Guests include-- Andrea Bocelli, Michael Bublé, Aretha Franklin, Lady Gaga, Billy Joel, Elton John, Diana Krall, k.d. lang, Rufus Wainwright, Stevie Wonder, and more.
Friday, December 16, 2016
Might Want To Check Out Tony Bennett Special
Tony Bennett-- 90 years old-- is still going strong. You might want to watch his special coming up on Tuesday, December 20th, 2016 at 9:00: PM on NBC.
Guests include-- Andrea Bocelli, Michael Bublé, Aretha Franklin, Lady Gaga, Billy Joel, Elton John, Diana Krall, k.d. lang, Rufus Wainwright, Stevie Wonder, and more.
Guests include-- Andrea Bocelli, Michael Bublé, Aretha Franklin, Lady Gaga, Billy Joel, Elton John, Diana Krall, k.d. lang, Rufus Wainwright, Stevie Wonder, and more.
Thursday, December 15, 2016
Easton's Rain Water Tax Problem
You can read all about it HERE
For many years as rain fell it was absorbed into the undeveloped farm fields never returning to the rivers. Much which farmers drew from the rivers to water their crops. As development ensued there were vast amounts of paved over and concreted properties which allowed ever increasing amounts of rainwater to reenter rivers through storm drains. Granted it wasn't all 100% pollution free but none the less helped to contribute an ever growing amount of rain water runoff to return to rivers where otherwise it would not have in years past.
Is this be a bad thing?
As population increases there is an ever increasing need for water removal from these rivers. The question is this-- should taxpayers be punished or rather rewarded?
Seems to me increasing the amount of rain runoff being allowed to collect and be funneled back helping feed rivers should be a good thing--no?
For many years as rain fell it was absorbed into the undeveloped farm fields never returning to the rivers. Much which farmers drew from the rivers to water their crops. As development ensued there were vast amounts of paved over and concreted properties which allowed ever increasing amounts of rainwater to reenter rivers through storm drains. Granted it wasn't all 100% pollution free but none the less helped to contribute an ever growing amount of rain water runoff to return to rivers where otherwise it would not have in years past.
Is this be a bad thing?
As population increases there is an ever increasing need for water removal from these rivers. The question is this-- should taxpayers be punished or rather rewarded?
Seems to me increasing the amount of rain runoff being allowed to collect and be funneled back helping feed rivers should be a good thing--no?
No Not Another Channel I'll Be Forced To Pay For
Reuters (12/15/2016): NBC teams up with Olympic committees to launch U.S. TV channel-- "Comcast Corp's NBC Universal said it has partnered with the International Olympic Committee and the United States Olympic Committee to launch an Olympic TV channel in the United States."
For those of you who aren't familiar-- cable companies are forced to buy "bundled packages". That means cable companies are forced to buy the whole enchilada of what these companies offer They can't rebroadcast NBC10 Philadelphia without be forced to pay for the other dozen cable channels NBC/Universal owns.
Currently whether you watch them or not cable operators are forced to buy Syfy, E!, USA, Bravo, The Weather Channel, Telemundo, MSNBC, CNBC or whatever the hell other channels they want to force down peoples throats. I sure as hell am not interested in an Olympics channel--that's for sure. Course they don't care if they sell a dimes' worth of advertising because cable users' fees is all they need to break even.
For years consumers complained why they can't buy al la carte channels from cable operators. This simple explanation is cable companies can't-- so neither can you. Also keep in mind this same company also owns "Comcast Cable" which also gives them a huge advantage over other cable companies for what they need to pay come contract time.
In short they can stick this new Olympics channel up their *&**-- I'm no interested in it.. Obviously you & I'll still be forced to pay for it like it or not.
Could the government do something about it?
HELL YEAH-- but they ain't gonna.

Graphic Courtesy: "The Fundamentals"
"No, the most viewed channels are not getting paid the highest monthly fees."
