Obviously, I rooting for myself to win tonight's $540-Million Mega-Millions jackpot. But if the numbers don't go my way, there are some other people I would like to see win.
First would be a member of Occupy Wall Street. That would just be awesome, as that malcontent would, in an instant, become the one thing that he hates more than any other: one of the 1%. I'd be interested to see how much that Occupy protester gives to the IRS as "their fair share". And no counting the money that you plan to give to charity (which the 1% does) or the donation to establish an endowment for scholarships or research (which the 1% also does) or the money you want to provide to entrepreneurs and start up businesses (which the 1% does as well). I'm talking about handing that money directly to the government for "proper redistribution" to "those that need it most". I'm guessing that contribution will not be a single penny above the 35% that is required.
If I can't win, I wouldn't mind seeing a member of WEAC, SEIU or AFCSME win instead. 540-Million bucks would cover a lot of health insurance premiums and retirement contributions. Remember, these are your Comrades--your Brothers-In-Arms who have been treated unfairly by the government--and this would be your chance to make things "fair" again. These are the people you faked being sick with so you could go down to Madison to protest last year. These are folks you chanted obscenities with--the people who gave up their holiday shopping to collect recall petitions so you could exact your "revenge". The unions themselves should also get a share--since they are going to have to spend a boatload to pay for all Kathleen Falk's TV ads.
And finally, If I can't win the Mega-Millions Jackpot, I hope that President Obama does. I know this isn't going to happen--as the President's spokesman said yesterday that the First Family is not buying any tickets. (To his credit, the President has been on record for years with his opposition to the lottery--correctly pointing out that a disproportionate number of low income people play--proving the old adage that a lottery is a tax on the poor and the stupid.) But if it did, The President could use the $540-Million to pay back 0.000145% of the national debt. Or, he could pay for 6-hours of the Affordable Care Act. Or, he could pay for about 60% of his anticipated re-election campaign expenses.
OR, the President could do like I plan to do if I win, he could quit his job, buy a house on Maui and do nothing but play golf and watch the sunset every day for the rest of our lives. That might make all of us Mega-Milions winners.
Friday, March 30, 2012
Thursday, March 29, 2012
It's Not the Same
Protesters are trying to equate the shooting death of Trayvon Martin in Florida with the shooting death of Bo Morrison in Slinger this month. Nice try, but the two cases are in no way the same. Whereas Martin was killed while traveling along a public walkway--and was followed by someone who thought he was "suspicious"--Morrison was killed while committing a crime.
Actually, Morrison was committing several crimes before and at the time of his death. First, he had consumed alcohol as a minor durnig a noisy underage drinking party. Then he was fleeing police by running away from the party. And finally, he had broken into a house--and was trying to conceal his location in that building. When discovered by the homeowner, Morrison moved toward the man with an arm raised in the air--and was shot. We can argue the merits of the "Castle Doctrine" that is now the law of the land in Wisconsin--but homeowners who feel threatened by intruders now have the right to use deadly force against those criminals.
And don't try to downplay the "threat" level involved in the Morrison case. The homeowner involved in the shooting is the person who called the cops to complain about the party at which Morrison had been drinking. Anyone who calls 9-1-1 to report a crime always has that fear in the back of their mind that by "getting involved" they will become a target for retribution by those arrested. I've been in that same situation myself.
While living in Marinette, I was awakened early one morning by the screams for help from a woman--and what sounded like a body hitting the wall again and again--coming from the apartment across the hall from mine. I called 9-1-1--and buzzed in the officers--who arrested the woman's boyfriend for domestic abuse and felony battery. As soon as the squad cars finally pulled out of the parking lot I started thinking "What if this guy finds out I'm the one who called the cops on him?" He lived just a few feet away from me--and obviously, he has violent tendencies. (In reviewing the arrest report the next day, I also found out that the cops removed a couple of guns from the apartment as well).
