Monday, September 30, 2013
The Plain Truth: Obama Regulations Are Going to Up Your Power Bill ...
The Plain Truth: Obama Regulations Are Going to Up Your Power Bill ...: Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is hopping mad at Obama. Why? Well, McConnell is from Kentucky, one of the coal-producing states th...
Obama Regulations Are Going to Up Your Power Bill Thats For Sure!
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is hopping mad at Obama.
Why? Well, McConnell is from Kentucky, one of the coal-producing states
that’s about to take it in the chops from new Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) regulations.
McConnell explained the reason for his anger, saying, “The Obama administration has been waging a war on coal and Kentucky jobs ever since the president was elected. If these reports are accurate, his latest proposal is not only an open war on coal jobs, but on all the residents, jobs, and businesses across the commonwealth that rely on this vital industry.”
And guess what? McConnell is right. These regulations will sock it to Kentucky. The mines and coal-producing companies will likely have to lay off more employees. But what McConnell and the rest of the D.C. insiders have failed to mention is that everyone with a light switch, TV, or any other use for electricity, will also be a victim of these new regulations.
You see, coal is a cheap way of generating electricity, both in the United States and around the world. And coal plants have been the price leader because the resource is so plentiful. It’s not an exaggeration to call the United States the Saudi Arabia of coal. We have vast stores of it in the Appalachian and Rocky Mountains regions. In fact, it’s the fuel that made America an industrial power house.
But environmentalists don’t like coal because of its carbon footprint. You see, power generation creates almost 40% of the greenhouse gases emitted in the United States, and coal is a prime offender. But natural gas, on the other hand, emits about half as much carbon dioxide as coal. By moving toward natural gas, Obama will please the environmentalist lobby, a core constituency of his.
Natural Gas Takes the Lead
As a result of the hydraulic fracking boom, America has been swimming in cheap natural gas. Prices dropped from about $12 per million BTU in 2008 to about $2 in 2012…but the trend in 2013 is in the other direction. As gas prices rise past $4 per million BTU, it’ll once again become less expensive for utilities to burn coal.
But with these new regulations, coal’s share of the market will shrink rapidly, from 51% in 2003 to 42% in 2011 to a projected 35% in 2040, says the Energy Information Agency (EIA).
According to the EIA projections, the U.S. will build only gas-fired plants from here forward. Coal technology just can’t achieve the carbon reduction Obama’s EPA is demanding. And the bottom line for you, the consumer or businessman, is higher electricity bills. America traditionally has paid some of the lowest electricity bills in the world. The cost for electricity ranges normally from $0.08 to $0.20 per kilowatt hour in the United States… and coal and hydroelectric power are the reasons why our prices remain so low.
Now, though, we need to get ready for this to change. The states that were leading the regulatory charge against coal, California and New York, already pay the highest power bills in the country. And D.C. is plotting to make the rest of our power bills higher too. Obama wants us all to pay more, and his EPA is poised to pass these coal regulations to make it happen.
McConnell explained the reason for his anger, saying, “The Obama administration has been waging a war on coal and Kentucky jobs ever since the president was elected. If these reports are accurate, his latest proposal is not only an open war on coal jobs, but on all the residents, jobs, and businesses across the commonwealth that rely on this vital industry.”
And guess what? McConnell is right. These regulations will sock it to Kentucky. The mines and coal-producing companies will likely have to lay off more employees. But what McConnell and the rest of the D.C. insiders have failed to mention is that everyone with a light switch, TV, or any other use for electricity, will also be a victim of these new regulations.
You see, coal is a cheap way of generating electricity, both in the United States and around the world. And coal plants have been the price leader because the resource is so plentiful. It’s not an exaggeration to call the United States the Saudi Arabia of coal. We have vast stores of it in the Appalachian and Rocky Mountains regions. In fact, it’s the fuel that made America an industrial power house.
But environmentalists don’t like coal because of its carbon footprint. You see, power generation creates almost 40% of the greenhouse gases emitted in the United States, and coal is a prime offender. But natural gas, on the other hand, emits about half as much carbon dioxide as coal. By moving toward natural gas, Obama will please the environmentalist lobby, a core constituency of his.
Natural Gas Takes the Lead
As a result of the hydraulic fracking boom, America has been swimming in cheap natural gas. Prices dropped from about $12 per million BTU in 2008 to about $2 in 2012…but the trend in 2013 is in the other direction. As gas prices rise past $4 per million BTU, it’ll once again become less expensive for utilities to burn coal.
But with these new regulations, coal’s share of the market will shrink rapidly, from 51% in 2003 to 42% in 2011 to a projected 35% in 2040, says the Energy Information Agency (EIA).
According to the EIA projections, the U.S. will build only gas-fired plants from here forward. Coal technology just can’t achieve the carbon reduction Obama’s EPA is demanding. And the bottom line for you, the consumer or businessman, is higher electricity bills. America traditionally has paid some of the lowest electricity bills in the world. The cost for electricity ranges normally from $0.08 to $0.20 per kilowatt hour in the United States… and coal and hydroelectric power are the reasons why our prices remain so low.
Now, though, we need to get ready for this to change. The states that were leading the regulatory charge against coal, California and New York, already pay the highest power bills in the country. And D.C. is plotting to make the rest of our power bills higher too. Obama wants us all to pay more, and his EPA is poised to pass these coal regulations to make it happen.
The Plain Truth: Why Do Bernanke and Obama Want Another Economic Cr...
The Plain Truth: Why Do Bernanke and Obama Want Another Economic Cr...: We predicted here at The Plain Truth that Ben Bernanke wouldn’t taper the Federal Reserve bond buying this month. Yet all the pundits on ...
Why Do Bernanke and Obama Want Another Economic Crisis!
We predicted here at The Plain Truth that Ben Bernanke
wouldn’t taper the Federal Reserve bond buying this month. Yet all the
pundits on Wall Street and in the media were fooled. They were fooled
because they don’t understand the iron rule:
Don’t listen to what politicians say! Watch what they do.
