Punishing Productivity, Rewarding Unproductive

I have said that onerous tax rates punish and disincentize production.  I have said that the job killer in a society is corporate taxes and taxes on the wealthy. If you give people something for free they have no reason to earn that freebie.  Well, voting for the people that continue the handouts does not count as "earning" the handouts. As discussed in this article a mother on welfare is better off than a mother earning $60k.

[T]he single mom is better off earnings gross income of $29,000 with $57,327 in net income & benefits than to earn gross income of $69,000 with net income and benefits of $57,045.

That is over $27,000 in handouts! Include the tax breaks (the lower tax rate that is being paid is a break) and the benefit comes out to over double the lower salary's gross income in handouts! Someone has to pay for that. And no matter how you slice it up it is not a fair system. What is frightening is how heavy the load actually is.

For every 1.65 employed persons in the private sector, 1 person receives welfare assistance. For every 1.25 employed persons in the private sector, 1 person receives welfare assistance or works for the government.

That is ridiculously unfair to the productive members of society. Worse, it is penalizing the more productive person while rewarding and encouraging the less productive person. The effect of that penalty is that we reward the less productive and remove the power of the productive to be more productive. Think about this...if the $69k mother were not paying so much of the load of taxes then she could afford things like a housecleaning service to help around the house ($100/week) and the lawn care service ($50/week) and maybe even a few extra trips to the movies with the kids ($60/week for a family of 3). That is what extra productivity is being stolen from anyone is working and being successful in our society. Big government lovers continue to want to expand the group hooked on freebies meaning they want to decrease the size of the group that works and eventually the system will eat itself as the working group will be supporting others more than they can support themselves. And in that system why would anyone want to work when you can be better off bleeding the others who work?

And This Is Surprising To Whom

Media Bias.  It is a given now, isn't it?  And it is a given that the media is slanted overwhelmingly to the Left.  It is a given in magnitude and in quantity. But I give this who think that bias is not there or that exists in equal parts for both directions.

Media coverage of President Barack Obama was largely positive in the final week of the presidential campaign, while coverage of Mitt Romney was mostly negative, according to a new report from the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism. From October 29 to November 5, positive stories about Obama in mainstream media outlets outnumbered negative ones by 10 percentage points, with 29 percent positive, and 19 negative. On the other hand, negative stories about the GOP nominee Mitt Romney outweighed positive stories by 17 points, with 33 percent negative compared to 16 positive.

Of little surprise, MSNBC was arguably unethically super-biased.

MSNBC's coverage of Romney during the final week (68% negative with no positive stories in the sample), was far more negative than the overall press, and even more negative than it had been during October 1 to 28 when 5% was positive and 57% was negative. For Obama, meanwhile, the coverage improved in the last week. From October 1 to 28, 33% was positive and 13% negative. During the campaign's final week, fully 51% of MSNBC's stories were positive while there were no negative stories at all in the sample.

Media Bias.  It is a given now.  And it is a given that the media is slanted overwhelmingly to the Left.  It is a given in magnitude and in quantity.

Leave Retail And Go Into Medicine

I wonder why the fuss is made for only Thanksgiving. I mean people don't seem to give a shit that places are open on Independence Day or Veteran's Day or Hanukkah or New Year's or Christmas. And in the end I don't have any sympathy for people who work on any of those days. If you are tired of working on holidays then get a different job in a different industry. It is like the asses who buy a house on the flight line next to the airport and then piss vinegar about the noise. Shut up! You knew what you were getting into. People's indignation over this makes me laugh. The poor souls in retail who have to work Thanksgiving. Here is the advice they should be given: "Get a job outside retail. I hear the medical industry is growing." ************** UPDATE ************** I love Wal-Mart more for this and hope they fire all employees who participate in these walk-outs or protests.

Wal-Mart is taking legal action against its organized labor opponents, filing an unfair labor practice charge over widespread protests at its stores across the country -- as well as rallies planned for Black Friday, considered the biggest shopping day of the year. The company filed a complaint on Thursday against the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, claiming the labor union -- one of the nation's largest -- has unlawfully disrupted business by staging protests at Wal-mart's stores and warehouses around the country over the past six months.

I think we can also say that this is another example of the union's strongarm efforts at bullying businesses to succumb to the will of the union. Union thugs want their membership increased and are insistent (militant even) about bullying Wal-Mart, the largest private employer worldwide, to allow unionization. These stands that Wal-Mart takes are the reasons my loyalty grows stronger for them every year...and, yes, I am a convert from the hate-Wal-Mart crowd.

Why Unions Suck, Part 4

I have long maintained that unions useful this as long past. They go on strike for little reason, they stay on strike at their own detriment, and they are usually out to make a point rather than look out for the best interests of their membership. They certainly do not care for society in large. In St Paul, for example, the union thought it was better to go on strike rather than have a pension cut and as a result Ford close is the entire plant. Stupidity marks the unions actions. Greed beyond all greed marks the unions actions. The latest tragedy is the death of Hostess.  Gone are Twinkies, Wonder Bread and Ding Dongs.

Hostess, the makers of Twinkies, Ding Dongs and Wonder Bread, is going out of business after striking workers failed to heed a Thursday deadline to return to work, the company said. “We deeply regret the necessity of today’s decision, but we do not have the financial resources to weather an extended nationwide strike,” Hostess CEO Gregory F. Rayburn said in announcing that the firm had filed a motion with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court to shutter its business. “Hostess Brands will move promptly to lay off most of its 18,500-member workforce and focus on selling its assets to the highest bidders.”

Unions...can't live with them, can't live without them. And no one can say they were not warned.

Hostess Brands Inc. had earlier warned employees that it would file to unwind its business and sell off assets if plant operations didn't return to normal levels by 5 p.m. Thursday. In announcing its decision, Hostess said its wind down would mean the closure of 33 bakeries, 565 distribution centers, approximately 5,500 delivery routes and 570 bakery outlet stores in the United States.

And heaven forbid any of the members of the union decide that is better for themselves do you go to work rather than stand outside holding a sign and picketing for ridiculousness.

Rayburn, who first joined Hostess earlier this year as a restructuring expert, had earlier said that many workers crossed picket lines this week to go back to work despite warnings by union leadership that they'd be fined.

Again, I say that the unions are not interested in what is good for their membership but what is instead a good for themselves. And its infinite wisdom this union just worked refused to work its members and several other unions' members out of 18,500 jobs.

Wal Mart, Black Friday And Stupidity

It appears that people believe they should control the decisions of a private company. The idea is as ridiculous as me thinking I should be allowed to control the actions of a neighbor. When a business decided they want to be open on a holiday nobody seems to care about it except on Thanksgiving. The indignation is kind of ridiculous, there is no mass protests for being open on the Fourth of July, there is no organized hate directed at places like the University of Minnesota for being open on Veterans Day, and there is no outcry when restaurants or gas stations or convenience stores are open on holidays. The indignation seems to be reserved for Thanksgiving. Having worked in retail I have one thing to say to all the people that believe it is an act against humanity to have a store open on Thanksgiving: get a different job! I know exactly how crappy it is to be working on a holiday. The 1 that always got me was having to work on New Years Eve during the countdown. It was, in fact, that crappy feeling that made me decide to get out of retail within the next year. It is quite a simple concept. If you don't like the conditions of your employment then change employment. So when I hear about workers at Wal Mart planning to do a walk out on Thanksgiving Day the only thing that comes to my mind is that I hope they are all fired on the spot.

A group of Wal-Mart workers are planning to stage a walkout next week on Black Friday, arguably the biggest holiday shopping day for the world's largest retail store. ... The union-backed groups OUR Walmart and Making Change at Wal-Mart, and a watchdog group Corporate Action Network, are calling on the nation's largest employer to end what they call retaliation against employees who speak out for better pay, fair schedules and affordable health care. On Black Friday, the organizations expect 1,000 protests, both at stores and online.

Just fire them. It is a private company, there is no union ruining the company, there is no reason to put up with this kind of insubordination. If the workers are so unhappy that they feel it is necessary to walk out, keep on walking. In general, I am not a supporter of Black Friday simply because I believe it brings out the worst in people. Cut prices on everything and people will buy crap that they don't need, don't want, and can't afford. But if people are dumb enough to follow that kind of stuff then who am I to stop it. I generally stay away from Black Friday. This year however I will be going to Walmart to make some purchases and hopefully tell some of the protesters exactly where I think they should go...to a different job.

The Growing Secession Protest

Before continuing with this discussion let's get a few things clear to ensure we understand a few of my premises.

First, no reasonable person should believe that these petitions for secession being filed at the White House's "We The People" website have any chance of action. They also will get nothing more from the President than some respectful platitudes of how we will "have to work together" (read 'you will have to sacrifice your beliefs in the name of compromise while I won the White House and will compromise by giving up very little') and that it is important that the petitioners' voices are heard (read 'you had your chance to whine now shut the f*** up'). Detractors will pass the movement off as only sour grapes, but there is some importance to these petitions. Blowing it off as sore losers is dangerous.

Second, if a state actually started action to secede then I want to be right there. At this point I believe we are skirting on the verge of "Government becom[ing] destructive" and that the Government cogs have forgotten that it they are "deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed". Pro-expansion of government people have forgotten that the government that provides everything must take it all from others...and eventually the consent of those others, no matter how minority they are, will go away.

Finally, while I hope for a secession movement to actually move forward and do so as peacefully as practical, I am not confident that it will be peaceful. It may even result in another civil war. But freedom is never free and always costs blood to retain. A price, though, that is not too steep for the fruits of freedom itself.

As of yesterday there were seven states that had collected over 25,000 signatures on the online petition at the White House's website. That threshold is what is needed to earn a response from the President.

The petition filed by Texas residents has racked up about 100,000 signatures. Six others from Louisiana, Florida, North Carolina, Alabama, Georgia and Tennessee have collected 30,000.

It is nothing new for people to say they are leaving the country because of how an election goes. Look at the number of Hollywood geniuses who promised they would leave (and sadly never did follow through). The difference here is I believe most of these people are willing to take action as well...or demand action. With Texas amassing over 100,000 signatures already it is a likely possibility that there will be pressure on state legislatures to actually engage in action. The actions may fail to move far at first in the Texas legislature but the pressure will continue. People will dismiss the actions and demonize those engaged in it (look at how respectfully the Tea Party groups are treated even by the media, much less the opposition). There will be hateful speech (un-prosecuted hate speech, by the way) against the secessionists. But with growing and continual pressure (which will get amped up as Obamacare's and other federal impositions effects become more real to the individual) the actions will start getting close to success (close to passage in the legislature, becoming an actual campaign issue for Texas gubernatorial races, etc). And then we can look back at this warning.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

The "evils" from the federal government are reaching a point of not being sufferable to a large portion of the population. Think about the percentage of Great Britain's population that the Revolutionaries represented compared to the entire United Kingdom. Compare that percentage to what you have as of right now where over 675,000 people have signed secession petitions.

These are all a protest and nothing more at this point. But when the media so dramatically covered the Occupy protests (held by people who claimed they spoke for half of a nation that didn't support them in any manner) some people actually thought the Occupy movement's size warranted attention to their complaints. At best count (which unfortunately comes from Wikipedia, so the validity of the size may be overstated) the movement peaked at 75,311. Even if adding in an extremely generous doubling of the median for the locations reported without a figure (median = 100, no figures for 263 locations) the movement's peak numbers were just over 101,000. And that collection of give-me-everything-without-working-for-it-myself was given credibility based solely on their numbers.

The secession signatories are so far easily over 600% the size of the Occupy protests at it peak. Listen to that group or risk a terrible collision course within the next 10 years.

Heed the warning of the Declaration of Independence quoted above, "...when a long train of abuses and usurpations...it is their duty, to throw off such Government..." And heed this warning from me. Dismiss the secessionists now at your huge peril later. Trample on them too much now and you will hasten the collision course for actions towards secession.

Economy Reaction To Obama Reelection Update

Obama won his re-election and what was easy to predict for years is coming to fruition: labor cutbacks directly attributed to Obamacare.

The health care overhaul and nationalizing takeover will go into full effect as a result of Obama winning the White House in 2008. While repeal was a very remote possibility had Romney won (people believing either way that the election would have a direct say in repeal or not were easily fooled and undereducated on how the system works), there was a chance of delay or having court challenges to the bill not be defended against by the Romney administration.

But Obama won. There is not any chance of any delay or partial defeat of the onerous and freedom-hating bill being implemented. At least the guess work is gone...it will happen. It already is happening.

Business are laying people off. Businesses are reducing full time equivalents and cutting hours. This was all predicted and I imagine the only ones who are surprised are the Obamacare supporters who don't run their own business that have employees to provide health care for. Business owners should not be surprised that many companies are finding it necessary for survival to reduce their workforce and reduce their employees' hours. People against Obamacare are not surprised by the reaction.

The latest in the line is Wal-Mart having to increase the employee share of the group health premium.

Wal-Mart Stores increased the share employees pay for its medical coverage programs 8% to 36%, depending on hours worked and pay, saying it expects health costs to continue rising.

Like other large employers, Wal-Mart is trying to manage costs while at the same time preparing to meet strict rules mandated in President Obama's health care overhaul, commonly called ObamaCare.

Don't undersell the significance of this.

Wal-Mart, the world's largest private employer with some 1.4 million employees globally, said in a mailing to employees that for its most popular plan, which covers individuals, the bi-weekly paycheck deduction would increase 13% to 23%, or $2 to $11 per paycheck.

That is the world's largest private employer responding to such drastic measures (increasing employees share of costs to up to 36%) as the initial response.

Nearly two-thirds of Wal-Mart's employees sign up to cover only themselves.

But the company said because of offsetting cost reduction moves the average rate employees pay will only rise about 4.4% in 2013, vs. an estimated 9% average increase for all U.S. workers, according to human resources firm Aon Hewitt.

The new law also mandates that parents ensure coverage for their kids well into their 20's. This will result in a lot of parents being forced to add their deadbeat children onto their health plans. The stat of 2/3 of Wal-Mart employees covering only themselves will drop. More employees will have family coverage which costs more. If it costs more to the company it will cost more to the employees in both premiums, slower wage increases (already 1/2 of the national average) and in hours reductions (meaning even more people will be dropped to below hours requirements that will give them benefits).

Gift Wrapped Election - Conservative Catch 22

One of the reasons Romney lost the election, according to Romney, is because of the gifts given out to various groups within the populace.

In each case they were very generous in what they gave to those groups. [...] With regards to the young people, for instance, a forgiveness of college loan interest, was a big gift. Free contraceptives were very big with young college-aged women. And then, finally, Obamacare also made a difference for them, because as you know, anybody now 26 years of age and younger was now going to be part of their parents' plan, and that was a big gift to young people. They turned out in large numbers, a larger share in this election even than in 2008.

I agree wholeheartedly with that assessment. But it is not anything new. Consider the whole concept of amnesty to illegal aliens is an attempt to buy the votes of millions of "new citizens". And I know it worked that way. I had a landlord whose citizenship was owed directly to amnesty by Reagan in 1986 and he would repeatedly tell me that he will always vote Republican as a result, as would his wife.

It is an old tactic. Consider this hypocrisy from the anti-lobby as well as the people who regularly want corporate America to have fewer and fewer rights. Corporate America and lobbyists are routinely attacked for getting things from Congress in exchange for their financial support. But it is the same thing that Obama (and plenty more before him) do...give something to a group for the tacit acknowledgement of an exchange for that group's vote.

What the problem for a true conservative is lies in the very belief of smaller government and reducing spending. How do you convince someone who is getting freebies (at the expense of the rest of the nation) to vote for a principle that would require productivity from the freebie-beneficiary? "Hey, vote for smaller government even though it means you will lose all of your handouts and would actually have to work as a result."

Not an easy sell.

Or the other side of the coin, the proverbial 'hard place', is to join in the give-a-way game. Start buying votes like Obama has effectively done for the past 4 years. Then that will grow the budget, grow spending (which every Republican and Democrat Congress has done anyway, so calling any Congress "conservative" is a laugh) and growing the size of government. In essence this strategy is rooted on sacrificing the very principles that identify you to enable you to win so you can enact principles that identify you. But to maintain winning you will have to maintain sacrificing the principles that identify you so you can continue to win while giving lip service to the your "principles" that used to identify you.

