Seems at though the "environmental" scientists have cherry-picked their data.
In an article from the opinion.telegraph in the UK, global warming was flat from 1998-2005. And that we had a warming period from 1918 and 1940 well before the great global industrialization. In addition, from 1940 to 1965 we had Global Cooling.
WHAT??? You mean it is not getting worse? You mean my SUV is not killing me?
Best read this article in the Telegraph!
Telegraph Article
Here is an article in the Wall Street Journal by Richard Lindzen that talks about how scientists that go against the grain are being intimidated. In some cases to the point of loosing grants and their jobs!
Wall Street Journal article
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
Tuesday, March 28, 2006
Immigration
I don't think that marching in the streets with Mexican Flags and chanting slogans in Spanish is helpful for all the illegal immigrants in this country.
If nothing else, this display brings to stark reality the problem we have with immigration in this country.
If nothing else, this display brings to stark reality the problem we have with immigration in this country.
Wednesday, February 22, 2006
The Olympics Disappoint!
NBC is concerned that they are not getting the viewer-ship they expected. Sorry, I cannot sympathize with them in the least!
Am I the only one who is tired of figure skating. We see every little moment of this venue (if we choose to watch). It all blurs together in one vision of flashing crotches and fairy dressing men(?).
Then there is the culture of ME, ME, ME!!! From Shani Davis refusing to join the long-track pursuit team to the absolutely ridiculous and selfish Lindsay Jacobellis who had to Hot_Dog it at the end of her snowboarding medal run. I only wish two more of the competitors would have passed her in the end!
Then there are the"Team Sports". What a joke this is. Ever since they allowed the Pros to be in the Olympics, the "I don't give a sh...." quotient has skyrocketed. Do you think the Russian people hit the streets in celebration yesterday when their team beat the Americans? Hell no! Do you think Shack will be in the Summer Olympics in 2008; I don't think so. And who would care?
They ought to go back to the good old days when the Olympics was about the amateur. Perhaps NBC should look at the venues that sell out...like Curling where insurance salesmen are more the norm than high profile pros and spoiled boarders with their pants half way down their asses!
There is only one thing worse than the Olympics and that is the competition....American Idol! Now there is a real comment on our culture. I think I will turn off the tube and read a book!
Am I the only one who is tired of figure skating. We see every little moment of this venue (if we choose to watch). It all blurs together in one vision of flashing crotches and fairy dressing men(?).
Then there is the culture of ME, ME, ME!!! From Shani Davis refusing to join the long-track pursuit team to the absolutely ridiculous and selfish Lindsay Jacobellis who had to Hot_Dog it at the end of her snowboarding medal run. I only wish two more of the competitors would have passed her in the end!
Then there are the"Team Sports". What a joke this is. Ever since they allowed the Pros to be in the Olympics, the "I don't give a sh...." quotient has skyrocketed. Do you think the Russian people hit the streets in celebration yesterday when their team beat the Americans? Hell no! Do you think Shack will be in the Summer Olympics in 2008; I don't think so. And who would care?
They ought to go back to the good old days when the Olympics was about the amateur. Perhaps NBC should look at the venues that sell out...like Curling where insurance salesmen are more the norm than high profile pros and spoiled boarders with their pants half way down their asses!
There is only one thing worse than the Olympics and that is the competition....American Idol! Now there is a real comment on our culture. I think I will turn off the tube and read a book!
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
Spotted Owl Fiasco
The Wall Street Journal had an article written by Jim Petersen of Evergreen Magazine about the plight of the Northern Spotted Owl. The article sustains other reports indicating that the mid 1990's halt of logging in the Northwest was premature and based on short-sighted science.
Jim Petersen has kindly given me permission to reprint his WSJ article.
Owl Be Damned
By JIM PETERSEN
February 18, 2006; Page A9
Wall Street Journal
Last month the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service published a call for proposals to develop a recovery plan for the northern spotted owl. It's about time: The owl was added to the nation's burgeoning list of threatened and endangered species nearly 16 years ago. That it took so long helps explain why only 10 of the 1,264 species listed under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) have ever recovered.
If my gut reading is correct, the owl won't be No. 11. It is already doomed across much of its range, and the reason is well known among field biologists who have been observing the bird for some 20 years. More aggressive barred owls are pushing them out of their 21-million-acre home range, or killing them, or both. In any case, spotted owls are fighting a losing battle, a fact that has me wondering if the Fish and Wildlife Service isn't whistling past the graveyard.
Barred owls, not to be confused with common barn owls, migrated from their native East Coast environs a century or more ago. No one knows why, and until they started killing already-threatened spotted owls, no one cared. Now they do. Just how long it will take the barreds to finish off their brethren isn't known, but the situation has become so precarious that a federal biologist recently opined that shooting barred owls might be the only way to save spotted owls.
