advertisement

The world-famous Internet site of the Nationally Syndicated Neal Boortz Show!

Search Boortz.com
Enter search terms:
Browse Boortz.com
Today's Nuze

"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it."

Frederic Bastiat

Recently in The more you know Category

MIKE TYSON SLUGS PHOTOG

By
Neal Boortz
@ November 12, 2009 8:44 AM
Permalink | Comments (8) | TrackBacks (0)

Good.  Wish I could have seen it. 


THOSE PHONY INFANT MORTALITY STATISTICS

By
Neal Boortz
@ November 10, 2009 9:21 AM
Permalink | Comments (24) | TrackBacks (0)

Last week we had a caller who cited U.S. infant mortality statistics as a reason for his support of a government takeover of health care.  He believed, as many do, those absurd statistics which show that we are No. 47 ... or somewhere around there ... infant mortality.

 

I was uncharacteristically gentle with this caller.  I told him to go do some research on the issue and call us back.  Specifically, I suggested that he look at the ways that different countries define infant mortality.   We never heard back from him .. and that's not surprising. 

 

Here's a general overview for you.  When you compare infant mortality statistics you need to look for the definitions.  What, for instance, constitutes a live birth?  In the United States any infant exhibiting any sign of life is considered to be alive.  It doesn't matter how small, how premature or how much it weights.  In countries like France, the Netherlands and Ireland they don't count the birth as a live birth unless the infant weighs more than 500 grams or the mother was ay least 22 months along in the pregnancy.  Other countries won't count the birth as being a live birth unless the infant survives for s specified period of time.

 

Check your definitions, my friends, before you buy into these infant mortality statistics.  All may not be what it seems. 


At the helm of every business, large or small, is someone who had the fortitude and drive to make it happen. Most of the liberals out there would call these people "greedy." They assume that the only reason anyone gets into business is just to make a profit. Meanwhile, what they forget is that those greedy business owners are the ones that create all of their French fry jobs and providing their minimum wage salaries.

So the Kauffman foundation for entrepreneurship came up with a report on some statistics on those evil entrepreneurs. I thought you might enjoy some highlights:

1. The average and median age of company founders when they started their current companies was 40.

2. 95.1 percent of respondents themselves had earned bachelor's degrees, and 47 percent had more advanced degrees.

3. Less than 1 percent came from extremely rich or extremely poor backgrounds

4. 15.2% of founders had a sibling that previously started a business.

5. 69.9 percent of respondents indicated they were married when they launched their first business. An additional 5.2 percent were divorced, separated, or widowed.

6. 59.7 percent of respondents indicated they had at least one child when they launched their first business, and 43.5 percent had two or more children.

7. The majority of the entrepreneurs in the sample were serial entrepreneurs. The average number of businesses launched by respondents was approximately 2.3.

8. 74.8 percent indicated desire to build wealth as an important motivation in becoming an entrepreneur.

9. Only 4.5 percent said the inability to find traditional employment was an important factor in starting a business.

10. Entrepreneurs are usually better educated than their parents.

11. Entrepreneurship doesn't always run in the family. More than half (51.9 percent) of respondents were the first in their families to launch a business.

12. The majority of respondents (75.4 percent) had worked as employees at other companies for more than six years before launching their own companies.

Pretty remarkable people, aren't they? Well, these are the people that are squarely placed in the Democrat's crosshairs when it comes to tax increases.


COMMENTING PRO TIPS

By
webwench
@ March 11, 2009 9:27 AM
Permalink | Comments (41) | TrackBacks (0)

Now that we've been at this commenting thing for a while, it looks like it's time for a little refresher. If your comments don't show up on the site, here are a few tips:

  1. No profanity. This isn't because we're prudish. It's because we want boortz.com to continue to be available to as many people as possible. If we allow profanity, it's going to start being blocked by companies. And we want you to waste your work hours with us! So if you feel the need to let loose with an expletive, use a euphemism, change out a letter, do whatever you need to do. I've actually had to delete a few well thought out comments just today and it made me sad. Not really, but maybe it made you sad.
  2. If your entire comment is an attack on another commenter, especially if it is a particularly, uh, graphic attack, it probably won't make it through. I'm looking at you Liberal Hater.
  3. Don't sign comments as someone else. If I suspect this, it won't make it through.
  4. If you submit your comment, and then you get a page with a blue box on it that contains this "Your comments are welcome! But, please be aware that in order to make our site a great experience for everyone, we take a look at all submissions prior to posting them.......", it has successfully made it through. No need to resubmit. If you get a pink box with an error message, then you should try again.
  5. All comments are moderated. By one person. Me. I have other duties. So it may take some time to appear. Usually, from 8am-4pm ET M-F they will show up pretty quickly. Any other time, not so much. It's okay, your comment will be in there waiting for me if you got the blue box described in item 4.

All that said, most comments do get published to the site. Just keep these helpful hints in mind and all will go much more smoothly. 


FINALLY!

By
Neal Boortz
@ December 17, 2008 8:15 AM
Permalink | Comments (25) | TrackBacks (0)

Someone has come up with a way to explain the difference between imply and infer .. and it's a definition that everyone can understand! Here you go ...

Only the SPEAKER can imply.

Only the LISTENER can infer.

Thank you, thank you, thank you. Now I understand. This one has been bothering me for years.


Jamie Dupree's Blog

If you enjoy Neal's daily chat with Jamie Dupree, you'll love Jamie's Blog! Check it out for analysis of the campaigns and goings on in Washington D.C.

Cristina Gonzalez and Laura Nunemaker assist in the daily preparation of Nealz Nuze!

send to a friend  view as printer-friendly  RSS feeds
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement