Saturday, November 30, 2013

Obama Mystique Fades In Light of Truth : The Shadows Fight Back

Boombox #15When the truth comes, the shadows fade and clarity of thought begins to shine. unfortunately there are huge sections of our country that are still in swathed in shadows where it seems a light, no matter how strong, can not penetrate.

Progressive Socialism A Failing Ideology : Marxist-Leninism Failed As Well

When reading a article in The Weekly Standard by Ronald Radosh critiquing a book by Robert Gallately, "Stalin's Curse, Battling for Communism in War and Cold War", I found it most interesting how Stalin and the Soviets had no intention of changing their ways after the war in Europe. Gallately wrote, 'Marxist - Leninist ideology which Stalin saw as the guideline for the spreading the Soviet system elsewhere' would be the order of the day, a strategy to bring the entire world under the domination of Soviet style Communism. 

One of the paragraphs in Radosh's article stands out as it seems to clears out some of the cobwebs that the progressive left in America has in their thinking about socialist tendencies, policies, being workable or moral, and given how the left's economic policies that are being force fed to the American public are destroying our economic livelihood, the following has significant importance for our society now and for our future.

"One of Gallately's signal combustions is an explanation of why Stalin did not accept the Americans offer to extend the Marshall Plan aid to the soviet Union and it eastern European satellites. Stalin did not reject the offer because he was afraid of Western control of (his) economy rather he believed that any aid would lead to rapid economic heath and thus under mining his determination to communize the enter region."

If one has a civilized discussion with a member of the progressive socialist liberal left Democrat party concerning the attributes, failures of socialism, and the Soviet attempt, and failure, to bring prosperity to millions through the Marxist-Leninist ideology of an all powerful central government, the left Democrats retort by saying the Marxist-Leninist socialist system just needed more time to develop to be successful, i.e., "Each according to his abilities and each according to his needs".

And when the conservation comes around to why it didn't and couldn't work as planned with proof given the same ideology is at work today in our own country, and how it is failing in all aspects just like the old Soviet system failed, the once civilized conversation starts to become uncivilized.

Friday, November 29, 2013

Vermont's Drug Infestation : The War On Heroin

Vermont is in a war that has the potential to change how the state lives from day to day. Fortunately they are on the move to stop the flood of Heroin coming into their state before it too late. This is interesting in that there are many in the media, and else where, calling to end the drug war by police and others. They say if you are in a hole and don't know how to get out, stop digging.

This analogy does have some merit seeing how the flood of drugs across our boarders seems to be unabated if not getting worse. Just as the answer to stopping people from wanting drugs more money and more police, and this is not just those that are already hooked, but all the new users waiting in line to participate begs some new ideas. It hasn't gone unnoticed as well that the talking heads haven't put forward any solution of their own.

The article in the Weekly Standard "Down and Out in Vermont, Heroin in the hills" depicts certain cities in the state fighting this disease and how they approach the problem. What caught my eye was a statement from the author as the possible reasons the state is struggling with this infestation of heroin.

The author stated, " - Vermont's modern vision of itself (is) a progressive outpost of tolerance and initiative, where the values of the community and environment precede those of the individual". This lays bear one of the fundamental problems that Vermont, and other states that have developed a similar creeds of progressivism over the years, will have to come to grips with if they truly want to transform their communities from ones of rampant crime to one of responsible acceptance of the rule of law.

This I believe can only come from the people deciding their own fates. If the people can decide that what has gone before does not work and changes must take place to solve their problems, there is hope for the future. If the challenge for change is to great and complacency rules the day, all will be lost.

Knock-Out Game Indicative of Progressive Socialist Societies?

It's time to stand and deliver - to proclaim the sun actually doesn't rise in the East will not make it so. If the facts on the ground say these attacks are racially motivated then why not say so? What possible reason can there be to turn away while someone is being murdered? indicative

How do you get the community involved in solving a terrible problem if no one is willing to say it's a problem, and then identify the root cause? If you can see by video and first hand accounts of what is taking place and yet ignore the problem, a solution will be impossible. What is the rational for this?

Is it fear of retaliation from people that we think are our friends but in reality are wholly owned and motivated by the progressive left. No one wants to believe they are alone in the mod mentality.

I wonder if this is what is taking place on the national stage as well when Mr Obama was reelected in 2012? A majority of the voting public could see and hear what had gone on for the first four years of Mr Obama administration and yet, ignoring the facts that are everywhere in plain sight, vote the problem to continue? What is the reason for the disconnect?

As the 'Knockout games' continue and Mr Obama and the progressive Democrats continue to "fundamentally" change our country, one has to wonder when common sense will enter the conscience of  the voting public? Maybe it easier to wait until it all falls apart. Only time will tell.

The Knockout Game: What Took the Conservative Media so Long to Notice?
By Charles Martel

Read more:
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Evil flourishes when good men do nothing, and too many conservatives have been wobbly about recent racial violence trends.

Back in June of 2011, the American Thinker published an article entitled "Racial Violence Has Not Made It Into the Conversation About Race." A few months later, the author wrote, "Between the flash mobs and the knock-out game, we have very good reasons to change the way we think about racism in America."

In June of 2011, at least two people had been killed as a result of the sadistic, racially charged knockout game. Since then, there have regularly been unprovoked attacks by black teens against non-black victims. Now, finally, after a series of attacks against Jewish pedestrians in New York City, mainstream conservatives are discussing the knock-out game. Fox News reports that the death toll from the "game" is now seven.

With only a few exceptions, including the American Thinker, until very recently few conservative news outlets would touch these stories, or the racial realities highlighted by the attacks.

Some will chalk this conservative timidity up to political correctness. But something far worse is going on. Whether the issue is amnesty, or affirmative action, flash mobs, or the knock-out game, too many mainstream conservatives seem intent on turning their backs on vulnerable non-minorities.

If you're a worker stuck with low wages and few hours, a white student applying for college admissions, or a victim of racist pastimes, then Conservatism, Inc. will not stand up for you. At least not when minorities are involved.

It's one thing for politicians to play it safe. We expect the worst from them. But journalists and commenters are supposed to "speak truth to power."

There were all sorts of indications that this was a trend, and a significant story. In 2011, the National Association of Black Journalists gave a St. Louis reporter a major award for his article, "Knockout King: Kids Call It a Game. Academics Call It a Bogus Trend. Cops Call it Murder."

There are all sorts of ways for scared conservatives to ignore racial issues. One is to ride the high horse.  

One interpretation simply ignores the facts. Ed Morrissey at HotAir writes, "Four people have been killed in similar assaults, which have nothing in common except the modus operandi." Morrissey probably knows that the assaults have something in common because he actually quotes Al Sharpton saying, "We would not be silent if it was the other way around. We cannot be silent or in any way reluctant to confront it when it is coming from our own community."

By "our community," Morrissey should have known, if he didn't, that Sharpton meant the black community, and the "if it was the other way around" referred to reversing the races.

The common thread is that the attackers are black and the victims are not.  Sean Hannity had on his show a Slate leftist named Matthew Yglesias who says that the trend is "fake." Yglesias, who was himself a victim of an unprovoked attack by "two dudes," helpfully explains that he was not knocked out, therefore the teens were not playing the knock-out game.

