Feb 18, 2009
Special Interest Groups
FDR pioneered a brilliant political strategy, special interest groups. A politician supports one particular group so that the group will vote for them. FDR did this with multiple groups. B.O. put funding for special interest groups in the stimulus package. I call him B.O. because he stinks. What's worse is that the special interest groups that he's helping is teacher unions.
This article points out how exactly unions are special interest groups. Unions support democratic candidates. What do the candidates give in return? How about some nice, green tinted pictures of Benjamin Franklin. Where do they get the money? Well, they take some from the tax payers and borrow some from China. Of course borrowing from China will get us kicked in the butt. But my point is that in a way, B.O. is now forcing us to make contributions to his campaign.
Is B.O. really above Washington? Not at all. We need to tell people about this funding of special interest groups. Many were deceived by B.O. and they need to realize their mistake. Some will still cling to their messiah like a Pennsylvanian clings to his their guns and religion. (Please note that I said "his" instead of "his or her".) By the way, Pennsylvanians are angry and bitter at politicians, and that is something worth being angry over.
James Tuttle
End Log.
Day 106 - Inflation, Stupidity on the Rise
Apparently, I like getting into political fights on the internet as well, because recently I got into another one. This one was on the aforementioned bill. The thread's title was "Do you believe the Stimulus bill was really bipartisan? I don't.". This lead to a discussion where I got involved. The following transcript occurred: [Thread Viewable Here]
I (tustin2121) said:
Politics! Gah! I don't want to get involved, but....Person A said:
No, the bill isn't bipartisan, but the Dems WANT it to be bipartisan so that when it fails, they can blame Republicans. (Note: not "if" it fails, but when, because spending several billion dollars will, if already hasn't, cause major inflation, which is BAD for the economy. If there were tax cuts in there, there won't be when they're done with it. And I know they're gonna try and slip in a few things that Republicans should hate too.)
tustin2121:I responded:Politics! Gah! I don't want to get involved, but....Step outside sir.
cause major inflation, which is BAD for the economy. If there were tax cuts in there, there won't be when they're done with it. And I know they're gonna try and slip in a few things that Republicans should hate too.)
You *Punches tustin* will not *backhand* talk utter *knees Tustin in the face* crap in economic *crushes Tustin's nose* terms *final punch* again.
As you can see, economic ignorance is something that makes me deeply angry.
Excuse me?! Economic Crap?! What makes me economically ignorant? PLEASE point out my flaws instead of simply beating me up! This isn't a counter argument, it's violence (albeit fake violence, but you get the point).Person B responded:
Also, if you're going to quote me, quote my entire statement, thank you. You seemed to have left out a vital part of my argument...
Indeed he did. He's right though.I respond:
tustin2121:because spending several billion dollars will, if already hasn't, cause major inflationThis is wrong.
No it isn't. Listen: money only has a certain value if a) it is backed by something of real value (eg Gold) or b) it is limited in quantity in proportion to all the goods in the market. Money by itself does not have any value; the paper bill has no intrinsic value, and most coins now a days are made of worthless pot-metal.Person B replies:
If there's more money in the system then there is value, then the value per money unit (eg. the dollar) drops (simple division here). When the value per dollar drops, people have to pay more dollars to get the same valued item, which is "rising prices", which is "inflation".
MMO designers and managers know this, because they use the same concept in games that have an economy. If there the value of their currency starts to fall, they'll create "gold sinks", which in the games usually are NPC shop owners and the like. When a player pays for something from the gold sink, the gold is taken from the player and taken out of the economy, which keeps the value of the gold from dropping.
Creating a money sink in real life is much much harder, because only the Federal Reserve, and by extension the Government, has the ability (or rather, the interest) to take money out of the system; everyone else wants and needs to use the money.
Therefore, generating money out of nowhere, like the stimulus bill proposes, will flood the market with representations of value (money) when no real value is being produced, and will cause hyper-inflation. QED.
tustin2121:I replied:Therefore, generating money out of nowhere, like the stimulus bill proposes, will flood the market with representations of value (money) when no real value is being produced, and will cause hyper-inflation. QED.Oh, I won't argue about a bill I don't know anything about, but your initial post said:
tustin2121:because spending several billion dollars will, if already hasn't, cause major inflationand that is plain wrong. Investments can be the way to counteract inflation. I won't argue your poins on the specific bill, 'cause I can't be bothered to research it. But what you wrote there, was very wrong.
