Didn't believe it until I actually saw it.
Of course, these were the days when we actually defended the country's sovereignty.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Monday, March 29, 2010
Instead of Going to the Movies...
you can just watch the trainwreck of a show that is about to happen.
If only there was somebody who saw it coming.
Heh.
If only there was somebody who saw it coming.
Heh.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
$20 Movie Ticket
The price of a movie ticket is going up.
I stopped going to movies about 3 years ago. I think I saw maybe, MAYBE 2 two movies last year (Gran Torino being one of them).
I've predicted in the past a decline in movie-going as hometheaters, combined with Netflix, not to mention modern-day parents who fail to keep their children quiet, drive people out of the theaters and into their home theaters, just like communism drives capital into tax havens.
But $11 for a regular show, not to mention $20 in New York City for A ticket? All so you can stand in line and listen to kids make noise while you view a screen from the far left corner of a theater? Yeah, that's going to help attendance.
You'll forgive me if I just sit in my finished basement with the LCD projector, surround sound, bean bag and a bottle of Jameson with Natasha in a nice little number under my arm.
I stopped going to movies about 3 years ago. I think I saw maybe, MAYBE 2 two movies last year (Gran Torino being one of them).
I've predicted in the past a decline in movie-going as hometheaters, combined with Netflix, not to mention modern-day parents who fail to keep their children quiet, drive people out of the theaters and into their home theaters, just like communism drives capital into tax havens.
But $11 for a regular show, not to mention $20 in New York City for A ticket? All so you can stand in line and listen to kids make noise while you view a screen from the far left corner of a theater? Yeah, that's going to help attendance.
You'll forgive me if I just sit in my finished basement with the LCD projector, surround sound, bean bag and a bottle of Jameson with Natasha in a nice little number under my arm.
Saturday, March 27, 2010
International Corporate Tax Rate Comparison
Hey Kids!
Want some fun excitement and craziness in your day!?
Want to be the cool guy on the block that impresses all the girls???
Want to be able to be the one kid in the entire college that might actually know what he or she is talking about?
Then learn your corporate tax rates!
Yes, corporate tax rates!
It's what all the cool young hipsters are learning!
------------------
On a more serious note, sadly corporate taxes are the silver bullet to end this recession. You eliminate them you not only bring a flood of investment and capital into the US, but you also immediately boost stock prices and recapitalize people's pensions, 403b's, 401k's, IRA's.
But who wants any of that icky stuff when we can blame corporations for all of our problems?
Want some fun excitement and craziness in your day!?
Want to be the cool guy on the block that impresses all the girls???
Want to be able to be the one kid in the entire college that might actually know what he or she is talking about?
Then learn your corporate tax rates!
Yes, corporate tax rates!
It's what all the cool young hipsters are learning!
------------------
On a more serious note, sadly corporate taxes are the silver bullet to end this recession. You eliminate them you not only bring a flood of investment and capital into the US, but you also immediately boost stock prices and recapitalize people's pensions, 403b's, 401k's, IRA's.
But who wants any of that icky stuff when we can blame corporations for all of our problems?
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
I Just Like the Way It Looks
Not adjusted in terms of Percent of GDP, duly noted, but even the KGB and Osama Bin Laden in their wildest dreams couldn't have done this kind of damage.
You will enjoy the ensuing chaos.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Charles Beasley
Sadly a another great one has passed on. I must have danced to his band at least 2 dozen times over the years.
Enjoy playing with Benny, Arty, Duke, the Count, and Jack, Charlie.
Enjoy playing with Benny, Arty, Duke, the Count, and Jack, Charlie.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Health Insurance Industry's Profits
OK, one more time for the cheap seats;
Really??
REALLY???
THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY IS NOT THE PROBLEM. THEY DO NOT HAVE HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS IN PROFITS. THEY ARE NOT THE CAUSE OF YOUR HEALTH INSURANCE GOING UP.
This isn't an opinion. This isn't a suggestion. It's just an "inconvenient truth" (that actually happens to be true) that leftists just plain refuse to verify or confirm.
Here is United Healthcare's income statement from their latest annual report.
If you compare the revenues to profits, you'll see they have roughly a 4% profit margin. A COUPLE billion in profits. Not the hundreds of billions Obama says they have, let alone the trillions he plans on spending.
"Yeah, well those greedy insurance executives are hoarding all the money paying it out to themselves!!! That's why their profits are so low!"
Really??
REALLY???
Because, frankly, I've yet to meet a liberal, the president included, that has had the intellectual honesty to look it up first.
Look, at that. Under $1 billion in executive compensation AND THAT'S ASSUMING HEMSLEY CASHING IN ALL OF HIS OPTIONS RIGHT NOW.
If you don't believe me, just look it up here.
The ignorance of the average American is disgusting and I will be happy to watch all the idiots that were taken in by this group of charlatans ask 20 years from now why GDP per capita is down to $20,000 in the US.
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Some Short Observations About Liberal Talk Radio
Well I was going to go to my favorite Irish bar and do taxes, but I forgot that today is St. Patrick's Day and there was no way I was going to get any work done, so allow me this short post.
