Fair? You Want Fair —–

Work for it !!




Sorry but any more fairness out of the government/liberals and everyone will be flat broke.

HILLARY CLINTON, CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT: Now today — today, as the shadow of crisis recedes and longer- term challenges come into focus, I believe we have to build a growth and fairness economy.

And just how much of that crisis was generated by the government mandates, laws, regulations, actions — and effing inaction ? A large portion of it Mrs. Clinton. Mortgage crisis exacerbated by the requirements from regulators that more loans be made in low (and no ) income areas for example.  My taxes keep going up and the only thing keeping pace with them is the number of rules I have to follow; in my personal life and in business. Let’s not kid ourselves here; this isn’t code, this is flat out calling for more income redistribution.

You can’t have one without the other

Well, according to you we already do. And for decades it was a system that lifted millions out of poverty. Strangely enough it was working quite well until we declared “War on Poverty“.

This week, the U.S. Census Bureau is scheduled to release its annual poverty report. The report will be notable because this year marks the 50th anniversary of the launch of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty. In his January 1964 State of the Union address, Johnson proclaimed, “This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America.”[1]

Since that time, U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs (in constant 2012 dollars). Adjusted for inflation, this spending (which does not include Social Security or Medicare) is three times the cost of all military wars in U.S. history since the American Revolution. Despite this mountain of spending, progress against poverty, at least as measured by the government, has been minimal.

This week, the Census Bureau will most likely report that the poverty rate last year was about 14 percent, essentially the same rate as in 1967, three years after the War on Poverty was announced. As Chart 1 shows, according to the Census, there has been no net progress in reducing poverty since the mid to late 1960s. 

The static nature of poverty is especially surprising because (as Chart 1 also shows) poverty fell dramatically during the period before the War on Poverty began. In 1950, the poverty rate was 32.2 percent. By 1965 (the first year during which any War on Poverty programs began to operate), the rate had been cut nearly in half to 17.3 percent

So we are supposed to elect you as President to do what couldn’t be done in your first try as Co-President?
When do we stop doing the same things over and over again ?

More importantly, when do we admit that ‘fair’ isn’t always a desirable goal? Should everyone have a fair chance? Absolutely. But that doesn’t mean every chance will work out the same for everyone. Some people will have bad luck and have to start over. Some people will run into medical problems that derail their plans.

And some people will flat out simply work harder, longer or better than other people. It is ‘fair’ that they get to experience all of the results of that hard work. And that does include more money then some people could ever spend in a lifetime or 10 lifetimes. And yes, it means that some of those people will chose to be selfish with their money. For me it is fair; they earned it, they get to determine how they spend it or not.


Let’s not kid ourselves about her ‘plan’ it is still more tax and spend. I do have to wonder why Mrs. Clinton waited until now; surely as a Senator she had a chance (after chance after chance…) to introduce such legislation.
Sorry Mrs. Clinton but unless you come up with something new; I don’t think I’ll be voting for you.

Please join the discussion.

Can Kicked – Again

Looks like the  issue of Greece’s debt and economy has been pushed back for a little while longer

After months of acrimony, Greece finally clinched a bailout agreement with its European creditors on Monday that will, if implemented, secure the country’s place in the euro and avoid financial collapse.

The terms of the deal, however, will be painful both for Greeks and their radical left-led government, which since its election in January had vowed to stand up to the creditors and reject the budget cuts they have been demanding.

I wonder how the people who suffered from the banking restrictions, the unrest feel about their leaders making essentially the same deal that was offered months ago.

Does anyone really think the latest round of bailout will make a difference?

Greece had requested a three-year, 53.5 billion-euro ($59.5 billion) financial package, but that number grew larger by tens of billions as the negotiations dragged on and the leaders calculated how much Greece will need to stay solvent.

Greece has received two previous bailouts, totaling 240 billion euros ($268 billion), in return for deep spending cuts, tax increases and reforms from successive governments. Although the country’s annual budget deficit has come down dramatically, Greece’s debt burden has increased as the economy has shrunk by a quarter.

