HUMILITY 101
Since the devastating earth quake and resulting tsunami, followed by impending nuclear disaster in Japan, there have been many lessons to be learned. As a distant observer nestled in my comfy country home hear in America, I have the luxury of picking and choosing what to take away from the tragedy in Japan. I could focus on the many political angles, or question the wisdom of building nuclear plants in known earthquake zones. I could focus on the media's complete and total incompetence in their reporting of the situation in there. Or I could simply distract myself from the devastation with basketball brackets and trips to Rio DeJinerio (like some people have chosen to do).
Rather, I am going to stick with my usual ROADHOUSE BLOG m.o. of seeing things just a little bit differently than most folks. Regardless of any religious or theological tendencies you may or may not have, there is one lesson that you are duty-bound to learn from what's happening in the land of the rising sun. The lesson is a simple one: You (we) just ain't "all that".
While you were considering the long term global effects of what particular type of light bulb you were going to purchase, there were tectonic plates beneath your feet considering what particular day they are going to shift, causing your entire house to be swallowed by a massive undiscovered fault line.
While you were wringing your hands at the checkout line because you had to decide which method of grocery bagging would have the least effect on the mating habits of some obscure species of field mouse in the year 2053, a nearby body of water was contemplating surging across the shoreline, destroying everything you ever loved.
The point is, you can worry about whatever unproven, fraudulent, over-hyped, yet-to-actually be witnessed, future faux-disaster you want to. But just remember this, as we learned last Friday, your recycling bin will not save you from twenty million gallons of water and debris rushing toward you at 100 mph. There is no natural disaster that will be impressed that you drive a Prius.
In short, we are small. As a species, we are so insignificant in the grand scheme of things, that we are really not in a position to waste time preparing for theoretical dilemmas. Considering the size, scope, and longevity of Mother Nature, it seems to me that we would be better off spending our time, money, and energy preparing for things we actually know can happen. Maybe the climate will change to an un-sustaneable level because I bought the wrong light bulb, maybe it won't. But in the meantime, I know for a fact that there will be volcanoes, floods, tsunamis, earthquakes, droughts, and swarms of angry man-eating locusts sometime between the end of time, and the next thirty seconds. Maybe we should concentrate on some of that.
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Saturday, February 26, 2011
COLLECTIVE BULLYING
I've been watching the events in Wisconsin for the past few weeks, and I am reminded of the fact that we have a long way to go in the fight to fix our educational system. On full display for everyone to see is a broken public school system run by the same people we are supposed to entrust our health care to...our government.
Rather than put my own personal spin on ground that's been well traveled over past couple of weeks by bringing up the cowardly democrats who fled like rats to avoid doing their job, or connecting the dots from President Obama to the labor unions, or whining yet again about the unfair coverage and blatantly bias coverage by the media of Governor Walker's fight to balance his state's budget, I'm simply going to boil this all down to a philosophical discussion. How's that for a run-on sentence?
Ask yourself the following question; Do the rights offered in this country apply to every citizen, or only the well connected? To ask me, you would hear me tell you that our rights apply to everyone, to ask a union representative, you would hear a well worded tap dance designed to distract you from the fact that he/she believes that the rights of a union member overrides and usurps that of an employer or the amount of money that employer has to work with in their budget during any given fiscal year.
Much like the big kid who would threaten "swirlies" unless you forked over your lunch money, unions threaten "strikes" unless you fork over wages and/or benefits that the free market would not otherwise provide under normal circumstances. At this point, the typical union member would proudly say, "Exactly, unions raise the standard of compensation for workers!". OK, but what happens when that artificially inflated level of compensation can no longer be afforded by the employer? Answer: Your employer either shuts it's doors, or bills the tax payer for a bailout as in the case of GM and Chrysler.
Worse yet, the difference between the car industry bailouts and what's happening in Wisconsin is the fact that in the case of the auto industry, the divide is between "labor" and "management". Labor being guilty of bullying their way to compensation packages that would eventually bankrupt the manufacturer while inflating the price of the car, and management being guilty of letting them, and then having the nerve to assume the tax payer should foot the bill. Yet in the case of Wisconsin, the divide is between labor being guilty of bullying their way to compensation packages that would eventually bankrupt the state while harming the quality of the children's education, and the tax payer being guilty of earning a paycheck and trying to provide for their family in the middle of a government induced recession. It's ironic that in both disputes, the tax payer is the one expected to fork over the cash.
