Monday, November 30, 2015

Low pay gives you nothing and as it is!

No matter who you are you have to accept it for the better of the good!
The way of life is a naturistic policy and if you just stand there you get ran over.

I talk about this a lot. If the wages goes up everything else will follow.
And the need for the pay to go up, mostly noted the fact that small towns
have nothing vs a bigger city. Basically noticed in the growth of Tulsa Oklahoma.
A place that has bumped up the pay vs a small town that keeps the
pay at their lowest. Small towns are in their way trying to grow to get around
not matching inflation as small towns wages are stagnant and so is the growth.
You can make it but can people afford it? Low wages keeps small towns down!

There is a such a divide rich and poor retail stores have to cater to both parties.
And that is depressing when you go into a store that does that being
it shows the divide in a bad light. My town is making a ALDI store for the rich
in town that don't want to go to Walmart to mingle with all the poor people!
There is too much hoopla to shop there and it's a way to screen out the poor
being they are too lazy to do it. In fact I say to the poor get in there and shop,
flood the place!

Also bad in a sociological view as the wages are low and life is low from that so
comes in the bottom of barrel workers. It's a fact of life you get what you pay for.
And where there is such a divide rich towns vs poor towns you get this more, it's
a fact of life and really should not be ignored! It shows the need to raise the pay to
keep it's ugly head from popping up. Such a divide causes the action of people
that want better pay being they like to buy food and pay their bills to work
at the better paying jobs. And will work at those places leaving the bad workers,
pushing the bad workers to lower income towns.

If you took a sociology class you might of learned
"There is a reason people work for the low pay, because they
can't make anywhere else." That normally a small issue but in a divide of richer
vs poorer things get massively worse! There is nothing bad with being a
bottom of the barrel, only that there would be so many in one spot
and if they expect you to live in the bottom of it also!

Pushing productivity (Productivity harassment!) is just harassing the workers being
the sales they want is just dust in the wind to the broke people that buys less.
And is like the do more with less of making your workers panic.
It's just shows a bad manager that failed and has to harass the workers to
get more done from the fail! Give the fail is also from the towns people being broke.

All of that points the wages do need to go up if you want anything in your town.
And... The fact many want nothing in town. Being they are sadomasochist voters.
Like it's noted in Oklahoma why people vote against their best interest.
Because they like it! And it does make others a victim from that practice,
like a nice car in the Walmart parking lot with a note stuck on it
"Sorry my bad!" Or like being in the quick sand with people that want to go down
in it with a few that want to do better. They can't they are in quick sand!
Well small towns are hell. Live in a small town welcome to hell!
It helps to understand this so you kind of know whats going on!

The point is all of this hell would be covered up with better pay.
It's just the wages are not matching inflation and the bottom of the iceberg
is exposed more than it should be! Better pay makes better people.
Progress runs over the sadomasochist voters that like it bad.
America can't live like they do. I mean if they did all we would have
in America would be a corn field. How bright would that light be?
Like in history we would be invaded easy. By Canada I hope!

Or noted as it's sad to be a victim of natural selection to roll with
the slow progress of it. As I see in my town people letting their homes rot.
In the end the house will fall over or they have to get out of the black mold trap.
There are more homes falling apart than they are tearing down in my town,
I noticed it lately. Nature is taking back it's land with no effort to stop it.
If they had better pay they could afford to fix their homes!

Anyway you see it the pay does need to go up in small towns.
All you really have to look at the growth in Tulsa from the better pay
to see the difference. If you are a sadomasochist and like it bad
then you make it bad for everyone else. Also it gives the town the bottom
of the barrel more than it should! With no change it's going to get worse in
small towns.

Many of the poor are "heavily in debt." in their car payment they had the last
10 years from refinancing the loan skipping payments.
Many just voluntary repossess the car to get rid of it not caring about
their credit history as it takes money to have credit, you have to buy stuff!
And many have their paycheck garnished, pay alimony leaving them to live
on half their paycheck. In that makes work places not willing to hire them
being they might steal at the work place because they would be hungry
and living on $4.50 after taxes etc. Garnishment & Alimony is a called a debt.
That is what workplaces look at to not hire people. What risk are they to the store.

