I Hate It When I'm Right.

Ya know, I don't mean to find fault with America. It's a great place to live. For the time being. But down the road a couple of decades from now, it could very likely be a third world country. Now that doesn't mean that everybody will be adversely affected. I mean the wealthy will still be living the good life with their tax cuts and all, but the rest of you (I say rest of you because by then I'll be long gone), the rest of you will all be living hand to mouth and there won't be much in the hand. Take for instance green technology. I know, I know. Some of you don't believe in the whole climate change thing. And that's OK. But the rest of the world is gearing up to meet the demand for carbon neutral and renewable energy products for home and industry. Now, far be it from me to find fault with our political leaders. They've led us into and through some tough times. But the one thing they don't seem to be willing to do, is to buy into the idea that green means jobs. All you hear whenever the subject comes up in Congress is that it will kill jobs. Meanwhile, China has just surpassed the entire world in green technology investment. Can you imagine that? China! Maker of cheap, contaminated, poorly made products that other people thought of, is actually investing in technological research to the tune of $75 billion per year, four or five times what America is spending. Meanwhile back here on the ranch, all we hear is Bah Humbug. Well, the laugh is on us, as in U.S. Because many of our companies and brightest researchers are flocking to China, because that's where the work is. And also, that's where the money is. Interestingly enough, some of that money used to be ours. I have a suggestion for you. Invest in Chinese language classes. Or green technology. But time just might be short.

Have I got A Deal For You.

I read an article last week that didn't register at the time, but it's beginning to turn my thinking. We keep complaining that China is manipulating it's currency to their advantage and to our disadvantage. We don't like it and we're increasingly demanding they stop. Then Japan did the same thing. It devalued it's money to combat China. Then I heard there are other countries that are "managing" their currency. Soooo. If this is the wave of the future, how come we haven't heard of it before now? Why is it that we always seem to be the last in the family to know? That's what my wife asks me whenever I forget to tell her something. But it's a good question. What's wrong with giving China a little of it's own medicine? While we're at it, we should start sending them products that are contaminated with our unwanted poisons? We've got a bunch of coal ash we can let them have real cheap. And garbage. Wow. Have we got a pile for them. I don't mean to be hard on China. If Iran and North Korea want some of our stuff, we'll be happy to work out a deal. Even Russia could have a little, if they promise to back our demands on Iran. In fact, we've got some bedbugs in America, we'd be willing to share, if the price is right. How about a deal on killer bees and illegal aliens? Hey, I'm just trying to help.

Get Out The Map, I Think We're Lost.

Where the heck are we in this country? I've been wondering this a lot of late. We're still fighting two wars that nobody seems to know much about. They're not too much of a problem because only volunteers are involved. We worry about our health, but not enough to accept a national health care. We're unhappy about jobs going overseas, but not too much as long as we have our jobs. We want our kids to get the best education but don't seem to mind that our country is falling behind most other developed countries in math and science, and many kids are reading three or four years below grade level. We're mad as wet hens over taxes, and don't understand why our roads are in such bad condition. We want our fresh veggies and fruit, but don't want to pick it ourselves, but don't want illegals doing it. Republicans want tax relief for the wealthy and Democrats don't seem to know what they want. If I didn't know different, I'd think we've all fallen off the turnip truck. How come we have candidates in this country who won't speak to reporters but want donations for their campaign from everybody except from their own district or state? How is it that our government is run by the highest bidder? How can the Supreme Court state that it's OK to buy candidates and even judges? Does anyone actually think we're headed in the right direction? Does anyone think the Democrats are doing a good job of leading? Does anyone actually think the Republicans have a better idea?

Energy Legislation? Oh Come On Now.

Well, the Senate is finally moving toward some sort of energy bill. They're calling for electric utilities to derive 15% of their power from alternative energy sources by 2021. Is that the kind of strong statement we want to make? I mean, a whole 15%? Don't most states require that much or more already? Are we supposed to think that's showing courageous leadership? And of course, that's only electric. What about transportation? Isn't that part of the energy equation too? It appears that our esteemed deliberative body, the portion of government that advises and consents isn't much of an advisor if that's the best they can come up with. I don't think it's the best they can come up with, it's just the only thing they're likely to get any sot of agreement on. Can you imagine a group of grown men and women who know what's best for the country, but are unwilling to vote for what the other side wants. Either side. When I was little and my sister and I couldn't agree, my parents chose for us, or we did without supper. Maybe that's what we need. A few parents choosing for the Senate and sending them to bed without supper. The other thing my mom and dad believed in was couple punishment. By that I mean a couple of spankings. That's another thing these folks could use. They're not really children, so it wouldn't be against the law, would it? And I don't mean to disregard the House of Representatives either. They're just as welcome to the switch and to go hungry.

