Let's face facts. Obama is not going after "the wealthy" to pay their fair share. The elitists, statists, and the greens are not attacking the poor or themselves. The object of their hatred is all aimed at the middle class. They can, will, and have controlled the poor. In fact they've been doing that for 100 years, since Wilson and FDR. Statists believe they have conquered those in the lower economic tier through welfare programs, unemployment insurance benefits, social services, public education, housing subsidies, and whatever other give-away programs they have used as bribes. And I could not argue their success. The poor, with their hands out, are not in a position to fight back.
Having accomplished their goals with the poor, they now are laser focused on the middle class. And it is this middle class who is giving them a fight. Blow back is coming at them through the tea party movement, through independents, through home-schoolers, through formerly employed manufacturing laborers, through small businesses, and through the middle class people who love the freedom to choose their own lifestyles. The middle class is still the group closest to the Constitution. The middle class is the group who has sacrificed the most lives in wars and defense of the nation. The middle class is the group who produced the goods that made the country self-sufficient. The middle class is the group of citizens who are outraged and appalled at the assault on the nation from within by the elites. So who does Obama perceive as his enemy? Who is the next victim class of the elite and statists? The middle class.
How do you kill the middle class? You eliminate their income potential. You kill their jobs. You destroy manufacturing. You make their lives miserable with regulations. You make their energy so expensive they cannot function. You ridicule their cultural and moral codes. You promote things to undermine their family structure. You tax them to death. You take over their communications. You attempt to track all of their activities. You humiliate them in airports, schools, media, and through their health care. You call them names. You inhibit their mobility and use their tax dollars to limit auto traffic, telling them they must walk or bike. You limit their food. You limit all of their independent survival abilities and micro-manage every aspect of their lives.
The middle class has become the enemy of the state (statists). It is only the middle class stopping the complete Communist takeover of the country.
Yes, we hear Obama going on about making the wealthy pay. But what is he actually doing? What he says and what he does are never the same thing. He's giving GE carte blanche to operate without taxes, and he is regulating the middle class out of options. He's handing out waivers to his favored few, while forcing the middle class into submission. He's funding more regulations than any one President has ever done. He's funding the takeover of rural America through his newly minted White House Rural Council. He's putting in place tracking devices through Federal funding. (the misnamed Smart Grid and more) He talks about responsible fiscal policy and has spent us, the middle class, into oblivion. All he says about making the wealthy pay their fair share is a joke. A very bad joke.
The wealthy are connected to the political class and so entrenched at the moment that, literally, they are untouched by the destruction. Obama is not changing that. Obama is living off of that. While his treasury secretary, Geithner, blamed his tax negligence on Turbo Tax, the rest of us would have lost our shirts for missing a tax payment. Nothing Obama plans to do will change that. In fact, his Obamacare debacle hires some 150,000 new IRS agents. You don't think those IRS agents are going after the likes of Geithner, do you? No. They will be going after the middle class.
The American middle class has been the envy of the world for most of my lifetime, that is until Obama came along. I would go further to say the American middle class has been the lifeblood of the country. Middle Americans, up until Obama's election, have had a better life than the majority of the planet, and for good reason. Americans earned it. This standard of living, up until recently, has been protected by the U.S. Constitution. The thorn in Obama's side is the U.S. Constitution which protected the individual rights of the middle class to live their lives, go about their lives in whatever lawful way they needed, and to practice their life skills to the best of their abilities. Obama has done more to undermine the U.S. Constitution and destroy the middle class than all of of the previous presidents combined. If he could, he would "transform" both out of existence, the Constitution and the middle class.
For all of these reasons and more, it is now up to the American middle class to save the country. The poor won't do it. For all intents and purposes, the poor are part of the statists creation and will not budge. The wealthy will not do it. The wealthy, also part of the statists creation, like their favored status so much that they will not let go of their power and influence. So who is left?
This is why the Marxists, the Michael Moore's, the Al Gore's, and the sycophant media are hell bent on destroying the middle class. We stand in the way. We are the enemies of the elitists, the statists, and the green Marxists. We are right now stuck, being squeezed, between the poor and the statists. We are the obstacle to Obama's "transformation." The question is, will the middle class stand up, fight back, say not just "No," but "Hell NO?"
(By the way, will someone please tell the progessive statists there WILL be an election in 2012, after which they are toast?! I'm sure Beverly Perdue, governor of my state, North Carolina, will be very disappointed about that.)
Also Published At Pundit House.com
Thursday, September 29, 2011
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
REVENGE OF THE NERDS = SMART METERS = TOO CLOSE FOR COMFORT
The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires judicial warrants before searches and seizures. It is written plain as day, for all to understand.
Here is the Wikepedia explaination The 4th Amendment: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Oh, that's right. I forgot. No one cares about the U.S. Constitution any more. Especially when everyone thinks they have to save the planet from ...us all.
So what is it that is "Too close for comfort?" Smart Meters. No one likes them. No one wants them. But here they come anyway?? I don't know if you have been reading the horror stories over these gadgets, but I have. Some of them have to do with severe health problems for people and for pets. Some of them have to do with immediately escalating energy bills upon installation of these "tell all" contraptions.
The latest I've learned is extortion by PG&E. Yes, I said EXTORTION. And I wasn't kidding. This is where PG&E installs the Smart Meter on your house without you being home or consenting to it. Then, a huge brouhaha erupts and PG&E decides legally (with a judicial order) they are obliged to uninstall the Smart Meter from those homes where homeowners request the removal. BUT, here's the catch. If you want the Smart Meter removed you have to pay PG&E $600.00 to come out and switch to an analog (regular) meter again. And if that is not bad enough, you must pay PG&E $20.00 per month extra just for the privilege of living without a Smart Meter.
So why the insidious tactics by an energy company to force something on its customers that they don't want? No, it isn't for the planet. It is for control over everyone's energy usage. It is for the purpose of rationing energy. You see, when they get the entire world hooked up the Smart Grid, redistribution of energy is easy as pie. You just shut down from one area, and divert the energy to another. The perfect recipe for green social justice. The new EPA energy police will be all too happy to make you carbon neutral and "share" your energy with some third world country.
Smart Meters talk in both directions. Whose talking? Your appliances. RFID chips are quickly being installed in all new appliances. Refrigerators, washers, driers, lamps, dishwashers, HVAC systems, your hair dryer, the whole shebang. (I pray everyday that my appliances, bought before these chips were installed, will hold up forever, amen.)
Think of the advantages. You no longer have to convince masses of people to do what you want. You just cut their energy off and on at will to control them. "Do what I say, or else you don't have heat tonight." Forget cap and trade. We're talking universal energy credits for every household. You don't need money. What you need is energy. Energy is the new currency.
I learned a new word today for this. It is "Technocracy." It was introduced to me by a man named Patrick M. Wood. Maybe I'm late to the party here. I determined right away that Smart Meters had nothing to do with saving energy or the planet, but were perfect control devices. Imagining a bureaucrat or a governmental tyrant, elected or not, controlling the heat in my house is not a far stretch for me. Obviously controlling our light bulbs was not too much for such tyrants. I'm sharing links below on Mr. Wood's work. Embedding the videos seemed a bit much for putting here, but I hope you will go to the links. One is 37 minutes long. The other is a youtube audio broadcast and it is 34 minutes long.
Evidently, what we have here is a sort of "Revenge of the Nerds." It seems the technocrats have been planning to control the world's population with energy for a very long time. Since the 1930's actually. (Why does it seem as if the 1930's spawned a lot of really bad things for us?! Oh, because it did.)
Two media exposés on this subject by Patrick M. Wood are Here and Here
Here is the Wikepedia explaination The 4th Amendment: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Oh, that's right. I forgot. No one cares about the U.S. Constitution any more. Especially when everyone thinks they have to save the planet from ...us all.
