Over Population and Unrest in the World

When a country has run-a-way population, the strains on its economy will bring down the economy or bring down freedom. Simple rule. With too many mouths to feed and no jobs, people will just 'mill around' in the streets all day. As they say: "Idle hands are the hands of the devil."

By that I mean, if you have 15% or 20% or 25% or more young people unemployed and mostly uneducated and unskilled, you have the makings of trouble. With a group like this, it is a simple matter to focus this group on unrest. Whether it's for more food or a job, the unrest can bring down a government.

That is why a "One-Baby-Per-Woman" is a concept whose time has come. A "One-Baby-Per-Woman" concept will reduce the strain on families to provide the basics for their child. "One-Baby-Per-Woman" concept will ease the need for a government to provide basic food for its population. As the population reduces, and the strain on families reduces through A "One-Baby-Per-Woman" concept and the country will find itself in a better financial position.

A "One-Baby-Per-Woman" concept will reduce unemployment.
A "One-Baby-Per-Woman" concept will reduce the need for food imports
A "One-Baby-Per-Woman" concept will reduce starvation
A "One-Baby-Per-Woman" concept will reduce the need to destroy "old Forests" for farmland.
A "One-Baby-Per-Woman" concept will reduce the need to build more schools
A "One-Baby-Per-Woman" concept will reduce the governments' costs in every country
A "One-Baby-Per-Woman" concept will provide for a country's stable social and economic well being

A "One-Baby-Per-Woman" concept is a concept the entire world needs to embrace NOW!!!.

And That's The Way I See It...
Straight Talk WIth Jay Clifford

World Population

The Earth is only so big and there are only so many acres of land to farm and there are only so many fish in the seas to catch --- to feed all the people. Face it World, there are too many people on Earth right now. We cannot feed all these people. Something has to be done or everyone will be at risk of not having enough fresh water and food.

It seems that the educated countries of the world have reduced their level of new babies. Even China has reduced it's new-born population. Now it's up to the rest of the world - specially the Middle East, Africa and South America and India most of all.

There is a reason people in those over-populated areas are always rioting and bringing down governments. They are mostly uneducated, underfeed or starving, and without jobs. Why no jobs? Because there never can be enough jobs for an over-populated world. Wake up world. The time to limit babies for everyone is now. One baby per woman and that's it.

By limiting women to one baby, the world's population will begin to reduce to a more sustainable level. With less people, there is less need for food and fresh water. With less people, there is less need to destroy "old forests". With less people, there can be jobs for everyone. With less people, every child will get more attention and less likely to commit crimes. With less people, every family can focus their money on just one child.

The people who say that we are taking the rights away from people by limiting every woman to one child, I say that is the responsibility of all people for the betterment of all the people to reduce the population in half over the next generation.

Having 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 or more babies is just not responsible. How can a poor family take care of all the needs of a multi-child family. On the other side, families that have the disposable income have to share the one baby per woman idea because they have the same responsibility as everyone else to work towards reducing the population.

And governments will find a one-baby-per-woman idea better for their citizens. Each country will then be able to create enough jobs for everyone. And each country will be able to feed and support education for everyone. An educated, feed and working society will be a stable society.

And that's the way I see it...
Straight Talk With Jay Clifford

Can A Leopard Change Their Spots

Tuesday's Jan 25th State of the Union speech will have obama telling everyone that his beliefs,
held for his lifetime, and the legislation he pushed through with "behind-the-closed-door-bribes" was all a mistake and now he "Sees The Light" and wants to go off in a new direction.

Can you believe him? I do not think so.

He will say whatever it takes to get him re-elected in 2012 so he can have the next 4 years without worrying about re-election and without worrying how many congresspersons he 'throws under the bus' to transform the United State of America into a 3rd rate, bankrupt, socialistic country.

Yes, the country needs jobs. Yes we need a change in the direction of the political winds.
Yes, people can change - after years of "seeing the light" and from years on the psychiatrist's couch.
BUT a leopard can never change their spots.
And neither can the core values of a dedicated socialists change into a capitalist over night.

I have zero trust in the person calling himself 'obama hussein'. Can you trust this man???

And that's the way I see it...
Straight Talk With Jay Clifford


.

NPR Nat'l Public Radio Needs to be free

NPR or National Public Radio needs to be free.

Why Should NPR get govt money - Why should my tax dollars be used to support this radio statio? IF the station's mission is to spread FREEDOM over the world, that is OK by me. Then, this station needs to stay completely and always out of USA politics at home.

Since there is an agenda at NPR to spew one political side over another, and paid by tax money, this is offensive to me. That said, NPR needs to be OFF US PUBLIC ASSISTANCE. NPR needs to compete like every other radio station.

If this station continues to get involved in biased reporting of the US political scene, then they need to compete for their money like every other radio station and NOT GET ANY US TAXPAYER MONEY.

And that's the Way I See It...
Straight Talk With Jay Clifford

Making nice in politics

Since President George Bush won his election, the Democrats have issued hate on any Republican everywhere they can find something to twist to make it sound like the Republicans are doing something wrong. OK Sometimes the Republicans did some things that are wrong in my view. BUT to have ABC & CBS & NBC & NPR & EVERY TALK SHOW HOST ON THESE TV STATIONS & The New York Times & The L.A. Times spewing hate at the Republicans ALL THE TIME for years and decades while the Democrats were in power and then when the DEMOCRATS LOSE THE ELECTION BECAUSE OF WHAT THE DEMOCRATS DID AND THEN THE DEMOCRATS TURN AROUND AND SAY - LET US MAKE NICE IS PURE BULL CRAP. The Democrats lost and now they want to change the rules that the Democrats have been playing with for decades to prevent the Republicans from using the same tactics - COME ON PUBLIC - OPEN YOUR EYES AT THIS DEMOCRATIC SMOKE SCREEN.

