Sunday, February 11, 2018
Unbelievable
Friday, October 16, 2015
Tuesday, September 9, 2014
An Open Letter To The Uniformed Firefighters Association
Friday, December 24, 2010
Marines
Semper Fi, God Bless America and God Bless the United States Marine Corps...
Justin Allen, 23,
Brett Linley, 29,
Matthew Weikert, 29,
Justus Bartett, 27,
Dave Santos, 21,
Chase Stanley, 21,
Jesse Reed, 26,
Matthew Johnson, 21,
Zachary Fisher, 24,
Brandon King, 23,
Christopher Goeke, 23,
Sheldon Tate, 27,
Sunday, October 17, 2010
An Open Letter To The Uniformed Firefighters Association Membership
Three hundred and forty-three firefighters were murdered at the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. The UFA capitalized on the tragedy and collected $81 million in donations for the Widows’ and Children’s Fund. Donors thought that their money would go directly to the widows, children and families of those who died on 9-11. The UFA had other ideas. They planned to invest the money and dole out small stipends to widows and children only, over time; families of single firefighters were not included. Further, the expectation of donors that their generosity would be dispensed expeditiously was ignored.
That prompted the New York State attorney general to intervene to force the UFA to distribute the money as donors intended. He was partially successful. When the smoke settled, the UFA got to keep about $23 million, which was eventually invested in risky equity and bond markets.
For a while the investments did well, and each December the UFA held an annual Christmas party for dependent children, paid for by the Fund. The UFA also published Fire Lines each January following the party, with photos of union officials surrounded by smiling children. It’s great public relations; union officials look like heroes to the membership.
Its great public relations until something goes wrong—then it’s not. In the fiscal year ending July 31, 2009, the Fund’s investments declined 5%. To attenuate the impact of that loss on the investment portfolio, the UFA reduced payments to dependents by 42%. A relatively small investment loss resulted in a large reduction in Fund services, which leads one to believe that investment returns takes precedence over dependent services as a goal of the Fund. You be the judge, but in my opinion, the UFA needs serious supervision by the membership in the management of the Widows’ and Children’s Fund.
Joseph J. Hehir
FDNY Retired
For further information, questions or input, jjhehir@excite.com
Saturday, September 11, 2010
The Tea Party
There are very vocal fringes on the left and right that attempt to either denigrate them or to speak for them as they play their psychological games. They will fail; middle of the road Americans are not swayed by them, and will vote in November.
Friday, August 6, 2010
The Widows' and Childrens' Fund
Their plan was to invest the money and dole out small amounts to widows and children only over time. The families of single firefighters were not included.
In one of their plans, the amount of money a widow would receive was so small that at thirty-six years old, she would have to live to be ninety-six before she received her full amount on a dollar for dollar basis, an amount that donors expected she would receive immediately.
That scheme was so outrageous that the Charities Bureau at the New York State Attorney General’s office intervened and made the union give the money out as expected, but not all of it. The union got to keep about $20 million, which they then invested. The investment is doing well, and each December they are able to throw a Christmas party and give the children a $500 stipend.
The union also publishes a paper in the winter. In it union officials, surrounded by grateful widows and children, are prominently portrayed. It’s great public relations; the firefighters eat it up.
Joseph J. Hehir
FDNY Retired
Saturday, April 3, 2010
A Tough Problem
As part of the stimulus package Arne Duncan, the head of the U. S. Department of Education, was given $4.35 billion in grant money to distribute to the states. The cash strapped states can surely use it. Never mind that the cash strapped nation doesn’t have it lying around to give.
This is how it works. Instead of distributing education money directly according to population, each state is required to submit a proposal on how they plan to spend the money on education. If Arne Duncan approves, they get the money.
He wants four things from the states: more charter schools, school systems must take student achievement into account when evaluating teachers for tenure, improved training for teachers and principals, and improved science instruction for the students.
Mr. Richard Iannuzzi, President of the 600,000 member New York State United Teachers union (NYSUT) and MR. Michael Mulgrew, the new President of the 55,000 member United Federation of Teachers (UFT) in New York City oppose this. Both unions have the support of the New York State legislature.
Governor David Paterson needs to find $9 billion dollars soon to balance his $133 billion 2010 – 2011 budget. Many other governors have similar problems. Governor Paterson proposes to cut $1.7 billion from education statewide if he doesn’t find some extra money fast. The $700 million the feds offered to New York State could have helped, but the legislature didn’t go along, so the feds didn’t help. There will be an additional opportunity to make the necessary changes to qualify for further grant money in June. Time will tell how this works out.
I personally oppose the federal government medaling in the affairs of local schools, but there is a national interest here. We are being creamed when it comes to educating young people. Asian and Indian students in this country and in their own countries work much harder and are much smarter than the average American student. Further, the level of education in the Black and Hispanic communities is very low, with no improvement in sight. The federal government is trying to raise standards for all to a point where we as a nation can continue to compete economically with other nations.
