Dr. Richard Dawkins once said that, “On a scale of seven, where one means I know he [God] exists, and seven I know he doesn’t, I call myself a six.”
“Professor Dawkins went on to say he believed he was a ‘6.9’, stating:’That doesn’t mean I’m absolutely confident, that I absolutely know, because I don’t.’”
Under those conditions, the benefits of being an atheist could be defined as:
B= Y(.9857) – ∞(.0143)
.9857=probability of Dr. Dawkins being right
.0143=probability of Dr. Dawkins being wrong
B=Benefits of being an atheist
Y = years of living in bliss
∞ = years contemplating your error
What would logic and reason dictate under those conditions?
Everybody believes that the political gridlock in D.C. is preventing any real discussion to solve this country’s gross federal deficit. My idea in getting everyone to the table and start talking solutions is to garnish congressional wages at a level equivalent to the Gross Federal Debt/GDP ratio. So, if the Gross Federal Debt is 90% of the GDP, members of the U.S. Congress will have 90% of their wages garnished. And when the ratio is greater than 100%, members of Congress have to pay out of their pockets the difference. Unfortunately such a law would never pass. Congress has never voted against its best interests. And right now, its best interest is to stay in power on our dime, or in today’s equivalent, our dollar.
This chart epitomizes the definition of insanity according to Einstein, “[D]oing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” Compare the duration of unemployment in the 70′s, when Nixon declared that, “We are all Keynesian now,” to the 80′s and 90′s when America had the largest economic growth during peacetime. Those 20 years of economic growth resulted during a time when taxes were dramatically reduced, entitlements were reformed, and the budget was balanced. It was not single party that brought this growth about, but a single idea. The idea that our country’s economic engine runs better when the private sector is in the driver’s seat.
Unfortunately we currently have an administration that believes our economic engine should be driven by the government. It believes that money spent by the government will be better for the economy than money spent by the private sector. This chart is one of many examples of what happens when we take money out of the economy and allow it to trickle-down our government bureaucracy. Stagnation. And don’t worry, Stagflation will be here soon.
Yeah, I know I’ve detached myself from politics for over a year, but a certain league of individuals has recently admonished me for not having posted here in so long. So while I won’t discuss topical political issues in this post, I still have points concerning politics I’d like to address… mostly points concerning my distancing from politics.
1. The forums in which we debate politics (media sources, the floors of congress, the dinner table) have welcomed discussions fueled by almost only emotions, rather than rationale and the search for truth. The core tenet behind the multiple party system in America was the idea that through thorough and earnest debate, the truth will seep through as through a strainer. The problem is that the majority of debates don’t let the truth through because either side is looking to merely win, lockstep with a laundry list of ideals written by a party, as opposed to coming to the best solution for our nation. Members from opposite parties will brandish the others moronic, only because they were unsuccessful in changing your mind to think as they do. How do they rationalize this? “They are simply too stupid to understand that what I espouse is the only correct/just/effective way.” Pride does not equal truth, and many are too scared of the hypocrisy tag to be able to say “I believe in this point my party believes in, but I don’t believe in that other thing it believes in.”
Possible Solution? Go into debates not looking to change the other person’s mind, but only with the goal to most honestly and clearly express your beliefs and opinions. If they don’t agree… so what? You walk away happy that you stood on your beliefs with integrity. And who knows… they might have gone away disagreeing with every word you said, but you planted a small seed that may grow into the deep-rooted memory that you were a sincere and amicable representative of your party, beliefs, whatever. Just remember, the second you tell someone they’re wrong, is the second before they stop listening to you.
I have to go to work, but I’ll continue the observations from my political hiatus… which I’m still happily engaged in.
So has anyone heard the one about Democrats imposing a 35% tax on health care benefits that range from $8,000 for individuals to $21,000 per family?You haven’t. That’s odd. I am sure the MSM would be discussing a plan that would essentially be one of the largest tax increases in our history and would essentially reduce health care benefits to many Americans. Hmmm…what else could they be reporting on?