How and why the government failed so miserably in its costly attempt to protect spotted owls is a sordid tale that illustrates what happens when science is politicized. Begin with the fact that protecting owls was never the objective: Saving old-growth forests from chainsaws was. The owl was simply a surrogate -- a stand-in for forests that do not themselves qualify for ESA protection. But if a link could be established between harvesting in old-growth forests and declining spotted owl numbers, the bird might well qualify for listing -- a line of thinking that in 1988 led Andy Stahl, then a resource analyst with the Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund, to famously declare, "Thank goodness the spotted owl evolved in the Northwest, for if it hadn't, we'd have to genetically engineer it. It's the perfect species for use as a surrogate."
Indeed it was. But to back their play, the Sierra Club, the Audubon Society and their friends in the Clinton administration needed a good story for the judge. They found it in three obscure reports: a 1976 master's thesis written by wildlife biology major Eric Forsman at Oregon State University; Mr. Forsman's 1980 doctoral dissertation; and a 1984 report written by him and two other biologists. All three reports suggested a strong link between declining owl populations and harvesting in old-growth forests. Unfortunately, the hypothesis has never been tested, so despite 16 years of research, no link between old-growth harvesting and declining owl populations has ever been established.
Moreover, we know little about the relationship between harvesting and owl populations. One such study -- privately funded -- infers an inverse relationship between harvesting and owls. In other words, in areas where some harvesting has occurred, owl numbers are increasing a bit, or at least holding their own, while numbers are declining in areas where no harvesting has occurred.
This news will come as no surprise to Oregon, Washington and California timberland owners who are legally required to provide habitat for owls. Their actively managed lands are home to the highest reproductive rates ever recorded for spotted owls. Why is this?
One possible answer is that the anecdotal evidence on which the listing decision was based is incomplete. No one denies the presence of owls in old-growth forests, but what about the owls that are prospering in managed forests and in forests where little old growth remains? Could it be that spotted owls are more resourceful than we think?
We don't know -- and the reason we don't know is that 16 years ago federal scientists chose to politicize their hypothesis rather than test it rigorously, to flatly reject critiques from biometricians who questioned the statistical validity of the evidence on which the listing decision was based, and to declare with by-god certainty that once the old-growth harvest stopped owl populations would begin to recover.
Some biologists believe that spotted owls still have a fighting chance for survival east of the Cascades in Oregon and Washington, but there is a problem: White fir is pushing native Douglas fir out of these forests in the same way barred owls are pushing spotted owls out of their home range. Minus a long-term thinning program, opposed by many of the same environmental groups that pushed the owl's threatened species listing, the birds will probably vanish from these forests, too.
No doubt one or more environmental groups will use the government's call for recovery plans to demand that even more habitat be set aside for spotted owls. When that demand is made, someone ought to remind Congress of a recent U.S. Forest Service estimate that an additional 1.1 million acres of federal forestland in the Pacific Northwest have grown into old-growth status since the owl's listing. But owl numbers continue to decline.
Perhaps the untold story of the northern spotted owl will lead the U.S. Senate to endorse changes in the Endangered Species Act ratified by the House of Representatives last fall. Among other things, the House version mandates immediate development and implementation of recovery plans for all listed species. To avoid repeats of the spotted owl fiasco, it would also be nice if the scientists selected to peer-review listing proposals represented all sides of inevitably controversial questions.
It should not take 16 years to write a recovery plan. The fact that it did ought to prompt some very pointed questions about what went on behind locked doors in the Portland, Ore., U.S. Bank Tower -- nicknamed the "Tower of Power" by government scientists who gathered there, beyond public and congressional scrutiny, in the spring of 1990 to sift through the pieces of their story. Congress ought to ask for their notes. I'm told they were shredded daily.
Mr. Petersen is the founder of the nonprofit Evergreen Foundation and the publisher of Evergreen Magazine in Montana.
Go here to see my last blog on this subject.
Here is another link that speaks to the Northwest Forest Plan from the Clinton years. The publication this link goes to is far from being a neutral observer, and yet this article quietly agrees that the plan has done little to save the Northern Spotted Owl.
Jim Petersen has kindly given me permission to reprint his WSJ article.
Owl Be Damned
By JIM PETERSEN
February 18, 2006; Page A9
Wall Street Journal
Last month the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service published a call for proposals to develop a recovery plan for the northern spotted owl. It's about time: The owl was added to the nation's burgeoning list of threatened and endangered species nearly 16 years ago. That it took so long helps explain why only 10 of the 1,264 species listed under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) have ever recovered.
If my gut reading is correct, the owl won't be No. 11. It is already doomed across much of its range, and the reason is well known among field biologists who have been observing the bird for some 20 years. More aggressive barred owls are pushing them out of their 21-million-acre home range, or killing them, or both. In any case, spotted owls are fighting a losing battle, a fact that has me wondering if the Fish and Wildlife Service isn't whistling past the graveyard.
Barred owls, not to be confused with common barn owls, migrated from their native East Coast environs a century or more ago. No one knows why, and until they started killing already-threatened spotted owls, no one cared. Now they do. Just how long it will take the barreds to finish off their brethren isn't known, but the situation has become so precarious that a federal biologist recently opined that shooting barred owls might be the only way to save spotted owls.
