There are three major political parties in the United States.
Unfortunately most people in this country don't realize it.
The three parties are in order of importance are Democrats, Whine and Cry (Tea Party) and the Republicans.
The Whine and Criers are a political party that is hiding out in the Republican Party (like a tape worm in a human). They believed that there was no difference between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party (just like Ralph Nader, and um some times me). The reason they attached themselves to the Republican Party is money and organization.
How do I know,I met some at my American Legion post and they said so.
As much as I think their ideas on taxes and the way the US government is run to be treacherous I found them to be sincere. They mean what they and say what they mean.
I can't say the same with Democrats and Republicans.
The Democrats had better take them seriously and learn how to deal with them.
The Republican Party as we know it has a more serious problem. They may become irrelevant.
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Steve's barking at why budget negotiation now?
As of July 27Th the Year if our lord 2011 a yes or no vote hasn't been done.
OK why there are negotiations going on as if those circus performers (known as federal elected official)
acting as they were doing a budget deal. The fact of the mater its a simple yes or no vote. If the congress doesn't want to borrow money so be it. The president can't do much about it. It say so in the constitution.
The country elected the anarchist, now were going to find out who is right.
Check back on August 6Th.
OK why there are negotiations going on as if those circus performers (known as federal elected official)
acting as they were doing a budget deal. The fact of the mater its a simple yes or no vote. If the congress doesn't want to borrow money so be it. The president can't do much about it. It say so in the constitution.
The country elected the anarchist, now were going to find out who is right.
Check back on August 6Th.
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Steve's barking at 3 stocks to short
I may be too late, but if I played the stock market I would short Intel, 3M, and Wynn resorts.
Why, there scapegoating the president.
Rule of thumb, if a company scapegoats someone or something you know they have a problem.
Intel, 3M and Wynn aren't the only ones scapegoating the president, but they're the only ones I remember.
Why, there scapegoating the president.
Rule of thumb, if a company scapegoats someone or something you know they have a problem.
Intel, 3M and Wynn aren't the only ones scapegoating the president, but they're the only ones I remember.
Sunday, July 24, 2011
Steve's barking at the preposed destroy America constitional Amendment
The Whine and Cry party in the form of Republicans in the house are demanding a balance budget amendment to our constitition.
If we had an amendment like that we wouldn't have been able to have fought in World War two.
We wouldn't be able to help victums of national disasters if these disasters happen after all the money that was budgeted is gone.
It appears to me with such an amendment the United States wouldn't be able to borrow to pay our bills in the case of a shortfall in revenue the budget wouldn't be balanced.
The United States has tried (though some would say not very successful) since the later part of the 20Th century lived up one of the reasons for the constitution as stated in the preamble, provide for the general welfare.
Those who want a balanced budget amendment do not believe in providing for the general welfare.
Those who want a balance budget amendment don't want to raise taxes, when the debate that our fore fathers had was how to raise revenue to pay for our revolutionary war debt as we could borrow again.
The debate was if we needed a strong centralized government to pay the debt or to continue to have lose confederation of states that unfortunately wasn't help pay the debt.
Oh by the way the strong centralized federalist won the day.
It was decided that local governments knew the ability of the citizens to pay their taxes. (Those who could afford more would pay more?)
Of cause things got muddled from day one but that's a different blog.
Getting back to the original premise, a constitutional balance budget amendment should be called lets destroy America as we know amendment.
To those congressmen who want a balance budget amendment, damn you fifth columnist.
If we had an amendment like that we wouldn't have been able to have fought in World War two.
We wouldn't be able to help victums of national disasters if these disasters happen after all the money that was budgeted is gone.
It appears to me with such an amendment the United States wouldn't be able to borrow to pay our bills in the case of a shortfall in revenue the budget wouldn't be balanced.
The United States has tried (though some would say not very successful) since the later part of the 20Th century lived up one of the reasons for the constitution as stated in the preamble, provide for the general welfare.
Those who want a balanced budget amendment do not believe in providing for the general welfare.
Those who want a balance budget amendment don't want to raise taxes, when the debate that our fore fathers had was how to raise revenue to pay for our revolutionary war debt as we could borrow again.
The debate was if we needed a strong centralized government to pay the debt or to continue to have lose confederation of states that unfortunately wasn't help pay the debt.
Oh by the way the strong centralized federalist won the day.
It was decided that local governments knew the ability of the citizens to pay their taxes. (Those who could afford more would pay more?)