If you act on the words of politicians (and Ben Bernanke is just another politician), be prepared to experience a head fake. Politicians tell you what you want to hear, not what they actually think or plan to do.
We were confident in making our prediction because we tuned out the D.C. propaganda and watched reality. Reality tells us that unemployment is higher than the numbers Obama’s Labor Department publishes. Inflation is higher than the Consumer Price Index (CPI) they publish. And the economy is much weaker than the Obama cheerleading squad is willing to admit.
If you don’t believe us, then give it the eye test. Drive past nearly any strip mall in America and count the vacant storefronts. Nearly every chain, from Staples (SPLS) to Best Buy(BBY), is shuttering stores. Restaurants are closing. Corporations are hoarding cash and not investing.
The talk of tapering has caused interest rates to spike, and mortgage loan numbers have tanked. New housing is barely off of life support. Car dealers still aren’t selling cars at pre-2008 numbers despite low interest rates and the average age of cars on the road reaching record highs.
The Federal Reserve will never be able to stop Quantitative Easing (QE) until the economy actually recovers. But mark our words… If they don’t stop it soon, they’re running the risk of causing a flash crash in the currency.
The world is already awash in U.S. dollars. China is dumping dollars. Russia is dumping dollars. Japan is weakening the Yen. If the dollar selling gets too great, and I see little reason to hold dollars under this wrong-headed policy, we run the risk of a total crash.
Even without a crash, the QE policy is systematically transferring wealth to the political and banking elites. Inflation is the greatest stealth tax in history.
And That’s Only Half the Story
Obama is playing a very dangerous game with the economy in the hopes of beating the Republicans in the 2014 elections. Here’s how his strategy works.
Instead of trying to come to an agreement on budget authorizations and debt ceiling with the Congress, Obama is playing brinkmanship and trying to create maximum financial insecurity. He believes he can hang a fall economic crisis around the neck of Congress and usher Nancy Pelosi back into the Speaker position.
John Boehner and Eric Cantor are being boxed into giving Obama the crisis he wants. Instead of fighting, they’re bending over backwards to try and forestall a crisis. What they don’t seem to understand is that Obama sees this strategy as weakness. He’s emboldened to create the crisis and therefore exploit Boehner’s weaknesses. He wants a democratic Congress more than he wants an economic recovery.
The best strategy for the Republicans is to actually rise up and fight. They need to remind the world that in the United States, the 14th Amendment to the Constitution makes it impossible to default. Every creditor will be paid. Every bond will be paid. Don’t let Obama get away with talk of default. It’s irresponsible and illegal.
Boehner should look Obama in the eye and say, “If you keep saying America is at risk of default, I’ll move impeachment proceeding in the House so we can replace you with a more responsible and honest president.”
Additionally, Congress has every right to end Obamacare. And they should realize that Obama can whine all he wants about shutdowns. Essential services such as the military and Social Security don’t shut down. It’s Obama’s constituencies of government worker unions, labor unions and bureaucrats that really take it in the chin during a shut down. Instead of retroactively giving people money for the time they didn’t work, this Congress should make Obama’s people pay a price for his irresponsibility.
Don’t listen to what politicians say! Watch what they do.
If you act on the words of politicians (and Ben Bernanke is just another politician), be prepared to experience a head fake. Politicians tell you what you want to hear, not what they actually think or plan to do.
We were confident in making our prediction because we tuned out the D.C. propaganda and watched reality. Reality tells us that unemployment is higher than the numbers Obama’s Labor Department publishes. Inflation is higher than the Consumer Price Index (CPI) they publish. And the economy is much weaker than the Obama cheerleading squad is willing to admit.
If you don’t believe us, then give it the eye test. Drive past nearly any strip mall in America and count the vacant storefronts. Nearly every chain, from Staples (SPLS) to Best Buy(BBY), is shuttering stores. Restaurants are closing. Corporations are hoarding cash and not investing.
The talk of tapering has caused interest rates to spike, and mortgage loan numbers have tanked. New housing is barely off of life support. Car dealers still aren’t selling cars at pre-2008 numbers despite low interest rates and the average age of cars on the road reaching record highs.
The Federal Reserve will never be able to stop Quantitative Easing (QE) until the economy actually recovers. But mark our words… If they don’t stop it soon, they’re running the risk of causing a flash crash in the currency.
The world is already awash in U.S. dollars. China is dumping dollars. Russia is dumping dollars. Japan is weakening the Yen. If the dollar selling gets too great, and I see little reason to hold dollars under this wrong-headed policy, we run the risk of a total crash.
Even without a crash, the QE policy is systematically transferring wealth to the political and banking elites. Inflation is the greatest stealth tax in history.
And That’s Only Half the Story
Obama is playing a very dangerous game with the economy in the hopes of beating the Republicans in the 2014 elections. Here’s how his strategy works.
Instead of trying to come to an agreement on budget authorizations and debt ceiling with the Congress, Obama is playing brinkmanship and trying to create maximum financial insecurity. He believes he can hang a fall economic crisis around the neck of Congress and usher Nancy Pelosi back into the Speaker position.
John Boehner and Eric Cantor are being boxed into giving Obama the crisis he wants. Instead of fighting, they’re bending over backwards to try and forestall a crisis. What they don’t seem to understand is that Obama sees this strategy as weakness. He’s emboldened to create the crisis and therefore exploit Boehner’s weaknesses. He wants a democratic Congress more than he wants an economic recovery.
The best strategy for the Republicans is to actually rise up and fight. They need to remind the world that in the United States, the 14th Amendment to the Constitution makes it impossible to default. Every creditor will be paid. Every bond will be paid. Don’t let Obama get away with talk of default. It’s irresponsible and illegal.
Boehner should look Obama in the eye and say, “If you keep saying America is at risk of default, I’ll move impeachment proceeding in the House so we can replace you with a more responsible and honest president.”
Additionally, Congress has every right to end Obamacare. And they should realize that Obama can whine all he wants about shutdowns. Essential services such as the military and Social Security don’t shut down. It’s Obama’s constituencies of government worker unions, labor unions and bureaucrats that really take it in the chin during a shut down. Instead of retroactively giving people money for the time they didn’t work, this Congress should make Obama’s people pay a price for his irresponsibility.