Yes, the Democrats routinely buy votes. It is no secret and it is nothing new. The only scandalous part is that the hate-business crowd mysteriously loses their principled indignation when the "buy votes" coin goes in favor of their party.

The real rub is what strategy can conservatives employ that maintains their principles and can win consistently against the purchased votes?

Agenda 21 - Attack On Sovereignty

In case you have not heard about it before I thought I would mention something now. One of the scariest things from the United Nations (and something that we may eventually succumb to given the pro-globalist leanings of our President) is call Agenda 21.

The reason it came to mind for me now is that I recently saw an ad promoting this horrific thing. The text of the advertisement:

For millions of years this lake thrived, but now it is dying.
Poisoned by humans who put themselves above nature.
It's time to stop the killing.
It's time to heal the planet
It's time to remove your footprint.
Agenda 21 is coming soon.

That's right...follow that advertisement's logic (as it is presented by the text, rightly or wrongly) which says that Humans should not be above the planet and humans have a footprint, but it is time to remove footprints. In other words, remove humans for the sake of the planet.

I know what the Church of Global Warming will say to the breakdown of the ad's logic. "We want humans to remove their carbon footprint." That, however, is not much better. "Remove", not "reduce" (which I also find objectionable), is the word being used. It is foolish to think that every word in the ad was not chosen deliberately. "Remove" the carbon footprint.

No more cars, planes, trains or ships; no more cell phones, television, movies or electricity and probably not even the oil known as "heating oil". No more commercial farming which means if you can't farm it yourself you don't eat it. Well, unless you have the currency of trade in a society that takes major steps backwards.

"Remove".

This is all in the name of the false god that the Church of Global Warming members worship: Ma Earth hot flashes. This is all driven on broken science assumptions and unsettled science. Somehow the congregation believes it is right to send the world back to the Stone Age because through some sort of miracle they can predict temperatures down to the tenth of a degree hundreds of years into the future of weather when they still cannot even predict earthquakes or even next month's temperatures within 1 degree.

Scary. Well, scary to people who love freedom. Warm and fuzzy to the people who hate freedom, technology and civilization.

Business Hostile, Race Relations Edition

Picture this (and I am speaking out of personal experience). You have a team of co-workers. The racial makeup (which is not at all relevant to the performance of the individuals) is 1 black, 1 Hispanic and 5 white. Now of those 7 people the top positions are held by the black and Hispanic who have oversight over the entire branch (not just the team). One of those two people performs in an above-and-beyond manner consistently. The other one shows new standards for sub-standard performance and results on a consistent basis. The union protects the sub-performer and has for over a decade. While this would be another example of why unions suck that is not the concern of this post.

Now imagine what the performance reviews would look like for years upon years. What would the disparity in the merit raises be? What kind of a gap in pay would there be after 5 years? 10 years?

Thanks to the shortsightedness of 1/2 of the country this year Obama will now get the chance to create another business hostile policy.

President Obama intends to close "persistent gaps" between whites and minorities in everything from credit scores and homeownership to test scores and graduation rates.

His remedy — short of new affirmative-action legislation — is to sue financial companies, schools and employers based on "disparate impact" complaints — a stealthy way to achieve racial preferences, opposed 2 to 1 by Americans.

Under this broad interpretation of civil-rights law, virtually any organization can be held liable for race bias if it maintains a policy that negatively impacts one racial group more than another — even if it has no racist motive and applies the policy evenly across all groups.

This means that even race-neutral rules for mortgage underwriting and consumer credit scoring potentially can be deemed racist if prosecutors can produce statistics showing they tend to result in adverse outcomes for blacks or Latinos.

What this means is that in the above real life example when the chronically under-performing employee complains about the salaries between her and the other person in a top position there could now be a case for the Obama Administration to pursue it.

Disparate outcomes are a part of a free society. In fact, to try to get rid of disparate outcomes (when opportunities are equal) is the absolute antithesis of a free society.

Let's extend the example now. Because of either threat of lawsuits or fear of lawsuits the employer decides to match the salaries. What is the motivation of the super performer to not only continue to super perform but to even meet minimum standards when sub-standard is going to get the same pay?

The take away from this story (and the example) is two-fold.

First, Obama's administration and his supporters are hostile to business. This was known by a few before the 2008 election but it was en vogue to vote based on race (and fear of being called racist by dishonest intolerant people likely effected quite a few people as well). This was known very well by 2012 and yet people still supported him. The rational conclusion is that the business hostility was a trait that Obama 2012 supporters wanted (and why they accepted the idea that their votes were "Revenge" as Obama stated).

Second, Obama's leanings are not capitalist but more towards a Chinese or Soviet communist/Marxist beliefs. Everyone must be equal and if everyone is not then beat down the ones who are performing too well. Fits very nicely into the union mentality as well.

Obama Issues 68 Regulations Per Day

As a metric for those who think that "Obama" and "regulation" are not synonymous here is a story for you.

It seems that President Obama is rushing towards a super hero identity of Captain Regulation.

...[S]o far today, the Obama administration has posted 165 new regulations and notifications on its reguations.gov website. In the past 90 days, it has posted 6,125 regulations and notices – an average of 68 a day.

How little freedom and individual choice can be left at the end of 96 more months at this rate? I mean, that is over 120,000 new regulations by the end of Obama's term. There is no way that can resemble a free society by the end of that.

Hypocrisy Of Energy Nazis

There has been a mad rush into "green energies" including the subsidizing of companies that were insoluble just because they said they were going to produce "green energy". There has been no measured approach and no amount of reason in the matter.

As energy prices soar over the coming few years keep in mind how quickly Obama moves against so-called "dirty" sources of energy.

The hypocrisy comes from the surrogates who hail a slow and measured approach.

"The proposed plan supports the Administration’s all-of-the-above approach to explore the full potential our nation’s domestic energy resources and to develop innovative technology and techniques that will lead to safe and responsible production of resources, including oil shale and tar sands, which industry recognizes are years from being commercially viable, but require RD&D today," Interior spokesman Blake Androff said. (Emphasis added)

Electric cars are years upon years away from being commercially viable, too. That is why the Church of Global Warming members had to get the Feds to heavily subsidize and in some places create extra incentives like qualifying for the HOV lanes.

Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) praised the plan, saying the administration exercised the right amount of caution on oil shale development, which has not yet been brought to commercial scale and brings concerns about the amount of water used in the practice.

Caution...except when it comes to CoGW approved things. Then make it law, subsidize it and rush into it. The hypocrisy from the Church is appalling.

And yet not surprising.

How Dare I Speak Truth

There is a post that is currently reverted to Draft called "How Dare I Speak The Truth".  It dealt with some of the hassles in dealing with unreasonable one-sided-minded people, of which 2012 brought them out like an infestation of nocturnal creatures so overwhelming that they have to come out during the day.  The post hit in the personal life and until the wake of that drama settles the post, which is hard hitting but honest and fair (as the situation was reviewed in full by several non-interested parties).

The problem is that reviewing the activity history shows they are still frequently visiting and for a while referred visits were conspicuously close to their visits.  This implies they would check the validity of the link and then somehow others shortly after would hit that specific post within a small timeframe.

There are several possibilities here as to why, but given the all-or-nothing approach taken already on several occasions in the past (complete with ultimatums like losing friendships permanently for talking about the Super Bowl at all if the Patriots lose--a fine example of how they handle many discussions, one view or no view is allowed), and given the scorched Earth way of handling issues that they regularly engage in, it is reasonable to conclude that some destructive behavior may be linked to the out of the ordinary visit history pattern.

To minimize the activity being witnessed the post is hidden for a while.  I wanted to let readers who may have noticed missing posts know that there is not a censorship movement going on and hard truths are not just disappearing.

Thank you for your attention.  Back to the regular broadcasting.

************ UPDATE ***********
I believe it is safe to re-publish the aforementioned post.

Obama Layoffs

Not often do I so quickly get to say I  told you so.  We are less than a week from Obama's re-election and the surge of layoffs begins.  I had been saying to colleagues and on Facebook that Obama's re-election will force companies to choose survival tactics such as layoffs and closures.  And with these actions (as well as gas price spikes, decreasing dollar strength, rising taxes, increased non-employment, etc) Obama supporters get no credibility to complain.

But first let's get back to the layoffs.