In New York, there are many obstacles that local school boards must overcome to properly meet their responsibilities. A major obstacle is the powerful influence that teacher unions have on how schools are run. They are able, with their political donations and their ability to “get out the vote”, to influence the legislature to tilt education legislation in their favor. The Triborough Amendment to the Taylor Law voted into law in 1982 by the legislature is an example. While the Taylor Law prohibits teachers from striking, the amendment prohibits school boards from changing the existing teacher contracts when they expire. Under the law there is nothing local school boards can do to change policy while negotiating for a new contract, which could go on forever. Everything, including regular step-ups in pay, must remain as is until a new agreement is reached. The federal government, with its promise of grant money, is trying to pressure legislatures to dilute the influence of unions in school board negotiations. Time will tell if that works also.
Some educators are to blame also. For example, the New York State Education Department included in their proposal for grant money $200,000 for very expensive office furniture for their executives. That item was sited as one reason New York State lost out. The Schenectady, NY school board is now busy trying to protect itself from a possible criminal investigation and sure voter disapproval next November. Student achievement is not their number one priority right now.
Most of all, school boards and educators are fighting an up hill battle to educate when the State’s family structure is in such bad shape. Family structure has a predominant influence on learning preparedness*. The single earner family, where one partner works and the other stays at home to care for the kids, is a dying institution today. Further, families headed by single mothers and families fractured by divorce do not have the structure to properly prepare children for learning. The feds have very little influence here.
This is a tough problem.
*FAMILY ENVIRONMENT has a substantial influence on children's scholastic achievement. Home experiences can significantly affect the development of literacy and language skills among young children (Roskos & Neuman, 1993; Snow, 1995) in families who promote linguistic skill development, parents and other adults encourage reading, make books available to children, read to the children, and limit television viewing (Sulzby & Teale, 1991). Among Indochinese refugee families in the United States, children with high levels of scholastic achievement were likely to have parents who encouraged hard work and excellence (Caplan, Choy, & Whitmore, 1992).
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Be sure to cancel your home insurance
Now I have a collection agency calling. What this poor collection agency doesn’t know yet is that I can be so abusive to them that they will be the ones to hang up on me, not the other way around. That’s what happened to the last one anyway.
I am making up a batch of new curse words and profanities to use on them when the time comes. I would let you know what they are, but you are not a collection agency person.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Our right as a Citizen
Friday, January 22, 2010
Short-term pain trumps long-term gain.
Thursday, December 31, 2009
I believe
Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said on December 27 that "the system worked" after Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab tried to ignite a bomb aboard a Northwest Airlines airplane on Christmas Day. She latter had to clarify that statement. She continues to affirm that the people who live and work in New York City will be protected when terrorist Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, goes on trial sometime in 2010.
New York Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly assures all that his department is up to the job of protecting New York City during the trial of Mr. Mohammed, after a van with tinted windows and no license plate was recently left on a street near Time Square unattended for at least two days.
I believe them when they say they can protect us. I believe them because I’m an idiot, but you shouldn’t.
Happy New Year,
Monday, September 7, 2009
More Health Care Stuff
As I see it, President Obama is asking 85% of the U. S. population to give up a portion of their health care benefits so that the other 15% can have health insurance. If the VA system I have described above is representative of what future U. S. health care will be like, I don’t think that many people will be happy with it.
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Health Care Under President Obama
A thirty-something walking down the street sees a watch for $500.00 in a shop window. The storekeeper sees him looking at the watch. The thirty-something thinks; that watch is too expensive and starts to walk away. The storekeeper then picks up the watch, runs out of the shop, grabs the thirty-something by the neck, forces him to take the watch and to fork over $500.00. The thirty-something then calls the cops and has the storekeeper arrested.
The next day the same thirty-something is walking down the same street when he bumps into President Obama. President Obama tries to sell him on his new health care package. The thirty-something declines saying that, for him, it is just too expensive. President Obama then calls the IRS and has him pay anyway. No cops were called, but they should have been.
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Health Care
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Professor Gates is a Tax Cheat
I wonder if Professor Gates and Treasury Secretary Geithner use the same tax preparation services?
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Friday, March 13, 2009
President Obama’s Stimulus Plan
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Foreclosure Fix
Here are some suggestions as to how taxpayers would be repaid: If the home were eventually sold for a profit, taxpayers would first receive their original investment and would share in any profit in proportion to the percent of the home they owned. If the home were sold at a loss, taxpayers would receive their original investment, with interest, before the homeowner received anything. If the homeowner eventually paid off the mortgage, then he or she would have to continue to make payments until taxpayers were paid in full, with interest. The homeowner would also have the opportunity to buy back the taxpayers’ share in the home at any time.
