Reinke Faces Life

http://channel-surfing.blogspot.com/2010/11/sad-but-not-surprising.html

Friday, November 05, 2010
Sad, but not surprising UPDATED

*** begin quote ***

MSNBC has suspended host Keith Olbermann indefinitely because he apparently made political donations to three Democratic candidates.

*** end quote ***

And where do the traditional broadcast anchors contribute? You don’t think that ANY of them give money to conservatives or R’s, do you?

The “liberal” media bias is just dishonest. The slants are one thing; the out-and-out hostility to viewpoints not approved by the vast left-wing conspiracy are unacceptable. The folks are voting with their eyeballs.

At one time, “liberal” was a label one could be proud of. A champion of the people. “Classical liberals” opposed the King and force. Modern day little L libertarians trace their roots to these great thinkers.

Now, both “conservatives” and “liberal” joust to be the one in control of the “guns of Gooferment” to tell people how to run their lives. I, no more, want orders from conservatives than I do the liberals.

Let’s cut Gooferment spending 10% across the board. Let’s sell 50 or 100 year bonds to retire the Gooferment debt. Let’s demand that the crooks in DC only spend what is taken in in taxes.

Let’s end the Warfare / Welfare state. And, return to peace.

Isn’t that something that “liberals” and “conservative” can agree on?

# # # # #

>In regard to unemployment, if you need to rely on that to survive

Agreed. Unfortunately, they pitched it as “insurance” and it ain’t. Unemployment is not an uninsurable risk. It’s not random. (Learnt that in the MC eckynomics class; I am after all a fat old white guy injineer with a low index.)

>So let’s agree to disagree.

Agreeably.

>government stands to make a profit. As they have on the bailout money.

So, they stole 10K$ from my wife’s retirement fund to enrich the unions, Wall Street, and the big banks. Then they sell the proceeds of that theft, make a profit, and me as the victim are supposed to be happy about that? If they had been forced to go thru bankruptcy, she would have gotten some money back. Estimates were 25¢ on the dollar. So we got screwed; I’m not happy. It was only a small percentage of her retirement and our portfolio. But it was the principle. By allowing anyone to avoid bankruptcy, the Gooferment took the pressure off the various managements to find a solution. By allowing Leman Brothers to fail but bailing out others, they created a mess. Goldman Sachs was picking winners and losers. Lehman was the biggest GS competitor. Timmy and others were all ex-GS people. It was a raid on the public treasury.

>I know you’ll never agree with me, but that’s my humble opinion.

You’re right about that. I’ve worked on Wall Street and I KNOW how the sleeze think.

>I believe most of today’s unemployment is due to skills gap.
> There are a lot of jobs out there, but individuals don’t fit the profile.

Might be. I think that the unemployment is due to the uncertainty that the Gooferment has introduced.

>I fear those jobs will not be coming back.

Well you could get them back if there were tariffs. But then, like Smoot Hawley, will create a worse Depression. We have to reinvent America. I think we have a natural global advantage in the production of food. So instead of paying farmers not to grow, we need to incentivize the food production process.

>This due to improper planning and reliance on another stipend from uncle
> sam, social security.

Another welfare program designed to transfer control to Washington DC. And, racist, xfer $ from poor minority men to rich white women. And, another mislabeled program; how can you “insure” old age?

>Why is Obamacare socialism when Medicare is a sacred cow?

Both are “socialism”!

>I think the free market is a viable option, with premiums being tax deductable.

I think we should just leave everyone alone to chose what they want and STOP using the guns of Gooferment to “social engineer”?

>Unfortunately, I do agree the Bush tax cuts must be repealed for the more wealthly americans.

Sorry, but when you take the money away from the rich, who will save and invest?

>Its an effective way to deal with the deficit. (Which Bush did wonders to increase.)

Nah, the Lafer curve, and the fact that you’re not dealing with idiots, will frustrate you. Lowering taxes will generate more revenue as it frees up people locked in by taxes. And, rich people aren’t stupid. How many docs will choose leisure over treating folks when their income is going to exceed 250K. And don’t forget it’s 250k$ on small business, so you’re paying on gross not net of expenses. It’s stupid. So like Maryland found out when they levied a “millionaire’s tax” over ½million, about ½ of their millionaires disappeared. Moved or feathered back their taxable income.

> legacy costs, defense and servicing debt.

I like the idea of a 10% across the board cut every year. But, no one is allowed to impact the citizens. Should drive the bureaucrats nuts!

>All of business is not hurting, this could be a record year on wall

>street. Bonuses are back up and greed is back in vogue.

You know that looting the public treasury is very profitable.

>Additionally, whether Republican or Democratic, I support my government.

That’s where we disagree. I’m a little L libertarian like Jefferson. It’s NOT my government. If we were having a beer, I could go into great detail about why it ain’t. :-)

> I disagree with some legislation, but I know it is a basic

>part of what makes this country great.

No, what makes this country great is liberty. And, then people make the most of it. Then, everything flowed from their “greed”.

