Economy
With Obama’s Washington welcome wearing off and the recession wearing thin on consumers, confidence takes a nosedive in February…one in five (19.4%) is confident/very confident in chances for a strong economy, lowering more than five points from last month (24.7%) as well as February ’08 (26.2%)…back in the good ‘ole days – February ’07 – confidence was a robust 53.2%. Stay tuned in March for the resonance from the stimulus bill…
President Obama's decision to shutter Gitmo doesn't appear to have done too much to allay consumer concerns regarding political and national security issues…one in four (24.8%) contend they continue to worry, down slightly from January (26.7%), but remaining heightened from a year ago (20.6%).
We witnessed a new high in practical spending last month, and consumers seemed to have relaxed this sentiment in February (perhaps because shoppers just aren’t headed to stores right now)…half (50.0%) of consumers indicate they’ve become more practical/realistic in purchasing, down seven points from January (57.3%), though still a substantial hike from a year ago (40.2%).
Likewise, consumers tempered in February when it comes to choosing needs over wants…although more than half (57.6%) still contend they zero in on necessities when spending, this figure drops from 66.0% last month, though remains on an incline from February ’08 (48.0%).
BIGresearch's Consumer Intentions & Actions Survey monitors over 8,000 consumers each month providing unique insights & identifying opportunities in a fragmented and transitory marketplace. www.bigresearch.com
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Crestwood taxpayers overwhelmingly defeat expansion
Mountain Top taxpayers rejected the Crestwood School District's proposed $55.75 million school expansion project during Tuesday's special election, forcing the school district to come up with another plan to combat overcapacity issues throughout district schools.
With all 10 precincts reporting, the proposal received support from only 15.5 percent, or 814, of those casting ballots. A total of 4,437 voters, or 84.5 percent, voted no. Absentee ballots have not been counted
With all 10 precincts reporting, the proposal received support from only 15.5 percent, or 814, of those casting ballots. A total of 4,437 voters, or 84.5 percent, voted no. Absentee ballots have not been counted
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
A 40-Year Wish List
A 40-Year Wish List
You won't believe what's in that stimulus bill.
"Never let a serious crisis go to waste. What I mean by that is it's an opportunity to do things you couldn't do before."
So said White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel in November, and Democrats in Congress are certainly taking his advice to heart. The 647-page, $825 billion House legislation is being sold as an economic "stimulus," but now that Democrats have finally released the details we understand Rahm's point much better. This is a political wonder that manages to spend money on just about every pent-up Democratic proposal of the last 40 years.
We've looked it over, and even we can't quite believe it. There's $1 billion for Amtrak, the federal railroad that hasn't turned a profit in 40 years; $2 billion for child-care subsidies; $50 million for that great engine of job creation, the National Endowment for the Arts; $400 million for global-warming research and another $2.4 billion for carbon-capture demonstration projects. There's even $650 million on top of the billions already doled out to pay for digital TV conversion coupons.
In selling the plan, President Obama has said this bill will make "dramatic investments to revive our flagging economy." Well, you be the judge. Some $30 billion, or less than 5% of the spending in the bill, is for fixing bridges or other highway projects. There's another $40 billion for broadband and electric grid development, airports and clean water projects that are arguably worthwhile priorities.
Add the roughly $20 billion for business tax cuts, and by our estimate only $90 billion out of $825 billion, or about 12 cents of every $1, is for something that can plausibly be considered a growth stimulus. And even many of these projects aren't likely to help the economy immediately. As Peter Orszag, the President's new budget director, told Congress a year ago, "even those [public works] that are 'on the shelf' generally cannot be undertaken quickly enough to provide timely stimulus to the economy."
Most of the rest of this project spending will go to such things as renewable energy funding ($8 billion) or mass transit ($6 billion) that have a low or negative return on investment. Most urban transit systems are so badly managed that their fares cover less than half of their costs. However, the people who operate these systems belong to public-employee unions that are campaign contributors to . . . guess which party?
Here's another lu-lu: Congress wants to spend $600 million more for the federal government to buy new cars. Uncle Sam already spends $3 billion a year on its fleet of 600,000 vehicles. Congress also wants to spend $7 billion for modernizing federal buildings and facilities. The Smithsonian is targeted to receive $150 million; we love the Smithsonian, too, but this is a job creator?
Another "stimulus" secret is that some $252 billion is for income-transfer payments -- that is, not investments that arguably help everyone, but cash or benefits to individuals for doing nothing at all. There's $81 billion for Medicaid, $36 billion for expanded unemployment benefits, $20 billion for food stamps, and $83 billion for the earned income credit for people who don't pay income tax. While some of that may be justified to help poorer Americans ride out the recession, they aren't job creators.
