Archive for the ‘Republican’ Category
ABC News Special: The Kennedy Health Care Act
ABC NEWS Special: The Kennedy Health Care Act – we decide what is good for you
It was released yesterday that ABC won’t air the Anti-Obama health care advertisement produced by the League of American Voters. The simple reason given was, well…actually a reason wasn’t given other than to say that the ad was “partisan.” Most free speech is in fact “partisan” as a particular point of view is advocated. It seems that Obama and the network intend that ABC’s is the only opinion allowed to be partisan as the network gave free airtime last month to a one hour infomercial delivered directly from Obama’s White House.
Apparently the network felt that the discussion of health care issues was only relevant when done from the White House during an exclusive ABC News presentation. After all, liberal propaganda must be protected. And, when the Obama White House starts regulating program content, ABC wants to be on Obama’s Facebook ‘Friends’ list.
In the end, this could signal a positive change in the network. If ABC is giving critical thought to the advertisements it runs, it may be that they are considering pulling the plug on other network gems. If so here are the top ten shows we wish ABC would yank from their portion of the airwaves.
10. Good Morning America – Obama propaganda tool #1, Charlie Gibson continues to embarrass himself. In the latest episode, while glorifying poor Cindy Sheehan during the Bush presidency, Gibson recently admonished her to “go away” when Sheehan showed up to protest outside the Obama vacation home. Most journalists are more careful to hide their liberal bias. Gibson should be ashamed for letting his become so transparent.
9. The View – Now that Elizabeth Hasselbeck (why are the conservative women always far and away the prettiest?) is a ‘mom-to-be’ program producers are trying to figure out how to keep the show’s leftists from just ranting. That is about all the lefties are capable of anyway; that and slamming conservative women for being beautiful as well as intelligent.
8. America’s Funniest Home Videos – Americans have a knack for doing stupid things while having trusted friends film them. Obama is highly sensitive to this tendency and is trying to limit the ability of news organizations to film him doing his stupid things. Unfortunately, the health care bills now being considered have been released to the public. The public didn’t like it one bit. So… a few critics have started showing up and making fools of key allies such as Arlen Specter and Kathleen Sebelius. It is bad enough that the public reads bills its representatives are to vote on, but it is even worse that the key supporters – including the President – have no idea what the proposal will do. AFV has gotten so predicable in recent years that one can tell exactly what the toddler is going to smack with dad’s golf club. Interestingly, that is exactly where health care consumers are going to get whacked if this thing becomes law.
7. Cougar Town (new) Courtney Cox – Please Dear God – may someone pull the plug on this utter embarrassment before it starts. The show is so conceptually bad that the network will undoubtedly be embarrassed that it even put up a pilot episode. Cougar Town is about a forty-ish, freshly divorced Mom trying to learn to chase younger guys. Why, we don’t know. Courtney Cox is being paid to portray the divorcee as well as to act as if she has very little brain matter in her pursuit of younger male companionship. The Obama administration in trying to hang onto the women’s vote, will certainly object to portraying newly single women in this fashion. Newly single women should also object to being portrayed in this fashion.
6. Dating in the Dark – Who in the world comes up with these ideas. Although getting to know someone before dating them is certainly a good idea, understanding that one’s date might have a face full of comic book tattoos would be good to know before heading out to Chez Maurice’s for an elegant dinner. Incidentally, this is the same philosophy Obama is using to sell his health care proposals. Keep the details from view for as long as possible. Before long, you will be having dinner at a fancy French restaurant with a zombie; a zombie who will stick you with the check.
5. Lost – Is this thing still on the air? Is there no one at ABC that can come up with an interesting story that can hold viewer’s attention? Well.. maybe not. With the public education system firmly in the hands of Obama’s teacher union allies, this may be all that future generations of viewers will be able to handle. In fact, “Lost” is exactly where voters were last November.
4. Dirty Sexy Money – The network should just be straight about its programming. Sex and money sells air time. So… why not have a show about sex and money? Because after Obama finishes with the economy, Americans will only have a limited shot at half of what sells air time.
3. The Bachelorette – Always looking for a way to take normal people to inflict severe emotional pain, ABC has extended the run of the Bachelorette. The sex and money theme is alive and well here, too. Viewers all seem to like the hot tub and bedroom scenes as well as the deeply personal feelings that are shared with the entire world. Team Obama has tried to build this level of intimacy with voters but is having trouble with the ‘trust’ part of the relationship. It would help if they read the bills they advocate. The Bachelorette would be wise to read up on her suitors as well.
2. I Survived a Japanese Game Show – This is the most unbelievably stupid idea to ever threaten to occupy air time. Mama San runs things for a group of young participants who are to do some – as yet undefined tasks. They are of course ‘hooking up’ with one another. This appears to be a silly version of Dirty Sexy Money in Japanese game show format. What was the research that ABC commissioned to determine that this show might be successful? Probably the same research group that is telling Obama that the public really does want the government to take over the health care delivery system.
