Department of Education and Stupidity, Again

BAM! Paragraph one out of the box!

No matter who you are, where you grew up or what you want to do, we all know digital skills and connectivity are crucial for success in today’s job market.

Does a painter, a farmer, a plumber, a chef, or a boxer really need digital skills and connectivity? NO! Some of those jobs might be helped by marketing on the internet but you can hire people to do that!

This is how an article from the Department of Education starts off to brag about how more money was spent for the government to get tablets and high speed internet for American Indian schools. This is supposed to be good because it will give students access to educational apps in STEM. This is supposed to solve the problem of indian youths having the lowest graduation rate across schools.

Money and gadgets do not improve education or graduation rate. The educational system needs to be examined. Students are not going to say "Hey! The school has tablets and the internet. I'll stay and graduate!" That is a bit of insipid simple thinking.

In addition, as far as STEM : Math just needs textbooks, pencils, and paper. Science requires the same as mathematics plus equipment for experiments. Only the technology and engineering portions of STEM really benefits from this.

However, this still does not solve the problem of the graduation rate.

Verizon and Microsoft are donating data and equipment, but there is still an over-arching government program which costs money.

Also we get some multicultural buzzword BS in the post. This somehow makes the education "culturally relevant" and "culturally appropriate."

Really? A freaking gadget is somehow more culturally sensitive or helpful than a person?

Fix the system; more spending never helps.

• Department of Education
• White House

Amusing Explanation through Bureaucratic Citation

I am pleasantly surprised that the press have reported that a middle-eastern airline, Kuwait Airways, has been called out by the Department of Transportation for not servicing Israeli citizens.

However, DOT seems to have been pushed into doing this. In a letter to the airline company it is revealed at first DOT did not seem to see a problem with the discrimination till the complaint was petitioned for review to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Here is a snippet from the letter:

Mr. Gatt’s complaint alleged that KAC discriminated against him, an Israeli citizen traveling on an Israeli passport, in violation of 49 U.S.C. §40127(a) by preventing him from purchasing a ticket for travel on KAC from John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK) to London Heathrow Airport (LHR). Upon notice of our initial decision finding no unlawful discrimination in this matter, Mr. Gatt filed a petition for review with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. We subsequently reopened our investigation and reconsidered the matter anew. As part of our reconsideration, we considered Mr. Gatt’s claim upon an alternative ground, i.e. 49 U.S.C. § 41310, which holds that, “[a]n air carrier or foreign air carrier may not subject a person, place, port, or type of traffic in foreign air transportation to unreasonable discrimination.” After a thorough review of the information provided by the parties, we find that KAC unreasonably discriminated against Mr. Gatt in violation of 49 U.S.C. § 41310 by refusing to sell him a ticket on its flight from JFK to LHR.

So... why was 49 U.S.C. § 41310 missed? Let's get really silly because a lot more was missed and cited in the letter. There were so many citations I just could not read the letter and make any sense of it.

Here are all the regulations/laws/court cases/etc. cited in the letter other than the original "49 U.S.C. §40127(a)" that was found to not be violated.

• 49 U.S.C. § 41310
• section 41310, formerly 49 U.S.C. § 1374(b)
• section 404(b) of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958
• section 404(b) of the Civil Aeronautics Act of 1938
• section 3 of the Interstate Commerce Act (ICA) of 1887
• Interstate Commerce Act of 1887, sec. 3, 24 Stat. 379, 380 (1887)
• Federal Aviation Act of 1958, Pub. L. No. 85-726, sec. 404(b), 72 Stat. 731, 760 (1958)
• Civil Aeronautics Act of 1938, Pub. L. No. 75-706, sec 404(b), 52 Stat. 973, 993 (1938)
• Pearson v. Duane, 71 U.S. 605, 615 (1866)
• Pittman v. Grayson, No. 93 Civ. 3974, 1997 WL 370331, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. July 2, 1997) (finding that airlines are common carriers), aff’d, 149 F.3d 111, 123 (2d Cir. 1998), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 818 (1999)
• Mitchell v. U.S., 313 U.S. 80 (1941)
• Fitzgerald v. Pan Am. World Airways, 229 F.2d 499 (2d Cir. 1956)
• 49 U.S.C. § 1374(b)
• 49 U.S.C. § 44902
• Williams v. Trans World Airlines, 509 F.2d 942 (2d Cir. 1975)
• 509 F.2d at 948 (holding T.W.A. acted reasonably in refusing passage to passenger who had been subject of F.B.I. warning)
• Cordero v. Cia Mexicana de Aviacion, S.A.
• 681 F.2d 669 (9th Cir.1982)
• Title 49 of the U.S. Code and the orders, rules and regulations of the Department of Transportation - Permit to Foreign Air Carrier, KAC Corporation, Order 2011-3-30, (March 24, 2011) Docket DOT-OST-2010-0246
• U.S. v. Baltimore & Ohio R.R. Co., 333 U.S. 169, 175 (1948)
• Fitzgerald, 229 F.2d 499
• Sec. 3 of the U.S. Export Administration Act of 1979, Pub. L. 96-72, 93 Stat. 503
• 50 App. U.S.C. 2402(5)(A)
• 15 C.F.R. 760 (outlining Department of Commerce’s anti-boycott regulations)
• 15 CFR 760.2 (a) (1)

