Say it ain't so! Obama didn't attend the annual Gridiron Show in Washington last night. Is the bloom off the rose? Is the love affair over between the press and the Messiah? His "story" was that he had spring break plans in Chicago with his daughters but actually was at Camp David. When the lies start in a relationship can the end be far off?
I suspect that he is just playing hard-to-get and the press will continue to worship him. Ain't love grand?!!!!
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Saturday, March 21, 2009
The Same Old Song
Yesterday I was working from home, trying to get excited about a project, when I received a call from some shill for Newt Gingrich. The premise of the call was a survey, which I sometimes will respond to. So she plays a short message from Newt and then comes back begging for money to help him "change America". I allowed to her that Newt must be smoking some strong stuff if he thinks I am giving him or any other Republican any money now. I explained that I was fully aware of his record and that he was no better than the rest of those idiots in office except that he can't spend our tax money right now. After my short tirade I hung up, feeling good about getting it off my chest. I have abusing Republicans and Democrats alike for the past three years and I hope they will eventually get the message.
The point of this story is not to brag about my lack of control. I pray for tolerance but the Lord hasn't gifted me with it in this area. The point is to illustrate that politicians, regardless of affiliation, are primarily interested in separating you from your money, either for themselves or to give to someone else. While this is not earth-shattering news it would be nice if we had some of them that would run on a platform of getting out of my life and my pocket. That used to be the position of the Republican party but they are just as intrusive, if not more so, than the Democrats. And the sad part of it is that the masses are going to the trough, looking for a handout. We have been told that the only way to get something done is for the government to do it and most of the country has bought it. I have several examples of where that is not the case:
Social Security (it makes Bernie Madoff look like a piker)
Medicare (Parts A, B & D)
Medicaid (any state)
The Veterans Administration
Anyone that would like to argue to me that these operations are efficiently run, let's go.
Many years ago I was one of the "evil rich" because I had a decent job. I still have friends in that category that now have a big bull's eye on their backs. I saw the impediments to keeping your earnings growing each year and decided I would do something that I enjoyed rather than continue to fight it. I probably saved myself a couple of ulcers and maybe a heart attack by doing it. This worked for me but where would these bloodsuckers be if all of the producers in our society had the same attitude? If the government keeps redistributing wealth, removing incentives to produce, they will eventually kill the golden goose. Then we will be like Europe.
God Forbid!!!
The point of this story is not to brag about my lack of control. I pray for tolerance but the Lord hasn't gifted me with it in this area. The point is to illustrate that politicians, regardless of affiliation, are primarily interested in separating you from your money, either for themselves or to give to someone else. While this is not earth-shattering news it would be nice if we had some of them that would run on a platform of getting out of my life and my pocket. That used to be the position of the Republican party but they are just as intrusive, if not more so, than the Democrats. And the sad part of it is that the masses are going to the trough, looking for a handout. We have been told that the only way to get something done is for the government to do it and most of the country has bought it. I have several examples of where that is not the case:
Social Security (it makes Bernie Madoff look like a piker)
Medicare (Parts A, B & D)
Medicaid (any state)
The Veterans Administration
Anyone that would like to argue to me that these operations are efficiently run, let's go.
Many years ago I was one of the "evil rich" because I had a decent job. I still have friends in that category that now have a big bull's eye on their backs. I saw the impediments to keeping your earnings growing each year and decided I would do something that I enjoyed rather than continue to fight it. I probably saved myself a couple of ulcers and maybe a heart attack by doing it. This worked for me but where would these bloodsuckers be if all of the producers in our society had the same attitude? If the government keeps redistributing wealth, removing incentives to produce, they will eventually kill the golden goose. Then we will be like Europe.
God Forbid!!!
Friday, March 20, 2009
What's Wrong With This Picture?
I have been following with amusement the folly surrounding the payout of $165 million in retention bonuses to AIG employees. In case you have been on the former planet Pluto for the past two weeks AIG paid out these bonuses in accordance with provisions of contracts signed by the employees and management. These employees are in the financial products division, those evil doers that are responsible, apparently, for everything just short of the cruxifiction of Christ, and there are rumors they may have played a part in that. The largest of these bonuses, some $6.4 million, as well as some smaller ones are being returned, the recipients being shamed into it by the likes of Barney Frank (The Banking Queen) and the Teleprompter in Chief, Barack Obama. The latest assault on these "bastards" was passed by the House last night tacking a 90% tax on amounts in excess of $250,000. This passed with 318 votes, which in itself is pretty amazing. Whether the coffee grinder that is the Senate will pass it remains to be seen. Of course this move is being cheered by the pitch-fork carrying protesters in the street, sending death threats to the bonus recipients and their families. What a country!
