The Individual

Creative Capitalism

2011-12-02T18:45:00.007-06:00

Bill Gates presents his ideas on creative capitalism (follow link with title). Large companies with a diverse and extensive repertoire of resources can look to reach out to the poorest people across the world. Breakthroughs in banking, medicine, energy and nutrition developed by these companies can help to reduce impoverishment faster than government agencies. By having a ranking systems for individual companies detailing their level of philanthropy, young innovative thinkers that seek change will be drawn to these organizations, resulting in productive advances that can be utilized by those countries limited in resources. As the level of awareness for these companies rises, consumer support will also increase, thereby bringing the living status to an advanced level never seen before.

Seems Plausible? I dig the idealism as well. Not too sure I understand the philanthropic ranking system? Would assume people are going to be drawn to cheapest cost over the philanthropic ideals of some large corporation any given coupon day of the week.

The Better System

2011-12-01T16:31:00.005-06:00

Is the free market system always the better option or are we being stubborn and blind? Should we look to the policies of the Chinese to better perfect our economy? former CEO of Intel thinks so. Only question i pose to author of opinion and Intel CEO is whether we really live in a free market society?

Roosevelt Conservative

2011-12-01T16:01:00.005-06:00

Looks like Newt has much to answer for. Though he denounces Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in public debates, former Congress leader has deeper ties to the government-sponsored company than one initially would perceive. In response to his support, he states he is more of a Teddy Roosevelt and Alexander Hamilton conservative. Two men that were keen on state-run organizations and centralized executive power.

Sovereignty...Does It Exist?

2011-11-30T17:33:00.017-06:00

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is abysmal. Here is a reflection of how collective international organizations may serve to do more harm than good. Recent bombings by NATO forces on Pakistani soldiers for two hours (follow link with title) is a clear reflection of this boundless and boundary-less force. At the discretion of a majority, NATO was capable of taking up arms and violating sovereign space as they please...killing innocent citizens in the meantime. Neglect of these boundaries is comparable to property right violations and should be denounced by the US and other free nations. Further, the US should lead the way toward the disenfranchisement of this increasingly dangerous organization.

The problem with large multinational political organizations like NATO is the inability to achieve absolute collective goals. When the issue at hand is taking lives, the issue is ALWAYS absolute. With many variables existing at the individual to individual level, how is this expected to work when a collective group of countries must all come together and work toward the same goal? If collectivism is difficult to handle at the basal level, then handling it at a larger level would become extremely difficult. What additional benefit does NATO offer that each country cannot handle on its own? Perhaps its the small voice, calling out for collective retaliation if they are invaded. In this case, are the more powerful countries like the US not likely to respond to unjustified invasion? The ultimate decision then would come down to self-interest and national security on a country by country basis. If countries acted out according to their own country's interest then they are less likely to be drawn into a conflict under a nationless organization that is supposedly serving everybody's interest and their resources can be used for more viable causes.

Back to the Horse and Carriage

2011-11-23T02:11:00.008-06:00

Alex Epstein of Industrial Progress discussing Energy with anti-nuclear and anti-carbon fuel protestor. Which is it: save the planet, save the animals or advance mankind?

2011-10-14T14:21:00.000-05:00

The Lord's Resistance Army is atrocious. So too are thousands of other events around the world...What possible benefit does the US gain from helping this country? What possible benefit does it gain from not helping? A country extended as much as it is does not need to squander troops for "training missions". Even if there is minimal risk to our troops, there is a risk nonetheless...Link

A True Hero

2011-10-06T01:49:00.000-05:00

In this day in age where we glorify reality tv stars and corrupt pop-stars, may we remember the individuals that truly drive the progress of humanity.

2011-10-05T16:37:00.001-05:00

Construction costs aren't going down anytime soon...CA goes further in the toilet.

Brown Sides Approves PLAs - Sides with Unions

Middle East: How Did It Spread So Fast?

2011-03-25T10:43:00.007-05:00

Turn on the t.v. and you are likely to find another anti-government uprising in the Middle East. I am left to wonder: how did this happen so fast over such a wide area? Did the government implement just one last law that reduced its citizens rights and was the straw that broke the camel's back. Or is there something else at play? It wouldn't be do far off to consider a secret intelligence cyberspace endeavor to help promote this change. Just think. People are more likely to get involved if they know others are doing. Humans are social animals, the lone ranger is few and far between these days. All it takes is a pseudo group to implement a detailed list of grievances against his or her government. This is spread consistently, perhaps over years, to the local population. In time, 'natural' citizens take on to the idea and begin to develop the animosities of the government in their own mind and the minds of their friends and children. This escalates, and the movement begins.

What News from the Left?

