Archive for the ‘finance’ Category

Well, we are, as of Friday, officially “popeless”, and to make it worse I just heard that the Cardinals won’t be getting Pujols back any time soon. I know what you are thinking, “it’s a sad day for Catholics the world over.” But fortunately we have the sequestration, and subsequently the end of the world as we know it, to keep our minds off of it. But before R.E.M. starts playing, let me set your mind at ease.

0bama, as usual, has been traveling around the nation telling scary stories that would put even the most gruesome campfire tales to shame. Then again, what do you expect from a community organizer? All he knows how to do is campaign. His answer for any problem is tax it, regulate it, subsidize it, campaign about it, rinse and repeat. Fiscal Cliff? Campaign for higher taxes. Gun violence? Campaign for strict regulations. Expensive healthcare? Campaign to subsidize it. Erectile Dysfunction? Campaign to subsidize free Viagra and tax the evil rich to pay for it.

The funny thing about the sequester cuts is that 0bama came up with them in 2011, but now he acts like the Republicans invented them to destroy the earth. Actually the Republicans are getting blamed for something that was dreamed up by a Democrat president, supported by Democrat representatives, and passed by a Democrat majority in the Senate. The Republicans in Congress even offered to give 0bama the power to change and rearrange them at his leisure and he turned it down. He has done what he is best at; creating an enemy and campaigning against that enemy. It’s a tactic referred to as a straw man. 0bama does this as well as anyone could and, with the help of the media to keep the illusion of an actual enemy, how could he be stopped? The problem is now the media is starting to notice the puppet strings and the puppet master is not happy about it.

Bob Woodward, the liberal media grandfather, has made the mistake of calling 0bama out on the sequester fallacy. He rightly pointed out that the “sequester cuts” aren’t really cuts at all. In reality, far away from liberal land, these cuts are only reductions in a planned spending increase.

Example: if I had a monthly budget for entertainment and I spent $50 a month, but I decided at the start of next year I would begin spending $100 a month, that is a spending increase of $50. If I then changed my mind and decided to spend only $75 a month I really didn’t make a cut. A cut would have been for me to cut the original $50 to $25.

Simple right? Thats what Bob thought too, but as soon as he called the president out, the rest of the media circled the wagons around 0bama and started discrediting him, calling him a Republican lapdog and the like. What was most surprising to Bob was an email he received from an unnamed senior White House official warning him that he would regret his heresy to the totalitarian in office. Woodward wouldn’t say who he received the email from, only that it was a senior White House official.

Now that we are beyond the deadline and nothing has happened, my question is what will 0bama do? His whole scheme was to wait until the deadline and do his best to scare everyone into believing that the sky would fall so that Republicans would cave and give him more tax increases, the same tactic he used with the fiscal cliff. It worked for him then but evidently the Republicans’ New Year’s resolution was to grow a spine. If so they’ve held on to their resolution longer than I did mine.

So basically all you need to know about this sequester nonsense is “don’t believe the hype” from the 0bama camp, and we can wait a little while longer on that R.E.M. song.


Speaker of the House, John Boehner, spilled the beans about Obama’s thoughts on spending cuts. In an interview with Stephan Moore, Wall Street Journal, Boehner said Obama firmly believes that America’s federal deficit is not the result of over spending, but is caused by “a health-care problem.” Boehner said, “They blame all of the fiscal woes on our health-care system.”

Boehner, reportedly told Obama, “Clearly we have a health-care problem, which is about to get worse with Obamacare. But, Mr. President, we have a very serious spending problem.” Obama eventually replied, “I’m getting tired of hearing you say that.”

Boehner went on to say that Obama is “unwilling to take on the left of his own party.” That’s why Obama refused to raise the retirement age for Medicare after agreeing to it. “He admitted in meetings that he couldn’t sell things to his own members,” said Boehner. “But he didn’t even want to try … We could never get him to step up.”

This news may surprise some people but for me it only verifies exactly what I already know. It is further evidence that, and it pains me to say this, the president of the United States of America is a spineless, ideological, narcissistic, sock puppet. For him to sit there and say that America “doesn’t have a spending problem” can mean only one of two things. He either has a sack the size of his big head or he is completely indoctrinated. I vote indoctrinated. Like Vladimir Putin said about Obama’s economic policy, “either he is trying to ruin America’s economy or he is just that stupid.”

Which do you think it is?


    In that order.

That’s right, now you have to claim your tooth fairy income on your taxes and pay 10% to the IRS. Thanks to Obamacare.


Not really,

Actually, as of January 1 your medical tax rate (if you are under 65) will jump from 7.5 to 10% of gross income.

You can thank Obamacare for that. That’s only part of the tax increases to be imposed on the middle class to pay for Obamacare. Remember that whole, “I won’t raise any taxes on the middle class” bit? Yea same ole song and dance in the White House.

