I didn't actually hate the tea party until now.
On the Nov 2010 statewide ballot in Missouri will be Proposition B, also called the "Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act."
And next Tuesday, the Missouri Tea Party will be hosting a Vote NO on Proposition B meeting.
What the fuck?
Granted, the Missouri Tea Party isn't the only opponent of this Act. But to see them join the ranks of large scale commercial breeders and puppy mill operators just gets my blood boiling. In my eyes, those groups are the lowest scum and filth of the earth. For any political organization to ally themselves with such ilk is simply abhorrent. The tea party always struck me as a bunch of idiots who enjoy bitching, but not providing viable solutions. I understand it's a stressful time and everybody needs an outlet. But to direct that energy against helpless animals, especially dogs, who have been bred as sensitive companions keenly attuned to their environments and reliant on us for physical and social fulfillment, is sinking to a whole other level.
Yeah, I know it's just this Missouri chapter, and that doesn't necessarily reflect the entire movement. But I don't doubt they are receiving some national funding and the fact that anyone who professes to be in this party could be against something like Proposition B just leaves a disgusting taste in my mouth.
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
October 5, 2010
August 25, 2009
Democracy (In)Action
Our rep, Frank Pallone Jr (D), jumped on the town hall bandwagon last night. However, he failed to realize just how many people would attend. So a line of at least 800 people snaked around the municipal building, vying for entrance into a room with 150 capacity.
We weren't able to get in, but it was pretty fun standing in line for an hour, listening to cranky old folks and random ranting.
We weren't able to get in, but it was pretty fun standing in line for an hour, listening to cranky old folks and random ranting.
July 17, 2009
Trickling Down the Bad Way
In a recent interview, NY Labor Commissioner Patricia Smith noted that "...for every job that you lose on Wall Street, you lose two jobs...in the service sector..."
So like it or not, the fat cats are key to NYC's economy. No rich people out spending their bankroll, no work for those providing the product.
Interview is here, Ms. Smith gets her quote on around 2:30 into the segment.
So like it or not, the fat cats are key to NYC's economy. No rich people out spending their bankroll, no work for those providing the product.
Interview is here, Ms. Smith gets her quote on around 2:30 into the segment.
June 12, 2009
June 5, 2009
Government Motors
So when the US and Canadian governments own nearly three-fourths of GM, I wonder what happens if the interests of the shareholders conflict with those of public policy? What if the best return for investors is to shift work overseas? Will the government try to stop the ensuing domestic job loss? What if GM can't produce vehicles at competitive quality and price? Will the government create subsidies to make sure those vehicles make it on the market? What if the company can't meet fuel efficiency standards on time? Will the government push the timeframe forward? What if labor costs rise faster than revenue? Will the government force the UAW to accept further concessions?
It will certainly be interesting to see the play between financial and political needs in this whole affair.
It will certainly be interesting to see the play between financial and political needs in this whole affair.
February 4, 2009
Bonus Bashing
OK, I'm sick of people making a big deal about the recent Wall Street bonuses.
First of all, the top tier at major banks did NOT get bonuses. This includes executives at Citigroup, AIG, JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America and Merrill Lynch. These people are the target of much anger, yet they did not receive any bonus.
Second, the $18 billion reported to the New York State comptroller includes all firms classified as "financial institutions" which is not compromised solely of poorly performing banks. You've got smaller community banks, funds, agencies, as well as investment banks that did not get any federal funds. If you consider the entire financial industry in New York, $18 billion is really not that much.
Third, much of the bonus money went to rank and file, like HR personnel, administrative assistants, call center reps, IT support and developers, accounting, internal legal counsel as well as professionals who earn on commission or whose individual business units actually turned a profit last year. As much as everyone hates on Wall Street employees, the vast majority are just people working hard to make a living, like anyone else. They had nothing to do with the bad financial decisions at the top and are simply being rewarded for doing well at their particular job.
Fourth, that $18 billion is before income taxes. Uncle Sam and local governments get close to half that amount as revenue.
And last but not least, most people bitching about this aren't thinking about the flip side. If they were offered similar bonuses, would they refuse, due to some "taxpayer money shouldn't be spent this way" principle? Not a chance.
So seriously, folks, shut up already!
First of all, the top tier at major banks did NOT get bonuses. This includes executives at Citigroup, AIG, JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America and Merrill Lynch. These people are the target of much anger, yet they did not receive any bonus.