As a conservative, I am duty bound to accept the rights of all people, even if the rights of others might not be in my best financial interest. That means I realize that when I pursue a particular job, it is the right of the employer to offer the terms of the job, and it is my right to accept them or not. It is my right to go elsewhere in search of employment, and it is the employer's right to offer an unreasonable compensation package that will result in him/her not being able to find quality employees, ultimately resulting in failure of his/her business. So says the free market.
For me to come to the negotiating table with a third party who's sole purpose is to win me "extras" that this particular job would not usually entitle me to, says a lot about me. It says that I can not stand on my own two feet, and that I have trouble navigating life without some powerfull third party holding my hand. It also says that I am starting from an adversarial position regarding my future relationship with my employer. It also tells you that I am not very forward thinking, because I do not recognize the exponential costs of my demands, and their inevitable result...unemployment. So says liberalism.
Lost in the haze of the Wisconsin debate are thousands of kids who are not being taught, by teachers who routinely claim that they teach because they "love children and love to teach". I guess that's as long as they pull down a salary and benefits package that would be the envy of any truck driver on the interstate.
I've been watching the events in Wisconsin for the past few weeks, and I am reminded of the fact that we have a long way to go in the fight to fix our educational system. On full display for everyone to see is a broken public school system run by the same people we are supposed to entrust our health care to...our government.
Rather than put my own personal spin on ground that's been well traveled over past couple of weeks by bringing up the cowardly democrats who fled like rats to avoid doing their job, or connecting the dots from President Obama to the labor unions, or whining yet again about the unfair coverage and blatantly bias coverage by the media of Governor Walker's fight to balance his state's budget, I'm simply going to boil this all down to a philosophical discussion. How's that for a run-on sentence?
Ask yourself the following question; Do the rights offered in this country apply to every citizen, or only the well connected? To ask me, you would hear me tell you that our rights apply to everyone, to ask a union representative, you would hear a well worded tap dance designed to distract you from the fact that he/she believes that the rights of a union member overrides and usurps that of an employer or the amount of money that employer has to work with in their budget during any given fiscal year.
Much like the big kid who would threaten "swirlies" unless you forked over your lunch money, unions threaten "strikes" unless you fork over wages and/or benefits that the free market would not otherwise provide under normal circumstances. At this point, the typical union member would proudly say, "Exactly, unions raise the standard of compensation for workers!". OK, but what happens when that artificially inflated level of compensation can no longer be afforded by the employer? Answer: Your employer either shuts it's doors, or bills the tax payer for a bailout as in the case of GM and Chrysler.
Worse yet, the difference between the car industry bailouts and what's happening in Wisconsin is the fact that in the case of the auto industry, the divide is between "labor" and "management". Labor being guilty of bullying their way to compensation packages that would eventually bankrupt the manufacturer while inflating the price of the car, and management being guilty of letting them, and then having the nerve to assume the tax payer should foot the bill. Yet in the case of Wisconsin, the divide is between labor being guilty of bullying their way to compensation packages that would eventually bankrupt the state while harming the quality of the children's education, and the tax payer being guilty of earning a paycheck and trying to provide for their family in the middle of a government induced recession. It's ironic that in both disputes, the tax payer is the one expected to fork over the cash.
As a conservative, I am duty bound to accept the rights of all people, even if the rights of others might not be in my best financial interest. That means I realize that when I pursue a particular job, it is the right of the employer to offer the terms of the job, and it is my right to accept them or not. It is my right to go elsewhere in search of employment, and it is the employer's right to offer an unreasonable compensation package that will result in him/her not being able to find quality employees, ultimately resulting in failure of his/her business. So says the free market.
For me to come to the negotiating table with a third party who's sole purpose is to win me "extras" that this particular job would not usually entitle me to, says a lot about me. It says that I can not stand on my own two feet, and that I have trouble navigating life without some powerfull third party holding my hand. It also says that I am starting from an adversarial position regarding my future relationship with my employer. It also tells you that I am not very forward thinking, because I do not recognize the exponential costs of my demands, and their inevitable result...unemployment. So says liberalism.
