With all the allegations of sexual harassment in the news you start to wonder "What the F...?"
Having been in the workplace for many years, although apparently a pretty boring one, I'm aware that there is a certain amount of interaction between men and women, some of which is welcome and some not welcome at all.
People spend a lot of time at work and there is a lot of time for interactions.
I've always worked in places where there were strict rules but rules are meant to be broken and much like any other place where people are together I've seen romance's blossom, some hearts broken, both ways and some bitter aftermaths.
I have seen a few cases of clearly inappropriate behavior that were handled and discipline administered.
What I now wonder is how much else may have been going on and how much did some behavior which seemed normal at the time border on what I read as sexual harassment now.
One example concerns relatively young naive people, both men and women who at lunch or near the water cooler might be teased about certain things that might elicit a blush or an awkward response.
Of course this is something that I consider fairly normal but after reading some accounts, is it now considered harassment or bullying?
Also what constitutes inappropriate touching? Apparently shoulder rubs are a no-no. It just seems that they used to be considered a nice thing. Obviously they were never ok if objected to but if offered and accepted it never seemed inappropriate.
I'm not defending anyone who went over the line or used their position to force certain inappropriate behavior, but the line seems to be shifting and I wonder where it is going to stop.
I know that human nature isn't going to change.
Thursday, November 30, 2017
Wednesday, November 29, 2017
Impact of Tax Manipulation
It is certainly possible that we will see a tax bill passed to appease big business, not because it is considered wonderful, but because it is needed so Republicans can say they got something done.
The bill itself is clearly not of much benefit to anyone not already fairly wealthy although it does throw the masses a few bones. Of course the real impact won't be felt until people file their 2018 tax returns, well after the midterms and before that many individuals might actually see small increases in take home pay as the tax rates get reduced.
The vast majority of Americans today actually use the tax system as sort of a forced saving device where what the pay every pay period is a little too high resulting in a refund when they file their taxes.
Having that little more in you pay check may seem fine until you find out the usual refund from personal deductions and other things has vanished.
As I said, the details are still vague and we know the benefit to low and middle class people is almost nothing, with increases likely in many States that have high taxes, but its simply impossible to do all the math until the bill is actually finalized and conferenced.
That's not going to stop our dotard talking about how it doesn't help people like him (it does) and how it is all aimed at the middle class (it isn't).
We do know it is going to be a bonanza for business and wealthy individuals and that it will significantly increase the debt. The only hope would be that it stimulates the economy so much that the increase economic activity offsets the expenses. However, considering the looming worker shortage and the current level of activity, the chances of that are pretty slim.
More likely to have the opposite effect, as any excess can be used to buy down debt as the Fed increases the discount rate.
Let's hope not.
The bill itself is clearly not of much benefit to anyone not already fairly wealthy although it does throw the masses a few bones. Of course the real impact won't be felt until people file their 2018 tax returns, well after the midterms and before that many individuals might actually see small increases in take home pay as the tax rates get reduced.
The vast majority of Americans today actually use the tax system as sort of a forced saving device where what the pay every pay period is a little too high resulting in a refund when they file their taxes.
Having that little more in you pay check may seem fine until you find out the usual refund from personal deductions and other things has vanished.
As I said, the details are still vague and we know the benefit to low and middle class people is almost nothing, with increases likely in many States that have high taxes, but its simply impossible to do all the math until the bill is actually finalized and conferenced.
That's not going to stop our dotard talking about how it doesn't help people like him (it does) and how it is all aimed at the middle class (it isn't).
We do know it is going to be a bonanza for business and wealthy individuals and that it will significantly increase the debt. The only hope would be that it stimulates the economy so much that the increase economic activity offsets the expenses. However, considering the looming worker shortage and the current level of activity, the chances of that are pretty slim.
More likely to have the opposite effect, as any excess can be used to buy down debt as the Fed increases the discount rate.
Let's hope not.