As for the promise of accountability, some $54 billion will go to federal programs that the Office of Management and Budget or the Government Accountability Office have already criticized as "ineffective" or unable to pass basic financial audits. These include the Economic Development Administration, the Small Business Administration, the 10 federal job training programs, and many more.
Oh, and don't forget education, which would get $66 billion more. That's more than the entire Education Department spent a mere 10 years ago and is on top of the doubling under President Bush. Some $6 billion of this will subsidize university building projects. If you think the intention here is to help kids learn, the House declares on page 257 that "No recipient . . . shall use such funds to provide financial assistance to students to attend private elementary or secondary schools." Horrors: Some money might go to nonunion teachers.
The larger fiscal issue here is whether this spending bonanza will become part of the annual "budget baseline" that Congress uses as the new floor when calculating how much to increase spending the following year, and into the future. Democrats insist that it will not. But it's hard -- no, impossible -- to believe that Congress will cut spending next year on any of these programs from their new, higher levels. The likelihood is that this allegedly emergency spending will become a permanent addition to federal outlays -- increasing pressure for tax increases in the bargain. Any Blue Dog Democrat who votes for this ought to turn in his "deficit hawk" credentials.
This is supposed to be a new era of bipartisanship, but this bill was written based on the wish list of every living -- or dead -- Democratic interest group. As Speaker Nancy Pelosi put it, "We won the election. We wrote the bill." So they did. Republicans should let them take all of the credit.
You won't believe what's in that stimulus bill.
"Never let a serious crisis go to waste. What I mean by that is it's an opportunity to do things you couldn't do before."
So said White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel in November, and Democrats in Congress are certainly taking his advice to heart. The 647-page, $825 billion House legislation is being sold as an economic "stimulus," but now that Democrats have finally released the details we understand Rahm's point much better. This is a political wonder that manages to spend money on just about every pent-up Democratic proposal of the last 40 years.
We've looked it over, and even we can't quite believe it. There's $1 billion for Amtrak, the federal railroad that hasn't turned a profit in 40 years; $2 billion for child-care subsidies; $50 million for that great engine of job creation, the National Endowment for the Arts; $400 million for global-warming research and another $2.4 billion for carbon-capture demonstration projects. There's even $650 million on top of the billions already doled out to pay for digital TV conversion coupons.
In selling the plan, President Obama has said this bill will make "dramatic investments to revive our flagging economy." Well, you be the judge. Some $30 billion, or less than 5% of the spending in the bill, is for fixing bridges or other highway projects. There's another $40 billion for broadband and electric grid development, airports and clean water projects that are arguably worthwhile priorities.
Add the roughly $20 billion for business tax cuts, and by our estimate only $90 billion out of $825 billion, or about 12 cents of every $1, is for something that can plausibly be considered a growth stimulus. And even many of these projects aren't likely to help the economy immediately. As Peter Orszag, the President's new budget director, told Congress a year ago, "even those [public works] that are 'on the shelf' generally cannot be undertaken quickly enough to provide timely stimulus to the economy."
Most of the rest of this project spending will go to such things as renewable energy funding ($8 billion) or mass transit ($6 billion) that have a low or negative return on investment. Most urban transit systems are so badly managed that their fares cover less than half of their costs. However, the people who operate these systems belong to public-employee unions that are campaign contributors to . . . guess which party?
Here's another lu-lu: Congress wants to spend $600 million more for the federal government to buy new cars. Uncle Sam already spends $3 billion a year on its fleet of 600,000 vehicles. Congress also wants to spend $7 billion for modernizing federal buildings and facilities. The Smithsonian is targeted to receive $150 million; we love the Smithsonian, too, but this is a job creator?
Another "stimulus" secret is that some $252 billion is for income-transfer payments -- that is, not investments that arguably help everyone, but cash or benefits to individuals for doing nothing at all. There's $81 billion for Medicaid, $36 billion for expanded unemployment benefits, $20 billion for food stamps, and $83 billion for the earned income credit for people who don't pay income tax. While some of that may be justified to help poorer Americans ride out the recession, they aren't job creators.
As for the promise of accountability, some $54 billion will go to federal programs that the Office of Management and Budget or the Government Accountability Office have already criticized as "ineffective" or unable to pass basic financial audits. These include the Economic Development Administration, the Small Business Administration, the 10 federal job training programs, and many more.
Oh, and don't forget education, which would get $66 billion more. That's more than the entire Education Department spent a mere 10 years ago and is on top of the doubling under President Bush. Some $6 billion of this will subsidize university building projects. If you think the intention here is to help kids learn, the House declares on page 257 that "No recipient . . . shall use such funds to provide financial assistance to students to attend private elementary or secondary schools." Horrors: Some money might go to nonunion teachers.
