Next Big Future: Spacex reusable test rocket has more accurate sens...: On June 14, 2013 SpaceX's Grasshopper flew 325 m (1066 feet)--higher than Manhattan's Chrysler Building --before smoothly landing ba...
comment:
One of the bright spots of a dreary situation in this country. Best wishes for SpaceX in this endeavor.
Al Fin: "Cowboy Commentary", aka "Eat your veggies" The Flag banner is posted in order to defy those who would make patriotic symbols illegal or disreputable.
Saturday, July 6, 2013
Farms produce more energy than they use
This is surprising. But it doesn't take into consideration all factors. Nonetheless, it is quite surprising.
ObamaCare train wreck
The thing I intend to do is to avoid the law as much as I can. But that may not be possible.
Given what is happening elsewhere, I am suspicious about this law. I suspect it is going to snuff out the white folks who are getting old, and replace them with the illegals that they prefer for citizens.
Given what is happening elsewhere, I am suspicious about this law. I suspect it is going to snuff out the white folks who are getting old, and replace them with the illegals that they prefer for citizens.
What Can You Do Now As An American Citizen?
July 1, 2013 by Bob Livingston
a quote from Free Republic
You can't trust what the politicians say for why the do what they do. But you can trust this: they'll do what's good for themselves.
Don't be fooled by the rhetoric. Not from them or from the "journalists".
a quote from Free Republic
“The issue is never the real issue: the real issue is always The Revolution. The cause is never the real cause: the real cause is always the acquisition of power.” (unknown 60s radical, quoted by David Horowitz)
You can't trust what the politicians say for why the do what they do. But you can trust this: they'll do what's good for themselves.
Don't be fooled by the rhetoric. Not from them or from the "journalists".
Obama channels his inner Al Gore in climate change messaging shift
The Hill's E2-Wire
quote:
What's the angle here? To shore up his base because he feels vulnerable? Radical environmentalists tend to be white upper class types. You know, the kind who need to feel morally superior.
If there's a problem, how does his proposals do anything to actually fix it?
There are solutions, but one might inquire as to whether or not these are just political moves, not true policy moves towards an actual solution that can work in the real world.
quote:
As a second-term president who knows the GOP House will not legislate on carbon control issues, Obama and his people are now speaking mainly to and for environmentalists,” said Theda Skocpol, a Harvard government and sociology professor.comment:
What's the angle here? To shore up his base because he feels vulnerable? Radical environmentalists tend to be white upper class types. You know, the kind who need to feel morally superior.
If there's a problem, how does his proposals do anything to actually fix it?
There are solutions, but one might inquire as to whether or not these are just political moves, not true policy moves towards an actual solution that can work in the real world.
"The futile debate over race in America"
"is white liberals’ psychological need to feel morally superior to other whites"
It has been said that you can judge a person by what makes them feel important.
In principle, what is the difference between feeling morally superior because of one's religious faith and something like this?
But to clarify, it should be noted that Christianity doesn't teach somebody to go around feeling morally superior to someone else. If it does, I missed something somewhere.
It has been said that you can judge a person by what makes them feel important.
In principle, what is the difference between feeling morally superior because of one's religious faith and something like this?
But to clarify, it should be noted that Christianity doesn't teach somebody to go around feeling morally superior to someone else. If it does, I missed something somewhere.
How much leverage?
Leverage can be like the story of the three bears. One is too big, the other too small, but one of the three is just right.
You probably can't run an economy without leverage. Perhaps you could, but it would be so limited that growth would be very slow. You need some of those animal spirits which can provide the impetus for growth. To put it another way, there needs to be incentives.
Perhaps another metaphor could be tried with the comparison to gambling. You can have a lottery, which allows a few to win big, but the vast majority will lose. Or, you could have a casino, where more can win than in a lottery, but the winners are relatively few. Finally, you could have no gambling at all. With no gambling, there is no easy money, but for some, that is a feature, not a bug. Leverage is like gambling to the extent to which leverage is allowed. The more leverage there is, the more it is like a lottery. The less leverage, the more boring it is. But no leverage at all is a safe option. Yet, no risk, no reward. Perhaps people require something of a risk to add some spice to their lives.
An alternative view of the current financial situation is that it was more like a lottery than a casino. Now, it has been "reformed" so that it is more like a casino than a plain old vanilla economy with no risk. For the leverage never really left. The leverage is still there. Moreover, it is desired. Therefore, there's still a fractional reserve system based upon debt. There's still a big, regulatory scheme with a big goverment saftety net. The casino system seems to have served us well enough over the years. It has been the dominant system since the end of the gold standard, when FDR abolished it.
