Borrowing a fortune to buy a useless college degree

What do you call someone who borrows a virtual fortune to finance a college degree that isn't worth the paper that the diploma is printed on?  A college graduate?  An up and coming titan of industry?  A future pillar of the community?

Nope, none of the above.  At least, that's not what I would call these folks.  I would appropriately label these guys and gals as stupid morons.  You know, those college brainiacs who majored in any liberal arts degree such as journalism, film, photography, sociology, psychology, English, art history or a litany of other completely irrelevant and useless program that no reasonable profitable business owner has any use for whatsoever.

And to top off the bad choices that these morons (or, college graduates as some would call them) make is that they went into hock to the tune of upwards of $30,000 or even more to call themselves a college graduate.  It's one thing when Daddy and Mommy fork out the dough for little Sally to spend four years studying fashion design, and then end up working at Chick-fil-A for $7/hour.  But when little Sally obtains four or five student loans that hang around her neck for most of the rest of her life like golden chains around Mr. T's neck, that truly is a magnificent example of an absolutely horrific and terrible life choice.

This may be news to many college students: a college degree does not guarantee you a huge salary and cushy job for life.  It never was any kind of guaranty at any point in history.  Granted, in the past employers found that college graduates in business, engineering, science and other solid pursuits made excellent employees in the long run, and those who actually studied the Three R's (readin' ritin, and 'rithmatic) had a leg up over those dimmer grads who chose to take pictures, study pictures and critique pictures while they piled up student debt up to their eyeballs.

And now we see a swarm of unemployable fine arts and journalism graduates down on Wall Street demanding that their student loans be forgiven, while carrying signs that blame their woes on all of those fat cat bankers.  Yes, you know those evil guys and gals in the suits, the guys and gals who studied business and finance in college rather than film.  Those guys.  They are the ones responsible for liberal arts major Sally's troubles, and why life has passed her by, or at least according to little brainiac Sally. 

This is so wrong on so many levels. 

You know what I call a liberal arts degree holder who can't even get a job at McDonalds in order to start repayment of their $30,000 student loans?  A college graduate, you say?  No.  I call them a burden on society, a moron and a hopeless idiot.    

Obama is right, for once: 'Republicans want dirtier air and dirtier water.'

President Obama is correct: the GOP condones more economic activity, during which the process of this activity marginally increases pollutants that are an external cost and are unavoidable consequences of all productive human efforts.  As considered from an economic point of view, both Republicans AND Democrats should want dirtier air and dirtier water.  Well, perhaps minuscule increases in air and water pollution, but it is inarguable: more economic activity produces more pollutants.  And as a nation, we all accept certain levels of pollution as the cost of a prospering and growing population. 

Of course, as an economic ignoramus, Barack Obama has no clue that there are certain unavoidable externalities that must ensue given increased economic activity.  No clue at all.  Taken to an extreme, Obama's position would be that Democrats are against emitting one single additional molecule of pollution into the country's air or water.  The only way that this position is achievable is if we stop any and all additional efforts to increase production of any product whatsoever.  This position of Obama's also assumes that the existing production of energy and goods is OK, that the pollution from our current levels of production are perfectly fine, and that cutting back on production would be even more acceptable.  In other words, Democrats support stagnation or atrophy as it pertains to the GNP of the U.S. economy.

Of course this position is ludicrous on its face.  But the dimwits who listen to Obama and Democrats eat this up, and in particular the tree hugging environmental movement types, who ultimately would be perfectly happy if a diminished number of cave dwellers simply lived like we did in the good ol' days, in our cold, damp caves with no cars, no washing machines and no electricity.  And that would entail that of the 300 plus million Americans currently residing within the boundaries of the U.S., perhaps 90% of them need to go away, leaving presumably the 10% of the remaining population (the 'good' percentage) to inhabit the country and live off the land, free from pollution and filth.  Sounds like paradise on earth to me.

And of course, that eventuality is a non-starter as well, but it epitomizes the Left's world view to a large extent: seeking a non-existent utopia that dwells in unison with Mother Earth, or Gaia, with no wants, needs or fears, and one that provides only peace and love for everybody.  Everybody, that is, except the other 90% of us who 'went away,' and the tree huggers choose not to explain what would need to happen to that 90% 'extra population' that Gaia could not support.  To these arrogant extremist environmentalists, all that matters is that most of us (especially conservatives and Republicans) simply 'go away,' and leave the country to them and their vegan and pure ways. 

You bet the Republicans want dirtier air and dirtier water: a certain degree of pollution is unavoidable and indeed acceptable in a thriving, growing economy.   I would vote for dirtier air and dirtier water every time it comes up on the ballot.

And it will be coming up on the ballot in November, 2012.  Vote for dirtier air and dirtier water.

It's the 'Right' thing to do.

The "Occupy" mobs nothing more than a 'Cargo Cult.'

This unorganized rabble we all see yelling into bullhorns about the evils of capitalism, the banking industry, and western civilization in general can be categorized as a cult.  More specifically, a ‘cargo cult.’  They have seen the success of the hated Tea Party, whose efforts have changed the political landscape and swung the pendulum of popular sentiment significantly to the right of center.

 These mobs want to effect the same degree of change that they all saw the Tea Party achieve, although in the opposite direction, and ignorantly assume that if enough people show up and make noise, their cause will be served.  Their largest shortcoming is their complete and utter lack of understanding of how the Tea Party got the victories they did.  They are clueless, but perservere in their mimicking of Tea Party rallies, when in reality they are stupidly stumbling around aping Tea Party tactics with no real understanding of how to effectively forward their agenda, which is to bring chaos to the existing system that has left them behind.

 If you are not familiar with the term 'cargo cult,' it refers to the primitive native peoples in the Pacific Islands and remote areas whose territories were pressed into service during WWII to service the U.S. Pacific Fleet, in addition to the Japanese Imperial Navy. These native people would watch as these foreigners (both Japanese and American troops) moved in, and subsequently build landing strips and control towers. Then as if by magic, planes would appear from the heavens and land on these strips full of food, water, supplies, gasoline, clothing, etc. Much of it would be distributed to the indigenous populations in addition to serving the war effort.

 After the war ended, these foreigners left, and so did all of their goodies. Not wanting to interrupt this gravy train, the natives would ape the behaviors of those foreigners in hopes of making the magic planes arrive again. They would build bamboo 'control towers,' clear rudimentary, crude 'landing strips' out of the jungle, and talk into crude 'microphones', hoping that this behavior would entice the goodies to reappear, but in reality they had absolutely no understanding of the actual nature of where all these goodies came from. They had to assume it came from out of the sky, (presumably from the 'gods' ). These cults persisted in mimicking these behaviors for years and in some cases decades after the shipments ended.

And the ‘Occupy’ fools are stupidly doing the exact same thing as these ignorant Pacific island natives: they are completely devoid of any understanding of how the Tea Party resonated with voters.  Specifically, the Occupy mobs are unaware that the Tea Party had rock solid principles that it rallied around: less government spending, less confiscatory taxation, smaller government and adherence to the Constitution of the United States. 

The occupy mobs have only their ‘rock solid’ principles of: lay in bed until noon, smoke marijuana until their throats are sore, and demand that money be provided to them in perpetuity to further their slovenly lifestyles.  These are principles that are held by only a small handful of stupid hippies, of whom all pay homage to their spiritual leaders Cheech and Chong, and this worst type of sloth will never, ever gain any support from the voting public whatsoever.

And yet these idiots continue to ape the Tea Party, and expect the same manner of change, but it will never come.  Just like those cargo cult Pacific Islanders continue to wait by their crude landing strips and man their bamboo control towers, hoping that their efforts will entice the goodies from the skies to appear again, as it did in the good old days. 

Filthy, pathetic hippies infest Wall Street

This mob of hippies' petulant infestation of Wall Street may make for great photo ops, sound bites and generate some media interest, but it will mostly generate garbage like their fore bearers always did at these protests, and garner resentment and ill-will from most of the public.

The garbled message that we get from this leaderless rabble seems to be 'these fat cats Wall Street bastards have money, and we don't.  Give it to us.'

