With (2) days to go it looks like it's going to be some slapped together debt ceiling plan passed. Dollars to doughnuts it won't make anyone happy. It's kind of like when you are traveling with your family in a car and dad wants to stop at the next greasy-spoon truck stop and mom wants to stop at a really nice place, so you end up at IHOP. Dad doesn't get his greasy SOS and mom doesn't get her nice ambiance. Neither are happy despite trying to put a good spin on it and the kids well, they didn't get a vote to begin with. In the debt ceiling scenario the american people are the kids. We don't get a say in the plan and we definitely are at the mercy of the decision makers. So kids swe'll do what we always do, resign ourselves to where we are at in the scheme of things and order the flapjacks!
All the principle arguments in this national tug of war are right and that's the problem.
Consider:
Was our national budget balanced just 12 years ago?
Yes, it was. There is no debate about it we had a balanced budget and several years of a surplus under Bill Clinton.
Did George Bush start us down the road to Perdition?
Yes, the debt went from being balanced to 7 trillion in the hole in his 8 years. He began two (2) wars, created Homeland Security, airport security, awarded HUGE government contracts to Blackwater, Haliburton and countless others. He reduced taxes on the wealthiest americans and then towards his final year in office the economy tanked and there were revenue shortfalls to add to the mess. A perfect storm of bad luck, bad decisions and the govenrnment's failure to (or unwilliness) to recognize the problem even as it was unfolding right in front of them.
Has Barack Obama contributed greatly to the debt problem?
Yes, the debt went from 7 trillion to close to 16-17 trillion in 3 years. He kept all the spending began by Bush and added countless programs of his own. The federal govenment has grown by 20% under his watch. He needed to embark on spending cuts his first day in office but instead he went the other way and spent, spent, spent. Wait two more years when ObamaCare kicks in. Yikes we haven't even added this to the debt ceiling yet.
Have revenues fallen?
Yes, they are at an historic low. Annual revenues are down to 14% when normally they are around 20-22%. Why? Well, tax cuts to the wealthy did not contribute to economic growth. They did not create jobs. The rich just banked more money while paying less into the system. Add to this the moribund economy, the lack of workers buying things, investors not investing, housing starts at record lows plus a dozen more things and you begin to see the Government is simply not getting enough money.
Is spending out of control?
Yes, absolutely. At the very first sign of economic collapse (Late 2007)the economic whiz kids should have jumped into action. They should have begun working on "what if..." scenarios such as what if things tank, what are we going to do? What if revenues fall what are we going to do? Let's start creating a spending cut plan.BUT they did nothing. Like deer in the head lights they just blinked a few times and waited for the collision. Now, 3 years into the great recession and government spending still hasn't been curtailed. Wars are still going on, Halliburton gets their checks on time as do all the other war vendors, increased unemployment, and the list goes on and on and on. The American people have cut their personal spending (good for them, but bad for the overall economy which ironically is also them) but the government has to be dragged kicking and screaming into spending cuts.
Should Obama make concessions in spending?
Yes
Should the Republicans make concessions in taxing wealthier Americans?
Yes
Should Republicans and Democrats alike stop the philosophical war over the
size, scope and purpose of the National Government and start acting like the "people first" patriots they purport to be?
Yes!! The fact is there are millions of Americans scared and holding their breaths. The college student facing the loss of tuition assistance, seniors wondering if they will lose their medical care, young families that want to buy a home but can't meet the sudenly too ridgid lender demands, people that want to work but yet are facing another month with no job.
Time to stop waving flags, exploding fireworks, and playing Lee Greenwood's patriotic song over and over again! All the outward trappings of being an American are worthless if you rot from within. We all need to get with it. American people have to get smarter, vote smarter, and politicians need to put the common welfare of Americans over their party or personal careers.
Sunday, July 31, 2011
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
I Promise Never to Promise"
Well friends the drop dead date of August 2 is now only 5 days away and the squabbling continues. The stock market dropped 450 pts in the last 4 days and that represents 3+%. I've lost 675.00 in a week. Why? Because the debt ceiling problem still looms and investors are getting jelly legs. Then we have the European debt issue that isn't yet resolved. My point is somebody better come up with some good ideas pretty damn soon.