So how was that homeowner supposed to feel after hearing someone moving around inside his house shortly after he "got involved"? Was he supposed to go downstairs without his gun? Should he have engaged Morrison in a conversation after finding him hiding in his house? "Hey man, what's going on?" "Just hiding from the cops, dude." "Oh, OK, I'll just go back to bed. Make sure you lock up when you leave." And should the homeowner have just allowed Morrison to continue toward him in the dark--unsure if Morrison was also armed?
While it would be absurd to suggest that Trayvon Martin shouldn't have been walking through a neighborhood with a hooded sweatshirt on if he didn't want to get shot--I don't think it's that unrealistic for Bo Morrison to not expect to be shot while illegally breaking into someone else's house.
Actually, Morrison was committing several crimes before and at the time of his death. First, he had consumed alcohol as a minor durnig a noisy underage drinking party. Then he was fleeing police by running away from the party. And finally, he had broken into a house--and was trying to conceal his location in that building. When discovered by the homeowner, Morrison moved toward the man with an arm raised in the air--and was shot. We can argue the merits of the "Castle Doctrine" that is now the law of the land in Wisconsin--but homeowners who feel threatened by intruders now have the right to use deadly force against those criminals.
And don't try to downplay the "threat" level involved in the Morrison case. The homeowner involved in the shooting is the person who called the cops to complain about the party at which Morrison had been drinking. Anyone who calls 9-1-1 to report a crime always has that fear in the back of their mind that by "getting involved" they will become a target for retribution by those arrested. I've been in that same situation myself.
While living in Marinette, I was awakened early one morning by the screams for help from a woman--and what sounded like a body hitting the wall again and again--coming from the apartment across the hall from mine. I called 9-1-1--and buzzed in the officers--who arrested the woman's boyfriend for domestic abuse and felony battery. As soon as the squad cars finally pulled out of the parking lot I started thinking "What if this guy finds out I'm the one who called the cops on him?" He lived just a few feet away from me--and obviously, he has violent tendencies. (In reviewing the arrest report the next day, I also found out that the cops removed a couple of guns from the apartment as well).
So how was that homeowner supposed to feel after hearing someone moving around inside his house shortly after he "got involved"? Was he supposed to go downstairs without his gun? Should he have engaged Morrison in a conversation after finding him hiding in his house? "Hey man, what's going on?" "Just hiding from the cops, dude." "Oh, OK, I'll just go back to bed. Make sure you lock up when you leave." And should the homeowner have just allowed Morrison to continue toward him in the dark--unsure if Morrison was also armed?
While it would be absurd to suggest that Trayvon Martin shouldn't have been walking through a neighborhood with a hooded sweatshirt on if he didn't want to get shot--I don't think it's that unrealistic for Bo Morrison to not expect to be shot while illegally breaking into someone else's house.
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
What Isn't Working
When the big labor unions were running those "It's not working" attack ads against Governor Walker earlier this year I was able to pull out my property tax bill and my state income tax return and see that the new budget was indeed "working" But a new set of numbers show that one provision of the Governor's agenda is definitely not working. I'm talking about the School Choice Program.
I have never been a fan of school vouchers--not because of argument from WEAC that it "steals" money from low performing public school districts--but rather because of the First Amendment implications of taxpayer dollars going to religious operations. Now the latest results from the Wisconsin Student Assessment System show that kids who leave the Milwaukee and Racine public schools for the private schools don't do any better on standardized tests--and in many cases actually do worse!
Overall, 49% of kids in the Milwaukee public schools test as at least "proficient" in math (how pathetic is that?). Only 40% of School Choice kids test as "proficient". When it comes to reading comprehension, 58% of MPS students were "proficient" (another depressing number)--while 56% reached the same level in School Choice.
In Racine the numbers are pretty much the same. 62% of public school kids are "proficient" in math--but just 51% of School Choice students test at that level. And in reading comprehension the gap is even bigger--with the public school kids testing out at 69% o"proficient" compared to just 56% for the School Choice students.
