(To Idiots Like This…)
My answer to Paul Krugman’s June 10th NY Times editorial has been grinding around in the back of my brain and on the computer keyboard for a couple days while visiting with family and traveling from city to city.
I’m now ready to do some final editing and spit this thing out for your consumption and enjoyment. You might want to wear goggles or safety glasses because the spit will be flying I’m afraid.
First things first—Paul Krugman is well known to love to embellish his scholarly editorial commentary with large numbers of important sounding figures and statistics, but, as his recently retired managing editor Daniel Okrent so eloquently said:
“Op-Ed columnist Paul Krugman has the disturbing habit of shaping, slicing and selectively citing numbers in a fashion that pleases his acolytes but leaves him open to substantive assaults.”
Did you hear me? This statement was from Mr. Krugman’s own managing editor!
I’m not inclined to be quite so kind because I feel that Krugman’s “nuanced” use of facts and statistics does two critical things--it renders the facts useless and the statistics moot.
In this most recent piece “Losing Our Country,” Krugman’s thesis starts out weak—
“Baby boomers like me grew up in a relatively equal society. In the 1960’s America was a place in which very few people were extremely wealthy, many blue-collar workers earned wages that placed them comfortably in the middle class, and working families could expect steadily rising living standards and a reasonable degree of economic security”
—and quickly dies on the operating table, unable to be resuscitated by even an expert economist because his statement is wrong Wrong WRONG.
I’m sorry Paul old buddy, but I too grew up in the same America that your did in the 1960’s and 1970’s (he’s three years older than me) and I can assure you that America then (like America now) was not in fact equal in any shape, in any form, nor in any fashion imaginable.
Further, our Founding Fathers (George, Ben, Thomas, Jefferson, et al) never intended for our society to be equal. The OPPORTUNITY for ACHIEVEMENT was the only thing that was supposed to be EQUAL—you #@*&% MORON!
In the rural Alabama that I knew in the 1960’s, where George Wallace ruled as Governor, whites and blacks still had separate drinking fountians, separate schools, and Miss Ozark and Miss Bronze beauty pageants were held separately each year.
The wealthy citizens lived on Squirrel Drive and on Broad Street, were members of the country club, and the ex-military new arrivals like us built their modest split level and ranch houses on Dellwood lane and on Brookwood circle and politely declined the country club membership offers because we had little in common with “those people” socially and besides, we needed to save the money to pay for college. We also didn’t expect “those people” to pay for our groceries, send us on vacation, and pay our doctor bills—we could do that quite well ourselves—thank you very much.
Next Krugman breaks out the “W” word I hate so much—he laments the fate of…get ready…here it comes…
“The Working Families.”
He says:
“Working families have seen little if any progress over the past 30 years. Adjusted for inflation, the income of the median family doubled between 1947 and 1973. But it rose only 22 percent from 1973 to 2003, and much of that gain was the result of wives' entering the paid labor force or working longer hours, not rising wages.”
So Paul Krugman, bless his little over educated liberal heart, is worried about “Working Families.” As I wrote back in September in my blog posting “Tax Cuts For Working Families,” I still want to know what the heck IS a “Working Family" anyway?
Do you know?
Please tell me if you do because I must have missed that day of class in school.
Here is part of what I said previously:
“Let me ask the question, exactly what is a "working family?"
Does the term “working family” mean that both parents, all of the children, and the family pets each hold full time or part time jobs?
Does the term “working family” only apply if you make less than $50,000 per year in total income?
Does the term imply that people making over $100,000 don’t work for a living and/or don't have families ?”
Next he (P. Krugman) throws in a subtle caveat—“adjusted for inflation”—in his presentation. The standard he used for “adjusting for inflation” is not mentioned. It could be the Consumer Price Index or it could be the standard annual inflation rate which has been all over the map since 1947. In fact, inflation was at its worst during the presidency of Democrat Jimmy Carter from 1976 to1980 and is probably at least partially responsible for the low level of income gains that Krugman quotes in the 1973-2003 period.
Finally, Krugman breaks out one of my other favorite weasel-words—the word “median.” Do you know what the median (or mean) income is? Do you know what the difference is between the median income and the average income of a group of citizens?
Many if not most of Krugman’s readers probably don’t, and he is counting on this fact to help prop up is poorly supported discussion; else he is ignoring this situation as he develops his argument.
Let me give you a simple example illustrating the difference between average and mean. Here goes…
Say that last year the people on your street have these incomes:
Household A $35,000
Household B $40,000
Household C $55,000
Household D $75,000
Household E $90,000
In this example, the median household income would be $55,000, but the average household income would be $59,000, $4,000 higher.
Stay with me here please, I’m almost done with the math examples…
Now say that some people move in, some people move out, and the next year the people on your street have these incomes:
Household A $38,000
Household B $42,000
Household C $50,000
Household D $75,000
Household E $90,000
Krugman’s lovely, all important median income in this example would be $50,000, but the average income would still be $59,000. Also notice that while two households made more than in the first example, one also made less and two stayed the same, so the average income stayed the same while the median income fell.
If I were Paul Krugman, I could, using the standards he has used in writing the current article, honestly write a headline blaring “MEDIAN INCOMES FALL 9% ON YOUR STREET.”
Would that make you jump off of the sofa and run to the voting booth to institute some change? In my opinion, this exact kind of rhetoric motivates a whole bunch of uninformed people to vote with their wallet rather than with their brains.
Next Comrade Krugman drags out another favorite dead horse—“economic security”—and starts flogging it with a wet noodle:
“Meanwhile, economic security is a thing of the past: year-to-year fluctuations in the incomes of working families are far larger than they were a generation ago. All it takes is a bit of bad luck in employment or health to plunge a family that seems solidly middle-class into poverty.”
He doesn’t bother with supporting this argument with facts and figures, because there are none—economic security is a figment of the imagination of the politicians that want to deliver an ever increasing stream of government supplied benefits and wealth distribution to an ever growing segment of the population. “Don’t worry” they say, vote for us and WE will give you a secure income, and secure health benefits, and secure retirement benefits, all at the expense of those mean old wealthy people living across town.
Krugman then opens the curtain and reveals his, and the Democrats, proposed solution to the purported problems…TAX THE WEALTHY, “THEY ARE DOING BETTER THAN WORKING FAMILIES ARE, AND IT’S JUST NOT FAIR.”
“But the wealthy have done very well indeed. Since 1973 the average income of the top 1 percent of Americans has doubled, and the income of the top 0.1 percent has tripled.
Why is this happening? I'll have more to say on that another day, but for now let me just point out that middle-class America didn't emerge by accident. It was created by what has been called the Great Compression of incomes that took place during World War II, and sustained for a generation by social norms that favored equality, strong labor unions and progressive taxation.
Since the 1970's, all of those sustaining forces have lost their power.
Since 1980 in particular, U.S. government policies have consistently favored the wealthy at the expense of working families - and under the current administration, that favoritism has become extreme and relentless. From tax cuts that favor the rich to bankruptcy "reform" that punishes the unlucky, almost every domestic policy seems intended to accelerate our march back to the robber baron era.”
See, Krugman somehow thinks that it’s the Government's job, not the individual’s job to earn a living and take care of families. Krugman and his ilk’s idea of the means to raise the income of their beloved “working families” is to take the money away from those that EARNED it, in the form of progressive taxation, and give it to those that didn’t EARN IT in the form of rebates and tax credits.
In fact, Krugman comes right out and says it: “social norms that favored equality, strong labor unions, and progressive taxation.”
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, Paul Krugman is a lying moron, and he believes that YOU can’t take care of your own business, and if you happen to be an achiever that has “won life’s lottery” and earns a good living, he wants the government to bring a gun to your door and take some of your money and spend it as he and his fellow liberal friends see fit.
What total, unmitigated, bigotry—financial bigotry. How much longer are WE going to put up with this way of thinking?
I'll give Paul Krugman one final concession...You're right Paul...we are losing our country...
We're losing our country to Idiots Like you.
Costa Rica here I come...
Sunday, June 12, 2005
Yet More “Zero Tolerance” Insanity
Anyone that has read this blog for more than a few weeks knows that I am NOT a fan of our country’s so called “Zero Tolerance” laws when it comes to public (government) schools.
There is hardly a day that goes by where a local news story doesn’t outline some horrific example of an innocent (by any intelligent, reasonable standard) student being expelled or otherwise disciplined for being accused of some ridiculous infraction.
There is even a Website dedicated to consolidating and publishing Zero Tolerance horror stories called ztnightmares.com.
Well, I just so happened to have tripped over a couple of my own fresh “Zero Tolerance” news stories and I decided to comment again this morning.
First, let me say that I think that the best way to describe “Zero Tolerance” is to evoke the words of “Captain” (the warden character played by Strother Martin in the 1967 film Cool Hand Luke featuring Paul Newman)…
“What we have heeaaah……is a failure……..to communicate…”
Actually, I guess that this first story about a student being refused his diploma for wearing a Bolo tie to graduation could more accurately be placed under the title of “school administration stupidity” rather than “Zero Tolerance Insanity,” but the concept is still the same.
“Pomfret, MD-- School officials are withholding a 17-year-old boy's diploma for wearing a bolo tie under his graduation gown.
The student, Thomas Benya, said he prefers the string bolo ties over traditional knotted ties to reflect his American Indian heritage.
But officials from Maurice J. McDonough High School in suburban Washington said they warned him beforehand that a bolo violated the dress code for the event, held for about 250 students.
Katie O'Malley-Simpson said there are "many opportunities throughout the year to express cultural heritage. But we don't do that at graduation."
So this kid did all of the academic work, but showed up wearing a skinny Bolo tie under his graduation gown and the so called “SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS,” also the likely products of Government Schools, chose to make an example of him and not award his diploma.
What complete and total crappola. These so-called administrators evidently shouldn’t be allowed to pick out their own clothes and dress themselves in the morning. The government should go to their homes and confiscate all of the sharp objects so they won’t hurt themselves when they don’t have real adult supervision.
Suppose that Mr. Benya followed their rules and wore a nice navy blue tie—with an airbrushed painting of a voluptuous nude woman on the area hidden under his graduation gown, and didn’t show anyone the painting. Suppose that he wrote nasty, suggestive epithets with a magic marker all over his abdomen and ass describing his vivid sexual fantasies with the gym teacher, and didn’t show anyone?
Would that meet the graduation dress code standards of the Maurice J. McDonough High School?
I suspect that it would, because what any school administrator armed with their “Zero Tolerance” armor doesn’t see or otherwise know about obviously won’t hurt them.
IDIOTS!
This next story is a classic example of what I fondly call a “Zero Tolerance” hysterical hyperventilating conniption fit. Here's the link to a story about two 8th graders doing a science project on the danger of BB guns.
Amherst, Mass.--Two eighth-graders who spent months working on a science project to prove how dangerous BB guns can be were disqualified from the state middle school science fair. The reason for the dismissal: BB guns are too dangerous.
Nathan C. Woodard and Nathaniel A. Gorlin-Crenshaw spent seven months researching and testing their hypothesis that BB guns can be deadly and should not be used by children.
The students spent about $200 on ballistics gelatin, which has the same density and consistency as human flesh, to use during their tests.
Nancy G. Degon, vice president of Massachusetts State Science Fair Inc. and co-chair of the middle-school fair, said fair rules prohibit hazardous substances and devices.
"The scientific review committee does not consider science projects involving firearms to be safe for middle school students," Degon said.
The boys were invited to present their findings to some judges and receive a certificate of accomplishment, but they rejected the offer because they were not allowed to compete.
"I was really disappointed," Woodard said. "We had a good point to prove."
See, these liberal government school “do-gooders” are even willing to eat their own species (as opposed to eating their own feces—the jury is still out on that issue.)
The kids used the BB guns at home, didn’t they? Nowhere in the story did they indicate that the kids were going to bring the guns to the science fair and shoot anything. I’m certain that what they were going to do was to bring the standard display board filled with charts and graphs and at no time were they going to violate Ms. Degon’s rule “prohibit(ing) hazardous substances and devices.”
These kids were doing a project to show how dangerous BB guns are to children—a project that supports the gun control and zero tolerance agenda—and the “ZERO TOLERANCE” crown can’t even hold still long enough to let the kids generate some actual data on the topic.
Data??? What is data, they ask?
You see, most of the intellectually dishonest crowd out there screaming about global warming, demanding gun control, and lamenting the dangers of gas hogging SUV’s can’t be bothered with the unbiased scientific process and don’t need boring things like data and details to support their arguments and public campaigns.
All liberals need is their bleeding hearts and a pant load of emotion—it’s what they feel that matters—thinking about and looking at the actual facts is an unnecessary encumbrance in the process of implementing change.
OHHH OHHH AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
CLUNK…(sound of me falling off of my chair)
There is hardly a day that goes by where a local news story doesn’t outline some horrific example of an innocent (by any intelligent, reasonable standard) student being expelled or otherwise disciplined for being accused of some ridiculous infraction.
There is even a Website dedicated to consolidating and publishing Zero Tolerance horror stories called ztnightmares.com.
Well, I just so happened to have tripped over a couple of my own fresh “Zero Tolerance” news stories and I decided to comment again this morning.
First, let me say that I think that the best way to describe “Zero Tolerance” is to evoke the words of “Captain” (the warden character played by Strother Martin in the 1967 film Cool Hand Luke featuring Paul Newman)…
“What we have heeaaah……is a failure……..to communicate…”
Actually, I guess that this first story about a student being refused his diploma for wearing a Bolo tie to graduation could more accurately be placed under the title of “school administration stupidity” rather than “Zero Tolerance Insanity,” but the concept is still the same.
“Pomfret, MD-- School officials are withholding a 17-year-old boy's diploma for wearing a bolo tie under his graduation gown.
The student, Thomas Benya, said he prefers the string bolo ties over traditional knotted ties to reflect his American Indian heritage.
But officials from Maurice J. McDonough High School in suburban Washington said they warned him beforehand that a bolo violated the dress code for the event, held for about 250 students.
Katie O'Malley-Simpson said there are "many opportunities throughout the year to express cultural heritage. But we don't do that at graduation."
So this kid did all of the academic work, but showed up wearing a skinny Bolo tie under his graduation gown and the so called “SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS,” also the likely products of Government Schools, chose to make an example of him and not award his diploma.
What complete and total crappola. These so-called administrators evidently shouldn’t be allowed to pick out their own clothes and dress themselves in the morning. The government should go to their homes and confiscate all of the sharp objects so they won’t hurt themselves when they don’t have real adult supervision.
Suppose that Mr. Benya followed their rules and wore a nice navy blue tie—with an airbrushed painting of a voluptuous nude woman on the area hidden under his graduation gown, and didn’t show anyone the painting. Suppose that he wrote nasty, suggestive epithets with a magic marker all over his abdomen and ass describing his vivid sexual fantasies with the gym teacher, and didn’t show anyone?
Would that meet the graduation dress code standards of the Maurice J. McDonough High School?
I suspect that it would, because what any school administrator armed with their “Zero Tolerance” armor doesn’t see or otherwise know about obviously won’t hurt them.
IDIOTS!
This next story is a classic example of what I fondly call a “Zero Tolerance” hysterical hyperventilating conniption fit. Here's the link to a story about two 8th graders doing a science project on the danger of BB guns.
Amherst, Mass.--Two eighth-graders who spent months working on a science project to prove how dangerous BB guns can be were disqualified from the state middle school science fair. The reason for the dismissal: BB guns are too dangerous.
Nathan C. Woodard and Nathaniel A. Gorlin-Crenshaw spent seven months researching and testing their hypothesis that BB guns can be deadly and should not be used by children.
The students spent about $200 on ballistics gelatin, which has the same density and consistency as human flesh, to use during their tests.
Nancy G. Degon, vice president of Massachusetts State Science Fair Inc. and co-chair of the middle-school fair, said fair rules prohibit hazardous substances and devices.
"The scientific review committee does not consider science projects involving firearms to be safe for middle school students," Degon said.
The boys were invited to present their findings to some judges and receive a certificate of accomplishment, but they rejected the offer because they were not allowed to compete.
"I was really disappointed," Woodard said. "We had a good point to prove."
See, these liberal government school “do-gooders” are even willing to eat their own species (as opposed to eating their own feces—the jury is still out on that issue.)
The kids used the BB guns at home, didn’t they? Nowhere in the story did they indicate that the kids were going to bring the guns to the science fair and shoot anything. I’m certain that what they were going to do was to bring the standard display board filled with charts and graphs and at no time were they going to violate Ms. Degon’s rule “prohibit(ing) hazardous substances and devices.”
