An Open letter to my friends

To my friends who continue to post crap that somehow trump is bringing back naziism: you have totally bought into the cartoonish portrayal of trump that the msm and dnc has tried to project onto trump. The dnc and msm, the wapo and nyt in particular has continued to mischaracterized trumps words and deeds into something that is totally false. They have twisted up their logic to somehow make it look like trump is some kind of racist, xenophobic anti-Muslim baboon. Nothing can be further from the truth.

By posting nazi and Hitler's comparisons, you are fomenting hate and fueling the fires of these rioters and justify their actions. You are doing exactly what you feared trump's voters would do if Clinton had won.  You have been led to believe this by the DNC/MSM projecting their thoughts on what they would do if they lost on Trump and his supporters.  

You have been brainwashed by the cartoon sections of the nyt,wapo et al that were dressed up as the news and opinion sections. 

It is sickening that my good, intelligent friends whom I admire and respect cannot see through this tripe while continue to post comparisons to nazis. I will not respond on their walls this message because I'll be labeled as a nazi lover by their friends. But, you all need to calm down. Trump is not these things you claim. He is not responsible for the sick actions of a few idiots. He does not need to do anything to condemn these actions other then to Support the police to apprehend and prosecute these criminals. (No, I will not pontificate on the moral equivalence of the blm movement to these idiots, but comparisons can easily be made)

Calm down. Trump hasnt done a thing yet. He is not president yet. If, when president, he advocates something you fear he will, I'll stand by your side in protest.

About that electoral college thingy

We are starting to hear the caterwauling to remove this ‘arcane’ system of voting we have.  That would be a horrible mistake, and here’s why:

The USA is NOT a democracy!!!!  It is a federal republic comprised of 50 sovereign states.  Each state is allotted electoral votes based upon it’s population, so everyone’s actual vote is relatively the same for everyone.  Each state’s citizens don’t elect a President directly, we elect a slate of electors who then elect a President.  This concept is very important to understand because this is what forces a candidate to compete in each of the states. 

If we didn’t have this system, all a candidate would have to do is got to LA, Houston, NYC and Chicago to garner enough votes to win.  By doing so, these candidates would tailor laws specifically to attract more voters, thus leaving out the rest of the nation to fend for itself.  DC would not care less what happens in Florida, Vermont, Oklahoma, Nebraska etc. because they don’t need their votes.

This electoral thingy is what forces candidates to compete everywhere in America, and thus create policies for all of America.  Take a good look at the map.  There are entire states lit up in Red that would be totally ignored if there wasn't an electoral college.  Then take a look at New York.  The ONLY reason it went to Clinton was because of NYC.  There simply isn't much blue in rural areas of the country which have totally different needs then urban areas.  These are the people who produce the food, goods and services consumed by urbanites.  Shouldn't their voice be heard too?  If we were to abandon the electoral college, nothing but urban issues would be dealt with.

Think of it this way: in the world series, it’s a best of 7 tournament.  The Dodgers win 10-0 in the 1st game, but the Yankees win the next 4 games by 1-0.  Although the Dodgers outscored the Yankees 10-4, the Yankees won the series.  You need to win the game, and the games won is what counts, not the score.  In Politics, its a best of 50 states (and DC), with each state being weighted according to population.  When you win a state, you get it's points.  The total popular vote has absolutely no meaning whatsoever, just as the total runs scored doesn't matter to determine the outcome.

One more point to make is that the electoral system ensures we have a peaceful transfer of power.  IT has worked very well for America, albeit with some bumps in the road.  No other system has come close to this with such a large, diverse population as we have in the USA.

Election 2016

As we wake up this morning, Donald Trump has become the President-Elect.  This event, apparently, came by surprise to a lot of people.  I wasn’t surprised at all.  If anyone was paying attention to my ‘rants’ and posts, they all had a common theme: 

1) The polling was all skewed by oversampling democrats and independents.  Poll after poll, it showed Clinton with a lead, but when you took the time to normalize the polls to remove this oversampling, Trump was either tied or in the lead.  Furthermore, national polling looks at the nation as a whole.  We know that California and New York (for example) would vote to Clinton by wide margins, but what about the other states?  So even with the polls skewed towards Clinton, her 3 point lead in the RCP averages means it’s a tie.

2) There was absolutely no enthusiasm for Clinton.  While Trump was filling stadiums with thousands who couldn’t get in, Clinton couldn’t fill the area in front of a hot dog stand.  The only time Clinton got a proud is when she brought celebrities with her, including Obama, but at no time in her campaign did she receive a sizable crowd of willing participants.  If she can’t draw a crowd to her rallies, how could she draw them to the polls?

3) The MSM was totally, and unabashedly in the tank for Clinton.  If the MSM had been neutural as they should be, Clinton would have never made it through the primaries with all her scandals that were not covered at all.  Benghazi?  her illegal, private email server? All the quid-pro-quo and pay-for-play with her Clinton Foundation (or at least the appearance of such nefarious activity)?  Wikileaks? Project Veritas? Any one of these things would have sunk a candidate and if the MSM did some actual investigative reporting, would have landed her in jail.  But not Clinton largely due to the fact that the Clinton’s own the Justice department and Comey did all he could to block the FBI from investigating— this in itself is another scandal worthy of MSM investigation, but again they took a pass.