China, Japan And Our Economy

Did you hear the one about the argument between China and Japan? Well China and Japan both claim ownership of a small group of uninhabited islands in the South China Sea. Actually it's the sea around the islands and the oil that may be under it that's of interest to both. Anyway, Japan has been administering the islands (whatever that means) and a Chinese fishing boat ( I'll bet it was fishing) rammed into two separate Japanese coastguard boats. So Japan arrested the captain of the Chinese boat. So China stopped all Chinese tourists from going to Japan and stopped shipping all "rare earth" metals and minerals to Japan. Then China threatened to do even more to Japan if Japan didn't release the captain. Now, let's go back to these rare earths. They're metals that are very rare hence the title RARE. You need them to build hybrid cars and most electronics and in guidance systems for bombs and missiles. China controls about 93% of the world supply. So, Japan backed down and released the captain. So what's the joke? I never said there was a joke. But the joke is that Japan who used to be the second largest economy behind the U.S. is now third behind China and in this little confrontation gave up the supremacy in the Pacific Asian region and bolstered Chinese ego allowing them to exert more pressure throughout Asia and the world. How does that help us? Since China controls so much of these rare earths, what's to stop them from pushing America around? Hey. They already are, by manipulating their currency hurting our economy. Everything is interconnected in the world today. Japan may not matter in the long haul, but for the short term they pulled a Democrat. They wimped out.

War, Draft Dogers, And Us.

Last week I was talking with a friend about the two wars we're in and the dangers of terrorism in general. This morning I was reading in the N.Y.Times an article about the National Guard and how it is unable to plan and train for national and local emergencies because it is forced to plan and train for combat. That caused me to think back to the last time there was a draft in this country. No, I'm not talking about a cool breeze. When young men, and women, are called up for duty through a system known as the draft. It was Viet Nam. Young folks may not even know we were at war in that country, or where it is, but back then everybody knew. There's nothing popular about the draft, especially with young people trying to plan their futures. There was even a group called draft dodgers who did almost anything they could to keep from going to war including burning their draft cards and going to Canada. Thank goodness for Canada. All you had to do was get out of bed one morning, have breakfast and drive to Canada. I had already served, so it didn't affect to me. My point is that the reason Pres. Bush was able to start and fight two wars without the whole country on his neck about it, was because there was no draft. Volunteers only, and special, paid "employees", who were and are mercenaries and the National Guard. We need the government to reinstate the draft before we can go to war in the future. No more mercenaries no more using the National Guard except as a last resort. The problem with that idea is that we'd never be able to go to war again. Ever. So what's wrong with that, you may ask? Well, what do you do with all those Generals we have sitting around and how about all those would be Generals? What're they gonna do?

Promise Or Contract? No Difference.

Well, I just read the condensed version of the Republican's "Contract with America". Oh No. I mean the Republican's "Pledge to America", the contract came in 1994. Anyway, it sounds just lovely. That is, if you don't pay attention too closely. Like suggesting to keep Bush tax cuts permanently and add another tax cut for businesses while professing to be concerned about the deficit. By the way these two cuts would add $4 Trillion to that deficit. Of course, you'll hear the Republicans claim it will create jobs thereby bringing down the deficit. What businessman in his right mind is going to create any jobs at all, no matter how much you give him, unless there's an increase in demand for his products? And almost all of those tax breaks are for billionaires from Wall Street, who have already proved they're not going to create jobs under any circumstances unless it's another pool cleaner or gardener. The other thing is the Health care plan recently passed into law and much disliked. They plan to repeal it. Does anyone think they could actually do that? It takes something like a two thirds majority to override a veto. That's not going to happen. And it at least holds out the promise to slow, if not lower, health care costs. Without it, double digit increases will continue. The rest seems to be a rewording of the failed 94 contract with America. If this is an indication of how they'll govern, and I'm sure it is, what's the difference who governs? A vote for this, is a vote for the party that caused this recession.

Well. Here's The Choices.

