Thursday, January 31, 2008
The President of the United States
Frankly the upcoming presidential election scares the crap out of me. As I mentioned earlier I have some RINO friends who say they will vote for Obama if he is nominated (fortunately that does not seem to be a probable outcome), but not for Hilary (they are the same on the issues). As if that isn't bad enough it seems that the Republicans are dead set on nominating another liberal for President. If McCain gets the nomination I seriously don't know who I will vote for. On the one hand the democrates can do a lot of damage in 4 years, but without a Jimmy Carter do you get a Ronald Regan? Also I would rather the Dems take the country down instead of the occasionally conservative GOP. Plus it would free Republicans in the house and Senate to open oppose the President where as if the president were a Republican they kind of have to toe the line. Trust in God. That is all I have to hope in.
Monday, January 28, 2008
Four differences.
I was listening to a podcast the other night that was talking about abortion, and why it is morally wrong. It was very interesting! No mention of religion was used either so I can't be told I'm forcing my religion on someone when I use this argument in a discussion.
There are only four differences between a fetus, and a newborn, yet it is legal to kill a fetus and illegal to kill and new born. Lets examine those differences. All you have to do is remember to s.l.e.d.
S- Size. Obviously a newborn is larger than a fetus, especially one that is not very old yet. So if we follow this line of thought out, a persons size effects their person hood. Obviously a larger body is a person and the smaller fetus is not. So does that mean that since I'm six foot and over 275 that I am more of a person than my wife who is five foot something and a buck and quarter? Or am I more of a person than most people since I am larger than most? Does that mean I can rule over them and do with them as I wish since I am more of a person than they are? Of course not! Yet when it comes to babies this is a criteria.
L- Level of Development. Newborns are more developed than in utero babies. If they weren't they would not be able to survive outside of the womb. I can argue that since I scored higher on my ACTs than most people I have a more developed brain than they do. I didn't say it was a good argument but it can be made. Does that mean that I can rule over those who didn't do as well as me? Also does this mean that we become more of a person as we age and develop (ie a 7 year old is more of a person than a 5 year old) until we reach our prime and then we begin to become less of a person as we begin to become more dependent on others.
E- Environment. In utero babies are by definition in the uterus and newborns have survived the birth process and now live in the big bad world. Really just a difference in inches when you think about it. So when I am at work am I a different person than when I am at home, or across the room? No. So does moving through the birth canal turn you into a person?
D- Dependency. The in utero babies are dependent for everything while newborns can at least breath on their own. So is a diabetic that is dependent on insulin less of a human than me? Or is someone who depends on glasses less of a human? That doesn't make sense either.
Well if the four differences between in utero babies and newborn aren't valid when applied to the general population, why are they valid when applied to the question of abortion? Just some food for thought.
There are only four differences between a fetus, and a newborn, yet it is legal to kill a fetus and illegal to kill and new born. Lets examine those differences. All you have to do is remember to s.l.e.d.
S- Size. Obviously a newborn is larger than a fetus, especially one that is not very old yet. So if we follow this line of thought out, a persons size effects their person hood. Obviously a larger body is a person and the smaller fetus is not. So does that mean that since I'm six foot and over 275 that I am more of a person than my wife who is five foot something and a buck and quarter? Or am I more of a person than most people since I am larger than most? Does that mean I can rule over them and do with them as I wish since I am more of a person than they are? Of course not! Yet when it comes to babies this is a criteria.
L- Level of Development. Newborns are more developed than in utero babies. If they weren't they would not be able to survive outside of the womb. I can argue that since I scored higher on my ACTs than most people I have a more developed brain than they do. I didn't say it was a good argument but it can be made. Does that mean that I can rule over those who didn't do as well as me? Also does this mean that we become more of a person as we age and develop (ie a 7 year old is more of a person than a 5 year old) until we reach our prime and then we begin to become less of a person as we begin to become more dependent on others.
E- Environment. In utero babies are by definition in the uterus and newborns have survived the birth process and now live in the big bad world. Really just a difference in inches when you think about it. So when I am at work am I a different person than when I am at home, or across the room? No. So does moving through the birth canal turn you into a person?
D- Dependency. The in utero babies are dependent for everything while newborns can at least breath on their own. So is a diabetic that is dependent on insulin less of a human than me? Or is someone who depends on glasses less of a human? That doesn't make sense either.
Well if the four differences between in utero babies and newborn aren't valid when applied to the general population, why are they valid when applied to the question of abortion? Just some food for thought.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Why I usually like my job
Today is a beautiful day. A light snow is falling. The fields are covered in snow. There is no mud, and there are no bugs. That is why I love the winter. Sure it's a pain when your water freezes or your hands get cold, or the stupid IV tube freezes up. But the plus side is that my boots are easier to clean, and there is no mud. Do you get the feeling I hate mud? I do, that and flies are two of my most hated things about my job.
Okay the guy that considers two gates and a rope a squeeze chute is pretty close as well, but normally only they get hurt in those situations because I hang back until the unrestrained animal, finishes running itself nearly to death trying to harm the producer. I wish the producer no harm, but if it is his animal and his lack of facility that are the cause. . . . I see no better motivator for improvement.
Okay the guy that considers two gates and a rope a squeeze chute is pretty close as well, but normally only they get hurt in those situations because I hang back until the unrestrained animal, finishes running itself nearly to death trying to harm the producer. I wish the producer no harm, but if it is his animal and his lack of facility that are the cause. . . . I see no better motivator for improvement.
Monday, January 21, 2008
Real Concern for the nation
Last week I was talking with some "conservative" friends of mine and they were telling me that they were planning on voting for Obama or Edwards if they were to get the Democratic nomination because they do not like any of the Republican candidates. I have to admit that none of the Republicans are true conservatives, but really, vote for a Dem!! They said their chief issue was health care for everyone.
