Global Warming, Computer modeling and the $15 minimum wage

Do you support global warming and the $15 minimum wage?

Global warming is based on computer modeling of weather patterns and temperatures using historical data. Meteorologists and computer programmers created programs that can forecast future weather patterns and their affects based on what has occurred in the past. It’s used to track hurricanes and predict long-term patterns. Think El Niño. The computer models tell us the affects of global warming are real.

Computer modeling has become a reliable way to predict possible outcomes. It’s applied to most things that affect our lives, from the food we eat to our financial systems.

Historical events and the laws of nature applied to the weather seems a sound method to arrive at a conclusion.

Laws of Economics, like the laws of nature, have been observed throughout history. Earliest civilizations would gather or hunt to provide for survival. Better hunters and gathers created surpluses. Surpluses were bartered for needs that a single individual’s efforts could not meet.

The barter system worked well on a small, local scale. Over time, however, it became too cumbersome; the capacity to trade was limited by the ability to transport product. Eventually, a system developed that allowed hunters, gatherers, farmers, and craftsmen to trade together using a substitute for the actual goods they produced. Money is an exchange unit for to trade goods or services.

Buyer and seller fix the relative value of the money. Buyers offer a price, and a negotiated transaction takes place. Shoppers buy items for which they are willing and able to pay. Prices of items that don’t sell are reduced to attract buyers. The customer, in an open market, sets the price by her choices. These basic economic laws have not changed.

The Law of Unintended Consequences now becomes relevant.

Understanding the basic laws of economics will help predict results. Economists and programmers can create computer programs forecasting the future. The effects are real and more immediate than global warming. Sometimes the results that are 180 degrees different from the ones intended.

Labor laws changed over time. Working condition, hours and employee rights are hard fought gains for labor. The minimum wage, settling a base wage for labor, is also a gain.

The labor unions understand that all labor is not equal. The apprentice programs, with graduated wage levels from beginner to journeyman to master, support the idea. Workers add value to the company and its products from their efforts. More experienced workers are expected to produce more and earn higher the wages as a result.

Entry-level jobs for young, unskilled workers are lost as an unintended consequence of rising minimum wage pressures. Training and wage costs are becoming too much for a business to absorb. Alternatives are sought to meet company needs: machines, computers, or a move offshore.

Businesses large and small work for the consumer. The consumer sets the price they are willing to pay. It is from this price that all costs to produce the product or service must be paid. Also, the business needs to survive, which requires reinvestment in the business. The investment requires a return. Why be in business if there is no return on capital invested and reinvested?

Labor should be rewarded, but when they are not they move to a better paying job. Taking the skills learned to better their life.

It is a duty of society to teach the next generation of workers to produce and survive. That bond also needs the next generation of workers to learn.

A solution must be found or the number structurally unemployable will grow. This generational problem will not go away without action. The rates of unemployment in our young is unacceptable.

The solution is not a minimum wage that violates the law of economics.

Media Noice

Noise gets louder as the political season unfolds, but some actions are quiet, almost hidden. The intent is to manipulate the voters or citizens. Two items reported in the news will provide this point.

In a Texas town a Mosque’s application for Sharia Law defeated by a vote of 5-4. The application allowed the mosque to use Sharia Law, applied in civil cases within the Muslim community. Two points; http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/muslims-are-angry-at-texas-mayor-after-she-stops-sharia-court-here-is-her-epic-response/

Texas state legislature has not passed Sharia Law.

Four elect officials voted for passage is unbelievable.

Some years ago in Waco Texas and Ruby Ridge in Idaho, the Branch Davidians and Randy Weaver, white separatist, wanted the same control over their affairs. The result was an armed assault by federal law enforcement.

The fact there was no media outcry for this application brings into question the Media as the 4th Estate.

The First Amendment protection is the foundation of our way of life. An agenda driven Media is the road to disaster. If our system provides equal protection it only follows that religious sects, white separates or any group claiming the same religious freedom should be treated equally.

This is flawed Logic, the United States is not divided into little enclaves of religion, but is one big melting pot of religious beliefs. When groups become separated by beliefs it creates conflict in applying the laws.

The recent shooting in Oregon is the latest misrepresentation or omission by the Media. Media choose to label our President of Mixed Racial Heritage as Black, explain then the Oregon shooter of the same mixed race heritage labeled as White with white separatist connections? http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/10/03/shock-la-times-labels-black-oregon-shooter-as-white-supremacist/

It is the subtle nuances that impacts how the news is presented, with its social or agenda bias.

Readers and fellow Bloggers help us shine the light of Truth on these actions. When an agenda driven story, something that is as outrageous as to offend free and open Press, it will be ridiculed. Simply asking a question sometimes is enough to shine the light exposing corruption.