As he describes it, "...two dudes randomly assaulted me before running away without stealing anything... I was knocked down, but definitely not out, and then after that I got kicked a bunch of times." This is actually the exact fact pattern of knockout game attacks.

Even Reuters news service notes that in these sadistic games, "if a victim doesn't fall to the first punch, other attackers try to finish the job." So Yglesias was just lucky.

Like Yglesias, a white 61-year-old named Jerry Newingham probably wasn't knocked out by the first punch thrown by his black attacker. That's why a group of black assailants then jumped up and down on Newingham's head until he was unconscious. He later died from the mauling he received as a result of the racial "game."

A guilt-ridden white leftist Slate writer is afraid to honestly discuss black racial violence? Good indoctrination and moral stupor can explain that. What's HotAir's excuse? An earlier piece written by Morrissey refers to the "race tu quoque" argument, which he wants to avoid. "We [conservatives] resist categorizing people by identity," he proclaims.

This piety may sound good to some, and it certainly has the benefit of avoiding a confrontation with reality. But it is not admirable to downplay the racial animus and clear racial patterns involved in these killings. The fact is that racial identity does play a role in the knockout game, also called "polar bear" hunting because the victims are generally white. This is a fact that a New York City CBS station was brave enough to publish, even if some conservatives are not.

Morrissey praises Brietbart's Joel Pollack because he "intentionally steered clear of the race discussion relating to recent crimes in Oklahoma and Spokane." How many problems are dealt with effectively because educated, involved people "intentionally steered clear" of them? More to the point, how would it work if whites said society should "intentionally steer clear" of racial facts when white bias crimes were occurring?

For Pollack and Morrissey, whites are evidently the only group that isn't allowed to recognize certain facts. Pollack and Morrissey seemingly don't want whites to express concerns about being targeted and harmed because of racial identity. If nothing else, "polar bear hunting" should convince them to revisit the issue of race and violence.
Charles Martel is the pseudonym of a conservative warrior

Read more:
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Thursday, November 28, 2013

Impersonator Signed Affordable Health Care Bill : Mr Obama is Furious

It appears that Mr Obama is amazed to find out that the health care bill might have been signed by him or an impersonator, someone that looks like him. He ponders what he will do now to find out how all this place all the while he wasn't aware of it.

He said if he can not discover how this happened on his watch he will appoint a panel of experts in detection to uncover those responsible. Impersonating a president is  serious.

Mr Obama and experts at the Democrat National Committee believe it probably was some kind of trick by the Republicans sending a look-alike to cause mischief for Mr Obama.

A White house spokesman noted after Mr Obama's Rose Garden appearance explaining to the press and the American people how this happened, a congressional bill being signed by an impersonator, of which he nothing of it at the time, this investigation should be complete and on Mr Obama's desk for personal perusal in little more then three years, depending what other circumstances that might pop up to replace it on the schedule.

This investigation could take even longer but spokesperson was informed that Mr Obama is very up set that someone can just walk into the White House and signed a bill of this importance all the while he is in the same room completely unaware. Unacceptable.

School Systems in Flux : Parents Making The Decisions

Little wonder why the public school system is attacking the Voucher, Charter and private schools as they are proving to be a good alternative to public education. The public school system has a lot of problems that they won't or can't address to compete for the available tax dollars. The public school mentality believes it is their right to have control of education. The teachers unions are the muscle behind this push back on the alternative schools as this is their source of funding.

It has always been this way and they see no need to make changes now. Remember the results of Gov. Scott Walkers plan, Act 10, to change how the public school system will function in Wisconsin?

An Analysis of Why and How Parents Choose Private Schools
Source: Benjamin Scafidi and Jim Kelly, "More Than Scores: An Analysis of Why and How Parents Choose Private Schools," Friedman Foundation, November 13, 2013.
November 27, 2013

Frustrated by the failure of many local public school districts to educate students adequately, parents, politicians and policymakers are considering alternative systems for the delivery of K-12 education in America, say Jim Kelly, founder and General Counsel of Georgia Community Foundation, Inc., and Ben Scafidi, a professor of economics and director of the Economics of Education Policy Center at Georgia College & State University.

In 2013, Georgia GOAL Scholarship Program, Inc. (GOAL), a tax-exempt, nonprofit student scholarship organization operating under Georgia's Education Expense Credit (i.e., tax-credit scholarship) law, asked the parents of scholarship recipients to complete a survey pertaining to the reasons they chose a private school for their children and the information about private schools that they deem important to the school selection process.
  • Georgia provides dollar-for-dollar tax credits for donations to Student Scholarship Organizations, nonprofits that provide private school scholarships.
  • Individuals may claim up to $1,000 and married couples filing jointly may claim up to $2,500.
  • An individual who is a member of an LLC, a shareholder of an "S" corporation, or a partner in a partnership may claim up to $10,000 of their tax actually paid as a member, shareholder or partner.
  • Corporate taxpayers may claim up to 75 percent of their total tax liability. The program is capped at $58 million in tax credits per year.
  • Surveyed parents were overwhelmingly satisfied with their private school choice, with 98.6 percent of parents being "very satisfied" or "satisfied" with their decision to send their children to a private school using a GOAL scholarship.
The implementation of K-12 school choice programs (e.g., tax-credit scholarships and vouchers) in many states is producing a large number of parents who, for a variety of reasons, have transferred their children from public to private schools.

The top five reasons why parents chose a private school for their children are all related to school climate and classroom management, including:
  • "Better student discipline" (50.9 percent), "better learning environment" (50.8 percent), "smaller class sizes" (48.9 percent),"improved student safety" (46.8 percent),and "more individual attention for my child" (39.3 percent).
  • Only 10.2 percent listed higher standardized test scores as one of their top five reasons.

Communation Skills Lost? : Face to Face Contact Unnecessary?

I wonder why this is taking place? I wonder as well why this article doesn't mention how many of the new generation have their head buried in their iphones and ipads? It would seem talking face to face is not necessary any more when all that is needed is to pump out a text or send a picture, right?

Gen X and Gen Y Lack Communication Skills Employers Are Looking For
Source: Kelley Holland, "Why Johnny Can't Write, and Why Employers Are Mad," CNBC, November 11, 2013.

November 27, 2013 

Despite stubbornly high unemployment, many employers complain that they can't find qualified candidates for the jobs they do have, says CNBC.
  • Often, it turns out, the mismatch results from applicants' inadequate communication skills.
  • In survey after survey, employers are complaining about job candidates' inability to speak and write clearly.
  • On Friday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported there were a net 204,000 new jobs created in October, though the unemployment rate rose to 7.3 percent.
Experts differ on why job candidates can't communicate effectively. Bram Lowsky, an executive vice president of Right Management, the workforce management arm of Manpower, blames technology. "With Gen X and Gen Y, because everything is shorthand and text, the ability to communicate effectively is challenged," he said. "You see it in the business world, whether with existing employees or job candidates looking for work."
  • Others say colleges aren't doing a good job.
  • In a survey of 318 employers published earlier this year by the Association of American Colleges and Universities and conducted by Hart Research Associates, 80 percent said colleges should focus more on written and oral communication.
William Ellet, an adjunct professor teaching writing at Brandeis International Business School, says the problem starts even earlier. He points out that when the Department of Education in 2012 published what it called "The Nation's Report Card: Writing 2011" -- just 24 percent of 8th and 12th graders were proficient in writing. From colleges on down, he said, "Nobody takes responsibility for writing instruction."