2011-03-22T09:32:00.006-05:00

Amidst the US-backed military intervention in Libya, I find it peculiar that we hear no opposition from the left. Where are all the anti-war protesters? It appears that as we carry forth with another US military escapade, the inconsistent anti-war liberals have turned their back to their binding doctrine of a peaceful and loving world. And for what? As we become bogged down in another futile war, we are left wondering where the line will be drawn. How long can the United States extend its resources? What inherent importance do we obtain with a rebel takeover of Libya? Even after a successful coup of Gadahfi we have not the slightest clue as to where the country's leadership lies. Something tells me that a rebel opposition that seeks to continue with a theocratic government based on Islam is not that 'Progressive'. Any government that does not seek to separate church and state is set to fail. Under no circumstances can a government based on law intertwine with a religious one, for the latter will come to dominate the former, and religious Imams will dictate the terms on what should and shouldn't be law. Are we to become involved as the internal battle ensues among different religious sects? Where this leaves us in terms of stability, I am still not certain? But I do not want to take the risk. Too many variables and if we become involved now, we are certain to stay involved for time to come.

To all Americans I ask: "Is it worth it?" To all those radical left anti-war protestors: "Be consistent!"

Doctors of the Round Table

2010-10-27T00:33:00.006-05:00

Wall Street Journal reports that the Relative Value Scale Update Committee (RUC), composed of 29 doctor's, make key decisions on how to spend $500 billion taxpayer dollars devoted to Medicare. While this panel has better representatives than a round table of politicians, there is a big problem with a small group that decides on how to spend money that does not belong to them. The
fault does not rest with doctors. This ismerely an example of how an overextended bureaucracy is continually set to destroy all remnants of a quality medical system. Work that has been in works for half a century, since the establishment of "government medicine" of Medicare.

In principle, the idea of an expert decision appears logical. But experts are not omnipotent. There are multiple factors that come to play that go into the price and would be better handled if the market dictates these terms. The problem is not that a panel exists, it is necessary with government adulterated medicine, it is that there should have never been the option for a panel to exist. It simply over complicates a system that was once determined by a physician - patient agreement. For instance, there was a time when a patient settled his agreement with a doctor for routine check-ups at a set cost determined by the physician. Now, in its place is series of administrative procedures that even stumps the people that have written it into law. Nobody has a clear depiction on what prices dominate what because there is no clearly defined market price for any given procedure. We are working out of chaos and I am getting confused as I write this blog....

Let me make it very simple. Doctor's are professionals who can set their prices at a competitive level that the market dictates. If they do not wish to expend the energy to set their own prices than they can hire a market specialist, just as a sports agent, who works for his physician to obtain the most competitive prices. Standard pricing set by a group of panelists proves to be just as inefficient as a small group of athletes that set the salary for every given position. Imagine that! All the old timers like Michael Jordan, Jerry West, Isaiah Thomas, Kareem Abdul-Jabaar setting standards on the amount of money a individual sports star is to make.

Seems a bit ridiculous to me.

Go Away Al

2010-10-06T14:20:00.002-05:00


Reuters

Power hungry and corrupt politicians like Al Gore are destroying the economy by coercing corporations to sign onto eco-friendly plans to help stave off "Climate Change." As the Chinese are on the rise and the US market remains sluggish, we need political officials to step aside and let businesses work first to improve their company. By reducing expenditures to government-led programs, corporations can expand in different ways that actually create jobs. As a surfeit of wealth accumulates, businesseswill begin to make a push toward eco-friendly donations. Donations, not creating market products that are non-competitive and only serve the means to disrupting any growth in the economy.

The Rules of Violation

2010-10-05T13:57:00.000-05:00

A culture, so naive to the concept of individual rights, sets down the rules of beating woman. Regardless if this is a traditional attitude proscribed by Allah himself, this corrupt violation is exemplary of why the West and the Middle East will never coincide together.

Which Type of Pie Do you Prefer?

2010-09-13T23:30:00.003-05:00

Note the rhetoric of the House Democrats. As Republicans call for a tax cut across the board, Democrats assure us that a cut for the wealthy will merely stifle the tax cut for the lower and middle classes. This argument can be refuted by using the pie analogy. Leftists see all of the money from this country as a static pie, with the predominate portion reserved for the wealthy. Few gain, the rest lose...solution: re-distribution. Free-enterprise thinking individuals see the pie as ever-expanding, while the percentages remain the same as the static pie, an increased amount for the wealthy coincides with a larger amount for the middle and lower classes. Thereby, all people gain. Due to the never-before-seen production of wealth at the turn of the century, I have my doubts that wealth is merely stagnant.
link to WSJ article

Endowed by Their Creator

2010-09-11T15:19:00.004-05:00

There is a common misconception that the famous lines of Jefferson's Declaration of Independence,"...endowed by their creator..." supposedly means that US citizens are a nation "under God." While people have the freedom to choose their creator, the intent of the author was not to direct this notion of a theocratic society subjecting themselves to Christian ideologies. Rather, the man who states "Question with boldness even the existence of God," intent is to confirm that every citizen has the right to his own individual liberty not subjected to any upper authority other than himself. If he chooses his upper authority to be a God, the freedom is his, yet, he should be mindful not to dub the opinion of his nature-worshipping brother inferior.