I can't listen to right wing talk radio any more because
1. I can finish their sentences.
2. I already know everything they're going to say.
3. It's really depressing.
So, for the past month I've been listening to Air America (which I thought was going bankrupt, but apparently they are still on the air). It's really had to listen before you turn it off or change the station, but after a month, I've come up with some observations about liberal talk radio that are not biased, but just simple observations.
1. They are reactionary to right wing talk radio.
I would say the most prominent thing you notice about liberal talk radio is how about 35% of their show is responding to right wing talk radio. You can't listen for more than 4 minutes before you hear "Glenn Beck" or "Rush Limbaugh" of course referred to in the pejorative. It shows me that their entire existence was founded in countering right-wing talk radio. The problem is this doesn't really pioneer any new lines of thought. It's just them bashing on right wing radio. Not once have I heard Rush or Glenn or Sean utter, "Nick Schultz" or "Mark Malloy." Ergo, right wing talk radio is established unto itself, while left wing talk radio is merely reactionary. There was no real ideological reason for it except to debunk or besmirch right wing talk radio. It's almost like a shell corporation, no real purpose to it.
2. No "Linking" "Domino" or "Cause and Effect" Thinking
To varying degrees all right wing talk show hosts carry through their lines of thought to a logical conclusion or result. Dennis Prager in particular is good at this, but regardless, ALL right wing talk show hosts do a "Cause and effect" analysis of policy, statements, economics, etc. Their left wing counterparts do NONE of this. And it's frustrating because half the reason I started listening was to understand the rationale or reasoning behind the socialist ideology. But since there is no explanation or linking all you get is talking points or stances. For example their arguments are really no more complex than "Oh, those partisan Republicans are trying stop health care because they're rich." No consideration is given to maybe the procedure or the constitution or the real reason "why" Republicans (as well as some democrats) are against the health care bill. It's just "they're rich, they're in bed with the insurance industry" and that is as deep as they get. In other words, even though the hosts are well into their 50's, it's no deeper than having a conversation with a 20 year old theater major.
3. Hate speech
This was the most shocking one of all. Mark Malloy, if you haven't listened to him, puts to rest the notion the right wing of politics in America is the source of hate. He has threatened to kick Glenn Beck's ass more than once, you can't go 10 minutes with out him calling the Republican's nazis and cursing up a storm (amazing the FCC doesn't shut him down) and wishing them essentially death. You think I'm joking? Listen in yourself.
At least when Rush or Glenn or even myself was broadcasting, our ideas were for the overall good of the nation. Balancing the budget, getting the economy going, fighting terrorism, stopping illegal immigration. But this guy just abandons any intellectual honesty and views all conservatives and republicans as nazis no matter what you say or do. You are the enemy to him and forget being Americans, you need to be taken out of the gene pool.
4. Presumption of Premises
When callers call in, there is a whole host of premises and assumptions leftists make that they just take for granted. For example George Bush is to blame for everything. Economy, war on terror, the terrorist attacks themselves. There's no discussion of it. It's just a given Bush caused this all when an intellectually honest person would maybe suggest 100 million Americans spending more than they made was the cause of the recession.
But Bush aside, simple childlike assumptions are the bedrock of their ideology. "Rich people need to be punished." The insurance companies are out to get you. Mark Malloy even cited that some CEO at one of the largest insurance companies in the US made something like $37 million over the past 3 years. Well....yeah, that's about right. By the same logic he should LOATHE professional sports, which he might, but you never hear about it. The overall point is that you can't listen to any intellectual discussion, not matter how intelligent or insightful the people are on liberal talk radio, because they're operating from false premises and thus the entire conversation is worthless.
5. Absolute Ignorance, Pushing Cluelessness, About Economics
Perhaps what gets me to turn to another station so quickly is when I hear them spout off some statistic I know to be completely wrong or just statistically impossible. They have no clue just how much spending Barack Obama has committed the US to, but it's not that they care, they literally think there's $100 trillion in GDP to tax. If you ask them, EVEN THE RADIO SHOW HOSTS, how big the government budget is relative to GDP, or just how much in GDP we produce, I don't think they could answer correctly.
Worse still is the borderline indifference about what the economic ramifications are to implementing higher taxes, higher spending, nationalization of industries, etc. They don't seem to understand that the government gets its money from the private sector. They don't seem to realize that the government needs the private sector and not vice versa. The impression I am LITERALLY getting from them is they think the "economy" is this big, amorphous blog including the government and basically, "stuff comes from it." No concept of taxation, no concept of the Laffer Curve, no concept of income statements or balance sheets. Just, "there's the economy and we get money from it and rich people control it and they suck."
In any case, if you have the time I DO recommend tuning into liberal talk radio and I would love to hear your observations. I just can't listen for more than 10 minutes at a time because it's like listening to 10 year olds trying to explain why they don't like having to work. You don't learn anything and it gets repetitive.
I can't listen to right wing talk radio any more because
1. I can finish their sentences.
2. I already know everything they're going to say.
3. It's really depressing.
So, for the past month I've been listening to Air America (which I thought was going bankrupt, but apparently they are still on the air). It's really had to listen before you turn it off or change the station, but after a month, I've come up with some observations about liberal talk radio that are not biased, but just simple observations.