For those of you who aren't familiar-- cable companies are forced to buy "bundled packages". That means cable companies are forced to buy the whole enchilada of what these companies offer They can't rebroadcast NBC10 Philadelphia without be forced to pay for the other dozen cable channels NBC/Universal owns.
Currently whether you watch them or not cable operators are forced to buy Syfy, E!, USA, Bravo, The Weather Channel, Telemundo, MSNBC, CNBC or whatever the hell other channels they want to force down peoples throats. I sure as hell am not interested in an Olympics channel--that's for sure. Course they don't care if they sell a dimes' worth of advertising because cable users' fees is all they need to break even.
For years consumers complained why they can't buy al la carte channels from cable operators. This simple explanation is cable companies can't-- so neither can you. Also keep in mind this same company also owns "Comcast Cable" which also gives them a huge advantage over other cable companies for what they need to pay come contract time.
In short they can stick this new Olympics channel up their *&**-- I'm no interested in it.. Obviously you & I'll still be forced to pay for it like it or not.
HELL YEAH-- but they ain't gonna.

Graphic Courtesy: "The Fundamentals"
"No, the most viewed channels are not getting paid the highest monthly fees."
United States Loves It's Guns
Yeah sure-- what could go wrong here?
Colorado school district allows teachers to carry guns-- "A rural Colorado school district has decided to allow its teachers and other school staff to carry guns on campus to protect students. The Hanover School District 28 board voted 3-2 Wednesday night to allow school employees to volunteer to be armed on the job after undergoing training."
I don't know about you, but some of the teachers I had couldn't be trusted with chalk erasers. One teacher I had kept a drawer full of them to whip at kids heads who pissed him off :-)
SNL: Oct 11, 1975
Yep, U.S. sure loves it's guns
Food For Thought-- Feb. 2014-- WCPO | Cincinnati
Colorado school district allows teachers to carry guns-- "A rural Colorado school district has decided to allow its teachers and other school staff to carry guns on campus to protect students. The Hanover School District 28 board voted 3-2 Wednesday night to allow school employees to volunteer to be armed on the job after undergoing training."
I don't know about you, but some of the teachers I had couldn't be trusted with chalk erasers. One teacher I had kept a drawer full of them to whip at kids heads who pissed him off :-)
Food For Thought-- Feb. 2014-- WCPO | Cincinnati
My Medicare Synopsis (2016)
I'm very meticulous when it comes to my budget and what I spend. In light of that here's why I'm a 100% supporter of Medicare (as it now stands).
In 2016 Medicare cost me $1,258. Medicare paid out $1,055.58 more then I paid in. Part D paid out $154.29 more then I paid in. I also bought complete 'Medigap' insurance . In this case it cost me $831.28 more then it paid out.
However taking all the premiums I paid together ($3,187.20) with what each paid I still came out ahead by $373.79.
What a relief. This is the first time in my life I've never received a bill from a doctor or hospital. Although medicines still cost me they were far more then offset what they would have been under my previous employer's plan.
Name me one other insurance plan where an MRI billed at $4,635 accepted a Medicare payment of $155.38. Nor where a medicine billed at $384.99 accepted a payment of $43.46.
This is why it concerns me when Donald Trump and conservatives in congress speak of seeking changes to Medicare & Social Security. Instead of cuts to Medicare they should be seeking expansions of it to younger folks. Having more younger folks-- with less age related illnesses-- will further serve to strength it.
Ask anyone you know who's now on Medicare whether it even compares to plans they had from the companies they worked for. Companies themselves complained for years why they should be held responsible for employees healthcare cost. Companies only hired people to do the needed tasks. Instead have been burdened years both during and after for employees healthcare and retirement financial needs. That's a whole lot of unnecessary burden for them and certainly a consideration when it comes for a need to hire additional workers.
It's beyond time to rethink how this nation provides for the retired (Social Security) and healthcare (Medicare). Each and every one of us-- pending premature death-- will need both one day. Anyone in government who even thinks about shortchanging these programs-- rather then strengthening them-- should be called out for what they are. Enemies towards the common good for the people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