However, this small blog entry is about the ridiculous policy of getting Republicans to sign a personal pledge to NEVER raise taxes. Apparently this shadowy person Grover Norquist (Tea Party) has enough clout to threaten Republicans with future defeat unless they sign this "pledge". I'm sorry if this offends you but that is plain retarded. Whatever if Gomer Pyle of the Democratic driven (Soda Party) makes every Democrat sign a pledge to NEVER cut spending. That also would be retarded. What in the hell is going on here?
Look I want all elected people to go to Washington (or Sacramento) and do their business for the American public, free of fettered pledges. If I was elected to Congress the first thing I wouldn't do is sign away my ability to make informed, rational, necessary decisions. I would leave my re election up to the people in my congressional district based on how well or poorly I've have done.
Look we need our "leaders" (I use the term loosely) to stop listening to lobby brokers, stop signing pledges from fringe groups, stop currying favor with the media, stop chasing skirts down the hallways, stop being irrationally stubborn just to show "who's boss". Grover Norquist go away and let the elected people do their job. And any new congressmen or women should be voted out if the first thing they do is sign their common sense away in some stupid pledge.
All elected officials, by definition, sign a mythical pledge to represent all the people in your constituancy, and use your talents to help all the people of this country. That unspoken pledge trumps any special interest group or shadowy bullys. Live up to that pledge and you will never have any reason to hang your head.
However, this small blog entry is about the ridiculous policy of getting Republicans to sign a personal pledge to NEVER raise taxes. Apparently this shadowy person Grover Norquist (Tea Party) has enough clout to threaten Republicans with future defeat unless they sign this "pledge". I'm sorry if this offends you but that is plain retarded. Whatever if Gomer Pyle of the Democratic driven (Soda Party) makes every Democrat sign a pledge to NEVER cut spending. That also would be retarded. What in the hell is going on here?
Look I want all elected people to go to Washington (or Sacramento) and do their business for the American public, free of fettered pledges. If I was elected to Congress the first thing I wouldn't do is sign away my ability to make informed, rational, necessary decisions. I would leave my re election up to the people in my congressional district based on how well or poorly I've have done.
Look we need our "leaders" (I use the term loosely) to stop listening to lobby brokers, stop signing pledges from fringe groups, stop currying favor with the media, stop chasing skirts down the hallways, stop being irrationally stubborn just to show "who's boss". Grover Norquist go away and let the elected people do their job. And any new congressmen or women should be voted out if the first thing they do is sign their common sense away in some stupid pledge.
All elected officials, by definition, sign a mythical pledge to represent all the people in your constituancy, and use your talents to help all the people of this country. That unspoken pledge trumps any special interest group or shadowy bullys. Live up to that pledge and you will never have any reason to hang your head.
Friday, July 22, 2011
" I Want a Raise Damn It"
Here we go again, playing chicken with the national economy. We have until August 2nd (10 days 6 hours) to raise the debt ceiling past 14+ trillion dollars. In theory, if the Congress does not agree to do this, America will default on loans and in particular international loans. It's money we have already spent. Think of it this way, we wrote a check that is about to bounce unless we fund the account. Even if you are only holding a few U.S. Savings Bonds or have a little money in the stockmarket you are in danger of the value of your holdings going down.
Some people skoff at the talk of how serious the situation is. Partly because America has never underfunded (not paid the check) before. Some ask, what would actually happen? Their thinking is that the U.S. is still a world power and a major player in the world economy. On the other hand, others claim America would be seen as a questionable financial risk. It's much like when your cousin Willie borrowed money from you, left you with an IOU but now says he doesn't have the money. How reluctent are you going to be to loan Willie more money?
If the debt ceiling isn't raised I don't believe the U.S. will come to an end. International markets will not serve a forclosure notice on us. Starbucks will still sell bitter coffee for inflated prices and China will still ship crap to every Walmart in America. Still, to default would likely see some potentially serious repercussions. Even my little 401K plan which is invested in stocks and bonds could sink faster than Sylvester Stallone's mother's new face. The already volatile stock market could easily drop 250 points (or more) in a day which would represent 20% or more of the total value of the market. It's happened before. I can see people panicking again and selling off their now much more worth(less) stocks and bonds and create an even bigger crisis in the stability of our overall econonomy. Our history is that when things go south, they go south in a hurry. People that are still reeling from the current recession (most people) would likely hunker down even more, stop spending even more and our already immoveable recession could easily become a double dip recession or hell a depression. You say pOtato, I say potAto.
So why not just raise the debt ceiling and then roll up our sleeves and get to work fixing our horrible debt level??
Two reasons:
1. To keep raising the national debt ceiling is akin to you saying, "well, I know I am in major debt but since I already wrote the checks on these new purchases, I'll just get more cash out of my credit card and put it into my checking account. Then, next year, I'll work on my debt problem. How many times can you do this before there isn't a next year?
2. Republicans won't agree to a raising of the debt ceiling unless the democrats agree to major spending cuts. Democrats loath spending cuts because it hurts those people in need and those (not in need) but who have figured out ways to cash in on entitlements too. The needy + the damn opportunists tend to vote democratic. (See if you can figure out why)?
Democrats don't want to raise the debt ceiling unless the wealthiest Americans are taxed at a higher rate (actually the rate they were being taxed before Bush reduced their taxes near the end of his second term). Republicans get campaign money from rich Americans (most are Republicans) and are loath to ask these people to pay more taxes. (See if you can figure out why)? So it's a stalemate.
As we move closer to the drop dead date of August 2nd, which side will blink first? You know what you hardly ever, ever see in a game of "chicken"? You hardly ever see both sides so stubborn they would rather self destruct than give in. I hope that's the case here because if the two major political parties decide to crash headlong into each other, there will be collateral damage.
Some people skoff at the talk of how serious the situation is. Partly because America has never underfunded (not paid the check) before. Some ask, what would actually happen? Their thinking is that the U.S. is still a world power and a major player in the world economy. On the other hand, others claim America would be seen as a questionable financial risk. It's much like when your cousin Willie borrowed money from you, left you with an IOU but now says he doesn't have the money. How reluctent are you going to be to loan Willie more money?
If the debt ceiling isn't raised I don't believe the U.S. will come to an end. International markets will not serve a forclosure notice on us. Starbucks will still sell bitter coffee for inflated prices and China will still ship crap to every Walmart in America. Still, to default would likely see some potentially serious repercussions. Even my little 401K plan which is invested in stocks and bonds could sink faster than Sylvester Stallone's mother's new face. The already volatile stock market could easily drop 250 points (or more) in a day which would represent 20% or more of the total value of the market. It's happened before. I can see people panicking again and selling off their now much more worth(less) stocks and bonds and create an even bigger crisis in the stability of our overall econonomy. Our history is that when things go south, they go south in a hurry. People that are still reeling from the current recession (most people) would likely hunker down even more, stop spending even more and our already immoveable recession could easily become a double dip recession or hell a depression. You say pOtato, I say potAto.
So why not just raise the debt ceiling and then roll up our sleeves and get to work fixing our horrible debt level??
Two reasons:
1. To keep raising the national debt ceiling is akin to you saying, "well, I know I am in major debt but since I already wrote the checks on these new purchases, I'll just get more cash out of my credit card and put it into my checking account. Then, next year, I'll work on my debt problem. How many times can you do this before there isn't a next year?
2. Republicans won't agree to a raising of the debt ceiling unless the democrats agree to major spending cuts. Democrats loath spending cuts because it hurts those people in need and those (not in need) but who have figured out ways to cash in on entitlements too. The needy + the damn opportunists tend to vote democratic. (See if you can figure out why)?
