The Urban Grind

Can someone please explain to me why it is that some people see fit to text perfect strangers?

Honestly, I just don’t understand why some people choose to text someone with whom they’ve never interacted either on the phone, or via email. I mean, what kind of response are they expecting?

This has happened to me several times, as I’ve been looking for a new apartment on Craigslist. What kind of potential roommate or landlord would settle for texting someone they’ve never met, and with whom they’ve never even exchanged emails? What’s even creepier is that these people don’t even bother introducing themselves in their texts. So I’m left thinking “Who is this?” Their text messages go something like this:

“When do you want to see the room?”

I mean, what is it these people are expecting? Does anyone with a brain in his head think the person on the other end will agree to meet someone who doesn’t even bother properly introducing himself? Also, if I’ve responded to one one listing, I think it’s pretty safe to assume I’ve responded to several others as well. So not only do these people not introduce themselves in their texts, they don’t even bother including anything about their apartments. For example, they could email or call and say “This is X and I’m getting back to you regarding the room in Astoria for $700 a month.”

But it rarely goes this way. You would think that these people, who will be getting hundreds of dollars of extra money in their pockets from renting out rooms in their apartments would make an effort to present themselves decently. Also, wouldn’t they want to get some idea of who they would be meeting by at least talking to the person?

What do you guys think?

High heels can be nice. But there’s certainly a difference between looking attractive, as opposed to looking like a hooker. These Christian Louboutin pumps, in my opinion, fall into the hooker category.

I thought $200 for a haircut was expensive. But then again, I haven’t been living in Manhattan for the last three years. Celebrity hairstylist Ted Gibson of What Not To Wear fame is charging customers $950 a head.

Gibson, a celebrity hairstylist who appears weekly on TLC makeover show What Not to Wear, says he aims to someday charge $1,500 – not because his costs are going up, but because demand for the kind of experience he offers hasn’t let up. While he isn’t exactly sure when he’ll raise prices, he’s confident he’ll still have customers when he does.
Gibson has pulled off this sort of thing before. Two years ago, he more than doubled his rate from $450 to $950 – and people still came, weak economy and all.

Gibson says demand is strong and shows no signs of waning. There are currently 10 people on the wait list for his $950 haircut in New York and 25 in Ft. Lauderdale. The wait time ranges from one month to eight weeks.

{snip}

A surprising portion of customers lined up for his pricey cuts aren’t the rich and famous. (Gibson says he generally services celebrities outside of his salon and thus charges his day rate, which is higher than $950.) Some of his customers come because they’re fans of his work on What Not to Wear, and the majority of his $950 haircut customers are actually “mid-income” women seeking the same luxury experience Gibson provides clients for events like the Golden Globes and the Oscars, he says.

“I’m bringing that same kind of access to the Upper East Side woman. The woman from NJ. The woman whose husband wants to give her a gift for the holidays,” he says.

I think these women are crazy. What do you guys think?

Via Townhall.com

1. He was a horrible employer. He maligned employees in public meetings, and often axed staff members for no good reason. When he needed to reduce the head count at Pixar, he insisted on firing people immediately without any severance. One of his lieutenants pleaded with him to provide two weeks’ notice, to which he replied “OK, but the notice is retroactive to two weeks ago.” Can you imagine what would happen if Bank of America ever did that?

2. He exercised maniacal control over his products, adamantly refusing to consider open platforms. When he developed the Macintosh, he didn’t allow slots for other cards, and even created customized screws to ensure that only Apple employees could open the boxes. He maintained this closed platform philosophy for the iPod, the iPad, and the iPhone – which is one reason why sales of Google’s Android-based smart phones have now surpassed the iPhone (and also why sales of Android-based tablets will exceed iPads within the next year). Zelda adds: I remember when several tech companies launched an anti-trust suit against Microsoft, accusing the computer OS giant of being a monopoly. How come they never complained about Apple. Personally, I’m no fan of Windows. It’s made to be buggy and obsolete after a short time. I’m more of a Linux woman.

3. Through extensive marketing, he convinced people to pay more for his products than comparable products offered by his competitors. On the average, iPhones cost about $100 more than equivalent Android-based phones, yet people buy iPhones because of the marketing. How capitalistic. Apple also gets its customers to replace their existing products with newer models (even if the original product isn’t obsolete) by refusing to supply major software upgrades. That’s pretty predatory marketing.

4. Steve Jobs was always – and Apple continues to be – a monumental exporter of American jobs. While President Obama is running around accusing Mitt Romney of exporting jobs, he is well aware that Jobs was the master, creating over 700,000 manufacturing positions in China. To his credit, however, Jobs did tell the President to his face that he exported jobs because the educational system in America is disgraceful due to its domination by teachers unions.

5. Using these business practices, he rang up the largest profits in American history, but does anyone complain about Apple’s outsized profiteering? The Left complains about banks and oil companies and drug companies because they’re not “cool” like Steve Jobs. But Apple’s profit margins are 29.66%, compared to Shell Oil’s 6.74% or Citibank’s 11.73%.

