Monthly Archives: July 2011

Let’s say they don’t get something passed…

So I see three possibilities to our debt ceiling problems. A long term deal, a short term deal and no deal.

Let’s see how these three would probably play out.

A short term deal that would push the debt ceiling up to cover the next few months and cut a few trillion off our spending for the next decade, but actually not cut anything from our outstanding debt. Don’t kid yourself, this is what both Boehner and Reid have suggested. And both of these plans, and any slight variation of them Moody’s has already said is not going to be enough to guarantee our AAA bond rating. More importantly these don’t solve anything.
We will be back here again in a few months for another game of chicken. Both parties are playing with fire with a game like this given how the fickle American public is.

Even a balanced budget amendment is passed (and while sane I don’t see it getting past a Socialist Democrat Senate with 2/3 vote needed) the fastest an amendment has ever been ratified is 4 months after it was approved by Congress…as we know Obama can do a LOT of damage in 4 months.

A short term fix, fixes just about nothing. And this is what Congress is debating.

Then we have Obama who has kinda sorta maybe called for a long term deal (we can’t be sure because he has never actually proposed ANYTHING, just complained about what others have done). He seems to claim he has a plan (I think) but unlike his idols (Blofeld, Goldfinger and Luther, their goals do seem to be about the same as the effects of Obama’s policies after all) he seems unwilling to share his plans with us.

So what would a long term solution involve? It seems to hinge on raising the debt ceiling high enough that we wouldn’t have to deal with this at least until well after the election (let’s see spending 4 billion a day over what we’re taking in, we’ll give them until March 1st 2013 to allow the next Congress to deal with this mess, that’s 2.4 Trillion dollars). If you thought the bond rating agencies hated the last option, they’ll despise this one. We’ll be 17 Trillion in Debt! If you think not meeting an arbitrary deadline will hurt the economy, let’s try turning ourselves into Greece and see how that affects the economy.

These two plans will lead to stagflation that will make the Carter administration look like a happy time, and an economic slowdown that will make the Great Depression look fast-paced. All because we couldn’t kick the habit of spending money we didn’t have. Both plans remind me of such great economic planning strategies as those of the USSR and the Weimar Republic (you know the place where a billion marks wouldn’t buy a loaf of bread and inflation was so rapid prices changed on the hour…you think 17 Trillion isn’t heading for that?).

Finally there is no plan.

We let gridlock continue. We meet the deadline with no increase of the debt ceiling. Well, what would happen?
We have enough money coming in from payroll taxes to pay the interest on the debt and all outstanding debts to our bond holders.

We have all the money we need to fund Social Security.

It’s after that we get to make hard choices. We would need to cut a lot of new payments to the federal government. We would have to go to true austerity. Corporate welfare would need to end immediately (oh, wait, that’s a good thing). Obama cronies like GE might actually have to pay taxes (oh, wait, another good thing). Whole useless Departments like Education and Agriculture would have to be cut back drastically if not eliminated (oh, wait, that’s a good thing too). Medicaid and Medicare would have to be slashed (good again).

But wait there must be some bad stuff here. Yes. Now like the short and long term “fixes” we would probably see an almost immediate sell off in the stock market probably dropping as far as 5,000 points because people are panicked little gerbils. My recommendation: Buy. Buy low, sell high. Because about a month after that crash businesses will realize their actual business is still there, and unlike the short and long term plans money might not be utterly worthless. It may have been momentarily hit, but very quickly it will become obvious that Obama suddenly does not have the funds, and with it, the power to regulate and destroy business. It will suddenly be safe to invest, to hire, to expand, to grow—you know all those things that help an economy and which Obama has made his personal mandate to impede. You may argue Obama doesn’t stand for that…but actual businesses seem to believe this so they will not move until the Caesar wanna-be is out or at least powerless.

Honestly as I said in a previous blog I would be happy with a Balanced Budget Amendment, real cuts to budget, not in the 10 year plan, but substantial cuts NOW, and a temporary increase in the debt ceiling to get us through only as long as it takes for the real cuts to take us below the old level. But short of that—let the debt hit ceiling. It may not be the most pragmatic, but it is certainly better than continuing this slow road to self-immolation.

Or ask yourself at what point does the debt become so large that we’ve passed the point of no return? If not 15 Trillion (Trillion, do you realize how big a Trillion is?) then when?

Leave a comment

Filed under Budget, Capitalism, Congress, Conservative, Debt, Economics

Debt Problems and Why You Shouldn’t Worry Too Much

Okay let’s deal with some basics here.  First watch this video.

We have enough to pay our debts.  We don’t have enough to keep spending more than our debts (well we do, we just don’t have enough to keep spending like drunken sailors).

The House has passed 2 different bills.  Each time it’s the Senate that is holding this up, and last time I checked the Senate is controlled by Democrats.

The 14th Amendment does not give the President to right to make new spending.  At most it gives him the power to pay our bond holders…and as I just said we have the money to do that.  We may not have the money to make welfare payments to people who haven’t been able to find a job in three years (yeah my heart bleeds), maybe they can swallow their pride and take a job somewhat below what they used to do (yet strangely more than we’re paying them to sit on their ass).  Oh, and we can’t make new payments to Medicaid and Medicare…which might prove that the medical field will actually work better, cheaper, and help more people when the government isn’t involved.  And we might not be able to make payments to the Department of Education, HHS, HUD, Interior, Agriculture, Commerce…you know that might again make things work better as well.