There are those who would object to calling the current system a casino system. Those same folks would also object to calling the gold standard a risk less system. But when it comes to the monetary system, there can be no sounder, safer system than the gold standard. FDR thought the gold standard was "just too darned sound" for his taste. FDR's New Deal installed the casino like system when it dropped the gold standard. The rest of the New Deal big safety net is there just to help out the losers when they inevitably lose. Lose they shall, as in any casino system, in the end, the House always wins.
Keep in mind also, that FDR didn't do it by himself. He had help when the Federal Reserve was created. This made fractional reserve banking "safer", or so it seemed. But it was really the first of many steps towards the big government safety net that was to be installed later. Without the Federal Reserve and the income tax, the ruling class couldn't play their social architecture games. The social architecture game is the ruse that allows the casino to function. The ruse being that everyone supposedly has a chance to win, but in the end, the big government bad boys are always the winners as with the house in the casino model.
You probably can't run an economy without leverage. Perhaps you could, but it would be so limited that growth would be very slow. You need some of those animal spirits which can provide the impetus for growth. To put it another way, there needs to be incentives.
Perhaps another metaphor could be tried with the comparison to gambling. You can have a lottery, which allows a few to win big, but the vast majority will lose. Or, you could have a casino, where more can win than in a lottery, but the winners are relatively few. Finally, you could have no gambling at all. With no gambling, there is no easy money, but for some, that is a feature, not a bug. Leverage is like gambling to the extent to which leverage is allowed. The more leverage there is, the more it is like a lottery. The less leverage, the more boring it is. But no leverage at all is a safe option. Yet, no risk, no reward. Perhaps people require something of a risk to add some spice to their lives.
An alternative view of the current financial situation is that it was more like a lottery than a casino. Now, it has been "reformed" so that it is more like a casino than a plain old vanilla economy with no risk. For the leverage never really left. The leverage is still there. Moreover, it is desired. Therefore, there's still a fractional reserve system based upon debt. There's still a big, regulatory scheme with a big goverment saftety net. The casino system seems to have served us well enough over the years. It has been the dominant system since the end of the gold standard, when FDR abolished it.
There are those who would object to calling the current system a casino system. Those same folks would also object to calling the gold standard a risk less system. But when it comes to the monetary system, there can be no sounder, safer system than the gold standard. FDR thought the gold standard was "just too darned sound" for his taste. FDR's New Deal installed the casino like system when it dropped the gold standard. The rest of the New Deal big safety net is there just to help out the losers when they inevitably lose. Lose they shall, as in any casino system, in the end, the House always wins.
Keep in mind also, that FDR didn't do it by himself. He had help when the Federal Reserve was created. This made fractional reserve banking "safer", or so it seemed. But it was really the first of many steps towards the big government safety net that was to be installed later. Without the Federal Reserve and the income tax, the ruling class couldn't play their social architecture games. The social architecture game is the ruse that allows the casino to function. The ruse being that everyone supposedly has a chance to win, but in the end, the big government bad boys are always the winners as with the house in the casino model.
Friday, July 5, 2013
Market Clearing Event Coming Soon
Published on Zero Hedge (http://www.zerohedge.com)
Opportunity Squandered: We Blew It
By Tyler Durden
Created 07/05/2013 - 10:59
We as a nation had an unparalleled, historic opportunity to set things right in the aftermath of the 2008 financial meltdown. Alas, we blew it. Instead of tearing down what had failed spectacularly, we chose to do more of what failed spectacularly: cartel-crony capitalism, centralized wealth and power and an expansion of our financialized debtocracy.Afterburner with Bill Whittle: Dependence Day
comment:
Wolf and Lamb parable. Read it and understand. No argument, no matter how well stated, will matter in the face of overwhelming force.
The only way to deal with a tyrant is by his own terms. Arguments won't suffice.
Wolf and Lamb parable. Read it and understand. No argument, no matter how well stated, will matter in the face of overwhelming force.
The only way to deal with a tyrant is by his own terms. Arguments won't suffice.
Low cost producers have the advantage in the marketplace
That's why hydrogen fuel cell powered cars will be the cars of the future.
Hydrogen fuel cell technology exists today. No, not the super expensive kind that they tell you about. There's a type of hydrogen fuel cell that will fit on an automobile and power that automobile today. It can be mass produced and it can perform the task required and it can be cheaper than gasoline.
The cars can be built right now, but aren't. Why not?
Simply stated, our society has lost the ability to innovate. When it comes to automotive technology and energy technology, America has become the "colossus with feet of clay".
It will happen elsewhere, but it won't happen here. Unless we change our ways.
Hydrogen fuel cell technology exists today. No, not the super expensive kind that they tell you about. There's a type of hydrogen fuel cell that will fit on an automobile and power that automobile today. It can be mass produced and it can perform the task required and it can be cheaper than gasoline.
The cars can be built right now, but aren't. Why not?
Simply stated, our society has lost the ability to innovate. When it comes to automotive technology and energy technology, America has become the "colossus with feet of clay".
