James L. Paris's Blog, page 81
June 13, 2017
America's Cheapest Family Joins Jim Paris Live
Known as America's Cheapest Family, Steven and Annette Economides joins Jim to discuss a wide array of money saving strategies. Topics include why you don't need coupons to save money at the grocery store, the smart way to save money on produce, how to save money on meat, how to teach your kids about money, dealing with the challenges of the high cost of college, and how to avoid financially supporting your adult children.
June 12, 2017
Group Behind Undercover Planned Parenthood Videos Seeks to Have Judge Disqualified
The Center for Medical Progress (CMP), responsible for capturing on video the ultra-candid admissions of Planned Parenthood (PP) staff and affiliates about the abortion-related work they do, is hitting back at a federal judge who recently ordered their latest productions to be kicked off the Internet.
According to Live Action News, attorneys for CMP and its founder, David Daleiden, have filed a motion in a Northern California U.S. District Court that asks for Judge William H. Orrick III to be disqualified ���on the grounds that there is evidence of bias in favor of the plaintiff and prejudice against the defendants.���
The plaintiff in the latest case brought against CMP is the National Abortion Federation (NAF). The NAF is suing the anti-abortion group on the basis that the ghoulish videos might inflame to such a degree that lives of NAF member abortionists could be endangered.
You may be familiar with the most recent CMP videos to surface, as they���ve received a fair bit of press coverage. The recordings, made at a variety of NAF trade shows (the abortion industry has trade shows ��� chew on the for a second), reveal various abortionists matter-of-factly griping about hassles that arise during the grim procedures, like ���the head that gets stuck that we can���t get out,��� and ���an eyeball just fell down into my lap, and that is gross!���
Lovely.
The affidavit filed on behalf of Daleiden and CMP accuses the judge of, among other things, having a rather cozy relationship with an organization that has historically strong ties to Planned Parenthood. The organization, Good Samaritan Family Resource Center (GSFRC) in San Francisco, is an abortion referral center for PP. Judge Orrick was a legal advisor to GSFRC from 1986 to 2009.
An excerpt of the affidavit references Judge Orrick���s alleged professional conflict of interest, as well as personal comments both he and his wife have allegedly made in public forums that call into question his ability to remain impartial while adjudicating cases involving Planned Parenthood and any of its affiliates:
���This includes Judge Orrick���s longstanding relationship as a past board member, and more recently as an emeritus board member, of an organization that has a ���key partnership��� with a Planned Parenthood affiliate that is a member of the plaintiff National Abortion Federation (NAF). Judge Orrick���s wife has also posted public comments, pictured with her husband, that are supportive of Planned Parenthood and critical of these moving defendants. For this reason, and the others set forth below, Daleiden and CMP respectfully request that Judge Orrick be recused from this case and that a stay be granted on all proceedings in this case until this motion is heard.���
By Robert G. Yetman, Jr. Editor At Large
Survey: 1 in 4 Americans Skips Doctor Because of Cost
You probably expect people to do it; you might even be one of them. It turns out, according to a new Bankrate.com study, that a large number of Americans - 25 percent of them - is passing on going to the doctor because they can���t afford it.
Speaking to Fox Business about the disturbing survey results, Bankrate.com analyst Robin Saks Frankel said, ���I found it concerning that so many people skip medical care because they are afraid of what the cost of treatment could be. Not all aches and pains can be easily dismissed and the future costs could end up being higher for someone if a condition is left untreated. To have health insurance and yet still have fears about treatment fees just seems wrong.���
No argument there.
According to the survey, older millennials, those in the age 27 to 36 age bracket, are most likely to skip the doctor because of cost fears ��� a whopping 32 percent of them don���t go to the doctor, presently. Frankel said that millennials are the biggest group of healthcare dropouts because of the enormous amount of student debt with which they���re burdened.
Historically, perceived invincibility has been a factor in keeping younger adults from going to the doctor, but now, the issue of expense is making that avoidance problem much worse.
To be sure, it is not just millennials forgoing health care services; 25 percent of America represents a much larger chunk than merely that demographic. The reality is that access to health care is presently out of reach, by virtue of high cost, to many Americans, and while there has not been a lot of talk on the national level as to how that inaccessibility is affecting mortality, make no mistake: if nothing changes, there will be a great deal of conversation on that point, very soon.