THAT! All of that was missed upon first review of a complaint that a Kuwaiti airline with operations in the U.S. would not sell any Israeli citizen a ticket. Ignored until the case could have gone to a U.S. Court of Appeals.

The scary thing is that whole mess of citations was missed when they didn't care. What citations can be found to pursue a case against anyone the government wants to go after?

How many B***S*** regulations/laws/etc. are out there waiting for a bureaucrat with nothing to do but looks up B***S*** stuff to mess with the citizenry?

The airlines discriminated. DOT was lazy and didn't do its job until it was almost embarrassed and then it found heaps of reasons to go after the airline.

When an agency isn't lazy, they have heaps of reasons to come after you.

• Department of Transportation 1, 2

Damned if you do, damned if you don't

The Secret Service is between a rock and a hard place. After too many mistakes that received quite a bit of press coverage it is not surprising that there was this poor judgement to shut down a park for security purposes.

Why was it poor judgement to shut down the park?

The shut down ended up shutting down "CureFest for Childhood Cancer." The rally had a permit and half the attendees were children. Many people ended up not being able to enter the park to just get items left behind.

Did anyone in the Secret Service take a moment and think that this might not be a good idea?

• The Washington Post
• CureFest for Childhood Cancer

Government Finally Cuts Spending

Yeah! The government has finally cut some spending!

What have they cut?

Disposable plates and cutler!

I'm fine with this, but it is a bit silly. Most businesses consider these items a regular business expense. People eat at their desks sometimes so they can continue working. This is good for the company because they get more work out of their employees.

But if this saves us enough money so we can study shrimp on a treadmill, go for it!

Secretary of Labor's Rose Colored Glasses

Well, the Secretary of Labor, Tom Perez, has put out a blog post calling on workers to form unions.

Tom cheers that we are in a great economic recovery but laments that wages are not up. He cites that union workers make about $200 more a week and so more people should form unions.

Of course there is no way that the ACA (Obamacare) has nothing to do with wages. Forcing employers to spend more money on employees or cut back on their hours to avoid this has absolutely nothing to do with wages. No. Not being in a union is to blame for low wages.

And yet, later in his blog post he writes:

At the same time, employers are recognizing the benefits of empowering their employees to build successful, profitable businesses founded on middle-class jobs. Across the country, we’ve seen company after company raise their minimum wage, offer sick and parental leave, and commit to fairer scheduling practices.

What is it Mr. Secretary? Do we need unions or are companies getting competitive by offering their employees more?

Let us not forget how well the unions have worked out for Chrysler and GM. Plus how unions have bankrupted cities.

But no. With all the bankruptcy that unions cause let us go ahead and promote them. There is plenty of bailout money. Maybe that extra $200 a week people will make can be used in bailouts to keep the businesses open so that they can pay an extra $200 a week.

Perez has a small distorted vision on wages and does not take into account of what the government has thrust upon businesses through regulations and laws, nor has he examined how unions have hurt businesses.

There is no economic growth unless you make the environment friendly to make a profit. The smaller a company's profits get, the smaller the salaries, hours, and size of the work force.

Alleging Pay Gap

The Department of Labor's Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs found that Savannah River Nuclear Solutions discriminated against female and black employees in pay from 2009 through 2010. The company denies this but has a conciliatory agreement to compensate these employees.

This sounds like one of those situations where it is cheaper to settle out of court. The settlement is for $235,000 across 72 employees. That is only $3263.89 per employee. Considering these are STEM jobs and probably pay well this discrepancy is probably fairly small percentage wise and easy to not notice.

