PRESS PASS: Drop Out Nation

Last month only 88,000 jobs were created and the PRESS immediately leaped on the “good news” that the unemployment rate declined to 7.6% from 7.7% ignoring the fact 496,000 people dropped out of the labor force. The total “drop out” number has surged from 80,699,000 to 89,967,000 since February 2009.  Sales at retailers also fell significantly last month as higher taxes and energy prices consume more income.  Not surprisingly the consumer confidence index fell to its lowest level in nine months.  Has any of this made the news, and been laid at the door of the President?  Seriously?  What do you think?  Instead what do we get from the Press daily?

Black, black, black, gay, gay, gay, black, black, black, gay, gay, gay.  We get diversionary reporting about “social” issues that deflect from very real problems.  I will say this one last time…  I do not care if you are black, gay, short or tall, white or straight.   These are conditions, not aspirations.  Everyone’s aspiration is economic prosperity and a higher standard of living, not as the Press suggests when it demagogues blackness and gayness as somehow more important than prosperity and happiness and whiteness and straightness.  Who’s racist and sexist here?  Yeah I know – I am…  the Press would not write it if it were not true.

The truth is people are dropping out of the aspirational pursuit of a higher standard of living.  This is a story that should be reported, but sadly is not and the President and his kind are getting a PRESS PASS on the biggest story of our times – DROP OUT NATION.  Too many don’t have to work, or are making conscious decisions to drop out of the work force.

As I said in my last article this is what Mitt should have talked about… using examples of very real people like Sandra and Barbara.

 Sandra (not her name) who works in the same location as my wife, has for the past ten years been out on disability two to three times every year for periods as extensive as eight months.  She is unmarried with five children from five different men.  This fact suggests that she was not so disabled as to take part in a least some physical activity.  She is currently on Food Stamps, WIC, and CA Housing Assistance.  She drives an Escalade and has a free cell phone.  Her current boyfriend is also currently out on disability and not legally in the country.  None of this is a secret.  She is happy to tell you about it.

Barbara (not her name) works for one of my clients.  She is a talented and competent manager.  She is quitting her job at the request of her husband because of tax increases in the State of Illinois.  It turns out that their combined salary puts them in a bracket where the combined Federal and State tax bite eats up her salary.  In other words, they will be better off were she to make $35,000 instead of the $80,000 she gets now.  Their solution is to quit her job so she can manage her husband’s weekend business – where he gets paid cash for the work he performs.  They DO want this kept a secret.  And they are not happy about this at all, but working doesn’t pay for them.

These Sandra and Barbara decisions are made by MILLIONS of people everyday.  Yet the Press does not report on this massive dislocation of work and character.  They continue to keep us in the dark on Drop Out Nation.

KITD FOHS

This stands for Kept In The Dark, Fed Only Horse Shit (as in how mushrooms are treated).

$T2eC16V,!)QE9s3HFdodBRZIOsKk6w~~60_3

It is a classic military arm patch inspired by events from Viet Nam, where air force troops who participated in a 1957 raid on a prison camp were not privy to any of the information about the raid and were sent into a situation with minimal awareness of the potential consequences.

Kinda like the Press today huh?  Maybe I should sell these patches and start a new political party like the “No-Nothing” Party of 19th Century America (look it up).

One Final Note:  David Stockman has written a book about this hoax – you should read it (click on the link below).  He is a pretty smart guy.

http://www.businessinsider.com/david-stockman-weve-been-lied-to-2013-3

 

RIP: Maggie Thatcher

Today marks the passing of a giant in the world of leadership.  M. Thatcher died today at the age of 87.  She, and the recently deceased hero of the left, Mr. Chavez represent opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to freedom and dignity and the approval of the Press and Liberal Left.  She was first and foremost a staunch advocate of freedom and dignity unlike Mr. Chavez.  At the same time she was unlike him when it came to the approval of the Press and Liberal Left.  They adored Mr. Chavez and despised Maggie.

Why?  Maybe it was that Maggie’s Way turned out so much better than their way and that she had no problem pointing that out.  Maggie called it as she saw it.

 “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.”

 “If you just set out to be liked, you would be prepared to compromise on anything at any time, and you would achieve nothing.”

 “No one would remember the Good Samaritan if he’d only had good intentions; he had money as well.”