It will happen elsewhere, but it won't happen here. Unless we change our ways.
It's all a matter of what you believe in
Another way of saying what Napoleon Hill used to say---If you can conceive it, you can achieve it.
But I don't like battery powered planes. No sir, they make about as much sense as nuclear powered planes. Now, that's an idea.
The trouble with nuclear powered planes is that you have to have shielding for the radiation. However, as this concept with batteries shows, you can minimize the amount of power needed, and maybe make batteries work. I figure if you can make batteries work, you can make nuclear work better.
But it is all a matter of what you believe. These people may end up making electric planes work, but if they can do this, they make make nuclear planes work too. But people don't believe in nuclear, so that most likely won't ever happen.
If you had a small nuclear reactor, really small, you may be able to shield it without too much weight. It can do anything the battery can do, but better.
But I don't like battery powered planes. No sir, they make about as much sense as nuclear powered planes. Now, that's an idea.
The trouble with nuclear powered planes is that you have to have shielding for the radiation. However, as this concept with batteries shows, you can minimize the amount of power needed, and maybe make batteries work. I figure if you can make batteries work, you can make nuclear work better.
But it is all a matter of what you believe. These people may end up making electric planes work, but if they can do this, they make make nuclear planes work too. But people don't believe in nuclear, so that most likely won't ever happen.
If you had a small nuclear reactor, really small, you may be able to shield it without too much weight. It can do anything the battery can do, but better.
Employment situation still not fully recovered
I like to use the household report. Maybe it isn't any better than the other, but I figure that these numbers are harder to fudge. What the latest reports do indicate is that there is indeed job growth. Yet, after 4 years of recovery, it is still below the peak of January 2008.
When you consider the debt that was incurred to get this "recovery", you have to ask if it was worth it. Or better yet, could we have done better than this? I should hope so.
When you consider the debt that was incurred to get this "recovery", you have to ask if it was worth it. Or better yet, could we have done better than this? I should hope so.
 |
| Yes, it does appear that current employment is below 2008's peak. 146.2 million then v.144 million today |
 |
| 144 million employed june 2013 report |
The Energy Question
Let's try to take a look at the big picture of our energy condition today.
We are told that we are putting too much carbon dioxide into the air. It is heating up the Earth and this is a bad thing. But is it really? Could there have been something good about it?
Let's back up a little bit, and see how we got to this point. In Roman times, there was little need for machines as there were plenty of slaves. The Romans could have built steam engines and started an industrial revolution, but they didn't. There was a curiosity in those times---it was called the aerophile, which is something like a steam engine. It remained a curiosity, because there was little need for machines to do work that the slaves could do. So, there was no industrial revolution for 1500 years or so. Not because the Romans were too primitive, but because they saw no need for what a steam engine could do for them.
Another thing about the industrial revolution---the reason coal came into use was because they were chopping down too many trees in order to run their new fangled steam engines. In fact, they ran out of trees in England, so they had to do something, and that something was to use coal. Now, if you were to burn trees, you have a carbon neutral source of energy. But there weren't enough trees, as was the case in England at the beginning of the industrial revolution. Coal may be dirty, but it saved the what remained of England's forests and the world's forests later as the revolution spread from England.
So, we began to use machines that used up fossil fuels. This is how we got to how we live today. We have become dependent upon the machines. If it weren't for the machines and the fossil fuels that run them, many of us could not survive. The world's population grew as living conditions improved. We can't live without these machines. The world has a lot more people than it once did because the machines made that possible.
Machines and fossil fuels replaced the slaves of the Roman world. We are highly advanced civilization, like the Romans, but there are those who believe that what we are doing cannot be sustained over the long run. There are too many people, they say. They are probably right. But, what to do about this? Kill off the surplus population? That may be good for the survivors, but not so good for the others. Perhaps there's a better way.
Energy production allowed us to raise civilization to a higher level than the Romans. Why can't that be the answer? There are those who argue that energy production takes too much out of the Earth. That's true, but it doesn't have to remain so.
Going back to the old ways of energy production isn't the answer. We may as well go back to slavery as the Romans did. Even if we did, the Roman empire didn't survive. The world would sink even further than that to a much more primitive state. Wind and solar are old technologies. They cannot push us to a higher level. They are like a new and improved horse and buggy system for a world that long ago gave up the horse and buggy. The horse and buggy can only work for a world with a lot fewer people in it.
What about conservation? It can only make what we've already got last longer than it will at present rates of usage. But, it cannot get us to a higher level. What happens when the fossil fuels run out?
Not to knock conservation and energy efficiency. You don't want things to be any more inefficient than it has to be. Inefficiency is something to be avoided. But it isn't a solution in itself. Energy has to be produced and produced in prodigious quantities at times. This cannot be done with solar and wind power. It can be done for fossil fuels, but not for the long term. Meanwhile, we are fouling our air.