The good news for job seekers is that some companies are providing help with writing. Lowsky estimates that Right Management is seeing an increase of 20 to 25 percent in the number of clients investing in career development for employees, including improving their communication skills.

Quantitative Easing Has Consequecnes : Unintended? Maybe Not? Just Politics

This is all about politics and the federal reserve propping up the economy to make the Democrats look good as the midterm election are coming in 2014. Also, if Republicans get into office in 2014 and  2016, watch what happens to the markets when the federal reserve decides it's time to pull back on the monetary easing, QE's.

The fed will no longer need to prop up the financial markets to make the government look like it is doing the right things to save the economy. With the Republicans in office it will be time to make the government look bad to the people by pulling back on buying the $85 billion dollars worth of bonds every month and there by allowing the markets to crash, losing trillions of dollars of citizens savings.

The media will have a field day showing how inapt the Republicans are and how the voters made such a huge mistake by voting them into office. This is as sure thing as the federal reserve is so misunderstood by just about everyone. And of course the fed chair person is a progressive Democrat.

"See what happens when you decide that Democrats can't save the economy. Everything was going just fine until the Republicans got into office. Now the market is crashing and you are loosing  everything".

This is right from the progressive's play book. It worked wonders against Bush for 8 years with the media screaming daily how bad an unemployment rate of 4.6% was which proved the economy was tanking. It really wasn't but it didn't matter, it's the seriousness of the charge that mattered. People bought it hook, line and sinker. Now look where we are. An unemployment of 7.3% and a U6 unemployment rate of 14% or worse and nearly 47% of the population still think Mr Obama is the "One". Go figure.

 Remember how this was done by the media and how well it worked? Elections do have consequences.

Unorthodox Monetary Policies: Watch Out for Unintended Effects
Source: Desmond Lachman, "Global Effects of Unorthodox Monetary Policies," American Enterprise Institute, November 13, 2013.
November 27, 2013

In the aftermath of the Great Recession, major central banks have scrambled to support economic recovery and to avoid deflation through highly accommodative and unorthodox monetary policy stances. Going forward, these central banks need to be much more mindful than they have been to date of the longer term unintended consequences of their policy actions, says Desmond Lachman, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

Over the past five years, in the aftermath of the Great Recession, the Federal Reserve, European Central Bank (ECB), Bank of Japan (BOJ) and Bank of England (BOE) have pursued unorthodox monetary policies on an unprecedented scale. This has led to a massive expansion in these central banks' balance sheets and has taken monetary policy into entirely uncharted waters. These effects raise basic concerns as to how these central banks can successfully exit from these policies.
  • Since September 2012, the Fed has been engaged in an open-ended third round of quantitative easing (QE).
  • This has involved the purchase of U.S. Treasury bonds and mortgage-backed securities at a rate of $85 billion a month.
  • In addition, the Fed is providing forward guidance to the markets by indicating that it will not raise its policy rate so long as unemployment remains above 6.5 percent and inflation expectations remain well anchored.
It would seem that these policies have succeeded in providing welcome support to these economies' recoveries by substantially lowering long-term interest rates and by increasing asset prices. However, they have come with a host of unintended consequences, including incipient asset- and credit-market bubbles. They have also had important spillover effects on other economies in general and on the emerging-market economies. Recent capital flows and currency movements have been particularly disruptive to the emerging-market economies, which have been the main engine of global economic growth.

One has to hope that the world's major central banks strike the right balance between the short-run gains to be obtained from further QE and the longer-run adverse costs of those policies. In particular, one must hope that these banks refrain from repeating their past mistakes of unduly fueling asset- and credit-market bubbles and of contributing to undue exchange-market volatility.

Non-Profit Organizations Really Non-Profit? : Congress Looking

This really long over due as one might expect, many non-profit organization are really not 'non-profit' but organized as such to funnel money to political campaign funds, i.e. AARP which is wholly owned by the progressive Democrats.

But the non - profit, especially the ones that are feeding the coffers of the progressives, needn't worry very much about congress coming after them as long as it is controlled by Democrats and enough Republicans that are benefitting from these organizations.

Nonprofit's Taxation Is under Review
Source: Neil Maghami, "When Nonprofits Compete with Businesses," Capital Research Center, November 2013.

November 27, 2013

Congress is seriously considering changes to the complicated rules that govern the way nonprofits may operate income-generating businesses. While reform won't be simple, this is an area that cries out for greater fairness in the way nonprofits and for-profits are treated under our tax laws, says Neil Maghami of the Capital Research Center.

Probably the most egregious and most powerful serial abuser of the non-profit tax exemption is the crony-capitalist, big government lobby AARP. Formerly known as the American Association of Retired Persons, the politically formidable AARP describes itself as a "nonprofit, nonpartisan organization with a membership that helps people 50-plus have independence, choice and control in ways that are beneficial and affordable to them and society as a whole."
  • What the AARP never admits in public is that it's a mammoth money-making enterprise, with $1.57 billion in assets and revenue of $1.18 billion in 2010, according to its tax returns.
  • The billions of dollars generated by AARP's money-making operations, as well as the extravagant salaries that it pays its executives, are so noteworthy that members of Congress have asked the IRS to review AARP's tax-exempt status.
In a 1999 article for the Capital Research Center, Patrick Reilly welcomed the idea that nonprofit leaders might embrace for-profit activities, "as long as a nonprofit's primary private activity continues to warrant tax-exemption." Reilly also warned against the heavy hand of "intrusive government regulations" as a solution to the problem. And in that admonition, Reilly made a point Congress should keep in mind in its current deliberations.

It would benefit neither the nonprofit sector, nor the for-profit sector, if the lines between the two became practically invisible by wanton non-enforcement of the relevant tax rules.
At the same time, drawing an unduly rigid line between the two through regulation would risk inviting an unwelcome level of government intrusion into and surveillance of nonprofit groups' activities.

Wednesday, November 27, 2013

Archeologists Parade New Fossil Found in Washington D.C. Dig

I'm not sure this is authentic as most of the conventional thought, supported by biblical text, explains they have been a factor since the very beginning.

Even so, this significant find helps to support the majority view of just how long we have had to suffer the effects of general progressive liberalism, and in particular Democrat liberalism.

That we have survived to this place in time says a lot about the extraordinary efforts of people with common sense and some sort of moral fortitude, Conservatives.

Middle Class Incomes Rise : Inflation/Unemployment/Cynicism Rising To?

This is good news. The problem that I have though with this analysis is the cost of living doesn't seem to be reflected in the new norm of food and energy which isn't included when factoring the rate of inflation. And who is hurt the most by inflation, the middle class and the poor.