They’ve already did the same thing twice already. Starting to look like a bad real life version of “Ground Hog Day” without the principals actually learning anything.
Not in Greece, not in the Eurozone, not in America or China. No one seems to be taking the issue to heart and making actual reform or changes to stave off disaster.

I hope that I’m just being alarmist here. What do you think about the state of the economy?


One Of The Reasons – Bernie Sanders

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is running to Hillary Clinton’s left on nearly every other issue — but says he can “bring us to the middle” on guns.

His idea of the center and mine are a little different. I would really not like to see what

But he touted several other votes, pointing to his support for banning semi-automatic weapons, for instant background checks for gun owners and for doing away with loopholes that allow buyers at gun shows to skirt some regulations.

Yeah, I don’t think touting past votes to ban semi-automatic weapons, for closing the ‘gun show loophole’ is anywhere near moving to the center. I would like to see some of his proposals for ‘bringing us to the middle’ on guns. Unfortunately his presidential bid website doesn’t seem to address that issue yet.

He said there’s a major difference between Vermont, a rural state with little gun control where hunting is a way of life, and cities like Chicago, where guns are used by gangs.
“Folks who do not like guns is fine. But we have millions of people who are gun owners in this country — 99.9% of those people obey the law,” Sanders said.

Yes Senator Sanders — there is a difference between the location and the infrastructure but the people are the same for most part. You have fewer gangs in Chicago but the only reason firearms are used mostly by the criminals there is really simple; the law abiding were forbidden to use them until very recently ! Surely those same people who are law abiding in Vermont would be law abiding in Chicago right?

“I want to see real, serious debate and action on guns, but it is not going to take place if we simply have extreme positions on both sides. I think I can bring us to the middle.”

Gun bans on the most common semi-automatic rifle (if he is only taking about banning ‘assault rifles’) isn’t ‘extreme’? Come on Senator Sanders; at least acknowledge the fact your position is already on the far side of what makes up the middle ground.

You might have some great ideas but this issue, combined with others I’ll explore later, keeps me from taking you serious as a candidate I could vote for.

Please join the discussion.

Financial News – Greece

Global stock markets sank Monday after Greece closed its banks and imposed capital controls in a dramatic turn in its struggle with heavy debts.

Oil prices declined and the euro edged down after Athens announced the moves to stanch the flow of money out of Greek banks and pressure creditors to offer concessions before a bailout program expires Tuesday.

Germany’s DAX index tumbled 2.9 percent to 11,161.41 points in early trading and France’s CAC-40 dived 3.4 percent to 4,887.69. Britain’s FTSE 100 dropped 1.6 percent to 6,643.83. Futures augured losses on Wall Street. Dow futures were down 1.1 percent at 17,677.00. S&P 500 futures shed 1.1 percent to 2,073.00.

Greece’s Cabinet closed banks for six business days and restricted cash withdrawals. The Athens Stock Exchange was due to be closed Monday. That follows Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras’ weekend decision to call a referendum on European and International Monetary Fund proposals for Greek reforms in return for bailout funds.

The accelerating crisis has raised questions about whether Greece might withdraw from the 19-nation euro currency, a move dubbed Grexit.

While this has happened in the past; I strongly suggest people keep an eye out. Each time this happens the odds of the problem cascading to affect our economy increases.  As everyone knows our world economy is very tightly interwoven with so many other countries. Even if we don’t have much direct trade with Greece, other countries do so if their economy tanks it can impact ours.
Next, I would also suggest people study how the Greek government has and will handle this. One of the common steps as shown above is a ‘bank holiday’. Think about what would do how you handle business, how you would put food on the table and gas in your car. People still have to work, still have to get to doctor’s appointments, buy medicine etc.

Think about what else the government or banks can do. Remember in 2013?

