What is an African American?
By definition I would expect that African American refers to any American citizen who is, or is descended from, a person who immigrated to The United States of America from Africa. If this is correct then the term does not apply to all black Americans and will include many people who are not black.
I am fair skinned or white, I am referred to as Caucasian. Once dark skinned or black people were referred to as Negro. Why is it now considered offensive to call a dark skinned person black or a Negro? Why is it correct to refer to dark skinned Americans as African American when it is clearly not accurate?
You may think that I am a racist by asking this question. Well I admit that I am. I believe that my race is superior to all other races on the planet. If we could get past some minor differences like skin color and language, we may be able to address some major ideological issues and begin to live up to our potential as members of the HUMAN race.
It seems that some people need to classify or categorize everything including people. There are those who classify people for beneficial reasons like medical research and those who have political or personal reasons. It is a waste of time and energy to argue over or be offended by these labels when they actually mean very little to most of us as we try to live our lives, raise our children and become better human beings.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
continue to persevere
It is difficult to keep posting new ideas when you don't get any comments on what you have posted, and by you I mean me. But I will try to continue to persevere.
In a way it is like voting Republican in Connecticut. Although most of the people I know have similar ideals we repeatedly watch as Connecticut keeps turning up blue (I'm really BLUE after the last presidential election). I will continue to vote for conservative candidates and smaller government in the hope that it will eventually pay off somehow. I don’t know if anything I post will “pay off” per say, but it lets me express myself and will hopefully encourage other people to do the same. We all need to pay attention to what is going on in our country, to think about the changes that some want to make, and to express our opinions. Do it in a blog and more importantly do it in letters to your elected officials. Writing to my elected “representatives” feels about as productive as shouting at the TV, but I will continue to both!
Please comment on this or my other posts, send me your ideas or links to other blogs. Lets talk amongst ourselves.
In a way it is like voting Republican in Connecticut. Although most of the people I know have similar ideals we repeatedly watch as Connecticut keeps turning up blue (I'm really BLUE after the last presidential election). I will continue to vote for conservative candidates and smaller government in the hope that it will eventually pay off somehow. I don’t know if anything I post will “pay off” per say, but it lets me express myself and will hopefully encourage other people to do the same. We all need to pay attention to what is going on in our country, to think about the changes that some want to make, and to express our opinions. Do it in a blog and more importantly do it in letters to your elected officials. Writing to my elected “representatives” feels about as productive as shouting at the TV, but I will continue to both!
Please comment on this or my other posts, send me your ideas or links to other blogs. Lets talk amongst ourselves.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Regarding Health Care Reform
Regarding Health Care Reform:
Health insurance should be privatized, it should be purchased in the same manner as auto and homeowners insurance. When the free market takes over the cost will come down and more options will be available.
Health Insurance should not be provided through your employer: This places a burden small businesses; A business that does not have many employees will have to pay more for insurance coverage per person. Many small companies must chose between hiring more people and providing insurance for those people they currently employ.
On the other hand some large companies take advantage of the system by hiring two part time employees rather than one full time employee as they are not required to insure part time employees
When Health care is provided as a “benefit” from an employer it usually comes after a probationary period, during which time the individual has no health insurance coverage and therefore can be a deterrent to an individual’s pursuit of better employment opportunities.
I would rather be paid a better wage and be responsible for my own health insurance than to have my insurance tied to my employment and have my employment options limited by the insurance system.
The governments only role in health care should be one of regulation. In fact, if the government was doing a proper job of regulation we would not have as serious of a problem as we are now facing.
An instance where government regulation should be implemented is on limiting the Insurance companies ability to set the price that they will pay for prescriptions and medical services. When a doctor or pharmacy agrees to accept insurance from a provider, they agree to the terms the insurance company sets, which include limits on how much they will pay for services. Wouldn’t it be nice to fill your gas tank and tell the station owner that although they charge $4.00/gallon you will give them $1.50 because it is what you consider to be reasonable and customary. The cost of the “savings” the insurance companies get from this policy is passed on to other consumers.
If the Federal government were to implement strict and fair guidelines on private health insurance, and provide assistance to those who cannot afford it on their own, we could all have decent medical care at a reasonable cost.