How and why the government failed so miserably in its costly attempt to protect spotted owls is a sordid tale that illustrates what happens when science is politicized. Begin with the fact that protecting owls was never the objective: Saving old-growth forests from chainsaws was. The owl was simply a surrogate -- a stand-in for forests that do not themselves qualify for ESA protection. But if a link could be established between harvesting in old-growth forests and declining spotted owl numbers, the bird might well qualify for listing -- a line of thinking that in 1988 led Andy Stahl, then a resource analyst with the Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund, to famously declare, "Thank goodness the spotted owl evolved in the Northwest, for if it hadn't, we'd have to genetically engineer it. It's the perfect species for use as a surrogate."
Indeed it was. But to back their play, the Sierra Club, the Audubon Society and their friends in the Clinton administration needed a good story for the judge. They found it in three obscure reports: a 1976 master's thesis written by wildlife biology major Eric Forsman at Oregon State University; Mr. Forsman's 1980 doctoral dissertation; and a 1984 report written by him and two other biologists. All three reports suggested a strong link between declining owl populations and harvesting in old-growth forests. Unfortunately, the hypothesis has never been tested, so despite 16 years of research, no link between old-growth harvesting and declining owl populations has ever been established.
Moreover, we know little about the relationship between harvesting and owl populations. One such study -- privately funded -- infers an inverse relationship between harvesting and owls. In other words, in areas where some harvesting has occurred, owl numbers are increasing a bit, or at least holding their own, while numbers are declining in areas where no harvesting has occurred.
This news will come as no surprise to Oregon, Washington and California timberland owners who are legally required to provide habitat for owls. Their actively managed lands are home to the highest reproductive rates ever recorded for spotted owls. Why is this?
One possible answer is that the anecdotal evidence on which the listing decision was based is incomplete. No one denies the presence of owls in old-growth forests, but what about the owls that are prospering in managed forests and in forests where little old growth remains? Could it be that spotted owls are more resourceful than we think?
We don't know -- and the reason we don't know is that 16 years ago federal scientists chose to politicize their hypothesis rather than test it rigorously, to flatly reject critiques from biometricians who questioned the statistical validity of the evidence on which the listing decision was based, and to declare with by-god certainty that once the old-growth harvest stopped owl populations would begin to recover.
Some biologists believe that spotted owls still have a fighting chance for survival east of the Cascades in Oregon and Washington, but there is a problem: White fir is pushing native Douglas fir out of these forests in the same way barred owls are pushing spotted owls out of their home range. Minus a long-term thinning program, opposed by many of the same environmental groups that pushed the owl's threatened species listing, the birds will probably vanish from these forests, too.
No doubt one or more environmental groups will use the government's call for recovery plans to demand that even more habitat be set aside for spotted owls. When that demand is made, someone ought to remind Congress of a recent U.S. Forest Service estimate that an additional 1.1 million acres of federal forestland in the Pacific Northwest have grown into old-growth status since the owl's listing. But owl numbers continue to decline.
Perhaps the untold story of the northern spotted owl will lead the U.S. Senate to endorse changes in the Endangered Species Act ratified by the House of Representatives last fall. Among other things, the House version mandates immediate development and implementation of recovery plans for all listed species. To avoid repeats of the spotted owl fiasco, it would also be nice if the scientists selected to peer-review listing proposals represented all sides of inevitably controversial questions.
It should not take 16 years to write a recovery plan. The fact that it did ought to prompt some very pointed questions about what went on behind locked doors in the Portland, Ore., U.S. Bank Tower -- nicknamed the "Tower of Power" by government scientists who gathered there, beyond public and congressional scrutiny, in the spring of 1990 to sift through the pieces of their story. Congress ought to ask for their notes. I'm told they were shredded daily.
Mr. Petersen is the founder of the nonprofit Evergreen Foundation and the publisher of Evergreen Magazine in Montana.
Go here to see my last blog on this subject.
Here is another link that speaks to the Northwest Forest Plan from the Clinton years. The publication this link goes to is far from being a neutral observer, and yet this article quietly agrees that the plan has done little to save the Northern Spotted Owl.
Thursday, February 09, 2006
More Reid
Below is a partial quote from Breitbart.com that sustains my argument placed on this blog on Jan, 10th. This guy is just another liberal blow-hard hack in the mold of Howard Dean!
"Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid wrote at least four letters helpful to Indian tribes represented by Jack Abramoff, and the senator's staff regularly had contact with the disgraced lobbyist's team about legislation affecting other clients.
The activities _ detailed in billing records and correspondence obtained by The Associated Press _ are far more extensive than previously disclosed. They occurred over three years as Reid collected nearly $68,000 in donations from Abramoff's firm, lobbying partners and clients. ...."
"Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid wrote at least four letters helpful to Indian tribes represented by Jack Abramoff, and the senator's staff regularly had contact with the disgraced lobbyist's team about legislation affecting other clients.