1. ABC NEWS Special: The Edward Kennedy Health Care Act – Driving Health Care off a Bridge. Team Obama will never permit this show to leave the air. The public may never watch.
Conservative Blog – Democrat Stages of Early Adolescence
Conservative Blog – Democrat Stages of Early Adolescence
As another summer draws to a close, America is looking back to understand what it means to be an American Family. Although a specific definition of ‘American Family’ is quite impossible to produce, suffice it to say that celebrating the challenges, joys and even some of the failures of parenthood is just cause for a Labor Day cookout.
So while the dogs and young ones tear up the landscaping next weekend with games of chase and Frisbee, it calls to mind why the youthful and carefree lifestyle is so enjoyable; it is free of serious responsibility. In politics, youthful and ‘hip’ leaders are also called to this lifestyle for exactly the same reason. These modern day Peter Pans are called Liberals. Giving away free health care even to people who are in the country illegally is easy – especially when someone else has to pay for it.
Anyone who has raised children into their teenage years understands the challenges. Watching the young one stay awake into the morning hours and then listening to him whine about lethargy and fatigue after falling out of bed at 6:00 am seems illogical to adults. To the teenage mind, staying up late and getting up early are two incidents that aren’t connected. They occur on different days and are therefore different events.
Democrats and liberals have difficulty connecting events that to most adults appear to be logically associated. A favorite example is the closing of Guantanamo detention center. Liberals wanted the facility closed, but had no real idea what to do with the prisoners. The two issues just weren’t connected. As a result, the President issued the closure orders and when real people objected to the plan to move the detainees onshore, liberals were dumbfounded that this was even a problem. Eventually, Obama paid off the Bermuda government to take a few of these lunatics out of Guantanamo, so instead of US voters being upset, the UK government is upset. It seems that the Obama administration failed to understand that the government of Bermuda and the United Kingdom were linked in any meaningful way.
Of course the most famous example is found in the health care debate. While the President and His leftist groupies in the media insist that His plan won’t lead to care rationing, the actual paperwork in the House bill indicates that the actual cost savings come from restricting payment on services. Restricting payments on services is the same as restricting services. With a government board deciding what services are to be delivered to which patient and under what conditions, Doctors and patients may no longer chose the course of action that is best for them. So any rational mind understands that no matter what the golden-tongued President says, the actual plan indicates that rationing will occur. Without rationing of care, there will be no cost control. Either the President can’t handle truth or he believes – as do most adolescent youth – that He can simply change the rules of economics through silly slogans.
Failure to make logical associations between action (or inaction) and result is only one hallmark of adolescence. The following are the top ten reasons that Democrats and Liberals really are adolescents in their governing philosophy and emotional development.
10. Continuing egocentrism; Intense self-focus - One old joke holds that the most dangerous place in Washington is between Joe Biden and a television camera. Now that Democrats control Congress and the White House, it would seem that there is plenty of camera-love to go around. All middle schoolers remember the popular and conceited leader supported by his/her brainless groupies… Obama is just extending the tradition to the federal government.
9. Continuing concern for gaining social approval – Being part of what the sixties generations referred to as the ‘in-crowd’ is central to a Democrat’s self esteem. The ‘in-crowd’ defines cultural norms – such as the ability to twitter. Supreme Court liberals also use international law as basis for evaluating legislative intent – purely for the purpose of ‘fitting in’ with the rest of the world. Adults care more about doing the right thing than they do about fitting in.
8. Questioning of social conventions and re-examination of own values and moral/ethical principles, sometimes resulting in conflicts with parents – Supreme Court Justice Sonya Sotomayor famously opined that Latina females made better decisions than white male counterparts within the US judiciary because of their unique perspective on life. Children have a unique perspective on life as well.
This perspective usually centers on enjoying themselves while someone else pays the bills. Democrats want others to do the work and pay the taxes while they enjoy perpetual re-election. For those that remember their first middle school group project, the popular kid always got the most credit for the least contribution.
7. Frequent mood swings – Ms. Boxer, current Senator from the bankrupt state of California, became incensed over being addressed as “Ma’am” during a Senate Committee hearing. The general in question, Brigadier General Michael Walsh of the Army Corps of Engineers was testifying before Boxer’s committee and committed the sin of addressing Ms. Boxer as “Ma’am” – the standard respectful term of a military officer. Ms. Boxer then pulled out her cell phone and sent a blast text message to her peeps about being disrespected by the Brigadier General. Emotional reaction to inconsequential events – especially when no disrespect was ever intended – is a characteristic of the middle school ‘in-crowd.’