And I hope it shows the need to raise the pay for the better of the good!

 ~~~~~Minimum Wage Mythbusters
Myth: Raising the minimum wage will only benefit teens.
Not true: The typical minimum wage worker is not a high school student earning weekend pocket money. In fact, 89 percent of those who would benefit from a federal minimum wage increase to $12 per hour are age 20 or older, and 56 percent are women.

Myth: Increasing the minimum wage will cause people to lose their jobs.
Not true: In a letter to President Obama and congressional leaders urging a minimum wage increase, more than 600 economists, including 7 Nobel Prize winners wrote, "In recent years there have been important developments in the academic literature on the effect of increases in the minimum wage on employment, with the weight of evidence now showing that increases in the minimum wage have had little or no negative effect on the employment of minimum-wage workers, even during times of weakness in the labor market. Research suggests that a minimum-wage increase could have a small stimulative effect on the economy as low-wage workers spend their additional earnings, raising demand and job growth, and providing some help on the jobs front."

Myth: Small business owners can't afford to pay their workers more, and therefore don't support an increase in the minimum wage.
Not true: A July 2015 survey found that 3 out of 5 small business owners with employees support a gradual increase in the minimum wage to $12. The survey reports that small business owners say an increase "would immediately put more money in the pocket of low-wage workers who will then spend the money on things like housing, food, and gas. This boost in demand for goods and services will help stimulate the economy and help create opportunities."

Myth: Raising the federal tipped minimum wage ($2.13 per hour since 1991) would hurt restaurants.
Not true: In California, employers are required to pay servers the full minimum wage of $9 per hour — before tips. Even with a 2014 increase in the minimum wage, the National Restaurant Association projects California restaurant sales will outpace all but only a handful of states in 2015.

Myth: Raising the federal tipped minimum wage ($2.13 per hour since 1991) would lead to restaurant job losses.
Not true: As of May 2015, employers in San Francisco must pay tipped workers the full minimum wage of $12.25 per hour — before tips. Yet, the San Francisco leisure and hospitality industry, which includes full-service restaurants, has experienced positive job growth this year, including following the most recent minimum wage increase.

Myth: Raising the federal minimum wage won't benefit workers in states where the hourly minimum rate is already higher than the federal minimum.
Not true: While 29 states and the District of Columbia currently have a minimum wage higher than the federal minimum, increasing the federal minimum wage will boost the earnings for nearly 38 million low-wage workers nationwide. That includes workers in those states already earning above the current federal minimum. Raising the federal minimum wage is an important part of strengthening the economy. A raise for minimum wage earners will put more money in more families' pockets, which will be spent on goods and services, stimulating economic growth locally and nationally.

Myth: Younger workers don't have to be paid the minimum wage.
Not true: While there are some exceptions, employers are generally required to pay at least the federal minimum wage. Exceptions allowed include a minimum wage of $4.25 per hour for young workers under the age of 20, but only during their first 90 consecutive calendar days of employment with an employer, and as long as their work does not displace other workers. After 90 consecutive days of employment or the employee reaches 20 years of age, whichever comes first, the employee must receive the current federal minimum wage or the state minimum wage, whichever is higher. There are programs requiring federal certification that allow for payment of less than the full federal minimum wage, but those programs are not limited to the employment of young workers.

Myth: Restaurant servers don't need to be paid the minimum wage since they receive tips.
Not true: An employer can pay a tipped employee as little as $2.13 per hour in direct wages, but only if that amount plus tips equal at least the federal minimum wage and the worker retains all tips and customarily and regularly receives more than $30 a month in tips. Often, an employee's tips combined with the employer's direct wages of at least $2.13 an hour do not equal the federal minimum hourly wage. When that occurs, the employer must make up the difference. Some states have minimum wage laws specific to tipped employees. When an employee is subject to both the federal and state wage laws, he or she is entitled to the provisions of each law which provides the greater benefits.

Myth: Increasing the minimum wage is bad for businesses.
Not true: Academic research has shown that higher wages sharply reduce employee turnover which can reduce employment and training costs.

Myth: Increasing the minimum wage is bad for the economy.
Not true: Since 1938, the federal minimum wage has been increased 22 times. For more than 75 years, real GDP per capita has steadily increased, even when the minimum wage has been raised.

Myth: The federal minimum wage goes up automatically as prices increase.
Not true: While some states have enacted rules in recent years triggering automatic increases in their minimum wages to help them keep up with inflation, the federal minimum wage does not operate in the same manner. An increase in the federal minimum wage requires approval by Congress and the president. However, in his call to gradually increase the current federal minimum, President Obama has also called for it to adjust automatically with inflation. Eliminating the requirement of formal congressional action would likely reduce the amount of time between increases, and better help low-income families keep up with rising prices.

Myth: The federal minimum wage is higher today than it was when President Reagan took office.
Not true: While the federal minimum wage was only $3.35 per hour in 1981 and is currently $7.25 per hour in real dollars, when adjusted for inflation, the current federal minimum wage would need to be more than $8 per hour to equal its buying power of the early 1980s and more nearly $11 per hour to equal its buying power of the late 1960s. That's why President Obama is urging Congress to increase the federal minimum wage and give low-wage workers a much-needed boost.

Myth: Increasing the minimum wage lacks public support.
Not true: Raising the federal minimum wage is an issue with broad popular support. Polls conducted since February 2013 when President Obama first called on Congress to increase the minimum wage have consistently shown that an overwhelming majority of Americans support an increase.

Myth: Increasing the minimum wage will result in job losses for newly hired and unskilled workers in what some call a “last-one-hired-equals-first-one-fired” scenario.
Not true: Minimum wage increases have little to no negative effect on employment as shown in independent studies from economists across the country. Academic research also has shown that higher wages sharply reduce employee turnover which can reduce employment and training costs.

Myth: The minimum wage stays the same if Congress doesn't change it.
Not true: Congress sets the minimum wage, but it doesn't keep pace with inflation. Because the cost of living is always rising, the value of a new minimum wage begins to fall from the moment it is set.

Warm Kitten

In life it's best to be just who you are.
And know what actions you do effects others.
This is something that is not in the mind set today.
People don't have a clue the should have a clue.
To a Tea Party type conservative a liberal is the
devil I think because Tea Party type conservatives expect
you to live the life of a catfish swimming in the bottom of
the water where all the shit drops down at!
You don't see Liberals do that stuff! I'm not going to swim in shit!

And the point is... They are the evil ones being they expect
you to live in the lake of fire or shit just like they do.
And they call you the devil because your not in shit also!
If you want the better for the good you can't be in shit!

Anyway in life you don't need to make a deal with the spirit of Jazz!
In the end it's not worth a warm kitten going up your A$$!

***That episode of the Mighty Boosh is taken out of the story
of Robert Johnson king of the Delta Blues!

Wednesday, November 25, 2015

Schools going to a four day week

There are many schools thinking about going to a four day week.
Yes it would be bad for kids but more it would drop the support staff.
Being they would lose days at work, 32 hours a week.
That is $235 out of your $7+ wage after taxes.
Or going from 160 hours a month to 128 hours a month.
99% of the support staff would have to quit to get a better paying job to pay 
the rent. Or work two jobs, killing job responsibility and ending functionality 
of the worker in the work place making zombie workers!

This also is the view of fail "Do more with less" which is I have failed and have
to get the workers to run around in a panic and that is not a good thing to do
for Teachers. It's bad managing it says you have failed and are in a panic!
You don't want to take days away from Teachers!
There are only so many custodians around to give them hugs!

But really, it's a bad thing for schools to do that you will loose most of your
support staff and what Teacher will clean the bathroom today?

Something will have to be done life changes. If you pay taxes and get payed
like you are from the 1950's then all you will have is the 1950's!
Something will go up to get more funding!

~~~~~Four-day school weeks: Districts weighing benefits, but Hofmeister 
says it's bad for kids
A sudden surge in public schools looking to entice teachers and squeeze more
out of limited budgets by moving to a four-day week could change the way
thousands of Oklahoma students learn.

But State Superintendent Joy Hofmeister isn’t pulling punches on the subject
she says any benefits are questionable at best and believes the scheme is
detrimental to academic instruction.