If Obama tries to continue his mad spending spree and if we hit the debt ceiling and uses his LSD induced interpretation of the 14th Amendment to do so, I predict two things.  The first is that a rational Supreme Court would give a power grab like that, the likes of which hasn’t been seen since a dictator wannabe like Lincoln, I suspect the Supreme Court will give that move a 9-0 thumbs down (but given that this is not a sane Court the vote will be 7-2, guess which two aren’t able to actually read what the Constitution says).  The 2nd prediction is that Obama will be even a bigger childish whiner than he has been.  I fully expect a prime time 2-year-old temper tantrum with foot stomping, name calling and pouting.

Odds are I would bet the Senate will collapse and Obama won’t be fully suicidal (but you never know).

And just a little reminder the power of the purse was given to only one half of one branch of the government (the one that’s currently controlled by the GOP).  The Founders must have had a reason for that.  Probably because it’s too easily abused a power that you should have 2 and a half branches as a check against the use of that power.  It’s really screwed up when the people with the authority to spend are the ones calling for cuts and reason and living within our means and it’s the other branches shirking their responsibility to hold that power in check.

Leave a comment

Filed under Budget, Congress, Constitution, Debt, Economics, Obama

Polls Numbers and Spin

This is an interesting way to spin something…

In the latest Gallup numbers, Gallup states:

Obama Rates Higher Than Boehner, Reid on Debt Situation

Fine that’s all well and good, I have no great faith in the intelligence of people so I’m not greatly shocked by these numbers…but then I actually looked at the numbers.

Now when you look at it, yes Obama at 41% is higher than Boehner (31) and Reid (23).  But is it fair to say that Obama rates higher?  No it’s not.

Because all you have to do is look at the next column.  52% disapprove of Obama and Reid and only 48% disapprove of Boehner.  It’s only a 4% difference but it’s very telling in both attitudes of the nation and the way that Gallup seems to be spinning data.  The title could have said more Americans disapprove of Democrat handling of debt debate.  Or you could have said over half of the nation disapproves of Obama’s handling of the debt ceiling…but we wouldn’t want to do that.  Why?  Because one of the most basic truths of American politics is that, for the most part, we don’t vote for politicians, we vote against them.  America didn’t vote for Clinton, they voted against Bush.  America didn’t vote for Bush, they voted against Clinton’s lackey Gore.  They didn’t vote for Bush as much as they voted against someone as slimy as Kerry (and his running mate who was a paragon of virtue, class and moral character).  And they certainly didn’t vote for Obama as much as they voted against a continuation of liberal RINO’s like Bush in the form of a senile corrupt Senator from Arizona named McCain.  The Tea Party might actually be one of the few times people voted for someone (but mainly because the Tea Party was AGAINST so many things).

So what does this mean?  It means that 52% of the country is against Obama.  And it’s not just a wishy-washy part of the country.  You’ll notice that while with Obama there were 8% of people who had no opinion (because this 8-15% seems to perpetually live in a cave and no opinion about anything!) there were 25% who had no opinion on Reid.  The higher number on Reid is indicative of people who really don’t follow the news and thus have less of an informed opinion on the second tier characters in the story of politics.  But notice that when you take out the clueless the same amount of America (52%) is very, very upset with Obama and the liberals. People who have something to vote against are more likely to turn up at the ballot box than people who have something to vote for.  Over half the country seems to disagree with Obama and his party over the debt, which means they disagree with him on the economy…the economy?  Isn’t that going to be the single largest issue in the next election?  Yes, yes it is!

Over half the country wants him gone.  A poll like this reveals that this is an election for the Republicans to lose (which they could easily do if they nominate Palin) and not one for Obama to win.  Numbers like this reveal that Obama’s only chance is to either dive to the center (which an arrogant narcissist like him won’t do) or pray that the GOP nominates a complete moron who will shoot themselves in the foot (given every GOP nominee since 1988 that is still a serious possibility).

Leave a comment

Filed under Arizona, Budget, Capitalism, Congress, Conservative, Debt, Economics, Government is useless, Harry Reid, Obama, Problems with the GOP, Tea Party

Best of the Blog: Life is not Fair! Deal with it.

So this truly moronic line (seriously it’s getting to a point where I can’t refer to this man without a string of profanity laced insults, he is really that dumb) came out of Obama’s mouth during his interview with Bill O’Reilly:

“What is absolutely true is I think in this country, there’s no reason why, if you get sick you should go bankrupt. The notion that that’s a radical principle, I don’t think the majority of people would agree with you.”

There is no reason why if you get sick you should go bankrupt? No reason? First let me deal with his crappy word choice before I give you a reason. Most people when they get sick don’t go bankrupt. Hell most of us when we get sick don’t even go to the doctor. So it’s not getting sick, it’s getting life threatening illnesses that could drive you bankrupt. Also not everyone who gets cancer or another life threatening illness goes bankrupt, even under the old system. So to be accurate what he should have said is:

“What is absolutely true is I think in this country, there’s no reason why, if you get a life threatening illness you may go bankrupt.” Now that I’ve corrected this idiots’ word choice to be factually accurate, let me deal with his idiot logic. No reason at all? You, the President of the United States can’t think of a reason? None at all? How about, life’s not fair.