Second, the $18 billion reported to the New York State comptroller includes all firms classified as "financial institutions" which is not compromised solely of poorly performing banks. You've got smaller community banks, funds, agencies, as well as investment banks that did not get any federal funds. If you consider the entire financial industry in New York, $18 billion is really not that much.
Third, much of the bonus money went to rank and file, like HR personnel, administrative assistants, call center reps, IT support and developers, accounting, internal legal counsel as well as professionals who earn on commission or whose individual business units actually turned a profit last year. As much as everyone hates on Wall Street employees, the vast majority are just people working hard to make a living, like anyone else. They had nothing to do with the bad financial decisions at the top and are simply being rewarded for doing well at their particular job.
Fourth, that $18 billion is before income taxes. Uncle Sam and local governments get close to half that amount as revenue.
And last but not least, most people bitching about this aren't thinking about the flip side. If they were offered similar bonuses, would they refuse, due to some "taxpayer money shouldn't be spent this way" principle? Not a chance.
So seriously, folks, shut up already!
January 21, 2009
Next 100 Days
After all the oratory and jubilation and homage to history, now begins the grace period...
November 5, 2008
President Obama
There's not much to say that hasn't been said already. So I will only add one little personal statement: I do not envy Obama. He just got one of the toughest, most stressful jobs in the world, with woes lining every corner and a whole lot of high expectations. I hope he's ready!
September 7, 2008
Guess Who Owns Your Mortgage?!
Finally, the Treasury does something intelligent. Dismissing the top executives at Fannie and Freddie. Suspension of dividends. Demotion of current stock to junior status. Reduction of mortgage backed holdings in the next 10 years. Infusion of cash to maintain liquidity.
It's a start. As long as lenders return to the high credit standards they should have been using all along (example guidelines shown here in painful detail), I don't even mind spending my precious tax dollars to help someone buy a home. There are plenty of hard working, deserving people who should be homeowners, if only to reduce my share of property taxes :-P
But seriously, one needs to finish what is started. This should be run as vigorously and relentlessly as a Chap 11 Reorg. Cuts need to be made, heads have to roll, and ultimately, the key lies with a single question: should these enterprises become completely nationalized or should the assets be sold to private investors? Either way, it's pretty clear the old framework is dead. I just hope our government is able to carry out a proper burial.
It's a start. As long as lenders return to the high credit standards they should have been using all along (example guidelines shown here in painful detail), I don't even mind spending my precious tax dollars to help someone buy a home. There are plenty of hard working, deserving people who should be homeowners, if only to reduce my share of property taxes :-P
But seriously, one needs to finish what is started. This should be run as vigorously and relentlessly as a Chap 11 Reorg. Cuts need to be made, heads have to roll, and ultimately, the key lies with a single question: should these enterprises become completely nationalized or should the assets be sold to private investors? Either way, it's pretty clear the old framework is dead. I just hope our government is able to carry out a proper burial.
June 27, 2008
Pandora's Box
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.The beauty of our constitution is how the interpretation of 27 words by nine old farts can open a can of so many wriggling seething worms.
June 20, 2008
Politics as Usual
There's no problem with Obama declining public financing. He has that right.
What irks me is his reasoning that public financing is "irreparably" a "broken system" so that is why he must decline its use. Bullshit. Why doesn't he just tell the truth: he can raise (and spend!) more money outside of public financing and that is what fuels a presidential campaign. I guess that would be too honest. Underneath the pretty words, he's a politician after all!
Not that McCain is handling it any better. Attacking Obama for breaking a promise, instead of conceding the guy just has a better fundraising machine? It's not helping his case.
What irks me is his reasoning that public financing is "irreparably" a "broken system" so that is why he must decline its use. Bullshit. Why doesn't he just tell the truth: he can raise (and spend!) more money outside of public financing and that is what fuels a presidential campaign. I guess that would be too honest. Underneath the pretty words, he's a politician after all!
Not that McCain is handling it any better. Attacking Obama for breaking a promise, instead of conceding the guy just has a better fundraising machine? It's not helping his case.
June 12, 2008
Happy Loving Day!
Celebrating the Loving v. Virginia Supreme Court decision to overturn state bans on interracial marriage.
It's pretty unbelievable that 40 years ago, this was considered a legal opinion on the issue:
More info here.
It's pretty unbelievable that 40 years ago, this was considered a legal opinion on the issue:
"Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix."We've come a long way since!
More info here.