As far as having the federal government run our health care system, well just look at the deplorable state of the Veterans Administration. If the government can not provide adequate health care for the small percentage of our population that are veterans, how could we even consider having them run the operation of a nation wide health care program?!
Health insurance should be privatized, it should be purchased in the same manner as auto and homeowners insurance. When the free market takes over the cost will come down and more options will be available.
Health Insurance should not be provided through your employer: This places a burden small businesses; A business that does not have many employees will have to pay more for insurance coverage per person. Many small companies must chose between hiring more people and providing insurance for those people they currently employ.
On the other hand some large companies take advantage of the system by hiring two part time employees rather than one full time employee as they are not required to insure part time employees
When Health care is provided as a “benefit” from an employer it usually comes after a probationary period, during which time the individual has no health insurance coverage and therefore can be a deterrent to an individual’s pursuit of better employment opportunities.
I would rather be paid a better wage and be responsible for my own health insurance than to have my insurance tied to my employment and have my employment options limited by the insurance system.
The governments only role in health care should be one of regulation. In fact, if the government was doing a proper job of regulation we would not have as serious of a problem as we are now facing.
An instance where government regulation should be implemented is on limiting the Insurance companies ability to set the price that they will pay for prescriptions and medical services. When a doctor or pharmacy agrees to accept insurance from a provider, they agree to the terms the insurance company sets, which include limits on how much they will pay for services. Wouldn’t it be nice to fill your gas tank and tell the station owner that although they charge $4.00/gallon you will give them $1.50 because it is what you consider to be reasonable and customary. The cost of the “savings” the insurance companies get from this policy is passed on to other consumers.
If the Federal government were to implement strict and fair guidelines on private health insurance, and provide assistance to those who cannot afford it on their own, we could all have decent medical care at a reasonable cost.
As far as having the federal government run our health care system, well just look at the deplorable state of the Veterans Administration. If the government can not provide adequate health care for the small percentage of our population that are veterans, how could we even consider having them run the operation of a nation wide health care program?!
bonus anger misdirected
The anger over AIG bonuses is misdirected. We should be angry that employees of companies receiving federal bail out money are being paid bonuses. Our anger should be directed at the elected officials that wrote, supported and voted for the bill!
The authors of the bailout plan should have set limits on, or called for the elimination of employee bonuses as a condition of receiving federal bail out funds. AIG could then have renegotiated the contracts which guaranteed the bonuses with its employees.
The administration was aware of these bonuses and chose to rush through an inadequate policy rather than address and correct the problem.
I believe that this administration is now feigning outrage and indignation over the issue of bonuses to increase our own anger. The Obama administration is using our anger to rush this bill through as the will of the people when they are actually acting in order to further their own agenda. The bill proposing a 90% tax on the bonuses is the first step toward government control of corporate pay structure including salary caps and pay limitations. This bill is reactionary and fundamentally wrong.
I believe that the government should be working with AIG and other companies to have any bonus money returned as these employees should not profit from tax payer money. I would support a bill that sets limits on bonuses to employees of companies receiving future bail out type funding from the federal government. I do not support government regulation or control of private industry pay and compensation. That said, I also believe that companies and employees of companies receiving our tax dollars should concentrate on stabilizing their business and our economic system and not on their individual profit.
The authors of the bailout plan should have set limits on, or called for the elimination of employee bonuses as a condition of receiving federal bail out funds. AIG could then have renegotiated the contracts which guaranteed the bonuses with its employees.
The administration was aware of these bonuses and chose to rush through an inadequate policy rather than address and correct the problem.
I believe that this administration is now feigning outrage and indignation over the issue of bonuses to increase our own anger. The Obama administration is using our anger to rush this bill through as the will of the people when they are actually acting in order to further their own agenda. The bill proposing a 90% tax on the bonuses is the first step toward government control of corporate pay structure including salary caps and pay limitations. This bill is reactionary and fundamentally wrong.
I believe that the government should be working with AIG and other companies to have any bonus money returned as these employees should not profit from tax payer money. I would support a bill that sets limits on bonuses to employees of companies receiving future bail out type funding from the federal government. I do not support government regulation or control of private industry pay and compensation. That said, I also believe that companies and employees of companies receiving our tax dollars should concentrate on stabilizing their business and our economic system and not on their individual profit.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)