It is good news that there is an increase in income for the middle class as compared  to how the fared in the last decades, but so many things have changed that effect the potential for prosperity in our country.

Also, and let's not forget how the federal reserve is controlling the stock market with the injection of $85 billion dollars every month making those that have stocks richer and those that don't tread water.

The division grows larger between the classes as more and more money is poured into the control of big banks that are not spreading the wealth around and companies that are reducing their  foot print in this country by not hiring, all the while the federal government is spending huge amounts of tax dollars, that we have to borrow or print, to support programs designed to actually cripple the middle and lower class by making them dependent on federal sources for survival, i.e. ObamaCare.

So just how much has the middle class improved over the last 5 years? A better question may be how much has the middle class lost over the last 5 years?

Poor and Middle Class Incomes Have Increased Significantly
Source: Scott Winship, "Poor and Middle Class Incomes Have Increased Significantly," Economic Policies for the 21st Century, November 13, 2013.
November 26, 2013

Public discussion of the economy is wondering why it is that since the 1970s poor and middle class households have seen practically no improvement in living standards, says Scott Winship, the Walter B. Wriston Fellow at the Manhattan Institute.
A widely-cited Economic Policy Institute study, for instance, says median household income was just 5 percent higher in 2012 than in 1979 and that the poverty rate rose from 11.7 percent to 15.0 percent.
But these worrying conclusions flow from problematic analyses.
  • Contrary to conventional wisdom, poor and middle class households are at least 30 percent richer today than their counterparts from 35 years ago.
  • Most analysts of income trends simply accept that the official Census Bureau figures are the best available.
But those figures have three important shortcomings.
  • First, they rely on an inferior way of accounting for changes in the cost of living. The best set of inflation estimates developed by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) only goes back to 1999, so it cannot be used to consider long-term income trends. However, a similar set of estimates from the Bureau of Economic Analysis is available back to the 1920s and indicates the same change in the cost of living after 1999 as the BLS series. Using this more sophisticated cost-of-living adjustment, which is preferred by the Congressional Budget Office and Federal Reserve Board, the increase in median household income was not 5 percent but 16 percent from 1979 to 2012.
  • Second, the official Census Bureau figures indicate that the household at the 20th percentile of income -- poorer than 80 percent of households and richer than only 20 percent of them -- was no better off in 2012 than in 1979. Switching to the better cost-of-living adjustment, however, shows a 10 percent improvement -- and a 19 percent improvement comparing the 1979 peak to the 2007 peak.
  • Finally, the Census Bureau figures do not account for the fact that households have become smaller over time.

Income Divisions Growing : Middle Class Shrinking - The Plan is Working

The new strategy of the progressives is to make the divide between those that have and those that don't as large as possible so that the largest group, those that don't have can be controlled to do the bidding of those that have the reigns of power. The true face of socialism.

This been the aim of progressive socialsit liberal Democrats for decades and is now coming into full bloom under Mr Obama's progressive socialist liberal administration. ObamaCare is a good example of how Mr Obama is dividing the country through chaos. And let's not forget Harry Reid taking control of the Senate with the Nuclear Option, eliminating the Republican opposition completely. Harry Reid and Mr Obama now have free reign over two thirds of the government. There is no one to stop them from totally "fundamentally changing America". Those words spoken by Mr Obama in 2008.

If this doesn't scare you into action by voting out these people next November, then we all will have to suffer the consequences of our inability to act, a country with no prosperity, a country with no future. Is this something we can accept as the new norm? I sure as hell can't and won't!

Income: The New Segregation
Source: Kevin D. Williamson, "The New Segregation," National Review, November 11, 2013. Sean F. Reardon and Kendra Bischoff
November 26, 2013

Income is the new boundary line in U.S. neighborhoods, but money is not the answer, says Kevin D. Williamson, a roving correspondent for National Review.

If you divided American families into six graduated income groups -- poor, low-income, lower-middle, upper-middle, high-income and affluent -- and took a trip in time back to the Age of Disco, you'd find that nearly two-thirds of all American families lived in neighborhoods with median incomes in the middle two groups: lower-middle and upper-middle. Return to the present day and you'll find that fewer than half of American families live in middle-income neighborhoods.

Those are the findings of Kendra Bischoff of Cornell University and Sean F. Reardon of Stanford University in their recent study "Residential Segregation by Income, 1970-2009," published by the Russell Sage Foundation. The results, if not exactly surprising, are nonetheless troubling.
  • Neighborhoods marked by a mix of residents in the fat middle of the economic bell curve are growing proportionally smaller, while both high-income and low-income neighborhoods grow proportionally more populous.
  • The consequences of income segregation are likely to be felt most strongly by children.
While the research is mixed on how great an impact things like school funding and peer-group composition have on long-term outcomes for children, it seems likely that the effects of these factors is large, at least for some significant group of children, namely potential high-performers who may not develop their talents and interests unless and until they discover the right opportunities.

The most important social habits are learned, they are not taught; children pick them up from those around them, the same way they pick up language.

Insurance Companies Win Big With ObamaCare : Higher Premiums, Higher Profits

I after reading this and understanding where this all heading, 'single payer health care', the heath care that we have enjoyed and trusted is now in peril. And it's not just for the 10% that didn't have any insurance, let alone good health care as they all did, remember it the law that no one, not even illegals are guaranteed care, but all of us across the nation will now not only be denied good insurance, but the quality of care will nearly gone as well.

I guess what is most troubling to me is the majority of voters seem not to understand what they are giving up by voting for progressive socialist Democrats? A majority of voters, citizens, seem to agree individual freedom to choose how they live isn't important any longer, they seem more then willing to accept a life of dependence on government rules, regulations and demands. I wonder how many of these citizens have ever heard of Liming's and what happens to them when they become confused?

Sarah Palin's comment that we are being 'enslaved' to our government under ObamaCare was on the mark, but she was viscously attacked by the progressive socialist Democrats in the media and by our government.

Why is this attack on our basic freedoms so hard for so many among us to understand? What basic moral fiber has been stripped out of our souls to allow our nation to become a sink hole of despair and failure? How can 48% of the population still believe, after all that has gone before, that the progressive socialist Democrats are doing a good job?

Where did this sickness of complacency and ignorance of self identity come from, and how did it spread to so many good people so easily? Why is it so much easier to just lay down and roll over then to stand and be counted as a proud American with a history of independence and courage?

Has our 326 year history of individual freedom and independence this easy to cast aside? In less then 5 years, we have lost our way?