The answer is nuclear energy of course. At present, many countries are participating the the ITER project, which will be a way to master fusion energy. Perhaps this will work. But what if it doesn't?
There are other ideas out there that look promising. But what if those don't work either? We could be in a real pickle if these ideas don't pan out.
Fission energy does work, but there are problems with it. The main problem is not the one that you hear about. The main problem is that we are like the Romans in one respect. Innovation was not one of the Romans best qualities. There was the story of Tiberius, the emperor who stopped the production of aluminum because it was a threat to his interests. Aluminum and aerophiles--- two things the Romans could have used to good advantage, but could not because innovation was stifled. Innovation in energy is being stifled today as innovation was stifled in Roman times. Fission energy can be perfected, and it was proven so, but that has been ignored and suppressed. A solution does exist, but the question is whether or not that innovation will be allowed. If it is, we can go to a higher level. If not, we may meet the fate of the Romans.
All forms of energy should be allowed. Let's not put all of our energy eggs in one basket. Don't stifle fission energy because it isn't perfect. Develop the molten-salt reactor. It may be the only real solution available to us. If it isn't, something better could replace it at some point. Consider it an insurance policy.
We are told that we are putting too much carbon dioxide into the air. It is heating up the Earth and this is a bad thing. But is it really? Could there have been something good about it?
Let's back up a little bit, and see how we got to this point. In Roman times, there was little need for machines as there were plenty of slaves. The Romans could have built steam engines and started an industrial revolution, but they didn't. There was a curiosity in those times---it was called the aerophile, which is something like a steam engine. It remained a curiosity, because there was little need for machines to do work that the slaves could do. So, there was no industrial revolution for 1500 years or so. Not because the Romans were too primitive, but because they saw no need for what a steam engine could do for them.
Another thing about the industrial revolution---the reason coal came into use was because they were chopping down too many trees in order to run their new fangled steam engines. In fact, they ran out of trees in England, so they had to do something, and that something was to use coal. Now, if you were to burn trees, you have a carbon neutral source of energy. But there weren't enough trees, as was the case in England at the beginning of the industrial revolution. Coal may be dirty, but it saved the what remained of England's forests and the world's forests later as the revolution spread from England.
So, we began to use machines that used up fossil fuels. This is how we got to how we live today. We have become dependent upon the machines. If it weren't for the machines and the fossil fuels that run them, many of us could not survive. The world's population grew as living conditions improved. We can't live without these machines. The world has a lot more people than it once did because the machines made that possible.
Machines and fossil fuels replaced the slaves of the Roman world. We are highly advanced civilization, like the Romans, but there are those who believe that what we are doing cannot be sustained over the long run. There are too many people, they say. They are probably right. But, what to do about this? Kill off the surplus population? That may be good for the survivors, but not so good for the others. Perhaps there's a better way.
Energy production allowed us to raise civilization to a higher level than the Romans. Why can't that be the answer? There are those who argue that energy production takes too much out of the Earth. That's true, but it doesn't have to remain so.
Going back to the old ways of energy production isn't the answer. We may as well go back to slavery as the Romans did. Even if we did, the Roman empire didn't survive. The world would sink even further than that to a much more primitive state. Wind and solar are old technologies. They cannot push us to a higher level. They are like a new and improved horse and buggy system for a world that long ago gave up the horse and buggy. The horse and buggy can only work for a world with a lot fewer people in it.
What about conservation? It can only make what we've already got last longer than it will at present rates of usage. But, it cannot get us to a higher level. What happens when the fossil fuels run out?
Not to knock conservation and energy efficiency. You don't want things to be any more inefficient than it has to be. Inefficiency is something to be avoided. But it isn't a solution in itself. Energy has to be produced and produced in prodigious quantities at times. This cannot be done with solar and wind power. It can be done for fossil fuels, but not for the long term. Meanwhile, we are fouling our air.
The answer is nuclear energy of course. At present, many countries are participating the the ITER project, which will be a way to master fusion energy. Perhaps this will work. But what if it doesn't?
There are other ideas out there that look promising. But what if those don't work either? We could be in a real pickle if these ideas don't pan out.
Fission energy does work, but there are problems with it. The main problem is not the one that you hear about. The main problem is that we are like the Romans in one respect. Innovation was not one of the Romans best qualities. There was the story of Tiberius, the emperor who stopped the production of aluminum because it was a threat to his interests. Aluminum and aerophiles--- two things the Romans could have used to good advantage, but could not because innovation was stifled. Innovation in energy is being stifled today as innovation was stifled in Roman times. Fission energy can be perfected, and it was proven so, but that has been ignored and suppressed. A solution does exist, but the question is whether or not that innovation will be allowed. If it is, we can go to a higher level. If not, we may meet the fate of the Romans.