Welch Allyn
Welch Allyn, a company that manufactures medical diagnostic equipment in central New York, announced in September that they would be laying off 275 employees, or roughly 10% of their workforce over the next three years. One of the major reasons discussed for the layoffs was a proactive response to the Medical Device Tax mandated by the new healthcare law.

Dana Holding Corp.
As recently as a week ago, a global auto parts manufacturing company in Ohio known as Dana Holding Corp., warned their employees of potential layoffs, citing "$24 million over the next six years in additional U.S. health care expenses". After laying off several white collar staffers, company insiders have hinted at more to come. The company will have to cover the additional $24 million cost somehow, which will likely equate to numerous cuts in their current workforce of 25,500 worldwide.

Stryker
One of the biggest medical device manufacturers in the world, Stryker will close their facility in Orchard Park, New York, eliminating 96 jobs in December. Worse, they plan on countering the medical device tax in Obamacare by slashing 5% of their global workforce - an estimated 1,170 positions.

Boston Scientific
In October of 2009, Boston Scientific CEO Ray Elliott, warned that proposed taxes in the health care reform bill could "lead to significant job losses" for his company. Nearly two years later, Elliott announced that the company would be cutting anywhere between 1,200 and 1,400 jobs, while simultaneously shifting investments and workers overseas - to China.

Medtronic
In March of 2010, medical device maker Medtronic warned that Obamacare taxes could result in a reduction of precisely 1,000 jobs. That plan became reality when the company cut 500 positions over the summer, with another 500 set for the end of 2013.
...
Smith & Nephew - 770 layoffs
Abbott Labs - 700 layoffs
Covidien - 595 layoffs
Kinetic Concepts - 427 layoffs
St. Jude Medical - 300 layoffs
Hill Rom - 200 layoffs

For those keeping score that is over 6000 jobs from just 10 companies. This does not include companies that will eliminate full time jobs for part time (less than 30 hours per week) since there are huge incentives to do so under the Obamacare rules.

Darden Restaurants
According to the Orlando Sentinel, Darden Restaurants, a casual dining chain best known for their Red Lobster, Olive Garden and LongHorn Steakhouse restaurants, is "experimenting with limiting the hours of some of its workers to avoid health care requirements under the Affordable Care Act when they take effect in 2014".

JANCOA Janitorial Services
The CEO of JANCOA, Mary Miller, testified to Congress that Obamacare was a "dream killer", adding that one option she had to consider "is reducing the majority of my team members to part-time employment in order to reduce the amount that I will be penalized."

Kroger
The American retailer in Cincinnati, Ohio recently was reported to be planning a significant slashing of their hourly workers. Doug Ross writes:

Operative Faith (a mid-level manager with the company) reveals that Kroger will soon join the ranks of Darden Restaurants and slash the hours of its non-exempt (hourly) workers to avoid millions in Obamacare penalties.

According to the source, Obamacare could result in tens of thousands of Kroger employees being limited to working 28 hours per week.

America, this is just the beginning. Expect layoffs for survival over the next 4 years minimum as Obamacare continues to go into effect by 2014 and then as other companies feel the suffocating crunch afterwards. Full time jobs will be increasingly difficult to find much less hold and the foolhardy thing that will happen is to again extend unemployment benefits which is addressing the symptoms of the illness not the illness itself. Unemployment numbers will eventually get better as people's benefits simply expire and there will be confusion about why people still feel like their in a depression.

America, you brought this on yourself. In voting for the same thing (hostile business environment and hostile environment towards the actual people that can solve this--the wealthy) you voted for continuing the our economic path. Eventually the path of circling the drain just goes down the drain.

Add Election Fraud To Union Accomplishments

In a meshing of two recent themes here, complaints of a Nevada union engaged in election fraud which adds to both the list of why unions suck and to the coverage of election shenanigans.

ALIPAC, Americans for Legal Immigration PAC, based in Raleigh, N.C., sent the Nevada secretary of state an email outlining its intention.

"We want to stop the felonious thefts of American elections," says William Gheen, ALIPAC's president.

Gheen points to a commentary published in Sunday's Las Vegas Review Journal. In it, editorial writer Glenn Cook accuses the Culinary Union 226 of knowingly registering illegal immigrants and then pressured them to vote.

Cook quotes an unidentified illegal immigrant who is on the Clark County voter rolls. The person claims a union representative told them they were "in so much trouble" for refusing to vote. Catherine Lu, a spokesperson for Nevada Secretary of State Ross Miller, said she could not comment on Cook's editorial or ALIPAC's official complaint.

Gheen says his group wants all non U.S. citizens removed from the voter rolls before Tuesday's election. He suggested the state could use Homeland Security databases such as E-verify to do the job.

Pretty Slow Weekend

This was an unusually slow weekend in the NFL for my purposes. Aside from my fantasy football team (which is enjoying unprecedented success this season) there are some things that make my NFL weekends worthwhile. In order they are:
#49ers winning (and how sweet it is)
#Patriots losing (the bigger the loss, the better--Belichek is a cheating ass)
#Cowboys losing (just, ugh)
#Colts winning (liked them since they got Eric Dickerson, loved them for drafting Peyton)
#Vikings losing (biggest bandwagon in sports)
#Bengals winning (like them since Cris Collinsworth played for them)

It is a rare week that my top 2 joys are not even possible, but that is what happened this past week as both the 49ers and Patriots were on bye. I didn't realize it until this morning, but I feel a little empty for not having either game in the same week.

Of the remaining joys in my NFL following I was thrilled to see that Dallas lost, Minnesota lost (though to a 49ers division rival) and the Colts winning. Only the Bengals could not pull through for me this weekend.

Liar Asks Who Wants A Liar For President

The levels some go to.

Bill Clinton, whose lies are infamously enshrined in things like political games, and whose lies are so easily documented that I am not going to even bother linking ("I did not have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky", nuff said) delivers a whopper of a question.

In trying to make the case that (a) Romney is knowingly lying and (b) therefore cannot be elected said the following:

You’re laughing, but who wants a president who will knowingly, repeatedly tell you something he knows is not true?” Clinton asked, after discounting a claim in a recent Romney ad that the Obama administration’s auto bailout hurt American workers.

Initially I would have said "ironic" but I think the best description is "unscrupulous". Wouldn't that be as backwards as if Newt Gingrich asked, "Can you really trust a man as Speaker of the House if he has had more than one marriage"?

Currency Of The Future Is Sex

I guess we know what the currency will be during future catastrophes. Sex. In the wake of Sandy and the gas shortage it seems some enterprising and lonely men have found a way to take advantage of the situation.

Men have been taking to the personals on Craigslist, trading gasoline for sex. Some of the ads on NewYork.Craigslist.org read as follows:

What Would you do for gas?? m4w – 30 Let’s help each other …………………?

gas4sex- m4w 35 – 6 foor [sic] 1 225 Italian workout good looking looking to hang out I have 5 gallons of gas

Question: does that count as prostitution or a date? I mean, getting sex for dinner gas would be a date, methinks.

Unions Still Suck, Example Notwithstanding

A previous post that was also linked on Facebook had some innocuous discussion in the Facebook comments. I made one concurring point that earned a disagreeing response.

Now, due to the cost to my "inner circle" in friends and family because they could not tolerate disagreement or refused to be respectful to opposition I had decided that all disagreements relating to blog posts linked on Facebook had to be removed from Facebook and brought to the blog.

So a comment came that disagreed. It warrants response (and should be preserved in the interest of open discussion) but I will not have it the debate on Facebook. I asked the person to move the comment here and they did not. At this moment I realize a possible reason: what they were replying to was a previous Facebook comment. So I moved that here also, brought their comment here and am now going to reply.

My comment:

The laws are so strong now (thanks to effective unions in the past and in spite of unions of the present) that if all he unions disappeared I don't believe there would be any problems. The unions now on the other hand are shooting themselves in the foot more often than not. From the Ford plant in St Paul closing because of the union's stubbornness on wages to companies all over the country experiencing the same to AFSCME going on strike and having to come back to a worse deal than they walked out on BOTH times the went on strike. The teacher's unions in Elk River, for example, pricing themselves so far beyond market (annual 10% raises during this economy is ridiculous and greedy) which led to huge cuts all around that ended up hurting the kids more than if the teachers had to settle for a raise that the average citizen in the area got during those years (2%-3%).

