The News Blast for 10/2

Second newsblast: news you can use!

1. Lib rally crowd estimated at "175,000 to 200,000" by...lib media. Capitol Police have issued no official estimate (big surprise...).

Check the pictures:

'One Nation [Forcefully Divided by Race, Income, and Employment status] Working Together' liberal rally:

Remember, this is 175,000 to 200,000.

"Restoring Honor [And God] in America" Glenn Beck Rally, cited at 60,000 to 70,000 and 87,000 by liberal media:

Both are pictures at the 'peak' of the gathering (I couldn't find aerials of the liberals as they're probably embarrassed at the turnout)

Now let's compare them:

Red = ONR dense crowd (people pushing themselves together), Blue = ONR Loose crowd (noticeable space between between people)

Notice how the crowd tapers off and people are moving toward the 'dense' area in the ONR picture above.

So, if we accept the lib media estimates of crowd size, did the Glenn Beck rally (which dense entirely around reflecting pool, under all the trees, the WWII memorial, and the side field; while loose only behind the WWII memorial and in a small portion of the side field.

2. Political gridlock as the economy drifts - if you think this is bad, wait until Republicans take over. Obama doesn't have the experience to play the political game, and the most effective Chief of Staff in the last two decades left on Friday. Obama's screwed.

The News Blast for 10/1

First of a new pattern for the blog: quick news commentary.

I hope you'll make the Newsblast part of your routine to keep yourself informed!

1. Rasmussen: All-Time Low of 34.6% Now Call Themselves Democrats - Public polling started about 1946 and, in that time, Democrat party identification has never dipped so low.

Why is this important?

Because Democrats largely depend on a very, very old system of party loyalty/individual benefit, more so at the 'elite' level than at the base. If more people are turning away from the party right after they pushed through the best kickback bill possible (the porkulus), it's evidence that their party's model is falling apart. Virg Bernero's absolutely dismal poll numbers are also evidence of this.

2. Bank of America Asks Patience As Stockholders Stew Over Slump The slump is the result of Obama's new financial controls. This has caused BoA to shed jobs and begin putting remaining employees on VHA health insurance (the institution you'll be hearing about a lot more next year: it's the Obamacare 'network,' but I prefer 'commune' or 'collective').

Why is this important?

Bank of America is very big and very public: this makes it very good to watch for an idea about the state of the financial sector. The fact that their stockholders seem to be selling, and that they're dumping property traders, tells me the Obama financial control bill is doing as Republicans predicted: further killing the housing market.

3. CNN Fires Rick Sanchez for "Jews" Remarks The crazies are cracking and it's like popcorn out there! This is the same Rick Sanchez that said Obama was as "captivating" to the rest of the world as he is to us at home. State media, sheesh...

Why is this important?

Because it's funny, helps us and keeps our spirits up :)

Thus we conclude the random Newsblast of the day - if you have suggestions, please leave them in the comment box. I do plan on doing more main articles with fewer articles tagged on, but let me know!

The Solutions Revolution

Bureaucrat: Man or Machine?

Man has dignity and this dignity deserves respect.

To treat someone as a means denies this respect and is evil: people should be treated as ends.

A human being is not a piece of equipment, yet the good bureaucrat is nothing more than that.

Politicians write a line in a bill among some 4,000 pages which describes the total functions of one person over their entire professional lifetime.

In government, people become mere means to reach policy goals.

Thus is the conflict for the vast majority of bureaucrats:

• to carry out the letter of the law and do their job well while becoming a replaceable automaton,
• or to have individuality and damage their part of the system.

Truly, a man cannot serve two masters.

The crisis of this choice is the reason for the higher rate of depression among public employees around the developed world.

(Empirical: In France and the Low Countries, suicide rates among public employees is much higher than the private sector (France's total population suicide rate is 14.7% while among public employees it is 15.3%). In Canada, depression and mental health issues account for 45% of disability claims in the government. In Japan, a country with (with 1/3 the US's population) 90-100 suicides PER DAY, news reports are plagued with pressured government officials killing themselves. In the US, however, the formula is different: our government officials (according to the DHHS) are more depressed than the general population, but kill themselves at about the same rate.)