Tuesday, November 28, 2017
State Dotardism
You set up a ceremony to honor true living heroes who served the country well and it should be a nice photo opportunity and a chance to generate some good will.
Of course, our dotard can't handle it.
He effectively slurs Elizabeth Warren who may or may not have some minor amount of native American ancestry by calling her Pocahontas, acting like its a common nickname for her, it isn't except maybe among rabid supporters or our dotard.
So a simple press opportunity becomes a story highlighting how he disrespected the Navajo code writers and it was compounded by staging the ceremony in front of a portrait of Andrew Jackson who was no friend to the Native Americans in his day.
This will enable him to talk about fake news not covering the fact that he recognized the code writers but instead focusing on something irrelevant. Of course every story will mention the purpose of the event, so they did cover it but he gave them the man bites dog angle that will get published.
Let's assume for a second that it isn't just idiocy, although that is a strong candidate, but some calculated strategy to divert attention from other news.
The fact that he is trying to neuter the Financial Protection Agency which Warren was a major proponent of may be the reason, since its very possible the courts will make him get congressional approval of his appointment.
Of course this publicity leads to the obvious point that he is in the hands of the big banks that his supporters hate so he needs to deflect.
So insult Warren and disrespect the code writers, but then have his own fake fox news argue wasn't disrespect at all.
I'm sure they will, puppet President, puppet news channel, puppet Congress and maybe soon a puppet court system.
Wasn't this what we fought against during the war the code writers helped us win?
Of course, our dotard can't handle it.
He effectively slurs Elizabeth Warren who may or may not have some minor amount of native American ancestry by calling her Pocahontas, acting like its a common nickname for her, it isn't except maybe among rabid supporters or our dotard.
So a simple press opportunity becomes a story highlighting how he disrespected the Navajo code writers and it was compounded by staging the ceremony in front of a portrait of Andrew Jackson who was no friend to the Native Americans in his day.
This will enable him to talk about fake news not covering the fact that he recognized the code writers but instead focusing on something irrelevant. Of course every story will mention the purpose of the event, so they did cover it but he gave them the man bites dog angle that will get published.
Let's assume for a second that it isn't just idiocy, although that is a strong candidate, but some calculated strategy to divert attention from other news.
The fact that he is trying to neuter the Financial Protection Agency which Warren was a major proponent of may be the reason, since its very possible the courts will make him get congressional approval of his appointment.
Of course this publicity leads to the obvious point that he is in the hands of the big banks that his supporters hate so he needs to deflect.
So insult Warren and disrespect the code writers, but then have his own fake fox news argue wasn't disrespect at all.
I'm sure they will, puppet President, puppet news channel, puppet Congress and maybe soon a puppet court system.
Wasn't this what we fought against during the war the code writers helped us win?
Monday, November 27, 2017
Payback?
Every analysis I see about the two tax "reform' proposals clearly show that the real impact is to borrow money from the wealthy and then give it to them in tax breaks.
The rest of the bill is pretty much just distraction where some deductions go away and some deductions increase with no real impact except on a few who tend to suffer.
But reducing taxes on the major campaign contributors is always there and I'm sure it guarantees future donations.
Hell they even have said it, failure to pass this will lead to dried up funding.
The donors want their payback and they want it now, or else.
That's why the Republicans are willing to push ahead with a law that is unpopular now and likely to be more so if it passes.
Getting those donations will allow them to attribute any economic progress to the bill, even though we are already close to full employment and most businesses are doing quite well.
In fact the odds of this economic situation continuing under this administration is questionable, so they need to pass it before a recession comes.
The economic expansion goes back to shortly after the great recession and generally we are overdue for a correction. I hope we don't get one, but we always have in the past.
Increased debt to pay the donors increases the chance of higher interest rates and that could easily tip the scales.
So pass this give away while they can claim credit where none is due/
The donors will know they delivered.
The rest of the bill is pretty much just distraction where some deductions go away and some deductions increase with no real impact except on a few who tend to suffer.
But reducing taxes on the major campaign contributors is always there and I'm sure it guarantees future donations.