Life is not fair. It throws things at you that you, in this lifetime, have done nothing to deserve and there is no way to combat it. It’s nobody’s fault. Now if you are a New Ager like me you might comfort yourself with the belief that everything happens for a reason, and everything is an opportunity to learn (and that there may be some multi-life karma in there too), but whether my spiritual beliefs are true or not…life isn’t fair.

It never has been fair. It never will be fair. Nothing we can do can or ever will change the very nature of this universe that it isn’t fair.

But it can be just in terms of how humans deal with each other.

I would like to ask Obama: Is there any just reason why I and the rest of America should go bankrupt and give up our liberties to choose what we want to buy or not to buy just because someone else can’t accept the fact that they’re going to die? Is it just that I must pay for their treatments which are necessary because either they: A.) not live a lifestyle which would have prevented them from getting this disease or B.) just drew the short end of the stick. Now a lot of you are going to complain about part A, that I’m insensitive or blaming the victim…no, not really. The biggest killers are heart disease (caused a lot by unhealthy living) and infection (more often than not caused by being old, they were going to die one way or another)…however the biggest cost for medical payments are cancer, which is either genetic (i.e. nobody’s fault) or brought on my unhealthy living (if you’re obese you’re at a much higher risk) and degenerative diseases (genetics) and occasionally long term issues like diabetes (most cases of which are completely preventable). Nowhere in this list did I see anything I caused. Why do I have to pay?

I’ll make you a deal, I’ll treat my dying (and by extension my life) with a little dignity, not waste everything I have on trying to prevent that which cannot be prevented, I’ll live life rather than simply try to prevent death, and I won’t ask anyone else to pay a dime (not even my children if I ever have them). For this, don’t ask me to pay for the fact that the only time you’ve valued living is when faced with death and thus are willing to throw boatloads of money away for procedures and treatments that will only delay the inevitable.

Now granted there are many people out there who have long term diseases that aren’t fatal, that cost a lot, and that get crappy expensive insurance or can’t get insurance…but that’s probably due to the fact that the government enforces state monopolies for insurance companies…and because they have insane regulations that force drug companies to charge outrageous prices to make enough to pay for research and still have a profit (and they are entitled to profit)…and because the lack of Tort reform creates obscene insurance premiums for doctors which they in turn pass onto their patients. (Oh there’s Medicaid and Medicare fraud, and the costs illegals place on the system) None of which was addressed by ObamaCare…only stealing from me was addressed in that petty excuse for a bill. Certainly isn’t fair (which it will never be) or just (which it could be if we didn’t have morons in Washington).

Oh but there was a second part to his statement:
“The notion that that’s a radical principle, I don’t think the majority of people would agree with you.”

Obama, you moron, it doesn’t matter if a lot of people agree with me or not, because truth and right have nothing to do with a popularity contest, but it is an incredibly radical notion to suggest that stealing from me is better than fixing a broken system. It is extremely radical to redefine the function of government from protection from outside forces to nanny state. It is obscenely radical to say you have the right to force me to buy things whether I want them or not. They are all radical notions. And you would know that Mr. President if you had a single brain cell focused on anything other than how cool you think you are.

Leave a comment

Filed under Health Care

Do Great Americans hold to rigid ideologies?

“History is scattered with the stories of those who held fast to rigid ideologies and refused to listen to those who disagreed. But those are not the Americans we remember.” –Obama (as a round about way of blaming Republicans and the Tea Party for our debt problems).

Really we don’t remember people who stick to their guns?  Let me see how many I get off the top of my head in 5 minutes.

John and Abigail Adams

Alexander Hamilton

Thomas Jefferson

Abraham Lincoln

Ronald Reagan

Medger Evers

Martin Luther King Jr.

Gen. George Patton

Alexander Graham Bell

Ralph Waldo Emerson

Henry David Thoreau

Thomas Edison

Nikola Tesla

Walt Whitman

William Faulkner

Milton Friedman

Walt Disney

Bill Gates

Steve Jobs

Rosa Parks

The Wright Brothers

John Quincy Adams

Mark Twain

Frederick Douglas

Thomas Paine

Amelia Earhart

Helen Keller

All Americans who did hold fast to the rigid belief that they were right.  All Americans who refused to listen to those who disagree.  All great American who we not only remember but remember fondly.  None perfect but all helped to make the world a better place.  Why?  Because they stood their ground, they ignored dissent and effectively gave the finger to anyone who got in their way.

It’s the people who don’t have values, who don’t hold to their values and always seek compromise over what is right that we don’t remember…So in a 100 years expect to list Obama there with Arthur, Cleveland, and Taft.

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

A Week of the Best: The Evils of Modern Liberalism

(Here at the Conservative New Ager we are going through some of the old blog in honor of “Republicans and Reincarnation” finally being published and to get the new home page out there…so this week there will be a lot of older stuff that still holds true).

