – 20, 2013. The margin of error was plus or minus 3.2 percentage points.

Higher Education Reaps Billions from Higher Tuitions

Higher education today is just a money making system to benefit a few elites that run the show, at the school level and in the federal government, especially now that the feds have taken over the student loan program from the banks.

But the problem now is when the bubble bursts on the student loans that aren't or can't be paid back, like the housing problem a few years back where mortgages went unpaid, then it will be up to the taxpayers to pick up the bill, again.

Another problem facing our country is not only is the federal government broke, but the taxpayers are broke as well. I wonder who will be able to pay the bills now?

Of course the university endowment funds will not be effected, the billions that have accumulated there over the years will go untouched by the tax man. Interesting how that works.

Higher Education Needs Reform
Source: Glenn Reynolds et al., "Where Higher Education Went Wrong," Reason Magazine, March 19, 2013.

March 28, 2013

In the college industry, prices have gone up and buyers (students) have flocked to the inflated degrees, encouraged by a flood of seemingly cheap student loans. As tuition has outpaced inflation significantly, the value of a college education has decreased with the recession and a mismatch in skills.

A higher education bubble looms in the future as the value of college has declined and online education is poised to address the imbalances, say policy experts Glenn Reynolds, Richard Vedder, Lisa Snell, Naomi Schaefer Riley, Nick Gillespie, Zachary Gochenour, Michael Gibson and Alex Tabarrok.
  • Tuition has risen at an annual growth rate of 7.45 percent, which has burdened American graduates with more than $1 trillion in student loan debt, more than total credit card debt or total auto loan debt.
  • Many students of private and public universities alike are graduating with more than $100,000 in debt, and applications have now plummeted as the costs appear to outweigh the benefits.
  • More than 700 colleges have virtually no admissions requirements and students today study 50 percent less than they did a few decades ago yet receive higher grades, meaning that students finish with degrees but are less prepared for the job market and know little more than they did as freshmen.
The government has played a significant role in rising costs and attendance. An abundance of available school loans leads to higher tuition fees as colleges raise their prices to take advantage of students' increased ability to pay.
  • For schools, increased tuition income has led to enormous school bureaucracies that employ far too many administrators and professors.
  • The number of instructors who teach four hours or less per week has doubled since 2000.
  • The quality of students entering higher education from America's K-12 schools has barely increased since 1970.
Today's service-based economy focuses more on hard skills like computer science and less on liberal arts, partly because humanities and social science degrees lack the necessary rigor. Finishing college is an important method of signaling to employers but the "traditional path" to success through college is no longer a sure thing.

Increasingly, online education is a game changer for universities who now have the ability to design meaningful interactive online courses. The education institution must make these necessary adjustments to make U.S. students competitive globally.

Unemployed & Underemployed Continue to Grow : Why?

I wonder why the Bureau of Labor Statistic uses the lower unemployment number of 7.7% instead of the U6 number which places the unemployment at over 14% and growing? Maybe they are told what to tell the public and to keep the real number hidden as it will reflect poorly on the current administration policies.

Currently there are about 80 million unemployed and underemployed workers in our country, and more joining the ranks every month as they decided to leave the work force entirely finding their search for jobs is futile.

Yet the talking heads continue to profess the country is turning the corner and prosperity is here. Housing, jobs, the stock market are all looking great. The good times are here again. But what about the food stamp problem, more and more people applying for Social Security disability and the debt and deficit still rocketing skyward and the new ObamaCare mandate bringing trillions of new debt?

The clarion call for "hope and change" is failing to inspire the unemployed and destitute as it once did. Still, the move is on for more billions for 'shovel ready jobs to build roads and bridges' to spread more taxpayer dollars among the faithful until the next election in 2014 where the progressive socialists hope to win both houses of congress.

If that happens, with the socialists in charge of the entire government, then the 'hope' will be just a memory for a better life, leaving only 'change' which will once and for all be a  "fundamental" change for our country and our way of life.

I wonder who voted for this new way of life and if they still believe it is a good thing?

College Grads May Be Stuck in Low-Skill Jobs
Source: Ben Casselman, "College Grads May Be Stuck in Low-Skill Jobs," Wall Street Journal, March 26, 2013. Paul Beaudry, David A. Green and Benjamin M. Sand, "The Great Reversal in the Demand for Skill and Cognitive Tasks," National Bureau of Economic Research, March 2013.
March 28, 2013

The recession left millions of college-educated Americans working in coffee shops and retail stores. Now, new research suggests their job prospects may not improve much when the economy rebounds, says the Wall Street Journal.

Underemployment -- skilled workers doing jobs that don't require their level of education -- has been one of the hallmarks of the slow recovery. But in a paper released Monday by the National Bureau of Economic Research, a team of Canadian economists argues that the United States faces a longer-term problem.
  • They found that unlike the 1990s, when companies needed hundreds of thousands of skilled workers to develop, build and install high-tech systems, demand for such skills has fallen in recent years, even as young people continued to flock to programs that taught them.
  • Paul Beaudry, an economist at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver and the paper's lead author, says new technologies may eventually revive demand for advanced skills, but an economic recovery alone won't be sufficient.
  • Using Labor Department data, Beaudry and his coauthors found that demand for college-level occupations -- primarily managers, professionals and technical workers -- peaked as a share of the workforce in about 2000, just as the dot-com bubble was about to burst, and then began to decline.
  • The supply of such workers, meanwhile, continued to grow through the 2000s.
  • The subsequent housing boom helped mask the problem by creating artificially high demand for workers of all kinds, but only temporarily.
Better-educated workers still face far better job prospects than their less-educated counterparts.
  • The unemployment rate for Americans with at least a bachelor's degree was 3.8 percent in February, compared with 7.9 percent for those with just a high school diploma.
  • College-educated employees also tend to earn more and advance more quickly even when they are in fields that don't require a degree.
But as college-educated workers have been forced to take lower-level jobs, they have displaced less-skilled workers, leaving those without degrees with few job options. "You eventually push the lowest skilled out of the market," says Beaudry.
Source: Ben Casselman, "College Grads May Be Stuck in Low-Skill Jobs," Wall Street Journal, March 26, 2013. Paul Beaudry, David A. Green and Benjamin M. Sand, "The Great Reversal in the Demand for Skill and Cognitive Tasks," National Bureau of Economic Research, March 2013.

ObamaCare's Demise : States Taking Charge

Want to see how this works, look no further then Wisconsin and the leadership of Governor Scott Walker.