There are so many things wrong I hardly know where to start. Let us begin with contract law. Imagine you are one of these employees at AIG back in September. You are a quickly rising star at the largest insurance company in the world and heretofore everything is rosey. You are making a six figure income but the real money comes in a performance bonus at the end of the year. Oops! Come to find out that crap you have been selling is worth less than the paper it is written on and, instead of making money, the company is losing billions. Bye, bye performance bonus and hello unemployment line. Here comes the government saying the company is too big to fail and throwing billions at the problem to fix it. The only problem is that, while politicians are great and lying and giving speeches(am I being redundant?), They know less about these insurance contracts and how to value them than any second grader. They need these people to help them unravel this mess. So the management of AIG agree to retention bonuses to these employees to assure that they have the necessary talent to get the job done. They signed a contract! The employees, who broke no laws, agreed to stay and help fix this mess, passing on opportunities with other private sector firms, which would allow them to earn similar money to what they were making at AIG. The Treasury Department and Chris Dodd signed off on them. Most of us would be reasonably comfortable that the deal was done. Hah!
Now what is happening is that the jack-booted thugs in the state and federal government are endeavoring to void legal contracts, pass a retroactive tax on specific individuals, and stir up the class envy constituents on the street. According to the constitution they have no right to do the first two and shame on them for doing the third. Sadly the head instigator in this mess is the President. Most members of Congress agree that what they are trying to do is probably unconstitutional. So why do it? For show that is why! Because most of their constituents have never made the kind of money the bonus recipients are receiving nor will they ever. The fact that government money is involved is just a tool to justify these illegal acts.
So you are one of these evil doers, what do you do? One, you give the bonus back and quit, letting them fix the mess themselves. Two, you keep the money, meet the terms of the contract, then quit. Third, you give back the bonus and stay on at what ever compensation Lord Obama deems appropriate. If you decide to keep the money you know that you will probably spend a large portion on lawyers trying to hold on to it. The sad fact is that even if you are right it will cost you dearly to prove it.
After the furor has died down the government, 80% equity holder in AIG, still has a mess to fix. This harkens back to the savings and loan failures of the 1980's. The savings and loans failed, the Resolution Trust Corp. took them over, and found buyers for them. This was before the days of bundling mortgages and selling them off was commonplace. After the dust settled it was determined that many financially savvy companies bought these assets and deep discounts to their value and made a killing through tax incentives and the resale of the assets. I know because I was working for such a company at the time. This was because the people at the RTC were way overmatched by the private sector and essentially had a fire sale just to get rid of the assets. The losers in this endeavor was, as usual, the taxpayers. Hopefully this will not happen again but it looks like it will.
I am not a bit happy about any of the financial upheaval going on right now. There is plenty of blame to go around, a big portion of which should go to the actions of the government for the past 20 years. Through tax policy and attempts at social engineering they created and environment to allow these things to happen. It would be nice to see this change but, sadly, history has a habit of repeating itself.
There are so many things wrong I hardly know where to start. Let us begin with contract law. Imagine you are one of these employees at AIG back in September. You are a quickly rising star at the largest insurance company in the world and heretofore everything is rosey. You are making a six figure income but the real money comes in a performance bonus at the end of the year. Oops! Come to find out that crap you have been selling is worth less than the paper it is written on and, instead of making money, the company is losing billions. Bye, bye performance bonus and hello unemployment line. Here comes the government saying the company is too big to fail and throwing billions at the problem to fix it. The only problem is that, while politicians are great and lying and giving speeches(am I being redundant?), They know less about these insurance contracts and how to value them than any second grader. They need these people to help them unravel this mess. So the management of AIG agree to retention bonuses to these employees to assure that they have the necessary talent to get the job done. They signed a contract! The employees, who broke no laws, agreed to stay and help fix this mess, passing on opportunities with other private sector firms, which would allow them to earn similar money to what they were making at AIG. The Treasury Department and Chris Dodd signed off on them. Most of us would be reasonably comfortable that the deal was done. Hah!
Now what is happening is that the jack-booted thugs in the state and federal government are endeavoring to void legal contracts, pass a retroactive tax on specific individuals, and stir up the class envy constituents on the street. According to the constitution they have no right to do the first two and shame on them for doing the third. Sadly the head instigator in this mess is the President. Most members of Congress agree that what they are trying to do is probably unconstitutional. So why do it? For show that is why! Because most of their constituents have never made the kind of money the bonus recipients are receiving nor will they ever. The fact that government money is involved is just a tool to justify these illegal acts.