Well Boys and girls, ladies and gentlemen, and children of all ages, we're deep into the countdown to the day we will pull the lever. That's right bunkie. Soon we get to decide which group will lead our country, not their country, but our country, even though they will act as though it's theirs exclusively to play with. But it's not theirs, it's ours. That's why we get to pull the lever. Although, as soon as we've pulled the lever (or pencil in the space or push the button), it gets turned over to the winners to run. Soooo. Who should we choose? Well, first we have the folks we gave the reins to, after promises to end two wars, repair the economy, include a public option, end the recession, and put people back to work and then added a multi-trillion $$$ to the deficit. We'll can them Team D. Then there's the group we took it all away from because they started those two wars without paying for them, gave away the store with tax cuts for everyone and turned a multi multi billion $$$ surplus into a multi-trillion $$$ deficit and drove us into this recession, but want control back so they can do more of the same. We'll this group Team R. Then there's the new start-up party that hasn't the foggiest idea of how to govern, but thinks there should be no taxes, no regulation, no interference and no government at all. We'll call this non-party Team T. Not to be confused with the "A" Team. Boy, am I happy with these choices. So? Who ya gonna vote for? Huh? Now you see why I want term limits? We really can't afford to have these (I'll be nice here and call them) individuals going to Washington, sticking around for years and decades, mucking up the works. The least we should require is some degree of intelligence and a sense of duty. Oh ya. And a willingness to do the right thing even if it's unpopular. Which, I guess, is a sense of duty. Don't get me wrong, every once in a while someone who is actually capable and dedicated gets elected. It's just that they soon learn they have no chance what-so-ever. They usually lose in an off year to a (remember this guy) Soupy Sales kind of opponent.

Why We're Falling Behind.

Well, my favorite columnist, Tom Friedman said in the N.Y.Times this morning exactly what I have been trying to voice. I couldn't put it all together in my poor head. He explained that the problem with America isn't that we don't have the right system, because we do. It isn't because we don't have the best and brightest people, because we do. It isn't because we're not capable of doing anything we want, because we can. It's because we're abusing the system we have. Our politicians are more interested in beating each other then in saving the country. We have far too many people out of work, but instead of pulling together to fix the problem, our leaders are looking to take care of the "Party" and it's ideology. We put a man on the moon for goodness sake, but we cant fix our own infrastructure. So, where is this craziness leading? If we keep going the way we have, we'll be a third world country. Not because we can't do better, but because we refuse to do better. We whine about taxes, then turn around and disregard normal maintenance. We complain about how bad the scenery is while we throw trash out the window. We choke on pollution and the lack of jobs and let the whole green technology with it's jobs fly away to China. Until Washington stops playing politics and the public starts supporting the country, we'll continue to slide backwards. We'll keep getting passed by China, and a host of other countries who know how to pull together the way we used to do. Why does it have to be Conservative or Liberal? Why can't it be American? Which is part conservative and part liberal and partway between. Of course to do that, we'd have to get rid of most of the leaders we have now, including almost all of the ones running against them now. We'd need a completely clean slate of citizen leaders. Leaders willing to serve limited terms of office. So they can't be infected with the Washington Bug of corruption and power.

The Big Campaign Ponzi Scheme.

Boy, here's a gimmick for ya. A 501C nonprofit is just that. A nonprofit corporation. The idea was originally allowed to help charities. They could supposedly spend no more than 50% of their income on campaign ads. Then it expanded until smart politicians figured out that they could exploit these 501C (4) corporations to hide campaign contributions. Donors can give all the money they want and nobody will ever know it was them. In fact, foreign corporations could give money to support a given politician and it would never be made public. Now of course at some point the IRS will be told. So here's what they do. They form the 501C (4) corporation, let's say in January, buy millions of $$$ in TV ads attacking some candidate or other, then fold in late November. They don't have to report to the IRS until as much as two years later. At that point, I suppose, they will get scolded for doing wrong. So, the "old peoples co-operative" or the "over the hill 60s" or some such name, can claim that this candidate or that one has stolen $500 billion from your medicare account, or cut your Social Security payments for next year, or cut off unemployment for the poor and increased everybody's taxes or even claim the candidate hates babies and motherhood. In other words, they can tell any lie they want in a TV ad and then go out of business and start a new one next campaign season. This is better than shell games, or ponzi schemes, and it's legal. It's legal because who's going to stop it? Politicians? Heck no. They're all doing it. The courts? The Supreme Court seems to think anything goes when it comes to politicking. So how come TV networks don't pull the plug on these lies? Huh, how come? The networks say they're not the police. So, who's left? Some champion on a big white horse? Ya know what? I have this large bridge in New York City I'm considering selling for a bargain basement price. Give me a call at 1-800 clueless.

Hey, There's Gold In That Trash.