6. Changes in own expectations alter previous relationships with parents and others, often resulting in greater conflict – Federal assistance provided to Bank of America and Citigroup was to be the initial olive branch extended by liberals to the business community. Following the liberals’ generosity, banks were supposed to agree to be taken over and used by the Obama administration as tools in further manipulating the free economy. Bankers quickly discovered that working for the federal government was very much less than enjoyable – not to mention profitable and quickly worked out a method to repay taxpayer funds. Democrats then tried to refuse the return of taxpayer money as that would release banks from government control. As with most middle school relationships, control is the central issue and money is a means to achieve it.
5. Focusing more on peer friendships – This is a critical failing of the Obama administration in particular. The President based his entire foreign policy around inviting other nations to be part of the world community. It never dawned on him that there might be some that didn’t want to join. North Korea still wants to threaten the US with nuclear and missile capacity. Every attempt to bring the DPRK into the ‘community of nations’ has been roundly laughed at. Obama’s most serious statements of objection are laughable – including “stop the provocations,” “we are deeply concerned,” and the ever famous “I strongly condemn their reckless actions.” Nations with adults running their governments understand that these statements mean nothing. Obama set himself up as the middle school Social Worker who speaks well, but really doesn’t understand what life is like in the hallways between classes.
4. Increasing interest in making decisions while overestimating own abilities – Akin to #5 above, the Obama administration places great faith in its ability to change hearts and minds. Obama believes that changing hearts and minds is possible with words. Adults understand that changing hearts and minds is a result of action taken or not taken.
3. Objecting more often to limitations on conduct, results in higher levels of conflict – Being restrained by authority is something lefties really hate. Like a child being told that he can’t have the car on Friday night because he hasn’t cut the grass seem makes no sense to the adolescent because use of the car and cutting the grass seem to be unrelated issues. The concept of consequence doesn’t apply in the liberal or adolescent mind. Liberals really fight limitations on spending. After all, Democrat vote buying schemes are much easier to finance when taxpayer dollars are used.
2. Has limited ability to extend logic to abstract concepts – This is an elementary feature of the liberal/adolescent mind. Particularly when policies have been tried in the past and revealed to be proven failures, liberals and early teen agers have no problem making the same mistakes multiple times. Inflation – the single biggest threat to the American middle class – is a direct result of government overspending. Jimmy Carter ignited the Reagan Revolution because he failed to understand the relationship between spending, borrowing, debt and unemployment – which fortunately led directly to his own unemployment. Democrats are in power now, but when the Stimulus inflation ignites a fresh wave of inflation, look for the lefties to take it on the chin in 2010 and still wonder why.
1. Thinking abilities are practiced in increased use of arguments or “talking back.” For a generation of liberal voters reliant on Leno and Letterman for meaningful insight, the current generation of liberals has fallen back on the use of diatribe instead of discourse. Discourse implies a willingness of all parties to be convinced of a given point of view based on evidence. Diatribe is performance-based without regard to matters of evidence. Obama and his supporters – like most middle school aged children – believe their eloquence and performance abilities overrule any evidence requirement. (CNN and Chris Mathew’s leg also believe this.) This explains why the President or his staff won’t tolerate challenging questions. It also explains why reporters rarely present them.
Interestingly, ‘talking back’ is a concept that Democrats practice themselves, but can’t tolerate from others. The health care town hall meetings show how incredibly inept Democrats are when confronted with their failures. The “in crowd” doesn’t understand why they can’t simply do what they want because they are popular. Their reactions are typified by feelings of disbelief and incomprehension which they respond to by attacking on the character of those that confront them. It is appropriate then that so many of the Democrat town hall meetings are being held in the local middle school cafeteria.
The Ten Worst Spokespersons for Obamacare
President Obama retired to a posh vacation home on Martha’s Vineyard this past Friday leaving His effort to take over American health care somewhat in doubt. He left His spokespersons to carry on the battle in the face of an unusually united Republican opposition. This opposition is supported by all voters with brain matter. And while He vacations when many Americans can no longer afford to go camping for the weekend; the various spokespersons are taking the healthcare battle forward.
For several weeks, Obama aides have concluded that the President Himself is the best salesman for healthcare reform. Unfortunately, whenever Mr. Obama presents His case, support for the enterprise drops. So… the vacation seemed to be a good excuse to throw in some second team players to see if they can move the ball. The resulting fumbles only fuel doubt that anyone in government can make something like a government run health insurance program work.
Democrats believe that they – as the ruling class – are to set the agenda and make the rules. Other, lesser, working people are to figure out how to make their decrees, laws and initiatives work. When Obama says that healthcare reform will not result in rationing of health services, He genuinely believes it. After all, His role is setting the rules. Others have to make it work. If He says that there will be no rationing, then there will be no rationing. It is just that simple. What more do people need to know?