So you are one of these evil doers, what do you do? One, you give the bonus back and quit, letting them fix the mess themselves. Two, you keep the money, meet the terms of the contract, then quit. Third, you give back the bonus and stay on at what ever compensation Lord Obama deems appropriate. If you decide to keep the money you know that you will probably spend a large portion on lawyers trying to hold on to it. The sad fact is that even if you are right it will cost you dearly to prove it.
After the furor has died down the government, 80% equity holder in AIG, still has a mess to fix. This harkens back to the savings and loan failures of the 1980's. The savings and loans failed, the Resolution Trust Corp. took them over, and found buyers for them. This was before the days of bundling mortgages and selling them off was commonplace. After the dust settled it was determined that many financially savvy companies bought these assets and deep discounts to their value and made a killing through tax incentives and the resale of the assets. I know because I was working for such a company at the time. This was because the people at the RTC were way overmatched by the private sector and essentially had a fire sale just to get rid of the assets. The losers in this endeavor was, as usual, the taxpayers. Hopefully this will not happen again but it looks like it will.
I am not a bit happy about any of the financial upheaval going on right now. There is plenty of blame to go around, a big portion of which should go to the actions of the government for the past 20 years. Through tax policy and attempts at social engineering they created and environment to allow these things to happen. It would be nice to see this change but, sadly, history has a habit of repeating itself.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Science for Science's Sake
It appears that the president is about to reverse the ban on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research that was instituted by his predecessor in 2001. While this is not unexpected it is a little disconcerting that, after what has been learned about the use of adult stem cells for similar research, the decision is being hailed as the only thing stopping us from curing Parkinson's, cancer, and growing new organs.
To refresh everyone's memories, President Bush, in a rather dramatic address to the nation in August 2001, made his case for his decision to refuse federal funding for this research. His decision was hailed by pro-life groups and decried by the scientific community. They paraded Michael J. Fox on TV, purposely off his medication, saying that he would not be cured because of the evil George W. Bush. The press as willing sycophants of the scientific community (they want to be perceived as smart and progressive, too) bashed Bush for not funding the research. It was entertaining TV regardless of the accuracy the material that was presented.
The important thing that was lost in the entire argument is this: Bush's decision only affected FEDERAL funding of the research. Privately funded research was going on and continued to be supported. Why was it so important that our federal government invest our tax dollars in this research? More to the point what is the justification of federal funding of any scientific or research project? Based on the nature of some of the grants funded the answer to the question is little or none! Our universities are full of very intelligent people that spend all of their time writing grant applications for federal funding of their specific research projects. They make wonderful arguments about how important the research is and how mankind will be saved or lost with or without the funding. They package their grant application up, tie a bow on it, and send it to Washington to some faceless bureaucrat that reads it (I hope), may or may not understand it, and sends it on for his boss to approve. His boss, who also probably does not understand it, passes it on because they have "X" number of dollars to dole out and if they don't spend it all their funding will be cut next year. And if his funding is cut his power is likewise and the likelihood of his getting a promotion with a bigger budget and more power is diminished.
I am not saying that federal funding of scientific research should be stopped. I just believe that the federal government is ill-equipped to evaluate the requests for plausibility. The private sector, with that evil profit motive ever present, has a better handle on what is worthwhile research and what is pouring money down a hole. That is because R & D budgets have to be justified and projects have to be defended to boards that have stockholders looking over their shoulders. Does this mean that valuable projects are not funded? Probably. But this means that many more projects of dubious value never get funded. And that is the way it should be. Let's face it, research projects are like children to their owners and we all think our own children are the best. The fact is that they are not and the taxpayer should not have to give you money to spare the scientists' feelings.
Will embryonic stem cell research produce the next great scientific breakthrough? I hope so. If we are going to fund it I want it to succeed. I work every day to and pay more taxes than the scientists will ever pay and I hate to see my money wasted. But I never have no ever will support the destruction of one human life to save another.
To refresh everyone's memories, President Bush, in a rather dramatic address to the nation in August 2001, made his case for his decision to refuse federal funding for this research. His decision was hailed by pro-life groups and decried by the scientific community. They paraded Michael J. Fox on TV, purposely off his medication, saying that he would not be cured because of the evil George W. Bush. The press as willing sycophants of the scientific community (they want to be perceived as smart and progressive, too) bashed Bush for not funding the research. It was entertaining TV regardless of the accuracy the material that was presented.