In addition the article mentions the company had a $2.5 billion contract in 2009. That makes this amount incredibly small in terms of bookkeeping.

Breaking down these numbers start to look statistically insignificant. This is looking like the government trying to force exactly equal outcomes and assuming small discrepancies are discrimination.

Please note that the article does not give any indication of the incomes of any of the employees or their job specifications other than being STEM jobs. I can only assume the STEM job is fairly decent pay perhaps above $70,000 a year.

Government Force on Children

You will do as you are told or there will be consequences.

Children that are 8 or 9 years old do not fit in handcuffs. So how do you put handcuffs on a child? Put their arms behind them and use the handcuffs above the elbow.

What could cause a child so young to be treated as such?

• Screaming in class
• Trying to leave an isolation room
• Not doing as you're told

Obey the state or suffer the consequences.

Catch 22 Healthcare

A new Nebraska hospital sued the Department of Health and Human Services over the accreditation process for Medicare.

Forty physicians unhappy with the local hospital made their own. However, the ACA delayed them for 18 months due to waiting for a study on the effects of physician-owned hospitals.

Next they were reviewed to see if they could get approved for Medicare. They were denied because during the review they had no Medicare inpatients and yet they can't take in Medicare inpatients without getting accredited.

Seriously. Who writes these freaking rules?

Centralized Waste from the Department of Education

I can always count on the Department of Education to waste money. A recent post touts $270 million awarded to 978 programs to support students.

Why is this waste? Centralized bureaucracy is costly. Let local municipalities take care of local concerns and cut their federal taxes. 282 of the schools (manual count of "Community College" in the name of the program list; could be miscounted) in the list of 978 are local. That is over 1/4 of the programs should be considered local programs. But first we had to send the money to D.C. and wait to get the money back.

What does the money go to?

• academic tutoring
• assistance in course selection
• information about financial aid and economic literacy
• support and resources to help students transfer from two-year to four-year colleges or from undergraduate to graduate or professional studies
• individualized counseling and career guidance
• exposure to cultural events
• mentoring
• housing assistance during school breaks for students who are homeless or in foster care

All of these items except for the last one sounds like it should be a basic service already available in any school. Maybe the first one could be considered an extra. Otherwise it is all services and information that should be available.

Except, maybe, "exposure to cultural events" which sounds like a party slush fund. Aren't you glad there is a centralized party fund?

The really weird thing about the last item is it is about housing for students when they are not in school instead of when they are in school. That seems like the focus on housing is counterproductive to when the student needs housing the most.

Only in centralized thinking do you get funding for services counter to the time of need.

Gas Tax : Punishing the Heretics of the Green Movement

There is a gap between funding for the highways and roads and the revenue coming in for it. The gas tax hasn't been raised for 22 years and you are going to hear calls for raising it.^[1][2]

End the Gas Tax

USA today calls for phasing out the gas tax because of the cost of bureaucracy. Anything government driven has this problem so this reason is moot.

Forbes calls for reform of the gas tax but gets the reasoning wrong. Forbes lays out the history of the gas tax and how funds in are tied to projects directly related to the road, however, in the 90's this relation was temporarily severed to pay for other things; this is blamed for the unpopularity of the tax and why reform is needed.

Bloomberg actually gets part of problem correct, ... fuel efficiency and less driving.

Government Created the Problem

CAFE standards demand better fuel efficiency in vehicles which means when the goals are met drivers buy less gas to go the same distance. So it stands to reason that less money is collected through taxes.

Fuel efficiency is nice but the government has no place dictating it; this is legislating physics which is a very arrogant thing for man to do.

The next problem is a double blow to the gas tax and funds for roads; the government's push for electric and hybrid vehicles.

Tax credits to buyers of the green vehicles is paid for by all tax payers. The first punch is these drivers don't use gas or only a little thus evading the gas tax and yet they still put wear and tear on the roads.

The double punch is the subsidy money could instead be put towards road construction and repair, but no. Instead we are going to continue to subsidize these vehicles and look to taxing the drivers that use gas more.

Last I checked only churches and non-profits were supposed to be tax exempt. (Yeah, the Volt lost money but that doesn't make it a non-profit organization.)