“I think this is certainly being amplified in local school districts
because of the teacher shortage. Frankly, I think it’s a short-term, promotional
tactic to attract teachers at the expense of kids,” she said.

~~~~~More than half of teachers consider quitting in the next TWO years 
as staff struggle with heavy workload and want better work-life balance
More than half of teachers are considering quitting in the next two years, their 
union revealed. Staff are struggling with the heavy workload and want a better 
work-life balance, a survey by the National Union of Teachers (NUT) found. 
Nearly 40 per cent said they suffered low morale while 47 per cent said they 
believed the school curriculum and pupil assessment methods were 'narrow 
and uncreative'.

The union urged the Government to take urgent action, as some teachers claimed 
they worked 60-hour weeks.    

The YouGov survey of around 1,000 teachers also found them reporting reductions
in the number of support staff and teachers in schools across the country. 
Meanwhile, Michael Gove's introduction of performance related pay was labelled 
'not practicable'. Two thirds of those questioned said they were against it. 

A further 62 per cent thought plans for 500 new free schools will have a negative effect.
Christine Blower, NUT general secretary, said: 'The Government's current priorities are 
both wrong and profoundly out of step with the views of teachers. 
'They are the essential cause of the growing problems with teacher supply.
'This survey demonstrates the combined, negative impact of the accountability 
agenda on teacher workload and morale. 

'Teachers feel that the Department for Education's work thus far to tackle workload 
has been totally inadequate.' She added that nearly one million pupils were expected 
to join schools across the country over the next decade.  

She said: 'The Government's solution so far has been to build free schools, 
often where there are surplus places, and to allow class sizes to grow.
'Add to this a situation where teachers are leaving in droves and teacher recruitment 
remains low. We now have a perfect storm of crisis upon crisis in the schools system.
'The Department for Education remains wilfully and recklessly unable to see that they 
are the cause of teacher misery across England.'

Nick Gibb, schools minister, said teaching recruitment is at its highest level since 2008.
He said: 'We are working with the profession to understand and tackle the top issues
that teachers said caused the most bureaucracy, with leading education experts taking
action on key areas such as marking and lesson planning.'

Saturday, November 21, 2015

Something to hold on to and the selfie arms

Long selfie arms is something good that stands out of the zombie land of
no individuality. To be one with everyone is to grow to something better.
And there needs to be a individuality pointing to the growth!

It gives you something to hold on to!

More than the long arms selfie I hope to see more tube arms come back!

Why? Well what are you missing in your life? For the ones you love you want the better
in life for them! I love a married woman myself and want to take her out panhandling
in another town. I do love her and want to be supportive, to date her!
Life is too short to chase after a career in your 50's you will be 60 in no time! LIVE!

And with my old lady I still support, whenever I take her out somewhere in town
I make my car backfire with her in it. People look at us, it's funny as hell.
She laughs, there is nothing wrong with fire coming out of your cars tail pipe
driving by the Red Lobster with people standing outside of it looking at us!
But the point is to be into the living! Not be a member of the zombie land!

Please think about that!

Monday, November 16, 2015

I'm a big fluffy cat take me home

If you love a married woman and she is worth it to jump into a fire,
then it's love. This is a story about love. I am a lover and in that noted is the
word love! It's about love! To be her lover. Otherwise it would be called sexer
and in that case that is not even a word as it's about love!
Things that have higher meanings!

The willingness to meet both to have a talk, wanting to date the wife,
being the willingness to jump should be noted for it's value!
The willingness to bend over backward for her, support, a smile.
To make it work, by such value there!
Willing for long term that will last! Lasting being she would be good for me!
She's gold!

She is the vortex, it's about her and what's wrong with that,
being her big fluffy cat! I'm ok with that if there is a smile then
it all has it's meaning! It's about things that have deeper value,
like to have other emotional support offered to her!
It's not sex, sex, sex it's support, support, support!
My needs are easy, it's about her needs that fills my needs!
To lift her up, she is the desired one regardless!
Have coffee and talk, I have a 10ft couch!

The main point is to talk about it give me a yes, no or something!
Something is needed, life is bad in the abyss! Please give me a something!
And that is the point the willingness to meet the wife and husband to
talk about it! I know I am willing. That is better than this abyss!

I'm a big fluffy cat, how about that! Please make that call and take me home!
It's up to you sweetheart! We would be a good pair, I would be good for you!
I am willing to make it work! You are a higher value!

~~~~~5 Myths About Polyamory
Myth #1: Poly people are unsatisfied
When someone goes outside a relationship looking for companionship or sex,
it's natural to assume there's something missing from their romance.
But that doesn't appear to be the case for polyamorous individuals.
Melissa Mitchell, a graduate student in psychology at the University of Georgia,
conducted research while at Simon Frasier University in Canada on 1,093 polyamorous
individuals. The participants were asked to list a primary partner and a secondary partner
(more on that later), and they averaged nine years together with their primary and
about two-and-a-half years with their secondary.

Mitchell and her colleagues surveyed their participants about how satisfied and
fulfilled they felt in their relationships. They found that people were more satisfied
with, felt more close to and more supported by their primary partner, suggesting
that their desire for a secondary partner had little to do with dissatisfaction in the
relationship. And satisfaction with an outside partner didn't hurt the primary relationship.

"Polyamorous relationships are relatively independent of one another,"
Mitchell said in January at the annual meeting of the Society for Personality and
Social Psychology in New Orleans. "We tend to assume in our culture that if you have
your needs met outside your relationship, some kind of detrimental effect is going to result,
and that's not what we find here."

Myth #2: Polyamorous people are still paired up
Many polyamorous people do form relationships that orbit around a committed couple,
with each person having relationships on the side. But the primary partner/secondary
partner model is an oversimplification for many poly relationships, said Bjarne Holmes,
a psychologist at Champlain College in Vermont. "I'd say about 30 percent or so of the
polyamorous population would say they think of one partner as being primary,"
Holmes told LiveScience. "A large part of the population would say,
'No, I don't buy into that idea of primary or secondary.'"

Many polyamorous people resist that hierarchy and say they get different things
out of different relationships, Holmes said. There are also many people who live in triads
or quads, in which three or four people have relationships with each other or with just one
or a few members of the group. "What I've come across most is actually configurations of
two males and a female living together," Holmes said.

Myth #3: Polyamory is a way to avoid commitment
Research by Amy Moors, a graduate student at the University of Michigan, finds that
people whose relationship style involves little emotional entanglement often say they'd
love a polyamorous relationship, thinking that they could have the benefits of coupledom
without too much attachment. Wrong. Joining a polyamorous relationship and thinking it's
going to be a commitment-free breeze would likely be a huge mistake. For one thing,
of polyamorous relationships are very serious and stable Holmes says he's interviewed
people who've been legally married for 40 years and in a relationship with a second
partner for 20.

