Have your cake, and others’ cake, too

One of the things that I constantly hear is how we as Americans should do “something” about a person’s pet cause, whether that cause is feeding the homeless, foreign aid, bailouts, orphaned animals, disaster relief, or any number of other causes that are considered to be “worthy” for our nation to throw money at. I consistently feel that it is not a legitimate function of government to send public money to charities. That position often ends with me being called names like “mean”, “heartless”, or worse.

I want you to do a thought exercise: Think of some worthy cause that you think we, as a people, should spend money on. I will pick one: homelessness. Now ask yourself a few simple questions:
How much of your own money do you contribute to feed and house the homeless?
If you have a spare room or couch, how many times have you invited a homeless person to stay in your home?
If you are not willing to donate to the cause that you deem worthy, then how can you morally demand through the use of government force that others do so? If you are reading this, you have probably spent some of your own money on luxuries like internet service or a computer, instead of giving that money to the homeless. How heartless you are! How dare you spend money on frivolities when people are sleeping in cardboard boxes without a meal! You must be heartless and cruel, you greedy bastard. This makes you feel guilty that you buy expensive luxuries when there are so many worthy causes, doesn’t it?

There must be a solution to this feeling of guilt that you feel. The solution is so simple! Why don’t you just vote to make other people give THEIR money to worthy causes on your behalf? That way, you can still buy those expensive luxury items, and still assuage your guilt. The plan here is that you get the government to take other people’s money away, and use THAT money to help your cause.

Of course there are as many worthy causes as there are voters, and what happens is that we eventually have more causes than we do money. At that point, the only way to handle things is to borrow the money. From China. That is a story for another day…

Deadbeat parents

The American court system jails thousands of parents every year for not paying child support. I read the article, and I have a couple of thoughts:

First, Article III Section 2 of the Constitution provides that crimes, except impeachment cases, must be tried before a jury, unless the defendant waivers his or her right. The court has managed to work around that by claiming that “contempt of court” cases are not crimes. Regardless, the Seventh Amendment states that in Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. Our court simply seems to ignore the plain intent of the founders: that no one person have the power of a King, not even a judge. The jury was to be the check and balance on the court. That is no more.

Then there are the practical and moral problems. My first wife and I got divorced in 1999.Following the state law formula, the court ordered that I pay half of my take home pay to my ex wife, nominally for child support. At the time, I grossed $1000 every two weeks. After taxes, I was left with about $720 each payday. $348 in child support was taken from my check, and sent to the ex-wife, leaving me with $720 per month to live on. The rent on my apartment was $600 for a small one bedroom. I was soon homeless and without a car, moving from couch to couch at the homes of friends. I got a second job, picking up garbage after the Shamu show at Sea World. I got an apartment with three roommates. I bought a car at a “buy here, pay here.” Somehow, I made it.

Except that the ex wife didn’t have a job, meaning that the support was more for her than for the children. The children would come over for visitation wearing rags, so I would have to buy them new clothes. Then they would ask for money for field trips and school supplies. Their mother would tell them that they couldn’t have it, and that I should pay it. Not wanting to deny them, I gave them the money.

My ex-wife was collecting more than $1400 a month in child support, and because she didn’t have to claim it as income, was getting another $400 a month in food stamps. she also claimed to be making $9,000 a year babysitting children, thus qualifying for $300 a month in earned income credit and another $300 per month in welfare. That’s right- she was making $2400 per month in child support and government checks, and babysitting the neighbor’s kids for a total take home of $3100 per month, tax free. That is the equivalent of grossing over $40,000 a year. Meanwhile, I was living below the poverty level. It is easy to see why many men become “deadbeats.” The child support system is fundamentally unfair, and there is no mechanism in place to ensure that the money actually supports the child.

Twelve years later, my kids are both grown up and have been living on their own for years. The punishing child support is a distant memory. The ex-wife got a job at WalMart as a cashier, worked there for a year, and injured her back. She is on Social Security disability and welfare now. As far as I know, other than that one year working at Wal Mart, she has never had a job her entire adult life.

But if I had failed to pay even some of that money, it is me who would have gone to jail, without an attorney, without a trial. Where is the real crime here? The only good thing that I can say I got out of all of those issues is that I no longer fear poverty, for I know what poverty is. I learned what it is like to work hard, and to work long hours just to eat. To this day, I still work two jobs, even though I no longer need the money.

Waste

How is high school athletics related to education? As a taxpayer, I resent the fact that I must pay extra taxes so that a student can participate in an extracurricular activity. In the central Florida area, every high school has a large stadium for football games, track facilities, top notch weight rooms, gymnastics, and many other pieces of expensive equipment that are designed to enable students to enjoy activities that are completely unrelated to what should be the goal of schools: education.

