Creative Thursday - Monarch, Tiger and Tree Oysters

100% of the People Polled in my Co-op Unit Say...

It's amazing, I did a poll in my co-op unit and here are the results...

100% believe no one would say they want to be taxed more.

100% believe harvard graduates are the dumbest people in America.

100% believe Alfred Nobel would have committed suicide, if he wasn't already dead

100% believe The liberal media believes the public is too stupid to question their ignorance.

100% believe the liberal media thinks their ignorance is genius.

100% believe that Reuters should be renamed Roto Reuters because all they do is write shit.

I was reading a Reuters article, oh who am I kidding Reuters hasn't written anything but propaganda or fluff for years. The piece is,  'Americans back mixed solution for debt crisis: Reuters/Ipsos poll' The piece is trying to make people believe that a, “...poll found that 56 percent of Americans want to see a combination of government spending cuts and tax increases included in a deal to bring down the U.S. budget deficit...”. Really? Let's raise the taxes on these 56% of the people and take care of our budget problems.

The next great quote is from a pollster, Julia Clark, she says., “...It does seem to be that the popular narrative is falling on the side of the president on this one...”. Really, so you are saying THE PRESIDENT WANTS TO RAISE TAXES ON EVERYONE? It is about time the media admits to this. Of course dim witted Julia did not expect Americans to read that into her quote.

But wait, as in a cheesy infomercial, there is more.

The piece then has a section siting, “WHO'S TO BLAME?”. In this section, “...The Reuters/Ipsos poll found that 31 percent of respondents held Republican lawmakers responsible... 21 percent blamed Obama and 9 percent blamed Democratic lawmakers.”, now I'm no math teacher, but given the admitted, “...margin of error of 4 percentage points for all respondents...”, that means the numbers, 31% republican, 30% democrat are insignificant. 

It then continues, “...Along those lines, 29 percent said Republican lawmakers should give the most ground in the negotiations, a quarter said Obama should and a fifth said Democrats should.”. What. Wait. Along those lines? Who should give the most ground? Obama isn't a democrat?”. I think I need two quick impromptu polls in the co-op.

100% believe a quarter + a fifth = 45%

100% believe 45% > 29%

By Reuters own admission, 45% of the people side against the democrats and the president. That would mean Reuters article contradicts itself and it's title completely.

So Reuters, you useless, uneducated, hacks! Please learn how to report the news and while you are at it, take a basic math course.

Politicians Es Bardus! Debt Ceiling.

I wrote a blog for today on Minimalism, but thought this one would be more appropriate to post.

When I was married, money was no object, I earned it and my ex spent it. She then opened up as many credit cards as possible and used them up. If a piece of furniture did not look new, it was replaced. If a room wasn't just the right color it was repainted. Financially, we were out of control.

After the divorce, I decided I needed to cut my expenses. I lived in my mom's basement for a year. When my wife bought out our previous house, I went home shopping and decided to buy the co-op instead of a house. I paid cash, I did not want the burden of a mortgage and high utility bills that I had, had for my entire adult life. I paid off my credit cards.

I had large alimony and child support payments as well as insurance and school payments. I needed to furnish a co-op and fix it up. I had to pay off a lawyers bill and put my life back on track. I decided after seeing how detrimental credit cards were, that I would cancel every last one. I needed to keep afloat and begin saving. I decided to put away money each month that I would not touch. That meant no extraneous purchases, trips to the movies, nights at the bar or eating out at restaurants.

The final part of the plan was to stay within my means, my co-op still needs work done, but I won't do it at the expense of my savings. I budget in money each month so larger projects have to be planned and smaller ones prioritized.

Now that I am running at zero debt and my budget allows it, I am living pretty well. By keeping my spending to a minimum, I always have money in the bank and can do things that I never thought I could before.

Where is all this going? Politicians Es Bardus!

