Previous 11 - 20 Next
I wouldn't go to Mexico if it was the only destination for vacation. I wouldn't spend any money there to support the corrupt regimes,both local and federal, that run that country under a fascist dictatorship. I urge Americans to refuse to travel there or buy real estate there or participate in Mexico in any way. The U.S. is going to be overrun by people not just trying to escape the corrupt regimes in Mexico and countries south of there, but by criminals, drug and human traffickers and other undesirables, plus people who carry communicable diseases.
In response to:

The Coming November Wars

Dot462 Wrote: Oct 31, 2014 12:02 PM
He doesn't need those things. He already legalized a group of aliens by executive order and he can do whatever he wants by use of his pen. After that, someone would have to bring suit to try to invalidate the executive order or Congress would have to take action to reverse it. It's tough to beat someone who wants to be a mini-dictator.
In response to:

A Halloween Sack Full of Subsidized Sugar

Dot462 Wrote: Oct 31, 2014 11:54 AM
All this meddling with subsidies for certain food items, punishments for growing too much of something, payoffs for keeping land fallow is left over from the 1930s when the AAA and NIRA acts helped to prolong the depression and deprived people of food. Yes, they did destroy crops. Tons of fruit were left to rot in order to keep the price up on the rest. Thousands of pigs were slaughtered when people were hungry in order to keep the price up for farmers. Farmers were paid for not growing crops to keep the price up. So, whoever heard of burning a food supply? I have and it was disgusting in the 1930s, but the leftover from that rotten administration afflicts us now.
In response to:

A Halloween Sack Full of Subsidized Sugar

Dot462 Wrote: Oct 31, 2014 11:47 AM
The sugar subsidies are bad, but there are hundreds, if not thousands, of other subsidies to industries which have lobbyists roaming the halls of Congress, donating to the campaigns of legislators, trying to keep what they have or get more in the way of subsidies. Getting rid of sugar subsidies is a nonstarter because asking other countries to do the same won't happen. Congress decided to subsidize ethanol, which has proven to be detrimental not only to the environment but to engines and does nothing except enrich corn producers, and still Congress can't bring itself to get rid of that subsidy. Unfortunately, that's why going toward a flat tax is also a nonstarter -- because so many special interests are entrenched in keeping all those tax deductions and subsidies and writeoffs. A flat tax would put them out of business and we know the lawyers won't let that happen. Attacking the sugar subsidy is nice, but it's jousting with windmills.
In response to:

Hillary Clinton Flunks Economics

Dot462 Wrote: Oct 29, 2014 1:09 PM
That wasn't a gaffe; that was HER. It's pretty clear if anyone is familiar with Marx that in the Manifesto he believed that the labor class created the wealth and the fat cat boss or business owner was the exploiter of labor and contributed nothing to the business. Hillary and Obama are believers in that false economic idea. That's why the press doesn't report on it -- because a lot of people believe that. They believe that CEOs who make millions while the worker bees make a few thousand a year are "exploiting" the workers. Some are not shy about calling for limits to salary levels (both floor and ceiling), bringing everyone to a condition of equality (maybe everybody equally poor?). They ignore that such as Bill Gates, Steve Wozniak and many other entrepreneurs have provided the jobs that their companies need because they invented something. If they hadn't invented it, their company would not exist and there would be no jobs. Marx had no truck with entrepreneurs; he was only interested in the rise of the proletariat, calling for worker ownership of the means of production, dispensing with people who might think of a better way to do something or actually invent a new thing or process. He ignored incentives for business development. Allegedly, we have come beyond that, what with the evidence of the failure of communism everywhere it's been tried, but with the Clintons and Obama, Elizabeth Warren, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz we still have the old guard (although some are not so old) who hang with Marx. It's sad, really.
In response to:

The Most Boring California Election Ever

Dot462 Wrote: Oct 23, 2014 12:08 PM
They don't need elections in CA. We know who dominates the politics in the People's Republic -- coastal cities control and other areas of the state are not represented. That's why there was a push to cut the state into pieces (won't happen, but it might be nice). Might as well just recognize that CA is a dictatorship of one party and just get on with life, pay your confiscatory taxes and be thankful that you can deduct your state income tax from your Federal.
In response to:

Rebuilding Gaza for the Next Attack

Dot462 Wrote: Oct 15, 2014 1:26 PM
It is interesting to me that Kerry can promise money to rebuild Gaza without an appropriation from Congress. Is he pledging his own money, or ours? If I could cast a vote on this, I wouldn't send a dime to Gaza until they recognized Israel's existence as a legitimate govt, renounced terrorism, got rid of Hamas. But, of course, that won't happen. In that case, no money should go to them.
I like Ron Paul, but saying that Ebola is not easy to transmit may be an error. Dr. Chan of the WHO says if it gets started in some of the huge cities in such countries as India, the Philippines and Malaysia, it would be an incalculable disaster. Now, we have two Ebola cases in workers who were exposed to Duncan. The CDC seems to be treating Ebola as though it is a Level 4 biohazard when they treated the two patients at Emory, but their guidelines don't advocate Level 4 protection in hospitals outside of the Level 4 facilities (of which we only have four here). When hazmat people suit up completely to remove Duncan's stuff from his apartment, it leads me to think that it's much easier to transmit than the CDC says. But, the main thing is confusion with CDC guidelines plus the lack of uniformity in how PPE is handled and provided for in hospitals.
The attack ads proliferate in Nevada. I try to mute them, but it's hard to avoid. Seems to me most of the attack ads are put up by Dems and I make it a policy to vote for the other candidate if I see an attack ad. The Miller-Laxalt campaign is pretty nasty. But, it extends down to the city council level as I received a robocall from candidate Cafferata attacking candidate Duerr, which makes me instantly want to vote for Duerr (this is a nonpartisan race). I check them out on their websites and elsewhere to see if either of them are worth voting for. We have None Of The Above here in Nevada and I sometimes exercise that option. In the primary for governor, there were a couple of Dems and they both lost to NOTA. Flores was the second best in that primary, but has no chance against Sandoval, but it was interesting that NOTA won.
But we have the International Classification of Disease (ICD-9, soon to be ICD-10) which lists many "diseases." It breaks down subtitles under the "diseases" into minutiae. It classifies "substance abuse" as a disease and under that it includes "alcohol abuse" and "drug abuse," which is further broken down into what drug. It codifies accidents and injuries and includes how the person was injured such as falling off a swing in a playground or being kicked by a horse. So, the reason the CDC takes on "diseases" such as obesity, smoking and gun injuries is that they are classified as "diseases." So, "public health" has been expanded to include anything that can happen to somebody indoors or outdoors. The CDC, then, thinks that it is the nanny state and can advocate, by spending money on TV advertising, that we stop smoking, stop drinking sugary beverages, etc. It then doesn't spend money on such things as research into a vaccine (or vaccines) for hemorrhagic fevers (of which there are several besides Ebola). When ICD-10 comes out next year, CDC will have even more minutiae to be concerned about that will be classified as a disease.
It's your tax dollar at work. The hospital will collect from Medicaid.
Previous 11 - 20 Next