As for
tustin2121:No it isn't. Listen: money only has a certain value if a) it is backed by something of real value (eg Gold) or b) it is limited in quantity in proportion to all the goods in the market. Money by itself does not have any value; the paper bill has no intrinsic value, and most coins now a days are made of worthless pot-metal.That is wrong too. The world eceonomy runs on one central things today: optimism. I'm not BS'ing here.
How can one statement be wrong and the other right when both are saying the same thing? Are we talking in double speak now? In order to spend the 700+ billion dollars, someone has to generate it first. Simply making the money does nothing if it doesn't get spent into the economy. Therefore, they go hand in hand when it comes to this.
[And] Yes, the economy does run on optimism, or as I like to call it, a promise; the promise was that this dollar has value. We run on this optimism because we scrapped the "backed by gold" in the 20's-30's, and we are now scrapping the "proportional value" with this bill. We are breaking the promise that we wouldn't make more representations of value than there is value by making billions of representations of value without making new value (or making very little of it).
Of course, more is to come, but I do think that people are getting slowly dumber as time goes on. This isn't rocket science, and I sure hope I explained the non-rocket-science to them well enough...
End Log.
Feb 8, 2009
Legotown
This is James Tuttle. I know that this article is old, but I need to comment on it. So I now feel feel like playing with legos because it is a toy which teaches kids the values of capitalism. Let me start by talking about Legotown.
Legotown is a capitalist town. Some people have more than others. People keep trying to produce something of value so that they can get more. The people who move up are the hardest workers and the people who contribute the most to the town. As production goes up, people get jobs and the producers can afford to pay the workers more money. It works out great.
Suddenly, Legotown turns to communism. People say, "I won't work harder because it won't get me anywhere." This will drop production and lower everyone's standard of living. Whatever gets produced, does not get produced well because no one has any incentive to produce it well. Workers will not work efficiently, and the producers don't care, because people who produce more efficiently do not get rewarded. Some people even have creative ideas. Some are medical devices to help improve the quality of lives and even saves lives. Others are tools for people in different lines of work. These tools help others do their jobs at a quicker pace and saves them money. Some of these workers are contractors who can now charge less with the help of the tools, saving somebody else money. But these ideas don't get invented because the inventors can't earn extra money for them.
The new equal government housing is terrible. Without much being produced, they cannot build great houses. They can improve some houses, but not every house, so they don't improve any house. Did I say house? I'm sorry. I meant apartment, without a yard for kids to play in. And some families are too big for their apartment. The government is trying to create different sized apartments for different sized families, but that is not going well.
Now let's talk about eminent domain. It's fine for government to take somebody's property to be used as a road. The real problem is when it is taken and given to a private company. If a private company wants it, they need to pay what it's worth, which is what the owner is willing to accept for it. If they don't want to sell it, then they are simply exercising their right to private property, which is necessary for a healthy economy.
Individuals and companies in the private sector know how to best use and allocate resources. Government cannot do that. Why? Because the incentive to make profit forces producers to produce what is best for society. That incentive for profit does not exist in government.
I now feel like reading The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith. He is an economist who developed the ideas of capitalism. Also, raise your kids on Legos so that they will learn the way of capitalism.
End Log.
Feb 2, 2009
Day 90 - "Islam is the Light"
I recently came across this article on FrontPage Magazine entitled "What Islam Isn't". It gives graphic details on how Islam is more than just a Religion, but a freaking full force system. It "has religious, legal, political, economic and military components" with the religious component as just the maiden-head to bring about all the others, to take control. A video was made off of it, that does well to deliver the message:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8789NMWZ9EI
Now I know Correlation does not equal Causation, but given the very strong correlation, maybe its worth a gander? And I know that quite a few Muslims are anything but terrorists and just want to live in peace, but I think that they are simply ignorant of the power that Islamic system is capable of and how the "radicals" use it to take control of places. And while no one will listen to me, I advise that these individuals who simply want peace branch off into a new Religion, based on the teachings of Islam that they hold dear, but without the system of Islam detailed in the article above.
