Tag: national debt

Stupid Government Tricks

It’s hard to know where to begin.

Yesterday, Joe Biden announced the White House’s attempt to slam the barn door after the horse is gone. Or rather, “try again” to end tax cuts for the rich. Mr. Obama already had that opportunity: it’s called a veto.

Let’s not forget Joe LIEberman and the so-called “Internet Kill Switch” that has been getting a lot of press coverage lately — especially since it turns out Egypt can and did turn of the Internet this week. Senator LIEberman of course denies that his bill contains any such provision, but with bills being multi-hundred page monstrosities often partly written by corporate interests, who can tell. Of course the truth is that this is old news, recycled for the new year (how very environmentally friendly). More truth, it would be difficult to implement in the United States, to say nothing of probably unconstitutional. Not that this matters to the current crew in Washington.

Speaking of “who cares about whether it’s constitutional,” the PATRIOT Act is up for renewal. Further, it looks very much like it’s going to be quietly rubber-stamped while everybody is busy arguing about gun control, the National Debt, Social Security, austerity, and tweaks to last year’s health insurance “reform” bill. If you think that sucks scissors, click here and voice your objections. Look everybody from MoveOn to the Cato Institute thinks it stinks; let’s get rid of it.

Once we’re done with the PATRIOT Act, perhaps we can have some meaningful reform (or abolition) of the TSA, who decided this week that they aren’t going to let any airport exercise their legal right to opt out of having TSA grope their passengers. This despite the fact that “”Nearly every positive security innovation since the beginning of TSA has come from the contractor screening program….”

While we’re on the topic of unilateral decisions by government agencies that fly in the face of public opinion, the USDA has decided that not only can farmers plant genetically engineered alfalfa, it won’t even keep track of how much is out there or where it is. Since alfalfa is bee-pollinated, the genetic material from these plants cannot help but to spread wildly. This means, in the words of Alternet, that “you can now kiss organic beef, dairy, and many vegetables goodbye.” It also puts every farmer at risk of owing Monsanto a royalty for foolishly allowing bees to deposit proprietary genes on their land. (Yes, it has been a long time since I quoted Alternet).

But back to Congress. Is there anybody here who thinks it’s a good idea for girls 10, 12, or 14 years old to be having babies? Anybody? Bueller? Well, John Boehner and 173 co-sponsors think that’s just fine. At least, they don’t want any of their precious tax dollars or even your dollars in your own tax-exempt Health Savings Account to be used for an abortion if it turns out your daughter is molested. They have proposed that “rape” be redefined as “forcible.” So, drugged at a party and wake up with no underwear and find out you’re pregnant a couple months later? Pony up your own abortion funds or live with the “consequences”, sweetie. Your sister who was left quadriplegic in a car crash and was subsequently molested by somebody at the rehab hospital? Hope you’ve got cash. But clearly, I’m just being “emotional.”

Maybe John Boner is one of the few people to whom I should ascribe a special nickname. He’d be in rarefied company with Joe LIEberman, Pat “Go f*** yourself” Leahy, and That Asshat Michael Chertoff.

In closing: at this rate we’re on target for another record year of bank closures (and even bigger “too big to fail” institutions); too young not to work, too old to get a job; compare and contrast; HealthSouth; more VW; and 8 wacky jobs at great companies. Sorry, these positions are all filled.

Inland Shorties

To Paraphrase My Source: why do we demonize doctors for over-prescribing (and parents for over-demanding) antibiotics when 80% of them are used on the farm?

Don’t Panic: Yellowstone has risen by as much as 10″ in spots.

Useless: New food labels tell you everything they think you need to know at a glance on the front of the package! Except, of course, how big a serving is.

Follow Up: Great Jack LaLanne quotes.

Been a while since we had a Japanfilter: Old pictures, traditional recipes. Less traditional. Free Japanese lessons.

Holocaust Remembrance Day: Enough said.

About Jobs: It’s not about competition; this might take some time; if he’s right, his wife may be unemployed in 2 years.

ACLU: Oh Snap.

Unaffiliated: Monitor lizard.

When can I buy one?: VW‘s latest mileage monster.

Harry? Is that you??: Reid says we must “reintroduce truth into the public debate.” Among other things!

Sharron: Won’t rule out running for President in 2012. Shudder.

Google: strange sense of censorship.