The response:

Whoa- so teachers don't get to ask for a 10% raise that would put them on par with middle-middle class? The problem is the schools in general aren't getting enough money. It isn't unreasonable for teachers to demand fair pay for what they worth.

I am from a deeply rooted pro-union family. The union went on strike on the Iron Range when safety was an issue - the only reason Mintack fixed the issue was because if they strength of the picket line.
Manny was in the same union for many years - never were we bled dry, asked to pay much for union dues. When [redacted] had knee surgery, his union rep and others from the large union came over with fresh cooked freezable meals, toilet paper, and an envelope with a check inside - that happened to cover the money [redacted] would have lost out on between the surgery and the two week waiting period until his temporary disability insurance kicked in. They would also call every few days to see if they could send someone over to help me take care of a baby [redacted], a 3 year old [redacted] and a laid-up [redacted].
When [redacted] was able to go back to work, and caught viral meningitis the first night back, the union was by his side when he was told he was going to be fired (which would be totally illegal!)!

Unless you are in or had direct experience as a union worker, you have no idea how much good they really do. Lumping one bad union rep into all unions would be like me lumping all republicians as mean spirited, women hating, wife, children bible-beating, anti-government (unless it's the death penalty), whiyes-only America because I've read article and have seen/read/heard news reports saying one or more of those from republicans.

The first thing that has to be addressed is the often used, very insulting and terribly broken idea that only people within a group are able to speak about the group, or worse, only people within a class can opine about the class. This broken mentality is used to an extreme in the abortion debate and more often than not it is the left that tries this exclusionary debate tactic in other areas too. Here it is in a union discussion, "[u]nless you are in or had direct experience..." The fact is people can talk intelligently about unions without having been in one. And to be sure, I am talking with experience both inside and out.

Furthermore, I am not talking about ONE bad rep. I am talking about the entire union (AFSCME) being corrupt and unions in general being bad in the big picture anymore.

The next item to address is the 10% issue. First, I didn't say teachers could not ask for it. Ask for the moon. The issue is that they got it locked into a contract and it was while the rest of the citizens were seeing pay cuts, lay offs or pay freezes. It was those 10% annual raises that was breaking the budget and the unions mule-like stubbornness to yield on those increases that caused classes to get closed, the teacher roster to be shrunk and still a need to go to the middle class taxpayer for an increase in property taxes. The property tax increase, paid for by citizens that were experiencing pay cuts, lay offs and pay freezes, were simply to bridge a major budget gap...and when salaries for teachers made up 75% of the budget and those salaries were being increased by 10%...there is a problem.

Crap, 10% annual increases just for existing, no matter what the economy is like, is ridiculous...especially when it is the taxpayer that is funding it.

Finally, I find it fascinating that on the one hand the reply says that 'lumping' one experience as a reflection of the whole is bad, but uses one personal experience as a reflection of the whole to make the case that unions are good. I agree, using one experience to reflect upon the whole is poor practice and bad sampling. But I have seen many, many, many, many more examples of unions causing more harm for the big picture than causing good. From crooked books, unethical campaigning practices, strong arm and intimidation for compliance, violence against non-conformists, pricing themselves out of jobs, demanding unreasonable concessions, putting teachers ahead of students, protecting bad employees at the expense of good employees, prohibiting career advancement for the sake of not raising the bar too high...all of these have multiple occurrences from most unions across the country.

Examples of them doing right by the larger good and bigger picture are just too few and far between. In fact, your personal example is not exclusive to unions. That would be done by a church group, close neighbors or a tight family. I have heard of PTA groups doing similar things and perfect strangers opening help-fund accounts for people going through hard times. Bowling leagues have done similar acts of goodness as have softball teams. I remember a collection for someone being done for the family of a swimming teammate of one of my exchange student's. They had a medical emergency or something and collections were being done to help them. People pitch in like that when there is a death in a family. A close friend of mine and his siblings families didn't have to cook for over a week after the death of a parent because so many people gave them prepared meals. That can be heard all over the place.

In fact, I think a stronger case can be made that your experience was just people and the only reason the word "union" is involved is that it happened to be the membership that the people were introduced in. I would bet that union compassion had nothing to do with it, but human compassion did. If it were unique to the union then there would not be a plethora of examples of similar (or more) compassionate contribution outside of unions.

The main point still remains, and remains well supported and poorly refuted: Unions Suck.

Poll Station Hijinks

Each election cycle there are illegal activities which surround the Black Panthers. It looks like this cycle is no exception.

Court-appointed Republican poll inspectors are being forcibly removed from voting stations in some Philadelphia wards and replaced in some cases by Democratic inspectors and even members of the Black Panthers, according to GOP officials.

...

The Philadelphia GOP is reporting that court appointed Minority (read GOP) Inspectors are being thrown out of polling locations in several Wards.

These Inspectors are election officials - again, court appointed -- and are reportedly being thrown out by the Head Judges of Elections (these Judges are elected Democrats) and being replaced by Democrats.

This has happened at [15] locations...

It seems that a judge has already had to intervene to reinstate 70 election inspectors. I think a wise move would be to have the totals through the time that one side's inspectors were ejected negated. There is no way to know that fraud did not occur.

***** UPDATE *****
So, you walk into the polling station and see a huge mural on the wall of the candidate you disagree with. Would that feel uncomfortable? What is the point of banning campaigning within a certain distance of polling station entrances (a standard practice for good reason) if polling stations can have murals of one of the candidates?

What about a banner hanging inside the polling station?

***** UPDATE 2 *****
You know, it should not be a surprise when fraud is mentioned with regards to Illinois (especially Chicago) politics. In the era of cell phones, Twitter and Facebook at least more of these stories can be surfaced and substantiated.

In Chicago (go figure) an election judge is wearing an Obama cap and it is claimed that he gave an extra ballot to the person in front of the picture taker in the story.

This photo, taken by a voter this morning at the Ward 4, Precinct 37 polling place (1212 South Plymouth Court, Chicago), shows an election judge checking in voters while wearing an Obama hat," a source writes. "Chicago's 4th ward is home to President Barack Obama."

The voter who took the photo says: "Woman in front of me also given an extra ballot."

Safety, Security, Freedom

I have thought long and hard over the past several years about the above mentioned items for my writings this week and feel I should air my opinions on these matters.

Way back near the turn of the century we all remember when terrorists attacked us on our own soil. What followed amazed me and continues to this very day. The champions of freedom decided that from then on going forward, for safety and security, our freedoms should be diminished. There is and always will be an eternal tug of war that balances security with freedom but I don’t think there has to be. I must admit I think it is odd that the people who foisted this upon us would a few short years later shriek with all their might that an opposing political party was robbing the people of their God given freedoms would be the same ones who used fear to take other freedoms.

The Patriot Act allows our government to search United States citizens without approval by the courts showing cause but merely by suspecting citizens of wrongdoing. I allow our government to detain us for no predetermined amount of time and without the ability to face our accusers or the right to a speedy trial by a jury of our peers. Let this all soak in for a moment if you were unaware. Any person who is a member of the NRA or ACLU has to cringe at this loss of rights; any person who wants a return to a more constitutional way of doing things must be disgusted by these laws. Republicans say and do nothing about the Patriot Act, they thought the damn thing up, but rest assured the Democrats with a super majority will address this clearly unconstitional law, nothing, nada, squat. Both parties refuse to address it under what I am sure is the guise that it is keeping us safe and if a few citizens get unjustly labeled an enemy combatant, I am sure the government has good reason, or the guy is sleeping with the wrong guys’ wife. But be reassuered that maybe someday the supreme court will weigh in on this one.

Another dandy imposed by the newly minted Department of Homeland Security was the wonderful TSA that costs us all dearly, pays poorly, and frisks us all regularly. I object to the TSA just on a cost basis alone and I don’t think they do a whole lot to keep us safe anyway but here is what I think on the entire boondoggle. We shouldn’t have a Dept. of Homeland Security, the FBI and NSA can more than handle it, we shouldn’t have a Patriot Act that robs us of freedoms. I think the price of freedom, true freedom, is much, much higher. I think the price of freepom is higher than our young men crossing an ocean, spilling their blood, and dying on some foreign soil. I think the price of freedom demands more than just my life, the true price of freedom is the lives of my children. Security should do what it can but to truly be free we must ALL be willing to lay down our lives for it. I may very well be wrong but I would rather live a truly free life and risk it being taken by someone who hates it for me, than give them to others, including my own government. Do away with the TSA and DHS, bomb us and destroy a major city or two if you must, just know you are killing and bombing people that are free, and will always be so, until we take it away from ourselves.