ONE FL congresswoman is one of the worst. Every word out of her mouth is hate with nothing about " DOING RIGHT BY THE AMERICAN PEOPLE." And this FL Congresswoman is now calling for Republicans to watch what they say when she is one of the worst congresspersons for spewing hate.

WAKE UP PEOPLE - IT'S A POWER PLAY AND THE LOSERS ARE THE AMERICAN PUBLIC.

And That's the Way I See It...
Straight Talk With Jay Clifford

GUN LAWS

I am in favor of allowing the public to have guns - period. One Democratic Senator last week SHOT one of two intruders in his house. What's so amazing about this ??? The Democratic Senator has been openly and forcefully in favor of restricting guns from the public. What a contradiction. The man has no conviction of his words. Some might even call him "two-faced". Is this hate speech - no way - It is simply telling the truth without any added inflammatory remarks - straight truth as reported in the news and the Senator's voting record.

So let us talk about gun control - Why should mentally ill people have the right to have guns? Good question.
But who will determine who is mentally ill and is this a slippery slope that we do not want to go down.

Maybe the answer lies in the community forgetting about "political correctness" - a term that reeks of racism, uniformity and exclusion. Maybe we should think about coming together as a community - like we used to - and report "unusual activity" to the principal or law enforcement. Maybe that in and of itself could reduce the violent crimes. By taking action now to help the youth make right decisions with their lives. Maybe there needs to be more boys & girls clubs to help children learn about the making good decisions and becoming responsible for their actions. Maybe these clubs can help to foster a 'second' family for children; giving these children the structure all children need and might be lacking in many homes.

So in summary - Every citizen must be able to keep firearms per the 1776 US Constitution. Secondly, we need to spend more money on helping the youth now before they develop into criminals or gang members. In the long run, this will save money and lives.

And that's the way I see it...
Straight Talk with Jay Clifford

Making hay after the horse left the burning barn

All of a sudden, the Democrats want to mix the seating in the President's State of the Union speech.
And I have to ask WHY????? WHY ??????

The only reason I can come up with is because the Democrats do not want to show the public how many seats they lost in the last election.

Come on people. Has any Democrat changed his tune??? I do not think so. They are using this mixing of Republicans and Democrats seating idea for one and only one reason. They Democratic side will be very small if they all stay together. And they are afraid to show the public that they LOST THE LAST ELECTION BECAUSE OF THE UNDERHANDED PASSING OF THE OBAMA HEALTH CARE AND THE WASTING OF $787,000,000,000 AND THE
CONCENTRATING OF POWER IN THE PRESIDENCY AND THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY IN BACK-DOOR CHICAGO-STYLE DEALINGS AND BRIBINGS. AND NEVER FORGET ABOUT THE "CZARS" THAT HAVE POWER AND WERE NEVER ELECTED NOR VETTED BY CONGRESS - EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE BEEN IN OFFICE MORE THAN ONE YEAR AND ARE REQUIRED TO BE VETTED BY CONGRESS.

KEEP THE DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS SEATING AS ITS BEEN FOR THE LAST 200+ YEARS - SEPARATED.

And that's the way I see it...
Straight Talk with Jay Clifford

Healthcare's decline

Just saw a TV Commercial for United Health Care. The man has Prostrate Cancer and
who does he get for his treatment under United Health Care ???
A RN - That's right a nurse, not a doctor or a cancer specialists - a nurse.
I am not taking anything away from nurses - It's just that you would expect to be treated
for Prostrate Cancer by a cancer doctor. That is obama health care in action -
Get used to it unless the congress can rescind and replace this terrible, terrible law that
will kill jobs, make doctors quit the profession and ration health care all while increasing
costs and your federal taxes.

And that's the way I see it...
Straight Talk with Jay Clifford

Black and White

At the risk of starting political straight talk, one of the 'soul' problems with the Black community began with President Lyndon Johnson and his legislation to "help" the Black people by creating WELFARE. Welfare in and of itself is not a bad thing. But the restrictions of government on who could receive welfare was the main destroyer of the Black culture and the Black family. Recipients of welfare - usually mothers - could not receive welfare IF there was a man living in the household. SO the smart thing to do in light of the free money (i.e.welfare) was to kick the Black man out of the house. This lead to a breakdown of the Black family. Any family without a father is more likely to see their children get into serious trouble with early pregnancy, drugs and gangs whatever their race.

Then along comes Jesse Jackson after Martin Luther King whose agenda is to make money while pretending to help the Black people. If he truly wanted to help the Black people he would have used his organization to help all poor people. BUT Jackson made it clear in every way, that the only way his organization could make money was to focus on Black people at the expense of all poor people. This fostered worsening race relations - putting his organization in contradiction with its stated purpose.

So what do we do about the "race" problem? We can discuss alternatives in my next blog

And that's the way I see it...
Straight Talk With Jay Clifford