 “If my critics saw me walking over the Thames they would say it was because I couldn’t swim.”

 You can bet Sean Penn and his Hollywood buddies won’t be at the funeral.  Neither will the liberal feminists.  But they could take lessons from her on what it means to be a woman.  She did it her way with the boys and did it with class, dignity and great effect.  “I am extraordinarily patient, provided I get my own way in the end,” she once remarked.

In the final analysis Mr. Chavez leaves the world a better place because he is gone, Maggie because she was here.

 RIP Maggie.  Say hello to Winston when he greets you at Heaven’s Gate.

 

How to Win the White House: 1

One of our readers asked me to “get real” and talk about what “we” (Republicans, Tea Partiers, Conservatives, businessmen, people of common sense and traditional morals, aka Old Fogies) need to do to get someone – who shares our aspirational worldview – elected to the White House.

My initial response to him was that the probability of winning the White House – for all the reasons outlined by the “good rabbi” (see my last article) – is very slim until something changes.  Mitt Romney had it exactly right with his “47%” assessment of the electorate.  That is why Mitt’s aspirational message fell on deaf ears for 47%’ers.  The 47%’ers in many ways need not aspire because there is little motivation for them to do so.  Given human nature the idea of risk and work is far less compelling than the reality of a guaranteed free lunch.

Mitt’s miscalculation was that he did not go further with his insight and paint a real and accurate picture of the financial and moral corruption rife in our system of transfer payments to the 47%’ers.

 

The 47%’ers

Is there poverty in the US?  Yes, as there is everywhere.  Should there be poverty in a perfect world?  Of course not, but we live now and always in a less than perfect world.  The truth is there are fewer poor today than ever in the US, and in relative per capita terms the poor are three times better off than those under the poverty line of just two generations ago.  In fact the government’s income definition for those under the poverty line does not include transfer payments that averaged $62,000 per person last year (46.2MM people).

How do the 47%’ers live?  Here are a few stats from the US Census Bureau:

  • Eighty percent (80%) of these households have air conditioning
  • Seventy five percent (75%) have a car / truck and 35% have two
  • Seventy percent (70%) have cable or satellite TV
  • Seventy percent (70%) have VCR’s or DVD players
  • Fifty percent have computers and the Internet

And the list goes on.  No… this is not the lap of luxury, but neither is it the dire pronouncements of the progressive liberal democrats.  The truly astonishing statistic is that 98% of the poor reported that their children never went hungry during the year.  All of this is good, or is it?

Depressingly the same report shows that there is very limited upward mobility in this segment of the population and that the principal cause of long-term poverty is the absence of a two parent home and the erosion of the work ethic – conditions precisely perpetuated by government programs.

In other words, all the money in the world won’t solve a moral and ethical problem.  And for the many of the 47%’ers, there’s enough money to stay out of real poverty – as people knew it two generations ago – but not enough to escape it and have hopes of a better future.

 

“Something Changes”

Something must change for a Republican to get elected to the White House.  That “thing” is the condition of the 47%.  It is sad to say but cutting back programs is now necessary.  Too many of the 47%’ers have become “active” in abusing the system and relying on government programs for their daily bread.  Heartless?  So say the opposition.  They paint evil pictures of fat Republicans / Conservatives and we for some reason fail to respond and paint the same and more condemning picture of fat and happy liberals who (1) have little time for improving the lives of the 47%’ers, and (2) make money off the transfer payment programs.

What is truly heartless – and should be hung on the necks of Liberals / Democrats – is the act of condemning these people to a life on the government dole and robbing them of their character in exchange for a few easy dollars to buy their dependable vote.

Mitt should have exposed the system for what it is – a corrupter of society that pits rich against poor.  He should have called out Obama and his like and shown them for what they are – panderers and hypocrites who care only about the poor as a voting bloc.  He should have said to the 47%’ers…  I am your guy, you deserve better than the crumbs they give you.  I will not use you and I will create an environment where you can make your own money, so that in the morning before you go to work you can look in the mirror and hold your head up high.

If we want to win, we need to go to war to win the war for some percentage of the 47%’ers who still feel that risk and work is worth it – not only to put food on the table but to feel pride in achieving their own successes.  You’re right Bill.  Let’s get real.  Are you ready to fight with me?