Lost in the haze of the Wisconsin debate are thousands of kids who are not being taught, by teachers who routinely claim that they teach because they "love children and love to teach". I guess that's as long as they pull down a salary and benefits package that would be the envy of any truck driver on the interstate.
Sunday, February 6, 2011
YOU'RE HIRED...not!
Last week, while playing with my son, the phone rang. The caller ID read: "PA SENATE". Ever the pessimist, I almost didn't answer it, assuming it was some sort of robo-call, or plea for donations by someone's lower tier staffer. The curiosity got the best of me, so I answered it. As it turns out, it was actually my State Senator Rich Alloway. Still the pessimist, I was waiting for him to ask for a donation, but he didn't. Instead, he just wanted to call me personally to tell me how much he enjoyed reading my book.
You see, some time back, he was speaking at a local fund raiser, and after some coaxing from my wife, I attended the event and gave him a copy of my book. Senator Alloway's call was very sincere and we had a great conversation about the media and general politics. After his call, I could feel my ego inflating. After all, it's not every day that a State Senator calls you for no other purpose than to say he's a fan of your work.
As pure coincidence, Alloway was to be hosting a job fair at an events center here in my home town. I decided to stop by and introduce myself in person. I'm glad I did, because though Alloway recognized me right away and couldn't have been a cooler dude to talk to, the event itself turned out to be worth the frozen/Arctic trip into town on it's own.
I've been to job fairs in the past, but this was easily the biggest one I have ever attended. Being there as an employed truck driver allowed me to observe the event as an outsider. After all, I wasn't there to find a job.
As I watched the variety of people wandering aimlessly throughout the boothes manned by various trade schools, community colleges, and local industries, I realized two things. One, you know unemployment is too high when a job fair in a rural area such as this can draw a crowd this size (1000+people). And two, you could easily split that crowd into two groups; those who want a job, and those who don't.
Those who wanted a job were easy to spot. They were comprised of people who went the extra mile to look their best. Dress pants, and pressed shirts for the men, dresses and heels for the ladies. All carrying some sort of folder containing a portfolio and resume. In this group there was also a sub-strata. Those who wanted a job, but weren't going to get one because they sabotaged themselves before they even left their house.
These were the folks that took the time to wear the right clothes, prepared the right portfolios, but couldn't find a convincing way to hide the "flaming skull with rotting flesh" tattoo etched into their neck. Not to be out done, there was the guy who realized all too late that the giant disks that usually plugged half-dollar sized holes in his earlobes were probably not going to help his employment situation, so he opted to ditch the disks and went with the "I want my earlobes to look like soggy onion rings" look.
Last week, while playing with my son, the phone rang. The caller ID read: "PA SENATE". Ever the pessimist, I almost didn't answer it, assuming it was some sort of robo-call, or plea for donations by someone's lower tier staffer. The curiosity got the best of me, so I answered it. As it turns out, it was actually my State Senator Rich Alloway. Still the pessimist, I was waiting for him to ask for a donation, but he didn't. Instead, he just wanted to call me personally to tell me how much he enjoyed reading my book.
You see, some time back, he was speaking at a local fund raiser, and after some coaxing from my wife, I attended the event and gave him a copy of my book. Senator Alloway's call was very sincere and we had a great conversation about the media and general politics. After his call, I could feel my ego inflating. After all, it's not every day that a State Senator calls you for no other purpose than to say he's a fan of your work.
As pure coincidence, Alloway was to be hosting a job fair at an events center here in my home town. I decided to stop by and introduce myself in person. I'm glad I did, because though Alloway recognized me right away and couldn't have been a cooler dude to talk to, the event itself turned out to be worth the frozen/Arctic trip into town on it's own.
I've been to job fairs in the past, but this was easily the biggest one I have ever attended. Being there as an employed truck driver allowed me to observe the event as an outsider. After all, I wasn't there to find a job.
As I watched the variety of people wandering aimlessly throughout the boothes manned by various trade schools, community colleges, and local industries, I realized two things. One, you know unemployment is too high when a job fair in a rural area such as this can draw a crowd this size (1000+people). And two, you could easily split that crowd into two groups; those who want a job, and those who don't.