These kids were doing a project to show how dangerous BB guns are to children—a project that supports the gun control and zero tolerance agenda—and the “ZERO TOLERANCE” crown can’t even hold still long enough to let the kids generate some actual data on the topic.
Data??? What is data, they ask?
You see, most of the intellectually dishonest crowd out there screaming about global warming, demanding gun control, and lamenting the dangers of gas hogging SUV’s can’t be bothered with the unbiased scientific process and don’t need boring things like data and details to support their arguments and public campaigns.
All liberals need is their bleeding hearts and a pant load of emotion—it’s what they feel that matters—thinking about and looking at the actual facts is an unnecessary encumbrance in the process of implementing change.
OHHH OHHH AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
CLUNK…(sound of me falling off of my chair)
Saturday, June 11, 2005
Blogging From West Virginia
Pat and I drove down from Erie, PA to Charleston, WV on Friday and today we attended a "town reunion" for the little coal mining town of Prenter, WV. My father's parent's lived there from the early 1930's to the mid 1960's, after which they relocated to southern Ohio before retiring to the Orlando, FL area in the 1970's.
After spending years in tiny, cold, wooden "shotgun houses", my Grandfather, without a college education, managed to advance far enough in the coal mining company and earn enough money to be able to move his wife and three sons into the nicest house in the entire town.
Here is a photo of what the only brick home in Prenter, WV looks like today.
Papa Roger's house
I mention this not for the purpose of bragging personally because I had nothing to do with it and have not set foot in the building since 1964, but I ask that you consider these facts in the context of my political commentary and as a means of understanding my recent criticism of Paul Krugman and the NY Times.
My family, on both sides, knows more than a little about adversity, and the value of getting a good education and working hard as the best means of obtaining the things you want out of life.
I am embarrassed to say that I feel that I have fallen far short of the accomplishments of both of my grandfathers as well as that of my father's professional achievements, especially when you look at the relative advantage that I have enjoyed over their meager beginnings.
I will, however, not stop trying to improve myself and I shall not sit idly by while "self proclaimed" experts like Paul Krugman tell me how to do what my family has been doing over the past four generations--and it doesn't involve taxing our wealthier neighbors' asses off to pay the costs of our own necessities and frivolities in life.
That's just the way things are--like it or not...
After spending years in tiny, cold, wooden "shotgun houses", my Grandfather, without a college education, managed to advance far enough in the coal mining company and earn enough money to be able to move his wife and three sons into the nicest house in the entire town.
Here is a photo of what the only brick home in Prenter, WV looks like today.
Papa Roger's house
I mention this not for the purpose of bragging personally because I had nothing to do with it and have not set foot in the building since 1964, but I ask that you consider these facts in the context of my political commentary and as a means of understanding my recent criticism of Paul Krugman and the NY Times.
My family, on both sides, knows more than a little about adversity, and the value of getting a good education and working hard as the best means of obtaining the things you want out of life.
I am embarrassed to say that I feel that I have fallen far short of the accomplishments of both of my grandfathers as well as that of my father's professional achievements, especially when you look at the relative advantage that I have enjoyed over their meager beginnings.
I will, however, not stop trying to improve myself and I shall not sit idly by while "self proclaimed" experts like Paul Krugman tell me how to do what my family has been doing over the past four generations--and it doesn't involve taxing our wealthier neighbors' asses off to pay the costs of our own necessities and frivolities in life.
That's just the way things are--like it or not...
"Losing Our Country"--Part II
(To Idiots Like This)
Following up on my earlier mention of NY Times’ Paul Krugman’s recent op-ed column entitled ”Losing Our Country”, I am now prepared to offer some additional commentary and possibly explain why I have taken Mr. Krugman to task so often recently here in my blog.
This effort will take the form of two additional postings. This morning’s Part II will address Paul Krugman’s credentials and his fundamental qualifications to comment on domestic economic policy and economic conditions. Part III will offer a point by point rebuttal of Krugman’s logic (or lack thereof) and details (or lack thereof) in ”Losing Our Country.”
First I would like to give credit where credit is due.
Mr. Paul Krugman is, in theory, obviously a very smart man. You don’t simply sleep-walk your way through a BA at Yale and get handed a PHD from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology without possessing a fairly high degree of mental capacity and some pretty good study skills.
My argument is not with Paul’s education or intelligence, but rather it is with his choice of topics relative to his knowledge base.
I say that Paul Krugman is what I call a bait-and-switch intellectual.
In support of this argument, here is an excerpt from his biography published on the NY Times online (bold emphasis mine—VRRIII):
“Mr. Krugman is the author or editor of 20 books and more than 200 papers in professional journals and edited volumes. His professional reputation rests largely on work in international trade and finance; he is one of the founders of the "new trade theory," a major rethinking of the theory of international trade. In recognition of that work, in 1991 the American Economic Association awarded him its John Bates Clark medal, a prize given every two years to "that economist under forty who is adjudged to have made a significant contribution to economic knowledge."
Mr. Krugman's current academic research is focused on economic and currency crises.
At the same time, Mr. Krugman has written extensively for a broader public audience.”
Do you see my point here?
No? Well let me explain…
In Mr. Krugman’s “writing extensively for a broader public audience,” I suggest that he is unfairly allowed to step out of his area of true expertise and into areas where, in my humble opinion, the only thing that he can add to the discussion is his own personal agenda and opinion—almost always politically motivated and thereby tainted—and/or a large dose of not always well intended hearsay.
This succinctly quantifies the problem which I have with all national newspapers, particularly the editorial departments—they are guilty of bait and switch editorializing.
The average NY Times reader doesn’t know anything about the writer other than a colloquial belief that “they must be really smart” and that “they must have something important to say,” else the newspaper’s editors wouldn’t let them write in such a high profile position. The NY Times is a master of this illusion.
And what is the Editors’ answer? I suspect that it would be “but we said that it was an opinion…”
What complete and total crappola. They can’t have it both ways intellectually.
To hide the factual inaccuracies, half truths, or outright lies and misrepresentations contained in Krugman’s and his cohorts writings behind the page title of “Editorial” or “Opinion” is still unethical in my opinion because Krugman is generically represented as a PHD economist.
But I remind you that Krugman is a recognized expert on International Trade and Finance, not domestic issues. His bio lets that cat out of the bag, but how many readers bother to look into the details like I have here?
For example, I consider myself to be a bit of a meteorological aficionado, but the Weather Channel should never hire me, a mechanical engineer and aspiring writer, to fill in this week reading the satellite charts and doing hurricane forecasting which the lives of hundreds if not thousands of people and millions of dollars of property depend on to protect.
So why then should Paul Krugman, an expert on International Trade and Finance, be allowed to try to tell me why my country is going down the toilet and the middle class has disappeared?
Just wondering…
Following up on my earlier mention of NY Times’ Paul Krugman’s recent op-ed column entitled ”Losing Our Country”, I am now prepared to offer some additional commentary and possibly explain why I have taken Mr. Krugman to task so often recently here in my blog.
This effort will take the form of two additional postings. This morning’s Part II will address Paul Krugman’s credentials and his fundamental qualifications to comment on domestic economic policy and economic conditions. Part III will offer a point by point rebuttal of Krugman’s logic (or lack thereof) and details (or lack thereof) in ”Losing Our Country.”
First I would like to give credit where credit is due.
Mr. Paul Krugman is, in theory, obviously a very smart man. You don’t simply sleep-walk your way through a BA at Yale and get handed a PHD from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology without possessing a fairly high degree of mental capacity and some pretty good study skills.
My argument is not with Paul’s education or intelligence, but rather it is with his choice of topics relative to his knowledge base.
I say that Paul Krugman is what I call a bait-and-switch intellectual.
In support of this argument, here is an excerpt from his biography published on the NY Times online (bold emphasis mine—VRRIII):
“Mr. Krugman is the author or editor of 20 books and more than 200 papers in professional journals and edited volumes. His professional reputation rests largely on work in international trade and finance; he is one of the founders of the "new trade theory," a major rethinking of the theory of international trade. In recognition of that work, in 1991 the American Economic Association awarded him its John Bates Clark medal, a prize given every two years to "that economist under forty who is adjudged to have made a significant contribution to economic knowledge."
Mr. Krugman's current academic research is focused on economic and currency crises.
At the same time, Mr. Krugman has written extensively for a broader public audience.”
Do you see my point here?
No? Well let me explain…
In Mr. Krugman’s “writing extensively for a broader public audience,” I suggest that he is unfairly allowed to step out of his area of true expertise and into areas where, in my humble opinion, the only thing that he can add to the discussion is his own personal agenda and opinion—almost always politically motivated and thereby tainted—and/or a large dose of not always well intended hearsay.
This succinctly quantifies the problem which I have with all national newspapers, particularly the editorial departments—they are guilty of bait and switch editorializing.
The average NY Times reader doesn’t know anything about the writer other than a colloquial belief that “they must be really smart” and that “they must have something important to say,” else the newspaper’s editors wouldn’t let them write in such a high profile position. The NY Times is a master of this illusion.
And what is the Editors’ answer? I suspect that it would be “but we said that it was an opinion…”
What complete and total crappola. They can’t have it both ways intellectually.
To hide the factual inaccuracies, half truths, or outright lies and misrepresentations contained in Krugman’s and his cohorts writings behind the page title of “Editorial” or “Opinion” is still unethical in my opinion because Krugman is generically represented as a PHD economist.
But I remind you that Krugman is a recognized expert on International Trade and Finance, not domestic issues. His bio lets that cat out of the bag, but how many readers bother to look into the details like I have here?
For example, I consider myself to be a bit of a meteorological aficionado, but the Weather Channel should never hire me, a mechanical engineer and aspiring writer, to fill in this week reading the satellite charts and doing hurricane forecasting which the lives of hundreds if not thousands of people and millions of dollars of property depend on to protect.
So why then should Paul Krugman, an expert on International Trade and Finance, be allowed to try to tell me why my country is going down the toilet and the middle class has disappeared?
Just wondering…
Friday, June 10, 2005
Losing Our Country
(To Idiots Like This...)
We made it from Erie, PA to Charleston, West Virginia today. What a beautiful drive it was. A little rest, a little dinner, and a few drinks--I'll be good to go.
If you have the time, here is today's reading assignment, the NY Times editoral entitled "Losing Our Country."
Here is a recent picture of the author:
NY Times' Paul Krugman
(Someone I know very well did a little Photoshop editing I'm afraid.)
I heard Armstrong Williams mention this miserable writing today when he was guest-hosting Rush Limbaugh's radio show, and I'm getting mentally wound up to take Mr. Krugman on.
Check back later to see what I have to say, and believe me--it's more than a mouthfull...
We made it from Erie, PA to Charleston, West Virginia today. What a beautiful drive it was. A little rest, a little dinner, and a few drinks--I'll be good to go.
If you have the time, here is today's reading assignment, the NY Times editoral entitled "Losing Our Country."
Here is a recent picture of the author:
NY Times' Paul Krugman
(Someone I know very well did a little Photoshop editing I'm afraid.)
I heard Armstrong Williams mention this miserable writing today when he was guest-hosting Rush Limbaugh's radio show, and I'm getting mentally wound up to take Mr. Krugman on.
Check back later to see what I have to say, and believe me--it's more than a mouthfull...
Thursday, June 09, 2005
You Can Make It Fool Proof
(But you can’t make it damn fool proof)
Being a Mechanical Engineer is a frustrating profession. The general public, consisting mainly of people who are not engineers, somehow think that engineers and the work we produce should be perfect, no matter how unique or complex the problem being addressed.
I have news for you, we’re not perfect, and a whole bunch of engineers working out there, in spite of their education and the possession of credentials like professional registration, are down right dangerous. Somehow enough good ones (engineers) manage to overcome the shortcomings of the bad ones.
Take aircraft, for instance. Although we have only mastered powered flight for the past one hundred years, the general public expects commercial and civilian aircraft to be models of perfection. Every time there is an accident, the survivors’ families attempt to sue the ass off of the manufacturer. The lawsuits nearly put manufacturers like Cessna and Piper out of business in the 1970’s.
I remember one instance where a guy pulled the front seat out of his Piper Cub so that he could mount a video camera in a position looking out of the windscreen. The guy also moved the rear seat forward temporarily so that he could fly the airplane and operate the camera at the same time.
He took off in the plane in front of his family, the modified seat came loose and slid backwards, the pilot yanked the stick back thereby stalling the airplane, and killed himself in the ensuing crash.
What did the wife do? Of course she sued Piper.
What did the jury do at the trial? Of course the found Piper at fault.
They ordered Piper to pay millions, even though the modified seating arrangement was not factory approved. They said Piper was to blame in not foreseeing the possibility that someone would move the seat to a position on the seat track beyond the normal range dictated by two seats.
I call BS on that verdict—but I wasn’t on the jury.
The good news is that the jury in Florida this week refused to blame Lear Jet in the 1999 crash that killed golfer Payne Stewart and five others.
“Orlando, Florida—A jury in Orange County, Fla., cleared a luxury jet manufacturer in the 1999 crash that killed pro golfer Payne Stewart and five others, according to Local 6 News.
A Learjet lost cabin pressure soon after taking off from Orlando in October 1999, killing all on board within minutes. The plane eventually ran out of fuel and crashed into a South Dakota pasture.
Stewart's family sued Learjet after the crash claiming a mechanical problem is what doomed the charter jet.”
See, it’s less than funny that so few people want to take responsibility for doing little things like maintaining the fancy doohickeys that we (engineers) design and build, and even fewer want to accept responsibility for any undesirable outcomes that result from their own negligence.
Another common reaction is to ask the government to step in and pass a law or regulation to solve some newly perceived problem. Take your car’s tire pressure, for instance.
The government is demanding that the auto manufactures install tire pressure sensors on all vehicles by the 2008 model year. The funny thing is, the manufacturers don’t like the way the rules are written and they are suing to delay the program’s implementation.
As is usual when the government gets involved in anything, the wording of the law is flawed:
“The group said the rule doesn't require the systems to operate with replacement tires, and the systems would only kick in when a motorist had been driving between 30 and 60 mph continuously for 20 minutes. That would make it difficult for someone driving in a city or under other stop-and-go situations to know if a tire had low pressure.
"With this rule, motorists may mistakenly feel safe and not believe they need to check their tires," Goodyear said in a statement.”
How bogus is that?
What I want to know is, if you are worried about wrecking due to tire pressure, rather than passing a law, why not just go out and buy a $2 tire pressure gauge and use it once in a while like I do?
You don’t have to be an engineer to think of that, do you?
Being a Mechanical Engineer is a frustrating profession. The general public, consisting mainly of people who are not engineers, somehow think that engineers and the work we produce should be perfect, no matter how unique or complex the problem being addressed.
I have news for you, we’re not perfect, and a whole bunch of engineers working out there, in spite of their education and the possession of credentials like professional registration, are down right dangerous. Somehow enough good ones (engineers) manage to overcome the shortcomings of the bad ones.
Take aircraft, for instance. Although we have only mastered powered flight for the past one hundred years, the general public expects commercial and civilian aircraft to be models of perfection. Every time there is an accident, the survivors’ families attempt to sue the ass off of the manufacturer. The lawsuits nearly put manufacturers like Cessna and Piper out of business in the 1970’s.
I remember one instance where a guy pulled the front seat out of his Piper Cub so that he could mount a video camera in a position looking out of the windscreen. The guy also moved the rear seat forward temporarily so that he could fly the airplane and operate the camera at the same time.
He took off in the plane in front of his family, the modified seat came loose and slid backwards, the pilot yanked the stick back thereby stalling the airplane, and killed himself in the ensuing crash.
What did the wife do? Of course she sued Piper.
What did the jury do at the trial? Of course the found Piper at fault.
They ordered Piper to pay millions, even though the modified seating arrangement was not factory approved. They said Piper was to blame in not foreseeing the possibility that someone would move the seat to a position on the seat track beyond the normal range dictated by two seats.
I call BS on that verdict—but I wasn’t on the jury.
The good news is that the jury in Florida this week refused to blame Lear Jet in the 1999 crash that killed golfer Payne Stewart and five others.
“Orlando, Florida—A jury in Orange County, Fla., cleared a luxury jet manufacturer in the 1999 crash that killed pro golfer Payne Stewart and five others, according to Local 6 News.
A Learjet lost cabin pressure soon after taking off from Orlando in October 1999, killing all on board within minutes. The plane eventually ran out of fuel and crashed into a South Dakota pasture.
Stewart's family sued Learjet after the crash claiming a mechanical problem is what doomed the charter jet.”
See, it’s less than funny that so few people want to take responsibility for doing little things like maintaining the fancy doohickeys that we (engineers) design and build, and even fewer want to accept responsibility for any undesirable outcomes that result from their own negligence.