Drenched in Wine

2010-08-06T21:39:00.004-05:00

As I focus in on my own wine glass on this humid Friday evening. I am reminded of a wine cellar. What is it that makes a wine cellar, of all things, so intriguing? The assortment of wine is impressive. Not to mention, it would be nice to commence with friends over a few of these bottles discussing the relevant issues the world has conjured up. However, what is most intriguing to me is the notion of accumulation. Somebody, through the fruits of their labor had to accumulate and stock their own supply that would be seemingly impossible within a state that lived by means of the bare minimum. These individuals had to have an excess. It would seem next to impossible for an individual to have this massive display if they were fixed upon the notion that there would be other necessities to fixate upon. This accumulation sets forth a sense of security that assures him or her that the basics have been taken care of and wine, of all things, can become an accessory that could be enjoyed after a longs days work. What a satisfying thought. The notion that one can walk down into their own basement and select from a variety of wines that they can choose from at their own convenience. And yet, many would begin to think that this assortment is too much excess and it should be well distributed to others so that many can have at least a couple sips day in and out. Have these collectivist individuals pondered upon conserving their own fruits, I ask? Have they any notion that what sets aside this particular individual wine stocker that he or she has taken it upon themselves to not only provide for themselves but accumulated enough to enjoy what their trade has given them. The saver does not ask for much but the freedom to stock as he or she pleases. Yet, those that have not saved demand much from this wine stocker as if it was his duty to supply that which he or she has worked for. There is no reciprocity in these actions. It comes to the very notion that those that supply are demanded of to supply for others, while those that do not supply have no demands that are implemented upon themselves. Who, I ask, is the truly selfish person? Yet I digress, perhaps they are merely selfless, with no belief that they are capable of such things.

Civics Failure

2010-04-09T09:01:00.001-05:00

College students received failing grades on basic civics tests, even from prestigious universities across the United States. Apparently clear is the success of liberal professors to misinterpret history to enable their elected leaders to pertinently destroy the individual liberty.
link to article

Entitlement vs. Gratitude

2010-04-06T07:55:00.002-05:00

Thomas Sowell on Welfare (see Milton Friedman in the room?)

The following article happens to be a nice follow-up to the video and food for thought in both America and one's personal life.

Roger Scruton, writing in the April issue of the American Spectator:

The proper response to a gift, even a gift of charity, is gratitude. People who feel gratitude also wish to express it. The easiest way is to give in one’s turn. By giving you pass on and amplify the goodwill that you received. Thus it is that, in America, where the tradition of giving is very much alive, and the state has not yet extinguished the desire or need for it, people give to their old school, to their university, to the hospital that cured them, to the local rescue service that saved them, and to the veterans who fought for them. They give without seeking or expecting recognition, but simply because gratitude is expressed through giving.

However, the state is taking over many of the functions that were previously performed by charities—not least education, health care, and the relief of poverty. And the state deals on impersonal and equal terms with its citizens. It has no favorites, and it is governed by the rules—anything else is received by the citizens as an injustice. Hence charity is replaced by justice as the ruling principle upon which social benefits are distributed. But while charity deals in gifts, justice deals in rights. And when your receive what is yours by right you don’t feel grateful. Hence people who receive their education and health care from the state are less inclined to give to schools and hospitals in their turn—something that is borne out vividly by the figures concerning charitable giving. The spirit of gratitude retreats from social experience, and in countries like France and Germany, where civil society is penetrated at every level by the state, people give little or nothing to charity, and regard gifts with suspicion, as attempts to privatize what should be a matter of public and impartial concern.

When gifts are replaced by rights, so is gratitude replaced by claims. And claims breed resentment. Since your queuing on equal terms with the competition, you will begin to think of the special conditions that entitle you to a greater, speedier, or a more effective share. You will be always one step from the official complaint, the court action, the press interview, and the snarling reproach against Them, the ones who owed you this right and also withheld it. That is the way European society is going, and American society may one day follow it.

Disconnection, Income Tax and the Booming 20s

2010-04-05T07:12:00.023-05:00

Disconnected from reality?

