ECONOMICS 057

~~ 057 because, as you may know,.. I am mentally challenged ~~

Economics in my Conservativity-based world is a little difficult to grasp hold of but, I do my best,.. trudging through the darkness with candle a-flicker,.. hand cusped to protect from the walking breezes. I 'tweet,' as 'ThatCrazyFeller,' and my major follow is the political world. I do love politics. One such follow I have is 'The Hill,' and it was there, late-night, I received a rather interesting bit of news.

“

@thehillThe Hill

Senate deals second defeat to Obama, blocks jobs bill componenthttp://t.co/L0QCK8yL

3 hours ago via HootSuite

“ Was the exacted tweet in question.

Now, then, interest peaked due to the popularity of the 'OWS' ,.. umm,.. I'll call it a movement (not bowel one, neither-- I get those when the Right Honourable President of the United States speaks {and loose ones, at that}). I hear that they speak of the need for jobs, equality, food and housing, the whole of the list escapes me but,.. I am counting on your intellect to recall it for yourself, please and thank you. I looked into the article, as always,.. to the point, shorter than some, with fewer journalistic comments than most I've read/followed.

Well, the article begins (I am purviewing as necc., as I don't want to misguide anyone), with the declaration that Senate GOP-folk blocked legislation by the administration for jobs bill legislation[s]. 'Hmm,' said my mind, and I read onward.

It's their piece, and I ain't gonna' steal that person's typing. Have a read, you'll be glad you did. I found the basic gist of the story to be that Republicans, say the Democrats, are blocking jobs bills put forward by the President to help make said President a 1-term office-holder, an economic failure, and something akin to a Jimmy Carter-esque style Leader of the ('Free') World. Those Democrats seemed to be explaining that the Republican's blockage of these provisions are what gave rise to the 'OWS Movement,' (again,.. 'OWS' means 'Occupy Wall Street,' – it has NOTHING to do with a person's innards).

So's the article went on and explained other stuffs as well. Again, READ THE ARTICLE FOR YOURSELF people. And don't stop with just that article,.. read those associated comments, as well. 3 pages (over 44 of 'em) last I saw. You'll see the political hatred drawn out by these adversarial giants (Dems. and GOP) over something as simple as governing to help bring about economic changes. Perhaps not so simple.

Being an Independent Conservative, my 'box' has many an intended hole in it,.. so's I can grab ideas which aren't necc. Conservative but, fit well in my lil world of Conservativity. I'm seeing this argument from a different angle then,..and the few rays of sunlight which adorn my eyeballs, without poking them directly and blinding me, tell me something's amiss. There's no common-sense debate at the moment, and it's this debate which we need in order to move forward, and get this economy going again. Downright anger generated by the parties involved is making it right difficult for any kind of rational debate, far as I can tell. Granted, the comments may be being 'planted' in order to arouse anger n such-not but,.. I'm not bright enough to know what's 'planted,' and what's not. Please allow me a little leeway, and let me assume most things said in those comments are truths (some of the seething is glaringly obvious, and I can figure those comments semi-invalid.. they must be weighed each, their own, though).

O my, I just re-read the article, and some of my assumptions have changed even more from when I wrote those comments.. I'll try n correct them here.

I had, originally, assumed that the Right Honourable President was speaking the truth when he mentioned that this provision of The Jobs Act was meant to “create jobs” when, after reading further into the body of the article, the measures of this provision are meant to “prevent layoffs” of teachers, firefolk and policefolk (first responding individuals). Changes the attitude of what's going on a wee bit, but, by golly, I ain't wanting to 'spread more shit,' as we say in Hellinois. This country needs debate. Open and Honest. Well, even with parameters changed, the points in my unstable mind are still valid. I will still assume that this provision was created in order to create new jobs, save someone's job, or to help support someone's job (whatever the hell that means, I am ignorant on this idea).

We're even.. my assumption that the measure was to save/support/create 2 million jobs was incorrect. This is a $35 Billion [with a freakin' 'B'] measure. That's still quite a considerable sum of money, though (enough to fully fund NASA a few years, helping to keep the US in the fore-front of technology). Okay, there was a report out that those public-sectors jobs s/s/c cost the taxpayers about $100K a year while the average private-sector job cost the taxpayers nothing, and added $50K a year to individual incomes. $35 Billion (with a 'B') divided by $100,000.00 is what ?? **gets my calculator** (yes,..I chat a LOT) – 350,000 jobs s/s/c . Now,..We need check that to how many jobs could be created by the millionaire taxes being spent on jobs ,.. $35 Billion (again,..with a 'B') divided by $50,000.00 equals what??.. hmm,..just multiply 350,000 by 2, cause 50k is ½ 100k, ..so's,.. 700,000 jobs could be s/s/c by NOT taxing those millionaires 0.5% over everything they make over $1 Million US. . Double the jobs made available for the same price.