Realizing a financial problem, I Cut my spending, Capped my Expenses and Balanced my budget. With the whole 'debt ceiling crisis' that our country is in, the politicians do not get these simple concepts, at least most of them don't. They could have raised the debt ceiling last week if they wanted to. Most people do not realize that a Cut, Cap and Balance bill passed in the house, but was blocked by the senate. This bill would have raised the debt limit, forced the government to cut spending, capped spending based on taxes collected and passed a balanced budget amendment to The Constitution. While watching C-Span (Queue the cricket sounds), I was astonished by how many politician were vehemently opposed to this bill. Check your politicians voting record and if he was against this, VOTE HIM OUT! Asking a politician to stop spending is like asking the rain to stop falling. Even the president threatened to veto this bill if it passed the senate.

I'm tired of hearing that it is political posturing or that one side is to blame more than the other. Both parties have ignored their responsibility to the people, both parties are anti-American and anti-Constitution.

I actually have a question for our ignorant Hawaiian president or anyone else that would like to answer it. Why would social security be the first thing cut if the government ran out of money? Social security is funded by payments that the citizens made (and are still making). Money that our politicians have stolen (Nice lock box, biggest douche in the universe aka. Al Gore). Why wouldn't unfunded programs be the first to be cut? Stop scaring our seniors!  Start scaring our least productive members!

Unfortunately, God has blessed America, too much. Now all we can say is God help America.

NetFlix, Gross Customer Service.

I have always been a firm believer in NetFlix's business concepts. That was until yesterday when I received an email, from them, explaining that I would have to pay a 60% price increase, for the same service I am receiving today. I'm a big advocate of customer service and will gladly pay more for an item or service if their company is customer-centric. Unfortunately, I was fooled into believing Netflix was one of those companies by there constant emails and recommendations.

It is almost like a politician has taken over NetfFix. Being from NJ, I remember when our state fruit, governor Jim McGreedy, came up with a plan to balance the budget by raising taxes on cigarettes. Unfortunately those horrible smokers quit en mass and left a huge hole in the budget. An example of the basic math behind this stupidity is this.
You have 100,000 people smoking that pay a 1.00 tax for a total of $100,000.00
You raise the tax on cigarettes by .50 to get an additional $50,000.00
You plan on getting $150,000 total.
40% of the smokers quit.
60,000 remaining smokers pay the new $1.50 tax for a total of $90,000
You may say Reed, that is a $10,000 dollar loss. Wrong! That is a $60,000 loss. Remember $150,000 was spent in the budget.
Let's say we change the new tax number from .50 to .75, that changes the revenue to $105,000 dollars. That assumes the extra .25 does not get anyone else to quit. It is still a $55,000 loss and a guarantee that less people will be in the tax pool going forward.

Where is all this going? What does this have to do with Netflix? Simple, if 40% of the people who are currently on NetFlix quit, they will lose money. Worse, going forward, less people will join NetFlix in the first place.

With the business climate that NetFlix is in, they do need to increase their rates. My problem is that I usually get stroked before I get F*!^ed, well at least I got a movie out of the deal. If NetFlix wanted customer's like me to stay, they should have at least offered free Blu-Ray or some other insignificant(to their bottom line) additional services.

To all of the people that I have talked into joining NetFlix, I apologize. The service was good while it lasted though.

How Many Journalists Does It Take to Screw Up a Light Bulb?

Bad Mod, even if it did only take 5 minutes.

I read an article “House Republicans: Down with squiggly light bulbs “ By JIM ABRAMS

Associated Press. (Link here, as long as it works).  This is one of those articles that is so slanted left, my guess is that Jim walks around bent over, ready to take it at all times.

The article is about a law passed during the Bush/democrat house era, that forces higher energy efficiency of light bulbs. Jim basically says how the Republicans do not understand the impact on the energy costs of the bulbs.

