Bailouts And Jobs - In India??

I had a pollster call me last night. From his accent I gathered it was coming from a phone bank far from our shores even though it was of political intent.

Actually, most of us who have computers and have had to call for technical support more often than not talk with someone who is fluent in English but not "American" English.

That brought to mind a recent Jim Hightower column berating a recent move by JP Morgan Chase.

It also made me want to reiterate my advice to seek out news wherever you can find it because in this day of cut backs too much is slipping through the cracks. Even network news is little more than Obama and a recap of the day's headlines. Cable news is totally skewed to the right or the left and papers are scant of content to say the least.

So here's the nitty gritty. Mr Hightower tells us we, the taxpayers, have poured $25 billion into Morgan Chase. What have they done with it? They've increased their outsourcing to India by 25% - to some $400 million!

Talk about unintended consequences! The government has slapped them with cost cutting goals. How better to do it then outsource more than they already have? It doesn't stop with JP Morgan Chase either. According to Business Week India's top tech firms are also bidding on at least three other $100 million contracts.

The 25-30% saved by outsourcing to India goes to the company; the workers in this country who have been replaced get nothing. Mr. Hightower makes one other point of note. Lower cost bank executives can also be found in India, but strangely, no one is looking for them! Is this how the bailout was intended to work? Somehow I doubt it, but as with other aspects of the bailouts, as well as the stimulus programs, it's being made up as they go. Has anyone seen concrete evidence that any of it is working?

The question is being asked if too much is happening all at once. My assessment at this point is yes. Program upon program is being introduced. The debt has gone beyond comprehension. Is it time to slow down and get the programs already in place working before adding to them? Forget that it has to all get done now because mid term election campaigning will take over next year. This is no way to run a country! I'd much rather see less done yet done well than piling the table so full it ultimately collapses.

I've said before and I'll no doubt repeat again, the stimulus and bailout programs have not been well thought out before the beginning of implementation. Slick rhetoric does not make it so. Just think about it. The claim that 95% of Americans who pay taxes will not see their taxes go up one dime. No. But they will see an increase preceded with the $ symbol. Everything from the local level on up where taxes are increased, be it on gas or cigarettes or alcohol or "fees" or "levies"; they are all tax increases!

Just who is minding the store? None of those Indians holding our outsourced jobs pay one cent of our taxes!

There Are Queens...

There are queens and there are queens. The question is which should wear the crown?

Miss California, Carrie Prejean, did not win the Miss USA pageant. The speculation is it's because of her answer to a question by one not vying for the same crown. Perez Hilton, an open and flamboyantly gay judge and blogger, asked her if every state should follow Vermont in legalizing gay marriage.

Horror of horrors, she did not take the bait and give the politically correct answer. Especially to a gay who was obviously baiting her. She said it was her belief that marriage should be between a man and a woman. At least that's how it has been reported.

This is a story that illustrates what selective quotes can and cannot accomplish. What she actually said was, "I think it's great that Americans are able to choose one or the other." That could be considered a "yes" to my way of thinking. She went on, "But in my country, and in my family, I think that I believe marriage should be between a man and a woman." That could be her own personal opinion, having nothing to do whether or not it should be legalized by the states. "No offense to anybody out there, but that's how I was raised." That's how she was raised! That was the value with which she grew up she held true to it.

If she was denied the crown because of that then beauty pageants have not risen from the lowest of low esteem in which I already hold them.

I am not anti-gay. I do not, however, have any appreciation for the in your face types like Mr.Perez who make a living ridiculing others until it's themselves and then they scream "Foul!"

Miss Prejean will not wear the Miss USA crown, but she will probably gain more from this tawdry exercise than the actual winner. Does anyone know who she was?

The one who should be crowned is Perez Hilton, though in an entirely different context. Especially after he told Matt Lauer she should have left her politics and her religion out of it. Her politics? What about his? He's the one who asked the question in the first place!

Carrie Prejean will not be Queen, even for a day. As for Perez Hilton? What a drag!

YOU Be The Judge!

All too often a story appears telling of school officials having gone a step too far in the name of protecting their students. The case of a thirteen year old girl who was subjected to a strip search for the alleged offense of passing out prescription strength ibuprofen has made it to the Supreme Court.

On the complaint of one student a school official searched her backpack and found nothing. She was then taken to the nurse's office where she had to shift her under garments, exposing herself. No pills were found.

The question is whether it was or was not an unreasonable search. The school officials had not bothered to search her desk nor her locker. They questioned no other students. So of course the young lady must have hidden the pills in her underwear. They did draw the line at searching her body cavities only because school officials had not been trained on how to do so.

There is a lot to be said as to how this incident was handled at the school level. More interesting to me was the discourse that took place at the Supreme Court.