By Robert G. Yetman, Jr. Editor At Large
Save 50 Percent And More Replacing Cable With An Internet TV Package
If you are a regular reader, you know that I dropped cable TV about five years ago. Thousands of people have visited our website and downloaded our free 17 page report on cable TV alternatives. You can download this PDF report for free (right click here and select a location to to save the report to your own computer). The good news is that it is now easier than ever to replace cable TV with one of several streaming services. When I dropped cable TV years ago it was more of a patchwork to put together the channels I wanted. I also had to accept the reality that it was not possible to completely replicate the channel lineup I had available through cable TV. In this article I want to focus on the four major TV streaming services that provide a suite of live channels, including news and sports. Remember, however, that you will still need a decent Internet connection to utilize streaming TV. The equipment you will need will vary depending on what streaming service you subscribe to (the most common devices are ROKU and Amazon Fire TV). Also, the new Smart TVs have this technology built in (eliminating the need for a set top box altogether).
A Closer Look At The Major Live TV Streaming Services
SlingTV (owned by DISH) offers several channel packages, the basic package starts at just $20. Of the major offerings, SlingTV offers the lowest base price for their starter channel package. Included in the $20 subscription are 29 channels. There are a variety of upgraded channel packages that can be added on for $5 just each. Many people are surprised to see that the basic package includes CNN, ESPN, Disney Channel, and many other popular channels.
Another satellite provider getting into streaming TV is DirecTV. DirecTV Now starts with a base price of $35 monthly. DirecTV Now has a basic package that includes 60 channels (which explains why the price is nearly double the basic channel package of SlingTV).
YouTubeTV is rolling out nationwide. At $35 monthly, the basic package includes 40 channels. One drawback is that there is not a Roku or Amazon Fire app yet. You can use a Google Chromecast device (since you have to use a computer or smartphone to navigate the channels, it is not as seamless of an integration as using a set top box).
You may already be familiar with Hulu as one of those streaming services that plays TV shows and movies on demand. Hulu is now getting into the live TV game with this new offering. Another drawback here is presently the lack of integration with Roku and Amazon Fire (another case requiring the use of a Google Chromecast). The cost is $39.99 monthly and this includes Hulu's premium limited commercial on demand library as well. So, if you already subscribe to Hulu you would be eliminating the cost of your standalone subscription. In our home we have the $7.99 Hulu basic streaming subscription, so if we went with Hulu Live the net increase in cost would be just $32. The basic package includes more than 50 channels.
Other Considerations
Each of the above services has not just their own unique channel lineup, but there are other differences that have to be considered. For example, one major issue is the limitation on how many devices can access your account at the same time. This is important if you will have multiple family members watching TV simultaneously on different devices. Some services only allow two devices to access the account at the same time, while others allow up to six. Of course, the ease of integration with your TV is another consideration. It appears that apps for Roku and Amazon Fire TV are just around the corner for those services not presently offering them. Nonetheless, Google Chromecast is just not as convenient to use as one of these set top boxes.
Another consideration is the ability to record programs for later playback. The features and limitations of the so called 'cloud DVR' capabilities will vary with each service as well. The great news is that all of these services offer a free trial and month-to-month agreements if you sign up. This means you can experiment until you find the service that is right for your family.
Conclusion
Any way you slice it, all of these packages will save you money compared to the cost of cable or satellite TV. They also make it convenient to access live TV on your laptop, desktop computer, and mobile devices. We are also seeing a limited number of local channels being added as well (this appears to be the next major feature improvement). All in all, it appears that streaming TV is here, and on average is being offered at a discount of 50 percent or more from cable TV. I expect prices to drop even more from here as additional streaming services are launched. I also expect cable TV to drop their prices as well due to the mass exodus to these streaming alternatives. Well, the Internet just changed yet another industry.
Helping you make the most of God���s money!
James L. Paris
Editor-In-Chief ChristianMoney.com
Follow Me on Twitter Twitter.com/jameslparis
Christian Financial Advice
Jim Paris 24 Hour Radio
June 11, 2017
Ms. Magazine Asks: ���When Will Wonder Woman Be a Fat, Femme Woman of Color?���
Anyone out there remember seminal (post-World War II, anyway) feminist Gloria Steinem, and the magazine of female empowerment she created, Ms.?
Well, they���re both still out there, fighting what they clearly see as the good fight.
On that note, a recent, high-profile blog post over at Ms. Magazine���s website, authored by Stephanie Abraham, asks out loud what has been, apparently, a pressing question rattling around in the heads of ardent feminists and other social justice warrior types (who, pretty much by definition, are also feminists) :
���When will Wonder Woman be a fat, femme woman of color?���
When, indeed?