Tuesday, September 24, 2013
The Plain Truth: Increased Gun Control Won’t Change Gun Violence Le...
The Plain Truth: Increased Gun Control Won’t Change Gun Violence Le...: Before we rehash the gun control debate, we should ask ourselves: Would the measures favored by President Obama, Senator Feinstein and oth...
Increased Gun Control Won’t Change Gun Violence Lets Be Real!
Before we rehash the gun control debate,
we should ask ourselves: Would the measures favored by President Obama,
Senator Feinstein and other gun control advocates have prevented
Monday’s shooting? There’s no way to be certain, but it’s unlikely. Most
gun control advocates favor handgun and assault rifle bans and often
claim that they keep guns out of the wrong hands. However, Monday’s
shooting is a prime example that they’re wrong.
Washington, D.C. is a gun free zone, and gun control advocates often tout gun laws in the nation’s capital because of their severity. People can’t so much as drive through D.C. with a loaded firearm much less carry one on their person. Not to mention that the Navy Yard is a federal facility, so firearms aren’t permitted unless carried by a guard. But those laws certainly didn’t stop the shooter.
Business as Usual… for the Left
Monday’s shooting at the Washington Navy Yard took our nation by surprise. The early morning had probably been business as usual for people in our nation’s capital, but that all changed abruptly. During the hours following the tragedy, Americans tried to make sense of the situation… but it became politics as usual for the left.
It didn’t take long for President Obama and Senator Feinstein to remount their agenda for stricter gun control. Referring to the “litany of massacres,” as she describes it, Feinstein stated, “Congress must stop shirking its responsibility and resume a thoughtful debate on gun violence in this country. We must do more to stop this endless loss of life.” Her solution for guns tends to be banning them. Don’t forget the time she said, “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them — Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in — I would have done it.”
Then, the president opened a speech Monday by saying, “So we are confronting yet another mass shooting, and today it happened on a military installation in our nation’s capital.” He also said, “Obviously, we’re going to be investigating thoroughly what happened, as we do so many of these shootings, sadly, that have happened, and do everything that we can to prevent them.”
Now, maybe I’m reading into his statements, but given President Obama’s affinity for blaming guns and gun owners for the violence in America, it’s not a stretch to suggest that this time he’s also making them the bad guy and implying that gun control should have the spotlight again. In the past, President Obama supported a bill that was an all-out handgun ban in Illinois (though he denies this and claims a staffer completed the questionnaire.) He favors bans on assault weapons, on the sale and transfer of semi-automatic weapons and allowing civil liability lawsuits against firearm and ammunition manufacturers, dealers and distributors. President Obama once stated that “if we can only do one thing to stop [gun violence], we should all try and do that.”
There’s an overwhelming lack of evidence that broad gun control measures would put an end to violence, but that won’t stop the left from pushing its anti-gun agenda. Just a day after the shootings, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney released a statement that the president is implementing executive orders and restated the president’s commitment to gun control measures.
When President Obama stands in front of another teleprompter and announces his latest plan for gun control, America better be prepared. Gun rights advocates have silenced the debate over the past few months, stalling legislation on Capitol Hill, and adding fuel to the fire for the left. You can bet that they’re going to show up ready for a showdown.
In pursuit of the truth, The Plain Truth!
Washington, D.C. is a gun free zone, and gun control advocates often tout gun laws in the nation’s capital because of their severity. People can’t so much as drive through D.C. with a loaded firearm much less carry one on their person. Not to mention that the Navy Yard is a federal facility, so firearms aren’t permitted unless carried by a guard. But those laws certainly didn’t stop the shooter.
Business as Usual… for the Left
Monday’s shooting at the Washington Navy Yard took our nation by surprise. The early morning had probably been business as usual for people in our nation’s capital, but that all changed abruptly. During the hours following the tragedy, Americans tried to make sense of the situation… but it became politics as usual for the left.
It didn’t take long for President Obama and Senator Feinstein to remount their agenda for stricter gun control. Referring to the “litany of massacres,” as she describes it, Feinstein stated, “Congress must stop shirking its responsibility and resume a thoughtful debate on gun violence in this country. We must do more to stop this endless loss of life.” Her solution for guns tends to be banning them. Don’t forget the time she said, “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them — Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in — I would have done it.”
Then, the president opened a speech Monday by saying, “So we are confronting yet another mass shooting, and today it happened on a military installation in our nation’s capital.” He also said, “Obviously, we’re going to be investigating thoroughly what happened, as we do so many of these shootings, sadly, that have happened, and do everything that we can to prevent them.”
Now, maybe I’m reading into his statements, but given President Obama’s affinity for blaming guns and gun owners for the violence in America, it’s not a stretch to suggest that this time he’s also making them the bad guy and implying that gun control should have the spotlight again. In the past, President Obama supported a bill that was an all-out handgun ban in Illinois (though he denies this and claims a staffer completed the questionnaire.) He favors bans on assault weapons, on the sale and transfer of semi-automatic weapons and allowing civil liability lawsuits against firearm and ammunition manufacturers, dealers and distributors. President Obama once stated that “if we can only do one thing to stop [gun violence], we should all try and do that.”
There’s an overwhelming lack of evidence that broad gun control measures would put an end to violence, but that won’t stop the left from pushing its anti-gun agenda. Just a day after the shootings, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney released a statement that the president is implementing executive orders and restated the president’s commitment to gun control measures.
When President Obama stands in front of another teleprompter and announces his latest plan for gun control, America better be prepared. Gun rights advocates have silenced the debate over the past few months, stalling legislation on Capitol Hill, and adding fuel to the fire for the left. You can bet that they’re going to show up ready for a showdown.
In pursuit of the truth, The Plain Truth!
Sunday, September 15, 2013
The Plain Truth: Gun Control Opposition Breathes Life Into Democrat...