The trouble with healthcare reform really began when lefties in the House had to commit their plans to paper. Democrats didn’t count on people actually reading the resulting bills. And when constituents got wind of what was being considered, they began to crash the congressional town hall love fests. The Obama campaign for health care reform then re-engaged in the debate to state and restate that all the bad things – like increased costs, decreased access and care rationing – are just not going to happen. Repeating the same mantra without addressing the details within the proposed legislation makes the President appear childish – and now His poll numbers reflect it.
So it is off to the Vineyard with the fam this week to let some second stringers take a shot. And after the Sunday shows this weekend, none of the Presidents scrubs are faring any better than the big guy. So here is the top ten list of worst spokespersons for health care reform:
10. MSNBC – Yelping lunatics on the air have not been able to convince folks that health care reform as proposed won’t pull the plug on Granny’s respirator. Olberman isn’t exactly the picture of fairness or credibility on any issue, so the Obama administration would do well to discourage their allies in the peacock newsroom to clam up. They would get more viewers on Rachel Maddow if they went back to talking about Che Guevara.
9. CNN – Wolf Blitzer actually tried to answer some viewer’s questions about health care reform on the Situation Room last week, but the questions they chose to answer all produced the response “we don’t know” or “we will have to wait and see.” That is surely helpful to the cause. Before ruining one sixth of the American economy, most sane people – including our Senior Citizens – don’t accept the “don’t know” answer. Someone with some facts and logic has got to explain the details within the House bills before the idea will get any support. Unfortunately, only Republicans and commentators have attempted to read the thousands of pages that were produced in only a few days.
8. Senators Max Baucus , Kent Conrad, Byron Dorgan - Could Democrats have possibly found any more boring US Senators to speak for healthcare? Well, no. These guys all look essentially the same, speak as if they just woke up from a nap and come from fundamentally red states. Baucus – by virtue of his chairmanship of the Senate Finance Committee has to give interviews on health care reform, but networks hate talking with him lest they lose audience share to nap time. Even Olberman has to slow down his pace when conversing with Montana Max.
7. Senator Harry Reid –A horrible spokesperson for anything except his retirement, the good Senator from Nevada is now in fact contemplating just such a future. Any Republican candidate – from a basketball coaches’ son to someone else no one has really heard of – would beat ‘ol Harry in a walk if the election were held now. And unfortunately for Reid, Team Obama couldn’t care less whether Searchlight Harry gets re-elected or not. The administration will continue to pressure Reid to comply. Voters – whom Reid works for – will continue to pressure him to resist. Just like a bad sit-com, the drama will take place late next year when Nevada voters finally fire this loon.
6. Congressperson Barney Frank – One wonders how Frank will achieve re-election after comparing one of his constituents to a dining room table. A dining room table just might possess more intellect than the good Congressman and at least the conversation would be quieter. It should be noted that the Massachusetts windbag enjoys the support of AIG and other Wall Street bigwigs, so he will always be tough to beat. However, the administration should avoid letting Barney talk out loud as he –like the President- refuses to actually answer any questions and isn’t above abusing constituents.
5. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer – the anti-Pelosi – Hoyer seems to be the one chosen to lull those that object to health care reform into feeling that they might be getting their message to Washington. Late last week, Congressman Hoyer stated publicly that the public option might have to be eliminated for a bill to gain passage in the House. It seems that Hoyer answers his phone when fellow Congressfolks phone in from their town hall meetings.
4.House Speaker Fancy Nancy Pelosi –the anti Hoyer – (Notice how Team Obama has put the kibosh on letting Pelosi do too much in the way of public speaking on health care? ) After comparing normal voters to Nazis, Pelosi stated late last week that no bill could pass the House without inclusion of the public option. She and Hoyer are scheduled for coffee on Monday morning.
3.HHS Secretary Kathleen of Sebelius – This isn’t Kansas anymore. Originally brought in as a symbol of Obama’s benevolence to states that usually vote red, Sebelius ignited a firestorm among the lunatic fringe of the Democrat party when she noted that the public option wasn’t necessarily a key part to the President’s health care agenda. The administration then spent most of last week cooling tempers on the left and giving the wink and a nod that the public option will absolutely be included in the legislation. She then stated that the media had created the misunderstanding. At least she has learned that it is plausible to blame the media for getting out the wrong message.
2. Senator (currently) Arlen Specter – Arlen Specter figured out that he would lose a GOP primary race to Pat Toomey. So rather than just voting with the Democrats, Specter then decided to become one – clearing the way for Toomey to roll into next fall’s election without engaging in a tough primary fight. Meanwhile, Specter is left running his town hall meetings in the face of angry opposition and trying to convince the Democrat party that he can indeed beat Toomey in the general election. Like a man at the center of a circular firing squad, turncoat Arlen stutters though the town hall meetings looking dazed and confused.