Another common reaction is to ask the government to step in and pass a law or regulation to solve some newly perceived problem. Take your car’s tire pressure, for instance.
The government is demanding that the auto manufactures install tire pressure sensors on all vehicles by the 2008 model year. The funny thing is, the manufacturers don’t like the way the rules are written and they are suing to delay the program’s implementation.
As is usual when the government gets involved in anything, the wording of the law is flawed:
“The group said the rule doesn't require the systems to operate with replacement tires, and the systems would only kick in when a motorist had been driving between 30 and 60 mph continuously for 20 minutes. That would make it difficult for someone driving in a city or under other stop-and-go situations to know if a tire had low pressure.
"With this rule, motorists may mistakenly feel safe and not believe they need to check their tires," Goodyear said in a statement.”
How bogus is that?
What I want to know is, if you are worried about wrecking due to tire pressure, rather than passing a law, why not just go out and buy a $2 tire pressure gauge and use it once in a while like I do?
You don’t have to be an engineer to think of that, do you?
Wednesday, June 08, 2005
Lake Erie
Vacation day number four finds us staying a few miles from the shore of lake Erie. I had no idea how many grapes they grow in northern Pennsylvania. The grape vines are everywhere—thousands of acres.
Here is a picture of my lunch dates at a marina restaurant on Tuesday:
And here is our view overlooking the lake from the restaurant patio:
It's beach day on the lake, water temperature--about 50 degrees F...Burrrrrrrhh
Here is a picture of my lunch dates at a marina restaurant on Tuesday:
And here is our view overlooking the lake from the restaurant patio:
It's beach day on the lake, water temperature--about 50 degrees F...Burrrrrrrhh
Tuesday, June 07, 2005
Travel Safety--Or the Lack Thereof...
I have every sympathy for the family and friends of Miss Natalie Holloway, the Alabama girl missing in Aruba.
But…
Unfortunately, our popular culture has allowed college spring breaker’s and now high school aged kids to travel to destinations which twenty years ago were only frequented by seasoned adult travelers. The current situation, in my mind, is not entirely unforeseen—that is, by anyone that has even a modicum of travel savvy. Times are changing in the Caribbean, but danger lurks in the shadows and I hope that school authorities and parents alike take notice.
For instance, the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico—today’s inexpensive spring break Mecca—was a completely undeveloped chunk of sleepy fishing villages in the 1970’s until the Mexican government and a bunch of international resort developers bought it (or stole the land from the poor farmers) and did a little “urban renewal.” In that day Acapulco, Mexico, on the Pacific Ocean, was the destination of choice and was typically economically out of the reach of all but the most well-heeled travelers.
I learned at an early age that you “aren’t in Kansas anymore” once your leave the borders of the US. I had the opportunity to travel to Subic Bay Philippines in the summer of 1978 while serving in the US Navy reserve. Ferdinand Marcos was still “dictator-in-chief”, Amelda Marcos was still buying her shoe collection, and the life of a young American sailor was worth exactly the amount of cash and jewelry you had on your person at the moment of the attack.
The first week I was in country, a middle aged Marine Sergeant from my ship (USS New Orleans-LPH 11) went out into town, got drunk, passed out, and woke up having had his ring finger cut off his hand to facilitate his assailants taking a cheep $50 plain man’s wedding band. I was mortified…
The local “bar girls” ran extortion scams where they would accuse a young sailor of some petty assault, you would be arrested by machine gun toting Filipino Police officers, and your ship would sail out of port with you sitting in a filthy jail cell with a bucket for a toilet—eating stale bread and rancid soup for your three squares a day—unless you paid the “fine” which was actually a form of blackmail shared by the lady and the corrupt police authorities. Needless to say that I was a good boy…
Everything, including life in general, and the lives of children, was cheep there. To enter the town from the Navy base, you crossed through a simple security checkpoint and then over a bridge on the Olongapo “Shit” River where you would witness little preteen girls standing on “bonka boats”—outrigger canoes—offering to “show you my tits” if you threw them a Peso. Each boat had a little boy on board who would dive off of the boat into the filthy water to retrieve the intentionally errantly thrown money. I was horrified.
Once in town, there were three forms of transportation: ankle express, “Jeepneys,” and “Trikes.” Our orientation told us to avoid the Trikes at all cost, but the Jeepneys--small, gaudily decorated open air busses—were ok. I met a jeepney driver named Virgillio (Virgil in Spanish) and he generally took care of my travel requirements when I was in town on leave.
You had to be back on base or in a motel room, otherwise off of the streets, by midnight. One night I was wandering back toward base real late, by myself because my cohorts had all gotten a motel and I had an early watch on the ship.
A trike driver, a Honda 50 motorcycle with a sidecar, came by and offered me a half-price ride back to the gate. The next thing I knew we were flying down deserted side streets, zigzagging into the slum areas of a town which was basically all slums.
When my driver finally stopped the trike and announced that he had to run an errand, I promptly leapt out of the sidecar and sprinted away as fast as my 6’2” tall, 160 pound well conditioned frame would carry me. Someone was chasing me, more than one person.
I probably ran past the same places twice as I tried to find my way back to main street, finally jumping into yet another trike headed toward the gate and successfully eluding my pursuers. (Realize that the average Filipino male is about 5’ tall-100 lbs, but is dangerous as hell when wielding a butterfly knife or a switchblade.) I could have jumped OVER anyone that accosted me at that point.
In the past 15 years I have spent a good deal of time traveling in the Bahamas and Jamaica. “No problem Mon,” are you feeling “Irie?” While both the Bahamas and the Caribbean are excellent family travel destinations, like America’s large cities, there are problem areas and neither are safe for little blond-haired, blue-eyed, debutants to go wandering around in helter-skelter at 3 AM in the morning.
I seriously doubt that I could successfully guarantee the safety of my own 6’3”, 235 pound middle aged white butt around Kingston, Jamaica at 3 AM wielding a machete and a machine gun. Prancing around with a pair of 36C’s, pierced bellybutton, and butterfly tattooed lily white, thong clad, 18 year old female buttocks would increase the probability of injury or death about 1000%.
I’m terribly sorry Mr. & Mrs. Holloway, but you just might have loved your daughter to death…
But…
Unfortunately, our popular culture has allowed college spring breaker’s and now high school aged kids to travel to destinations which twenty years ago were only frequented by seasoned adult travelers. The current situation, in my mind, is not entirely unforeseen—that is, by anyone that has even a modicum of travel savvy. Times are changing in the Caribbean, but danger lurks in the shadows and I hope that school authorities and parents alike take notice.
For instance, the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico—today’s inexpensive spring break Mecca—was a completely undeveloped chunk of sleepy fishing villages in the 1970’s until the Mexican government and a bunch of international resort developers bought it (or stole the land from the poor farmers) and did a little “urban renewal.” In that day Acapulco, Mexico, on the Pacific Ocean, was the destination of choice and was typically economically out of the reach of all but the most well-heeled travelers.
I learned at an early age that you “aren’t in Kansas anymore” once your leave the borders of the US. I had the opportunity to travel to Subic Bay Philippines in the summer of 1978 while serving in the US Navy reserve. Ferdinand Marcos was still “dictator-in-chief”, Amelda Marcos was still buying her shoe collection, and the life of a young American sailor was worth exactly the amount of cash and jewelry you had on your person at the moment of the attack.
The first week I was in country, a middle aged Marine Sergeant from my ship (USS New Orleans-LPH 11) went out into town, got drunk, passed out, and woke up having had his ring finger cut off his hand to facilitate his assailants taking a cheep $50 plain man’s wedding band. I was mortified…
The local “bar girls” ran extortion scams where they would accuse a young sailor of some petty assault, you would be arrested by machine gun toting Filipino Police officers, and your ship would sail out of port with you sitting in a filthy jail cell with a bucket for a toilet—eating stale bread and rancid soup for your three squares a day—unless you paid the “fine” which was actually a form of blackmail shared by the lady and the corrupt police authorities. Needless to say that I was a good boy…
Everything, including life in general, and the lives of children, was cheep there. To enter the town from the Navy base, you crossed through a simple security checkpoint and then over a bridge on the Olongapo “Shit” River where you would witness little preteen girls standing on “bonka boats”—outrigger canoes—offering to “show you my tits” if you threw them a Peso. Each boat had a little boy on board who would dive off of the boat into the filthy water to retrieve the intentionally errantly thrown money. I was horrified.
Once in town, there were three forms of transportation: ankle express, “Jeepneys,” and “Trikes.” Our orientation told us to avoid the Trikes at all cost, but the Jeepneys--small, gaudily decorated open air busses—were ok. I met a jeepney driver named Virgillio (Virgil in Spanish) and he generally took care of my travel requirements when I was in town on leave.
You had to be back on base or in a motel room, otherwise off of the streets, by midnight. One night I was wandering back toward base real late, by myself because my cohorts had all gotten a motel and I had an early watch on the ship.
A trike driver, a Honda 50 motorcycle with a sidecar, came by and offered me a half-price ride back to the gate. The next thing I knew we were flying down deserted side streets, zigzagging into the slum areas of a town which was basically all slums.
When my driver finally stopped the trike and announced that he had to run an errand, I promptly leapt out of the sidecar and sprinted away as fast as my 6’2” tall, 160 pound well conditioned frame would carry me. Someone was chasing me, more than one person.
I probably ran past the same places twice as I tried to find my way back to main street, finally jumping into yet another trike headed toward the gate and successfully eluding my pursuers. (Realize that the average Filipino male is about 5’ tall-100 lbs, but is dangerous as hell when wielding a butterfly knife or a switchblade.) I could have jumped OVER anyone that accosted me at that point.
In the past 15 years I have spent a good deal of time traveling in the Bahamas and Jamaica. “No problem Mon,” are you feeling “Irie?” While both the Bahamas and the Caribbean are excellent family travel destinations, like America’s large cities, there are problem areas and neither are safe for little blond-haired, blue-eyed, debutants to go wandering around in helter-skelter at 3 AM in the morning.
I seriously doubt that I could successfully guarantee the safety of my own 6’3”, 235 pound middle aged white butt around Kingston, Jamaica at 3 AM wielding a machete and a machine gun. Prancing around with a pair of 36C’s, pierced bellybutton, and butterfly tattooed lily white, thong clad, 18 year old female buttocks would increase the probability of injury or death about 1000%.
I’m terribly sorry Mr. & Mrs. Holloway, but you just might have loved your daughter to death…
Free Parking
Back in the early 1990’s I had a business partner that was, shall we say, a total ass. The deal was fifty-fifty, fair and square. I did all the work, and he made all the profit. Such a deal…
My partner was ten years older than me and had a LOT more money than I had, and he basically ran roughshod over me in any situation in which he had an opinion or financial stake. In the middle of our relationship he decided to buy a good sized office building. He got a good deal on it in a foreclosure auction, but he couldn’t possibly fill it up with his own people, so he was scrambling for tenants and cash flow any way possible.
One of those ways was to demand that I move our business into the new building, at nearly double the rent (naturally paid to him) that I was previously paying at our old location. I reluctantly complied, but the commute was nearly double and the fancier space did little for our company’s bottom line.
I hated it.
The building was situated in a parking lot adjacent to a group of three little strip shopping centers clustered around a common parking lot. Our parking lot was basically an asphalt extension of the Shopping Centers’ lots.
There were two restaurants in the adjacent center and in the evening, as is often the case in suburban retail areas, there was a need for overflow parking for “Squid Roe”—a good seafood restaurant next door--and our parking lot was the obvious choice.
My partner, being the workaholic that he was, always worked to 8 or 9 PM and soon noticed the parking situation. What did he do? He had a “shit-fit” and ran out in the parking lot, waving potential diners away from HIS parking spaces.
What an Ultra-Maroon.
He then demanded that the owner of the restaurant pay him rent for using the parking lot. The owner basically told him to perform a “rectal cranial inversion” maneuver (stick his head up his own ass) and a battle ensued.
My partner made a big production of installing galvanized fence posts and chain barriers across the entry to our lot, but before he could lock the chains the first evening the restaurant owner relented, and agreed to provide my partner with a $75 per month credit toward food in the restaurant. It took him three months to recoup the cost of the chains and posts.
I dumped the business relationship within the year, at great personal and financial expense, and thus ended the first couple of semesters of what I call my “Street MBA.”
Having said all of that, I can’t say that I don’t admire the homeless guy in this story that was caught collecting cash from tourists to park in a free lot..
Destin, FL--A homeless man is facing a possible prison term for allegedly charging tourists $5 to park in a free lot during the busy Memorial Day weekend.
Bruce Lee Thompson, 57, was held Monday at the Okaloosa County jail in Crestview on $2,000 bail. He has a July 19 court date on charges of obtaining property by impersonation, theft and a licensing violation. If convicted, penalties could range from probation to more than five years in prison.
The unemployed man set up a sign advertising "party parking," according to his arrest report.
"It's totally ridiculous," said Beverly Canady of The Finishing Touch, a store in the small shopping center where Thompson put up his sign. "We don't mind people parking here, but you just don't come literally off the street and charge people to park."
I know that its private property, but I applaud the guy’s initiative. He found an underutilized, undervalued asset, and capitalized on the opportunity.
I say that "homeless advocates" should take his business model and build on it.
Naaah, they would just rather hand cash and free housing to the “disadvantaged”…
My partner was ten years older than me and had a LOT more money than I had, and he basically ran roughshod over me in any situation in which he had an opinion or financial stake. In the middle of our relationship he decided to buy a good sized office building. He got a good deal on it in a foreclosure auction, but he couldn’t possibly fill it up with his own people, so he was scrambling for tenants and cash flow any way possible.
One of those ways was to demand that I move our business into the new building, at nearly double the rent (naturally paid to him) that I was previously paying at our old location. I reluctantly complied, but the commute was nearly double and the fancier space did little for our company’s bottom line.
I hated it.
The building was situated in a parking lot adjacent to a group of three little strip shopping centers clustered around a common parking lot. Our parking lot was basically an asphalt extension of the Shopping Centers’ lots.
There were two restaurants in the adjacent center and in the evening, as is often the case in suburban retail areas, there was a need for overflow parking for “Squid Roe”—a good seafood restaurant next door--and our parking lot was the obvious choice.
My partner, being the workaholic that he was, always worked to 8 or 9 PM and soon noticed the parking situation. What did he do? He had a “shit-fit” and ran out in the parking lot, waving potential diners away from HIS parking spaces.
What an Ultra-Maroon.
He then demanded that the owner of the restaurant pay him rent for using the parking lot. The owner basically told him to perform a “rectal cranial inversion” maneuver (stick his head up his own ass) and a battle ensued.
My partner made a big production of installing galvanized fence posts and chain barriers across the entry to our lot, but before he could lock the chains the first evening the restaurant owner relented, and agreed to provide my partner with a $75 per month credit toward food in the restaurant. It took him three months to recoup the cost of the chains and posts.
I dumped the business relationship within the year, at great personal and financial expense, and thus ended the first couple of semesters of what I call my “Street MBA.”
Having said all of that, I can’t say that I don’t admire the homeless guy in this story that was caught collecting cash from tourists to park in a free lot..
Destin, FL--A homeless man is facing a possible prison term for allegedly charging tourists $5 to park in a free lot during the busy Memorial Day weekend.
Bruce Lee Thompson, 57, was held Monday at the Okaloosa County jail in Crestview on $2,000 bail. He has a July 19 court date on charges of obtaining property by impersonation, theft and a licensing violation. If convicted, penalties could range from probation to more than five years in prison.
The unemployed man set up a sign advertising "party parking," according to his arrest report.
"It's totally ridiculous," said Beverly Canady of The Finishing Touch, a store in the small shopping center where Thompson put up his sign. "We don't mind people parking here, but you just don't come literally off the street and charge people to park."
I know that its private property, but I applaud the guy’s initiative. He found an underutilized, undervalued asset, and capitalized on the opportunity.
I say that "homeless advocates" should take his business model and build on it.
Naaah, they would just rather hand cash and free housing to the “disadvantaged”…
Monday, June 06, 2005
I Have a Suggestion
Go To Bed Earlier...
The headline reads: "Early School Bell Cost Teens Sleep--US Study"
Click on the link and read the entire story for yourself...and while you're at it--make up your own ranting and raving.
I'm on vacation and don't have the energy right now.
The headline reads: "Early School Bell Cost Teens Sleep--US Study"
Click on the link and read the entire story for yourself...and while you're at it--make up your own ranting and raving.
I'm on vacation and don't have the energy right now.