Gay marriage

Gay Marriage and the Minnesota Constitution

 

  I would like to start my contribution to this blog by adding my thoughts to the marriage amendment being considered for the state constitution.  I plan on voting no for the following reasons.

1.        Maybe I am a bit rusty on the constitution but I am sure that in the there somewhere is language regarding equal protection under the law.  If I am right and any rights are granted to married couples then we must either recognize same sex relationships or the government needs to get out of the marriage business.  What comes to mind immediately is power of attorney, inheritance and tax codes.

2.       I don’t believe that the marriage amendment will stand up to the supreme court of Minnesota and rulings from other states lend weight to my position.   I think the U.S. supreme court will someday here the matter but until then I think the state courts will continue their current track

3.       With the tremendous level of debt at both the state level and national level the court costs don’t justify any gains that would be made.  With gay marriage already not legal we are doing no more than making it more not legal.  I know the anti-gay marriage folks are trying to avert the courts making it legal as they did in Iowa but please refer to my first point.

4.       They church has every right to not ever recognize gat marriage and would never expect them to recognize it nor should they ever have to.  They can speak of moral all they wish but I don’t want my church dictating what is acceptable in society much less some OTHER church deciding what our laws should be.  I wonder what the westburo Baptist church would like to see change.  If one thinks I am off base here please keep in mind that the southern Baptists in our country try to dictate policy on a regular basis.

5.       My number one reason is my children.  I have a son and a daughter with one on the way.  I imagine someday one of my children who I love with all of my heart coming to me and declaring that they are gay.  I would never want that for them because I think gay people have a tough row to hoe but still, they tell me that they have found the love of their life.  Who am I to say how a person lives their life but for my kids I just want them to be happy, I love them and really only want them to be productive members of society and happy and if my son wants to be happy and marry some fella and contribute to America who am I to stand in his way or tell him marriage is out of the question… 

NAACP Runs Polling Station

I read this story and I knew two things.

There would be some people who would not find a problem with this story is the first.

The second is that those people would have a melt down if the roles were reversed.

Let's demonstrate (though I know the hypocrite-partisan-hacks will not fess up).

According to Eve Rockford, a poll watcher trained by voter integrity group True the Vote, three NAACP members showed up to the 139 precinct location with 50 cases of bottled water and began handing bottles out to people standing in line. While wearing NAACP labeled clothing, members were "stirring the crowd" and talking to voters about flying to Ohio to promote President Barack Obama.
...
At this point, NAACP members were instructed to turn their clothing inside out, which they refused to do and said they weren’t going to stop their actions inside the polling place. Their behavior and actions to move people to the front of the line continued for the rest of the evening. Texas State Representative Sylvester Turner, a former Texas NAACP leader, was also seen outside the building talking with voters.

“The NAACP basically ran this poll location and the judges did nothing about it,” Rockford said.

Did you find anything wrong with this?

How about this?

According to Eve Rockford, a poll watcher trained by voter integrity group True the Vote, three Tea Party members showed up to the 139 precinct location with 50 cases of bottled water and began handing bottles out to people standing in line. While wearing Tea Party labeled clothing, members were "stirring the crowd" and talking to voters about flying to Ohio to promote Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney.
...
At this point, Tea Party members were instructed to turn their clothing inside out, which they refused to do and said they weren’t going to stop their actions inside the polling place. Their behavior and actions to move people to the front of the line continued for the rest of the evening. Texas State Representative Sylvester Turner, a former Texas Tea Party leader, was also seen outside the building talking with voters.

“The Tea Party basically ran this poll location and the judges did nothing about it,” Rockford said.

One of those versions is the real one and the other edited to illustrate a point. If only one version got you upset then you are likely a partisan hack. Both of these should strike you as being wrong. Having the state representative there makes the story even more appalling. That election officials did nothing is shameful.

I personally would be deeply bothered regardless of which version of the story is true. One would shock me. I would be shocked to hear of such blatant disregard for the laws in an organized manner from the Tea Party.

The real story is the version with the NAACP. And this behavior is of no surprise.

Why Unions Suck, Part 3

Yet another example of intimidation efforts by union thugs.

I have said before and maintain that stealing / vandalizing political property or doing such things to property for assumably political purposes is akin to terrorism. I maintain these crimes should carry felony charges.

These punks should be charged with a felony for each sign.

Perrysburg police arrested four Toledo area men early Friday morning on charges of stealing Mitt Romney campaign signs in Wood and Lucas counties in Northwest Ohio.

The signs were found in a pickup truck owned by Sheet Metal Workers International, Union Local 33 in Parma, according to the police report.

Many of the signs -- some measuring as large as 4 feet by 8 feet -- were believed to have been put up by members of Northwest Ohio Conservative Coalition, said John McAvoy, the group's president.

Perrysburg police reported that at 1 a.m., four men – Corey Beaubian, 37, Sean Bresler, 33; and John Russell, 39, all of Toledo; and Christopher Monaghan, 41, of Rossford -- were arrested and charged with receiving stolen property. Police also said the Ford F-150 pickup truck also contained tools such as drills that could have been used to take the large signs down.

The signs were reportedly removed from private property and business locations in Lucas and Wood Counties.

There is intimidation by unions for opposing them, crossing a picket line (which myopic union lovers will say is justification for the union's felonious criminal activity), for wanting to vote against unionization (again, they will say this warrants threats even though it flies in the face of a belief of a free society) and we know it exists. Now is proof of theft by union members for not being politically in goose-step.

The reason for doing this kind of cowardly behavior is to intimidate people into silence. That and a lack of confidence in one's own beliefs so much so that opposition is threatening and must be silenced.

Pathetic.

Intro

I look forward to adding to the discourse. My very first thought on here will be of the gay marriage amendment being added to the state const

Dear Class, Here are some general corrections that people could profit from. Exercise Set IV (1) This argument violates the fourth criterion, since there is evidence Reagan appeared in Hollywood movies. (2) This satisfies all four criteria. (3) This violates the fourth criterion, because of all the evidence in favor of evolution. (4) This violates the second criterion of a good argument. (5) This violates the first, second, and fourth criteria of a good argument. (6) This satisfies all four criteria of a good argument. (7) This violates the foruth criterion of a good argument, but the other criteria are satisfied. (8) This rather obviously violates the first criterion of a good argument. (9) This violates the fourth criterion of a good argument, since it overlooks the evidence that medicine advances and hence allows people to live longer. (10) This rather clearly violates both the second and third criteria. Omar Mirza

Gay marriage and Minnesota

Gay Marriage and the Minnesota Constitution

  I would like to start my contribution to this blog by adding my thoughts to the marriage amendment being considered for the state constitution.  I plan on voting no for the following reasons.

1.        Maybe I am a bit rusty on the constitution but I am sure that in the there somewhere is language regarding equal protection under the law.  If I am right and any rights are granted to married couples then we must either recognize same sex relationships or the government needs to get out of the marriage business.  What comes to mind immediately is power of attorney, inheritance and tax codes.

2.       I don’t believe that the marriage amendment will stand up to the supreme court of Minnesota and rulings from other states lend weight to my position.   I think the U.S. supreme court will someday here the matter but until then I think the state courts will continue their current track

3.       With the tremendous level of debt at both the state level and national level the court costs don’t justify any gains that would be made.  With gay marriage already not legal we are doing no more than making it more not legal.  I know the anti-gay marriage folks are trying to avert the courts making it legal as they did in Iowa but please refer to my first point.

4.       They church has every right to not ever recognize gat marriage and would never expect them to recognize it nor should they ever have to.  They can speak of moral all they wish but I don’t want my church dictating what is acceptable in society much less some OTHER church deciding what our laws should be.  I wonder what the westburo Baptist church would like to see change.  If one thinks I am off base here please keep in mind that the southern Baptists in our country try to dictate policy on a regular basis.

