My Theory Of Parenting

It’s all about building up lots and lots of calluses.

There is no way someone who has never played the guitar could pick up one and start playing for hours as if he were Jimi Hendrix.  And it’s not just because there are years of musical training required to get to that point.  Even if science found a way to magically ‘download’ Jimi’s guitar playing skill to your brain, you still couldn’t do it.

Why?  Because you haven’t built up the calluses on your fingers yet.

Spending years playing a stringed instrument not only hones your musical ability but it also causes  calluses to build up on your finger tips that will allow you to play longer, faster and harder than you could when you started.  Without those calluses, any attempt to play difficult pieces of music for hours on end would cause your fingers to end up as bloody stumps.

You have to slowly build up those calluses in order to take your craft to the next level.

Same goes for parenting.  I don’t mean that you get callus over time and lose interest or feeling for your job as a parent.  I mean these parental calluses toughen you up and give you the wisdom and courage to take on the more difficult parental tasks/decisions as your kids grow up.  Reading books about parenting are great but having the knowledge to do the right thing is not enough – you have to put in the work and build up those calluses.  Experience can’t be learned, it must be endured.

My wife and I are parents to a 12 year old daughter and a 9 year old son and while I’m only half way through the process of rearing them to adulthood, I’ve learned that parenting is really about intentionally entering into the struggles of parenting so that these stronger calluses can form.

On Friday my daughter is leaving for a weekend choir competition at the beach and this is the first time we are not chaperoning her.   If you told us two years ago that we’d allow our 12 year old daughter to go on a weekend trip without one of us tagging along we’d have thought you were crazy and there would be no way we’d allow that.

But we’re staying home this weekend and we’re doing this for two reasons – 1) Our daughter asked us to let her make this trip on her own and 2) We agreed that she was mature enough to take this next step.

And don’t think that I’m some cool, hip father who is comfortable letting my kids be free spirits.  I’m not!

When my daughter was born I was the typical doting father who was very protective of my little princess.  I hovered over people who wanted to hold her and made sure they sanitized their hands before they touched her.  I cried like a baby when we first dropped her off at daycare when she was 3 months old and I remained stressed about leaving her at daycare until 3 years later (once our son was born) when my wife quit her civil engineering job to become a stay-at-home mom.

How did I get to this point?  How can I watch her leave the house for a weekend and not break down?

Because of the parental calluses I have received over the years from:

Wiping away my tears after watching her get wheeled into surgery as a baby,

Dropping her off at daycare for the first 3 years of her life,

Driving her to spend a week with the grandparents every summer,

Watching her walk into the middle school gym for a Friday night dance,

Rushing her to the hospital after she broke her arm and

Waving goodbye as my wife and I leave her home to babysit our son so that we can have a date night.

All of those events (and countless others I can’t remember) slowly, over time, built up calluses that allow me, as a parent, to reach the next level.  It’s not that I don’t care but more that I’ve lived through prior stressful situations and seen my daughter come through the other side as a stronger and more mature girl who is on her way to becoming a woman.   I had to live through those experiences to gain the wisdom to make the tougher choices now.

I’ll be honest; right now the thought of my daughter pulling out of the driveway in her car to go pick her friends up on a Saturday night turns my stomach to the point where I want to vomit.   And dropping her off at college?  I don’t want to think about it.

But based on what I’ve seen and experienced over the past 12 years, I know that when the time comes for those major life events I’ll have thicker calluses on my parenting hands that’ll allow me to smile and be proud that she has embraced the next steps she must take to become a woman.

A couple of years ago, the thought of letting my daughter go out of town for the weekend without either of her parents going with her would’ve kept me up at night.  But now I’m happy for her.  I’m proud that she feels confident enough to WANT to do this on her own.  Will I pray like crazy that God protects her this weekend?  Heck yea.  Will I sleep well this weekend?  Heck yea.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

CBO Report Margin Of Error Is 100%

BREAKING – It is very difficult to model the world’s largest economy.

I get it, Macroeconomics is hard.  It’s hard not only because of the math and statistics but it’s hard because Macroeconomic models must attempt to model one of the most difficult variables – human decisions.  These models are routinely asked to predict how people will alter their saving and spending habits based on a tweak of a minor variable (like the minimum wage).  I doubt there is any group that can accurately do that but I’m quite certain that a research arm of our Federal Government has about a 0% chance of getting this part right.

So when the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) asked the question – What would happen to US employment if we raised the minimum wage to $10.10? – We got this answer (emphasis mine):

Effects of the $10.10 Option on Employment and Income.  Once fully implemented in the second half of 2016, the $10.10 option would reduce total employment by about 500,000 workers, or 0.3 percent, CBO projects.  As with any such estimates, however, the actual losses could be smaller or larger; in CBO’s assessment, there is about a two-thirds chance that the effect would be in the range between a very slight reduction in employment and a reduction in employment of 1.0 million workers (see Table 1).”

The 43 page CBO report basically says this – There’s a 67% probability that job losses will be in the range of 0 to 1 million 2 years after raising the minimum wage to $10.10.

Wow…..How much money did we spend to generate this report?

I’m no fan of raising the minimum wage ANY, never mind increasing it 39%.  I do believe that doing so would be very detrimental to the US economy and yes, we’ll lose tons of jobs.  So I agree with the CBO findings but I can’t bring myself to treat this report as some economic gospel.  Yes, let’s continue to hammer the Left when they attempt to push legislation to raise the minimum wage but using this CBO report as our only weapon is not the best strategy.  When someone makes a prediction and says that the margin of error is +/- 100% then I take that report with a huge boulder of salt.

Sidebar prediction from me that requires zero tax payer dollars and is just as accurate as this latest CBO report – On February 18th 2016, the high temperature in my city in South Carolina will be 50°F and there is a 67% chance the high temperature will be in the range of 0° F and 100° F.

I do, however, think this CBO report can teach us something very important – The Federal Government shouldn’t be tweaking variables in our economy in the hopes of manipulating its outcomes.

It’s a far wiser course of action to keep the Federal Government out of the economy as much as possible and let the “Invisible Hand” do its thing.  The Free Market is like a supercomputer that not only analyzes the variables in current macroeconomic models but it also has a way to accurately account for human emotion/decisions because these individual decisions are at the heart of the Free Market’s Invisible Hand.  Consumers making individual choices every day will cause the Invisible Hand to pick winners/losers, set prices for goods/services, make innovation more successful by determining what products get developed and set salaries for every job in every industry.

The Invisible Hand is like magic and best of all it doesn’t require any big spending stimulus bill or massive legislation bill that polarizes the nation.  We should get back to that, right?

Posted in economics, politics | 1 Comment

New Feature For TurboTax 2013

UPDATE (17-FEB-14) Intuit VP of TurboTax offers clarification in comments section below.

I have been using TurboTax for the last 10 years to file my Federal and State taxes and I’ve been one of its biggest cheerleaders.