You don���t even really need to read the post (although you should) to know what Abraham is griping about. She takes issue with the fact that Wonder Woman, as portrayed in the recently-released and very well-received film starring Gal Gadot, is still a somewhat-traditional girl, while also exhibiting standard superhero traits. In addition to Abraham being clearly bent out of shape over Wonder Woman���s ���heteronormativity,��� she is displeased with the fact that this 2017 version of the character is neither fat nor a woman of color.
The kvetching over her lack of rotundity seems flatly bizarre. Are there any overweight superheroes? Isn���t part of what makes them the superheroes the fact they are physical specimens?
Setting aside the matter of Wonder Woman���s color (a black or brown Wonder Woman would be just fine with a whole bunch of folks of all shades)���the fact that anyone is perturbed the character is not portrayed in a mass-market film as an obese lesbian is just another example of why one should never allow themselves to become so possessed of, and by, their chosen agenda that common sense flies entirely out the window.
By Robert G. Yetman, Jr. Editor At Large
Innocent Error, or Something Else? Textbooks in India Printed with References to Christ as a Demon
Christians in Ahmedabad, India are understandably upset these days.
It seems that class nine (roughly equivalent to American ninth grade) Hindi-language school textbooks in use in that community refer to Jesus Christ as a ���demon.���
According to reporting by The Christian Post, the government is saying that the appearance of the adjective ���hevaan,��� or ���demon,��� before the name of Jesus in the schoolbooks was absolutely an error. The responsibility for the printing of the books is that of the Gujarat State School Textbook Board.
In the textbook at issue, Chapter 16 reads, in part, ���Is sambandh me hevaan Isa ka ek kathan sada smaraniya hai;��� the English translation is: ���one statement of demon Jesus is always memorable.���
What has particularly irritated so many Christians in Ahmedabad is that the government appears to have dragged its feet in addressing the matter, leaving open the question as to whether the supposed misprinting was really an error. At the very least, many question how seriously the government views the offense. It turns out that the description of Jesus as a demon was first brought to the attention of the government over a month ago, but nothing was done. Recently, the Catholic Church of Gujarat stepped up the pressure a bit. Church spokesman Fr. Vinayak Jhadav:
���When we did not hear from the textbook board, we took the matter to the Gujarat United Christian Forum and decided to represent the case before the state education minister for an explanation, correction and disciplinary action against those responsible for the error. This is not about religion, it is about quality of education.���
Well, with all apologies to the good Father, referring to Jesus as a demon is at least a little about religion.
Anyway, the government is now saying the ���error��� will be fixed forthwith.
By Robert G. Yetman, Jr. Editor At Large
June 9, 2017
Alabama Town Demands Teenagers Get Business Licenses in Order to Mow Lawns
Summer jobs for teens just aren���t what they used to be in these United States.
It seems that one city in Alabama has decided that local kids who want to mow lawns as a way of making a few bucks can only do so legally if they get business licenses.
In Gardendale, as in municipalities all across the country, local laws require that those who choose to run some kind of an enterprise must have a business license.
Nothing shocking about that, in general; even some of the most ardent anti-government types have no problem with cities and towns requiring business licenses.
What is surprising is that Gardendale is going to the extent of demanding that local kids who want to cut neighbors��� lawns for a few bucks - an activity once seen as a rite of passage for teens in America - will need to secure a business license.
It appears that local lawn care companies in Gardendale are partly behind the city government���s push to crack down on kids who cut grass without the proper credentials, according to WBMA.
Resident Elton Campbell has a granddaughter who mows the lawns of her neighbors.
���One of the men that cuts several yards made a remark to one of our neighbors that ���if he saw her cutting grass again that he was going to call Gardendale��� because she didn���t have a business license,��� said Campbell.
Adding insult to injury is the cost of the license - $110. For many young kids doing lawns here and there for summer work, that���s a whole lot of money.
Gardendale���s mayor, Stan Hogeland, says that while everyone running a business within city limits must have a license, that mandate is not intended to apply to kids cutting lawns for neighbors.
���I would love to have something on our books that gave a more favorable response to that student out there cutting grass,��� said Hogeland. ���And see if there���s maybe a temporary license during the summer months that targets teenagers.���
For now, though, kids in Hogeland had better pony up that $110���or else.
