Lets Get Smarter

Deregulation, Jobs, and a Brief History Lesson

noreply@blogger.com (Two Beaners) — Thu, 28 Oct 2010 06:55:00 +0000

Along with tax breaks for businesses (which we already covered a few posts ago), deregulation is another myth from the conservative party they believe spurs innovation and job growth. Let's look at this a little deeper, and see how that worked out for America in the past...

First, for those who aren't familiar- Merriam Webster's definition of Deregulation is fairly straight forward:

"the act or process of removing regulations or restrictions."

Essentially, allowing businesses more freedom by reducing the number of rules they must follow.

Rules- some think they're needed to keep people in check, while others think they put handcuffs and prevent them from achieving even more (If you watch or read the news at all, I'm sure you've heard the handcuffs metaphor from conservatives numerous times).

But what happens when we take these handcuffs off? Here are a few examples, and if you haven't heard of any of these people, google them, you might not like what you find, but at least you'll be a little smarter.

Enron

Once named "Americas Most Innovative Company" for 6 consecutive years by Fortune, is now known for its corporate fraud and corruption

Jeffery Skilling

Former President of Enron Corporation, now serving a 24 year prison sentence.

Enron, and President Jeffery Skilling- what was once a powerful energy company, is now an embarrassment and perfect example of how companies can take advantage of a system with little regulation. They were known to turn off power plants in California (Blackouts anyone?) to drive up the price of electricity. Basically creating a supply shortage so they could instantly sell their service at a higher price. And they sold ELECTRICITY, something EVERY household uses. Enron did some shady deals with companies they controlled, which allowed them hide their debts and losses from their financial reports. In the end, the company filed for bankruptcy in 2001, which was the largest Chapter 11 bankruptcy at the time. This is an example where there wasn't enough oversight and regulation, and since there weren't many rules in place- Enron decided to make up some of their own.

Good Documentary - ENRON: The Smartest Guys in the Room (On Netflix Instant if you've got an account)

Bernie Madoff

Former stockbroker and investment banker, now serving a prison sentence of 150 years

Bernie Madoff- Founder of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC. He spent decades running one of the biggest ponzi schemes in history. He single handedly destroyed life savings accounts, charities, and countless others- cheating them out of $50 Billion. A simple explanation of how he did it, was by using the money he got from NEW investors to pay off OLD investors. Essentially, no real money was being made, he just looked for more people who wanted to "invest" their money with him to keep the cashflow coming.

More recently, President Obama passed the wall street reform bill, which a big part was aimed for increased consumer protection, along with other regulations intended to prevent the need for future bailouts in case of another financial crisis (Regulators to set standards for how much money banks need to keep on hand, new limits on how Wall street banks manage their own accounts and hedge funds, etc.) A lot of the bill means little to most of us, unless you have a degree in business or finance, but the main benefits to everyone comes from the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which helps prevent consumers from being victims of abusive credit card or mortgage practices. This means a reduced number of "Pre-Approved" credit cards sent out in the masses, as well as no credit card companies prowling around on college campuses. Most college students are not financially independent, and a lot aren't even mature enough to manage their own finances. I'm not saying all credit is bad, just irresponsible credit is bad. If you give an 18 year old a piece of plastic with a $10,000 spending limit, he's probably going to do some damage with it... and the banks will be making some nice change off him. I got a credit card when I was in school, so some may call me a hypocrite. But I assure you- I am not! I mean, I was instantly pre-approved for a platinum card just for signing up for a free pita. Plus- I was a broke college student, and I was hungry; who would've done anything different?

Truth Needles, The Economy, and My "liberal socialist agenda"

noreply@blogger.com (Two Beaners) — Mon, 25 Oct 2010 08:00:00 +0000

Economic Inequality. Greed, Competition, and Morals

Do socio-academic elites know what they're doing?

The Number One Issue in America, the Economy (its complicated)-Mental Warfare

For the record, Democrats, liberals, Nancy Pelosi, and President Barack Obama, DID NOT bankrupt our country. Understanding this will save you a lot of mental energy for the upcoming daunting task of "understanding" how the world, and global economy works.