1. They are reactionary to right wing talk radio.
I would say the most prominent thing you notice about liberal talk radio is how about 35% of their show is responding to right wing talk radio. You can't listen for more than 4 minutes before you hear "Glenn Beck" or "Rush Limbaugh" of course referred to in the pejorative. It shows me that their entire existence was founded in countering right-wing talk radio. The problem is this doesn't really pioneer any new lines of thought. It's just them bashing on right wing radio. Not once have I heard Rush or Glenn or Sean utter, "Nick Schultz" or "Mark Malloy." Ergo, right wing talk radio is established unto itself, while left wing talk radio is merely reactionary. There was no real ideological reason for it except to debunk or besmirch right wing talk radio. It's almost like a shell corporation, no real purpose to it.
2. No "Linking" "Domino" or "Cause and Effect" Thinking
To varying degrees all right wing talk show hosts carry through their lines of thought to a logical conclusion or result. Dennis Prager in particular is good at this, but regardless, ALL right wing talk show hosts do a "Cause and effect" analysis of policy, statements, economics, etc. Their left wing counterparts do NONE of this. And it's frustrating because half the reason I started listening was to understand the rationale or reasoning behind the socialist ideology. But since there is no explanation or linking all you get is talking points or stances. For example their arguments are really no more complex than "Oh, those partisan Republicans are trying stop health care because they're rich." No consideration is given to maybe the procedure or the constitution or the real reason "why" Republicans (as well as some democrats) are against the health care bill. It's just "they're rich, they're in bed with the insurance industry" and that is as deep as they get. In other words, even though the hosts are well into their 50's, it's no deeper than having a conversation with a 20 year old theater major.
3. Hate speech
This was the most shocking one of all. Mark Malloy, if you haven't listened to him, puts to rest the notion the right wing of politics in America is the source of hate. He has threatened to kick Glenn Beck's ass more than once, you can't go 10 minutes with out him calling the Republican's nazis and cursing up a storm (amazing the FCC doesn't shut him down) and wishing them essentially death. You think I'm joking? Listen in yourself.
At least when Rush or Glenn or even myself was broadcasting, our ideas were for the overall good of the nation. Balancing the budget, getting the economy going, fighting terrorism, stopping illegal immigration. But this guy just abandons any intellectual honesty and views all conservatives and republicans as nazis no matter what you say or do. You are the enemy to him and forget being Americans, you need to be taken out of the gene pool.
4. Presumption of Premises
When callers call in, there is a whole host of premises and assumptions leftists make that they just take for granted. For example George Bush is to blame for everything. Economy, war on terror, the terrorist attacks themselves. There's no discussion of it. It's just a given Bush caused this all when an intellectually honest person would maybe suggest 100 million Americans spending more than they made was the cause of the recession.
But Bush aside, simple childlike assumptions are the bedrock of their ideology. "Rich people need to be punished." The insurance companies are out to get you. Mark Malloy even cited that some CEO at one of the largest insurance companies in the US made something like $37 million over the past 3 years. Well....yeah, that's about right. By the same logic he should LOATHE professional sports, which he might, but you never hear about it. The overall point is that you can't listen to any intellectual discussion, not matter how intelligent or insightful the people are on liberal talk radio, because they're operating from false premises and thus the entire conversation is worthless.
5. Absolute Ignorance, Pushing Cluelessness, About Economics
Perhaps what gets me to turn to another station so quickly is when I hear them spout off some statistic I know to be completely wrong or just statistically impossible. They have no clue just how much spending Barack Obama has committed the US to, but it's not that they care, they literally think there's $100 trillion in GDP to tax. If you ask them, EVEN THE RADIO SHOW HOSTS, how big the government budget is relative to GDP, or just how much in GDP we produce, I don't think they could answer correctly.
Worse still is the borderline indifference about what the economic ramifications are to implementing higher taxes, higher spending, nationalization of industries, etc. They don't seem to understand that the government gets its money from the private sector. They don't seem to realize that the government needs the private sector and not vice versa. The impression I am LITERALLY getting from them is they think the "economy" is this big, amorphous blog including the government and basically, "stuff comes from it." No concept of taxation, no concept of the Laffer Curve, no concept of income statements or balance sheets. Just, "there's the economy and we get money from it and rich people control it and they suck."
In any case, if you have the time I DO recommend tuning into liberal talk radio and I would love to hear your observations. I just can't listen for more than 10 minutes at a time because it's like listening to 10 year olds trying to explain why they don't like having to work. You don't learn anything and it gets repetitive.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
"Hey, Is That an Iceberg?"
The iceberg we knew was coming for the past 40 years, but did nothing to change our course? Yeah, that one? Yeah, it's here.
But do not worry.
You want to know why?
Because Obama will fix it.
A 20 year old philosophy major from the suburbs told me so.
But do not worry.
You want to know why?
Because Obama will fix it.
A 20 year old philosophy major from the suburbs told me so.
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Sophia Loren
My god, what a timeless woman. 75 and she beats most modern day American 20 something teen idol worshipers.
EelkemaCare
I took my car in for an oil change. I didn’t make it for the early bird special and thus with tax and everything it cost $42 and some spare change. It took about 15 minutes, the guy came in, tried to up-sell me on some window wipers which I declined and then off I went.