Another Way Taxpayers Lose Under ObamaCare
Source: Robert F. Graboyes, "Another Way Taxpayers Lose Under ObamaCare," U.S. News & World Report, November 11, 2013.
November 26, 2013

State insurance commissioners have long seen themselves as protectors of the public's wallets -- the officials who say "no" to insurers' requests to increase health insurance premiums. It has not yet sunk in that on this coming New Year's Day, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) will flip the commissioners' motives upside-down, prompting them to approve and even encourage premium increases, says Robert F. Graboyes, a senior research fellow with the Mercatus Center and professor of health economics at Virginia Commonwealth University.
  • Under the ACA, a family of four with $30,000 in income will only pay $600 for, say, a $10,000 insurance policy. The federal government will cover the remaining $9,400.
  • Under the "medical loss ratio" rules, the insurer can keep $2,000 for overhead and profit. The remaining $8,000 must go to health care providers -- doctors, hospitals, therapists, etc.
Now, suppose the insurer raises the premium to $20,000.
  • The family of four will still pay only $600. The federal government absorbs 100 percent of the increases and must now kick in $19,400 instead of $9,400.
  • The insurer doubles payments to providers by paying higher reimbursement rates and by expanding the menu of benefits, (e.g., more tests, more surgeries, lengthy spa visits.)
Again, the enrollee pays no more for insurance, but providers get $16,000 in income rather than $8,000 -- and insurers retain $4,000 instead of $2,000. Plus, the enrollee gets much more generous benefits. No insurer has any motive to reduce premiums, since no purchasers will benefit.

Some critics argue that a swelling-premiums scenario would never occur because state regulators would never approve such increases. But why not?
  • Until now, commissioners were strongly motivated to hold the line on costs. Until now, forbidding insurers to raise premiums meant more money in the wallets of the state's voters and possibly the state's health care providers, too.
  • Now the commissioner who insists on lower premiums reduces the amount of care available to subsidized voters and doesn't save them a dime.
  • Because of the ACA's bizarre structure, higher premiums now mean better benefits for subsidized enrollees; higher incomes for doctors, hospitals, other providers and insurers; and higher state tax revenues from now-richer providers and insurers.
The only loser is the U.S. taxpayer, who must pay for these swelling costs.

Tuesday, November 26, 2013

Green Energy Subsides Are Wasteful : Taxpayers Foot the Bill, Again

The out right lying by the government and the media doesn't stop with wind and solar power, biofuels, Ethanol, is subsidized by more then 55 cents per gallon and causes more pollution in it's production then does the extraction of fossil fuels like oil and natural gas.

Does it matter to the general public, I don't know if it does as the majority voters continues to elect the very people that demand we pay the extra price for wind, solar and biofuels whether we like it or not.

Why is that?

Green Energy Is the Real Subsidy Hog
Source: Bjorn Lomborg, "Green Energy Is the Real Subsidy Hog," Wall Street Journal, November 11, 2013.

November 26, 2013

Renewables receive three times as much money per energy unit as fossil fuels, says Bjorn Lomborg, director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center. For 20 years the world has tried subsidizing green technology instead of focusing on making it more efficient.
  • Today Spain spends about 1 percent of gross domestic product throwing money at green energy such as solar and wind power.
  • The $11 billion a year is more than Spain spends on higher education.
  • At the end of the century, with current commitments, these Spanish efforts will have delayed the impact of global warming by roughly 61 hours, according to the estimates of Yale University's well-regarded Dynamic Integrated Climate-Economy model.
A myth about fossil-fuel subsidies worth debunking is that the United States subsidizes fossil fuels more heavily than green energy. Not so.
  • The U.S. Energy Information Administration estimated in 2010 that fossil-fuel subsidies amounted to $4 billion a year.
  • Renewable sources received more than triple that figure, roughly $14 billion.
Actual spending skews even more toward green energy than it seems. Since wind turbines and other renewable sources produce much less energy than fossil fuels, the United States is paying more for less.
  • Coal-powered electricity is subsidized at about 5 percent of one cent for every kilowatt-hour (kwh) produced, while wind power gets about a nickel per kwh.
  • For solar power, it costs the taxpayer 77 cents per kwh.
Inaccurate information of this sort is needlessly misinforming public policy. Subsidizing first generation, inefficient green energy might make well-off people feel good about themselves, but it won't transform the energy market.

Progressives Rule by Fiat : Insurers & People Confused

I wonder how a heath care plan would work if the government wasn't involved, and we didn't have a progressive socialist liberal Democrat sitting on his throne issuing orders and changing laws to suit his agenda to "Transform America".

Sigh - I guess as the saying goes, 'if wishes were horses we would all ride'. What we need now is not just wishing things were different, we have to go to work to change the current trend of ignorance and corruption that has infested our government and country.

Failing this, generation will suffer our inability to understand what is happening all around us and take action to change this direction of destruction to save our children's future.

Health Insurers Express Worries over Obama Shift on Policy Cancellations
Source: Timothy W. Martin et al., "Health Insurers Express Worries over Obama Shift on Policy Cancellations," Wall Street Journal, November 14, 2013.
November 19, 2013

The president's move to placate millions of Americans rattled health insurers, who said they were unsure how to revive canceled policies in short order, says the Wall Street Journal.
While companies had expected the White House to address the white-hot issue of policy cancellations, President Barack Obama's decision to let people keep their old policies undercuts years of preparations for the overhaul of the health insurance market and introduces new uncertainties.
  • Two senior insurance executives said they had not yet received any formal direction on how to carry out the change, and had only learned the outlines of the plan.
  • At least two insurance commissioners, in Washington state and Washington, D.C., were quick to declare they wouldn't allow insurers there to continue offering plans that don't comply with the law.
  • "I do not believe [Mr. Obama's] proposal is a good deal for the state of Washington," said Mike Kreidler, the commissioner there.
It also means significant new risks for the insurance industry if the change is carried out.
  • If old plans are restored, "fewer healthy people and younger people would be leaving their current plans," said Jim O'Connor, a Milliman Inc. actuary who advised health plans on setting rates for the exchanges.
  • Meanwhile, he said, the sickest people now in the individual market would likely see lower prices through the exchanges and move to those plans.
Some insurance commissioners expressed doubt that Obama's decision could be implemented. "[I]t is unclear how, as a practical matter, the changes proposed today by the president can be put into effect," said Louisiana insurance commissioner Jim Donelon, the president of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, in a statement.

"In many states, cancellation notices have already gone out to policyholders and rates and plans have already been approved for 2014," said Donelon, a Republican. "Changing the rules through administrative action at this late date creates uncertainty and may not address the underlying issues."

ObamaCare Incentivizes Fraud : It's Free for 3 Months

The Affordable Care Act is unworkable and corrupt on it face, but then that is how it was designed. Make the system of complicated no one will be able to know every aspect of the law, forcing everyone to become a law breaker.

And law breakers must be punished as what better institution to do that  The Department of Justice and the IRS. Oh, and when the system is so screwed up and failing everyone, the government will have to step in and take it over, i.e. 'Single Payer'. Who knew?

ObamaCare Legalizes Fraud
Source: Tori Richards, "Buy 1, Get 3 Free! Experts say ObamaCare 'Grace Period' Gives Fraudsters the Green Light,", November 7, 2013.
November 15, 2013

Tucked inside nearly 11,000 pages of the Affordable Care Act is a little-known provision that doles out three months of free health care to individuals who choose to default on their premiums, says Tori Richards, writing for Watchdog.
  • People who receive the federal subsidy to be part of ObamaCare will be allowed to incur a three-month "grace period" if they can't pay their premiums and then simply cancel their policies, stiffing the doctors and hospitals.
  • Their only repercussion is that they have to wait until the following year's open enrollment if they want coverage on the exchange.
"It will help break the system," says Rep. Louis Gohmert, R-Texas, one of a core group of Republicans who oppose ObamaCare. "This is a huge piece of evidence to show this can't work, you will break the system and bankrupt people involved."