All forms of energy should be allowed. Let's not put all of our energy eggs in one basket. Don't stifle fission energy because it isn't perfect. Develop the molten-salt reactor. It may be the only real solution available to us. If it isn't, something better could replace it at some point. Consider it an insurance policy.
Bob Dylan - Times They are a-Changin
This was a liberal song in that time of rapid change. The times are changing again, but I don't think it will be like the way it was in the sixties. It could go any old way, for prediction of the course for the human race is difficult, if not impossible. We can build up to a new level, or down to the old level of times long ago past. One way or another, things are not going to remain the same.
Thursday, July 4, 2013
The case for much higher gold prices
Published on Zero Hedge (http://www.zerohedge.com)
Guest Post: Gold's Under-Valuation Is Extreme
By Tyler Durden
Created 07/03/2013 - 19:29
The price of gold fell last week to the $1,200 level. The lemming sentiment in capital markets is uniformly bearish, yet every price-drop brings forth hungry buyers for physical gold from all over the world. Even hard-bitten gold bugs in the West are shaken and frightened to call a bottom, yet it is these conditions that accompany a selling climax. This article concludes there is a high possibility that gold will go sharply higher from here. There are three loose ends to consider: valuation, economic and market fundamentals.Wednesday, July 3, 2013
Grand Funk Railroad - All You've Got Is Money
My take on this song is that it is about someone who organizes their entire life around their money. When all you've got is money, you don't have much. Life can become a nightmare.
I'm thinking that's where Western Civilization has become. We've all organized ourselves around our money and now the scary part is about to begin. All we've got is money.
I'm thinking that's where Western Civilization has become. We've all organized ourselves around our money and now the scary part is about to begin. All we've got is money.
Krauthammer’s Take: ‘Cynicism Is Always The Right Assumption’ For Obama Administration
NRO, The Corner
quote:
Note that the employer mandate applies to those who have money. Those who have less money still have to comply. Zing! Yep, help out the fat cats and screw the little guy. Again. Nice going for the "progressive" president.
quote:
Krauthammer agreed with the assessment of Senator Barraso, who said in a statement that the decision today reflects the White House’s acknowledgment of the political and policy failures of Obamacare, while cynically shielding democrats from blame for the economic turmoil the employer mandate will bring.comment:
Note that the employer mandate applies to those who have money. Those who have less money still have to comply. Zing! Yep, help out the fat cats and screw the little guy. Again. Nice going for the "progressive" president.
Ticking time bomb
The Fed Is Paying Banks Not To Lend
By Tyler Durden
Created 07/02/2013 - 16:48
It should come as no surprise to most ZeroHedge readers but sometimes the facts and data need to be reiterated to ensure the message is not getting lost. As Michael Snyder rhetorically asks, did you know that U.S. banks have more than 1.8 trillion dollars parked at the Federal Reserve and that the Fed is actually paying them not to lend that money to us? We were always told that the goal of quantitative easing was to "help the economy", but the truth is that the vast majority of the money that the Fed has created through quantitative easing has not even gotten into the system. Instead, most of it is sitting at the Fed slowly earning interest for the bankers. Our financial system is a house of cards built on a foundation of risk, leverage and debt. When it all comes tumbling down, it should not be a surprise to any of us.Tuesday, July 2, 2013
Workers, young people discuss the enduring relevance of the Battle of Gettysburg
World Socialist Web Site
comment:
Lest you think I'm changing my politics, never fear. Occasionally, I'll check out a lefty site and see what they're talking about.
This article isn't particularly encouraging. These young people are imbibing the poisonous doctrines of the left.
If there's a revolution in this country, no doubt it will be because of the stupidity of the leadership. Or stupidity from some quarter. For it seems as though these kids are being programmed quite well to be perfect little lefties. A revolution along the lines that these kids are talking about would just be another disaster.
These kids are only repeating the programming that's been burned into their brains. If there really was some independent thinking going on here, I'd be encouraged.
But there's one thing that I'm agreeing with with respect to the left. The rich are the ones who bear the most responsibility for the rotten state of affairs that we are witnessing. There's a great responsibility that comes with wealth and power. It just may be the case that the wealthy are only pretending to care about the poor. They may believe that this gives them good PR in order to avoid any backlash that may have occurred from resentment due to their privileged social position.
Most of the super rich vote for the Democrats. When you see the Democrats voting lock step with the immigration bill and when said immigration bill does not help the working poor, you can begin to see how the Democrats are more interested in the rhetoric of helping the poor as opposed to actually doing something useful to help the poor.