Wow, Thomas Friedman had a powerful editorial in the N.Y. Times this morning. He mentioned a young man who developed a way to get the plastic out of discarded computers and etc, and recycle it into reusable plastic. It was a great idea that was funded by American taxpayers. The problem is that because we don't have an energy bill from congress, he can't get the recycled raw materials in this country, but he can in Europe, Japan or China, so that's where he has to send jobs. Can we be proud of our government for this? It's all about climate change. In China and elsewhere, they've made climate change into a four letter word, Friedman says, JOBS. But here in America, some politicians have made it into a different four letter word, JOKE. So, while we sit on our hands and make fun of the science, They make jobs to meet the demands of the world and to employ their people. And to get a head start on us. So who's the smart ones? Think about the warmest year on record and how to turn that into jobs. It doesn't matter whether you believe in climate change science or not. A smart person can see the opportunities in joining. A dummy sees a funny story. Which do you want to be? Well then, the next time you hear a politician poke fun at climate change talk, tell him he's making fun of your next job.

TV, The Tea Party And The Coffee Party.

It looks to me like the Republican party is in a pickle. It's a fickle pickle. There have been a number of Tea party favorites that beat out Republican party favorites in the primary elections. These Tea party winners are particularly conservative. They are far far right in their thinking. Too far for the Republican party's taste. The problem for the Republican party is whether or not to support them. In fact, I'll bet there are some where the Republican party would rather support the Democrat candidate. Maybe all of them. Problem is, if they did that, they'd lose any chance of winning a majority. They'd also lose a whole lot of their members. In fact they could wind up causing a third party to form. On the other hand, if they back the Tea party candidates, they'll begin to lose control of their own party. This is fun, isn't it? Now if we could only start something like this in the Democrat party. Maybe a Coffee party. I've said before, we need to get rid of the two party system. A five party system would be great. Who's the fifth party? The Independent party of course. Just one problem with this idea. Can you imagine the political ads from five parties and that many candidates? We'd definitely have to have new campaign reform on advertising. On the other hand, there'd be so many ads, there'd be no time for programming. With the caliber of programming being what it is, that too would be good.

How Come Big Companies Get Their Way?

Well Californians are set to vote on whether or not to keep it's clean air law that regulates gas emissions. It's a state law, not an American law. It only impacts people who live in California or, I suppose, visit there. It sounds like a very reasonable plan, and Californians have long been on the cutting edge of things. I guess that's why they're considered liberal or moderate. Anyway, there's a lot of money being channeled into this fight, against the measure. And an awful lot of it is coming from out of state. Now who in the world would want to change and/or influence the vote if they don't even live there? Well, if you haven't already figured that one out, it's out of state oil companies. See, tighter rules on emissions hurts all oil companies and they don't like anybody putting their hands in oil company pockets. After all, that's where they keep some of those record breaking profits. I say 'some of the profits' because the pockets aren't big enough to hold all the profits. So, what's a voter to do? My suggestion is to tell the oil companies to pound sand. Of course, I tell the Democrats to say the same thing to Republicans and vote for keeping the Bush tax cuts for everyone making less than $250,000, but let them run out for the wealthy corp. execs and wall street. It's time to stand up to these ultra rich trying to run things for their pockets by taking it out of our pockets. Let's stop running scared and start being fair-minded, thoughtful and normal once again.

What's A Little Cash Among Friends?

We have a big problem in this country with unemployment. A substantial part of the reason is the recession. But a situation that plays a big role and in the future will play a huge role, is that jobs are being exported to other countries. Now here's where you say "it's those low wages they pay in Mexico and China and elsewhere". Well that's partly true, but according to an interesting article in the Washington Post this morning, that's not the only reason. See other countries, like Mexico and China are offering substantial cash incentives. The U.S. is offering loan guarantees the give you a lower interest rate. Let's see, do I want cash money as a gift or a sure bet for lower interest on a loan? Is there anyone who thinks America has the inside track on this one? Now to be fair, the U.S. does have grants available, but you have to apply for and fill out exhaustive forms requiring an office staff just to get it all filled out properly. Or a cash gift just to move elsewhere. I'm not fond of America giving money away, but if it means saving jobs? What the heck are we waiting for? Another reason for locating factories is the question of how close to the labs where innovation is located. Now here's where America is ahead. The danger is that these labs could begin to move with the factories and take our brain children with them. So, what's the answer? Don"t you think we should start passing out the green to any company that will locate here and tax the heck out of those who don't, to pay for it?

Special Tax Cuts For The Rich?