Or at least that seems to be the message I am getting from this mob.  They have been raised by their irresponsible Gen-X parents to value self esteem over accomplishment, and they are demanding that the responsible people working in the corporate environs hand them over cold hard cash, simply because they are alive and breathing in the U.S. of A.

Sorry, hippies. Ain't gonna happen.

Sooner or later you all will grow up, and find out that if you want some of that money that these Wall Streeter's have, you'll have to shave, shower and cover up your tattoos, remove your earrings and get hair cuts.  Additionally, you'll actually need some sort of resume that an employer might be interested in, with actual accomplishments: like holding a minimum wage job for more than a week. 

I know, I know: your self esteem will suffer.  Having to flip burgers and be nice to customers.  Yes, I know this is too degrading to even consider.

Well, welcome to the NFL.  Life is tough, and nobody owes you a living.  Despite what your useless parents told you.

Get a job, you smelly stupid hippies.  Nothing you do on Wall Street in the next week, or month, or year will make any difference in your life.  You are not standing up for right versus wrong, for good versus evil.  You just want to steal the goodies from those so-called fat cats up in those office buildings.  Those people up there are the responsible ones.  The ones who shower, dress neatly, keep their noses to the grindstone and respect authority. In other words, they play by the rules.  And you don't.

Just get a job, take a shower and shut up.

You useless human debris.

Liberals pursue development of the best non-fossil fuel ever: Pixie Dust!!

The Obama administration just threw $535,000,000.00 of our taxpayer money at a non-proven energy company, Solyndra, and watched this investment in the future go up in smoke. 

He wants Americans to use something else besides fossil fuels and nuclear energy, even though nothing else we know of can replace them.  And why?  Because this is the agenda of the crazy, far left tree hugger hippies and they happen to be a Democrat constituency group whose votes he covets. 

We all know that Obama does not like nuclear energy, coal energy, natural gas energy, and in particular he absolutely LOATHES petroleum, that evil energy source that evil conservatives call the life blood of capitalism.  More accurately, I should say his constituency group of tree hugging hippies loathes all of those energy sources.  All of these evil, antiquated energy sources give Obama the heebie jeebies: if he promotes them, then 'POOF!'  There goes the support of the tree huggers.  Accordingly, he's convinced that all of these are dangerous and harmful to the planet.  None of this stuff is any good, Obama obediently states.

What does he like?  Well, with Solyndra for example, he thinks that solar energy is the way to go, and that we as a nation should subsidize this form of renewable energy to the hilt.  And he did.  And we can all see what happened.  It kinda fizzled.  Because in reality, rather than in the nebulous child-like world of Utopian dreamers where this foolish dream energy can power the airline industry, this technology is in Realville, USA nowhere near becoming a reality.

He also likes wind power.  Ditto his administration's subsidization of all things wind driven, and the results are similar to that of solar energy: jack squat.  The technology just isn't there yet.  But that doesn't stop this administration from funneling a gazillion or two of tax payer dollars into its further development.  We'll all be standing by to reap the rewards of this investment.  That is, if the wind continues to blow all the time.  Which it doesn't. 

I have noticed that we have as a nation been ignoring a major source of energy that is not particularly new, but nevertheless efficient and exciting: Pixie Dust!  It has many names, such as Fairy Dust, Magic Dust and others, but the technology is the same: sprinkle it on something, and it flies, or turns into something spectacular.  Simple technology, really, but it has been overlooked for decades in favor of fossil fuels, which tend to pollute.  No polution has been detected with the use of Fairy Dust in any application we've seen so far.

Witness Dionne Sanders hawk DirectTV services while sporting fairy wings and throwing gobs of the sparkly stuff at a TV screen using cable programming, and VOILA: Green Bay Packer games shown in Miami, Florida! Shazzam! Magic!!  Need I say more to convince even the most rigid sceptic that this is the energy source of the future?

I think not.    

