Over the past month, I've probably watched at least fifteen different interviews with the new political figure out of New York City....Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
So I've come to this observation. When you get ready to finish college (for a four-year degree), they need to require some type of oral exam or Q and A session. You need to be able to state some logical arguments, and sustain a basic conclusion. In the case of Ocasio-Cortez and her degree from Boston University and her degree (supposedly relating to economics), I would suggest that she's pretty much lost and unable to conduct a logical argument or sustain a basic conclusion. In simple terms, I'm not sure what she did four years, but that $49,000 per year....was pretty much dumped down the drain with little gained in terms of intellect.
I'll even go as far to suggest that everytime she speaks and does one of her arguments....it hurts the reputation of the University.
I doubt if any university wants to implement some kind of qualification exam for their Bachelor's Degree.....mostly because half the students would fail, but it would suggest to me that all we are doing is pumping idiot 'man-kids' into the public, with no true skills gained from four years of college.
Wednesday, 1 August 2018
The Next California Exit
There are several problems with this. First, they put it up as a ballot measure. If voted upon and reaching a passing rate....neither the State Constitution nor the federal government.....have any method to really make this work.
Second, if a regular guy owned property in this region? Well....you'd have to compensate the guy, and I would imagine this would get up into the hundreds of billions. Who would pay it?
Third, who exactly is the aNAn? I could see a dozen tribes trying to get 'respect' and having control over this region, with this going into twenty years of legal challenges.
Fourth, Why limit this to the eastern side of California? Why not the entire state? Or why not the western end?
Fifth, there are dozens of federal parks, reservations, and military sites in this region. I just don't see the federal government giving them up.
On paper, it's interesting....beyond that, it's a joke.
Monday, 30 July 2018
Trump Anxiety Disorder?
I was sitting this morning and reading through a piece which talked about 'Trump Anxiety Disorder'.
This idea (hard to describe as a true medical condition....came from an essay written by psychologist Jennifer Panning. The suffering here? You come to a point of "feeling a loss of control and helplessness, and fretting about what's happening in the country and spending excessive time on social media."
The psychologists aren't saying how many folks they are treating, and my humble guess is that it's into the 300,000 (a fair number might be university students).
After hearing the whole chatter....I asked the question....how would you handle this as a psychologist talking to some poor guy in a bad-off way?
Well....you'd have to ask them to give up social media for sixty days (my feeling). News? Probably limit the guy to just local news for the same period.
As for Trump? You'd go and talk to the guy every two weeks....suggesting that maybe a group setting would be better for them. So you can imagine this group meeting.....ten folks with some moderator....kinda like a alcohol rehab group....meeting every Thursday night to talk about their Trump feelings. A fair number of these would be women, in their forties....single.
Somewhere in the mix of ten folks....there'd be one Trump-guy....mostly pretending that he has issues....just to hang out and chat with single gals.
The problem I see with the mental health issue is that Trump might be around through 2024, and that's a fair bit of time to be in some rehab group.
But the other issue that bothers me.....are people really that fragile? If you had suggested something like this back in 2000 or 2004....folks would have laughed. Yet here we are.....fragile Americans in need to special help.
Oddly, what the mental health guys say is that this is just a mental issue....it's not causing folks to drink whiskey or take drugs.....at least not yet. Personally, I think if they just went off to North Korea for two weeks, they'd get all this disorder stuff out of their head and think of other things to worry about.
This idea (hard to describe as a true medical condition....came from an essay written by psychologist Jennifer Panning. The suffering here? You come to a point of "feeling a loss of control and helplessness, and fretting about what's happening in the country and spending excessive time on social media."
The psychologists aren't saying how many folks they are treating, and my humble guess is that it's into the 300,000 (a fair number might be university students).
After hearing the whole chatter....I asked the question....how would you handle this as a psychologist talking to some poor guy in a bad-off way?
Well....you'd have to ask them to give up social media for sixty days (my feeling). News? Probably limit the guy to just local news for the same period.
As for Trump? You'd go and talk to the guy every two weeks....suggesting that maybe a group setting would be better for them. So you can imagine this group meeting.....ten folks with some moderator....kinda like a alcohol rehab group....meeting every Thursday night to talk about their Trump feelings. A fair number of these would be women, in their forties....single.
