Wednesday, July 22, 2009

My 2-cents

by jwright
.
.
Comedian Steven Wright once said, "If you get a penny for your thoughts, why do we always put our '2-cents' in?"
.
Real Politics columnist John Stossel writes on the very confusing issue of national health care reform: “It's crazy for a group of mere mortals to try to design 15% of the U.S. economy. It's even crazier to do it by August. Yet that is what some members of Congress presume to do. They intend, as the New York Times puts it, ‘to reinvent the nation's health care system’. Let that sink in. A handful of people who probably never even ran a small business actually think they can reinvent the health care system.”
.
Stossel gives the congressional legislators credit for being mere mortals. I’d liken them more to being arrogant snake oil salesmen with blown dried hair and good quality suits. There was a saying that the definition of an expert is anyone more than 25 miles from home. This appears to be the case of the lawmakers who are attempting to follow President Obama’s orders and overhaul (or possibly ruin?) our national health care system.
.
From the liberal NY Times: “Three of the five Congressional committees working on legislation to reinvent the nation’s health care system delivered bills this week along the lines proposed by President Obama. Instead of celebrating their success, many Democrats were apprehensive, nervous and defensive.” That’s understandable. Much of what they are proposing is so bizarre that even the unwashed, average American can understand it. Recent national polls reflect it’s not to their liking.
.
The lawmakers can’t predict it’s eventual cost in new taxes, or if it actually improves the system or replaces it with what Canada and the UK currently “enjoy.” Still, President Obama is pressing hard for something now. Too often, and unfortunately, what a bill contains is secondary to its passing. This controversial bill will affect everyone, forever. Why the rush? Do it right.
.
jaq~
.
Information sources:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/07/22/arrogance_97561.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/18/health/policy/18health.html?_r=3&hp

Friday, July 17, 2009

Is Your Home Really Your Castle?

by j. wright
.
So you think “your home is your castle?” Not if the U.S. Senate passes the questionable “climate” bill the House of Representatives passed last week on a 219-212 vote. It legislates mandatory home inspections by federal regulators (Big Brother?) who will demand to audit every aspect of your home under the threat of substantial and repeated fines if their visits are denied or their demands not satisfied.
.
The inspectors shall request copies of utility bills, or permission to obtain copies from your utility companies and use them to produce an estimate of generalized heating and cooling end-uses; and will inspect for R-values of wall/ceiling/floor insulation; type of windows: glazing type and frame material; type, model number, and location of heating/cooling system, ductwork, location and R-value of duct insulation; type of foundation if crawl, basement, or slab; the age and efficiency of your hardwired light fixtures and screw-in bulbs and the number of water faucets, showerheads just to name a few areas.
.
Does this mandatory intervention violate the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guaranteeing protection from unreasonable search and seizure? “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
..
This legislation was fueled on the automatic assumption that global warming is taking place and it attributes to rising CO2 levels, despite the fact that this is a highly contentious question and is being rejected by more and more international scientists, but who cares? This government knows best even when it ignores the Constitution. Your choice: federal fines, or do you spend dollars you can’t spare to upgrade?
.
jaq~

Wednesday, July 8, 2009

Step Two in Totalitarianism - Mandatory Home Inspections

by jwright-July 8, 2009
.
So you think “your home is your castle?” Maybe not if the U.S. Senate actually passes the questionable “climate” bill the House of Representatives passed last week on a 219-212 vote. It legislates mandatory home inspections by federal government regulators (Big Brother?) who will demand to audit every aspect of your home under the threat of substantial and repeated fines if their visits are denied or their demands not satisfied.