6. And after earning exorbitant profits, he practiced serious tax avoidance (which I wholeheartedly endorse for any entity, but the Left hates.) What’s fascinating is how the Left protected and excused him for this; in fact, the New York Times just published a serious analysis of Apple’s tax avoidance schemes. It’s obvious that the Times knew about this for years, but chose not to write about it when Jobs was alive.

It’s also obvious that Jobs was intimately involved in this tax strategy. This was a maniacal man. Isaacson writes that at the gala event celebrating the launch of NeXT, Jobs was involved in everything with no detail being too small. For example, he personally reviewed the invitation list and approved the menu – behavior that was typical throughout his business career. He clearly knew Apple was engaged in every possible scheme to avoid taxes. To be fair to the Times, at least they contrasted the tax rate of Apple with that of the Evil Empire (WalMart). Apple’s federal tax rate was 9.8% while the Evil Empire paid 24%. What is a liberal to do?

7. It wasn’t until late in life that he started to make substantial contributions to charitable organizations. Compared to Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak, he was never a generous person and chose to live in quite a luxurious life-style. Compare that with a contemporary who also earned huge amounts of money, but lived on less than 1% of it and started a foundation early in his career that directed millions of dollars to charity – the evil Michael Milken.

The point of all this is that the Left has always chosen its favored capitalists. Unions anoint business people whom they favor, and our President has been a major practitioner of crony capitalism – picking winners and losers. If Steve Jobs (and Apple) gets a pass for whatever reason, then every business in America should be treated the same way.

And we didn’t even mention the child and slave labor used to manufacture Apple’s products.

The fact that thousands of Africans are flooding into Israel due to alleged economic hardship is not exactly new news. However, what you may not know is that this is all being coordinated by leftist NGO’s (non governmental organizations) such as the George Soros funded New Israel Fund

Are the Africans flooding into Israel doing so just because of economic hardship at home, or has the flood of infiltrators been planned, aided and abetted by the New Israel Fund and other leftist groups?

There is mounting evidence in favor of the latter possibility.

Middle East expert Dr. Guy Bechor writes in a recent article published on his website and elsewhere that leftist “human rights” NGOs seek to change Israel’s demographic balance.

“After they failed to let in hundreds of thousands of Palestinians into this country, these people now expect a migration of hundreds of thousands of Muslims from Africa to Israel. It’s not a war on immigration that lies ahead of us, but a war over the continuation of the Jewish majority in Israel,” he states bluntly. “And what is the plan hatched in secret by those organizations of ‘human rights?’ When the numbers reach a quarter of a million or half a million, and we’re getting there fast, the organizations will turn to the High Court of Justice and to the United Nations, demanding that Israel grant residency to these ‘immigrants’ and even citizenship, as is customary in the West.”

“With that, the percentage of Muslims in Israel will jump immediately to between 30% and 35%, with all the demographic implications that you can imagine. Being residents, then citizens, the Africans will naturally be able to bring their family members, and the numbers will double.”

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has ordered 25,000 of them deported.

Now you might be wondering, “What does this have to do with Obama?”

According to Roberta Moore at JDL UK, the Obama administration is providing funds to Israel, via the U.N., for these infiltrators. (Via Atlas Shrugs)

In a highly disturbing piece of news over at Kr8 Israeli Patriot, the online magazine reports that the Obama administration is providing funds to Israel (via the UN) for every illegal African immigrant that enters the Jewish state.

The funds, quite bizarrely, are only between $1000-2000 per illegal, per month, not enough to cover food let alone rent and food. However, in what is being seen as the likely incentive for carrying out this migratory sabotage of the Jewish state, is the fact that these funds are being split, with a portion of it going to unnamed sources at various stages of the transfer, from its way from the US to Israel.

In other words, considering that hundreds of illegals penetrate Israel’s borders daily, someone is profiting from this venture handsomely.

Unfortunately, this is the modus operandi of the Left in all developed countries.

For example, in the U.S., Attorney General Eric “My People” Holder has sued Arizona and Alabama merely for trying to protect their citizens from the onslaught of illegals in their states. And let’s not forget Mayor Lou Barletta of Hazleton PA who got sued by all the open borders groups for trying to tackle his city’s illegal immigration problem.

Across the pond in the U.K, a former adviser to Tony Blair has come out and said that the Labor party purposely opened that country’s doors to massive immigration to “rub the Right’s nose in diversity”, And look how well that’s turned out for ordinary Brits.

In case any of you were wondering how Obama would fund his mammoth health care plan, aside from raising taxes, the answer is that he raided Medicare to the tune of 500 million dollars. (Via Hotair.com)

Anyway, we’re already seeing the result of these upcoming cuts being that fewer Medicare patients are now being admitted to hospitals.

