POLITICAL: It’s the gooferment!


Health Care Through Central Planning: A Helpful Analogy
by Karen Kwiatkowski

*** begin quote ***

We have examples – ophthalmology and veterinarian services come to mind first. You can get an eye exam for $50, and then order glasses online for another $20. Overall, that’s less than a pair of running shoes, or a meal out with the family at Applebee’s. The wide variety of eye surgeries available and the competitive and safe nature of these surgeries speak to the working of a freer market than what we see for the rest of our health care. The argument by the statist left and statist right is falsely premised by the idea that the current health care “system” is a free market system, and based on the ideas that free market systems can’t work for health care because people are not all equal in either health, desires for health or finances.

*** end quote ***

We have to keep hitting the gooferment on all fronts. It’s ineffective, inefficient, and screws up everything it touches!

# # # # #

JOBSEARCH: non-off-shorable

Updating my meme for the future generations:

Success for your generation is:

(1) ruthless financial discipline — no bad debt;

(2) a life long interest in learning — education — a degree — they can’t take it away from you;

(3) a white collar job, non-off-shorable, in order to save big bux;

(4) a blue collar skill for hard times — never saw a poor plumber;

(5) one or more internet based businesses — your store is always open;

(6) a free time hobby that generates income; and

(7) a large will-maintained network of people who can “help” you.

# – # – #

It’s become apparent that any job that can be moved off-shore will be. The cheaper wage rates are making it more and more attractive for work to move globally.

Stories about IBM and their “playbook” style consulting can be done from anywhere.

TATA has an order of magnitude in any bidding war. My friend, a TATA-competing consultant, was told by the TATA sales guy that “they just offered contacting manager to drop the last zero off any bid they received”. Over drinks, the contracting manager confided to my friend that is exactly what he did. The contracting manager took my friend’s proposal for 1.2M$ and TATA took the bid at 120K$. The consulting company my friend worked for went out of business shortly after that.

So, when you look for that white collar job, make sure it’s one that will stay here. (Whereever here is for you!)

# # # # #

RANT: GM Government Motors to make cars in China?


GM to form China venture, invest $293 million
Sun Aug 30, 2009 7:33am EDT
By Fang Yan and Edmund Klamann

*** begin quote ***

SHANGHAI (Reuters) – General Motors said on Sunday it has agreed to set up a light commercial vehicle production venture with major Chinese automaker FAW Group, with total investment of 2 billion yuan ($293 million).

The 50-50 joint venture, based in the northeast China city of Changchun in Jilin province, will make light-duty trucks and vans, GM said in a statement.

*** end quote ***

Bet they will have the UAW representing the workers? Not!

Hey, it’s only 293M$ of our tax money.

Glad the gooferment is branching out. From it’s Constitutionally mandated functions.

Now you see the meaning of Fascism. Oh, I mean gooferment – business cooperation.

How’s that “change” working out for you?

# # # # #

POLITICAL: If Health Care, why not sports?


Public Option Sports
by Phil Maymin

*** begin quote ***

The only conclusion one can reach from all this is public options are of course a great idea. They should also be applied to sports.

Sports and health care? Are the two even comparable in terms of impact on the economy?

They are. We pay about as much for health insurance as we do for sports. Health insurance companies had total revenue of $405 billion in 2007, according to the Highline Data Health Industry Aggregate. Total sports revenue, including the NBA, NFL, NHL, MBA and golf, are now around $400 billion a year, according to Plunkett Research, Ltd.

*** end quote ***

Makes “perfect sense”!

As a matter of fact, when these SOCIALISTS are talking about NATIONALIZING healthcare, just substitute in any other industry.

If I have a “RIGHT” to healthcare, don’t I have a “RIGHT” to food?

It’s absurd.

But follow it to its logical extreme and you wind up back in the USSR.

And, we all know how that turned out.

I just shake my head at our collective foolishness!

Vote them all out. Speak out against this radical left into Socialism!

# # # # #

POLITICAL: Public pensions are really robbery!


Golden Parachutes for Public Retirees Will Sink Us All, Experts Say
by Teri Sforza

*** begin quote ***

Recently, the chief egghead for the gargantuan California Public Employees Retirement System said the same.

“I don’t want to sugarcoat anything,” said Ron Seeling, the CalPERS chief actuary, according to a story in the Capitol Weekly. “We are facing decades without significant turnarounds in assets, decades of – what I, my personal words, nobody else’s – unsustainable pension costs of between 25 percent of pay for a miscellaneous plan and 40 to 50 percent of pay for a safety plan (police and firefighters) … unsustainable pension costs. We’ve got to find some other solutions.”