Sunday, June 05, 2005
NY Times—Full Of Crap…Again (Updated Version)
Check out this story in today’s NY Times Online
Richest Are Leaving Even The Rich Far Behind
“When F. Scott Fitzgerald pronounced that the very rich "are different from you and me," Ernest Hemingway's famously dismissive response was: "Yes, they have more money." Today he might well add: much, much, much more money.
The people at the top of America's money pyramid have so prospered in recent years that they have pulled far ahead of the rest of the population, an analysis of tax records and other government data by The New York Times shows. They have even left behind people making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year.
Call them the hyper-rich.
They are not just a few Croesus-like rarities. Draw a line under the top 0.1 percent of income earners - the top one-thousandth. Above that line are about 145,000 taxpayers, each with at least $1.6 million in income and often much more.
The average income for the top 0.1 percent was $3 million in 2002, the latest year for which averages are available. That number is two and a half times the $1.2 million, adjusted for inflation, that group reported in 1980. No other income group rose nearly as fast.
President Bush said during the third election debate last October that most of the tax cuts went to low- and middle-income Americans. In fact, most - 53 percent - will go to people with incomes in the top 10 percent over the first 15 years of the cuts, which began in 2001 and would have to be reauthorized in 2010. And more than 15 percent will go just to the top 0.1 percent, those 145,000 taxpayers.”
Normally I would ask the rhetorical question: “so what’s their point?”
Fortunately, or unfortunately, depending on your perspective, the NY Times point is all too clear here—class envy and class warfare.
They even go to the trouble to quote a few wealthy liberals in an effort to make their point:
“But some of the wealthiest Americans, including Warren E. Buffett, George Soros and Ted Turner, have warned that such a concentration of wealth can turn a meritocracy into an aristocracy and ultimately stifle economic growth by putting too much of the nation's capital in the hands of inheritors rather than strivers and innovators.”
I guess it’s easy enough for Buffet, Soros, and Turner to lament the evils of being rich—since THEY ALREADY HAVE MADE THEIR FORTUNES. So they want to go out and tax the rest of the producers in the economy and provide additional barriers for achieving success in the form of increased taxes on income and capital gains.
I’m sorry, but the entire logic of this article is typically one sided and flawed. What the heck is wrong with people succeeding and making LOTS of money. The Times acts like the high income earners are stealing their money or otherwise not earning it, and that it is somehow a sin for the government to let the people that EARNED the money KEEP more of it on April 15th.
The other significant fact that the NY Times refuses to admit is this. Most of the households they define as “rich” ($100K-500K per year income) are simply dual income families with two college grad wage earners. They aren’t making that kind of money sitting by the pool sipping mint juleps—two people are working their asses off for 25 or 30 years each.
And the article’s so-called “hyper rich?” Like it or not, the “hyper rich” are also business owners and investors putting all of their “riches” back into the market by providing working capital so businesses can provide jobs for all of the “working families” the Times is so intent in protecting and proving tax refunds, rebates, and credits to. To hear the Times tell it, the wealthy Americans make their money, then bury it in their back yard or stuff it in their mattress—never to be seen again unless the government steps in and recovers it for use through taxation.
As I’ve said over and over and over before…
YOU CANNOT GET A TAX REFUND OR TAX CUT IF YOU DO NOT PAY TAXES!
As I wrote way back in September 2004 in my posting Tax Cuts For Working Families:
"Seriously folks, how can you cut taxes on someone that already doesn’t pay taxes? The bottom 20% of income earners already gets an earned income credit and a resulting tax refund equaling 5.7% of their non-taxable income. The bottom 40% of households earned 9.7% of the total household income and had a negative tax rate of 2.8%. This means, even after Bush’s tax reform, that the imperial federal government of the United States uses the IRS to take money from the top 60% of income earners and give it to the bottom 40%. The Dem’s figure that if they can just increase this figure from 40% to 51% that they will be guaranteed re-election to local and national offices for eternity."
Now they’re (the Dems) working on getting these same poor souls out of paying their own Medicare and Social Security tax. It is somehow considered to be unfair to make a "working family" pay one thin dime toward the cost of their own retirement and government supplied medical care. Satellite TV, yearly trips to Disney, beer, cigarettes, unplanned children, and bass boats are obvious higher priorities than education, hard work, planning and savings.
They want refunds and benefits for “working families”, but the Times insists that it is the duty of all of those mean old “HYPER RICH” to dam well by God pay for it through taxation.
I am so SICK of this refrain...
Richest Are Leaving Even The Rich Far Behind
“When F. Scott Fitzgerald pronounced that the very rich "are different from you and me," Ernest Hemingway's famously dismissive response was: "Yes, they have more money." Today he might well add: much, much, much more money.
The people at the top of America's money pyramid have so prospered in recent years that they have pulled far ahead of the rest of the population, an analysis of tax records and other government data by The New York Times shows. They have even left behind people making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year.
Call them the hyper-rich.
They are not just a few Croesus-like rarities. Draw a line under the top 0.1 percent of income earners - the top one-thousandth. Above that line are about 145,000 taxpayers, each with at least $1.6 million in income and often much more.
The average income for the top 0.1 percent was $3 million in 2002, the latest year for which averages are available. That number is two and a half times the $1.2 million, adjusted for inflation, that group reported in 1980. No other income group rose nearly as fast.
President Bush said during the third election debate last October that most of the tax cuts went to low- and middle-income Americans. In fact, most - 53 percent - will go to people with incomes in the top 10 percent over the first 15 years of the cuts, which began in 2001 and would have to be reauthorized in 2010. And more than 15 percent will go just to the top 0.1 percent, those 145,000 taxpayers.”
Normally I would ask the rhetorical question: “so what’s their point?”
Fortunately, or unfortunately, depending on your perspective, the NY Times point is all too clear here—class envy and class warfare.
They even go to the trouble to quote a few wealthy liberals in an effort to make their point:
“But some of the wealthiest Americans, including Warren E. Buffett, George Soros and Ted Turner, have warned that such a concentration of wealth can turn a meritocracy into an aristocracy and ultimately stifle economic growth by putting too much of the nation's capital in the hands of inheritors rather than strivers and innovators.”
I guess it’s easy enough for Buffet, Soros, and Turner to lament the evils of being rich—since THEY ALREADY HAVE MADE THEIR FORTUNES. So they want to go out and tax the rest of the producers in the economy and provide additional barriers for achieving success in the form of increased taxes on income and capital gains.
I’m sorry, but the entire logic of this article is typically one sided and flawed. What the heck is wrong with people succeeding and making LOTS of money. The Times acts like the high income earners are stealing their money or otherwise not earning it, and that it is somehow a sin for the government to let the people that EARNED the money KEEP more of it on April 15th.
The other significant fact that the NY Times refuses to admit is this. Most of the households they define as “rich” ($100K-500K per year income) are simply dual income families with two college grad wage earners. They aren’t making that kind of money sitting by the pool sipping mint juleps—two people are working their asses off for 25 or 30 years each.
And the article’s so-called “hyper rich?” Like it or not, the “hyper rich” are also business owners and investors putting all of their “riches” back into the market by providing working capital so businesses can provide jobs for all of the “working families” the Times is so intent in protecting and proving tax refunds, rebates, and credits to. To hear the Times tell it, the wealthy Americans make their money, then bury it in their back yard or stuff it in their mattress—never to be seen again unless the government steps in and recovers it for use through taxation.
As I’ve said over and over and over before…
YOU CANNOT GET A TAX REFUND OR TAX CUT IF YOU DO NOT PAY TAXES!
As I wrote way back in September 2004 in my posting Tax Cuts For Working Families:
"Seriously folks, how can you cut taxes on someone that already doesn’t pay taxes? The bottom 20% of income earners already gets an earned income credit and a resulting tax refund equaling 5.7% of their non-taxable income. The bottom 40% of households earned 9.7% of the total household income and had a negative tax rate of 2.8%. This means, even after Bush’s tax reform, that the imperial federal government of the United States uses the IRS to take money from the top 60% of income earners and give it to the bottom 40%. The Dem’s figure that if they can just increase this figure from 40% to 51% that they will be guaranteed re-election to local and national offices for eternity."
Now they’re (the Dems) working on getting these same poor souls out of paying their own Medicare and Social Security tax. It is somehow considered to be unfair to make a "working family" pay one thin dime toward the cost of their own retirement and government supplied medical care. Satellite TV, yearly trips to Disney, beer, cigarettes, unplanned children, and bass boats are obvious higher priorities than education, hard work, planning and savings.
They want refunds and benefits for “working families”, but the Times insists that it is the duty of all of those mean old “HYPER RICH” to dam well by God pay for it through taxation.
I am so SICK of this refrain...
A Fool & Their Money…
Are soon parted
We made it to Pittsburg yesterday. The trip was uneventful--airplanes on time and light crowds at the airport. I was in "news and information withdrawal" by the time we got in to the hotel after dinner last night.
The hotel has high speed internet--but not wireless and I forgot to bring a CAT5 cable and am forced to use dial-up. AAAAAHHH, it's better than nothing, but just barely.
I've tried to catch up on the news, and I love the Local6.com Website because they always have stories like this one about some bartender selling an 8” French fry on E-Bay.
“WALCOTT, Iowa An 8-inch french fry found by a bartender has sold for nearly $200 on eBay.
Mindy Marland said she was working at the Checkered Flag Bar & Grill, across from the Iowa 80 Truckstop, when she spotted the unusually long french fry.
"A waitress was walking by and I saw it sitting right on top of a plate she was getting ready to serve - I was intrigued by it and took it off the plate," said Marland, 29, of Walcott.
Marland said she decided to sell it on eBay. Bids started at $1. By the time bidding ended, it had sold for $197.50.”
So what is one to do with a $200 French fry? Eat it, or frame it?
Imagine the owner's horror when he/she wakes up after a night of partying to find that a stoned college friend had a little snack...
We made it to Pittsburg yesterday. The trip was uneventful--airplanes on time and light crowds at the airport. I was in "news and information withdrawal" by the time we got in to the hotel after dinner last night.
The hotel has high speed internet--but not wireless and I forgot to bring a CAT5 cable and am forced to use dial-up. AAAAAHHH, it's better than nothing, but just barely.
I've tried to catch up on the news, and I love the Local6.com Website because they always have stories like this one about some bartender selling an 8” French fry on E-Bay.
“WALCOTT, Iowa An 8-inch french fry found by a bartender has sold for nearly $200 on eBay.
Mindy Marland said she was working at the Checkered Flag Bar & Grill, across from the Iowa 80 Truckstop, when she spotted the unusually long french fry.
"A waitress was walking by and I saw it sitting right on top of a plate she was getting ready to serve - I was intrigued by it and took it off the plate," said Marland, 29, of Walcott.
Marland said she decided to sell it on eBay. Bids started at $1. By the time bidding ended, it had sold for $197.50.”
So what is one to do with a $200 French fry? Eat it, or frame it?
Imagine the owner's horror when he/she wakes up after a night of partying to find that a stoned college friend had a little snack...
Saturday, June 04, 2005
Help Me Understand
OK, maybe I’m just dense.
If you park a car bomb in front of a Mosque and detonate your explosives, thereby killing yourself and 40 Iraqi worshipers and destroy the Mosque, how many Quran’s are damaged or destroyed?
Dozens?
Dozens of dozens?
Since there have been a number of Mosques destroyed recently, I want to know what is the big %$#*& deal about a US soldier kicking a Muslim prisoner’s Quran or throwing some water balloons and getting a Quran wet?
“U.S. Confirms Gitmo Soldier Kicked Quran
By ROBERT BURNS, AP Military Writer
WASHINGTON - U.S. military officials say no guard at the Guantanamo Bay prison for terror suspects flushed a detainee's Quran down the toilet, but they disclosed that a Muslim holy book was splashed with urine.
In other newly disclosed incidents, a detainee's Quran was deliberately kicked and another's was stepped on.
On March 25, a detainee complained to guards that "urine came through an air vent" and splashed on him and his Quran. A guard admitted he was at fault, but a report released Friday evening offering new details about Quran mishandling incidents did not make clear whether the guard intended the result.
In another confirmed incident, water balloons thrown by prison guards caused an unspecified number of Qurans to get wet, and in a confirmed but ambiguous case, a two-word obscenity was written in English on the inside cover of a Quran.”
First, I’m wondering why they don’t more accurately call Robert Burns, the “AP Military Writer,” a “Military Critic?”
Further, why isn’t Robert Burns, AP “Military Writer,” breathlessly telling us about the number of charred remains of Qurans that have been found clutched in the dismembered hands found outside the destroyed Mosque?
Why isn’t Comrad Robert Burns, AP “Military Writer” (Columbia leftist Journalism School class of 1990) printing photos along with his stories showing the stacks of Qurans soaked with water sprayed on the Mosque by Muslim firefighters dousing the fire started by the wild eyed Islamic Jihadist Towel Head Muslim that blew himself up?
Yeah, you know the answer as well as I do…
If you park a car bomb in front of a Mosque and detonate your explosives, thereby killing yourself and 40 Iraqi worshipers and destroy the Mosque, how many Quran’s are damaged or destroyed?
Dozens?
Dozens of dozens?
Since there have been a number of Mosques destroyed recently, I want to know what is the big %$#*& deal about a US soldier kicking a Muslim prisoner’s Quran or throwing some water balloons and getting a Quran wet?
“U.S. Confirms Gitmo Soldier Kicked Quran
By ROBERT BURNS, AP Military Writer
WASHINGTON - U.S. military officials say no guard at the Guantanamo Bay prison for terror suspects flushed a detainee's Quran down the toilet, but they disclosed that a Muslim holy book was splashed with urine.
In other newly disclosed incidents, a detainee's Quran was deliberately kicked and another's was stepped on.
On March 25, a detainee complained to guards that "urine came through an air vent" and splashed on him and his Quran. A guard admitted he was at fault, but a report released Friday evening offering new details about Quran mishandling incidents did not make clear whether the guard intended the result.
In another confirmed incident, water balloons thrown by prison guards caused an unspecified number of Qurans to get wet, and in a confirmed but ambiguous case, a two-word obscenity was written in English on the inside cover of a Quran.”
First, I’m wondering why they don’t more accurately call Robert Burns, the “AP Military Writer,” a “Military Critic?”
Further, why isn’t Robert Burns, AP “Military Writer,” breathlessly telling us about the number of charred remains of Qurans that have been found clutched in the dismembered hands found outside the destroyed Mosque?
Why isn’t Comrad Robert Burns, AP “Military Writer” (Columbia leftist Journalism School class of 1990) printing photos along with his stories showing the stacks of Qurans soaked with water sprayed on the Mosque by Muslim firefighters dousing the fire started by the wild eyed Islamic Jihadist Towel Head Muslim that blew himself up?
Yeah, you know the answer as well as I do…
The Whole World Is Going Down The Toilet
When I was attending Georgia Tech back in the late 1970’s I lived in Harrison Dormitory for a year. Harrison had no AC, clunky steam radiator heat, and a lovely view of the Downtown Connector (a combination of I-75 and I-85) and the world famous The Varsity restaurant, the largest drive-in restaurant in the US. It even has a 600 car parking deck.
As a concession to the students, there was a pedestrian tunnel under the interstate at 5th Street that allowed you to walk across if you wanted to visit the adjacent run-down retail establishments and housing on the other side of “the concrete gulch.”
There was this little hole-in-the-wall bar (I forget the name) that had an eclectic mix of local residents and students as patrons. I only wandered in there a couple of times, because I was frightened by the way they served their popcorn—in a toilet.
You heard me right, the first thing that you saw when you walked in the door was a full sized porcelin toilet sitting on the end of the bar—full of popcorn. And people were EATING the popcorn. I, personally, could never quite get used to the idea.
If you are going to do popcorn in a toilet, why not serve dinner in a toilet like they are doing in this restaurant in Tiawan?
“KAOHSIUNG, Tiawan--Taiwanese restaurateur Eric Wang has given new meaning to the traditional revelers' cry of bottoms up.
His eatery in the southern city of Kaohsiung delivers its food not on conventional plates and dishes, but in miniaturized Western and Asian style toilets, both the flush and non-flush variety.
For anyone missing the point, diners are encouraged to stir up mushy, earth-colored offerings like curry chicken rice and chocolate ice cream to conjure up -- well, the real thing.
Located in a downtown area with a variety of competing eateries, Marton -- the name means toilet in Chinese -- attracts its customers through its dazzling bathroom decor.
Walking in through an arched door, diners are greeted with a giant toilet bowl sitting between two urinals. White ceramic toilet seats comfortably accommodate their bottoms, and urinals grace the walls.”