Let's compare the Republican and Democrat tax plans. R for Republican, D for Democrat. R plan will extend Bush tax cuts for everyone, D plan will extent tax cuts for only those making up to $250,000 per year. How would either of these affect you? R plan changes estate tax upward to no tax on up to $10 million. D plan makes no change which means no tax up to $2 million(?). How will either of these affect you? R plan will cost almost $400 billion per year for ten years. D plan will cost less than $100 billion per year. R plan will increase interest payments on debt by about $95 billion per year. D plan about one forth as much. So how will either plan affect you? R plan would include a spending freeze on all non-military spending which would save about $30 billion per year. $30 billion against $400 billion. I'm under-impressed and under-whelmed. In-so-far as our debts are concerned, the best course would be to roll back all tax cuts, but to help our economy, the Democrat plan to continue the tax cuts for those making less than $250,000 makes a lot more sense than giving it to the very wealthy. Don't get me wrong, I don't dislike the wealthy, but they really don't need the help. The rest of us do. Oh, by the way. The middle class will probably spend it's tax cut money helping the economy, but the rich only pocket the money, not helping the economy at all. And the small businesses affected include mostly lobbying companies, Haliburton and the like, so that's no loss. All in all, whether you're a Democrat or Republican, the Democrat plan makes the most sense. Don't be fooled by all the "smoke screen talk".

Share And Share Alike.

In the NY Times this morning Bob Herbert quoted the book Aftershock about the shrinking of the middle class and the expansion of the poorer class. He also talks about the wealthy getting much wealthier. That's why there is a, so called resurgence in our economy. A "recovery" for our economy. So, are you enjoying this recovery? If you're not, you may be a part of that shrinking middle class, cause you sure ain't among the wealthy. On the other hand if you think things are swell, you're definitely rich and probably sixty plus years old. Otherwise you wouldn't be using the word "swell". So how come the rich are enjoying good times and the rest are out of work or at best struggling? It has to do with the redistribution of wealth that's taken place over the last thirty years or so. Oh I know, you've probably heard about how Obama wants to redistribute the wealth of the country by taking it away from the good folks and giving it to the poor. Don't buy that hogwash. The redistribution has already taken place, but it went the other way. On average, young people today, and even middle aged make less then their parents did after inflation. That's a fact. That's why there isn't a recovery for the general public. People who make less, are forced to buy less. Buying less forces factories to cut back which means lost jobs which means less buying and on and on. So until there's a fairer division of the income levels, there won't be a recovery. Has nothing to do with Obama or Palin or anybody else. It has to do with corporate execs making two or three hundred times as much as their workers make.

Come On China, We Got Rules Against That.

OK. Since we all completely understand the concept of undervaluing currency, we can... Oh you don't fully understand it? Well, let me explain. First... Hey. I don't "fully" understand it either. In fact I don't understand it very well at all. What I do know, is that by undervaluing it's currency, China gets an edge on us. It's stuff is cheaper and our stuff is more expensive. That much I get. It hurts us and it hurts our companies and it hurts our workers. Now, when other countries have done something like that to us in the past, the companies effected and our government have fought back. So why aren't we doing it with China? Well, it seems our companies won't do it because their afraid of retaliation. See most of our companies doing business with China are sort of in business with China. It's how things are done in the 21st century business world. The reason our government is afraid to do anything is because they're afraid China would start selling our bonds that they're holding. Our debt. But according the Paul Krugman, the Noble Prize winning economist, that would actually be a good thing, because it would drive down the value of our debt. Which means it would drive down our debt and it would drive down the value of China's bond holdings. In other words, it would be very costly to China to sell our bonds in any large quantity. Now, back to the multi-national companies. Just because something is good for them, like partnering with China, doesn't necessarily mean it's good for us. In fact, it's usually bad for us because it means lost jobs and more imports from China. The multi-nationals don't care. As long as they make a killing, so what. Soooo. I think we ought to do what we have done to other countries who have not played fair. We ought to fight back. With higher and higher tariffs on their products until they stop cheating. It would mean more revenue and would put China on notice. Whadda you think?

When Did Being Poor Become Fashionable?

I just read in my local newspaper this morning that poverty is "on track to post a record gain". That's right. They think that last year 45 million people were classified as poor, or in poverty, which I assume means about the same thing. I mean if you're poor, you are in poverty, if you're in poverty, you're poor. Is that a record we should be proud of? Our government isn't much help here. It almost looks like that's their goal. To make as many people poor as they can. The Democrats want to spend more and more money that we don't have and the Republicans want to give as much away in the form of tax cuts to the rich as they can. All the time ignoring the fact that we're in a recession and people are hurting. It's pretty obvious they aren't talking with each other. Is it a good idea to make less and spend more. Maybe their goal is to make America poor. If the country is poor, we'll all wind up poor. Except for the very rich who were on the inside track all along. In fact, maybe that's who came up with the ideas of over-spending and over giving-away as a pair in the first place. The Republicans had a chance and blew it, the Democrats are having a chance but are too timid to take their chance. Now the Republicans want their chance back, but they want to do the same things that didn't work the last time. When do the citizens get a chance to run the government? I mean, we could hardly do worse then the crew that's in there now. I'm for going to Washington to do one thing, do it well, do it in one term and then get out. Make room for the next guy's problems and solutions.