My dad taught me to do my taxes when I was in high school and it’s something I’ve done since but I hated the manual forms.  As my life got more complicated (having a family, buying/selling houses, investing in stocks, etc.) the forms got more intense and required more of my valuable time to complete.  But once I found TurboTax in 2004, this time of year was no longer looked on with dread and misery.  (Don’t get me wrong, as much as I love TurboTax, I’d prefer we dissolve the IRS, move to a Fair Tax system and eliminate the need to use TurboTax every year but that is a topic for another blog post).

This year was no different than the past 10 – TurboTax rolled out some nifty updates to make filing even easier and in just a couple of hours I had finished and e-filed my returns with no issues whatsoever.

TurboTax always has some extra features they tell you about once you’ve finished and as I was clicking through them I came upon this screen.

turbo tax obamacareHow lovely.  TurboTax is now shilling for Obamacare.

Needless to say, I didn’t click on the “start here” button.

This added ‘feature’ got me to wondering why TurboTax would do this.  They could have a totally altruistic (and financial) reason for doing this.  Obamacare is here, whether we like it or not, and TurboTax needs to educate their customers and provide a service that makes their product better than the other tax preparation alternatives.

But there may be another reason.  TurboTax software is developed by Intuit and here is a list of their political activity (Notice who they gave the most money to):

intuit political contributionsIntuit’s largest recipient of their political donations was Barack Obama.  When you’ve donated butt loads of cash to this guy you need to make sure his signature piece of legislation is a success so it’s good to see Intuit is helping The One boost enrollment to this disaster.

Posted in politics | 3 Comments

How Leftists Argue

After the recent UAW pummeling in Tennessee, Leftists have an extreme case of #Butthurt and they are taking to Twitter and demonstrating the 3 step arguing technique they always follow:

1)      Lie

2)      Shift and

3)      Vile Tweet

Before I give you an example of this arguing technique, let’s make sure you understand just how bad this defeat was for the UAW.

“The election was also extraordinary because Volkswagen choose to cooperate closely with the UAW. Volkswagen allowed UAW organizers to campaign inside the factory—a step rarely seen in this or other industries.”

“This is like an alternate universe where everything is turned upside down,” said Cliff Hammond, a labor lawyer at Nemeth Law PC in Detroit, who represents management clients but previously worked at the Service Employees International Union. “Usually, companies fight” union drives, he added.

And from the Labor Union Report post:

“The union reportedly dispatched 20 organizers into the plant. They wore black UAW t-shirts and were given access to employees on company-paid time, company offices, access to break areas and lunch rooms.”

“With so many people roaming through their plant, some employees complained it felt like they were “on lockdown.”

“The black-shirted UAW organizers were allowed to stay in the plant all the way up to 11:59 pm on the even of Wednesday’s vote.”

So to sum up – The VW management supported the UAW and encouraged its employees to vote FOR the union.  As if that wasn’t enough, the UAW was also given unprecedented access INSIDE the plant leading up to the vote.  And they still lost!

Now on to the #Butthurt.

Lie:
https://twitter.com/Hesiod2k11/status/434751527123578880

https://twitter.com/Hesiod2k11/status/434728634431983616
 
No, you would not be happy with any union vote that didn’t result in the formation of a union and we all know that.  Senator Corker makes a statement claiming VW would send more jobs to Tennessee if the UAW was defeated  and that is what the Left is calling ‘intimidation’ or something?

That is laughable.  Unions, who may not have invented voter intimidation but they damn well perfected it, are now claiming they were intimidated by the comments of a Senator.  Forget about the dozens of Outsider UAW goons roaming the halls of the VW facility leading up to the election.  You can’t make this stuff up.

Shift:

https://twitter.com/Hesiod2k11/status/434744382399320064

Now the Leftist wants to shift the argument to how the UAW has been great for other automotive companies.  Don’t ever take this bait from the Left but instead continue reminding them that they lost…..again.

Vile tweet:

https://twitter.com/Hesiod2k11/status/434752750568480769
This is the way it always ends with Leftists on twitter and this is always followed by a Block or Spam report.

This is why it’s useless to engage in a sensible debate with them.  You’d have better luck teaching a dog how to solve a Rubik’s cube.

Just enjoy the sweet taste of their tears…..There will be many more this year.

Posted in politics, unionthugs | 1 Comment

Save The Earth, Stop Breathing!

CO2 vs populationIf you selfish people would just stop breathing so much we could bring down CO2 levels and stabilize the climate!

The science is settled.

Posted in Climate Change | 2 Comments

Is NPR Becoming Pro 2nd Amendment?

Not likely but sometimes the most interesting parts of an NPR story don’t make it to their web page version.

There was an NPR story investigating how guns in Vermont are becoming a currency to be used to purchase illegal drugs.  The story is an interesting one to read but I was more interested in Taylor Dobbs’ introduction that can be found on the transcript:

“Vermont has a long history of hunting and other shooting sports and one of the lowest rates of violent crime in the nation. And there are no state level restrictions on gun ownership.”

Did you catch that?  Very little gun control = lowest rates of violent crime in the nation.  Sounds like a statistic you’d hear from an pro 2nd Amendment conservative!  Is NPR changing their gun grabbing stance?  Not a chance.

You’ll notice from the web version of the story (here) that this introduction was scrubbed.

The State Run Media censors didn’t react quick enough to prevent the audio of that opening FACT getting aired, but they did have time to make sure this pro 2nd Amendment propaganda didn’t make it to their website.

Posted in npr, politics | Leave a comment

Global Temperature Update – FEB 2014

With the latest Snowpocalypse set to hit the South this week, I figured now was a good time to update global temperatures and show once again how the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) team’s fixation on CO2 is misguided (at best) and more akin to cult like behavior.

Remember, the AGW cult says that increasing CO2 emissions will send the planet on a runaway warming scenario and they have tons of peer reviewed literature to back up their claims.

The AGW rightly cautions us to not confuse ‘weather’ events (a recent blizzard, a few hot days in the summer, etc.) with ‘climate’ events.  In fact there is a peer reviewed paper that states:

“Our results show that temperature records of at least 17 years in length are required for identifying human effects on global-mean tropospheric temperature.”

OK, let’s play their game.

I will show 17 years of global temperature anomalies (departure from a base period average) for three well known datasets: Hadley Climate Research Unit (CRU), University of Alabama Huntsville (UAH) and the Remote Sensing System (RSS).  In addition, I’ll compare each of these temperature anomalies to the atmospheric CO2 concentrations as measure from the Mauna Leo research station.

Here is the graph of atmospheric CO2 concentrations and sure enough, we are definitely pumping more CO2 up there and I’ll concede the AGW point that most of this increase is from humans.

co2Now let’s see what effect this increasing amount of atmospheric CO2 has had on the three temperature data sets over the last 17 years.

crucru vs co2uahuah vs co2rssrss vs co2All these temperature graphs look pretty flat, don’t they?  And since this is a time period of exactly 17 years, then we can use the conclusions of the AGW cult peer reviewed paper to confidently state that increased atmospheric CO2 concentrations have NOT raised global temperatures.

