Showing posts with label drunken blogging. Show all posts
Showing posts with label drunken blogging. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

Beer prices rise for the Consumer as Costs of Production Fall and Profits Rise


A number of brewers announced recently that the price of beer that the consumer pays will be going up citing rising costs. In the CNN story above the reasons given are less vague. The brewers claim to be raising prices to offset rising commodity prices and fall in volumes. Though, commodity prices have fallen recently and have caused farmers and dairies to worry about staying profitable this year. Also, ten days ago Anheuser-Busch InBev announced that their second quarter profits had grown despite the drop in volume because of cost cutting measures. One has to work through the maze of business doublespeak in these non judgmental articles regarding price increase and increased profitability to understand that cost cutting and "synergies" in these cases refers to job cuts as a result of the InBev takeover of Anheuser-Busch.

If you are the kind of person who likes to buy American and support American jobs, it is getting harder and harder to find an economical beer. Though some of the big brewers still employ Americans.

Monday, May 19, 2008

Yager-bombing the Middle East


Aparently Hillary Clinton was able to drink McCain under the table in Estonia. This raises serious questions for the McCain presidential campaign. How can we expect a presidential candidate to be hard on the terrorists when they go easy on their own liver? While they both only consumed four(4) shots of vodka at least we can assume Hillary could out drink both Osama Bin Laden and Muqtada al-Sadr because muslims are not permitted to drink alcohol and we can assume they would not be prepaired for it. We have yet to hear of any exploits of Obama's capacitiy to imbibe intoxicants and this story raises the question. How much can Obama drink? For that matter how much can Ron Paul drink? Obama looks pretty lanky, and Ron Paul is no spring chicken but experience is what counts. Also, the story lacks information on how large a shot is in Estonia. I would assume that being married to President Bill Clinton would give one plenty of experience with keeping ones composure after consuming mass quantities of alcohol. So I was quite shocked to find that the contest had ended after four shots. Perhaps that is just when McCain threw in the towel. Which brings us back to the question. If McCain gave in to Hillary after just four shots of vodka, how can we believe his talk that he will stand strong against the terrorists and win the war in Iraq?

Thursday, February 21, 2008

A Strange Night


As fodder for conspiratorially-minded people, I offer Exhibits A, B, and C.

A: The Picture. On the Night of the Full Lunar Eclipse, this blog had received 666 visits, for a bounce rate of 66.67%.

B: Democracy seems to have failed in Pakistan, as the opposition might not have enough votes to oust Musharraf.

C. I'm still blogging at god awful early.

In conclusion, what does this prove? Nothing. People who argue this way are counterproductive to the betterment of mankind.

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

An Insider's Look


Chez Pazienza, now a blogger for Huffington Post, writes about his job experience at CNN, how they fired him for his opinions, and offers a behind the scenes look into the daily operations of CNN's newsroom. As one might expect it doesn't take a genius to figure out where the problem lies. As Mr. Pazienza says himself, "I watched my bosses literally stand in the middle of the newsroom and ask, 'What can we do to not lead with Iraq?' -- the reason being that Iraq, although an important story, wasn't always a surefire ratings draw. I was asked to complete self-evaluations which pressed me to describe the ways in which I'd 'increased shareholder value.'"

Let's see if his stance is as popular and as powerful as he believes. Sure, the bloggers of the world outnumber those in the traditional mainstream media news industry, however these bloggers are also, for the most part, apathetic and ignored by the powers that be, a form of institutional resistance to the new trend towards micro economies. Sure, an army of people, armed with laptops and vitriolic opinion are a force to be reckoned with here in this new information sphere that is undergoing continual evolution as users continuously provide new content and context, but they have not overcome spatial issues. For instance, there is no actual demonstration of power that would come from all of the bloggers who are passionate about a particular issue, such as voting reform, march together for their beliefs. Unfortunately, the real world gets in the way all too often, as the numerous qualified, intelligent bloggers have more to lose than gain by participating in such a demonstration.

Thursday, January 10, 2008

Socialist Feminism


The entire old media, not just Fox News, has been dragging what is percieved as the middle further and further to the Right. This is just to reaquaint you with what The Left actually looks like.

You should be compensated for your domestic labors and for your offspring. These activities directly benefit your employer and the state. The substantial benefit derived from these activities amounts to these entities differing costs to you. In a very real sense you are subsidising the operation of your employer and the government with the costs of remaining alive.