Please join us in this pursuit of good and fair government.

How Do We live in peace, Christian, Jew and Muslim

You are a good person, hardworking, committed to your family and friends. Wanting only to go to work, provide for your family and live a peaceful life. How to do that is the question facing all of us.
A Simpler Life
Government; employees and elected official are playing a larger role in everyday life. Understanding more about government, whose actions and inactions impact our lives and therefore, our freedoms become necessary.
Fear is not part of a Simpler Life. The goal is not to make you fearful. The goal is awareness of actions on our government and pressure placed on our elected officials.
Islamic faith goals and objectives are one of the most critical issues facing us.
The Islamic faith claims to be based on the Ten Commandments which it shares with Christian and Jewish faiths. We share the same God and common heritage.
View the three major religions as a family; Judaism the older brother, Christianity the middle child and Islam, the younger brother.
A simplistic view of the older brother is a family-centered faith where the word of God is personal. The word of God to be followed as given.
The middle child, Christianity, the compassionate child. Focused on doing good in the community of man. Sharing love of God with the members of the faith and unbelievers.
Islam as the youngest of the three believes the rules given by God do not apply to it.
Ten Commandments given by God are the eternal Law which arrived with clarity will provide the guide in this evaluation.
To understand the Islamic beliefs, it is important the words of that faith be put forth. The first term the non-Muslim or Islamic unbeliever needs to understand is; Taqiyya. For this understanding I am drawing on accepted translations:
Taqiyya is the Concealing, precaution, guarding which is employed in disguising ones’ beliefs, intentions, convictions, ideas, feeling, an opinion or strategies. In practical terms it is the manifested as dissimulating, Lying, deceiving, vexing and confounding the intentions of deflecting attention, foiling or pre-emptive blocking. It is currently employed in fending off and neutralizing any criticism of Islam or Muslims.
The support for this action is in their holy document Chapter 3, Verse 28 and Chapter 16 verse 106. It is the Duty of the Believer to advance the interest of Islam regardless of the method.
Therefore, Islam allows the believer to break the 8th commandment, in fact, they are encouraged to do so in their view it advances the interest of Islamification or Dominance.

If you are an Unbeliever, the Muslim must lie to you where your interests conflict with Islam. In a world where truth is situational, this may be accepted. But the problem arises for a society when one part announce the other parts of the body politic must Submit, Convert or Die.
Beliefs and goals of Islam are in Direct conflict with living a simple, peaceful life and that of a world that want’s Peace.
How Do we live in Peace?

Politician’s Playbook

Politician’s Playbook

Representation is every citizen’s right. That representation determined at the ballot box.

The process has been reduced to “Structured Noise”. Structured because it is based on a Politicians’ Playbook and Noise in that nothing is ever done to put forth workable long-term solutions.

Saul Alinski is an author who every citizen should become aware of. He put forth a strategy to take over governments with the doctrine of;

  • Compare “what is” to the “perfect” (even though the perfect is unattainable) –
  • “What is” will always be lacking –
  • When “What is” is removed it then can be replaced by whatever the winner wants.

Two outstanding examples;

  • In the election of 1992, candidate Bill Clinton hammered on the economy with the phrase “it is the economy stupid”. By historical standards the economy was not bad. Reviewing of the Media immediately after the election shows the economy had rebounded. Comparison of “what is” to the “perfect” created doubt in the voters mind.

Hilary Rodham Clinton, the candidate’s wife, used the teachings of Saul Alinsky as the basis for her master thesis.

  • The other example is Obama Care. The cry from the liberals, health care was Broken. This when it was one of best in the world. Broken because it was not “perfect”.
    • The insurance Companies were thieves and scrooges. Replacing the insurance companies was the rallying cry, yet once Obama Care passed, taxes raised, promises broken.
    • Who provides Obama Care, the same insurances companies only more profitable by all the new polices mandated on the citizens.

As a Community Organizer whose teaching did Barack Obama follow?- Yep Saul Alinsky!

Yeah so what. How does that explain the Politician’s Playbook?

Saul Alinsky first put his rules on paper they were for the liberals. But he must be rolling over in his grave because the conservatives have now adopted them.

With both using the same Playbook of disruption nothing is accomplished. This maybe ok for a soccer game playing to a tie but doesn’t work in governing.

I propose a phrase to be used on all politicians –“yes but what do you propose to do?” Now as one listens to the news they can listen to the comments and then put the question forward.

The rules printed here numbered 1-12 can be used while listening to politicians.

  • When one of the rules is used, say Rule #5, which Donald Trump uses often you call or yell out the number.
  • By doing this you will be using Rule #4 and
  • Hopefully we see Rule #11 working.

Rule # 1:”Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have”

Rule # 2:”Never go outside the expertise of your people”

Rule # 3:”Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.”