Conservativity says that double the jobs means double Up on those taxes, 'cause those 'rich' folks making $200,000.00 and more are taxed higher than the 'poor' folks making $100,000 or $50,000 a year. Twice the people working?? More tax revenues developed because not all those people will be getting exemptions for children and what-not. From personal experiences – I am disabled on minimum disability for my schizophrenia, and I receive 102 in food stamps on the link card here in Hellinois, I'm not disabled enough to qualify for SSI here because 2 heart attacks aren't enough to qualify – that means that there will be about , again,..**calculator time** $71,400,000 dollars in extra savings from food stamp benefits alone in one year's time by helping those millionaires put people to work, save or support jobs already on the books. Savings from the Right Honourable President's plan in food stamps?? about ½, if those 350,000 lost their jobs, eh, let's give him $36 Million in savings for food stamps.

This, alone, should help people understand the benefits of NOT passing this provision.

'OWS' Movement asks for Jobs,.. Healthcare, … Business' ask for relief from Obamascare, needing credit from banks for expansion and help from the US Government on regulatory requirements in the near future before hiring because those costs may be too prohibitive, … Banks reluctant to lend due to overall economy, citing poor performances of the US and most 1^st World Nations' GDP to Debt ratios, and European Banking troubles.

Please allow my Conservativity a 'stab' at a few of these troubles plaguing the US Economy. Eh,..perhaps later but,.. there is a 'fix,' and it saves us more money than it'd take to implement it. Our economy could possibly turn around much sooner. Think on it for yourselves awhile.

Thanks for you patience,

Rudolph VanVaulkenburgh

21 Oct. 2011

~~Although Yahoo! May publish this, I retain all my rights,..copy and other-wise, to publish, and expound further on this subject, in my own blog~~

No bad Reservations when it comes to Conservativity.

Olde Policies, with a modernization and a few twists, could help Our recovery efforts and put people to work. 

An Idea :: 

I would like to propose to the people that the US Government re-visit the reservation policies that were used with the Native American Nations in the past 2 centuries [1800's and early 1900's] in order to help pay down the debt, put people to work, and help individuals and/or corporations to be able to innovate and thrive. 

The 'Why-fores::' 

Why use those olde-fashioned policies to help in these modern economic times?? Because the reservation system allows for a certain amount of autonomy to those that are governed under it. Allowances could be added, or taken away, by the individual agreements entered into by Our Congress and those with whom they lease, or sell, these reservations to. The autonomy given to such buyers of the reservations would allow those entities to create more hospitable work environments,.. conducive to their particular type of operation[s]. Innovation could be enhanced by allowing for specific allowances in each agreement, not using a 'one-size fits all' type of agreement but, instead, tailoring the remedies to each situation. 

As for creating jobs. I believe that the reservations ( created by these agreements / leases / sales ) would create boon sights in a particular field of work, or research. Their autonomous nature would allow for differing tax authorities, regulations queued to the particular work / activity being done and, possibly, allow for exceptions in trade and tariff policies aimed at allowing the owner of such a 'lease' to buy and sell their wares at the best possible price. 


The General Idea :: 

The general idea is for the U.S. Congress to create new, lease-able, reservations conducive to business, research, and entrepreneurial enterprises which can be publicly auctioned, using those revenues to help pay down debt and fund essential services. My thought is to keep the number of reservations very limited, use the revenues generated to pay down debts first ( possibly making it law that Congress use a very high percentage of revenues generated by this means to pay down debt), and to create jobs by allowing those 'lease-holders' the autonomy needed to profit in today's economy. 

I would suggest using U.S. Geological Survey information, U.S. Census information, and U.S. Department of Labor information and statistics to help find suitable sights. Once these sights are found, use more state and local information to fine tune each proposed reservation, using criteria formed in the base proposal for each sight deemed needed (or wanted). The reservations would use (already owned) U.S. Government lands, helping to keep the government from acquiring property by using the 14th amendment. 

These reservations could then be packaged, presented to the full Congress for approval, and the auction process begun. Each auction's participant would enter into the auction with the ability to negotiate terms and conditions, with each term or condition adding or taking away from the reservation's worth. In this way, tailoring the reservation to best suit the lessee's needs would be possible. Each reservation would be given a form of 'sovereign immunity,' allowing for favorable conditions to be made within the boundaries of the reservation being leased. Highest bidder wins each auction, pending Congressional approval, and a signature by the President. 

Revenues for the government, favorable conditions for those who can put people to work, or ideas into motion, and jobs for American people. It costs us very little but, makes your congressmen and women work a little harder. The possibilities presented by making such reservations would benefit the country greatly. 

My Thanks for Your Patience,

Rudolph VanVaulkenburgh

19 October 2011

An inexpensive fix for the Healthcare 'Crisis,' .. and a lil back story as to why.