Meanwhile, while all that smoke from raging fires was taking place in the Clinton camp, The Clintons paraded out a bunch of bimbos, some paid to lie, some simply did so to get some fame.  Granted, Trump didn’t help himself much with some of his comments, but it was enough to fan the little bit of smoke into a small fire.  Is Trump a mysoginist?  no.  Just take a look at who’s running his campaign and his companies.  Is Trump a racist?  nope.  He has plenty people of color running his companies, and he’s opened up properties to people of color when that wasn’t allowed at the time.  Is Trump anti-muslim?  Nope.  All he said is that we need to stop the flow of Syrian refugees until we can get a better handle on who is here.  The same for the southern wall. Yet all you hear from the MSM is all the trumped up DNC talking points to somehow make Trump a worse human being than Clinton.  The DNC and the MSM worked very close together and nearly succeeded.  But, people came out to see Trump at rallies, and somehow he managed to break through the DNC/MSM talking points.

One more point to make.  I watched MSNBC for the election coverage, and watched them all try to figure out what happened.  What happened is that they totally bought into the liberal echo chamber that the MSM, NYT, WAPO etc. created, and that any deviation from what they confidently thought would happen was unexpected.  They totally bought into the lies and the talking DNC talking points while poo-pooing Clinton’s scandals.  And it wasn’t just them.  It was also my Facebook friends who totally bought into this false narrative as well.  I really feel bad for them as they hopefully realize that the NYT, WAPO, etc. did not do them any favors by skewing the news and not reporting fairly.

4) Lastly, Clinton should have been indicted for her email server and her foundation.  The ONLY reason she wasn’t was Clinton owns Loretta Lynch and the DoJ.  It was Bill Clinton who appointed Lynch to be Attorney General in the NY office… the same office that has jurisdiction over the investigations into her email server and foundation.  It is Lynch who built that office, and they are loyal to Lynch, so these investigations were stymied or hampered in any way they could. (Does anyone actually believe Bill and Loretta had a private meeting at a remote tarmac to discuss golf and grandchildren?) They constantly got in the FBI’s way.  Follow the dots.  Everyone else has except the MSM, which is why liberals haven’t connected them yet.  If this was anyone else, that person would have the book thrown at them a long time ago.

The electorate realizes that Washington is broken, and the only way to fix Washington is to hire an outsider with potentially new ways of getting things done.  Yes, the election was very close, but only because the democrats did a very good job of tearing trump down to create the perception that he's as bad as Clinton, who no one really is defending her scandalous behavior.  The electorate is screaming for someone to fix DC, which is why Sanders diid unexpectedly well, although the system was rigged against him.  Electing Clinton to fix DC would have been like the fox hired to guard the henhouse.  She is part of the problem, not the solution.  At least with Trump, we have a chance to fix things.

I've said this about the primaries: The people selected Trump despite the party, and the party selected Clinton despite the people.  The same can be said about this election.

Why Trump (or Kasich)

This year’s election cycle has been very entertaining.  Both parties thought they could just anoint someone and win their respective primaries easily.  What the party elites did not anticipate was the anger the electorate has for Washington DC politicians.  The electorate is angry for lots of reasons, but primarily that the news reports from the MSM simply does not reflect reality anymore.  Case in point: We keep hearing news about how the economy is growing and things are rosy meanwhile people cannot find jobs and have stopped looking or had to settle for part-time jobs because that’s the only thing available these days (largely due to Obamacare); more people are on food stamps than ever before ; costs are going up while wages are going down.  There is a worldwide Muslim terrorist insurgency happening and our MSM is not reporting on it, and when they do, they blame Israel.  Our borders are wide open and crime is rampant because of it, but our MSM won’t report on it.  We are being invaded by Syrian ‘refugees', and these ‘refugees’ are causing all kinds of mayhem in Europe, yet our government wants to bring this mayhem into this country.  Our national debt is the highest by far and growing faster and faster, but our MSM won’t report on this like they did when an ‘R' held the Whitehouse. We have given Iran a clear pathway to nuclear weapons and funding to achieve their goals (and fund their terrorist networks) and we got absolutely nothing for it in return.

The electorate is angry because we see the issues that aren’t getting reported accurately, and we see solutions to the mess, but the career politicians aren’t doing a thing about it other than perpetuating it.

On the Democrat side

Clinton has been chosen by the elites.  She has been anointed to be the nominee.  And in normal times, she’d have a cakewalk to the nomination, regardless of the fact that the process is rigged in her favor.  A candidate like Sanders who is a socialist, runs as a socialist, has been elected to the senate as a socialist and is listed as an ‘I’ in the Senate because he is a socialist somehow is doing quite well running in the democrat’s primary.  He won’t win the nomination because the democrat nomination process is rigged against anyone not anointed, but even still, he’s garnering support.  I don’t think this has anything to do with Sander’s positions.  Rather, his support comes from the anger people have against career politicians and Clinton embodies the worst characteristics of them.  She is dishonest, conniving, has huge monetary ties to Muslim countries via her Husband’s presidential library among other avenues of cash flow.  But, she simply is not likable because she is not genuine (have you heard her with her fake southern accent?  Have you hear her talk to a black audience?).  Her husband was successful because he could lie to your face and make you feel good about it.  She doesn’t have that kind of ability so she’ll lie to your face and you dislike her for it.  She is a deeply flawed individual with virtually no accomplishments to show for it.

Sander’s apparent strength is only measured against Clinton’s weakness as a candidate.