Rule # 4:”Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.”

Rule # 5:”Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”

Rule # 6:”A good tactic is one your people enjoy.”

Rule # 7:”A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.”

Rule # 8:”Keep the pressure on. Never let up.”

Rule # 9:”The threat is usually more terrifying than the thin itself.”

Rule # 10:”If you push a negative hard enough it will push through and become a positive”

Rule # 11:”The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.”

Rule # 12:”Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it.”

Representation is every citizen’s right. That representation determined at the ballot box.

The process has been reduced to “Structured Noise”. Structured because it is based on a Politicians’ Playbook and Noise in that nothing is ever done to put forth workable long-term solutions.

Saul Alinski is an author who every citizen should become aware of. He put forth a strategy to take over governments with the doctrine of;

  • Compare “what is” to the “perfect” (even though the perfect is unattainable) –
  • “What is” will always be lacking –
  • When “What is” is removed it then can be replaced by whatever the winner wants.

Two outstanding examples;

  • In the election of 1992, candidate Bill Clinton hammered on the economy with the phrase “it is the economy stupid”. By historical standards the economy was not bad. Reviewing of the Media immediately after the election shows the economy had rebounded. Comparison of “what is” to the “perfect” created doubt in the voters mind.

Hilary Rodham Clinton, the candidate’s wife, used the teachings of Saul Alinsky as the basis for her master thesis.

  • The other example is Obama Care. The cry from the liberals, health care was Broken. This when it was one of best in the world. Broken because it was not “perfect”.
    • The insurance Companies were thieves and scrooges. Replacing the insurance companies was the rallying cry, yet once Obama Care passed, taxes raised, promises broken.
    • Who provides Obama Care, the same insurances companies only more profitable by all the new polices mandated on the citizens.

As a Community Organizer whose teaching did Barack Obama follow?- Yep Saul Alinsky!

Yeah so what. How does that explain the Politician’s Playbook?

Saul Alinsky first put his rules on paper they were for the liberals. But he must be rolling over in his grave because the conservatives have now adopted them.

With both using the same Playbook of disruption nothing is accomplished. This maybe ok for a soccer game playing to a tie but doesn’t work in governing.

I propose a phrase to be used on all politicians –“yes but what do you propose to do?” Now as one listens to the news they can listen to the comments and then put the question forward.

The rules printed here numbered 1-12 can be used while listening to politicians.

  • When one of the rules is used, say Rule #5, which Donald Trump uses often you call or yell out the number.
  • By doing this you will be using Rule #4 and
  • Hopefully we see Rule #11 working.

Rule # 1:”Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have”

Rule # 2:”Never go outside the expertise of your people”

Rule # 3:”Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.”

Rule # 4:”Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.”

Rule # 5:”Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”

Rule # 6:”A good tactic is one your people enjoy.”

Rule # 7:”A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.”

Rule # 8:”Keep the pressure on. Never let up.”

Rule # 9:”The threat is usually more terrifying than the thin itself.”

Rule # 10:”If you push a negative hard enough it will push through and become a positive”

Rule # 11:”The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.”

Rule # 12:”Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it.”

Tea Party, Ideas for moving forward

Tea Party Looking Forward
Quotes make poignant statements. Quotes put together to make an argument. Two such Quotes point to the fate facing the Tea Party movement.
“Money is the Mother’s milk of politics” Jesse Unruh, Democrat leader.
“Insanity: doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result” Albert Einstein.
Fact: MONEY dominates politics. Special interests control the money. Republicans and Democrats receive funding from the Lobbyists. This needs to change.
Einstein was a bright man. Taking his view on change, how do we escape the insanity?
Find a way to fund elections not controlled by money from special interests
Create a boots on the ground organization with the local voters
Unifying message or set of goals
Unruh got it right money is necessary. But activist workers from the community is a close second. Putting people in the process proves a commitment to the message. If the money is close or even in an election, the side with a good ground game will win. Harry Reid’s 2010 Senatorial race proved this. Money was close, polls were against him, but the ground game won the day for him.
Money and ground troops need structure to apply these resources effectively. Without structure confusion will result.
Building anything needs structure; an idea, machine, building or organization. Our Constitution provides an idea for a more perfect union. Control from the voter, a bottom-up model. Citizens are coming together to discuss –not argue- the problems of the local, state and federal community.
Money interests and political parties have shifted the bottom up governing model of the Constitution to a Top-down Ruling model. National political leaders and lobbyist control who is to get the “Mother’s Milk”.
Most sincere candidates are forced to accept this truth. From this truth comes the split personalities’ of elected officials.
The National Machine Politicians have rigged the system by procedures in both houses of Congress. This rigging is repeated in state legislatures and territories. The “powers” allow meaningless votes on issues of interest to local citizens. These votes provide proof elected officials tried to represent voters’ concerns.
Elected officials engage in this rigging as a “Necessary Evil”. Believing that their holding of the office is doing some good.
Stopping the insanity requires a bottom-up change. Changing the way a political party is organized and financed.
Ten Dollar ($10) monthly contributions. Contributions to be divided between all elected offices by the pre-determined formula. These donation can provide the “Mother’s Milk”. Just 3 out of 100 people need to contribute. Should the party lose, its focus donors can stop the money.
Candidates will be attracted, some good some bad. Many good candidates who do not want to be bought by the current national political structure will step forward.
Part of the money will fund a boots on the ground organization. Allowing local citizens the opportunity to be involved.
What results is a true Bottom to Top political organization? This model will work for Conservatives and Liberals equally. Returning us to the government outlined in the Constitution.
These are my thoughts, share yours. Together our County can move forward.