People may be astonished at this notion, but it took 124 years of American history for the second-handers in politics and society to get their hands, permanently, on income tax. The ratification of the 16th Amendment constituted the first permanent federal income tax in American history. Just to think that prior to 1913, only 2% of the US population owed federal taxes. From 1914 to 1920 the federal revenue coming from income taxes rose from about 10% to 70%, largely to fund the US efforts in WWI. After this uncharacteristic influx of taxes and the economic recession of 1920-21, the US politicians had a tough time maintaining these high income tax rates. At this time, treasury secretary Andrew Mellon, a Pittsburgh entrepreneur, proposed a principle of supply-side economics to dramatically reduce the tax rates to levels of the pre-WWI era. He argued that high surtax rates led to a misallocation of capital, reduced tax collections, and hindered productive economic activity. By reducing taxes on wealthy individuals, who during periods of high tax-rates took extensive steps to avoid federal income taxes (i.e. through tax-exempt securities), Mellon's policy had tremendous impact by diverting capital from tax-exempt practices to investment within the private industry. This promoted extensive growth in the economy and significantly increased the overall average of real wages. Odd enough, and something for the "spread the wealth" leftist ideology to think about, the increase in money supply for all individuals meant the tax burden shifted from the lower-income group toward the upper-income group. Also, the government still received the same amount of money as they did during the significant tax increase years, because of the overwhelming wealth produced in the booming economy.

At the first sign of a troubled economy, a recession no different than seen in 1920-21, Hoover and his congressional supporters implemented a policy to drastically increase the tax burden. By 1935 the tax rate, under FDR, rose to 79% on the upper income individuals and the economy still proved to stagnate. It was not until the significant drop in the tax rate on upper-income families, post WWII, that the US began seeing the type of economy that promotes wealth and productivity.

Are we to wait this long? The reinstatement of the high tax rate on the upper echelon will only serve to cripple the economy and in effect increase the effective tax burden on the lower-income families. While it would seem that the hike in the percentage of tax increases would serve to induce "equality" so-to-speak, it will only cause a decline in real wages and effectively limit the productive expansion of industry.

[Main Ideas from the Article "Federal Personal Income Tax Policy in the 1920s" Author(s): Gene Smiley and Richard H. Keehn; Source: The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 5, 1995]

The Flaw of Democracies

2010-04-04T07:33:00.011-05:00

Summary of Important Passages of the Afghan Constitution: (Note: Articles 22, 30, 34, and 40 weakly uphold the only values of American individualistic ideology. However, these principles become meaningless with the implementation of the first 3 articles):

This Constitution accepted on the merit of democracy:

Article 1: Afghan constitution defines the regime as an Islamic Republic

Article 2: Islam is enshrined as the state religion

Article 3: The supreme source of law: “In Afghanistan, no law can be contrary to the beliefs and provisions of the sacred religion of Islam”

Article 20: The national anthem is required by law to mention Allahu Akbar –meaning “God is greatest”

Articles 22, 30, 40: Suggestions that proclaim support to the idea of rights and legal equality before the law.

Article 34: Promise that “freedom of expression is inviolable”

Outcome:

A.) -Schools “daring to allow girls to attend class” have been bombarded with rocket fire.

B.) -Five teachers were murdered and dozens of schools shut down because of the suspected teaching of women.

C.) -2005 Ali Mohaqiq Nasab, editor of Women’s Rights, convicted of blasphemy.

a. Prosecutor demanded that Nasab receive the death penalty.

b. Editor spared and sentenced to jail for two years.

D.) -2006: Afghan convert to Christianity, Abdul Rahman, denounced as an apostate (a person who forsakes his religion).

a. Threatened with execution. Again, his life spared, and he was excommunicated to Europe.

E.) -2008: Persecution of Parwiz Kambakhsh (24 year old Afghan student), who was accused of circulating an article with regard to the rights of women in Islam and for starting un-Islamic discussions in class.

a. Council of clerics decreed capital punishment

b. Afghanistan’s upper house of parliament endorsed the sentence.

c. Crowds took to street to support the sentence, with one cleric declaring “He should be punished so that others learn from him.”

d. It was from heavy pressure from the West that the sentence was reduced on appeal-to twenty years in prison.

F.) -Hamid Karzai, the allegedly pro-freedom, pro-Western president of Afghanistan, downplayed the Danish cartoons of Muhammad, proclaiming them to be “an insult to more than a billion Muslims.” (So much for the 34th Article). [Details from Winning the Unwinnable War by Elan Journo.]

This democratic establishment is to procure a safer environment for America? Let us be reminded that Socrates was sacrificed in the name of a democracy, in civilized Athens, because he raised objections against the will of the majority. A democracy subjects an individual's rights to the discretion of the majority. To me, doesn't appear like the correct form of government to establish in a country that has based its public philosophy on submission of the individual to authority for the last 1000 years.