Somewhere in the mix of ten folks....there'd be one Trump-guy....mostly pretending that he has issues....just to hang out and chat with single gals.
The problem I see with the mental health issue is that Trump might be around through 2024, and that's a fair bit of time to be in some rehab group.
But the other issue that bothers me.....are people really that fragile? If you had suggested something like this back in 2000 or 2004....folks would have laughed. Yet here we are.....fragile Americans in need to special help.
Oddly, what the mental health guys say is that this is just a mental issue....it's not causing folks to drink whiskey or take drugs.....at least not yet. Personally, I think if they just went off to North Korea for two weeks, they'd get all this disorder stuff out of their head and think of other things to worry about.
Mueller and Trump: 2011
It rarely ever gets brought up, but back in 2011....Mr Mueller had this problem with Mr Trump.
Mueller, at that time....was acting director of the FBI. He came up and joined a private golf club in Sterling, VA....owned by Trump.
Initial fee? Well....it's in the range of $100k. Monthly costs? $695 a month. I know, it's hefty, but it's a private club and big-shots tend to show up.
If you were golfing every weekend, it'd probably be worth the money suggested.
In 2011, Mueller came to quit the club. There's never been any real explanation over this. What Mueller wanted was part of his initial fee back. No one says how much (if any) of it that he got back.
But you start to think over this. As the acting director, he was making $175,000 at the time. How did he afford the initial fee? One might assume that he had enough pocket money to make this happen. But if you go and figure the $695 monthly fee, and food/drinks for a Saturday out....he was likely spending $10,000 a year on his 'hobby'.....that's before we even get to the 'right' clothing or the 'right' equipment.
Is this golf episode something that might come up in any court case? Well....that's the thing, you just don't know how the returned fee business went, and if sour-apples might exist with Mueller.
Mueller, at that time....was acting director of the FBI. He came up and joined a private golf club in Sterling, VA....owned by Trump.
Initial fee? Well....it's in the range of $100k. Monthly costs? $695 a month. I know, it's hefty, but it's a private club and big-shots tend to show up.
If you were golfing every weekend, it'd probably be worth the money suggested.
In 2011, Mueller came to quit the club. There's never been any real explanation over this. What Mueller wanted was part of his initial fee back. No one says how much (if any) of it that he got back.
But you start to think over this. As the acting director, he was making $175,000 at the time. How did he afford the initial fee? One might assume that he had enough pocket money to make this happen. But if you go and figure the $695 monthly fee, and food/drinks for a Saturday out....he was likely spending $10,000 a year on his 'hobby'.....that's before we even get to the 'right' clothing or the 'right' equipment.
Is this golf episode something that might come up in any court case? Well....that's the thing, you just don't know how the returned fee business went, and if sour-apples might exist with Mueller.
Sunday, 29 July 2018
Maximum Disruption
I noticed today....that Oklahoma Senator James Lankford (speaking on some ABC show) said that "Russia's aim is to disrupt American elections, including in the upcoming 2018 midterms".
You can imagine some guy....sitting in some farm and tractor implement store in Alabama....speaking tomorrow to some folks over this topic, and wondering.....are the Russians trying to get him to vote Democrat, or Republican? Hours will go by as the guys stand there by the coffee machine....delaying actual farm work, as they debate as the evil Russians might be doing this.
Sitting in DC....five or six GOP senators will be sitting there and talking over how the evil Russians might be helping the Democrats to win the election.
Sitting in some lobbyist bar in DC.....three Democrats are talking over the evil Russians and how they are going to help the Republicans.
Sitting in Moscow is Putin and he's asking his people....who the hell started this stupid rumor? One of the young guys admitted that he was drinking with a CIA guy and mentioned this as a joke. Putin starts laughing.
The problem here is that once the Chinese, the Germans, the Swiss, and the folks on Togo figure out this game.....all of them will start rumors that they are also going to disrupt the US election.