Sorry, but I think I’ll just have a sandwich here at home…
As a concession to the students, there was a pedestrian tunnel under the interstate at 5th Street that allowed you to walk across if you wanted to visit the adjacent run-down retail establishments and housing on the other side of “the concrete gulch.”
There was this little hole-in-the-wall bar (I forget the name) that had an eclectic mix of local residents and students as patrons. I only wandered in there a couple of times, because I was frightened by the way they served their popcorn—in a toilet.
You heard me right, the first thing that you saw when you walked in the door was a full sized porcelin toilet sitting on the end of the bar—full of popcorn. And people were EATING the popcorn. I, personally, could never quite get used to the idea.
If you are going to do popcorn in a toilet, why not serve dinner in a toilet like they are doing in this restaurant in Tiawan?
“KAOHSIUNG, Tiawan--Taiwanese restaurateur Eric Wang has given new meaning to the traditional revelers' cry of bottoms up.
His eatery in the southern city of Kaohsiung delivers its food not on conventional plates and dishes, but in miniaturized Western and Asian style toilets, both the flush and non-flush variety.
For anyone missing the point, diners are encouraged to stir up mushy, earth-colored offerings like curry chicken rice and chocolate ice cream to conjure up -- well, the real thing.
Located in a downtown area with a variety of competing eateries, Marton -- the name means toilet in Chinese -- attracts its customers through its dazzling bathroom decor.
Walking in through an arched door, diners are greeted with a giant toilet bowl sitting between two urinals. White ceramic toilet seats comfortably accommodate their bottoms, and urinals grace the walls.”
Sorry, but I think I’ll just have a sandwich here at home…
Lord, I Was Born A Ramblin' Man...
Tryin' to make a livin' and doin' the best I can...
I have some good news and some bad news.
The good news is that I'm going on vacation for ten days. We're traveling by air from Brunswick to Atlanta, then on to the suburbs of Pittsburg this morning.
The bad news, for my blogs and my writing in general, is that I'm going to have to live on a normal 24 hour schedule rather than my "night owl" 12 hour schedule and, spending some of the time in hotels and in relative's homes, I'm afraid that my blogging is going to suffer as a result. God knows what kind of internet connections will be available--all slow probably.
After a couple of days with my girl Pat's family and a visit to Frank Lloyd Wright's Fallingwater house in nearby Bear Run, Pennsylvania, it's on to Erie, PA to visit Pat's daughter in their new home they moved into last week. I think that there is a surround sound stereo with my name on the wiring there.
Next Friday we're traveling down to Charleston, WV to rendevous with my Dad's two brothers and my 92 year old grandmother and attend a "Town Reunion" in a little town where my Dad's family lived from the 1930's until the early 1960's. My grandfather was the electrical superintendent in the Red Parrot Coal mine during that time, and it is fun to meet people that went to school with and knew my father and uncles and learn about coal mining life in the early 1900's.
Continuing the family adventure, we'll be attending the Rogers reunion on Sunday in southeastern Ohio. Again, lots of food and ex-coal miners sitting around talking about the good old days.
We'll be returning here to paradise on Monday, the 13th, at which time I'll collapse into a heap on the floor or sofa--eager to rest and sit around in my underwear with a computer in my lap (sorry about that mental picture--too much information.)
Until then, I ask for your patience and that you check back by once in a while for some intermittant travel blogging.
If I get bored or see something amazing, you'll be the first to know.
I have some good news and some bad news.
The good news is that I'm going on vacation for ten days. We're traveling by air from Brunswick to Atlanta, then on to the suburbs of Pittsburg this morning.
The bad news, for my blogs and my writing in general, is that I'm going to have to live on a normal 24 hour schedule rather than my "night owl" 12 hour schedule and, spending some of the time in hotels and in relative's homes, I'm afraid that my blogging is going to suffer as a result. God knows what kind of internet connections will be available--all slow probably.
After a couple of days with my girl Pat's family and a visit to Frank Lloyd Wright's Fallingwater house in nearby Bear Run, Pennsylvania, it's on to Erie, PA to visit Pat's daughter in their new home they moved into last week. I think that there is a surround sound stereo with my name on the wiring there.
Next Friday we're traveling down to Charleston, WV to rendevous with my Dad's two brothers and my 92 year old grandmother and attend a "Town Reunion" in a little town where my Dad's family lived from the 1930's until the early 1960's. My grandfather was the electrical superintendent in the Red Parrot Coal mine during that time, and it is fun to meet people that went to school with and knew my father and uncles and learn about coal mining life in the early 1900's.
Continuing the family adventure, we'll be attending the Rogers reunion on Sunday in southeastern Ohio. Again, lots of food and ex-coal miners sitting around talking about the good old days.
We'll be returning here to paradise on Monday, the 13th, at which time I'll collapse into a heap on the floor or sofa--eager to rest and sit around in my underwear with a computer in my lap (sorry about that mental picture--too much information.)
Until then, I ask for your patience and that you check back by once in a while for some intermittant travel blogging.
If I get bored or see something amazing, you'll be the first to know.
Thursday, June 02, 2005
Storm Stress Syndrome?
Pluuuueaseeeee…
Damn I’m insensitive today. I guess it could be that I’m all cranky and suffering from a bad case of “Internet Deprivation” since I had to spend nearly 12 hours with only hit or miss service today.
I guess I should call some hotline somewhere or consider going in for counseling like these people down in Florida are doing.
“Mental health experts have noticed more cases of what they call "storm stress syndrome" after recent news coverage of the 2005 hurricane season, according to Local 6 News.
A crisis counseling organization has seen a 20 percent spike in phone call volume in the days before the official June 1 start of hurricane season.
Experts in Central Florida said they noticed the first cases of "storm stress syndrome" after last year's storms.
Recent severe weather in Central Florida and the start of the hurricane season can be too much for some storm victims.
"They get depressed or they get anxiety and are not able to function properly when it rains or is thundering," Project Hope worker Maria Weber said.
The best way to deal with storm stress syndrome is to talk about it with a professional, according to the report.”
I have a solution for all of these depressed Floridians. Here is what they need to do rather than fretting their little miserable lives away and spending their children’s inheritance money on shrinks.
Instead of enjoying the good life, golfing in the middle of the winter, water skiing on New Years day, and hanging out at the beach when a hurricane isn’t blowing, MOVE TO WISCONSIN.
It’s lovely there, I hear. They have two seasons…winter and July.
That should solve their “storm stress syndrome” quite nicely.
Damn I’m insensitive today. I guess it could be that I’m all cranky and suffering from a bad case of “Internet Deprivation” since I had to spend nearly 12 hours with only hit or miss service today.
I guess I should call some hotline somewhere or consider going in for counseling like these people down in Florida are doing.
“Mental health experts have noticed more cases of what they call "storm stress syndrome" after recent news coverage of the 2005 hurricane season, according to Local 6 News.
A crisis counseling organization has seen a 20 percent spike in phone call volume in the days before the official June 1 start of hurricane season.
Experts in Central Florida said they noticed the first cases of "storm stress syndrome" after last year's storms.
Recent severe weather in Central Florida and the start of the hurricane season can be too much for some storm victims.
"They get depressed or they get anxiety and are not able to function properly when it rains or is thundering," Project Hope worker Maria Weber said.
The best way to deal with storm stress syndrome is to talk about it with a professional, according to the report.”
I have a solution for all of these depressed Floridians. Here is what they need to do rather than fretting their little miserable lives away and spending their children’s inheritance money on shrinks.
Instead of enjoying the good life, golfing in the middle of the winter, water skiing on New Years day, and hanging out at the beach when a hurricane isn’t blowing, MOVE TO WISCONSIN.
It’s lovely there, I hear. They have two seasons…winter and July.
That should solve their “storm stress syndrome” quite nicely.
Weird Beard Stupidity
Those that know me know that I’ve had a moustache and some form of beard for most of the past 28 years. I actually let the beard come and go—usually it is closely cropped and sits low on my cheeks and chin.
Back in the days when I was a frequent scuba diver I had to trim down my moustache and shave off my beard so that my scuba mask wouldn’t leak. The guys that had thin scraggly beards or those that wore the small format masks could get away with the facial hair, but I have what’s called a “sweater face” and can grow a beard right up to my eyebrows so I made the facial hair sacrifice to support my sports endeavors.
I’ve only been completely clean-shaven once in this time, that being a three week period last year while I was playing the part of Hannibal, a self-committed mental patient in the play “The Curious Savage.” I disagreed with the director, who also made me cut my ponytail off and for some reason thought that everyone in the early 1950’s (the period the play took place) had short hair and were clean-shaven. I thought that he (the director) was an idiot and he has subsequently proven his management ineptness in subsequent dealings.
Speaking of idiots, here’s a story about a firefighter that’s going to court to keep his beard. His reasoning is based on religion—the idiot is A MUSLIM.
“PHILADELPHIA -- A Muslim firefighter who refuses to shave his beard on religious grounds cannot be fired while his legal case unfolds, a city judge ruled in a test of the state's religious freedom law.
The Philadelphia Fire Department, like most big-city departments, prohibits beards and mustaches, citing safety reasons. Facial hair, the department says, can prevent firefighters from getting a seal when they wear respirators.
Firefighter Curtis De Veaux agreed to shave when he joined the department two years ago. But as his faith deepened, he decided he was no longer willing to, he said Wednesday.
De Veaux also said he has a skin condition that makes it painful to shave. He added that he can get a proper seal on a respirator despite his beard.”
The next sound you hear is me inhaling in order to supply air to issue my Sam Kinnison like scream:
Ohhhhh Ohhhhhh, AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
This idiot can NOT possibly be serious.
OK, a couple of points here, speaking from my infinite experience…(in diving, not firefighting)
A. I could get a proper seal on my scuba mask when I was diving with a heavy five o’clock shadow, but the rest of my dive party wasn’t implicitly relying on me to fight a fire and save their lives in an emergency. It was between me and my dive buddy to decide what was safe, and you never dived alone. Likewise, firefighters work as a team and rely on each other for their own safety. If someone were sick or otherwise incompetent, I wouldn’t want to enter a building with them in tow while fighting a fire.
B. When scuba diving, I was diving in water, not toxic smoke, and I could generally see the surface and make an emergency ascent if I had a mask or regulator problem. I could see where it would be nearly impossible to successfully exit a burning building full of smoke with a Quran in one hand and a leaky mask, clouded with fumes, strapped loosely to my face.
C. I didn’t wear a full-face mask like firefighters do, so if my mask leaked water I could close my eyes or leave them open and let the salt water burn them for a few minutes while I breathed through the regulator that was still clenched firmly in my teeth. If the firefighter’s mask leaks, it not only compromises his vision, but also his air supply.
D. And finally, WEIRD BEARD knew the rules when he joined the fire department. He should just suck it up or move back to Iran, or Iraq or wherever and join the fire department there--they certainly could use his training and assistance.
Leave it to this moron to hide behind Pennsylvania’s religious freedom law to cover his own selfishness. I bet his lovely Muslim mother and the rest of his family would sue the city's and the fire officials' asses off if he managed to get hurt or killed sporting his symbol of Muslimity.
If he wins the lawsuit and insists on staying with the fire department, someone aught to accidentally break both of his knees and see if the Americans with Disabilities Act can help him keep his firefighting job working from a wheelchair.
Can't we all just get a GRIP here?
Back in the days when I was a frequent scuba diver I had to trim down my moustache and shave off my beard so that my scuba mask wouldn’t leak. The guys that had thin scraggly beards or those that wore the small format masks could get away with the facial hair, but I have what’s called a “sweater face” and can grow a beard right up to my eyebrows so I made the facial hair sacrifice to support my sports endeavors.
I’ve only been completely clean-shaven once in this time, that being a three week period last year while I was playing the part of Hannibal, a self-committed mental patient in the play “The Curious Savage.” I disagreed with the director, who also made me cut my ponytail off and for some reason thought that everyone in the early 1950’s (the period the play took place) had short hair and were clean-shaven. I thought that he (the director) was an idiot and he has subsequently proven his management ineptness in subsequent dealings.
Speaking of idiots, here’s a story about a firefighter that’s going to court to keep his beard. His reasoning is based on religion—the idiot is A MUSLIM.
“PHILADELPHIA -- A Muslim firefighter who refuses to shave his beard on religious grounds cannot be fired while his legal case unfolds, a city judge ruled in a test of the state's religious freedom law.
The Philadelphia Fire Department, like most big-city departments, prohibits beards and mustaches, citing safety reasons. Facial hair, the department says, can prevent firefighters from getting a seal when they wear respirators.
Firefighter Curtis De Veaux agreed to shave when he joined the department two years ago. But as his faith deepened, he decided he was no longer willing to, he said Wednesday.
De Veaux also said he has a skin condition that makes it painful to shave. He added that he can get a proper seal on a respirator despite his beard.”
The next sound you hear is me inhaling in order to supply air to issue my Sam Kinnison like scream:
Ohhhhh Ohhhhhh, AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
This idiot can NOT possibly be serious.
OK, a couple of points here, speaking from my infinite experience…(in diving, not firefighting)
A. I could get a proper seal on my scuba mask when I was diving with a heavy five o’clock shadow, but the rest of my dive party wasn’t implicitly relying on me to fight a fire and save their lives in an emergency. It was between me and my dive buddy to decide what was safe, and you never dived alone. Likewise, firefighters work as a team and rely on each other for their own safety. If someone were sick or otherwise incompetent, I wouldn’t want to enter a building with them in tow while fighting a fire.
B. When scuba diving, I was diving in water, not toxic smoke, and I could generally see the surface and make an emergency ascent if I had a mask or regulator problem. I could see where it would be nearly impossible to successfully exit a burning building full of smoke with a Quran in one hand and a leaky mask, clouded with fumes, strapped loosely to my face.
C. I didn’t wear a full-face mask like firefighters do, so if my mask leaked water I could close my eyes or leave them open and let the salt water burn them for a few minutes while I breathed through the regulator that was still clenched firmly in my teeth. If the firefighter’s mask leaks, it not only compromises his vision, but also his air supply.
D. And finally, WEIRD BEARD knew the rules when he joined the fire department. He should just suck it up or move back to Iran, or Iraq or wherever and join the fire department there--they certainly could use his training and assistance.
Leave it to this moron to hide behind Pennsylvania’s religious freedom law to cover his own selfishness. I bet his lovely Muslim mother and the rest of his family would sue the city's and the fire officials' asses off if he managed to get hurt or killed sporting his symbol of Muslimity.
If he wins the lawsuit and insists on staying with the fire department, someone aught to accidentally break both of his knees and see if the Americans with Disabilities Act can help him keep his firefighting job working from a wheelchair.
Can't we all just get a GRIP here?
Internet Problems
Sorry for the light posting this morning, but I'm having router/modem problems..Arrrrgh!
I can get connected to the wireless router, but the system can't find the internet throught the cable modem.
I gave up about 12:30 last night and started again an HOUR AGO, rebooting a half dozen times and almost throwing the whole shebang out into the back yard.
Finally, and miraculously, I got connected...I'm not turning it off for a while.
I can get connected to the wireless router, but the system can't find the internet throught the cable modem.
I gave up about 12:30 last night and started again an HOUR AGO, rebooting a half dozen times and almost throwing the whole shebang out into the back yard.
Finally, and miraculously, I got connected...I'm not turning it off for a while.
Wednesday, June 01, 2005
You Just Can't Make Stuff Like This Up
We had a relatively quite Memorial Day weekend focused on staying here at the condo and avoiding the bars, restaurants, and all of the “Tourists” in general here on St. Simons Island. Rumor has it that the island was packed, but we chose to not get involved. Call us smart or call us snobbish, we had a lot less stress as a result of our efforts. All seemed quiet to me.
There is a local talk radio show here on AM 1440 that runs from 7:30 to 10:00 each morning that I’ve recently started listening to. The show in its present format is fairly low budget and sort of lame in the commentary, but I have designs on the host’s job—at least on a fill in basis—he just don’t know it yet. I guarantee that I could increase the call volume within three months, although they might be trying to “ride me out of town on a rail…”
Any way, on Tuesday morning I was listening to the talk radio show when a caller told the story of two “Streakers” that were arrested early Sunday morning on the beach down by the fishing pier. By “streakers” I mean “buck nekkid” people—my southern readers know what I mean.
You know—“streakers”—people running ‘round in public with no clothes on.
The story was sort of funny at the time, and on a slow news day a few other callers commented and one guy actually added some additional details, but I basically thought nothing about it, even after hearing the local noon news broadcast giving brief details and the names of the offenders.
Well, let me tell you, over the past two days I have put the story together by doing a little personal sleuthing and guess what…
I know these two young men. Two 20 something year old guys I’ll call Pete and Repeat Here’s what happened…er…um…here’s what they did.