Those who wanted a job were easy to spot. They were comprised of people who went the extra mile to look their best. Dress pants, and pressed shirts for the men, dresses and heels for the ladies. All carrying some sort of folder containing a portfolio and resume. In this group there was also a sub-strata. Those who wanted a job, but weren't going to get one because they sabotaged themselves before they even left their house.
These were the folks that took the time to wear the right clothes, prepared the right portfolios, but couldn't find a convincing way to hide the "flaming skull with rotting flesh" tattoo etched into their neck. Not to be out done, there was the guy who realized all too late that the giant disks that usually plugged half-dollar sized holes in his earlobes were probably not going to help his employment situation, so he opted to ditch the disks and went with the "I want my earlobes to look like soggy onion rings" look.
Moving on to those who had no intention of finding work. They were easy to spot as well. Many in this group moved in packs. Bringing friends and family and looking like reject extras from a bad rap video, these folks weren't even trying to be discreet about their agenda. They were there to grab job applications so they can fill them out as a requirement for unemployment benefits and welfare.
All in all, braving the elements to experience my town's job fair extravaganza turned out to be not only a great chance to see slackers and go-getters in their full glory, but it was also a good chance to push my son around in his stroller and make fun of people.
Monday, January 10, 2011
LIL' GANGSTAS
Maybe the reality that confronts me daily in the form of newly issued grey hairs is finally sinking in. Maybe I actually am out of touch. Maybe my intellect has not yet reached a level that would allow me to properly contextualize any form of entertainment popularized after 1987. Maybe I actually am an over-protective parent. Or, maybe there is a segment of society that cannot muster enough fore-sight/long term speculative reasoning ability to recognize a bad idea when they see one. This segment is known as the "clueless parent".
First, in the interest of full disclosure, it has been brought to my attention that my following opinion could be mis-interpreted as some sort of racial prejudice. So, to set the record straight...it is not. Please withhold judgement until the end of this piece.
Recently, my six year old daughter was in our living room when she decided to start dancing. This is not unusual because she has lots of energy and loves to dance. The problem was the particular dance she was doing. Cross between the ticks of someone who suffers from cerebral palsy and something I would commonly see on the dance floor of bars I used to frequent before I met my wife, this "dance" concerned me enough to ask my daughter what she was doing.
She explained that she was do the "tooty-ta" dance. After further inquiry, I learned that it was something she was taught in her first grade class, and it turned out to be a video that I was able to find on "You-Tube".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qULd3d_gDCg
As a father, I am told that one of my duties is to protect my children from things that might harm them or things that might not be in their best interest. I am also told that my wife and I are responsible for whatever our children turn out to be as adults. On both points, I am in total agreement.
In the year 2011, the ever-growing list of things I need to protect my children from includes but is not limited to the following...bees, germs, snakes, pedophiles, sharp objects, traffic, drugs, pimps, prostitutes, stripper poles, and negative stereotypes disguised as cute, harmless little dances for children.
Call me crazy, but I have a bit of a problem with my kid being taught to emulate the mannerisms of people who refuse to wear clothes that fit properly, and can't seem to figure out which end of the hat is the front. Top that with comically large gold medallions and non-sensical lyrics and viola! A brand new gangsta rapper in training. Every parent's dream.
As for the racism angle, not so fast. My prejudice against rap music runs both deep and wide, and for many reasons to be written about in a future article. But this has nothing to do with skin color. It simply has to do with musical tastes. And for those who doubt my sincerity, I offer my CD collection as exhibit "A". It contains the following artists: Buddy Guy, John Lee Hooker, Muddy Waters, Jimi Hendrix, Stevie Wonder, Miles Davis, Taj Mahal, Ray Charles, Bo Diddly, BB King, and a whole list of other black musicians who know how to make music with actual instruments, as opposed to electronic sampling programs.
As for "tooty ta", it has no apparent educational value for kids of any color.