On the Republican side

The republican elites put their full weight behind candidates like Bush.  These same elites did what they could to tear down conservatives like Cruz and Rubio so they could mount a full court press for Bush.  This was their game plan, completely ignoring outsiders like Trump, Carson and Fiorina.  They simply didn’t (and still don’t) understand why the electorate is so angry, especially why republicans are especially angry with the GOP leadership.  They kind of understand why conservatives are angry but they discount them completely, much to their demise. 

Republicans are angry because for the last few election cycles, the elites have anointed establishment candidates (Dole, McCain, Romney).  Obama was elected (and totally beatable) because the GOP elite would not get behind someone outside of their control.  The GOP took the house, largely due to conservatives and the Tea Party pushing the GOP for change, and then took the senate for the same reason.  But what did the Elites do?  They gave us Boehner and McConnel (Both establishment members) and excluded anyone from leadership who wasn’t a party elite or elite wannabe which includes members of the people who made it possible for their leadership.  This was a big ‘Fuck You!’ to the Tea Party and conservatives who delivered the house and senate into their hands.  As we witnessed time and again McConnell and Boehner get rolled over by democrats in the minority, their failure to live up to any of their promises or to assert the will of the people who elected them, conservatives began pointing out their failures and began applying pressure on them.  The spineless, crybaby powderpuff Boehner couldn’t take it anymore and resigned. 

If you ever watched the Harlem Globetrotters, they always played agains the Washington Senators, and of course always won.  The Washington Senators were happy to lose because they were part of the act and were paid pretty well to look bad, or more to the point, to make the Harlem Globetrotters look good.  Republicans are tired of watching the GOP play the Washington Senators role to the Democrat’s Harlem Globetrotters.  Republicans are frustrated because they keep electing republican elites only to watch them happily lose to the democrats even when the GOP is in the majority.

Unlike democrats, the republican electorate is smart enough to realize that doing the same thing repeatedly but expecting different results is the definition of insanity.  Democrats continue to elect the same people that have destroyed their own cities (Detroit, Flint, St. Luis etc) so we know they aren’t that smart.

Republicans and conservatives railed against Obama because he had no experience whatsoever.  His Presidency reflected his lack of executive experience to America’s detriment.  (I can list out many examples, from having to be the smartest person in the room, hence Biden as his VP, to hiring people with lack of specific experience to run departments like Clinton and Kerry as Sec State etc. etc. etc.).  So why should republicans and conservatives get behind another senator like Cruz or Rubio?  Although both had legitimate careers prior to joining the senate unlike Obama, the point still stands.

So who is left besides the outsiders?  The governors, Bush, Walker, Kasich, Christie and Jindal.  Walker and Jindal exited the race because they saw the writing on the wall: they were not going to get support from the Elites and they saw what Trump was preparing to do.  They were the smart ones.  Christie is a Northeast Republican and although he is a tough negotiator and has done relatively well for New Jersey, he is no conservative nor would get the backing of a huge swath of republicans.  Bush became the embodiment of the establishment, and thus the lightning rod for the anger and frustration of the electorate, so much so that he was forced out of the running.  This leaves Kasich.  

As for the outsiders (Trump, Fiorina, Carson), Carson was too nice and Fiorina had some baggage from her Hp Days.  Trump, however, was saying and doing things to get noticed.  His airtime was largely free because of his antics.  Love him or hate him, you know him as a business man who is self funded, can’t be bought or controlled because of this, and is playing this election smartly.  I think he’s spent less money than everyone else, which shows what happens when you spend your own money rather then other people’s money: you do it wisely.  Regardless of his positions, Trump became the ‘fuck you’ candidate for the anti-establishment republicans tapping into the anger they have for the process.  No one really knows his positions on anything, and it doesn’t really matter what they are.  What matters is that he is not of the political elite, and the political elite are now perceived as the problem, and the solution to that problem is to not elect anyone from that crowd or whomever they endorse.

We keep hearing news reports about how Trump is damaging the ‘Republican Brand’.  If playing the part of the Washington Senators and continually getting beat up by democrats is their brand, then good, that brand deserves to be damaged.  In reality, it is the Elite that have damaged the party of limited government, strong defense, protected borders, and energy independence.  

So what is the elite to do?  Well, they all few down to a secluded Island in 54 private jets to figure this out.  They don’t like Cruz or Kasich because they are conservatives.  They enlist Romney to make a big speech.  (That just served to piss people off even further).  So it looks like they are pinning their hopes on Rubio.  But Rubio might not even win his home state of Florida!  It looks like Rubio and Kasich just made a deal that Rubio supporter in Ohio all vote for Kasich and Kasich supporters in Florida should vote for Rubio.  Is this the best the republican elites can do?  And when Trump eventually wins the nomination, then what?  Will they sit this one out and allow Clinton to win (a self-fulfilling prophecy on their part because Clinton is very beatable).  Will they grudgingly back Trump?

What SHOULD the elites do?  They should look in the mirror and recognize they have a major problem, and it isn’t Donald Trump.  It is themselves that refuse to listen to their constituents who are conservatives and will hold these elites to their word when they tell conservatives they will push a conservative agenda of smaller government, stronger defense, strength in leadership worldwide to combat ISIS and global Islamic terrorism, to protect our borders to make us all safer and energy independence so we are not beholden to volatile oil sheiks.  This is a problem of their own creation, and I for one love the fact they are squirming.