Continued Diplomacy in the Face of Terror

2010-04-03T14:33:00.013-05:00

This week, Iran obtained critical valves and vacuum gauges, both specialized hardware for enriching uranium. Meanwhile, United States authorities work toward diplomacy and powerless sanctions against Iran. This action issynonymous with European concessions with Hitler in the 1930s. The result: World War II.

Where is the Underground Railroad for Doctors?

2010-04-02T07:00:00.005-05:00

Dr. Cassell deserves high praise as he upholds his first amendment right by placing a slogan: "If you voted for Obama, seek urologic care elsewhere" on the window of his office doorway. While Dr. Cassell clearly noted that he still would treat all customers, he finds, as he should, that he still deserves the right to formulate his own opinion and deter patients that idolize a philosophy that subjects his profession to the whims of Washington. As expected, outrage poured in from the district representative, Alan Grayson-D, as he commented: “I think it’s disgusting...I know that most people go into health care because they want to help sick people. They don’t have some political agenda. I think it’s outrageous that someone would try to press his political agenda.”He added, “I think the sore losers are out in force.”
Translation: "All doctors need to shut-up and get to work...I will formulate your opinion for you!"

I beg to differ Mr. Grayson, but doctors are not puppets to society. They offer a trade. Their trade is to fix people. Are they to do this without compensation? Are they to not even express a complaint in the matter? Let me ask Mr. Grayson, "Is a mechanic to fix a car for every person that comes to him because he went into the profession to fix cars? Is this same mechanic to not raise any objection if politicians demand that all people need functional cars, even if they can't afford it?" The answer is absolutely not. Yet, the scum politicians like Mr. Grayson demand doctors to work on every patient that comes to them. They do not think that doctors offer a trade, but are mere servants to public demand. What's even worse, doctors are not even able to raise any complaints. Under their rationale, Washington will take care of it.

Good for you Dr. Cassell. I hope more doctors follow suit.

Russians Will Lose as they Continue to Seek Compromise

2010-04-01T08:18:00.003-05:00

Attack number two hit Russia on Wednesday as the Chechnya Islamic terrorists killed a dozen people in southern Russia. At this moment Russian leaders should be emboldened by their enemy and declare a state of war against Islamic Totalitarianism. The Chechen civilians, who seek to create an "Islamic state spanning all the Muslim republics of Russia's north Caucasus", are emboldened as Russian officials take a passive approach toward the ruthless attacks against its countrymen. Russian officials concede that "widespread poverty, corruption and human rights abuses by security forces in the region create a rich soil for extremists" (WSJ-April 1, 2010). By minimizing the attacks through excuses, Russia continues to legitimize these acts of war. Even worse, Russian leaders turn the blame against themselves, as if they are deserving of these attacks because they failed in their "humane" acts. Do they not realize that this religious movement seeks to encompass the world with an ideology of submission to Allah...which is ultimately the selfless submission of ones mind to authority. While Russia is free to suffer its own fate, let us ensure that the United States does not respond in a similar fashion. Let us be reminded that Islamic states as a whole seek to spread their selfless ideology and will not stop until a.) they are convinced their goal is impossible to attain or b.) they succeed.

Just War Theory

2010-04-01T00:00:00.002-05:00

Obama continues the neoconservative "Just War Theory" that places citizens of foreign counties at a higher moral standing than our troops. The message holds that America is in the Middle East not for its own own self-interest to eliminate Islamic Totalitarianism, but to help others in some "higher" good that reflects our charity to enable them to achieve democracy. By establishing the mob-rule system that is known as democracy we enable our enemy to establish whichever government they wish, even if it is anti-American. The Just War Theory doctrine is the predominate policy guiding our leaders and military action ever since World War II, and has only weakened America, not strengthened it. This doctrine has given our weak enemy hope of victory by enabling them to carrying out a long, extended war. It is a non-win scenario as US replaces complete victory with appeasement. It places citizens of other countries higher than our own troops. The death of our soldier is acceptable, whereas the death of a citizen of a foreign nation is unacceptable. This selfless policy is reflected in the Speech Obama delivered to our troops this past 24 hours, "You are bringing hope and opportunity to people who know a lot of pain and suffering." The message to our troops should be of one basis only, to protect American lives. That is, the lives of themselves. It should then be followed that we must give them hell, so they may never even think twice about attacking a free-nation again.

List of Few Reasons for Rise in Cost

2010-03-31T21:01:00.004-05:00

We hear a lot about poor health care coverage and rising costs of medical insurance and how the government should get involved with a public option. Yet, before answering these questions, people need to ask themselves: why is there a rise in cost?

Answer: 3rd party payments to physicians or hospitals and the poor spending habits when handling another's money. This accounts for approximatetly 60% in the rise of healthcare costs---> 1/3 excessive cost for tax exemption and 1/4 excessive cost for Medicare and Medicaid.