Be advised, that a "one size fits all" mentality does not work. Please also be advised again, that liberals, in no way shape or form, are communists, or socialists, sadly; that is what I keep hearing from the "right".... Lets stop doing that ok? Wasted mental energy, mental energy is a precious resource. Please do your own thinking!

This is from 2006, who was President then? Rhetorical Question....

2006 Report on us heading for bankruptcy-Federal Reserve, St. Louis

Many people are feeling the anxiety that has come along with this extended downturn in the economy, for many of us, we have simply sat on the sidelines, continued to work harder, while playing armchair quarterback on politics, and the economy.

For the record, I admire Barack Obama I trust his agenda. I think most people know that I do not speak from a position of ignorance.

according to many conservatives, and by their definition of liberals, we are simply "uneducated" and "dumb".

Well, I will go out on a limb here and throw some neurology/science at you. But what to these poeple know...they're just some liberal hippy lettuce smokers.

"A study published in Nature Neuroscience measured brain activity on Liberals and Conservatives and “found” that “the anterior cingulate cortex (AAC) was twice as active in liberals than in conservatives.” AKA, Liberals were more mentally pliable than Conservatives.

I’d be wary of extrapolating this out too far. But, it certainly raises interesting questions about how brains develop, and what effects certain kinds of stimuli (of a Liberal bent?) have on ones cognitive abilities."

http://ecarson.wordpress.com/2007/09/17/%E2%80%9Cproof%E2%80%9D-that-liberals-are-smart-conservatives-are-dumb/

Dylan Ratigan, from Wall Street to liberal commentator....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMWIYHqfK-0

Let me also remind some people, and even politicians have gotten it wrong, George Bush was behind the Wall Street Bailout, and the Democrats voted yes, this saved the global financial system. That is a fact, it is no longer speculation.

Proof that you forget things. You idiots

The title of this article is: "Bush Signs Wall street Bailout.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/04/bush-signs-wall-street-bailout/

Jobs.

Truth

Who creates them? Rich corporations and individuals? Or the Government?

Truth Needle | Ad incorrect: Stimulus bills created jobs

A television ad by the National Republican Senatorial Committee accuses U.S. Sen. Patty Murray of voting for "a failed stimulus that didn't create jobs." At the same time, an ad by Republican challenger Dino Rossi's campaign attacks Murray for supporting "several stimulus bills which have done nothing other than run up the national debt."

click link below.....

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2013196457_truthneedlestimulus19m.html

Right now there are lots of people without jobs, but companies are more productive and wealthier than they have ever been in the history of the world. So why are there no jobs? Like my brother pointed out, jobs aren't being taken by illegal immigrants, or even legal citizens. Jobs are being shipped over seas. If you want a job, go get one. Like we mentioned before, illegal immigrants, will NEVER be unemployed, they will find work.

“Productivity rose in 2009 in nearly 60 percent of the 50 detailed industries
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/prin1.nr0.htm Once again, do you really know what to make of all these numbers? Be honest.

The average American, unless involved with finance and banking, should not be trying to figure this stuff out. And you should not be trusting the information you get from "Certain" conservative media sources.

One thing to keep in mind, demand is absent from a lot of industries. We need to stop pretending that people buy American made goods, we don't. Look at the stuff you buy. I'm not a blame China for everything liberal, I am a blame the consumer liberal. I changed my spending habits dramatically. Find out how, here:

http://consumerist.com/

Other thoughts

It is imperative that the government take drastic action to create economic incentives for jobs in America, I think the oil industries should be mandated to give $1 billion dollars quarterly to schools, and hospitals.

They make so much money, they can afford it. That is not a “socialist” agenda, that's common sense. That is taking our country back. They should not be allowed to drill wherever they want, either.

To get new jobs going, long term ones, we need completely new industries, and we need the government and people to be on board. It will be in energy, and health care, education, and technology. We must get THOSE jobs back. No Child Left behind standardized the education system in our country, got kids dumber and fatter, and made teachers hate their lives. Nice work Republicans.