This is just the second year that School Voucher students in Milwaukee were compared to their public school counterparts on the standardized test results and the first year that Racine kids were compared. Keep in mind, this is a program that started in Milwaukee in 1990--so we had more than 20-years of non-acountability for a taxpayer-funded program--a fact that should anger all of us who demand the same "proof that it's working" from every other function of state government.
These numbers won't quell the call from those who want to expand School Choice to more districts--or even make it a statewide option. But it is clear to me, that spending an hour of learning about religion every day isn't helping anyone to read better or add correctly.
I have never been a fan of school vouchers--not because of argument from WEAC that it "steals" money from low performing public school districts--but rather because of the First Amendment implications of taxpayer dollars going to religious operations. Now the latest results from the Wisconsin Student Assessment System show that kids who leave the Milwaukee and Racine public schools for the private schools don't do any better on standardized tests--and in many cases actually do worse!
Overall, 49% of kids in the Milwaukee public schools test as at least "proficient" in math (how pathetic is that?). Only 40% of School Choice kids test as "proficient". When it comes to reading comprehension, 58% of MPS students were "proficient" (another depressing number)--while 56% reached the same level in School Choice.
In Racine the numbers are pretty much the same. 62% of public school kids are "proficient" in math--but just 51% of School Choice students test at that level. And in reading comprehension the gap is even bigger--with the public school kids testing out at 69% o"proficient" compared to just 56% for the School Choice students.
This is just the second year that School Voucher students in Milwaukee were compared to their public school counterparts on the standardized test results and the first year that Racine kids were compared. Keep in mind, this is a program that started in Milwaukee in 1990--so we had more than 20-years of non-acountability for a taxpayer-funded program--a fact that should anger all of us who demand the same "proof that it's working" from every other function of state government.
These numbers won't quell the call from those who want to expand School Choice to more districts--or even make it a statewide option. But it is clear to me, that spending an hour of learning about religion every day isn't helping anyone to read better or add correctly.
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Healthy Incentives
I went to the doctor's office last week. It was something of a combo visit. I wanted to get checked out for this cold that I have had for five weeks now--and I had to get in my annual physical before April 1st. You see, my health insurance provider gives me some incentive to get an annual physical--if I was to fail to get one, the low premiums I enjoy with my High Deductible Health Savings Account policy would TRIPLE. Believe me, when faced with that possibility, you make it a priority to see the doctor--even if you feel great. As a further incentive, the insurance picks up the entire cost of the physical.
After the examination, I was given a clean bill of health (save for the cold). Proper blood pressure and heart rate, healthy weight, low bad cholesterol levels, no unusual lumps, spots or internal sounds. My physician said it was one of the most "boring" examinations she had ever done--as most people who come in are overweight, out-of-shape, borderline-diabetic or at risk for having a heart attack at any minute.
I told her I have incentive to stay healthy, as I'm paying for the first couple thousand dollars for any medical procedure out of my own pocket--having an HD-HSA policy. She laughed and said she wished more people had that incentive--as most of the people she sees are on Medicare or Badgercare--and they aren't paying much of anything out of pocket.
And there you have it: the number one cause of out-of-control health care costs--when you aren't picking up the tab--or a very small percentage of it--what is your incentive to actually limit that expense? What would you buy at the grocery store if the bill was sent somewhere else and you paid only a little bit of the actual cost? What size house would you live in if you only had to pay 5% of the mortgage? How would you drive if your insurance rates never went up--no matter how many crashes you had?
Besides the over-reaching, unconstitutional requirements of the Affordable Care Act and its budget-crushing deficit-tripling cost, the lack of any incentive to be healthy and ease the crunch on the health care system is my biggest problem with the new law. Why not allow insurers who are now "required" to cover everyone, to give a cost break to those who cost very little to insure--and put the high risk enrollees cover more of their own expenses?
That third handful of potato chips might be less tempting if you knew it would be hitting you in the pocketbook-along with the waistline.