Why the dependence on third party systems for payments?

1. Tax Exemption to Companies that Provide Health Insurance:

History -

a. Companies competing to acquire labor during World War II offered medical care as fringe benefit.

b. Congress passes legislation for employee provided health insurance to be tax exempt.

How Does this Account for Rise in Cost?

a. Leads employees to rely on their employer, rather than themselves.

b. Leads employees to take a larger fraction of their total remuneration (salary) in form of medical care.

Solution:

a. If tax exemption were removed, employees could bargain with their employees for higher take-home pay.

b. This would enable employee to pay medical care directly-->allows government to reduce tax rate on income while raising the same total revenue.

2. Enactment of Medicare and Medicaid

History -

a. Est. ca. 1965 as direct subsidy for medical care for low income and elderly population.

How Does this Account for Rise in Cost?

a. The lower the price, the greater the quantity demanded; at zero price, the quantity demanded becomes infinite. Some method of rationing must be substituted for price, which invariably means administrative rationing.

Read more from Milton Friedman--HOOVER DIGEST-MILTON FRIEDMAN ON HEALTHCARE

Amending Amendments

2010-03-25T21:15:00.000-05:00

As the Health Reform Bill goes back to the house, there are some things to consider. The bill will pass and universal coverage will, unfortunately, become law. Republican attempts to dismantle the bill through amendments will merely prolong the inevitable. These amendments will serve there purpose, however, by exploiting the intricate caveats intertwined with this bill and reveal the parochial attitude of all Democrats that see through to its passage.

Among the amendments rejected by the democrats and are to remembered: Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) to prevent convicted child molesters and rapists from getting reimbursed by the government for drugs to treat erectile dysfunction(REJECTED); an amendment from Sen. George LeMieux (R-Fla.) to require all members of Congress to enroll in Medicaid(REJECTED); a measure from Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) to certify that no households earning less than $250,000 will see increased taxes as a result of health care reform(REJECTED); and an amendment by Sen. Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.) to certify that Americans will not have to change their health insurance as a result of the bill if they do not want to(REJECTED).

We won't forget.

Winning the War Means Demoralizing the Enemy

2010-03-24T16:35:00.013-05:00

OPERATION PAF: PROTECT AMERICAN FREEDOM

These defamatory Muhammad pictures should be printed and/or painted on every tank, bomb, gun, and arm of American soldiers in the Middle East. Victory against terrorism lies with the implementation of supreme force against the Islamic Totalitarian regimes, especially Iran and Saudi Arabia. They exact war through uncertain force and ambiguous fear. Let us retaliate with brute force and definite fear. Let them know that freedom is more important than their worthless messenger Muhammad. Success rests alone through the demoralization of our enemy. Let them think...check that...Convince them that freedom will not cower nor submit to any god any day.

As for Those Doctors...

2010-03-24T09:12:00.005-05:00

'Do you know what it takes to perform a brain operation? Do you know the kind of skill it demands, and the years of passionate, merciless, excruciating devotion that go to acquire that skill? That was what I would not place at the disposal of men whose sole qualification to rule me was their capacity to spout the fraudulent generalities that got them elected to the privilege of enforcing their wishes at the point of a gun. I would not let them dictate the purpose for which my years of study had been spent, or the conditions of my work, or my

choice of patients, or the amount of my reward. I observed that in all the discussions that preceded the enslavement of medicine, men discussed everything--except the desires of the doctors. Men considered only the "welfare" of the patients, with no thought for those who were to provide it. That a doctor should have any right, desire or choice in the matter, was regarded as irrelevant selfishness; his is not to choose, they said, only "to serve." . . . I have often wondered at the smugness with which people assert their right to enslave me, to control my work, to force my will, to violate my conscience, to stifle my mind--yet what is it that they expect to depend on, when they lie on an operating table under my hands?' Their moral code has taught them to believe that it is safe to rely on the virtue of their victims. Well, that is the virtue I have withdrawn. Let them discover the kind of doctors that their system will now produce. Let them discover, in the operating rooms and hospital wards, that it is not safe to place their lives in the hands of a man they have throttled. It is not safe, if he is the sort of man who resents it—and still less safe, if he is the sort who doesn’t.”