Stimulate With Stimulus Baby, Stimulate.

Well. Who's right. When it comes to tax cuts or tax increases, the answer is, who's running for what office? If you're asking what's best for the economy or our debt, then tax increases are the best way to help solve the problem, at least when it comes to the tax question. Now a lot of people disagree with that statement, but if you ask the non-partisan Congressional Budget office, then it's tax baby tax. Actually that's not what they said. What they said is that the so called 'Bush tax cuts' should be allowed to expire. The next best thing would be the Obama proposal to leave them be, for all but the wealthiest two percent of Americans. So why the wealthiest? Because they wouldn't spend that money and that's what's needed. Spending. Next question. Why are we so much in debt? Because Pres. Bush did several things without paying for them. He put them on the credit card, so to speak. He gave the tax cuts, he prosecuted two wars, the costly medicare prescription program, and then partly because of those decisions, the recession which started during his tenure in spite of what some talk-show hosts would have you believe. Next question. How do we get out of the recession? Well, it may not be popular and no politician running for office would consider it, but some sort of stimulus is necessary to get the public confidence up and people buying. See, companies don't hire because of tax breaks, no matter how enticing. They hire because there is demand for their products. That makes complete sense no matter how you look at it. You can't get demand unless people are willing to buy. That's why you stimulate. That's pretty much what the word means. Of course there are lots of people who have given the word a bad name. Mostly politicians and talk-show hosts. But look at what the auto deal did. You got a big discount for trading your old clunker for cash. Car sales went through the roof. It was a great success by any measurement. It was a stimulus. I rest my case.

Burn Baby Burn

Well, this fool down in Florida who planned to burn copies of the Koran has changed his mind. Actually he's not so much a fool as he is a crackpot bent on getting as much publicity as he possibly can. Attention is what his kind is really after. The thing is, he has been successful. Have you seen all the networks including the cable news people all condemning him. They all say he's just looking for attention and they're not going to give it to him. Of course they're saying it while interviewing him and showing clips of him making public appearances and statements. So how do you not give attention to someone by showing and talking about him? Look. I'm doing it myself. So what's the big deal about burning the Koran anyway? I mean people burn our flag and we don't get all torn up about it, right? Well, many Muslims do get all torn up about any suggestion of disrespect toward their religion. You or I may think that's silly, but the facts are the facts. So how big a deal is it to show a little respect, even if we don't agree with it. Or just ignore it. But they're building their Mosques all over the place, how do you ignore that? Probably the same way we ignore the Christian churches or Jewish synagogues all over the place. Mostly we only notice our own house of worship. Or maybe not even those, most of the time. In fact a lot of people would have trouble giving directions to their own church. But they know all about that Islamic community center being build right on top of the 911 sight, two blocks away. Oh, yeah. That's right. It's two blocks away and not even facing the World Trade Center sight. So what? Is that going to hurt you or me? Not likely. In fact, it's going to clean up the neighborhood somewhat. Maybe other buildings in the area will start improvements. That would be refreshing instead of the gentleman's clubs and all that are there now. Sort of a face lift. Back to this nutcase in Florida. Best thing to do is ignore him too. It'd break his heart, but we all have our days. He's had his. Now his church might grow to 55 or maybe 58. All the better to pay his salary and that of his assistant. But don't get me started on that.

Heads You Win, Tails You Lose?

Well, the president has gone and done it. He's called out the Republicans and given the people a choice to make. Who do him think him are? Until now, it was easy for us to decide who too vote for. Just vote for the guy who wasn't there before. No thinking necessary. Or if you prefer, whoever had the nastiest campaign ads. But now, now we have to decide which plan of action we want to vote for. Do we vote for the Republicans who wants to return to the way things were run under President George W. Bush and favor the wealthy and deregulate business? Or do we go with the Democrats who have spent a lot of money to get us out of the recession, without accomplishing it, but who still favor the middle class over the wealthy and want to regulate business? These are genuinely hard questions. Who's right? If you've always been a Republican you probably think they're right. If you're a Democrat. you think they're right. If you're independent minded, you probably can't decide. A lot of people want to kick the Democrats out. That's because they're in the majority, but not enough so to force through their agenda. The Republicans know that and have blocked some very good ideas and maybe some not so very good ideas. Anyway, you need to decide for yourself. All I know is that going back to the last president takes us back to where we turned a substantial surplus to a very, very large deficit, and deregulation and lack of oversight pushed us into this recession. Frankly, I'm not sure I want to go backwards.

Goodbye Old Jobs, Goodbye New Jobs.

Well there you have it. The last light bulb factory in the U.S. is closing. Well, at least the last old-fashioned incandescent bulbs. It's just like we were told by our government over the last decade or so. New technology will replace the old jobs that are going overseas, with newer, greener, high tech jobs for the future. Problem is, these newer, greener, high tech jobs are going overseas too. What? How could that happen? There were promises made. Assurances given. Can't we do something? Can't we require that these new technologies, many that are developed right here in the good ole U. S. of A., also be made here? Can't we do that? No. International law won't let us. Hey. The heck with international law, we're America. We'll do it anyway. What's to stop us? For starters, if we do that, the rest of the world will do it to us, and rightly so. It law is supposed to make for a level playing field. What we have to figure out is how to keep those jobs here without losing our higher pay. The problem is more economics then anything. Most, actually could be made here. All it would require is a little cut in pay, coupled with a cut in executive compensation and a cut in profits. Those last two are just not of any interest to companies who like to think of themselves as good citizens. Even if they don't pay any taxes or keep jobs here. At least they still complain about high corporate taxes and a government that isn't friendly toward them. Isn't friendly? They don't pay taxes. How much more friendly can it get?

Let's Not Burn Anybody's Books.

OK, so the Dove World Outreach Church and it's pastor Terry Jones think it's a good idea to burn copies of the Koran. Do they really think it's a good idea? Or are they just grabbing for attention? I mean look at the name of the church. Dove (a sign of peace), Outreach ( the sort of thing you do when you want to foster understanding), Church (a place of worship). Do these word suggest a confrontational approach to life? General Petraeus is right on when he says that such an act would place American soldiers at increased risk. And that goes for any other Americans in any country where there are substantial numbers of Muslims. Do we really need the burning of religious books to remind us of 911? Did any of you folks forget about 911 and need this kind of a reminder of that terrible day? Do any of you actually think it was all Muslims that caused it? I hope that all Jews and all Muslims don't actually think that all Christians were involved in the crusades. Do we really need hatemongers to solve the world's problems? Does anyone think hate will solve these problems? Is America so pure that we can point fingers at others? Isn't there something in our Bible that suggests we check out the log in our own eye before we complain about the speck in someone else's eye?

Sweet Coal Ash. Sweeter Than The Roses.

Do you remember back in 2008, a humongous coal ash pond broke and spilled a billion gallons of toxic coal ash into local rivers and onto private lands? Remember everyone was aghast? And that the government promised swift action to make sure that kind of thing never happened again? Well guess what? Nothing happened. Surprised? Of course not. Actually the EPA came up with a plan to classify coal ash as a toxic waste material, which it certainly is. But the White House wasn't excited about the plan, probably because the coal industry fought it with lots of cash. Now, if you don't live near one of these "ponds" or down stream from one, or if there's no possibility of this stuff contaminating your drinking water or the aquifer under your part of the country, whatta you care. On the other hand, if you are one of the majority of people in this country, maybe you'd be interested in knowing that the EPA is holding public hearings on the subject. They now have to offer two plans. One is like the first and the other is to do pretty much nothing. Which do you prefer? Why not tell your congressman. After all it is election season. He (or she) just might listen right now.

Where Have All The Jobs Gone?

Ya know what the worst mistake our country's government has made over the last half century was? The Iraqi war? The housing bubble? The deregulation of the banking industry? None of the above. And it wasn't even allowing the oil industry to get away with shortcuts and unsafe programs. The biggest problem was in mistakenly thinking it would be OK to allow our industrial base to move offshore. That losing so much industry to other countries wouldn't come back to bite us. I suppose the arguement was and is that it couldn't be stopped, so why fight it. So why not spin the story that we would become the information leaders of the world. Problem is, we didn't make the changes necessary to make that happen and to make it profitable for everyone. Ya know, pretty much everyone could make it in the industrial world, but not so in the information world. That's because the information world doesn't need as many people as the industrial world does. Even with new technological advances. And everyone would need advanced education. Just what did the government forget to do? It forgot to educate the public. As industries left America, the unemployed got next to nothing in the way of retooling and reeducation. I suppose the idea of the "free market" approach was uppermost in government's minds. Let those folks get off their duffs and get an education. Well for the most part, that didn't happen. Those folks found jobs asking if you want fries with that. The smart thing would have been to begin providing a free college or tradeschool education for everyone, young and old alike. As it is, we're falling behind countries that did think ahead. It seems our politicians aren't as smart as theirs. No news there.