You can imagine some guy....sitting in some farm and tractor implement store in Alabama....speaking tomorrow to some folks over this topic, and wondering.....are the Russians trying to get him to vote Democrat, or Republican? Hours will go by as the guys stand there by the coffee machine....delaying actual farm work, as they debate as the evil Russians might be doing this.
Sitting in DC....five or six GOP senators will be sitting there and talking over how the evil Russians might be helping the Democrats to win the election.
Sitting in some lobbyist bar in DC.....three Democrats are talking over the evil Russians and how they are going to help the Republicans.
Sitting in Moscow is Putin and he's asking his people....who the hell started this stupid rumor? One of the young guys admitted that he was drinking with a CIA guy and mentioned this as a joke. Putin starts laughing.
The problem here is that once the Chinese, the Germans, the Swiss, and the folks on Togo figure out this game.....all of them will start rumors that they are also going to disrupt the US election.
Talking Debt
There's a piece written by Mitch Daniels which has attracted a fair amount of attention this morning. Via a Fox article, his chatter is over this....Connecticut, California, New York, New Jersey and Illinois.....are reaching the stage where they will be insolvent. Chief cause? Well....trying to fund pension programs which are beyond imagination. In the case of California, it's a failing bond which amounts upward to $428 billion. Daniels statement is that reality will soon hit the Senate, and in some dramatic way....they will have to save these five states. The taxpayer, in his opinion, is screwed.
The timeline? Daniels doesn't say, and the Fox host doesn't guess. If you were asking me....it won't happen in 2018, or 2019. But I could see Illinois reaching a stage where they ask for some 'gift'....some ten-billion-dollar loan with zero-percent interest and ten years to pay it back. The problem is that paying it back will likely be impossible unless they go and remedy their pension program in a massive way. In some cases, the idiots were stupid enough to write it into their Constitution, and the judges will enforce it to remain. Because of this issue, whoever is President at the time when this comes up....could render a dramatic 'no', and force the state deeper into a pit.
Trump at this moment of chaos? He probably won't be their friend.
I think three dramatic things must occur. First, each state has to remedy its pension (by law or Constitutional efforts) before you can come and request federal help, and that state supreme court must sign off on the pension change. If the two groups won't work to achieve the matter, don't bother giving them a nickel.
Second, the amount of money given shouldn't go over the sum of twenty-five billion dollars per state, with a zero-interest deal for the first five years, and a 3.5-percent interest deal for the second five year period. If they need a third five-year period? Fine....attach the 5-percent interest onto it.
Third and final....write a simple federal law into the deal that once you take the federal loan to cover the pension mess....you can't go and get another loan via a credit group or bank for the same problem, until you've paid off the federal loan.
On the pension amount? This is the curious thing. When you've got some fireman retiring in California at age 55, and he's collecting $120,000 a year on a pension.....there's something wrong. When you have some city finance chief for a town in Illinois retiring, and collecting $225,000 a year....there's something wrong.
So somewhere down the line, some idiot is going to have write and pass a 'limit-law' to say you can't collect more than $40,000 on pensions. If a guy wants to take his promised money and invest into some 401k-type pension deal, then I don't have a problem with that. But I doubt if any of these five states have the type of employees who would accept that deal.
Here's the bad news....Trump is likely around for 6.5 years and the odds of any of these characters approaching the Senate to beg for help? They'd have to convince Trump to help them.....deep-blue Democratic voter states? There's this odd likely chance that it'll be 2025 before they can ask for help and they will go and get even deeper into debt.
The timeline? Daniels doesn't say, and the Fox host doesn't guess. If you were asking me....it won't happen in 2018, or 2019. But I could see Illinois reaching a stage where they ask for some 'gift'....some ten-billion-dollar loan with zero-percent interest and ten years to pay it back. The problem is that paying it back will likely be impossible unless they go and remedy their pension program in a massive way. In some cases, the idiots were stupid enough to write it into their Constitution, and the judges will enforce it to remain. Because of this issue, whoever is President at the time when this comes up....could render a dramatic 'no', and force the state deeper into a pit.
Trump at this moment of chaos? He probably won't be their friend.
I think three dramatic things must occur. First, each state has to remedy its pension (by law or Constitutional efforts) before you can come and request federal help, and that state supreme court must sign off on the pension change. If the two groups won't work to achieve the matter, don't bother giving them a nickel.