*** end quote ***

No doubt, while the article studies California, every one shares this problem.


Private industry has long ago switched to the 401K.

Why not the public sector?

Then we wouldn’t care how much they got at retirement. And we wouldn’t be a risk for it.

# # # # #

RANT: Responding to the Kennedy funeral

>I was struck this past week by the positive images and stories being told by the family and friends of the late US Senator Edward M. Kennedy. >His life knew more than its share of tragedy, ambiguity, and even disgrace. >But his life also had lots of good stuff to counterbalance all the drama
I was struck how the rich and powerful are able to skate away from the tragedy they cause. Mark Steyn called it “Airbrushing out Mary Jo Kopechne”. I thought perfectly described it.
I grew up during the Camelot era. A product of Catholic schooling, everyone was enamored of the first Catholic President. Then over time, the inside joke got out. The sordid family history leaked out around the edges. Never an expose. Just an inside joke.
I was shocked — “I’m shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!” Captain Renault in Casablanca — to see Boston’s Cardinal Archbishop in the proceedings. Money talks; principles walk!
I followed the MJK story and an older wiser relative summed it up: “If you did it, you’d be in prison for a long time. But a kennedy, nothing will happen!” He was absolutely right.
Teddy was not a paragon. He was a typical “Liberal”. “Good for thee, but not for me.” He was born with all the advantages wealth could bestow. The womanizing, drugs, drinking, and such wouldn’t be so bad. Bad enough! But mainly self-destructive. He went to new depths when he killed a young girl in a particularly horrifying fashion (i.e., it took her an estimated FIVE hours to drown while Teddy sobered up and covered up)!
Where he really negatively excelled was in his role as “Senator”. He was the classic “Liberal”. He “knew” what was good for us! That ego would drive policy that would impact millions but not him. That’s the egotism of “liberals” that are “superior” to all the little people. He was a person who had it all given to him, and yet pretended to know what we all needed. In a different time, he’d not have survived. Somehow, in ours, he prospered. Guess it’s pretty easy when nothing, even murder, sticks.
My problem with him was that: (1) He masqueraded as a Catholic while active in the pro-abortion movement. That’s called giving scandal. We were always taught that was the worst sin. (2) He proscribed solutions while carefully exempting himself. Do you think he had Massachusetts care like an ordinary taxpayer of his state get mandated? (3) He had a particularly obnoxious habit — lately reported in the “liberal” media as if it were “cute” — of asking “if anyone had heard any good Chappaquiddick jokes”.
No, I wouldn’t call it drama. I would call it the tragedy of a wasted life. And, I fail to see the “good stuff”. He was a poltroon — where he was because of his family money, power, and influence. Like the modern day “super star” athletes, who should thank their lucky stars every morning, he should have been … … better.
Maybe great wealth is a great curse, but he certainly let it carry him down.
I think this is a motivator. No matter how much you are born with, you have to earn it. No matter how little your born with, you can do better.
It makes me sad. But not for the reasons on TV! Sad for what could have been.
# # # # #

RANT: No privacy in Obamacare


August 26, 2009 8:26 PM

Democratic Health Care Bill Divulges IRS Tax Data

Posted by Declan McCullagh

*** begin quote ***

One of the problems with any proposed law that’s over 1,000 pages long and constantly changing is that much deviltry can lie in the details. Take the Democrats’ proposal to rewrite health care policy, better known as H.R. 3200 or by opponents as “Obamacare.” (Here’s our CBS News television coverage.)

Section 431(a) of the bill says that the IRS must divulge taxpayer identity information, including the filing status, the modified adjusted gross income, the number of dependents, and “other information as is prescribed by” regulation. That information will be provided to the new Health Choices Commissioner and state health programs and used to determine who qualifies for “affordability credits.”

*** and ***

Over at the Institute for Policy Innovation (a free-market think tank and presumably no fan of Obamacare), Tom Giovanetti argues that: “How many thousands of federal employees will have access to your records? The privacy of your health records will be only as good as the most nosy, most dishonest and most malcontented federal employee…. So say good-bye to privacy from the federal government. It was fun while it lasted for 233 years.”

*** end quote ***

And, CBS couldn’t possibly have a prejudice!

Please, the article is disingenuous. With a slap at a “free market think tank” as if that disqualifies them from having brought forward an “interesting fact”. THey point out to anyone who can read that the bill ENSURES that your privacy is gone!


How’s “change” working out for you? Me, not so good!

# # # # #