Juxtapose that with my visit to my new, most favorite doctor, Dr. Eelkema.
I don’t like him because he’s personable.
I don’t like him because he’s professional.
I don’t like him because he’s on time.
I like him because he’s cheap.
So cheap in fact that it cost me LESS TO VISIT HIM THAN TO GET MY OIL CHANGED.
I showed up, and with a militant level of adherence to time he was ready for our appointment. Checked a couple things, took my blood pressure, diagnosed my problems and BOOM, I was out the door. And the price for this standard doctor’s visit?
$38 and spare change. AND less time than it took to get my oil changed.
It was one of those times where you were happy to pay because the deal you got provided more utility than the price you even paid.
The question is how does Dr. Eelkema do it?
Simple, he got rid of the insurance companies, thereby eliminating a huge amount of overhead, time and paper work, only takes cash payment and makes you sign a waiver essentially saying you won’t sue.
Amazing.
You eliminate three things – insurance companies, collection problems and lawsuits/lawyers – and the cost of a doctor’s visit drops to $38.
Now it could be because Dr. Eelkema is an older gentleman and maybe he has earned his fortunes and can afford to run his practice that cheaply. Perhaps he is just getting older and as one ages time becomes more valuable than money. But it still couldn’t prevent my economic spidey senses from thinking about what would happen if instead of the 2,000 page health care reform monstrosity Obama/Pelosi/Reid are trying to ram down America’s throat we did a Dr. Eelkema Health Care style reform. That instead treating health insurance like a right, we treat it more like car insurance. You pay OUT OF POCKET expenses for regular maintenance of your car such as oil changes, tire replacement, batteries, etc, just like you would regular maintenance on your body (check ups, visits, tests, etc). However, you only have insurance should a catastrophe occur. You crash your car, the insurance company pays for its repair or an entire new one. You crash your body, the health insurance the insurance company kicks in to repair you. And what amazes me is that if you’re in reasonably decent shape your health insurance and general health expenditures on YOU will cost the same, if not LESS THAN YOUR CAR, BUT THAT'S IF YOU'RE USING A DOCTOR LIKE DR.EELKEMA.
In otherwords, Dr. Eelkema is the empirical proof of "what could be" or what the REAL costs of health care are if you get rid of insurance companies, lawyers, lawsuits, and government. That $38 is what you really have to pay. Not the $200, the majority of which goes to other entities that have NOTHING to do with your health care except to make it more expensive.
But, I know, I know. We’ve all been told health care is a right (forget the fact rights don’t cost anything while health care is a commodity no matter what anybody tells you). And it’s a tragedy if a single mom of 6 children from 6 different fathers has to pay a $15 copay for each of them. And it’s a travesty if a union member has to pay a copay at all. Matter of fact it’s dictatorial totalitarianism if you have to spend a single penny on your own health care. And besides, we have to make sure all those lawyers have plenty of money coming their way, not to mention government bureaucrats need jobs too and taking over 1/6th of the economy will certainly help with that.
But the simple problem is health care reform is just like tax reform. The American people are just too damn brainwashed or perhaps too damn stupid to think that it can be that simple. You can have a flat sales tax or the 13,000 page tax code, just like you can have Obamacare or EelkemaCare.
Enjoy fighting for Obamacare.
Juxtapose that with my visit to my new, most favorite doctor, Dr. Eelkema.
I don’t like him because he’s personable.
I don’t like him because he’s professional.
I don’t like him because he’s on time.
I like him because he’s cheap.
So cheap in fact that it cost me LESS TO VISIT HIM THAN TO GET MY OIL CHANGED.
I showed up, and with a militant level of adherence to time he was ready for our appointment. Checked a couple things, took my blood pressure, diagnosed my problems and BOOM, I was out the door. And the price for this standard doctor’s visit?
$38 and spare change. AND less time than it took to get my oil changed.
It was one of those times where you were happy to pay because the deal you got provided more utility than the price you even paid.
The question is how does Dr. Eelkema do it?
Simple, he got rid of the insurance companies, thereby eliminating a huge amount of overhead, time and paper work, only takes cash payment and makes you sign a waiver essentially saying you won’t sue.
Amazing.
You eliminate three things – insurance companies, collection problems and lawsuits/lawyers – and the cost of a doctor’s visit drops to $38.
Now it could be because Dr. Eelkema is an older gentleman and maybe he has earned his fortunes and can afford to run his practice that cheaply. Perhaps he is just getting older and as one ages time becomes more valuable than money. But it still couldn’t prevent my economic spidey senses from thinking about what would happen if instead of the 2,000 page health care reform monstrosity Obama/Pelosi/Reid are trying to ram down America’s throat we did a Dr. Eelkema Health Care style reform. That instead treating health insurance like a right, we treat it more like car insurance. You pay OUT OF POCKET expenses for regular maintenance of your car such as oil changes, tire replacement, batteries, etc, just like you would regular maintenance on your body (check ups, visits, tests, etc). However, you only have insurance should a catastrophe occur. You crash your car, the insurance company pays for its repair or an entire new one. You crash your body, the health insurance the insurance company kicks in to repair you. And what amazes me is that if you’re in reasonably decent shape your health insurance and general health expenditures on YOU will cost the same, if not LESS THAN YOUR CAR, BUT THAT'S IF YOU'RE USING A DOCTOR LIKE DR.EELKEMA.