As I’ve stated before, the AGW cult has an inconvenient correlation problem.  Notice that the correlation coefficient (R2) for all these temperature anomalies vs. CO2 graphs is very low (less than 1% for RSS/CRU and only 3.7% for UAH).  This means there is less than a 3.7% probability that the temperature anomalies over the last 17 years were influenced by atmospheric CO2 concentrations.

Is the science settled now?

Posted in Climate Change | 5 Comments

The Budget Deficit Memory Hole

The Left appears very organized in the way they are presenting our fiscal situation and as expected, “journalists” are reprinting the talking points unchallenged.

Have you missed it?  Team Obama is trying to cast The One as a very austere POTUS over the past few years and they are doing this by saying Obama has cut the deficit in half.

Here is an example from NPR’s Mara Liasson (emphasis mine):

In President Obama’s State of the Union address last month, he all but declared victory on the federal deficit. He ticked off the country’s accomplishments: a housing rebound, more manufacturing jobs and “our deficits cut by more than half,” he said.

The annual budget deficit has indeed decreased from 9.8 percent of the country’s gross domestic product when Obama took office to 4.1 percent now, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

This is the very short (and unchallenged) fact that we’ll hear over and over again as we are coming up against the next debt ceiling fight and the mid-term elections.  Watch as this short sentence will be the extent of the “reporting” on this topic because apparently journalists seemed to have lost the ability to look at our deficits past 2009.  Do you think it might be worth looking at the deficits under Obama and compare them with the deficits of say the last couple of decades?

Here is a graph using data from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) which is very similar to the CBO data quoted in the NPR article.

budget deficit as percentage of gdpNotice anything significant that happened under Obama’s first year in office (2009)?  Yea, we’ve basically cut the deficit in half by using 2009 as the base year but we’re still running a deficit that is WAY above anything we’ve seen over the past 20 years.

Let’s give Ms. Liasson the benefit of the doubt and say she was busy and didn’t have time to graph this for herself.  She referenced the CBO report in her article and there is a table at the very top of that report that lists the budget deficits for 2008 – 2013 and that should’ve raise at least a yellow flag for this veteran reporter.  Note the two red circles!

cbo deficit reportDid you notice that Ms. Liasson used the phrase “when Obama took office” when she told us that the 2009 budget deficit was 9.8% of GDP?  That’s done so you make the assumption that the 2009 budget deficit was due to Bush and not Obama.  Conveniently, she fails to mention the $787 billion stimulus package that Obama and the Democrat controlled House and Senate sailed through in early 2009.  You can see from the following graph that without that $787 billion in extra spending in 2009, that year’s deficit would have been almost identical to 2008’s deficit.

budget deficitSorry to break the news to Ms. Liasson but the vast majority of the 2009 budget deficit wasn’t Bush’s fault.  With regard to the 2009 budget deficit, we can safely say that Obama most certainly DID build that.

Why will we see the State Run Media regurgitate this talking point without challenging it?  Are the reporters just lazy?  Do they lack the mathematical ability to analyze tables and graphs?  Do they have lousy memories?

No, I don’t believe any of those excuses.  Simply put – They’re hacks.

Posted in economics, politics | 1 Comment

Jacob Lew Is Clueless

NPR’s Melissa Block recently had an interview with Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew and I’m amazed at how much the Treasury Secretary struggles with simple math.

Here is the main quote from that interview where Ms. Block was asking if he was worried about our $17+ trillion debt (emphasis mine):

BLOCK: Secretary Lew, if you look at the long-term prospects here, even though annual deficits are shrinking, the U.S. long-term debt is now over 17 trillion dollars. It’s about, I think, 73 percent of GDP. How big a problem do you consider that to be?

LEW: Look, I think if you look at the path that we’ve taken over the last five years, we’ve reduced the deficit, cut in half. We’ve stabilized the deficit as a percentage of GDP, kept it coming down and we’ve stabilized debt as a percentage of GDP. Obviously, there are longer-term issues that the president has spend much time looking at, negotiating with Congress about, but you don’t get to the long term if you don’t get through the short term in a successful way.

The short term, we’re doing very well. We’re bringing the deficit down and, frankly, we need to worry more about growing opportunities for Americans to find good middle-class jobs because that’s ultimately the path towards the strongest fiscal policy.

Wow, according to Mr. Lew, it sounds like the US is on very sound fiscal footing right now.

It’s true, Team Obama is bringing the deficit down but their starting point for this talking point is 2009 (when Obama took office) and you can see from the graphs below, something extraordinary happened during that year.  (Note that the graphs below were generated from the Office of Management and Budget data)

budget deficitbudget deficit as percentage of gdpFirst off, even starting with 2009 as our baseline, we haven’t cut the deficit in “half” as Mr. Lew stated.  Our budget deficit as a percentage of GDP went from 10.1% in 2009 to 4.0% in 2013 and that is a 40.6% reduction (not a 50% reduction).  I’ll give Mr. Lew the liberty of rounding up but still, after looking at the charts above, I doubt any fiscally responsible person would call that a success!

If I increased my credit card debt by 315% in 1 year (which is exactly what we did in the US in 2009), continued to spend more than I took in for the next 4 years but reduced my deficit over these 5 years by 50% I doubt my wife would be happy with my self-defined “austere” choices.  In 2013, my budget deficit would still be 2 times as high as my deficit in 2008.

Sorry to interject some basic math into Mr. Lew’s talking points but tripling our budget deficit in one year (2009) and then gradually cutting that in “half” is NOT lowering our National Debt!  A third grader could figure this out!

Posted in economics, politics | 2 Comments

Real Income Inequality Solutions

If you watched Obama’s State of the Union speech (I didn’t) then you know he spent a lot of time talking about Income Inequality.  If you think this is just a short term talking point then you haven’t been paying attention to what the Left is doing and you need to be armed to battle their most recent meme.

Unlike some conservatives, I do believe that there has been a real shift in income inequality over the last 20 years and a very powerful graph from this blog post proves it.

income inequality graphTrue, there was a recent study that showed no change in upward mobility in the US over the past 20 years but upward mobility and income inequality are two different things.  From the NPR story about this study:

“The researchers, led by Raj Chetty of Harvard University, looked at low-income people born in the early 1970s, and how likely they were to advance to top income brackets. The researchers then compared their economic mobility with that of people born later.”

“What we found is that mobility has remained remarkably stable,” says Harvard’s Nathaniel Hendren, a co-author of the study. “The chance in which kids can climb up or down the income ladder has remained pretty stable over the last 20 to 25 years.”

So there is no change in the percent of people moving into higher tax brackets over the last 20 years but the graph above clearly shows the percent change in income of the top 10% has more than doubled those in the bottom 90%.

Instead of following the path of the Obamas and Elizabeth Warrens of the Left who seek to treat the symptoms of Income Inequality (increasing the minimum wage, increasing taxes on the wealthy, etc.) which will not have any impact on income inequality, I’d prefer to attack the underlying causes of this Income Inequality.

So without further ado, here is my 4 point plan to attack these real drivers of Income Inequality.