My story, at a glance:: 

First,.. a little background. I was diagnosed a paranoid schizophrenic back in the mid-eighties. I was having big troubles finding work that I could do that would sustain me as an independent person(getting me out of my mother n step-dad's home). I had gotten out of the Marine Corps, where I was trained as a food service specialist, and couldn't find any work. The recession hit central Hellinois (yes,..I typed Hellinois) very hard, it seemed that a food service handling chit was too much experience for the fast food industry at the time -- all applications come back as 'overqualified for the position,' even though people with college degrees were being hired. I worked when and where I could but, with my limited knowledge, I would make mistakes, and the guilt from 'messing Up' was too much. I went to the state for help, there were jobs training opportunities, and I hoped I could be trained in home building or something,.. food service was a dead-end. I applied at 'Job Service,' as it was called, and they sent me for testing,.. to find out why I wasn't able to keep a job decently. One of those tests were psychiatric,.. and the doc's tests said I was suffering from the 'paranoid schizophrenia,' and Job Service turned me down for training,..suggested I get help,..sent me on my way. 

Fast-forward a few years later to about 1992 or 1993 (My memory, when it comes to time and dates, is not very good). My mom and step-dad had decided to sell their home and do their own thing after my step-dad's retirement. I was able to pack up a truck my step-dad had given to me,.. and move out. I was able to secure myself a space behind a friend's home in Decatur,... slept, generally, in a tent and we talked n did stuff during the days [ by we, I meant my friends and I ]. My work, at the time, was watching my little sister's children while she went to college. A few hours a month, and minimal pay by the state (Yes, she was a single mom, her oldest being born with CP, and the state and federal governments were helping her better herself.). It was at this time that my mom took me to see a doctor n find out what my problem was. I obliged her, and we saw my childhood doctor in my old hometown. He sent me to see about disability,.. the meeting wasn't a long one, and I really didn't know why, but, he did. Mom took me to Social Security, and mom and dad, both, took me to doctors appointments that Social Security required (the truck had a huge hole in the gas tank,..and was pretty-much immovable at this time). I was , again, diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia, and was approved for disability, even though the state decided I was not disabled at the time (yes,.. mom took me to see about getting help with food stamps and some sort of income,..I did receive food stamp help, though). 

That's the background,.. My troubles are now known to you (the major one). These experiences may not be the same as others from here on out but,.. they give credence to this opinion piece. 

A few years later, I was given a drug called 'Zyprexa' for my mind troubles. I was reluctant to take it but, eventually,.. settled into a morning routine, it's been long ago,.. .This, I think, was in the late 1990's.. after fast-track was approved for pharmaceutical companies by the Congress and FDA. The drug worked wonders, I tell you. I even stopped drinking like a 'fish.' One October, I went from about 24 litres of Vodka a month to 0. I just didn't need it, nor did I want it. I had drank for quantity, not quality but, I found that 'self-medicating,' as they call it, was no longer needed (I do, however, continue to make my own cigarettes,. So,.. not ALL self-medication has ended). This drug, Zyprexa, though, had some evil characteristics that the doc's,..nor I, knew about. I believe it messed with my metabolism, as I ended Up gaining about 200 lbs. while taking it. My diet hadn't changed, nor had my exercising (I walked about a mile a day, and also walked about town to the stores n such,.. loved the library and ancient histories there). 

I also developed insulin-dependent diabetes while taking this drug. Two side effects, one drug,.. one side-effect needing medications. Drugs I began needing to take (I think I remember them all) at the first were : Metphormin, Glipizide, and, eventually, the Insulin. My doctor and I tried everything, changed my diet -- even going so far as to eat nothing but salads with a 'diet' Italian dressing for a month -- but, the blood sugars never responded well. My hip had begun killing me,..so's I had to stop my exercising routines. I developed a hernia on my stomach, and couldn't even do sit-ups. The diabetes effected me in another way,.. my mom had gotten me a kitten to keep me company, every time she scratched me, I would get infected, needing anti-biotics. Anyhow, My doctor at the time finally prescribed to me another 'wonder drug,' by the name of 'Avandia.' Need I say more?? 

A longer story shortened.. I now need 13 drugs to take care of the ailments,.. and side-effects, developed from taking the one drug I began taking so long ago - not including aspirin and ibuprophen for pains, and medicines to help stop other physical ailments which I get OTC. I have an answer as to WHY I'm at this point.



Our political friends,.. liberal and quasi-conservative alike, have allowed an industry to manipulate us for far too long, perhaps unwittingly but, I highly doubt it. That industry is the Pharmaceutical Industry, heavily anchored in the Northeastern US, and quite a powerful lobby. 