Democrats don't want to raise the debt ceiling unless the wealthiest Americans are taxed at a higher rate (actually the rate they were being taxed before Bush reduced their taxes near the end of his second term). Republicans get campaign money from rich Americans (most are Republicans) and are loath to ask these people to pay more taxes. (See if you can figure out why)? So it's a stalemate.
As we move closer to the drop dead date of August 2nd, which side will blink first? You know what you hardly ever, ever see in a game of "chicken"? You hardly ever see both sides so stubborn they would rather self destruct than give in. I hope that's the case here because if the two major political parties decide to crash headlong into each other, there will be collateral damage.
Friday, July 8, 2011
Austin Weighing In
Austin (my son) a twenty something responded to my blog about the New York Magazine survey of graduates from 2011 and an earlier time the grads of 1960. If you need to read the blog he is referring to, go to the archive below and click on July 6th. Enjoy
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post ""Seniors Then and Now":
Austin weighing in:
What survey was this? I mean, where did it come from? Who published it and who conducted it? It sounds pretty biased. Surveys are heavily flawed too, because (as you indicated in one of your paragraphs) they often use wording that is vague, limited or confining. The fact that 0% of people said that they were gay (or bisexual or transgender?) makes it seem like a wholly non-credible survey.
But we are of a generation (us twenty-somethings) that has sprouted the term "quarter-life crisis." I've always been a big fan of the quarter-life crisis because; why not get it done at quarter life rather at during mid-life? And besides, the infamous mid-life crisis is known for being costly, new cars, divorces, renting an apartment in the valley.
But that used to be more of a male thing, though not exclusively a male thing. The quarter-life crisis affects youths of all stripes. I think it has to do with, in part, the economy. We need our parents to survive financially. We can't, like older generations, do it on our own. And people in their early to mid twenties fail to launch, not because they don't want to work hard, but because the jets are fueled, the launch pad is set, but there's no take-off because there's nowhere to land.
And we're also a generation who looks at life in terms of what it has to offer us, not the other way around. This is both good and bad. It's good because it means we have the potential to fulfill our dreams and not live as one of Marx's alienated workers. It's bad because... we often dream more than we do.
Can you picture it? Student X was a History major. He is smart, organized; marginally skilled. He knows how to write. So he gets said job at said company and works in said cubicle. He always pictured himself doing something else, something more "meaningful," but what? He's thinking about going to law school, but he's not sure if it's what he wants or if it's just something to do. He'd really like to backpack through Europe; maybe even "find" himself while he's at it.
In so many ways, this is a totally ancient dilemma. One can picture a ancient student of Athens-U pacing around a campfire at night in a toga, looking up at the constellations, saying to himself: "I always pictured myself doing something more. I really like Philosophy and Astronomy but I don't know... I'm definitely not going to work at the sandal repair shop the rest of my life."
The Biblical adage 'there's nothing new under the sun' was invented by a moody youth with a melancholy bent. Yes, the currency of wood and shale had been greatly devalued. The only thing the young and listless could do was wander the desert.
But it is true that the American socio-economic landscape is changing, and America's youth has all the things the previous generation had, but less of a chance to do something with it.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post ""Seniors Then and Now":
Austin weighing in:
What survey was this? I mean, where did it come from? Who published it and who conducted it? It sounds pretty biased. Surveys are heavily flawed too, because (as you indicated in one of your paragraphs) they often use wording that is vague, limited or confining. The fact that 0% of people said that they were gay (or bisexual or transgender?) makes it seem like a wholly non-credible survey.
But we are of a generation (us twenty-somethings) that has sprouted the term "quarter-life crisis." I've always been a big fan of the quarter-life crisis because; why not get it done at quarter life rather at during mid-life? And besides, the infamous mid-life crisis is known for being costly, new cars, divorces, renting an apartment in the valley.
But that used to be more of a male thing, though not exclusively a male thing. The quarter-life crisis affects youths of all stripes. I think it has to do with, in part, the economy. We need our parents to survive financially. We can't, like older generations, do it on our own. And people in their early to mid twenties fail to launch, not because they don't want to work hard, but because the jets are fueled, the launch pad is set, but there's no take-off because there's nowhere to land.