A Collective Veto Could Nullify ObamaCare
Source: Michael Cannon, "50 Vetoes: How States Can Stop the Obama Health Care Law," Cato Institute, March 21, 2013.
March 28, 2013

Many provisions of the Affordable Care Act ("ObamaCare") seek to expand access to health care but are not in the best interests of the states. Thirty-four states have already refused to create health care exchanges and many others are currently deciding whether to expand Medicaid coverage as envisioned by the ObamaCare mandate. The Obama administration is still trying to coerce states into implementing parts of the expansion the Supreme Court viewed as optional.

States should collectively veto the exchanges and Medicaid expansion, which would force Congress to reconsider or repeal the mandate, says Michael Cannon, director of health policy studies at the Cato Institute.
  • States can reduce federal deficits by $1.7 trillion if they refuse to implement the exchanges and Medicaid expansion mandated by ObamaCare.
  • The Supreme Court has already ruled that the federal government cannot force states to create the exchanges, the creation of which would violate state law and raise taxes in many states.
  • Each state has the ability to takes its time implementing an exchange and always has the ability to switch to a state-funded exchange.
Even the state-funded exchanges are still controlled by the federal government, which has yet to provide information on how the federal exchanges will be different.
  • With a majority of Americans opposed to the health care mandate, states should not only refuse to create exchanges but should also block the employer mandate, which penalizes employers that fail to offer health benefits with a $2,000 fine.
  • States can protect employers by refusing to create exchanges, which nullifies the tax credits that penalize a state's employers.
  • States can also collectively exempt at least 12 million low- and middle-income individuals from the expensive individual mandate, which requires nearly all Americans to purchase a health insurance plan or pay a tax to the Internal Revenue Service.
Additionally, refusing to create exchanges will reduce the federal deficit, assuming the Internal Revenue Service rescinds the tax credit rule it created, which extends subsidies to federal exchanges.

Because Medicaid is full of fraud and expansion would raise the debt and cost each state money in the long run, states can force Congress' hand by collectively vetoing the exchanges and Medicaid expansion. Ideally, this would render the mandate irrelevant.

Three Year College Degree : Academe to Lose Billions

What a great idea except there will be a lot of push back from the universities. Just imagine the amount of money that the schools and universities will lose from tuition and housing when the student leaves after only three years instead of 5 or 6 years?

Most schools of higher learning are self servicing institution dedicated to enriching their members with taxpayer dollars, guaranteed by the federal government. What a sweet deal for academe, a free ride for life on someone else's dime.

So, when someone comes along with any idea that the nation can prosper from students entering the work place several years earlier to start producing income and new taxes, and students, on top of all this good news, can save a small fortune from attending school several years less to obtain a degree, will be seen as an attack on those among us that believes they are the center of the known universe and therefore untouchable and beyond the control of mere mortals.

What an outrage!

The Case for a Three Year College Degree
March 28, 2013
Source: Reuven Brenner, "Accelerated Learning Would Add Trillions of Dollars in Wealth," The American

Reducing the time it takes for a student to complete college could add trillions of dollars in wealth to the U.S. economy. Changes in the labor market and educational institutions mean that now is the perfect time to alter the required time to attain a college degree, says Reuven Brenner, the Repap Chair at McGill University's Desautels Faculty of Management.
  • Assume that after graduation the average salary would be just $20,000 and remain there.
  • With 4 million students finishing one year earlier, this would add $80 billion to the national income during that year.
  • Or at an average annual income of $40,000, it would add $160 billion.
  • Assume now that the additional $80 billionin national income would be compounding at 7 percent over the next 40 years.
  • This would then amount to an additional $1.2 trillion of wealth -- for just one generation of 4 million students joining the labor force a year earlier at a $20,000 salary.
  • At $40,000, this would amount to $2.4 trillion by the 40th year -- again, for just one generation of 4 million people joining the labor force a year earlier.
  • The added wealth depends on how rosy one makes the assumptions about salaries or compounding rates.
  • Add 10, 20, or 30 generations, each starting to work a year earlier, and the numbers run into the tens of trillions of dollars.
The indirect impacts may be as significant. One or two years of additional, compounding earnings could do a lot to shore up entitlement programs, with a more positive impact than requiring people 65 and older to stay in the labor force much longer: the magic of resulting compounding would start earlier.

Over the past few decades, students have taken too many years to graduate, having plenty of fun along the way (financed mostly by parents or taxpayers) while students in other countries practice greater discipline. For example, students in Israel finish their undergraduate education in three years and exit with skills that companies are looking for. In the United States, 63 percent of employers said that recent college graduates don't have the skills they need to succeed.

Today, we should focus on accelerating learning and on providing youth with real world experiences that match the job market. The government should stop subsidizing schools and universities, and higher education institutions should once again become more selective in who they admit to study.

Thursday, March 28, 2013

News People Fear How They look : What News?

Who knew this would be important? Well maybe it has always been this way given the looks of some liberal women.Description: Description:

ObamaCare Crushed by Collective State Action

What a great idea - states standing up for what's in their collective best interest instead of facing economic ruin at the hands of progressive socialist Democrats that are responsible for this nightmare that is the Affordable Care Act.

A Collective Veto Could Nullify ObamaCare
March 28, 2013
Source: Michael Cannon, "50 Vetoes: How States Can Stop the Obama Health Care Law," Cato Institute, March 21, 2013.

Many provisions of the Affordable Care Act ("ObamaCare") seek to expand access to health care but are not in the best interests of the states. Thirty-four states have already refused to create health care exchanges and many others are currently deciding whether to expand Medicaid coverage as envisioned by the ObamaCare mandate. The Obama administration is still trying to coerce states into implementing parts of the expansion the Supreme Court viewed as optional. States should collectively veto the exchanges and Medicaid expansion, which would force Congress to reconsider or repeal the mandate, says Michael Cannon, director of health policy studies at the Cato Institute.
  • States can reduce federal deficits by $1.7 trillion if they refuse to implement the exchanges and Medicaid expansion mandated by ObamaCare.
  • The Supreme Court has already ruled that the federal government cannot force states to create the exchanges, the creation of which would violate state law and raise taxes in many states.
  • Each state has the ability to takes its time implementing an exchange and always has the ability to switch to a state-funded exchange.
Even the state-funded exchanges are still controlled by the federal government, which has yet to provide information on how the federal exchanges will be different.
  • With a majority of Americans opposed to the health care mandate, states should not only refuse to create exchanges but should also block the employer mandate, which penalizes employers that fail to offer health benefits with a $2,000 fine.
  • States can protect employers by refusing to create exchanges, which nullifies the tax credits that penalize a state's employers.
  • States can also collectively exempt at least 12 million low- and middle-income individuals from the expensive individual mandate, which requires nearly all Americans to purchase a health insurance plan or pay a tax to the Internal Revenue Service.
Additionally, refusing to create exchanges will reduce the federal deficit, assuming the Internal Revenue Service rescinds the tax credit rule it created, which extends subsidies to federal exchanges.