1. Robert “Family Guy” Gibbs – Number one in the trust-building business, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs’ job is to make the President look good. Following on the heels of a campaign where the President was treated like a saint, Gibbs thought he had the easiest job in the world. Unfortunately, making members of the press look foolish – even CNN reporters will get angry and start asking real questions. The platitudes that used to produce such adoration in the press aren’t working anymore so Gibbs has been punching up his resume.
Honorable mention goes to Joe Biden – who also has been restricted to that previously undisclosed secret location lest he lend his ‘wordsmithing’ skill to Obamacare. With Obamacare on the ropes, the Dems want him exiled as far away as possible – to someplace like the Congo.
Honorable mention also goes to Hillary – who actually was exiled to the Congo.
Immigration Law Boycott – Will Arizona Cut Power To L.A.?
Across the nation, the Arizona immigration law is a personal insult to many people of Hispanic descent. The Los Angeles City Council, in order to make a political statement, voted to boycott the state of Arizona and Arizona-based business. In response to the Los Angeles boycott, the commissioner of Arizona’s electric and water utilities threatened to cut off the electricity supplied to the Los Angeles power grid by Arizona power plants.
Article Source: Will Arizona cut power to L.A. over immigration law boycott?
Boycott Arizona goes nationwide
The Arizona immigration law has encouraged other cities with large Hispanic populations to deprive the state of cash now, including San Francisco, San Diego and Oakland. In Seattle, not known as a center of Hispanic culture, the city council approved a similar boycott May 18. Across the nation, many organizations have also canceled conventions in Arizona. Just type in the words “boycott Arizona” in your Google search bar and you will get The National Council of La Raza homepage, inviting institutions across the nation to join the NCLR in their boycott of Arizona. But the Los Angeles boycott is the first so far to result in a game of tit for tat over a law many think encourages racial profiling and violates civil rights.
Depriving the Los Angeles power grid
The Arizona Corporation Commission, which administrates the state’s electric and water utilities, raised the idea of pulling the plug on Los Angeles, following the Los Angeles boycott. Arizona’s power plants supply electricity to 25 percent of the Los Angeles power grid, according to CNNMoney.com. In a letter to Los Angeles Mayor Antonio R. Villaraigosa, Arizona Corporation Commissioner Gary Pierce wrote that “If an economic boycott is truly what you desire, I will be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements so Los Angeles no longer receives power from Arizona-based generation. I am confident that Arizona’s utilities would be happy to take those electrons off your hands.”
Los Angeles boycott could add up to millions
In a vote of 13-1, the Los Angeles City Council chose to bar the city from conducting business with Arizona unless the Arizona immigration law, which goes into effect in July, is revoked. The vote was followed an emotional council, as reported by MSNBC, during which numerous members stressed how their ancestors were U.S. immigrants. The stake isn’t exactly among small potatoes. Totaling up to as much as $ 58 million, Los Angeles has investments and contracts in Arizona. Most of the dollars involve airport, port and energy service that can’t lawfully be affected by the boycott. About $ 7.7 million is left in city contracts that could possibly be put into play. Some of those contracts include helicopter services, Taser guns, waste management, engineering and surveillance equipment.
Will Arizona really cut power to Los Angeles?
Will the state of Arizona really cut power to Los Angeles completely? Coming in to downplay the threatening nature of the letter is John LeSueur, a spokesman for Pierce. He said the commission itself does not have the authority for Arizona to cut power to Los Angeles. “It’s not a threat,” he told CNNMoney.com. “It’s just pointing out the ramification of what L.A.’s threat would be on the boycott. If they carry out their threat to boycott Arizona, that includes 25 percent of their power.” LeSueur pointed out that Los Angeles has partial ownership in two of the Arizona power plants, including a 5.7 percent stake in the Palo Verde nuclear power plant, and a 21 percent stake in the Navajo Generation Station on a Navajo reservation.
Hispanics could get the whip’s tip with the Arizona boycott
The economic impact of the Arizona immigration law could be substantial. According to Fox News, officials in Phoenix say their city could lose as much as $ 90 million in the next five years over the protests. This estimate represents not just lost convention and hotel feels, but it also includes the money tourists would otherwise spend in the city. In a twist of irony, Hispanics make up a major portion of Arizona’s hospitality and service workforce. With that in mind and the fact city governments and organization are pulling the plug on travel and conventions in Arizona, Hispanic workers have the most to lose, as pointed out by state officials.
Corporate Funding Of Politicians – Good Or Bad?
It’s a radical idea, but perhaps one whose time has finally come. Recently, the United States Supreme Court held that, as a legal entity with legal personhood, corporations also have the right to contribute campaign funds in amounts commensurate with those allowed for flesh-and-blood persons. As if Big Business doesn’t already have enough influence, it would seem that now the floodgates are opened and no restrictions apply any longer.
