Steve's barking one of the troubles with congress

One of the troubles with congress is they make the rules.
What the incentive to have spending limits for a run for political office when they can receive millions in (bribes) campaign contributions?
What's the incentive to have a ruling that you can't work at lobbying or in the industry that you set the rules for when you were in congress for at least 3 years?
 There is an incentive to make laws for companies and people who don't have the best interest of America and it's people. Just think of the two questions above.
Let's face it, us peons are screwed.  

Steve's barking why are economic sidebars important?

Economics should be easy.
You start with a seed.
I believe that the seed being the desire and the ability to pay for that desire.
The water and the nutrients are products that are wanted and the ability to produce those products.( Money, Factories, Ideas, Land for Agriculture, etc).
The sun light one can equate to money going into the product and one can even say the oxygen is the money made from the product.

Sidebars or what is the best way for growing (the economy).
 One can easily use statics and  what has been used before.
They can be a good source if they were honest. I believe them but like President Reagan use to say trust but verify.
Now I watch (sometimes as I hold my nose) Television economic commentators say thing like how we need a better educated work force in the sciences ( maybe true). How the government is screwing up the economy, or just the opposite, the government isn't doing enough. Sometimes I even hear the same people making say too much government interference, not enough is being done. What the government does or doesn't do is important as long as you remember the first paragraph.

I  like to read  economic articles and blogs as long as they don't mention a third party, that is generally a turn off unless it is written in jest. 

Steve's barking at zipperheads

What are zipperheads?
Zipperheads are smart people that in order to get ahead in life have a zipper in the back of their heads and take their brains out. Think of elected officials in the good old US of A.
I wonder if it's true of politicians all over the world?

Steve's barking who's speaking up for the Isrealis who come from Arab countries

I hear on the boob tube and read in the paper about this group and that who want to boycott Israel because of what they call Israel and the occupation of Palestine land. There is even an ex-president who calls what's happening in Israel apartheid. It seems that everybody speaks for the Muslim Arab, the Christian Arab, and every other Arab who has a religion except the Jewish Arab.
Now the Jewish population of Israel is over 50% of those coming from Northern Africa.
Didn't they come because they were second class citizens in their old countries?
Didn't they come out of fear for their lives?
Weren't they afraid of what happened in Nazi Germany would happen to them?
It would appear to me that those who criticize Israel are really talking about European Jews (Askenizey) and when you take sides in a conflict were you're not involved one should look at the whole story.

I used to hear the stories of the Russian Jews, very rarely did I hear of the Iraq Jews, or Syrian Jews or for any of the Arab countries. I heard some stories after they escaped.
I read about them now from the Jewish agency only when they what to rebuke the claims of the Palestinians.
There should have been  ongoing information blitz from the beginning of the state of Israel till now.

I have the desire to boycott the boycotters of Israel because of there ignorance of the plight of the Arab Jew and if they didn't call Jordon and Egypt occupiers.

If Aljzeera wanted to win points on honest reporting they would report on the Arab Jews of Israel and how they were treated in their counties of origin.

Steve's barking privacy and an open government?

Why are those who a complaining that government is listening in on American secrets are in general the same people who demand open government?
In a democracy they say there should be no secrets from the people.
In a free society government shouldn't know what the people are saying to one another.
Question is a free society exclusionary from a democratic society?
Question does a majority rule society a free society because those in the majority hold back the rights  of the minority ( think of the old segregation in the south)?
Question how can a press question the government about privacy of it's citizens when at the same time dumpster dive and hound celebrities ( who just so happen to be private citizens) all in the name of freedom of the press?
Why do some people complain about violation of the fourth amendment for listening in on conversation and even government reading e mails and think it's alright to stop some one on the street
and frisk them ( which by the way we have the fourth amendment according to most American history books is because the British employed stop and frisk in colonial times)?
Maybe the US government should use the Terry ruling to explain why they can legally obtain e mail records and telephone conversations.

There is a Motown record of the way I feel- Ball of Confusion.

Steve' barking Why do news shows talk about rival networks news show

What has become of my world, why in the heck would a so called news show talk about a rival networks news show? Oh look how stupid they are? Oh she or he is such a bozo? Back in the day it was unheard of to  mention an other networks work and reporters.
Today all the shows on the so called cable news channels think they're the daily show.

