More Opinion by The Springboard

The Issue of Terrorism Is Not A Jobs Issue
"Actor Mandy Patinkin suggested that, in regard to the Middle East, if we give them the best roads, the best medical technology, agriculture, and infrastructure they would not feel cheated. The crux of his argument is that if they (the Middle East) have all of these amenities afforded them, they won't be so inclined to go after Western civilization. The argument is reminiscent of many on the left who have made the suggestion that jobs are the key to ending terrorism."

Thursday, March 28, 2024

We Should Be Asking Questions, Not Just Forgiving Student Loans

I realize full well that the student loan forgiveness controversy is a bit old news. Of course I disagree with it as well as find it unlawful. But it does make me wonder about another side to the whole thing that perhaps requires further examination, despite the whole idea of it being entirely ridiculous anyway.

Why does anyone feel forgiving student loans is necessary and just?

Of course, the argument is that students who have gone well beyond their college days are suffering massive financial setbacks trying to pay them back, with many graduates requiring decades to do it, and enduring massive interest payments to boot.

First of all, cry me a river. College, for anyone who may have wondered about it, is optional. No one is required to go through continued education.

This is where someone will come in and say to me, "But in order to get into a high paying and meaningful career, and succeed in life, one is almost required to have a degree."

The argument is always, unless you want to be stuck flipping burgers or cleaning toilets and live in abject poverty, you must go to school so you can get something better. Granted, those are generally someone else's words. Not mine. I know full well that's far from the case in the real world.

Many people do jobs that don't require a college degree that also happen to pay extremely well, and many people make a very good living doing things that they didn't have to "suffer" through student loans to do it.

At the same time, I also fully recognize that certain professions do require a college degree, and if someone has interest in those professions, then by all means. Go to college and pursue that. 

The thing that grabs my attention, and that I think should grab anyone's attention is, yeah. But wait a minute. Isn't that the whole selling point of the college degree? That you will get this nice degree to put on display and get this great job and achieve a financial life better than anyone who didn't go to college?

I mean, that is the selling point, right? So, how come it isn't true? 

What if we tackled the issue with another question rather than just decide we should forgive loans and deem them to be unfair? What if we asked, "Are colleges falsely advertising and duping their consumers?" 

Moreover, maybe we should examine, when it comes to compensation, do salaries match the value of the goods and services offered to obtain them? Should the value be commensurate and demonstrable? If you are going to sell me something and sell me on the value, shouldn't your product have to at least support the value it supposedly offers?

I think what we need to do is go back to the colleges and dig a bit deeper into them about what their business practices are. Because clearly the people they've sold these degrees to aren't getting the promise they paid for, right?

They're not getting ahead like the colleges told them they would. Instead, they are suffering, saddled with debt they cannot repay stuck in jobs that don't support the degree they paid for.

Now, I am no legal expert. But that sounds like false advertising to me. 

I also think some of the way these loans are structured need to also be examined. Too many of them allow students to add things in like housing and living expenses. Should that be something allowed to be added in? More college students should be encouraged to work while they attend school in order to not only pay for their education but pay for living while they are doing it.

Just like the rest of us, by the way. If we want things, well...we have to work for them, right? A place to live, a car to drive, food to eat. Instilling a J. Wellington Wimpy mentality onto our kids, "I will kindly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today," is no way to foster future financial literacy.

All in all, I just think we're looking at this the wrong way. Sure, college is expensive. But why is it so expensive? And why is it that the cost doesn't live up to the promises sold? And why is no one pointing some of these questions at the colleges themselves? 

The colleges are essentially selling bills of goods like no other business would ever legally get away with, and instead of holding the colleges to account to answer for it, we're simply allowing them to continue doing it, and holding the taxpayers responsible to cover the bill.

If you are wanting me to flip the bill for your product, you better tell me first why the people who received the goods can't afford to pay for what they got.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook page or on X to keep up with the latest writings wherever I may write them. You can also find video content on my YouTube channel, The Springboard.