You want proof beyond these statistics? Try this recent discovery: [CrunchGear] A Nintendo DS game was discovered recently to have the EXACT SAME AUDIO as the infamous "Islam is the Light" doll. As the video on the page details, the phrase "Islam is the light" is uttered by this children's toy when the kids are playing with it. The phrase is the ONLY thing distinguishable as speech in the bunches of gibberish babbled by the baby doll (and DS game). Those who pass it off as gibberish need to have their ears cleaned and those that pass is off as "Go into the light" need to realize that "Go" does not have the "S" phoneme in there anywhere! Here lies the Principle "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me."
End Log.
Feb 1, 2009
Line By Line: Teaching Children the Pleasures of Gay Sex
Welcome to Line-By-Line!WARNING: If you can see this line, than the following transcript may not be formatted properly: you will not be able to tell the article from the commentary. Please go to the original post to see the proper Line-By-Line output transcript.
Please enter the URL of the news article you will be berating today.
>http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/sep/08091608.html
Now Loading Article...
Title: U.K Government Funded Project Teaches Children as Young as Five About the "pleasures of gay sex"
Author: Hilary White
News Source: LifeSiteNews
Release Date: Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Area: London
Begin Article:
From the earliest primary grades, school children in Britain should be taught about homosexual relations, a government funded education research project has said.
Heba...hooba....wwhe....WHAT?!?! Whoa!! Where did THIS come from?!?!
No Outsiders, a 28-month, tax-funded research project funded by the government's Economic and Social Research Council, is already functioning in 14 primary schools in Britain, using books, puppet shows and plays to teach children as young as five about the "pleasures of gay sex."
"The Pleasures of GAY SEX"?!?!?! WHY do we need to teach CHILDREN the pleasures of GAY SEX?! AT AGE FIVE?!?!?!
The project is costing British taxpayers £600,000 (Cn. $1,143,989) and is being promoted in schools under the rubric of combating "homophobic bullying" in schools.
At Age FIVE?! Kids don't even know what sex IS at age five! Why the HELL would you need to COMBAT Homiphobic BULLYING at AGE FIVE?!?!
No no no, there's more to this than combating bullying, I know there is.
At a seminar this week at Exeter University, the project's members and supporters said they will go beyond what is taught to the children in schools, and "interrogate" the "desexualisation of children's bodies", [...]
Interrogate what?! The "Desexualization" of children's bodies?! You're the one sexualizing children! You want to teach children the pleasures of gay sex!
[...] "the negation of pleasure and desire in educational contexts" [...]
The removal of pleasure and desire is usually a GOOD thing. Just look at any single sex school out there! And you want to introduce pleasure and desire?!
[...] and "the tendency to shy away from discussion of (sexual) bodily activity." The ultimate goal, they wrote, is to create "primary classrooms where queer sexualities are affirmed and celebrated."
"Celebrated", huh? So we are going to hold a celebration everyday for gay student (who I might remind everyone, are only five years old). WHY?!
Papers prepared for the seminar by the No Outsiders project leaders say that the seminar will question the "taken-for-granted" status of the "supposedly sexless" primary classroom.
Primary School Classrooms ARE sexless!! There's no such thing as sex when we're dealing with five year olds!! The only concept children have about sex when they're FIVE YEARS OLD is that the opposite sex has COOTIES!!
The project will examine "'the place of the research team members' own bodies, desires and pleasures in this research."
Wait wait wait. Let me get this straight: You are going to examine your own bodies, desires, and pleasures in reaserch involving small children and teaching them about the pleasures of gay sex. Does anyone else see where this is heading?!?!?!
Elizabeth Atkinson, a project leader, however, denied that this week's seminar was connected to the No Outsiders work in classrooms. "The seminar is part of a long-standing academic debate and has nothing to do with schools," she said. "It has no connection with sex education."