Second, the amount of money given shouldn't go over the sum of twenty-five billion dollars per state, with a zero-interest deal for the first five years, and a 3.5-percent interest deal for the second five year period. If they need a third five-year period? Fine....attach the 5-percent interest onto it.
Third and final....write a simple federal law into the deal that once you take the federal loan to cover the pension mess....you can't go and get another loan via a credit group or bank for the same problem, until you've paid off the federal loan.
On the pension amount? This is the curious thing. When you've got some fireman retiring in California at age 55, and he's collecting $120,000 a year on a pension.....there's something wrong. When you have some city finance chief for a town in Illinois retiring, and collecting $225,000 a year....there's something wrong.
So somewhere down the line, some idiot is going to have write and pass a 'limit-law' to say you can't collect more than $40,000 on pensions. If a guy wants to take his promised money and invest into some 401k-type pension deal, then I don't have a problem with that. But I doubt if any of these five states have the type of employees who would accept that deal.
Here's the bad news....Trump is likely around for 6.5 years and the odds of any of these characters approaching the Senate to beg for help? They'd have to convince Trump to help them.....deep-blue Democratic voter states? There's this odd likely chance that it'll be 2025 before they can ask for help and they will go and get even deeper into debt.
Austin in the News
I noticed this coming up today.....a report from the Austin, Texas’s Equity Office. They say there's some problems brewing over existing Confederate monuments, some neighborhoods in the city of Austin, at least ten streets, and the city name itself.
The Austin name? Well.....it comes from Stephen F. Austin, who happened to oppose Mexico's effort in the mid-1800s to dump slavery in the Tejas region. Austin at the time said that freed slaves would become "vagabonds, a nuisance and a menace."
So, the question is.....would this discussion reach a stage where you'd have to rename an entire city?
Someone did a study and said that if you just went out and renamed one single street....it costs around $5,000 to do the signs, maps, and paperwork required. But then you have to go and figure out the new names, and folks tend to get real creative.
Like.....some idiot could say Lee Street is a bad thing, and then you'd get sixty suggestions on the new street name (Barney Street (after the dinosaur), or Hippy Street, or Skywalker Driver, or Dallas Cowboy Avenue, or Stormy Daniels Street).
But then a whole city?
You'd have some idiots suggest Humperville, DaWaDaWaDaWa or Meth-City. Or how about Batmanville, Dusty Rhodes (after the wrestler), or West Trump.
The odds that it'd get this far? You might be able to persuade folks to just accept a couple of street name changes, but an entire neighborhood being renamed? I have my doubts, and there's zero chance that the city itself might change it's name.
But we are at a stage with society where people are cynical and sarcastic.....willing to rename their city 'Kim-City' after North Korea's dictator, or Hooterville after the TV show.
The Austin name? Well.....it comes from Stephen F. Austin, who happened to oppose Mexico's effort in the mid-1800s to dump slavery in the Tejas region. Austin at the time said that freed slaves would become "vagabonds, a nuisance and a menace."
So, the question is.....would this discussion reach a stage where you'd have to rename an entire city?
Someone did a study and said that if you just went out and renamed one single street....it costs around $5,000 to do the signs, maps, and paperwork required. But then you have to go and figure out the new names, and folks tend to get real creative.
Like.....some idiot could say Lee Street is a bad thing, and then you'd get sixty suggestions on the new street name (Barney Street (after the dinosaur), or Hippy Street, or Skywalker Driver, or Dallas Cowboy Avenue, or Stormy Daniels Street).
But then a whole city?
You'd have some idiots suggest Humperville, DaWaDaWaDaWa or Meth-City. Or how about Batmanville, Dusty Rhodes (after the wrestler), or West Trump.
The odds that it'd get this far? You might be able to persuade folks to just accept a couple of street name changes, but an entire neighborhood being renamed? I have my doubts, and there's zero chance that the city itself might change it's name.
But we are at a stage with society where people are cynical and sarcastic.....willing to rename their city 'Kim-City' after North Korea's dictator, or Hooterville after the TV show.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)