Hell they even have said it, failure to pass this will lead to dried up funding.
The donors want their payback and they want it now, or else.
That's why the Republicans are willing to push ahead with a law that is unpopular now and likely to be more so if it passes.
Getting those donations will allow them to attribute any economic progress to the bill, even though we are already close to full employment and most businesses are doing quite well.
In fact the odds of this economic situation continuing under this administration is questionable, so they need to pass it before a recession comes.
The economic expansion goes back to shortly after the great recession and generally we are overdue for a correction. I hope we don't get one, but we always have in the past.
Increased debt to pay the donors increases the chance of higher interest rates and that could easily tip the scales.
So pass this give away while they can claim credit where none is due/
The donors will know they delivered.
Sunday, November 26, 2017
Fake News and those who believe it.
Sometimes you talk to someone and they say something so wrong that you don't know what to do.
For example there are people who argue that the Earth is flat. This despite the fact that by now enough people have circumnavigated it to fill a small country and there are countless pictures from space.
Since the new way to deny the obvious is to declare it fake news or a conspiracy, you reveal yourself as being part of one or the other when you dispute him/her.
Something has gone very wrong when a larger than usual group of people hold views that are simply inane.
I'm not talking about people who think aliens exist or that there was more than one shooter involved in the JFK assassination, although I guess some it started with those people.
There are people with shows that espouse views that are simply dangerous and ridiculous but have a lot of listeners.
Denying Sandy Hook or the Las Vegas shootings as being staged by a group that is trying to take away guns, I think that's the argument, is cruel and vicious to the survivors of those events and relatives of the victims who know first hand that the events were very real.
The idea that we live in a society where lies are assumed is a sad statement and unfortunately if the argument is that everything you produce as proof is fabricated, then there is no real way to argue with them.
They are best ignored but we have theories going around spread by these people that are in fact dangerous.
Take the anti-vac people who are causing diseases to re-appear that were close to eliminated.
The very small risk related to taking vaccinations is nothing compared to the risk of the diseases themselves.
Ignore the fact that the industries in the world have been spewing dangerous and unknown chemical into the atmosphere at breakneck speed, and blame certain development on tested and approved medical treatments sponsored by those get rich quick doctors.
If you react the same way to every risk, you would probably never leave your house without a load of heavy duty sunscreen, you certainly wouldn't drive or fly and probably realize that walking or running were likely to kill you any second now.
What we really need in this country is a return to common sense where we realize that what you see in the movies or on TV is not necessarily representative of the real world and people who tell you everyone else is lying to you are the ones doing the lying.
Less virtual and more actual reality please.
For example there are people who argue that the Earth is flat. This despite the fact that by now enough people have circumnavigated it to fill a small country and there are countless pictures from space.
Since the new way to deny the obvious is to declare it fake news or a conspiracy, you reveal yourself as being part of one or the other when you dispute him/her.
Something has gone very wrong when a larger than usual group of people hold views that are simply inane.
I'm not talking about people who think aliens exist or that there was more than one shooter involved in the JFK assassination, although I guess some it started with those people.
There are people with shows that espouse views that are simply dangerous and ridiculous but have a lot of listeners.
Denying Sandy Hook or the Las Vegas shootings as being staged by a group that is trying to take away guns, I think that's the argument, is cruel and vicious to the survivors of those events and relatives of the victims who know first hand that the events were very real.
The idea that we live in a society where lies are assumed is a sad statement and unfortunately if the argument is that everything you produce as proof is fabricated, then there is no real way to argue with them.
They are best ignored but we have theories going around spread by these people that are in fact dangerous.
Take the anti-vac people who are causing diseases to re-appear that were close to eliminated.
The very small risk related to taking vaccinations is nothing compared to the risk of the diseases themselves.
Ignore the fact that the industries in the world have been spewing dangerous and unknown chemical into the atmosphere at breakneck speed, and blame certain development on tested and approved medical treatments sponsored by those get rich quick doctors.
