Saturday, April 19, 2008

John McCain: More Liberal Then Most Democrats On Economics.

So John “I don’t have much experience with the economy” McCain offered his economic recovery plan a few days ago. I remember hearing this. I figured this would be at least as fun as watching a blind guy at a strip club.

The first topic McCain said he would introduce a new tax system. A system that would give the tax payers a choice of whether or not to participate in the new system or the old one. Good boy Jonny!! Did you think of that one on your own? Give him some bubbles. Now Mr. Conservative, just exactly how do you propose to pay for this new simultaneous system? You are not proposing getting rid of the old one and loosing up money used to run it. Don't you think that in the interest of getting back the biggest refund check people will have to do their taxes both ways to find out which system to use to achieve that end? You are just going to make government BIGGER! That is a liberal idea if I ever heard one. I mean it is one of the staples of the conservative Battle cry. "liberal democrats just want to increase government size and waste your tax money!!"

This led to yet another Liberal idea. An increase in the exemptions for dependants. Man that is just like giving welfare an increase. Now I don’t know if you have to understand anything about sociology to be president, but here is a lesson that I hope candidates one and all grasp. Sing along if you can.

Families have children by what their resources can afford. You think you are picking the number of children, but really science does it for you 95% of the time. The number of children per family produced has dropped in the last 70 years. This has been true since we left agriculture behind as our source of survival. The closer you get to the bottom of the wage earning scale, the more that "careful family planning" has not occurred. The more you make, the less children are an asset and the more they become a liability. A sociological impulse to curb child bearing occurs in the middle class. Then once you get so high up on the earnings scale children become an affordable luxury like a nice car or a trip to the Bahama's. A little further explanation is probably in order.

This is where life gets complicated for an elderly war vet that suffered abuse and possibly some brain damage. It requires math and sociology. If you double the amount of return tax credit to $7,000 per dependant, that is only going really help families at the lowest level of income earner. If you make say $80,000 per year, that extra $3,500 is less the 5% of your income. That is a little more then 2 week’s salary for them. This is the range where most people can afford to send a couple of children to college, have a decent house, and keep a healthy debt to earnings ratio. (I say can, not do.) Now if you increase a “dependant” dependant tax by $3,500 to the lowest end of the wage earning bracket, you encourage family growth. That family growth contributes to so many of our social and economical problems that exist today. If you only make $17,000 a year, then a $3,500 per child increase is a more then a 20% (a 41% total) increase in their income. To increase your wealth by a nearly half for every dependant is pretty inspiring. Now, is that going to produce well educated, well adjusted, and functional children? The chances are much worse. Since most children are not really consuming 1/5th, let alone 1/3rd of your net income, then they become an asset at the lower levels. Nice plan buddy, why not just pay children to have more kids. Oh wait, your plan is.

The 18.4 gas tax break for 3 months a year is going to save the average person around, you ready for this, $10 per month. The big “saver” of course will be those driving gas guzzling SUZ 40 miles each way to work and back. They might save up to $40 a month. So who will this break really help? Really big business that consume gas like there is no limited supply. They could save millions. Great economy is going bad, what we need is more tax breaks for the people who can afford to pay their CEO’s $10 million per year. Now that is more like it. An idea that looks "giving" and helpful to the masses , but really there to help "the biggest tax payers." So at least he is not completely crossed over here yet.

Here is a great one. Man this guy has been smoking some really good stuff. He is going to offer government backed loan mortgages for those people who were either budgetarily challenged, furturly blind, or just plain not very smart and bought houses that they couldn’t afford and are about to loose them. There are companies out there going bankrupt left and right who backed these loans, and he wants the government to jump into the business? Many of these people are about to loose their house because they don’t have jobs or they lost their high paying auto factory job and now are Wal-Mart door greeters. How are they going to pay any loan back? Fix that problem. I think having an economy that is already on shaky ground is not the best time to enter a business that is showing to be a big looser for the private sector. I mean why not just open up a government airlines instead. That is going so well. And yet another program that will require money that we don’t have. All while maintaining our economic hemorrhage to Iraq. That is again "not very conservative."

I mean these ideas are more liberal thinking then any of the ones that the liberal democrats are proposing. The problem is that he embodies the part of liberalism that is most out of touch with economic reality. Elect John McCain and you will have no country to protect. It will be split up between the South Americans and the Asians.

