Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Heaviest Element Yet Known to Science
This was sent to me by a friend and though I've yet been able to source and vet it's authenticity and accuracy, I thought I'd pass it on for you all to ponder. Consider...
"Lawrence Livermore Laboratories has discovered the heaviest element yet known to science.
The new element, Governmentium (Gv), has one neutron, 25 assistant neutrons, 88 deputy neutrons, and 198 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 312.
These 312 particles are held together by forces called morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons.
Since Governmentium has no electrons, it is inert; however, it can be detected, because it impedes every reaction with which it comes into contact. A tiny amount of Governmentium can cause a reaction that would normally take less than a second, to take from 4 days to 4 years to complete.
Governmentium has a normal half-life of 2 – 6 years. It does not decay, but instead undergoes a reorganization in which a portion of the assistant neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places.
In fact, Governmentium’s mass will actually increase over time, since each reorganization will cause more morons to become neutrons, forming isodopes.
This characteristic of morons promotion leads some scientists to believe that Governmentium is formed whenever morons reach a critical concentration. This hypothetical quantity is referred to as critical morass.
When catalyzed with money, Governmentium becomes Administratium, an element that radiates just as much energy as Governmentium since it has half as many peons but twice as many morons."
"We are all in the same boat on a stormy sea and
we owe each other a terrible loyalty." - G. K. Chesterson
Labels: government, humor, science
Sunday, September 20, 2009
The cost of "my rights"
"A privilege is something we receive when someone else pays. The police and firefighters whose deaths we will remember this month on Sept. 11 in part purchased my "right" to walk the streets of New York terror-free." - Mindy Belz
Some might include "the home children live in, the bed they sleep in, the food they eat, the clothes they wear, ad nauseum." Sadly, many have put forth the argument that these "privileges" are "rights."
Many of yesterday's children have grown to become today's young adults who confuse "privileges" with "rights" and in the end determine it is their "right" to shove their hand, or better stated have government shove it's "hand," into the pockets of their friends, family, neighbors and fellow citizens to pay for what they erroneously believe to be "rights."
That's not only wrong; it's pure and simple, selfish, self-centered and self-destructive. No one has the "right" to someone else's property, wealth (great or small) or time unless there is an expectation of remuneration. Few have an understanding of the value of what other's have, that is especially true in children who are always demanding of their parents the latest in clothes, toys, electronics, entertainment, food with little understanding that there is a price to be paid for all and the source of that payment is finite.
Sometimes parents, in an attempt to please their children, quiet them, assuage their need to conform to their peer group or just feel like they are being good parents, will give into their child’s demands. That can lead to an unhealthy expectation on the part of the child that all their expectations are equally important and must be equally met. They may then extend that expectation to their adult expectations of what government and the taxpayer should give them, limiting their own social, moral, and financial personal responsibilities. They think it is their "right" to have what they want with no understanding of the cost.
Other times, a parent may be unable to provide for a child's demands for his "rights," or see those demands as unhealthy, and withhold some of those "privileges." The child may in young adulthood grow to think he was "abused" by his "unfair" parents and in rebellion turn to government as the "sugar daddy" to fill what he may see as "rights" but are really "privileges." Thus he demands from government, becomes a dependent of government, and ultimately becomes a slave to government to which he has ceded his power of freedom, and, perhaps, even life and death.
Much of the demand for "rights" in today's ongoing debate finds its root in the erroneous understanding of "rights" vs. "privilege" and the teaching our children have received in much of their education about the role of government in their lives. They have been taught that government is their source of everything and it is in government that they will find complete fulfillment of their needs.
Sadly, they have not learned that what government gives with one hand, it takes away with the other. There is no "zero sums" formula where there is no cost for added service. They have also not had the historical perspective of seeing that government rarely meets the promises it makes, nor does it create a program, policy, bureaucracy, benefit or entitlement that ends up meeting cost projections. Rather, without fail, legislative cost projections are exceeded by many multiples. What was sold as costing $100 million ends up costing $300 million. What was budgeted for $1 billion ends up costing $3 billion.
In the 1960's when Medicare was being debated in Congress, then President Lyndon Johnson, as a strong advocate of Medicare, counseled legislators that if they were to win the debate, and thus the vote, they had to move the debate off the subject of cost. He told them don't let the costs get projected too far out because it will scare other people:
"A health program yesterday runs $300 million, but the fools had to go to projecting it down the road five or six years, and when you project it the first year, it runs $900 million. Now I don't know whether I would approve $900 million second year or not. I might approve 450 or 500. But the first thing Dick Russell comes running in saying, 'My God, you've got a billion-dollar program for next year on health, therefore I'm against any of it now.' Do you follow me?"