So what is it that is "Too close for comfort?" Smart Meters. No one likes them. No one wants them. But here they come anyway?? I don't know if you have been reading the horror stories over these gadgets, but I have. Some of them have to do with severe health problems for people and for pets. Some of them have to do with immediately escalating energy bills upon installation of these "tell all" contraptions.
The latest I've learned is extortion by PG&E. Yes, I said EXTORTION. And I wasn't kidding. This is where PG&E installs the Smart Meter on your house without you being home or consenting to it. Then, a huge brouhaha erupts and PG&E decides legally (with a judicial order) they are obliged to uninstall the Smart Meter from those homes where homeowners request the removal. BUT, here's the catch. If you want the Smart Meter removed you have to pay PG&E $600.00 to come out and switch to an analog (regular) meter again. And if that is not bad enough, you must pay PG&E $20.00 per month extra just for the privilege of living without a Smart Meter.
So why the insidious tactics by an energy company to force something on its customers that they don't want? No, it isn't for the planet. It is for control over everyone's energy usage. It is for the purpose of rationing energy. You see, when they get the entire world hooked up the Smart Grid, redistribution of energy is easy as pie. You just shut down from one area, and divert the energy to another. The perfect recipe for green social justice. The new EPA energy police will be all too happy to make you carbon neutral and "share" your energy with some third world country.
The Environmental Protection Agency has said new greenhouse gas regulations, as proposed, may be “absurd” in application and “impossible to administer” by its self-imposed 2016 deadline. But the agency is still asking for taxpayers to shoulder the burden of up to 230,000 new bureaucrats — at a cost of $21 billion — to attempt to implement the rules.
Smart Meters talk in both directions. Whose talking? Your appliances. RFID chips are quickly being installed in all new appliances. Refrigerators, washers, driers, lamps, dishwashers, HVAC systems, your hair dryer, the whole shebang. (I pray everyday that my appliances, bought before these chips were installed, will hold up forever, amen.)
Think of the advantages. You no longer have to convince masses of people to do what you want. You just cut their energy off and on at will to control them. "Do what I say, or else you don't have heat tonight." Forget cap and trade. We're talking universal energy credits for every household. You don't need money. What you need is energy. Energy is the new currency.
I learned a new word today for this. It is "Technocracy." It was introduced to me by a man named Patrick M. Wood. Maybe I'm late to the party here. I determined right away that Smart Meters had nothing to do with saving energy or the planet, but were perfect control devices. Imagining a bureaucrat or a governmental tyrant, elected or not, controlling the heat in my house is not a far stretch for me. Obviously controlling our light bulbs was not too much for such tyrants. I'm sharing links below on Mr. Wood's work. Embedding the videos seemed a bit much for putting here, but I hope you will go to the links. One is 37 minutes long. The other is a youtube audio broadcast and it is 34 minutes long.
Evidently, what we have here is a sort of "Revenge of the Nerds." It seems the technocrats have been planning to control the world's population with energy for a very long time. Since the 1930's actually. (Why does it seem as if the 1930's spawned a lot of really bad things for us?! Oh, because it did.)
Two media exposés on this subject by Patrick M. Wood are Here and Here
Friday, September 23, 2011
MY TAKE ON REPUBLICAN DEBATES
I, for one, am grateful for the Republican debates. I realize they are part theater and part charades, but nevertheless, I think some reality shows through. I sit there watching the candidates and wonder, as I look at each of them, is this the person most aligned with what our country needs to survive the disaster that is Obama and the rest of the Progressive government we've inherited?
I ask questions like:
1. Will this person dismantle the constructions Obama and other presidents have put in place that destroy free markets and kill businesses?
2. Will this person micromanage our lives, just like the left does?
3. Will this person do what needs to be done to put the monetary policy on sound footing?
4. Will this person just do more social engineering?
5. Will this person take down the federal agencies that are draining the coffers and strangling our livelihoods and lives?
6. Will this person face down enemies and strengthen our military?
7. Does this person have a moral compass?
8. Will this person actually defend the U.S. Constitution from enemies foreign and domestic?
9. Will this person lie to the public?
10. Will this person downsize the federal government back to within its Constitutional limits?
So all of that is going on in my mind while I'm listening to the candidates answer questions. As they answer, I hear a lot of spin. Realizing they are trying to sell their ideas, I guess "spin" is what they think they must do. Some of them do not come across as "spinners." Ron Paul does not "spin," in my estimation. He just calls it like he sees it. Bachmann does not come across as a "spinner." She, too, seems to just speak her mind. And I like what she says. Her exposure of Perry's (Guardasil) cronyism is spot on. Johnson and Huntsman might as well go home. They have about two points each that are conservative, but otherwise they just don't go where I want to go. They seem smarmy and more interested in global initiatives than restoring America. Santorum seems sincere, but also seems hot tempered, which may be a good thing in some circumstances, but not good in others. His hard hitting style comes across sometimes as arrogance and that worries me, but I think he is just passionate on his points. Cain. Well, now there is a "spinner." He sells his 9-9-9 plan like a used car salesman. I'm sure he was great for Godfather's Pizza and a terrific businessman. I think he is probably a really nice man. I could like him personally. But I hate the Fair Tax and he will never get my vote because of it. Gingrich has the right personality for the job, is statesmanlike, and his experience shows. I worry he still likes government solutions and may not be "small government" enough. However, he is strong on American defense, foreign policies, and free market solutions to economics. He has a good grasp of the Muslim threat to us.
Assuming the lower tier of candidates can't win, I'd put Gingrich at head of state, Bachmann in charge of justice, Cain in charge of commerce, Paul in charge of treasury, Santorum in charge of defense policies, Johnson and Huntsman can do event planning maybe.
O.K. So that brings us to the two supposed front runners.
Perry lost me totally last night. He tried to spin the Guardasil episode as a matter of the heart. Same with his illegal "in state" tuition issue. It's all about "heart," is it? Well, we had one of those "compassionate conservatives" from Texas already...and we ended up with another unaffordable entitlement (the drug bill) and the "No Child Left Behind Act." Not to mention undefended borders. No thank you. Not going there again. So he has a heart? Don't we all? But does that mean we create more mandates that enrich corporations and unions? And does that mean we are in for another amnesty program? More entitlements that redistribute the wealth? And, his cronyism points to more corporatism and corruption. What is the difference between this Guardasil episode and Solyndra? Not much, if you ask me.
And then Romney. Well, I have said in the past that his Romneycare program would prevent me from ever voting for him. He definitely slid around that issue last night. He explained it in a way that sounded very plausible. He pointed out a huge difference between Romneycare and Obamacare, saying that Romneycare does not get between the patient and the doctor. That is a huge difference and makes me rethink things somewhat. My other problem with Romneycare is that it is mandated socialism. That is a core problem for me. It tells me he will use socialism when he wants to, to promote some so-called "common good." He defends Social Security the same way, though does indicate the program needs "fixing." In the end, Romney is another "compassionate conservative" who promotes socialism-lite.
I keep landing on Bachmann, with Gingrich as my second choice. You could flip those two around and I would be o.k. with that. Either one as President or Vice President. But at this point, if Romney or Perry get the nomination, I am flumblustered as to how to proceed. It is not that I am looking for purity, exactly. But it is going to take really tough and strong medicine to take this country forward on better footing. Whoever gets the Presidency is going to have one hell of a mess to clean up, not just Obama's mess, but those who went before him enacting disastrous agencies and policies. As far as I can tell, Romney and Perry are just more of the same and we will stumble along without fixing the real problems...those problems existed before Obamacare.
By the way, from my grasp of the issue, Obamacare is not just that one bill. Obamacare policies were funded through the first stimulous bill, are being put in place as I write, and have to be weeded out, one by one. That is more than just giving the states a "waiver" from Obamacare. That means the rest of it will have to be found and scrapped ASAP. Obama and Pelosi and Reid sent a slew of roaches into our healthcare system via the stimulus bill. Funding for micro-chips in persons is in there. Funding for the federal file system of all patient records is in there. Funding for implementing the bureaucratic death panels is in there. That must be addressed.
I was glad to hear most of the candidates say they would repeal Dodd-Frank, another redistribution bill that puts financial institutions in worse shape, a la the Community Reinvestment Act, but worse.
That's my take on the debates so far. There are questions not being asked regarding slush funds for Sustainable Development, Smart Growth, and Agenda 21. I would ask the candidates if they would dismantle Carter's Community Reinvestment Act, Clinton's Council on Sustainable Development, Obama's White House Rural Council, the Food Modernization Safety Act, Bush's Part D bill, besides the EPA, the NEA, (both of them, arts + education), and cut HUD and the DOE. Would they reinstate funding for roads from the 30% diverted to greenways and bike lanes? What would they do about the continuing flow of block grants? Can we rethink the gerrymandering Voting Rights Act? (talk about a sticky wicket no one will touch. ) Can we change the "anchor baby" provision? So many questions.
It seems odd to me those subjects don't show up in the debates, but being media driven, who knows why. What do you think? Do you have a favorite yet?
I ask questions like:
1. Will this person dismantle the constructions Obama and other presidents have put in place that destroy free markets and kill businesses?
2. Will this person micromanage our lives, just like the left does?
3. Will this person do what needs to be done to put the monetary policy on sound footing?
4. Will this person just do more social engineering?
5. Will this person take down the federal agencies that are draining the coffers and strangling our livelihoods and lives?
6. Will this person face down enemies and strengthen our military?
7. Does this person have a moral compass?
8. Will this person actually defend the U.S. Constitution from enemies foreign and domestic?
9. Will this person lie to the public?
10. Will this person downsize the federal government back to within its Constitutional limits?
So all of that is going on in my mind while I'm listening to the candidates answer questions. As they answer, I hear a lot of spin. Realizing they are trying to sell their ideas, I guess "spin" is what they think they must do. Some of them do not come across as "spinners." Ron Paul does not "spin," in my estimation. He just calls it like he sees it. Bachmann does not come across as a "spinner." She, too, seems to just speak her mind. And I like what she says. Her exposure of Perry's (Guardasil) cronyism is spot on. Johnson and Huntsman might as well go home. They have about two points each that are conservative, but otherwise they just don't go where I want to go. They seem smarmy and more interested in global initiatives than restoring America. Santorum seems sincere, but also seems hot tempered, which may be a good thing in some circumstances, but not good in others. His hard hitting style comes across sometimes as arrogance and that worries me, but I think he is just passionate on his points. Cain. Well, now there is a "spinner." He sells his 9-9-9 plan like a used car salesman. I'm sure he was great for Godfather's Pizza and a terrific businessman. I think he is probably a really nice man. I could like him personally. But I hate the Fair Tax and he will never get my vote because of it. Gingrich has the right personality for the job, is statesmanlike, and his experience shows. I worry he still likes government solutions and may not be "small government" enough. However, he is strong on American defense, foreign policies, and free market solutions to economics. He has a good grasp of the Muslim threat to us.
Assuming the lower tier of candidates can't win, I'd put Gingrich at head of state, Bachmann in charge of justice, Cain in charge of commerce, Paul in charge of treasury, Santorum in charge of defense policies, Johnson and Huntsman can do event planning maybe.
O.K. So that brings us to the two supposed front runners.
Perry lost me totally last night. He tried to spin the Guardasil episode as a matter of the heart. Same with his illegal "in state" tuition issue. It's all about "heart," is it? Well, we had one of those "compassionate conservatives" from Texas already...and we ended up with another unaffordable entitlement (the drug bill) and the "No Child Left Behind Act." Not to mention undefended borders. No thank you. Not going there again. So he has a heart? Don't we all? But does that mean we create more mandates that enrich corporations and unions? And does that mean we are in for another amnesty program? More entitlements that redistribute the wealth? And, his cronyism points to more corporatism and corruption. What is the difference between this Guardasil episode and Solyndra? Not much, if you ask me.
And then Romney. Well, I have said in the past that his Romneycare program would prevent me from ever voting for him. He definitely slid around that issue last night. He explained it in a way that sounded very plausible. He pointed out a huge difference between Romneycare and Obamacare, saying that Romneycare does not get between the patient and the doctor. That is a huge difference and makes me rethink things somewhat. My other problem with Romneycare is that it is mandated socialism. That is a core problem for me. It tells me he will use socialism when he wants to, to promote some so-called "common good." He defends Social Security the same way, though does indicate the program needs "fixing." In the end, Romney is another "compassionate conservative" who promotes socialism-lite.
I keep landing on Bachmann, with Gingrich as my second choice. You could flip those two around and I would be o.k. with that. Either one as President or Vice President. But at this point, if Romney or Perry get the nomination, I am flumblustered as to how to proceed. It is not that I am looking for purity, exactly. But it is going to take really tough and strong medicine to take this country forward on better footing. Whoever gets the Presidency is going to have one hell of a mess to clean up, not just Obama's mess, but those who went before him enacting disastrous agencies and policies. As far as I can tell, Romney and Perry are just more of the same and we will stumble along without fixing the real problems...those problems existed before Obamacare.
By the way, from my grasp of the issue, Obamacare is not just that one bill. Obamacare policies were funded through the first stimulous bill, are being put in place as I write, and have to be weeded out, one by one. That is more than just giving the states a "waiver" from Obamacare. That means the rest of it will have to be found and scrapped ASAP. Obama and Pelosi and Reid sent a slew of roaches into our healthcare system via the stimulus bill. Funding for micro-chips in persons is in there. Funding for the federal file system of all patient records is in there. Funding for implementing the bureaucratic death panels is in there. That must be addressed.
I was glad to hear most of the candidates say they would repeal Dodd-Frank, another redistribution bill that puts financial institutions in worse shape, a la the Community Reinvestment Act, but worse.
That's my take on the debates so far. There are questions not being asked regarding slush funds for Sustainable Development, Smart Growth, and Agenda 21. I would ask the candidates if they would dismantle Carter's Community Reinvestment Act, Clinton's Council on Sustainable Development, Obama's White House Rural Council, the Food Modernization Safety Act, Bush's Part D bill, besides the EPA, the NEA, (both of them, arts + education), and cut HUD and the DOE. Would they reinstate funding for roads from the 30% diverted to greenways and bike lanes? What would they do about the continuing flow of block grants? Can we rethink the gerrymandering Voting Rights Act? (talk about a sticky wicket no one will touch. ) Can we change the "anchor baby" provision? So many questions.
It seems odd to me those subjects don't show up in the debates, but being media driven, who knows why. What do you think? Do you have a favorite yet?
Monday, September 19, 2011
PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS EXPLAINED
I was visiting a facebook discussion today that was going round and round on whether government was the problem or corporations were the problem. This was like playing with "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?" At first and at last, after reading all of the arguments, I decided it was government that was the root of the problem. I'm holding to that for the following reasoning; It is our government that has led us down the path to "Public Private Partnerships." It is our government officials who broke the bank, created deficit spending, ignored the Constitution, and pretty much blew it up in our faces. It is our government officials who made the rules against the Constitution and they have betrayed America and the trust of all Americans. It is our government officials who, over time, took our money and ran with it to some ungodly place that we now find ourselves placed. We've been deceived and we have elected so many of the wrong people to lead the country. I pray that our next elections bring us real Americans to lead us out of the wilderness.