# # # # # posted 2010-11-06 20:39

>In regard to unemployment, if you need to rely on that to survive

Agreed. Unfortunately, they pitched it as “insurance” and it ain’t. Unemployment is not an uninsurable risk. It’s not random. (Learnt that in the MC eckynomics class; I am after all a fat old white guy injineer with a low index.)

>So let’s agree to disagree.

Agreeably.

>government stands to make a profit. As they have on the bailout money.

So, they stole 10K$ from my wife’s retirement fund to enrich the unions, Wall Street, and the big banks. Then they sell the proceeds of that theft, make a profit, and me as the victim are supposed to be happy about that? If they had been forced to go thru bankruptcy, she would have gotten some money back. Estimates were 25¢ on the dollar. So we got screwed; I’m not happy. It was only a small percentage of her retirement and our portfolio. But it was the principle. By allowing anyone to avoid bankruptcy, the Gooferment took the pressure off the various managements to find a solution. By allowing Leman Brothers to fail but bailing out others, they created a mess. Goldman Sachs was picking winners and losers. Lehman was the biggest GS competitor. Timmy and others were all ex-GS people. It was a raid on the public treasury.

>I know you’ll never agree with me, but that’s my humble opinion.

You’re right about that. I’ve worked on Wall Street and I KNOW how the sleeze think.

>I believe most of today’s unemployment is due to skills gap.

> There are a lot of jobs out there, but individuals don’t fit the profile.

Might be. I think that the unemployment is due to the uncertainty that the Gooferment has introduced.

>I fear those jobs will not be coming back.

Well you could get them back if there were tariffs. But then, like Smoot Hawley, will create a worse Depression. We have to reinvent America. I think we have a natural global advantage in the production of food. So instead of paying farmers not to grow, we need to incentivize the food production process.

>This due to improper planning and reliance on another stipend from uncle
> sam, social security.

Another welfare program designed to transfer control to Washington DC. And, racist, xfer $ from poor minority men to rich white women. And, another mislabeled program; how can you “insure” old age?

>Why is Obamacare socialism when Medicare is a sacred cow?

Both are “socialism”!

>I think the free market is a viable option, with premiums being tax deductable.

I think we should just leave everyone alone to chose what they want and STOP using the guns of Gooferment to “social engineer”?

>Unfortunately, I do agree the Bush tax cuts must be repealed for the more wealthly americans.

Sorry, but when you take the money away from the rich, who will save and invest?

>Its an effective way to deal with the deficit. (Which Bush did wonders to increase.)

Nah, the Lafer curve, and the fact that you’re not dealing with idiots, will frustrate you. Lowering taxes will generate more revenue as it frees up people locked in by taxes. And, rich people aren’t stupid. How many docs will choose leisure over treating folks when their income is going to exceed 250K. And don’t forget it’s 250k$ on small business, so you’re paying on gross not net of expenses. It’s stupid. So like Maryland found out when they levied a “millionaire’s tax” over ½million, about ½ of their millionaires disappeared. Moved or feathered back their taxable income.

> legacy costs, defense and servicing debt.

I like the idea of a 10% across the board cut every year. But, no one is allowed to impact the citizens. Should drive the bureaucrats nuts!

>All of business is not hurting, this could be a record year on wall

>street. Bonuses are back up and greed is back in vogue.

You know that looting the public treasury is very profitable.

>Additionally, whether Republican or Democratic, I support my government.

That’s where we disagree. I’m a little L libertarian like Jefferson. It’s NOT my government. If we were having a beer, I could go into great detail about why it ain’t. :-)

> I disagree with some legislation, but I know it is a basic

>part of what makes this country great.

No, what makes this country great is liberty. And, then people make the most of it. Then, everything flowed from their “greed”.

# # # # # posted 2010-11-06 20:39

The big question is are Americans “We, The People” or “We, the sheeple”. I haven’t flown since this nonsense started and don’t plan to. I’d suggest that each of us has to decide when enough is enough. As a little L libertarian, I object to the Gooferment infringing upon our rights to supposedly “make us safe”.

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. — Ben Franklin

If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen. — Samuel Adams

Why aren’t we all screaming and boycotting the airlines?

*** begin quote ***

Kathryn Muratore
[address deleted]

October 25, 2010

US Airways
ATTN: Customer Relations
4000 E Sky Harbor Blvd
Phoenix, AZ 85034

Dear Sir or Madam:

I am writing regarding my plans for Christmas travel with my family from Washington, DC to [a town in] CA. I purchased my tickets on your airline – via orbitz.com – about a month ago. However, I just learned that BWI has backscatter scanners as primary screening for all passengers, so I am changing my plans. I was not alerted of this gross invasion of privacy when I purchased my tickets and, having flown out of BWI in June without going through a scanner, so I had no knowledge of this requirement at the time of purchase. I am requesting that you do one of two things in order to keep this customer happy:

1. Refund the entire amount of my ticket so that I can use the money to make alternative arrangements. My ticket # is 03777558XXXXXX and I paid $651.80.

2. Or, cover my expenses to fly to BWI from another airport without the scanners installed so that I can make the flight that I’ve already paid for. For example, I can rent a car one-way (est. $100), drive to Norfolk, VA and catch flight 4084 to Philadelphia at around 1:30 pm, then connect from PHL to BWI on flight 3407. Orbitz has this flight listed at $141. I won’t charge you for the time and inconvenience – just the car, gas, and flight.