Because Medicaid is full of fraud and expansion would raise the debt and cost each state money in the long run, states can force Congress' hand by collectively vetoing the exchanges and Medicaid expansion. Ideally, this would render the mandate irrelevant.

Green Jobs Created? NO - Just More Government Overreach

Again, Who Knew? This kind of thing just makes ones head spin. Trying to understand how this nightmare can be true is nearly incomprehensible. Everything that this administration has told us concerning green energy jobs has been a lie. The entire agenda was designed to accommodate the eco-fascists among the voter base and further the build up of government.

That this agenda destroys real jobs and causes families to restructure their entire way of life to just survive is of little importance. Getting and keeping power is the agenda of the progressive socialists Democrats. Nothing in this country or the world is more important to them. Everyone and everything must be put at risk to obtain and keep total power.

I know this is old stuff to those that understand who the progressives are and their driving force. but it can't be stated too often that we are, as a nation, at risk if they are not turned out of office.

Green Jobs Haven't Lived up to Obama's Promise
March 26, 2013
 Sources: Diana Furchtgott-Roth, "Green Jobs Haven't Lived up to Obama's Promise," MarketWatch, March 22, 2013. "Green Goods and Services Summary," U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, March 19, 2013.

America can boast only 500 green jobs in solar electric power generation, but 886,000 green jobs in government -- many for passage of environmental laws, enforcement of environmental regulations, and administration of environmental programs, according to the new count of green jobs for 2011 released by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) last week, says Diana Furchtgott-Roth, a former chief economist of the U.S. Department of Labor and a senior fellow with the Manhattan Institute.
  • The new report shows that the number of green jobs in the economy grew from 3.2 million in 2010, the first year of data collected, to 3.4 million in 2011.
  • That's an increase of one-tenth of a percent of the nation's jobs, from 2.5 percent to 2.6 percent.
When people hear of green jobs, they think workers are making wind and solar power, and electric cars and batteries. But few Americans are employed in these sectors.
  • In addition to the 500 jobs in solar electric power generation, biomass and geothermal electric generation each accounted for 1,000 jobs, and wind electric power generation employed 3,000 Americans.
  • These are all dwarfed by nuclear power, at 44,000, even though nuclear power is no favorite of environmentalists.
  • In contrast, the number of jobs in oil and gas extraction increased from 159,000 in 2010 to 172,000 in 2011.
  • The largest increase in green jobs came from the construction industry, which added 102,000 jobs, mostly through relabeling.
  • As more construction materials are categorized as energy efficient, the jobs of those who install them turn green.
For instance, BLS counts construction workers who install energy efficient windows as having green jobs, but not those who put in regular windows. Plumbers who install "Lo-Flo" toilets have green jobs, but not plumbers who put in regular fixtures.
  • The largest number of green jobs, 886,000, or 26 percent of total, are in the federal, state, and local governments.
  • This is a decline of 15,000 from 2010, when government was responsible for 28 percent of green jobs.
  • It takes a quarter of the green jobs work force to pass green jobs laws, write the regulations, and enforce them.

Navy Fighter (VTL) F35B Shows It's Stuff at Sea

Watch this video on the carrier landing and take-offs of the new F35B vertical take off and landing fighter air craft (VTL) - after watching it just think how the Obama administration will find that 'we don't need this air craft as it just will make our enemies hate us even more. Our large military is the problem in the world, a smaller, shore based military will be much more effective for world peace'.

Don't hold your breath believing Mr. Obama won't cancel this air craft like he did the F22 - he needs the money for more free stuff his voting base demands.

Wisconsin's Act 10 Saved Jobs & Billions : Progressives Hate It

In Wisconsin, Act 10 was proposed by Governor Scott Walker, a Republican, and pasted by the legislature, both houses controlled by Republicans, to change the state from a tax and spend nightmare under the control of progressive socialist Democrats for the last eight years, to a prosperous and expanding energetic state.

If memory serves you, this was completed under extreme conditions brought on by months of vicious attacks from the progressive liberal Democrat unions and the Democrat party from all over the country, that sought to cripple the capital, didn't happen, but cost the taxpayers of Wisconsin millions of dollars.

Now this bill is under attack again, but this time from the courts, lead by activists judges and progressive socialists union leaders. The progressives will never allow the decisions of the people to stand in the way of their agenda of more government and less individual freedom. That the philosophy of socialism is a complete failure, as proved by the success of Act 10, means nothing.

Believe, the progressive socialists will never accept any law that benefits the people at a cost of decreasing the power of government. The battle cry from the progressive socialist liberal Democrats is and always has been, 'by any means necessary' to get and keep power.

'Act 10 has saved taxpayers $2 billion, turned a $3.6 billion deficit into a surplus and lowered property taxes for the first time in 12 years. Pure and simple, Act 10 is working.'

Wednesday, March 27, 2013

Budget Stratgy Proposals : Liberal/Conservative

How many times do we have point out that government overreach into our lives cause most of our long term problems. Short term problems as well. Why doesn't this register with so many among us who voted for our economy and country to decline?

This comparison is so easy to understand. One budget shows common sense and reality basing it's entire strategy on balancing revenues and spending. Debt reduction and a balanced budget in 10 years.

The other budget is based on the progressive socialist agenda of dependence and control where government takes away individual freedom and replaces it with the chains of more debt and more spending. No Balance or debt reduction, but more deficit spending.

Why anyone would have a problem understanding the intent of each of these budgets?

Comparing the Ryan and Murray Budget Plans
March 27, 2013
Source: Stephen Entin, "The Ryan and Murray Budget Plans," Tax Foundation, March 20, 2013.

Passing a budget is an apparently difficult task for Congress lately. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) proposed a budget that was passed in the House of Representatives and Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) proposed a budget that was passed in the Senate. Each budget specifies a revenue floor and a spending target for each budget area but fails to provide many specifics. The lower tax rates and smaller government in the Ryan plan would be best for the economy, says Stephen Entin, a senior fellow at the Tax Foundation.
  • The Ryan plan lowers the 15 percent statutory individual income tax rate to 10 percent and lowers all higher individual tax rates to 25 percent.
  • The plan also repeals the Affordable Care Act (ACA) high income surtax, the investment income surtax and the alternative minimum tax, and cuts the corporate income tax rate to 25 percent.
  • The Murray tax plan limits the benefits of itemized deductions to 15 percent of the amount, increases taxes on upper income individuals and also extends a number of refundable credits.
The Tax Foundation model shows that the Ryan tax reductions would raise gross domestic product (GDP) and labor income by 6 percent, which equals roughly 8 million additional full time jobs. For each dollar of net tax increase, GDP would rise by $6.20 and more than half of the revenue loss from reduced tax rates would be recovered through increased GDP and employment.
In contrast, the Murray plan tax increases would reduce GDP and labor income by less than 1 percent and for each dollar of net tax increase, GDP would fall by $1.60. More than 25 percent of the revenue gains from increased tax rates would be lost because of reduced GDP and employment.
  • In the Ryan plan, the tax cuts would be directed towards those with upper income because the ACA raises tax rates on those with high income.
  • The Murray tax plan would increase taxes on people in the upper income brackets, which would reduce the number of hours worked and wages earned.
  • With tax hikes, income would fall at all levels; with tax reductions, income will rise substantially across all income brackets.
The health of the economy improves when the size of the federal government is reduced. Lower taxes will reduce the burden on individuals and businesses, and will lead to economic recovery.