Let me first clarify my use of the word “evil.”As a New Ager I believe that every single soul in the universe will one day reach enlightenment and be welcomed into heaven. Don’t try and list off really evil people in history because they too will one day make it back to God. So my belief is that people aren’t evil, they can be very ignorant of what they’re doing, but they themselves and their souls are not evil. But I do classify their actions as evil. I classify such actions as Evil when their actions not only delay their own return to enlightenment, but also hurt the progression of others, whether the act is malicious or well-intentioned…

…So to my liberal friends out there: I’m insulting your idiotic beliefs, not you.

Okay, so we’ve got that out-of-the-way, why is modern liberalism evil? Doesn’t liberalism support equal rights of life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness for all humanity, democratic republicanism, the rule of law over force, and all are equal before the law and all that stuff? No, you’re thinking of Classical Liberalism, a philosophy which is at the heart of the Enlightenment and American Revolution. Modern conservatism and modern liberalism are both out growths Classical liberalism. Philosophically modern conservatism is more of Classical Liberalism’s heir (in practice is sadly falls a little short), modern liberalism is Classical Liberalism’s idiot bastard child.

Why? you ask. After all, as a friend of mine recently said:

“As a Democrat, I support social welfare programs — that’s not ‘babysitting the populace.’ I think that government has a responsibility to provide programs for those in need.”

Isn’t that a good thing? Wanting to help those in need? It seems so good?…And yet, it is evil. And let me explain why.(And I’m not attacking my friend in particular, I’m pretty sure almost every liberal in America would agree with that statement in its entirety).

Let’s look closely at the 2nd sentence in that statement (mostly because the first sentence is self-contradictory).

The government has a responsibility to provide programs for those in need.

There are three key terms in this sentence: Responsibility, Provide, and Need. We’ll deal with each one separately

The Responsibility of Government

What is the responsibility of government? Well if you listen to Classical Liberalism and modern conservatives who have their heads screwed on correctly, government is there to do things. Protect your rights and do those things which only the force as large as government can. What are your rights? The classic list is Life. Liberty, Property/Pursuit of Happiness. What does it mean to protect these things? Does it mean the government should stop me from eating that Big Mac because that will cause a cholesterol build up which will one day lead to my death? Nope. Protection means to protect you from others forcibly destroy your life or liberty. Through this the government has a responsibility to create a military to protect you from outside sources, and a police force (FBI, State Police, Highway Patrol, Sheriffs, and Local Police) and a court system for internal threats. They are there to stop others from taking things away from you.

Notice in this understanding of government’s responsibility they are not giving you anything. You were born with life and liberty it’s just no one can rightfully take it away from you.

The second issue is things that only something as large as government can tend to. Things like standards. Weights, measurement, currency, laws for conducting business. highway and streets (because they all need to be standardized, although upkeep and repair should be at least contracted out if not privatized).These things need to be standardized because without them you have about zero chance of pursing happiness successfully. For instance one of things government has a right to do is standardize what is and isn’t legal accounting practices so that everyone is keeping their books in the same way and thus everyone (and by everyone I primarily mean mainly stockholder and potential stockholders) can make sure everything is proper and the system is working and not lying. Our government chooses not partake in this responsibility—I say this because the accounting practices of Enron, which were designed to hide it’s illegal activities, were and still are very legal. That’s right it’s legal to hide your illegal activities. But does Congress rewrite accounting laws? No. It would rather discuss you right to health care.

And herein is where the evil lies in that. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, are things you are born with and that no one gives to you. Health care is something that is given to you. Why is this evil? Because it is an insult the value of humanity. The human soul is an end unto itself, completely capable through its work and mind of providing everything it needs for itself. It’s a concept called free will. To say that something must be given to you, that you are not capable of getting it for yourself means to things. You are not complete and have insufficient power to live a whole life, and that whoever does provide this for you does have that power. Traditionally the relationship is called that of the master and slave…and in the scenario of the modern liberalism, government is not playing the role of slave (which it should be).To say that government has a responsibility to provide anything perverts the concept of a right, it perverts the concept of government which should be used as a shield against the irrational forces which choose not to recognize you god given rights into the driving force that makes you life complete. It subordinates your will to the will of government…to the will of the party, the leader (what’s the German word for “leader”?), Big Brother.

What the Government should provide?

Well nothing is the obvious answer if your read the previous paragraphs. But there is another reason why the government providing anything is just plain evil. To provide something means the government has to get it from somewhere. Where does it get the money to operate? Taxes. Now we don’t pay our taxes out the goodness of our heart. If we are rational we pay for what the government should be doing because we recognize government is a necessary evil that requires funds to operate to protect us…That accounts for about 10 cents of every dollar the government collects. We pay the other 90 cents because the government has guns and prisons and thieves called IRS who will go into your bank account and just take it without your permission.(Anyone else miss the good old days of Robin Hood and the American Revolution, when we knew what to do with tax collectors?).