World Turned Upside Down 6

Is anyone paying attention?  How did we become so uniformed, and worse, so trusting of institutions that clearly exist to perpetuate themselves, instead of serving the PEOPLE.  Let’s talk about the truth of the economy, the culture and the end game.

THE ECONOMY:

The stock market keeps rising daily and we therefore believe that the economy is doing well.  Except it isn’t.  I know I am not a team player when I say this, but the simple truths are:

 1.  The pros in the market know there is no other place to put your money right now.  Therefore prices rise despite the absence of the underlying fundamentals (like revenue growth).

2. Workers are not working because there are truly fewer good jobs and also because THEY DON’T HAVE TO!!!

You need to read Mort Zuckerman on this story… (Click here…)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323393304578364670697613576.html

The bottom line is this…  we are being lied to by the Press, the President and every other yin-yang whose supports this government’s economic plan.  What plan?   The number of Americans unemployed for six months or longer went up by 89,000 in February to a total of 4.8 million. The average duration of unemployment rose to 36.9 weeks, up from 35.3 weeks in January. The labor-force participation rate dropped to 63.5%, the lowest in 30 years. The average workweek is a low 34.5 hours thanks to employers shortening workers’ hours or asking employees to take unpaid leave.  These are facts, not the upside down wishful thinking of the fanatic progressives.

 

THE CULTURE:

In my last post I stated that the problem is not economic.  The problem is in fact, cultural.  Rabbi Steven Pruzansky of Congregation Bnai Yeshurun in New Jersey makes precisely this point far more cogently than I.  You really need to read his thoughts.  Therefore I have posted them in their entirety at the bottom of this page.

The bottom line is this…  There are too few people who buy into the American Dream of hard work, sacrifice and aspiration any more.  Mitt Romney knew this and said as much and was vilified for speaking the truth.  This is a real economic problem that is not going away.  The reality is… the “Occupy” riots across this country in the last two years were mere dress rehearsals for what lies ahead – years of unrest sparked by the increasing discontent of the unsuccessful who want to seize the fruits and the bounty of the successful, and do not appreciate the slow pace of redistribution

 

THE END GAME:

Finally, they (the European Union) are taking people’s SAVINGS in Cyprus (I wrote about this earlier). How long before the same happens to “real countries” like Italy, Spain and France?  How long before it happens here?  When governments exist solely to perpetuate themselves, the people matter little more than as a source of revenue.

This is the path to slavery… or as F. Hayek described it in accurate detail…  The Road to Serfdom…  You should read it…  http://finderscheapers.com/product-price/The-Road-to-Serfdom-F-A-Hayek-0226320553-9780226320557-1GOI77MEPD5

All that we are witnessing now has happened before resulting in war and revolution.  You think I am crazy?  You need to pull your heads out of the sand my friends.  This is very real, as the above stories make all too apparent.

 

The Rabbi…

If only we had Catholics who spoke out like this…

 “The most charitable way of explaining the election results of 2012 is that Americans voted for the status quo – for the incumbent President and for a divided Congress. They must enjoy gridlock, partisanship, incompetence, economic stagnation and avoidance of responsibility. And fewer people voted.

 But as we awake from the nightmare, it is important to eschew the facile explanations for the Romney defeat that will prevail among the chattering classes. Romney did not lose because of the effects of Hurricane Sandy that devastated this area, nor did he lose because he ran a poor campaign, nor did he lose because the Republicans could have chosen better candidates, nor did he lose because Obama benefited from a slight uptick in the economy due to the business cycle.

 Romney lost because he didn’t get enough votes to win.

That might seem obvious, but not for the obvious reasons. Romney lost because the conservative virtues – the traditional American virtues – of liberty, hard work, free enterprise, private initiative and aspirations to moral greatness – no longer inspire or animate a majority of the electorate.

 The simplest reason why Romney lost was because it is impossible to compete against free stuff.

Every businessman knows this; that is why the “loss leader” or the giveaway is such a powerful marketing tool. Obama’s America is one in which free stuff is given away: the adults among the 47,000,000 on food stamps clearly recognized for whom they should vote, and so they did, by the tens of millions; those who – courtesy of Obama – receive two full years of unemployment benefits (which, of course, both disincentivizes looking for work and also motivates people to work off the books while collecting their windfall) surely know for whom to vote. The lure of free stuff is irresistible.