I Don’t Give A Damn

Posted: November 18, 2012 in America, finance, Opinion
Tags: , , , , ,

Everywhere I look I see people “not giving a damn”, what in the entire history of mankind has that ever got anyone? I’ll tell you this much, I didn’t “give a damn” all throughout my teens and early twenties and the only place that ever got me was living off part time minimum wage, food stamps, and rental assistance, not to mention dropped out of college. Granted, I’m only now entering my mid-twenties, but since I changed my habits and my attitude, I’ve got a full time job at a fortune 400 company working my way up. Although that job is in a factory and I’m only now on the bottom rung, I, for the first time, have a path to success and the motivation to get there. To be honest, the path I’m on now isn’t what I necessarily want to be doing when I retire, and I don’t think I’m living up to my full potential, but because of my own mistakes I’ve closed a few other paths I wish I’d taken now. Even though I’ve made those mistakes I have set myself up to be able to take the long way around to accomplish my goals. Now that I’m off government hand outs I can afford to eventually pay my debt to the school and take another swing at it, or I may nit need school. If this blog becomes successful I may be able to peruse a career in journalism, or I could end up in politics. Who knows what my future could hold? I do know that without my decision to get myself in gear and straighten up I’d probably still be flipping burgers 20 hours a week, taking government hand outs. Mostly because I’ve been in the situation, I don’t think all “entitlements” should be disbanded. I do know that they need to be reformed, because, though they do help people through tough times, they don’t encourage those people to do better. We conservatives call them entitlements because in too many people they create a sense of entitlement. They make people feel like, “I’m entitled to this.” That’s not what they were created for. Disability is for people who are physically or mentally incapable of holding a regular job, not people who are too drunk or stoned to hold a job. Food Stamps are for people who are on fixed income and don’t have enough to feed themselves and/or their children, or for people going through a tough time, they are not for people who are just too lazy to find a full-time job, like I used to be. I’ve heard people who really need food stamps say how embarrassing it is to have to use food stamps, that there is a stigma about them. If we would stop people from being able to abuse them that stigma wouldn’t exist. A friend of mine worked in a grocery store for a few years and she said that she could tell who was going to use an EBT card because they would be buying nothing but name brands and expensive cuts of meat, and wouldn’t be dressed like a person that could afford it. She also said, this assumption wasn’t true 100% of the time, she would see some people who bought the store brand and used coupons and ad matches. Those people were either the people that looked well off or the people who seemed to be truly in need of the assistance, either by disability or social security.

Now, before o get any hate mail, I know this doesn’t apply to everyone. All I’m saying is that for certain disability cases there should be periodic re-evaluations. For food stamps there should be restrictions on purchases. I also think that recipients should be subject to periodic drug tests and that criminal background should factor in.

I know what some will say, “but Storey, you say you don’t like government restrictions!” This is true, but when it comes to the government restricting is presence and it’s spending of American’s tax dollars, I say go for it Uncle Sam, restrict the he’ll out of yourself.

Anyway if you “don’t give a damn”, think it over.

Let me know what you think down in the comments and subscribe up top.

Well it looks like everyone is going to have to start eating Mrs. Freashly’s from now on.
Hostess, who filed chapter 11 bankruptcy in January this year, has decided to close down and lay off 18,500 employees, according to the LA times website.

But why are they doing such a thing?

Hostess’ chief executive, Gregory F. Rayburn said “We deeply regret the necessity of today’s decision, but we do not have the financial resources to weather an extended nationwide strike.”

For those that don’t really understand what filing bankruptcy entails, let me explain a little bit. If you went to a government school, like I had the misfortune of doing, chances are you didn’t learn a damn thing about finances, unless you are just nerdy enough to Bing it, like me. In this instance, when a company is failing and they have more debt than they can pay, they can go to bankruptcy court and file chapter 11. What do they go there for? To ask the government to bail them out with our tax dollars? No, they ask the court to grant them fiscal protection from their creditors to cease any and all collection activities while the company readjusts it’s debts and restructures. This means all contracts are null and void, everyone from the suppliers to the unions. The lenders are usually going to be happy with whatever arrangement that they can make because if they don’t work with them the company may go out of business and then they won’t get any of their money back. So the bankruptcy protects the investors, makes sure the lenders get paid, and makes it possible for the company to continue to keep their employees.

Since the courts approved their filing, the unions have to take a new deal. Hostess laid out a deal with cuts to their wages and their benefits package. The unions shot it down so Hostess offered to work with them as much as they could. The unions threaded to strike, Hostess let them, and the media, know that if there is a strike, we will be forced to close the plants. Hostess told them, straight up, if these plants stop producing and delivering product on time that they would have to shut down. What did the unions do?

STRIKE! They ignored the warnings and chose to stand outside with signs. Nobody crossed the picket lines so Hostess closed up shop.

Hostess ended fiscal year 2010 with a net loss of $341 million. In their bankruptcy filing their biggest creditor was the Bakery & Confectionary Union & Industry International Pension Fund for the humble sum of $944 million. All their other debts combined come to about $304.22 million, that includes one other pension fund and their vendors and everything else.

The union released this statement:

“The crisis facing Hostess Brands is the result of nearly a decade of financial and operational mismanagement that resulted in two bankruptcies, mountains of debt, declining sales and lost market share,” said union President Frank Hurt. “The Wall Street investors who took over the company after the last bankruptcy attempted to resolve the mess by attacking the company’s most valuable asset – its workers.”

I’d say that the financial mismanagement looks to be agreeing to those union pensions. This is what unions do. This why I’m proud to live in a right to work state and I’ll fight unionization tooth and nail if it ever tries to infest my area or my company. Unions are outdated and unnecessary in America today. Sure if I moved to Chicago, bloody Illinois I could be a union goon and get paid more but all that does is drive up the cost of living. Gas is as cheap in my state as it is anywhere in the US and I work for a company that pays at least as good, and better in most cases, than any similar industry in my area. When you have a right to work state unions aren’t needed. That’s why they fight it. They force workers to join through intimidation and ruin companies.

As always I want to know what you think in the comments below, and if you want more of the truth, subscribe up top. I still have more to say on unions but I’ll have to save that ammo for another battle, until then remember
Facts are to Liberals, as beef broth is to vegans.