Secondly, successful polyamorous partners communicate relentlessly, Holmes said:
"They communicate to death." It's the only way to ensure that everyone's needs are
met and no one is feeling jealous or left out in a relationship that involves many people.

Myth #4: Polyamory is exhausting
The monogamists in the crowd may be shaking their heads. Isn't all that communication
and negotiation exhausting? It's true that polyamorous relationships take lots of time,
said Elizabeth Sheff, a legal consultant and former Georgia State University professor
who is writing a book on polyamorous families. "Even if you're able to hang out together,
giving four relationships the amount of care and feeding and maintenance they need can be
a full-time job," Sheff told LiveScience.

But people who thrive in polyamory seem to love that job, Holmes said.
Polyamorous people report feeling energized by their multiple relationships and say that
good feelings in one translate to good feelings in others. "I had someone describe to me
that love breeds more feelings of love," Holmes said.

Myth #5: Polyamory is bad for the kids
One big question about polyamory is how it affects families with children.
The answer to that is not entirely clear — there have been no large-scale, long-term
studies on the outcomes of kids growing up with polyamorous parents.

But some early research is suggesting that polyamory doesn't have to have a bad impact
on the kids. Sheff has interviewed more than 100 members of polyamorous families,
including about two dozen children of polyamorous parents ranging in age from
5 to 17 years old.

Parents list some disadvantages of the polyamorous lifestyle for their kids, namely stigma
from the outside world and the danger of a child becoming attached to a partner who might
later leave the arrangement, a risk most tried to ameliorate by being extremely cautious
about introducing partners to their children. For their part, kids in the 5- to 8-year-old range
were rarely aware that their families were different from the norm, Sheff found.
They thought about their parents' boyfriends and girlfriends as they related to themselves,
not as they related to mom or dad.

"A 6-year-old may not think of someone as mommy's girlfriend, but think of that person
as 'the one who brings Legos' or 'the one who takes me out to ice cream,'" Sheff said.

From ages 9 to 12, kids became more aware of their families as different, but mostly
said it was easy to stay "closeted," because people tend to mistake polyamorous
arrangements as blended families or other relics of modern relationship complexity.
The teens in the 13- to 17-year-old crowd tended to take a more in-your-face approach,
Sheff said, "an approach of, 'If you think this is wrong you're going to have to prove it to
me. My family is fine.'"

Some teens indicated that they'd consider polyamory for themselves; others weren't
interested at all. Both parents and kids saw advantages to the polyamorous lifestyle
as well. For parents, having more than two adults on hand to help with child-rearing
could be a lifesaver. Kids also reported liking having multiple adults whom they trusted
though they complained that with so much supervision, they couldn't get away with anything.
Children also spoke of the advantages of growing up knowing they could make their own
decisions about how to build their families.

The results are likely somewhat optimistic, Sheff said, as dysfunctional families are
usually less likely to volunteer for studies. But the lack of widespread trauma among
the children of polyamorous families suggests that polyamory is not, by definition,
terrible for kids.

"One of the main things this does indicate to me is that these families can be really good
places to raise children," Sheff said. "Not necessarily that all of them, definitionally, are,
but that they may be, depending on how families work it out."

Saturday, November 14, 2015

In the light of Paris attacks isis long term will fail

With the attacks in Paris I have to note in the long run ISIS will fail.
And whoever replaces ISIS will fail also. All of this won't last in the long run.

ISIS is like rednecks in the south but a different version.
"Anything you don’t understand, Mr. Rankin, you attribute to God. God for you is
where you sweep away all the mysteries of the world, all the challenges to our
intelligence. You simply turn your mind off and say God did it."
(Or in the case did it for their god.)

Life will and always will go around ISIS and related,
it is a run to a fail every time. So why be that fail?

Isn't it time to let it go and grow ISIS is crap on the worlds shoes
it won't stay there!

Paris will move on again without ISIS!

I show support with Paris in the attacks!

Sunday, November 8, 2015

The good catches up.

I have been in many strange relationships. I always seem to be the healer,
I always seem to end up with strange ones and there is nothing wrong with
that they where good for me also. Love is not a one way road! 
It's good to see or know there is growth down the road from me that I give.
I guess like after they think about it or something like it.
Love is not finite!

I have red string of fate type relationships to far out to be explained.
Met them before I met them and more.

I have a now gay soul mate. It started with me dating her older sister in college and 
she took me home to meet the family I saw her younger sister we both knew it was 
meant to be, but I was too stupid to know it at the times in 89, 98!  

I had a cool barfing hair dresser that took me to a gay bar being that was
her security because the was abused my a biker gang. 
I'm not gay I was supporting her. Nothing like......

My high school girlfriend was a ex teen prostitute, someone pimped her at 13
I think. They took her to Vegas then a long time later they took her home broke 
her jaw dropped her off rung the door bell at her parents house, and she was my 
girlfriend after that when she was 15. In the 90's I remember someone calling me 
at 6AM about being tested for AIDS one of the guys had AIDS that got her. 
I tested good and she is still here also so it was ok. 
Still kind of freaks you out about it even though we didn't really have sex.

My old lady her mom tried to kill her when she was a kid and bad and bad 
happened to her. And added after my divorce being un happy for it's own reasons.
I had a bouncy time between a girlfriend I loved. It was on again off again.
I lived in three places at the time because I didn't know where I would end up! 

And from that bouncy, bouncy times and all my other loves comes on a light
for Polyamory. Love both but not all in the same house!
My old lady is a old lady and change is not wanted there in something like that.
She's ok with me finding someone new but keep her out of it, but support her.
She knows I won't leave her I need her also. Polyamory!

I fell for a Married "Gypsy lady!" I should of been on my knees sooner!
She has boom, boom, but........ Maybe next year? I do love her!
Damn we need to talk! At least she would be entertained by me!
I'm ok with that! Oh please!

Other than my loves is about my dad dieing, me being hit by a car on a moped,

I had a cursed car that tried to kill me four times. I had to jump on my roller skates 
in to a creek next to a road or get hit by car once.  
Worked in a hotel with two of the 911 guys was in a elevator
alone with both of them once. Protected destiny? I think so I have a strange life!
A college friend had a lady that gave him DMT giving him a psychosis for a few days 
he was seeing green lizards etc.
It's in my writings here, about all that stuff but the point is to point
for those that have bad in their life, the good catches up!