It is both bad economic policy and morally wrong to put an intelligent, responsible person in a situation where doing a good job and having personhood are incompatible.

Government employees suffer from the delusion of efficacy and individuality supported by high wages, public unions, and encouragement from their co-workers: they will oppose cuts.

No matter their conditions, however, who someone is is more important than what they have.

We have it in our power to literally rescue them from a system which denies their rightful dignity.

It is the same kind of tough love we practice with drug addicts.

Cuts, like rehab, will not be liked by bureaucrats, but must be done both for their moral benefit and for the good of our civilization.

Government and the Middle Class

Almost every government program benefits the Middle Class at the expense of the very rich and the very poor.

We live in a democratic republic. Authority and legislative agendas is inevitably derived from popular will and support.

The focus of our political system is on the wishes of the Middle Class. For instance, the email that sparked this post was from Michelle Malkin and Eric Son of Eric: "Stop New Tax on the Middle Class!"

Depending on which politically expedient source you use, the Middle Class makes up between 25-66% of the American public.

In my limited opinion, our politics and their governmental outcomes suggest 55-70%.

Being that this is such a huge voting block, politicians are inevitably going to respond to large movements within it.

Typically our government structure seeks to "serve" the Middle Class while, at the same time, keep it struggling.

Why? Because this serves the political elite's interests best: it keeps them elected.

Why the MC struggles:

MC families usually invest solely in a home and give us the phrase 'house poor' to signify the many MC couples live a lower standard of living with the faith that their sacrifice to pay for a too-expensive house will pay off.

Since 2005, this hasnt happened, thus MC families struggle.

Cash for Clunkers is, perhaps, the best example of helping the MC at the expense of the very rich and very poor.

The program was designed to get old cars out of the market and make new cars cheaper to people who'd been owning older cars.

Putting aside that each car taken in the program cost taxpayers $24,000, the effects were simple: the top 1% of income earners primarily paid for it while fewer old cars raised the price of used cars for the rest of the year.

Who did that hurt? While the hurt to the rich and upper MC is very direct, the reduced supply and corresponding jump in prices of low-end cars catastrophically damaged the social mobility (ability to rise into the MC) of the poor.

If you cant afford a car at all, you cant get to a job. If you cant get to your job, you cant make money and you dont get on-the-job training. If you dont get those, you fall behind in the market and join the perpetual underclass, dependent on others and the state.

Share

Explanation of the Wave

Quick Overview of how Liberal Economics Fail

Libs use public spending to stimulate the creation of investment capital. The result is a whole bunch of money in investment firms (and a HUGE capacity for making war) but a bunch of unemployment (very good for making war).

Their economic model was designed for the 1930's...where more production overwhelmingly meant more employees (it didnt work then - 19% unemployment in 1939 after 7 years of this system).

In the Information Age, more investment capital means better technology/training for maximizing the production of those employees you already have.

Libs will attempt to remedy the problem with more govt spending to train the adults left behind by the Wall Street rallies.

The first problem is the govt spending that destroyed the natural balance between technological advancement and the education of the worker. The training-based govt spending destroys entrepreneurial initiative because those trained dont know how to create systems, just operate in them.

Libs, then, make the govt create systems...which work as well as the Post Office. For example, health care.

Health employment's knowledge base is collapsing very quickly. If you learned the cutting edge in 1995, and didnt go back to school, think of how far you are behind in 2010. The AMA, then, doesnt encourage doctors to change...it just lobbies the government to subsidize the failing system.

This also works for war: the New Deal generated and then taxed to death a huge amount of investment capital...they, then, used this combined with the need for work of millions of young men and women...to go to WWII. Hitler's plan was the same.

These are the failures of any artificially planned economy and the reason why many of us are limited to part time work or unemployment checks.