The Plain Truth: Gun Control Opposition Breathes Life Into Democrat...: As Americans, we have to fight harder than ever to make our voices heard. We’ve drifted further from what America was intended to be, and ...
Gun Control Opposition Breathes Life Into Democratic Process, Its About Time!
As Americans, we have to fight harder than ever to make our voices
heard. We’ve drifted further from what America was intended to be, and
our optimism has plummeted. The U.S. government is proving to be a
convoluted, untrustworthy, unmanageable animal. Our Congressmen have
agendas that don’t include the American people, and meanwhile the
president continues trampling the constitution. But there’s still hope.
Recent events in Colorado have shown that the democratic process might not be as dead as we think it is. You see, Colorado gun owners are celebrating after voters recalled two politicians earlier this week. The fine folks of Colorado love their personal freedoms, especially those guaranteed by the Second Amendment, and Senate Majority Leader John Morse and Senator Angela Giron learned that the hard way.
“It’s Our Nature…”
Morse and Giron found themselves in their constituents’ crosshairs after showing support for gun control laws. The laws, which would limit magazine size and expand background checks, prompted a lawsuit by most of Colorado’s elected sheriffs…pushed almost ten counties to consider seceding…and drove gun manufacturer MagPul out of the state. MagPul said, “If we’re able to stay in Colorado and manufacture a product, but law-abiding citizens of the state were unable to purchase the product, customers around the state and the nation would boycott us for remaining here.”
Once a few people decided they’d had enough of the gun laws, they spoke up…and then they realized they weren’t alone. Anthony Garcia said, “We got together and did the ‘impossible.’ Anybody who’s watching this, they can too. All they have to do is get up and get involved. That’s it.”
Americans seem afraid to take on the politicians on Capitol Hill, but I guarantee if you do take them on, you won’t be fighting alone. A lot of Americans are fed up, and if we stood together, we could become a force to be reckoned with. Think about this: it only took six average “Joes” to prompt the recall in Colorado. Victor Head, of Pueblo Freedom and Rights, wasn’t willing to stand by silently: “There is only so much they can ram down your throat before you end up getting sick of it and spitting it back out.”
Deeper Pockets Won’t Always Save the Day
There’s another thing we can learn from the face-off in Colorado: money won’t always buffer the win. Many Americans are quick to abandon a cause or a candidate because there’s little financial backing, but sometimes it simply isn’t necessary. Liberal and progressive groups raised almost $3 million in support of Morse and Giron, while those supporting the recall raised only a fraction of that, at just over half a million. Yet, those with the deeper pockets still lost. Sometimes all it takes to send a message is sticking to your guns (no pun intended), even if you don’t think you can afford to.
Now, the Colorado recalls aren’t the end of the line for the fight over personal liberties. During his concession speech, Morse said, “We as the Democratic Party will continue to fight,” and he’s right. A loss like this will only serve as fuel to their fire, and conservatives better be ready. According to Kurt Bardella, a consultant for the recall campaigns, “What happened in Colorado, a purple state, could happen anywhere if the will of the people is ignored and politicians take their cues from New York City or Washington, D.C. At the end of the day, people will not tolerate an imposition of un-checked government over-reach on their lives.”
In pursuit of the truth,The Plain Truth!
Recent events in Colorado have shown that the democratic process might not be as dead as we think it is. You see, Colorado gun owners are celebrating after voters recalled two politicians earlier this week. The fine folks of Colorado love their personal freedoms, especially those guaranteed by the Second Amendment, and Senate Majority Leader John Morse and Senator Angela Giron learned that the hard way.
“It’s Our Nature…”
Morse and Giron found themselves in their constituents’ crosshairs after showing support for gun control laws. The laws, which would limit magazine size and expand background checks, prompted a lawsuit by most of Colorado’s elected sheriffs…pushed almost ten counties to consider seceding…and drove gun manufacturer MagPul out of the state. MagPul said, “If we’re able to stay in Colorado and manufacture a product, but law-abiding citizens of the state were unable to purchase the product, customers around the state and the nation would boycott us for remaining here.”
Once a few people decided they’d had enough of the gun laws, they spoke up…and then they realized they weren’t alone. Anthony Garcia said, “We got together and did the ‘impossible.’ Anybody who’s watching this, they can too. All they have to do is get up and get involved. That’s it.”
Americans seem afraid to take on the politicians on Capitol Hill, but I guarantee if you do take them on, you won’t be fighting alone. A lot of Americans are fed up, and if we stood together, we could become a force to be reckoned with. Think about this: it only took six average “Joes” to prompt the recall in Colorado. Victor Head, of Pueblo Freedom and Rights, wasn’t willing to stand by silently: “There is only so much they can ram down your throat before you end up getting sick of it and spitting it back out.”
Deeper Pockets Won’t Always Save the Day
There’s another thing we can learn from the face-off in Colorado: money won’t always buffer the win. Many Americans are quick to abandon a cause or a candidate because there’s little financial backing, but sometimes it simply isn’t necessary. Liberal and progressive groups raised almost $3 million in support of Morse and Giron, while those supporting the recall raised only a fraction of that, at just over half a million. Yet, those with the deeper pockets still lost. Sometimes all it takes to send a message is sticking to your guns (no pun intended), even if you don’t think you can afford to.
Now, the Colorado recalls aren’t the end of the line for the fight over personal liberties. During his concession speech, Morse said, “We as the Democratic Party will continue to fight,” and he’s right. A loss like this will only serve as fuel to their fire, and conservatives better be ready. According to Kurt Bardella, a consultant for the recall campaigns, “What happened in Colorado, a purple state, could happen anywhere if the will of the people is ignored and politicians take their cues from New York City or Washington, D.C. At the end of the day, people will not tolerate an imposition of un-checked government over-reach on their lives.”
In pursuit of the truth,The Plain Truth!
The Plain Truth: Privacy Concerns Surround New Electronic License P...
The Plain Truth: Privacy Concerns Surround New Electronic License P...: There’s a certain amount of distrust for the government that’s healthy. And they sure do make it easy… especially when it comes to new ide...