-- Ayn Rand, from Atlas Shrugged, published in 1957

LET THE REVOLUTION BEGIN

2010-03-22T00:25:00.004-05:00

I was watching CSPAN today and noticed that many of the callers in support of this bill were unemployed individuals that could not afford insurance. To me, it seems the logical step would be to attempt to get the economy rolling again to assure more people can earn an income and pay for their own health insurance. The focus should be on reducing taxes on companies, to enable them to hire more people. Yet, this is the complete opposite of what is proposed with this bill's passage. The funding of this bill includes a substantial tax increase on insurance, medical device, and drug companies. Government easily drives the insurance companies out-of-business, eliminating the public option. An easily understandable ploy of you are a scum politician driven by power.However, the confusing thing to me is: why the tax on medical device and drug companies? These taxes will only serve to cripple the "improvement" of healthcare through the advancement of technology. According to this logic, they seek to cripple medical advancement to assure everyone has crappy care. Absolutely ABSURD! As Bill Hawkins, CEO of medical device company Medtronic, states in the WSJ that his "company[medtronic] could cut at least 1,000 jobs to absorb a new 2.9% excise tax on medical-device makers. Where is the justification in people losing their jobs to assure that others get health insurance? Many of these individuals are welfare recipients that receive the exploits of the hard-working man/woman. Therefore, the message that we must live for is to work hard to ensure people can continue to be lazy. That's what we have become: Lazy-Ass America!

What if Atlas Shrugged?

2010-03-03T16:07:00.000-06:00

Why is Atlas Shrugged still a top seller? The prescient nature of Ayn Rand's novel seems congruent with today's world of second handers. Stossel does well in his explanation.

Continual Rise and Fall of the 3rd-Party

2009-12-12T11:48:00.003-06:00

Recent trends indicate that independent parties stand a chance to win-out in upcoming elections. Imagine this, people begin to vote for politicians based on principle and not the "what will win" mentality. Just think of the scenarios. The Republican party may be strong proponents for limited government and fiscal responsibility, but they would be the first to abandon the separation of church and state by inter-mixing religion and politics. Whereas, the liberals may be fine spoken on free speech, but would be the first to advocate government interference in all aspects of society. A 3rd-party system offers the chance for people to abide by a consistent philosophy or at least cause the dominant parties to again switch their values on these apparently 'popular' trend. Sadly, the dominant party will win out and will quickly abandon these principles once they have taken a little sip of power.

The Worthless Prize

2009-11-20T00:15:00.000-06:00

When Alfred Nobel established the Nobel Prize in the 1901, he had one intention in mind: to reward excellence. It appears excellence has been replaced by mediocrity and even worse, popularity. If the most coveted prize the world has to offer is to be handed out like Halloween candy, it no longer deserves a noble name. It seems the "Ignoble" prize is more appropriate.

Racism Is Not Dissent

2009-11-07T12:44:00.000-06:00

'Racist!' The recent outcry from the left in response to public dissent. Perhaps they are a bit confused, so we should clarify.

Main Entry: rac·ism

1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

2 : racial prejudice or discrimination

Main Entry: dis·sent
–verb (used without object)

1.to differ in sentiment or opinion, esp. from the majority; withhold assent; disagree (often fol. by from): Two of the justices dissented from the majority decision.
2.to disagree with the methods, goals, etc., of a political party or government; take an opposing view.
3.to disagree with or reject the doctrines or authority of an established church.
–noun

4.difference of sentiment or opinion.
5. dissenting opinion.
6. disagreement with the philosophy, methods, goals, etc., of a political party or government.
7. separation from an established church, esp. the Church of England; nonconformity.

One considers given individuals to be subjects of an opinion. The other sets an opinion against the subjection of one individual to that of another, whether it be one, few, or many.

Colonists were considered subjects to the royal authority among the British loyalists. The loyalists were not quite racist, but the general opinion certainly reflects racist ideology.

A lack of dissent may lead to unrestrained power; the minority at the mercy of "well-intentioned" leaders. However, as history has taught us, good intentions differ from person-to-person.

Legal Protection: A National Crisis

2009-11-04T12:33:00.000-06:00

The following is my commentary regarding an excellent point brought about in an Opinion article from the Wall Street Journal:

The legal industry is in complete disarray. Individual citizens charged for a crime are not provided the 'best possible' legal protection, so 'change' must ensue within the entire field of law. The current problem is not merely one of bad lawyers, but includes all of the administrative factors and practices that are currently undertaken as common practice. The solution? A complete legal industry reform led exclusively by a doctor panel. Doctors fix problems associated with the human mind and body, and since it was the human mind that created jurisprudence and body that built the US court system, than doctors are the ideal choice to lead the overhaul of the legal system. The physician panel will convene once a month to discuss issues pertaining to the courtroom, litigation process, legal advertisement, legal records, and contingency fees. Next, they decide on those that will work quickest to better the current system and take action on their plan. Lawyers may know how to win an argument but their inability to understand the human mind, makes them secondary to doctors for a systematic legal change. Besides, lawyers have been provided sufficient time to fix the serious issue of 'poor protection' so it is time for them adhere to the direction of the physician panel, which will set the terms of legal practice and turn it around once and for all.