Wednesday, March 27, 2024

Polls Show Voters Believe Democrats Are Cheating

We can sit around all day and debate whether or not the 2020 election was stolen, but the reality is that we will probably never know the truth about that—even if Trump goes back to the White House. Some questions simply remain questions. 

But one thing is clear, and that's that Democrats are up to no good in this election cycle, and more and more of the American people are waking up to it. 

In a recent new national poll, 56% of voters believe that President Joe Biden is trying to jail Donald Trump simply to win an election. What's more telling in the polling is how many of those voters polled believe it is a concentrated effort coming directly from the White House itself, and at the direction of the Biden administration.

Whether or not even that happens to be true can also be debated, and even when it comes to that question, we may never have a definitive answer. But at the same time, it seems quite clear what's going on and why it is happening at all.

The Democrats are cheating—or trying very hard to.

We also know it is backfiring, and badly. In nearly every single mock general poll Donald Trump now leads in the race over Biden. And while polls can be subject to interpretation and not always reliable, the fact that most polls are weighted toward Democrats is something to keep in mind. If a Republican is winning in the polls, he's probably winning in the real world.

On top of it all, it's the things the Democrats are going after Trump for that has made more than a few people raise their eyebrows at. None of it seems—legitimate. It's a lot of innuendo and implied things, but really, where are the crimes? Where is the evidence? And why are the only people bringing any of these cases Democrats? And moreover, why are they all confirmed Trump haters?

I have said it over and over again. If the Democrats believed in the success of their time in the White House, it would be the only thing that would matter. If it's all true, and the Biden administration has been a glowing success, what would they have to fear with Donald Trump running? By their account, the Democrats have already proven they can lead the country.

Of course, the problem is, none of that is true. The Biden administration has been a complete disaster and I think even they know it. Deep down, they know it. Otherwise, what's the threat from Donald Trump?

The thing is, all of these "cases" have so many red flags it is simply hard for any thinking person to ignore, which is part of what is generating the growing consensus that Biden's going after Trump solely for political reasons.

The E. Jean Carroll case, for example, came from an allegation of a rape that occurred 26 years prior, that absolutely no evidence was provided to prove. The person who paid her legal fees was an anti-Trump billionaire. A dress she said provided proof turned out to be one not in style until two years after the alleged rape. There was also a TV interview, which was barred from evidence, where she said she was never raped.

But of course, when it comes to Trump, you don't need to prove a case in court. You don't even necessarily need to offer a conviction. Because the allegation is more important than anything else, and they know that all they have to do is accuse Trump of something and the media will run with it, call it true, and naive viewers who also hate Trump will ignore the evidence and go along with the story.

In that same poll, 67% believe that all of the indictments against Trump are politically motivated. 58% believe Biden has played a role. 52% believe that indictments were only brought because Trump was leading in polls. 58% believe that all of this nonsense should be dropped, and it should be up to the American people to decide who becomes our next president.

I think what it comes down to is that people aren't seeing the results Biden keeps saying he's gotten done and it makes them wonder more what all this Trump chasing is really about. To make matters worse, Biden doesn't talk about the supposed accomplishments. He simply talks about the dangers electing Trump poses, while at the same time working very hard to paint the former president as the Most Evil Man in America.

And what about the New York case? Sure, New York effectively won. But based on what evidence of what wrongdoing? Trump did not do anything against the law. He did not do anything outside of what other developers always do. And the prosecutor who brought the case had many on the record meetings at the White House prior to the case. What were those conversations and why don't we know what they were?

The facts are clear. The aim is to financially destroy and potentially jail Trump to get him out of their way. Because it is the only way they can win. I think there was cheating in 2020. Like I said, that can be debated, and we will likely never know the truth. But what is true is that the Democrats know they can't pull the same stunt in 2024 that they pulled in 2020. 