But it’s not just their theft and extortion that’s evil. Back to health care. Notice what’s implied by the concept of you have a right to health care. That means a doctor has to treat you, whether you will pay them or not. If it’s an absolute right it can’t be ethically paid for. You don’t pay someone for your liberty or your life? No, that would be evil. You can pay someone to protect those things, but you’re not paying them for life or liberty, you have those by being a human, you’re paying them to act as a shield against outside forces that seek to steal those things. So if health care was a Right that you have, it would be unethical or evil to demand payment for it. But if you have the right to demand the services of a doctor or a nurse, or demand the right to drug that could save your life, what does that mean? It means that the doctor does not have the right to refuse you treatment, payment or no. And if the doctor doesn’t have the right to refuse treatment, the right to demand payment, doesn’t that mean he is a slave. Doesn’t it mean that the drug company and the scientist who came up with the drug are slaves to the person demanding the drug if they don’t have the right to determine what they think is a fair price for the drug.

I feel I need to make this clear. If the doctor has a right to demand payment for his knowledge and his service then health care must logically be conditional. Rights are not conditional. If health care is a right, then health care providers must logically be slaves. It’s one or the other. Rationally there can no having health care as a right and not having slaves. Since modern liberalism states health care is a right, logically they are calling for the enslavement of an entire class of people. Modern liberalism claims lots of things are rights, a live-able wage, for instance, but when you run it through logically if it is a right then someone must be forced to provide this right. That person is called a slave.

So that’s twice now that modern liberalism has devalued human life to little more than slavery. Let’s take a look at the third part of the sentence.

Who are those in need?

Those in need—are we talking about those in need of protection from genocidal tyrants? Those in need of defense against a culture that debases women as less than human? Nope. From the context of the sentence it seems we’re talking about people who don’t have enough stuff/money according to our liberal friends. But we give those in need everything they “need” let’s look at why they’re needy.

“You need only do three things in this country to avoid poverty – finish high school, marry before having a child, and marry after the age of 20. Only 8 percent of the families who do this are poor; 79 percent of those who fail to do this are poor.”

William Galston, advisor to Bill Clinton.

So I’m not a sociologist here, but using the information provided for us by the Clinton administration, it would seem that poverty is primarily caused by making really stupid choices. Taking another look at the statistics, as economist Thomas Sowell love to point out in just about every book he writes, over half of those people who are below the poverty line are in their 20’s and won’t be below the poverty line in 10 years, having given up their places among the poor to a new set of 20 somethings. So it would seem that most people tend to learn from their youthful mistakes. Who would have thought in a capitalistic system that rewards hard work and intelligence that the stupid and lazy get the shaft.

But the call goes, ‘what about their children!?’ The children of these people who live below the poverty line will never be able to break this cycle. To which I say: Bullshit. Every school I have ever worked at full-time could be called “at risk” education. And at every school some of my brightest students were not the children of middle class families, but the children of parents who lived in poverty. They saw how their family lived and they choose to get an education so that wouldn’t be them. The children who repeat the cycle of poverty are those who CHOOSE to not strive, to not learn, to not break the cycle. It is a choice, as the opportunity is always there in a capitalistic system to get outfit has nothing to do with race or gender or religion. It is a matter of choice. To deny this denies free willow wait there once again we find that to say that people are needy means that we don’t believe they have free will, the responsibility to take the consequences of their choices; once again liberalism has devalued human beings to little more than a mindless thing.

Modern liberalism’s problem is that it devalues the inherent value of human life. It sees all of humanity as either problems to fix or tools to use. But a human being is not a problem or a tool. It is an end unto itself. Only from this perspective can a life have value. Liberalism pushes everyone away from this value through its destruction of free will through its imposition of slavery and through its denial of human value. I’ll be the first to say that history is more than filled with far worse example of this evil than your modern American liberal, but it is a difference in degree not kind. I will also admit that while this idea pushes people away from any kind of personal growth, it is the person’s choices to follow that philosophy not the philosophy itself that is at fault for not achieving personal enlightenment. But it is still used as a tool for preventing the progression of many human lives…and it that sense it is absolute evil.

Coming soon….why I’m not thrilled with Republicans either….

Leave a comment

Filed under Evils of Liberalism, Government is corrupt, Government is useless

A week of retrospectives

In honor of Republicans and Reincarnation being published I thought it would be a good time to take a break from new blogs (also because how many times can I talk about the budget before you slit your wrist) and go back over some of the best blogs in the last 2 years of this blog.

Obviously if something major happens that requires a blog but most things (like the budget and the terrorist acts in Oslo) require some time develop well thought-out responses and not just knee jerk reactions.

This will also be a good chance to bring some new readers in and welcome in the new format at WordPress.

So any favorites you want me to bring to the forefront?

Leave a comment

Filed under Books for Conservatives, Books for New Agers, Reading Suggestions, Republicans and Reincarnation

Republicans and Reincarnation is for sale!!!!

It’s for sale.

Republicans and Reincarnation: The Conscience of A New Age Conservative is finally for sale!!

You should buy a copy. Or three. One for you. One for your best friend whom you want to have one of the best books of the 21st century. And one just because you never know when you’ll need a back up copy.

Buy it at my publisher AuthorHouse

Barnes & Noble

Amazon  (although they apparently are not selling the Kindle version just yet, but they should have it up soon).  