It just hit me that the group that is "studying" the "sexual pleasures" of children, and doing "work in the classroom" is called "No Outsiders". No Outsiders, as in, "we don't want YOU CLOSE-MINDED PARENTS involved in our study of children... oh... oh hoh!" REMEMBER PARENTS: Being closed minded is a GOOD THING!!
The seminar document admits that the researchers are responding to "accusations of the corruption of innocent children" [...]
NO!!!!! Having sex with children in a classroom setting ISN'T CORRUPTING CHILDREN!!! NO!!!!!
[...] that has "led team members to make repeated claims that this project is not about sex or desire - and that it is therefore not about bodies.
No, it's just about teaching kids the pleasure of gay sex, which, I might add, by pure definition MEANS that it IS about their bodies, since their bodies are what experiance the pleasure.
"Yet, at a very significant level," they said, "that is exactly what it is about and to deny this may have significant negative implications for children and young people."
Oh, good, there's someone there with a FREAKING QUARTER OF A BRAIN!!!
Questions for discussion outlined in the seminar schedule, include: "How might we create primary classrooms where gender-queer bodies and queer sexualities (for children and teachers) are affirmed and celebrated?"; [...]
Um.... we don't. Because if we did, that would detract from, say, ACTUAL LEARNING! Oh, wait, we don't care about that...
[...]"What would it take to teach queerly? How would teachers' and children's bodies be implicated in this? What sorts of subversions and reversals might it entail?" [...]
Um... is the word "Impacted" a good word to use in the context of "teachers' and children's bodies" and "teaching queerly"? And by God, what the hell is "Teach Queerly" supposed to mean?!
[...] and, "At what cost do we deny children's and teachers' sexuality? What do we lose if desire and pleasure are banned from the classroom?"
WHAT WE LOSE IS YOUR FREAKING SOCIALIST CONCEPT OF SEXUALIZING CHILDREN!!!! THAT'S WHAT WE LOSE!!! These people are going to give me a heart attack!
LISTEN, You Queer Socialists, A) children are NOT sexual beings! They do not live around sex and they do not care about sex, as opposed to YOU SCUMBAGS!! In fact, most of THE WORLD does not LIVE around SEX. You Are The EXCEPTION!!, And B) We have been "denying" people's sexuality in the classroom for about TWO HUNDRED YEARS now, and no one's complained until YOU want to go have SEX in the FREAKING CLASSROOM!!!
Simon Calvert of the Christian Institute, however, has responded to the seminar, saying, "When an adult who is working in a primary school suggests that children should explore their sexuality, that should result in a complaint to the police."
Oh my God, a SANE INDIVIDUAL!!! THANK YOU!!!
The project's supporters include the National Union of Teachers, the General Teaching Council for England, Stonewall, the homosexualist political lobby and "Schools Out", a homosexualist promotion project for schools.
And all of these groups should be JAILED for considering this..... thing in the classroom. FIVE YEAR OLDS!!! They want to do this to five year olds!
Oh I am definatly sleeping well tonight after this rampage...
C:\>
End Transcript.
Jan 25, 2009
Line By Line: Presidental Address (Jan 24, 2009)
Please enter the URL of the news article you will be berating today.
>http://www.whitehouse.gov/president-obama-delivers-your-weekly-address/
Now Loading Article...
Title: 01/24/09: President Obama's Weekly Address
Author: President Barack Obama
News Source: whitehouse on YouTube
Release Date: Saturday, January 24, 2009 EST
Area: Washington, DC
Begin Article:
We begin this year and this Administration in the midst of an unprecedented crisis that calls for unprecedented action. Just this week, we saw more people file for unemployment than at any time in the last twenty-six years, and experts agree that if nothing is done, the unemployment rate could reach double digits.
And since Obama doesn't want to be blamed for this, as it is now under his watch, we need to do something right now.
Our economy could fall $1 trillion short of its full capacity, which translates into more than $12,000 in lost income for a family of four. And we could lose a generation of potential, as more young Americans are forced to forgo college dreams or the chance to train for the jobs of the future.
Hm.... I wonder where he gets his figures from. Seriously, what is the economy's "full capacity"?
In short, if we do not act boldly and swiftly, a bad situation could become dramatically worse.