The inspectors shall request copies of utility bills, or permission to obtain copies from your utility companies and use them to produce an estimate of generalized end-uses (heating, and cooling); and then will inspect for R-values of wall/ceiling/floor insulation; Square footage and approximate age of home; Type of windows: glazing type(s) and frame material(s); Type, model number, and location of heating/cooling system(s); Type of ductwork, location and R-value of duct insulation, and any indications of previous duct sealing; Type of foundation if crawl, basement, or slab; Checklist of common air-leakage sites; Estimated age and efficiency of major appliances such as dishwashers, refrigerators, freezers, washers and dryers; Number and type of hardwired light fixtures and screw-in bulbs in portable lamps suitable for energy efficient re-lamping; Visual indications of condensation; Presence and location of exhaust fans, and whether they are vented outdoors; Number and type of water faucets, showerheads; and Presence and type(s) of combustion equipment; blocked chimney, and corroded or missing vent connections

This legislation was fueled on the automatic assumption that global warming is taking place and it attributes to rising CO2 levels, despite the fact that this is a highly contentious question and is being rejected by more and more international scientists, but who cares? Government knows best. If your home doesn’t pass muster, what then? Federal fines, or do you spend dollars you can’t spare to upgrade?


jaq~
.
Information source: http://www.infowars.com/bureaucrats-will-carry-out-mandatory-home-inspections-under-climate-bill/

Wednesday, July 1, 2009

Step One in Totalitarianism - Cap and Trade

by jwright



HEADLINE: Dollar Falls Most in Month as China Urges New Reserve Currency. That was the June 27 headline at Bloomberg.com, published by the Bloomberg Professional, a service terminal that provides real-time financial news, market data, and analysis.
.
The U.S. Dollar declined the most against the Euro and dropped in value versus the Yen after China challenged Obamanomics and repeated its call for a new global currency.
.
What does the decline in value of the dollar mean for you and me? In a capsule, according to the Gerson Lehman Group, its devaluation means higher prices for our every day goods and commodities, as they are expected to continue to rise along with the value of energy, oil, precious and base metals. Fuel costs will increase, and consumer credit will shrink while inflation increases (punishing those like me and others on a fixed income).
.
The opponents of the president’s ominous Cap-and-Trade bill that passed recently in the U.S. House of Representatives said much the same. In the opinion of millions it’s a new, unfair tax on energy consumption that will essentially increase the costs of everything we use. Slowdowns in corporate production will ensue. American businesses relocating offshore would result, subsequently followed with the loss of American jobs.

Some politicians say the bill makes sense because if energy costs rise, consumption will be less. The nebulous reasoning is that we’ll then lessen our dependence on foreign oil and somehow change our planet’s climate. Is this like rearranging the chairs in a restaurant’s public smoking section while the growing smoke cloud lingers everywhere? With China and India’s growth, the pollution on the planet increases while our cost of living increases and our standard of living erodes, the economy continues to founder, and worse, the central federal government attains more power. We are the losers.

Sources: www.bloomberg.com; www.glgroup.com/
.
jaq~

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Why This Particular Health Care Reform Package?

by j. wright
.
A clever quote from a former U.S Senator, Illinois Republican Everett McKinley Dirksen said, "A million here, a million there, soon adds up to real money."

Not any more, at least if you are an elected legislator working in Washington, D. C.

Remember as recently as last fall when President Bush's Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson asked for a then astronomical $700 billion dollars ($700,000,000,000.00) which was approved after much wailing and gnashing of Congressional teeth. Called TARP for Troubled Asset Relief Program, it expanded beyond the $700 billion before leaving the Senate. Congress entrusted Paulson, unconstitutionally, to "fix" the financial mess; it's still with us. Where did the $700 billion in taxpayer dollars go?

Now we are getting used to larger numbers: trillions with 12 zeroes. Dirksen's millions here and there pale in comparison. President Obama started pushing a new health care reform package that was to top out at $1.trillion (1,000,000,000,000.00) over ten years. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) took a closer look and came up with $1.6 trillion. Today, their revised figure is $3 trillion. This astronomical amount of future taxpayer debt (Quoting Obama: we don’t have the money) will supposedly provide Americans with a questionable health care program similar to that of the UK and Canada. That's something to look forward to.

