"Only 7 more days until the recount!"
That came off of The Onion for this week. So true...
Really though, all of this advanced voting has pointed to signs of huge voter turnout for this election. The experts say that means a Democratic success. See, the key to Democratic success is generally a form of brainwashing, where people with otherwise unused brain power have that space filled with "vote or die" nonsense, and then topped off with "vote for Kerry" nonsense. That's how they win - they get the people who don't vote/don't want to vote/don't know what to vote for crowd to show up, and they vote based on TV. Should be a good time...
This weekend is the GA/FL game in J'ville, FL. I'm going down to Sea Island tomorrow morning with my Dad and grandpa. We spend a couple days down there, then go down for the game, and then come crawling back on Saturday night only to have to get up and leave paradise on Sunday. Seriously though, it's a lot of fun, even though we generally lose, and the fact that we were able to go at all is pretty cool. This year looks....different....for the Dawgs. Florida has no "coach" now, and they look like a truly terrible team. But, regardless, Florida has looked bad before and still beaten UGA. The game is a rivalry, so the name of the game changes, and records mean nothing. Georgia has often had a better team of players and still lost. But we still lead the overall series. See, there's the upbeat side of it! I think we've got 'em this year. My Dad has predicted UGA, 30-14. Try to spot us on TV.
I should probably go to work now.
10.27.2004
10.21.2004
You know, sometimes people just make things up, out of thin air, just to mislead folks...for the sake of clarity, we'll refer to it from this point forward as "lying."
I get a newsletter from The Career News every now and then. I think I must have signed up for this a few years ago at UGA, no clue really, but that's another story. This week's letter contained the following information:
"Wanting a job but not actively looking takes a person out of the unemployment rate calculation. In response to recurring questions about the unemployment rate, the Labor Department has created other indicators that paint a fuller portrait of the employment market. One of those measures, sometimes called an underemployment rate, adds two groups to those officially deemed unemployed:
In August, when the official unemployment rate fell 0.1 percentage point to 5.4 percent, this alternative index remained at 9.5 percent -- right where it had been the previous month. Sylvia Allegretto, an economist with the liberal Economic Policy Institute in Washington, said this underemployment rate more accurately reflects the weakness in the job market."
Discouraged job seekers? Discouraged? Since when is that an excuse for not getting a job? Since when is that an excuse for anything? Seriously, deal with your feelings, then get a job. Man, it is so easy for any of us to blame our problems on someone else. People like this Economic Policy Institute and other masters of political correctness only make it easier for people to point that finger somewhere else besides themselves.
But seriously, the worst one of those two points is that they actually count people working part-time as UNEMPLOYED. That includes (though unfortunately not detailed in this document) people aged 18-22, people who, traditionally, either have NO job, or a part-time job - which, as it turns out, also means "unemployed." Does anyone else think it's strange that they can refer to anyone who is EMPLOYED as part of the UNEMPLOYMENT figures? The folks putting this out are either 1) ignorant, 2) illiterate or 3) flat-out lying to us.
Look folks, I understand that personal issues do prevent people from getting the job they want or getting a job at all, and I certainly hope that they get a good job sooner rather than later...but if you have a job, you're NOT unemployed, simply by definition.
Additionally, how is it that "wanting a job" but not having a job counts you as employed? And how do you know anyway? I guess you just take their word for it. I don't know, I guess it's somewhat reasonable, but it sure doesn't make sense.
For people who NEED a job, here's the short of it: if you have no job, then your job is to FIND a job. I sure think that's fair to assume.
I get a newsletter from The Career News every now and then. I think I must have signed up for this a few years ago at UGA, no clue really, but that's another story. This week's letter contained the following information:
"Wanting a job but not actively looking takes a person out of the unemployment rate calculation. In response to recurring questions about the unemployment rate, the Labor Department has created other indicators that paint a fuller portrait of the employment market. One of those measures, sometimes called an underemployment rate, adds two groups to those officially deemed unemployed:
- 'Marginally attached' workers, the Labor Department's term for people who have personal issues that interfere with the search, including discouraged jobseekers;
- People working part time because they couldn't find full-time jobs or had scaled-back hours.
In August, when the official unemployment rate fell 0.1 percentage point to 5.4 percent, this alternative index remained at 9.5 percent -- right where it had been the previous month. Sylvia Allegretto, an economist with the liberal Economic Policy Institute in Washington, said this underemployment rate more accurately reflects the weakness in the job market."