He should know. As Cypriot finance minister in 2013, Sarris was forced into a deal contingent on winding down a bank on an ELA lifeline. A second bank was forced to raid its clients deposits to recapitalize, a process known as a ‘bail-in’.

How many of us keep most of our money in the banks; wouldn’t it be a kick to find out the bank decided to take 10, 15, 40% of your money to stay afloat?

I’m watching closely and trying to take the lessons to heart. What do you think about the situation?
Please join the discussion>?

Really Mr. President?

“This type of mass violence does not happen in other advanced countries. It doesn’t happen in other places with this kind of frequency.”

— Barack Obama on Thursday, June 18th, 2015 in remarks at the White House

As usual the gun control advocates – aka Anti-Rights Cultists — will try to weasel out of it citing the ‘advanced’ countries specification. As if the people of a high GDP country are any more moral or ethical than anyone else.

In Tunisia, a gunman killed 37 people, mostly tourists, at a seaside resort. In Kuwait, an Islamic State suicide bomber killed at least 27 people at a Shiite mosque. In France, a driver rammed his truck into a U.S.-owned gas factory, where a decapitated body was found with the head hanging at the entrance. In all, at least 65 people were killed across the three continents.

I wonder how Tunisia and Kuwait feel about being left of of the “advanced” country status. Of course, France doesn’t qualify because – well only one person was killed there, right?

Of course even Politifact is having to spin unsuccessfully President Obama’s claim.

We compared mass shooting incidents across countries is to calculate the number of victims per capita — that is, adjusted for the country’s total population size.

Calculating it this way shows the United States in the upper half of the list of 11 countries, ranking higher than Australia, Canada, China, England, France, Germany and Mexico.

Still, the U.S. doesn’t rank No. 1. At 0.15 mass shooting fatalities per 100,000 people, the U.S. had a lower rate than Norway (1.3 per 100,000), Finland (0.34 per 100,000) and Switzerland (1.7 per 100,000).

We’ll note that all of these countries had one or two particularly big attacks and have relatively small populations, which have pushed up their per-capita rates. In Norway, that single attack in 2011 left 67 dead by gunfire (plus additional bomb casualties). Finland had two attacks, one that killed eight and one that killed 10. And Switzerland had one incident that killed 14.

Still, while the United States did rank in the top one-third of the list, the fact that three other countries exceeded the United States using this method of comparison does weaken Obama’s claim that “it doesn’t happen in other places with this kind of frequency.” In at least three countries, the data shows, it does.

Elsass warned PolitiFact of a few caveats about the data. While they believe their database “to be among the most exhaustive compilations available,” Elsass noted that it may not include every instance of mass shootings. It also doesn’t include every example of mass killings — just those committed by firearms, even though mass stabbings are not uncommon in such places as China. Finally, their database doesn’t include acts generally considered to be terrorism, such as the attack in Paris on the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo.

“If these were included, we are likely to see something much different statistically as there have been a number of very high-profile terrorist attacks in Europe, some including the use of firearms, that are excluded from the current analysis,” she said. But in all likelihood, this would only make the case against Obama’s claim stronger.

Emphasis mine – I don’t mind talking about the issues. I don’t mind admitting that America, for whatever reasons, is more homicidal then many other countries. But let’s be honest in our debate.

Please join the discussion. 

Let’s Not Argue Like The Antis

Please, I really beg some of the people on our side to learn how to debate and to do so with some decorum.  Yeah, I know I shouldn’t expect much from an FB discussion group…..but the number of people who actually argue like the antis is quite small. There has been some great points raised about the two recent laws but in a discussion about Campus Carry; it’s obvious some people never were taught how to debate or logic.
The question came up as to why the implementation of Campus Carry has been scheduled for Fall of 2016 for Universities and major Colleges – 2017 for Junior Colleges.
My answer was simple – colleges need time to do it right and do it in such a way so the gun control advocates will not be able to overturn it in the courts.