The defining moment of the whole campaign was the revelation of the secretly recorded video in which Romney acknowledged the difficulty of winning an election in which “47% of the people” start off against him because they pay no taxes and just receive money – “free stuff” – from the government.

 Almost half of the population has no skin in the game – they don’t care about high taxes, promoting business, or creating jobs, nor do they care that the money for their free stuff is being borrowed from their children and from the Chinese.

They just want the free stuff that comes their way at someone else’s expense. In the end, that 47% leaves very little margin for error for any Republican, and does not bode well for the future.

It is impossible to imagine a conservative candidate winning against such overwhelming odds. People do vote their pocketbooks. In essence, the people vote for a Congress who will not raise their taxes, and for a President who will give them free stuff, never mind who has to pay for it.

 That engenders the second reason why Romney lost: the inescapable conclusion that the electorate is ignorant and uninformed. Indeed, it does not pay to be an informed voter, because most other voters – the clear majority – are unintelligent and easily swayed by emotion and raw populism. That is the indelicate way of saying that too many people vote with their hearts and not their heads. That is why Obama did not have to produce a second term agenda, or even defend his first-term record. He needed only to portray Mitt Romney as a rapacious capitalist who throws elderly women over a cliff, when he is not just snatching away their cancer medication, while starving the poor and cutting taxes for the rich.

 During his 1956 presidential campaign, a woman called out to Adlai Stevenson: “Senator, you have the vote of every thinking person!” Stevenson called back: “That’s not enough, madam, we need a majority!” Truer words were never spoken.

 Obama could get away with saying that “Romney wants the rich to play by a different set of rules” – without ever defining what those different rules were; with saying that the “rich should pay their fair share” – without ever defining what a “fair share” is; with saying that Romney wants the poor, elderly and sick to “fend for themselves” – without even acknowledging that all these government programs are going bankrupt, their current insolvency only papered over by deficit spending.

 Similarly, Obama (or his surrogates) could hint to blacks that a Romney victory would lead them back into chains and proclaim to women that their abortions and birth control would be taken away. He could appeal to Hispanics that Romney would have them all arrested and shipped to Mexico and unabashedly state that he will not enforce the current immigration laws. He could espouse the furtherance of the incestuous relationship between governments and unions – in which politicians ply the unions with public money, in exchange for which the unions provide the politicians with votes, in exchange for which the politicians provide more money and the unions provide more votes, etc., even though the money is gone.

Obama also knows that the electorate has changed – that whites will soon be a minority in America (they’re already a minority in California) and that the new immigrants to the US are primarily from the Third World and do not share the traditional American values that attracted immigrants in the 19th and 20th centuries. It is a different world, and a different America. Obama is part of that different America, knows it, and knows how to tap into it. That is why he won.

Obama also proved again that negative advertising works, invective sells, and harsh personal attacks succeed. That Romney never engaged in such diatribes points to his essential goodness as a person; his “negative ads” were simple facts, never personal abuse – facts about high unemployment, lower take-home pay, a loss of American power and prestige abroad, a lack of leadership, etc. As a politician, though, Romney failed because he did not embrace the devil’s bargain of making unsustainable promises.

 It turned out that it was not possible for Romney and Ryan – people of substance, depth and ideas – to compete with the shallow populism and platitudes of their opponents. Obama mastered the politics of envy – of class warfare – never reaching out to Americans as such but to individual groups, and cobbling together a winning majority from these minority groups. If an Obama could not be defeated – with his record and his vision of America, in which free stuff seduces voters – it is hard to envision any change in the future.

The road to Hillary Clinton in 2016 and to a European-socialist economy – those very economies that are collapsing today in Europe – is paved. For Jews, mostly assimilated anyway and staunch Democrats, the results demonstrate again that liberalism is their Torah. Almost 70% voted for a president widely perceived by Israelis and most committed Jews as hostile to Israel. They voted to secure Obama’s future at America’s expense and at Israel’s expense – in effect, preferring Obama to Netanyahu by a wide margin.

 A dangerous time is ahead. Under present circumstances, it is inconceivable that the US will take any aggressive action against Iran and will more likely thwart any Israeli initiative. The US will preach the importance of negotiations up until the production of the first Iranian nuclear weapon – and then state that the world must learn to live with this new reality.

