Steve's barking Why?No Unions?

The latest statistics suggest that the union movement is dying in America.
The reasons being is that the workers don't want livable wages. The workers don't want other people to fight for their rights, such as lawyers for the wealthy. The workers don't want to be paid the same as the fellow who works next to them after all every worker thinks he or she is the hardest worker at the job sight. Workers just don't want unions.

Speaking of unions and the law, how can judges not stop states from doing away with collective bargaining.
If I'm not mistaken it's implied in most states constitutions freedom of expression and the peoples right to have grievances heard by their elective official. Isn't that kind part of collective bargaining.

Now I don't know how it is in most states but in New York it's illegal to strike, now holding this to be true, and even if it's not true Governors have the upper hand. they can pretty much dictate terms. This being true one can only think of Governors like Scott Walker as a Punk A** dictator who can't negotiate out of a paper bag.   

Steve's barking so ya think ya can do better then Social Security

For those who think they can do better then Social Security if you had the money to invest instead of giving it to the government's annuity program that pays a cola, compare it to your 401 K and if you don't have one check with you uncle, aunt or cousin who have one. If the 401 k puts a side 13% of the salary and  when you retire you  can be getting more then the 8 to 22,000 a year then you might be right.
If only this statement would put an end to those stupid statements that claim how bad an investment Social Security is as an investment and you would be better off if you invested on your own (claiming that if you invested in government bonds with compounding you would be better off (The math  along with the yields don't add up).
A look at the 401 K is one way of looking if a person could do better if they invested the money that was taken out of a workers check.  It could get complicated because 13% is not the average one puts into a 401 K.
The formulas is something for math geeks to work on.

Steve's barking at robots taking away jobs

In the US and the European Union we have been so afraid of illegal aliens taking away jobs that we forgot the old nemesis industrialization and robots.
I just read some ware that drones are going to be flying Fed Ex packages and UPS will follow suite, opes there goes a whole mess of pilots.
AP had a story about driverless  cars in the future (Google cars I think they called them). Part of the package  will be that they would be able to pick up passengers like a taxi does now. These robot or drone vehicles could be buses and trucks that, buses picking up passengers and trucks delivering goods. What in G-ds name will happen to the jobs. Yes I know that some one has to build these cars buses, trucks and smart highways and too of cause operate these highways and vehicles to make sure they are running with out a hitch. Unfortunately one does not need as many workers, especially unskilled workers.

There's been talk of most of all the manufacturing jobs that were lost coming back to the US because no matter how cheep it's done overseas robots can do it cheaper, and they don't strike or complain about unsafe conditions.
Now I know that since the beginning of the industrial revolution there has been the fear of job loss.
Industries have even died out and jobs lost but it has always seems that more jobs have been created, but as in all things in this world past histories are never quite the same and this time things may be really different.

I don't think we'll have to worry about the coming robatation in this country, you have to have a strong power grid and it's falling apart of which were too cheap to fix.     

Steve's barking at moving because of high taxes

I heard it on the boob tube as I was surfing the channels people move to get away from high income taxes states or counties because they don't want to pay the high taxes. Now this conversation was brought on by a famous golfer who said he would have to re think were he lives (California) perhaps even leaning the US. 
Now on this channel that I just happen to stop at was a man and a woman I guess debating if wealthy people leave high income tax states for states that have no income tax. Now the man showed statistics that showed that the rich tend to leave high income states at a rate of less then 1%.  The women on the other hand stated that "all" studies show that people leave high income tax states for no income tax states.
You can take that statement that people are leaving high tax states. Now one can say that there are several reasons one leaves a states for another, such as most of the little or no tax states are in the south with a warm climate and most of the high tax states are in the North and with an aging population  the retires want to be warm. Another reason people leave states is because of jobs. Energy is big now, so North Dakota and Texas will be gaining population while Alaska population is stagnant, no new oil well.
Now my little peek at my state New York shows that the lower taxed counties are losing population while the higher taxed counties are gaining per the census (Go figure).
Now I can't figure out why there are more super rich in NY and Calf then in Fla and even Texas, after all these folks can move any were. 

Steve's barking at the privilege of gun ownership

Gun ownership in the United States is a privilege not a right.
There is no federal law in the United States that states that the citizens of the United State has the right of gun   ownership.
Now I'm looking at my handy dandy copy of the American Constitution, so I'll copy the second amendment to the Constitution. The amendment that reportedly states that a citizen has the right of gun ownership.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.   
Now reading these words, I don't see the were it is stated that any citizen who wants a firearm could have it.
It does say pretty clearly that if you are part of a well regulated that you can keep ( Not necessarily own) arms.
I looked in my dictionary to find out what is the meaning to bear arms. It stated to bear arms was to carry.
Well regulated means the same today as it did in the 1780s, like the banks are supposed to be regulated now but are not, well at least not well regulated.
Now I know that there are many of my countrymen who claim that the founding fathers of my great nation meant that a guns were a protection against the nation becoming tyrannical and guns should be used to protect the citizens from tyrants. We even have those claim the second amendment was put in place for the protection of one person and home, they do this by quoting some scholarly that was either written or purportedly said in some speech. Nonsense , if the framers of the second amendment wanted any of that verbiage in the amendment they would have put it in. Unfortunately we will never know what the real reason for the second amendment for  there is no recording of the debate. My guess the second amendment was sent to the states as an answer to Shay's rebellion were the soldiers had to break into an armory to get their weapons to put the rebellion down.
Now to make things a little more complicated, Any law that is passed now will be just a feel  good law, though it may save lives the laws will not stop massacres.