Here's some info that will put you to sleep:

Do you or the people on TV telling you how to think, have the ability to know what to do/say with all of this information? Once again, we let them have their turn. They failed. It's the Democrats turn, I wouldn't be so partisan, but the times call for it. I do not trust the agenda on the Right. I am not for spending, I am for less government. Less from the G.O.P that is.

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/pi/pinewsrelease.htm

http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php

http://mortgage-x.com/trends.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_funds_rate

Should Obama and his supporters be labeled as “socialists?” I think socialism came out a long time ago, George Bush, the Patriot Act, etc. Why isn't anyone fighting to repeal the Patriot Act? That's because conservatives cannot admit they are wrong, they voted for a loser, and they still have an allegiance to a failed way of thinking. Time to call people out on their lazy thinking, and apathy.

The real reason the economy sucks.

President Obama is not taking away your freedoms, or pushing a socialized agenda on anyone. I've read your GOP conspiracy theories as well,

http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/Blog/?p=332

OH no watch out for Socialism!!

http://obamaism.blogspot.com/ (this guy is a moron)

Look at what socialist Party Leaders say about Obama.

http://articles.cnn.com/2010-04-14/politics/Obama.socialist_1_socialist-agenda-democratic-socialists-health-care-bill?_s=PM:POLITICS

The GOP.

This is where you should be focusing your negative energy...I want to look forward, but until you start blaming the appropriate people, this will get brought up. The G.O.P, the Grand old Party. You failed.

"I dont like where Washington is heading...."
not really sure what this means....but it gets said on tv all the time...

So what should we do now? Here are some thoughts that might make you want to give more solutions, instead of complaints.

Education- No Child left behind make our children dumber, and fatter. Republicans had their chance, they ruined it. And, No Child left behind was actually never fully funded. Lets the Democrats and Mrs. Obama do it

http://www.google.com/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&q=no++child+left+behind+never+funded&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

A brief primer in No Child Left Behind. NCLB was the education plan on which Bush campaigned in 2000. It was based upon the success of a similar plan in Texas, affectionately known as the "Houston Miracle" - which by the way NEVER HAPPENED (for more information see this article). NCLB was the first piece of domestic legislation passed after 9/11, and it was passed with bipartisan support because it sounded so appealing.

Healthcare/ Insurance Companies- When you have McDonalds on every street, and an obesity problem, the government needs to step in.

"Unless you're a Warren Buffett or Bill Gates, you're one illness away from financial ruin in this country," says lead author, and M.D., of the Harvard Medical School, in Cambridge, Mass. "If an illness is long enough and expensive enough, private insurance offers very little protection against medical bankruptcy, and that's the major finding in our study."

http://articles.cnn.com/2009-06-05/health/bankruptcy.medical.bills_1_medical-bills-bankruptcies-health-insurance?_s=PM:HEALTH

Energy Policy- we live off of oil, we killed for it. How was $140 per barrel of oil and tax breaks to big oil not a transfer of wealth to George Bush, Texas, Alaska and Big oil? Apparently no one cares about the impact of the energy companies on our country, and we all refuse to remember, that big oil makes more money that countries combined. We depend on them for our food and transportation, in order to get to school you most likely will drive. You live in the suburbs and work in the city, good luck next time gas prices hit $4.00 a gallon, is that not a tax? . We cannot let them run loose. Wake up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGOM_9k-eg0

Information: Get the idiots off TV, information is paramount in a democracy. The government should not allow lies and emotional rhetoric infect the public.

Economic incentives

Many people accept inequality as a given, and argue that the prospect of greater material wealth provides incentives for competition and innovation within an economy.

Some modern economic theories, such as the neoclassical school, have suggested that a functioning economy entails a certain level of unemployment. These theories argue that unemployment benefits must be below the wage level to provide an incentive to work, thereby mandating inequality and that additionally, it is impossible to lower unemployment down to zero. Hypotheses such as socialism, dispute this positive role of unemployment.

