The Right to Liberty and the Pursuit of Craziness

I am always trying to figure out what these "conservatives" are really thinking. Their distrust of government (except to blow up other countries) and their bizarre ideology that somehow people can be trusted to do the right thing. Do they really feel humans are that awesome and smart? Or do they only want to protect their own large sums of money so they get everyone all jazzed up about taxes?? (I can't help thinking that Rush simply wants the poor and paranoid to protect his own wealth by staging anti-Obama rallies)

One theory of mine is that many right-winged politicians are simply not well traveled. When you argue that people can make good financial decisions without government legislation--they haven't opened their eyes to the incredible corruption that happens in countries without such regulation. (Don't they know people are greedy little pigs?)

Even Ron Paul, who has some good ideas, but also a few nutty ones, has a silly thought that doctors would uphold the Hippocratic oath to provide free medical care if we eliminated Medicare/Medicaid. It is certainly an interesting theory that Government programs have eliminated personal responsibility towards the poor. However, in this day and age people are definitely more greedy. If you reversed the clock I just don't see people going back to the days of yore when they looked out for each other. It is a fact that the higher your income level, the less you actually help others, volunteer or donate.....

My personal experience growing up in NJ was that people were horrid to one another. Then moving to Alaska I almost fell over how much people trusted and helped one another. My explanation for this difference: the less populated an area, the nicer the people. We get cranky living on top of one another...Just like gerbils attacking their young in a crowded cage...
So for now Government is what we have to protect us from ourselves.

What's The Deal With Swine Flu??

So everyone is scared about swine flu. The media is having a great time scaring the pants off of everyone, as a good thriller is always fun. But here's the let down: it's not as exciting as the media makes it out to be.
For one, I should know as living in Alaska, it looks like I already caught the flu two weeks ago. When I realized that I had the flu and not a cold (because of the chills & lack of runny nose) I started researching more about symptoms. I came upon some British websites that honestly told their population --yes --half of you have the swine flu, but get over it--it is actually MILDER than regular flu.
A statement was released by the government, that yes, 98% of flu right now (Aug/Sept.) in the USA are H1N1. So many of us loyal citizens have the damn thing but don't even realize it--because you are not going to test for something that seems so ordinary...
Of course I understand the flu is never a joke--as vulnerable populations are always at risk for complications. I just don't know why they want people to expect this fearsome disease--when actually it is much milder, they probably already have it and therefore are spreading it without even realizing it.....

Why Would it Cost $220,000 to Raise a Child??

So I'm reading a Time magazine article about the high cost of raising a child (in the USA that is). The number quoted was $220,000. I looked up the USDA stats that come up with these numbers and sure enough--average spent in 2008 was about $180,00-$220,000 depending on your income, as rich people simply spend more on their kids.

I needed to know more because it seemed so crazy to me, so I looked at the breakdown chart. Ok, the food bills make sense, especially if you buy healthy food. Of course breast feeding your baby would greatly reduce the first years costs. Health expenses probably includes dental, etc..so that wasn't outrageous. Nor was $1,160 on 2 years worth of transportation once you include an occasional plane ticket. However, I contend if we weren't obsessed with driving children to all these sports & lessons and had better public transportation that cost would be less too...

The main issues I had with their numerology (or our voracious lifestyles) was the clothes & housing. I agree that clothing a teenager is expensive--because lets face it, we are so crazy materialistic that our teenagers get heckled for not wearing the hottest trends and having sparkling new sneakers. The only way to fix that is to shake up society. But can't we suck it up and buy more used clothes for the little ones?? Or a few less? I often see daycare kids dressed to the nines in the nicest outfits--in my opinion the parents are alleviating their guilt by dressing them up....yet I regress.

Housing was the big ah-ha moment: The cost breakdown was 33% of that large $200,000 estimate -due to mortgage and utilities. Probably based on the assumption that an American kid will simply fall over and die without his or her own bedroom. Therefore you need to run out and buy a four bedroom three bath house. Baloney!
Many people without children happen to have big mortgages as well, and I'm pretty sure they crank the heat . So I'm not sure how the kids are to blame for the mortgage, except for the perception that you need this big-ass house so you can hide from each other.

Remember the Brady Bunch? Six kids 3 bedrooms. My sister just raised her kids in a 2 bedroom house (the trick was to make the basement a play area) And our house in Alaska used to house 4 kids and it is two bedrooms, tiny office -possible third bedroom, and one bathroom.
Sharing bedrooms actually teaches kids to get along with one another. Sure they can argue and go nuts--but the lesson is you need to deal with it--not shut the door and hide. Plus I know some kids actually find it fun--and that isolation is lonely. Of course if you have a boy and a girl, you probably are going to separate them out at some point (I'm not crazy enough to say they should share a room) Maybe build out that attic like the Brady Bunch did!