Government Overreach Strangling Economy : Progressive Agenda

Again - where is the problem?, government!! No matter what the idea is coming from the federal government, the result is always has the same, waste, fraud and outright theft.

Why would anyone actually vote for national decline, but they did. Twice! 

Slow Economic Growth in 2013
March 14, 2013
Source: Bruce Yandle, "The Economic Situation, March 2013," Mercatus Center, March 1, 2013.

Recent economic news has created just a sliver of hope, yet the overall economic picture for 2013 looks bleak. The combination of deficits, regulations and labor trends will create significant obstacles to achieving the economic vibrancy of decades past, says Bruce Yandle, a distinguished adjunct professor of economics with the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) predicts a 1.7 percent growth in gross domestic product (GDP) in 2013, the World Bank predicts 1.9 percent and Wells Fargo predicts 1.7 percent. This suggests that 2013 will be a rockier year than 2012 but luckily all signs point to a stronger recovery in 2014. However, growth will continue to be suppressed by fiscal policy and macroeconomic conditions.
  • The United States will spend about $388 billion per year servicing $16.4 trillion in debt at current interest levels but this cost would jump to $820 billion per year at 5 percent.
  • GDP growth is being suppressed by bank regulators whose tight grip on lending and ultra-low interest rates has kept a budget crisis from occurring.
  • Even if nominal GDP growth is larger than the CBO's official predictions for 2015 to 2023, GDP growth per year will only average about 1.47 percentage points.
This lackluster growth is hardly enough to offset the gap between government revenues and government spending, which is estimated at 2.72 percent of GDP per year. Improved GDP growth would make America's future fiscal situation easier to manage but the deficit problem must be addressed.
  • Federal regulation, which costs an estimated $1.8 trillion annually, creates another obstacle that hinders growth.
  • Over the past four decades, lawyers and lobbyists have contributed to the incredible growth of the Federal Register, the federal government's publication detailing all proposed federal regulations.
  • While recent employment data shows some improvement in the labor market, President Obama's proposal to raise the minimum wage to $9 per hour would not stimulate the economy but instead punish lower-income workers.
If the economy is to grow, the thicket of rules and regulations must be thinned and government deficits must be reined in.

Peace Through Strength : World History of War

This is something that most people don't want to think about right now, what's more important is living in the digital world of IPhones and Tablets. Tic Tac Tic Tac goes the texting.

The real world has been reduced to a 3X5 screen. History, since the beginning of time, shows one person killing another. Nothing has changed. Why would anyone believe all we have to do to obtain peace is to ignore reality?

Ignore history at your own peril. Who will you blame when the screen goes blank?

This article is spot on. The human race has always been at war, always, and just because some benevolent leader, with a great smile and smooth delivery of the message, proclaims he can change all that by having an obedient citizenry doing his will, makes the people of that nation fools and destined for destruction.

The Way of the World Is Force by Charley Reese
Reprinted with permission from the 31 October 1983 Issue of the Orlando Sentinel.
IF someone puts a .45 to your head and pulls the trigger, you are going to die. Laws, public opinion, ethics, ideals, treaties, Geneva conventions and personal preferences will not prevent your death.
As a Buddhist sage observed, “If you understand, the world is the way it is; if you do not understand, the world is the way it is.”

The way of the world is force. You may not like that. You may choose not to believe it. But it is true. The world Is ruled by force.  Public opinion Is worthless. It will not stop a handgun, much less a tank or a missile. Law is nothing but rules you apply after you have subdued people by force. Laws, without being backed up by more force, are not worth the ink they’re written with.

Americans suffer from peaceitis, a mental disability. It has the same effect as a hallucinatory drug. It makes intelligent and educated people live in an illusory world that never has existed.  Peaceitis results from living too long in an artificial environment in which the reality of the-world is concealed from view.

Most Americans who have never seen a burned corpse, a body torn apart by shrapnel or bullets or those peculiar mouth-shapes left by a knife or bayonet on flesh begin to think that words and ideas are what control the world, that any difference can be negotiated, that any conflict can be managed. They think that if everybody is well-fed and housed, they all will be nice.

The reality is that the most terrible things are done by well-fed, well-housed people.
A penniless, starving peasant is no more of a threat than a crippled, starving lion. He has no power. He’s probably stupid as a result of protein deficiency. He has no education. He has no training. He has no physical energy. He cannot make a revolution. He cannot afford a bullet, much less a gun. He is drudge labor, sometimes useful as cannon fodder. His principal role is to be a victim.

Peasant revolutions are middle-class fantasies, useful propaganda tools. In reality, they do not exist and never have. The mild form of insanity known as peaceitis most recently manifested itself in the reaction to the invasion of Grenada . Intellectual crooks and peaceltis victims argued that Grenada was no threat to us. Of course, Grenada by itself was no threat to us. Grenada was being converted to a platform for Soviet weapons. This was being done by a government that imposed itself by force on the people of Grenada . We removed the threat by force.

W HAT keeps you alive and free are nuclear warheads, tanks, rifles, machine guns and trained warriors ready to use them. It is not economics, philosophy, ethics, negotiations, treaties or laws. Power and the will to use it are the only things standing between us and the grave.

People Infected with peaceitis are a threat to the physical safety of themselves and their fellow Americans. They try to prevent the use of American power. They try to prevent the proper arming and upkeep of our military power. In their sickness some think that military power not only is unnecessary but is evil in itself.  You cut a throat. The rightness or wrong ness of it doesn’t matter to the dead man. He is still dead. Whether the death is a good death or bad death depends on whether you like or dislike the dead person. Whether the man dies or lives depends solely on whether the knife thrust can be deflected and the knife wielder killed or disabled.

You can’t depend on force, victims of peaceitis proclaim. Actually, you can’t depend on anything but force. Diplomacy works only if it’s backed by force. Diplomacy Itself is about force: the threat of it, the use of it, the direction of It. Peace is nothing but the after math of war or the Interlude between wars. War or the threat of war is what makes a peace, or else there is no peace.