Maybe the reality that confronts me daily in the form of newly issued grey hairs is finally sinking in. Maybe I actually am out of touch. Maybe my intellect has not yet reached a level that would allow me to properly contextualize any form of entertainment popularized after 1987. Maybe I actually am an over-protective parent. Or, maybe there is a segment of society that cannot muster enough fore-sight/long term speculative reasoning ability to recognize a bad idea when they see one. This segment is known as the "clueless parent".
First, in the interest of full disclosure, it has been brought to my attention that my following opinion could be mis-interpreted as some sort of racial prejudice. So, to set the record straight...it is not. Please withhold judgement until the end of this piece.
Recently, my six year old daughter was in our living room when she decided to start dancing. This is not unusual because she has lots of energy and loves to dance. The problem was the particular dance she was doing. Cross between the ticks of someone who suffers from cerebral palsy and something I would commonly see on the dance floor of bars I used to frequent before I met my wife, this "dance" concerned me enough to ask my daughter what she was doing.
She explained that she was do the "tooty-ta" dance. After further inquiry, I learned that it was something she was taught in her first grade class, and it turned out to be a video that I was able to find on "You-Tube".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qULd3d_gDCg
As a father, I am told that one of my duties is to protect my children from things that might harm them or things that might not be in their best interest. I am also told that my wife and I are responsible for whatever our children turn out to be as adults. On both points, I am in total agreement.
In the year 2011, the ever-growing list of things I need to protect my children from includes but is not limited to the following...bees, germs, snakes, pedophiles, sharp objects, traffic, drugs, pimps, prostitutes, stripper poles, and negative stereotypes disguised as cute, harmless little dances for children.
Call me crazy, but I have a bit of a problem with my kid being taught to emulate the mannerisms of people who refuse to wear clothes that fit properly, and can't seem to figure out which end of the hat is the front. Top that with comically large gold medallions and non-sensical lyrics and viola! A brand new gangsta rapper in training. Every parent's dream.
As for the racism angle, not so fast. My prejudice against rap music runs both deep and wide, and for many reasons to be written about in a future article. But this has nothing to do with skin color. It simply has to do with musical tastes. And for those who doubt my sincerity, I offer my CD collection as exhibit "A". It contains the following artists: Buddy Guy, John Lee Hooker, Muddy Waters, Jimi Hendrix, Stevie Wonder, Miles Davis, Taj Mahal, Ray Charles, Bo Diddly, BB King, and a whole list of other black musicians who know how to make music with actual instruments, as opposed to electronic sampling programs.
As for "tooty ta", it has no apparent educational value for kids of any color.
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
LAST RIGHTS
Throughout history, one of the identifying features of a civilized culture has been the respecting of a dying man's last request. Whether a matter of law, policy, or unwritten rule, the seeing-through of the deceased's last wishes has usually been considered a noble act reserved for the closest of kin or best of friend. Then came liberalism.
Where common sense and general decency dictate that your property is exactly that-your property, liberalism dictates that your property belongs to the government, who allows you to "borrow" it until the moment of your death, at which time they have the right to reclaim it. At least, that seems to be the logic behind the idea of the "death tax".
Consider this. Assuming that you are a law abiding citizen, during your time on this Earth, every paycheck you ever earn is taxed before it even touches your hand. Then, everything you ever purchase is taxed...sometimes redundantly. By rights, (and the constitution) anything left over is supposed to be yours. Consequently, it is supposed to be you who makes the decisions regarding who will inherit what's left over. But, as with all other decisions in life, liberals believe that your last request should be left to that Goliath of bureaucracy we call "the government".
I say "Why stop there"? If the government is entitled to decide who gets your money when you die, then why not the rest of your stuff? After all, who are you to decide who gets your family photos? Pets? Clothes? Beer stein collection? Books? Baseball cards? Etc, etc...
With liberalism having such a "death grip" on our life...and death, it's easy to see why it is no longer a custom to place pennies on the eyes of the dead.
Throughout history, one of the identifying features of a civilized culture has been the respecting of a dying man's last request. Whether a matter of law, policy, or unwritten rule, the seeing-through of the deceased's last wishes has usually been considered a noble act reserved for the closest of kin or best of friend. Then came liberalism.
Where common sense and general decency dictate that your property is exactly that-your property, liberalism dictates that your property belongs to the government, who allows you to "borrow" it until the moment of your death, at which time they have the right to reclaim it. At least, that seems to be the logic behind the idea of the "death tax".