The important thing that was lost in the entire argument is this: Bush's decision only affected FEDERAL funding of the research. Privately funded research was going on and continued to be supported. Why was it so important that our federal government invest our tax dollars in this research? More to the point what is the justification of federal funding of any scientific or research project? Based on the nature of some of the grants funded the answer to the question is little or none! Our universities are full of very intelligent people that spend all of their time writing grant applications for federal funding of their specific research projects. They make wonderful arguments about how important the research is and how mankind will be saved or lost with or without the funding. They package their grant application up, tie a bow on it, and send it to Washington to some faceless bureaucrat that reads it (I hope), may or may not understand it, and sends it on for his boss to approve. His boss, who also probably does not understand it, passes it on because they have "X" number of dollars to dole out and if they don't spend it all their funding will be cut next year. And if his funding is cut his power is likewise and the likelihood of his getting a promotion with a bigger budget and more power is diminished.
I am not saying that federal funding of scientific research should be stopped. I just believe that the federal government is ill-equipped to evaluate the requests for plausibility. The private sector, with that evil profit motive ever present, has a better handle on what is worthwhile research and what is pouring money down a hole. That is because R & D budgets have to be justified and projects have to be defended to boards that have stockholders looking over their shoulders. Does this mean that valuable projects are not funded? Probably. But this means that many more projects of dubious value never get funded. And that is the way it should be. Let's face it, research projects are like children to their owners and we all think our own children are the best. The fact is that they are not and the taxpayer should not have to give you money to spare the scientists' feelings.
Will embryonic stem cell research produce the next great scientific breakthrough? I hope so. If we are going to fund it I want it to succeed. I work every day to and pay more taxes than the scientists will ever pay and I hate to see my money wasted. But I never have no ever will support the destruction of one human life to save another.
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Bobby Jindal Strikes Back !
I just watched a profile of the governor of Louisiana, Bobby Jindal, on 60 Minutes and was impressed. This was the second time to listen to him, the first being in the Republican response to Obama on Tuesday night. In that speech he seemed extremely nervous and when compared to Obama was not much of an orator. However, after the 60 Minutes story I was much more impressed.
To begin, he was much more relaxed on 60 Minutes. The story gave some background on him that I didn't know and fleshed him out more for me. He is very sharp and articulate and is getting some great kudos for the 14 months he has been governor. He hits all of the hot buttons for conservatives and doesn't mind pissing off the corrupt Louisiana political establishment. He doesn't seem to be letting the national attention go to his head and wants to clean up Louisiana before worrying about his next political step.
On the downside he is very young and is not ready for national office. Not that he will not be in a few years but he has a lot of traps in his way. First, cleaning up the political cesspool that is Louisiana politics is not going to be easy. Those boys play for keeps down there so he needs to watch his back. Second, No matter how you shake it he has an ethnic hurdle to get over to be accepted by some of the Republican base. He impresses me and the educated Republicans but will Bubba vote for him? He had some success in Louisiana but let's how he is doing in 4 years.
Finally, he is committed to the same conservative values that I am and those have proven to be a hard sell to the general public. He is a Catholic that is Pro life, unlike those Catholics in the Democrat Party (Pelosi & Kerry) that claim to be against abortion "personally" but all the while doing all they can to promote it.
I am not sold on him but he does bear watching. Being in a party so woefully lacking in leaders there is not much else to watch.
To begin, he was much more relaxed on 60 Minutes. The story gave some background on him that I didn't know and fleshed him out more for me. He is very sharp and articulate and is getting some great kudos for the 14 months he has been governor. He hits all of the hot buttons for conservatives and doesn't mind pissing off the corrupt Louisiana political establishment. He doesn't seem to be letting the national attention go to his head and wants to clean up Louisiana before worrying about his next political step.
On the downside he is very young and is not ready for national office. Not that he will not be in a few years but he has a lot of traps in his way. First, cleaning up the political cesspool that is Louisiana politics is not going to be easy. Those boys play for keeps down there so he needs to watch his back. Second, No matter how you shake it he has an ethnic hurdle to get over to be accepted by some of the Republican base. He impresses me and the educated Republicans but will Bubba vote for him? He had some success in Louisiana but let's how he is doing in 4 years.
Finally, he is committed to the same conservative values that I am and those have proven to be a hard sell to the general public. He is a Catholic that is Pro life, unlike those Catholics in the Democrat Party (Pelosi & Kerry) that claim to be against abortion "personally" but all the while doing all they can to promote it.
I am not sold on him but he does bear watching. Being in a party so woefully lacking in leaders there is not much else to watch.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
