For years, ever since we forgot our founding fathers, our politicians have slowly been taking away our rights. Leftists take away our economic rights; rightists take away our social rights. It is pretty simple.
For decades, we have been taught Franklin Roosevelt was one of our greatest Presidents. That may be, but the qualities he taught future generations of politicians is that it is OK to take away the citizens' rights so long as you are a good protector.
Maybe we should learn more about John Locke, James Madison, & Thomas Jefferson, and less about John Kennedy, Franklin Roosevelt and George Bush.
Wednesday, September 22, 2004
Tuesday, September 21, 2004
No Child Left Behind
I have not been a big fan of this piece of federal legislation. Firstly, I believe that the Department of Education should be eliminated and its budget removed to offset other overspending.
However, Rep David Wu has recently come on attack against the act, indicating that essentially, the standards are too tough. Also, not enough emphasis is placed on improvement.
My reaction is this: CRAP! If you believe in standards, make them tough and achievable. If your schools aren't passing the standardized tests, then get better. Find different ways to pass the exams.
Finally, if these standardized tests examinate students based upon reading, writing and arithmetic, then why would we worry if teachers "teach to the test?"
Having said all of that, I don't believe the federal government should have a role in the education of local students. It just wastes tons of money. But Rep Wu, get real! School is undoubetedly less challenging than when you or I went to school. And you want to make it less challenging? Give me a break.
However, Rep David Wu has recently come on attack against the act, indicating that essentially, the standards are too tough. Also, not enough emphasis is placed on improvement.
My reaction is this: CRAP! If you believe in standards, make them tough and achievable. If your schools aren't passing the standardized tests, then get better. Find different ways to pass the exams.
Finally, if these standardized tests examinate students based upon reading, writing and arithmetic, then why would we worry if teachers "teach to the test?"
Having said all of that, I don't believe the federal government should have a role in the education of local students. It just wastes tons of money. But Rep Wu, get real! School is undoubetedly less challenging than when you or I went to school. And you want to make it less challenging? Give me a break.
Saturday, September 18, 2004
This is a call.......
To all those who might be intentionally or randomly reading this blog. If you were born in 1972 or after, the board of trustees of the Social Security system states that there will be no system for you to draw from. The social security trust fund is expected to be totally bankrupt.
Of course, this assumes that the American citenzry can even believe they can afford to collect on the trust fund, with $49 trillion in IOU's. In reality, the social security system will begin running deficits in about 12-13 years. This is significant for a couple of reasons:
1) our Federal budget has only been able to balance because of a surplus in the amount of payments versus withdrawals into the trust fund. If it weren't for this "new math," the marvelous balanced budgets of the late 90's, early 2000's would have been deficits to the tune of $250+ million each year.
2) we must have one of three things beginning in in 12-13 years just to be able to meet the amount of withdrawals that will occur: raise taxes, reduce benefits, or reduce the burden of the withdrawals.
It is expected that if we were to take action today, payroll transfer payments (your social security and medicare "so-called" taxes), need to increase by about 15%. If we wait 10 years, I shudder to imagine the amount of needed increase.
If you are expecting to receive the social security payments you already paid, the system must be changed and soon. Do you want to dramatically change the system, or increase the Ponzi scheme. If this is of concern to you, please vote.
Of course, this assumes that the American citenzry can even believe they can afford to collect on the trust fund, with $49 trillion in IOU's. In reality, the social security system will begin running deficits in about 12-13 years. This is significant for a couple of reasons:
1) our Federal budget has only been able to balance because of a surplus in the amount of payments versus withdrawals into the trust fund. If it weren't for this "new math," the marvelous balanced budgets of the late 90's, early 2000's would have been deficits to the tune of $250+ million each year.
2) we must have one of three things beginning in in 12-13 years just to be able to meet the amount of withdrawals that will occur: raise taxes, reduce benefits, or reduce the burden of the withdrawals.
It is expected that if we were to take action today, payroll transfer payments (your social security and medicare "so-called" taxes), need to increase by about 15%. If we wait 10 years, I shudder to imagine the amount of needed increase.
If you are expecting to receive the social security payments you already paid, the system must be changed and soon. Do you want to dramatically change the system, or increase the Ponzi scheme. If this is of concern to you, please vote.
The Electoral College
Recently, two states have come out looking to change our electoral college system of elections: Colorado and Washington.
This concern me very much. Already, our country has stripped the states dramatically of their power in the ferderal government system. Our founders thought states rights to be paramount in our union; much more so than federal power. As proof, our country is named, "The United States of America."
Attempting to change our electoral system to a popular vote system will nearly guarantee that which our founders feared most: tyranny by the majority.
Consider this when thinking out the debate.
This concern me very much. Already, our country has stripped the states dramatically of their power in the ferderal government system. Our founders thought states rights to be paramount in our union; much more so than federal power. As proof, our country is named, "The United States of America."
Attempting to change our electoral system to a popular vote system will nearly guarantee that which our founders feared most: tyranny by the majority.
Consider this when thinking out the debate.
Tuesday, September 14, 2004
Another Bailout
The federal government has, in its infinite wisdom, decided to bail out US Airways, who just filed for bankruptcy for the second time in the past year. I am glad that we have $800 million to waste on a company that can't run without government handouts.
What happened to the fiscal conservatives in Congress?
What happened to the fiscal conservatives in Congress?
Monday, September 13, 2004
Antitrust Run Amok
According to one of my favorite weblogs, "www.poorandstupid.com", the Miami Dolphins and Tennessee Titans football game that was played on Saturday instead of Sunday, was prohibited from being played on national television. Why you might ask? Because an amateur game was played within 75 miles.
Are you kidding me? This is actually a law to prevent monopolies? Hey John Stossel, give me a break!
Are you kidding me? This is actually a law to prevent monopolies? Hey John Stossel, give me a break!
Thursday, September 09, 2004
The Oregon Liquor Control Commission (OLCC)
A new law has stipulated that all alcohol fermented a certain way must be sold in liquor stores, rather than the grocery store. Incedentally, this will force many makers of malted beverages (most specifically Mike's Hard Lemonade) to forego selling much of their product.
Why does this commission still exist? Can't "We the People" make up our own minds?
Why does this commission still exist? Can't "We the People" make up our own minds?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