After the examination, I was given a clean bill of health (save for the cold). Proper blood pressure and heart rate, healthy weight, low bad cholesterol levels, no unusual lumps, spots or internal sounds. My physician said it was one of the most "boring" examinations she had ever done--as most people who come in are overweight, out-of-shape, borderline-diabetic or at risk for having a heart attack at any minute.
I told her I have incentive to stay healthy, as I'm paying for the first couple thousand dollars for any medical procedure out of my own pocket--having an HD-HSA policy. She laughed and said she wished more people had that incentive--as most of the people she sees are on Medicare or Badgercare--and they aren't paying much of anything out of pocket.
And there you have it: the number one cause of out-of-control health care costs--when you aren't picking up the tab--or a very small percentage of it--what is your incentive to actually limit that expense? What would you buy at the grocery store if the bill was sent somewhere else and you paid only a little bit of the actual cost? What size house would you live in if you only had to pay 5% of the mortgage? How would you drive if your insurance rates never went up--no matter how many crashes you had?
Besides the over-reaching, unconstitutional requirements of the Affordable Care Act and its budget-crushing deficit-tripling cost, the lack of any incentive to be healthy and ease the crunch on the health care system is my biggest problem with the new law. Why not allow insurers who are now "required" to cover everyone, to give a cost break to those who cost very little to insure--and put the high risk enrollees cover more of their own expenses?
That third handful of potato chips might be less tempting if you knew it would be hitting you in the pocketbook-along with the waistline.
Monday, March 26, 2012
Apparently, I was taking my life in my own hands during our recent trip to visit my parents in Florida. I made the mistake of wearing a hooded sweatshirt inside their gated community. That is allegedly enough to be considered not only suspicious--but downright dangerous.
Our first night down there, I was grilling burgers on the back patio. There was a light rain, so I had the hood pulled up over my head. What if my parents' neighbors had seen me? Would they have been scared? Would they have felt threatened? Would they have called 911? "Hello, Police? Yes, there is a man I don't know walking around in my neighbor's yard--and he's wearing a hoodie!" "Did you say a hoodie, sir?" "Yes, a hoodie!" "We'll send over the SWAT team immediately."
Or what if one of the private security guards that drives the streets of the community had spotted me out there? Would he have set up surveillance to monitor my movements? Would he have pulled out the spotlight and accosted me? Would he have mistaken my burger flipper for a gun--and fired if I moved toward him unexpectedly?
And would the Lake County Prosecutor tell my wife that there would be no arrests, no criminal charges and no further investigation "Because, Mrs. Kause, he was wearing a hooded sweatshirt and really, he was somewhere he didn't belong. There's a reason we have walls and gates around this community."
We were in the Orlando area the day 17-year old Trayvon Martin was killed while walking through another gated community--armed with nothing more than a bag of Skittles and a bottle of soda. I can honestly say I don't remember much of the initial local media coverage of the case. You don't really pay attention to the crime stories of some other city--it doesn't affect you, so what do you care? As I recall, one of the stations had their top story that week "Are Skinny Jeans Dangerous to Your Health? This is a special report you don't want to miss!!"
I guess when we go to visit the folks next winter, I'll just pack nothing but Tommy Bahama shirts and Khaki pants--and leave the "dangerous" hoodies at home.
Our first night down there, I was grilling burgers on the back patio. There was a light rain, so I had the hood pulled up over my head. What if my parents' neighbors had seen me? Would they have been scared? Would they have felt threatened? Would they have called 911? "Hello, Police? Yes, there is a man I don't know walking around in my neighbor's yard--and he's wearing a hoodie!" "Did you say a hoodie, sir?" "Yes, a hoodie!" "We'll send over the SWAT team immediately."
Or what if one of the private security guards that drives the streets of the community had spotted me out there? Would he have set up surveillance to monitor my movements? Would he have pulled out the spotlight and accosted me? Would he have mistaken my burger flipper for a gun--and fired if I moved toward him unexpectedly?