We have finally reached a turning point in this crisis, for New York City radiologist Dr. Rafal offers a viable solution. He is listed as a top candidate who will successfully lead the Doctor's Panel of Legal Overview(DPLO) to 'cure' the disorder that has enveloped the US legal system.

-MFE

Milton Friedman on Healthcare

2009-11-03T20:00:00.000-06:00

Are healthcare costs a problem? Depends on who you ask. Arguments from both sides of the spectrum argue a government "do more" approach countered by a "do-nothing" approach. Both are somewhat correct, but not to the degree that they would initially presume. Presently, there are two ways to limit the costs of healthcare: complete government control or no government control. The former does so at the cost of innovation and medical technology, with personal responsibility placed in the hands of our representatives. While the latter reduces costs while exponentially expanding innovation/technology yet places the ball in our court to be more responsible with our decisions.

Nobel Laureate Milton Friedman decribes...which do you prefer?

-MFE

Is that Cash, Check, or...Ask Your Parents?

2009-10-24T16:37:00.000-05:00

The ever increasing age of maturity will become extended with Uncle Sam's loyal soldiers implementing the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009 this week. One clause will seemingly affect all young adults under the age of 21 who must have a co-signer or provide detailed info indicating they can make the payments. So if your planning extravagent spending sprees on credit (perhaps on raging party gear?) that mom and dad may not know about, think again.

...boy is it becoming difficult to grow up these days!

-MFE

Who Says There is No Opposition to Global Warming?

2009-10-14T20:07:00.000-05:00

Back in 2003 Dr. Michael Mann, climatologist, used geological factors (i.e. tree rings) to make the argument to Congress that the decade of the 1990s was the hottest decade in a millenium and that 1998 as the hottest year in a millenium. Public opinion and support grew rampant from his findings. From 2003-2005 Dr. McIntyre and McKitrick published articles that countered the validity of Mann's original hypothesis. To resolve this issue Joe Barton, chairman of the US House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee and Ed Whitfield, the chairman of the subcommitte on Oversight and Investigation, requested that Dr. Wegman(Ph.D in mathematical statistics and fellow of the American Statistical Association and Senior Member of the IEEE) issue a report on the statistical validity of the journal(s) published by Michael Mann and the counter-argument(s) posed in the articles of McIntyre and McKitrick.

The Wegman comittee, which included David W. Scott (Rice University) and Yasmin H. Said (The Johns Hopkins University), concluded that Mann's argument was both "obscure and incomplete," while the counter-argument of McIntyre and McKitrick to be both "valid and compelling." The congressional paper concluded: "Our comittee believes that the assessment that the decade of the 1990s was the hottest decade in the millenium and that 1998 was the hottest year in a millenium cannot be supported by Mann's paper." Wegman noted that the Mann report made statistical mistakes that would be common to those that were not fine-tuned in statistical methodology. They found that the cryptic nature used within the Mann report leaves outsiders only guessing at the procedures in use. Furthermore, the Wegman committee held questions as to the validity of using tree rings as a way to interpret temperature signals due to the variability that may arise.

This argument does not dismiss man-made global warming as a whole. However, the ability of lawmakers to direct public policy off unsound evidence should be enough to send shivers down your spine.

-MFE

Michael Phelps vs. Synthetic Polymers

2009-10-14T15:50:00.000-05:00

It is hard to believe the swimming records set by Michael Phelps in the latest Beijing Olympics. What is even more amazing is the ability of man's mind to develop a new wetsuit that enables a seemingly no-name swimmer (Paul Biederman) to crush Michael Phelp's and his 200m freestyle record in the World Championships this summer. Outrage from Phelp's manager Bob Bowman and much of the swimming community led, unfortunately, to the banishment of the high-tech suits by FINA (the governing body of swimming) . However, is it justified to ostracize the "NASA" suits? I mean Michael Phelp's record setting olympics was an acculmination of his fitness, skill, and...yes... the latest synthetic fiber, polyurethane, light-weight, ultra-expensive, high-tech swimsuit pant legs developed by Speedo. Does this mean all of his records are considered null and void since he had a competitive advantage to those swimmer's in prior olympics? It appears the only way to satisfy this beleaguered public is for FINA to impose an injunction that reverts to the time of ancient Greece in which athletes had to compete in the nude. This would be absolutely ridiculous. Alternatively, FINA should embrace these new tech suits in full support in the fusion of technology and sport, man's mind together with athletic talent. This makes it not only the accomplishment of the individual athlete but also the prowess and innovation of the thinkers behind the scenes. Perhaps one day two men, innovator and athlete, will stand atop of the podium, leaning forward to receive their well-deserved gold medal.

-MFE

Sample Post - Global Warming Attack on Minnesota

2009-10-07T22:19:00.000-05:00

Minnesota is getting ridiculously hot. Somebody better alert Al Gore!