And we're also a generation who looks at life in terms of what it has to offer us, not the other way around. This is both good and bad. It's good because it means we have the potential to fulfill our dreams and not live as one of Marx's alienated workers. It's bad because... we often dream more than we do.
Can you picture it? Student X was a History major. He is smart, organized; marginally skilled. He knows how to write. So he gets said job at said company and works in said cubicle. He always pictured himself doing something else, something more "meaningful," but what? He's thinking about going to law school, but he's not sure if it's what he wants or if it's just something to do. He'd really like to backpack through Europe; maybe even "find" himself while he's at it.
In so many ways, this is a totally ancient dilemma. One can picture a ancient student of Athens-U pacing around a campfire at night in a toga, looking up at the constellations, saying to himself: "I always pictured myself doing something more. I really like Philosophy and Astronomy but I don't know... I'm definitely not going to work at the sandal repair shop the rest of my life."
The Biblical adage 'there's nothing new under the sun' was invented by a moody youth with a melancholy bent. Yes, the currency of wood and shale had been greatly devalued. The only thing the young and listless could do was wander the desert.
But it is true that the American socio-economic landscape is changing, and America's youth has all the things the previous generation had, but less of a chance to do something with it.
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
"Seniors Then and Now"
I recently read with interest a small piece in New York Magazine titled: "Seniors Then and Now". Seniors that graduated from a New York high school in 1960 (really seniors) were compared with high school graduates from the same school, this year 2011. That is an approximate age gap of 50 years. Some surprising results came from this anonymous survey.
For example: 54% of the graduates from 1960 described themselves as being in great health but only 36% of the 18 year olds said that about themselves. I realize great health can mean something different to a 68 year old than a younger person but still, the baby boomers clearly should not have a "Darwinian" edge on health at age 68. Why are so many 18 year olds not in great health?
Another interesting question is are you a charitable person? 62% of the older crowd self identified that they were and only 36% of the teens described themselves as being charitable. The question wasn't did you give to charities (something a 68 year old would likely be able to do more than an 18 year old). NO the question was are you someone that freely gives to others and many young people (2 out of 3 in fact) said no.
In favor of the teens was this question: Are/were you a great student (obviously meaning high school) and 43% of todays grads said yes whereas only 29% of the boomers said they were. Why weren't the boomers better students? Are the teens thinking they are great students because of grade inflation and the incessant need to tell kids they are great? Maybe they the teens are great students because they have to be in this competitive world whereas in 1960 there were many ways to make a buck.
Are you able to express yourself? This question I thought would yield scads of boomers that had been told to stay quiet unless spoken too, but NO. 83% said they are able to express themselves but only 49% of todays grads thought so about themselves. Is social networking causing young people to be able to communicate with their device but real people? The 1960 grads had no other viable method to make their way in the world except learning to express themselves. Either that or end up in a dead end job where mumbling to yourself was your only social network.
Baby boomers said they aren't party people or hosts of parties, 29% but todays chatty kids said yes they host and attend social gatherings, 50%. This question yielded shocking results (to me): do you believe in an afterlife? Which group do you think said yes more? Baby boomers said they believed in an afterlife at the rate of 9%. Nine frigging percent!!! 9 of 10 people aged 68 said they didn't believe in an afterlife. However, 49% of this supposedly jaded younger generation said yes they believe in an afterlife.
The boomers indicated they read books and newspapers more by large margins, but the youth self reported being more laid back, more realistic and more humble than the older group. This younger generation self-reported more drug use, and admitted they drink too much by whopping scores: Drug use: Boomers 0%, 18 year olds 19%. Of course the question must have been are you CURRENTLY using or drinking too much because most of those baby boomers would have had to own up to the fact that when they were 18 they used drugs and drank too much too. I mean they were at woodstock, and countless other venues where pot was more available than water. C'mon now!
The most shocking question / results was this one: Are you gay or lesbian? Boomers said yes (3%) and the 18 year olds reported an incredible (0%). Apparently when it comes to age, young and old alike are in the closet together.