Elections are already heavily supported by corporate interests. With greatly increased levels of cash, they are practically guaranteed to drown out anyone else. Since it will all be corporate propaganda anyway, why not just sit it out?
It goes so contrary to the ideals and very ideology of our modern democratic system – but what if it works? What if by having zero or almost zero turnout, the media and their political favorites are forced awake instead of carrying on with business as usual?
The connection is often made between democracy and capitalism. One is told to vote with one’s feet when it comes to choosing schools or residences, and vote with one’s pocketbooks when it comes to goods and services. Well, how about voting with one’s silence, one’s absence, one’s disregard?
The worst thing for human psychology is to be ignored. In the Bible, God’s punishment for Cain’s act of murder was not the death penalty but exile, and for all to shun him wherever he went. What if the American electorate should just ignore the politicians for a change and sit out an election? That would send a truly unique message – that instead of holding one’s nose and voting for the perceived lesser of two evils, American voters insist on policies that reflect their wishes, instead of making do with those that go against them less.
Egyptian Employees Call For Rise In Minimum Wage
With elections scheduled later on this year in Egypt, workers have started to step-up their demands for a boost in the minimum wage. Â The thirty-five Egyptian Pounds per month minimum wage has stayed unchanged going back twenty six years and lots of ordinary Egyptians believe something needs to be done as inflation is just about 10%.
Â
Large groups of protestors in recent times clashed with police as they demanded a rise to 1,200 Egyptian Pounds each month. Presently, close to 40% of Egyptians live life below the poverty line and the rise in the minimum wage would make an immense impact to a substantial number of families. Nonetheless, it is being suggested that the Egyptian government are considering an increase to 450 Egyptian Pounds per month.
Â
There is little question that an increase in wages will assist a large number of men and women and in an election year, such a move would clearly help out the government at the polls. On the other hand, there is the tiny matter of how such an increase would be paid for. Governments do not have a bottomless pit of funding with which to pay public sector workers and at the same time businesses and organizations can only pay wages out of the money they produce.
Â
Egypt creates an awful lot of its wealth from natural resources such as oil, coal and gas together with tourism. Government may be able to pay extra for the rise in minimum wage for its personnel through a combination of tax increases, efficiency savings and redundancies. Even so, they may want to take into consideration that tax increases don’t always work as in 2005, the rate of corporation tax was cut from 40% to 20% year tax revenues the subsequent year doubled.
Â
A likely area to be hit with increases is the foreign visitor. The fees of visas could be increased to deliver increased government income while the private sector may likely have to raise room rates at resorts and prices at restaurants in order to pay their staff the bigger minimum wage. Â These expenses would almost certainly be passed on to the tourist. The real expense in Red Sea Holidays from the UK is the cost of flights. Hotels and services once in Egypt have always been superb value so there is scope for an increase there. However, pressure may be put on airlines to lower airfares so as not to price breaks to Egypt too far above their existing levels.
Ohio HB 486 Limits Payday Lending Fees
Ohio passed a comprehensive payday lending reform law, HB 545, in 2008. Interest rates lenders were charging on payday cash advances were capped with this law. Two years after this law went into effect, Representatives Jennifer Garrison, Gerald Stebelton and Matt Lundy are co-sponsoring HB 486, intended to further limit payday lenders.
The argument for more payday loan regulation through HB 486
Ohio’s HB 486 is being introduced under the auspice of more regulation for the payday lending industry. Payday lending stores are charging contentious fees for services such as check cashing, loan origination and credit checks, and many lawmakers are none too pleased. When HB 545 passed in 2008, the goal was to reduce the cost of payday loans and more heavily regulate the industry. Ohio’s HB 486 is designed to solidify regulations even more. Legislators are worried of the fact that many payday lenders are charging customers $ 15 – $ 25 on every $ 100 borrowed over a two or four week period. Some borrowers misuse this service and end up digging themselves deeper into debt.
Payday loans – arguments against more regulations
Though the payday lending industry is not often liked or well received, HB 486 attempts to penalize payday lenders for following the law. Once HB 545 was passed, interest rates on payday loans were capped at 28 percent annual interest, which is about the same for most credit cards. However, over the two-week period of most payday loans, that interest rate does not provide the income lenders need to cover their costs. More than 700 payday lending stores closed down, leaving 2,500 Ohio residents unemployed.
The Small Loans Act providing some help for Ohio lenders
In an attempt to remain above waters, Ohio payday lenders began operating under the Small Loans Act. Under the Small Loans Act, lenders are able to charge fees for check cashing, credit checks and loan origination. However, increased reporting, cash-on-hand and more regulated advertising is required by the Small Loans Act. The payday lending stores in Ohio that began charging fees and operating under the Small Loans Act have followed the letter of the law, ensuring that they are providing a legal service. And HB 486 is looking to end this practice.