For me it's good to be poly, why put up walls? 
I love everyone anyway! And the road I came from I understand
life is not to an end! It's a beginning of a road and worth the ride!

I need to note human is human with rights. Gay rights are fixed and coming next 
is Polyamory! Don't discriminate my Polyamory thank you!

****There is a lot I won't say here about my life or others lives,
even if it seems like a lot there is a lot not said!
It is covered like the "What happens in the hotel stays in the hotel!"
But still to protect the guilty (Normal human behavior) all of the stuff
names etc is withheld.
It really does not matter these days anyway, it only makes them more adorable!
But what matters is a trust! Now that's love!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sales Tax Plan For Schools Reflects a Shift

Being Oklahoma reflecting on what I say about reductionist thinking.
Low taxes, low taxes... Well government has to run on something!
If Oklahoma is not going to raise taxes, then there should be a shift to
the sales tax going higher. Matthew 22:21 A good point noted!

That would be a fair thing to do being the failure and the need for surivial
from the taxes being lowered. It's about time they pay their fair share.

Noted the poor buys less than the rich guys. Food stamps have no sales tax!
Federal law prohibits sales tax from being charged on food stamp purchases.

So the rich guy buying the Starbucks everyday vs 

the poor like me that would make something like
it but in a jar to save money would pay less 
sales tax as I buy less costly stuff! 
Fancy Starbucks!  

It's ok to raise the sales tax being the rich can 
afford it, and ends up in a naturalistic policy of 
low pay vs sales. 