In Massachusetts, where a variation of ObamaCare already exists, the problem already has emerged, says Devon Herrick, senior fellow with the National Center for Policy Analysis.

"People are signing up and getting care and bailing out," Herrick says. "I was talking to an insurance agent a few years ago [in Massachusetts]. She said once a week she would get a call from a college girl who discovers she's pregnant and wants health insurance. That's an example of a condition that you can schedule."

So what can be done about this now? Not much, says Gohmert. Changing the law would require a signature by Obama, and Gohmert holds out no hope for that scenario.

Obama Lied On Benghazi & Won : Mitt Told the Truth & Lost

Boombox #14I can't add anything to this other then I fear for our country. Compliancy and ignorance will lead to destruction.

Politicians Want Information : Tavern 'Sipping' Worked

I didn't know that.

Early politicians required feedback from the public to determine what the
people considered important. Since there were no telephones, TV's or radios,
the politicians sent their assistants to local taverns, pubs, and bars. They
were told to 'go sip some Ale and listen to people's conversations
political concerns. Many assistants were dispatched at different times. 'You
go sip here' and 'You go sip there.' The two words 'go sip' were eventually
combined when referring to the local opinion and, thus we have the term

Monday, November 25, 2013

Sugar Subsides for Protection : World Trade Stifled

Sugar industry is a mess and who suffers the most is the consumers. Nothing new hear but to believe the politicians will do something rational to solve this problem of subsides for the sugar protection is not rational.

Solving the Global Sugar Trade Problem
Source: Tom Giovanetti, "Solving the Sugar Subsidy Problem," Institute for Policy Innovation, October 2013.
November 25, 2013 

Agriculture subsidies and trade manipulation have long been among the most intractable of policy problems. In developed countries, agricultural interests often become powerful and sympathetic interest groups. This results in a web of harmful and market distorting agricultural trade policies across the globe. But of all these distorted agricultural commodity markets, sugar is almost certainly the worst, says Tom Giovanetti, president of the Institute for Policy Innovation.

As a response to the massively manipulated global sugar market, the U.S. government preserves its domestic sugar industry through a complicated maze of import quotas and loan programs. Viewed in isolation, these programs are hard to defend and certainly distort whatever the status quo would be without them. But that leaves open the question of what the long-term result of eliminating these programs would actually be, and whether Americans would truly be better off as a result.
  • When you realize that both developed and developing countries produce sugar and subsidize its production and export, it's easy to see how the global sugar market has become a maze of policies so distorting that it's hard to even refer to it as a market.
  • The developed countries of the European Union, for example, comprise the third largest sugar producer in the world, while Brazil, a developing country, is the first.
The sugar problem is a global problem, and it requires a global solution.
  • More than 100 countries produce sugar, and they all subsidize its production in various ways.
  • The solution to the sugar problem is, at its core, the same as the solution to many other agriculture policy problems: a renewed effort through the international trade process to liberalize trade.
  • Congress and the president should commit to the elimination of subsidies and trade barriers for sugar and other agricultural commodities through a renewed process under the auspices of the World Trade Organization (WTO).
Nobody thinks it will be easy, and the United States will have to make some politically painful concessions, but such is the nature of trade agreements. Far better for the United States to surrender some of our harmful protectionist policies to achieve greater gains through a WTO process than to unilaterally drop them and gain no long-term market improvements in exchange.

Patty Murray (D) Washington State : More Bridges More Roads More Spending

I would never expect any less from Patty Murray, a clueless progressive socialist Democrat from Washington state. She has no clue how the economic system works or for that matter how people live and survive in real life.

Patty Murray is a socialist Democrat and therefore is located outside the bounds of reality.

Increasing Infrastructure Spending Merely Shuffles Jobs
Source: James Sherk, "Additional Infrastructure Spending Would Employ Few New Workers," Heritage Foundation, November 7, 2013.
November 25, 2013

Prominent members of Congress, such as Senate Budget Committee chair Patty Murray (D-WA), have called for substantially increasing infrastructure spending to create jobs. They claim that spending tens of billions of dollars repairing bridges and roads would significantly reduce unemployment and stimulate the economy. But these calls misunderstand the nature of infrastructure construction work, says James Sherk, senior policy analyst in labor economics at the Heritage Foundation.
  • Infrastructure projects are capital intensive, not labor intensive.
  • Road and bridge construction requires a relatively small number of highly skilled workers using advanced equipment and machinery.
  • Across the United States, just over 300,000 Americans work in highway, street or bridge construction -- less than the population of Wichita, Kansas.
  • Furthermore, many workers on these jobs need advanced skills to effectively and safely use construction equipment and very few unemployed workers have the skills necessary to work on infrastructure projects.
  • Just 8.5 percent of the unemployed previously worked in an occupation heavily utilized in highway, street or bridge construction.
Additional infrastructure spending would consequently employ relatively few unemployed workers. Instead, federal construction contractors would hire the skilled workforce they need away from private construction projects. New jobs created would come primarily at the expense of other jobs in the private sector.

Further, the states best know their highway and bridge maintenance and rehabilitation priorities. Funneling resources from the states to Washington and back to the states promotes a Washington-centric approach to infrastructure needs. Spending decisions should be made by states based on the condition of existing infrastructure and future capacity needs -- not by Washington on the basis of economic conditions.

Nature Has A Price On It's Head : Enviro's Losing Climate Change?

What this seems to be is just more hyperbole from the environmentalist in the wake of the average citizen becoming wary of man made global warming or climate change destroying the earth if we don't spend billion now for more research. Decades have past and we are still here.

Besides, once the politicians find out that trillions are just laying around in some swamp, they will find a way to tax it.

Can We Put a Price on Nature?
Source: H. Sterling Burnett, "Can We Put a Price on Nature?" National Center for Policy Analysis, November 2013
November 25, 2013

Intact ecosystems and the services they provide are considered by many people to be inherently valuable or priceless. Relatively recently, some environmentalists and economists began to argue that dollar values could be placed on the services nature provides, leading to wiser development decisions. However, there are a host of problems with efforts to put a price on nature, says H. Sterling Burnett, a senior fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis.
Few estimates of the value of ecosystem services or goods actually exist. In 1997, in one of the most influential and widely cited papers, economist Robert Costanza estimated the current economic value of 17 ecosystem services for 16 biomes, or geographically and biologically distinct environments, based on published studies and a few original calculations. Among the biomes and services valued, he found:
  • Estuaries provide $4.1 trillion worth of services by reducing the damage caused by tropical storms, replenishing nutrients, providing habitat and offering recreational opportunities (among other services).
  • Tropical forests play a valuable and significant role in climate regulation, provide raw materials, prevent soil erosion and serve as a store of genetic material worth $3.8 trillion annually.
  • Tidal marshes also reduce damage from floods and storms, provide critical waste treatment services, limited food production, natural habitat and recreational opportunities, for a value of $1.65 trillion annually.
  • The value of the ecosystem services provided by the entire biosphere (most of which is outside the market) is in the range of $16-54 trillion per year, with an average of $33 trillion per year.
However, there are difficulties valuing global (and even local) ecosystem services, in part because they are public goods and thus lack a market-revealed price. Critics argue that public funding of efforts to value ecosystem services is not justified now, nor is it likely to be in the future. They question, for instance, the millions of dollars flowing to researchers attempting to define the scope of the project and the valuations produced.
Defining ecosystems in general, or specifically, is difficult. It is equally difficult to establish a sound economic baseline for the benefits nature provides to mankind. Where ecological services need to be monetized, they likely will be. Where monetization is unlikely or virtually impossible, decision makers probably don't need to spend time making these kinds of cost-benefit calculations.