Consider this. Assuming that you are a law abiding citizen, during your time on this Earth, every paycheck you ever earn is taxed before it even touches your hand. Then, everything you ever purchase is taxed...sometimes redundantly. By rights, (and the constitution) anything left over is supposed to be yours. Consequently, it is supposed to be you who makes the decisions regarding who will inherit what's left over. But, as with all other decisions in life, liberals believe that your last request should be left to that Goliath of bureaucracy we call "the government".
I say "Why stop there"? If the government is entitled to decide who gets your money when you die, then why not the rest of your stuff? After all, who are you to decide who gets your family photos? Pets? Clothes? Beer stein collection? Books? Baseball cards? Etc, etc...
With liberalism having such a "death grip" on our life...and death, it's easy to see why it is no longer a custom to place pennies on the eyes of the dead.
Sunday, December 5, 2010
TARGET: GOLDEN GOOSE
As a rule, I try not to re-hash topics I've covered in the past. But with the current state of our economy and congress' child-like understanding of both the cause of it, and solutions to it, I felt a refresher coarse might be in order.
As congress fights among themselves about whether or not to extend the current tax rates, or raise taxes on certain, but not all citizens of America, it occurs to me that in the future, we might want to consider a basic aptitude test as a requirement for being allowed to run for public office. Until that day though, all I can do is offer my free economic lessons and hope that prospective politicians take full advantage of it.
I'm going to make this short and sweet. If you think raising taxes on "the rich" is going to help the economy, you are wrong. First, it's not fair to tax one citizen at a different tax rate than another. Especially when it's done for spite, jealousy, or simple ignorance of economics. Second, if you want to "create jobs", who better to do that than the people who actually do the most hiring? I mean really! Who hires more people? The X-Box addicted, 87' GEO driving, Mamma's basement living welfare case? The small business owner who's business has never actually required the hiring of more than thirty people? Or the "rich fat cat" who's enterprises require a minimum of two thousand associates to staff adequately?
Who is more likely to purchase big ticket items like boats, cars, pools, planes, summer homes, or turn one condos at Charlotte Motor Speedway? The welfare case? Mr. Small Business? Or the rich guy? Considering that those big ticket items do not grow on trees, where do you suppose they come from? You guessed it, the American worker. That is assuming that their manufacturers haven't fled the country trying to escape excessive taxation...irony.
So though it may bother you that some rich jerk just bought his third 120 foot yacht, you need to remember that the purchase of that yacht employed hundreds of people and fed many families. From everyone who works for the yacht company to the guy who scrapes the barnacles off it's hull, and everyone in between...people made money from the rich guy's indulgences.
Reducing the rich guy's ability to indulge himself via higher taxes might make you feel better, but it ain't going to put food on the table of the guy who assembles yacht engines.
Third, the age old rule of "S#&% rolls down hill" applies today just as it always has. That means that even though I might not be rich, my boss is. And when his taxes are raised, I'll give you one guess as to who is actually going to feel the pain of it. Be it a smaller cost of living raise, reduced benefits, or another year without new equipment, I'll be the one who takes the hit. You see, rich guys don't just buy yachts, they buy entire fleets of new trucks for their companies...unless the cost of those trucks goes up due to taxation. Keep in mind that an unsold truck brings NO tax revenue, but trucks sold at a reasonable/less prohibitive tax rate will bring tax revenue.
They are supposed to be teaching this stuff in schools. So why is it up to me? I should be in bed by now!
As a rule, I try not to re-hash topics I've covered in the past. But with the current state of our economy and congress' child-like understanding of both the cause of it, and solutions to it, I felt a refresher coarse might be in order.
As congress fights among themselves about whether or not to extend the current tax rates, or raise taxes on certain, but not all citizens of America, it occurs to me that in the future, we might want to consider a basic aptitude test as a requirement for being allowed to run for public office. Until that day though, all I can do is offer my free economic lessons and hope that prospective politicians take full advantage of it.