Smashing as it is the sales tax going up would be needed with such a downfall of 
funding going on in Oklahoma! The whole school system would really go to hell
without doing something! That might not be so bad but really!

~~~~~Boren Sales Tax Plan Reflects Shift in Oklahoma Tax Base
University of Oklahoma President David Boren’s proposed penny sales tax for
education reflects a fundamental shift in the way the state is paying for public schools,
higher education and other services. Economists interviewed by Oklahoma Watch
expressed concern about reducing the state’s reliance on income taxes and increasing
its dependence on sales taxes to finance essential state functions.

Boren said in an interview that he shared those concerns, but was convinced
Oklahoma’s public education system faces such big funding cuts that
“the education crisis trumps the tax policy question.”
“Our choice is to either do this or do nothing,” he said.

An Oklahoma Watch data analysis shows that income tax cuts approved by the
Legislature over the last 10 years have reduced state revenues by nearly
$1 billion a year, roughly the same amount as next year’s predicted budget shortfall.

Boren is leading a ballot initiative campaign to persuade Oklahomans to approve a
one-cent sales tax increase that would restore about $600 million a year in funding for
public schools and higher education. His group plans to file its petition language and
is expected announce its backers this week. If the group is able to gather enough
petition signatures, the penny sales tax would appear on the general election
ballot in November 2016.

If voters approved the measure, it would restore the education funds that have
been lost over the last decade. Analysts acknowledged that might be the only
practical way to address Oklahoma’s educational woes, but was not necessarily
good tax policy.

“Oklahoma has a regressive tax system, and the sales tax is a big part of that,”
said Carl Davis, research director for the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy
in Washington, a nongovernment research group. ITEP did an analysis of Oklahoma’s
tax system showing that an average low-income family spends about 10 percent of its
budget on state and local taxes, compared with about 4 percent for high-income
families. Davis said Oklahoma is one of several conservative states, including
neighboring Kansas, which have been shifting from income taxes toward sales taxes
to finance core state services such as education, transportation, health and
public safety.

“It’s a trend that’s been going on for a number of years, mainly on the theory that
relying more on consumption taxes is better for state economies.
Whether that’s actually true or not is highly doubtful,” Davis said.

“What we do know [is that] when you move more toward consumption taxes…
it does increase the unfairness of state tax codes.”

Oklahoma’s top personal income tax rate has been raised and lowered many times
since the Legislature created the tax 100 years ago. The highest it ever got was
17 percent for some taxpayers from 1979 through 1988, according to
Oklahoma Tax Commission records.

Over the past decade, the Legislature has voted four times to reduce the top rate,
from 6.65 percent in 2005 to 5.0 percent today. Some of the reductions were
phased in over several years and subject to revenue growth triggers.

Tax Commission data shows that income tax reductions approved over the last
decade have reduced annual state revenue collections by more than $900 million
a year. If the state had enough revenue growth to trigger a final approved cut in
2018, it would cause an additional loss of $100 million or so.

At this point, with state revenues plunging because of lower oil prices, that scenario
appears doubtful. The Oklahoma Equalization Board won’t estimate next year’s
budget shortfall until mid-December, but preliminary speculation suggests it could
be as much as $1 billion.

The Boren plan would add another penny to the state sales tax, currently 4.5 cents.
(Cities and counties impose additional sales taxes.) The 1-cent increase would raise
about $600 million a year for public schools and higher education.

“We are facing, I think, really the dismantlement of public education in Oklahoma.
I don’t think that’s an alarmist statement,” Boren said.

“We could put to productive use a billion new dollars. Instead, we face a $1 billion
shortfall in the legislature. It’s very likely that there will be even more significant cuts
in education this year. If we’re 49th now, it’s very likely we’ll go to 51st after this year,
trying to close the budget gap. We’ll be at the bottom of the elevator shaft.”

Boren, a Democrat, said his group chose the sales tax because initial polling showed
that trying to raise education funds by increasing the income tax would be difficult and
divisive. But when pollsters queried voters about a sales tax for education, initial
support was nearly 70 percent among Republicans and Democrats.

“This is not where we started out,” Boren said, referring to the sales tax.
“It was the last option standing. It was the lesser of evils.
The biggest evil, I think, was to do nothing.”

Boren said it would be pointless to choose a different funding vehicle if it appeared
certain it would be rejected. “There’s no use even trying to do something unless it’s
bipartisan and has a chance of passage,” he said.

Boren said the petition would contain language designed to set a baseline level of
legislative appropriations. That would prevent lawmakers from simply reducing their
future education outlays to offset the sales tax revenue coming in, he said.

Mickey Hepner, an economist and dean of the University of Central Oklahoma
College of Business in Edmond, said he probably would sign Boren’s petition,
but wished Oklahoma had chosen a different path.

“We’re already a high-sales-tax state. Our sales taxes are already above the
national average. Our income taxes are below the national average, particularly after
we’ve cut them over the last decade,” Hepner said. Hepner said the Oklahoma Legislature
seemed to be following a trend of reducing income taxes in hopes that doing so would
stimulate economic growth. He said there was “negligible” evidence that such growth
actually had occurred, because the stimulative effect of reductions in income taxes was
offset by the contractionary effect of fewer expenditures by schoolteachers and other
recipients of state revenue in a balanced-budget environment.

“We should have known that cutting income taxes over the last decade would make it
much more difficult to fund core government services like education,” Hepner said.
“So the teacher shortage crisis that we’re in now was avoidable, had we not been
focused so much on tax cuts.”

It’s unclear how the sales tax plan will be received by various interest groups,
including cities and counties, social-service advocates and policy organizations.
In a written statement, Jonathan Small, executive vice president for the 
Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs, a conservative think tank, said Oklahoma
could increase teacher pay without imposing tax increases.
The state could cut non-core government spending and use the savings to pay for
the salary hikes, he said. "Also, given our state’s direct competition with Texas, 
we must eliminate the personal income tax for teachers just like we do for aerospace 
engineers in Oklahoma," Small said. (The state allows aerospace engineers to 
claim an annual personal income-tax credit of up to $5,000 for five years.)

Larkin Warner, a retired Oklahoma State University economist who has
advised the state on tax policy, said all states tend to rely on three major
sources of income to support essential services such as education: income taxes,
property taxes and sales taxes.

Because Oklahoma is an agricultural state, it has had a historical aversion to
property taxes, Warner said. Consequently, the state has one of the lowest
average property tax rates in the nation.

Now, Warner said, the state seemed to have decided that it doesn’t like income taxes
either, placing most of the burden of financing government on the sales tax.

“We just merrily go along cutting the income tax,” Warner said.
“We hate the property tax worse than poison. We’ve already ridden the sales tax to
where it’s way too high… We’re kind of in a pickle, and there’s no solution if we’re
committed to getting rid of the income tax, which appears to be the case.”

***I also have to ask why haven't Oklahoma used it's "Rainy Day Fund"
to help pull the schools out. In education you get what you pay for and
the funding is low! So expect low until funding goes up!

I also need to emphasize a personal opinion I have that schools need
to benchmark the kids parents before the kids takes the test!
There are too many confederate flags and Tea Party stickers on the
back of trucks in my town!

Saturday, November 7, 2015


Conservatism is evil! Why?

It is a good point in life to know if you are a "Sadomasochist voter."
Because it's best for you to not be one, also there are people that
don't like to suffer like you do and don't like you making them suffer.
And that is why I say "Everyone is a victim of stupid people!"
You need to change, really, you do!

Many think they are living the life but it's in the dark. Much like the dark ages!
Isn't it best to get out of the dark and into the light?

Why call it "sadomasochist voter?" Well that voting against yourself is also
against everyone else and that is why I say "Everyone is a victim of stupid people!"
Because they are!

Why vote for people that want to take things away from you, like low taxes?
Why save $0.20 on a case of beer, being that is about all I can afford vs
a rich guy saving $1000 on a new Dodge truck that cost more than my house.
I was needing that $1000! I make $7 after taxes and would rely on food stamps.

Looking around and thinking about it's clear the "Sadomasochist voter" 
is because they like it that way and expect everyone
to live bad like they do. They like their misery, they like it
wanting to decide for you even when it withholds your and others rights.

People don't want to be a victim of stupid people so they know
and will take action or let natural section do it's thing.
Like won't raise the wages, then let them buy less stuff.
Better pay = better sales but no lets stay home and buy nothing!
They will have to raise the pay sometime. No pay going up makes
the town look bad as more and more homes fall over with people that 
can't afford wood to fix their homes. The pay is low the town is low also!

Also on the other hand why did Democrats just sit there and do nothing letting
George W. Bush the guy with the DUI from Texas and known to be drunk,
get in and let us all go to hell.

Let us all go and like a house with termites it cost a lot to repair being you can't fix
it with duct tape! The wood etc cost money! But noted why do noting and let 
Bush do that? Like a conservatard running the country like he runs his own house
falling over and ready to be bulldozed because he was too poor to fix it!

America is not run like a small town. If it was, we would have nothing 
like they do in small towns!

I was pointing at the National debt back then. 
It was a clear crash coming. The National debt is a issue now also and is why I 
say we need a Socialist in office. Action is needed for down the road!

Or be the "Sadomasochist voter" and put a shit hole in office
that wants to reduce everything. Taking you down, taking you down!
It's like say being chased by Republican grannies that don't like Polyamory
because they want you to live in their hell because they like it
other wise they would not be that way. 

They expect you to never grow like they can't grow! 
Their traditional values keep them in a life of fear and control and 
no growth everything grows around them while they think they are all high 
and mighty, not understanding life! Because they don't ask why. 
What it is, is what it is because they can't think for themselves.

People that think for themselves tend to see they don't like being
stuck in with something that does not work!

Please don't listen to those harvesting the turd farm, with a
TeaBagger sticker on their truck! No one likes their shit! 


Please let them know those days are over! 
The pursuit of happiness is far more valued 
than the pursuit of un-happiness, even if they like it bad!

Or being a realist with no fingers in my ears pretending I didn't hear.
This Sadomasochist conservatism ends in natural selection.
Low pay, you can't fix your home, it falls over.
No food starve and die, die, just like the dinosaurs did!
Why live a life of nothing making others have nothing.
That is the point! Don't be that way!
It makes Hillary slap her chest at you! 
I said earlier that she should of slapped her chest at those Republicans 
at the 11 hour Benghazi grilling. And I guess she did. Close enough! 
Putting water under the bridge about the time she was working at 
Walmart corp being silent during Walmarts union busting activitys 
"Wal-Mart’s vehement anti-unionism, for example,
It's a matter of what is best for the country. And that would be like socialist because of 
action not being taken. The ladder is not being kicked hard enough!
I stand by Bernie Sanders. I respect Hillary for how she is doing with all the crap
of the Republitards. I understand! Keep slapping your chest at them!
But America is in the unknown right now. No one knows! 
We need a harder Socialist! Really, it's time!

Friday, November 6, 2015

Know about Fracking and Tar Sands

For those that want the Keystone pipeline should know what is required in
getting the oil out of the Tar sand.

"Separation of the oil from sands requires an abundance of clean hot water, 
which unfortunately cannot be recycled, and must be stored in aboveground 
open-air ponds that can contaminate water through evaporation and seepage.  
It takes about two tons of tar sands to produce one barrel (42 gallons) of oil."

So in that fact I do expect the Tar Sand to be more likely to be bought and
shipped to another country that has lower standards of their environment.
Most Americans don't want that nasty in their town!
They don't want to be a victim of stupid people that don't care otherwise
with black smoke going out their diesel trucks. 
It ends in natural selection and it's best not to listen to them as
I don't think they think ahead as they have that reductionist thinking
of expecting us to die with them in the end!

But you do need to think for yourself. And to do that you need to know
what it all is about.