Privacy Concerns Surround New Electronic License Plate1 Why?
There’s a certain amount of distrust for the government that’s
healthy. And they sure do make it easy… especially when it comes to new
ideas and proposed laws that essentially promise to violate our privacy.
The worst part is that we have to be worried about more than just our federal government…
State and local governments are no exception when it comes to violating our privacy rights, too.
You see, Americans are already concerned about their privacy being violated when it comes to their cellphones and emails, among other things.
The last thing they want to worry about is someone hacking their personal information through their license plate…
California’s Senate Bill 806 has made its way to Governor Jerry Brown’s desk and legislators are simply waiting on him to sign off. The bill would kick-start a pilot program for electronic license plate system. The 12-by-6-inch digital screen would be found on as many as 160,000 cars during the three year pilot.
The digital plates are designed to show the state name along with the license plate number, similar to the traditional plates. However, the technology would allow the plates to display Amber Alerts or notifications that indicate that the tag is expired or even that the car is uninsured or stolen. The screen could also facilitate toll payments. All potentially beneficial things, sure, but is it really worth it?
Privacy Getting the Ultimate Boot
While California may have the best of intentions when it comes to electronic license plates, there are reasons for privacy concerns. According to Lee Tien, an attorney at Electronic Frontier Foundation, the bill has “gotten some amendments that address some of the location privacy issues – within the pilot, the DMV would not be receiving any location information. But the company that operates the plates would [have access, and] they are going to be controlling what’s on the plates.” However, Tien doesn’t believe the legislature is taking privacy concerns seriously: “We’re surprised and disappointed that this bill seems to be proceeding without any serious exploration of the privacy risks. Just because it’s a pilot doesn’t excuse the Legislature of responsibility.”
If it Ain’t Broke, Don’t Fix It?
If you’re like me, you’re probably thinking, “If it isn’t broken, don’t fix it.” However, we all know that California is broke, and they’re going to do almost anything they can to cut the budget and increase revenue, and the state thinks the electronic plates will help them do just that. The state hopes that the plates, patented by San Francisco-based Smart Plate Mobile, will make the vehicle registration process more efficient and save the DMV nearly $20 million on the cost of yearly tag renewals.
A similar bill was proposed in California in 2010, but that bill allowed advertisements to scroll on the screens if a car was stopped for more than three seconds. The state saw the plates as a way to increase revenue because the DMW would’ve profited from selling ad space. While the current bill doesn’t include provisions for advertisements, they haven’t ruled ads out altogether. Jim Lites, a lobbyist for Smart Plate Mobile, said the bill’s focus isn’t advertisement revenue, but is instead focused on creating more efficiency. But the truth is, Lites doesn’t really rule anything out: “Let’s focus on that and let the Legislature decide what they would like this technology to do, assuming this pilot is successful.”
Residents of California aren’t the only people who should be concerned. While California may be the first to test-drive the plates, New Jersey and South Carolina are considering electronic license plates as well.
If the technology is already on our cars, what stops the government from using it (as history is proving… virtually nothing can stop the government.) And if more scrutiny isn’t placed upon this device regarding the privacy concerns, we may be setting ourselves up for the ultimate tracking and monitoring system. We’ve got bigger problems now than those Orwellian traffic cameras; these things would be able to monitor us the entire time we’re on the go.
In pursuit of the truth,The Plain Truth!
The worst part is that we have to be worried about more than just our federal government…
State and local governments are no exception when it comes to violating our privacy rights, too.
You see, Americans are already concerned about their privacy being violated when it comes to their cellphones and emails, among other things.
The last thing they want to worry about is someone hacking their personal information through their license plate…
California’s Senate Bill 806 has made its way to Governor Jerry Brown’s desk and legislators are simply waiting on him to sign off. The bill would kick-start a pilot program for electronic license plate system. The 12-by-6-inch digital screen would be found on as many as 160,000 cars during the three year pilot.
The digital plates are designed to show the state name along with the license plate number, similar to the traditional plates. However, the technology would allow the plates to display Amber Alerts or notifications that indicate that the tag is expired or even that the car is uninsured or stolen. The screen could also facilitate toll payments. All potentially beneficial things, sure, but is it really worth it?
Privacy Getting the Ultimate Boot
While California may have the best of intentions when it comes to electronic license plates, there are reasons for privacy concerns. According to Lee Tien, an attorney at Electronic Frontier Foundation, the bill has “gotten some amendments that address some of the location privacy issues – within the pilot, the DMV would not be receiving any location information. But the company that operates the plates would [have access, and] they are going to be controlling what’s on the plates.” However, Tien doesn’t believe the legislature is taking privacy concerns seriously: “We’re surprised and disappointed that this bill seems to be proceeding without any serious exploration of the privacy risks. Just because it’s a pilot doesn’t excuse the Legislature of responsibility.”
If it Ain’t Broke, Don’t Fix It?
If you’re like me, you’re probably thinking, “If it isn’t broken, don’t fix it.” However, we all know that California is broke, and they’re going to do almost anything they can to cut the budget and increase revenue, and the state thinks the electronic plates will help them do just that. The state hopes that the plates, patented by San Francisco-based Smart Plate Mobile, will make the vehicle registration process more efficient and save the DMV nearly $20 million on the cost of yearly tag renewals.
A similar bill was proposed in California in 2010, but that bill allowed advertisements to scroll on the screens if a car was stopped for more than three seconds. The state saw the plates as a way to increase revenue because the DMW would’ve profited from selling ad space. While the current bill doesn’t include provisions for advertisements, they haven’t ruled ads out altogether. Jim Lites, a lobbyist for Smart Plate Mobile, said the bill’s focus isn’t advertisement revenue, but is instead focused on creating more efficiency. But the truth is, Lites doesn’t really rule anything out: “Let’s focus on that and let the Legislature decide what they would like this technology to do, assuming this pilot is successful.”
Residents of California aren’t the only people who should be concerned. While California may be the first to test-drive the plates, New Jersey and South Carolina are considering electronic license plates as well.
