Archive for February 7, 2009

They Were All Good Boys

I called my rams from the pasture; they all came running obediently, knowing that I had feed for them. The man with the trailer was there, waiting. After they finished their corn, I grabbed one of my keeper rams and led him up into the trailer. The younger rams obediently followed. After all, I was their shepherd and looked out for their well being.

I took out the two senior rams that I was going to keep. The man counted out my pieces of silver (so to speak), and my betrayed, gentle rams headed off to slaughter for I couldn’t afford to feed them any longer. I kept them much too long waiting for rain that hasn’t come and, really, they should have been slaughtered a year ago, but I kept them busy grazing around the property to keep the fire danger down. Or so I justified it to myself.

I went to the feed store and grocery store afterwards and spent 1.25 sheep.

Comments (2) »

“Days of Terror” in Mexico

From the Miami Herald:

The kidnapping trend is so prevalent in Mexico that people know kidnappers believe they can collect between $15,000 and $22,400 within a week.

In one of the worst cases reported in Mexico City, a 5-year-old boy from a poor family also from Iztapalapa was kidnapped from a flea market. The boy’s kidnappers requested the equivalent of about $22,400 in ransom, but killed the child by injecting acid into his heart before any money could be exchanged. They feared getting caught.

”We are not living in fear, these are days of terror,” said González. “People today feel more at risk, and they want to protect their families, their children.”.

This is what we can expect with a breakdown in society. If you fear the breakdown is coming here, too, best prepare now.

Having lived on the Mexican border, I know that the breakdown is already occurring without any assistance whatsoever from Washington except rhetoric about racism.

Thanks for the video link, Robert D.

Comments (15) »

At What Point Do You Stop Being a Kid?

Two 20-year-old men and an 18-year-old man from Jacksonville (read story here) were arrested for going up to Kingsland, Georgia, to rob and kill people. The comment section noted that they were “kids”, as though that somehow excused their actions.

When I was 15 through 17 years old, I worked two jobs, one after school and one on the weekend. When I was 20 years old, I was married, working, an Army veteran, and had a child. I knew that if I wanted to survive, I had to do it on my own, and I was not somebody else’s responsibility. The idea of robbing and killing people for their money never entered my head.

Don’t give me any crap about “kids”. They were adults who planned to rob and murder.

Comments (1) »

The Wall Street Journal’s Article on Obama’s Loser Stimulus Plan

Excerpt:

Speaking to a House Democratic retreat on Thursday night, Mr. Obama took on those critics. “So then you get the argument, well, this is not a stimulus bill, this is a spending bill. What do you think a stimulus is? (Laughter and applause.) That’s the whole point. No, seriously. (Laughter.) That’s the point. (Applause.)”

So there it is: Mr. Obama is now endorsing a sort of reductionist Keynesianism that argues that any government spending is an economic stimulus. This is so manifestly false that we doubt Mr. Obama really believes it. He has to know that it matters what the government spends the money on, as well as how it is financed. A dollar doled out in jobless benefits may well be spent by the worker who receives it. That $1 of spending will count as economic activity and add to GDP.

But that same dollar can’t be conjured out of thin air. The government has to take that dollar away from someone else — either in higher taxes, or by issuing new debt in the form of a bond. The person who is taxed or buys the bond will have $1 less to spend. If the beneficiary of that $1 spends it on something less productive than the taxed American or the lender would have, then the net impact on growth will be negative.

Some Democrats claim these transfer payments are stimulating because they go mainly to poor people, who immediately spend the money. Tax cuts for business or for incomes across the board won’t work, they add, because those tax cuts go disproportionately to “the rich,” who will save the money. But a saved $1 doesn’t vanish from the economy, unless it is stuffed into a mattress. It enters the financial system, where it is lent to others; or it is invested in the stock market as capital for businesses; or it is invested in entirely new businesses, which are the real drivers of job creation and prosperity.

At the current moment, amid a capital strike, the latter is the kind of fiscal stimulus we really need. Yet there is virtually none of it in the bills now moving through Congress. Senate moderates may succeed in cutting $100 billion or so in spending from the bill, which is political window dressing. Even they aren’t talking about adding the kind of tax cuts that would really help the economy now.

Unless, of course, the object isn’t helping the economy but tearing down the economy in order to eliminate capitalism.

I can remember when rampant inflation destroyed the savings rate of this country. After all, where is the incentive to save when a dollar saved today is worth fifty cents tomorrow? The only thing this loser of a bill will stimulate is inflation.

Leave a comment »

2nd Annual Sammies Awards

I would NOT advise going and announcing that you fought big government by starting your own cash basis only business or lyin’ your ass off on your income tax form and successfully evading taxes on income in the 100K plus range. This only works if you are an Obama cabinet appointment or well connected politically on the (D) side.

Leave a comment »

The “Stimulus”: Spending Over $1,000,000 Per Day For Every Day Since Jesus’ Birth

Check it out. That just ain’t right.

Then read “Talking Us Into a Depression“, a viewpoint with which I agree.

Excerpt:

As you can see, we have had far more job losses relative to output losses than any major post-war recession. This does not mean that more output losses are not coming, but it means that, perhaps unique to this recession, job losses are preceding rather than following output losses — in other words, job losses are occurring more than in any other recession based on the expectation of output losses, rather than in reaction to them. I wonder who it is that is setting these expectations?

Wow, using panic to achieve political aims and in the process accelerating job losses. And they say we libertarians are heartless!

And, of course, the more people that lose their jobs on negative economic news designed to force the passage of the “stimulus” package, the more houses and cars are lost, bankruptcies are declared, and spending declines.

I have to believe it is deliberate. Nobody could be THAT dumb.

Wait. I forgot about Nancy Pelosi.

Leave a comment »