The activities _ detailed in billing records and correspondence obtained by The Associated Press _ are far more extensive than previously disclosed. They occurred over three years as Reid collected nearly $68,000 in donations from Abramoff's firm, lobbying partners and clients. ...."
Monday, February 06, 2006
Cabo Whales
Just got back from a week in Cabo San Lucas Mexico; my first time in Mexico except for a memorable trip across the border to Tijuana when I was 19. 
While we were there, we went whale watching. Apparently, the whales are there in the thousands around this time of year. We would see them just off the shore every evening and decided we wanted to get up close and personal.
We went on a raft (same type you would go down the Colorado River on) that had two 150cc outboard engines. This thing was FAST!. On the trip out there we were going over 50mph. For those who have not been on the water, this is fast for water travel.
The several boats out there worked together to spot the breaching whales. Our boat responded much faster than the rest and we would be right on their tails when they came up for a breath, as you can see from the pictures. You only get 30 or so seconds then they disappear for 5 or so minutes.
One thing the pictures do not give you. That is the fact that the breath that comes out of their blow-holes smells very bad. I cannot put into words the surprise we all had when this guy blows this retched smelling mist out. We were covered by the stuff one time when we were right behind the guy.
Amazing experience I recommend for anyone that goes down there this time of year. If you have the time, apparently, you can take a plane ride up the coast a couple of hundred miles and see where they give birth to their babies. Quite a site I understand because the mama's come to the surface every 45 seconds or so because their offspring can only hold their breath that long.
These same guys will be seen in the Alaskan waters in late summer. Since we will be there then, I look forward to seeing them again.
While we were there, we went whale watching. Apparently, the whales are there in the thousands around this time of year. We would see them just off the shore every evening and decided we wanted to get up close and personal.
We went on a raft (same type you would go down the Colorado River on) that had two 150cc outboard engines. This thing was FAST!. On the trip out there we were going over 50mph. For those who have not been on the water, this is fast for water travel.
The several boats out there worked together to spot the breaching whales. Our boat responded much faster than the rest and we would be right on their tails when they came up for a breath, as you can see from the pictures. You only get 30 or so seconds then they disappear for 5 or so minutes.
One thing the pictures do not give you. That is the fact that the breath that comes out of their blow-holes smells very bad. I cannot put into words the surprise we all had when this guy blows this retched smelling mist out. We were covered by the stuff one time when we were right behind the guy.
Amazing experience I recommend for anyone that goes down there this time of year. If you have the time, apparently, you can take a plane ride up the coast a couple of hundred miles and see where they give birth to their babies. Quite a site I understand because the mama's come to the surface every 45 seconds or so because their offspring can only hold their breath that long.
These same guys will be seen in the Alaskan waters in late summer. Since we will be there then, I look forward to seeing them again.
Monday, January 23, 2006
Visiting Elk
At 12am last night (I guess that is today), I was awakened by a tap-tap on the window. When I pulled up the shade I was face to face with a 6-point Bull Elk. I mean, he was just staring right at me - head on - with his snout no more than 2 feet away from me.
He was eating the shrubs below the window. I got my wife up and rushed to my office to get my camera. By the time I returned he had left the bedroom window and was around the house just west of the house.
Attached are a couple of these shots.
This guy has been around the house for the last two nights and was the one I took the picture of on the 16th.
He was eating the shrubs below the window. I got my wife up and rushed to my office to get my camera. By the time I returned he had left the bedroom window and was around the house just west of the house.Attached are a couple of these shots.
This guy has been around the house for the last two nights and was the one I took the picture of on the 16th.
Wednesday, January 18, 2006
Police Report from North Park
The following are a couple of police reports written by the clever Jim Dustin of the Jackson County Star.
Dec 13: a ranch manager on the west side of the county had a chat with some snowmobilers regarding the concept of private property.
Dec 14: the EMT's assisted when a child fell out of a shopping cart.
Dec 14: a motorist driving over Cameron Pass and down into Jackson County was confronted with numerous curves along Highway 14. He failed to make the first one; passersby helped.
Dec 14: motorists were faced with a prickly problem when they encountered a rather large porcupine in the middle of Highway 125 south of Walden. Officers summoned the DOW.
Dec 13: a ranch manager on the west side of the county had a chat with some snowmobilers regarding the concept of private property.
Dec 14: the EMT's assisted when a child fell out of a shopping cart.
Dec 14: a motorist driving over Cameron Pass and down into Jackson County was confronted with numerous curves along Highway 14. He failed to make the first one; passersby helped.
Dec 14: motorists were faced with a prickly problem when they encountered a rather large porcupine in the middle of Highway 125 south of Walden. Officers summoned the DOW.
Northern Spotted Owl
EATS ->
In the Feb 2006 issue of Outdoor Life the editor relates the sad fact that the environmentalists had it all wrong about the Spotted Owl. Sad, that is for the 130,000 people who lost their jobs!
Having been placed on the endangered list in 1990, the Clinton administration (in the mid 90's), banned all logging on 24 million acres in the Pacific North West. This shut down the logging industry and therefore the loss of jobs.