TUESDAY, June 5 (HealthDay News) — Federal government pressure has led to an increasing number of Medicare patients being held for observation instead of being admitted to hospitals, a new study suggests.

So despite all the carping and caterwauling by liberals about how the Republicans are waging a “war on women,” we see the real war is the one Obama is waging against senior citizens. Something is very wrong when illegal aliens can make free use of our hospital emergency rooms without paying, but our own law abiding people, who have worked and paid taxes for years can’t get admitted.

Here’s the difference between being held for observation vs. being admitted to a hospital:
Although a patient’s experience of being held for observation, especially for days, may seem exactly the same as being admitted to the hospital, the difference is apparent when it comes time to pay the bill, the researchers noted.

Patients held for observation are classified as outpatients and, under Medicare rules, outpatients may face higher co-payments for in-hospital services and won’t be covered for subsequent care in skilled nursing facilities.

The practice has angered patient advocacy groups, one of which launched a class-action lawsuit against the federal government last year.

Obama’s media sycophants are hard at work promoting Obamacare.  So while they won’t necessarily be that blunt, these DNC organ publications like The New York Times, among others, will publish pieces on why certain so-called oncology associations believe that palliative care is the way to go in treating patients with aggessive cancer. They’ll also publish news of certain medical boards urging fewer diagnostic tests for patients. Furthermore, certain organizations like the United States Preventive Services Task Force will conveniently come out with news that all of the sudden, mammograms are unnecessary for women under 50.

Most recently, the Obama worshiping New York Times is now saying that annual physicals are not necessary, and even harmful! Now in case you’re wondering who’s behind all this, let’s just say the United States Preventive Services Task Force is at it again. Here’s some background on this quasi-governmental group.

Created in 1984, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF or Task Force) is an independent group of national experts in prevention and evidence-based medicine that works to improve the health of all Americans by making evidence-based recommendations about clinical preventive services such as screenings, counseling services, or preventive medications. The USPSTF is made up of 16 volunteer members who come from the fields of preventive medicine and primary care, including internal medicine, family medicine, pediatrics, behavioral health, obstetrics/gynecology, and nursing. All members volunteer their time to serve on the USPSTF, and most are practicing clinicians.

When Congress authorized the USPSTF, it required the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to support the Task Force’s work. The 1998 Public Health Service Act and the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act instruct AHRQ to provide administrative, research, technical, and communication support to the Task Force. As part of this support, AHRQ helps with day-to-day operations, coordinates the production of evidence reports, ensures consistent use of Task Force methods, and helps disseminate Task Force materials and recommendations. The Director of AHRQ also appoints new USPSTF members, with guidance from the Chair of the Task Force. While AHRQ staff supports the Task Force, it is important to note that the Task Force is an independent body, and its work does not require AHRQ or HHS approval.

You can read more about them here and here.

Anyway, getting to the New York Times article, here’s what Elizabeth Rosenthal has to say:

FOR decades, scientific research has shown that annual physical exams – and many of the screening tests that routinely accompany them – are in many ways pointless or (worse) dangerous, because they can lead to unneeded procedures. The last few years have produced a steady stream of new evidence against the utility of popular tests:

Prostate specific antigen blood tests to detect prostate cancer? No longer recommended by the United States Preventive Services Task Force.

Routine EKGs? No use.

Yearly Pap smears? Nope. (Every three years.)

So why do Americans, nearly alone on the planet, remain so devoted to the ritual physical exam and to all of these tests, and why do so many doctors continue to provide them? Indeed, the last decade has seen a boom in what hospitals and health care companies call “executive physicals” – batteries of screening exams for apparently healthy people, purporting to ferret out hidden disease with the zeal of Homeland Security officers searching for terrorists.

{snip}

The United States spends about twice as much per person as other developed countries on health care, generally without better results. A 2009 study of waste in the United States health care system pointed to “unwarranted use of medical care” – unneeded, unproven or redundant diagnosis or treatment – as the biggest single component, accounting for $250 billion to $325 billion a year.

In other words, us greedy Americans are consuming way too many limited resources, and we need to sacrifice so that everyone (except the elites) will have the same low standard of care. Remember it’s all about equality of outcome. So what’s the solution proposed by the beloved United States Preventive Services Task Force?

As of today, only a few screening tests are recommended as useful for healthy, asymptomatic people by the Preventive Services Task Force and some of those – like blood pressure checks – don’t require a doctor visit and could be performed in a pharmacy. “If you follow their recommendations you hardly do anything to patients,” said Dr. Brett, adding that the most important intervention doctors perform on healthy patients may be counseling about habits. For new patients, he still does the full head-to-toe medical exam – though he does not routinely order blood work – and regards some parts as more or less playacting.

In other words, ditch doctors, and just see a pharmacist to get your blood pressure checked. That way, we’ll all be “equal.”

Now let me add one more thing here.

Liberals love to go on and on about how health care is a basic right. But they’re lying. What they clearly want is rationing.