But please lets remember, that the high cost of raising a child really has nothing to do with keeping them warm, fed & clothed-- but more with what Americans want and what they have come to expect.

Rush Limbaugh is the Real Socialist Nazi

The few times I have listened to pill popping Rush Limbaugh, I have heard him refer to Hitler as some sort of Socialist. This is true to a point--he believed cleaning his society of any "undesirables" would help propel the arian nation forward, i.e.-- the perfect white people. He wanted what was best for a society of blue eyed, blonde beauties. No minorities, no Jews, no disabled people to keep anyone else down.....
Of course anyone who has read about "socialism" knows that what Marx wanted, and how it was or is interpreted by other countries (Soviet Union, China, Cuba) varies tremendously. Anyone who has read anything by Marx knows that obviously his dream of socialism is nothing like what Hitler wanted....
Either way, that leads to the point--what does Limbaugh actually want?? To the best of my understanding he is against government "entitlement" programs like Social Security or Medicare, or any future government health care. The funding that keeps disabled and old folk living with some sort of human dignity and medical care. So we don't have sickly, frail people starving on the streets. Obviously they should get their lazy asses off of their hospital beds and pay their own bills. Break out of those socialist nursing homes, by getting a job--maybe by spewing hate on the radio?? Perhaps that would be a good job for someone suffering from incurable dementia....
Hitler wanted to gas the disabled, Limbaugh prefers to starve them of care. Oh big difference.
The second reason Limbaugh is the real Hitler is the way he states his message. By screaming propaganda. Being loud and full of controversy. He is not subtle--no way. Well guess who studied this particular way of spreading information?? I believe the quote in Mein Kamf is something like: everyone will listen to the loud fool, as opposed to the quiet thinker. Enough said.

British Columbia Parks and Recreation

Recently we took a trip up the Alaska Highway. From North Dakota back to Alaska--a short jaunt --ha, ha. What struck us as the most amazing thing about our trip wasn't the stone sheep, grizzly bear, or caribou we saw--but the British Columbia Park system. What a pleasant surprise! The public playgrounds/picnic areas/benches were the nicest we have ever seen--and we stopped at three different parks there. We also noticed all the workers buzzing about--cleaning the outhouses, emptying recycling bins, etc....The public bathrooms at Laird Hot Springs even had a 4 stall public composting restroom--and no, it did not stink!

So we don't really know what this all means--we stopped in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Yukon as well--and Yukon parks are very nice too--but B.C. just kicks it up a notch. Do they pay more in taxes?? And how about the economy--do park budgets get cut in Canada?? Or do they just value them more?? (We did not even have to pay any day use fees, except for the hot springs).

As someone who seriously appreciates everything a park offers, I am always upset when Alaska or any other state closes parks first due to "budget shortfalls". As if they don't value them at all, nor does the public find them that important.
I haven't really gotten to why the thinking is so different, but it is amazing nevertheless.

The Diabolical Nature of the Healthcare Debate

Today I saw a TV ad from a breast cancer organization helping spread fear about health care reform. Mainly they warned that the US currently has good cancer care, but that the goofballs in Government are going to put restrictions on that.
The diabolical irony here is that--has everyone read their own private insurance plans??? Most people have cap limits, or a $$ when they are "maxed out". I personally know of a brain tumor patient simply booted out of their private health care plan. And guess who is picking up the tab for his chemo now?? Well big bad government, that's who (Medicaid/Medicare). The same system the "right" usually hates. But now the "right" is sooo worried about human life. Well only rich people's lives actually....

Sarah Palin is the Real Elitist

So Ms. Sarah feels good that she has exposed the bogeyman of healthcare reform--discussion about end of life and excessive medical procedures. True enough she smelled the rat of socialized medicine. BUT the big BUT is our American butts for one....we with our "free will" food choices have caused these insurmountable health care costs (heart disease, diabetes, etc.) that's where all those Medicare dollars are going folks like it or not.

Secondly--Sarah feels we all have rights to "life expanding" treatments, indefinitely??Well who pays for it now?? Often the taxpayer. And who will pay for it in the future, as these procedures get more complex and expensive??
Regular private insurance already practices the "death march"--but they do it in a less tacky way by calling it all financial--sorry dude, but you've maxed out. And this happens to many average Joes that get severely disabled or get "life expanding treatments" that go beyond their coverage. Then they fall back on to Medicaid. So the only ones in the end who can actually afford fancy technology and "life at all costs" are the republican elitists. The same folks that hate Medicaid & Medicare , the so called "entitlement programs" that actually keep people alive ....