Of cause things got muddled from day one but that's a different blog.
Getting back to the original premise, a constitutional balance budget amendment should be called lets destroy America as we know amendment.
To those congressmen who want a balance budget amendment, damn you fifth columnist.
Friday, July 22, 2011
Steve's barking at food and farms
The world is going hungry.
I know I'm part of the obese generation, so how can I state that the world is going hungry?
Lets assume that the United States is the bread basket of the world.
Any how we meaning the United States is in all probability will eliminate farm subsidies.
That doesn't seem like a bad idea, after all I keep reading about the great American debt.
The big question is will eliminating farm subsidies eliminate farms in this country, therefore making Argentina the bread basket of the world? When you have fewer lands being grained farmed and a growing world population logic says less grains in the world to eat more hunger.
In America we are eliminating farms that grew our fruits and vegetables because the land is more valuable then the produce.
The world is also running out of usable water(of cause you can never know this if you go to Las Vegas ).
Science is going to have to find more ways to recycle the waste water. Cheaper way to desalt salt water.
Science is going to have find a way to transport water cheaply from places that have water to places that have none cheaply.
As for the farms that have disappeared in this country we're going to have to go to vertical farming.
The main problem I see with this scenario is that the capitalist in this country would put the kibosh on adding food to this country and very possibly the world.
#Another muddy blog.
I know I'm part of the obese generation, so how can I state that the world is going hungry?
Lets assume that the United States is the bread basket of the world.
Any how we meaning the United States is in all probability will eliminate farm subsidies.
That doesn't seem like a bad idea, after all I keep reading about the great American debt.
The big question is will eliminating farm subsidies eliminate farms in this country, therefore making Argentina the bread basket of the world? When you have fewer lands being grained farmed and a growing world population logic says less grains in the world to eat more hunger.
In America we are eliminating farms that grew our fruits and vegetables because the land is more valuable then the produce.
The world is also running out of usable water(of cause you can never know this if you go to Las Vegas ).
Science is going to have to find more ways to recycle the waste water. Cheaper way to desalt salt water.
Science is going to have find a way to transport water cheaply from places that have water to places that have none cheaply.
As for the farms that have disappeared in this country we're going to have to go to vertical farming.
The main problem I see with this scenario is that the capitalist in this country would put the kibosh on adding food to this country and very possibly the world.
#Another muddy blog.
Thursday, July 21, 2011
steve's barking at health care in the US
The health care in the United States stink. Let me repeat myself the health care in the United States stinks. I'm not arguing who's got the best health care system, I'm just looking at the health care system in my country.
We really don't have enough doctors.
The insurance companies set the rates. One company can give a doctor let say $10,000 for a heart operation, an other company gives the same doctor let say $7,000 for the same procedure, which the doctor grudgingly excepts, he'll charge both insurance companies $15,000 which some one with out insurance will have to pay but the insurance companies pay only what rates that they set.
Every year it seems that the insurance raise their rates two or three times the inflation rate. They give the justification that doctor and hospital rates are going up yet our government wants to cut payments to doctors and hospitals that they pay through medicare and medicaid.
Who's making out well by the U.S. health care system?
The patient? I don't think so.
The doctors and the hospitals? Some but not all.
The health care insurance holders? No way, it's pay up or die.
The insurance company? Oh yea.
Pity us poor Americans, we like to bitch and moan, but change things for the better,never.
We really don't have enough doctors.
The insurance companies set the rates. One company can give a doctor let say $10,000 for a heart operation, an other company gives the same doctor let say $7,000 for the same procedure, which the doctor grudgingly excepts, he'll charge both insurance companies $15,000 which some one with out insurance will have to pay but the insurance companies pay only what rates that they set.
Every year it seems that the insurance raise their rates two or three times the inflation rate. They give the justification that doctor and hospital rates are going up yet our government wants to cut payments to doctors and hospitals that they pay through medicare and medicaid.
Who's making out well by the U.S. health care system?
The patient? I don't think so.
The doctors and the hospitals? Some but not all.
The health care insurance holders? No way, it's pay up or die.
The insurance company? Oh yea.
Pity us poor Americans, we like to bitch and moan, but change things for the better,never.
Saturday, July 16, 2011
Steve's barking at Education cheating
Cheating on standardized reading test in Atlanta.
Cheating on standardized test in Chicago.
What have these two city school system have in common?
The incentives to do well on standardized tests.
Is there a good chance that NYC teachers cheating charter schools and in public schools?