Whether people like or hate us is irrelevant. Our choice is to be feared or to be a victim. There is no other choice.


Kim Jung Un - No Experience is Maximum Leader Now

What in the world is going on here? Why would we do something just like a totally communist country. Are the people of both countries equally ignorant?
The worst part is we had a choice!
(Author Unknown)
Kim Jung Un

Kim Jung Un had NO military experience whatsoever before Daddy made him a four-star general.
This snot-nosed twerp had never accomplished anything in his life that would even come close to military leadership. He hadn't even so much as led a Cub Scout troop, coached a sports team, or commanded a military platoon.
So he is made the "Beloved Leader" Of North Korea .
Sorry, just remembered that we did the same thing.
We took an arrogant community organizer, who had never worn a uniform, and made him Commander-in-Chief.
A guy, who had never had a real job, worked on a budget, or led anything more than an  ACORN demonstration, and we made him "Beloved Leader" of the United States    TWICE !!!

Tuesday, March 26, 2013

Gov Progams Waste Money on Duplication & Fraud

The waste and fraud in the federal government is appalling, but trying to stop this nightmare of spending would surly crimp many legislator from filling their collective pockets with kick backs and we just can't have that.

Every wonder how so many congressmen and senators come into congress poor and leave millionaires?

Not All Budget Cuts Have to Hurt
March 14, 2013
Source: "Prime Cuts Summary," Citizens Against Government Waste, February 2013.

The high-profile battle of sequestration has brought to the attention of the American people the importance of spending cuts to reduce the federal deficit. Politicians on both sides of the aisle agree that sequestration is supposed to be painful, cutting right at the heart of discretionary spending.

The Obama administration in particular has made statements about the drastic effects of the sequestration cuts on education and transportation. However, there are plenty of smart cuts the government could make without aiming for the jugular, says Citizens Against Government Waste.
  • Raising Medicare's eligibility age by two months per year from age 65 in 2017 to age 67 in 2035 would reduce federal spending by $124.8 billion over 10 years.
  • Eliminating the Rural Utilities Service, which expands electricity service to rural areas, could save $48.1 billion over five years and allow the private sector to assume the responsibility.
  • Reducing improper Medicare payments by 50 percent would save $24 billion over five years.
  • Eliminating Community Development Block Grants, which are marked for infrastructure investments and job creation but are frequently wasted, would save $17 billion over five years.
  • Reducing growth by 20 percent in the Department of Defense's Major Defense Acquisition Portfolio, which conducts research, development and acquisition, would save $14.9 billion over five years.
  • Eliminating the sugar, dairy and peanut subsidies, all price supports that distort the free market, would save $12 billion over five years.
  • Eliminating Amtrak subsidies would save an estimated $7.1 billion over five years.
  • Repealing the Davis-Bacon Act, which requires federal contractors to pay prevailing wages, would save $6.3 billion over five years.
  • Suspending federal land purchases would save $2.3 billion over five years.
  • Selling the Tennessee Valley Authority's electric power assets and privatizing its non-power functions would raise an estimated $1.1 billion over five years.
  • Eliminating Targeted Water Infrastructure Grants, which are duplicative of funding available from other projects, would save an estimated $785 million over five years.
  • Eliminating the Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership, which amounts to corporate welfare for advisers and consultants, would save $715 million over five years.
These are just a few of the 44 recommendations that Citizens Against Government Waste makes. Cuts such as these avoid many of the most divisive debates over federal policies and should be seriously considered.

ObamaCare Spending Finds States Struggling for Funds

Interesting study on spending for health care among the states on Medicare and Medicaid. This will also be a 'telltale' item when ObamaCare takes effect next year.  

Many states will find they had no idea just what the Affordable Care Act would really cost, especially those states that are controlled by progressive socialist Democrats who, incidentally, always vote in lock-step with other progressives.

Not to worry, the taxpayer will always be there to pick up the tab, right? Oh wait, the taxpayer is now in the minority, they are tapped out. As the saying goes, 'one can only go to the well so many times before the well goes dry'.

The State of Health Care Spending
March 26, 2013
Source: Jeremy Nighohossian, Andrew J. Rettenmaier and Zijun Wang, "The State of Health Care Spending," National Center for Policy Analysis, March 26, 2013.

Why does the United States spend so much more of its national income on health care than other countries? As of 2010, the health care sector comprised 17 percent of the U.S. economy, which is a significantly greater share than all other developed countries. This has been a topic of investigation and debate within the health policy community for some time, with many concluding that the fault lies mainly in the way private sector medicine is practiced. In a new study, economists Jeremy Nighohossian, Andrew Rettenmaier and Zijun Wang of the Private Enterprise Research Center at Texas A&M University, asked a similar question about states within the United States, after finding that some states spend more than twice as much on health care as other states, as a percent of state income.

The study finds that Medicare and Medicaid exhibit much more variation than the private sector. For example, over a 40-year period:
  • The variation in Medicaid spending, as a percent of state gross domestic product (GDP), was from two to three times greater than the variation in private sector spending.
  • The variation in Medicare spending was from one and a half to two times greater than the variation in private sector spending.
The study reports that health care spending in three states -- Maine, West Virginia and Mississippi -- accounts for one out of every five dollars of state GDP. Conversely, Wyoming spends less than 9 percent.
Overall, the study found that:
  • Medicare spending ranges from $11,903 per enrollee in New Jersey to $7,576 in Arizona.
  • Medicaid spending ranges from $11,569 per enrollee in Alaska to $4,569 in California.
The two programs operate very differently from state to state. For example, the study finds that:
  • While 43 percent of beneficiaries are in Medicare Advantage plans (mainly managed care) in Minnesota, the figure is less than 10 percent in Alaska, Delaware, Vermont, Wyoming and New Hampshire.
  • While South Carolina and Tennessee have 100 percent of their Medicaid enrollees in managed care programs; Alaska, New Hampshire and Wyoming have no Medicaid managed care enrollment.

Affordable Care Act to Bloat Medicaid : States Crushed

Oh no! Who knew? the Affordable Care Act will increase spending on Medicaid. One would have to assume that insanity was at play believing that the cost of providing health care to 33 million more people will cost less, especially with the progressive socialists are demanding, for the most part, that it should be free for a majority of the new participants.

Yikes! ObamaCare was never designed to be a workable solution to provide health care for everyone, it was designed to bring the population under  the control of the federal government. To believe anything else means you are generically altered, therefore insane and a progressive socialist Democrat.