In otherwords, Dr. Eelkema is the empirical proof of "what could be" or what the REAL costs of health care are if you get rid of insurance companies, lawyers, lawsuits, and government. That $38 is what you really have to pay. Not the $200, the majority of which goes to other entities that have NOTHING to do with your health care except to make it more expensive.
But, I know, I know. We’ve all been told health care is a right (forget the fact rights don’t cost anything while health care is a commodity no matter what anybody tells you). And it’s a tragedy if a single mom of 6 children from 6 different fathers has to pay a $15 copay for each of them. And it’s a travesty if a union member has to pay a copay at all. Matter of fact it’s dictatorial totalitarianism if you have to spend a single penny on your own health care. And besides, we have to make sure all those lawyers have plenty of money coming their way, not to mention government bureaucrats need jobs too and taking over 1/6th of the economy will certainly help with that.
But the simple problem is health care reform is just like tax reform. The American people are just too damn brainwashed or perhaps too damn stupid to think that it can be that simple. You can have a flat sales tax or the 13,000 page tax code, just like you can have Obamacare or EelkemaCare.
Enjoy fighting for Obamacare.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Does Anybody See the Common Trait?
I'm not joking. There is a physical trait I've noticed of liberals.
Tyranny Will Form
One way or another. In the past 3 years I've learned to loathe ignorant people who live in democracies and do not understand their duty in protecting the nation, themselves and their children's future from charlatans known as socialism.
Monday, March 08, 2010
Comic Book Guy Terrorist Potentially Caught
I will buy everybody a round if it turns out to be the Comic Book Guy.
Don't get me wrong, I loathe terrorists. But spoiled brat suburbanites when are so desperate to join a crusade that they betray their home country for something as foul as radical Islam, they deserve a special place in hell.
Don't get me wrong, I loathe terrorists. But spoiled brat suburbanites when are so desperate to join a crusade that they betray their home country for something as foul as radical Islam, they deserve a special place in hell.
Saturday, March 06, 2010
The Last Boyscout and Public Schools
"The Last Boyscout" which is a great movie, Daman Wayans has a great line;
"I'm going to say it again for the cheap seats. I DON'T KNOW WHERE JOE HALLENBACK IS!"
And so I often find myself saying things that don't need to be said, but apparently people aren't listening. So, in a very Last Boyscout way;
"I'm going to say it again for the cheap seats. PEOPLE IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS DON'T GO THERE TO EDUCATE THE CHILDREN FIRST AS MUCH AS THEY GO THERE TO HAVE A JOB.
Until you get rid of this "teachers license" BS and allow people with REAL WORLD experience in to teach these kids, you're going to have deadbeat losers like this who have nothing better to do with their lives that they run for school board as a means of a career on account they can't be employed anywhere else.
Oh no, I know, I know. Alan Greenspan can't teach economics because "he doesn't have a teacher's license" or a degree in "education."
Yes, won't somebody please think of the children indeed.
"I'm going to say it again for the cheap seats. I DON'T KNOW WHERE JOE HALLENBACK IS!"
And so I often find myself saying things that don't need to be said, but apparently people aren't listening. So, in a very Last Boyscout way;
"I'm going to say it again for the cheap seats. PEOPLE IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS DON'T GO THERE TO EDUCATE THE CHILDREN FIRST AS MUCH AS THEY GO THERE TO HAVE A JOB.
Until you get rid of this "teachers license" BS and allow people with REAL WORLD experience in to teach these kids, you're going to have deadbeat losers like this who have nothing better to do with their lives that they run for school board as a means of a career on account they can't be employed anywhere else.
Oh no, I know, I know. Alan Greenspan can't teach economics because "he doesn't have a teacher's license" or a degree in "education."
Yes, won't somebody please think of the children indeed.
Friday, March 05, 2010
When Liberal Arts Majors Marry Engineers
An extreme example, but will highlight the point I'm trying to make here, I know a couple where the guy got his masters in computer engineering and her a degree in journalism. Her dad was a brain surgeon or heart surgeon or something big and thus she had a house and a car bought and paid for as well as a spending account until her knight in shinning FORTRAN armor came along and took over from the father.
Now, with children, the wife stays at home, doesn't really work, but woe upon you if you dare suggest she wasn't really ever independent in her life and didn't support herself.
Naturally what irks me is the hypocrisy of people who major in a worthless field, espouse to be independent and self-reliant, and then marry somebody who actually produces something or work, YET STILL MAINTAINS THEIR lefter leaning ideology about wealth distribution, essentially taking the stance their engineering majoring spouse should be taxed in a quasi-slave-like arrangement.
Ergo, why my blood pressure rises when I see this.
Who precisely do they think is going to turn the country around or produce the wealth to pay down our debts? Additionally, how much you want to bet those liberal arts majors are going to be scurrying for engineers when the stimulus money runs out to make ends meet.
As always, enjoy the decline.
Now, with children, the wife stays at home, doesn't really work, but woe upon you if you dare suggest she wasn't really ever independent in her life and didn't support herself.