They each work as bartenders down at the local Irish Pub that has been here on the island for almost 40 years. They both worked the night shift Saturday night.
Apparently there was some drinking going on—on both sides of the bar. I mean LOT’s of Drinking. Then the bar closed down at 2:00 AM, and then there were more libations, and some imbibing to be had after roommates Pete and Repeat got home to their rental cottage near the beach.
By 7:30 AM Sunday morning, it must have seemed like a good idea to them to walk out on the beach, strip off their shorts, and jump into the Atlantic Ocean (actually St. Simons Sound) and take a little dip. After running into and out of the surf a couple of times, a bystander notified the authorities of their antics.
This is when the trouble started. Pete and Repeat wandered out of the surf and were walking “buck nekkid” up onto the concrete fishing pier, where they proceeded to dive off into the surf, at great risk to life, limb, and personal private parts (if you know what I mean-there’s sharks out there) and swim back to shore.
Upon exiting the surf this time, they were greeted by an arriving Glynn County patrol squad car. They then delivered various oral explicatives and some universal signs of disrespect utilizing their arms and fingers, finally donning their boxers and running like hell.
Pete was unfortunately apprehended a short distance from the scene of the crime. Repeat initially got away. I say “initially’ because here is what ensued.
Pete, now cooperating with the authorities, politely asked if they would be kind enough to drive by his beach cottage so that he could retrieve his cell phone and wallet, all the better to make phone calls and arrange bail for his indescressions.
The police complied…we have nice officers here in Glynn County. So good so far.
The police, being wise to the ways of the world and not wanting Pete to enter his home alone and retrieve a Uzzi or MK-10000000, or any other potentially lethal, illegal, automatic weapon, elected to enter said premises with Pete and, upon entry, found Repeat reclining on the sofa, basking in the glow of his previous escape.
A couple of thousand dollars later, Pete and Repeat are free on bond, jobless, and Repeat’s father, the Juvenile Court Judge, has dis-owned him.
I swear I’m not lying. As I said earlier—you can’t make this kind of stuff up…
There is a local talk radio show here on AM 1440 that runs from 7:30 to 10:00 each morning that I’ve recently started listening to. The show in its present format is fairly low budget and sort of lame in the commentary, but I have designs on the host’s job—at least on a fill in basis—he just don’t know it yet. I guarantee that I could increase the call volume within three months, although they might be trying to “ride me out of town on a rail…”
Any way, on Tuesday morning I was listening to the talk radio show when a caller told the story of two “Streakers” that were arrested early Sunday morning on the beach down by the fishing pier. By “streakers” I mean “buck nekkid” people—my southern readers know what I mean.
You know—“streakers”—people running ‘round in public with no clothes on.
The story was sort of funny at the time, and on a slow news day a few other callers commented and one guy actually added some additional details, but I basically thought nothing about it, even after hearing the local noon news broadcast giving brief details and the names of the offenders.
Well, let me tell you, over the past two days I have put the story together by doing a little personal sleuthing and guess what…
I know these two young men. Two 20 something year old guys I’ll call Pete and Repeat Here’s what happened…er…um…here’s what they did.
They each work as bartenders down at the local Irish Pub that has been here on the island for almost 40 years. They both worked the night shift Saturday night.
Apparently there was some drinking going on—on both sides of the bar. I mean LOT’s of Drinking. Then the bar closed down at 2:00 AM, and then there were more libations, and some imbibing to be had after roommates Pete and Repeat got home to their rental cottage near the beach.
By 7:30 AM Sunday morning, it must have seemed like a good idea to them to walk out on the beach, strip off their shorts, and jump into the Atlantic Ocean (actually St. Simons Sound) and take a little dip. After running into and out of the surf a couple of times, a bystander notified the authorities of their antics.
This is when the trouble started. Pete and Repeat wandered out of the surf and were walking “buck nekkid” up onto the concrete fishing pier, where they proceeded to dive off into the surf, at great risk to life, limb, and personal private parts (if you know what I mean-there’s sharks out there) and swim back to shore.
Upon exiting the surf this time, they were greeted by an arriving Glynn County patrol squad car. They then delivered various oral explicatives and some universal signs of disrespect utilizing their arms and fingers, finally donning their boxers and running like hell.
Pete was unfortunately apprehended a short distance from the scene of the crime. Repeat initially got away. I say “initially’ because here is what ensued.
Pete, now cooperating with the authorities, politely asked if they would be kind enough to drive by his beach cottage so that he could retrieve his cell phone and wallet, all the better to make phone calls and arrange bail for his indescressions.
The police complied…we have nice officers here in Glynn County. So good so far.
The police, being wise to the ways of the world and not wanting Pete to enter his home alone and retrieve a Uzzi or MK-10000000, or any other potentially lethal, illegal, automatic weapon, elected to enter said premises with Pete and, upon entry, found Repeat reclining on the sofa, basking in the glow of his previous escape.
A couple of thousand dollars later, Pete and Repeat are free on bond, jobless, and Repeat’s father, the Juvenile Court Judge, has dis-owned him.
I swear I’m not lying. As I said earlier—you can’t make this kind of stuff up…
John Kerry's "Hillarycare Lite"
I stopped by the old John Kerry Website today just to see what the heck was going on.
First, the good news--John Kerry has actually tendered an original piece of legislation, Senate Bill S114, called "Kids come first act of 2005." How exciting...
You do remember that in all the years he had been in the Senate before losing his bid for the presidency that he had only sponsored TWO bills…EVER? Massachusetts' voters must be so proud...
Unfortunately, when you look at the details of S114, it looks like it is another version of "Hillarycare Lite."
The interesting thing is that on the Kerry Web Site they say:
"On the first day of the 109th Congress, Kerry introduced legislation in the Senate, the “Kids First Act” - S. 114, to provide health care coverage to the 11 million American children who currently go without. Kerry’s legislation also helps Governors and states save on health care costs by reducing the burden on state's Medicaid rolls."
New Federal funding for 11 million uninsured children?
Sounds good on the surface, but...How does Kerry define "children?" Let’s take a look at the actual text of the legislation which can be found here on the Senate Web Site. It reads as follows:
"Currently, there are 9,000,000 children under the age of 19 that are uninsured. One out of every 8 children are uninsured while 1 in 5 Hispanic children and 1 in 7 African American children are uninsured. Three-quarters, approximately 6,800,000, of these children are eligible but not enrolled in the medicaid program or the State children's health insurance program (SCHIP). Long-range studies found that 1 in 3 children went without health insurance for all or part of 2002 and 2003."
So which is it, Mr. Kerry--11 million uninsured kids, or 9 million uninsured kids? And who is at fault that the 6.8 million kids "are eligible for but not enrolled in the Medicaid program"?
The government's, or the kid’s parents who didn't enroll them?
So, now if you believe the actual numbers put forth in the bill, there is really somewhere between 2.2 and 4.2 million uninsured kids that are not already eligible for Medicaid—a program which we are already paying taxes for.
As you read further, you find that they aren't really talking about little babies and toddlers (what my mental picture of kids usually is).
"There are 7,600,000 young adults between the ages of 19 and 20. In the United States, approximately 28 percent, or 2,100,000 individuals, of this group are uninsured."
Ah hah…so S114 also covers 2.1 million "young adults" in the 19 to 20 age bracket, which is where I guess the Kerry Website gets their 11 million number (+ or - 100,000, what the heck...)
They also want to tie federal funding to promises by each state that children of illegal aliens are not excluded in any future state legislation and to include children of families that earn 300% of the poverty line base income. So this isn't really all about insuring the children of poor families, is it? It's about transfering the legitimate responsibility of the healthcare of children from the parents (democratic voters) to the taxpayers (republican voters.) Well isn't that special.
And finally, I want to point out that there seems to be a pathologically induced inability in "healthcare advocates" and Democrats to discern between the concepts of a lack of "health insurance" and a lack of "adequate and timely health care." Health Insurance is money, Health Care is pills and shots and doctors and hospitals.
This bill, in my opinion, is typical liberal bait and switch crap.
All the public sees and hears is the "Kids come First" title and the 11 million uninsured number, with no qualification as to how the "kids" got to where they are in the first place--the parents lack of concern and action.
What do you think?
Update 11:40 PM:
I knew I smelled a rat in the form of an income tax increase in this bill, and I found it:
SEC. 501. PARTIAL REPEAL OF RATE REDUCTION IN THE HIGHEST INCOME TAX BRACKET.
Section 1(i)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following flush sentence:
`In the case of taxable years beginning during calendar year 2005 and thereafter, the final item in the fourth column in the preceding table shall be applied by substituting for `35.0%' such rate as the Secretary determines is necessary to provide sufficient revenues to offset the Federal outlays required to implement the provisions of, and amendments made by, the Kids Come First Act of 2005.'.
In other words, the health care insurance costs of Mr. Kerry's 9 million or 11 million "kids", most of which are already eligible for taxpayer funded Medicare, will be born by the "wealthy taxpayers" that pay the current 35% rate.
How much should I mail in, Senator Kerry? Will all of my income be enough?
What a %$#& moron...
First, the good news--John Kerry has actually tendered an original piece of legislation, Senate Bill S114, called "Kids come first act of 2005." How exciting...
You do remember that in all the years he had been in the Senate before losing his bid for the presidency that he had only sponsored TWO bills…EVER? Massachusetts' voters must be so proud...
Unfortunately, when you look at the details of S114, it looks like it is another version of "Hillarycare Lite."
The interesting thing is that on the Kerry Web Site they say:
"On the first day of the 109th Congress, Kerry introduced legislation in the Senate, the “Kids First Act” - S. 114, to provide health care coverage to the 11 million American children who currently go without. Kerry’s legislation also helps Governors and states save on health care costs by reducing the burden on state's Medicaid rolls."
New Federal funding for 11 million uninsured children?
Sounds good on the surface, but...How does Kerry define "children?" Let’s take a look at the actual text of the legislation which can be found here on the Senate Web Site. It reads as follows:
"Currently, there are 9,000,000 children under the age of 19 that are uninsured. One out of every 8 children are uninsured while 1 in 5 Hispanic children and 1 in 7 African American children are uninsured. Three-quarters, approximately 6,800,000, of these children are eligible but not enrolled in the medicaid program or the State children's health insurance program (SCHIP). Long-range studies found that 1 in 3 children went without health insurance for all or part of 2002 and 2003."
So which is it, Mr. Kerry--11 million uninsured kids, or 9 million uninsured kids? And who is at fault that the 6.8 million kids "are eligible for but not enrolled in the Medicaid program"?
The government's, or the kid’s parents who didn't enroll them?
So, now if you believe the actual numbers put forth in the bill, there is really somewhere between 2.2 and 4.2 million uninsured kids that are not already eligible for Medicaid—a program which we are already paying taxes for.
As you read further, you find that they aren't really talking about little babies and toddlers (what my mental picture of kids usually is).
"There are 7,600,000 young adults between the ages of 19 and 20. In the United States, approximately 28 percent, or 2,100,000 individuals, of this group are uninsured."
Ah hah…so S114 also covers 2.1 million "young adults" in the 19 to 20 age bracket, which is where I guess the Kerry Website gets their 11 million number (+ or - 100,000, what the heck...)
They also want to tie federal funding to promises by each state that children of illegal aliens are not excluded in any future state legislation and to include children of families that earn 300% of the poverty line base income. So this isn't really all about insuring the children of poor families, is it? It's about transfering the legitimate responsibility of the healthcare of children from the parents (democratic voters) to the taxpayers (republican voters.) Well isn't that special.
And finally, I want to point out that there seems to be a pathologically induced inability in "healthcare advocates" and Democrats to discern between the concepts of a lack of "health insurance" and a lack of "adequate and timely health care." Health Insurance is money, Health Care is pills and shots and doctors and hospitals.
This bill, in my opinion, is typical liberal bait and switch crap.
All the public sees and hears is the "Kids come First" title and the 11 million uninsured number, with no qualification as to how the "kids" got to where they are in the first place--the parents lack of concern and action.
What do you think?
Update 11:40 PM:
I knew I smelled a rat in the form of an income tax increase in this bill, and I found it:
SEC. 501. PARTIAL REPEAL OF RATE REDUCTION IN THE HIGHEST INCOME TAX BRACKET.
Section 1(i)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following flush sentence:
`In the case of taxable years beginning during calendar year 2005 and thereafter, the final item in the fourth column in the preceding table shall be applied by substituting for `35.0%' such rate as the Secretary determines is necessary to provide sufficient revenues to offset the Federal outlays required to implement the provisions of, and amendments made by, the Kids Come First Act of 2005.'.
In other words, the health care insurance costs of Mr. Kerry's 9 million or 11 million "kids", most of which are already eligible for taxpayer funded Medicare, will be born by the "wealthy taxpayers" that pay the current 35% rate.
How much should I mail in, Senator Kerry? Will all of my income be enough?
What a %$#& moron...
Tuesday, May 31, 2005
They're Standing On My Last Good Nerve--AGAIN
I’ve never once in my life ever worked in a job that paid minimum wage, even when I was a teenager. Rather than saying that I was just lucky, I assert that I was just that good at what I did.
Some would like to attribute the truth in this apparently arrogant statement to the fact that I am one of those mean old privileged white guys that the Democrats love to tax and the liberal media loves to bash for hogging all of the money and opportunities in life.
They’d be wrong, though.
I feel like that many times in my fitful career as an engineer and business owner that I wasn’t paid what my efforts were worth, but every single time I started feeling underpaid, I could only blame myself and I either changed the situation by getting a new employer or I worked harder and stuck it out.
I’ve actually turned out to be the toughest, meanest boss that I’ve ever worked for—I worked for months at a time back in the late 1990’s without paying myself one thin dime. It’s a real downer when everyone is making money but you, and YOU own the company.
That’s why I get so angry when I see mindless, sappy, feel-good, “rob from the rich and give to the poor ” type stories like this one in USA Today trumpeting various states overriding the Federal minimum wage laws.
“More states are raising their minimum wages, pushing hourly rates above $7 in some and shrinking the role of the federal minimum wage, which hasn't gone up in eight years.
In all, 17 states and the District of Columbia - covering 45% of the U.S. population - have set minimums above the federal rate of $5.15.
That has helped cut the number of workers earning the minimum or less (for those earning tips) from 4.8 million in 1997 to 2 million last year, or 2.7% of hourly earners, the Bureau of Labor Statistics says.
About half of minimum-wage earners work at restaurants. Millions more have wages that are influenced by the minimum. Its buying power is at its lowest point since 1949.
Congress last changed the federal minimum wage in 1997. The latest proposal to raise it died in the Senate in March.”
Neither the Imperial Federal Government nor the individual states have any business in setting minimum wages. They didn’t do a darn thing for my personal wages when my company was sinking underneath me—other than demand that I pay unemployment taxes, workmen's compensation insurance, and hire an accounting firm to prove that I was losing money and eventually was broke (and FYI I've never once collected unemployment or workman's comp either.)
So why should the government be allowed to run around telling business owners how much to pay their employees? From personal experience I can tell you that if you want good employees you have to pay them what they are worth. Everyone with half a brain realizes that, right?
I guess that it is no surprise that half of the “minimum-wage earners work at restaurants,” but I have a suggestion to remedy that situation…
Why don’t all of the "wage activists" and bleeding heart liberals out there that want to raise the wages of the gum-chewing waiter or waitress that just spent the last half hour ignoring their empty tea glass just toss an extra $5 or $10 out of THEIR OWN WALLET onto the table next time they are leaving the restaurant?
Sorta like putting THEIR money where THEIR mouth is, instead of spending my hard earned cash to solve THEIR PROBLEM, you know?
Is it just me?
Some would like to attribute the truth in this apparently arrogant statement to the fact that I am one of those mean old privileged white guys that the Democrats love to tax and the liberal media loves to bash for hogging all of the money and opportunities in life.
They’d be wrong, though.
I feel like that many times in my fitful career as an engineer and business owner that I wasn’t paid what my efforts were worth, but every single time I started feeling underpaid, I could only blame myself and I either changed the situation by getting a new employer or I worked harder and stuck it out.
I’ve actually turned out to be the toughest, meanest boss that I’ve ever worked for—I worked for months at a time back in the late 1990’s without paying myself one thin dime. It’s a real downer when everyone is making money but you, and YOU own the company.
That’s why I get so angry when I see mindless, sappy, feel-good, “rob from the rich and give to the poor ” type stories like this one in USA Today trumpeting various states overriding the Federal minimum wage laws.