The population of the Spotted Owl has continued to decline even though there has been no logging. Seems as though the reason is the fact that the Barred Owl's favorite target is the Spotted Owl! Heavens me! Did we jump to conclusions back in 1995?
Just another example of how the left, the environmentalists in this case, are really anti-capitalist when it comes right down to it.
Monday, January 16, 2006
I think he is lost
When the snow is close to 4 feet deep on the flats, getting around is much easier if you use the plowed streets!
Thursday, January 12, 2006
Alito on his way to confirmation!
"A senior Democratic leadership aide conceded that President George W. Bush's 55-year-old conservative nominee appeared to have the votes." From Reuters Jan 12, 2006
It hasn't happened yet, but it looks like our country will have a NEW Supreme Court. Thank goodness. Of all the things that George Bush has done, this is the most important for our country. Now there are 5 judges solidly in the conservative camp. That doesn't mean that they will vote conservative every time, but it does look like a majority will interpret the constitution now rather than try to rewrite it!
Fantastic!
It hasn't happened yet, but it looks like our country will have a NEW Supreme Court. Thank goodness. Of all the things that George Bush has done, this is the most important for our country. Now there are 5 judges solidly in the conservative camp. That doesn't mean that they will vote conservative every time, but it does look like a majority will interpret the constitution now rather than try to rewrite it!
Fantastic!
Tuesday, January 10, 2006
Harry Reid is a Phony!
I wrote a letter to the editor of the Denver Post about a guest commentary Harry Reid had in that paper last Sunday, Jan. 8, 2006, which, by the way, will be published this coming Sunday, Jan 15 2006 in the Post. You can read Reid's comments here:
http://www.denverpost.com/guestcommentary/ci_3375720
The gist is that "others" have this problem with the Abramoff scandal. WHAT A BUNCH OF BUNK! I wrote the following:
Editor, Denver Post
In response to the Guest Commentary of Harry Reid; Jan 8, 2006;
Not only is Harry Reid sanctimonious, he is hypocritical in his guest commentary called "Time for capital cleanup" (Sunday Perspective). I am very disappointed in the Post for allowing this type of commentary to be unanswered. I give you one thing, the picture at the top of the column does a good job of portraying him as a smug, chin in the air phony that he really is.
In the fifth paragraph he states; "The problem is Washington is run by leaders who put their own political interests ahead of America's interests."
What a joke! A quick Google of 'Abramoff Reid' will display numerous links to Mr Reid's complicity in the whole scandal (see some below).
Not only did he receive over $60,000 from Abramoff's office, he refuses to accept responsibility. Unlike many of his Democrat colleagues, he is not returning any of it, or, for that matter, donating a dime of the tainted money to charities like some of his Democrat friends are.
Later on in the column he talks about how the Democrats have resolved to "clean up Washington". Mr Reid ought not have his minions clean too hard, they may unearth their own skeletons!
Finally, he wants us all to ask ourselves: "is this the best America can do - a government where the special interests come before the people?"
I say to Mr Reid; yes we can, and the first step is to get rid of leaders like him.
Here are a few of the links to articles exposing Mr Reid:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/17/AR2005111701682.html (next to last paragraph)
http://www.nrsc.org/newsdesk/document.aspx?ID=1386
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/1/3/115231.shtml
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/005805.php
http://www.denverpost.com/guestcommentary/ci_3375720
The gist is that "others" have this problem with the Abramoff scandal. WHAT A BUNCH OF BUNK! I wrote the following:
Editor, Denver Post
In response to the Guest Commentary of Harry Reid; Jan 8, 2006;
Not only is Harry Reid sanctimonious, he is hypocritical in his guest commentary called "Time for capital cleanup" (Sunday Perspective). I am very disappointed in the Post for allowing this type of commentary to be unanswered. I give you one thing, the picture at the top of the column does a good job of portraying him as a smug, chin in the air phony that he really is.
In the fifth paragraph he states; "The problem is Washington is run by leaders who put their own political interests ahead of America's interests."
What a joke! A quick Google of 'Abramoff Reid' will display numerous links to Mr Reid's complicity in the whole scandal (see some below).
Not only did he receive over $60,000 from Abramoff's office, he refuses to accept responsibility. Unlike many of his Democrat colleagues, he is not returning any of it, or, for that matter, donating a dime of the tainted money to charities like some of his Democrat friends are.
Later on in the column he talks about how the Democrats have resolved to "clean up Washington". Mr Reid ought not have his minions clean too hard, they may unearth their own skeletons!
Finally, he wants us all to ask ourselves: "is this the best America can do - a government where the special interests come before the people?"
I say to Mr Reid; yes we can, and the first step is to get rid of leaders like him.
Here are a few of the links to articles exposing Mr Reid:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/17/AR2005111701682.html (next to last paragraph)
http://www.nrsc.org/newsdesk/document.aspx?ID=1386
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/1/3/115231.shtml
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/005805.php
Thursday, January 05, 2006
girly-men come to Steamboat.