The math of payday loans in Ohio
Many legislators are pointing to figures such as 391 percent APR to explain why they believe payday lenders need more regulation. Both HB 545 and HB 486, however, do not take into account that payday loans are designed specifically for short-term financial solutions for between two and four weeks. Additionally, the only other option available for most payday loan customers is to head face-to-face with bank fees of $ 30 or more for bounced checks. Many payday loan customers have credit that does not qualify them for more traditional financial products.
So what do you think? Will HB 486 protect consumers? Or will payday lenders be put out of business because of HB 486?
With Little Chance Of Success, Climate Change Bill Hits Senate
Wednesday, after months of partisan bickering and the peevish defection of one of its main sponsors, the Senate climate change bill was unveiled. Senators John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, and independents of Connecticut, Joe Lieberman, presented a climate and energy package designed to limit climate change and promote clean energy jobs. Kerry said it was imperative the Senate climate change bill, which includes a little something for everyone, gets passed this year. But one of the vote-getting goodies in the climate bill is expanded off-shore drilling — a provision that could backfire in the wake of the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
A bad climate for change
Negotiations with lawmakers by Kerry and Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, on the climate and energy bill appeared to be humming along until just last month. Graham abruptly withdrew his support of the energy legislation under pressure from GOP true believers. Right Wing enforcers were really upset with Graham for giving Democrats installment loans of Republican support. As an excuse, Graham gave an oblique reference to immigration politics. But potential Republican votes that the climate change bill needs to pass may have gone out the window along with Graham.
Stained by oil is clean energy
After the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico began last month, incentives to increase domestic offshore drilling was written in. The New York Times explains that instead of providing for an expansion of offshore drilling, the Kerry-Lieberman bill gives coastal states the right to veto any drilling plan that could cause environmental or economic harm. Graham had a hand in drafting the original oil drilling provision.
Energy legislation and a big crowd
A swarm of lobbyists have been attracted by the Senate Climate change bill. Oil companies have spent millions of dollars trying to stop the bill from passing. Clean energy producers in low-carbon nuclear power, natural gas or wind and solar power have been trying to enrich themselves with the Senate climate bill. Reuters reports that green energy utilities such as FPL Group and Exelon have lobbied alongside environmental groups for the climate change bill, along with General Electric, a manufacturer of clean coal for power plants and wind turbines.
Clean energy, green jobs
Kerry’s presentation of the Senate climate change bill had along with it a blog on the Huffington Post asking for public support. Kerry claims the climate and energy bill package will help create nearly 2 million new green energy jobs, develop new products, and support the research and development required to help the U.S. maintain leadership in the global economy. He also claims the climate bill as written will reduce the deficit by about $21 billion in nine years.
Senate and Climate Change?
Kerry thinks that it seems to be long overdue for American to finally lead on climate change. He vows to mount a “full court press” to pass the energy legislation in 2010. But Kerry wants to add more pressure to a Congress paralyzed from dealing with the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, financial reform, immigration reform, an upcoming Supreme Court nomination battle and a sputtering economic recovery.
Sources
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/science/earth/13climate.html
Reuters reports
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1219978020100512?type=marketsNews
Huffington Post
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-kerry/transforming-our-power_b_573303.html
California Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act: The first Part
Last night the Californian Secretary of state confirmed to everyone that the voter initiative to legalize marijuana received about 523,531 signatures-more than 433,971 signatures were needed to get on the November ballot. The initiative has many supporters who believe that legalizing pot will not only save the cash-strapped Californian economy, but will also bring in instant cash of tax revenue. Many of the people who don't support the bill argue that legalizing the drug will end in more crime and great health impacts. Other people suggest that legalizing gray-market marijuana will make the marijuana quality go down and will significantly hurt the budding marijuana industry. {Part 1 of this article covers the Regulate, Control, and Tax Cannabis Act in California and the arguments for its passage. Part 2: Arguments against Marijuana Legalization in California covers the arguments against marijuana legalization in California}.
History of marijuana legalization in California.
The first law in the state criminalizing marijuana in the US was passed in California in 1913. Other states quickly followed suit. By 1937, federal law made possession or transfer of “Marihuana” illegal for everything except medical and industrial uses.
The US Federal government put marijuana in the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 although the act was declared unconstitutional in 1969. California made medical marijuana legal with Proposition 215 in 1996, reigniting the national debate. The federal government still considers marijuana an illegal Schedule I narcotic and considers it to have “no valid medical use.”
California legalization of marijuana measures.