Jim, calls out Rep. Joe Barton, R Texas for saying "If you are Al Gore and want to spend $10 for a light bulb, more power to you,", and says that Barton exaggerated the cost of most energy efficient bulbs. Really Jim? Are you that far out of touch that you should be a politician? Have you ever actually purchased or used one of these 'Energy-efficient' bulbs? My guess is no! The L.E.D.s cost approx. $35 each for a 60w equivalent(brightest available at Home Depot) and 100w equivalent cfls run about $8 each (For full spectrum, non-subsidized).

Jim then goes on to say... 'The White House says the standards drive U.S. innovation, create manufacturing jobs and reduce harmful greenhouse gas emissions.'. Hey Jim, where are those manufacturing jobs being created? In the U.S.? No you idiot, China, Japan, Over-seas-istan, anywhere OSHA can't dictate stupid rules that harm businesses and destroy jobs. Don't see you calling the White House out Jim. Oh, and about Green House gas emissions and the environment, where do you mention the environmental hazards of cfls? If they break, they release poisonous gasses into your house and the atmosphere, not to mention the amount of Mercury they use and the dangers in manufacturing them.

To top it all off, Jim then talks of an advocacy group that has quotes from Thomas Edison's(inventor of the incandescent bulb) great-grandson and great-nephew saying, they support the new standards. Really Jim? What have these 'kin', as you put it in your article, invented? I have ancestor that invented things too. Am I a legitimate source to quote about them? Not even close.

Don't worry Jim, I'm almost done with you. The majority of bulbs in my house are L.E.D.s, the remainder are CFLs. Why Jim? I believe in the technologies. I don't need someone forcing me to buy something I do not want to because, they feel, it is better for me. If you like this law Jim, why don't you ask the government to do it right? If we want to talk efficiency, outlaw all cfls in favor of L.E.D.s, outlaw all L.C.D. and plasma TVs in favor of L.E.D.s and D.L.P.s and force, I mean pass a law against all non-rechargeable batteries?  I know why not, in your mind Jim, they(the politicians) are soooooooo much smarter than you. They can't trust people like you to make up your own mind and exert your ability to change the market. They need to force you, for your own good.

This issue is so much bigger than someone like Jim could understand. We (the people) subscribe to democracy and capitalism. The government and media need to learn what that means. It means that the people vote with their money. In the form of light bulbs, the free market holds an election. People vote on what they want, by buying one or more type(s) of bulb(s). The light bulb(s) that get enough votes(purchases), to continue to be sold, win.

I guess I ask to much when I ask for a non-partial, informative media.

P.S. If anyone knows what light bulbs are being used in the White House and what the cost of those bulbs were, please email me. I have not found any information after researching it.

A Politician is NOT Smarter Than a Fifth Grader.

Summer is here and that means I get the girls on alternating weeks. This past weeks lesson was compliments of the U.S. Government. I told Lizzy that if she and Emily did the dishes I would give them each ten dollars. I then proclaimed to Emily that if she did not do the dishes, she would still get the ten dollars. Emily said cool and went to play on her Ipod. Lizzy complained it was unfair and that if she did the dishes alone deserved the full amount. I explained to Lizzy that we were going by the rules of our elected officials and therefore because she was the worker, she would have to give Emily, the non-worker her earnings. The wealth had to be redistributed. Lizzy was annoyed and asked what would happen if she did not do the dishes. I explained to the kids that, what they just learned, was the failings of a concept that liberals will defend MORE than The Constitution of our great nation; MORE than the principles of freedom our very country was founded on.  It is called socialism.

People liken socialism to charity, it should be likened to armed robbery. While charity is the ability to freely give to those in need, socialism is using the governments power to force one person to give to a less deserving person.

It never ceases to amaze me that my children at 8 and 13 can learn simple lessons in under fifteen minutes that our politicians, media and current generations couldn't grasp in 78 years. I hope that the seniors who put us in this mess, my generation which has contributed to this mess and the following generation that is aggravating this mess can use what is left of their precious brain power to make changes. At least I know if they don't, my children will be prepared to, if it is not too late.