And, in short, if Obama acts quickly, a bad situation will become dramatically worse, as I'm sure he will outline right now:
That is why I have proposed an American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan to immediately jumpstart job creation as well as long-term economic growth. I am pleased to say that both parties in Congress are already hard at work on this plan, and I hope to sign it into law in less than a month.
Hm... how does the government create jobs again? How do we jumpstart job creation, Obama?
It’s a plan that will save or create three to four million jobs over the next few years, and one that recognizes both the paradox and the promise of this moment - the fact that there are millions of Americans trying to find work even as, all around the country, there’s so much work to be done.
Oh, I thought the paradox of the moment was that Obama was planning on creating jobs out of thin air. Obama, please, you still haven't told us HOW you plan on creating/saving jobs. Could you please answer that?
That’s why this is not just a short-term program to boost employment. It’s one that will invest in our most important priorities like energy and education; health care and a new infrastructure that are necessary to keep us strong and competitive in the 21st century.
Okay okay okay...... HOW? Obama? Could you please... answer....?
Today I’d like to talk specifically about the progress we expect to make in each of these areas.
The progress that we espect to make but don't know how we expect to make it.
To accelerate the creation of a clean energy economy, we will double our capacity to generate alternative sources of energy like wind, solar, and biofuels over the next three years.
Oh boy. Here comes the new GREEN economy. Obama, I hate to break it to you, but that economy is going to fail. A green economy is a forced economy, and a forced economy is a failed economy because it cannot do what it wants to do when it wants to do it.
And, actually, does this mean that these are the new jobs?!
We’ll begin to build a new electricity grid that lay down more than 3,000 miles of transmission lines to convey this new energy from coast to coast. We’ll save taxpayers $2 billion a year by making 75% of federal buildings more energy efficient, and save the average working family $350 on their energy bills by weatherizing 2.5 million homes.
Woah woah woah, there. WE will weatherize 2.5 million homes. I thought for a moment that Obama said that we, as in the government, is going to weatherize 2.5 million homes. Where's those Right to Privacy people now?
To lower health care cost, cut medical errors, and improve care, we’ll computerize the nation’s health record in five years, saving billions of dollars in health care costs and countless lives.
Well, besides cost of paper and maybe transfer of records costs, how exactly does that cut billions in healthcare? Especially since computer glitches and hard drive failures are, well, bad for data. And actually, aside that, I thought that medical records were already being digitized, by the private sector (ie, not by the government).
And we’ll protect health insurance for more than 8 million Americans who are in danger of losing their coverage during this economic downturn.
Subsidized heatlhcare for everyone!
To ensure our children can compete and succeed in this new economy, we’ll renovate and modernize 10,000 schools, building state-of-the-art classrooms, libraries, and labs to improve learning for over five million students.
Um... no. Obama, that will improve the learning experiance not the actual learning. In order to imporve the actual learning, teachers are going to have to be better trained to a) teach and b) deal with trouble makers. It might also help if the Teachers' Union vanishes as well, because if they do, then that means that schools can fire bade teachers and raise the paygrade of good teachers. That is what will help education.
We’ll invest more in Pell Grants to make college affordable for seven million more students, provide a $2,500 college tax credit to four million students, and triple the number of fellowships in science to help spur the next generation of innovation.
And most likely, these increases in money will go to the poor kids who 90% of the time will drop out of school for bad grades anyway. Maybe instead of subsidies, we should find a way to decrease tuition. Not that the government can do that...
Finally, we will rebuild and retrofit America to meet the demands of the 21st century. That means repairing and modernizing thousands of miles of America’s roadways and providing new mass transit options for millions of Americans.
Um... Obama.... the roads belong to the states, not you.
It means protecting America by securing 90 major ports and creating a better communications network for local law enforcement and public safety officials in the event of an emergency. And it means expanding broadband access to millions of Americans, so business can compete on a level-playing field, wherever they’re located.
Obama's gon'na get me some In'trenet! MR. PRESIDENT YOU DO NOT CONTROL THAT! And by God if he takes it over!! Socialism Alert!! Socialism Alert!! Obama is going to take over dishing out Broadband! Prepare for a telecom/internet company government takeover!!
I know that some are skeptical about the size and scale of this recovery plan.