If you react the same way to every risk, you would probably never leave your house without a load of heavy duty sunscreen, you certainly wouldn't drive or fly and probably realize that walking or running were likely to kill you any second now.
What we really need in this country is a return to common sense where we realize that what you see in the movies or on TV is not necessarily representative of the real world and people who tell you everyone else is lying to you are the ones doing the lying.
Less virtual and more actual reality please.
Saturday, November 25, 2017
Conservative?
People use this term as if it was something everyone understood. There's a definition of it in the dictionary but in usage it represents lots of different things, many of which aren't at all conservative in the dictionary sense.
In the definition it refers to someone who is averse to change, but people who call themselves conservatives are trying to change many things.
From a family values point of view they want to get rid of abortions and eliminate gay marriage.
Those now each represent changes, but they would argue they want to return to the way it once was, but of course its still a change.
Conservatives are trying to change the tax system to give business more money and raise the deficit. These are both changes.
Many people calling themselves conservatives want to define this as a Christian country which would certainly be a major and radical change to the country where religious freedom was a founding principle.
They only want you to be free to practice a form of Christianity.
Of course they ignore Christian values when it suits their purpose and ignore abuse against women and minorities which isn't very Christian at all.
They can call themselves whatever they want but there isn't much conservatism in their positions for the most part.
They make up issues such as political correctness or worrying about what language people speak.
A real conservative would respect our constitutional freedom including freedom of religion. They would respect the principle that all men are created equal with the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
They would represent real American values, not this made up faux radical stuff they call conservative values.
In the definition it refers to someone who is averse to change, but people who call themselves conservatives are trying to change many things.
From a family values point of view they want to get rid of abortions and eliminate gay marriage.
Those now each represent changes, but they would argue they want to return to the way it once was, but of course its still a change.
Conservatives are trying to change the tax system to give business more money and raise the deficit. These are both changes.
Many people calling themselves conservatives want to define this as a Christian country which would certainly be a major and radical change to the country where religious freedom was a founding principle.
They only want you to be free to practice a form of Christianity.
Of course they ignore Christian values when it suits their purpose and ignore abuse against women and minorities which isn't very Christian at all.
They can call themselves whatever they want but there isn't much conservatism in their positions for the most part.
They make up issues such as political correctness or worrying about what language people speak.
A real conservative would respect our constitutional freedom including freedom of religion. They would respect the principle that all men are created equal with the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
They would represent real American values, not this made up faux radical stuff they call conservative values.
Friday, November 24, 2017
Trade
Pretty much every time the dotard tweets it makes you shake your head.
The point is that he seems to believe a lot of what he tweets even when it is obviously wrong.
In fact one wonders how he can be so wrong so often, but then again a lot of other people ate getting like that too.
There really are only two major positions on trade, one is to have unrestricted free trade with other nations and the other is to restrict it.
Economists would argue that the first is the better strategy with maybe a few limited exceptions. The reason is that is allows the most efficient producer to sell the most products leading to the most efficient us of resources.
The protected trade position ends up keeping inefficiencies in the system as they are protected form competition.
It may be a worthwhile policy, on a limited basis to protect a new business until it can mature by giving it favorable access to your domestic market, understanding that it will cost your people more, at least in the short term.
It doesn't seem like the dotard has a clue about trade and seems to think the way it gets measured is by who sells the most, "the winner" of the deal.
So when cheap foreign manufacturers ended up selling more to us, at least on the surface, the dotard feels it is a bad deal.
It is almost inevitable that in most circumstances foreign countries will sell us more products than we will sell them for the simple reason that our economy is so much bigger. We are the jackpot market and we just buy more than anyone else.
Of course, being wrong about a fairly complex issue isn't the worst thing, one would think he would have economic advisers who could explain it. They aren't the people on the Faux Channel though.
The point is that he seems to believe a lot of what he tweets even when it is obviously wrong.
In fact one wonders how he can be so wrong so often, but then again a lot of other people ate getting like that too.