With all of that being said, I coincidentally came across a video this evening that pretty much explains what happened, how, and why. It is actually two videos, but not terribly long. I hope you'll take a few minutes to watch them. One thing I have noted as I have gone along in this process is that people who have witnessed this transition and really care about America are the ones who are speaking out to warn the rest of us. If we don't listen and figure out how to fight back, we will lose forever the Republic that our founders gave us.
The wonderful woman who did these videos evidently died last year. I only discovered that reading the comments on the video page at youtube. She left a legacy for us to carry forward. Her name is Joan Veon. Her website still lives HERE There is an obituary on that site, but also much more information that she left for us.
With all of that being said, I coincidentally came across a video this evening that pretty much explains what happened, how, and why. It is actually two videos, but not terribly long. I hope you'll take a few minutes to watch them. One thing I have noted as I have gone along in this process is that people who have witnessed this transition and really care about America are the ones who are speaking out to warn the rest of us. If we don't listen and figure out how to fight back, we will lose forever the Republic that our founders gave us.
The wonderful woman who did these videos evidently died last year. I only discovered that reading the comments on the video page at youtube. She left a legacy for us to carry forward. Her name is Joan Veon. Her website still lives HERE There is an obituary on that site, but also much more information that she left for us.
Sunday, September 18, 2011
UNSUSTAINABLE OXYMORONS
Marxist Capitalists?? Fascist Capitalists? It struck me today how oxymoronic things are becoming. A capitalist company that spends lots of time, energy, and money supporting Marxist or Fascist causes doesn't make any sense to me. But I'm seeing it everywhere I look. This is an oxymoron. How did that happen? How does a perfectly sound, profit seeking, company get sucked into green policies that are, by definition, anti-capitalistic? The other thing I am seeing continually lately is that professional trade organizations are pushing their members into Marxist-Fascist philosophy with regard to doing business.
Something weird is going on within the business world. Something really weird. Public Private Partnership (PPP's) are permeating business operations in the U.S. these days. Hybrids. Not quite private business, yet not quite government. Businesses performing the bidding of government. Government partnering with businesses. Public funds going straight to businesses with lots of fanfare and hoopla! As if this is just the greatest thing on earth. When all along, I thought the leftist-progressives hated the military industrial complex, but now they are all about a government industrial complex?? (GM. GE. Gee whiz)
I was thinking today of the rise of Six Sigma, how it exploded into the business world and became all the rage. Product quality, just-in-time inventory management, cost-benefit analysis and savings, rewards systems, all were taking the manufacturing sector by storm. Pretty soon, everyone who was going anywhere on the upward mobility ladder had to have a green belt, or a black belt, or some sort of belt in Six Sigma. History of Six Sigma By the mid 1990's Six Sigma was the IT method of doing business and the IT credential to have.
I bring this up because as I was thinking about the "Sustainable Development" doctrine and it struck me that the same exact trajectory has taken place and just as fast, if not faster. Sustainable Development is the new Six Sigma, i.e. the newest, latest trend of choice for our way of life, including doing business. The difference is that Six Sigma was just about business practices...where Sustainable Development is about business and government collaborating to tell us how to live. What this tells me is two things: One of them is; people are like sheep, being led into herds going in the same direction as fast as the trends will take them. (Just when you hoped you might be surrounded by other adults, you find out they are all junior high kids who look older, but have an adolescent compulsion to jump on the band wagon with everyone else.) The other thing it tells me, in the case of Sustainable Development, is that education does not seem to have anything to do with critical thinking, common sense, or any other real life skills.
So now it is Sustainable Development. This is the latest IT thing. Except in this case it is a political ideology more than an actual business method...at least as we traditionally think of business. Some few recommended methods come with it, but it is actually a philosophy of social construct, leading businessmen and women to deny capitalism for the sake of altruism. Now that is an amazing turn of the trends..from Six Sigma to Sustainable Development. These two business philosophies are not cut of the same cloth. One is about the goal of producing goods with efficiency and successful economics, resulting in profits. The other is about the goal of business providing benefit to the common good, to society on the terms of social justice by participating in government projects in manners proscribed by the government, economic soundness be damned.
At the same time, thousands of non-profits have popped up promoting themselves as the latest purveyor of Sustainable Development. History of Sustainable Development IT has become so huge that one could not begin to tell the billions of dollars being thrown at IT. IT calls itself "green," but goes much further. IT is all encompassing redefinition of the culture of doing business.
IT has penetrated the American Institute for Architects, The U.S. Building Council (Now called the U.S. Green Building Council), The American Planning Association, the Chamber of Commerce, and all sorts of professional organizations. HGTV promotes Green houses. We have Green cars, Green appliances, Green clothing, Green decorating, Green foods, Green construction, Green Grocers, Green jobs, Green energy, on and on. None of these green things have a whit to do with sound business policies. Though, the purveyors pretend the opposite. In fact, green is costing everyone more, creating products no one wants, forcing lifestyles no one wants, and generally is just tilting at windmills. (pun intended)
So why is this an oxymoron? There is nothing in any of this that permits business to operate just for the sake of doing practical market based business. In order to do business according to the green IT people, you must be using "Best Practices." What are "Best Practices?" "Best Practices" means using your business to promote the redistribution of wealth, social justice, less use of any resource to produce and sell products, and you must pass these standards through the same professional organizations who are spreading this nonsense throughout the land. "Best Practices" in the case of building, means pushing the cost of building out of reach of most people. "Best Practices" means forcing people to purchase things they don't want, such as Smart recycling bins with RFID chips. "Best Practices" means hiring people with inadequate skills to make the government happy and get tax deductions. "Best Practices" in most cases means either doing business on government terms or go out of business. Sometimes, in this topsy turvy world, it means doing business on government terms which cause you to go out of business. Woo Hoo....figure that one out.
This is a contagion of some very un-American, anti-constitutional, dogma that is has infiltrated the business world in America. Opportunists have taken the Climate Change, Global Warming, Sustainable Development lies and woven a net around the American people, some of whom must be just deaf, dumb, and blind to these lies. You can't do business any more without proving to some radical environmentalist group that you are "Green" enough to suit them. The radical environmentalist group now has become your professional trade organization. You want credentials or license? Pass the Sustainability test.
You might be thinking "Green" is good business. (as opposed to bad business?) I'm here to tell you that "Green + Sustainability" may get you some government grants and subsidies. IT might get you some public relations points to make your customers believe the same propaganda. IT may get you some tax deductions. IT pretends to be a lot of things. But IT isn't good business. Why? Because these "Green + Sustainability" policies have turned into crony capitalism, which then turns into Fascism and eventually becomes pure Marxism.
Plus, you don't get the tax deductions, grants and subsidies, or contracts from government unless you are IT enough to get gold stars from the professional organizations you are paying dues to in order to have licenses and accreditation. Frankly, this is outright extortion...that is if you want those particular jobs or if you want to be a "socially acceptable" business.
As we've seen today with Barack Obama's Solyndra Solar Panels scandal, our government is throwing money into the trash bin for "Green" jobs. This is a waste of our money, to say the least. But it speaks to the larger issue of corruption in our government using our taxes to force people into the global Marxist scheme of "Sustainable Development." The DOE was the agency that funneled the $500 million into Solyndra. But folks, that is hardly even the tip of the iceberg. Every agency and Obama Czar is throwing buckets of our money into companies and local governments to comply with Marxist policies. Maybe the Chamber of Commerce should take note of what happens when the government gets involved with stupid schemes like solar panels that cannot produce the energy as advertised and are not profitable products. (Instead, our local regional Chamber of Commerce is sponsoring a "Green Conference" next weekend.)