What should they have done if they were smart?  They should have backed a conservative like Scott Walker or John Kasich -two proven Governors with plenty of experience for getting things done - for President right from the start.  But they didn’t and said ‘Fuck you’ to us again, so ‘Fuck You’ right back — I’ll support Trump or Kasich, or anyone the elites don’t support just because ‘Fuck You’.

(I’ve always said the Republican party is the Party of Stupid, and they are sure living up to their name.)

So, for the 3rd cycle in a row, a very weak democrat will run against some republican and that weak democrat may win simply because they are running against the Party of Stupid.  But is sure is entertaining to watch, but aside from the entertainment value, our country is in dire shape.

My take on the Supreme Court’s decision on same-sex marriage

1st off, I think a man kissing a man is gross, but I also can't stand black licorice. There's nothing you can do to change my taste buds to like black licorice, just as there's nothing you can do to change my mind about 2 men kissing.  

But, if 2 men love each other and want to spend their lives together, and this makes them happy, who am I to stand in their way? I really don't care. If they choose to sign a legal document defining their relationship, I say great! I'm all for it!  

Here's the issues as I see it:

A) There are 2 components to a marriage. 1) the civil documents that make a marriage legal. 2) the religious component that defines what the word marriage means. The primary arguments everyone is having is how religion is defining what a marriage means. Most religions define marriage as one man and one woman. Religious dogma is extremely slow to change. Some sects have embraced the new definition, some have not, and some will not. But so what? Leave religion out of it!

I don't think anyone has an issue with the civil definition of marriage, and the Supreme Court just affirmed that the civil definition should be used in all 50 states, and I personally think it's about time. But let's not confuse the civil (legal) definition With the religious one. They are different, and you are not going to change the pope's mind.

Most conservatives understand this distinction, but there’s a very vocal minority (those that are conservative for religious reasons) that doesn’t.  I get it, and if explained correctly, the rest will as well.  

HOWEVER, just because the civil definition now includes same-sex, that does not give 2 men the right to expect the Catholic Church to marry them.  That’s an entirely different argument that gay’s will lose, and lose big.  Jews, Muslims etc. will line up squarely behind Catholics on this for one simple reason: If gays win, then there’d be nothing prohibiting anyone entering a Temple or Mosque to have a pig roast, because that too is against their religion, but having the precedent set, that won’t matter anymore.  I believe that this is what the court’s decenters were getting at.

What I also get that it is awkward to ask ‘Will you domestic partner me?’.  It’d be great if there were 2 socially acceptable words for a domestic partnership, but there isn’t.  Perhaps we should enlist the Eskimos because they have several dozen words that mean snow.  Allthough the word is spelled and pronounced the same,  it now has  2 different meanings (civil and religious).  We all have to come to terms with this and the church will need to back off their definition of marriage when it is applied outside of their scope of influence.  

B) There’s an economic component to marriage.  The tax code treats individuals differently than married people.  Married people can file jointly and reap some benefits, while individuals cannot.  A simple conservative solution has been put forth many, many times that alleviates this issue completely so that everyone is treated equally, no matter what or who you are, or who/what you identify as (I’m looking at you Bruce Jenner).  The simple fix is to eliminate all deductions, and simplify the tax code so that there are no ‘IF’ statements.  Just a standard deduction below which no taxes are owed, and then the tax rate that is applied to everything above the standard deduction.  

C) There’s a health care issue involved here too.  All corporate plans and all Obamacare plans only cover families.  So, now that spouses can now be gay, they can now be covered.  Again, there was a conservative health care plan that would have eliminated this issue.  Each individual has a MSA that individuals and/or their employer contributes to.  You, as the manager of your own MSA, can determine who gets covered. So if you want to cover your gay spouse, or even your Auntie Bruce, go for it!  No one will stand in your way because it is YOUR account, and you can do with it as you wish.

The Income Tax Code

I am a programmer by nature. It's what I do and how I'm wired. I think in terms of if...then..else statements. I believe things should be logical and concise.

The goal of our tax system is to generate funds for our federal government to operate.

Our modern day tax code is so full of if..then..else statements that it makes no sense. In the simplest terms, If you earn x then you pay y.

Lets get a bit more complex, shall we?

IF you earn X then
IF are married then
IF you have kids then
IF you own property

You get yourself into the bonus rounds with many deductions when you own a house.

This concept of the 'if statement' in the federal tax code is nothing more than to control our behavior by rewarding us citizens with candy when we do something socially acceptable like getting married, having kids and buying a home. the tax code punishes us when we do something socially unacceptable like earn too much.

Unfortunately, both parties have bought into this tax code philosophy so neither party is interested in reforming the tax code. Both parties sees the tax code as candy to give away to buy votes. There is no wonder why there are so many lobbyist crawling around DC representing some group of people wanting more candy for themselves.

What we need is a tax code that has exactly 2 things congress can control. The interest rate and the standard deduction. That's it. No other deductions and no if statements.

Here is how it works: congress sets the standard interest rate based upon what congress feels they need to spend in the following year. For this example, let's say 25%. The standard household income deduction sets a level below which you don't pay any taxes. Simple to calculate, and simple to understand.

This is similar to Steve Forbe's Flat Tax idea. It was a great idea then, and it still is now.

A question you may have: 'Well what about deductions for children'? Answer: Having children is a life decision and shouldn't be taken lightly. It is your choice to have kids and you need to factor into your thinking if you can afford to have kids or not. It is not FEDGOV place to help or hinder in any way. The same goes for buying a house or any other issue you may have.