Now I'm going to write something that going to really bewilder any reader of this blog, gun violence will only decrease very little if the powers that be realize that the second amendment does not give anybody the right to own a arms. There over three hundred million guns in the US and no one in their right mind will try to take them away.
Perhaps if enough gun owners understand that gun ownership is a privileged not a right, they will help put together gun laws that will reduce gun violence in this country.

* If gun ownership stop tyrants from ruling a country how did the Taliban rule Afghanistan?
* If having a gun protects you from violence how come police are attacked?      

Steve's barking at the ghost of conservative republicans past

For those who believe that the Republic Party is dead as far as having A president, I bring you back to  the thrilling days of yesteryear "64 when the Republic Party especially the conservative wing was considered dead and buried only to have the ghost of conservatives past Richard Nixon beat the tried and true Liberal Hubert Humphrey (Of cause one could say that he was the last Liberal in the White House).
Judging from past history please don't believe that the libertarian- conservative wing of the Republican party will not come up from it's grave in presidential politics.


I want a  constructional amendment demanding democracy in presidential election.Winner by popular vote. One person, one voice.
* Money  drowns out the voice of many, making only the few to be heard. 

Steve's barking at healthy fat people deniers

This past week a new statistical study by the AMA suggest that being overweight doesn't mean that you'll die sooner then the person who has normal weight, the study even suggested that there is a 6% chance that the overweight person would live longer. After this study was published the deniers are coming out of the woodwork. The statistics are wrong,after all conventional wisdom for years have been saying that if you are fat you have so many diseases that are associated over weight. We have people who say of cause this survey is invalid, a person who dies of cancer  will not be overweight.
I don't know the rational of these deniers, but I can see were it's possible for overweight people to get  better health care, after all if a person is overweight a will look for things such as diabetes faster then a normal weight individual (?). Prior studies have shown that overweight individuals who work out live longer then normal individuals who live a sedentary life. One only hopes that those who don't like these results don't become like (climate change) global warming deniers.

Odd statistic, we in the United States have a lower life expectancy then most developed nation, that is until the US socialized medicine kicks in at 65. If you live to 65 you can expect to live longer then other developed countries.      .

Steve's barking that value money is nothing

What is money?
In economic terms money it's the storage of value.(I hope I'm getting it right, all you economist out there).
Hypothetically if it takes a worker last year 30 minutes to buy a dozen eggs and this year it takes  that worker 45 minutes to buy that same dozen eggs even though the price of the eggs went down, the value of the work is less.( For argument sake the union excepted lower wages to keep those jobs).
A person puts in a hundred dollars a month into a bank for thirty years along with paying off his mortgage, though some times the putting the hundred dollars a month was put off to help pay the mortgage. The mortgage is paid off, one can argue that the value of the money saved is greater then while the mortgage is being paid off.
A person invests money in the stock market, and makes a bundle, pulls most of the money out, that person can now buy better things then before he put his money in the market.(One can even say that the value of his original money (or investment) increased.
Another person put money into the market and the value of his stock decreases, were he is forced to take a loss. The value of his original money (investment) has decreased. This investor has to buy lesser quality of goods. One can argue that this person is caught up in inflation of his or her own making.


I understand that my reasoning may be hard to understand.
Money is the storage of value only if you let. The real value should be the goods and services that you receive from present or past work, even if that past work has been past on from generation to generation.    

Steve's barking at the limited free market

We in this country like to profess our love of the free market.
Our belief in the free market is so strong it will cure the common cold.
Now is it a free market if only a few companies control the production of oil?
Is it a free market when all the major banking house are in collusion?
Is it  a truly free market when a person gets health insurance when there are only a few insurance companies offering he same kind of services.
Question libertarians believe in the free market?
Do they believe that with out the government there would be a free market?
Is the US turning into a third world country because of the libertarians?
Was the US more prosperous when it was heavily regulated?
Do those who are against progressives believe that there would be a free market economy if we they didn't break up the monopolies?


Time have certainly changed it used to be conservatives vs liberals, now we have progressives vs libertarians.
Oh I'm not a conservative, I'm a libertarian.
Oh no I'm not a liberal, I'm a progressive.
Since when?
 

Steve's barking at why does my painter have to pay taxes

Why does my painter have to pay taxes?
After all the money that I pay him has already been taxed.
There is a large majority in this country that claims that dividends  from stocks shouldn't be taxed because the corporation has already been taxed and therefore the government is taxing the profits twice. Under that reasoning I'm asking why should my painter have to pay taxes on the wages I pay him for painting my apartment, after all I already paid taxes on the wages that I'm giving him. Of cause if ones an elitist, that person might say he's being taxed on wages, and one has got to be encouraged to invest. Of cause many of the companies with the highest stock values don't pay dividends (go figure). 
So in conclusion the value of work is less then the value of money received from investing.


* To be fair my independent contractor painter is probably not reporting his earnings to the IRA, or as I like to call it Greeking  or in the old fashion term being paid off the books.