Discouraged job seekers? Discouraged? Since when is that an excuse for not getting a job? Since when is that an excuse for anything? Seriously, deal with your feelings, then get a job. Man, it is so easy for any of us to blame our problems on someone else. People like this Economic Policy Institute and other masters of political correctness only make it easier for people to point that finger somewhere else besides themselves.
But seriously, the worst one of those two points is that they actually count people working part-time as UNEMPLOYED. That includes (though unfortunately not detailed in this document) people aged 18-22, people who, traditionally, either have NO job, or a part-time job - which, as it turns out, also means "unemployed." Does anyone else think it's strange that they can refer to anyone who is EMPLOYED as part of the UNEMPLOYMENT figures? The folks putting this out are either 1) ignorant, 2) illiterate or 3) flat-out lying to us.
Look folks, I understand that personal issues do prevent people from getting the job they want or getting a job at all, and I certainly hope that they get a good job sooner rather than later...but if you have a job, you're NOT unemployed, simply by definition.
Additionally, how is it that "wanting a job" but not having a job counts you as employed? And how do you know anyway? I guess you just take their word for it. I don't know, I guess it's somewhat reasonable, but it sure doesn't make sense.
For people who NEED a job, here's the short of it: if you have no job, then your job is to FIND a job. I sure think that's fair to assume.
10.18.2004
...and now it's starting to get cold.
Seriously? I barely remember it being summer. Happened a little too fast. Maybe I should get a job as a teacher, where summer shows up just like you remember it as a kid. Sweet.
Watched "The Day After Tomorrow" this weekend. It was fun to watch, but it stretched the imagination just a little too far. And I could really have done without the strained father-son relationship and ridiculous love story. But man, it's neat to see the destruction. That's all I'll say.
Having problems with my new router. It's a nice one, wireless-g, 108mbps. I'm having problems, however, ACCESSING MY OWN WEBSITE. I really don't get it. The SCAP site, my site, Mike's site and some other sites are all hosted on the same server, so none of them work. And, try as I might, I haven't been able to find a SINGLE other website out there that DOESN'T work besides the ones I just listed. Very convenient, eh? In all honesty, there are other sites that I cannot ping, but I can browse to them, making <0 sense. Well, obviously it does make sense, or it wouldn't happen, but I just need to figure it out. Mike's been helping, but the Support Hotline of Indian Technicians hasn't helped at all, and forums have turned up nothing thus far. I'm sure there will be a big celebration when I get it all fixed, so I'll let you guys know.
A moment of silence please..............thank you. Yes, last night, I made a DVD of the slide show FROM MY WEDDING. Long time in the making, my friends. This was just a test for my sake, to make sure that I got all the DVD features set up correctly with my new Encore DVD program, and to check player compatibilty for the DVD-R media. Mostly good results, but there were some functions that I didn't set correctly. No problems with playback at all, looked very good. One image needed to be deinterlaced.
I'm thinking it's time for all the "undecideds" to decide. One prominent talk show host has proposed that undecideds shouldn't be allowed to vote if they haven't made their mind up by now. To me that's just words for the sake of words. If they haven't made their minds up by now, THEY STILL HAVE TWO WEEKS TO DECIDE. Now, if they haven't decided by the time they step into the box, then maybe they shouldn't vote, I'll buy that. But for now, hey, the election day is November 2nd, so in my opinion, and that of the federal and state governments, people have until 7:00pm on November 2nd to make up their mind about the president and his challenger.
Seriously? I barely remember it being summer. Happened a little too fast. Maybe I should get a job as a teacher, where summer shows up just like you remember it as a kid. Sweet.
Watched "The Day After Tomorrow" this weekend. It was fun to watch, but it stretched the imagination just a little too far. And I could really have done without the strained father-son relationship and ridiculous love story. But man, it's neat to see the destruction. That's all I'll say.