So, it's either lose an election or remove the guy who can actually win. And that's what they are up to. And the polls show clearly that The People know that's what the gig is.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook page to keep up with the latest writings wherever I may write them. You can also follow me on X. If you liked this post, please share it across your own social media. Every click helps to support what I do and keep it going.

Monday, March 25, 2024

Instagram Wants to Limit News and Information

We are in an interesting time when much of what we digest in the way of "news and information," happens in a very different way than it did many decades ago when there were only a handful of networks, newspapers and radio stations to get it from, and all of them mostly came from centralized news organizations like the Associated Press ultimately.

In many ways, there was also much less bias presented in news. It was straightforward journalism that sought to get to the truth, even when the truth may be painful and even destroy political careers.

Perhaps news has never truly been completely reliable. But certainly, it was more reliable than it is today.

Beyond the 24-hour news cycle, of course, the advent of social media outlets also changed a lot of the way that we receive news and information. Discussions or opinions that would otherwise be relegated to the dinner table or other social gatherings, and perhaps the occasional "Letter to the Editor," now moved into more public territory. 

Social media is largely a place where everyone has an individual voice that they can share with masses of other people. 

But that's not what everyone wants, of course, and after Trump's reelection efforts in 2020, we saw a side of truth that doesn't want to be heard, and we saw freedom of speech come under fire. Social media outlets began shutting down anyone who said things the social media powers that be did not like, and even banned certain people from being heard at all.

Suddenly truth was not being determined or examined. It was simply being decided.

Sure, it doesn't mean that many can't still have a voice. Many people, such as myself, can still freely write and publish blogs or articles sharing my thoughts and opinions, or findings on particular topics I find interesting that I think others may also find interesting.

But the sites that I write on can be limited by the places where I can post the links, such as Facebook, X and elsewhere. That can have a limiting effect on who gets to see it, let alone find it.

When Elon Musk took over X, his aim was to put an end to that and allow a freer forum for people to express themselves. It can be hotly debated whether he has actually accomplished that. But the fact remains that social media is still pushing back on certain speech.

That can be shown in the recent decision by Instagram to limit political speech in particular. 

Regardless of whether or not news or information is better with so many voices in the pool of news and information is also debatable. Because not everyone is going to have the whole truth and nothing but the truth necessarily. 

Even when it comes to my own writing on various topics, it's my opinion and it is up to the reader to decide whether or not they agree with it. It's also up to the reader to seek out more information to better form their own opinions.

What social media and blogs and podcasts and whatever other media source is being used offers is another side. An alternative. I think that does, in fact, make things better. Because otherwise all you have is one centralized source who collectively decides what is true or not. 

That makes news and information potentially propaganda. Because one group can simply control the flow. 

The problem is not so much the limiting of news and information. It's the clear agenda behind it. Because it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that most of social media and news outlets are slanted to the liberal side.

And you can't make an informed decision without hearing all sides. It is better to form an opinion based on multiple sources and perspectives than to rely only on one.

Especially when it comes to politics, I think it is important for people to be able to think openly and constructively. If we had a media now that were more prone to just tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth, perhaps a decision like Instagram's would make more sense. 

But that's not the world we are living in. The truth can often times now be questioned. It is often shaped and configured rather than told as it is. People need to have the ability to hear all sides and decide for themselves. That's part of why freedom of speech is so important. Why it is necessary. 

And again, it doesn't mean that anyone else is absolutely going to preach the Gospel. People still must do their own homework. But the discussion is needed, and every voice should have an opportunity to at least be heard, even when we don't like what is said.

Instagram members can opt back into political content. But the first choice should be to be able to see and hear the content before a decision is made whether or not it should appear at all for the viewers. But again, it also puts control into the hands of a very select group of people to decide what we can see or hear. 

That is not a good thing. Every American, regardless of their political leanings should want every word to potentially be heard. Because when you begin to silence one speech, eventually speech you want and need to hear will also be silenced.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook page or follow me on X to keep up with the latest writings wherever I may write them. 

