May 2010


Alan, Cather­ine, Ken, Mike, Richard, Shel­ley, Megan, Max and another dozen of you I either didn’t get names from or I can’t recall: thank you. Your help yes­ter­day and today was invalu­able in pump­ing and re-pumping our base­ment, break­ing down the cel­lar door, then unload­ing the base­ment, bag­ging, haul­ing and tak­ing care of debris.

Thanks to the man in the orange shirt, who noticed the bur­den of our sun­porch and helped me be aware of how to address it.

Thank you each for your warmth, kind­ness, good humor and unfail­ing spirit. I hon­estly believe that because I was so grate­ful for your pres­ence, help and moral sup­port, I moved beyond grief at what was lost and could so clearly see what was gained.

Bless­ings on you. All of you. All of us.

Read the rest.
We have a great country. It’s the people, not the government.
“We the people, in order to form a more perfect union…”

Advertisements

On this Memorial Day, I have thought of who deserves the honor of the new ribbon to be presented by this administration, and I had to get spiritual to find a worth receipient.
There is an individual in the Bible about 2000 years ago who was described as having incredible power and ability. Dead brought back to life, walking on water, and demons asking permision to do things. Later in his life, he had a moment where a mob was arresting him and Peter cut off the ear of Malchus. He replied “Don’t you know that at a word my father will send a legion of angels?” I am amazed at the restraint. Consider going through torture and death when at a word it would all stop and tormentors cease. Jesus’s restraint provided salvation, and as such we are blessed as a result. Therefore, I present the galant restraint ribbon to Jesus.
For the rest of our warriors, I wish the Congressional Medal of Honor, Silver star, and Purple Heart.
I worked at a mental health facility where we had a week of training on how to deal with those individuals. One member of my group stated he might have a hard time doing the actions presented. I, of course, asked why. Well this individual was a retired Marine and stated that for the last 20 years, if someone came towards him to commit harm, it was his job to take them out, not back off.
We have a force that is committed, trained, and dedicated to the best interests of our country. My prayers are for them as they take that training and fight an enemy with one hand tied. They all deserve better than our present administration is providing. I hope none of them earn the yellow award. They deserve better honor than that.

This link has an interesting tone generator. I did have fun playing with it, though couldn’t get it to copy over here.

Commander in Chief John A. Logan of the Grand Army of the Republic issued the 1868 proclamation declaring the first Decoration Day. He credited his wife, Mary Logan, with the suggestion for the commemoration. But the idea had its roots in the decoration of the graves of Civil War dead by women, going back at least to 1864.

On April 25, 1866, in Columbus, Mississippi, a women’s association decorated the graves of both Union and Confederate soldiers. In a nation trying to find a way to move on after a war that split the country, states, communities and even families, this gesture was welcomed as a way to lay the past to rest while honoring those who had fought on either side.

The first formal observance seems to have been on May 5, 1866, in Waterloo, New York — President Lyndon Johnson recognized this as the “Birthplace of Memorial Day.”

On May 30, 1870, General Logan gave an address in honor of the new commemorative holiday. In it he said: “This Memorial Day, on which we decorate their graves with the tokens of love and affection, is no idle ceremony with us, to pass away an hour; but it brings back to our minds in all their vividness the fearful conflicts of that terrible war in which they fell as victims…. Let us, then, all unite in the solemn feelings of the hour, and tender with our flowers the warmest sympathies of our souls! Let us revive our patriotism and love of country by this act, and strengthen our loyalty by the example of the noble dead around us….”

From here.

I am indebted to “The Smallest Minority” for finding this and bringing it back to mind.

I compare the thoughts presented with the post I previously noted where an economist stated the stimulus had done what was planned – moved income from the private sector to the government.
Refer to here.
“”It’s the system working as it should,” Van de Water says. Government is stimulating growth and helping people in need, he says. As the economy recovers, private wages will rebound, he says.”
The last phrase is backwards in reality. The economy will only recover as the private wages rebound. That is how the economy is defined. The government cannot rebound the economy as they are a drag on the finances by removing them from circulation and producing nothing as a result. The smaller the government, the better the economy. William Bradford discovered this well before this nation’s founding:
“The experience that was had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years and that amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanity of that conceit of Plato’s and other ancients applauded by some of later times; that the taking away of property and bringing in community into a commonwealth would make them happy and flourishing; as if they were wiser than God. For this community (so far as it was) was found to breed much confusion and discontent and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort. For the young men, that were most able and fit for labour and service, did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men’s wives and children without any recompense. The strong, or man of parts, had no more in division of victuals and clothes than he that was weak and not able to do a quarter the other could; this was thought injustice. The aged and graver men to be ranked and equalized in labours and victuals, clothes, etc., with the meaner and younger sort, thought it some indignity and disrespect unto them. And for men’s wives to be commanded to do service for other men, as dressing their meat, washing their clothes, etc., they deemed it a kind of slavery, neither could many husbands well brook it. Upon the point all being to have alike, and all to do alike, they thought themselves in the like condition, and one as good as another; and so, if it did not cut off those relations that God hath set amongst men, yet it did at least much diminish and take off the mutual respects that should be preserved amongst them. And would have been worse if they had been men of another condition. Let none object this is men’s corruption, and nothing to the course itself. I answer, seeing all men have this corruption in them, God in His wisdom saw another course fitter for them.” (bold mine)

Those not rewarded for their efforts (greed according to the video) are not inclined to produce as much. Notice also, the experience noted that respect was diminished – any different for the welfare receipients now? Didn’t they provide the LoneStar card to reduce the stigma of having Food Stamps? History not learned is repeated.