By Robert G. Yetman, Jr. Editor At Large
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott Signs Anti-Abortion Bill that Should Not Even Need to Have Been Written
In the minds of those who are pro-life, all abortions are equal, as in, all abortions are equally bad.
That said, it is difficult to consider the atrocity known as the dismemberment abortion, and not view that as being the worst of the worst.
On Tuesday, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed Texas Senate Bill 8, which protects unborn babies from becoming victims of that unspeakable act. The following, from LifeNews.com, pretty much says it all:
���Texas Senate Bill 8 prohibits dismemberment abortions, a method typically used in the second trimester to kill nearly fully-formed, living unborn babies. It is a barbaric and dangerous procedure in which the unborn baby is ripped apart in the womb and pulled out in pieces while his or her heart is still beating.���
Perhaps even more stunning than dismemberment abortion���is the fact that a law has to be passed anywhere in 2017 America to keep it from happening. Sadly, only eight states, now including Texas, have laws on the books to protect the unborn from dismemberment abortions. The other seven are Alabama, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and West Virginia.
National Right to Life was quick to applaud Gov. Abbott���s signing of Texas Senate Bill 8. Ingrid Duran, National Right to Life Committee State Legislative Director, declared that ���the Texas Unborn Child Protection from Dismemberment Abortion Act is a vital step in protecting pregnant mothers and their unborn children from being subject to such a dehumanizing experience,��� while Carol Tobias, President of National Right to Life, said that the group applauds ���the efforts of our affiliate, Texas Right to Life, and the pro-life dedication of the Texas legislature and Governor Abbott for their commitment in enacting this life-affirming law.���
Eight states down; 42 to go.
By Robert G. Yetman, Jr. Editor At Large
June 8, 2017
Off-Broadway Production of Anti-Trump Play Closes Because of Poor Reviews & Ticket Sales
You���d think a play themed on what a dangerous, rotten president Donald Trump is���would do exceptionally well in the bastion of liberalism known as New York City.
Turns out, not so much.
As reported by The New York Times, the producer of the Off-Broadway play Building the Wall, Jeffrey Richards, announced via Twitter last Friday that the production would stage its final performances over the weekend, and then close, a month earlier than its originally-scheduled end date of July 9.
And so it did, thanks to poor reviews and ticket sales.
Building the Wall, written by Tony Award-winning playwright Robert Schenkkan, is a drama that envisions life in America just three years after the election of Donald Trump, and does so by painting a rather ugly picture. The play is set in the year 2019, and President Trump has been kicked out of office after he throws Muslims and Mexicans into death camps following a terror attack. The ���action��� of the play, such as it is, centers on a history professor visiting one of the camp guards in prison and getting his story.
As it happens, however, such a compelling leftist storyline isn���t even a big seller in New York.
Commenting on the early closure, producer Richards said, ���Our author built a powerful play; however, during this Tony Awards season and during a season which has not been kind to straight plays, we were unable to build an audience. It is especially difficult to do so when you are Off Broadway.���
It is also difficult to do when your play isn���t any good.
By Robert G. Yetman, Jr. Editor At Large
SBA Administrator Says Volume of Government Regulations Is Devastating Small Businesses
Have you tried to start a small business anytime recently?
Depending on the exact size and nature of your business, you may be out of compliance with a host of local, state, and federal regulations, and not even know it. There are large numbers of people, all across the country, who innocently start working at very small, almost-entirely self-contained enterprises, and later find themselves at odds with regulators eager to fine and sanction them for any of a whole host of violations, much of them very minor and technical in nature.
So is there any real help forthcoming?
Very possibly. Linda McMahon, wife of professional wrestling impresario Vince McMahon and new administrator of the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA), seems genuinely concerned about the fact that the present regulatory environment in the nation is suffocating small business. On Monday, McMahon rightly noted that even more than any one regulation, it is the mountain of rules and laws facing small business that prompt many budding entrepreneurs to decide that going into business just isn���t worth the hassle.
���It is not necessarily any particular regulation as much as it is the volume of regulations,��� McMahon said Monday as a guest on Fox Business��� After the Bell. ���And the cost of compliance and the time for compliance���everything is just way too complex than what it needs to be.���
Still, while it is a good sign that the Trump administration - including, and especially, the SBA���s administrator - recognize that small business owners are drowning in regulations, that awareness is of no value if material change is not implemented.
Here���s hoping the right thing is done, for the sake of all of those who keep America���s economic engine running.
By Robert G. Yetman, Jr. Editor At Large