If the technology is already on our cars, what stops the government from using it (as history is proving… virtually nothing can stop the government.) And if more scrutiny isn’t placed upon this device regarding the privacy concerns, we may be setting ourselves up for the ultimate tracking and monitoring system. We’ve got bigger problems now than those Orwellian traffic cameras; these things would be able to monitor us the entire time we’re on the go.
In pursuit of the truth,The Plain Truth!
Friday, September 6, 2013
The Plain Truth: American Morality - A Glimmer of Hope on the Horiz...
The Plain Truth: American Morality - A Glimmer of Hope on the Horiz...: Has the United States lost it’s basic principle of morality? Has the United States moved away from the guiding principles that this country ...
American Morality - A Glimmer of Hope on the Horizon?
Has the United States lost it’s basic principle of morality? Has the United States moved away from the guiding principles that this country was founded on? A single line from the Declaration of Independence describes these basic principles, and it is the meaning of these words which provided the foundation for the formation of the United States:
"We hold these truths to be self evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." - Thomas Jefferson
All Americans are created equal and that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is a right granted to every citizen of the United States. Our founding fathers acquired these principles from their religious beliefs, and regardless of what people may think, the United States was founded on Biblical principles. Our founding fathers did not use certain aspects of the Bible just to satisfy what they wanted in a country. They used the Bible as a whole in order to create an understanding of what the basic rights are for an individual. They concluded that these rights are from God and are given to all individuals.
One of the unalienable rights given by our creator is the right to live our lives. Our creator placed each individual on this earth for a reason. Is it not true that other people in the world have that same unalienable right to live and fulfill God's purpose? So, if this is a founding principle for our country, does it not follow that we as a country should help others less fortunate then us? Should not others, who were born in underdeveloped countries, have the same right to life? In this article, I will address some of these questions, with the hope that by examining these issues, we can as a society, move in a direction our founding fathers had envisioned. Americans have lost site of the fact that excess without giving is not really what our founding fathers had in mind. Lets examine some examples which are symbolic of this immorality that currently exists within the American society.
Before presenting this first example, we need to have a clear definition of what morality is. From WordNet, a lexical database for the English language, developed at the Cognitive Science Library at Princeton University, morality is concern with the distinction between good and evil or right and wrong. This first example of immorality may be considered by many as one that does not have anything to do with morality, but if you give it more then cursory thought, you would most likely consider it a morality issue.
This first example has to do with Americans and their relationship with their automobiles. Yes, immorality can be seen at such a insignificant level. More importantly, this example shows the pervasiveness of immorality within the American society. Most Americans, if typical, need an automobile for basic functioning within most areas of the United States. The automobile has become a perfunctory status symbol. Many people within the United States can barely pay their rent or mortgage, but they will shovel out money per month on an automobile they really can not afford. They spend money per month in the form of a car payment or lease, just to have a “nice” car.
The American obsession with the sport utility vehicle is one I still do not understand. One basic argument of the SUV owner is that by driving a SUV, they feel safer. If your driving skill is so poor that you can not avoid poor drivers, try working on your driving skill. This to me makes more sense then driving a tank (SUV) which consumes large quantities of fuel and concomitantly contributes to an increase in fuel demand. This increase in fuel demand drives fuel prices upward. With Americans so reliant upon their automobiles, higher fuel prices mean less extra money in their pocket. Money that could be used to help feed those dying from starvation throughout the world.
The American car companies for many years pushed the SUV on the American public, and now these car companies are suffering the consequences. The thinking as to why these companies offered these vehicles to the American public was that they thought Americans would continue in their mind set that excess is better. The American car companies today are doing poorly as a business. They have continually laid off workers in order to maintain a level of viability. They have been very slow to innovate and the federal government has had to mandate fuel efficiency. Because of their sluggish response to the need for fuel efficient vehicles, American car companies are now suffering the consequences.
On the other hand, Toyota and Honda, companies which have put fuel efficient hybrids out into the market place, are now doing very well. Toyota is now the number one car seller in the world. Toyota and Honda have always placed fuel efficiency as a higher priority. A glimmer of hope lies in the fact that Americans are starting to create the mind set that excess is not good, and frugality is the way of the future. Simply put, driving SUVs is not intelligent.
Driving an SUV when it really is not necessary is an example of overindulgence in the United States. Granted, there are situations where an individual needs a SUV such as Alaska or any area of the country where road conditions are poor or winters are severe. Or, there are occasions where material needs to be transported in a SUV because of it’s increase carrying capacity. In these cases, there is a legitimate reason to own a SUV because of it’s utilitarian value. But the majority of SUV owners are not in these situations or extreme conditions frequently enough to warrant owning such a fuel wasting vehicle. Driving a hybrid is an example of intelligent frugality. In order to buy a Toyota or Honda hybrid, you will have to be put on a long waiting list. This is a good sign that Americans are starting to develop the mind set that having less is better and frugality is the way of the future.
Our society has been through a period of excess and over indulgence but changes, hopefully, are on the horizon. Morality in the form of giving needs to be reincorporated back into our society. It makes more sense to drive a more fuel efficient vehicle, and use some of the saved money to contribute to the world hunger problem. For most morally conscious individuals, this type of sustained and continual activity leads to greater long term happiness.
Giving does not have to be monetary, it can be in other forms, such as giving time or knowledge. This bring us to our next example of morality reduction that has been in existence in the United States. Many parents today are not giving enough time to their children. Children need to be nurtured. A parents wisdom, gained through a life time of experiences, needs to be imparted to their children. Parents need to impart to their children the value of giving and a feeling of concern for others . When I was a child growing up, school shootings where kids are killing teachers and fellow students, was virtually unheard of. Today, school shootings are occurring at an alarming frequency. To me, part of the problem is due to parents not spending enough time with their children. Again it comes down to giving. In this case, it comes down to giving time and knowledge. Parents not giving enough time to their children is another example of morality reduction within our society.