From here via Dissecting Leftism

“Don’t color Veronique de Rugy shocked, shocked to find that government spending crowds out private investment, but the results of the new study by Harvard Business School will certainly shock some Keynesian academics — and high-ranking government officials. Instead of providing a stimulating effect to the economy, government spending creates pressures on private industry to reduce staff and investment. The study’s authors count themselves as among the shocked:
Recent research at Harvard Business School began with the premise that as a state’s congressional delegation grew in stature and power in Washington, D.C., local businesses would benefit from the increased federal spending sure to come their way.
It turned out quite the opposite. In fact, professors Lauren Cohen, Joshua Coval, and Christopher Malloy discovered to their surprise that companies experienced lower sales and retrenched by cutting payroll, R&D, and other expenses. Indeed, in the years that followed a congressman’s ascendancy to the chairmanship of a powerful committee, the average firm in his state cut back capital expenditures by roughly 15 percent, according to their working paper, “Do Powerful Politicians Cause Corporate Downsizing?”
“It was an enormous surprise, at least to us, to learn that the average firm in the chairman’s state did not benefit at all from the unanticipated increase in spending,” Coval reports.
This surprising result does not come from a misapprehension about pork and its relation to the chairmanships of the committees. Indeed, the study shows that pork dollars flow in mighty streams from those chairs to home districts and states. It’s not just earmarks, either, but also legislative expenditures that increase:
The average state experiences a 40 to 50 percent increase in earmark spending if its senator becomes chair of one of the top-three congressional committees. In the House, the average is around 20 percent.
For broader measures of spending, such as discretionary state-level federal transfers, the increase from being represented by a powerful senator is around 10 percent.
And yet:
In the year that follows a congressman’s ascendancy, the average firm in his state cuts back capital expenditures by roughly 15 percent.
There is some evidence that firms scale back their employment and experience a decline in sales growth.
If this seems counterintuitive, it might be from marinating too long in Beltway conventional wisdom. When private entities (citizens or businesses) retain capital, it gets used in a more rational manner, mainly because the entity has competitive incentives to use capital wisely and efficiently. The private entity also has his own interests in mind, and can act quickly to use the capital to its best application. Private entities innovate and look to create and expand markets, creating more growth.
In comparison, government moves much slower with capital. It generally works to its own benefit and not that of private entities. Lacking competition, there is no incentive for efficiency. Most importantly, it rarely creates new markets or growth but instead creates a spoils system that ends up reorganizing the status quo to favor some and disfavor others.
All of that is certainly true in the long-term sense. It now appears true in the short-term sense as well, despite the immediate application of government funds to specific areas. If this study is true, it calls into question the entire concept of Keynesian stimulus, and it shows that the Obama administration has gone in an entirely wrong direction both in concept and in practical terms in attempting to create economic growth. The best way to achieve growth appears to be to eliminate government interventions and to keep capital in the hands of the private sector. And that’s no shock at all to anyone who pays attention to economics.”

I don’t want to forget that Bush was one who started this boondoggle with his tarp and provided cover for Pres 0 to continue unabated unfunded spending. Next, remember that the congress is charged per the Constitution with being in charge of spending, and as such, there are 435 candidates eligible for replacement in November.

www.bussorah.wordpress.com
Some corporate communications that would make Dilbert proud
As of tomorrow, employees will only be able to access the building using individual security cards. Pictures will be taken next Wednesday, and employees will receive their cards in two weeks.’ (Microsoft Corp in Redmond WA)

‘What I need is an exact list of specific unknown problems we might encounter.’ (Lykes Lines Shipping)

E-mail is not to be used to pass on information or data. It should be used only for company business.’ (Accounting manager, Electric Boat Company)

‘This project is so important we can’t let things that are more important interfere with it.’ (Advertising/ Marketing manager, United Parcel Service)

‘Doing it right is no excuse for not meeting the schedule.’ (Plant Manager, Delco Corporation)

‘No one will believe you solved this problem in one day! We’ve been working on it for months. Now go act busy for a few weeks and I’ll let you know when it’s time to tell them.’ (R&D supervisor, Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing/ 3M Corp)

Quote from the Boss: ‘Teamwork is a lot of people doing what I say.’ (Marketing executive, Citrix Corporation)

My sister passed away and her funeral was scheduled for Monday. When I told my Boss, he said she died on purpose so that I would have to miss work on the busiest day of the year. He then asked if we could change her burial to Friday. He said,’That would be better for me.’ (Shipping executive, FTD Florists)

‘We know that communication is a problem, but the company is not going to discuss it with the employees.’ (Switching supervisor, AT&T Long Lines Division)

Next Page »