My husband will be on the flight from BWI to [a CA airport] on ticket # 03777558XXXXXX and I will be traveling with my baby daughter. Because of his work schedule, he can not commit to any of the alternative travel arrangements that I am considering. This is why, if I don’t get a refund, I want to be on the same flight from BWI to [a CA airport] with him.

I made the same trip in June – from BWI to [a CA airport] – for the funeral of my husband’s maternal grandmother. We hope to see his paternal grandmother this Christmas and for many years to come. Unfortunately, unless the airline industry starts protecting their customer’s human rights, this will be the last time I will fly to California.

I am deeply concerned about the non-choice of a backscatter scan or an enhanced pat-down for my daughter and myself. I dare say that US Air’s complicity in the TSA policy is anti-American, since it violates our Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure, without a warrant and without probable cause. I’m sure that, by buying a ticket from your company, I did not become a suspect in a crime. If I did, then you would also be involved in the conspiracy and would presumably be getting an enhanced pat-down with every ticket sold!

I’ve never been frisked in my life. I don’t intend to be frisked now and I don’t want my daughter to be frisked before her 2nd birthday. And I certainly won’t show a stranger parts of me that I intentionally keep covered with clothing around all other strangers. If US Air doesn’t have the guts to stand up for their customers’ rights, then you don’t deserve any business.

The short-term goal of this letter is to fix the problem of my upcoming holiday travel. But, in the long term, US Air must stand up for what is right. For that reason, I will be making this letter public, and, your response or lack of a response will be public as well. I will state the obvious intention here – to humiliate the travel industry into doing what it ought to have done already: tell the TSA that you know how to protect your customers best and to take their mitts off of us!

Sincerely,
Kathryn Muratore

*** end quote ***

# # # # #

General Motors won’t have to pay federal taxes on up to $50 billion in profit under an unusual provision of its government-funded bailout, giving the car maker an added boost as it prepares to return to the stock market this month.

GM may use the $50 billion in so-called tax-loss carry-forwards to shield that amount of profit from U.S. taxes for up to 20 years.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704462704575590642149103202.html?mod=djemalertNEWS

# – # – #

I’m speechless.

# # # # # posted 2010-11-02 17:36

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/11/01/business/main7011590.shtml

NEW YORK, Nov. 11, 2010
Popular U.S. Tabloids in Trouble?
American Media Inc., Publisher of The National Enquirer, Star, Plans to File for Bankruptcy Protection in 2 Weeks
(AP) Last updated 3:53 p.m. ET

*** begin quote ***

After years of dishing tales of celebrity folly and misfortune, The National Enquirer’s publisher has fallen on hard times of its own.

American Media Inc. plans to seek federal bankruptcy protection in the next two weeks or so. The privately held company, based in Boca

Raton, Fla., announced its intention Monday without sharing any details about its finances.

*** end quote ***

They did save the USA from one lying politician. They should have received a Pulitzer for investigative journalism. But attacking a big Gooferment Socialist with the “D” label is politically incorrect. If they had done it to an “R”, they’d have won.

American needs to clean its house of the “liberal elite”. We can no longer afford the luxury of their muddled thinking and obvious biases.

Sorry, time to grow up!

# # # # #

William Lynch>FJohn Reinke: William asks: Will you join me in committing to vote? Join the Commit to Vote Challenge and inspire your friends to vote

William committed to vote by November 2nd. “I am voting as it is my responsibility as a citizen and I want to protect my interests. “

# – # – #

I’ll vote. Trying to protect everyone’s interests from an out-of-control Gooferment. A citizen exchanges loyalty for protection. The State, “King”, Gooferment, whatever you want to call this mess is NOT protecting me, the average joe six-pack, or the rest of the Sheeple. When you have no choice, it’s like voting in the old USSR. When you have no hope of change, why bother. So I understand staying-at-home. The American experiment is collapsing under the greed of the “Secular Progressive” leadership in both the D’s and the R’s. When the piggy bank is empty, we have to start over again. Argh! Vote, yes; chance that things will improve, zero. Best we can hope for is gridlock.

# # # # # posted 2010-10-28 09:26

http://www.redstate.com/laborunionreport/2010/10/19/armageddon-what-democrats-are-hiding-why-they-are-really-scared/

*** begin quote ***

One example of a company that would likely go out of business is YRC trucking, which employs approximately 35,000 Teamsters. While the freight currently carried by YRC would likely be picked up by other carriers (many of which are non-union), the loss of members (and their dues) would be devastating for the Teamsters and the Democrats.

Right now, before November 2nd, Democrats don’t want voters to know that their union benefactors may further cause the economy to fall further or more companies to close and jobs to be lost. As a result, Democrats are not talking about it on the campaign trail. Instead they’re hoping they can work out a scheme during a lame duck session, sticking taxpayers with another $165 billion union bailout.

*** end quote ***

Seems like every time you turn over a “financial rock”, there’s poop under it. That the politicians and bureaucrats have left for the taxpayer to clean up after. Argh!

# # # # #