When you go grocery shopping, commute to and from work, keep a clean house, and produce offspring you confer a benefit on those entities. This streaches credulity in its current form so allow me to expand on these points. Clearly your employer should not be relieved every day that you made it in alive, they should not be expected to compensate you for the act of sticking your dirty shirts in the washing machine, or even to pay extra for the detergent. Even if I were saying this it would in effect limit your freedom in life as your employer would choose the least expensive mode of satisfying your basic survival needs even to the extent of a return to the company town of the 1920's where every aspect of your life was decided by your employer. As for transportation, if every employer participated in public transportation and allowed employees to buy group rate passes, freedom of choice need not be impinged. Also, if your employer was responsible of every aspect of your cost of living it would severely reduce wages. However, your wage would be an actual reflection of the market value of your labor instead of ransom to subsidise the cost of having employees.

I am making this radical point to emphasize that every employer has a moral duty to pay every employee a living wage. Further, I wish to emphasize that demands for universal health care, and universal post-highschool education are demands of the rational center, not the fringe element of the left. Freedom from fear about housing, food, hygene, health, and education needs are basic conserns of real people in America.

On the government front the profiting off of your living is more incidious. This is exemplified by the state's intrest in promoting marrage. I am not referring to any debate on homosexual marrage. The state actively promotes marrages for the purpose of creating a stable tax base. They do this in part by regulating marrage through licencing, but to a much greater degree in the creation and application of law. Ones marital status is a legal status and can have a substantive effect on the outcome of a court case, specifically because the state wishes to promote marrage as opposed to other consentual sexual relationships between adults. For example, children born out of wedlock are more likely to end up in the care of the state. While this is not going to be the most luxurious accomidation for the child, it can be illustrative about the costs the state is differing to married parents so that they bear the cost of raising a child until the child becomes a taxpayer.

At the very least, the state owes every child health care and education past the high-school level. Both of these things have a higher return on the investment paid into them. The return is a healthy adult with higher earning potential, and thus more taxable wages. This article makes a similar argument.

After hearing all this, would you believe I am a libertarian?

There you have it. This is the left. NPR and PBS and Democrats like John Edwards are the center. The Clintons, Joseph Liberman, the main stream media, and most of the Republicans are the right. The evangaliticals, Fox, the Neocons, and the rest of the Republicans are the far right. I could tell you about the far left but they are really crazy. PETA crazy.

Thursday, October 18, 2007

CORRUPTION, FAILURE AND RAGE!

This is the first time congress has driven me to drink. I get the feeling it wont be the last, unless I stop caring about this country which is fuckin unlikely. These articles below treat this latest failure by the legislature and the Democrats as par for the course and really it is. Which is sad. Sad for us the American people. What I am so upset about is that the Democrats in the Senate Froeign Intelligence comitte have given the telecom industry immunity from prosecution for their participation in the illegal warrentless wiretapping program. In return they got from the Republicans the regulation that the Supreme Court required of them in the first place. So basically we lose because the Democrats still cant resist the same old tired arguments from the Republicans. They threatened to say the Democrats are week on terror and want to allow Bin Laden to hurt us poor defenceless people of the states. News flash for the Democrats, the Republicans will say that any and the argument is a red fucking herring.

This domestic spying program was going on before the attacks of 9/11. Think about that. That means this program did not protect us from Bin Laden. It existed and it did not contribute to our safety. That seriously impairs the likelihood that it will protect us from another attack in the future. Further, the Bush administration had all the information they needed to know about and prevent the attacks of 9/11. More information form huge piles of phone records will not make any of us safer.

Apart from that partisan piece of rhetoric, that I cant fucking believe continues to work, and that it does only goes to show how far out of touch the Democrats in Washington are, I have not heard any other arguments in favor of the domestic spying program. Hows that for a run-on sentence? So that means I have not heard any serious arguments in favor of the program. Even creationists put up more resistance.

General counsil for AT&fuckingT, Wayne Watts, argues that this is a dispute between the Legislative and Executive branch and so the telecom industry should be given immunity from prosecution for participating in an illegal activity at the request of the executive branch. The kind of argument that only a lawyer could appreciate. That doesnt make it a legitimate argument and the legal neuance should not cool your rage. Do you feel the rage?

The last point I want to make is that even if a branch of the government asks you to break the law, you are still breaking the fucking law.


http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/bal-te.surveillance18oct18,0,4239460.story
http://web20.telecomtv.com/pages/?newsid=42051&id=e9381817-0593-417a-8639-c4c53e2a2a10&view=news