Naturally what irks me is the hypocrisy of people who major in a worthless field, espouse to be independent and self-reliant, and then marry somebody who actually produces something or work, YET STILL MAINTAINS THEIR lefter leaning ideology about wealth distribution, essentially taking the stance their engineering majoring spouse should be taxed in a quasi-slave-like arrangement.
Ergo, why my blood pressure rises when I see this.
Who precisely do they think is going to turn the country around or produce the wealth to pay down our debts? Additionally, how much you want to bet those liberal arts majors are going to be scurrying for engineers when the stimulus money runs out to make ends meet.
As always, enjoy the decline.
Today's Economic Comparison
Jobs losses "under Bush" vs. "under Obama."
What I love is that both presidents inherited recessions, but guess who the media loves to blame for both, even though it was neither of their faults.
Also, on a side note, anybody else sick of 20 somethings, let alone older adults blaming the economy on Bush who in the same breath then complain about how they had to go into foreclosure on their home because they borrowed too much money?
Thursday, March 04, 2010
Why You Shouldn't Send Your Kids to Antioch College
In reality, this isn't really a "new" post. It is just a re-posting under a title that is more appropriate given what has just happened and some good advice for any parents in Ohio thinking about pissing away their hard earned money.
So permit me to recap;
Mom of Antioch College graduate comes in and goes to bat for "Antioch College" after I link to the Spearhead's article citing its closure, claiming her daughter got a "great" education and "immediately" found employment in her field.
I make "cynical" "evil" "republican" "nazi" predictions that her daughter majored in a worthless subject and the only reason she found "employment in her field" was because her "field" was essentially subsidized by either charity or the taxpayers. In other words, she doesn't produce anything of economic value to society and is literally a parasite.
Readers of Cappy Cap come to bat IN STYLE and prove;
1. Her daughter works at a community theater
2. That receives money from charity
3. Most of which is from the Ohioan taxpayer
The overall lesson to learn here is that Antioch College, as well as many others, simply just produce what could be considered "economic parasites" who instead of "lowering themselves" to collecting a welfare check, engage in faux, fake "professions" or "careers" all of which are economically no different than collecting a welfare check in that it is still paid for by others. They just go through the facade of having a "job" presumably to make themselves feel better.
So here is the question to would be Antioch students and parents;
Do you have the intellectual honesty to admit that if it requires a government subsidy and the taxpayers to finance you, that you are indeed an economic parasite?
We all hate GM and the federal bail out.
We all hate the big banks and the bail out they received?
What about the millions of worthless degreed people who only have jobs because the tax payer is forced to provide them some make-work job that produces nothing society wants?
If you have the cognitive dissonance skills to tolerate this hypocrisy, then send your children to Antioch. If not, then send them somewhere else.
So permit me to recap;
Mom of Antioch College graduate comes in and goes to bat for "Antioch College" after I link to the Spearhead's article citing its closure, claiming her daughter got a "great" education and "immediately" found employment in her field.
I make "cynical" "evil" "republican" "nazi" predictions that her daughter majored in a worthless subject and the only reason she found "employment in her field" was because her "field" was essentially subsidized by either charity or the taxpayers. In other words, she doesn't produce anything of economic value to society and is literally a parasite.
Readers of Cappy Cap come to bat IN STYLE and prove;
1. Her daughter works at a community theater
2. That receives money from charity
3. Most of which is from the Ohioan taxpayer
The overall lesson to learn here is that Antioch College, as well as many others, simply just produce what could be considered "economic parasites" who instead of "lowering themselves" to collecting a welfare check, engage in faux, fake "professions" or "careers" all of which are economically no different than collecting a welfare check in that it is still paid for by others. They just go through the facade of having a "job" presumably to make themselves feel better.
So here is the question to would be Antioch students and parents;
Do you have the intellectual honesty to admit that if it requires a government subsidy and the taxpayers to finance you, that you are indeed an economic parasite?
We all hate GM and the federal bail out.
We all hate the big banks and the bail out they received?
What about the millions of worthless degreed people who only have jobs because the tax payer is forced to provide them some make-work job that produces nothing society wants?
If you have the cognitive dissonance skills to tolerate this hypocrisy, then send your children to Antioch. If not, then send them somewhere else.
Wednesday, March 03, 2010
Ball Throwing vs. Brain Cutting
Unlike all the other professional football players, this guy will actually produce something of worth for society. Sadly there will be no play-by-play radio coverage of his brain surgeries on AM 1500.
Tuesday, March 02, 2010
The Economic "Fail" of the Century
As some of you are aware, the price of oil has become somewhat pricey in recent months. It's now around $100 and we get to pay approaching $4 a gallon in gas.
Accusations will be made. Big oil will be blamed. Investigations launched. But in the end it is the unstoppable forces of economics and the declining currency of a declining nation that will win in the end of the day and you will continue to have to pay $4 a gallon in gas...maybe $5 or $6 when summer rolls around.
Now we can blame the turmoil in the middle east (correctly) for the increase in prices. You can blame the declining dollar (correctly) for the increase in prices as well. And yes, I will even allow those on the unthinking and galactically ignorant left to go to their knee-jerk position of blaming "big oil" (incorrectly) for the increase in prices. But it will all be for naught because the debate is moot. There is no reason to argue about oil. And I shall explain why with some more of my super awesome economic genius.
