Showing posts with label consequence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label consequence. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 8, 2015

RL Sept. 08 15 (The End of Europe)

The End Of Europe
"Refugee"
Immigration
Iran
Foreign
BtF: Think, The Mess, Ferguson Effect, Freedom Of, Economic, Education, 2016, Clinton, and The Other.

Sunday, June 28, 2015

RL June 28 15

Fundamental Concepts - Game Over 
The Fall
The Left
Executive
Greece
Marriage
Foreign
BtF: Freedom of, The Mess, SCOTUS, Think, ans The Others

Thursday, February 5, 2009

Breaking the Stimulus Package

I am getting sick of all of this the misleading focus on the "pork". The bill is fundamentally flawed. I hope the republicans are not just being obstructionists. I don't think they are. I don't want to paint them as saviors, but it is a two party system after all.

The package has five main parts with some over lay and bad little bits. The US first ideas about purchases is a bad little bit. Focus and the main parts is imperative. First the pork. Things like the fountains in Washington state and water parks in Florida. That overlaps with the so called stimulative spending. That is the road spending and well that is really it from where sit but some include school improvements and the like. That then overlaps into what i call regulatory spending. The green jobs, efficient buildings, carbon reduction demonstration, std education and weather stripping type programs. The more distinct sections are the tax cuts. The other is the social safety net expansions. That is the 65% payments of COBRA, food stamp and unemployment extensions and blanket medicare cover for the unemployed?

The Pork. Pork is Pork do you need and argument against it? The bill way to expensive. We already carry to much dept. Let it go.

The Stimulus. There is going to be some in this bill. They have to be labor intensive, can start this year, the finished product helps the economy and the project will be there for 10+ years. Stimulus is not better than tax cuts as follows.

The Regulatory. Dump it all. This is not the time to tinker with everything. None of it meets the criteria of the Stimulus section, it applies here to. Do we need any more panels and commissions? More bureaucracy.

The Safety Net. It is more Social engineering. That in part is what got us into this. People need help now. Fine. That cannot become the base line for next years spending. If we spend less next year on them it cannot be allowed to be called cut. There must be an iron clad sunset of these expansions.

The Tax Cuts. Is it More stimulating to give a business a 1000 in tax cuts or 1000 in sales? Sales in the end puts only the profits in there pockets and then they pay taxes on it. The cuts as I know them now they are just gimmicks. 1000 to individuals will do nothing. People will save it and when things come back it will be there to go back into the economy and spur inflation. Fast write off are just giving money to companies now instead of two years or so from now. What is that going to do as we recover? Both of the cut are doing more harm than good. The cuts have to rate cuts and they have to be certain. People can't think that they can be raised in a couple months.

Not In the Bill
  1. Bad asset fix( the original TARP would have done it)
  2. A housing fix. Encourage interest cut till the loans are solvent. No cram down
  3. Reverse the mark to market and up tick changes
  4. Clear path to get business out from under the Government
  5. Clear statement that we will let everyone fail after one or two round of help( bad but it's where we are)
  6. Clear statement of capitalism
  7. Sunsets for everything, Anything not spent in the next 2 years is taken back.
The bill is fundamentally wrong. It has to be stopped. Filibuster. STOP Talking pork. It is just spin and is unbelievably stupid. It is the least of the problems. Filibuster!

Tuesday, March 18, 2008

Honor for good or bad

I vegging in front of the tv as i do far to often. Watching two what have so far been lackluster shows on Fox (entertainment not news). Honor enters into the second show, so a brief rundown. Serial rapist and murder kills nun. Detectives find one surviver and she doesn't want testify. they convince her to and promise to protect her. In flash backs to the 16th,17th century?, throughout the lead detective's girlfriend is raped buy the lord of the house?. He makes an insensitive comment then decides to duel the lord. Kills him and leaves town because it wasn't his place to challenge. Flash forward the witness leaves protection and is found died. Turns out she lost a sister back in India to an honor killing. Her other sister called her to meet and her father killed her.

early on our detective friend( 400 yrs old to explain the 2-300 yr flashback, it is tv) laments that honor doesn't exist in America. I am with him. Later after killing the lord he ponders whether it was honorable to kill him of if it was just revenge and if thats all honor really was, well something like that. i should have written this while it was still fresh. At the time i thought it was a little odd. At the end there are the comments about "how is it honorable the kill someone for being raped" and "she deserved better than that". True, but looking at it now, are they taking the extremes and bash honor in general? Not where i was going.

The thought i was having which is the more palatable version today is the only thing evil needs to win is for good men to do nothing. To extend that one does they think is right despite the legal and social consequences as well as ignoring personal hardship. In short honor. The problem is when it goes to far,no. When the good man thinks he is one but is not. Killing an unapologetic rapist i have no problem with. I likely couldn't do it myself but i would not be able to send someone else to jail for it. Of course i am not sure that they would even let the fact that the "victim" was a rapist. However killing your daughter for not being "pure" anymore is inexcusable. In that case i think it is more a selfish move to protect his own honor. Is disowning her not enough?

In the end i am saying that as much as i like to encourage honorable actions that means encouraging actions of those who think they are honorable. I think i can live with that. I do wish the law was more flexible. Should i face jail for hitting someone once after they untruthfully slurring members of my family repeatedly to put it nicely?