Welfare Is Not Working

As I have shown in a previous post, we’ve drastically increased the amount of Welfare spending since the US declared its ‘War on Poverty’ but yet the poverty rate has been basically unchanged for the 40 years.

heritage 2poverty rateThrowing money at this problem has not helped so Congress should take a serious look at the outlays of these Welfare programs (and other ‘entitlement’ programs) and reduce them.  It’s well known that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results so 40 years should be enough time to realize Welfare, as we know it, isn’t working.

Let’s try something else that will lift people out of poverty.

Family Values Pays

There was a study performed in 2006 that showed how changes in the family structure and changes in poverty are closely related.  From the chart below, you can see that single parent households with children are much more likely to fall into the poverty rate and the situation has worsened over time.

single parent poverty rateIn 1969, only 10% of households could be categorized as having a single parent (8% with a female and 2% with a male) but that figure increased to 17% in 2006 (13% with a female and 4% with a male).  Conversely, the amount of households categorized as having married parents went from 67% in 1969 to 46% in 2006.  So the US has decreased the amount of 2 parent households by 31% and increased the amount of single parent households by 70%!

Is that bad?

Well, Yes!  In 2006, single female families with children had a 39.9% chance of falling within the poverty rate and single family male families with children had a 19% chance of falling within the poverty rate.  Compare that with a 7.5% chance of married couples with children and you see that single parent families have a 2.5 to 5.3 times higher likelihood of falling into poverty when compared with 2 parent households.

The harsh truth here is that we can totally reverse this trend if we are willing to confront this brutal fact.  Babies do not materialize out of the vacuum of space; two people have to engage in the act of sex to make a baby.  Having children ‘accidentally’ is something that is very preventable and it doesn’t take a blue ribbon government commission to figure it out.  Stop having unprotected sex or at a minimum learn to use birth control!

This data needs to be publicized so young men and women can become educated and realize that the choices they make in the heat of passion can not only affect their earning potential but the futures of their children.  We can’t ‘legislate morality’ but we can show people that there is some sound economic logic in waiting until marriage to have kids and to deny this brutal fact and avoid appearing prudish is really doing a disservice to our youth and causing more long term pain to our next generations.

Education Is The Tide That Floats All Boats

Another reason for the decline in earning potential for the middle class is the movement of manufacturing jobs to foreign countries.  This was a good thing in that Union memberships plummeted in the US but many hard working people lost their jobs (and the economy lost their spending) because they were not prepared for this paradigm shift.  People were incapable of finding other high paying jobs in more technical fields because they thought they’d be able to work for 40 years turning a wrench on an assembly line.

As a Free Market zealot, I not only expected this off shoring of manufacturing and other industries but I welcomed it.  This is what Companies have a duty to do – Find a way to cut as much cost out of the production of their goods and services  as they can while not sacrificing quality.  A publicly traded company has a fiduciary responsibility to do this so as to maximize profits and returns to their shareholders.

While there are stories coming out how this off shoring trend is reversing now that wages in China are rising (leading to ‘re-shoring’), we will never be back to the golden years of US manufacturing of the 50’s and 60’s.  We need to acknowledge that fact and educate our children and adults to adapt to this move to a knowledge based economy.  I wrote about that here:

“But here is the rub.  Moving to a Knowledge Based Economy demands a workforce that is highly skilled and those employees are required to have more education than a high school diploma provides.  Americans need to recognize this now, better yet we should have recognized it 10 years ago, or we will be left behind.   China, Mexico and India are not going away and there is no way to put the genie back in the bottle.  America needs to set a priority on producing a highly skilled workforce which means more graduates from technical schools and traditional 4-year colleges.”

While this isn’t a quick fix, Education is truly the tide that floats all boats.  Only through an education curriculum geared toward giving students tools to thrive in this new economy can we have a more educated citizenry that can get jobs, start companies and innovate our way out of this malaise.

There is still plenty of innovation left in this new knowledge based economy and plenty of jobs for all people but we have to change in order to take advantage of it.  A Bloomberg article said it best:

“Will there be enough decent jobs in this new world — or will the new technologies just make the rich richer while impoverishing everybody else? Brynjolfsson and McAfee meet this second kind of pessimist halfway. Just like its predecessors, the next phase of innovation will eventually destroy a lot of jobs, they say. But it will create a lot as well. This won’t happen all at once. There’ll be time to adjust, as economies have in the past. If policy makers rise to the challenge, they can make the adjustment easier and the gains more widely shared.”

“To support growth in the second machine age, the government needs to retool the education system (digital technologies can help), foster a favorable climate for entrepreneurs and new business startups (where most of the new jobs will be), encourage research and development, build modern infrastructure, and liberalize immigration to help meet the demand for skills. In all these areas, the U.S. has advantages it’s in danger of surrendering, especially if undue pessimism drives it into a defensive crouch.”

Did you catch that very important sentence in the 1st paragraph above?

If policy makers rise to the challenge, they can make the adjustment easier and the gains more widely shared.”

Which brings me to my last point…

Big Government Is Not The Solution, It Is The Problem

Unless we can get Big Government out of the way and have Washington DC focus only on their Constitutional duties, we’ll never be successful in implementing any of the real solutions above.

Yes, companies will move some of their manufacturing back to the US once labor rates are no longer attractive overseas but many companies will still stay in foreign countries because of the high US corporate tax rates.

The US has the highest corporate tax rate in the world and this is an obvious motivation for companies to relocate in other countries (sending important jobs with them).  The solution to this is really simple.  Lower the US corporate tax rate (I prefer 0% but really anything equal to the world average of 24% would be better than our current 40%) and watch the magic happen.  Companies will move jobs back to the US, these new jobs will involve people paying income taxes (that the US isn’t getting now), spending money (which will stimulate the economy and create new jobs) and the net effect will be lower unemployment and more Federal/State tax revenue even with the lower corporate tax rate.

Big Government’s hindrance to real income equality goes even further when we factor in crony capitalism that upsets the Free Market and gives sweetheart contracts to a politician’s biggest donors.  See Solyndra.

This Forbes article takes it a step further in stating that if you want to reduce Income Inequality then you need to take Big Government out of the currency business.

“Don’t blame “the rich” for America’s growing inequality. The problem is our unstable fiat dollar, which is to say, the problem is government. If we want prosperity for all, we have to go back to basics. We have to go back to gold.”

Our current Government is too involved in the weeds to take a strategic view of the problems we’re facing and work WITH private businesses instead of working AGAINST them.  Washington DC spent months wringing their hands of the Sequester cuts that amount to just 2.4% of overall Federal Government spending and then, months later, reinstituted some of that spending.  That is spending way too much time in the weeds while more US companies moved jobs overseas during this mental masturbation over sequester cuts.

I’m not a fan of the Department of Education but if we have to have it then let’s have them focus on retooling our system to educate our kids so they are prepared for this new knowledge based economy.  The DOE is too involved in Common Core and other useless initiatives that do little more than create paperwork that justifies their existence.

Conclusion

So there you have my 4 point plan to really address Income Inequality and return the US back to an economic power that it once was – 1) Reform Welfare and other ‘entitlement’ programs, 2) Encourage the two parent household, 3) Improve Education and 4) Get Big Government out of the way.