Trade Pact Is Good For . . . Who?

As the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a proposed free-trade agreement among 12 Pacific Rim countries, moves forward in Congress, it is time to pause and reflect. Some are getting caught up in the excitement of the moment; optimism abounds in supporters and doom is around every corner for those opposed. The truth lies somewhere in the middle. Let’s pause and reflect.

Supporters of the new agreement believe that removing tariffs and restrictions will increase the amount of goods and services produced by the US and sold elsewhere. They say employment will increase with the increased demand, as will profits.

Why should we be interested in an increase in corporate profits? There are two reasons.
Increased profits, when reinvested in the company, fuel company growth
As profits increase, there is normally a corresponding increase in stock prices
The amount of corporate America owned by the working class, either directly or via retirement options, is increasing. The value of your 401k rises when stock prices rise. That is a good thing.

A look at past agreements may provide a clearer indication of the future effects of this one. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was passed in 1993 and has been in place long enough to evaluate its success or failure.

Determining whether NAFTA has succeeded or failed depends on your point of view. NAFTA proponents also projected that freer markets would generate more U.S. jobs. That did not happen; there was a net job loss, with American industry moving many operations to Mexico.

The agreement was intended to increase U.S. exports to Mexico. This did happen, but the net effect was to create a trade deficit with Mexico. On these two key points, the agreement produced negative results. But there are other areas that provided positive results.

For the Mexican middle class, that section of society that drives the economy, NAFTA has provided good news. The middle class in Mexico expanded by 11.4 points from 1994 to 2010, rising from 27.8% of the total population to 39.2%.

The primary benefit is in the urban areas, where approximately 50% of the population is middle class. Rural areas still lag behind, with only 25% of the population attaining middle-class status.

With the rise of the middle-class, there have been political reforms. An area of great promise is the effort to attack corruption. Corruption is the largest tax on economic growth.

The outlook moving forward is good. The Mexican government is allowing foreign partners in the oil fields, and there is large untapped shale reserve on the Mexico-Texas border. Natural resources, such as oil and gas production, are expected to increase. With more economic opportunities in Mexico, the flight of its citizens to the U.S. should lessen.

Now the Trans-Pacific Partnership is in front of Congress and being sold using the NAFTA formula. The results should be the same: U.S. job losses, a reversal in the balance of trade, and a growing middle class in our trading partners. But, pause to consider.
Might some of the trade imbalance be a transfer of amounts that now go to the Chinese?
Are the job losses in industries that would leave to another market anyway?

  • Is increasing the standard of living in other countries a positive outcome?
    The primary focus of our trade policy is commerce, as it should be. However, given that prosperous societies are typically peaceful, could helping to ignite prosperity with less than favorable trade agreement terms have added benefits? I invite your comments.

  • A Good Place to Start

    Welcome to 33 Cents a Day: The Blog. However, you found us; I’m glad you made it.
    As this is the first post, I think it’s important to explain my goals and what I intend to accomplish.

    First, I hope to provide content that will assist readers in navigating the ocean of political noise. There’s plenty out there; I hope to bring some clarity.

    Second, I want to offer an accurate perspective on the actions of those who intend to manipulate, deceive, or abuse in the political process. Again, I’ll have lots to work with.

    Third, I desire to stimulate conversations that lead to actions – actions that lead to real solutions. I believe there are solutions out there; we just have to look beyond the status quo.

    Finally, if all goes well, I will have built a platform where other, like-minded bloggers can join the conversation. I know you’re out there. Don’t be shy!

    We don’t know one another very well yet; I’d like to get better acquainted through our conversations in the comments. Going forward, I make you three promises.
    I promise to source every assertion with credible documentation
    I promise to identify opinion clearly when given
    I promise to maintain a fresh, optimistic perspective – eschewing cynicism in all its forms

    If that sounds good to you, let’s get started!