That $300 million program now costs $408,000,000,000 in fiscal year 2009. That's $408 billion, 1,360 times its original projected cost and 14% of the federal budget. Medicare and SCHIP add another $224 billion to the current budget. Those plans have no incentive to hold down costs, in the twisted world of government budgeting, if an agency cuts costs and comes in under budget in one year, they are not rewarded but penalized.
Government also has no incentive to hold costs down, because it has the power of the legislative and judicial system to demand more and more taxation from the citizens it is supposed to protect. Yet, today's young adults, in their focus on perceived "rights" and "entitlements" fail to consider the ultimate cost of their demands for more and more government intervention in their lives.
We as individuals have a right to demand quality health care services from those we pay. We have the ability to go to a different provider when we are not served properly. We have that right because we are paying the bill, either directly or via individual or employer provided insurance plans. We pay for those plans either directly or as part of our compensation package. We have, not perfect control, but control nevertheless, over the direction of our health care.
Health care in the US is about 1/6th of our economy, which is 16% or $2.404 TRILLION dollars. That is 77% of the total US government outlay for FY2009. And some want to turn over control of that portion of our economy, no, our lives, to a faceless government bureaucrat.
Under a plan of "privilege" where my neighbor, friends and family pay for my health care via government controlled plans, whether the so called "public option" or government mandates, I become dependent on and responsible to that other party and the whims of bureaucracy to meet my very personal health care needs. To a people who know of the struggle of running up against a government bureaucracy like the IRS or Social Security or Medicare, where faceless individuals have near unlimited power over your income, your finance, your freedom, your health care and even your life, the thought of more invasion by government into the intimate area of personal health is an fearful affront.
Those who have no understanding or experience in these matters merely see it as a relief from the responsibilities of life. That's a relief they may one day come to regret.
"We are all in the same boat on a stormy sea and
we owe each other a terrible loyalty." - G. K. Chesterson
Labels: children, federal budget deficit, government, health care, Medicare, personal responsibility
Sunday, November 09, 2008
Time to come down off the "high"
With the election over, journalists, pundits, commentators, most politicians and most importantly, the President-Elect, Barack Obama, have all begun to scale back the rhetoric. These professionals, for the most part, understand there is an important distinction between campaigning for political office and holding that office.
The words, thoughts and ideas expressed in a campaign are idealistic, crafted to appeal to a candidate’s constituency’s hope and dreams. A political candidate also knows the rhetoric of campaigning will rarely become policy. Therefore he or she must scale back the expectations of their constituencies otherwise those who carried them to office will turn on them when they realize their idealized hopes will not be attained, or at least to the degree they were led to believe during the campaign.
To his credit, President elect Obama began lowering expectations in the final week of his campaign when it became clear that barring unforeseen and hugely inaccurate polling, he would most likely become this nation’s 44th President. The difficulty for Obama is that most of the constituency he has courted, the youth vote and the wealth envy vote, do not understand the difference between campaigning and governing.
Political candidates have since the beginning of politics promised far more than they can deliver. In the form of government in this nation, that fact is inherent in our Constitutional Republic. You see, this is not a democracy, despite the misguided belief perpetuated by the educational system and the media.
Sadly, the constituencies of President-Elect Obama have drunk the “Kool-aid” of “Change” and truly believe that their candidate and our soon to be President will enact all that he has promised. Many remain in “campaign mode” ravenously attacking anyone expressing ideas and opinions even slightly different from their own. They look for attack and disparagement in even the most benign of comment.
Their youthful idealism and expectations, their lack of understanding of the American political process, will lead them to disillusion and disappointment. At the same time, their inability to tone down their rhetoric and attacks will serve only to alienate them from both those who may agree with them as well as those who don’t.
Their friends, families and fellow employees will all soon tire of the constant argumentative attitude and newly empowered political groupies will soon find themselves not only disappointed in their expectations, but distanced from those who would have otherwise been there for them when they finally realize their candidate cannot fulfill the all promises made and their government has failed them despite their hope for change.
"We are all in the same boat on a stormy sea and
we owe each other a terrible loyalty." - G. K. Chesterson
Labels: Barack Obama, Constitution, democracy, dictatorship, government, politics, Republic, voting