Many economists believe that one of the main reasons that inequality might induce economic incentive is because material wellbeing and conspicuous consumption are related to status. In this view, high stratification of income (high inequality) creates high amounts of social stratification, leading to greater competition for status. One of the first writers to note this relationship was Adam Smith who recognized "regard" as one of the major driving forces behind economic activity. From The Theory of Moral Sentiments in 1759:

[W]hat is the end of avarice and ambition, of the pursuit of wealth, of power, and pre-eminence? Is it to supply the necessities of nature? The wages of the meanest labourer can supply them... [W]hy should those who have been educated in the higher ranks of life, regard it as worse than death, to be reduced to live, even without labour, upon the same simple fare with him, to dwell under the same lowly roof, and to be clothed in the same humble attire? From whence, then, arises that emulation which runs through all the different ranks of men, and what are the advantages which we propose by that great purpose of human life which we call bettering our condition? To be observed, to be attended to, to be taken notice of with sympathy, complacency, and approbation, are all the advantages which we can propose to derive from it. It is the vanity, not the ease, or the pleasure, which interests us (Theory of Moral Sentiments, Part I, Section III, Chapter II).

Modern sociologists and economists such as Juliet Schor and Robert H. Frank have studied the extent to which economic activity is fueled by the ability of consumption to represent social status. Schor, in The Overspent American, argues that the increasing inequality during the 1980s and 1990s strongly accounts for increasing aspirations of income, increased consumption, decreased savings, and increased debt. In Luxury Fever Robert H. Frank argues that people's satisfaction with their income is much more strongly affected by how it compares with others than its absolute level.

Economic Theories-
The G.O.P Way

it will be important to know the definition of a theory:

-a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles.

-contemplation or speculation.

-guess or conjecture

Supply-side economics is better known to some as "Reaganomics", or the "trickle-down" policy espoused by former president Ronald Reagan. He popularized the controversial idea that greater tax cuts for investors and entrepreneurs provide incentives to save and invest and produce economic benefits that trickle down into the overall economy. In this article, we summarize the basic theory behind supply-side economics. I have a question, has that
worked?

Nice work to all the conservative think tanks out there.

Americans think they deserve a better wage than other people. That's why companies put profits over morals, generally speaking. “Keeping up with the Jones's” a commonly known phrase used to describe how we compete socially, is an important factor that is hard to get people to notice. Its not just Economics, its socio-economics.

Maybe we should have all been “keeping up” with the people who had last names that weren't American. Just a thought.

One party is talking about economic theories, the other is doing things. I choose the party of Action. Not the party of sitting around in suits over thinking everything.

Lazy thinking, too many choices, decision paralysis, and irrational behavior. It's a cerebral concept, studied by psychologists, and marketing think tanks. Here is a little something on that.

http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/120/analysis-of-paralysis.html

Have Faith

Stay positive, and stay tuned in, America. It does wonders.

Immigration, Crime, and a little Common Sense

noreply@blogger.com (Two Beaners) — Mon, 25 Oct 2010 03:20:00 +0000

Many people have the misconception that illegal immigrants increase the amount of crime in communities across the US (let's forget about the "crime" of being in the US illegally for the sake of this argument).

If you believe that, you must believe that these people are sneaking into the US from Mexico- a country where drug cartels control large portions of land, terrorize communities, and decapitate mayors, police officers, as well as other public officials- and come to the US to commit crimes for themselves?

"Come on guys, there's enough crime in Mexico, let's go do some in the US..."

You think they risk their lives and commit the "crime" of coming into the US, just to commit more crime? Don't you think it'd be easier to just commit crimes in Mexico? I mean, it seems like it'd be way easier to get away with things over there rather that in the US.

If I wanted to do something that I would get in trouble for in the US, that I know I could get away with in Mexico, I'd definitely go there to do it...say for example, if I was underage and wanted to drink alcohol, why not go to Mexico to do it where I wouldn't have to worry about getting into trouble? But that doesn't happen, us Americans are better than that...Right?

Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and opinions, but when you hear something on the news or from politicians, do you ever think about what they say before you repeat it to others, and more importantly- actually believe it yourself? Well, you probably should...you might sound a little less like a robot repeating what you heard, and a little smarter next time you try to make a point.

Tax Breaks and Job Creation: Helping Businesses Be More Successful...or Just Making it Look Like They're More Successful?

noreply@blogger.com (Two Beaners) — Sun, 24 Oct 2010 22:24:00 +0000

Some people believe the way to create more jobs is by giving tax breaks to businesses. But is that really the best option? Does it really lead to a more successful business that will hire more employees? Let's think about it for a sec...

I believe the general thought process is:

1) Tax breaks = more capital for businesses
2) More capital = money to hire new employees, innovate, be more successful, etc.

Does that make sense to you? It kind of does for me, at least in certain situations- but I have some questions first before I can say for sure. Like...

What if a business is unsuccessful, and no one wants their product or service?

For example: If tax breaks are given to a company that is losing money on a consistent basis, what is that extra money going to be used for? If no one's buying their goods, why would they hire more employees? What they NEED TO DO is fix the problems they currently have that are preventing them from making profits. If they don't, they will just continue to bleed off money, and the tax breaks would've just kept them alive a little longer, but not save their ship from sinking.

What if the business is already successful, but was just hit with a cashflow problem?

This seems like the ideal situation where tax breaks would help. If a company has quality products, but sales have been down due to economic conditions, this little break could be a lifesaver. I would support tax breaks in this situation, it would definitely keep the company alive...but would they hire more employees? Probably not, at least not until their sales picked up...and even then, there's no guarantee that they would.

What if a business is already successful, and doesn't have a cashflow problem?

So this is for all of those big businesses, and some small businesses as well, that are doing just fine and don't need any tax breaks to survive. Sales are good, profits are high, everything's fine and dandy. So what would they do with the extra money from tax breaks? They might hire new employees, but can anyone say Bonus $$$?

" Tax-Break Bonuses Baby! Free money for doing the same exact job"

So let's recap:

In every one of theses cases, tax breaks are just making their bottom line better:

-If the company sucks, they just don't suck as hard- but no jobs will be created.
-If the company is good but in need of cash, it may actually help- but most likely, no jobs will be created.
-If the company is good and nothings wrong, they don't even need the tax breaks- jobs may be created...or they could just line their pockets with some bonus money.

After getting bailed out with more than $170 BILLION taxpayer dollars, they planned to payout ~$165 MILLION in bonuses. When there was a public outcry, they returned only about $50 million...but still paid out over $100 MILLION.

If the idea is to make these businesses more successful, I don't believe blindly throwing more money in the form of tax breaks will get the job done. That doesn't make them do better jobs, that just makes their bottom line look better with the flip of a switch. It also doesn't lead to the job growth that Republicans believe in. I am all for tax breaks for companies that need it, not because I believe it will create new jobs, but because it will help successful companies survive.

Now if you really wanted to create new jobs, why not offer tax breaks to companies that actually hire new employees? Make it a requirement that companies must hire new employees BEFORE receiving tax breaks...I would support that, who wouldn't?

So do tax breaks actually make businesses better and create more jobs, or just make it look like they're doing better?

Anyone got a clue?

This Just In: Immigrant Unemployment Approaches 0%

noreply@blogger.com (Two Beaners) — Sun, 24 Oct 2010 07:59:00 +0000

"They take our jobs..." is a popular idea used to describe the negative effects that illegal immigrants have on our society, but very rarely does the person saying it give any details as to WHAT jobs these "illegals" are taking. I'm pretty sure I'm not an illegal immigrant, nor do I know any (at least I don't think so), so I can't give a definite answer either... but let's think about this a little...

Lets start with a history lesson, and go back to the 1940s- when the US enacted the Bracero, or guest worker program, which INVITED Mexicans to come to America and work in the agricultural and railroad industries (as well as other low skilled jobs.) At its height, over 430,000 of these guest workers entered the US annually! And in the late 1980s, many of these immigrants were granted amnesty with the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which granted legal status to those living in the US since before 1982.