According to The New York Times the Court spent an hour debating what middle school students are apt to be hiding in their underwear and what should be done about it.

I may be missing something here, but if this case had been on my docket I'd have done a bit of research beforehand. Listening to debate over the "ick" factor versus how logical hiding things in under garments would seem, to learning that kids sniff marking pens to get a high, or learning that when one of the Justices was in school he undressed once a day - for gym class, and "things" often found their way into his underwear! This strikes me as a court of the absurd - and the uninformed.

I fully realize today's youth are far more savvy about drugs then I was at their age. Even now for that matter. Where to get them, how to hide them, even how to use them. Those who appear not to be so savvy are the school officials who don't cover the basics before reacting.

Worse yet is how out of touch the Supreme Court seemed to be on a problem that seems to be uncomfortably common. It provided no comfort that the highest court in the land found themselves uncomfortable with the search but were reluctant to second guess school officials who are often confronted with issues involving drugs.

They say "justice" is blind. In this case there's a bit of deaf and dumb in there too.

I'm Killing Our Planet!

Hub came into the kitchen at lunch time and took a sandwich out of my hand. "Serious diet time," he says, "You (me) have to get down to 150 and I have to get to 180."

"Where are you taking me?" Now isn't that a logical question? Who'd have thought it was in response to the latest studies showing fat people are making global warming worse. Okay, I thought, we move more slowly and sweat more. Maybe that does add to the heat wave. Dumb me.

We've now joined livestock as the villains in our own earthly scenario! Actually it has not so much to do with the fact that the populations of all but the poorest of countries are getting fatter with each generation as much as what it takes to get us that way. Food. It's because we eat more food. Food production produces major CO2 emissions and the more we eat the more is produced.

Okay folks, here comes another Dogwalk solution. We need a cap and trade policy for eating. Those of us who over indulge on prime beef and fine wine buy credits from the poor starving people in the many third world countries we never seem able to elevate. They'd get money to plant crops and buy their own livestock and gain weight and improve their standard of living. When they're equal with the rest of the world, we'll be out of funds from buying credits, the roles will reverse and the cycle will start all over again. They've made global warming simple. I've made solving it simple.

Never mind matters of health ranging from stressed joints to heart disease. Never mind what it will do the retail market for women's sizes! What about the medical professionals who treat us - family practice physicians and all the specialists, physical therapy after the hip and knee replacements, chiropractic to straighten out those old bent bones. The pharmaceuticals who produce all those pills we pop for blood pressure, cholesterol and pain! The pharmacists who dispense them - if they're so inclined. You get the idea.

Dr. Phil Edwards of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine told the The Sun (UK), "Moving about in a heavy body is like driving a gas guzzler. We need to do a lot to reverse the global trend towards fatness. It is a key factor in the battle to reduce carbon emissions and slow climate change."

I rather like my solution for global warming. Fat credits. As far as the economic issues I've outlined, I'm sure there's a solution for that too. I think it's called TARP. Troubled Asset Relief Program. Of course if our collective "asset" less maybe we wouldn't be fat in the first place!

Beauty Is In The Ears Of The Beholder

There are times I think it would be great to hearken back to the time before television. The time when family sat around the radio and listened to the likes of Jack Benny and Fred Allen with wonder. The time before you had any idea of what those who so entertained you looked like. If we could do that maybe the phenomenal success of Susan Boyle wouldn't be so surprising!

I've been browsing through all the reports on this latest subject of media hype. I find it interesting, as was the case with Paul Potts, she was not without some musical training and experience. Never-the-less, she's seemingly come out of no where and is being fawned over by celebrities and and talk show hosts ad nauseam. She has a voice. You bet she does and we're so "surprised". Some articles have even suggested it's bad for for aspiring performers to see the likes of Miss Boyle and Mr. Potts gain such sudden success because they will be less inclined to put in the hard work necessary should an American Idol or Britain's Got Talent not come along. I think not. As I mentioned, both Boyle and Potts earned their time in the limelight.

What I don't give a whit about is how the media types and the likes of Ashton Kutcher and Demi Moore are drooling over her. I care very much that both took advantage of an opportunity presented and withstood the arched eyebrows and rolling eyes with dignity. They believed in themselves and their dream. Because of their belief in themselves we've been the fortunate ones. We get to share the gift.

Making the rounds is a suggestion that Simon has had his hand in Miss Boyle's success. Maybe, though I doubt he would do anything to jeopardize the vehicle that has made him rich and famous unto himself.

As far as the question as to whether or not Miss Boyle can really sing, I suggest you listen to a demo tape she made ten years ago.

Go ahead. Close your eyes and pretend it's the radio. Miss Boyle's got talent. Undeniably beautiful talent.