Most States Will Lose Money Expanding Medicaid
March 18, 2013
Source: Drew Gonshorowski, "Obamacare and the Medicaid Expansion: How Does Your State?" Heritage Foundation, March 5, 2013.

Medicaid expansion has been touted by proponents as a no-brainer because it will save states money. However, this appears to be true only for states with already bloated Medicaid programs. For the majority of states, expanding Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) will cost money, says Drew Gonshorowski of the Heritage Foundation.
  • Forty of the 50 states are projected to see increases in costs due to Medicaid expansion.
  • Only New York, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Vermont and Wisconsin stand to save money.
  • For these the states, restructuring their existing programs will allow them to transfer substantial cost to the federal ledger.
The estimates of savings for these states assume that the costs of uncompensated care will decrease, which has not always been the case in other states following expansions of Medicaid. The estimates also assume that state legislators will reduce state supplemental payments to providers, which is an assumption that is not guaranteed.
  • States are unlikely to cut payments because the ACA already cuts federal Medicaid payments.
  • Between 2014 and 2020, $18.1 billion will be cut out of federal Medicaid Disproportionate Share Hospital funding and $22.1 billion will be cut from Medicare Disproportionate Share Hospital funding.
  • Federal cuts will likely push hospitals and clinics to push for more -- not less -- supplemental state payments.
Expanding Medicaid represents a massive increase in federal and state spending for most states. For the first three years that the federal government will match 100 percent of state expenses, most states may see modest savings. As soon as the federal match rate begins to lower, states will experience rising costs that will offset any projected savings.

Medicaid expansion will cost most, if not all, states money and increase pressure on state legislators who must balance their budgets with the need for providers to recoup their costs.

Monday, March 25, 2013

Private Health Exchanges Work : Gov Exchanges Fail

This is so great - the free market at work showing the progressive socialists that they are the problem. But then, anyone that has taken even the least amount of interest in controlling their own lives will know this.

Sadly, so many among us have become accustomed to believing the government knows what is best for everyone that they can't think for themselves any longer. Proof of this was the results of last Novembers election. 

Private Exchanges Grow in Popularity
March 25, 2013
Source: Anna Wilde Matthews, "To Save, Workers Take On Health-Cost Risk," Wall Street Journal, March 17, 2013.

Sears Holdings Corp. and Darden Restaurants Inc. have a new approach to offering their employees health benefits. Each firm gives their workers a sum of money and allows them to choose their health plans from an online marketplace. The system allows workers to take on health cost risks to save money, says the Wall Street Journal.
  • The new marketplace is operated by consulting firm Aon Hewitt, a unit of Aon PLC, and was used by more than 100,000 employees of the two large companies.
  • Both employers gave employees a set contribution that could be applied toward the health plan of their choice.
  • Workers have the option to pay more each month for plans with more benefits or to choose cheaper plans that have larger out-of-pocket fees and higher deductibles.
People who spend their own money tend to be more cautious when racking up medical bills compared to those with traditional insurance plans.
  • The marketplaces are referred to as private exchanges and are separate from the public exchanges that will be created by the state and federal governments under the Affordable Cart Act.
  • In theory, the public exchanges will operate similarly to the private exchanges, which have been received positively by Sears and Darden employees.
  • Consulting agencies and major health benefits players like Mercer, Buck Consultants and Towers Watson & Co., are also all offering their own version of the private exchanges.
In 2012, more than 70 percent of Sears' and Darden's workers chose a preferred-provider organization (PPO) plan but that percentage dropped to 47 percent in 2013 when the workers entered the exchange. In 2013, 39 percent of workers chose higher deductible consumer directed health plans, up from 21 percent in 2012. Overall, 42 percent of employees chose plans that were less expensive and 26 percent chose plans that were more expensive after entering the private exchange.
  • Both companies indicate that early surveys show employees are pleased with the programs and each company is considering renewing their use of the private exchange.
  • Many other companies are also considering adopting the private changes and the companies offering them are reporting a very high interest level.

Law of The Sea A Progressive Dream : A Nightmare for America

There is an unwritten law of common sense that states 'never believe anything that comes from the United Nations (UN)' proclaiming it will benefit all man kind.

The UN is corrupt to very core. It's entire existence is founded on attacking free countries with regulations and proposals that are designed to restrict their freedom and remove as much of their natural resources, money, as they can to be distributed to lesser nations.

That those lesser nations are ruled by tyrants or mass killers is of no importance. What is important is that the Western nations must be brought to understand their obligation to world order, ordered by and directed by the self appointed elites in the United Nations.

Is this a nightmare or reality? This is the dream of the progressive socialist liberals around the world.

LOST at Sea: Why America Should Reject the Law of the Sea Treaty
March 25, 2013
Source: Iain Murray, "LOST at Sea: Why America Should Reject the Law of the Sea Treaty," National Center for Policy Analysis, March 2013.

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, referred to as LOST, is an international treaty governing maritime law. LOST establishes the right for all nations to use the sea freely. Drafted in New York City between 1973 and 1982, the United States refused to ratify the Treaty based on arguments over national sovereignty. However, there are also strong economic and environmental reasons for why the U.S. Senate should continue to reject ratification, says Iain Murray, an adjunct fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis.
  • Prior to World War I, some nations claimed that the seas could be appropriated like land.
  • Following the war, many nations began to claim 12 mile limits on territorial waters, which became controversial for countries claiming fishing and natural resources rights.
  • LOST refers to the seabed, which is 200 nautical miles outside of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) off the coast of every sovereign state, as the common heritage of mankind.
LOST sets up a governing organization called the International Seabed Authority ("the Authority"). It regulates the development and extraction of any resource outside of a nation's EEZ. The Authority levies fees equal to 1 percent of the value or volume after the first five years, increasing 1 percent per year until the twelfth year. By enacting these price controls, the Treaty artificially attempts to create stable prices. The Treaty also allows the Authority to set up an international version of a nationalized industry to extract resources.
  • Because the Treaty sets up a command and control regime, it is ineffective and will fail to allocate resources as effectively as the free market.
  • By imposing royalties and fees on sea-based mining, the Authority creates a competitive disadvantage for sea mining when competing against land-based mining.
  • The Treaty's arbitration powers have failed to settle any serious international dispute.
  • LOST also institutionalizes corruption by delegating power to a few individuals representing a few states, many of whom are unsavory and funnel any profits from the Treaty toward the ruling class of their country or even to terrorists.
The United States should continue to abstain from ratifying the Treaty because it does not create property rights and certainty for U.S. companies. The failed economic model the Treaty uses forces contractors to subsidize the Authority while providing a revenue stream for developing states and harmful regimes, which may decrease global welfare.