IN REALITY (and I say this with all seriousness) gas should be trading at about 40 cents a gallon. And if I were president and had both houses of congress it would be at 40 cents a gallon. It would trade at 40 cents a gallon NOT because we would enact price controls, but the MARKET rate would be 40 cents a gallon.
Now, would this be because I would drill baby drill?
No.
Would this be because I would invade the middle east for their oil recreating an oil-rich empire?
No.
Would it be because I would subsidize alternative fuels to the point gas would have to be 40 cents a gallon?
No.
It would be because I would gather up all the business "leaders" in the US and we'd get them into a little room and I would ask them one simple question;
"Why in frick's name are you requiring people to commute to work when today's technology makes it pointless?"
I have brought up this point before, but at the time I was not a student of computer networks or IT like I am today, and was informed that for security reasons, among other reasons, businesses do not like it when people work from home. But after a year of studying computer networking I am here to inform you that it is not only technologically possible, it is no riskier (bar human behavior) to have people working remotely. Telecommuting from your home is no riskier (with the appropriate measures taken) than working at an office, if for any other reason, you are technically still telecommuting while in the office, using the exact same routers and servers.
Of course, the question is "why don't we telecommute then?" and this is the largest most gigantic economic fail the US has ever made.
In short we passed up on the latest economic revolution because we are no longer American and no longer dare to dream.
If you look through history there have been various economic "revolutions" that have advanced and improved humans' lives greatly.
The agrarian revolution basically wiped out hunger.
The industrial revolution brought us electricity, transport and limitless goods and services making out lives that much easier.
The technology or "information" revolution made communications immediate.
And a by-product of the revolution allowed for the next great economic revolution, the "telecommuting revolution."
The only problem is, nobody in the US cared to avail themselves of it.
Oh, India certainly has, taking significant business from the US' IT sector. So has China and Ireland.
But no, not us. You must have us confused with the Rockefellers and Vanderbilts and the Carnigies and those other stupid "old" and "industrious" Americans. No, not us. We're modern Americans. We don't dare dream of never having to drive to work again. That's just not in our blood. No, we much prefer to sit 2 hours a day in bumper to bumper traffic while we hole up in some beige, tan cubicle and do mind-numbing tasks. That's the American dream!
This is the real reason why you are paying $4 in gas. This is the real reason why we have to spend billions on infrastructure that is unnecessary and unneeded. This is why there are thousands of deaths a year more than there has to be on roads. And this is a major reason why your families are stressed, torn or sometimes just plain destroyed. Because the American people failed to avail themselves of this most recent economic revolution because we just don't have the audacity to do so anymore.
Of course, there is another option.
You could do what I do.
Let me explain.
I get a call occasionally from a recruiting company called "Robert Half International." They have an office in DT Minneapolis. Their main finance/banking guy "Doug" knows who I am and knows that for the most part no bank in the area would hire me because of my super awesome book that predicted the housing crash (because why would you want to hire THAT guy? I mean who would want to hire the guy who PREDICTED THE BUBBLE?) In any case, when I do get a call from them, I know;
1. It's some rookie new hire who doesn't know I'm verbotten in the Minnesota banking industry
2. I'm not going to get the job (again because of my super awesome book you should all read).
So when it comes time for him to set up a "meeting to get to know you" I can more or less decree whatever I want because there's no way I'm getting the job in the first place.
Rookie - "Can you come downtown to meet me?"
Me - "No, how about you come to my local bar in my town. I usually start drinking around 1PM."
or
Rookie - "We have a position open in the vibrant DOWNTOWN AREA! You'll get to be where all the action is."
Me - "Will they pay me $20,000 extra per year to deal with the commute and give me an underground parking space in the building I'd be working in?"
Rookie - "Well (shocked), no...um, I don't think so."
Me - "Can I telecommute?"
Rookie - "Well,...um, I could ask but I highly doubt it."
Me - "Can I set my own hours to avoid rush hour?"
Rookie - "Ummmm...I think they would prefer you be there 8-5PM."
Me - "Eh, forget then, not interested."
In other words, desperate as the employment situation may be, why do you accept commuting? Why do you not demand the right to telecommute?
Sure, it's a bold move and sure there's plenty of other people out there willing to become the corporate slave who would just "love" to commute, but if the entirety of the US labor market would simply get a little self-respect and say, "eh, I'm not commuting" what could they do?
Then again, maybe I'm just crazy. Maybe people like to commute and waste years of their lives, missing out on seeing their children and spending time with their families. Maybe they like spending trillions of dollars on gas over the years. I mean, what better to spend your money on that gas, right? And who doesn't love the increased chance of divorce because "you're never home?" And did I mention all the icky yucky gross economic growth that would occur because of extra disposable income?
Yeah, we wouldn't dare take advantage of this latest revolution.
Accusations will be made. Big oil will be blamed. Investigations launched. But in the end it is the unstoppable forces of economics and the declining currency of a declining nation that will win in the end of the day and you will continue to have to pay $4 a gallon in gas...maybe $5 or $6 when summer rolls around.