“More states are raising their minimum wages, pushing hourly rates above $7 in some and shrinking the role of the federal minimum wage, which hasn't gone up in eight years.
In all, 17 states and the District of Columbia - covering 45% of the U.S. population - have set minimums above the federal rate of $5.15.
That has helped cut the number of workers earning the minimum or less (for those earning tips) from 4.8 million in 1997 to 2 million last year, or 2.7% of hourly earners, the Bureau of Labor Statistics says.
About half of minimum-wage earners work at restaurants. Millions more have wages that are influenced by the minimum. Its buying power is at its lowest point since 1949.
Congress last changed the federal minimum wage in 1997. The latest proposal to raise it died in the Senate in March.”
Neither the Imperial Federal Government nor the individual states have any business in setting minimum wages. They didn’t do a darn thing for my personal wages when my company was sinking underneath me—other than demand that I pay unemployment taxes, workmen's compensation insurance, and hire an accounting firm to prove that I was losing money and eventually was broke (and FYI I've never once collected unemployment or workman's comp either.)
So why should the government be allowed to run around telling business owners how much to pay their employees? From personal experience I can tell you that if you want good employees you have to pay them what they are worth. Everyone with half a brain realizes that, right?
I guess that it is no surprise that half of the “minimum-wage earners work at restaurants,” but I have a suggestion to remedy that situation…
Why don’t all of the "wage activists" and bleeding heart liberals out there that want to raise the wages of the gum-chewing waiter or waitress that just spent the last half hour ignoring their empty tea glass just toss an extra $5 or $10 out of THEIR OWN WALLET onto the table next time they are leaving the restaurant?
Sorta like putting THEIR money where THEIR mouth is, instead of spending my hard earned cash to solve THEIR PROBLEM, you know?
Is it just me?
More Goverenment School Insanity
If you are an uneducated dumb ass, I suggest that you stop reading right now, because what I have to say is going to offend you. Actually, I don’t believe that many readers who visit my blog are uneducated dumb asses and I didn’t mean to imply any such thing. If you are a parent of school aged children you definitely want to keep reading.
My keyword here is “uneducated,” because being born a dumb ass is not a crime, we are all born that way. I certainly was, but I had a capacity to learn and I’ve used it with various levels of success in the past forty-five years.
If you are uneducated and over the age of thirty-five, your condition is most likely your own fault (with all due respect to learning disabled individuals) because until the late 1970’s or early 1980’s, successfully attending the minimum of 12 years of our government schools (our so called free public education) was more than adequate to prepare you for employment and dealing with life’s experiences. In addition, attending a quality four-year college or university certainly served to help matters
If you are between twenty-five and thirty-five years old and only attended the first 12 years of government schooling, you might be experiencing some trouble with advancing your career beyond the point of asking “you want to super size that?” I’m not saying this is true of everyone, but there are a lot of people out there that have been severely let down by government schools and I, as a property tax payer, feel like I haven’t gotten my money’s worth as property taxes provide most of the funds used by government schools.
Who I’m really concerned about are our current high school graduates and the kids in their young twenties that are duped into borrowing money to attend all of these “diploma mills” disguised as private colleges and the Internet schools promising a four-year education in two and one-half years. What do they do, a Vulcan “mind meld’ and transfer a proficiency in the subject matter directly into your cerebral cortex? This is complete and total BS in most cases, resulting in the liberals in government demanding a raise in the minimum wage since the education standards basically suck and they think that the only way to get earning up is to legislate wages.
Adding to the Federal Government’s farcical “no child left behind” program, there is this Sacramento Bee story about California lawmakers limiting the size of textbooks:
My keyword here is “uneducated,” because being born a dumb ass is not a crime, we are all born that way. I certainly was, but I had a capacity to learn and I’ve used it with various levels of success in the past forty-five years.
If you are uneducated and over the age of thirty-five, your condition is most likely your own fault (with all due respect to learning disabled individuals) because until the late 1970’s or early 1980’s, successfully attending the minimum of 12 years of our government schools (our so called free public education) was more than adequate to prepare you for employment and dealing with life’s experiences. In addition, attending a quality four-year college or university certainly served to help matters
If you are between twenty-five and thirty-five years old and only attended the first 12 years of government schooling, you might be experiencing some trouble with advancing your career beyond the point of asking “you want to super size that?” I’m not saying this is true of everyone, but there are a lot of people out there that have been severely let down by government schools and I, as a property tax payer, feel like I haven’t gotten my money’s worth as property taxes provide most of the funds used by government schools.
Who I’m really concerned about are our current high school graduates and the kids in their young twenties that are duped into borrowing money to attend all of these “diploma mills” disguised as private colleges and the Internet schools promising a four-year education in two and one-half years. What do they do, a Vulcan “mind meld’ and transfer a proficiency in the subject matter directly into your cerebral cortex? This is complete and total BS in most cases, resulting in the liberals in government demanding a raise in the minimum wage since the education standards basically suck and they think that the only way to get earning up is to legislate wages.
Adding to the Federal Government’s farcical “no child left behind” program, there is this Sacramento Bee story about California lawmakers limiting the size of textbooks:
“Lawmakers voted Thursday to ban school districts from purchasing textbooks longer than 200 pages.
The bill, believed to be the first of its kind nationwide, was hailed by supporters as a way to revolutionize education.
Critics lambasted Assembly Bill 756 as silly.
"This bill is really the epitome of micromanagement," said Assemblyman Keith Richman, R-Northridge. "(It's) absolutely ridiculous." ...
But Assemblywoman Jackie Goldberg, a Los Angeles Democrat who chairs the Assembly Education Committee, said critics are thinking too narrowly…
"Our problem in California is not the size of textbooks, it's that we have large achievement gaps that need to be closed," he said.”
Huummmmm…“Large achievement gaps”--must be the textbooks are too big...
It seems to me that the solution isn’t that they need smaller textbooks, they need to teach more of what is in the big fat textbooks that they already have.
Things Could Be Getting Warmer
(but not the way you think)
If you listen to the media, in addition to hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, and tsunamis, we should all be preparing to die from global warming. “Global warming this” and “global warming that”—I’m sick of false experts and scientists that know nothing about meteorological issues beating me over the head with global warming.
If you want to worry about the disaster du jour, the latest thing is…
VOLCANOES!
Well, being the internet nerd that I am, I’m on the E-mail alert listing from the Volcano Live web site. You aught to go check out the work of researcher John.Seach at his site.
You might think that Kilauea in Hawaii and Mt. St. Helens in Washington State are the only potential problem volcanoes here in the US. Then you’d be WRONG, because there are actually 169 active volcanoes in the US and Mariannas territory.
The good news for me and my family is that all of the potential problem volcanoes are located far away from us in Alaska, California, Washington, Oregon, and Hawaii. I didn’t realize that there were so many in the northwest.
And finally, the reason I opened this posting by mentioning global warming is this—if the Earth is beginning an increased period of volcanic activity (it is cyclic, you know), then running around hysterically passing Kyoto Treaties and changing the law saying the kind of Freon we use in our car air conditioners is going to accomplish NOTHING. Remember how much ash and other crap that Mt. Pinatubo blasted into the sky in the Philippines back in 1991? I do, because I was trying to learn to fly an airplane and half the time the visibility was insufficent to allow a student to fly solo.
If VOC’s and aerosol gasses are responsible for global warming, we’re all in for a good dose of it as a result of NATURAL CAUSES. And then, of course, there is the possibility of atmospheric change because of sunlight being reduced by all of the ash. Then all of the nay-sayers and pseudo-scientists will start running around screaming about something else…
GLOBAL COOLING…now where’s my heavy coat…
If you listen to the media, in addition to hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, and tsunamis, we should all be preparing to die from global warming. “Global warming this” and “global warming that”—I’m sick of false experts and scientists that know nothing about meteorological issues beating me over the head with global warming.
If you want to worry about the disaster du jour, the latest thing is…
VOLCANOES!
Well, being the internet nerd that I am, I’m on the E-mail alert listing from the Volcano Live web site. You aught to go check out the work of researcher John.Seach at his site.
You might think that Kilauea in Hawaii and Mt. St. Helens in Washington State are the only potential problem volcanoes here in the US. Then you’d be WRONG, because there are actually 169 active volcanoes in the US and Mariannas territory.
The good news for me and my family is that all of the potential problem volcanoes are located far away from us in Alaska, California, Washington, Oregon, and Hawaii. I didn’t realize that there were so many in the northwest.
And finally, the reason I opened this posting by mentioning global warming is this—if the Earth is beginning an increased period of volcanic activity (it is cyclic, you know), then running around hysterically passing Kyoto Treaties and changing the law saying the kind of Freon we use in our car air conditioners is going to accomplish NOTHING. Remember how much ash and other crap that Mt. Pinatubo blasted into the sky in the Philippines back in 1991? I do, because I was trying to learn to fly an airplane and half the time the visibility was insufficent to allow a student to fly solo.
If VOC’s and aerosol gasses are responsible for global warming, we’re all in for a good dose of it as a result of NATURAL CAUSES. And then, of course, there is the possibility of atmospheric change because of sunlight being reduced by all of the ash. Then all of the nay-sayers and pseudo-scientists will start running around screaming about something else…
GLOBAL COOLING…now where’s my heavy coat…
Monday, May 30, 2005
Hair Care Surchage--Racist?
Take a look at this story from The Washington Post about so-called racial discrimination at Dillard’s department store.
“LITTLE ROCK, Ark. -- An Alabama woman is seeking class-action status for a lawsuit against a Dillard's Inc. hair salon for allegedly charging black women more than white women.
Debbie Deavers Sturvisant alleges that a hair salon in a Tuscaloosa, Ala., Dillard's department store charged $35 to wash and set her hair, while white women paid $20 for the same service.
Sturvisant's lawsuit could bring a whole new level of attention to the general practice across the country of charging differently for hair care based on ethnicity.
Officials in Arizona, California, Florida, Maryland and Massachusetts have already addressed race- and sex-based pricing differences at hair salons.
"The stereotype is that all black hair is the same. But that's erroneous, just as all hair for Caucasians is not the same," said Patrick C. Cooper, a Birmingham, Ala., lawyer who plans to represent thousands of affected customers. Sturvisant's lawsuit was filed in February.”
I’m not a hair stylist, but I think that I know a thing or two about haircuts. I easily got twice as many haircuts in the first 20 years of my life than I’ve gotten in the past 25 years, but they all didn’t cost the same—the price depended on where I was getting it cut, who was cutting it, and how long my hair was at the time.
When I lived at home with my parents, my dad, the Army pilot, was a firm believer in “white sidewalls” on the side of a little boys head. I had a fresh $3 haircut, every two weeks, come rain or shine—whether I needed it or not. My Dad did too. If your hair was touching your ears, it was time to visit the barber.
When I went off to college, the only change in my hairstyle was that I grew a thin moustache, but it (the moustache) and my “white sidewalls” haircut had to now conform to the hair standards of the US Navy.
It was a tough life in the late 1970’s, running around with minimal hair while my non-military peers were wandering around with un-kept long hair. There was no reason to go to a fancy hair salon and pay $10 or $15 for a haircut when there was a nearby campus barber shop that would do the job for $7. No shampoo and no conditioner, just little bitty itchy pieces of hair inside your shirt collar when it was all over with. Black, white, straight hair or curly, the price was the same because the time it takes to deliver a nice scalping is the same regardless of skin color.
Times have changed today and there are fewer options in the way of the old classic barber shops for men. Now you have to run the gauntlet of the “unisex” salons and witness women in all states of hairstyle disarray, heads festooned with foil strips and curlers, some looking like drowned poodles as you try to avert your eyes to avoid laughing or being turned to stone in a manner similar to being caught looking at Medusa (the Greek chick with the head full of snakes.)
It’s not uncommon for a woman to pay over $100 for a haircut. Of course, by haircut I don’t just mean getting their hair cut. Noooo, I mean a “Styling.” Shampoo, conditioner, clip, cut, trim, layers, highlights, roots, overall color, pedicure, manicure, it’s a wonder there is anything left of you when you get through spending THREE HOURS in a hair salon. What could possibly take so long?
And ethnic people (I’m trying to be sensitive here…) do some even weirder stuff to their hair. If they have curly hair they want it straight. Relaxers, straighteners, braiding, funky colors like gold and orange, there are shops out there that specialize in the alchemy that is required to deal with the hair of African Americans.
So where’s the beef? I would no more walk into “Lacrisha’s Caribbean Braid Shop” asking to have my “ears lowered” than these silly bitches need to be hiking into a salon in an Alabama Dillard’s and complaining about the prices.
There is obviously a reason that the prices are different, but racial discrimination, in the negative sense, is not it. Being the insensitive asshole that I am, my solution would be to raise all of the prices from $20 up to $35 and tell everyone to go to hell if they didn't like it. Of course I’d probably be out of business in six months and everyone, black and white, would be wandering back down to Lacrisha’s for some “corn rows.”
So the staff of the Dillard’s salon doesn’t do Dippidy Do and Afro Sheen, and takes a little longer to do a nice Afro. Are they legally required to go out and recruit someone specializing in ethnic hairstyles in order to avoid litigation?
I say not, but I’m just an ignorant Redneck, what do I know about haircuts?
“LITTLE ROCK, Ark. -- An Alabama woman is seeking class-action status for a lawsuit against a Dillard's Inc. hair salon for allegedly charging black women more than white women.
Debbie Deavers Sturvisant alleges that a hair salon in a Tuscaloosa, Ala., Dillard's department store charged $35 to wash and set her hair, while white women paid $20 for the same service.
Sturvisant's lawsuit could bring a whole new level of attention to the general practice across the country of charging differently for hair care based on ethnicity.
Officials in Arizona, California, Florida, Maryland and Massachusetts have already addressed race- and sex-based pricing differences at hair salons.
"The stereotype is that all black hair is the same. But that's erroneous, just as all hair for Caucasians is not the same," said Patrick C. Cooper, a Birmingham, Ala., lawyer who plans to represent thousands of affected customers. Sturvisant's lawsuit was filed in February.”
I’m not a hair stylist, but I think that I know a thing or two about haircuts. I easily got twice as many haircuts in the first 20 years of my life than I’ve gotten in the past 25 years, but they all didn’t cost the same—the price depended on where I was getting it cut, who was cutting it, and how long my hair was at the time.
When I lived at home with my parents, my dad, the Army pilot, was a firm believer in “white sidewalls” on the side of a little boys head. I had a fresh $3 haircut, every two weeks, come rain or shine—whether I needed it or not. My Dad did too. If your hair was touching your ears, it was time to visit the barber.
When I went off to college, the only change in my hairstyle was that I grew a thin moustache, but it (the moustache) and my “white sidewalls” haircut had to now conform to the hair standards of the US Navy.
It was a tough life in the late 1970’s, running around with minimal hair while my non-military peers were wandering around with un-kept long hair. There was no reason to go to a fancy hair salon and pay $10 or $15 for a haircut when there was a nearby campus barber shop that would do the job for $7. No shampoo and no conditioner, just little bitty itchy pieces of hair inside your shirt collar when it was all over with. Black, white, straight hair or curly, the price was the same because the time it takes to deliver a nice scalping is the same regardless of skin color.
Times have changed today and there are fewer options in the way of the old classic barber shops for men. Now you have to run the gauntlet of the “unisex” salons and witness women in all states of hairstyle disarray, heads festooned with foil strips and curlers, some looking like drowned poodles as you try to avert your eyes to avoid laughing or being turned to stone in a manner similar to being caught looking at Medusa (the Greek chick with the head full of snakes.)
It’s not uncommon for a woman to pay over $100 for a haircut. Of course, by haircut I don’t just mean getting their hair cut. Noooo, I mean a “Styling.” Shampoo, conditioner, clip, cut, trim, layers, highlights, roots, overall color, pedicure, manicure, it’s a wonder there is anything left of you when you get through spending THREE HOURS in a hair salon. What could possibly take so long?
And ethnic people (I’m trying to be sensitive here…) do some even weirder stuff to their hair. If they have curly hair they want it straight. Relaxers, straighteners, braiding, funky colors like gold and orange, there are shops out there that specialize in the alchemy that is required to deal with the hair of African Americans.
So where’s the beef? I would no more walk into “Lacrisha’s Caribbean Braid Shop” asking to have my “ears lowered” than these silly bitches need to be hiking into a salon in an Alabama Dillard’s and complaining about the prices.
There is obviously a reason that the prices are different, but racial discrimination, in the negative sense, is not it. Being the insensitive asshole that I am, my solution would be to raise all of the prices from $20 up to $35 and tell everyone to go to hell if they didn't like it. Of course I’d probably be out of business in six months and everyone, black and white, would be wandering back down to Lacrisha’s for some “corn rows.”