Washington's Progressives Do Not Lead - They Manage Us

 We have the right to be frightened - there are so many in Washington among the progressive socialist Democrats that are lying to us about everything, it stands to reason we can not believe anything they tell us as fact. We always have to believe there is spin to their message to move us in certain direction. Many times that direction is a determent to our personal welfare.
The White House, and the rest of the progressive socialist Democrats, are managing us. This should be reason enough to vote against them. Sadly, it isn't, wasn't, as last November's election was proof. So many among us are ready and willing to bend the knee and take the vow of subservience.

 The Best of Comrades
John Ransom                

Swift Boat Captn wrote: And things were so great before Obama took over. Let's go back to the Chimp's economy that he started by turning surpluses into deficits then finished by losing 800,000 jobs per month and Wall Street on the brink of extinction. - This Won’t End End Well: Obama Giveth X and Taketh Away 7.6 Percent More

Dear Comrade Kerry,
In February 2007, when the terrible, evil George W. Bush was president, there were 2,427,000 more jobs than there are today.
In February 2007, when the terrible, evil George W. Bush was president, there were 5,167,000 fewer unemployed.
There’s more money in the system, going to fewer people than ever before.
The average American can’t afford to buy a new car now. Thanks GM/Obama.
The average American is watching as home prices climb for rich Americans, but stagnate for everyone else. Top tier homes are selling- and have been selling since Obama became pope- outpacing middle tier and lower tier homes. The rest of us have to make due with home prices that equal those seen in 1894…That’s 1894…not, 1994.       

“Whether real or manufactured by record-low foreclosures, bank supply withdrawals, and fed-subsidized cash REO-to-rent trades,” writes Tyler Durden at Zero Hedge, “the sad truth is that jobs (and the GDP-enhancing multiplier effect that they create) are just not coming. Even Bob Shiller prefers the potential for 4% gains in stocks over housing risk in the medium-term as he points out that - inflation-adjusted - house prices are back at levels first seen in 1894... now that is a long-term investor. “

And just because the Dow’s making new highs, you think everything is wonderful. What happened to Occupy Wall Street?
This is a system that was deliberately crafted by your buddy BHO.
Congrats Comrade Kerry!
You’re right: In America, you in particular, have a right to be stupid.

Sunday, March 24, 2013

Col. Oliver North Video : We Are Americans

Here is a great video of Col. Oliver North explaining who we are as Americans. Take a few minutes to watch, and believe we are blessed to be living in this country.

North Korean Maximum Leader Duped : Who Knew?

What a good time we all had!
  Then this happened                                                

Obama Visit to Israel Wards Off Responsibility - Again

Truly, the Obama visit is a sham designed to ward any responsibility for what might transpire in the near future. Obama will say 'I did my best' as the rockets rain down on Israel and Iran.

He will hang is his head and say 'I guess it wasn't enough', and head to the first tee. It's no longer his problem, some else will have to find a way to end the killing. It's not his fault.

Remember Benghazi? Not my fault. Fast and Furious?  Not my fault. Syria? Not my fault. North Africa? Not my fault. - - -

Obama Delivers Recipe For Disaster in Israel
Mark Davis

You can’t blame President Obama for making a beeline to a convention hall filled with students during his Israel trip. If there is any group that has shown a particular susceptibility to his snake oil, it is the soft, impressionable minds of those at the cusp of adulthood.

We can only hope that Israeli students are less gullible than their American counterparts.
The president’s wish is for Israelis to lose their resolve against Palestinian terrorism, to shrug and just let a Palestinian state sprout in their midst.

For the record, there are plenty of Israelis willing to do just that, which has confounded me for years.
How is it that I, an American Christian, am more vigilant about the security of Israel than some Israeli jews?

Polls show that many young Israelis are more skeptical of the “two-state solution” than their parents. I hope so, but I wonder if Israel has the time for these youngsters to grow up, achieve power, and spread the kind of clarity currently offered by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Meanwhile, I hope Netanyahu is eating right and hitting the treadmill often. At 63, he needs to be around a very long time to awaken some of his own people and educate current and perhaps future American presidents.

To be bipartisan about this, the Bush administration bought into this two-state nonsense, willingly marching Israel toward shared space with a freshly-created country that would surely be peppered with leadership flavored by Hezbollah and Hamas. This is, as they say in international affairs, crazy.

I know it is hard to tell long-suffering Palestinians that their propensity to elevate leaders of a terrorist bent is a deal-breaker for any group looking for its own country. It is even harder to deliver the ultimate clarity-- that there is in fact no basis in logic or history for a new nation called Palestine, carved from the soil of Israel.

There is already a Palestinian state in the region. It’s called Jordan. If geography is a sticking point, any Palestinian seeking to remain on Israeli soil can be assured of a life far more promising under Israeli governance than the violent third-world lives they lead in the West Bank and Gaza, lands handed over to them in the most recent phony offer of land for peace.

It’s never enough. if Israel, a tiny slice of land surrounded by millions of square miles of people longing for its extinction, will just give up a little more territory, then, finally, there will supposedly be peace.

Progressives Agenda on The Law : Legislate From the Bench

Political Cartoons by Chuck AsayJustice in America today. If the progressive socialists can't "fundamentally" change the country through congress, then they will legislate the changes from the bench.

A majority of the American voters agree. Witness the reelection of  Mr. Obama last November.

I have always been told that the American voter is smart enough to understand this stuff to not allow it to happen?

Progressive Obama's Israel Visit Just More Smoke & Mirrors

Political Cartoons by Lisa BensonJust more smoke and mirrors - Mr. Obama has no intention of changing his agenda of 'non- commitment' while wooing the Israelis with his back slapping and big smile. The con game continues.

It is a given by anyone that has paid attention, if the Iranians attack Israel, Mr. Obama will do nothing to help except appoint a 'blue ribbon' panel to find ways to escape having to take any responsibility for not supporting the decades old alliance with Israel.

Mr. Obama will allow the Israeli people to be destroyed and the consequences for America will be catastrophic. How? A majority of the voters will agree it was time to move on, who cares about such a small country like Israel, besides they'll say, 'don't bother me with this stuff right now, I'm sending a messages on my IPhone about the great party we had last night. Where is Israel anyway?'

And using Hillary's proclamation of defiance to illustrate the indifference of the American voter to world affairs, "what difference does it make anyway" for us in America as Israel is so far away.

Saturday, March 23, 2013

Education In Flux : Conflicting Forces

With all of the turmoil that surrounds change in our society, much of the educational system has seen a significant change as well. I'm not sure how much of it is for the better right now, but at least many people and organizations are actively trying to make it better. That's the good news.

The bad news is how many kids will not get a good education while this process develops? I hope New York City is not an indication of how the change is going as nearly 80% of students upon graduations can't read.