Let’s see if the Left and the GOP establishment are willing to confront these brutal facts and implement these solutions to fix our current (and future) Economic problems.

Posted in economics, Income Inequality, politics | 2 Comments

Supernova In M82

The galaxy M82, located in the Ursa Major (UMa) constellation (i.e. The Big Dipper), had a star go supernova a few days ago (designated SN 2014J) and over the coming week or so you will have an opportunity to see something that very few people will ever get to see.

The reason that non professional astronomers (who don’t have access to huge land and space based telescopes) can see this event is because M82 is part of a galaxy pair (M81 being the other) that is located just about 12 million light years away which is practically our next door neighbor in galactic terms.  This supernova is close enough and bright enough that we amateur astronomers can view this bit of cosmic evolution (a star dying, sending out its matter to be recombined to form other stars) with our own eyes and this is truly a once in a lifetime event.

I went out tonight to see this supernova I hope with this blog post, you’ll be inspired to do the same.

At first, I tried to see the supernova with my 15×60 binoculars (which I have to secure to a tripod) but due to the low magnitude of the supernova and the intense light pollution in my northern sky, I was unable to detect the exploding star.  I could easily see M81 and M82 in the binoculars but they appeared like any other galaxy in my binoculars, a fuzzy blob with no bright features.  Although I was unsuccessful, others may be able to see this supernova with binoculars if you live in a region where the northern sky is dark and unhampered by light pollution.  But unfortunately for me, I don’t live in such a location.

Undaunted, I then pulled out my big gun – the 10” Newtonian reflector.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERAWith this huge light bucket I was able to easily view the exploding star with my 27mm Televue Panoptic eyepiece although I had to use averted vision techniques to really see it.  For those unfamiliar, averted vision is the method of seeing faint objects by looking to the side of the desired object (it’s a skill we humans have hardcoded in our DNA because this gives us good periphery vision to spot predators and/or prey).  Many back yard astronomers, like myself, who like to hunt distant galaxies and nebulae are familiar with this technique.

I had another bullet for this big gun so I went a step further and used my 11mm Televue Nagler eyepiece and this really made the supernova pop and at times I didn’t need to use averted vision to see it.  I spent about 10 minutes in the freezing temperatures staring at this supernova and I only stopped once my toes started getting numb.

One of the great things about Astronomy is the fact that when we look up to the cosmos we are actually sitting in a time machine.  The stars we see in the night sky with our naked eye are all contained within our Milky Way Galaxy which is about 100 thousand light years across.  The stars we see with our naked eyes are really only thousands of light years away but that still means that the light you are seeing left those stars about the time Moses was leading his people out of slavery in Egypt!

The power of our virtual time machine grows when we use a telescope or binoculars and this allows us to not only look deeper into our own galaxy but see other galaxies that are millions of light years away from us.  When I looked into my telescope tonight, the photons of the supernova SN 2014J explosion were hitting my eyes 12 million years AFTER the event happened!  That means I was seeing this star’s death unfold as it happened 10 million years before humans appeared on the evolutionary time scale.  Truly amazing!

Now here are my tips if you want to see this supernova for yourself.

Although there are many articles with locator guides to this supernova, I have to be honest with you – Finding this galaxy is not easy for those who are not familiar with the night sky and most likely you’ll need a telescope.

Because I’m “Old School”, I have a manual telescope on a non-motorized Dobsonian Mount.  I like to see the objects with my own eyes (versus through photographs that have been enhanced and over exposed) and I like to find the objects myself (versus punching in coordinates and having a computer drive move my telescope to that point).  That’s just me and if you have an automated telescope then chances are you’ve already punched in the coordinates and taken some fantastic photos.  The rest of this blog post is for those who aren’t so lucky!

Don’t be discouraged by the fact that this hunting expedition will be tough for even those familiar with the constellations.  Fortunately for even the most novice amateur astronomer, this supernova is located in one of the most easily recognized northern hemispherical constellations – The Big Dipper.

My suggestion is to start at the upper left star in the Big Dipper ‘scoop’ (Dubhe) and then move up to the next brightest star (h UMa).  Then move left to an asterism of stars that looks like an angle and the next two pictures should help you with that 2 step star hop (note that my star chart app calls M81 “Bode’s Nebula” since that is another name it is known by).

m81 and m82 locator guide 1m81 and m82 locator guide 2Once you’ve located that angle asterism, you will then need to move down a little to find M81 and M82.

Once you zoom in on M82, you’ll see the supernova located inside the galaxy at the tip of the bottom arrow in the following picture.

m82 detailsThe other two arrows in the picture above represent normal stars that are always present but if you can find that lower star then you’ve located the supernova!

Happy hunting fellow amateur astronomers and I hope you receive as much awe and joy as I received tonight when I saw SN 2014J with my own eyes.

Posted in astronomy | Leave a comment

#PrincessBrideScience

There is a new twitter hashtag #PrincessBrideScience that related famous quotes from that movie to science so I decided to have some fun with the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) cult with a few tweets.

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments

Enviro-Whacko Logic

barred-owls-perchedFrom the ‘You Can’t Make This Up’ Department….

Environmentalists have had a long love affair with the spotted owl and they’ll tell you it’s because they love all creatures and want to protect them but the reality is they saw the spotted owl as a means to attack the logging industry.  Well now the chickens, or really the owls, are coming home to roost.

From the NPR story:

“In desperation to save the rare northern spotted owl, biologists are doing something that goes against their core — shooting another owl that’s rapidly taking over spotted owl territory across the northwest.”

The barred owl is moving into the spotted owl territory and because the barred owl is more aggressive and reproduces faster, it’s taking over the spotted owls’ nests and reducing the amount of food the spotted owls can eat.

So what is the Leftist solution to this case of Nature behaving in a ‘natural’ way?  Kill the barred owls!

“Barred owls are not rare. Still, shooting them has presented such a quandary to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that it has taken more than seven years come to this solution.”

“On the other hand, the Fish and Wildlife Service can’t ignore the invasion because it’s legally required to help rare species under the Endangered Species Act. The agency even hired an ethicist, Clark University’s Bill Lynn, to help wildlife experts resolve the dilemma.”

People recognized there’s a crisis for the spotted owl, that barred owls are part of the cause of that crisis and, so, they reluctantly, essentially justified the experimental removal of barred owls,” Lynn says.”

They hired an ethicist to justify the killing of the barred owls to make them feel good!

Who gave the Federal Government the authority to play ‘God’ and decide which species is more important?  Do we derive such a great public benefit from having spotted owls flying around that it necessitates killing barred owls?

Of course not, but this is what always happens when Leftists get emotionally attached to an issue and then come face to face with the reality that Nature is against their cause.  They double down on stupid and try to influence a natural process so their preferred issue wins.  See Solyndra.

The spotted owl deserves its fair share and the wealthy barred owls have to sacrifice.  Besides, there are too many barred owls and they can afford to pay a little more to help the spotted owls.  Sound familiar?