There was a letter to the editor from a guy from Ft Collins who just visited Steamboat over the Christmas break. he complained about the ice on the sidewalks. Here is my response which I sent in to the local paper.
WARNING! It snows here in Steamboat. My goodness, this year it has snowed a lot. I hear that the three feet I have in my yard is just average; some have five feet.
And then sometimes it gets warm (periods of global warming...I think) and some of that snow melts and turns to water which runs all over the place. It runs off roofs and on to streets and even on to sidewalks.
And then it gets cold here in the winter. Really cold sometimes. And if it gets cold right after a big melt, all that water freezes. It freezes on the roofs; it freezes on your car and in your car locks; it even freezes all that water on the streets and sidewalks.
Frozen water is slippery, in fact, very slippery when it is about 32 degrees out. You must take care when you walk on it so as to not fall on your butt, or slide your car into the one in front of you. If you have a car, perhaps you should have snow tires, and if you are walking, by all means, get yourself some Yaks.
Better yet, try skiing or ice skating where the slipperier it is, the better. In fact, that is why most people come to Steamboat in the first place.
GIVE ME A BREAK!
The guy from the front range that wrote to the editor the other day, complaining of ice on the sidewalk, needs to get a life. When you come to the mountains in the winter, you are going to run into some ice and snow; even on the sidewalks. And even when the merchants in this town try their hardest to keep ahead of it. It is just a loosing proposition. Like keeping your sand castle standing in a rising tide. Or does this guy think our taxes should be raised so that we can have a ice-remover man who spends his day chipping all the ice away?
What is with our culture now where so many are looking for something to complain about and someone to blame. Perhaps that guy should vacation in Florida and dodge hurricanes or go to California and take his chances with earthquakes and mudslides. Or even Texas where he will have to watch out for all those tornados. It even gets hot down there too. Perhaps the towns in Texas should provide fans on street corners so as to keep people from heat stroke.
I can't help but remember, not too long ago, when one would see 80 year old Dorothy Wither (owner of a local store called Dorothy's) walking down Lincoln with her ski pole, climbing over the 3 foot piles of snow that were, not only on the side of the road, but right smack dab down the center of Lincoln. When they had time, the merchants would shovel little paths through those piles only to have them filled in by the state plows that night.
Of course, Dorothy was a tough, no nonsense woman; a real pioneer woman. Seems to me that, what we have now are too many girly-men...and women.
Tuesday, December 20, 2005
disapointment
I haven't been here for quite some time and when I do, all I find is a bunch of responses to my blog refering to this stock deal here and that special webhosting site there. All I can say is; GET LOST! Each and every one of these slime-ball posts will get a visit and I will try my best to return in kind!
Monday, March 28, 2005
Do Nothing with Social Security ?????
I received a response to a blog I wrote on Feb 5th concerning Social Security. In this response I was pointed to the following URL: http://www.spokesmanreview.com/chat/transcript.asp?id=61. At this site a Prof from E.Washington U discusses SS.
I enjoy looking at different takes on this subject so I read most of the article. If I wrote all the things that I disagreed with, this blog would be much too long to hold anyones attention, so I will hold it down to a couple of observations.
First, Mr Orr received his MA from the University of Colorado a few years after I graduated from there. He then stayed on to get his PhD. After all that has gone on at CU in the last few months with Ward Churchill, I am tempted to say..."I rest my case". What do you expect from a guy that studies at an institution such as CU? I can tell you from experience of going there in the 60's, having family living in Boulder (Peoples Republic of) and having a daughter who graduated from there, CU could easily be called the Berkley of the Rocky Mountains! Now he teaches at a school in one of the most liberal areas of the country.
As is typical of the majority of people against the reform of SS, this guy has little to say other than, let's do nothing! He calls SS an insurance system. If I am not mistaken, this is not the intent back in the 30's when the thing was created.
He thinks that private accounts would allow people to loose all their money unless they were an expert in the markets. I say, make it a requirement that only indexed funds be allowed. Or, for that matter, continue to put the money in T Notes, but with MY NAME ON THE T NOTE!
Even Chris Rock in his ranting has stated that SS is a scam for Blacks in this country because the average life span of a Black man is only 57. He is wrong on the life span (it is 67), but he has a point. Blacks put their money into SS for 35 years only to, on average, die before they even get to use it. And their families get no benefit other than the small death benefit.
He wants to fund SS with another tax increase on the RICH! Did you know that if pressed, the Libs will admit that they consider rich to be family income over $60,000 a year. How about that all you 2 teacher families making $80,000! I bet you never thought you were one of the evil rich in this country. Of course you teachers don't need to worry about SS, you have a private pension that has been doing just fine, thank you, invested in the stock market!!!
OK lets tax the really wealthy. You know, the guys and gals that make the really big money. You know Socialism! Robin Hood and all that good stuff.....does this all sound familiar?
He ignores the demographics of the Baby Boomers hitting the retirement age in a couple of years or so. His answer, well, increased productivity has taken care of this 16 to 1 gong to 3 to 1 thing. Yea, sure, why, even the libs in Congress have admitted that this is going to be a huge problem.