Deficit: Why austerity is a sucker’s game.

Duh: Financial crisis was avoidable.

The War On Drugs Gets Silly: Drug catapult.

That Nixon Was Too Liberal: Newt Gingrich says the EPA must go.

JP Morgan Takes the Fifth: Won’t detail a half million loans.

No, really?: Housing bust means workers can’t move to new jobs, a key feature of the “job market.”

Rare Fossil: Pterosaur and egg.

New Years Health Resolutions?

Alright, I do know that it’s not exactly the 1st. But by now, some of you who had health, weight, or fitness resolutions for the New Year are starting to wonder if it’s really worth the effort. For you, I present these items.

Maybe your resolution was just to “eat healthier.” Well, one of the few things just about every health and nutrition expert can agree on is that fruits and vegetables are healthy — and most of us eat too few of them. And by “most of us,” I mean everybody from vegans (who often eat lots of grains) to paleo eaters (who are likely to eat handfuls of nuts and lots of meat). If you were unimpressed by the thought that eating more of them could make you “prettier,” perhaps you would like to know that it is also linked to a lower risk of dying from ischemic heart disease.

I’ve been an advocate of weight bearing exercise for years, and I like this article from BlogHer. I admit, I hate the picture. I know it was selected to be all non-threatening and get ladies used to the idea that they can lift without looking like, oh, I dunno, Gladys.* But as the article says, emphasis mine:

I lost inches everywhere – my thighs went down an inch each, my waist an inch and a half – and I lost 7% body fat. The jeans I am wearing today are a full two sizes smaller than the ones I was wearing 2 months ago. And I’m pretty sure I don’t look like any of those muscle-bound gals in the bodybuilding competitions. At least, no one has said the word “bulky” in my presence. This combination of heavy lifting and high-intensity intervals is the closest thing to a fitness miracle I’ve ever found.

If you aren’t ready to buy weights, there’s always body weight exercises like push-ups and squats. In fact, there are many regimens designed for use without any equipment more complicated than a chair.

Maybe instead of lifting weight, you want to lose weight. There’s this L.A. Times item on whether we can blame the obesity epidemic on excessive carbohydrate consumption. Nobody could blame you for wanting to lose weight; after all obesity is blamed for 16,000 extra deaths annually and $7000 in lost productivity and medical costs. Want to be horrified? Check out this infographic from Men’s Fitness:

Obesity
Via: Medicalcoding.org

Seriously, don’t give up on the New Years Resolution right now.

In closing: pre-existing conditions; a horrifying read; even more amusing given the source; bubble; science, or future made for TV movie; damn straight; overwhelming support for a handful of sensible “gun control” laws (including enforcing the ones on the books); they laughed at me when I suggested China could foreclose; banks can’t even follow the law when dealing with one another; I’ve known people who weren’t this bright; and shrimp farming.

*Make no mistake. This woman worked very, very hard for hours every day to get this look. I can’t say I know whether she uses any hormones or not. She is to be admired for her dedication. However, most women I know don’t want to look quite so muscular. And trust me, even working at my level means just forget woven shirts.

Am I Late? To the Discussion on Sex and Health Insurance, that is

It seems that certain loonies have realized that the recently passed health insurance reform bill actually might benefit women.

To wit, people — who happen to be women by the way — who manage to get coverage in the various state pools for those who can’t get traditional insurance due to pre-existing and/or chronic conditions might — might! — have abortions that are covered by that insurance. Now the President says something to the effect of “Oh no, no that’s not right. The Feds ain’t payin for no abortions. Don’t you worry your pretty little heads, religious zealots!” Actually, says a spokeswoman for the Department of Health and Human Services, yes they will be covered but if and only if it’s rape, incest, or the woman’s life are in danger (not health, but life). Now remember that the entire purpose of this pool is that the insured has health problems bad enough to keep her from getting insurance elsewhere.

Yeah, because society is really better off when we make cancer survivors and the like pay for their own damn abortions. Dirty sluts!

Elsewhere, we have rumblings that certain conservatives (who must have been out of contact with reality for the last few decades) are upset that insurance coverage for The Pill — and for that matter the screening test you need before the almighty Gynecologist will allow you access to a twelve month supply, and not a single pill more — might become standard. Or, as Amanda Marcotte helpfully simplifies it, “Conservative Groups Demand High Abortion, Teen Pregnancy Rates.”