You've got to be kidding me!!! Name one thing that the government does that has not turned out worse than it was before they got involved, besides national defense? Look at other countries that have socialized medicine! Canada now has a term called medical destinations. These are places that people go on their "vacations" so they can have medical procedures done. For instance flying to India to have hip replacement surgery since the waiting list in Canada is so long. Or what about in England where women are being encouraged to stay at home until absolutely necessary when they are giving birth because there isn't enough money for them to stay in the hospital any longer than possible. Or how about the people who have been pulling there own teeth because they can't get into the dentist?
They told me that they thought doctors make to much money. Okay, I won't say they don't make good money, but the best and the brightest tend to gravitate to areas where they can make good money. I want the best and the brightest being my doctor. IF the government takes over and caps how much doctors can make and they can make more in other places, I guarantee some of tomorrows doctors will be going into those professions.
How do you lower costs? Cap malpractice suits! Get rid of insurance by companies and offer tax breaks to people who purchase their own insurance. That way I can purchase insurance for what I want. If I don't want optical I won't get it. If I want a deductible for $5,000, then that is what I will get. Then the free market will get involved and when that occurs prices tend to get lower. That is the way to lower costs.
You've got to be kidding me!!! Name one thing that the government does that has not turned out worse than it was before they got involved, besides national defense? Look at other countries that have socialized medicine! Canada now has a term called medical destinations. These are places that people go on their "vacations" so they can have medical procedures done. For instance flying to India to have hip replacement surgery since the waiting list in Canada is so long. Or what about in England where women are being encouraged to stay at home until absolutely necessary when they are giving birth because there isn't enough money for them to stay in the hospital any longer than possible. Or how about the people who have been pulling there own teeth because they can't get into the dentist?
They told me that they thought doctors make to much money. Okay, I won't say they don't make good money, but the best and the brightest tend to gravitate to areas where they can make good money. I want the best and the brightest being my doctor. IF the government takes over and caps how much doctors can make and they can make more in other places, I guarantee some of tomorrows doctors will be going into those professions.
How do you lower costs? Cap malpractice suits! Get rid of insurance by companies and offer tax breaks to people who purchase their own insurance. That way I can purchase insurance for what I want. If I don't want optical I won't get it. If I want a deductible for $5,000, then that is what I will get. Then the free market will get involved and when that occurs prices tend to get lower. That is the way to lower costs.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Going through Hardees
Just the other day I was taking a break from work, that's right I work for a living which is a novel idea for some out there, and going through the drive through at the local Hardees. When I got my total I was shocked at the total price. Granted Hardees is the most expensive fast food one can get but in my neck of the woods it is the only fast food one can get. Only later did it come to me that the increase was due to the wonderful democrats we have controlling our Senate and House.
Last year they increased the minimum wage and thus increased my tax burden as far as I am concerned. Being a salaried employee in a small company, the increase in minimum wage means that the 75,000 I take home (not my actual salary just an example) does not go as far as it used to. What the dems fail to realize is that by increasing the minimum wage they increase the input cost on almost everything produced in this country. I say that because if the minimum wage goes up I am sure the greedy unions will want to make sure that their employees make X amount more than minimum wage and therefore their hourly wage will increase as well.
We all know that the company is not going to take the loss, and they shouldn't, so they pass the increase on to everyone else. That means that $5.00 doesn't buy as much as it used to as far as quantity. In fact in my state the minimum wage went from $5.15 to $6.20/hr at 20.4% increase. Assuming that is passed on to the rest of us, which it will be at least in part, a meal at Hardees that used to cost $5.00 will need to be increased to $6.02 if the full percentage is passed on. In our example the sales tax will also increase 7 cents on the meal. So not only does it cost me more but now I am paying even more money into the state, county, city, and school district coffers. Plus the minimum wage earners income increased 20.4% so their income tax will also increase. That is assuming they pay into the government. I think the government just found a sneaky way to increase our taxes and make us salaried people that much poorer.
By the way the minimum wage increases another 16.9% January 1, 2009 to $7.25 and hour. That is an overall increase of 40.8%!!! I need to make $105,600 in 2009 just to maintain my standard of living, not including the new amount of taxes I will be paying. Well that's what happens we you elect Democrats and RINO republicans.
Last year they increased the minimum wage and thus increased my tax burden as far as I am concerned. Being a salaried employee in a small company, the increase in minimum wage means that the 75,000 I take home (not my actual salary just an example) does not go as far as it used to. What the dems fail to realize is that by increasing the minimum wage they increase the input cost on almost everything produced in this country. I say that because if the minimum wage goes up I am sure the greedy unions will want to make sure that their employees make X amount more than minimum wage and therefore their hourly wage will increase as well.
We all know that the company is not going to take the loss, and they shouldn't, so they pass the increase on to everyone else. That means that $5.00 doesn't buy as much as it used to as far as quantity. In fact in my state the minimum wage went from $5.15 to $6.20/hr at 20.4% increase. Assuming that is passed on to the rest of us, which it will be at least in part, a meal at Hardees that used to cost $5.00 will need to be increased to $6.02 if the full percentage is passed on. In our example the sales tax will also increase 7 cents on the meal. So not only does it cost me more but now I am paying even more money into the state, county, city, and school district coffers. Plus the minimum wage earners income increased 20.4% so their income tax will also increase. That is assuming they pay into the government. I think the government just found a sneaky way to increase our taxes and make us salaried people that much poorer.
By the way the minimum wage increases another 16.9% January 1, 2009 to $7.25 and hour. That is an overall increase of 40.8%!!! I need to make $105,600 in 2009 just to maintain my standard of living, not including the new amount of taxes I will be paying. Well that's what happens we you elect Democrats and RINO republicans.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