Now we can blame the turmoil in the middle east (correctly) for the increase in prices. You can blame the declining dollar (correctly) for the increase in prices as well. And yes, I will even allow those on the unthinking and galactically ignorant left to go to their knee-jerk position of blaming "big oil" (incorrectly) for the increase in prices. But it will all be for naught because the debate is moot. There is no reason to argue about oil. And I shall explain why with some more of my super awesome economic genius.
IN REALITY (and I say this with all seriousness) gas should be trading at about 40 cents a gallon. And if I were president and had both houses of congress it would be at 40 cents a gallon. It would trade at 40 cents a gallon NOT because we would enact price controls, but the MARKET rate would be 40 cents a gallon.
Now, would this be because I would drill baby drill?
No.
Would this be because I would invade the middle east for their oil recreating an oil-rich empire?
No.
Would it be because I would subsidize alternative fuels to the point gas would have to be 40 cents a gallon?
No.
It would be because I would gather up all the business "leaders" in the US and we'd get them into a little room and I would ask them one simple question;
"Why in frick's name are you requiring people to commute to work when today's technology makes it pointless?"
I have brought up this point before, but at the time I was not a student of computer networks or IT like I am today, and was informed that for security reasons, among other reasons, businesses do not like it when people work from home. But after a year of studying computer networking I am here to inform you that it is not only technologically possible, it is no riskier (bar human behavior) to have people working remotely. Telecommuting from your home is no riskier (with the appropriate measures taken) than working at an office, if for any other reason, you are technically still telecommuting while in the office, using the exact same routers and servers.
Of course, the question is "why don't we telecommute then?" and this is the largest most gigantic economic fail the US has ever made.
In short we passed up on the latest economic revolution because we are no longer American and no longer dare to dream.
If you look through history there have been various economic "revolutions" that have advanced and improved humans' lives greatly.
The agrarian revolution basically wiped out hunger.
The industrial revolution brought us electricity, transport and limitless goods and services making out lives that much easier.
The technology or "information" revolution made communications immediate.
And a by-product of the revolution allowed for the next great economic revolution, the "telecommuting revolution."
The only problem is, nobody in the US cared to avail themselves of it.
Oh, India certainly has, taking significant business from the US' IT sector. So has China and Ireland.
But no, not us. You must have us confused with the Rockefellers and Vanderbilts and the Carnigies and those other stupid "old" and "industrious" Americans. No, not us. We're modern Americans. We don't dare dream of never having to drive to work again. That's just not in our blood. No, we much prefer to sit 2 hours a day in bumper to bumper traffic while we hole up in some beige, tan cubicle and do mind-numbing tasks. That's the American dream!
This is the real reason why you are paying $4 in gas. This is the real reason why we have to spend billions on infrastructure that is unnecessary and unneeded. This is why there are thousands of deaths a year more than there has to be on roads. And this is a major reason why your families are stressed, torn or sometimes just plain destroyed. Because the American people failed to avail themselves of this most recent economic revolution because we just don't have the audacity to do so anymore.
Of course, there is another option.
You could do what I do.
Let me explain.
I get a call occasionally from a recruiting company called "Robert Half International." They have an office in DT Minneapolis. Their main finance/banking guy "Doug" knows who I am and knows that for the most part no bank in the area would hire me because of my super awesome book that predicted the housing crash (because why would you want to hire THAT guy? I mean who would want to hire the guy who PREDICTED THE BUBBLE?) In any case, when I do get a call from them, I know;
1. It's some rookie new hire who doesn't know I'm verbotten in the Minnesota banking industry
2. I'm not going to get the job (again because of my super awesome book you should all read).
So when it comes time for him to set up a "meeting to get to know you" I can more or less decree whatever I want because there's no way I'm getting the job in the first place.
Rookie - "Can you come downtown to meet me?"
Me - "No, how about you come to my local bar in my town. I usually start drinking around 1PM."
or
Rookie - "We have a position open in the vibrant DOWNTOWN AREA! You'll get to be where all the action is."
Me - "Will they pay me $20,000 extra per year to deal with the commute and give me an underground parking space in the building I'd be working in?"
Rookie - "Well (shocked), no...um, I don't think so."
Me - "Can I telecommute?"
Rookie - "Well,...um, I could ask but I highly doubt it."
Me - "Can I set my own hours to avoid rush hour?"
Rookie - "Ummmm...I think they would prefer you be there 8-5PM."
Me - "Eh, forget then, not interested."
In other words, desperate as the employment situation may be, why do you accept commuting? Why do you not demand the right to telecommute?
Sure, it's a bold move and sure there's plenty of other people out there willing to become the corporate slave who would just "love" to commute, but if the entirety of the US labor market would simply get a little self-respect and say, "eh, I'm not commuting" what could they do?
Then again, maybe I'm just crazy. Maybe people like to commute and waste years of their lives, missing out on seeing their children and spending time with their families. Maybe they like spending trillions of dollars on gas over the years. I mean, what better to spend your money on that gas, right? And who doesn't love the increased chance of divorce because "you're never home?" And did I mention all the icky yucky gross economic growth that would occur because of extra disposable income?
Yeah, we wouldn't dare take advantage of this latest revolution.