Playing Card Decks With 51 Cards : Not a Full Deck, Stupid!

Fun facts you probably didn't know and probably don't care about,
but once you know the facts all will be revealed. Enjoy.

Common entertainment included playing cards. However, there was a tax levied
when purchasing playing cards but only applicable to the 'Ace of Spades.' To
avoid paying he tax, people would purchase 51 cards instead. Yet, since
most games require 52 cards, these people were thought to be stupid or dumb
because they weren't 'playing with a full deck.'

Mr Obama's Ideology Overshadows Race : Times Are Changing?

Boombox #12I believe this is becoming the accepted narrative among the average citizen. It has nothing to do with race but everything to do with ideology. 

New York City's New Mayor de Blasio : More For Everyone

The question now is, is New York City, and for that matter, New York State, headed to ruin with election of  de Blasio? Can New York state feed the beast?

With huge taxes now and more coming to feed the agenda of socialism, leaving most thinking men and women with few options for survival, and those that decided to leave the city and state for greener pastures was small just a few years ago, but now the dam is broken with hundreds of business headed out. I wonder who will pay the bill when those that have been paying the taxes are gone?

Here are few interesting facts on New York City that will begin to anwswer some of the more pressing issues. City spending has increased in the last twelve years by 55% and pension costs have grown by more then 300%. With the escaping business from the city, New York's budget deficit is more then $2 billion dollars and de Blasio's answer is more taxes and more spending.

Here is another fun fact, New York City has more the 500,000 government employees of which the largest representation of these employees is in the heath care sector, the biggest supporters of de Blasio, and many government funded nonprofits. Most of these are union members, of which there are more then 150 different union contracts demanding more for less, which pay little or nothing for their health care or pensions.

Even more fun, de Blasio has indicated during his campaign he will do what is necessary to fulfill his pledges to support New York's great history of serving the people with great services and programs. He won the election but now will he or can he deliver on those promises?

New York is much like California and Illinois, they are caught in a nasty trap of promising ever more services and programs to an ever growing number of recipients but with an ever shrinking tax base. The progressive socialists believe there really is no end to the taxes they can demand for an expanding agenda of social programs.

As Margaret Thatcher once said, 'soon you will run out of other peoples money'. There seems to be no escaping reality, you can get just much blood from the turnip but when gone the game is over. Period!

Sunday, November 24, 2013

Vacation In Africa With the Family : $100 Million ? Who Cares? guess when it come down to how much you lover your country, making sure Mr Obama and his family have a good time is more important than deciding on energy supplies, a war in Syria or $17 trillion dollars in debt and an health care system for everyone that destroys our health care.

Spending a 100 million for a vacation isn't all that much  when you consider it's for a King, a Monarch, the "one".

I sure hope Michelle is proud of her country now.

Detroits Jobless Rate and Population Variants Graphed : Revealing

This says a lot about just where Detroit is and where they have come from.

Mr Obama & Congress Pivote to Immigration? Boarder Excitment Builds

It seems individuals from south of the boarder have heard that immigration reform is coming to congress as Mt Obama pivots away from ObamaCare.

It's called the waiting game where everyone knows at the end of the line the free stuff is waiting for them. The only requirement is to vote Democrat.

Barack Obama A Failure? : No! That Dam Bush!
This pretty much common knowledge among those of us that are awake and functioning. To those that still rely on the progressive socialist liberal Democrat play book, it still and always be Bush's fault for all of Obama failures.

Thanksgiving : The Real Meaning -Capitalism, NOT Collectivism

Please Enable Images to See this
Take a few minutes out of your busy day to refresh your memory on just what happened back so many years ago for us to celebrate Thanksgiving like we do today. Sadly, the majority of Americans understand Thanksgiving only as a huge turkey meal and football games.

It's tragic that so many have never understood the idea of struggle and then giving thanks for working their way out of problems to feel the meaning of success, accomplishment and a job well done.

To see and understand the meaning between two forms of ideology, how one is tried and doesn't accomplish the goals of the group, but when the other is tried and works to benefit all members, the group see the difference and then celebrates their success.

Nothing has really changed from then till now. The idea of capitalism has produced the greatest country in the world, ever, and it has taken only a relatively short time to do so, given the history of Europe and most of it's failed ventures.

Why is this so easy to understand for some us but is lost on so many others in today's cultures?

The Real Meaning of Thanksgiving: The Triumph of Capitalism over Collectivism

Saturday, November 23, 2013

ObamaCare Pole Charted for Clarity : Kasier Family

interesting chart on ObamaCare and what the general public thinks about it. Take a minute to understand what it says about how people view this law.

ObamaCare Costs to Consurmers Deadly for Politics : Fix Pushed Past Election

Making the price of health care available to everyone is a good idea but the Obama administration doesn't it like that. Want proof, why do you think they pushed the ObamaCare website fix on pricing back until after the election next year?

Difficult Process of Comparing Health Care Costs
Source: Martha Bebinger, "How Much Is That X-Ray? Still Hard To Say, Even In Massachusetts," Kaiser Health News, November 9, 2013.
November 22, 2013

Finding out how much an X-ray costs sounds like a simple question, but it is actually very difficult to get an answer. In Massachusetts, a new state law requires insurers to be able to tell members how much a test, treatment or surgery will cost. But while the new law pulls back the curtain on prices of health procedures to some degree, the burden is still on the patient to ask for information, says Kaiser Health News.
  • The point of this new requirement is to help patients make smarter choices so that they start behaving more like consumers of health care.
  • Insurers aren't thinking that way.
  • They all sound a little overwhelmed by trying to put a price tag on medical care.
"Health care is very complex and so it's difficult to make things simple, straightforward and precise," says Derek Abruzzese, the vice president for strategy and product development at Tufts Health Plan.
Insurers are also worried about getting the price right because the new state law puts insurers on the hook if they are wrong. Sue Amsel is working on a shopping tool that insurer Harvard Pilgrim Health Care is developing.
  • If someone wants to compare X-ray prices, they have to fill out separate online forms for each X-ray lab.
  • Then the insurer has 48 hours give them an estimate.
  • It takes roughly 20 minutes to fill out a single form.
Harvard Pilgrim will spell out what's included and what's not in its estimate. So residents of Massachusetts can find out in advance, how much everything from a blood test to open heart surgery costs. But in these early days at least, it isn't quick or easy.