5.       My number one reason is my children.  I have a son and a daughter with one on the way.  I imagine someday one of my children who I love with all of my heart coming to me and declaring that they are gay.  I would never want that for them because I think gay people have a tough row to hoe but still, they tell me that they have found the love of their life.  Who am I to say how a person lives their life but for my kids I just want them to be happy, I love them and really only want them to be productive members of society and happy and if my son wants to be happy and marry some fella and contribute to America who am I to stand in his way or tell him marriage is out of the question… 

Add caption

Looming Tax Hikes Causing Business Owners To Cash In

George Lucas (the man who forgot that Han shot first) sold LucasFilm to Disney (Walt is turning in his grave since Eisner took over) for $4.05 billion (a fraction of the national debt).

While the news of the sale may be causing mixed reactions among Star Wars fans one thing is known. Lucas selling the company in 2012, or more accurately, before 2013 for a reason. Onerous taxes on capital gains are about to get more onerous in the coming year. Lucas soldout long ago, but he sold to Disney now may have been timed intentionally.

Wade Westhoff, a financial adviser based in Danville, Calif., says of the Disney deal...“This is a textbook example of exit planning for a private business owner.” ...
That Lucas struck a deal in 2012 may be no accident, either, advisers say. Long-term capital gains tax from the sale of assets held more than one year are taxed at a rate of 15% for investors in the 25% income-tax bracket or above (Lucas’s level), and zero for investors in the 10% or 15% bracket. Those rates are set to jump to 20% and 10%, respectively in January. “He probably wanted to take advantage of the lower rate on long-term capital gain while it’s certain,” says Bill Smith, managing director at CBIZ MHM, a national accounting and professional services provider.

There really is not a justification for stealing someone's capital gains like the government already does. It is, quite simply, a move to foster and maintain class warfare and nurture hatred of the wealthy. It is quite sad that this has to happen all because of people who think that the productive people in the nation MUST carry the weight of the non- or under-productive.

The problem is not limited to the likes of Lucas. Many small businesses are facing similar decisions.

A looming increase in the capital-gains tax rate next year is fueling sales of some privately-held businesses.

Many business owners—mostly founders who could gain a lot from a sale—are looking to close deals before next year, when the maximum tax on investment income is scheduled to rise from 15% currently to at least 23.8% on most capital gains, at least for higher-income households. Many sellers intend to convert their equity into retirement funds or just start anew.

Again, there is no moral justification for stealing someone's fruits of investment. And notice that the tax theft rate is cutting into what could otherwise go into retirement funds. To be clear, capital gains taxes apply to pensions as well. Think of that the next time you hear a senior citizen pissing vinegar about their pensions not growing much.

Taxes affect business decisions. I would posit the affect is much stronger for the more "negative" consequences like layoffs, relocations and selling/closing.

Bert Wolf of Acetylene Oxygen in Harlingen, Texas, says he plans to sell his compressed-gas business before 2013. Many business owners are looking to close deals by year's end.

"It just made more sense for me to take my chips off the table and go do something else," said Bert Wolf, 60 years old, who has an agreement to sell his compressed-gas business, Acetylene Oxygen Co. of Harlingen, Tex., before year-end.

I can hear someone wanting to say, "It is only a 7% increase. Big deal." First, that is WAY bigger than the GDP growth and so it is unfair. Essentially that rational is saying that government's "income" should grow more than the people who pay for "income" can earn.

The average citizen whines when their bills grow faster than their income. Yet the hate-the-rich crowd have no qualms about imposing that situation on fellow citizens. Hatred justifies much for people.

Second, that 7% is gargantuan.

Mr. Wolf added that if he waited until after the tax increase to sell, he would have to expand the business at the current rate "for at least 3 or 4 more years to achieve the same after-tax sales dollar."

And it might be fair to make this a partisan thing, or at least a reflection on Obama's economic policies.

To be sure, the weak economy has been difficult for many small-business owners across the board. The median selling price for U.S. small businesses in the quarter ended Sept. 30 was $174,000 down 8.2% from four years earlier, according to BizBuySell.com, an online small-business marketplace. The firm's findings are based on sales, reported voluntarily by business brokers and mostly of less than $1 million, in 70 major markets.

Anecdotally I am encountering a huge resistance to hire until it is determined who wins the election. Add that to the number of business closing, contracting or selling under Obama and add to that the number of business that are warning of contraction and closures if Obama wins and you have a good understanding of how the job producers and job makers of the country feel about the business culture.

Putting the squeeze on the rich puts a bigger squeeze on the middle class who rely on the rich for jobs.

Why Unions Suck (Redux)

Unions charge union dues and in many cases their membership is obligatory, which means their dues are obligatory. Don't give me the "fairshare" crap because it is a scam. After being forced to be in AFSCME and studying their books for years I know it is just a matter of claiming campaign pieces are pushing pro-labor positions and BAM those expenses can be paid for out of the fairshare funds...no matter how political the pieces actually are.

I also know that, at least the stewards at the University of Minnesota that I knew, did a lot of their literature preparation using office supplies (paid for by the U of MN) and their time was on the clock. So, fairshare comments are full of crap and the idea that the members are meticulous about how they divide those things up is less real than unicorn farms and dragon burgers. Honesty within the union's accounting is even less real.

Back to the story.

AFSCME has been sending campaign literature for an issue the is SO-O-O crucial to the labor movement: marriage.

That's right, somehow marriage has such important impacts on labor-management issues that they are spending money on direct mail literature.
Those of you following the issue know what side they are taking. I just cannot figure out how this is so important in employee-management bargaining laws.

It came from AFSCME Council 5 and demonstrates yet again that unions in general and AFSCME specifically are worthless to their original purpose. They should lose all of their tax benefits and be counted as just another PAC. We as a society should remember what they are...a lobbyist group. Nothing more.

Oh, wait, they are a hypocritical lobbyist group. Most of their positions, candidates and endorsements are wanting larger government intrusion and regulation. They lambaste opponents for wanting smaller government. So when their flyer says "too much government intrusion into our private lives" I have to laugh.

Crap like this make groups lose their credibility. But is it possible for a group to have "negative" credibility? Or is a big fat "none" the worst it can be?

Fire The Help But Not The Senator

Remember the scandal earlier in the year where there were Secret Service agents in a sex scandal? Prostitution in a foreign country, while on duty or something?

There were people that were saying those agents should lose their jobs for it. Among those people was Sen Menendez of New Jersey.

"If the facts are true, they should all be fired. The reality is is that the secret service not only protects the president of the United States, they represent the United States of America. They were on duty. If the facts are true as we are reading in the press, they shouldn't have a job."

Fast forward to the present time. Sen Menendez now has a chance to put his principles where his mouth is. He should fire himself, if the facts are true as we are reading in the press, he shouldn't have a job.

Two women from the Dominican Republic told The Daily Caller that Democratic New Jersey Sen. Bob Menendez paid them for sex earlier this year.

In interviews, the two women said they met Menendez around Easter at Casa de Campo, an expensive 7,000-acre resort in the Dominican Republic. They claimed Menendez agreed to pay them $500 for sex acts, but in the end they each received only $100.
...
When shown a photograph of Sen. Menendez, the women said they recognized him as the man with whom they’d had sexual relations at Casa de Campo this spring. Both said they were brought to the resort with the understanding they would be paid for sex.

Neither knew the identity of the man at the time. Both claimed to recognize him later as Sen. Menendez.

“He called him[self] ‘Bob,’” said one.

They could be "recognizing" a doppelganger, right?

But as we say here often, But wait, there's more.

Menendez’s 2012 public schedule shows no events listed for Easter or the following three days. Aircraft records obtained by TheDC show that Melgen’s plane left Florida the morning of Easter Sunday this year, stopped at the Teterboro private airport near Menendez’s home in New Jersey, and flew on to the Dominican Republic.

Two days later it returned to the United States from a private airport near Casa de Campo.

I have a sneaking suspicion that Menendez will find some rationalization for why he should not suffer the same fate that he demanded of the 'help'. Fire the Help for being involved in a sex scandal, per Menedez, but don't close the Senator's office...it was just a sex scandal.

Why Unions Suck

After a storm that caused so much devastation that New York and New Jersey ask the fed to pick up 100% of the cost of cleanup, the state of New Jersey has the gall to be a choosy beggar about the help they get.