Some examples at these links below. The first one is a Green Chamber competing with the normal Chamber of Commerce. A link from this page is for a new corporation designation just for businesses who promote Sustainable Development, called a B corporation. The B stands for "Benefit." Isn't that nice? I guess S corps. and C corps. aren't enough for these guys. It's a parallel universe....all for the new IT. The B Corp. folks are petitioning our North Carolina legislature to create this new corporate status. They have actually found support in our legislature. Watch out for this.
North Carolina Green Chamber of Commerce
B Corporation Site
Business Wisconsin.edu
Lancaster Chamber .com
Maryland Chamber.com
Something weird is going on within the business world. Something really weird. Public Private Partnership (PPP's) are permeating business operations in the U.S. these days. Hybrids. Not quite private business, yet not quite government. Businesses performing the bidding of government. Government partnering with businesses. Public funds going straight to businesses with lots of fanfare and hoopla! As if this is just the greatest thing on earth. When all along, I thought the leftist-progressives hated the military industrial complex, but now they are all about a government industrial complex?? (GM. GE. Gee whiz)
I was thinking today of the rise of Six Sigma, how it exploded into the business world and became all the rage. Product quality, just-in-time inventory management, cost-benefit analysis and savings, rewards systems, all were taking the manufacturing sector by storm. Pretty soon, everyone who was going anywhere on the upward mobility ladder had to have a green belt, or a black belt, or some sort of belt in Six Sigma. History of Six Sigma By the mid 1990's Six Sigma was the IT method of doing business and the IT credential to have.
I bring this up because as I was thinking about the "Sustainable Development" doctrine and it struck me that the same exact trajectory has taken place and just as fast, if not faster. Sustainable Development is the new Six Sigma, i.e. the newest, latest trend of choice for our way of life, including doing business. The difference is that Six Sigma was just about business practices...where Sustainable Development is about business and government collaborating to tell us how to live. What this tells me is two things: One of them is; people are like sheep, being led into herds going in the same direction as fast as the trends will take them. (Just when you hoped you might be surrounded by other adults, you find out they are all junior high kids who look older, but have an adolescent compulsion to jump on the band wagon with everyone else.) The other thing it tells me, in the case of Sustainable Development, is that education does not seem to have anything to do with critical thinking, common sense, or any other real life skills.
So now it is Sustainable Development. This is the latest IT thing. Except in this case it is a political ideology more than an actual business method...at least as we traditionally think of business. Some few recommended methods come with it, but it is actually a philosophy of social construct, leading businessmen and women to deny capitalism for the sake of altruism. Now that is an amazing turn of the trends..from Six Sigma to Sustainable Development. These two business philosophies are not cut of the same cloth. One is about the goal of producing goods with efficiency and successful economics, resulting in profits. The other is about the goal of business providing benefit to the common good, to society on the terms of social justice by participating in government projects in manners proscribed by the government, economic soundness be damned.
At the same time, thousands of non-profits have popped up promoting themselves as the latest purveyor of Sustainable Development. History of Sustainable Development IT has become so huge that one could not begin to tell the billions of dollars being thrown at IT. IT calls itself "green," but goes much further. IT is all encompassing redefinition of the culture of doing business.
IT has penetrated the American Institute for Architects, The U.S. Building Council (Now called the U.S. Green Building Council), The American Planning Association, the Chamber of Commerce, and all sorts of professional organizations. HGTV promotes Green houses. We have Green cars, Green appliances, Green clothing, Green decorating, Green foods, Green construction, Green Grocers, Green jobs, Green energy, on and on. None of these green things have a whit to do with sound business policies. Though, the purveyors pretend the opposite. In fact, green is costing everyone more, creating products no one wants, forcing lifestyles no one wants, and generally is just tilting at windmills. (pun intended)
So why is this an oxymoron? There is nothing in any of this that permits business to operate just for the sake of doing practical market based business. In order to do business according to the green IT people, you must be using "Best Practices." What are "Best Practices?" "Best Practices" means using your business to promote the redistribution of wealth, social justice, less use of any resource to produce and sell products, and you must pass these standards through the same professional organizations who are spreading this nonsense throughout the land. "Best Practices" in the case of building, means pushing the cost of building out of reach of most people. "Best Practices" means forcing people to purchase things they don't want, such as Smart recycling bins with RFID chips. "Best Practices" means hiring people with inadequate skills to make the government happy and get tax deductions. "Best Practices" in most cases means either doing business on government terms or go out of business. Sometimes, in this topsy turvy world, it means doing business on government terms which cause you to go out of business. Woo Hoo....figure that one out.
This is a contagion of some very un-American, anti-constitutional, dogma that is has infiltrated the business world in America. Opportunists have taken the Climate Change, Global Warming, Sustainable Development lies and woven a net around the American people, some of whom must be just deaf, dumb, and blind to these lies. You can't do business any more without proving to some radical environmentalist group that you are "Green" enough to suit them. The radical environmentalist group now has become your professional trade organization. You want credentials or license? Pass the Sustainability test.
You might be thinking "Green" is good business. (as opposed to bad business?) I'm here to tell you that "Green + Sustainability" may get you some government grants and subsidies. IT might get you some public relations points to make your customers believe the same propaganda. IT may get you some tax deductions. IT pretends to be a lot of things. But IT isn't good business. Why? Because these "Green + Sustainability" policies have turned into crony capitalism, which then turns into Fascism and eventually becomes pure Marxism.
Plus, you don't get the tax deductions, grants and subsidies, or contracts from government unless you are IT enough to get gold stars from the professional organizations you are paying dues to in order to have licenses and accreditation. Frankly, this is outright extortion...that is if you want those particular jobs or if you want to be a "socially acceptable" business.
As we've seen today with Barack Obama's Solyndra Solar Panels scandal, our government is throwing money into the trash bin for "Green" jobs. This is a waste of our money, to say the least. But it speaks to the larger issue of corruption in our government using our taxes to force people into the global Marxist scheme of "Sustainable Development." The DOE was the agency that funneled the $500 million into Solyndra. But folks, that is hardly even the tip of the iceberg. Every agency and Obama Czar is throwing buckets of our money into companies and local governments to comply with Marxist policies. Maybe the Chamber of Commerce should take note of what happens when the government gets involved with stupid schemes like solar panels that cannot produce the energy as advertised and are not profitable products. (Instead, our local regional Chamber of Commerce is sponsoring a "Green Conference" next weekend.)
Some examples at these links below. The first one is a Green Chamber competing with the normal Chamber of Commerce. A link from this page is for a new corporation designation just for businesses who promote Sustainable Development, called a B corporation. The B stands for "Benefit." Isn't that nice? I guess S corps. and C corps. aren't enough for these guys. It's a parallel universe....all for the new IT. The B Corp. folks are petitioning our North Carolina legislature to create this new corporate status. They have actually found support in our legislature. Watch out for this.
North Carolina Green Chamber of Commerce
B Corporation Site
Business Wisconsin.edu
Lancaster Chamber .com
Maryland Chamber.com
Saturday, September 17, 2011
SEPTEMBER WITH POMPLAMOOSE!
I just don't have the heart today to post something grouchy...so I'm sharing this for fun. I hope you enjoy it!!
All the best,
Cheryl
All the best,
Cheryl
Sunday, September 11, 2011
SMART GRID FOR WHOSE BENEFIT?
Maybe I have control issues. I like to control my own life decisions based on as much factual information I can gather. I don't like having other people control me or attempt to control me. I don't give other people permission to control me. I am my own person. I would like to think that you are your own person and that you have no interest in controlling me. You can persuade me with facts, not spin or innuendo or flat out lies. Well, that's my psychology tip for today, but that is also the crux of the Smart Grid issue.