The larger fiscal issue here is whether this spending bonanza will become part of the annual "budget baseline" that Congress uses as the new floor when calculating how much to increase spending the following year, and into the future. Democrats insist that it will not. But it's hard -- no, impossible -- to believe that Congress will cut spending next year on any of these programs from their new, higher levels. The likelihood is that this allegedly emergency spending will become a permanent addition to federal outlays -- increasing pressure for tax increases in the bargain. Any Blue Dog Democrat who votes for this ought to turn in his "deficit hawk" credentials.
This is supposed to be a new era of bipartisanship, but this bill was written based on the wish list of every living -- or dead -- Democratic interest group. As Speaker Nancy Pelosi put it, "We won the election. We wrote the bill." So they did. Republicans should let them take all of the credit.
Desperately Seeking Joy...
It is not difficult to smile and see a bright future, if you look to God and the joy and sunshine that He gives you within. When you speak negative things, you breath life into them and their existence. The Women helping Women note I posted yesterday speaks of happiness and wrath. "As God is the wellspring of true happiness, so we are the channel or pipe that brings happiness to others. Read it and meditate on these things.
Proverbs 11:23 says: 'The godly can look forward to Happiness, while the wicked can expect only wrath.' In all your dealings, your walk with Christ is a light to others. Make sure that your light is not hid. And share good news with others. There is always good news in everything that happens. What is done is in the past and cannot be changed. The future is ALWAYS bright in the Lord! No matter how I am treated, I will never get tired of doing what is good. I know that I continue to reap harvest after harvest of blessings! Because my joy comes from God, not man...
When we worry and fret about the future, we are saying "God, I know I told you about this problem, but I just don't think that you are faithful and just to deliver what is your perfect will for me."
Because the Lord has given us free will, it is in our hands, to either:
Have the faith,& trust that he will deliver in his time.
Or
Try to handle it ourselves. But know that if you decide to do it, then you are responsible for the end results.
I think it is much easier to Give it over to God and let him be accountable...
What about you????
Proverbs 11:23 says: 'The godly can look forward to Happiness, while the wicked can expect only wrath.' In all your dealings, your walk with Christ is a light to others. Make sure that your light is not hid. And share good news with others. There is always good news in everything that happens. What is done is in the past and cannot be changed. The future is ALWAYS bright in the Lord! No matter how I am treated, I will never get tired of doing what is good. I know that I continue to reap harvest after harvest of blessings! Because my joy comes from God, not man...
When we worry and fret about the future, we are saying "God, I know I told you about this problem, but I just don't think that you are faithful and just to deliver what is your perfect will for me."
Because the Lord has given us free will, it is in our hands, to either:
Have the faith,& trust that he will deliver in his time.
Or
Try to handle it ourselves. But know that if you decide to do it, then you are responsible for the end results.
I think it is much easier to Give it over to God and let him be accountable...
What about you????
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Yes, Virginia -- There is a Feminist in Sarah Palin!
This past Tuesday, Sarah Palin made the most explicitly feminist political speech by ANYONE running for national office in the last 20 years. She said,
“Women of my generation were allowed finally to make more of our own choices with education, with career, and I have never forgotten that we owe that opportunity to women, to feminists who came before us,” Palin said. “The belief in equal opportunity is not just the cause of feminists, it’s the creed of our country — equal opportunity.”
Many people are trying to marginalize this lady, and discredit her accomplishments. She has worked harder than Obama & Biden combined. She has more executive experience, marked record of achievement and increased responsibility.
When was the last time you heard a MAN having a ethics violation for having his staff or security detail run women for him?
When was the last time you heard about how much a man spent on his apparel?
Why don't we talk about the abuse of power and the subversive tactic to rid us of our Free Speech...and One person One Vote? Or are we to accept the thug politics and stomp all over the Constitution.
And what happened to that press complaint "We don't have access?" She is the MOST accessible candidate.
Electing Obama will set the progress of African Americans back 20 years. Women further. Remember when they first implemented affirmative action, and unqualified people were getting hired?
This past week, I sat on a panel for AC360. I thought my positions and arguments were valid and was open for debate. The attacks I have received, had NOTHING to do with what I said, but how I looked, or suggested that I was a slave of some sort...HUH?
Let's talk about the issues. One thing that needs to resonate among women is that in 2008 with 52%, women decide. I ask each of you reach into your soul and open you mind. There are 16.5% women who are still undecided, help them decide McCain-Palin.