Another example of the immorality prevalent within our society is displayed by the films which come out of Hollywood today. I am sorry to say that most of these films really are to put it bluntly, garbage. Most of these films lack the cerebral quality of the earlier films. From a technical perspective i.e. special effects, they are excellent, but from a cerebral perspective, they are lacking. They are only produced in order to make money for those who are producing them, without any understanding to the implications they may have on society, especially younger people.
Creativity is basically gone from Hollywood and many of the movies coming out today are remakes of successful earlier films. Once and a while a good film will be presented to the American public, but generally speaking most are junk. Most of today’s actors are not really household names. They come and go fairly quickly and lack the staying power of a John Wayne, Jimmy Stewart, or Humphrey Bogart. These actors displayed a level of integrity and they new about the personification they were displaying to the American public. They were not perfect, but they did display a higher level of morality.
Is our society spiraling downward into the oblivion of lost hope? I believe not. More and more we are seeing examples which display the positive value of giving. A case in point. Time Magazine finally got it right when they named rock star Bono, and Bill and Melinda Gates as the Persons of the Year for 2005. They were named persons of the year not because of anything that happened at Microsoft and not because Bono is a rock star, they were named persons of the year for their charitable work and activism aimed at reducing global poverty and improving world health. Finally a media organization is recognizing the value of giving.
Another sign of hope that Americans may be moving away from the mind set of excess and non-giving, can be seen in the enormous outpouring of giving monetarily in the wake of the worst hurricane season the United States has had on record. Americans have also given monetarily to the tsunami relief effort. Americans have not been giving readily to the current starving in Africa. In December 2005, the UN's Food and Agriculture Organization issued a warning that nearly 12 million Africans face the immediate threat of famine. Americans have not been giving to the Pakistani earthquake relief efforts.
This lack of giving is not really due to Americans not willing to give, but rather due to the lack of media exposure. CNN would rather spend hours talking about whether President Bush broke the law by wire tapping potential terrorists in the United States, then talk about the important world issues such as the thousands that are dying in the wake of the Pakistan earthquake or the starving in Africa. It is very important that the media expose these type of stories. You can not give if you do not know about the need.
The point is this. Giving on a continuous basis, produces feelings of long term happiness. For this country to get back to it’s moral principles, giving to others in need is one way to move in that direction. Which brings me back to my original point. Americans need to fully get back to the mind set that giving and having less is of greater value then having more. We must move away from trying to produce short term happiness via artificial means.
Artificial symbols such as what type of car you drive, how fancy your clothing is, or how many vacation homes you can acquire should be of less importance to any one who has some substance to them. The next time you find yourself propagating one of these excesses, think of the 24,000 people per day that are dying of hunger. Think about the six million children under the age of five which will die of hunger each year. Think about the downtrodden, the abused, and the tortured. When you think about these things, giving makes more sense. Give what you can and when you can.
Albert Einstein once said “ the value of a man resides in what he gives and not in what he is capable of receiving.” What many people do not realize is that Albert Einstein was a deeply religious man. He knew that only a God could produce such a complex universe, and that such complexity could not have been produced by random chaotic events. He saw the order in the universe and the relation of the universe with God. He simply did not wear his religion on his sleeve. He also had insights beyond physics in that he realized what truly gives a man a sense of happiness and inner peace.
Einstein had it right in that happiness does not come from what you hold, but really from what you give. No matter what your religious belief, a life time of giving to those less fortunate then yourself, will result in long term happiness. Give it a try. You might be surprised at the feeling it produces. A glimmer of hope is on the horizon. The United States can move back to it’s Biblical principles. But we must all do our part. Sponsored by http://adcitymarketing.webstarts.com
"We hold these truths to be self evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." - Thomas Jefferson
All Americans are created equal and that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is a right granted to every citizen of the United States. Our founding fathers acquired these principles from their religious beliefs, and regardless of what people may think, the United States was founded on Biblical principles. Our founding fathers did not use certain aspects of the Bible just to satisfy what they wanted in a country. They used the Bible as a whole in order to create an understanding of what the basic rights are for an individual. They concluded that these rights are from God and are given to all individuals.
One of the unalienable rights given by our creator is the right to live our lives. Our creator placed each individual on this earth for a reason. Is it not true that other people in the world have that same unalienable right to live and fulfill God's purpose? So, if this is a founding principle for our country, does it not follow that we as a country should help others less fortunate then us? Should not others, who were born in underdeveloped countries, have the same right to life? In this article, I will address some of these questions, with the hope that by examining these issues, we can as a society, move in a direction our founding fathers had envisioned. Americans have lost site of the fact that excess without giving is not really what our founding fathers had in mind. Lets examine some examples which are symbolic of this immorality that currently exists within the American society.
Before presenting this first example, we need to have a clear definition of what morality is. From WordNet, a lexical database for the English language, developed at the Cognitive Science Library at Princeton University, morality is concern with the distinction between good and evil or right and wrong. This first example of immorality may be considered by many as one that does not have anything to do with morality, but if you give it more then cursory thought, you would most likely consider it a morality issue.
This first example has to do with Americans and their relationship with their automobiles. Yes, immorality can be seen at such a insignificant level. More importantly, this example shows the pervasiveness of immorality within the American society. Most Americans, if typical, need an automobile for basic functioning within most areas of the United States. The automobile has become a perfunctory status symbol. Many people within the United States can barely pay their rent or mortgage, but they will shovel out money per month on an automobile they really can not afford. They spend money per month in the form of a car payment or lease, just to have a “nice” car.
The American obsession with the sport utility vehicle is one I still do not understand. One basic argument of the SUV owner is that by driving a SUV, they feel safer. If your driving skill is so poor that you can not avoid poor drivers, try working on your driving skill. This to me makes more sense then driving a tank (SUV) which consumes large quantities of fuel and concomitantly contributes to an increase in fuel demand. This increase in fuel demand drives fuel prices upward. With Americans so reliant upon their automobiles, higher fuel prices mean less extra money in their pocket. Money that could be used to help feed those dying from starvation throughout the world.
