Post Scripts

by Jack

The markets across the board were generally flat today, despite the dire predictions from democrat lawmakers that the sky is falling. It seems the market either doesn’t believe them or they have bigger concerns to worry about.   Over the course of the year the market shows an economy on the mend, but ever so slowly. If you look at the chart, and only the chart, you would say the economy is absolutely improving. The chart can’t lie, right?  No, but it also doesn’t tell the whole truth.

What happens when the gov infusion of $85 billion dollars a month stops? That huge amount of money every month has been feeding the stock market and the mega corporations that it represents.  Let’s be clear on this point, for the last three plus years it’s been that $85 billion dollars a month in cotton money that is 100% backed by the federal government’s promise to take it from you that’s been driving the market.    

I’m sure hoping you have the extra money to pay it back?  Because federal government is betting our collective future on it.    Can you afford to pay your share, which is roughly about $52,885 as of today?  I can’t. 

The feds are charging you interest on your debt and that causes your bill to go up every day.   Isn’t it great that they have so much trust in your ability to earn money and pay yuor debts?    And because they have so much confidence in you to pay they have plans for you to be stuck with a whole lot more debt in the coming months and years.   You are going to pay it, right?   All those in favor of paying and paying signify by voting democrate.

Let me leave you with this final thought;  No matter how much they spend (for you) you are obligated to pay it back and remember, the stock market is literally hanging by a thread if you don’t.   Why you, you wonder?   Well who else Bunky?    The government doesn’t earn one damn dime, they take everything they spend from the pockets of the people, whether you call it a corporate tax, an income tax, sales tax or fees, etc.,  it’s all something that is deducted from your net income.    Gov. can’t create wealth they can only spend it; they are a non-profit on steroids! Thank you for holding up the stock market with your credit card.

Posted by Tina

How high on your priorities list for California government spending is education? What about hydrogen stations for the handful of cars currently on the road? Unless the plan is to force hydrogen cars on all of California by next year this expenditure is seriously out of whack:

California is spending nearly $15 million to build 10 hydrogen fueling stations, even though just 227 hydrogen-powered vehicles exist in the state today.

It’s a hefty bet on the future, given that government officials have been trying for nine years, with little success, to get automakers to build more hydrogen cars.

The project is part of a sprawling but little-known state program that packs a powerful financial punch: It spent $1.6 billion last year on a myriad of energy-efficiency and alternative-energy projects.

Even as California has scaled back education, law enforcement and assistance to the disabled in this era of financial stress, the energy program has continued unrestrained and is expected to grow significantly in coming years.

I expect silence from a couple of our critics. When Democrats are shown to be callous and unconcerned about the very things they continually pretend to champion, like kids and education or the disabled, they stay mum…the Democrat Party can do no wrong.

A better approach would be balanced and would meet the high priority needs first. Education, the disabled, and law enforcement first and when policy creates more business and therefore more revenue, then these special interest projects can be considered. Kids educations, the needs of the disabled, and the safety of our streets should not be sacrificed on the altar of the green energy lobby and their green freak political allies in government.

Posted by Tina

If you were starting a new project or business would you look for the most complex possible model or would you look for a simple plan? Most people would recognize that a simple plan, with well defined parameters and goals would afford the best possible chance to reach a positive outcome. The more complex the model the more chances there are for missteps and mistakes. The more complex the plan the more confusion and delay there is for those attempting to execute it. The more confusion, mistakes, missteps, and delay the more expensive the project becomes. No business person would purposely design a complex business model. He would know instinctively that a complex plan is a recipe for failure. After seeing this chart I have to ask…what was the Obama administration thinking when it designed the Affordable Care Act? What was the Reid Pelosi Congress thinking?

I see a plan that will cause taxes to rise and cost the American taxpayer trillions over time.

I see a plan that will add greatly to our already massive debt.

I see a plan that is ripe for fraud and abuse.

I see a plan that is impossible to understand or execute opening citizens to unfair fines and fees.

I see a plan that will cost the American people in terms of jobs and job satisfaction.

I see a plan that will deliver mediocre services and still not result in every American having insurance.

I see a plan that cannot work and that will create chaos, havoc, and great unnecessary expense.

Our leaders have no skin in the big government game. They live in a comphy bubble of privilege. Their lives and livelihoods are not affected by the complex laws they foist onto the public. Their interest in passing such laws is simply to keep their privileged status and the power and stature it affords them. They don’t care whether what they have given us works.

I highly recommend the source article, “Crovitz: ObamaCare’s Serious Complications “, which includes this “ironic” point of interest:

Ironically, President Obama’s former top regulator is among the best known proponents of less complexity. Cass Sunstein, who oversaw regulations for the White House in 2009-12, is the author of “Simpler: The Future of Government,” published earlier this year.

Can we count on Mr Sunstien to recommend scrapping Obamcare? Nah…the Democrats are the party of “do as we say not as we do”. They don’t care if this plan works; the chaos, havoc and expense won’t touch their lives!

by Jack

Anyone hear a fan of the philosopher René Descartes? He was widely regarded as the father of modern philosophy and for that alone I like him and think he’s worth reading.

Descartes challenged the traditional thinking of his day, which was not without some risk. After all, the Inquisition was in full swing and science deferred to religious doctrine or (giving a sign of throat slit). That’s somewhat forgivable since it was the 17th century, but when Muslims believe that way in the 21st century…then, not so much. No point to make here, just an observation.