Orr says that Bush lied about accounts being guaranteed a better return. I am tired of these folks always using hyperbole in describing anything Bush does. I'm surprised he didn't accuse him of some Naziism. As I have stated in past discussions, it sure will not be hard to achieve a better return than what SS provides now. Particularly when you consider it is all gone when you die as the system is now..
This is much too long as it is. Nobody is going to want to read this thing, so I will end for now. Just remember, when you hear a one sided story on this very important thing, when a guy like Orr says do nothing, then head for the exit.
I enjoy looking at different takes on this subject so I read most of the article. If I wrote all the things that I disagreed with, this blog would be much too long to hold anyones attention, so I will hold it down to a couple of observations.
First, Mr Orr received his MA from the University of Colorado a few years after I graduated from there. He then stayed on to get his PhD. After all that has gone on at CU in the last few months with Ward Churchill, I am tempted to say..."I rest my case". What do you expect from a guy that studies at an institution such as CU? I can tell you from experience of going there in the 60's, having family living in Boulder (Peoples Republic of) and having a daughter who graduated from there, CU could easily be called the Berkley of the Rocky Mountains! Now he teaches at a school in one of the most liberal areas of the country.
As is typical of the majority of people against the reform of SS, this guy has little to say other than, let's do nothing! He calls SS an insurance system. If I am not mistaken, this is not the intent back in the 30's when the thing was created.
He thinks that private accounts would allow people to loose all their money unless they were an expert in the markets. I say, make it a requirement that only indexed funds be allowed. Or, for that matter, continue to put the money in T Notes, but with MY NAME ON THE T NOTE!
Even Chris Rock in his ranting has stated that SS is a scam for Blacks in this country because the average life span of a Black man is only 57. He is wrong on the life span (it is 67), but he has a point. Blacks put their money into SS for 35 years only to, on average, die before they even get to use it. And their families get no benefit other than the small death benefit.
He wants to fund SS with another tax increase on the RICH! Did you know that if pressed, the Libs will admit that they consider rich to be family income over $60,000 a year. How about that all you 2 teacher families making $80,000! I bet you never thought you were one of the evil rich in this country. Of course you teachers don't need to worry about SS, you have a private pension that has been doing just fine, thank you, invested in the stock market!!!
OK lets tax the really wealthy. You know, the guys and gals that make the really big money. You know Socialism! Robin Hood and all that good stuff.....does this all sound familiar?
He ignores the demographics of the Baby Boomers hitting the retirement age in a couple of years or so. His answer, well, increased productivity has taken care of this 16 to 1 gong to 3 to 1 thing. Yea, sure, why, even the libs in Congress have admitted that this is going to be a huge problem.
Orr says that Bush lied about accounts being guaranteed a better return. I am tired of these folks always using hyperbole in describing anything Bush does. I'm surprised he didn't accuse him of some Naziism. As I have stated in past discussions, it sure will not be hard to achieve a better return than what SS provides now. Particularly when you consider it is all gone when you die as the system is now..
This is much too long as it is. Nobody is going to want to read this thing, so I will end for now. Just remember, when you hear a one sided story on this very important thing, when a guy like Orr says do nothing, then head for the exit.
Sunday, February 27, 2005
Losers
I just got back from a walk with my dogs. We parked in the same place and saw, basically, the same cars who, too, are owned by people walking their dogs. On one there is a Kerry - Edwards sign on the rear bumper.
What is it with these people who drive around town displaying the name of a couple of losers on their car. I don't know what to think of it. Are they the type that leave their garage sale signs up in the neighborhood for 6 months after the sale, or are they just spiteful romantics that think that they are making a "Hate Bush" statement by doing it?
Get a life!
The election is over and with it, your overblown impression that the majority of this country was on your side. I would love to talk to a person like this, but I know what occur. Wide eyed, red faced and loud talking, this person would spue all the cute little sound bites she heard from all her hollywood heros (ops, I gave it away; she was a she). When you talk to her, you would find intellectual bankruptcy. And if she would, god willing, give you the the chance to bring on the overwhelmingly logical facts of your side, she would go right on as if she did not hear them.
I take comfort in the fact that no mater what she does now, she and her type cannot reverse what really happened.
Oh, by the way, when I got back to my car, I noticed a big "L" smudged on the dirty bumper, just to the RIGHT of the sticker.
I smile
What is it with these people who drive around town displaying the name of a couple of losers on their car. I don't know what to think of it. Are they the type that leave their garage sale signs up in the neighborhood for 6 months after the sale, or are they just spiteful romantics that think that they are making a "Hate Bush" statement by doing it?
Get a life!
The election is over and with it, your overblown impression that the majority of this country was on your side. I would love to talk to a person like this, but I know what occur. Wide eyed, red faced and loud talking, this person would spue all the cute little sound bites she heard from all her hollywood heros (ops, I gave it away; she was a she). When you talk to her, you would find intellectual bankruptcy. And if she would, god willing, give you the the chance to bring on the overwhelmingly logical facts of your side, she would go right on as if she did not hear them.