Yes?
Is there a quality control to catch cheating on the standardize test?
I doubt it.
Can we tell if our children are learning?
Only when the take the SATs or ACT and how well they do in life after high school.
I can only shrug my shoulders when I hear those arguments of how well were doing school our children in New York City schools.
*Read Freakonomics or maybe it was SuperFreakonomics about Chicago Schools.
Cheating on standardized test in Chicago.
What have these two city school system have in common?
The incentives to do well on standardized tests.
Is there a good chance that NYC teachers cheating charter schools and in public schools?
Yes?
Is there a quality control to catch cheating on the standardize test?
I doubt it.
Can we tell if our children are learning?
Only when the take the SATs or ACT and how well they do in life after high school.
I can only shrug my shoulders when I hear those arguments of how well were doing school our children in New York City schools.
*Read Freakonomics or maybe it was SuperFreakonomics about Chicago Schools.
Wednesday, July 13, 2011
Steve's barking at taking the social security money and run.
I hear almost every day. I even hear from the social security administration.
Try to put off as long as possible taking social security. After all you will get 25% more in your social security check if you wait till your 66 and not take it at 62 when you legal can start to collect. The feeling goes that if you can afford to hold off getting your social security you will make more money, after all 25% more in your social security check is nothing to sneeze at. I will agree if your working that's a good idea, but if your not you would be foolish even if you don't need Social Security.
Lets make believe that you would make $20,000 per year in social security if you collect at full retirement age at 66 and a minus of 25% from your check is $15,000.
The real truth is you make $15,000 a year in Social Security times the 4 years equal $60,000 dollars.
If all things stay the same (which we know isn't true but these numbers are probably still pretty close) a person will make $5,000 more a year, now if my math is correct it would take 12 years to break even.
Again if my math is correct 66 plus 12 equals 78 years old before they would break even.
Life expectancy in the United State is a little over 78 years.
Is it a good idea to Wait for your Social Security?
If you don't need the money why not invest the extra $5,000 dollars a year?
If you are advised by your financial advisor hold off collecting Social Security, run don't walk away from that person.
* I used 20,000 for that was an easy number to use.
* Taxes weren't taken into account but it really shouldn't change the idea of taking Social Security as soon as you can.
Try to put off as long as possible taking social security. After all you will get 25% more in your social security check if you wait till your 66 and not take it at 62 when you legal can start to collect. The feeling goes that if you can afford to hold off getting your social security you will make more money, after all 25% more in your social security check is nothing to sneeze at. I will agree if your working that's a good idea, but if your not you would be foolish even if you don't need Social Security.
Lets make believe that you would make $20,000 per year in social security if you collect at full retirement age at 66 and a minus of 25% from your check is $15,000.
The real truth is you make $15,000 a year in Social Security times the 4 years equal $60,000 dollars.
If all things stay the same (which we know isn't true but these numbers are probably still pretty close) a person will make $5,000 more a year, now if my math is correct it would take 12 years to break even.
Again if my math is correct 66 plus 12 equals 78 years old before they would break even.
Life expectancy in the United State is a little over 78 years.
Is it a good idea to Wait for your Social Security?
If you don't need the money why not invest the extra $5,000 dollars a year?
If you are advised by your financial advisor hold off collecting Social Security, run don't walk away from that person.
* I used 20,000 for that was an easy number to use.
* Taxes weren't taken into account but it really shouldn't change the idea of taking Social Security as soon as you can.
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
Steve's barking at economic terrorist
I bet most people don't know that there are economic terrorist in the United States.
These terrorist are called congressmen, or the more political correct term congressperson.
In other counties these terrorist hide out in a place called parliament.
On the the major international setting they hide out in the IMF and I believe they call themselves bankers.
These terrorist want to to away with subsidies such as farm, rail, and social services.
If I had my way, everyone would get drunk and puke on each other.
These terrorist are called congressmen, or the more political correct term congressperson.
In other counties these terrorist hide out in a place called parliament.
On the the major international setting they hide out in the IMF and I believe they call themselves bankers.
These terrorist want to to away with subsidies such as farm, rail, and social services.
If I had my way, everyone would get drunk and puke on each other.
Saturday, July 2, 2011
Steve's barking at no Basketball or Football this fall
Oh crisp, what am I going to do this fall. The NFL has locked out their product, I mean players.