Steve's barking the beginning of the end or the end of the beginning of American austerity?

Stop the presses, Macy's, Walmart, and even that new great innovative retailer Amazon had a down quarter( Amazon actually lost money).
Now I am personally sadden by this but I'm not surprised. If you'r taking money out of consumers pocket books a reasonable person can expect less spending by these very same consumers.
Now in case anyone doesn't follow what I'm writing about, the United States is going through what we call a Sequester. A Sequester is the US version of a European austerity budget.
Now if my mind isn't playing tricks on me the Sequester started about the same time as the beginning of this retail quarter. A logical person can make the assumption that some one who is furloughed losing a days pay once a month is going to have less money to spend ( or to save) cutting into buying power of the federal consumer (worker).
Will the counties top retailer persuade congress to end the Sequester?
Assuming that they can't persuade congress to end the Sequester will they start laying people off?
If these great retailers start laying off people wouldn't the President be blamed even though it's not his fault?
Would China, Japan, European Union head for an economic down turn?
If those counties have an economic down turn, wouldn't that hurt economically all of the Americas and Russia by curtailing much of their exports?  
Is the next great depression around the corner?  

The American consumers are paying down their dept,and that's being herald as a good thing by many.
I find it a scary thing, and it's a better indicator that consumer confidence is waning then any survey.
Could it be that an invisible hand is showing the federal workers to batten down the hatches for the stormy economic times ahead.

I'm looking for a deficit spike at the beginning of next year do to the spike in money being returned to the federal workers on their tax returns, and tax receipts  being lower do too fewer workers and lower profits.

Steve's barking money doesn't talk it shouts

Despite the fact that money in itself doesn't have a mouth, those who have money do.
Money when trying to convince doesn't talk, it shouts.
The higher the amount of money the loader the shouting.
Money shouts so loud it can drown out all other voices, as if those voices don't exist.
Money can shout so loud and so long that it can convince other wise intelligent people to believe really stupid stuff.
Money can be so loud and convincing it can( for the lack of better definition) brainwash the people.
If we let too much money into our democracy, we can kiss it good bye.

Steve's barking Mayor Mike Bloomberg fails 5th grade reading comprehension test

On August 12, 2013 took a reading comprehensive test.
There was only one question. on a single paragraph.
Paragraph :
The right of the people to be secure in their person, house, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but on probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the person or things to be seized.
Answering the question is it alright for the police to stop and search a person to prevent crime after reading that paragraph he answered of cause it is. It's an important tool in fighting crime.

*The question with stop and frisk and the Terry decision of the (Liberal) Warren Court states that stopping an individual can be constitutional if the police have a reasonable suspicion of a crime and in order to protect themselves they may pat down and use as evidence any found.
Much has been written about the Terry Supreme Court decision and the general rule is that stop and frisk should be used for a police officer's protection not to gather evidence.

The other question for Mayor Mike can you do the math. 88% of the over two million stop and frisk involve nothing being found. That does not equal what the Terry decision warrants. 

  

Steve's barking Can this be the end of the nation state?

The large nation state and even some of those smaller nation states seems to be in danger of imploding. Some for the reason that they seem to think that having draconian measures put on their people to enforce the rules of outside forces ( think Greece, Ireland and Portugal ect).
Some because of what those pesky talking heads like to call sectarian violence.
Is the world going back to prehistoric times that instead if the nation state we had a loss confederation of tribes?
The end of the rule of nations can be looked on as a call for freedom and the tribes of the world demanding that they be ruled the way they want to be ruled.

The reason that makes the United States different from most nations is the tolerance of  the differences of the different tribes, even though we don't quite understand this. Though out the United States' history we've had conflict because of intolerance of some of our tribes and their demand that
their intolerance be the rule of the land, all this in the name of democracy.

*I look at the Middle East and see nations of minority rule, even when with a democratic process that happened in Egypt before the latest upheaval. The democratic elected government didn't think of the other tribes and truth be told they are a minority.
In Israel  a truly minority of the populace runs the government and they don't even get a very large vote.