The "Ironed Jawed Angels" ask no less.
“Women of my generation were allowed finally to make more of our own choices with education, with career, and I have never forgotten that we owe that opportunity to women, to feminists who came before us,” Palin said. “The belief in equal opportunity is not just the cause of feminists, it’s the creed of our country — equal opportunity.”
Many people are trying to marginalize this lady, and discredit her accomplishments. She has worked harder than Obama & Biden combined. She has more executive experience, marked record of achievement and increased responsibility.
When was the last time you heard a MAN having a ethics violation for having his staff or security detail run women for him?
When was the last time you heard about how much a man spent on his apparel?
Why don't we talk about the abuse of power and the subversive tactic to rid us of our Free Speech...and One person One Vote? Or are we to accept the thug politics and stomp all over the Constitution.
And what happened to that press complaint "We don't have access?" She is the MOST accessible candidate.
Electing Obama will set the progress of African Americans back 20 years. Women further. Remember when they first implemented affirmative action, and unqualified people were getting hired?
This past week, I sat on a panel for AC360. I thought my positions and arguments were valid and was open for debate. The attacks I have received, had NOTHING to do with what I said, but how I looked, or suggested that I was a slave of some sort...HUH?
Let's talk about the issues. One thing that needs to resonate among women is that in 2008 with 52%, women decide. I ask each of you reach into your soul and open you mind. There are 16.5% women who are still undecided, help them decide McCain-Palin.
The "Ironed Jawed Angels" ask no less.
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Using His WHole Name
Hands up! You're under arrest for saying 'Hussein Obama!'
By Bobby Eberle On October 9, 2008 at 5:57 am
We have seen many changes in this great nation which have been brought about by left wing activists. As kids, we used to say the Pledge of Allegiance. Now, it's being attacked in the courts. We used to say a prayer in the morning before school or at football games. Socialists in America have deemed that "offensive" and the practice has all but disappeared. Christmas displays honoring the birth of Christ trigger convulsions by the Left, who say that we shouldn't make people feel "uncomfortable" with our manger scenes.
Now, we can't even say what we want to say in public because not only will the thought police be on patrol, but, using a recent event in Florida as an example, saying "Hussein Obama" in public might just get you a visit from the FBI. Just ask Florida's Lee County Sheriff Mike Scott who is under fire -- and investigation -- for referring to Obama at a campaign rally by his -- gasp -- full name. What is going on with America?
At a rally in Estero, Florida on Monday for Gov. Sarah Palin, one of the pre-rally speakers was Sheriff Scott. Now, anyone who has been to a political rally knows that the job of the warm-up speakers is to do exactly as the name implies: warm-up the audience. Whether the audience is cheering wildly or booing loudly, the pre-rally speakers are there to wake them up and get them going. So... according to ABC News, Sheriff Scott stepped to the podium and said, "On November 4, let's leave Barack Hussein Obama wondering what happened."
Oh, the shock of it all! Speaking someone's full legal name in public! When asked about the "incident," Sheriff Scott responded by saying:
“I absolutely, unequivocally don’t regret saying it,” Scott told the News-Press on Monday. “In order to be a speaker at this event, I had to give my full name — Michael Joseph Scott — to the Secret Service, even though I’m the sheriff of Lee County. So why would I apologize? Is there some kind of double standard here where I have to give my full name, but I can’t use his?”
“Unless he changed his name, my position hasn’t changed,” said Scott of Obama. “It seems very clear to me that people have one of three stances on this thing: There are those who dislike it, there are those who like it, and there are those who think it’s a whole big deal about nothing, which is where I stand.”
As noted in the Cape Coral Daily Breeze, the Palin campaign responded by issuing the following statement:
“We do not condone this inappropriate rhetoric which distracts from the real questions of judgment, character and experience that voters will base their decisions on this November.”
Fair enough. If Palin or anyone else wants to say the usage of Barack Hussein Obama is inappropriate, he or she has a right to do so. But Sheriff Scott also has a right to say what he wants to say without fear of reprisal by the government. However, according to a local Florida NBC affiliate, Sheriff Scott's remark has now earned him an investigation by the federal government.
The NBC station reports that officials with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel have started an investigation of the Sheriff under the question of "did he use his position as sheriff to influence an election? If so, he could be in violation of a federal election law called the Hatch Act." The basis the Feds are using is whether Scott was campaigning while on duty and in uniform.
Sheriff Scott responded to the NBC story with the following statement:
"I am on duty 24/7 and 365 whether in or out of uniform. Like every other elected official, I am aware of from President to Governor to State Representatives, etc. We engage in political activities whether for ourselves as candidates or for others. As of this writing, I am unaware of having done anything to generate all this attention other than using the senator's full name."