To be fair, this survey tended to ask questions more favorable to the boomers. For example, do you read newspapers and boomers said yes (91%) but they didn't ask this question, do you seek out news and information from all sources other than newspapers? Young people would have undoubedly said yes at a higher rate.
The point is this, young people may keep up on the news but do so on cumputers and Iphones etc.
The one result that saddened me was this one: Are you satisfied with your life right now? 60 year olds said yes (86%) but 18 year olds said yes a lot less frequently (61%). I really don't like thinking this younger generation 18-38 is so disatisfied. I mean shouldn't 68 year old's be the ones concerned about their lives and future, their shrinking incomes, health issues and so forth?? Shouldn't younger people be happier?? Why aren't younger people more satisfied with how their lives are?
Do you have any ideas??
For example: 54% of the graduates from 1960 described themselves as being in great health but only 36% of the 18 year olds said that about themselves. I realize great health can mean something different to a 68 year old than a younger person but still, the baby boomers clearly should not have a "Darwinian" edge on health at age 68. Why are so many 18 year olds not in great health?
Another interesting question is are you a charitable person? 62% of the older crowd self identified that they were and only 36% of the teens described themselves as being charitable. The question wasn't did you give to charities (something a 68 year old would likely be able to do more than an 18 year old). NO the question was are you someone that freely gives to others and many young people (2 out of 3 in fact) said no.
In favor of the teens was this question: Are/were you a great student (obviously meaning high school) and 43% of todays grads said yes whereas only 29% of the boomers said they were. Why weren't the boomers better students? Are the teens thinking they are great students because of grade inflation and the incessant need to tell kids they are great? Maybe they the teens are great students because they have to be in this competitive world whereas in 1960 there were many ways to make a buck.
Are you able to express yourself? This question I thought would yield scads of boomers that had been told to stay quiet unless spoken too, but NO. 83% said they are able to express themselves but only 49% of todays grads thought so about themselves. Is social networking causing young people to be able to communicate with their device but real people? The 1960 grads had no other viable method to make their way in the world except learning to express themselves. Either that or end up in a dead end job where mumbling to yourself was your only social network.
Baby boomers said they aren't party people or hosts of parties, 29% but todays chatty kids said yes they host and attend social gatherings, 50%. This question yielded shocking results (to me): do you believe in an afterlife? Which group do you think said yes more? Baby boomers said they believed in an afterlife at the rate of 9%. Nine frigging percent!!! 9 of 10 people aged 68 said they didn't believe in an afterlife. However, 49% of this supposedly jaded younger generation said yes they believe in an afterlife.
The boomers indicated they read books and newspapers more by large margins, but the youth self reported being more laid back, more realistic and more humble than the older group. This younger generation self-reported more drug use, and admitted they drink too much by whopping scores: Drug use: Boomers 0%, 18 year olds 19%. Of course the question must have been are you CURRENTLY using or drinking too much because most of those baby boomers would have had to own up to the fact that when they were 18 they used drugs and drank too much too. I mean they were at woodstock, and countless other venues where pot was more available than water. C'mon now!
The most shocking question / results was this one: Are you gay or lesbian? Boomers said yes (3%) and the 18 year olds reported an incredible (0%). Apparently when it comes to age, young and old alike are in the closet together.
To be fair, this survey tended to ask questions more favorable to the boomers. For example, do you read newspapers and boomers said yes (91%) but they didn't ask this question, do you seek out news and information from all sources other than newspapers? Young people would have undoubedly said yes at a higher rate.
The point is this, young people may keep up on the news but do so on cumputers and Iphones etc.
The one result that saddened me was this one: Are you satisfied with your life right now? 60 year olds said yes (86%) but 18 year olds said yes a lot less frequently (61%). I really don't like thinking this younger generation 18-38 is so disatisfied. I mean shouldn't 68 year old's be the ones concerned about their lives and future, their shrinking incomes, health issues and so forth?? Shouldn't younger people be happier?? Why aren't younger people more satisfied with how their lives are?
Do you have any ideas??
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)