Prices for the book are lower at my publisher, prices for the Nook at B&N is lower than the price at my publisher.  (Royalties are higher from my publisher, so you know where my bias lies).

Feel free to write a review or two…Feel free to mention it to every carbon based life-form you know…feel free to forward information to any member of the media you know.

Leave a comment

Filed under A Course in Miracles, American Exceptionalism, Art, Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand, Books for Conservatives, Books for New Agers, Capitalism, Chakra, Charity, Conservative, Dalai Lama, Economics, Education, Equality, Evils of Liberalism, Faith, Foreign Policy, Free Will, Goldwater, GOP, Government is corrupt, Government is useless, Happiness, Health Care, Humor, Individualism, Karma, Literature, Long Term Thinking, Marianne Williamson, Patriotism, Purpose of Life, Reading Suggestions, Reincarnation, Republicans and Reincarnation, Selfishness, Tao Te Ching, Taxes, Teaching, Tyranny, Unjust legislation, War on Terrorism

What a pompous schmuck

“A lot of the spending cuts that we’re making should be around areas like defense spending as opposed to food stamps,” –Obama to NPR.

One, this is a schmuck who has yet to propose anything of his own.

Two, if you want to cut defense spending then let’s cut Libya and Yemen. We aren’t even there legally.

Third, I’ll admit that we never had a plan when going in to Afghanistan…okay the military had a plan, but we clearly didn’t have a plan on what to do once the military drove the Taliban out. I will admit I was foolish and thought we had learned from WWI and WWII that you have to have a plan on what to do after you kill the bad guys. But Bush didn’t. And I will admit that I was naïve and didn’t critique Bush at first because I assumed there was one but I just couldn’t see all the pieces, after all in the early stages even someone with a plan would be able to show it working from day one, these kind of things take time. But yeah, while I had no desire to Monday morning quarterback, Bush had no plan. And Obama continued to have no plan on Afghanistan. So let’s just bomb the shit out of the Taliban one last time, take out all the drug lords we can and leave. But don’t be the one who continues to have no plan and then gets us into civil wars where both sides are pretty scummy (not to mention I’m sure that the priority list for both sides in Libya read:  (1.) Kill the other side (2.) Kill the Jews (3.) Kill the Great Satan) and then complain about military spending.

Fourth after being a complete hypocrite for getting us into a war that even theoretically won’t free a single soul (at least in Afghanistan our intentions were good) he then wants to talk about food stamps. You know what? How about we cut both programs. The entitlement spending in this nation has become insane. When one out of three people are on a government handout of some kind it should become clear to all but the mentally impaired that we’ve hit a point where we need to turn back. People have become too reliant on safety nets put in by the government. For instance, right now in economic hard times, are people cutting back on their expense? Nope they’re putting all their same expenses on credit cards. Real moronic move. Why are they doing this? Probably because they know there is always a bailout waiting to help them. After all if people can buy houses they can’t afford and have the government help them pay for it with my tax dollars—tax dollars I have because I didn’t listen to my old boss who called me an idiot for not buying a house on a subprime loan, remind me who the idiot is?—why would you cut any of your other costs.

No. We need to cut everything. Get out of these wars we have no plan in (if there was a plan to bring freedom I’d be all for it but there’s not) and kill these entitlement programs and force some frugality back in the country.

Leave a comment

Filed under Budget, Debt, Obama, War on Terrorism

Why Social Security doesn’t work

I know some of you know this in the theoretical, but sometimes seeing the actual numbers helps.

The average person earns 1.2 million dollars in the course of their life (if you only have a High School Diploma) in current dollars. Assuming they go to work at 19 that averages out to $25,000 a year, probably making somewhere near $40,000 at retirement assuming an average raise of 1% per year (it’s more because I’m giving a you a 1% raise in real dollars), I’m being generous. In reality you’d probably end up with a much higher number.

At present FICA is 6.25%. Currently it has been lowered but let’s assume that the average 6.2% will hold (if I accounted with the lower FICA this would have even a more outrageous ending).

So, over a lifetime the average high school graduate will contribute $74,400 and their employer will contribute $74,400 for a total of $148,800. (If you’re self employed you get to put up all of it.)

If they retire at 67 they get full benefits (if they retire before this it is reduced benefits, but actually those reduced benefits end up costing more in the long run).

If they’re making $40,000 (not an outrageous sum) at full retirement their benefits are going to be about $1,300 a month.

The average life expectancy is currently 78.3.

So, retiring at 67 means they’ll be collecting benefits for 11 years 4 months.
1300 x 11.3×12=$176,280. That’s right, they will draw $176,280 from social security if they retire today and live 11.3 more years (but as we know life expectancy keeps going up so in 11 years the life expectancy will probably be around 79 or 80 which only makes this next paragraph even worse).

$176,280 is $27,480 more than the $148,800 they and their employer put in. We all knew that everyone gets more than they put in, but now you know by how much. Times every person who retires. Yes social security is currently funded ….because it’s stealing from the rest of us. But this Ponzi scheme has to go.