They want a new collective bargaining agreement. They want to give the players a lesser percentage then they are giving them now, I really don't know what the percentage is 60/ 40 or something like that. Maybe they want it 40/60 split. The only thing I'm sure of is that I don't believe there will be football this year. I just feel it in my gut.
The owners in smaller markets want more money from those in larger richer markets, but that hasn't been stated.
Most money is from national television revenue, which is split evenly among all teams, even those teams that no one wants to watch. There are certain teams that can charge more for fannies in the stadium then other teams can. They also get money souvenirs and team logos ect. Now (and again I maybe wrong) it seems to me those that aren't making that kind of money are just plain jealous and for they want that kind of money. The only way they can get that extra money is by holding up the players and demanding that the players take less. They want to take money from a group that when they leave the job over 50% are broke. Of cause none of the owners are going broke, just some make more money then others. In economic terms I guess that those have nots want a bigger return for there money.
I hope I'm wrong after all look at all that revenue that will be lost (never mind the jobs will not be done)from vender's, hotels, and major manufactures like Nike that will be lost and never be made up, if there is no football played in the National Football this year.
Now let me write about an international game, basketball.
Do I believe there will be a strike (lock out) in the NBA that will last forever? Perhaps.
The league says that only 4 teams made money. I see no reason not to believe league.
Teams don't get that much money from there national TV contracts, so big market teams definitely do have an advantage, especially at making money. In that case, I kind of side with the owners who if they had any brains would split money with visiting teams from the gate. ( a socialist idea I know).
There has been talk of a hard cap, what happens if there are several injuries, those team play short handed.
Anyway this will cause the same economic problem that the NFL lock out will cause this country.
OH I forgot to mention beer consummation will go down and bars will lose patrons.
Oh I imagine marriage counselling will boom, along with hospital emergency rooms.
So much for foolish economic consequences what about my mental health?
It'll go down the tubes. I may even have to talk to the wife on days that I just like to hide out.
So guys, I'm begging you to end the lock outs, find common ground for new collective bargaining agreements. Do this for your country and that special countryman, me.
Oh well there's always college, please end the lock outs please. It's the patriotic duty for the clubs to play ball.
There will be football this year, marriage councilling will suffer till next year.
Thank you guys.
They want a new collective bargaining agreement. They want to give the players a lesser percentage then they are giving them now, I really don't know what the percentage is 60/ 40 or something like that. Maybe they want it 40/60 split. The only thing I'm sure of is that I don't believe there will be football this year. I just feel it in my gut.
The owners in smaller markets want more money from those in larger richer markets, but that hasn't been stated.
Most money is from national television revenue, which is split evenly among all teams, even those teams that no one wants to watch. There are certain teams that can charge more for fannies in the stadium then other teams can. They also get money souvenirs and team logos ect. Now (and again I maybe wrong) it seems to me those that aren't making that kind of money are just plain jealous and for they want that kind of money. The only way they can get that extra money is by holding up the players and demanding that the players take less. They want to take money from a group that when they leave the job over 50% are broke. Of cause none of the owners are going broke, just some make more money then others. In economic terms I guess that those have nots want a bigger return for there money.
I hope I'm wrong after all look at all that revenue that will be lost (never mind the jobs will not be done)from vender's, hotels, and major manufactures like Nike that will be lost and never be made up, if there is no football played in the National Football this year.
Now let me write about an international game, basketball.
Do I believe there will be a strike (lock out) in the NBA that will last forever? Perhaps.
The league says that only 4 teams made money. I see no reason not to believe league.
Teams don't get that much money from there national TV contracts, so big market teams definitely do have an advantage, especially at making money. In that case, I kind of side with the owners who if they had any brains would split money with visiting teams from the gate. ( a socialist idea I know).
There has been talk of a hard cap, what happens if there are several injuries, those team play short handed.
Anyway this will cause the same economic problem that the NFL lock out will cause this country.
OH I forgot to mention beer consummation will go down and bars will lose patrons.
Oh I imagine marriage counselling will boom, along with hospital emergency rooms.
So much for foolish economic consequences what about my mental health?
It'll go down the tubes. I may even have to talk to the wife on days that I just like to hide out.
So guys, I'm begging you to end the lock outs, find common ground for new collective bargaining agreements. Do this for your country and that special countryman, me.
Oh well there's always college, please end the lock outs please. It's the patriotic duty for the clubs to play ball.
There will be football this year, marriage councilling will suffer till next year.
Thank you guys.
Labels:
economics,
Just goofing off?,
rant,
sports
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)