And would the Lake County Prosecutor tell my wife that there would be no arrests, no criminal charges and no further investigation "Because, Mrs. Kause, he was wearing a hooded sweatshirt and really, he was somewhere he didn't belong. There's a reason we have walls and gates around this community."
We were in the Orlando area the day 17-year old Trayvon Martin was killed while walking through another gated community--armed with nothing more than a bag of Skittles and a bottle of soda. I can honestly say I don't remember much of the initial local media coverage of the case. You don't really pay attention to the crime stories of some other city--it doesn't affect you, so what do you care? As I recall, one of the stations had their top story that week "Are Skinny Jeans Dangerous to Your Health? This is a special report you don't want to miss!!"
I guess when we go to visit the folks next winter, I'll just pack nothing but Tommy Bahama shirts and Khaki pants--and leave the "dangerous" hoodies at home.
Friday, March 23, 2012
Maybe the Mayans Were Right
I'm beginning to think the Mayans were right in predicting the end of the world is coming up on December 21st of this year. I mean, how else to explain what is going on around here?
Earthquakes in Clintonville? Who had that in the natural disaster pool this year? I fully expect "I survived the Clintonville Earthquake" t-shirts to hit local gas stations and the internet any day now. And now you've got Montello trying to horn in on the earthquake action--with residents there reporting the ground shaking this week. If this keeps up, Wisconsin's "Big One" will feature Madison sliding into Lake Mendota--just like California will break off into the Pacific Ocean one of these days.
Another sign of the Apocalypse? How about 80-degree days in Wisconsin in March? Usually we have to wait until mid-May to see the parade of pasty white legs and muffin tops make their return to the area. But this year, half the people in the bars for St Patricks Day were showing way too much skin. UW Oshkosh students will be able to save hundreds of dollars by getting drunk at the beach in Menominee Park instead of having to go all the way down to Padre Island or Panama City--where it's only a few degrees warmer.
With the end obviously now in sight, it might be a good time to revise some of those predictions for 2012. You can now put me down for the Chicago Cubs to win the World Series. That should pretty much guarantee the Earth splits in two--with each half hurtling into deep space. I'm also going to expect President Obama to win re-election as well. When all the volcanoes on the planet are erupting and spewing red-hot lava and ash into the atmosphere, tripling the federal deficit won't be such a big concern will it?
So we all may as well quit are jobs and get to work on accomplishing all of those things on the "bucket list". The end is obviously near.
Earthquakes in Clintonville? Who had that in the natural disaster pool this year? I fully expect "I survived the Clintonville Earthquake" t-shirts to hit local gas stations and the internet any day now. And now you've got Montello trying to horn in on the earthquake action--with residents there reporting the ground shaking this week. If this keeps up, Wisconsin's "Big One" will feature Madison sliding into Lake Mendota--just like California will break off into the Pacific Ocean one of these days.
Another sign of the Apocalypse? How about 80-degree days in Wisconsin in March? Usually we have to wait until mid-May to see the parade of pasty white legs and muffin tops make their return to the area. But this year, half the people in the bars for St Patricks Day were showing way too much skin. UW Oshkosh students will be able to save hundreds of dollars by getting drunk at the beach in Menominee Park instead of having to go all the way down to Padre Island or Panama City--where it's only a few degrees warmer.
With the end obviously now in sight, it might be a good time to revise some of those predictions for 2012. You can now put me down for the Chicago Cubs to win the World Series. That should pretty much guarantee the Earth splits in two--with each half hurtling into deep space. I'm also going to expect President Obama to win re-election as well. When all the volcanoes on the planet are erupting and spewing red-hot lava and ash into the atmosphere, tripling the federal deficit won't be such a big concern will it?
So we all may as well quit are jobs and get to work on accomplishing all of those things on the "bucket list". The end is obviously near.
Thursday, March 22, 2012
The Real Villains
Could those of you who list Congressman Paul Ryan and Governor Scott Walker as the most "Evil People in the World" for wanting to rein in the cost of social programs also add Latasha Jackson to your rankings? Jackson is not a Republican lawmaker, she is not a Billionaire Wall Street businessperson, and she is not a Conservative Talk Show Host with the highest ratings in the country. She IS a scam artist who was directly stealing money from the working poor.