The premise for Smart Grid technology and Smart Meters is not, as you have been taught to believe, protecting the environment. It is also not about the scarcity of energy supplies. The premise of Smart Grid technology is: How can we create a device that intervenes in the lives of the most people and capitalize on that with control over them and use their money to do it? By appealing to the energy industry with promises of selling less energy while at the same time making more money, the Progressives and Environmentalists have joined forces to create a non-existent crisis in order to suit all of their mega schemes of; controlling people, reducing energy usage, and the myth of "healing the planet," all at the same time. Believe me, the only thing that will NOT come out of this is the "healing of the planet" part. You do not need to starve people of the energy they need to survive in order to "heal the planet." And the planet is not sick by the way, no thanks to Al Gore who makes me sick every time he speaks.
The United States has seen rationing before. During WWII many commodities were rationed to support the war effort. This is different. This is not war. And this is not desperation due to some dire circumstance. Smart Grids are not about rationing for a real cause, but for a fictional construction made expressly for the purpose of controlling people and their lives. Why do I say this?
Read AL FIN today
"There are more than 350 billion tons of recoverable U.S. coal reserves - equivalent to an estimated 800 billion barrels of oil, compared to Saudi Arabia's proven reserves of 260 barrels."
Read that again. And if that is not enough for you or you hate coal, read this:
"Environmental Benefits: Combining the Coal-to-Liquids (CTL) and Biomass-to-Liquids (BTL) processes, Accelergy removes 20% of the CO₂ emissions associated with standard refining methods, resulting in cleaner fuels that reduce nitrogen oxide and particulate emissions and enabling use of higher efficiency engines."
While serious engineers and scientists are very busy saving us from energy starvation and from pollution, our government is busy subsidizing energy starvation through Smart Grid equipment designed to monitor and control our energy use. This is not some conspiracy nonsense. It's right there out in the open for all to see.
Over in Italy, 85% of homes are equipped with Smart Meters.
"Meanwhile, the introduction of smart meters has given Enel customers greater control over their energy bills. Typically, the meter is installed in a convenient place in the home -- say, in a kitchen cupboard or the laundry room. When electricity prices are high, for instance during the peak evening period or on cold winter nights, the smart meter informs household members of higher rates, allowing them to alter their habits (such as postponing a load of laundry until the next morning) to avoid big charges. Analysts figure that attentive Enel customers have been able to cut their bills by as much as one-half by keeping close tabs on energy prices and usage."
God forbid anyone crank up the heat on a cold winter night or toss in a load of laundry when they are home off work. Heaven forbid people use their kitchen during normal eating hours. No, the spinmeisters are telling you this gives you, the customer, "greater control over your energy bill." Isn't that nice? You can eat dinner at three a.m. Or you can go to bed with 5 quilts over you in the winter and do nothing until spring. And when do you do laundry? I guess that must be two p.m. in the afternoon while you are at work. Or maybe two a.m. in the middle of the night, just before you turn on your stove to eat your three a.m. dinner? Just make sure your schedule coincides with the non peak hours or your wallet will be skinned and you will be sent to the poor house. And who do you think this hurts the most? The poor and the elderly. BUT, I'm sure the government will step in and subsidize those folks with your money, so you can pay twice for you energy...both for yours and theirs.
So let's see. The government creates energy starvation by refusing to allow drilling, fracking, refining, or nuclear power plants. Then the government says there is a crisis of not enough energy. Voilá! The government then subsidizes energy companies to create Smart Grid technology. By golly, then the government forces everyone to use Smart Grid technology. Then, when the poor and elderly can't afford the increased rates to pay for the now higher cost energy, the government steps in and makes everyone pay again for those who can't. You pay for the subsidies of both the poor and the energy companies, AND the higher energy rates. The energy companies just got wealthier. The government became more powerful. And you, well...you just got poorer and less in control of your own life. When, if the government had stayed out of it in the first place, there would be no need for anyone to go through any of this.
Recommendations such as this one below should give you some idea of how fast they want to hook you up: Spiegel International Business
"With so many smart meters to be installed in the near future, Enel's Gallo figures other utilities can learn a lot from the Italian experiment. First of all, he recommends that companies roll out the technology as quickly as possible. Instead of gradual installation, a whirlwind program, often in just three or four years, helps achieve a fast return on investment. That may involve higher up-front costs, but it gives utilities quick access to consumer data and greater control over their energy network, which can lead to ancillary cost savings. "In the long run, it's more efficient than installing smart meters over a decade," says Gallo. "
Folks....they already have consumer data by the month. Now they need it immediately? And by the hour? In real time??
This data gathering is a problem for me. I understand the capture of data on my energy use one time at the end of the month for billing purposes. I do not understand any necessity for capturing my data in real time all day long. And how many folks will be privvy to that data? How many house break-ins will be possible because of that data. How easy is that data hacked? Plus, it costs X amount of money to create the energy per Kilowatt hour. X cost does not change from one hour to the next. Why does the energy company want to charge more for certain hours and less for others? Demand? Well, demand does not change the X cost of creating the energy. So, someone tell me why that is not gouging to charge more during hours when usage increases? This is the same theory being bounced around to charge drivers more for driving during rush hour. Excuse me, but the road and the gasoline costs are the same no matter when you are driving, so ...anyway, you get what I mean. Why don't we charge people more for consuming milk in the morning because that is when most people put milk on their cereal? Good grief!
No one is mentioning that this "Grid" becomes a mark for terrorists or for sabotage. No one is mentioning the dangers of government accessibility to your personal energy usage data or government controlling the Grid. Once you are hooked up, you are vulnerable to anyone who wants to flip a switch, bribe you, or do whatever they want.
So I guess I have control issues. Do you? Or are we just frogs sitting in the tepid water while the heat keeps being turned up little by little?
And for my local readers....here come's Duke Energy with Smart Meters right at us. Smart Meters Contract with Duke Energy 17,000 Smart Meters installed in Charlotte
We have already subsidized them through the Stimulus Bill of 2009. Isn't that nice?
Duke has also applied for $200 million in Department of Energy smart grid stimulus grants, which it said could help it install them about two years faster than otherwise planned (see Smart Grid Stimulus Applications at $2.85B and Counting).
I posted in Dec. 2010 on this subject
The premise for Smart Grid technology and Smart Meters is not, as you have been taught to believe, protecting the environment. It is also not about the scarcity of energy supplies. The premise of Smart Grid technology is: How can we create a device that intervenes in the lives of the most people and capitalize on that with control over them and use their money to do it? By appealing to the energy industry with promises of selling less energy while at the same time making more money, the Progressives and Environmentalists have joined forces to create a non-existent crisis in order to suit all of their mega schemes of; controlling people, reducing energy usage, and the myth of "healing the planet," all at the same time. Believe me, the only thing that will NOT come out of this is the "healing of the planet" part. You do not need to starve people of the energy they need to survive in order to "heal the planet." And the planet is not sick by the way, no thanks to Al Gore who makes me sick every time he speaks.
The United States has seen rationing before. During WWII many commodities were rationed to support the war effort. This is different. This is not war. And this is not desperation due to some dire circumstance. Smart Grids are not about rationing for a real cause, but for a fictional construction made expressly for the purpose of controlling people and their lives. Why do I say this?
Read AL FIN today
"There are more than 350 billion tons of recoverable U.S. coal reserves - equivalent to an estimated 800 billion barrels of oil, compared to Saudi Arabia's proven reserves of 260 barrels."
Read that again. And if that is not enough for you or you hate coal, read this:
"Environmental Benefits: Combining the Coal-to-Liquids (CTL) and Biomass-to-Liquids (BTL) processes, Accelergy removes 20% of the CO₂ emissions associated with standard refining methods, resulting in cleaner fuels that reduce nitrogen oxide and particulate emissions and enabling use of higher efficiency engines."
While serious engineers and scientists are very busy saving us from energy starvation and from pollution, our government is busy subsidizing energy starvation through Smart Grid equipment designed to monitor and control our energy use. This is not some conspiracy nonsense. It's right there out in the open for all to see.