 But this election should be a wake-up call to Jews. There is no permanent empire, nor is there is an enduring haven for Jews anywhere in the exile. The American empire began to decline in 2007, and the deterioration has been exacerbated in the last five years. This election only hastens that decline. Society is permeated with sloth, greed, envy and materialistic excess. It has lost its moorings and its moral foundations. The takers outnumber the givers, and that will only increase in years to come.

 The “Occupy” riots across this country in the last two years were mere dress rehearsals for what lies ahead – years of unrest sparked by the increasing discontent of the unsuccessful who want to seize the fruits and the bounty of the successful, and do not appreciate the slow pace of redistribution. 

If this election proves one thing, it is that the Old America is gone. And, sad for the world, it is not coming back.”

No School Like the Old School

Prudence: (syn.) care, circumspection, conservatism, considerateness, deliberation, diligence, discretion, economy, foresight, forethought, frugality, judgment, precaution, sagacity tact, vigilance, wisdom.

Thesaurus entry

 “Dear Prudence, won’t you come out to play?”

Beatles’ song about Mia Farrow’s sister.

Maybe this is just my pet peeve, but having $100K in savings to your name at age 50 is imprudent at best and irresponsible at worst.  Irresponsible in the sense that you knew you would retire one day and therefore had to save today for that 100% eventuality.  Yet, among 45 to 54-year-olds the median savings is $101,000.  A full 15% of this group has savings of $24,999 or less.  Do they think they can spend everything now and rely on someone else – Social Security – to pay their bills later in life that lasts a full 12 years longer than their parents’?  Where the prudence?

Want to get pissed off?  Look at your next Social Security statement and consider that if the government had not stolen that money and instead allowed you to invest it in a boring bond and stock fund for all those years…  Yes you get my point.  You will never see that money by the way.  It will go to the non-savers.  Those who made little and spent everything will get a pay out.  You “rich guys” will be “means testedout and receive nothing.  Thanks, suckers!  This is the price of imprudence.

In another story this week, it was reported that 48% of all newborns are born to single mothers.  This despite clear evidence that this kind of imprudent behavior virtually consigns one to all types of problems social and economic.  Yet we call this kind permissive social behavior progressive and laugh at old-schoolers as “out of touch” and “don’t get its.”

How are these two stories related?  Our financial and societal problems (poverty etc.) today are not rooted in economics; they are rooted in progressive culturalism where “the moment” is all that matters.  Live for today, tomorrow doesn’t matter.  Except that it does.

Clinton had it wrong.  It’s not the economy stupid.  It’s the culture.

Dear Prudence won’t you come out to play because your sister Careless Disregard is overrunning the land!

 

Cyprus: Canary in the Coal Mine

For hundreds of years mining workers would carry caged canaries into the tunnels with them. If dangerous gases such as methane or carbon monoxide leaked into the mineshaft, the gases would kill the canary before killing the miners.

This week the government of Cyprus – in order to pay for its overspending – attempted to “tax” the savings accounts of its citizens 10% – 15%.  OK.  Think about this.  You’ve worked hard for years and saved (unlike most who simply spent it all…  damn are they looking geniuses now or what?).  You go to bed tonight and tomorrow you wake up and poof… $25,000 of your $250,000 savings is taken by the government.

Oh yes, desperate times demand desperate measures indeed!  And nothing is more desperate than a cornered animal – like the government of Cyprus – with the Euro crowd closing in and demanding payback.  Do you think this type of government abuse can happen only in a small country like Cyprus?  Think again.

Yes my friends, Cyprus is the canary in the coalmine.  Its citizens have been addicted to the Euro Easy social model for so long they missed the canary’s death (it happened years ago).  Habituated to generous government spending for everything from welfare, pensions, unemployment programs to state run enterprises freed from the rigors of making a profit its citizens took prosperity as a birthright.  Now comes the payback and what the government cares most about is perpetuating itself, not its citizen’s welfare or “rights”.

As far as citizen rights, you have none when a government has the power to take your money, guns, civil rights and freedoms.  When a government has that kind of power, it has all the “rights” it needs to do what it wants to you.

Scared now?

Location of the coal mine where the canary died:  (Hey, its right next to another one…  Greece.)

map

 

If you want more of the gory details…  click here…  http://www.shelteroffshore.com/index.php/2/cyprus-problem-devastated-cypriot-economy-11129

RIP: Hugo Chavez

Now that the world gets to close the ledger on the “living” Hugo Chavez,  how does the balance sheet stack up on his legacy?