~~~~~Fracking and Tar Sands: The New "Magic Bullets?"
Portland is the postcard city of Maine.  Busy streets host tourists sampling blueberry jams and enjoying lobster rolls on the wharf, shoppers with arms full of L. L. Bean bags, meandering down the cobblestone, business people at lunch meetings on patios.  We’re all proud to be Mainers, proud of the allure that draws people from all over the world to visit us during all seasons, designating us “Vacationland.”  We’re the second—yes, the second—greenest state in the country right behind Vermont.  That’s more reason for our residents to be proud, and protective, from our mountains to our shores; especially when our own South Portland could be the point of delivery for an unfavorable crude oil product called
“tar sands.” the Portland Pipeline Corp. operates a terminal and a pair of parallel, 236-mile-long underground pipes in South Portland that supply crude oil from below Casco Bay to a refinery in Montreal.   These pipes are over sixty years old, and cross major Maine watersheds, including Sebago Lake.  Portland Pipeline Corp. has stated having no immediate plans to reverse the flow of the line; however, the South Portland City Council chose to ask voters in November if they would like an ordinance to preemptively prevent tar sands crudes from streaming through the city.

Tar sands (also referred to as oil sands) represent approximately two-thirds of the world’s oil reserves.  They are essentially grains of sand that are wrapped in layers of clay, water and bitumen, a heavy, viscous, black oil.  Sands are gritty, not liquid and therefore cannot be pumped from the ground; they must be mined and then diluted with a plethora of volatile organic chemicals before they can be transported through pipelines.

Separation of the oil from sands requires an abundance of clean hot water, which unfortunately cannot be recycled, and must be stored in aboveground open-air ponds that can contaminate water through evaporation and seepage.  It takes about two tons of tar sands to produce one barrel (42 gallons) of oil.
There is a sensitivity to oil transport in any form, by ship, rail, and of course, pipeline.  Look at the recent spill in Mayflower, Arkansas where 200,000 gallons of oil cascaded from the 65-year-old Pegasus pipeline owned by Exxon Mobil.  Pipes constructed before the 1970s commonly have problematic hairline cracks due to faulty weld techniques.

Another hot topic in the energy world is hydrofracking.  Hydrofracking is a technique for extracting natural gas and other elements like uranium and petroleum.  Water, sand and chemicals are mixed and injected at high pressure into wells drilled from shale beds.  The pressure creates small fractures that are usually smaller than one millimeter.

Through hydrofracking, the United States has become energy independent, and the price of natural gas has dropped tremendously.  However, fracking does have disadvantages such as increased seismic activity in areas where hydrofracking is conducted, serious depletion of fresh water.  Also, where toxic chemicals are being forced into the ground at high pressures, land and water supplies are becoming contaminated.
Remember ethanol?  Yes, ethanol, that high-cost, low-yield by-product of corn that now isn’t much more than an additive in gasoline.  Ethanol was supposed to revolutionize the face of energy.  Ethanol was supposed to be a cleaner, greener way to wean America from foreign oil dependence by powering our homes and vehicles into the future.

But as some environmentalists will tell you, take into consideration what resources are depleted to grow corn.  Corn is not a perennial crop; it needs to be completely replanted every single season, and fertilized amply.  Land needs to be cultivated annually if crops are not rotated.  For every 26.1 pounds of corn—about 104 ears of corn—one gallon of ethanol is produced.  All things considered, corn isn’t much cleaner than gasoline.  Also, corn prices have nearly tripled over the last six years, which has made feed more expensive for livestock farmers.

There’s a common theme between the harvesting of tar sands, fracking and ethanol, and it’s this: we have an inherent, societal inability to assess detrimental environmental externalities and net economic benefit.  What that means is that without considering the potential impact on the environment and rapidly depleting resources, these bandwagons are jumped upon blindly.

At Thayer, we’re seeing an increased tendency for consumers to rush into converting to natural gas units without considering the equipment they have to upgrade.  Natural gas may seem like a more economical option, but take the opportunity to develop a long-term plan.  Natural gas may cost more where a comprehensive preventative maintenance plan could effectively prolong equipment life, save more money, and present less of an environmental strain.

~~~~~Fracking and Tar Sands
Some of the worst impacts are on the air however. Getting the oil from the oil sands
with steam injection and refining leads to major global warming impacts.
In fact this process leads to two to four times the amount of greenhouse gases per
barrel of the end-product of refined oil as that produced when extracting conventional oil.
If you include the final numbers, from oil sands extraction to combustion you can see
that this is one of the major causes of global warming; the emission is 10 to 45% more
greenhouse gases than regular oil!

Yes Veto the Keystone XL oil pipeline

All oil pipes leak!

Even more when you get to moving tar sand
with what it takes to get the stuff moving.
Tar does not flow well in pipes and you know they won't add water to make it flow!
Not to the fact it's full of carbon and that is a nasty thing to breakdown.

The Keystone making jobs is really for as long as it takes to make it.
When it is done how many jobs will be lost?

With gas prices being low right now it does not matter because
"Tar sands miners want Keystone XL because it will help them ship oil overseas
to an international market, where their product will fetch more money
and add billions of dollars in annual profits. That's a losing deal for everyone
except Big Oil."

I am glad to see the nasty thing get put down! There is much bad about it,
really you just have to think a little about it, unless your last brain cell
is flickering in that case all I can say is life is better thinking for yourself!
Look into it and ask what is the cost down the road of the pipeline!