If you want these deductions, go to your State governments and lobby them for your candy. It should not be a FEDGOV issue.

The ramifications of this proposal is far reaching. It will cost us citizens virtually nothing to figure out how much we owe. The IRS will shrivel down to a team of about 5000 employees overseeing the computer operations of the simple process. Accountants and lawyers will hate this as their cottage industry will dry up, but I'm sure they'll will find other things to do. It would remove power from And most importantly, it will free us citizens from the overbearing weight of FEDGOv's attempt to control our behavior thus unleashing the power of our capital to build a truly great society in the manner We the People would envision rather than the Utopia that Politicians would force down our throats.

NJ State Triathlon - Olympic . July 19.  It's on!!

NFL Crime and Punishment

Is it enough just to accuse a person of a crime for that person to lose his/her livelihood? Whatever happened to due process?


As for Ray Rice, there is actual video showing the crime. Obviously guilty as he's already admitted as such and apologized for it. Definitely a firing offense. Can he be rehabilitated and re-instated into the NFL? I think yes. I'll bet he'd do anything to play again.

As for Adrian Peterson, The debate on corporal punishment is a heated one. Did he cross a line using something other than an open hand across a bottom? Perhaps he did according to the lines most of us have with dealing with corporal punishment. Did he do anything more than what his own parents did to him? Don't know that answer. Should he get a suspension from his job? Yes, largely because he's already admitted it, but a total ban on him playing? No. I think this incident is a major learning event in this man's life. He'll never do this again.

Micheal Vic went to jail for his crimes. He did his time and got back to playing in the NFL. Neither Adrian nor Ray will do time, but they should have the same opportunity to win back positions in the NFL. 

These are large teaching moments and should be used as such.

Test Twitterfeed

Stay Tuned!

Starting soon I'll begin blogging about my training and my journey.  I am building (at least in my head) an introduction to why I'm doing this and who I've become.

Stay tuned!

Test post

Tis is a test from the ipad blogger app.

The conservative plan for solving our healthcare 'crisis'.

The conservative plan for solving our healthcare 'crisis'.

I am going to set up an analogy to make it clear the roles fedgov, private enterprise and individuals are.  We have a game called football.  This game has rules that have been agreed to, rules that were made by 'we the people' .  We have teams (represents private enterprises) that play on this field and we have referees (represents fedgov) to ensure all the rules are followed and the game is played fairly.  As you can see, this situation is mutually agreed upon and constitutional. 


The game is played, and when new rules are warranted, they are added by 'we the people'.  When one team or another breaks the rules, the referee steps in and calls a penalty.   The game is fair yet the outcome is uncertain for there are no guarantees of success .


But, what happens when the referees suddenly take sides, favoring one team over another?  This creates a very unfair situation, regardless of who the referees are favoring.  This is exactly the situation that the 'Stimulus' bill does, it favors spending on certain industries (green tech for example), or propping up failing companies (Solyndra for example), or funneling cash to states that otherwise need to fix their own fiscal problems rather than hide them (California for example).  This is unfair to well run companies who are playing by the rules, or industries who are providing goods and services that we need and it's unfair to states who do have their fiscal houses in order.


What happens when the referee ALSO fields a team (aka Obamacare)?  Who can compete against that?  The answer is no one can.  The Referee team can pretty much do whatever they please because  they are also refereeing the game.  Anything goes because there will not be any penalties called on themselves.  It is a huge conflict of interest.  A private entity has no chance of succeeding against this team/referee combination for 2 huge reasons: 1) The referees aren't going to call any fouls against themselves, yet will call fouls on their opponents for any reason whatsoever to get them out of the game; and 2) The referee team, if they get into a financial bind can print their own money whereas a private entity cannot.  What private entity can succeed against that?


When a private entity does wrong, it can be sued and people can go to jail.  If fedgov does wrong, it doesn't get sued and people don't go to jail.  Why?  Because in the case of fedgov performing operational tasks such as Obamacare, the regulatory agency is ALSO fedgov.  Fedgov is not going to sue itself. 


What is the solution?  It's actually quite simple.  Fedgov continues in the regulatory function (referee) and 'we the people' set up the parameters of this game thus:

1. Set up the rules governing minimal coverage that people must have; rules to dealing with changing plans and rules for 'pre-existing' conditions (for which will be moot issue)
2. Eliminate barriers to competition by eliminating the restrictions of selling policies across state lines.  Fedgov has been quashing competition in this way, which drives up costs.  Of course there will be consolidations in this industry, but that is all good for competitive reasons. 
3. Allow 'we the people' to set up medical savings accounts (MSA) that employers and individuals can contribute to.  (Rules governing these accounts come from fedgov).  An MSA is yours to do with and is your to manage, they follow you from job to job, so all you need to do is tell your employer where your MSA is, and they will contribute accordingly, thus there is no break in coverage due to changing jobs.  An individual can contribute to an MSA account themselves.  For example, if your parent is ill, you can add money into it to help her out.  Medicare and Medicaid payments also flow into these accounts.  If you know you have an upcoming procedure, you can begin to contribute to it ahead of time.
4. With an MSA, you can choose your own healthcare insurance policies.  You go online, and select the federally (and state) mandated minimum coverage, and then you select whatever options you wish above that.  Because there is no more interstate barriers, you will now have hundred's of companies to choose from.  The choice is now yours, not your company's.  Because there is greater choice, there is greater competition which drive efficiencies and  cost savings to you. 
5. With an MSA, you choose your own doctors according to whatever plans they accept.  It is your money so it is your choice.
6. With an MSA, you can choose WHO to cover, and you can pool your MSA with a spouse(married or a legal domestic partnership, depending on the state).  Every child must be covered, so when a child is born, you tell your employer what to withhold (just as you do now).    Rules need to apply for changing accounts and coverage.  You can choose who to cover so you can cover anyone you wish, including a live-in-boyfriend.  You just pay the premium for his coverage. 
7. With an MSA, the plan is yours and it follows you from employer to employer.  It also is yours when you are unemployed, and you can contribute to it via cobra, or medicaid if need be. Or, your rich uncle can contribute to it.  But, because you have the account, you are covered.  Thus, eliminating the majority of uninsured people, as well as eliminating the majority of 'pre-existing conditions' issue.
8. Hospital visitations are done by who is being covered, not by who is married to whom.
9. Tort reform must be addressed as it is a huge cost driver of healthcare.
10. Rules surrounding 'pre-existing conditions' must be dealt with.  As an analogy, let's say you have no auto insurance, yet you get into an accident.  You then call Geico to get insurance.  Would it be fair for Geico to give you insurance for the accident that already took place?  As you see above, we are trying to eliminate this condition, and with MSA's, we attempt to eliminate them entirely.


As you can see, this plan tackles all of the goals that Obamacare is trying to achieve, but it does so in a way that fedgov still plays referee, but does not field a team.  Costs are driven down for an individual because of enhanced competition, and tort reform.  Costs are also driven down for employers because they do not need to administer plans anymore.  'Pre-Existing Conditions' is being tackled by attempting to eliminate the issue entirely.  Gay spouses can be covered, whereas they are not in most states now. 




  

iOwnTheWorld.com » Blog Archive » America Turning Redder

iOwnTheWorld.com » Blog Archive » America Turning Redder

» The GOP Pro-Growth, Flat Tax Competition - Big Government

» The GOP Pro-Growth, Flat Tax Competition - Big Government

Senate rejects big piece of Obama jobs bill

Senate rejects big piece of Obama jobs bill

USPS in Trouble

Here is the basic problem with federal government operating a business.  This article is all about the US Post Office, but it highlights clearly the issues.  USPS has been losing customers for years due to several factors.  One factor is competition from UPS and FedEx and another factor is technology that has enabled people and businesses to go Green by becoming paperless.

The paperless company has the ability to do Electronic Fund Transfers (no more mailing checks), emails, EDI (Electronic Data Interchange) which allows sales orders, Purchase Orders, Invoices, Shipping Documents etc. all to be electronically mailed rather then using USPS.  USPS has been losing volume for years and will continue to do so.  It's not like this was sudden or unexpected.

Competition is stiff among USPS, UPS and FedEx.  Competition leads to innovations and improvements in services as we see all the time with UPS and FedEx's commercials detailing new, cheaper services. They can make these changes to products and services rather easily, and bring these to market quickly.  The USPS cannot.  THE USPS needs an act of congress to enable change (and we all know how fast they can move...not).  By design, the USPS cannot be flexible enough to really compete.  So far, they have been able to get away with this because no other service delivers mail to the door because by law, the USPS has a virtual monopoly on this service.

Labor costs are literally strangling the USPS. 

"At the same time, decades of contractual promises made to unionized workers, including no-layoff clauses, are increasing the post office’s costs. Labor represents 80 percent of the agency’s expenses, compared with 53 percent at United Parcel Service and 32 percent at FedEx, its two biggest private competitors. Postal workers also receive more generous health benefits than most other federal employees. "

Let me repeat:  Labor represents 80% of the expenses.  How can the USPS compete or just survive with labor costs so high, and no ability to make any changes due to contract?  (Who in their right mind signs a no-layoff contract knowing full well the need to lay off workers?)  Obviously the labor issue is a political hot potato.  USPS needs to lay off workers for obvious reasons but unions will not allow it. 

So far, I've attempted to keep partisanship out of this to lay the foundations for the discussion.  Here are the points I wish to make:

1. How did labor get to be 80% of USPS costs?  As the NYT points out, "decades of contractual promises made to unionized workers, including no-layoff clauses, are increasing the post office’s costs."  This is what happens when a political party and a Public Sector Union get together in a cozy situation.  The unions get great benefits and great contracts and the political party gets untold support in money, organization, protesters, phone banks, gotv etc. to reelect members of that party.  It’s a vicious cycle that may benefit unions and the party, but it is extremely costly to 'We The People" who have to pay for it.  I know there is a need for Private sector Unions, but not for Public Sector Unions.  Like it or not, Scott Walker in Wisconsin fought hard to give the tools needed for districts to save money.  The results are clear that he did the right thing. 

2. This is an example of why government should not run an industry.  It cannot react fast enough to compete, nor can the business model change without an act of congress.   This applies to Obamacare, which is about to destroy the health insurance industry to replace it with Government run healthcare.  The very same issues that are happening to USPS will happen to Obamacare, except there will be no competition from the private sector  thus reducing any incentive to innovate or improve services.  How can a company compete against Obamacare  Inc. when Obamacare Inc. can just print more money?