April 25, 2008
NJ FY2009
Corzine has been getting a lot of flak for his proposed budget cuts. I must admit, it's nice to see a governor tackle the spending problem. The fact is that New Jersey doesn't have enough revenue to cover its costs, so something has to give.
Two years ago, the answer was an increase in sales tax, which was not met with the outright revolt you might have expected. This year, he's trying to avoid raising taxes, and I'm a little shocked by the resistance to this tactic. For a state that's constantly bitching about government waste, you'd think spending decreases would be most welcome. But I think there are more protests against the cuts than there were against the higher sales tax!
Here's the proposed 2009 budget.
A couple things caught my attention:
* The biggest increase is K-12 education aid. Half a billion higher than last year and 35% of the budget! This more than offsets the $190M decrease in municipal aid, so if towns need to raise taxes for services like roads and administration, that's one thing. But they shouldn't be increasing property taxes to cover school costs.
* As always, arts suffer first. I understand the logic, but it's still sad seeing hits against the NJSO, Papermill Playhouse, etc.
* $6M one-time Tamiflu cost!?!
* While K-12 got a nice boost, colleges and universities got slapped. I don't know if that's a comfortable trade-off, since higher education is so important these days.
* I don't understand the obsession with monitoring sexual offenders. The proposal indicates $1.2M more on legislation for this. Why spend extra money on sex criminals? While the prospect of a sexual offender in your neighborhood is scary, is it any worse than a convicted murderer or drug dealer? Yet we're not spending any more on tracking them!
* The new income limits on property tax rebates saves quite a bit of money! $472M total. There must be more people making over 100K than I thought.
And last but not least, looking over this proposal really drives home exactly how difficult it is to run a fiscally responsible state. I do respect Corzine for this attempt at balancing a budget without any revenue increases. At least he's got the right frame of mind.
Two years ago, the answer was an increase in sales tax, which was not met with the outright revolt you might have expected. This year, he's trying to avoid raising taxes, and I'm a little shocked by the resistance to this tactic. For a state that's constantly bitching about government waste, you'd think spending decreases would be most welcome. But I think there are more protests against the cuts than there were against the higher sales tax!
Here's the proposed 2009 budget.
A couple things caught my attention:
* The biggest increase is K-12 education aid. Half a billion higher than last year and 35% of the budget! This more than offsets the $190M decrease in municipal aid, so if towns need to raise taxes for services like roads and administration, that's one thing. But they shouldn't be increasing property taxes to cover school costs.
* As always, arts suffer first. I understand the logic, but it's still sad seeing hits against the NJSO, Papermill Playhouse, etc.
* $6M one-time Tamiflu cost!?!
* While K-12 got a nice boost, colleges and universities got slapped. I don't know if that's a comfortable trade-off, since higher education is so important these days.
* I don't understand the obsession with monitoring sexual offenders. The proposal indicates $1.2M more on legislation for this. Why spend extra money on sex criminals? While the prospect of a sexual offender in your neighborhood is scary, is it any worse than a convicted murderer or drug dealer? Yet we're not spending any more on tracking them!
* The new income limits on property tax rebates saves quite a bit of money! $472M total. There must be more people making over 100K than I thought.
And last but not least, looking over this proposal really drives home exactly how difficult it is to run a fiscally responsible state. I do respect Corzine for this attempt at balancing a budget without any revenue increases. At least he's got the right frame of mind.
January 25, 2008
Just Give Up Already
Today, the New York Times endorsed Hillary Clinton and John McCain.
You know what this means? Giuliani, it's time to stop. You're slipping in Florida and one of the biggest publications in your home state hates you. Bow out gracefully, while you can.
You know what this means? Giuliani, it's time to stop. You're slipping in Florida and one of the biggest publications in your home state hates you. Bow out gracefully, while you can.
January 10, 2008
It's the Economy, Stupid!
The pundits keep trying to figure out the "key" issue for this election. Most seem to have accepted the economy is what concerns most Americans as they head to the voting booth.
When has it not been the economy? Everything stable and secure in this county starts with economics. Health care, the Iraq war, global warming - all these issues are dependant on jobs and access to capital. Even social battlegrounds are tied to the flow of money.
While people may not be directly thinking "economy" when they choose a candidate, I think subconsciously, that's really what drives us to vote. We are putting people into positions where they spend our money, and we want a say in that spending. If you're supporting a politican because of their stance on gay marriage, you're doing it because you want financial resources devoted to that cause. If you're concerned about environmental issues, you vote for the person who's going to most intelligently allocate funds towards that. All public policies, from banning abortion to interest rates to social security, rely on your tax dollars being shoved around. Deep down, we in the U.S. know that money talks and walks and gets legislation passed.