The subsidies don't go just to the people that buy the cars but companies within the pipeline that make the car or parts of it. There is an article that "debunks" Volt myths and fails on the government money myth. It frames the myth as "#5 It’s made of government bailout money." That is not the myth; the myth is "the Volt is a government subsidized car." In fact the debunking of the myth admits to the subsidies and blames Bush for the subsidies; whether this is a Bush subsidy or an Obama subsidy it is still a government subsidy. Supposedly the 2016 Volt will be profitable.

There's no telling how long these subsidies will continue. A subsidy is per model per model year and does not phase out till 200,000 units of it are sold. Even then the subsidy phases out to 50% after two quarters, 25% at four quarters, and no credit after six quarters after hitting the 200,000 mark. By then the car will be on to the next model year and a new set of subsidies.^[1][2]

To be fair there was a discontinued subsidy. It was replaced by a new one.

What's the Solution?

End the gas tax, end the green car subsidies, and budget the roads like any other part of the government.

Ending the gas tax will make the cost of the transportation of goods cheaper thus making them more affordable. This can lead to an increase of consumption and leading to the need for more production. In the end there could be more tax revenue through increased income tax revenues; in addition this enriches the lives of the citizens.

Ending the subsidies will also correct the car and energy market to use what is truly economical choices. Also, it is immoral to make one person to pay for part of another person's desired purchase. Can you imagine if the government subsidized the purchase of yachts? Subsidizing the purchase of a car because of the type of motor it uses is no different.

Budget the roads like other parts of the budget. Make the importance of running shrimps on a treadmill compete with the importance of good roads. Hopefully we can expose wasteful projects by making them compete with critical projects.

Or we can raise the gas tax making products more expensive due to transportation costs while we give money to people who buy cars that do not contribute to the road fund.

1 2 1 2 3

FAA Jerks

The concept of private drones and drones for commerce is a really exciting and popular idea. So if the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) approves a company to use drones, that's got to be great and a lot of social points with the people. In fact here is their front headline for today plus screen capture.
Amazon Gets Experimental Airworthiness Certificate

However, if you read the article you will realize that the decision is nothing more than a headline banner ingratiation for the public.

The details are the excrement of the bowels.

From the page:

The UAS must always remain within visual line-of-sight of the pilot and observer. The pilot actually flying the aircraft must have at least a private pilot’s certificate and current medical certification.

So the FAA rules just completely screws the green movement. If the drone needs to remain in line-of-sight then the controller ( not pilot, there is no pilot ) then they need to follow in a vehicle. And who is this observer? Is the FAA imposing more people to deliver a package than the USPS ( United States Post Office )?

So the more people to deliver a package the more energy needed the less green it is. FAA conspiracy.

And how does piloting a plane translate to a drone? Why is an old technology being applied to a new technology? Don't we need a new standard?

What is the observer? This seems to be an excessive requirement. How many of you do your job and there is someone who's job is to watch you?

How does piloting a plane help piloting a drone? Should we not need a video game expert instead?

What is up with the medical certification? Do you need medical certification to play a video game? No.

Is flying a drone more like flying a plane or more like playing a video game?

If you say a plane you're an idiot.

Dept. of Education Rewards Incompetence Just Like the IRS

Oh it's so fun and easy to poke fun at government and its bureaucracies.

Hopefully all of you have heard about the IRS agents that didn't pay their taxes that received bonuses. How about the Department of Education employee that gives advise on student loans that self admittedly made mistakes on her student loans?

The stupidity of this is astounding. Nicole Callahan released an article named "4 Mistakes I Made With My Student Loans and How You Can Avoid Them." This is not advise from someone in the public sector but someone that works for the government. Her position? Digital Engagement Strategist at the Department of Education’s Office of Federal Student Aid.

Yes. She openly admits she made mistakes on her student loans and yet gets a job related to student aid. What could go wrong?

So what were her four mistakes?

I should have kept track of what I was borrowing
I should have made interest payments while I was still in school
I should have kept my loan servicer in the loop
I should have figured out what my monthly loan payments were going to be BEFORE I went into repayment

Half of her problems were "I didn't do simple Math."

However she is only a "Digital Engagement Strategist" and hence she is just more web designerish right? (Don't let Obamacare roll out affect you judgement of government web technology experts) Let's blog-search her name.

Oh no!

About 120 results

Let us list every headline associated with her name. Page one only.