Oh, good. At least he's not stupid enough to think that all of us are socilists like him.
I understand that skepticism, which is why this recovery plan must and will include unprecedented measures that will allow the American people to hold my Administration accountable for these results.
Good. I like that. Unfortunatly, no one in the media is gonna give a crap to report these measurements, so it will all be for naught anyhow. Though I'm still not going to hold my breath for when these "measures" will appear.
We won’t just throw money at our problems - we’ll invest in what works.
Because if we were simply throwing money at the problem, then people might compare us to FDR, who simply through stuff at the wall to "see what sticks" (oh yes, FDR said that).
Instead of politicians doling out money behind a veil of secrecy, decisions about where we invest will be made public, and informed by independent experts whenever possible. We’ll launch an unprecedented effort to root out waste, inefficiency, and unnecessary spending in our government, and every American will be able to see how and where we spend taxpayer dollars by going to a new website called recovery.gov.
I can't wait to see Obama cut Government Jobs while saying that he's creating jobs. In fact, I think I'm going to have to wait - until Hell freezes over and the second thrid coming happens.
No one policy or program will solve the challenges we face right now, nor will this crisis recede in a short period of time.
This crisis may not go away for... uh... ten years! I'm going to have to work on this for ten years, ladies and gentlemen. Reelect me, 2016!
But if we act now and act boldly; if we start rewarding hard work and responsibility once more; if we act as citizens and not partisans and begin again the work of remaking America, then I have faith that we will emerge from this trying time even stronger and more prosperous than we were before.
Did you see it?! Did you see it?!?! "if we start rewarding hard work and responsibility once more"... Obama just admitted that we aren't rewarding hard work anymore. He just admitted that responsibility and hard work are NOT rewarded anymore. He just admitted that we are a socialist state because we reward everyone equally no matter how hard they try! Oh yes, people. We're there already, and Obama himself just confirmed it.
Thanks for listening.
No, thank you for the wonderful affirmation of socialism...
Thank you for choosing Line-By-Line! Good Bye!C:\>
End Transcript.
Day 82 - Your Weekly Presidental Address
However, since Obama is now in office, he has changed his channel on YouTube. Now he is broadcasting from the Official Channel of the White House, which would seem like an act of real Hubris had he done this before his Inauguration, but given that he started the whitehouse channel after his Inauguration, it's not nearly as hubris-y. As per "White House copyright policy" (which may or may not be his policy), all these videos are in the public domain and, strangely for YouTube, can be downloaded with a link under the video. You can also watch these things "in HD", which is different from "watch in high quality", because "HD" expands the video window to fill the entire width of the page so you can see every blemish and lie in our president's face (giving you a "Damn! I could touch it!" sensation). I think I'll be having a Line-By-Line of his weekly addresses shortly, especially if he decides to say anything other than "these things need to be changed".
The other thing that I want to address right now is the Presidential BlackBerry. Oh yes, Obama got to keep the BlackBerry, which apparently he faught tooth and nail to keep [Associated Press]. According to AP, this is his habit that he just couldn't drop (like his smoking habit, but that got pretty much dropped). Obama, I must say that this will probably be one of the worst descisions you have made, yet. I know that sentence was all over the place with tenses, but hear me out:
Obama's off at Camp David for some reason. Someone, maybe a terrorist who decided to infiltrate BlackBerry corp, decides to hack into his phone and triangulate his location (those things have GPS's too you know). The threat that was heading for Washington now reroutes to Camp David.Mr. President, please, for your own safety, get rid of it. I know you can't live without it, but surely the CIA or someone there can come up with a special security device that applies all the Presidential Records Act crap and is not as vulnerable because it isn't a commercial device that anyone can buy to test-hack into before hacking yours. Mr. President, I hate you, but for the love of the country and for your own personal safety, replace the phone.
End Log.
PS, I went through and changed all the blog posts so that I don't have to limit my HTML layout creativity by Blogger's "Convert Line Breaks" setting. So everything should remain the same, but if suddenly all you people who RSS this blog have all of their posts set suddenly to "Unread", that's why. Now I just have to remember to put the double <br>'s into my posts. :)