2.10.2006

Credible sources of news and political insight?

So Michelle Malkin has a post today on her blog that links to a new Google news feature for its automaton followers. Apparently Google, in an attempt to be "edgy, hip, and relevant", now produces small video news segments viewable by visitors and that desperately seek to cover the same current news stories as everyone else. In the segment in question the Google "guy" decides to explain radical islamic insanity over recently published cartoons by attacking Michelle's opinions on her blog, those being, that islamic wackos are responsible for provoking the violence we're seeing and that islam basically can't control itself (kind of like a 13 year old with cable, no parents around, and lots of free time.)

My opinion: now that Google too (along with Apple, Yahoo!, etc.) has made it clear that theirs is a company helmed by liberal, out-of-touch eggheads, we should find other ways of getting our email and seeking information on the Internet. Maybe it's just me, but if I'm seeking to gain customers for my business I'd generally try not to tick off or alienate over 50% of them. *rolls eyes*

2.04.2006

Look at the yellow sign on the left.


And some more from our muslim friends:


1.28.2006

This is what I've been saying for years. Why don't Labor or the Liberals get it?

The Union Threat

by Jonathan Hoenig [ CapitalistPig Asset Management LLC ]

I have tremendous respect for anyone who puts in an honest day's work — no matter if you are a brain surgeon, lawyer or a short-order cook.

But the reality of business is that, in modern times, the value of physical labor is low. A company's success exists not because of its ability to hire workers with the biggest muscles, but those who invent, leverage and exploit new technology. The assembly line “grunt work” is noble, but relatively low on the hierarchy of productivity. It's not a person's strength, but their smarts that count, and it's the tools and machines a worker uses that raise productivity and create wealth.

And although labor unions' intentions are good, they ultimately end up not improving a community's standard of living, but rather irreparably harming it. The notion that unions are responsible for creating prosperous living conditions for their members is a flat-out farce.

One of the main problems with unions is that they force unreasonably high wages that ultimately end up hindering a company's prospects. Every firm aims to attract the most talented and productive employees possible. But wages are not arbitrary, and when a union contract forces a company to pay an employee $70,000 for a job that another might accept for $40,000, the firm's overall level of productivity and competitiveness suffers accordingly.

Over time, paying higher-than-market-wages eventually drains the businesses' potential for growth and brings the whole ship down. A company that is less productive and competitive almost always ends up losing to more nimble competitors who don't have the “legacy” costs imposed by stiff union contracts. U.S. automakers such as Ford or GM offer the perfect example.

Because they are compelled to pay higher wages than the market would otherwise dictate, companies are also able to higher fewer workers. So the net result of the union's demands for rich salaries and benefits is unemployment — both for prospective new hires and the lucky few who are able to, for a time at least, become employed at abnormally high rates. Ever notice how mass layoffs always seem to happen at airlines, steelmakers — almost any industry that's heavily unionized?

In a free society, individuals certainly have the right to voluntarily unionize. There are elements of unionization, such as basic collective bargaining or group purchasing, that also produce benefits for members. And if a company's wages are legitimately low, the threat of a strike can compel them to be raised. But the notion that without unions, greedy employers would exploit the poor, unfortunate working class, is a crock.

Moreover, within many industries, union membership isn't voluntary, but required. Thanks to political pull or long-standing contracts, one doesn't have the option not to join. Because they hold such influence, the union bosses end up surrogate managers of the company. Is it any coincidence these industries are the ones that eventually end up in complete financial disarray?

Unions also do a disservice by lulling their members into a false sense of professional complacency. Because unionization prompts one to identify so closely with a particular vocation, it's easy to forget that one must always improve his skills in anticipation of how business might develop in the future. The truth is, just because you were a steelworker in 1976 doesn't mean you can succeed as a steelworker in 2006. Times change, business changes and unionized workers who don't develop new skill sets are usually the ones who are left behind, holding only an empty promise that the union will take care of them forever.

Finally, unions promote the false notion that, beyond salaries and promised benefits; workers are somehow “owed” something by the company. That's just not the case. While I respect him personally, the laborer generally has no impact on the company's long-term success. The real productivity and success comes from inventing the Model T — not merely assembling it. In representing their members, unions too frequently overlook this important fact.

1.27.2006

More proof the end of the world is coming...

1.09.2006

Oh Noes! President Bush is destroying our economy!

DOW at 11,000

I am still waiting for a real debate on our president's actions over these last two terms. The war? Going well (as far as wars go.) Education? No Child Left Behind (Oh noes, you mean we have to pass tests to prove we can teach? NCLB is dangerous for our children!) Economy? Doing VERY well. Unemployment? VERY low. Standard of living? High. Taxes? Lower than in the 90s.

At a time when:
- 09.11.2001
- Hurricane Katrina
- Hurricane Rita
- Unprecedented levels of islamic terrorism around the world

What were you guys complaining about again?

*silence*

Oh, I wasn't sure...

12.14.2005

A warning to all believers...

Keep a very close eye on the situation in Iran. With the president of that country calling for a "proactive" approach to the Israeli-Arab conflict by all muslims, we very well may be witnessing the stage begin set for the great battle and the Lord's return. Listen carefully to reports of nuclear development and proliferation by the muslim states (primarily Iran) - these will be the tools that will embolden the armies of darkness into thinking that they can attack and destroy Israel for good.

Of course, we already know what the outcome will be. Be ready friends...

12.09.2005

Massachusetts: As sandy as Ohio.

Today was our first big snow since moving from Michigan to Massachusetts. It looks wonderful outside and I'm excited about sledding and snowboarding this season.

The people of MA, like the people of Ohio, use a combination of salt and sand on the roads when they get snowy/slippery. Being from Michigan I'm used to our honorable road crews using 100% salt to keep the roads clean - and it does, very well.

Sand and salt does not work (well, maybe a little.) What you end up with is slush (because the salt is melting the snow and ice) and MUD (because of the sand mixing with the snow and water from the melted ice.) It is pretty horrible, and often, still pretty darn slippery. Today's snow was living proof of this: even with all-time AWD, my car was still sliding in the turns on salted/sanded roadways.

The verdict: salt is best, sand is pretty darn worthless.