• 6 Things You Must Know About Repaying Your Student Loans ...
• 4 Mistakes I Made With My Student Loans and How You Can ...
• Need Advice About Your Student Loans? Your Loan Servicer ...
• ED.gov Blog
• 7 Ways to Promote FAFSA Completion at Your School | ED. ...
• 5 Reasons You Should Complete the Free Application for ...
• 4 Common Student Loan Mistakes | ED.gov Blog
• 5 Things You Need To Know About Your Student Loans | ED. ...
• 7 Things You Need Before You Fill Out the FAFSA | ED.gov ...
• 4 Things to Do During Your Student Loan Grace Period | ED. ...

So there may be a bit of advice coming from Nicole on about 120 articles? And how does she describe herself in the 4 mistakes article?

So while I don’t claim to be a student loan expert, I have learned a lot of lessons along the way, mostly through trial and error.

Admits not an expert. Is this government promoting incompetence or an individual covering their posterior?

Shouldn't the Department of Education use an expert to give advise on student loans? Why are they using an amateur?

1 2

Five Ranchers You Have Not Heard About

Some people have mixed feelings about what happened at the Bundy Ranch. Some feel part of it was Bundy's problem since he didn't pay grazing fees. From here on the arguments and little details go on for a while. One thing is for sure and that is that the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) overreacted to the situation.

Even though Bundy might be in the wrong a bit, I'm okay with that because the government is in the wrong a lot. This push against the government is good even if done in a not so kosher manner.

If you play by the rules you might get trampled because the government does not play by the rules. Five ranchers are being trampled on in South Dakota^[1][2]. It's not the BLM this time but the Department of Game, Fish and Parks of South Dakota. Still, totally wrong.

These five ranchers have land that had, I repeat "had," a railway running though it. The land has been owned by their families but easement laws allowed some of it to be used for the railroad. So the tracks eventually closed and the railroad gave it back to South Dakota, except these are easements, not possessions. The railroad cannot give the land to anyone. Under South Dakota law the land goes back to the original owners once the easement is void which is the ranchers.

What actually happened was the state took the land and turned it into a scenic trail. It is now a 109 mile trail cutting through five ranchers' lands. The government has made a regulation no motorized vehicles can go on the trail. So now there is a line on their land the ranchers can not cross; a line that was illegal by state law to be made in the first place. A scenic trail is a piss poor use of easement laws.

In short the ranchers can not cross this line because of beautification, at least that is what I read "scenic trail" as meaning. We are not even talking about an endangered species anymore. Ranchers' way of living is threatened just so things can be prettier.

Are you kidding me!? This is why we should start breaking the rules because the rules are stupid. The rules are anti-human. Thank the founders for the Second Amendment. An aerobic exorcise of it might force the government to obey the law too.

So for now enjoy Joe giving a critique of the Bundy Ranch incident.

1 2

What Is The Best The Government Can Do About The Recession? Nothing!

Price Control from Obamacare to Toilet Paper

Oh the stupidity of people and government. People should have health care because it is a right. So to ensure people have health care it is illegal not to have health insurance. And the government defines what needs to be in that insurance. This way if people pay for stuff they don't even need. That pooled together money reduces costs, right? Plus government will limit what you can charge which again reduces costs, right?

One of the popular trends today to get projects of many different types off the ground is "crowd funding." That sort of sounds like Obamacare right? Get a lot people to pay for something. However the difference is "crowd funding" is voluntary and Obamacare is at the point of a gun. A popular project under "crowd funding" could get a lot of money if successful, otherwise the project fails.

Obamacare is like a tax, but not a tax. Are you listening douche bag Justice Roberts? (Someone pee in his morning coffee please.) The government taxes us and takes our money and spends it on what it thinks best. Obamacare tells us if we do not have health insurance we have to pay a fine, not a tax. We are charged for our existence.

Also, if the government limits how much can be charged for services then everything will be affordable, right? Maybe. Most probably it will be affordable but not necessarily available.

Just turn to Venezuela to see what price controls do. If you don't remember this I will refresh your memory. Venezuela suffered a toilet paper shortage because of price controls. It is now so bad that the Venezuelan government has "temporarily" taken control of the toilet paper factories to make sure that toilet paper is being produced for the people. That's right. Force is being used to make sure people make toilet paper.

That is the result of price control.

How steady will your doctor's hand be when he has to operate at gun point?

Posting YouTube videos is reason to suspend 2nd amenment rights

Government Promotes Boring Food

Thank goodness most people don't read government websites. Otherwise people would be planning some really disappointing picnics.

But this is how I view it.

No red meat!? Really. No burgers or hot dogs.

No apple pie.

Apple and tuna, but no apple pie.

Is this a communist picnic?