Technology Can Replace Nearly Everything : Nearly - A video for Learning

Just when you thought your IPad and IPhone can do everything that you used to do with paper and pencil, this come to mind - - it's a little old but still relevant.

Progressive Democrats Seen As 'Decepticons' : Cash for Clunkers/ObamaCare/Climate Change etc.

Cash for Clunkers was a loser from the beginning, as intended, which was intentionally based on a lie that a reduction in Carbon dioxide, CO2, which in turn is a lie perpetrated by a small group of progressive socialist environmentalists seeking control of the population through fear, would stop the destruction of the planet. Decades have past and we're are still here.

Of course never mind the facts, to make this happen politicians and the media, all the same group,  jumped on board the environmentalist train of false facts and graphs before it left the station, spouted this nonsense to the public with hair on fire head lines predicting cataclysm if we don't act immediately to stem the problem.

As we know now, and billions of tax dollars later, it was all a scam to line the pockets of politicians and their cohorts in the media, and the environmentalists to gain access to the power to control outcomes though ignorance and fear.

One of results of this bold face lie, a complete deception, is the unemployment of thousands of coal workers and increased electrical rates for everyone. More then 43% of our electrical energy comes from coal. Still puzzled about the intentions of the progressive Democrats?

But thanks to ObamaCare's total melt down of lies and misrepresentation from the Obama administration, the general public is now beginning to casting a jauntiest eye on everything that comes from the progressive socialist left Democrats. The general public is seeing the Democrats as just 'decepticons' that are using them as tools to gain power for a socialist agenda.

Evaluating Cash for Clunkers
Source: Ted Gayer and Emily Parker, "Cash for Clunkers: An Evaluation of the Car Allowance Rebate System," Brookings Institution, October 31, 2013.
November 22, 2013

The Car Allowance Rebate System (CARS), more commonly known as Cash for Clunkers, was a government program administered by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) that allowed consumers to trade in an older, less fuel-efficient vehicle for a voucher to be applied toward the purchase of a newer, more fuel-efficient vehicle, say Ted Gayer and Emily Parker, of the Brookings Institution.
  • Depending on the difference in fuel economy between the trade-in vehicle and the new vehicle, program participants received a voucher for either $3,500 or $4,500.
  • After the "clunker" was traded in at the dealership, its engine was destroyed, ensuring its permanent removal from the U.S. vehicle fleet.
  • Nearly 700,000 clunkers were traded in between July 1, 2009 and August 24, 2009 as part of the program.
The primary motivation for the CARS program was to provide temporary stimulus to counter the economic contraction that was occurring at that time, while also reducing fuel consumption and thus emissions. The evidence suggests that the program did indeed incentivize the sale of more fuel efficient vehicles by pulling sales forward from the near-term future.
  • This resulted in a small and short-lived increase in production, gross domestic product and job creation.
  • However, the implied cost per job created was much higher than alternative fiscal stimulus policies.
  • Further, these small stimulus effects do not account for the depletion of the capital stock that resulted from the destruction of used vehicles.
The CARS program led to a slight improvement in fuel economy and some reduction in carbon emissions. The cost per ton of carbon dioxide reduced from the program suggests that the program was not a cost-effective way to reduce emissions, although it was more cost effective than some other environmental policies, such as the tax subsidy for electric vehicles or the tax credit for ethanol.

Success Defined by Self Control And Discipline : Searching for Identity (Dalai Lama)

This seem appropriate for a Saturday in that you might take a few minutes out of your week end schedule to thing about something else other then how far you are behind in the news cycle or how much your health care insurance will cost next year, let alone thinking when the game starts.

Not that this will make much difference if you are focused on pressing immediate problems, but it's something to think about. And as I have found to be true, to change a habit or complete a difficult task it starts with organizing ones thoughts regarding accomplishing the task. It's the same thing when you try to lose weight or stop smoking. If you don't think about it as a problem, a solution and a successful conclusion will never occur.

Finding meaning to your life is no easy task given outside financial and political influences that demand decisions to just survive, so changing your life style under these circumstances seems nearly impossible, but becoming self-aware is a good place to start.

But even inconsistent thought on a  problem, like when a situation presents itself that is relevant to your task, preparing dinner or thoughts about eating when you smell something enticing as you pass the food court in the mall, seeing someone standing out in the cold having cigarette, and you do not succumb to the temptation to eat or smoke, will help to define your problem, no matter what it is, it will begin to subside, slowly. Patience is a virtue.

If your work is your identity and it has forced you to discard your family as an inconvenience, maybe it's time to begin the process of change. What can I do to balance my efforts? What is actually important? Good questions to ask if you want change.

In reality to make changes will take focused 'will power' which is derived from a discipline of self control. Recognizing something as a problem and then taking action to correct it is the very basis for success. Allowing a problem to go unchecked is like the preferable bad apple in the basket, it will, in time, effect all the other apples.

Friday, November 22, 2013

Dictator and Tryrant Looses On ObamaCare health Plan : Hitler Rants

Obama care reaches into places most of us would never go -

Hitler finds out his ObamaCare bronze plan will cost him more and he looses his doctor -,d.aWM

Federal Tax Policy Benefits Those Who Vote Accordingly : Progressive Ideology

Under the current administration, taxes are not to benefit those that need the help the most, tax money is collected to support certain groups that have seen their way clear to vote for those that control the purse strings.

Of course, much of these tax payment just happen to wind up in the coffers of the same purse controllers by a back door, remember people like those the owned Soylndra just happen to be a bundler for Mr Obama as well for the progressive socialist Democrats.  Millions changed hands from tax payers to Democrat political action committees.  Who knew?

Who Do Federal Tax Polices Benefit?
Source: Gerald Prante and Scott A. Hodge, "The Distribution of Tax and Spending Policies in the United States," Tax Foundation, November 8, 2013.
November 22, 2013

Governments at all levels throughout the United States impose taxes in order to finance spending programs intended to benefit their citizens. A common question posed about these fiscal policies is how their costs and benefits are distributed across different subgroups of the population, most notably by income group, says Scott A. Hodge, president of the Tax Foundation, and Gerald Prante, of the Tax Foundation. In other words, how much do people pay in taxes versus how much do they receive in government spending?

Federal tax and spending policies drive most of the redistribution in America today.
  • The lowest-income families receive $8.13 in federal spending for every $1 dollar they pay in federal taxes.
  • Middle-income families receive $1.57 in federal spending for every $1 they pay in federal taxes.
  • However, high-income families receive $0.25 cents in federal spending for every $1 they pay in federal taxes.
  • As a group, the bottom 60 percent of American families receive more back in total government spending than they pay in total taxes.
  • Government tax and spending policies combine to redistribute more than $2 trillion from the top 40 percent of families to the bottom 60 percent.
  • The total amount of redistribution has increased slightly over the past 12 years. Middle-income and working lower-income families were the biggest beneficiaries.
The ultimate lesson of this study is that taxes and spending both have distributional effects. When lawmakers focus solely on tax distribution and ignore spending distribution they get a highly distorted picture of how the nation's fiscal system treats Americans in different income groups. Lawmakers can remove equity as an issue in tax reform by matching any loss in progressivity on the tax side with an equal increase in progressivity on the spending side.