Oh that’s right. Our President is on a marketing tour in Copenhagen ensuring his cronies in Chicago make a quick buck from the Olympics. Thank God the MSM is on top that story, since it has such an impact on so many Americans. … Ok, now back to Congress shenanigans.
So the Senate Finance committee wants to impose a 35% tax on employer-sponsored health care benefits that cross the above mentioned threshold. This will inevitably lead employer’s to reduce benefits, fire employees, or increase costs to consumers.
Now why would Congress purposely increase the cost of employer-sponsored health care benefits at the determinant of the employees and consumers. It is possible that Congress is purposely increasing the cost of employer-sponsored health care benefits in order to garner support in the business sector for a public option. Congress could pitch the idea that employers could avoid the 35% tax through a public option. And if the public option is passed, employers will inevitably dump their employees into a public option in order to avoid the 35% tax. Even though there is no viable explanation why employer-sponsored health care benefits should be taxed, I am sure Congress is acting in our best interests in and not in its interest of increasing its reach into our lives.
~ Chuck
Language on the 35% tax is found on page 202. Happy reading.
on 9-12-2009 there will be a march on Washington in protest to the wild spending, socialistic reform of America, Universal health care, Government encroachment into citizens lives and to defend our constitution. The march will begin at 10 am and will be covered on Fox News. If you cant make it to Washington there will be tea parties nation wide look at the link below for more information. Its time to stand up and defend this country we love.
Forget global warming. The greatest threat to human civilization is a zombie infection. According to recent study on infectious diseases, a zombie infection could potentially wipe out our civilization if not properly addressed. According to the study, the only viable solution to a zombie infection is instant eradication of the infected. Which gives me an idea for a bumper sticker: “Save the Earth, Kill a Zombie.” Pretty catchy.
Here is a link to the article on the study. I tried to get a copy of the study, but it isn’t out yet.
In my continued effort to avoid the news and discussions of political nature, I post this link with my hand over my eyes. I am, however, peeking through my fingers to make sure I post this right.
“If Congress is so Pro-Small Business, then how come they spent $4 Trillion and there are NO new low interest loan programs available from the Gov for business owners, No Tax Cuts, No rules on litigation by Greedy Trail Lawyers, Nothing to help small business owners to create jobs or even stay in business? Congress is in fact Pro-Socialist, Anti-American Capitalist. WAKE UP! Speak Out Before you lose your job.”
This is a Facebook status change Michael Pinson is asking his supporters to use on their facebook for 24 hours. I’m still not exactly sure who he is, but whoever wrote this is tops in my book.
Ok, back to my “avoiding politics/avoiding news” phase!
According to the AP, President Obama played fast and loose with details. Who would have thought the AP actually still did journalism?
Here is a taste:
OBAMA: “We already have rough agreement” on some aspects of what a health care overhaul should involve, and one is: “It will keep government out of health care decisions, giving you the option to keep your insurance if you’re happy with it.”
THE FACTS: In House legislation, a commission appointed by the government would determine what is and isn’t covered by insurance plans offered in a new purchasing pool, including a plan sponsored by the government. The bill also holds out the possibility that, over time, those standards could be imposed on all private insurance plans, not just the ones in the pool.
OBAMA: “If we had done nothing, if you had the same old budget as opposed to the changes we made in our budget, you’d have a $9.3 trillion deficit over the next 10 years. Because of the changes we’ve made, it’s going to be $7.1 trillion.”
THE FACTS: Obama’s numbers are based on figures compiled by his own budget office. But they rely on assumptions about economic growth that some economists find too optimistic. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, in its own analysis of the president’s budget numbers, concluded that the cumulative deficit over the next decade would be $9.1 trillion.
The Road to Liberty is run by Chuck and Julian, two Republicans. We also have regular contributions from republicans Ignacio and Joel. - Email: TheRoadToLiberty (at) gmail.com