Posted in politics | 2 Comments

A Damaging Book For Team Obama

Robert Gates, former Secretary of Defense under Bush and Obama, has written a new book called “Duty” and NPR’s Steve Inskeep had a long interview with him about the new book.  Read the whole transcript here but I’ll share a few money quotes that show just how damaging this book will be to Team Obama.

All quotes are from Mr. Gates but I’ve also included some questions from Mr. Inskeep and they are noted with his name in front of the quote.

Vice President Joe Biden:

INSKEEP: Why did you write that Vice President Biden, in your view, has been wrong about every major foreign policy issue for 40 years? That’s a pretty scathing line.

GATES: And he was in there advising the president every day. He was, I think, stoking the president’s suspicion of the military. But the other side of it is, frankly, I believe it. The vice president, when he was a senator — a very new senator — voted against the aid package for South Vietnam, and the — that was part of the deal when we pulled out of South Vietnam to try and help them survive. He said that when the, when the Shah fell in Iran in 2009 — 1979, rather — that that was a step forward for progress toward human rights in Iran. He opposed virtually every element of President Reagan’s defense buildup. He voted against the B-1, the B-2, the MX and so on. He voted against the first Gulf War. So on a number of these major issues, I just — I, frankly, over a long period of time, felt that he had been on the wrong — he’d been — I think he had been wrong.

The young, arrogant members of Obama’s staff:

I had worked for probably three of the most significant and toughest national security advisers in our history: Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski and Brent Scowcroft. And there were things that went on in the Obama White House that, under those three guys, I am confident would have been a firing offense, such as direct calls from NSC staff members to four-star generals and so on. That just wouldn’t have been allowed.

They were going outside the chain of command. It’s not appropriate for somebody on the National Security Council staff to be in direct contact with combatant commanders.

Hillary Clinton and why she opposed the Iraqi Surge:

Well, Hillary was a very strong supporter of the Afghan surge. And she turns to the president and says, you know, the reason that the surge worked — that the surge worked in Iraq, in terms of arguing for the surge in Afghanistan — and just commented almost just as an aside that the main reason she’d opposed the Iraq surge has been because of running against him in the — in the presidential — early in the presidential year in 2008.

Obama’s advisers cared more about politics than National Security:

INSKEEP: You do describe what you felt was, quote, a total focus on politics by often the president, nearly always Vice President Biden and always from the rest of his staff.

GATES: Well, what I — what I write about in the book was that domestic politics had a role in the debates about national security issues that I had not previously experienced. But I also go on to write that at the end of the day the president made — President Obama made decisions based on what he thought was in the best interest of U.S. national security. So his decisions to increase troops in Afghanistan early in 2009 and then a substantial increase toward the end of 2009, were decisions taken against all of the advice of his domestic political advisers, White House staff and the vice president.

The paranoia of Obama and having a need for everyone to love him:

INSKEEP: It’s remarkable this exchange that you record here on page 369. You’re in a private meeting with the president and Admiral Mike Mullen, the president’s top military adviser, and you quote the president asking a number of really direct questions: What is wrong? Is it the process? Are they — meaning the military — is the military suspicious of my politics? Do they resent that I never served in the military? Do they think because I’m young that I don’t see what they’re doing? That’s a remarkable series of questions to hear from a man who outwardly has always been quite confident.

That’s some pretty damning stuff right there.  This should be bad for Team Obama and the future POTUS aspirations of Hillary Clinton, right?  I doubt it.

I predict the State Run Media already have pieces written to discredit this book and they’ll say Mr. Gates has a political agenda and that is what drove him to write these lies.  The Juice Box “Journolists” like Ezra Klein will do their blocking as best they can to tamp down the hype of this book and divert attention to Bridgegate.  Jay Carney will deflect questions and refuse to comment on matters of National Security or some other bullshit like that.

But hopefully people will read this book and realize how much danger we are in right now because even matters of National Security aren’t immune to the petty, Chicago style politics of Team Obama.

May God have mercy on us because we have 3 more years of this.

Posted in politics | 4 Comments

Reversing Type 2 Diabetes In One Year

Type 2 diabetics can bring their blood sugar measurements within the normal range without medicine if they are diagnosed early and they adopt a lifestyle change. I did this in less than a year and I will share my journey in this blog post in the hopes that others can do the same thing and not only improve the quality of their life but also extend it.

On 08-MAR-13 I was diagnosed with Type 2 Diabetes.  My A1C measurement was 11.5% (which is literally almost off the charts since the maximum is 12%) and my morning blood sugar measurement was 352 mg/dL (which also bumps into the maximum level of 400 on most meters).  It should also be noted that in March 2013 I was 20 pounds over my normal ‘fighting weight’ and this also contributed to my poor physical health.

My Endocrinologist prescribed the maximum dose of Janumet and that accompanied with an increase in my exercise regime brought my A1C and fasting blood sugar measurements within the range of where Diabetics are asked to be – fasting blood sugar measurements of around 125 mg/dL and around 150 mg/dL two hours after a meal.  It should be noted that during the first 4 months on this Janumet/Exercise regime I did lose 10 of the 20 pounds that I needed to lose and that also helped.

But that wasn’t good enough for me.  These blood sugar measurements are not normal for a non-diabetic (less than 100 mg/dL fasting and less than 140 mg/dL two hours after a meal) and I wanted to be in that range without medicine.  There is sufficient evidence that high blood sugar measurements, even those classified as ‘normal’ by the American Diabetes Association, can lead to brain loss so just meeting the limits of the ADA was not enough for me.

When I expressed that desire to my Endocrinologist in July 2013, I was told to give up that fantasy because my genetics predisposed me to Type 2 Diabetes and I should get comfortable taking 2 pills a day to control my blood sugar.  Sorry doc, that’s not the way I operate!

Against the advice of my doctor but based on a comment thread in an earlier blog post, I decided in August 2013 to stop taking my medicine and undertake a radical, short term diet (based on a medical study from Newcastle University) to eliminate the fat around my pancreas and restart my beta cell/insulin production.

This diet is not easy and amounted to 800 calories per day with very little carbohydrates but I committed to do it for 2 weeks just to see what would happen.  To my surprise, after a week on this diet I lost that final 10 pounds and my morning blood sugar measurements were in the 70’s

blood sugar during dietSo, in only a week, that diet worked to reset my pancreas and bring my fasting blood sugar measurements into the normal range of a non-diabetic!

For the past 5 months after that radical diet, I have settled into a high fat (100 – 150g per day), high protein (100 – 150g per day) diet of around 2,000 – 2,500 calories a day and limited my carbohydrates to around 40g per day.  Those 40g of carbs come mainly from nuts, berries and vegetables and I totally eliminated bread, rice, grits, potatoes and other starchy carbs.

The results can be best shown via this graph of my morning blood sugar measurements which I started logging the day I was diagnosed.  The red arrow signifies the point where I started the week long diet and long term life style change.  Also note that there is a month gap where I stopped logging my morning blood sugar measurements in my spreadsheet but I did measure them everyday wi my meter and they were in the 130 – 150 mg/dL range.

morning blood sugar measurementsAnd now for the happy ending!