Crews from Huntsville, as well as Decatur Utilities and Joe Wheeler out of Trinity headed up [to the northeast] this week, but Derrick Moore, one of the Decatur workers, said they were told by crews in New Jersey that they can't do any work there since they're not union employees.

The crews that are in Roanoke, Virginia say they are just watching and waiting even though they originally received a call asking for help from Seaside Heights, New Jersey.

The crews were told to stand down. In fact, Moore said the crew from Trinity is already headed back home.

My hope for Karmic Retribution is that New Jersey's clean up goes so slowly and badly that they long for the days when Newark was not the shining example of the best of New Jersey. I mean, can you imagine a state that is so messed up that Newark is the star of the state?

How Dare I Speak The Truth

Earlier today I saw a ranting post about abortion. I was trying to turn over a new leaf and not cross mediums (eg bringing Facebook onto blog or email/chat into blog). But this person's horrifically broken logic is so frightening that I needed it out there to demonstrate why the debate only continues to devolve.

I try not to get too political on Facebook, but does someone have to publicly say something like this once a week now? Like I've said before, I would feel a whole lot better about this position if there was ANY attention paid toward ending rape and rape culture. But, frankly, until someone from the republican party says he or she is going to at least ATTEMPT to look at policies that would protect women from this brutal violence, I don't want to hear one more thing about ending a woman's right to reclaim her personal freedoms.

That was followed up with a comment by the same author.

I know this is going really far out on a limb here, but I would love to hear a man that's experienced rape and knows the degradation and powerlessness that haunts a survivor talk about it with other men that clearly don't have a clue. It feels to me that if these political candidates can publicly call rape, "legitimate rape," "the rape thing" and "force-able rape" without shame or fear, and without any kind of recognition of how they might be minimizing and discounting the experiences of women who have survived sexual violence, then they're already past the point of being able to really hear and empathize with a woman's point of view. (Emphasis added)

I responded only with "Absolutely disagree".

The very premise of the person's original position is deeply flawed. "If rape exists then all abortion must be available." Mind you, this person is pro-abortion and very much anti-fetus rights (not trying to alter the labels of the debate, just trying to keep the labels for this person as accurate as possible). I disagree with the very premise of the post.

I disagree with the comment as well. Unless I am missing something, the implication is that men who have been raped need to educate men who have not before the have nots can formulate their own opinion. This is an oft repeated statement in the abortion debate, that some class of people (usually all males, or all males who are anti-abortion) should not be listened to because they are not a part of the other class (usually women, or pro-abortion people). This is a ridiculous expectation of discussion. To put this kind of exclusion on a public law issue is irresponsible.

Imagine, only rich people are allowed to discuss tax policies for the wealthy. Only landowners can discuss tax levies. Only business owners can discuss labor laws. Only people who have been brutalized by police can have an opinion on police brutality laws.

Ridiculous.

Why did I comment, though? Because the person claims to be "open for discussing hot topics" and "able to have mature discussions" and is "a moderate". Deep down I have never believed any of those claims, but I could only take them at their word. I offered only that I disagreed and right away I received a chat request. Why in chat? To prevent the appearance of disagreement in public. The chat was brief. The thing that ended it was me saying that some women make it up.

Person: they think women make it up.
So maybe it would be great for a man that has experienced it to talk about it publicly.
You are misreading this in a profound way.
Me: no, but me not being raped does not mean i have not abillity to think about the issue critically, have an opinion on it and dare to say that women could be not on the same page
"...and empathize with a woman's point of view" implies that the woman's POV is of higher regard on the matter.
Person: Okay, but you haven't called it "the rape thing" "legitimate rape" implying that there is illegitimate rape, and "forceable rape" implying that woman are making up their claims.

(Emphasis added)To which I replied (brace yourself, it is highly offensive): "Some women do".

The response? "I have to go...I can't talk about this with you."

Of course they could not talk about it. Their moral high ground was being challenged. Of course they could not talk about it. Those who often profess the ability to handle discussions usually cannot. Of course they could not talk about it. Those who preach the requirement of others to be tolerant are often the least tolerant people around...and this is no exception.

***** UPDATE (edited) *****
Not that it really matters, but I find it comical that the person unfriended me on Facebook (oh gasp) within minutes. Wait, that is not the comical part. Then 2 hours later sent a friend request...after dragging a loved one into the mix. This coward keeps putting loved ones on the spot about my beliefs instead of leaving them out of it (since the loved ones do not like to be in these discussions) and coming straight to the source, me. Coward.

***** UPDATE 2 *****
The person in question upheld my every assessment of their character. Like a coward, when the going to tough she ran away. The shame is not only how badly she is fooling herself about who she is (thinking she is a tolerant person of differences in people, thinking she is open-minded and thinking she treats people fairly--these characteristics only exist from them when she doesn't care about the topic you disagree on OR if you unless you agree with her). The pitiful part is that for someone who thinks she puts a high value on a friendship she was abysmally disrespectful to me for so long (which I endured because my loved one highly valued their friendship) and was so quick to split when she finally found a topic that I voiced disagreement with her on.

The truth is that this person has been sending litmus tests about me to others. "He doesn't really believe that? No? Good." I recognize this and have seen it often. It always comes from self-proclaimed "open-minded" people who preach to others about their moral obligation to be tolerant and usually is accompanied by a woefully off-the-mark claim of being a moderate. If you were to bet a mortgage on those people you know eventually tucking and running you would win many a mortgage payments. This person was no exception. Disagreement was frowned on. Opposing viewpoints were openly mocked in parties, parties that would otherwise be politics-free.

The person was nice otherwise. It is only that when it came to current events there was no room for tolerance of other viewpoints, there was some of the most passive-aggressive behaviors seen and disrespect sometimes would bleed into other areas. I take that back...current events and sports were the topics that had to be avoided because there was little tolerance, if any at all, given to non-conforming views.

While this whole drama was (1) predicted by me a couple months ago, and (2) a perfect example of how fickle the person is, the best example (and the confirmation to me of the true character of this person) came a couple of days before the Giants second Super Bowl victory over the Patriots. It was a simple and direct message on Facebook saying that if the Patriots lose, anyone who even speaks of the game to her in any fashion will be unfriended and she will never speak to those people again. She reiterated shortly after that that she was not joking. That was the day I knew the true nature of her "tolerance", "open-mindedness" and sense of equality...for if they had won there would be lots of talk about the game from her.

The person is somewhat outraged that text from Facebook was quoted. It seems in their vast knowledge of the stuff they judge others on they don't know that Facebook has been deemed by courts to be public information. [facepalm].

Frankly, I am sad for the loved ones who valued their relationship with this person. I am neither surprised by the turn of events (like I said, I predicted exactly this a while ago after a get together at a friend's that was moving out of country) nor am I bothered. On the surface she was very pleasant and inviting. So long as things were good for her she was there to listen. I don't know of anytime she was physically "there" to help, but I know for quite some time I did not include her on the list of people to ask. On the surface she was friendly and caring. But I have known what it would take to maintain a deeper relationship, a close friendship, with her. It would take us lying to her about our beliefs, joining her in the mocking of people that are of like mind to us, agreeing with her on everything. And, of course, that would be the antithesis of a close friendship. That is why she & I were not able to be close. It is why I feel pity for this person. How can you find truly enlightening friendships when you are so obtuse towards tolerance? If no one is able to do anything more than stroke your ego and not challenge your mind you will never grow the mind. And this person is in that pitfall.

If someone does not know how to weather a storm then they are not able to be a good friend, a close friend or even a friend that can be counted on...ever.

***** UPDATE 3 *****
I had to take drastic steps to stop the stalking by these people. I kind of hoped that when they protested about being called a coward for, among other things, continually going to a third party to ask what my responses are that they would instead come to me directly. Nope. I kind of thought that when they said they were done with me that their trolling and attempts to cause trouble in our lives would end. Nope. I noticed their IP addresses were still hitting here and finally had to take steps that I didn't even take amidst death threats: I implemented a script to block their IDs. Turns out that they want to control other's content, thoughts and beliefs. All while calling themselves "open minded" and "tolerant" and "fair"...the only question is do they know they are full of it or have they projected the lie so well that they are convinced it is true?