Another example: Obama announces his energy plan to fight global warming. But poor people are not fighting global warming, they are more interested in staying alive. The so-called fight against global warming is a rich man's concern. The ones who will foot the bill for fighting global warming won't be the rich. For example, I read that ordinary Germans are paying three times what we pay for energy here in America. Evidently, Obama thinks we have too good of a deal, so let's be more like Europe! If they could, they will repeat that pattern with oil that powers autos. But why force motorists to pay so much for fuel? How does that help the working man? Yet, we are told that the Europeans are supposed to be so much more egalitarian than Americans. Evidently, their idea of egalitarianism to have everyone be equally poor. So, why bring that punishing attitude to America? If anything, the Europeans should bring low energy prices to their countries. They'd be a lot better off.
Things aren't the way they appear. Just because some political party claims to be for the working man, doesn't mean that they actually are. Yet people buy the packaging without looking critically at what's inside.
Update:
Oh, yeah. Forgot to mention Obamacare. Lol.
comment:
Lest you think I'm changing my politics, never fear. Occasionally, I'll check out a lefty site and see what they're talking about.
This article isn't particularly encouraging. These young people are imbibing the poisonous doctrines of the left.
If there's a revolution in this country, no doubt it will be because of the stupidity of the leadership. Or stupidity from some quarter. For it seems as though these kids are being programmed quite well to be perfect little lefties. A revolution along the lines that these kids are talking about would just be another disaster.
These kids are only repeating the programming that's been burned into their brains. If there really was some independent thinking going on here, I'd be encouraged.
But there's one thing that I'm agreeing with with respect to the left. The rich are the ones who bear the most responsibility for the rotten state of affairs that we are witnessing. There's a great responsibility that comes with wealth and power. It just may be the case that the wealthy are only pretending to care about the poor. They may believe that this gives them good PR in order to avoid any backlash that may have occurred from resentment due to their privileged social position.
Most of the super rich vote for the Democrats. When you see the Democrats voting lock step with the immigration bill and when said immigration bill does not help the working poor, you can begin to see how the Democrats are more interested in the rhetoric of helping the poor as opposed to actually doing something useful to help the poor.
Another example: Obama announces his energy plan to fight global warming. But poor people are not fighting global warming, they are more interested in staying alive. The so-called fight against global warming is a rich man's concern. The ones who will foot the bill for fighting global warming won't be the rich. For example, I read that ordinary Germans are paying three times what we pay for energy here in America. Evidently, Obama thinks we have too good of a deal, so let's be more like Europe! If they could, they will repeat that pattern with oil that powers autos. But why force motorists to pay so much for fuel? How does that help the working man? Yet, we are told that the Europeans are supposed to be so much more egalitarian than Americans. Evidently, their idea of egalitarianism to have everyone be equally poor. So, why bring that punishing attitude to America? If anything, the Europeans should bring low energy prices to their countries. They'd be a lot better off.
Things aren't the way they appear. Just because some political party claims to be for the working man, doesn't mean that they actually are. Yet people buy the packaging without looking critically at what's inside.
Update:
Oh, yeah. Forgot to mention Obamacare. Lol.
Next Big Future: Building new worlds become the greatest generation...
Next Big Future: Building new worlds become the greatest generation...: Al Globus has a vision and plan to use $4 billion in government prizes and programs to catalize a larger space colonization effort. I think...
Next Big Future: Skylon spaceplane full prototype engine gets fundi...
Next Big Future: Skylon spaceplane full prototype engine gets fundi...: The UK’s Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, singled out the SABRE project that will power Skylon into space in his 2013 spending r...
A Roe by Any Other Name
Mona Charen, National Review
quote:
The Court has shot itself in the foot. Public approval of the Court has gone down. There must be a bubble in DC, which now includes the Court. DC is in its own little world.
quote:
So “hungry” were the five members of the majority to pontificate about the merits of same-sex marriage, he wrote, that they skipped blithely over “a technicality of little interest to anyone except the people of We the People” — namely, that there was no case or controversy for the high court to resolve in Windsor....So what, Scalia asked, “are we doing here?”comment:
The Court has shot itself in the foot. Public approval of the Court has gone down. There must be a bubble in DC, which now includes the Court. DC is in its own little world.
From the senility file
Same broad who want Bush to be impeached now wants Obama to be impeached.
It worked on Nixon, but it won't work here. Obama has the law on his side. He is not a particularly good president, but the wiretapping stuff is legal. For Congress to impeach him for that is a joke.
It worked on Nixon, but it won't work here. Obama has the law on his side. He is not a particularly good president, but the wiretapping stuff is legal. For Congress to impeach him for that is a joke.
Monday, July 1, 2013
Germans Loved Obama. Now We Don’t Trust Him.
Malte Spitz op-ed in the New York Times
quote:
I just wish that people would stop and consider the topsy-turvy world that is being created. We liberated Germany from the Nazis. Now Germany is lecturing us on human rights and the hell of it is, they are right. The world is lecturing us on that, and they are right. That's how crazy this is becoming. Land of the free and home of the brave is going to be something from the quaint, old past.