So the staff of the Dillard’s salon doesn’t do Dippidy Do and Afro Sheen, and takes a little longer to do a nice Afro. Are they legally required to go out and recruit someone specializing in ethnic hairstyles in order to avoid litigation?
I say not, but I’m just an ignorant Redneck, what do I know about haircuts?
Paul Krugman Is An Insensitive Idiot
Did I mention that I think that NY Times editorialist Paul Krugman is an idiot?
Yeah, I re-read my headline, and I guess that I just did…and in Sunday’s NY Times Op Ed piece, Krugman provides an ample example of why I hold this belief--AGAIN. I think that I mentioned Krugman’s mental capacity earlier this month in a slightly less polite manner.
Here is a sample of his latest blithering:
“One of the more bizarre aspects of the Iraq war has been President Bush's repeated insistence that his generals tell him they have enough troops. Even more bizarrely, it may be true - I mean, that his generals tell him that they have enough troops, not that they actually have enough. An article in yesterday's Baltimore Sun explains why.
The article tells the tale of John Riggs, a former Army commander, who "publicly contradicted Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld by arguing that the Army was overstretched in Iraq and Afghanistan" - then abruptly found himself forced into retirement at a reduced rank, which normally only happens as a result of a major scandal.
The truth, of course, is that there aren't nearly enough troops. "Basically, we've got all the toys, but not enough boys," a Marine major in Anbar Province told The Los Angeles Times.”
Why can’t the NY Times and its editorial staff take a few days off once in a while from the arduous task of endlessly bashing the military and its Commander-In-Chief, President Bush?
It is Memorial Day, after all, you know? We’re supposed to be honoring our military and our veterans, not endless debating their value and the decision making ability of its leadership.
The press keeps on trying to armchair quarterback our military’s operations, even though virtually none of the writers have ever set foot on a military base, except possibly to buy cheep beer or go to an air show.
Apparently the media really doesn’t want us to conduct any military operations overseas, they just want the better paying government jobs made available for “working families.”
If one single soldier is injured or killed, and if one single civilian is killed or displaced, then our actions are considered to be “the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time.
Let’s take Iraq as an example.
We could have avoided any US military casualties and just gone in and Nuked the shit out of Baghdad and Fallujah—turned most of Iraq into a giant silicone glass parking lot for a new Super Wal Mart and a big BP gas station.
Once the first mushroom cloud had disipated, the media would have melted down in a fit of eye rolling, salivating, hand-wringing. I agree that that method of prosecution of the war would have been overkill, but hey, the Times and Ted Koppel wouldn’t be doing a monthly body count over the US troop losses right now and the debate over troop levels would be mute.
Instead, we conducted a precision air attack that lasted a few weeks and softened everything up before our ground forces went in. As a result of being so sensitive to avoiding civilian collateral damage, we now have to sit around while the Saudi and Syrian “insurgents” and former members of Saddam’s Bathist Republican Guard “chicken shit” coward brigades take pot shots at our military and kill hundreds of innocent civilians. And yet the media blames our military for the current state of affairs in Iraq.
Following the air strikes two years ago, we also could have vacated our military out of their cushy deployments in Germany and South Korea and covered Iraq up with troops--probably gotten a half million personnel into the region within six months of the initial campaign, but we didn’t. And again, the media would have screamed bloody murder. “Abandoning our Allies” the headlines would have read. “Look at all of the disgruntaled solders” would have been the lead in for the evening news.
Yes, with an all voluntary Army you still have some half hearted, even half-assed participants. Some join just looking for the enlistment bonus and the college tuition. Some are really mean bastards that like drowning cats and shooting stray dogs. Fortunately, the majority are proud, honorable Americans that wish to serve our country and understand that in order to function as the world's police force you are required to break some things and kill some people.
What the men and women serving in the armed forces and the families of those lost in our efforts should not have to endure is a hostile press that diminishes the apparent value of their contribution, all in a politically motivated temper tantrum.
The media just doesn’t get it when it comes to the military, and they don’t play fair when it comes to their news coverage and editorial commentary.
I’m really sick of it, aren’t you?
Yeah, I re-read my headline, and I guess that I just did…and in Sunday’s NY Times Op Ed piece, Krugman provides an ample example of why I hold this belief--AGAIN. I think that I mentioned Krugman’s mental capacity earlier this month in a slightly less polite manner.
Here is a sample of his latest blithering:
“One of the more bizarre aspects of the Iraq war has been President Bush's repeated insistence that his generals tell him they have enough troops. Even more bizarrely, it may be true - I mean, that his generals tell him that they have enough troops, not that they actually have enough. An article in yesterday's Baltimore Sun explains why.
The article tells the tale of John Riggs, a former Army commander, who "publicly contradicted Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld by arguing that the Army was overstretched in Iraq and Afghanistan" - then abruptly found himself forced into retirement at a reduced rank, which normally only happens as a result of a major scandal.
The truth, of course, is that there aren't nearly enough troops. "Basically, we've got all the toys, but not enough boys," a Marine major in Anbar Province told The Los Angeles Times.”
Why can’t the NY Times and its editorial staff take a few days off once in a while from the arduous task of endlessly bashing the military and its Commander-In-Chief, President Bush?
It is Memorial Day, after all, you know? We’re supposed to be honoring our military and our veterans, not endless debating their value and the decision making ability of its leadership.
The press keeps on trying to armchair quarterback our military’s operations, even though virtually none of the writers have ever set foot on a military base, except possibly to buy cheep beer or go to an air show.
Apparently the media really doesn’t want us to conduct any military operations overseas, they just want the better paying government jobs made available for “working families.”
If one single soldier is injured or killed, and if one single civilian is killed or displaced, then our actions are considered to be “the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time.
Let’s take Iraq as an example.
We could have avoided any US military casualties and just gone in and Nuked the shit out of Baghdad and Fallujah—turned most of Iraq into a giant silicone glass parking lot for a new Super Wal Mart and a big BP gas station.
Once the first mushroom cloud had disipated, the media would have melted down in a fit of eye rolling, salivating, hand-wringing. I agree that that method of prosecution of the war would have been overkill, but hey, the Times and Ted Koppel wouldn’t be doing a monthly body count over the US troop losses right now and the debate over troop levels would be mute.
Instead, we conducted a precision air attack that lasted a few weeks and softened everything up before our ground forces went in. As a result of being so sensitive to avoiding civilian collateral damage, we now have to sit around while the Saudi and Syrian “insurgents” and former members of Saddam’s Bathist Republican Guard “chicken shit” coward brigades take pot shots at our military and kill hundreds of innocent civilians. And yet the media blames our military for the current state of affairs in Iraq.
Following the air strikes two years ago, we also could have vacated our military out of their cushy deployments in Germany and South Korea and covered Iraq up with troops--probably gotten a half million personnel into the region within six months of the initial campaign, but we didn’t. And again, the media would have screamed bloody murder. “Abandoning our Allies” the headlines would have read. “Look at all of the disgruntaled solders” would have been the lead in for the evening news.
Yes, with an all voluntary Army you still have some half hearted, even half-assed participants. Some join just looking for the enlistment bonus and the college tuition. Some are really mean bastards that like drowning cats and shooting stray dogs. Fortunately, the majority are proud, honorable Americans that wish to serve our country and understand that in order to function as the world's police force you are required to break some things and kill some people.
What the men and women serving in the armed forces and the families of those lost in our efforts should not have to endure is a hostile press that diminishes the apparent value of their contribution, all in a politically motivated temper tantrum.
The media just doesn’t get it when it comes to the military, and they don’t play fair when it comes to their news coverage and editorial commentary.
I’m really sick of it, aren’t you?
And We Have A Winner...
Everyone can stop holding their breath—we’ve had our first shark attack in Florida this year:
"Daytona Beach Shores, Fl--Miami man is Volusia County's first shark bite victim of the year.
Alfonso Garcia was swimming in the surf in Daytona Beach Shores yesterday when he was bitten on his left foot.
"The guy was sitting on the ground with his foot up and blood everywhere and I looked over and there was a chunk of his foot taken out," a witness told Local 6 News. "There were teeth rake marks across his toes."
He was taken to a Daytona Beach hospital where he was treated for a minor cut that required stitches. He was released from the hospital a short time later.
Volusia County had the highest number of shark attacks in Florida last year -- three. That's down from the 13 reported in 2003."
I’ve been ranting about the stupidity of the media’s coverage of “shark sightings” and “shark attacks” every year for the past ten years, and I will probably be ranting and writing about this subject every year for the next ten years.
So, it is with a calm head and a great personal understanding of shark behavior that I remind you, AGAIN, that you have a greater chance of being struck by lightning than being killed by a shark.
And of course, if you believe the hysteria and never go to the beach, you can eliminate the risk posed by sharks completely from your life, and that’s OK with me…
Because it leaves a less crowded beach for me to enjoy.
"Daytona Beach Shores, Fl--Miami man is Volusia County's first shark bite victim of the year.
Alfonso Garcia was swimming in the surf in Daytona Beach Shores yesterday when he was bitten on his left foot.
"The guy was sitting on the ground with his foot up and blood everywhere and I looked over and there was a chunk of his foot taken out," a witness told Local 6 News. "There were teeth rake marks across his toes."
He was taken to a Daytona Beach hospital where he was treated for a minor cut that required stitches. He was released from the hospital a short time later.
Volusia County had the highest number of shark attacks in Florida last year -- three. That's down from the 13 reported in 2003."
I’ve been ranting about the stupidity of the media’s coverage of “shark sightings” and “shark attacks” every year for the past ten years, and I will probably be ranting and writing about this subject every year for the next ten years.
So, it is with a calm head and a great personal understanding of shark behavior that I remind you, AGAIN, that you have a greater chance of being struck by lightning than being killed by a shark.
And of course, if you believe the hysteria and never go to the beach, you can eliminate the risk posed by sharks completely from your life, and that’s OK with me…
Because it leaves a less crowded beach for me to enjoy.
Sunday, May 29, 2005
Writing For The NY Times = Loosing your Mind
Leave it to the NY Times to continue to bash the military on Memorial Day Weekend. What complete %$#@& idiots and partisan hacks their editorial writers are.
Today’s headline reads ”The Death Spiral of The Volunteer Army.”
“Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld likes to talk about transforming America's military. But the main transformation he may leave behind is a catastrophic falloff in recruitment for the country's vital ground fighting forces: the Army and the Marine Corps. The recruitment chain that has given the United States highly qualified, highly skilled and highly motivated ground forces for the three decades since the government abandoned the draft has started to break down.
This is astonishing, even allowing for the administration's failure to prepare Americans honestly for how long and difficult the occupation of Iraq would be. There are over 60 million American men and women between 18 and 35, the age group sought by Army recruiters. Getting the 80,000 or so new volunteers the Army needs to enlist each year ought not to be such a daunting challenge. There are obvious attractions to joining the world's most powerful, prestigious and best-equipped ground fighting forces, and in so doing qualifying for valuable benefits like college tuition aid.”
So think about this story with me for a minute…
What exactly would the NY Times propose that the military do to improve their image?
Would they have the Army stop fighting “the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time “and start collecting money for “defense funding” while handing out boxes of doughnuts wearing funny hats with the Shriners on urban streets every weekend?
Should the Marines start building houses for the homeless with Habitat for Humanity?
Maybe providing a free tire rotation and oil change at local recruitment centers would help?
If they can’t improve their image and get recruiting numbers up, is the Times suggesting that they restart the draft? Remember last fall when the media was full of rumors that Bush and the mean old Republicans were going to start drafting again?
I say that the media has been conducting a conscious campaign against the US military, and this article, posing with fake concern asking serious questions about recruitment efforts, is actually a smirking declaration of their preliminary victory in their private “war” against the war-making powers of our government.
Finally, the Times inadvertently takes credit for the recruiting problem with this paragraph:
“Why this is happening is no mystery. Two years of hearing about too few troops on the ground, inadequate armor, extended tours of duty and accelerated rotations back into combat have taken their toll, discouraging potential enlistees and their parents. The citizen-soldiers of the Guard and Reserves have suddenly become full-time warriors. Nor has it helped that when abuse scandals have erupted, the Pentagon has seemed quicker to punish lower-ranking soldiers than top commanders and policy makers. This negative cycle now threatens to feed on itself. Fewer recruits will mean more stress on those now in uniform and more grim reports reaching hometowns across America.”
They’re damn right that “two years of hearing about too few troops on the ground, inadequate armor…” might be having some effect on recruiting. The media has become professional armchair quarterbacks, injecting their opinions into every detail of the war on terrorism—enjoying the reporting of each and every road-side bombing and jubilantly reporting every injury and death with a pompus “we told you so attitude.”
They revel in screaming “oh my gosh, the Reserves and National Guard are actually having to go out and fight” rather than sit at home collecting their generous part-time paychecks to do a couple weeks of time in the summer and one weekend each month.
Yes, the current deployment schedule is tough, but at no place in any of these type articles do they ever bother to mention that the reduction in our armed forces occurred during Bill Clinton’s eight years of service as Commander-in-Chief, a reduction from 1.8 million down to 1.2 million soldiers—accompanied by parallel cuts in spending for not so insignificant things like armor, is the reason that we are where we are today.
I place the low troop levels and supposed inadequate armoring squarely on the shoulders of the pantyhose-commander-in-chief Bill Clinton, not George Bush.
What Partisan, Lying Idiots...
Today’s headline reads ”The Death Spiral of The Volunteer Army.”
“Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld likes to talk about transforming America's military. But the main transformation he may leave behind is a catastrophic falloff in recruitment for the country's vital ground fighting forces: the Army and the Marine Corps. The recruitment chain that has given the United States highly qualified, highly skilled and highly motivated ground forces for the three decades since the government abandoned the draft has started to break down.
This is astonishing, even allowing for the administration's failure to prepare Americans honestly for how long and difficult the occupation of Iraq would be. There are over 60 million American men and women between 18 and 35, the age group sought by Army recruiters. Getting the 80,000 or so new volunteers the Army needs to enlist each year ought not to be such a daunting challenge. There are obvious attractions to joining the world's most powerful, prestigious and best-equipped ground fighting forces, and in so doing qualifying for valuable benefits like college tuition aid.”
So think about this story with me for a minute…
What exactly would the NY Times propose that the military do to improve their image?
Would they have the Army stop fighting “the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time “and start collecting money for “defense funding” while handing out boxes of doughnuts wearing funny hats with the Shriners on urban streets every weekend?
Should the Marines start building houses for the homeless with Habitat for Humanity?
Maybe providing a free tire rotation and oil change at local recruitment centers would help?
If they can’t improve their image and get recruiting numbers up, is the Times suggesting that they restart the draft? Remember last fall when the media was full of rumors that Bush and the mean old Republicans were going to start drafting again?
I say that the media has been conducting a conscious campaign against the US military, and this article, posing with fake concern asking serious questions about recruitment efforts, is actually a smirking declaration of their preliminary victory in their private “war” against the war-making powers of our government.
Finally, the Times inadvertently takes credit for the recruiting problem with this paragraph:
“Why this is happening is no mystery. Two years of hearing about too few troops on the ground, inadequate armor, extended tours of duty and accelerated rotations back into combat have taken their toll, discouraging potential enlistees and their parents. The citizen-soldiers of the Guard and Reserves have suddenly become full-time warriors. Nor has it helped that when abuse scandals have erupted, the Pentagon has seemed quicker to punish lower-ranking soldiers than top commanders and policy makers. This negative cycle now threatens to feed on itself. Fewer recruits will mean more stress on those now in uniform and more grim reports reaching hometowns across America.”
They’re damn right that “two years of hearing about too few troops on the ground, inadequate armor…” might be having some effect on recruiting. The media has become professional armchair quarterbacks, injecting their opinions into every detail of the war on terrorism—enjoying the reporting of each and every road-side bombing and jubilantly reporting every injury and death with a pompus “we told you so attitude.”
They revel in screaming “oh my gosh, the Reserves and National Guard are actually having to go out and fight” rather than sit at home collecting their generous part-time paychecks to do a couple weeks of time in the summer and one weekend each month.
Yes, the current deployment schedule is tough, but at no place in any of these type articles do they ever bother to mention that the reduction in our armed forces occurred during Bill Clinton’s eight years of service as Commander-in-Chief, a reduction from 1.8 million down to 1.2 million soldiers—accompanied by parallel cuts in spending for not so insignificant things like armor, is the reason that we are where we are today.
I place the low troop levels and supposed inadequate armoring squarely on the shoulders of the pantyhose-commander-in-chief Bill Clinton, not George Bush.
What Partisan, Lying Idiots...