Over in Italy, 85% of homes are equipped with Smart Meters.
"Meanwhile, the introduction of smart meters has given Enel customers greater control over their energy bills. Typically, the meter is installed in a convenient place in the home -- say, in a kitchen cupboard or the laundry room. When electricity prices are high, for instance during the peak evening period or on cold winter nights, the smart meter informs household members of higher rates, allowing them to alter their habits (such as postponing a load of laundry until the next morning) to avoid big charges. Analysts figure that attentive Enel customers have been able to cut their bills by as much as one-half by keeping close tabs on energy prices and usage."
God forbid anyone crank up the heat on a cold winter night or toss in a load of laundry when they are home off work. Heaven forbid people use their kitchen during normal eating hours. No, the spinmeisters are telling you this gives you, the customer, "greater control over your energy bill." Isn't that nice? You can eat dinner at three a.m. Or you can go to bed with 5 quilts over you in the winter and do nothing until spring. And when do you do laundry? I guess that must be two p.m. in the afternoon while you are at work. Or maybe two a.m. in the middle of the night, just before you turn on your stove to eat your three a.m. dinner? Just make sure your schedule coincides with the non peak hours or your wallet will be skinned and you will be sent to the poor house. And who do you think this hurts the most? The poor and the elderly. BUT, I'm sure the government will step in and subsidize those folks with your money, so you can pay twice for you energy...both for yours and theirs.
So let's see. The government creates energy starvation by refusing to allow drilling, fracking, refining, or nuclear power plants. Then the government says there is a crisis of not enough energy. Voilá! The government then subsidizes energy companies to create Smart Grid technology. By golly, then the government forces everyone to use Smart Grid technology. Then, when the poor and elderly can't afford the increased rates to pay for the now higher cost energy, the government steps in and makes everyone pay again for those who can't. You pay for the subsidies of both the poor and the energy companies, AND the higher energy rates. The energy companies just got wealthier. The government became more powerful. And you, well...you just got poorer and less in control of your own life. When, if the government had stayed out of it in the first place, there would be no need for anyone to go through any of this.
Recommendations such as this one below should give you some idea of how fast they want to hook you up: Spiegel International Business
"With so many smart meters to be installed in the near future, Enel's Gallo figures other utilities can learn a lot from the Italian experiment. First of all, he recommends that companies roll out the technology as quickly as possible. Instead of gradual installation, a whirlwind program, often in just three or four years, helps achieve a fast return on investment. That may involve higher up-front costs, but it gives utilities quick access to consumer data and greater control over their energy network, which can lead to ancillary cost savings. "In the long run, it's more efficient than installing smart meters over a decade," says Gallo. "
Folks....they already have consumer data by the month. Now they need it immediately? And by the hour? In real time??
This data gathering is a problem for me. I understand the capture of data on my energy use one time at the end of the month for billing purposes. I do not understand any necessity for capturing my data in real time all day long. And how many folks will be privvy to that data? How many house break-ins will be possible because of that data. How easy is that data hacked? Plus, it costs X amount of money to create the energy per Kilowatt hour. X cost does not change from one hour to the next. Why does the energy company want to charge more for certain hours and less for others? Demand? Well, demand does not change the X cost of creating the energy. So, someone tell me why that is not gouging to charge more during hours when usage increases? This is the same theory being bounced around to charge drivers more for driving during rush hour. Excuse me, but the road and the gasoline costs are the same no matter when you are driving, so ...anyway, you get what I mean. Why don't we charge people more for consuming milk in the morning because that is when most people put milk on their cereal? Good grief!
No one is mentioning that this "Grid" becomes a mark for terrorists or for sabotage. No one is mentioning the dangers of government accessibility to your personal energy usage data or government controlling the Grid. Once you are hooked up, you are vulnerable to anyone who wants to flip a switch, bribe you, or do whatever they want.
So I guess I have control issues. Do you? Or are we just frogs sitting in the tepid water while the heat keeps being turned up little by little?
And for my local readers....here come's Duke Energy with Smart Meters right at us. Smart Meters Contract with Duke Energy 17,000 Smart Meters installed in Charlotte
We have already subsidized them through the Stimulus Bill of 2009. Isn't that nice?
Duke has also applied for $200 million in Department of Energy smart grid stimulus grants, which it said could help it install them about two years faster than otherwise planned (see Smart Grid Stimulus Applications at $2.85B and Counting).
I posted in Dec. 2010 on this subject
Thursday, September 8, 2011
"ALL POLITICS IS LOCAL" TAKES ON NEW MEANING
Tip O'Neil, a former Speaker of the House of Representatives from many years ago, coined the phrase, "All politics is local." When he said this he was referring to the idea that voters would vote for their local issues over the grand ideologies of one politician or another. He also meant that voters are closer to their local politicians and not so wrapped up in the Federal schemes being played out in Washington DC. That was then.....way back when the Federal government was less involved in the daily personal lives of citizens. Voters then had just a few Federal issues to concern them; defense of the nation, social security, medicare, immigration policies, interstate highways, and that was about it. My how things have changed. Those issues are still on the list, but now we have to include; personal energy use, personal water use, personal trash management, personal building decisions, personal education choices, personal property issues, personal healthcare decisions, just to name a few.
Somehow, over time, the Federal greed for power over individuals has become so prevalent that citizens can't sneeze without asking permission from the Federal government. The Federal government has been taken over by the most intolerable greed for power that Americans are looking at coming elections and wondering, "Does my vote even matter anymore?" What does this have to do with "politics being local?"
The Federal government is being enabled by local politicians, from cities, counties, and each state. Our local politicians are letting this pervasive intrusion into our daily lives occur. No, worse than that. Our local politicians are forcing us into Federal policies that local citizens don't want, don't need, and are extremely averse to adopt. Federal politicians have, over time, figured out how to bribe local politicians into acquiescence. (The bad joke there is that these bribes have been done with borrowed and printed money causing huge debts and inflation, but who is laughing?) You, citizen, might be saying to yourself that you feel disenfranchised, but you can't put your finger on it. You are wondering, since you voted locally for this guy or that lady, why your elected representative is NOT doing what you thought that representative would do, i.e. represent you. You might be asking yourself, why are these policies being put into place when you and your friends and neighbors don't want any of these policies.
When the bonds for parks and recreation was on our local ballot, the voters turned it down. What happened? The council ignored the voters and just went ahead, using our taxes, grants, and subsidies for those projects anyway.
When the Carolina Thread Trail came before the council with its greenway proposition, our council was sold a project that by definition takes private property out of the hands of owners using tax incentives and public money. Even without eminent domain, the Carolina Thread Trail premise is the act of turning private property over to the government. This property must be maintained by the remaining taxpayers. Then, after unanimously agreeing to adopt the Carolina Thread Trail, some on the council acted SHOCKED that the project could not be completed without using eminent domain to take property from private ownership. That might be good theater and fool some people, but it is duplicitous, false, misleading, disingenuous, and flat out wrong. You can't tell me that these same council members had no idea that there would be some unwilling property owners along some parts of the Carolina Thread Trail. After all, who sits down with a map of the county, proposes to take land away from other private property owners just for the sake of a recreational walking or biking trail and then thinks everyone will just jump up and hand over their land?
When the issue of trash management and recycling came before the council, our council adopted a "Pay As You Throw" plan that was designed by the EPA. While Gastonia citizens were already paying for trash management and recycling through property taxes, this council decided that they could use property tax revenues for other special favored projects and make the citizens pay extra fees for trash management, creating yet another revenue stream for the government coffers. Throwing a crumb to the citizens, the council lowered the tax rate by .01 cent per hundred dollars, saying this .01 cent would offset the $6.00 to $9.00 per month for the trash and recycling scheme, again designed by the EPA. The city council has left no opt out option for citizens, thereby forcing citizens to pay for a service they may or may not want. What was not reported to the public about this waste management system is that the recycling bins come with Radio Frequency ID chips so Republic Waste Management will track your recycling activity and report your activity to the local government for the purpose of education and fines.