I would like to address one particular statement from Chuck Donovan at the Heritage Foundation:

People who are insured don’t want to pay for services they don’t need or to which they have moral objections. Parents want to have a say over what’s covered and what’s not for their children.

Let’s take this to it’s logical conclusion, shall we? They want you to think that they have a moral objection to birth control (and abortion, which is prevented by birth control). The second sentence makes it clear that they object to sexually active teens having access to birth control. So he does make clear what those of us who have kept track of anti-abortion rhetoric for a while have long known: they are really against sex. Well, more accurately, any sex they aren’t having. If they are against their kids preventing pregnancy and support women people “living with the consequences of sex” as most so-called pro-life people claim they are, they must surely also be against curing any sexually transmitted diseases they may contract. After all, that syphilis or gonorrhea is a consequence of sex!

And so why should insurance pay for this? Why should it be insured when Joe Average fools around and accidentally gives Jane Average a disease she’d rather not talk about in polite company? I don’t support people cheating on their spouses! Do you?

And with that, I stumble on why research has developed no vaccine against AIDS, let alone any hope of a cure.

Well guess what? The overwhelming majority of Americans think it’s a good idea to let other Americans plan the size of their families. The overwhelming majority of Americans think that although abortion is often a tragedy, it is most often the best possible end of an even bigger tragedy. And yes, have no fear, almost everybody agrees that it is a good idea to cure people with sexually transmitted diseases.

As “reform” is implemented, let’s not allow our elected officials to forget that while the squeaky wheel may need greasing, that alone won’t get you where you need to be.

In closing: ghost ship at ground zero; Wall Street “Reform” will soon be law; notice what happens after 2001; and pictures of Kyoto. Next time, hopefully, something on the economy.

A Midsummer Day’s Post

Happy Solstice! Now might be a good time for some bloggy closet cleaning (did mine with the redesign, thanks!).

And here’s a little meme courtesy of Kathy. Here’s how it works: Google up “[your name here] needs.” My needs are interesting. I apparently need:

  • Your Support
  • a Spring Haircut
  • a Forever Home
  • and to Change.

How about you?

In closing: exploring the universe; a new way to get on the freeway; Keep on shoving that shoe into your mouth, Sharron; where the national debt meets the national how-we-pay-for-healthcare crisis; I never thought I would call for gutting “gifted” programs; my President Emperor Right or Wrong; and stay cool.

Mortgapocolypse

Before we get to today’s news, let’s start with a bit of history and background on how banking and lending works. Long ago, the first bankers realized that the odds of everybody wanting their money at the same time were just astronomical. So if they were to lend some of that money out at interest, not only would they profit, but they could pass on a little bit of that interest to depositors, making people want to deposit money with them. Charging of interest is even discussed in the Bible, so we know it happened in Biblical times. This process in fact creates money, so it’s very important to the economy.

But let’s fast-forward to a mythical and highly simplified bank somewhere in America. We’ll call it Bailey Bank. Bailey’s got ten thousand depositors with an average daily balance of $1,000. Simple math says they have roughly $10,000,000 in deposits — small by modern standards but still nothing to sneeze at. The Federal Reserve Bank regulates how much money they need to have on hand, and also says how much needs to be deposited with them for emergency purposes. They still have plenty of money to lend out.

So Bailey makes a few dozen mortgage loans, and lends for a few farms and small businesses too. If they are short on cash, they can borrow money from nearby Potter Bank or from the Federal Reserve, at interest rates set by the Fed. These are the rates that Greenspan used to mess with, and the ones Bernanke can change today, not the rates that banks charge us but the rates they charge one another and the rate that the Fed charges them.

When they came to the point where they didn’t really have more money to lend, they sold a bunch of mortgages to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Fannie and Freddie paid them to be the servicers — sending the bills and collecting the money — and paid Bailey most of the money they would have earned by keeping the mortgage until it was completely paid off. This left Bailey with more money to write more mortgages. But Fannie and Freddie have rules about what they will and won’t buy. So Bailey changed some lending policies to make sure that Fannie and Freddie would buy their loans. There are properties that you almost can’t get a mortgage on because other banks did the same thing.

You already know the sad story of banks being left holding the bag in the foreclosure crisis they created. And maybe you even have seen how banks are driving down property values in your neighborhood by dumping properties at ludicrously low asking prices.