The American car companies for many years pushed the SUV on the American public, and now these car companies are suffering the consequences. The thinking as to why these companies offered these vehicles to the American public was that they thought Americans would continue in their mind set that excess is better. The American car companies today are doing poorly as a business. They have continually laid off workers in order to maintain a level of viability. They have been very slow to innovate and the federal government has had to mandate fuel efficiency. Because of their sluggish response to the need for fuel efficient vehicles, American car companies are now suffering the consequences.
On the other hand, Toyota and Honda, companies which have put fuel efficient hybrids out into the market place, are now doing very well. Toyota is now the number one car seller in the world. Toyota and Honda have always placed fuel efficiency as a higher priority. A glimmer of hope lies in the fact that Americans are starting to create the mind set that excess is not good, and frugality is the way of the future. Simply put, driving SUVs is not intelligent.
Driving an SUV when it really is not necessary is an example of overindulgence in the United States. Granted, there are situations where an individual needs a SUV such as Alaska or any area of the country where road conditions are poor or winters are severe. Or, there are occasions where material needs to be transported in a SUV because of it’s increase carrying capacity. In these cases, there is a legitimate reason to own a SUV because of it’s utilitarian value. But the majority of SUV owners are not in these situations or extreme conditions frequently enough to warrant owning such a fuel wasting vehicle. Driving a hybrid is an example of intelligent frugality. In order to buy a Toyota or Honda hybrid, you will have to be put on a long waiting list. This is a good sign that Americans are starting to develop the mind set that having less is better and frugality is the way of the future.
Our society has been through a period of excess and over indulgence but changes, hopefully, are on the horizon. Morality in the form of giving needs to be reincorporated back into our society. It makes more sense to drive a more fuel efficient vehicle, and use some of the saved money to contribute to the world hunger problem. For most morally conscious individuals, this type of sustained and continual activity leads to greater long term happiness.
Giving does not have to be monetary, it can be in other forms, such as giving time or knowledge. This bring us to our next example of morality reduction that has been in existence in the United States. Many parents today are not giving enough time to their children. Children need to be nurtured. A parents wisdom, gained through a life time of experiences, needs to be imparted to their children. Parents need to impart to their children the value of giving and a feeling of concern for others . When I was a child growing up, school shootings where kids are killing teachers and fellow students, was virtually unheard of. Today, school shootings are occurring at an alarming frequency. To me, part of the problem is due to parents not spending enough time with their children. Again it comes down to giving. In this case, it comes down to giving time and knowledge. Parents not giving enough time to their children is another example of morality reduction within our society.
Another example of the immorality prevalent within our society is displayed by the films which come out of Hollywood today. I am sorry to say that most of these films really are to put it bluntly, garbage. Most of these films lack the cerebral quality of the earlier films. From a technical perspective i.e. special effects, they are excellent, but from a cerebral perspective, they are lacking. They are only produced in order to make money for those who are producing them, without any understanding to the implications they may have on society, especially younger people.
Creativity is basically gone from Hollywood and many of the movies coming out today are remakes of successful earlier films. Once and a while a good film will be presented to the American public, but generally speaking most are junk. Most of today’s actors are not really household names. They come and go fairly quickly and lack the staying power of a John Wayne, Jimmy Stewart, or Humphrey Bogart. These actors displayed a level of integrity and they new about the personification they were displaying to the American public. They were not perfect, but they did display a higher level of morality.
Is our society spiraling downward into the oblivion of lost hope? I believe not. More and more we are seeing examples which display the positive value of giving. A case in point. Time Magazine finally got it right when they named rock star Bono, and Bill and Melinda Gates as the Persons of the Year for 2005. They were named persons of the year not because of anything that happened at Microsoft and not because Bono is a rock star, they were named persons of the year for their charitable work and activism aimed at reducing global poverty and improving world health. Finally a media organization is recognizing the value of giving.
Another sign of hope that Americans may be moving away from the mind set of excess and non-giving, can be seen in the enormous outpouring of giving monetarily in the wake of the worst hurricane season the United States has had on record. Americans have also given monetarily to the tsunami relief effort. Americans have not been giving readily to the current starving in Africa. In December 2005, the UN's Food and Agriculture Organization issued a warning that nearly 12 million Africans face the immediate threat of famine. Americans have not been giving to the Pakistani earthquake relief efforts.
This lack of giving is not really due to Americans not willing to give, but rather due to the lack of media exposure. CNN would rather spend hours talking about whether President Bush broke the law by wire tapping potential terrorists in the United States, then talk about the important world issues such as the thousands that are dying in the wake of the Pakistan earthquake or the starving in Africa. It is very important that the media expose these type of stories. You can not give if you do not know about the need.
The point is this. Giving on a continuous basis, produces feelings of long term happiness. For this country to get back to it’s moral principles, giving to others in need is one way to move in that direction. Which brings me back to my original point. Americans need to fully get back to the mind set that giving and having less is of greater value then having more. We must move away from trying to produce short term happiness via artificial means.
Artificial symbols such as what type of car you drive, how fancy your clothing is, or how many vacation homes you can acquire should be of less importance to any one who has some substance to them. The next time you find yourself propagating one of these excesses, think of the 24,000 people per day that are dying of hunger. Think about the six million children under the age of five which will die of hunger each year. Think about the downtrodden, the abused, and the tortured. When you think about these things, giving makes more sense. Give what you can and when you can.
Albert Einstein once said “ the value of a man resides in what he gives and not in what he is capable of receiving.” What many people do not realize is that Albert Einstein was a deeply religious man. He knew that only a God could produce such a complex universe, and that such complexity could not have been produced by random chaotic events. He saw the order in the universe and the relation of the universe with God. He simply did not wear his religion on his sleeve. He also had insights beyond physics in that he realized what truly gives a man a sense of happiness and inner peace.
Einstein had it right in that happiness does not come from what you hold, but really from what you give. No matter what your religious belief, a life time of giving to those less fortunate then yourself, will result in long term happiness. Give it a try. You might be surprised at the feeling it produces. A glimmer of hope is on the horizon. The United States can move back to it’s Biblical principles. But we must all do our part. Sponsored by http://adcitymarketing.webstarts.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)