Example #1

  • Person T  I think its fair that they gave this time. To train campus security and police to handle everything and develop systems and practices and teach their officers how to handle it.
  • Person M —  There’s nothing to train… It’s legal.

Right….140 something years (I think) of Campus Carry being illegal and someone is saying there is no reason to train campus security or police otherwise. I think the vast majority of people recognize how simply inane that is.

Example #2  Person J

So, putting aside the vitriol, your answer is that colleges need time to enforce the law properly, communicate to students and train professionals. Aren’t those all the role of the State? Aren’t all these time-consuming tasks already being handled by the rest of us? Colleges think they are their own little empires and can interpret the First and Second Amendment however their little liberal minds choose.


The first line fails to distinguish between developing procedures and policies in accordance with the law and “enforcing the law” — I thought  police and the courts enforced the law. And yes, continuing with the first line, administrations do need time to communicate with the students. In fact, it is required by the law !!

(d-1) After consulting with students, staff, and faculty of  the institution regarding the nature of the student population, specific safety considerations, and the uniqueness of the campus environment, the president or other chief executive officer of an institution of higher education in this state shall establish reasonable rules, regulations, or other provisions regarding the carrying of concealed handguns by license holders on the campus of
the institution or on premises located on the campus of the institution. The president or officer may not establish provisions that generally prohibit or have the effect of generally prohibiting license holders from carrying concealed handguns on the campus of the institution. The president or officer may amend the provisions as necessary for campus safety. The provisions take effect as determined by the president or officer unless subsequently amended
by the board of regents or other governing board under Subsection  (d-2). The institution must give effective notice under Section 30.06, Penal Code, with respect to any portion of a premises on which license holders may not carry.

Yes, the legislative actually requires the administrations to at least talk to the students. Not follow their advice (which can be good or bad) but talking to a couple thousand people or at least setting it up to do so is going to take some time. Acting on the information given isn’t going to happen over night.  And yes, making sure that campus security and the campus police are aware of and can properly interpret the requirements and restrictions of the new policies takes time. Again – we are overturning decades of previous habits and training. Change takes time in some cases.

And let’s continue – with the next line and talk about lessons we should have learned in civics class in high school. No, developing policies and procedures for universities and colleges is not the role of the state.


This is the one that got my goat. Example #3 – Person J

I simply asked you to defend your position that colleges should be allowed to each make up their own laws regarding campus carry.


That is such a straw man argument I was shocked it didn’t come from the mind of a gun control advocate. Seriously. For those of you who know me in real life, I’ll give you the link to the FB argument if you want it. I’d advise against looking; it might make your brain pop. Regardless anyone who knows me, knows that I would never argue that colleges ‘should be allowed to make up their own laws’. Nothing in my statements could be remotely twisted to mean that. I asked three times for him to quote my words
Again this is about not making our side indistinguishable from the antis — that type of attack is beneath us. We can discuss if 14 months is too long. We can discuss why it is reasonable to make sure the rules the schools come up with can withstand a court challenge in a reasonable debate.


I just want to close and make sure I say this. I am not saying it is wrong to think the legislative made a bad decision. I’m not saying it is wrong to think the law should be enacted quicker. I’m not saying you have to agree with campus carry or not. — Those are all valid opinions; just don’t argue like the antis is all.

Please join the discussion.

State Department News

Probably everyone has heard of the recent efforts of the State Department (PDF of proposal here – search for ITAR to invoke the International Trafficking in Arms Regulations (ITAR) in order to remove ‘technical data” from discussion and posting online. This is nothing short of two things: first an attempt to circumvent our right to free speech and in my opinion more importantly, a distraction.

Paragraph (b) of the revised definition explicitly sets forth the Department’s requirement of authorization to release information into the ”public domain.” Prior to making available ”technical data” or software subject to the ITAR, the U.S. government must approve the release through one of the following: (1) The Department; (2) the Department of Defense’s Office of Security Review; (3) a relevant U.S. government contracting authority with authority to allow the ”technical data” or software to be made available to the public, if one exists; or (4) another U.S. government official with authority to allow the ”technical data” or software to be made available to the public.