On 13-JAN-14 I had my 6 month checkup with my Endocrinologist and my A1C measurement was 5.1% (which is right in the middle of where a normal, non-diabetic would be) and based on that, my doctor ‘released’ me!  My blood sugar measurements are now ‘normal’ without medicine so (in my doctor’s own words) there is no reason to see him every 6 months and I can get a yearly A1C with my primary care physician during my annual physical.

Although this is a ‘happy ending’, this is not the end.  This lifestyle change is something I’m committed to do for the rest of my life and I continue to learn something every week about how what I put in my mouth correlates to my overall health and blood sugar measurements so expect many more blog posts about what I’ve learned.

What I hope to stress to everyone reading this blog post is that the Type 2 Diabetes diagnosis I received in March of 2013 was not a death sentence but instead a wakeup call.

After that diagnosis, I wondered what goes through the mind of a diabetic who is in the hospital getting prepped to get his feet amputated.  Does he think about all the pizzas, cup cakes, baked potatoes, french fries and sub sandwiches he’s eaten over the course of his life and say, ‘yea, that was totally worth it?’  Or does he wish he could have a few more years to walk his daughter down the aisle, see his son graduate from college or hold his grandchild in his arms?  I think it is the latter and I’m taking responsibility now for what goes in my mouth so I can lead a long, full life and be there for my family.

Posted in Diabetes, paleo | 14 Comments

War On Poverty Update

There seems to be a rallying cry of the Left this year to push the class warfare, income inequality memes and they are now claiming a renewed interest in the War on Poverty.

Before we listen to the Elizabeth Warrens of the world tell us how to redistribute the wealth, let’s see how we’ve done fighting this War on Poverty over the last 50 years.

The following graph shows the US annual poverty rate plotted against the combined spending (expressed as a percentage of US GDP) of Welfare and Medicaid.

poverty rate vs welfareDo you think we’re winning this war?

At first you might draw the conclusion that this war has had the direct opposite results – Increased Welfare/Medicaid spending caused an INCREASE in the poverty rate since the slope of the trend line is positive.  But we must be careful with this statement because the correlation factor (R2) on this data is just 12% so that isn’t a sound statistical conclusion.  (Note – For a primer on correlation and R2, go here).

You can, however, draw a sound statistical conclusion that there is absolutely no truth to the meme generated by the Left that states we can lift people out of poverty by handing them more money via Welfare and Medicaid.  If the Left’s theory was right then the trend line would be negative (increased spending would correspond to a drop in poverty rate) but the graph clearly shows that isn’t true.

At best, you can make the claim that the US poverty rate has been stuck on about 11% since we started this war in the mid 1960’s and the massive amount of money we’ve thrown at this problem has had no effect at all.   The following graph illustrates this point.

poverty rate

Posted in economics, Income Inequality, politics | 1 Comment

Time For An AGW Cult Team Huddle

One of the high priests in the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) Cult is Michael Mann (the hockey stick guy) and he’s all about supporting the cause (not science, the cause) but he better be worried because the guys and gals responsible for “supporting the cause” are starting to look like even bigger clowns than they have in the past.

Just about everybody in the continental US is experiencing record breaking cold temperatures that are blamed on this polar vortex (it was 7 F this morning for me in South Carolina) and you’d think the AGW cult would lay low while this latest example of their failed predictions comes on the heels of the Goretanic getting stuck in the Antarctic ice.  But no, leave it to NPR to continue carrying the water (I mean ice) for the AGW cult (emphasis mine):

“The next logical question is why the vortex has weakened so much that a big piece of it has spun down over the U.S.”

“Along with the effects that those high-pressure systems over Alaska and Greenland are having, there’s the possibility that climate change is also a factor.”

That’s right, according to the AGW cult, Global Warming is causing the massive deep freeze for the US right now.

In case you were wondering, NPR got this information from this Scientific American article:

“More and more Arctic sea ice is melting during summer months. The more ice that melts, the more the Arctic Ocean warms. The ocean radiates much of that excess heat back to the atmosphere in winter, which disrupts the polar vortex. Data taken over the past decade indicate that when a lot of Arctic sea ice disappears in the summer, the vortex has a tendency to weaken over the subsequent winter, if related atmospheric conditions prevail over the northern Atlantic Ocean.”

So this is all related to melting ice in the Arctic?  First, this is just a theory that can’t be confirmed by the very climate models that the AGW cult uses as their holy texts (see the end the blog post at this link).  But even if this theory were true, the Arctic sea ice extent measurements contradict this theory because they have within 2 standard deviations of the 30 year historical average for 2013.

arctic iceThe AGW cult claims that we had an unusual melting of Arctic sea ice during the summer of 2013 and this caused this disruption in the polar vortex this winter.  But from this link, we see again that the 2013 Arctic sea ice extent (shown as the brown line) was very close to the 30 year average (shown as the black line).  Moreover, we see that there was much more melting of Arctic ice in the summer of 2012 (shown as the dashed line) but that didn’t cause the polar vortex to send the US into a deep freeze last winter.

arctic ice 2013The AGW cult is flailing and it’s a glorious schadenfreude to watch.

ADDENDUM – If you want to monitor polar sea ice extent you can use the following links for the Arctic and Antarctic.

Posted in Climate Change | 1 Comment

The Mother Of All Climate Ironies

By now, we’re all familiar with the mother of all ironies as a Ship of Fools packed with Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) zealots got trapped in Antarctic sea ice.

You can’t make this stuff up.  A group of people that claim sea ice is melting on the poles plans an Antarctic expedition to document the sea ice melt but instead gets trapped in the sea ice and has to be air rescued by helicopter.  That kind of fail is reserved for the most ignorant of humans and can be likened to two submarine detecting submarines colliding in the open ocean (which actually happened).

We’d expect the AGW cult to use this inconvenient truth to seriously examine their models and theses but instead you can expect the AGW Team to spin this like nothing significant happened.

I can see the AGW cult spinning this failure two ways but we must be informed and not allow them to get away with it.

Spin #1 – The leader (Chris Turney) wasn’t going there to examine melting ice but just leading a tour retracing the path of an expedition that occurred in 1912.

First, Chris Turney is a high priest in the AGW cult as you can see from this video:

Here is Chris Turney blaming hurricane Sandy on Climate Change:

https://twitter.com/ProfChrisTurney/status/264497640081850368

Chris Turley and his team believe that sea ice is melting and even though they were actually stuck in the ice, the AGW cult members on board doubled down in a message here.

“We’re stuck in our own experiment. We came to Antarctica to study how one of the biggest icebergs in the world has altered the system by trapping ice. We followed Sir Douglas Mawson’s footsteps into Commonwealth Bay, and are now ourselves trapped by ice surrounding our ship.”

“Sea ice is disappearing due to climate change, but here ice is building up. We have found this has changed the system on many levels. The increase in sea ice has freshened the seawater below, so much so that you can almost drink it. This change will have impacts on the deep ocean circulation.”

It should be noted that like all good AGW high priests (see Al Gore), Chris Turney has a financial interest in keeping this lie going.