3. As to what to do about the USPS, perhaps it is time to privatize it.  Let it operate as a stand-alone business with some congressional oversight, but allow it to make it's own contracts with unions, allow it to modernize, allow it to operate in a way it can make money again, and lastly, remove some of the restrictions about carrying 1st class mail that perhaps other companies can compete in this arena.  This is just a suggestion.  One thing is clear, we cannot just print more money to allow this situation to continue.  USPS has to get control over its labor costs, and it has to figure out ways to compete.  Otherwise, it will not survive, and believe me, I just can't wait for the next delivery of junk mail and bills.

Progress Report -- Week1

This is the 1st full week on this new program.  I kinda feel like I woke up from a very long sleep.  Woke up groggy and wondering where the heck am I?  I feel like I'm beginning to get my head straight.  I opened my eyes just a little further and saw my house.  I closed them shut again!  But... opened them up reluctantly to see that I have lots of work to do to get the place in order.  Its a beginning.

Things are still overwhelming, but I feel much better this past week.  I have to rediscover the mental toughness that I had several years ago.  It won't happen overnight, but I'm encouraged so far with the progress.

I laughed this weekend.  Its a very common experience for most people, but not for me in a very long time.  Most people laugh and feel better afterwards.  That's why we laugh... to feel better and put aside problems for just a little bit. Yeah, I fake laugh a lot to keep up appearances but it isn't the feel better kind of laugh.

I laughed this weekend because of something my eldest did.  She played a practical joke on me that a week  before, I would have been very angry.  She put a rubber band around the kitchen sink spritzer and made sure it was aimed well.  So when I turned on the faucet, I got a blast of water in my face.  Of course the entire kitchen was hosed down too before I stopped the water.  It was a great joke executed very well!  Seeing my eldest's face trying to hold back the mirth... waiting for my reaction to know if she needed to run to the next county... I laughed.  And when I was done laughing, I gave her a big hug and some sponges to clean the mess up.

It felt good to laugh.  I hope to do it more.  Its a beginning.

Back to the program.  I am learning lots and I'm losing weight!  I have now lost 2 pounds already!  My energy levels are very good.  I don't feel run down anymore.  I hope to start putting the rest of the items together this week so I can start to earn some money from this.  More to follow when I know more if this will work or not.

My Inner Scream

As you can see, my blog is named 'My Inner Scream'.  I chose this name for a reason, but when I chose it, I didn't know how apropos the name really was.

Most people have an inner monologue.  That voice inside your head that you can debate with, think with, plan with, review past events with etc.  It is the sounding board for editing what will eventually come out of your mouth.  When working properly, it filters out the  improper behaviors or inappropriate responses.

I say most people have this function working properly.  Some do not.  My youngest does not have an inner monologue, it all comes out of her mouth without any editing at all.  There are many clinical names for this and many types of remedies, but that isn't the focus of this discussion.  She is a very happy, intelligent person who just needs to fine tune her editing skills.

When something out of the ordinary happens, that inner voice begins screaming "LOOK OUT!".  It's what causes the hair at the back of your neck to stand up and to get you to pay close attention to your surroundings and to ensure your speech filters are more tuned than normal.  For instance, you are driving your car and your '6th' sense is warning you something is amiss.  You look over your shoulder and another car is in your blind spot moving into the lane you are moving into as well.  This is your Inner Scream at work.

I suffer from hearing loss in one ear, and due to the specific injury i suffered when I was 5, I constantly have a high pitched ringing called tinnitus.  It is always there and there is no cure.  All one can do is ignore it, but it is always there.  Ive had 40 years of practice at ignoring it and i'm quite good at it.

What if there are so many things going amiss that your Inner Monologue is constantly screaming at you?  At the time I created this blog, This was the situation I was in.  The job was a hassle, I was going through a divorce, I had financial problems etc.  Everything I was doing seamed to be screaming at me.  At some point, all one can do is ignore it as if it was tinnitus.

As time went on, I became unemployed again.  But this time, it affected me more than I could imagine.  Now I am jobless, house in foreclosure etc.  The racket cannot be ignored any longer.  The din in my head is deafening to a point that it affects everything I do.  It is difficult to do the things that needs to be done.  In more quiet moments I can look around and see what is happening as it manifests itself in my surroundings.  My house is a mess, simple things like paying bills, bathing, getting dressed, laundry or signing up for food stamps etc., aren't taken care of.  I look around and the screaming become louder to take care of things!

I have immersed myself in stupid things to keep me from thinking about my problems: political discussions, TV, online games.  I used to like to read books. I find that I cannot focus on reading because it is too noisy inside to concentrate.

The image on my blog is a perfect representation of how I feel... hands against my ears and screaming back.  At first when I started this blog, the screaming back was in defiance that I CAN and I WILL.  I used this blog as an outlet --- to give written voice to that inner scream.  As time went on and the inner scream didn't subside no matter what I did including therapy.  There was so much screaming that it became overwhelming to write it out.  My screaming back became that of anguish that I was losing the battle.  Unfortunately, now my screaming back resembles the picture perfectly in that it is a scream of utter despair.  I am so overwhelmed by my inner scream.  I don't sleep much and when I wake up most every day wishing that I hadn't.

I hate to admit this but I have shut down almost completely.  Even the activities that I enjoyed such as woodworking and playing my guitar hold no release, no joy nor distraction from my inner scream.  I still go through the motions of searching for work.  I've even had some interviews.  But i fear my passion for IT has also left me and it shows in my voice.  I muster enough enthusiasm when my kids are around, but I just hope I'm not doing them more harm than good.  