We need to harness this exciting form of energy.  And we as a nation need to man up and acquire the national gumption to fund wide scale development of Pixie Dust.  Imagine the benefits all Americans could enjoy with a never ending supply of Pixie Dust.  We have seen Peter Pan, Wendy, Tinker Bell and all of their friends fly around and do magical things under power of Pixie Dust.  We have seen Mary Poppins, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and Herbie the Volkswagen do amazing things under the power of Pixie Dust.

With some well funded national resolve, we can now channel our national resources to obtain a never ending supply of Pixie Dust, if only we could fully fund its discovery and exploration.  And that does not come cheaply, fellow Americans.  We must muster some resolve, verve and moxie to dig deep into our pockets to harness this newest form of non-fossil fuel that is so promising.

Wind power cannot lift a Boeing 747 (Air Force One) off the ground even 1 inch.  Neither can solar power, wave power, switch grass or any other tree hugger hippie juice.  But Pixie Dust can! 

What are we waiting for?  Let's go for it, and soon we will bear the fruits of this endeavor together, and we can drive Pixie Dust cars, power Pixie Dust aircraft carriers and bring to bear against our enemies Pixie Dust  fueled tanks and fighter jets.

All that is standing in the way of this Utopian dream is a few trillion dollars or so.  Let's get on with it!

Fair, Schmair: Obama spews class warfare disguised as 'fairness.'

The latest speech from our president, one which echoes the same theme we have heard from liberals since the dawn of time, hammers home to his political base the false concept of 'fairness' in managing our shared national resources and responsibilities.

'It's only fair,' Obama blithely mouths as he reads his ubiquitous Tele-Prompter.  I would love to hear what his definition of fairness actual is, and how it relates to our national affairs.

He is obviously speaking only to the 'do-not's' in the crowd (as opposed to 'have-nots, a topic for another time).  His base, whom he wants to rally into a frenzied hate-filled froth, consists of those who have at least $1.00 less than the other guy standing next to them.  The 'do-not's' envy the opposition consisting of 'do'ers' and want to punish those who got that extra buck in an unfair manner. 

Obama's version of what is fair and what is unfair is simple: if one guy has a lot of money, and the other guy has less than that, essential unfairness is at hand.  In Obama's mind, everyone should have an equal share of everything.  And this is the problem with all liberal thinking, which is based on Karl Marx's 19th century publication 'Das Kapital,' the I-Ching of liberalism.  'From those, according to their ability.  To those, according to their need.'  That's the bedrock of liberalism, and the basis of what is in the liberal mind fair, and what is unfair.

This half-baked and completely debunked theory of Marx leaves out a vital part of the equation, and liberals just love to rant and  rave about millionaires and billionaires not paying their 'fair share,' all the while ignoring just how those millionaires and billionaires got to be millionaires and billionaires in the first place.  Most of them worked their butts off, sacrificed enormous amounts of time, energy and money, and took risks with their assets that many of the rest of us would think insane.  And they were rewarded for all of this with millions and billions of dollars.

And what about the 'do-not's' who did not?  Who drank themselves into the gutter, who alienated their family and friends with their nasty, self destructive behavior?  Why don't they have millions and billions of dollars?  Liberals would argue that the system is simply unfair, and that these losers are losers simply because they got a crummy lot in life, unlike those lucky rich bastards who got their fortunes through sheer luck.

Obama and his 'fairness' argument is only for those of his base who can't think for themselves, and believe their liberal leaders who tell them that anyone who has more money came about it through nefarious means, and that with their vote they can take away much of those ill-gotten gains and pass it around to the 'do-not's', who did nothing to earn anything, and that is how 'fairness' works.

Fairness, schmairness.  Rather than hating rich people (also known as class warfare), how about just putting your nose to the grindstone and forget about what others have and worry only about you and what you can do to improve your lot in life?  Instead, if you are a mindless liberal I suspect you will ignore any suggestion of taking responsibility for yourself,  and rather try and steal what you want and need from your neighbor who actually earned what he has gotten in life.

Believe it or not, there are more voters in this country that believe what I have to say about fairness, than what Obama has to say about fairness.  And it's going to show itself in November of 2012.

You can take that to the bank.

We all know old people are parasites, but what about teachers?