** Hopefully those who read this blog have a understanding as to what I've just written.
It's not the usual.

Steve's barking calling Dr. Quack in Bush

This week on of the fittest ex presidents of the United States had a stint put in because his doctor found a blocked artery.No fatty he.
Another ex president had physical problems so he has become a vegan, says he never felt heather.
I've sen recent pictures of the ex-pres, and he doesn't look good. My impression of a strict vegan diet is that one has a harder time fighting disease. So if President Clinton thinks he's heather with a  vegan diet, one can only hope that he's not the healthiest person in the cemetery.

Can a person like me on medicare get a stint or only those who can afford Rolls Royce medicine either by paying for it or by position in life are the only ones in the US of A who get stints?
Speaking of health, just how healthy is mayor Mike?
I understand that I'm not the healthiest person in the world because I'm (to put it mildly) fat, but how much more unhealthy am I then anybody who is on medicare? How much is this obesity health obsession due to ascetic prejudice?  

Steve's barking entitlements good, curbing entitlements bad

Entitlements are a good thing for the economics of a country.
Look at the United States. How prosperous this country is when poppy and mommy can take care of themselves in there old age.
Now I do recall that as a youngster several of my friends parents would take care of their grandparents. It was a good arrangement when my friends were young, mom and pop could go to work, and my friends were looked after by their grandparent. As they got older this arrangement wasn't so good anymore. There became a strain on the household. Especially if  the grandparent got sick. Then of cause Medicare came along, and the family budget wasn't so confined. A new car could be purchased every five years., or borrowing for college wasn't such a hardship as the parents could help the child.
In days gone by the last liberal president ,Nixon got through congress passed a permanent cola for Social Security, unfortunately presidents that came after him kept increasing the percentage that Medicare recipients had  to pay for their doctors insurance ( Medicare part B) kept rising along with the actual cost of what the doctor was allowed to charge Medicare, so in some years the Social Security beneficiary would actually lose money.
Getting back to the original premise, food stamps help those in need (of which there are too way too many) buy food, in some cases helping the small farmer and in other cases helping the big conglomerate, in either case more work is created.
Let's assume that the cost to the beneficiary goes up, wouldn't the clients see the doctor less there by lessoning the need for a large staff in the doctors office, cutting jobs.
Let's get back to Social Security. I'm making the statement that the more money the bottom rung of the retires have the better for the bottom line of American business.
Does anybody in congress understand the preamble to the constitution that the country must promote the general welfare and that includes food stamps, Medicare,Medicaid, and Social Security in the modern world.
Those who would cut entitlements are very Christian, Jewish, or Muslim, for all those religions believe in taking care of the less fortunate. (It wouldn't surprise me if Hinduism and Buddhism has the same tenants to them).

Steve's barking at cheating ( athletes) risk, reward

Oh no baseball is doing the unthinkable, they're going after player who used performance enhancing drugs.
They're doing it for the best interest of the game. The fans want it, or so the commissioner believes.
I kinda thought that professional sports are star and winning driven.
The bigger the star the more money the star makes. What does that mean in economic terms?
The greater the reward, the greater the incentive to cheat.
Bankers did it, and we got the public get punished, athletes do it and they get punished.
Heck even now I understand that Goldman Sachs is cheating by manipulating the price of aluminum.
I believe that those fellows who call themselves economist call this risk reward.
To many of us humans this cheating risk reward is in our DNA. How many of my peers cheated to get a better grade?

Armature sports has just as much cheating as professional sports, I guess it must be the need to win.
Is the need to win in the human DNA. How else can one explain a person who has more money then he or she needs, demands and get more money just because the guy or girl down the block doing the same job gets more money, that person believes that they should make more justifiable or not.


* Baseball is risking loosing fans, especially those who are in towns that have no chance of making the playoffs, they come out to see the stars.
**Baseball has had cheating since the first paid ball player. Players spiking other players, throwing illegal pitches (hall of  fame pitcher  Gaylord Perry caught with a emery board to scuff up the ball comes to mind).
*** When one is caught cheating blame some one else, and or ignorance. ( I thought it was acne cream said the star athlete) ( The government wanted me to give the non credit worth loans said the banker).