      Fast track was a gift to them, even I was fooled at the time, believing great strides would come from quickening the patenting and marketing processes. Boy, were we ever wrong !! You see, those companies took advantage of the lessening of their regulatory oversights, they researched the medicines, found cures n such, I know but, hid the ones away that actually cured or helped the 'patients' they were meant to help. Instead, they patented and marketed to us those drugs which induced other side-effects. (Perhaps a type of 'Jobs Creation Policy'??)

       Why ?? For profitability.

              Pharmaceuticals which cured an ailment without producing side-effects are, pretty-much,  considered non-starters for marketing. The pharmaceutical Industry holds many such patents, keeping them hid away and unavailable to the people who would benefit. Those drugs which helped an ailment but, which induced side-effects, have been given (top) priority and made available for production and sales. For quite the higher price, here in the US.. in Canada (probably world-wide), price controls keep them from stealing taxpayer dollars. In the US, however, no such controls exist, and the companies drive our healthcare plans into insolvency by producing those (flawed) medications. I know illegal fraud and abuse costs the US taxpayer billions every year but,.. the abuse, fraud, and manipulation by these drug manufacturers and researchers has cost us even more, and they do it legally. Medicare part D, I believe, was another gift to them by the quasi-conservative President, Mr. George Bush. 

In summary, the US healthcare 'crisis' is not at all a crisis if we were to, stop the 'legal raping' of the government's healthcare funds by the pharmaceutical industries. They receive grants and such from the government, tax incentives, and regulatory perks, which other industries do not. Their lobbyists see to that, and more-n-likely, more. Put an end to it, Congress !! Figure the costs of your medications, what you pay,..what your insurance pays,..what our government has to kick in, as well. Look and observe each medication. Write down the side-effects for each, estimate those costs, or find them out for real. What do they cost you?? Not just in other drugs but, in special diets, changes to your workout routines, etc. . 


Ending the healthcare 'crisis' may be as simple as going to your medicine chest and doing those simple things, then writing your congressman/woman and asking why are we paying so much for this 'crap?' 


My Thanks for your patience. 

Rudolph VanVaulkenburgh

19 October 2011

A little fiscal Conservativity could be Overwhelming.

Morality in Politics? -

Not quite 'Ethics 101' but, an Open Letter –:

The conservative movement, as of this time (mid Oct 2011) is in search of leadership which has been lacking these past few years. The former President Bush did well until he began the movement to bail out the corporation known as AIG. They made a fortune's fortune by buying, selling, and trading very risky real-estate portfolios, and should have lived and died by the swords of their own making. Such is the way of capitalism. Too big to fail?? I think, and thought, not.

President Obama followed in President Bushes footsteps,.. bailing out two automotive giants, who,..by the way,..eventually went through bankruptcy proceedings. Both candidates for President pretty-well promised to bail them out, appeasing 'Main Street.' President Bush had bailed out a 'Wall Street' bank and, it seemed, the people of 'Main Street' deserved to be bailed out as well. Two wrongs have never made a right,.. or a 'correct.' My personal vote was given to Mr. Barr in that election, as I believed the mainstream candidates unfit (too liberal) for office.

“Too liberal??,” you may ask of me.

I am an Independent Conservative, my 'conservativity' comes mainly in the government's fiscal areas. I believe that what adult men and women do is their own business as long as it does no (direct and/or intentional) harm to others. I believe personal livelihoods (and beliefs) should be kept out of the Federal elections, as they are much better handled by state and local governing bodies. In this 'Fiscal Conservativity' both McCain and Obama failed miserably long before the elections were ever held.

Based on their mainstream records, McCain should have handily won the elections in 2008 but, he kept to his party's ideological standards, and that hurt him badly with Independents and Moderates alike. The Republican Party has troubles with a large majority of people because that party seems to wish to impose their ideology upon everyone.

That just will not work,.. not at all.

If the Republican Party wishes to thrive in any election, they must begin to emphasize their 'fiscal conservativity', and leave their moral principles at home-- within their Party and within their families. Leave those ideologies out of the Government's purview. The separation of Church and State thought upon by Our Founding Fathers was, I believe, meant to accomplish just this very philosophy. Government has NO authority to rule over one's personal moralities as long as those moralities do not (intentionally) injure another in some meaningful way.

Again, I am an independent Conservative, and my views are not held by the Republican Caucus but, I would ask that the Conservative movement re-think it's election strategies. Conservatives should run on their fiscal policies, strong defenses, and a good dose of 'Conservative Patriotics.' Republican's insistence of an anti-abortion litmus, (predominantly) Judeo-Christian values, and (utter) disregard for others viewpoints on many moral matters has hamstrung their efforts (in so many ways) to recruit and promote highly legitimate conservative candidates for offices – local, state, and federal alike.

This is but one man's opinion, as far as I know.

Mine.

Thanks for your patience,

Rudolph VanVaulkenburgh.

19 October 2011