The requirements of paragraph (b) are not new. Rather, they are a more explicit statement of the ITAR’s requirement that one must seek and receive a license or other authorization from the Department or other cognizant U.S. government authority to release ITAR controlled ”technical data,” as defined in § 120.10. A release of ”technical data” may occur by disseminating ”technical data” at a public conference or trade show, publishing ”technical data” in a book or journal article, or posting ”technical data” to the Internet.

This proposed provision will enhance compliance with the ITAR by clarifying that ”technical data” may not be made available to the public without authorization. Persons who intend to discuss ”technical data” at a conference or trade show, or to publish it, must ensure that they obtain the appropriate authorization.



I don’t think there is a snowballs chance in Hades of this going through; while there are reasons to limit ‘technical information’ but most of what the people publish online is common knowledge. Should a diagram and blue print for a Mosin Nagant become subject to ITAR despite the fact that firearm has been around for over 100 years?

So why does the State Department elect (here is a hint) to make this move at this time?

Of course the answer is a distraction.

Speaking by telephone, Clinton told the more than 1,300 fast food workers gathered at a convention in Detroit that every worker deserves a fair wage and the right to unionize. 

“I want to be your champion. I want to fight with you every day,” said Clinton, who kicked off her presidential campaign in April saying she wants to be the champion for “everyday Americans.”

The call was another step to the left for Clinton, as she vies for the Democratic nod with progressive candidates Bernie Sanders andMartin O’Malley. She told the assembled crowd that they should continue building the Fight for 15 movement, which is pressing employers to raise workers’ pay.

From Politics

That hissing sound you just heard is more air coming out of thebubble in the global bond market. From Germany to the U.S., fixed income prices tanked last week, sending yields way up. The turmoil is a clear signal that investors are bracing for higher interest rates — whether the Federal Reserve is ready for its first rate hike in a decade or not.

Greece needs money to pay its bills. But creditors don’t want to fork over more dough until it agrees to difficult economic reforms, which would prove Greece is working to stand on its own two feet.
The two sides have been wrangling for months over the terms of a deal that would see lenders give Greece 7.2 billion euros ($8 billion), which is the final portion of a previously agreed to bailout program that could save the country from a messy “Grexit” scenario.

From economic news at home and aboard.

The Affordable Care Act gets less disastrous every day. The latest boost: Overall costs are now likely to be $14 billion per year lower than estimated just two months ago, and $56 billion per year cheaper than the first official estimate in 2010. That’s a 30% reduction, compared with the 2010 numbers.

The Congressional Budget Office regularly updates its cost projections for all big federal programs, and its latest numbers show an improvement related to Obamacare, as the ACA is known, that few supporters or critics saw coming. In 2010, the year Congress passed the law, the CBO said the annual cost of administering the law and providing subsidies to enrollees to help them purchase insurance would be about $172 billion in 2019, when all the provisions of the law are fully in effect. In January of this year, CBO dropped its 2019 estimate to $135 billion per year. It has now dropped that even lower, to $121 billion per year.

What’s behind the slowdown?

Nobody is quite sure why the growth in healthcare costs has slowed so dramatically, after two decades of growth at 3 or 4 times the rate of inflation, which harmed both family and company budgets. Possible reasons: A tough recession that forced many families to cut back on healthcare spending, cost-control efforts throughout the healthcare system, and insurance policies that force consumers to pay more out of pocket, making them more likely to cut bank on nonessential things.

From previous disasters the administration pushed through. Let’s face it, there are many reasons the Obama Administration wants the pro-rights crowd being on the defensive. Not the least is the number of pro-rights laws being passed in many states. I’ll be talking about two here soon; Open Carry and Campus Carry, here in Texas. In the mean time; have some fun looking around at some the technical data published on the internet; wonder how these folks are going to react to the proposed law.

Please join the discussion.