So yes. It's the Economy, Stupid.
When has it not been the economy? Everything stable and secure in this county starts with economics. Health care, the Iraq war, global warming - all these issues are dependant on jobs and access to capital. Even social battlegrounds are tied to the flow of money.
While people may not be directly thinking "economy" when they choose a candidate, I think subconsciously, that's really what drives us to vote. We are putting people into positions where they spend our money, and we want a say in that spending. If you're supporting a politican because of their stance on gay marriage, you're doing it because you want financial resources devoted to that cause. If you're concerned about environmental issues, you vote for the person who's going to most intelligently allocate funds towards that. All public policies, from banning abortion to interest rates to social security, rely on your tax dollars being shoved around. Deep down, we in the U.S. know that money talks and walks and gets legislation passed.
So yes. It's the Economy, Stupid.
January 5, 2008
Crazy Caucus
Why does the Democratic party have more complicated state primary/caucus rules than the Republican party? It seems backwards: choosing representatives that then channel their support to a candidate is far more along the lines of a Republic (like our national electoral system). But the Republican party is the one using populate vote. Bizarre.
Since this is the first primary I care to participate in, I've tried to familiarize myself with the process. In Iowa, the Democrats definitely go down a more complicated, statistically manipulative path. MyDD has some interesting insights on the subject:
http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/12/14/13159/459
In New Jersey, the difference between the two party primaries is pretty obvious.
The Republicans have it fairly simple:
Then you look at the Democrats:
What the fuck? Is it so hard to just say "Hey, Person X, you got the most votes, so the state's delegates will support you." What's with the "Unpledged" and "At-Large" and "Add Ons" and dicking around with districts? What are they trying to hide?
Ah, politics. It's going to be an interesting year.
Sources:
http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P08/NJ-D.phtml
http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P08/NJ-R.phtml
http://www.nj.gov/oag/elections/2008results/08primary-election/2008-Delegate-Slection-Plan.pdf
http://www.njgop.org/images/nj/Rules_for_Selection_of_Delegates_v1.pdf
Since this is the first primary I care to participate in, I've tried to familiarize myself with the process. In Iowa, the Democrats definitely go down a more complicated, statistically manipulative path. MyDD has some interesting insights on the subject:
http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/12/14/13159/459
In New Jersey, the difference between the two party primaries is pretty obvious.
The Republicans have it fairly simple:
Tuesday, February 5 2008: All of New Jersey's 52 delegates to the Republican National Convention are allocated to the presidential contender receiving the greatest number of votes in the primary statewide.
Party leaders (the National Committeeman, the National Committeewoman, and the chairman of New Jersey's Republican Party) will attend the convention pledged to the winner of the primary.
Then you look at the Democrats:
Tuesday, February 5 2008: 107 of 127 delegates to the Democratic National Convention are allocated to presidential contenders based on the results of voting in New Jersey's Presidential Primary. A mandatory 15 percent threshold is required for a presidential contender to be allocated delegates at either the congressional district or statewide level.
70 district delegates are allocated proportionally to presidential contenders based on the primary results in each of 20 special "delegate districts" that are not the same as congressional voting districts. Each of these "delegate districts" will consist of two Legislative Districts paired together.
In addition, 37 delegates are allocated to presidential contenders based on the primary vote statewide:
* 23 At-Large National Convention delegates
* 14 Pledged Party Leaders and Elected Officials delegates
Thursday, April 17 2008: The NJ Democratic State Committee chooses 20 delegates that will go to the Democratic National Convention officially "Unpledged." These delegates consist of:
* 8 Democratic National Committee members
* 9 Members of Congress (2 Senators and 7 Representatives)
* 1 Governor
* 2 "add-ons" (elected by a vote, consisting of a quorum of 40% of the Members of the NJ Democratic State Committee)
What the fuck? Is it so hard to just say "Hey, Person X, you got the most votes, so the state's delegates will support you." What's with the "Unpledged" and "At-Large" and "Add Ons" and dicking around with districts? What are they trying to hide?
Ah, politics. It's going to be an interesting year.
Sources:
http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P08/NJ-D.phtml
http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P08/NJ-R.phtml
http://www.nj.gov/oag/elections/2008results/08primary-election/2008-Delegate-Slection-Plan.pdf
http://www.njgop.org/images/nj/Rules_for_Selection_of_Delegates_v1.pdf
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)