The virtue is being drained out of this country and is being replaced with vice. But nobody wants to believe that. Nobody wants to believe that their government is doing this to them. Open your eyes and take a good hard look.
quote:
In Germany, whenever the government begins to infringe on individual freedom, society stands up. Given our history, we Germans are not willing to trade in our liberty for potentially better security. Germans have experienced firsthand what happens when the government knows too much about someone.comment:
I just wish that people would stop and consider the topsy-turvy world that is being created. We liberated Germany from the Nazis. Now Germany is lecturing us on human rights and the hell of it is, they are right. The world is lecturing us on that, and they are right. That's how crazy this is becoming. Land of the free and home of the brave is going to be something from the quaint, old past.
The virtue is being drained out of this country and is being replaced with vice. But nobody wants to believe that. Nobody wants to believe that their government is doing this to them. Open your eyes and take a good hard look.
Obama’s Energy Plan: Impoverish America
By Robert Zubrin, NRO
quote:
comment:
Obama is really helping the oil cartels as Zubrin points out. This comes at the detriment of the US, which Zubrin also points out. A perfect illustration of how government isn't solving anything, it is causing a big problem here that could be solved if it weren't for their own corruption and incompetence.
quote:
Natural gas can be used to power automobiles — directly or (more easily) by converting it to methanol and employing it as a liquid fuel in flex-fuel vehicles...Obama’s plan, however, is designed explicitly to prevent such a promising development. Rather than being used to compete against foreign oil, the plan commits our natural gas to replace American coal.
comment:
Obama is really helping the oil cartels as Zubrin points out. This comes at the detriment of the US, which Zubrin also points out. A perfect illustration of how government isn't solving anything, it is causing a big problem here that could be solved if it weren't for their own corruption and incompetence.
Left wing projection
Published on Zero Hedge (http://www.zerohedge.com)
Guest Post: Is The Economic Crisis An Indictment Of Capitalism?
By Tyler Durden
Created 06/30/2013 - 14:25
One of the sad narratives of the financial meltdown of 2008 and its aftermath is that it was and remains the result [1] of unbridled capitalism [2]. Too much freedom spoiled the economic broth. We must never tire of explaining the fallacies in the thinking of those who think the Great Recession is a clear case of the failure of capitalism. In fact, it is a quintessential example of the failures of interventionism to bring about anything other than economic destruction and relative impoverishment.
Source URL: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-06-30/guest-post-economic-crisis-indictment-capitalism
Links:
[1] http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/headtohead/2013/06/201361294652861958.html
[2] http://billmoyers.com/segment/preview-taming-capitalism-run-wild/
[1] http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/headtohead/2013/06/201361294652861958.html
[2] http://billmoyers.com/segment/preview-taming-capitalism-run-wild/
How academics are deceiving the public
Published on Zero Hedge (http://www.zerohedge.com)
Guest Post: The Deflationist Error
By Tyler Durden
Created 06/30/2013 - 19:42
Many people believe there is a significant risk that the Irving Fisher debt-deflation theory of great depressions is still an economic threat today. They overlook the fact that Fisher published his theory examining debt-deflation events under a gold standard, which does not apply today. Financial credit contractions therefore take a different appearance. It is indicative of our economic biases that we completely overlook the differences between the sound money of 1929/30 and the infinitely expandable money of 2008/09. We make this error because today's economists lead us astray with a fundamental belief that the state through monetary intervention can fix everything. Even though today's economists are a broad church they follow beliefs instead of well-reasoned economic theory. Beliefs are better left to clerics.Obama's Climate Five-Year Plan
reason.com
quote:
What's more is that it will not accomplish what he claims it will do. It will make little, if any difference.
But it will make a big difference in the quality of life. It won't be better, it will get worse.
quote:
At Georgetown, the president warned that "the special interests and their allies in Congress" will say his plan "will kill jobs and crush the economy, and basically end American free enterprise as we know it." I don't think Obama’s national climate action plan is going to kill American free enterprise. But its costly patchwork of programs, directives, regulations, grants, and initiatives will surely wound it.comment:
What's more is that it will not accomplish what he claims it will do. It will make little, if any difference.
But it will make a big difference in the quality of life. It won't be better, it will get worse.
Sunday, June 30, 2013
Will Schumer's "Jedi Mind Trick" work on enough Republicans?
Schumer's trying some type of psychological gambit on the GOP.
How to tell?
As I wrote before, the only reason the Democrats want this is that it is good for them. The illegals don't even want citizenship. They only want to work and to send money to their families. With this in mind, then why does the GOP think it is good for them too? If it is so good for the GOP, why wasn't there a significant opposition in the Democrat caucus? Not only insignificant, but non-existent opposition. Do these Republicans really believe the Democrats have their best interests in mind?