One of the reasons I got a dog was to distract them from seeing me as I really am, and to distract me from the inner scream.  Who can be sad with that extremely cute, shaggy face, floppy-eared waggie-tailed doggie around.  When Bella is around, things kinda seem normal.  She has saved my life on numerous occasions and continues to do so.  I take her almost everywhere I go.  She makes everyone smile.  She forces me to get outside a few times a day.

There is no doubt I suffer from depression in the clinical sense.  If you read this, you will have a glimpse into how depression works on people and how they feel.  I had a girlfriend of almost 10 years who suffered from depression and I only caught glimpses of this.  I now know exactly what she is going through.  I broke up with her because as I was sliding hard into depression, all she could do is empathize.  She could not help.  Also, I felt unworthy of being loved nor can I return love because I don't even like myself.  

I am not writing this to gain sympathy!  I don't want it!  No depressed person wants anyone's sympathy.  It only makes us feel worse.  You cannot tell me anything I don't already know and when you try, it makes me feel worse.  Don't tell me 'Do it for your kids.'  I already know this and it just comes off as condescending.  I have alienated several people already by telling them this.  I know the people around me who love me hate seeing this and I know you feel powerless to help.  I truly am sorry, and believe me, it just adds more fuel to the inner scream.  What is a good thing to say is 'I am here for you'...and to be there when we choose to talk about it... but don't respond back with condescending remarks... just listen.

Why am I writing this... why now?  Because something may be happening to change all of this.  I don't want to get into too many details until I know this will work.  I have embarked on a program that hopefully will change the way I think, live and work.  This has the potential to repair my body, mind and soul.  If this works, I'll describe what happened.

Suffice it to say that I started the program today.  I wrote all of this because for the 1st time in a very long time I woke up looking forward to the day.  I feel a little better and the screaming inside has subsided enough to write this out.  I think the 1st step to repairing myself is to repair my body.  I am at 180 pounds and 38 inches around. I will be tracking this all month and I'll post the results here weekly.

Wish me luck!

I beg to differ Mr President

Via Drudge:

NEW YORK (CBS) — After suffering a “shellacking” in the midterm elections, President Obama acknowledges what many have seen as his chief weakness – failing to sell the importance of several legislative milestones to the American people.

“I think that’s a fair argument. I think that, over the course of two years we were so busy and so focused on getting a bunch of stuff done that, we stopped paying attention to the fact that leadership isn’t just legislation. That it’s a matter of persuading people. And giving them confidence and bringing them together. And setting a tone,” Mr. Obama told 60 Minutes’ Steve Kroft in an exclusive interview set to air Sunday.

Mr. President, I think you were very successful in delivering your message. Your problem is that no one was buying it! No matter how much you sell, wrap up your terrible policies with guilded words read from your teleprompter, 'we the people' are smart enough to see through the lipstick to know that we didnt want what was being sold. Nor do 'we the people' like having bad policies rammed down our throats without debates and without a proper reading of the legislation. Us dumb folks don't like people who say 'we need to pass this so we can know what's in it'.

Even those hayseeds from Kansas know that when you buy a car, you need to know what kind of engine it has. Only a true idiot would purchase something that expensive and not know what they are buying. No Mr. President, those people you talk down to and your colleagues like Pelosi, Reid, Kerry et al. who publicly call us morons have purchased a big box full of shit. Who are the idiots?

The election of 2010 -- Rejecting Liberal Policies

The election of 2010 was a complete rejection of the Democrat's liberal policies.  This rejection wasn't just at the federal level either.  State and local elections saw a tidal wave of Republicans being elected.     People are now recognizing that government IS the problem, not the solution and have elected those politicians who advocate for a limited, less intrusive government at all levels.

Historic GOP Gains in State Legislatures

• Going into the 2010 election, Democrats held 60 partisan legislative chambers and Republicans held 36, with a couple of ties.

• It looks like the GOP has picked up an astounding 20 chambers, including both houses in Alabama, Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Carolina, and Wisconsin and additional chambers in Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Montana, New Hampshire, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.

• In total legislative seats, it is possible that after all the results are posted, Republicans will have won a nationwide majority.

• Republicans haven’t enjoyed this much power in state capitals since the 1920s.

This rejection wasn't exactly nationwide, however.  There were a few hold-out states --- NY, NJ, CA, MA, WA --- that are so overwhelmingly liberal that this election had virtually no effect.  But, races that should have been cake walks for Liberals were much closer than expected.  The people of those states need to suffer another 2 years of crushing debt and bad policies before the rising red tide can impact these states as well.  NJ has a fighting chance to curb Liberal policies due to Governor Chris Christie who has already made significant gains by taking on unions, special interests and insuring sound fiscal policies.

I believe 'We the People' have woken up to the destructive policies of the left and are saying finally 'enough is enough'.  WTP DON’T want to be told what light bulb or toilet bowl to use; we DON'T want to be told what kind of car to drive; we DON'T want to be told what doctor to see; we DON'T want nationalized healthcare; we DON'T want crushing national debt left to our children; and we certainly DON'T want a nameless, faceless Washington bureaucrat telling us how to raise our kids.

Now a note to the GOP---  Remember those that got you where you are; Conservatives.  Remember that several squishy Republicans were replaced in the primaries by Conservative Republicans.  We are watching you and we will not forget.  We are fired up and very active and will remain so for quite some time.  2012 will see a new President and it should see a new Senate leadership as well.