The Regulate, Control, and Tax Cannabis Act, or the Californian initiative to legalize marijuana, has limitations on the way to legally use marijuana. Anyone 21 or older would be permitted to “possess, cultivate, or transport marijuana for personal use.” Marijuana would be taxed and regulated through commercial sales or production by local governments in California. Individuals would also be prohibited from smoking marijuana in public, smoking marijuana while minors are present, providing to any underage person, possessing the drug on school grounds or driving while under the influence of marijuana.
The cost-savings argument for marijuana legalization
Supporters of the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act argue that the legalization of marijuana would save the State of California a significant amount of money. California is currently in a huge budget deficit, and has been using payday cash advances on the state budget to cover costs.
Estimates for these savings range from $ 156 million to $ 1 billion. Many supporters claim that once the stretched-thin law-enforcement system stops prosecuting those people who grow, poses, or sell marijuana, they can focus on real crimes and criminals that are doing more dangerous and violent things. Those for the act also point out the fact that few deaths in California are due to marijuana while hundreds of death each year are due to alcohol.
The argument on taxation for cannabis legalization.
While saving California millions of dollars in law enforcement, the Regulate, Control and Tax Act also gives government the ability to tax marijuana. Those for the act estimate that $ 15 billion gray-market and black market marijuana is being sold every year in California.
An excise tax on the retail sales of marijuana would bring in an estimated $ 1.3 billion a year or more in revenue. Some counties and cities within California currently tax medical marijuana dispensaries. These county and city taxes make as much as $ 350,000 per dispensary.
Legalizing pot job argument
Many areas of California, like Humboldt County, have already a thriving marijuana tourism industry. With things such as schools focused on growing marijuana and medical marijuana dispensaries, the place brings in millions of dollars each year in tourism revenue. If the marijuana tourism industry in California grew to just one-third the size of the wine industry, it would help to create 50,000 jobs, as pointed out by supporters. Marijuana being legalized would also make it legal to produce hemp in state which might add to the agricultural base in California.
California's Regulate, Control, and Tax Cannabis Act is due to go on the November ballot. If you were interested in the arguments against the legalization of marijuana in California, I would suggest you see Part 2: Arguments against Marijuana Legalization in California.
Sources:
The Associated Press
Business Week
Seattle Times
Time Magazine
CNN
California NORML
Bernanke testimony | Helicopter Ben vs. Ron Paul
Was America the sole recipient of the bailout?
Ben Bernanke’s testimony before Congress continued today, punctuated by a very entertaining exchange between Bernanke and Rep. Ron Paul (R – TX), part of which was an allegation that the Fed was lending to Greece to ease the turmoil there. Decide for yourself whether Greece should be allowed to borrow money from the Federal Reserve.
Bernanke flatly denied Mr. Paul’s allegation, calling them “bizarre.”
Is it truly that bizarre?
Is the Federal Reserve about to bailout Greece? Has that been done for other countries in the past? Greece is still a question mark, irrespective of Bernanke’s testimony. The writing may already be on the wall.
Written in “Texas Straight Talk”
In a recent weekly column at House.gov, Ron Paul wrote about the unveiling financial crisis in Greece. The government is close to defaulting on public debt, as the Treasury is almost dry. The debt level, claims Paul, is “about 120 percent of their gross domestic product,” so the public sector soaks up “what amounts to 40 percent of GDP.” This has European investors running scared, needless to say. However, the European Central Bank seems calm.
Why would that be? Outsiders are not sure. Is the Federal Reserve about to bail out Greece? We don’t know, says Paul, partly because the Federal Reserve’s distribution of bailout dollars hasn’t been as transparent as promised, but also because if they were aiding a foreign central bank, by law they don’t have to disclose that fact and it is exempt from audit. Considering that Greece isn’t the only European country in trouble – and that many of those countries in trouble have some sort of tie to Goldman Sachs – we wonder whether these countries will also be deemed “too big to fail” by the U.S. banking concerns. And who will be on the hook if such is the case? It would be American taxpayers, at a time when the real unemployment rate is still staggeringly high.
Creating fiat currency and shoveling it around with impunity
Our government buys into the idea of fiat currency. It’s creating money for whatever purpose they like; it’s a check the bank doesn’t have the actual capital to cash.The US Government and the Federal Reserve seem content to keep the status quo, with no concern to the burden it puts on future generations. Ron Paul suggests that Americans deserve to know if they are “going to be left holding the bag” as the Federal Reserve throws around money they don’t actually have – it’s imaginary!
Evidence log for your consideration
- Federal Reserve money supported Saddam Hussein and the Iraq military
- Federal Reserve money was involved in Watergate
- Here’s the Senate Watergate Report for more on Watergate.
Bernanke testimony does not inspire confidence
This is exactly why Ron Paul would like laws to be changed so that we can audit the Federal Reserve. Fast cash from our pockets to other nations cannot continue when our nation bears this burden of its own. We need to know what’s happening. Americans deserve transparency from their governmental institutions.