“Chris Turney is, apparently, Professor of Climate Change at the University of NSW. He is also a Director of Carbonscape Holdings, which has “developed technology to fix carbon from the atmosphere and make a host of green bi-products, helping reduce greenhouse gas levels.”

Carbonscape, a company based in New Zealand, is funded by several government bodies there, such as the Ministry of Science & Innovation, the Ministry of Agriculture & Fisheries, and New Zealand Trade & Enterprise.

Chris Turney wants others to get into this Ponzi scheme as well:

https://twitter.com/ProfChrisTurney/status/313933087836876800

Make no mistake about it, Chris Turney is an AGW cult high priest and he lead this trip to Antarctica with the intent of documenting ice melt but instead encountered a wall of sea ice to rebut his cult beliefs.

Spin #2 – The ice appeared quickly and was a freak phenomenon.

Chris Turney seemed to allude to this as the cause of their debacle here in this tweet:

https://twitter.com/ProfChrisTurney/status/418252260104486912

A “breakout”, huh?

No, this wasn’t a sudden event.  Here is a graph of the Antarctic sea ice extent and you can see that for the past 4 months Antarctica has seen ice formation outside 2 standard deviations of the average for the past 30 years.

antarctic iceSo expect the AGW cult to use these two spin tactics to divert attention away from this epic failure.  It is our job to ensure that we rebut these lies and prove to everyone that the AGW cult members are the real deniers of science.

Addendum – Here are a couple more ironic tweets from Chris Turney over the past year:

https://twitter.com/ProfChrisTurney/status/358165674184544256

https://twitter.com/ProfChrisTurney/status/355278234595766272

https://twitter.com/ProfChrisTurney/status/308914372862951424

Posted in Climate Change | 2 Comments

GLAAD Just Went A Bridge Too Far

a bridge too farGLAAD (The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) has had a couple of no good, terrible, rotten years.

Last year it was their “kiss-in” protest at Chick-Fil-A restaurants that ended in complete failure.

This year GLAAD didn’t like Phil Robertson giving his interpretation of what the Bible calls a sin so they forced A&E to suspend him indefinitely.  GLAAD probably thought they had a huge win here but soon after both A&E and Cracker Barrel realized they were about to cut off the main demographic of their money making empires so they both reversed their positions and dropped GLAAD like a bad habit.

You might think this is just another example of a Leftist organization attempting to suppress the opinions with which they don’t agree only to realize the truth in Quinn’s First Law (Liberalism always generates the exact opposite of its stated intent).  But I think this latest temper tantrum of GLAAD took the culture debate in America to a new level and this is why I say GLAAD went a bridge too far.

If you aren’t familiar with the movie “A Bridge Too Far” then allow me to give some background.  This movie, which is one of my favorite war movies, told the historical account of the failed Operation Market Garden in WWII.  Montgomery had a plan to punch through the German Siegfried line defenses and send his troops deep inside German occupied lands but the operation was risky because it required paratroopers to take and hold 6 bridges while the main force motored through the country side.  In the end it was a failure because the logistical difficulties in trying to hold these 6 bridges proved too much and hence the movie title – A Bridge Too Far.

I think this latest GLAAD protest has gone a bridge too far and not only awaked a sleeping giant in America but also revealed just why the Left hates Duck Dynasty.

Before Duck Dynasty, attempts to infiltrate reality TV failed on the right because the focus was on “infiltrating” rather than producing good entertainment. With a grasp of pop culture and capitalism that puts Kris Kardashian to shame, the Robertsons are the first conservative family to understand how reality TV works.

The threat of the Robertsons isn’t in Phil’s politically incorrect comments. The threat is that this family has figured out how right-wing politics and Evangelical Christianity can influence pop culture without being the punch line or the bad guy. While the left has spent decades making conservatives look like idiots and Christians look like bigots, Duck Dynasty reminds average Americans that these views are mainstream. The left is alerted but will those on the right take advantage of what the Robertsons have created?

The Left, and specifically GLAAD, is worried.  Big Time!

And GLAAD’s worries are not just on a cultural war level but on a business level as well.  From GLAAD’s latest available Performance Report available on their website (ending December 2011), they have a money problem.

GLAAD Financial reportFor the fiscal year 2011, GLAAD had $4.1 million in revenue but $6.7 million in expenses.  Nobody ever accused Liberals of being good with balancing budgets!

GLAAD has not issued a similar report for 2012 but they did provide a copy of their Form 990 for 2012 and they had the same amount of revenue ($4.1 million) that year and reported expenses of $5.3 million.  Their budget deficit shrunk but they still are on a financially unsustainable course.

I noticed something else interesting from the Form 990 for 2012 – Their annual revenue from gifts, grants, contributions and membership fees has dropped.

glaad contributionsUnless things have changed in 2013 (which I doubt they have), GLAAD is on the ropes both financially and in the court of public opinion so now is the time to step on their throats.

We have seen over the past couple of years what can happen when Conservatives fight back with our voices and our money to force companies and organizations to stop giving money and time to Liberal groups.  Now is not the time to stop.

Addendum – If you are so inclined, Page 19 of the GLAAD Financial Report lists their corporate partners.  Notice NBC, CBS, ABC and CNN are listed.

GLAAD Corporate Partners 1GLAAD Corporate Partners 2

Posted in politics | 4 Comments

What To Do When Obamacare Unravels

Over Christmas there was a great Opinion piece in the Wall-Street Journal that fleshes out what I’ve been dancing around for a couple of years now.

The real way we will make our US healthcare system better is by moving it closer to a Free Market model and that means moving us away from employer provided group plans and toward individual plans.

Here are three paragraphs that should get you excited enough to not only read the whole thing but also write your Congressional representatives.

Health insurance should be individual, portable across jobs, states and providers; lifelong and guaranteed-renewable, meaning you have the right to continue with no unexpected increase in premiums if you get sick. Insurance should protect wealth against large, unforeseen, necessary expenses, rather than be a wildly inefficient payment plan for routine expenses.

People want to buy this insurance, and companies want to sell it. It would be far cheaper, and would solve the pre-existing conditions problem. We do not have such health insurance only because it was regulated out of existence. Businesses cannot establish or contribute to portable individual policies, or employees would have to pay taxes. So businesses only offer group plans. Knowing they will abandon individual insurance when they get a job, and without cross-state portability, there is little reason for young people to invest in lifelong, portable health insurance. Mandated coverage, pressure against full risk rating, and a dysfunctional cash market did the rest.

Rather than a mandate for employer-based groups, we should transition to fully individual-based health insurance. Allow national individual insurance offered and sold to anyone, anywhere, without the tangled mess of state mandates and regulations. Allow employers to contribute to individual insurance at least on an even basis with group plans. Current group plans can convert to individual plans, at once or as people leave. Since all members in a group convert, there is no adverse selection of sicker people.

What a novel idea – Let individuals decide what insurance plans are right for them and then watch as insurance companies adjust their policy offerings to meet the demands of the Market.

This plan makes so much sense that Washington DC won’t do it unless we start a grassroots movement to force them.

Posted in healthcare, Over Regulation, politics | Leave a comment