I know that there are many parents out there will claim that participation in sports is important, and that many life lessons are learned through sports. OK, then: Why is it necessary for the education of children to transport an entire football team, cheerleaders, coaching staff, and marching band of a public high school from Colorado to Florida at taxpayer expense?  Not only that, but the same night, another high school team flew from California to play in a Florida football game. The children couldn’t play at one single school between here and Colorado? Here and California? Is this really a wise use of taxpayer money?

Florida doesn’t have enough money to fund emergency services or repair roads, but we have enough to fly hundreds of children to Disney’s backyard to play a game?

Admissions meeting

I am flying 1,200 miles to see the admissions committee of a college, so that I can attend Physician Assistant school. I hope to get in, because I think that I am ready to move on from EMS. I still love patient care, and I enjoy what I do.

The problem is that I no longer enjoy the setting. It began when a rash of poor care by fellow paramedics was being actively covered up by my administration. It culminated in my mother being one of the patients who were shortchanged. This planted the seeds of discontent. Now I understand that no profession is immune. I have worked with plenty of nurses and doctors who screw up just as badly, and private ambulance companies are no better, been there, done that. I was willing to suffer through things, since I couldn’t see anywhere or any job where bad employees were not tolerated and protected. I sucked it up.

Until recently, when the public began jumping on the “cushy” pay for firefighters, and the “public employees are evil” bandwagon. I am tired of being spit on and underpaid. It is time to go.

That’s right- underpaid. Starting pay for a firefighter/paramedic is $13.77 an hour. After two promotions and 15 years with the same department, I make $19.23 an hour. I began working a part time second job as a paramedic in a local theme park less than six months ago, and we only perform BLS procedures. Starting pay for a medic with no experience is $16.50 an hour, and $17.50 an hour if you have two or more years of experience. The health plan is better, the hours are better, and the working conditions easier.

So, I am trying to get into school to get my master’s degree. Like me, many firefighters are leaving the profession. Out of the 100 men and women in my department, we have lost 9 in the past year:
1 now drives an ice cream delivery truck
1 left to return to college
2 have left to be nurses
2 left to be firefighters in other states
1 is now a radio DJ
2 retired, and I have no idea where they are now

I also know that one just tested for a department in Colorado, one tested in Arizona, and three have notified the department that they will be retiring between now and June. And now me. If all goes well, I will be leaving by December.

Gold experts and inflation

Gold tops $1900 an announce, and the experts are all claiming that it is overbought, and that the bubble will soon burst.

That is the same thing that the experts said in June, when gold was at $1500 an ounce.
– and October of 2010, when gold was $1380 an ounce.
– and March, 2010, when gold was at $1200 an ounce.
– and December of 2009, when gold was passing $1100 an ounce.
– and in December of 2005, when gold was $520 an ounce.

The secret here is that the world’s governments and private citizens alike are coming to the realization that the US Government cannot stop spending money, and are moving away from using the dollar as the reserve currency for the world. This is injecting large amounts of dollars into the world’s markets, and making the dollar worth less. This is causing a massive devaluation of the dollar. This isn’t the first time that a country has spent itself into financial ruin. Zimbabwe, the Soviets, and the Germans have all done it during the last century.

Our politicians don’t care, because both parties need your money to buy your vote. They are spending us into ruin. Don’t be caught holding dollars when the end comes, or you will need them to heat your home, like this woman is doing in 1923 Germany, because bank notes are cheaper than coal.

Price of 1 ounce of gold (in German Marks):

January,1919………. 170
September,1919……. 499
January, 1920………. 1,340
September, 1920……. 1,201
January, 1921………. 1,349
September, 1921…….2,175
January, 1922……….3,976
September, 1922…….30,381
January, 1923……….372,477
September, 1923…….269,439,000 (that’s right- from 4 thousand to 270 million in a year and a half)
Oct. 2, 1923………….6,631,749,000
Oct. 9, 1923………….24,868,950,000
Oct. 16, 1923…………84,969,072,000
Oct. 23, 1923…………1,160,552,882,000 (over 1 trillion)
Oct. 30, 1923…………1,347,070,000,000
Nov. 5, 1923…………..8,700,000,000,000
Nov. 30, 1923…………87,000,000,000,000 (almost 80 trillion increase in one month)

Do you see how the problem escalates? This is where we are headed. Scary stuff.

Pay and skill

I work at a major theme park. This theme park recently had a turnover problem- that is, a number of employees were leaving for other paramedic positions that paid more money. To solve the problem, they raised starting paramedic pay to $17.50 an hour- a raise of $3.75 an hour. The medics who had been there for more than a few years are livid. They are claiming that they ‘deserve’ more because they have been there longer.

The American public believes that public employees are overpaid. They complain about what the public employees ‘deserve’ and claim that, since the economy is bad, that public employees should be paid less.

Both positions show a complete lack of understanding of basic economics. The law of supply and demand dictates what an employee makes. The market sets the price of labor. If you, as an employer, pay too little, your employees will leave. The ones that are available to replace them will be of lower quality. That is, the employee is selling a product: his labor. The price of that product is set by the market. Wages are a balance between the supply of people that are capable of providing the labor, and the number of people who are needed to perform that labor.