I'm going to make this short and sweet. If you think raising taxes on "the rich" is going to help the economy, you are wrong. First, it's not fair to tax one citizen at a different tax rate than another. Especially when it's done for spite, jealousy, or simple ignorance of economics. Second, if you want to "create jobs", who better to do that than the people who actually do the most hiring? I mean really! Who hires more people? The X-Box addicted, 87' GEO driving, Mamma's basement living welfare case? The small business owner who's business has never actually required the hiring of more than thirty people? Or the "rich fat cat" who's enterprises require a minimum of two thousand associates to staff adequately?
Who is more likely to purchase big ticket items like boats, cars, pools, planes, summer homes, or turn one condos at Charlotte Motor Speedway? The welfare case? Mr. Small Business? Or the rich guy? Considering that those big ticket items do not grow on trees, where do you suppose they come from? You guessed it, the American worker. That is assuming that their manufacturers haven't fled the country trying to escape excessive taxation...irony.
So though it may bother you that some rich jerk just bought his third 120 foot yacht, you need to remember that the purchase of that yacht employed hundreds of people and fed many families. From everyone who works for the yacht company to the guy who scrapes the barnacles off it's hull, and everyone in between...people made money from the rich guy's indulgences.
Reducing the rich guy's ability to indulge himself via higher taxes might make you feel better, but it ain't going to put food on the table of the guy who assembles yacht engines.
Third, the age old rule of "S#&% rolls down hill" applies today just as it always has. That means that even though I might not be rich, my boss is. And when his taxes are raised, I'll give you one guess as to who is actually going to feel the pain of it. Be it a smaller cost of living raise, reduced benefits, or another year without new equipment, I'll be the one who takes the hit. You see, rich guys don't just buy yachts, they buy entire fleets of new trucks for their companies...unless the cost of those trucks goes up due to taxation. Keep in mind that an unsold truck brings NO tax revenue, but trucks sold at a reasonable/less prohibitive tax rate will bring tax revenue.
They are supposed to be teaching this stuff in schools. So why is it up to me? I should be in bed by now!
Saturday, November 6, 2010
NOW, THE HARD PART
First, I would like to address the state of Maryland. You were robbed. Though I'm not usually prone to conspiracy theories, and I rarely rely on anecdotal evidence, I must say that in my un-scientific opinion..."You got jacked Bro!".
If I am not to assume that there were some sort of electoral shenanigans that produced an O'Malley/Mikulski win on Tuesday, then there are only two other possibilities. Maryland voters are so embarrassed by their desire to vote democrat, that they refuse to put O'Malley/Mikulski signs in their yard, or there is a densely populated part of Maryland that is not shown on any map and can not be seen from any road, and just happens to vote primarily democrat.
You see, as a truck driver, I cover all points of Maryland. From the Eastern Shore, to the mountains of Garret Country and everywhere in between. From Baltimore to Cumberland and Waldorf to Rockville, there has been one thing that stands out above all else in recent weeks. The ratio of Ehrlich signs over O'Malley's has easily been 20 to 1. It's been nearly impossible to swing a dead cow without hitting a giant 4x8 Ehrlich sign, but finding an O'Malley sign has been akin to a game of Where's Waldo.
Between this puzzeling observation and O'Malley's reference to illegal aliens as "new Americans" in a debate, I have to assume that there is something fishy going on in Annapolis.
Second, I would like to address California. You guys are just screwed. At this point, your best hope for the future of your state is that the San Andreas Fault finally gives-way and allows California to slide on out to sea.
On a more serious note, there are many lessons to be learned from the election of 2010. The most most important being that there are few things more valuable on this Earth than education. Not necessarily an education certified in some over-priced, ivy-league, snob-o-torium, but the sort of education one receives through life experience and a willingness to apply rational thought to an issue when there's no one around to impress. It was the regular folk out there taking the time to educate themselves on issues like health care, taxes, government spending, and illegal immigration who saved the day on November 2nd, 2010...not the smug-ocracy from Harvard and Yale.
We also need to understand that this election was not the victory we should be celebrating. Yes, I understand the need to do a naked "happy dance" on the front lawn to revel in the defeat of Nancy Pelosi. Yes, I understand the scope of Republican/T.E.A. party wins on every level of government from national to local. And yes, I do understand the satisfaction we felt when the liberal/main stream media was forced to announce the election results to the world, while trying not to look like they just swallowed a turd (Matthews and Olberman couldn't quite pull it off).