Sunday, March 24, 2024

A Sign of Something Else?

From time to time my wife and I enjoy perusing an antique and consignment store in a nearby town. There are always interesting things to look at, the prices are fairly reasonable as well, and sometimes you can find something rather unique.

A lot of times there are signs or plaques that are quite intentional in making a joke. But sometimes you also happen to find a joke where one was, perhaps, not necessarily intended.

Of course, anyone who has been married for a while is all too aware that marriage is not all love and romance the likes of an untold number of movies and books about love. There are times when you even think, maybe I should just pack it in and call it a day. Is this even worth it?

But it is also the trials and tribulations and sour moments that actually serve more often than not to make a marriage stronger.

Coming upon one of the booths at the store there was a sign for sale that read, "All because two people fell in love." And right above it, a very large tree saw.

Naturally, if one has a bit of a sense of humor, right away you can see how the saw may imply something about that sign. Because while most of the time those sour moments in marriage do indeed make our marriages stronger, there are still times when the thought occurs that having a large tree saw around might come in handy.




Jim Bauer writes mostly about conservative politics, finance and investing. But of course, he also writes the occasional random thought or shares his views on everyday life. If you'd like to keep up with the latest writings wherever he may write them, you can follow him on his Facebook page.

Wednesday, March 20, 2024

A Surging Post Begs a Question

Sometimes an old post surges for whatever reason and it makes me wonder why. Especially if the post in question happens to be one that is not evergreen, and really is no longer relevant. Not that I mind if a post like that does surge, of course. Regardless of whether they are relevant or not, I still get paid for them.

Unfortunately, I can't see what search terms someone may be using to find them. But this post, in particular, begs a question, especially as we are rolling deep into another presidential election coming up in November.

It has long been felt by some that our current president, Joe Biden, hasn't really been running things. So, who is? Many have suggested that it's our former president, Barack Obama, secretly behind the curtain pulling the levers and strings and serving as a shadow president.

I admit, it's always been an idea sort of "on the fringe." Even I suspect it at least. If it's not Barack Obama running things, perhaps it is a collective of sorts within the administration? 

Do we have any logs we can check to see if any staffers have been in frequent and direct contact with Obama? Or would that make things too obvious? Would there be another way the communications are occurring? 

It's tin-hatty to a degree. But nowadays you just never know. It's hard to really know what's going on when you have a president who 99% of the time appears out of his wits. What is interesting to me is that the very post that is surging, "President Obama Is Not My President," may be surging based on the very premise that he is operating as a shadow president, and people are searching for things looking for an explanation or theorem on that idea.

The post had nothing to do with that, of course. It was speaking on a Mosque that was being proposed to be built at Ground Zero where the Twin Towers were taken down by Muslim terrorists on 9/11 and Obama's support for that at the time, which I felt was a slap in the face, and an unpresidential move considering what happened there.

I already had issues with Barack Obama's actions, and this was simply a final straw to conclude that perhaps it was time for him to step down. A position that I feel now may have been a bit extreme. Nonetheless, it's very old news. So, what else could be the reason the post is surging?

Does it say anything, even, about the coming election? About the possibility more people are questioning or more deeply examining their decision in November away from Biden? Who's finding the post? Democrats? Republicans? Independents?

The latter, if that's who's looking, would be even more interesting, of course, since it's usually the independents who ultimately determine who the winner is. 

Regardless of why the post may be surging, it does seem to suggest, at least just below the surface, that if an irrelevant statement that President Obama is not my president—which is obvious—is catching some attention, that at least in title only, the idea is relevant to today in that way.

Because I would assume nobody is suddenly finding new interest in the Mosque, or even anything that occurred during Obama's lackluster presidency.

What else can it be, is the question?

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook page to keep up with the latest writings wherever I may write them. You can also follow me on X.