The Democrats won't agree to any bill without a pathway to citizenship. The best interests of anybody else, whether it is the illegals or the GOP, is secondary in their opinion. If it is in the best interests for the illegals to come out of the shadows, it could be done just as easily without citizenship as with citizenship. Therefore, the Democrats are only interested in their votes and the power that goes with it.
The GOP should recognize this and act accordingly.
Fox News: "I believe that by the end of this year, the House will pass the Senate bill," Schumer said.The mind trick seemed to work in the Senate, but what about the House? Some of them are not hypnotized by the suggestive power of Schumer's words
"I was moved almost to the point of tears by Senator Schumer's concern for the future prospects of the Republican Party," Gowdy said, sarcastically.There's a big split in the GOP, all right. Just look at the toe sucker, Dick Morris. He's supposed to be all GOP now, but he just loves his big government liberalism. There's a real split there, but it need not be over the welfare of the GOP. You can bet that a partisan issue is going to have Democrats lined up solidly on one side and the GOP on the other. In this case, the GOP is split. Why the split? Because the GOP doesn't know its true interests.
How to tell?
As I wrote before, the only reason the Democrats want this is that it is good for them. The illegals don't even want citizenship. They only want to work and to send money to their families. With this in mind, then why does the GOP think it is good for them too? If it is so good for the GOP, why wasn't there a significant opposition in the Democrat caucus? Not only insignificant, but non-existent opposition. Do these Republicans really believe the Democrats have their best interests in mind?
The Democrats won't agree to any bill without a pathway to citizenship. The best interests of anybody else, whether it is the illegals or the GOP, is secondary in their opinion. If it is in the best interests for the illegals to come out of the shadows, it could be done just as easily without citizenship as with citizenship. Therefore, the Democrats are only interested in their votes and the power that goes with it.
The GOP should recognize this and act accordingly.
SODOMA E GOMORRA
Presented without comment in case you are interested.
Note: Looks like Portuguese subtitles. It is in English.
Note: Looks like Portuguese subtitles. It is in English.
QE madness
Published on Zero Hedge (http://www.zerohedge.com)
Jim Rogers Warns "We're All Going To Suffer From This Crazy, Crazy Money Printing"
By Tyler Durden
Created 06/29/2013 - 22:34
"We're getting to that point where either one of two things are going to happen; either central banks are going to stop all this [money printing], or the market is going to force them to stop it. It looks like we may be having a juncture of both... where the Fed is getting worried... and at the same time, the market is jumping in and saying, 'Yes, it's insane what you're doing, and this has to end.' And if it's not ending now, it's going to end sometime in the next year, because this cannot go on - it's too insane.""There are a lot of leveraged players who are now being forced to sell [gold]. Usually when you have this kind of forced liquidation, you're getting closer to a bottom, maybe not the final bottom, but certainly close to a bottom.
Source URL: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-06-29/jim-rogers-warns-were-all-going-suffer-crazy-crazy-money-printing
Palin Floats Leaving GOP
Breitbart
This appears to be getting hyped a bit.
Nevertheless, conservatives have to do something to get control over the GOP, or will have to leave it.
One alternative, if I may suggest, would be to form a Liberty Caucus. The Caucus would decide upon a candidate to run in the GOP primaries for President. If successful, it could be expanded to other offices.
Palin was responding on Fox News to a question from a viewer, Josh Painter, who asked if she and conservative talk radio host Mark Levin would be willing to form a "Freedom Party" if the GOP continues to let down conservatives.comment:
This appears to be getting hyped a bit.
Nevertheless, conservatives have to do something to get control over the GOP, or will have to leave it.
One alternative, if I may suggest, would be to form a Liberty Caucus. The Caucus would decide upon a candidate to run in the GOP primaries for President. If successful, it could be expanded to other offices.
Theodore Roosevelt – Dick Morris TV: History Video!
Theodore Roosevelt – Dick Morris TV: History Video!
comment:
Morris idolizes Roosevelt. I don't agree. From his description of him, I'd say he had done some remarkably bad things to the country. He is probably responsible for Wilson becoming president. Wilson was responsible for the Federal Reserve. He favored an income tax, which is a bad thing. The income tax enabled the big government that we suffer under now. Morris may side with Republicans, but he is no conservative. He loves the big government liberalism that is killing this country.
comment:
Morris idolizes Roosevelt. I don't agree. From his description of him, I'd say he had done some remarkably bad things to the country. He is probably responsible for Wilson becoming president. Wilson was responsible for the Federal Reserve. He favored an income tax, which is a bad thing. The income tax enabled the big government that we suffer under now. Morris may side with Republicans, but he is no conservative. He loves the big government liberalism that is killing this country.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)