But the larger point is that even thought this was a massive electoral victory, it was really more of a successful job interview...and now we actually have to do the job. A better analogy might be that this election is mearly a solid foot-hold on a beyond vertical climb, up the icy rock face of Mt. Everest, while competing climbers are allowed to shoot you with B.B. guns.
We may have thrown the Obama agenda off track for the moment, but the battle is just now getting started. As evidenced by election results in California, Nevada, Maryland and Delaware, we still have a long way to go before we can safely say we've defeated socialism in America. We have many debates and Congressional votes ahead that will need to be won. We have millions of hearts and minds to win. There are literally millions of people out there who are in dire need of a complete ideological/philosophical over-haul...and we have less than two years to do the job.
In short, this is no time to celebrate. It will be after the liberal/progressive agenda is stigmatized and ridiculed out of the main-stream that I will crack open "the good stuff" and propose a toast.
First, I would like to address the state of Maryland. You were robbed. Though I'm not usually prone to conspiracy theories, and I rarely rely on anecdotal evidence, I must say that in my un-scientific opinion..."You got jacked Bro!".
If I am not to assume that there were some sort of electoral shenanigans that produced an O'Malley/Mikulski win on Tuesday, then there are only two other possibilities. Maryland voters are so embarrassed by their desire to vote democrat, that they refuse to put O'Malley/Mikulski signs in their yard, or there is a densely populated part of Maryland that is not shown on any map and can not be seen from any road, and just happens to vote primarily democrat.
You see, as a truck driver, I cover all points of Maryland. From the Eastern Shore, to the mountains of Garret Country and everywhere in between. From Baltimore to Cumberland and Waldorf to Rockville, there has been one thing that stands out above all else in recent weeks. The ratio of Ehrlich signs over O'Malley's has easily been 20 to 1. It's been nearly impossible to swing a dead cow without hitting a giant 4x8 Ehrlich sign, but finding an O'Malley sign has been akin to a game of Where's Waldo.
Between this puzzeling observation and O'Malley's reference to illegal aliens as "new Americans" in a debate, I have to assume that there is something fishy going on in Annapolis.
Second, I would like to address California. You guys are just screwed. At this point, your best hope for the future of your state is that the San Andreas Fault finally gives-way and allows California to slide on out to sea.
On a more serious note, there are many lessons to be learned from the election of 2010. The most most important being that there are few things more valuable on this Earth than education. Not necessarily an education certified in some over-priced, ivy-league, snob-o-torium, but the sort of education one receives through life experience and a willingness to apply rational thought to an issue when there's no one around to impress. It was the regular folk out there taking the time to educate themselves on issues like health care, taxes, government spending, and illegal immigration who saved the day on November 2nd, 2010...not the smug-ocracy from Harvard and Yale.
We also need to understand that this election was not the victory we should be celebrating. Yes, I understand the need to do a naked "happy dance" on the front lawn to revel in the defeat of Nancy Pelosi. Yes, I understand the scope of Republican/T.E.A. party wins on every level of government from national to local. And yes, I do understand the satisfaction we felt when the liberal/main stream media was forced to announce the election results to the world, while trying not to look like they just swallowed a turd (Matthews and Olberman couldn't quite pull it off).
But the larger point is that even thought this was a massive electoral victory, it was really more of a successful job interview...and now we actually have to do the job. A better analogy might be that this election is mearly a solid foot-hold on a beyond vertical climb, up the icy rock face of Mt. Everest, while competing climbers are allowed to shoot you with B.B. guns.
We may have thrown the Obama agenda off track for the moment, but the battle is just now getting started. As evidenced by election results in California, Nevada, Maryland and Delaware, we still have a long way to go before we can safely say we've defeated socialism in America. We have many debates and Congressional votes ahead that will need to be won. We have millions of hearts and minds to win. There are literally millions of people out there who are in dire need of a complete ideological/philosophical over-haul...and we have less than two years to do the job.
In short, this is no time to celebrate. It will be after the liberal/progressive agenda is stigmatized and ridiculed out of the main-stream that I will crack open "the good stuff" and propose a toast.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)