Numerous things can lower wages. If just anyone can provide that product, then the price (pay) will be low. A good example of this is greeter at WalMart. This position requires a skill set that nearly anyone can master, so the wages for that position are low. The other factor that can have negative effects on wages is the demand for that particular skill. You may be a master of 14th century French poetry, but there is no market for 14th century French poetry, so you will likely become a greeter at WalMart, that being your only other marketable skill.

Conversely, wages can also be driven in the opposite direction. If you bring a skill set to the table that not many people have, you can “auction” off those skills to the highest bidder.

This is the point that many miss. If you think that you are more valuable simply because you have been at a job for a long time, you are wrong. You become more valuable with longevity because you have (presumably) become more adept at the job you are being tasked with as the years went by. Eventually, though, the job is mastered, and your value becomes capped at a certain level. In order to demand more pay, the employee must accomplish two things: he must gain more skill, and must ensure that the skill gained is one that the employer needs. Just like any other product. It is up to you as to whether or not it is worth the effort to improve your product (yourself) for the additional pay.

And to employers: remember that, as your wage scale falls below market value, the more valuable employees will sell their wares to the highest bidder, leaving you with a cheaper, sometimes less valuable product. It is up to you to determine if you are willing to accept the lower level of skill.

CBS news bias

With the Obama’s planning to take another vacation to Martha’s Vinyard, CBS news has come to his defense as the Republicans attack him for taking too many vacations. CBS news correspondent Mark Knoller, a self-proclaimed presidential statistician, claims that Obama has had 61 vacation days over his 31 months in office.

Now, I am one of those who believes that a President is always working, and no matter where they are. I thought the complaints about Bush vacations were silly partisan sniping, and I believe that the same can be said about the attacks on Obama for his vacation. After all, President Bush was just as capable of carrying out the business of the Executive branch from his ranch in Texas as he is from the White House.

Mark Knoller, in an article written in January of 2010, about Obama’s first year in office, claimed that Obama spent 27 days at Camp David, and another 26 days on vacation in his first year. That totals 53 days. In addition, he spent 29 days playing golf. It doesn’t appear that accuracy in reporting is Mr. Knoller’s strong suit, because in July of 2010, he claimed that Obama had taken 35 vacation days so far in his Presidency.

 Mark Knoller claimed on December 31st of 2010 that Obama took 32 days of vacation in 2010, and took 58 days of vacation in 2009. According to my math, that is a total of 90 days for 2009 and 2010. So how can the same man claim that, as of 2011, Obama has taken a total of 61 days of vacation? I think Mark Knoller just makes up numbers as he goes along.

No, today’s post is about the press and their partisan bias, not about Presidential time off. Much hay is made in lefty circles about how Fox news is biased. Names like “Faux News,” yet this is an obvious, provable falsehood. This should be no surprise, since more than half of the items that CBS news is selling in their online store is Obama memorabilia.

Tell me again that Fox is biased, and CBS is not.

(Incidentally, I could not find a source that listed the number of days that Obama has vacationed.)

Only Fox news has biased coverage

Recently, there was an attack by a group of forty or more teens against a neighborhood, and one of the residents used a rifle to scare them off. Some of the people reading the article were asking why the news didn’t mention the fact that it was a group of forty black teens attacking residents of a white neighborhood, and the further alleged that if it had been a large group of white teens terrorizing a black neighborhood, it would have been the largest headline possible. Calls from the press to pass hate crime laws would have been heard. Instead, crickets.

The Chicago Tribune responded by saying:

It’s the newspaper’s sound general policy not to mention race in a story, whether about crime or anything else, unless it has some clear relevance to the topic. 

 Really? Let’s see:

Editorial accusing people who disagree with Obama of racism.

Story accusing Arizona of racism because they crack down on illegal immigrants, who happen to be Mexican because the Mexican border is closer to Arizona than the Canadian border.

Story about how blacks do not save their money like whites do.

Story about a man charged with a hate crime for pointing at another man and calling him a name.

The Chicago Tribune fails to realize that the race of people involved with a story only becomes relevant when you report the race of the people. Ignoring the fact that an attack is racially motivated makes the race of those people irrelevant and shows your bias.

Hey Dave Ramsey

You keep telling people what a bad investment it is to buy gold. Let’s take another look at the numbers:

Dow in 1971: 868
25 ounces of Gold in 1971: 875

Dow in 2010: 10,067
25 ounces of gold: 27,200 (1088 per ounce)

Dow today:10,862
25 ounces of gold: 44,550 (1782 per ounce)

So, since January of 2010, the Dow has increased at an annual rate of 5%, but gold has climbed at an annual rate of 40%. Since 1971, the Dow climbed at an average of 28.8%, and gold at a whopping 124.7%.

Of course, the Dow is adjusted, and the stocks on it are dropped as they become worthless, so the actual return on the Dow is much lower than that. Thanks Dave.