If you think that won't happen here, it is already the case in Cleveland, Ohio where the city hired trash police to hand out $100.00 fines for non-compliance. This is taking place in cities all over the country. Each ID chip is assigned with your address. The bins are weighed by the high tech trucks picking them up. Your recycling amount is then recorded to Republic's data base and reported to your city. Charlotte's recycling program is already using the tracking chips with the same company, Republic. Our council voted to make us pay fees to have our activities tracked.
While I'm on the trash issue, I want to point out two things. Mandating citizens to purchase a trash service is the same as Obamacare. The commerce clause does not give the government the right to force people to buy something. Secondly, the RFID chips violate the search and seizure clause. You are being searched without a warrant if the government decides to raid your recycling and trash bins to monitor your compliance.
Another assault on voter consent is coming through the local government appointment of unelected boards of hand-picked boot-lickers and then handing off the policy decisions to these boards. These boards are not accountable to the voters, but are creating policies that the voters never have a chance to consider. Planning commissions and boards are bringing forth projects that reflect grants and subsidies coming from outside of our local jurisdiction, boards such as the regional government, the Unified Development Ordinance board, the Municipal Planning Commission, etc. From my research I am finding these boards are making policies based on whether or not local government and projects can apply for and receive State or Federal grants and subsidies. This is happening outside of voter consent. And again, happening for the purpose of obtaining money and bowing to Federal power.
The only option we have to rid ourselves of this is to elect people who care about what their constituents want in the manner of government and to NOT elect people who care more about getting money from the Federal government ....which is completely broke, in case no one noticed.
My point here is that we voted these people into office to represent us and protect our rights. Instead what our elected representatives are doing is anti-individual rights and using our tax money to implement projects that we, the people, don't want, don't need, and find to be oppressive. Our local elected officials are proving themselves to be just as greedy and power hungry as the Federal and State elected officials.
Tip O'Neil may not have realized how his phrase would eventually play out across the land. Today, local politics is being driven by Federal policies. This means that indeed, "all politics is local." We, locally, have an opportunity to turn off the Federal intrusion into our lives by electing representatives who reject the debt-laden oppressive control over our lives. When 2012 comes around, we have an opportunity, I hope, to elect Congressional representatives and a president who will stop this insane flow of borrowed money into the rest of the nation.
Tip was right. "All politics is local!"
Somehow, over time, the Federal greed for power over individuals has become so prevalent that citizens can't sneeze without asking permission from the Federal government. The Federal government has been taken over by the most intolerable greed for power that Americans are looking at coming elections and wondering, "Does my vote even matter anymore?" What does this have to do with "politics being local?"
The Federal government is being enabled by local politicians, from cities, counties, and each state. Our local politicians are letting this pervasive intrusion into our daily lives occur. No, worse than that. Our local politicians are forcing us into Federal policies that local citizens don't want, don't need, and are extremely averse to adopt. Federal politicians have, over time, figured out how to bribe local politicians into acquiescence. (The bad joke there is that these bribes have been done with borrowed and printed money causing huge debts and inflation, but who is laughing?) You, citizen, might be saying to yourself that you feel disenfranchised, but you can't put your finger on it. You are wondering, since you voted locally for this guy or that lady, why your elected representative is NOT doing what you thought that representative would do, i.e. represent you. You might be asking yourself, why are these policies being put into place when you and your friends and neighbors don't want any of these policies.
When the bonds for parks and recreation was on our local ballot, the voters turned it down. What happened? The council ignored the voters and just went ahead, using our taxes, grants, and subsidies for those projects anyway.
When the Carolina Thread Trail came before the council with its greenway proposition, our council was sold a project that by definition takes private property out of the hands of owners using tax incentives and public money. Even without eminent domain, the Carolina Thread Trail premise is the act of turning private property over to the government. This property must be maintained by the remaining taxpayers. Then, after unanimously agreeing to adopt the Carolina Thread Trail, some on the council acted SHOCKED that the project could not be completed without using eminent domain to take property from private ownership. That might be good theater and fool some people, but it is duplicitous, false, misleading, disingenuous, and flat out wrong. You can't tell me that these same council members had no idea that there would be some unwilling property owners along some parts of the Carolina Thread Trail. After all, who sits down with a map of the county, proposes to take land away from other private property owners just for the sake of a recreational walking or biking trail and then thinks everyone will just jump up and hand over their land?
When the issue of trash management and recycling came before the council, our council adopted a "Pay As You Throw" plan that was designed by the EPA. While Gastonia citizens were already paying for trash management and recycling through property taxes, this council decided that they could use property tax revenues for other special favored projects and make the citizens pay extra fees for trash management, creating yet another revenue stream for the government coffers. Throwing a crumb to the citizens, the council lowered the tax rate by .01 cent per hundred dollars, saying this .01 cent would offset the $6.00 to $9.00 per month for the trash and recycling scheme, again designed by the EPA. The city council has left no opt out option for citizens, thereby forcing citizens to pay for a service they may or may not want. What was not reported to the public about this waste management system is that the recycling bins come with Radio Frequency ID chips so Republic Waste Management will track your recycling activity and report your activity to the local government for the purpose of education and fines.
If you think that won't happen here, it is already the case in Cleveland, Ohio where the city hired trash police to hand out $100.00 fines for non-compliance. This is taking place in cities all over the country. Each ID chip is assigned with your address. The bins are weighed by the high tech trucks picking them up. Your recycling amount is then recorded to Republic's data base and reported to your city. Charlotte's recycling program is already using the tracking chips with the same company, Republic. Our council voted to make us pay fees to have our activities tracked.
While I'm on the trash issue, I want to point out two things. Mandating citizens to purchase a trash service is the same as Obamacare. The commerce clause does not give the government the right to force people to buy something. Secondly, the RFID chips violate the search and seizure clause. You are being searched without a warrant if the government decides to raid your recycling and trash bins to monitor your compliance.
Another assault on voter consent is coming through the local government appointment of unelected boards of hand-picked boot-lickers and then handing off the policy decisions to these boards. These boards are not accountable to the voters, but are creating policies that the voters never have a chance to consider. Planning commissions and boards are bringing forth projects that reflect grants and subsidies coming from outside of our local jurisdiction, boards such as the regional government, the Unified Development Ordinance board, the Municipal Planning Commission, etc. From my research I am finding these boards are making policies based on whether or not local government and projects can apply for and receive State or Federal grants and subsidies. This is happening outside of voter consent. And again, happening for the purpose of obtaining money and bowing to Federal power.
The only option we have to rid ourselves of this is to elect people who care about what their constituents want in the manner of government and to NOT elect people who care more about getting money from the Federal government ....which is completely broke, in case no one noticed.
My point here is that we voted these people into office to represent us and protect our rights. Instead what our elected representatives are doing is anti-individual rights and using our tax money to implement projects that we, the people, don't want, don't need, and find to be oppressive. Our local elected officials are proving themselves to be just as greedy and power hungry as the Federal and State elected officials.
Tip O'Neil may not have realized how his phrase would eventually play out across the land. Today, local politics is being driven by Federal policies. This means that indeed, "all politics is local." We, locally, have an opportunity to turn off the Federal intrusion into our lives by electing representatives who reject the debt-laden oppressive control over our lives. When 2012 comes around, we have an opportunity, I hope, to elect Congressional representatives and a president who will stop this insane flow of borrowed money into the rest of the nation.
Tip was right. "All politics is local!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