NOTE:  The “dead” Chavez will live on in socialist fantasy like Che Guevara  – narcissists somehow cleansed of their true and real faults.

Abrogation of free speech

Opponents were put in jail or driven into exile.  For example, the opposition television channel, RCTV, was refused a renewed license.  Today in Venezuela there is effectively no opposition media.  Those who disagree are harassed.  The names of the 3.6MM people who signed a petition calling for his recall were published; many were sacked from state jobs or denied passports or other official services.

 NOTE:  Any resemblance to the media here or the publication of the names of gun owners is merely coincidental.

 The company he kept

There is a saying that you can tell a man by his friends.  Hugo counted among his good friends, Saddam Hussein, Fidel Castro (I think he is dead – Cuba just won’t admit it), Muammar Gaddafi (just looks like he is dead), and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (wants everybody dead).  This is a heck of a list – a veritable fearsome foursome of democracy and liberty around the globe.  Sorry, I forgot Sean Penn.

 The decline in the social fabric of Venezuela

Rampant crime and violence reached a record in 2011 with more than 20,000 Venezuelans killed as a result.

 The decline of the economy

Venezuela has one of the world’s largest fiscal deficits, highest inflation rates, worst misalignment of the exchange rate, fastest-growing debt, and one of the most precipitous drops in productive capacity—including that of the oil sector. During the Chávez era the nation fell to the bottom of the rankings that measure international competitiveness, ease of doing business, or attractiveness to foreign investors, while rising to the top of the list of the world’s most corrupt countries.   At the same time, he amassed a personal fortune north of $2 Billion.

Table: Inflation

latam-inflation

He helped the poor

Some studies show his programs reduced poverty, but did little to eliminate its long-term causes. Crime has risen and public schools remain far behind countries with comparable per capita income.  He was indeed a hero to the poor who had NO voice in Venezuela until he took power.  He gave them a voice.  Whether he left them better off is debatable.  Here’s a Table that shows the result of his revolution.

poverty venez

 

And so we close the ledger on Mr. Chavez.  On balance???  To hear Sean Penn and his like-minded buds in Hollywood tell it,  the world is losing a hero and a saint.  The ledger simply doesn’t show it.  But Sean and his buddies are very forgiving of fellow narcissists – or so it seems.  To them he is a latter day Robin Hood.

So be it.  But, Robin Hood was still a crook.  Stealing is still a crime.  Real heroes and saints who create revolutions don’t steal – they give.  That is why we should honor true heroes like Washington, ML King and Aung San Suu Kyi (look it up).  Unlike Hugo who craved power and wealth, these few sacrificed greatly and fought for liberty and justice for their people.

Hugo was a corrupt dictator.  The maxim that absolute power corrupts absolutely fits him like a glove. While I sympathize with his loved ones, his passing is good news for the world. RIP Hugo Chavez. 

Limo Liberal Logic 4: Deep Thoughts

This is a sometime feature where we showcase the logic of the progressive left.

Barak Obama – “Let’s declare that in the wealthiest nation on earth, no one who works full time should have to live in poverty and raise the minimum wage to $9 per hour”.  OK.  Let me see that works out to $1.75 per hour for 2080 hours annually.  That’s $3,640 per year less 30% for payroll and income taxes…  or about $2,548.  So by his logic $2,548 is the difference between poverty and not poverty for these wage earners?  Finally a definition of poverty we can all live with.

Since we are declaring things, let’s declare that the laws of labor supply and demand are hereby suspended.  Let’s just ignore nettlesome facts like the demand for labor might not be completely neutral in regard to the supply of labor at a higher cost.

We can also ignore other bothersome facts like employers faced with a 24% increase in the price of labor combined with a 99 week unemployment liability will keep right on hiring that type of worker and in fact do more of it.

And oh yea…  let’s ignore the fact that most people don’t work fulltime and run a family on minimum wage jobs.  In fact most do not since (1)  they are part time workers, and (2) it is more beneficial financially to get on government programs and work for cash under the table at $10 per hour (this is the employer equivalent cost of a $7.25 per hour work when you factor in state and federal taxes and insurance costs).