The rational of Descartes’ time was basically that God gave reason to humans, so any truths reached by humans must be reconcilable with Christian doctrine because of it’s inerrancy. If a contradiction occurs then faith takes precedence, because philosophy is the servant of theology. St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-74) was the Church’s absolute authority on matters of faith and reason. Aquinas believed that all knowledge had been discovered by by past authorities and it was just a matter of definition of what truth is, from a religious perspective of course.  I kid you not, Aquinas actually believed by his age everything was discovered!  

The idea they knew everything that mattered by the 13th century was one truth that did not stand the test of time. lol  It amazes me he could even think that way, there were so many things unknown!  Back then you couldn’t take a step without being in unknown territory. Aquinas might have been a good Saint, but he had a lot to be desired when it came to healthy skepticism and rational thought.

Descartes was desperate for real knowledge and truth, and he ridiculed ancient wise men like Aristotle for his unsatisfactory explanations on things beyond his ability to know, much less comprehend.   For example Aristotle said stones fall to the ground because they have a propensity to do so!   Don’t laugh, because the great minds of his time accepted this.   But, Descartes’ was well aware that his new way of thinking would draw fire from academics and the Catholic Church which had attempted to discredit a number of visionaries like Johannes Kepler (who accurately figured out the elliptical orbits of the planets) Galileo and Francis Bacon who said most of what Aristotle professed was bunk science.

Descartes Essays of 1637 is introduced with this method for sorting out truth:

1. Accept only that which is clear to your mind. (bogus…that totally subjective to one’s mind)
2. Split large problems into smaller ones. (Better, but not always possible)
3. Argue from the simple to complex. (Much better, logical and sustainable)
4. Check everything carefully when you have finished. (That applies to me more than anyone, as I’m often in a rush to publish and this leads to an occasional mistake. That’s bad because 1 aw shi# wipes out 10 atta-boys every time)

If we last another 500 years, I wonder will the truths we think we know today be exposed as silly and preposterous as Aristotle’s stone example?   Which truths do you think will flunk time’s test? 

Posted by Tina

A report in The Atlantic Wire provides an explanation for the charge that the truckers protest in DC was instigated by a lunatic woman with crazy ideas:

Not all trucker protesters like Truckers Ride for the Constitution group, or the woman who’s become the face of it, Zeeda Andrews. “She pretty much has destroyed things,” said Chris Hemmer, who told The Atlantic Wire that his group originally pitched the idea for the protest. Hemmer, of the National Gun Association and the Truckers To Shut Down America Facebook page, said that Andrews, the main media contact for Truckers Ride for the Constitution (formerly also known as Truckers to Shut Down America), is “out there,” and not doing the movement any favors. A 18-wheeled movement that was meant to protest fuel prices has been turned into one protesting President Obama, the government shutdown, and a number of conspiracy theories.

This may explain the low turnout…could be America’s truckers didn’t want to be associated with Zeeda Andrews.

Posted by Tina

Mark Stein, in his stylish way, takes a look at the National Park closings and tactics used by the National Park Service to intimidate and threaten ordinary citizens. We have posted about these events but not with quite the depth or the history Mark brings to the subject. I had to share a bit of that history as it relates to the sorry events going on in Americas Parks.

OC Register:

If Magna Carta is a landmark in its concept of individual rights, the Forest Charter played an equivalent role in advancing the concept of the commons, the public space. Repealing various restrictions by his predecessors, Henry II opened the royal forests to the freemen of England, granted extensive grazing and hunting rights and eliminated the somewhat severe penalty of death for taking the King’s venison. The NPS have not yet fried anyone for taking King Barack’s deer, but it is somewhat sobering to reflect that an English peasant enjoyed more freedom on the Sovereign’s land in the 13th century than a freeborn American does on “the people’s land” in the 21st century.

Mark Stein may be one of Americas most valuable treasures!

Posted by Tina

It’s no surprise that citizens have discovered that the so-called “Affordable Care Act” was sold to the public with a bunch of promises that turn out to be deceptively false. Scott Johnson writes about the five untruths referencing a similar article in the Weekly Standard, in his Powerline piece. Here are the five things we were promised:

Deception #1: universal coverage

Deception #2: no new taxes on the middle class

Deception #3: annual premium savings of $2,500

Deception #4: no increase in the deficit

Deception #5: you can keep your plan if you like it

In other news today Heritage f=reports that a survey conducted by the Medical Group Management Association (MGMA), a trade group representing multi-physician medical practices found a number of physicians will not participate in the healthcare exchanges:

A majority (55.5 percent) of practices believe the exchanges will have an unfavorable, or very unfavorable, impact on their practice.
Fewer than three in 10 practices (29.2 percent) definitely plan to “participate with any new health insurance product(s) sold” on an exchange, with a majority (56.4 percent) still uncertain.
Of those not participating in the exchanges, the top concern, listed by 64 percent of practices, was “concerns about the administrative and regulatory burdens related to these products.”
More than two in three practices said that reimbursement rates for exchange plans are somewhat lower (36.2 percent) or much lower (33.2 percent) than “average payment rates from all commercial payers in your area”—and these lower reimbursement rates likely explain the lack of robust commitment by physician practices in participating in exchange plans.

This is only one survey but it does lend weight to the idea that Obamacare needs at least another look, if not to be scrapped with legislators starting over.

Scott Johnson puts it another way:

This is my refrain: If only we had a free press, Obamacare would be a bloody, unrelenting scandal, like Abu Ghraib, or Watergate. As it is, it is only business as usual for liberals and liberalism.

I have to agree. If republicans had devised such a failure and favored constituents over the general populace they would have resulted in an endless media hammering.