~~~~Stopping the Keystone XL oil pipeline
Studies show that tar sands pipelines are more vulnerable to leaks than those
carrying traditional crude because of the oil's corrosive nature and the chemicals
necessary to make it run through the pipes. Despite the industry's grand safety claims,
we also know from recent spills and subsequent government investigations that its
leak-detection systems are subpar and its spill containment and clean-up methods
inadequate. Just look at the 2010 tar sands disaster in western Michigan the site of
what has become the most expensive onshore oil spill in U.S. history.
Four years and a billion dollars later, tar sands contamination still plagues the
Kalamazoo River and nearby communities.

A pipeline spill would threaten the land and water supply of some 110,000 ranches
and farms in Montana, South Dakota, and Nebraska that produced more than
$40 billion worth of food in 2012. In those three states alone, the pipeline would cross
1,073 rivers, lakes, and streams, including the Yellowstone River in Montana and
the Platte River in Nebraska, along with tens of thousands of acres of wetlands.
It would also run within a mile of more than 3,000 wells that provide drinking
and irrigation water in those states.

Because of its silty composition, mining and refining tar sands oil demands an
enormous amount of energy -- much more than conventional crude.
Keystone XL would ramp up tar sands production, requiring even more energy
and creating greater carbon pollution: the equivalent of Americans driving an
unthinkable 60 billion extra miles every year.
NASA scientist James Hansen estimates that the remaining tar sands reserves
contain twice the amount of carbon pollution emitted by the entire global oil industry
in all of human history. "If Canada proceeds and we do nothing,
" Hansen wrote in a New York Times editorial, "it will be game over for the climate."

Advocates tout the project as a national jobs creator. The reality is, Keystone XL
would likely kill more jobs than it would add. According the State Department,
it would create 1,950 construction jobs for two years.
Once complete? Thirty-five new permanent American jobs, according to pipeline
builder TransCanada. But won't refined tar sands oil help fuel the United States
and reduce gas prices? Think again. Tar sands miners want Keystone XL because
it will help them ship oil overseas to an international market, where their product
will fetch more money and add billions of dollars in annual profits.
That's a losing deal for everyone except Big Oil.

Thursday, November 5, 2015

Low pay is no sale need to grow

There is a lot of changes going on these days. The inequality pay issue is growing.
"Most Walmart workers can only dream of making $25,000 in a year.
Meanwhile, the Waltons get $25,000 per minute from their Walmart dividends alone."
Most in small towns make $1 every 9 minutes!

And to note the level of inequality, being massively divided.
And we are in the red zone as you look at the data.
"The other wealth gap—the 1% vs the 0.01%"

The issues of that? Going down the line, the poor spends what they earn.
So being their pay is low the divide is big and the money going from the poor too
the middle class and 1% is shrinking. So the divide of the 1% vs the 001% is growing.
Take from the 001% and give to the poor sends the money back up the ladder.

The money is not getting to the workers and in the light of supply and demand
there is less demand as they buy less as they have less to buy with.
And you have the failed push of pushing out quality merchandise to people that
more likely can't afford that. Quality cost money most don't have money
looking down the road with no wage increase.

With the reductionist thinking of reduce, reduce die thinking.
Keeping the pay from going up, cutting taxes.
Leads to the point Republicans like to impoverish their consumers.
But for what action is going on pushing it ends in natural selection
as a lack of sales.

And that is how it should work. Low pay = Low sales = Better pay to make sales.
You can't keep it rolling with most of the people causing a consumer based pricing
long term! Lowering the price to match the towns peoples income is death!
And also is high prices as the most of the poor won't buy those things anymore
being the price went up. Or the high prices make them buy less as those things
took most of their money.

So the pay needs to go up. It's ok to take a loss in paying a higher wage.
Being the whole town would be making a higher wage and will be going out
to spend what they earn. Making the stores more money!
"There is no growth without change, No change without loss
and no loss without pain."

Like the better pay would be just sitting there like it magically vanished.
And they would have to raise the cost of the merchandise to pay for the
higher wages. Like not knowing people spend what they earn and giving the
people money to burn is a good thing. As they are broke and with better pay
they will still be broke but spend more money going broke! A good thing!

But low pay keeps things low! Well why have it all go down because of
many broke people? If you spend less than you earn then the mass of people
like you will kill everything because most of them make nothing!

14 Ways an Economist Says I Love You and Invest

No matter how cornball is sounds there is always something that drives the market.
There is no use in denying it. It's love! Without that part the market sort of
wonders around lost pondering the meaning of life knowing what it is missing.
Like a empty 10ft couch just sitting there waiting for coffee and a talk!
Ghostly ghostly couch sitting there! One of those things where a single person
can't sit on it by themselves as it has something missing to it. It's other half!
But still the couch sits there waiting, in time, in time it hopes as it says I love you
please come see me! Wishing, hoping, oh please yes!

But to note "14 Ways an Economist Says I Love You" Is really true these days.


~~~~~Tips for better investment
When it comes to choosing what investment to go for, a one-size-fits-all approach just
doesn’t work – there isn’t a single investment product that will work for everyone.
We all have a unique set of personal circumstances and individual savings goals,
and it’s only when you take a closer look at these that you can begin to answer the
question as what is the best investment for me?

Some of the best ways to invest much better are discussed:

Put it another way – when will you need access to your money?
Certain investment products run for a fixed period of time, so if you have a specific
date in mind as to when you need access to your capital, then some product types
won’t be right for you. In addition, certain investments, such as shares,
are much longer lasting and shouldn’t be considered as short term investments.

Certain assets require a lump sum investment, such as corporate bonds or when
you’re putting down a deposit to purchase a property, and others offer the flexibility
of either lump sum or regular contributions, such as a cash ISA or stocks and shares ISA.
Some investments also have a minimum financial commitment, so knowing what you
can afford and whether you plan to make a one-off or an ongoing saving is
a good starting point.

We all have different reasons for saving, and the purpose of your investment can affect
how much risk you’re prepared to take with your money. If your investment is to pay for
your children’s education, then you may be investing over a long period of time,
and looking for a higher return, as a result you may be inclined to choose a
higher-risk investment option.

There are other investment products available that can also provide a regular income
such as annuities, or corporate bond funds, alternatively you could choose to invest in
a buy-to-let property to provide you with a rental income. Consumers may wish to
seek professional advice first before taking out such products as they often require
a huge commitment.