This also left Fannie and Freddie behind the 8-ball, and it may yet cost American taxpayers $1,000,000,000,000 to fix it. Why bother? Because banks have stopped counting on holding mortgages until they mature and count on selling the paper to investors like Fannie and Freddie. Without someone to buy the paper and give banks more money to lend, lending will dry up even more than it already has. And that means almost nobody buys property without cash. It may already be too late to save Fannie and Freddie; they are being delisted from the New York Stock Exchange. It would be polite to say that’s a negative for the stocks.

But there is one ray of sunshine in the mortgage mess: the arrest of Lee Bentley Farkas of mortgage company Taylor, Bean & Whitaker. He and unnamed conspirators are accused of fraud in the TARP program, “misappropriating” $400,000,000, and causing the collapse of Colonial Bank by selling them $1,500,000,000 in bad mortgages. I agree that this prosecution is a good start.

In closing: Arizona still keen to repeal the 14th Amendment even as its schools wonder how to comply with state law; homelessness in America; China owns 13% of the publicly held national debt; some people said I was nuts when I suggested that some religious nuts favored the life of an embryo that couldn’t even become a baby over that of a fully grown woman; terrorist nitwits; and sometimes buttons are better than velcro.

The Water Bottle Saga

Last summer, we made some changes in our exercise routine, such that for the first time it made sense to actually consume some sort of “recovery drink.” A simple glass of water — or refilling one of those water bottles you get at the convenience store — was no longer going to cut it. My requirements for such a bottle included the following:

  • BPA free.
  • Dishwasher safe!
  • No stupid gasket that really should be removed for cleaning or it will get gross, but won’t really fit back in correctly should you manage to pry it out of there.
  • Mouth of bottle must be big enough to fit ice cubes, preferably from the door dispenser on the freezer rather than having to shove them through individually.
  • Must be easy to drink from quickly.
  • Must hold roughly a quart or liter of fluid (I won’t quibble over the small difference between the two sizes)
  • Must not be prone to leaking.
  • Must be translucent.

Why translucent, you may ask? We mix our own recovery formula so we can not only control the number of calories involved (here’s the nutrition panel for Gatorade dust; I can choose to make a “weaker” version). We can add a small quantity of glutamine to the mix, something even Gatorade’s scientists admit may be helpful [Update: here’s what we do and why]. If you can’t see through the bottle, you can’t know if it’s shaken enough. For that matter if you can’t see the insides, how the heck do you know it’s really clean?

So this seems to me like a reasonable enough list. I think most people would agree that these are good things to have out of a water bottle for sport/exercise use. Things like “using recycled materials” and other buzzwords are nice, but not if the product can’t do the basic job.

So then consider this list of “best” reusable bottles from HuffPo. What I see here are a lot of bottles you can’t see through, many of which have teeny necks that you have to manually force an ice cube through, and a lot of bottles that you have to completely remove the lid to have a drink. When you only have a 30 second break for hydration, that just won’t cut it. I actually went to REI (why do I bother, they never have what I need) to look at their selection. It was almost exclusively Nalgene and Camelbak products, and not a darn thing that met all my criteria. For what those products cost, I will not settle for “almost.”

As a stopgap — the bottle I had been using had developed a leak around the base of the drinking spout — I found a Rubbermaid bottle that was clear, dishwasher safe, and best of all cheap. However, it was prone to tipping and did have a gasket in the lid. Moreover, that opening looks pretty wide, but it’s a couple millimeters too narrow to avoid spraying ice cubes all over the kitchen. That’s just something you can’t tell in the store.

Yesterday I happened to be in a supplement store when I stumbled across something called the Blender Bottle. While this thing was really designed for some of the heavier protein mixers and such, it fit what I needed perfectly. The little spring thingy is really kind of optional when we’re talking about something as light as Gatorade. The mouth is wide, the spout generous and easily operated, no gaskets, dishwasher safe, even heat safe. So far so good on this thing.

In closing: on the national debt; here‘s obligatory health insurance reform links; the next incarnation of the iconic 747 flies; more reason to like Alan Grayson; the real filibuster-proof majority; the Social Security “reform” idea that just wouldn’t die; and two items on the changing face of employment. What a shame that someone doesn’t get that women are holding their jobs specifically because they often get paid less for the same work!