Latasha Jackson is the Milwaukee County woman who ran fake day care centers in order to collect more than THREE-MILLION DOLLARS in subsidies from a state program designed to help low-income parents pay for babysitting so they could go to work. For TEN YEARS Jackson billed the state for providing day care to kids that either didn't exist, were actually her relatives or were the kids of the people who basically just sat around at the "day care centers" pretending to be "teachers".
And Jackson would probably still be running that scam today--if it were not for a series of investigative reporting articles that won the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel a Pulitzer Prize. Articles that found state regulators had long suspected that Jackson was running a scam--but never did the proper follow up to confirm it. It was only after the VERY embarrassing J-S articles that her flow of money was cut off. Why didn't those regulators do anything before that? Probably because "it's not their money" and secondly, it seemed like there was still plenty of money to go around.
To add insult to injury, the plea agreement filed in Milwaukee Federal Court this week calls for Jackson (who bought a 76-hundred square foot mansion in the suburbs and drove around in a new Jaguar with her ill-gotten gains) will be required to pay just 333-thousand dollars in restitution. Barely one-tenth of the money she stole from poor parents.
Those Journal-Sentinel articles actually uncovered hundreds of phony and shady operations that were defrauding the day care subsidy program of $45-MILLION DOLLARS--in a program that would annually spend 350-million. A full 13% of the money that should have been going to help working families was instead being stolen. But when Congressman Ryan or Governor Walker propose freezing spending on such programs, or cutting the funding by five percent, they are portrayed as being cold, evil, heartless men in a series of press releases, protests and TV ads.
So where is the TV ad featuring Latasha Jackson? Where will the protesters be demanding "social justice" when she and others who ran the same scam return to court for their plea and sentencing hearings? And when will we start hearing the demands for accountability in all of the programs that would provide PLENTY for the less-fortunate--if we would just make sure that those that actually need it are the only ones getting it?
Latasha Jackson is the Milwaukee County woman who ran fake day care centers in order to collect more than THREE-MILLION DOLLARS in subsidies from a state program designed to help low-income parents pay for babysitting so they could go to work. For TEN YEARS Jackson billed the state for providing day care to kids that either didn't exist, were actually her relatives or were the kids of the people who basically just sat around at the "day care centers" pretending to be "teachers".
And Jackson would probably still be running that scam today--if it were not for a series of investigative reporting articles that won the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel a Pulitzer Prize. Articles that found state regulators had long suspected that Jackson was running a scam--but never did the proper follow up to confirm it. It was only after the VERY embarrassing J-S articles that her flow of money was cut off. Why didn't those regulators do anything before that? Probably because "it's not their money" and secondly, it seemed like there was still plenty of money to go around.
To add insult to injury, the plea agreement filed in Milwaukee Federal Court this week calls for Jackson (who bought a 76-hundred square foot mansion in the suburbs and drove around in a new Jaguar with her ill-gotten gains) will be required to pay just 333-thousand dollars in restitution. Barely one-tenth of the money she stole from poor parents.
Those Journal-Sentinel articles actually uncovered hundreds of phony and shady operations that were defrauding the day care subsidy program of $45-MILLION DOLLARS--in a program that would annually spend 350-million. A full 13% of the money that should have been going to help working families was instead being stolen. But when Congressman Ryan or Governor Walker propose freezing spending on such programs, or cutting the funding by five percent, they are portrayed as being cold, evil, heartless men in a series of press releases, protests and TV ads.
So where is the TV ad featuring Latasha Jackson? Where will the protesters be demanding "social justice" when she and others who ran the same scam return to court for their plea and sentencing hearings? And when will we start hearing the demands for accountability in all of the programs that would provide PLENTY for the less-fortunate--if we would just make sure that those that actually need it are the only ones getting it?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)