Hey. No Bank Bailout For Mr Karzai.

Well, here's the deal. Mr Mahmoud Karzai, the brother of the Afghanistan President and major stockholder of the largest bank in Afghanistan is calling on the United States to bail out the bank. Pres. Hamid Karzai has called on the citizens to remain calm. Mr Karzai, the brother, is one of the folks thought to be somewhat corrupt. Now there, didn't I say that politely? My wife tells me I should be more polite. Here in the good ole U. S. of A. we're struggling with something of a recession. A small thing, but it's our recession and we'd like to solve our own problems. We have not called on Afghanistan to step in and solve our recession. Now, admittedly there are similarities. If you look at our congress, you might think, hey, we have corruption too. And you'd be right. But still, we haven't asked for Mr. Karzai's help. Again, if you look at our congress, you might get the idea that we're involved in a civil war. After all, our representatives aren't very civil. Of course, in Afghanistan, there's a lot more civility. That's because there's plenty of U.S. dollars and drug money to go around. Not so in the U.S. Here, our representatives have to struggle to get their share. What with earmarks and all, our boys (and girls) don't have it easy. So back off Mr. Karzai. You can have our troops and out munitions and foreign aid dollars, but no bank bailout. We tried that with our own banks and they took the money and ran straight to the bank, so to speak. They didn't share it like we asked.

Why We Should Tax The Rich.

There were several great editorials in the NY Times this morning on the economy. The one I think has the best explanation of the recession and why it won't go away is titled "How to end the Great Recession". Guess what. The answer is that when the rich get too large a percentage of the national income, then there's not enough left for the public to spend to keep the economy going strong. See, if most people get a big enough income they tend to spend more. But if the rich get more income, they tend not to spend more. And even if they did, there aren't enough of them to make a difference. So there you have it. A perfectly good reason to tax the heck out of rich people and give more to the rest of us. Sounds too good to be true, doesn't it. But it says exactly what I've thought for years. Giving more to the rich helps only the rich. Giving more to the rest of us causes us to spend more and that's what causes the economy to move along. And that benefits everyone. Now my conservative cousin will claim that's wealth redistribution. In some ways it is and in other ways it isn't. But the point is that if things continue as they are, we'll continue in a recession and neither the rich nor the poor will profit from that. So Tax Baby Tax (the rich).

How Much Do Tou Make?

Here's an interesting tidbit for you to chew on. The average total income and benefits package for the CEO of the largest 500 companies in the country is $7.5 million per year. That's not the total for all of the top execs. That's just one person. On the other hand the average total package for regular employees is $36,000 per year, and that includes benefits. So class, how many times can you divide $36,000 into $7.5 million? Answer? A whole lot. But Corporate lawyers are saying that "it would be unfairly complex to calculate and could encourage false comparisons". Is that right? Could it encourage false comparisons? Would anyone need to falsely compare if they're getting $36,000 and the boss is getting $7 and a half mil? To tell you the truth, I don't think that's a very good comparison. Don't get me wrong, I think the boss should get more. A lot more. After all, he (or she) is responsible for keeping the company going so the rest have jobs. But once you've said that, that's all the boss is worth. So, what's a fair ratio? I suppose it should be a floating number. Very large companies should carry a larger number then small ones, but 208 to one? Is that a good number? At that rate, it's clear why folks find it so hard to get a raise. The raises all go to the boss. And ya know what? That's only an average. That means that some CEOs are getting a whole lot more. I suspect the ones getting a whole lot less aren't doing a very good job. Or will be renegotiating as soon as they hear about this.

Tea, Jack Daniels And The SEC.

Hrumph. The SEC has decided not to pursue any action against Moody's. And let that be a lesson. Moody's is one of three major ratings companies who rate stocks and bonds etc. They're the ones that told the world that it would be a good idea to invest in the toxic subprime mortgage packages that helped cause the financial meltdown at the beginning of the Great Recession we're still in. So now all three credit ratings companies are on notice. If they try to fool the public again, they just might get off Scot free. Again. Got em running scared now, don't we? So the SEC, Security Exchange Commission, the agency charged with the responsibility of protecting Americans from unfair financial practices like ponzi schemes and stock price manipulation and such things, is showing that it's ready to play hard ball with these folks. Uh, well, actually more like wiffle ball. All right, so things haven't changed at all. The SEC still seems to be in bed with Wall Street, just like the big three ratings companies are. Did you really expect anything else. Who's going to stop them? Congress? Ha! Congress has it's shorts so tied up in knots, it can't pass anything that looks like it will help the public. You'd better forget the Tea Party. What this country needs is a good stiff jolt of Jack Daniel's.