Oh and let’s ask what you could have done with $148,000 more in your lifetime…oh maybe buy a house and have enough credit that you didn’t need to get a subprime loan. Maybe pay for your kids to go to college. Or if we cut that in half and didn’t just force that money out of your employer’s bank account maybe they could have hired someone else (or maybe a dozen other employees)…or maybe take care of your parent (what an idea)…or how about even saving for retirement. Even the compound interest of a basic CD would yield a lot more that measly 27K overage. A myriad of things could be done which would have made the economy infinitely more healthy.

But no. We had to have an entitlement program. Great plan.  And it only gets worse the more you make.

Now we can cut benefits or we can raise the retirement age or we can tell people that if they’re not a certain again, tough they’re just not getting anything they put into this failing system (or all of the above).  But the fact remains that more is coming out than is going in and that makes this nothing more than an elaborate pyramid scheme that needs to be stopped.

Oh and we didn’t even talk about the obscene cost of Medicaid and Medicare

Leave a comment

Filed under Budget, Capitalism, Debt, Economics, Government is useless, Long Term Thinking, Social Security, Welfare

I’m not the only one who thinks some people are whiners…

So remember when in my review of Transformers I couldn’t understand the people who were complaining about Optimus killing the bad guys (because apparently in their warped memory Prime was a stand in for Gandhi).  It’s comforting to know I’m not the only one who remembers the old cartoon has some logical sense of right and wrong.

Leave a comment

Filed under Movies for Conservatives, People Are Stupid

What exactly are Judeo-Christian Values?

Here’s a question that always bugs me: the phrase “Judeo-Christian values”. Used a lot by the right, but there is a healthy amount of it on the left as well. In fact both sides use the phrase too much. Too too much. I have grown to hate the phrase because I actually know Christianity. I have read three translations of the Bible cover to cover (and some of the New Testament in the original Greek), I have read the Gnostic texts and the Gospels that didn’t make it; I have read the Council decisions of the ancient and medieval world. I have read Augustine, Aquinas, Maimonides, Kierkegaard, C.S. Lewis and a handful of other Christian philosophers. And I can tell you just about any and every value (no matter how contradictory) can be justified at some point in time as a Judeo-Christian value. The phrase Judeo-Christian value is so vague and so nebulous as to mean NOTHING.  But clearly everybody means something when they say it…Hell even atheists like to use the phrase when attacking people.

So I would like to know what are the Judeo-Christian values you all refer to?

I can articulate my spiritual beliefs and how they lead to political ends…can someone please help me figure out what the other side is valuing…

New Age Conservative Values

  • Uniqueness of humanity and the spark of the divine which leads to reason
  • Free will to use that reason is what makes us divine and leads to Liberty
  • Reincarnation and Karma leads to Long Term Thinking
  • Value of Life over the Quantity leads to policy that encourages virtue and opportunity not results.
  • That Enlightenment is the goal of multiple lives which means that happiness is the goal of an individual life.


Filed under Atheism, Conservative, Faith, New Age

A few thoughts on Global Warming…

So while doing some research I found the same answer over and over and over again. The earth gets warmer and colder over time. It’s a wacky thing. Some might even call it a cycle. It was warm in the ancient world (so warm you could grow grapes in Northern England, it’s too cold to do that right now), then it got cold around 900AC then warm a century later then warm again; so warm that Erik the Red could actually live in Greenland (you can’t really do that now) then it got really cold again, so cold we call it the little Ice Age. Then it got warm again. That’s where we’re at right now.

But here’s the really fun part, we’re still not as warm as it once was. Looking at this cycle you would have to be an idiot of extreme measure to think that this latest warming period was directly caused by human intervention (Especially when you consider that CO2 levels are vastly lower than they were back in the Paleozoic era and as far as we can tell temperature wasn’t all that different.) An intelligent person might notice it looks more like a sine wave—it goes up, it goes down. A very natural pattern.
Here’s another fun part…try and find the eruptions of Thera or Krakatoa, which threw up more particulate matter than the entire industrialized world puts up in a decade, on this chart. Hint their eruptions seem to cause no change whatsoever in overall temperature.

Notice also those nice lines I drew in showing that not only our current temperature, but our current temperature plus a couple degrees is still lower than what it has historically been.

So exactly what was your proof that climate change was caused by the burning of fossil fuels again? A yeah, it got a little warmer over the last century…big deal.

Leave a comment

Filed under Environmentalism, Long Term Thinking, People Are Stupid

Laws for the GOP to Pass: End Financial Aid for College

So recently I’ve seen a string of articles on whether or not college is worth the money or the fact that the college tuition is a bubble about to burst. And to that I respond let it burst and let’s let the federal government help it along, because this will actually be a good thing.

For decades now the federal government has encouraged people to go to college. They do this because we need more educated people in this country if we going to survive as an economic powerhouse (that or we can continue shipping a lot of college grads in and shipping a lot of jobs out). And the method the government thought best? Why through loans and grants.

Funny thing happened though. (Not really that funny, because any high school grad who has taken even a semi-competent course in Econ could have seen this coming).

(Numbers have been simplified for ease of reading but the general principle is true). Let’s say it costs $1,000 a year to go to college. To help you out the government gave you $900 worth of grants and loans. Suddenly next year the total cost is $2000? The government not seeing any correlation between its loan and tuition costs says they’ll now cover $1500 worth of your costs. The next year all your costs for college are $2700. The government now will cover $2000 and tuition next year is $3300. I’m sure by now you have already seen where this is going; every time the government pays more the colleges raise their costs because they know the government will cover that. If you saw that pattern congratulations, you’re smarter than a chimp and most members of Congress. Further bonus points if you see how this is exactly like what happened when the government forced banks to make loans on houses and housing prices went up. Only it’s worse.

Take a look at this chart. See the housing market. See how that bubble burst. And see how it was out pacing the CPI (consumer price index, or the primary measurement of inflation). And now see how tuition makes the housing bubble look like a hiccup we can ignore. Yeah, that’s going to go well.

There have been some complaints that the federal government is not paying for technical colleges and this is discriminatory. We should be grateful they’re not paying for technical college…it’s probably why technical college is still affordable.

Should we blame the colleges for having a very human and very predictable level of greed? A little. They clearly had fancy new wings and shinny new stadiums more on their mind than the best interest of the students. But is the obese child to blame or the parent who keeps feeding them McDonalds? After all these are academics we’re talking about. These are people who make high school teachers look like worldly people with vast amounts of street smarts. Did they know any better? Doubtful, they’ve never been in the real world or the private sector where people expect results if they give you piles of money. Academia should be pitied not scolded.

But government is to blame in this too. (Not to mention the morons who keep electing them. The sad problem in democracy is that you might not always get the best government, but you always get the government you deserve.)

So what should we do about it? Why isn’t that obvious? Stop all federal loans and grants for college tuition. Everything. Every last dime. Kill it. Pay out what we’ve promised for this year, but after that destroy it all with the zeal of an arachnophobic killing a spider.

What will happen? Well suddenly 90% of all colleges will be of the range of what 99% of all students can pay. Colleges may be run by academics, but they’re not run by complete morons. They’ll look at the laws of supply and demand and realize if they’re going to keep their students they better cut their tuition costs… a lot. Which will suddenly make college more affordable for everyone.

Yes there will be some side effects.

First a lot more people are going to go to community college for their first two years since they’re going to have to pay out of their own pocket they’re going to pick the cheaper option. More people going to community college will mean that the community colleges will actually have the money to pay for more facilities, better teachers, more courses and actually be something other than a joke and fodder for NBC.

On the flip side the 4-year colleges will have to do some cutting. I’m going to guess on what a few of those cuts might be. First up T.A.’s. I imagine if they have to make cuts they will tell professors that they actually have to teach their own classes. Which is an interesting concept…because I don’t know if you know this, but professors know stuff….which if they’re in the classroom they can teach you things. As someone who went to a college that didn’t have T.A.’s I can tell you it’s amazing the things you can learn from professors. Like knowledge. It’s a radical concept for higher education, I know, but I think it’s worth a try. Because otherwise you’re just paying a huge amount of cash to have a T.A. tell you to read a textbook. At which point we’re at that great quote from Good Will Hunting “you dropped a hundred and fifty grand on a fuckin’ education you coulda got for a dollar fifty in late chares at the public library.” Trust me, as it currently stands, if you take a look at the top 15 colleges in the nation, they’re all hideously overpriced and not worth the money. (Yes, I know 2 of the top 15 are free, but they’re military schools which means you would have to take orders from Obama…no amount of saving money is worth that…under any other Presidency they are among the highest value available, under this idiot, well…).

What the hell is that?

And maybe colleges can stop wasting their student’s money on really ugly art…like that…

And I will admit some money will probably be diverted that would once go to smashing really small particles together in ways that will never help anyone in science departments that are actually researching things like alternative fuel sources and ways to make things cheaper or better (in other words patents that can bring in money). That will be a real shame.

Finally, yes some colleges will have to cut their sports programs. Why? Well, as Thomas Sowell points out in Economic Facts and Fallacies most colleges lose money on their sports programs. Lots of money. In fact in Sowell’s book it speculated that maybe 10 of the 1,000 NCAA institutions are in the black. With coaches and recruiters making in excess of six figure salaries is that really a shock? Now I’m sure the first reaction will be to raise ticket prices (by maybe a 1000% that’s about what it would take when the students who want learn aren’t subsidizing the jocks). But I have a feeling that no one is so in favor of college basketball and football that they’ll be willing to pay for what it currently costs. For students this will not be a loss as the remaining jocks might actually now be held to some kind of standard (I base the fact that most professional football players can’t string a sentence together, but they sure can welcome back a guy who tortures animals). …Interestingly enough I suspect if football is no longer a way to get into college then high schools might start making some truly shocking purchases, like books or teacher’s salaries, instead of shelling out half the budget for new team uniforms (but I might be overly optimistic in this).


Filed under Capitalism, Economics, Laws the GOP should pass

Deja Vu

It’s the anniversary of Dim Jimmy Carter’s Malaise speech (you know the one where he said that America was on the downfall and would never again be great…right before we became the world’s only superpower and had an economic boom and took down the Soviet Union…all made possible by firing the little Anti-Semite named Carter).

But history has a tendency to repeat itself…

Thanks to Laura Ingram for putting this together.

Leave a comment

Filed under Carter, Economics, Obama