"430,00 people a year? Damn, they must really be hurting for workers... is that my grandpa???"

Fast forward to today, where the Mexican population has a college graduate rate of ~13%. A majority of those college graduates are legal immigrants who earned their degrees and better paying jobs. That leaves just under 90% of Mexicans, legal AND illegal, that are working the average and low paying jobs that they can only get with their limited education.

Are we as Americans, demonizing a population for not only taking the lowest paying jobs in our economy, but also jobs they have been doing since the 1940s?

Is "Joe 6-pack" mad because he aspires to be a field worker, with low pay and no benefits?

Or maybe he's mad because he wants Americans picking his vegetables and not immigrants? Joe's parents and grandparents didn't have a problem with the millions of guest-worker immigrants picking their vegetables...what's the deal?

Well Joe, or anyone else who wants to take your jobs back, we have some good news: The United Farm Workers (UFA) are willing to GIVE THEM BACK TO YOU! That is, if you're willing to take them up on their offer.

The UFA's "Take Our Job's" campaign is inviting ANY legal citizen or resident to come and work in the fields, all you have to do is give your name and email at the following link, and they will put you in contact with an employer:

http://www.ufw.org/toj_play/TOJNEW_12_JAL.html

Also, how many Mexicans or Hispanics do you see on street corners with cardboard signs looking for handouts vs. any other population? Usually when you see them on the street, they are looking to do work, not holding their hands out for some free change...

"Give me money for nothing...I don't have a job (and I'm not looking for one)"

"Can we work for some money? We want a job and we'll do anything"

So to recap:

-We invited millions of immigrants to come and work in America from the 1940s - 1960s.

-We gave them legal status in the 1980s.  

-Now, almost 90% of the Hispanic population are working low skilled, low paying jobs, while just over 10% gets college degrees.

-People are angry because the 90% of immigrants with little education are taking their jobs. Really?

To me, it sounds like people are looking for excuses to negatively portray Hispanic immigrants in American society. I do think immigration reform is needed; but no wall should be put up- besides it'd just be a waste of money, I guarantee they'd still find ways to cross the border. We need to provide a system that makes it easier to obtain legal status for the immigrants that do want to come to America for a better life...does the American Dream sound familiar? Hell, maybe we should help make Mexico a better place, so that less would want to leave. I mean, we love going to the middle east and other parts of the world to spread democracy, why not help out our neighbors to the south?

Has your job been taken??? Think about it...

Swallow Some Truth Pills: Healthcare - The Winners and Losers...Where do YOU fit in?

noreply@blogger.com (Two Beaners) — Sat, 23 Oct 2010 05:47:00 +0000

Obamacare...what some people believe is a necessary step to revamp our health care system, others think is a violation of our constitutional rights as Americans. There are over 15 attorney generals from states around the country that are filing a lawsuit to amend portions of the bill, while others are calling repeal the whole thing all together.

Florida Attorney General, Bill McCollum, files lawsuit to block the healthcare bill. He probably doesn't need it, I bet he already has a good policy.

And what are some of the major features of the bill that people are in such an uproar about???

One is the government mandate that requires all people in the US to have health insurance by 2014. People have been campaigning off this part of the bill, saying it's "unconstitutional" that the government requires them to have health insurance....

but how does this portion actually affect the people that are trying to get it repealed???

Well... it really doesn't! The congressmen, women, attorney generals, and the ~60% of Americans out there that are currently insured through their employers- have NOTHING to worry about. They just have to continue with their lives...they already have their insurance. Are they mad because the government now requires them to do something they are ALREADY doing? Who knows...if someone can explain that to me I am all ears.

John Boehner (R) Ohio:

Life with the Healthcare Bill

John Boehner (R) Ohio:

Life after the repeal of the Healthcare Bill

Another big issue: Money

Another call to repeal is because the cost of health policies will increase! And actually, there is some truth to that- for the company I currently work for, premiums just went up a considerable amount (Employees here also got a hefty raise to offset the price increase for their policy, but I doubt that happened everywhere...and even so, I still hear people complaining about it when they are netting even more money than before). And it's important to remember, the health insurance companies are the ones increasing the costs, but...