The question is this... If Sheriff Scott had not said "Barack Hussein Obama," do you really think he would now be under investigation? If you answered "no," then that should send a shiver down your spine, because it means that the government is imposing pressure and creating a public example of Scott for simply saying someone's name.
Whether the investigation leads to charges or legal action is not the point. The point is that government intimidation is being brought to bear for someone exercising his first amendment right to free speech. This is wrong, regardless of whether you think his usage of Barack Hussein Obama was appropriate or not. This is still America, isn't it?
By Bobby Eberle On October 9, 2008 at 5:57 am
We have seen many changes in this great nation which have been brought about by left wing activists. As kids, we used to say the Pledge of Allegiance. Now, it's being attacked in the courts. We used to say a prayer in the morning before school or at football games. Socialists in America have deemed that "offensive" and the practice has all but disappeared. Christmas displays honoring the birth of Christ trigger convulsions by the Left, who say that we shouldn't make people feel "uncomfortable" with our manger scenes.
Now, we can't even say what we want to say in public because not only will the thought police be on patrol, but, using a recent event in Florida as an example, saying "Hussein Obama" in public might just get you a visit from the FBI. Just ask Florida's Lee County Sheriff Mike Scott who is under fire -- and investigation -- for referring to Obama at a campaign rally by his -- gasp -- full name. What is going on with America?
At a rally in Estero, Florida on Monday for Gov. Sarah Palin, one of the pre-rally speakers was Sheriff Scott. Now, anyone who has been to a political rally knows that the job of the warm-up speakers is to do exactly as the name implies: warm-up the audience. Whether the audience is cheering wildly or booing loudly, the pre-rally speakers are there to wake them up and get them going. So... according to ABC News, Sheriff Scott stepped to the podium and said, "On November 4, let's leave Barack Hussein Obama wondering what happened."
Oh, the shock of it all! Speaking someone's full legal name in public! When asked about the "incident," Sheriff Scott responded by saying:
“I absolutely, unequivocally don’t regret saying it,” Scott told the News-Press on Monday. “In order to be a speaker at this event, I had to give my full name — Michael Joseph Scott — to the Secret Service, even though I’m the sheriff of Lee County. So why would I apologize? Is there some kind of double standard here where I have to give my full name, but I can’t use his?”
“Unless he changed his name, my position hasn’t changed,” said Scott of Obama. “It seems very clear to me that people have one of three stances on this thing: There are those who dislike it, there are those who like it, and there are those who think it’s a whole big deal about nothing, which is where I stand.”
As noted in the Cape Coral Daily Breeze, the Palin campaign responded by issuing the following statement:
“We do not condone this inappropriate rhetoric which distracts from the real questions of judgment, character and experience that voters will base their decisions on this November.”
Fair enough. If Palin or anyone else wants to say the usage of Barack Hussein Obama is inappropriate, he or she has a right to do so. But Sheriff Scott also has a right to say what he wants to say without fear of reprisal by the government. However, according to a local Florida NBC affiliate, Sheriff Scott's remark has now earned him an investigation by the federal government.
The NBC station reports that officials with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel have started an investigation of the Sheriff under the question of "did he use his position as sheriff to influence an election? If so, he could be in violation of a federal election law called the Hatch Act." The basis the Feds are using is whether Scott was campaigning while on duty and in uniform.
Sheriff Scott responded to the NBC story with the following statement:
"I am on duty 24/7 and 365 whether in or out of uniform. Like every other elected official, I am aware of from President to Governor to State Representatives, etc. We engage in political activities whether for ourselves as candidates or for others. As of this writing, I am unaware of having done anything to generate all this attention other than using the senator's full name."
The question is this... If Sheriff Scott had not said "Barack Hussein Obama," do you really think he would now be under investigation? If you answered "no," then that should send a shiver down your spine, because it means that the government is imposing pressure and creating a public example of Scott for simply saying someone's name.
Whether the investigation leads to charges or legal action is not the point. The point is that government intimidation is being brought to bear for someone exercising his first amendment right to free speech. This is wrong, regardless of whether you think his usage of Barack Hussein Obama was appropriate or not. This is still America, isn't it?
Friday, October 3, 2008
Change to believe in...
America still does not see what change he (Obama) is talking about. It's the .38 cents left in your wallet for every dollar you earn...that is the change we can believe in...because the other .62 cents will be a pipe dream!
If you visit his site, on his splash page he is offering the First Edition of a Obama Magnet, that you will get with your $15 donation.
The second edition magnet will come into play if he is elected into office.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