A Short History of K-12 Reform
March 20, 2013
Source: Chester Finn, Jr., "A Short History of K-12 Reform," Hoover Institution, March 14, 2013.

Over the last two decades, the American education system has made significant changes. While generally slow to react, K-12 education is filled with innovations and novel programs that provide promise for the future, says Chester Finn Jr., a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution.
Finn reviews 10 major K-12 developments that took place between 1990 and 2010.
  • Following the groundbreaking work in "A Nation at Risk," the development of academic goals, standards, assessments, tracking metrics and accountability systems created a system that evaluated results, not inputs or intentions.
  • These new standards reformed the way the federal government granted aid to students, adding significant strings attached to federal funds to compel states to adopt specific educational initiatives to produce targeted outcomes.
  • The federal government also modified its key monitoring system, the National Assessment of Educational Progress, changing the once general oversight report into a detailed state-by-state analysis of education performance.
  • The spread of charter schools across the country has fostered significant school choice and created an entirely new type of school that creates more competition and personalized education.
  • By 2010 five in every 10 pupils were enrolled in schools that they or their parents played an active role in selecting rather than passively being assigned by a district bureaucracy with geographically-based attendance zones.
  • To improve the quality of teachers, individual schools, districts and charters created new routes for teachers to enter the classroom that do not involve a formal pedagogical education.
  • Many political leaders at the state and local levels took an active role in K-12 policies and operations, and leadership of state and local education agencies was vested in unconventional characters.
  • Technology revolutionized data systems, administrative communication and teaching capabilities and now enables hybrid and online learning systems.
  • States experimented with school funding, which allowed greater flexibility.
  • Education before and after K-12 was integrated seamlessly, enabling lifetime tracking of an individual student's progress.
Together, these changes occurred slowly over time but completely transformed the American education system as a whole. For politicians and parents, reforming K-12 education may seem like a daunting and stodgy task. Looking at these 10 developments, it is clear that the education system changes more quickly than we often think.

Dementia On the Rise : Why? The Struggle for Reality?

I wonder why the prediction is for such a rise in the number of cases of Dementia? What is it among our society that causes people to lose their grip on reality?

I wonder if it's the constant struggle to understand why prosperity and individual freedom is now seen as a bad thing by so many. People in this age bracket grew up knowing how great it was to be able to decide one's own fate through hard work and dedication, but to now see this precept go by the boards as old fashioned and out dated.

The older generation can't come to grips with what they see as nonsense, a total lack of common sense to believe the 'collective', progressive socialism, is more important then freedom of thought and action.

What's important now is a willingness to accept the decisions of others as a means to simply survive. To excel in life's work is no longer seen as a viable solution for success. Accepting the fact that so many now believe that being a tool for others to use as they see fit to achieve a fundamental change to our country, a country that has given them everything, is too much for the 'greatest' generation to understand.

One in Three Elderly Have Dementia When They Die
March 22, 2013
Source:  Janice Lloyd, "One in Three Elderly Have Dementia When They Die," USA Today, March 19, 2013.

A new study from the Alzheimer's Association shows that deaths from Alzheimer's and other forms of dementia have increased 68 percent from 2000 to 2010. The report also says that dementia is the second largest contributor to death after heart failure. The data for the study was collected from Medicare and Medicaid reports, says USA Today.

The report's findings include:
  • One in three seniors dies from a form of dementia.
  • Deaths from heart disease, HIV/AIDS and stroke have declined.
  • Dementia is the second largest contributor to death after heart failure.
  • Health care, long-term care and hospice care are expected to increase to $1.2 trillion by 2050 for patients age 65 and older.
  • Medicare costs for seniors with Alzheimer's or other forms of dementia are nearly three times higher than for seniors without any form of dementia.
  • Medicaid costs are 19 times higher for seniors with a form of dementia than for seniors without dementia.
  • Stress on caregivers is estimated to result in more than $9 billion in increased health care costs.
  • The number of Alzheimer's cases is expected to rise from 5.2 million to 13.8 million by 2050.

Progressives Force Citizens Into Poverty : Savings Raided/Lost

Thank you Mr Obama and the other progressive socialist Democrats for your leadership in bring our country to her knees. What better way to destroy our way of life then to make sure the population has no choice then to accept dependency and poverty as a way of life.

Workers are saving less as they have no choice, it's save less or be cast into the street. Little wonder then why many are taking early withdrawals from their 401K's as well.

This is the "fundamental "change that Mr Obama talked about in 2008 when was running for president. And after 4 years of crushing failure in all areas of our economy and foreign policy, the majority of the population decided to vote for more of the same last November. Why would they do this?

Most taking heads in the media exclaim the general public as smart and aware of their destiny, but given that these smart voters willingly decided to accept 4 more years of decline makes for the Clinton reframe " a willing acceptance of disbelief" a more realistic argument that the voting public isn't as smart as they once were thought to be.

Workers Saving Too Little to Retire
March 22, 2013
Source: Kelly Greene and Vipal Monga, "Workers Saving Too Little to Retire," Wall Street Journal, March 19, 2013.

More Americans than ever before will soon be retiring and evidence suggests many are not saving enough for retirement. A combination of financial and demographic forces is making it more difficult for households to prepare for their future, says the Wall Street Journal.
  • An updated 2012 report by the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) shows that 57 percent of U.S. workers reported less than $25,000 in total household savings and investments, excluding their homes, which represented a 7 percent increase over 2008.
  • Twenty-eight percent of respondents in the survey had no confidence that they will have enough money to retire, which is the highest level in the study's 23-year history.
  • According to the Society of Actuaries, as much as $97 billion could be added to corporate pension liabilities because of rising life expectancy.
Longer lives means more costs must be spread out over the same amount of retirement savings. Many households are struggling to find the extra income to contribute to retirement as living costs have risen in the last decade, particularly during the Great Recession.
  • About 50 percent of the workers and retirees in the EBRI survey said they would be unable to come up with $2,000 if an unexpected need were to arise in the next month.
  • While the survey does not count traditional pensions, which are designed to provide retirees with steady income throughout their lives, the portion of private sector workers who receive these retirement plans has declined significantly.
  • Only 3 percent of workers in 2011 were covered by defined-benefit plans, down from 28 percent in 1979.
For the companies that do offer those plans, they will likely have to kick in extra funds to account for longer life spans.
  • In 2013, a male who retires at age 65 is expected to live an additional 20.5 years and a female who retires at age 65 is expected to live an additional 22.7 years.
  • U.S. pension obligations for all publicly traded companies totaled $1.93 trillion at the end of 2012, up from $1.6 trillion in 2008.
Greater life expectancy and less savings mean that fewer Americans will have enough money to last throughout retirement and companies will face larger pension liabilities.