That won't always be the case, prices will go down! The mandate requiring everyone to have health insurance doesn't go into effect in 2014, which is when everyone in the US will be paying into the health care system and prices should level out. But for now, the provisions that are in effect are making it so insurance companies have to cover more people, without increasing the number of people paying into the system (young people/college students are now insured under their parents until age 26, children now cannot be denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions) Insurance companies also cannot put lifetime caps on policies or drop patients coverage if they get sick. All of these provisions is GOOD for the health and well being of Americans, but BAD for insurance companies that are focused on profits. Yes, for every company the main idea is to make money, and I guarantee insurance companies will continue to make profits, but there are certain things worth more than money- like your life.

Can't find a job after school? Don't worry, you're still insured under your parents until age 26 with the new bill

Who are the losers if provisions get repealed?

The uninsured, unemployed, young people, those with pre-existing conditions, and the middle/lower classes. If the politicians and businesses get their way to repeal portions of the bill, the little guys will be left out to dry...again.

Does your child have a pre-existing condition? Doesn't matter, companies cannot deny him coverage with the new bill...unless that jerk from Florida gets his way.

So to recap:

-There are groups out there trying to repeal part of a bill that affects them (the wealthy) in very small ways, but screws over others (the not so wealthy) in a very HUGE way.
-They are making a conscious effort to negatively impact the lives of almost 1/3 of our country...
-The bill will require everyone to get health insurance and make them take more responsibility for their own health- so there will be no more "freeloaders" taking advantage of the system at the taxpayer's expense.

One last Note...How does it relate to immigration?

There is a lot of buzz in this country about immigration- mostly negative stuff about illegal immigrants taking the jobs of Americans, and getting a free ride with public education and healthcare at the taxpayers expense. If you are worried about that as well as the health care system, than this bill is a double wammie for you! Since illegal immigrants won't be able to get the coverage required by law- it will be much, much easier to identify them and take corrective action...Just something to think about

Mora Making You Smarter

noreply@blogger.com (Two Beaners) — Fri, 22 Oct 2010 02:29:00 +0000

Technology, Politics, and Problem Solving

Lets talk.

Keep baggin'

Lobbying Spending Database-It matters

Historically, the party that spends the most, usually loses. You can find out why in a great book called Freakonomics. I will give you a hint, those that win elections, do so because of their character. Most spend more money to make the other party look bad. Make sense? I hope so.

Marijuana Cigarettes

"It's not a drug, it is a leaf" -Arnold Schwarzenegger

Why is Marijuana Illegal, well, the reason hopefully shocks you, and hopefully pisses you off. They're insulting our collective intelligence.

Harry Anslinger, the first Drug Czar, here are the reasons he told the public for why it should be illegal.

“There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others.”

“…the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races.”

“Marijuana is an addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality, and death.”

“Reefer makes darkies think they’re as good as white men.”

“Marihuana leads to pacifism and communist brainwashing”

“You smoke a joint and you’re likely to kill your brother.”

“Marijuana is the most violence-causing drug in the history of mankind.”

Its time to get this done. Whether or not you live in California and are voting on Prop 19, you need to be helping this movement.

But why? I don't poke smot? Well it shouldn't matter, your TAX dollars are being wasted.

Or, as Alternet describes it....

The War on Pot: America's $42 Billion dollar Boondoggle

Mora Making you think about things

noreply@blogger.com (Two Beaners) — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 07:49:00 +0000

Technology, Politics, and Problem Solving

Lets talk.

The 45-year-old recovering alcoholic and Mormon convert has become the first true demagogue of the information age. His nightly diet of falsehoods and conspiracies on Fox, and his daily outrages on the radio, have propelled his popularity past even Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity. His method is simple: He goes places where others are forbidden by conscience.

-Dana Milbank, The Washington Post