Thursday, April 17, 2008

Sorry, But No News to Report

Well it has been awhile since I have been able to post. Been working on the book as well as encountering family obligations, and oh yeah, work a little in between. On the surface it seems like there has been a lit of news in the last few weeks. But peel back the surface and see it is the same old tired stories.

Clinton is trying to make a mountain our of mole hill as a case against Obama. She says he called us industrial belt north shore state residents “bitter” and that is demeaning. Well Hillary, we are “bitter”. Your husband signed NAFTA into law making it easy for industry to leave the area it corrupted, polluted, and diminished. Oh yeah, and you did nothing but attend nice social functions. Now you call that “experience”. If giving Bill a “Lewinski” is qualifications for being president, then why isn’t Monica Lewinski running? She has tried to take credit for every good thing her husband did and reject everything bad, yet gets removed from the former and tied to the later. Ahh, if you people don’t see through the thin corrupt political skin of Hillary yet, then there is no going on about it. Clinton, an advocate for gun rights and religion in politics. That is laughable.

China is in the news. They are hosting a controversial Olympics This coming summer. They are having some trouble with protesters. On the surface you might think this is a “new” story, But they were awarded the games in ’01. They have been ruled by a repressive régime for 10,000 years and have been getting chastised by the world for human rights violations for at least 40 years. What is new is that the media is just now getting around to covering it from the Olympic perspective. As if they didn’t expect the one chance for the people to speak out was not going to be utilized.

Oh and for those of you who think that, “the Olympics should be left a-political”, shut-up. The legend of the original Olympics was based on the purpose of building a truce. If they want to stop politics in the Olympics, then they should stop inviting countries to the games. Stop waving their flags when they win and stop playing their national anthem when they are first. That props these people up as representatives of our ideals, aka politics. Invite their gymnastics club, individual athletes, or swim diving team, but not under a country’s banner. Don’t worry you won’t need the giant stadiums then. More people would show up to the Special Olympics. Asking to take politics out of the Olympics is like asking to have fighting removed from hockey or crashes removed from auto racing.

Robert Mugabe President of Zimbabwe is refusing to step down after 3 decades of power. His country’s economy is in shambles as inflation is in the many thousands of percent range. His people are starving and destitute. There are no previous administrations to blame it on. I don’t know, “news” to me is not that “the sun came up today.” News would be if it didn’t. There is and was no this guy was going into retirement gently. Nothing shocking there.

General Petraeus (never trust a man with that many vowels in his name. There is just no need for it.) delivered a clear and precise report that ran contradictory to what was actually happening in Iraq. Everything worked as planed, but nothings has changed and we need to go back and do it again. Day after day reports of more violence and record months poor in. We went there to fight the Sunnis and now are in a heated battle with the Shia. Of course our original enemies that attack us on 9/11 are Sunnis. Then again John McCain can’t seem to remember that to save his life. We are paying half of them to either quit fighting, the other half are afraid of the half that are being paid. Afraid they will shoot them and tell the US they were terrorists. No News here. This is what every stooge monkey that the administration has put in front of the public since day one has done. You may note that there are no plans made that go past January of 2009. Everybody knows the democrats will win and pull out all of the troops sooner then immediately.

Elliot Spitzer got busted for buying a very expensive hooker. Really this is the height of greed. He spent the cost of a small Kia to pay this woman to keep her mouth shut and leave after sex. This could have been done for about $500. but nooo, he had to show how much he could spend. He wanted to get caught. You can not stend that kind of money in one place and have it go unnoticed. I can’t believe there are other people out there, no matter who they are, spending that kind of money for sex. The chick wasn’t even very good looking. For that kind of money you can walk into a club get wasted, get everybody else wasted and be the man of the hour. Some sleezy chick will sleep with you. Do it some place where nobody knows your name, pay in cash, and leave when it is done. If he came to a bar in my town, nobody would know who he is. Most of them don’t know who the mayor of this town is, let alone the governor of NY. It is because any man paying that kind of money for a piece of ass is not spending money that they legitimately earned, that he got caught. It is also why it really isn’t “news”. Every time somebody gets busted with one of these scandals they are spending money they don’t have. If they went through the clientele of every one this lady serviced for that kind of money, you would find none of them are on the level.

So unless I missed something really bid while taking care of my day to days, that is about all that has happened in the last month and a half. I see McCain is trying his had at economics. That might have to be addressed next. That is like have a retard try his hand at trigonometry.

Counter text

New counter