Having problems with my new router. It's a nice one, wireless-g, 108mbps. I'm having problems, however, ACCESSING MY OWN WEBSITE. I really don't get it. The SCAP site, my site, Mike's site and some other sites are all hosted on the same server, so none of them work. And, try as I might, I haven't been able to find a SINGLE other website out there that DOESN'T work besides the ones I just listed. Very convenient, eh? In all honesty, there are other sites that I cannot ping, but I can browse to them, making <0 sense. Well, obviously it does make sense, or it wouldn't happen, but I just need to figure it out. Mike's been helping, but the Support Hotline of Indian Technicians hasn't helped at all, and forums have turned up nothing thus far. I'm sure there will be a big celebration when I get it all fixed, so I'll let you guys know.
A moment of silence please..............thank you. Yes, last night, I made a DVD of the slide show FROM MY WEDDING. Long time in the making, my friends. This was just a test for my sake, to make sure that I got all the DVD features set up correctly with my new Encore DVD program, and to check player compatibilty for the DVD-R media. Mostly good results, but there were some functions that I didn't set correctly. No problems with playback at all, looked very good. One image needed to be deinterlaced.
I'm thinking it's time for all the "undecideds" to decide. One prominent talk show host has proposed that undecideds shouldn't be allowed to vote if they haven't made their mind up by now. To me that's just words for the sake of words. If they haven't made their minds up by now, THEY STILL HAVE TWO WEEKS TO DECIDE. Now, if they haven't decided by the time they step into the box, then maybe they shouldn't vote, I'll buy that. But for now, hey, the election day is November 2nd, so in my opinion, and that of the federal and state governments, people have until 7:00pm on November 2nd to make up their mind about the president and his challenger.
10.13.2004
It's been a crazy couple of weeks, so no updates...until now.
First off, want to draw attention to the comments on my post about the voting rights, where people were talking about testing people before allowing them to vote. My sister posted a comment that made a lot of sense to me...yeah, basically, we COULD test people for basic literacy and political knowledge, but the criteria would be decided by whoever was in office, so it would probably change every 2 or 4 years. Additionally, it would probably require another "test" in high schools and preparation courses to get the kids ready to vote. Honestly, if we're running out of room in school for the arts and sports, then it's not time to start adding more requirements. Good call on that one.
Now, there's been a couple of debates in the last couple of weeks, along with speculation about who brought what onstage with them....this is just getting ridiculous. They call the debates a "draw" for the most part, even though each side maintains victory. I think the least important but most interesting has been the VP debate. Interesting because we don't get to hear much from these people (relatively), and interesting because it doesn't really matter. They become mouthpieces for their candidates for the most part, and NOBODY votes for a vice president. People vote for the #1 guy. Sure, a VP candidate can help/hurt a little, but we're not even talking about a single point increase in the polls.
Tonight is another presidential debate, this one concerning mostly domestic issues. Many people say that Bush has spent the last 4 years spending money in ways it ought not be spent (a big one people mention is, of course, Homeland Security programs). I agree that Bush has made some strange decisions with taxpayer money. As of this year, I am one of those elite that have actually paid taxes. I think it'd be more than appropriate to scale back domestic spending, and the candidate who will make that point will have an edge. Of course, more substance is necessary...which programs will be cut back, and which will be reinforced with taxpayer funds? If we can ditch a lot of the handouts, all the better. If we start spending more on getting healthcare for all americans...well, explain 1) how we can afford that, 2) why it would be better to socialize medicine than simply repair the current situation and 3) where the constitution makes provisions for domestic healthcare on a personal scale. I have my opinions, and I've done my research, so I already realize a lot of the mistakes in this type of spending...I also know which candidate has been talking so much lately about how a social medical program is in his plan.
Taxes...one candidate has promised to raise taxes significantly. The candidate that raises taxes should realize that most of the people who vote fall into the group known as "taxpayers," and that most of them benefitted from the recent tax cuts...and they were all happy about it. Why would they vote for a tax increase? Just a thought. One of the candidates has given significant face time to a few tax plans that would eliminate income taxes altogether, with various means of acheiving this while still paying for current obligations and also lowering the deficit. I'd be interested in trying something like that...