Why are we considering this? To provide access or coverage for some unverified number of Americans who for a multitude of reasons, some personal, do not have health insurance coverage? Even the various plans being considered do not cover everyone, that’s been reported for weeks. So how much will this boondoggle really cost if it passes? Many of the legislators are in the dark though they seem willing to pass the bill anyway. Can "We the People" stop them? Maybe when pigs fly. We need health care reform but is this it?


jaq~

Wednesday, June 10, 2009

Do We Have An Over-reaching Executive Administration?

by j. wright


Two things in the national political works at this writing concern me greatly. One that may become enacted is the proposed appointment by President Obama of an “Executive-Pay Czar,” or as sometimes referred to in the media, a “Master of Compensation.” This appointed “Master,” not one selected or approved by Congress, will be filled by attorney Kenneth Feinberg, formerly on vice-president Joe Biden’s economic advisory staff. Feinberg’s job will be to ensure that private companies that received tazpayer bailout dollars from the questionable Troubled Asset Relief Fund (TARP) are abiding by the new executive pay levels put in place by Obama.

To begin with, TARP’s constitutionality was highly questionable when the Democrat controlled Congress relinquished its sovereign responsibility for the disbursement of the national treasury to the Executive branch, namely the Secretary of the Treasury under former president Bush and now under Obama. Add to that, the naming of a "Pay Czar" is another affront to the American free enterprise system exercised by the Executive branch whose apparent intention is to control private business expenditures. It has been reported that the new federal “Pay Czar’s” authority could possibly even reach into private companies that were NOT recipients of TARP. This the America where I grew up? Hardly.

The other issue is how Chrysler Corporation’s remaining debt holders had their day before the U.S. Supreme Court and lost, leaving the Indiana pensioners whose retirement savings were wrapped up in Chrysler bonds, standing alone in challenging Obama and his administration who earlier had called for “shared sacrifice” in this issue.

As National Review printed recently: “It should be noted that Chrysler’s unions, unsecured creditors who jumped to the head of the line thanks to White House power play, did not give an inch on their base pay or pension terms. Who would call that shared sacrifice?”

jaq~


National Review quote source: http://planetgore.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTA4MTRlYmFiODhhNGU5MDI0YjhhMGNkZTY1NzAwY2Y=.

Friday, May 22, 2009

Whom to Advise in the Ongoing Israeli-Palestinian Issue

by jwright

In reading Philadelphia Inquirer columnist and editorial board member Trudy Rubin’s recent column in the Cadillac News, I found myself amazed at her naiveté in general with the ongoing, never ending Israeli-Palestinian issue.

Ms. Rubin suggested that President Obama “coulda-woulda-shoulda” said things much differently when meeting earlier with Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu at the White House and she offered some examples.

I’m not an expert on mid-east politics but my memory still works. The suggestion that Israeli should again seriously recognize a sovereign Palestinian state brings to mind what happened when the Israel government decided to remove itself, it’s people and military from the contentious Gaza Strip neighboring Egypt. This was a unilateral act on Israel’s part to show the Palestinians and their neighboring Arab state supporters that peaceful coexistence might be possible. It takes two to tango.

Israel discovered too late when Hamas, the elected Palestinian terrorist government of the Gaza Strip, began to ruthlessly and indiscriminately shower the neighboring Israeli villages and towns with rockets, killing and injuring hundreds of innocent men, women and children. All while the United Nations looked the other way. Very convenient for Hamas, a declared enemy of Israel who has vowed to never recognize Israel as a Jewish State, or as a sovereign state at all.

I also don’t know Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu personally but I’d wager that he is not interested in having a repeat of that mindless behavior coming from the West Bank from a newly formed sovereign Palestinian State. My suggestion would be to not advise Israeli on what to do but instead direct any further discussion at the terrorist government in Gaza, and to any potential Palestinian terrorists in the West Bank. In my biased opinion, that’s who requires that proverbial trip to the woodshed.
.
jaq~