I have been blasting our elderly population as of late for being the primary reason our society is going to hell in a hand basket.  You know, sucking up Social Security payments, Medicare, Medicade, prescription drugs and in Chicago until lately, free bus rides: all simply because of how long they have been around, and no other productive reason.  A recent statistic came to light to prove this point: several decades ago, the percentage of our older population living under the poverty line ( in 1949, I believe, or close to then) was 39%.  As of 2009, that percentage has dropped to 8%.  This statistic clearly indicates that we are simply transferring the wealth of our nation to oldsters for no other reason than their age.
This is unsustainable.  I have been saying that old poeple are killing us with this transfer, and that nearly 6 out of everey 10 dollars coming out of the U.S. Treasury in the form of entitlement payments are for old people (Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are the biggies). They are public enemy #1. 

But who's #2?  Public school teachers, of course.  Yes, those folks who have custody of our children for six to eight hours daily, Monday through Friday.  And they are not doing the job that their predecessors did, either: check out the questions that were on an 8th grade math test in 1895:

1. Name and define the Fundamental Rules of Arithmetic.

2. A wagon box is 2 ft. deep, 10 feet long, and 3 ft. wide. How many bushels of wheat will it hold?
3. If a load of wheat weighs 3942 lbs., what is it worth at 50 cts. per bu, deducting 1050 lbs. for tare?
4. District No. 33 has a valuation of $35,000. What is the necessary levy to carry on a school seven months at $50 per month, and have $104 for incidentals?
5. Find cost of 6720 lbs. coal at $6.00 per ton.
6. Find the interest of $512.60 for 8 months and 18 days at 7 percent.
7. What is the cost of 40 boards 12 inches wide and 16 ft. long at $.20 per inch?
8. Find bank discount on $300 for 90 days (no grace) at 10 percent.
9. What is the cost of a square farm at $15 per acre, the distance around which is 640 rods?
10. Write a Bank Check, a Promissory Note, and a Receipt.

Our 8th graders today can barely read, much less answer a single question above, thanks to our current crop of parasitic public school teachers.  These public teachers, all members of teachers unions, incidentally, work for 30 years, and retire in their early 50's at 75% or so of their salaries for the rest of their lives.  And they receive other benefits during this idle time as well.  And who pays for these parasites to retire in luxury in their Boca Raton condos? 

WE DO!

Us private sector schmucks, who work our entire lives until we drop dead (or retire on our hard earned portfolios), and we are paying these blood sucking teachers to lay around in their hammocks on the beach, sipping their Mai Tais for up to 30 years or more on OUR DIME!

When I went to my elementary public school in the early 1960's, the entire school of 200 kids, K through 6th grade, was taught, managed and maintained by a staff of around 16 people:

• The principal
• Two administrators
• School nurse
• 10 teachers
• 1 janitor 
• 1 general maintenance employee

Now a similar school in 2011 will have the following:

• 1 Principal
• 2 Vice Principals
• 10 or more administrators
• 30 teachers (to include gym teachers, art teachers, music teachers, choir teachers, etc)
• 2 school nurses
• a nurse's aide
• 10 cafeteria workers
• 4 janitors
• 4 lawn mowing people
• 5 general maintenance crew workers

I think you get the point: these public union teachers have feather bedded each and every single school in each and every single school district in the entire country with superfluous and unnecessary employees to the point that they are sucking the very life blood out of their communities, and then they ALL retire in their 50's, requiring another 20-something year old new teacher or administrator to replace them since they are no longer working (but getting paid by the district).  And in the event that the 52 year old retired slacker public teacher or administrator lives until 82, that 22-year old replacement will then be 52 and THEY WILL RETIRE AS WELL!  Subsequently, for that single teacher  or admin slot, the community will be paying THREE people to teach or 'administer': the 82 year old slug, the newly retired 52 year old mooch, and the new 22-year old to replace TWO people already sucking from the public payroll for one teaching and/or administrative slot.

It's an unsustainable racket, I say.  Simply unsustainable.  But old people are still #1 (in terms of public enemies, that is...).

Sorry, old folks and public union teachers.  I call 'em as I see em.  And don't forget this: these public teachers get the summer off, with pay.