So, there's some things to think about. I should probably mention some football stuff too...I went to see UGA stomp LSU a couple of weeks ago. Seriously, best sporting event I've ever attended. The atmosphere was unbeatable - the entire stadium was on their feet screaming for the whole 3 1/2 hours of the game. Awesome, just awesome...and then...Tennessee tore UGA a new one last weekend. That has to be the biggest full reverse I've ever seen in a one-week period. My opinion? Tennessee got destroyed the week before by Auburn, losing by a large margin of points. At the same time, UGA beat LSU by a WAY large margin. Tennessee comes to UGA ready to make a statement, and UGA comes in feeling unbeatable. Simply put, Tennessee wanted it badly against a big opponent, and UGA didn't worry about it till it was too late - sometime in the 4th quarter. Now we get to play out our hearts against...Vanderbilt? Ahhhh....well, I just hope we don't take them for granted, because seriously, if UGA lost to Vandy, that would end the season. On the bright side, I bet Vandy would start getting financial donations from alumni again ;)
I'm reinstalling the OS on Hilary's computer, adding some anti-virus software, and (finally) hooking it up to the broadband here. Now we can sit next to each other and send instant messages. I'm so ready.
First off, want to draw attention to the comments on my post about the voting rights, where people were talking about testing people before allowing them to vote. My sister posted a comment that made a lot of sense to me...yeah, basically, we COULD test people for basic literacy and political knowledge, but the criteria would be decided by whoever was in office, so it would probably change every 2 or 4 years. Additionally, it would probably require another "test" in high schools and preparation courses to get the kids ready to vote. Honestly, if we're running out of room in school for the arts and sports, then it's not time to start adding more requirements. Good call on that one.
Now, there's been a couple of debates in the last couple of weeks, along with speculation about who brought what onstage with them....this is just getting ridiculous. They call the debates a "draw" for the most part, even though each side maintains victory. I think the least important but most interesting has been the VP debate. Interesting because we don't get to hear much from these people (relatively), and interesting because it doesn't really matter. They become mouthpieces for their candidates for the most part, and NOBODY votes for a vice president. People vote for the #1 guy. Sure, a VP candidate can help/hurt a little, but we're not even talking about a single point increase in the polls.
Tonight is another presidential debate, this one concerning mostly domestic issues. Many people say that Bush has spent the last 4 years spending money in ways it ought not be spent (a big one people mention is, of course, Homeland Security programs). I agree that Bush has made some strange decisions with taxpayer money. As of this year, I am one of those elite that have actually paid taxes. I think it'd be more than appropriate to scale back domestic spending, and the candidate who will make that point will have an edge. Of course, more substance is necessary...which programs will be cut back, and which will be reinforced with taxpayer funds? If we can ditch a lot of the handouts, all the better. If we start spending more on getting healthcare for all americans...well, explain 1) how we can afford that, 2) why it would be better to socialize medicine than simply repair the current situation and 3) where the constitution makes provisions for domestic healthcare on a personal scale. I have my opinions, and I've done my research, so I already realize a lot of the mistakes in this type of spending...I also know which candidate has been talking so much lately about how a social medical program is in his plan.
Taxes...one candidate has promised to raise taxes significantly. The candidate that raises taxes should realize that most of the people who vote fall into the group known as "taxpayers," and that most of them benefitted from the recent tax cuts...and they were all happy about it. Why would they vote for a tax increase? Just a thought. One of the candidates has given significant face time to a few tax plans that would eliminate income taxes altogether, with various means of acheiving this while still paying for current obligations and also lowering the deficit. I'd be interested in trying something like that...
So, there's some things to think about. I should probably mention some football stuff too...I went to see UGA stomp LSU a couple of weeks ago. Seriously, best sporting event I've ever attended. The atmosphere was unbeatable - the entire stadium was on their feet screaming for the whole 3 1/2 hours of the game. Awesome, just awesome...and then...Tennessee tore UGA a new one last weekend. That has to be the biggest full reverse I've ever seen in a one-week period. My opinion? Tennessee got destroyed the week before by Auburn, losing by a large margin of points. At the same time, UGA beat LSU by a WAY large margin. Tennessee comes to UGA ready to make a statement, and UGA comes in feeling unbeatable. Simply put, Tennessee wanted it badly against a big opponent, and UGA didn't worry about it till it was too late - sometime in the 4th quarter. Now we get to play out our hearts against...Vanderbilt? Ahhhh....well, I just hope we don't take them for granted, because seriously, if UGA lost to Vandy, that would end the season. On the bright side, I bet Vandy would start getting financial donations from alumni again ;)
I'm reinstalling the OS on Hilary's computer, adding some anti-virus software, and (finally) hooking it up to the broadband here. Now we can sit next to each other and send instant messages. I'm so ready.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