I take comfort in the fact that no mater what she does now, she and her type cannot reverse what really happened.
Oh, by the way, when I got back to my car, I noticed a big "L" smudged on the dirty bumper, just to the RIGHT of the sticker.
I smile
Friday, February 18, 2005
Private accts means fewer elected Democrats
Let's cut to the chase! The Dems want Social Security to stay the same because they want as many people dependent on government as possible! If you have a bunch of people dependent on the government for their livelihood whether it is SS or welfare, they are going to vote for the Dems. The dems want to expand programs. They want more and more dependent people.
You certainly would not vote republican if you thought they would cut programs.
Private accounts are owned by the people. Even the working poor. If everyone has a direct investment in the country's economy, they are going to vote for the people who want the best for business.
You certainly would not vote republican if you thought they would cut programs.
Private accounts are owned by the people. Even the working poor. If everyone has a direct investment in the country's economy, they are going to vote for the people who want the best for business.
Thursday, February 17, 2005
Social Security a Gov Ponzi Scheme
Most informed people understand that Social Security (SS) is just a legal pyramid scheme perpetrated on the working folks of America. The workers of today pay 12.3% of their gross wages (half of this paid by the employer) into SS. This money goes to pay the benefits of todays retired workers. When the system started there were about 16 young workers paying into SS for every 1 retiree. Today there are about 3 workers paying into the account for every retiree. Some day, if the system is not changed, theoretically, this figure could drop to one worker for every retiree. How would you like to pay your own family's bills and then be personally responsible for paying for the retirement of someone else.
More money is going into this system than is being spent today. The amount that is in excess of what is needed to pay the current retirees, goes into what is called the SS Trust Fund. All this is, is a bunch of T-Bonds (Treasury Bonds). What are T-Bonds, well they are obligations of the Federal Government. You can go down to your bank today and buy some if you want a low, but safe return on your money. The Trust Fund has been growing since 1983 or so when SS taxes were raised. The Fund will be in positive balance until, some say 2018, some say earlier, say 2008.
THEN WHAT HAPPENS? The government must use the built up surplus (T-Bonds) to pay some of the benefits of the then existing retirees. The problem is that to get the cash, the government must go out and TAX the people, or borrow more (sell new Bonds to investors who may or may not be Americans). Either method is not good for our economy. The debt of the government rises. Taxes must go up or benefits go down some way to pay for this mess. Since raising taxes hurts the economy (takes money out of your pocket now as a worker), benefits will probably go down! Or, the retirement age will go up.
A very important fact is overlooked in this discussion by most government lovers. The SS surplus (Trust Fund) is counted as part of the government's yearly income (taxes and such). This makes the deficit look better than it really is. If it was not part of the equation, the deficit would look REALLY bad (you know; the truth).
The answer: The Democrats want to raise taxes and the Republicans want to cut back on government spending.
A better solution is to have young workers put some of their SS taxes into an individual account that THEY WILL OWN. Yes, like a forced IRA. And like I talked about a couple of Blogs ago, this account will provide a much better return than SS does now, as shown through its history! And MOST important...you will own it. You can use it in retirement and when you die, it will be passed on to your kids. Social Security, on the other hand, ENDS when you die. And in the event you die before you are 66 years old. All your investment is gone!
More money is going into this system than is being spent today. The amount that is in excess of what is needed to pay the current retirees, goes into what is called the SS Trust Fund. All this is, is a bunch of T-Bonds (Treasury Bonds). What are T-Bonds, well they are obligations of the Federal Government. You can go down to your bank today and buy some if you want a low, but safe return on your money. The Trust Fund has been growing since 1983 or so when SS taxes were raised. The Fund will be in positive balance until, some say 2018, some say earlier, say 2008.
THEN WHAT HAPPENS? The government must use the built up surplus (T-Bonds) to pay some of the benefits of the then existing retirees. The problem is that to get the cash, the government must go out and TAX the people, or borrow more (sell new Bonds to investors who may or may not be Americans). Either method is not good for our economy. The debt of the government rises. Taxes must go up or benefits go down some way to pay for this mess. Since raising taxes hurts the economy (takes money out of your pocket now as a worker), benefits will probably go down! Or, the retirement age will go up.
A very important fact is overlooked in this discussion by most government lovers. The SS surplus (Trust Fund) is counted as part of the government's yearly income (taxes and such). This makes the deficit look better than it really is. If it was not part of the equation, the deficit would look REALLY bad (you know; the truth).
The answer: The Democrats want to raise taxes and the Republicans want to cut back on government spending.
A better solution is to have young workers put some of their SS taxes into an individual account that THEY WILL OWN. Yes, like a forced IRA. And like I talked about a couple of Blogs ago, this account will provide a much better return than SS does now, as shown through its history! And MOST important...you will own it. You can use it in retirement and when you die, it will be passed on to your kids. Social Security, on the other hand, ENDS when you die. And in the event you die before you are 66 years old. All your investment is gone!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