So why be such a puss and just raise the minimum wage to $9.00?  Since we can just DECLARE economic reality in this the wealthiest nation on earth, why not go whole hog and raise it to $20 per hour?  By this logic we will all be better off.  Thanks Obama for another dose of liberal limo logic.

You are this week’s winner and stand in the pantheon of economic geniuses like Ms. Pelosi who thinks unemployment insurance is an economic stimulus program.

what-me-worry2

No wonder we are $17,000,000,000,000 in debt.  Hey wait – in the real world don’t you subtract debt from assets to determine wealth?  And in the real world do you not get paid what you are worth?  And in the real world are you doomed to making minimum wage your entire life?  In the real world can’t you make more money than minimum wage by working harder and becoming more valuable to your employer?

Hey, wait!!!  Why don’t we declare that…  “in the wealthiest nation on earth, you can make more money per hour if you work harder and smarter.”

You’re right.  Obama is way smarter than me.  I need to shut up and get in line and be a team player and stop this pesky concern with facts.

 

P.S. You know I am just itching to say something about Hollywood’s mourning the passing of that great friend to mankind – Hugo Chavez (thug extraordinaire).  Next time.

 

 

PRESS PASS: FOURTH ESTATE

This post features the failure of the Fourth Estate.

Happy days are here again.  The skies are clear and blue again.  At least that is what the press and the President would have you believe.  It’s like the Wizard of Oz.  We can see the ersatz machinations of the man behind the curtain, but there’s no Dorothy to bring him to account.   What about:

  • Benghazi – This story has disappeared despite the death of American citizens.  Do we see Rachel Maddow ranting daily about this?
  • Gitmo – Not only does it still exist but also the President is using drones on the enemy NOW.  Where are Andy Cooper and CNN on this TORTURE story?
  • Afghanistan – A true tragedy and Obama’s “good war”.  The KIA count is now 3,258  in an underfunded and apathetic effort (75% of them under the Obama Administration).  No daily Katie Couric “death counts” as there were during Bush’s time in office.
  • Unemployment – Another tragedy. No story here reported DAILY  by CBS or ABC.
  • Deficit spending – No daily update by Jon Stewart show or Colbert on this brazen “heist of the future in broad daylight”.

Where’s the Press?  Why no accountability?  It’s simple.  He’s their guy and this is their revolution.  He is their savior doing God’s work freeing the oppressed peoples of the United States.  The truth is far more banal.  He is the man behind the curtain creating the illusion of positive change while masking something far more mundane – a power grab more fitting a banana republic strongman.

There’s no positive change only the trading one form of oppression for another.  So sayeth one of my favorite authors from the old days.

… Every revolution in history has failed: the oppressed, as soon as they seize power, turn into the oppressors, resorting to totalitarian tactics to “protect the revolution.” That is why minorities seeking the abolition of prejudice become intolerant, minorities seeking peace become militant, minorities seeking equality become self-righteous, and minorities seeking liberation become hostile…”

Tom Robbins, Still Life with Woodpecker

You’re right.  I’m making a mountain out of a molehill… there is no story here.  Move on people, nothing to see…

True / False Test.   ….. for  George Bush the Press coverage would be exactly the same for these events?

 

World Turned Upside Down 5

People are fools and will sell their souls for a pittance.  And so it goes with the promises of more socialism in the State of the Union address.

The truth…  everything he offered is a simple doubling down on failure.  But it is spun in such a way that it all sounds so good and morally superior (to the cold hard truths like “you can’t spend more than you earn” and “there’s no such thing as a free lunch”).  These truths are much harder to sell.  And when you are a salesman that only cares about this year’s numbers…  you load the customer up with “freebies”.

The Fool:  Do you think the Democrats (especially) and for that matter the Republicans actually care about the poor?   If you do, you are a fool.

Selling your Soul:  For the promise of an easy life you give them your vote… your soul, as well as, your future.  Once they have your vote they don’t need you anymore until the next election.

The Reality:  The Democrats know they can never raise the poor out of poverty.  So they promise a “living” but not a life (of aspiration and hope, only the same grinding hand to mouth month to month).  They need the poor kept where they are so they have a reliable voting bloc that ensures them that they KEEP THEIR JOBS.  This they must do.  Most are unfit for any other kind of work in the “real world” where they would have to earn their money the old fashioned way.

This is a world turned upside down where seeds are being sown on poor soil with nary a care about the harvest.

ATT0001515