There really are only two major positions on trade, one is to have unrestricted free trade with other nations and the other is to restrict it.
Economists would argue that the first is the better strategy with maybe a few limited exceptions. The reason is that is allows the most efficient producer to sell the most products leading to the most efficient us of resources.
The protected trade position ends up keeping inefficiencies in the system as they are protected form competition.
It may be a worthwhile policy, on a limited basis to protect a new business until it can mature by giving it favorable access to your domestic market, understanding that it will cost your people more, at least in the short term.
It doesn't seem like the dotard has a clue about trade and seems to think the way it gets measured is by who sells the most, "the winner" of the deal.
So when cheap foreign manufacturers ended up selling more to us, at least on the surface, the dotard feels it is a bad deal.
It is almost inevitable that in most circumstances foreign countries will sell us more products than we will sell them for the simple reason that our economy is so much bigger. We are the jackpot market and we just buy more than anyone else.
Of course, being wrong about a fairly complex issue isn't the worst thing, one would think he would have economic advisers who could explain it. They aren't the people on the Faux Channel though.
Thursday, November 23, 2017
Happy Thanksgiving
Its Thanksgiving Day in America and their are still many things to be thankful for, and I wish everyone a great holiday and hope it is a happy and peaceful one.
The net month and a half is officially the holiday season, I guess, and the retailers have started their "black Friday" sales a bit earlier as they do each year.
You get a bit nostalgic around this time if you have reached a certain age thinking back on when everything seemed simpler and less materialistic.
The past wasn't really better, although it was probably healthier with more actual activities and less virtual ones.
A great advantage of growing up in the city back then was all the walking, walk to play, walk to school, walk to the store, walk to the subway, walk up the stairs to your apartment.
These didn't seem like big advantages, but to get that sort of exercise in the suburbs, you have to work at it, and probably pay a pretty penny to a gym.
Now you can put on virtual headsets and probably recreate all those experiences.
Just not the same.
Happy Thanksgiving!
The net month and a half is officially the holiday season, I guess, and the retailers have started their "black Friday" sales a bit earlier as they do each year.
You get a bit nostalgic around this time if you have reached a certain age thinking back on when everything seemed simpler and less materialistic.
The past wasn't really better, although it was probably healthier with more actual activities and less virtual ones.
A great advantage of growing up in the city back then was all the walking, walk to play, walk to school, walk to the store, walk to the subway, walk up the stairs to your apartment.
These didn't seem like big advantages, but to get that sort of exercise in the suburbs, you have to work at it, and probably pay a pretty penny to a gym.
Now you can put on virtual headsets and probably recreate all those experiences.
Just not the same.
Happy Thanksgiving!
Wednesday, November 22, 2017
Suemerica
We live in a country where everyone seems to sue everyone else.
Of course that's not really true, its just that many lawsuits are so high profile.
Its such a part of our culture that we have a number of TV shows that show people suing each other.
I admit it can be entertaining, if also a bit ridiculous.
If you happen to be involved in an incident that gets publicized you will be, generally, approached by lawyers wanting to represent you.
Some of the lawsuits or threats are more for public relations than anything else. Others serve as backdoors to try to litigate "crimes" past the statute of limitations.
The GOP candidate for the senate just said he is contemplating suing his accusers for defamation. Can't imagine that actually happen, mostly because they are probably telling the truth, but he needs to act like they aren't to sway some voters in the campaign.
It might work.
I'm sure there will be a ton of law suits related to all the unproven sexual harassment claims that are coming out of the woodwork. Certainly a lot of the allegations are true but because of the statute of limitations few are going to result in criminal charges.
I read that people who survived the shooting in Las Vegas are filing suits against the hotel, although as bad as it was, it really seems to be the fault of a single lunatic.
Guess the hotel should have noticed all those rifles.
However, filing a law suit is one of the most American things we can do, so it was almost inevitable.
Of course that's not really true, its just that many lawsuits are so high profile.
Its such a part of our culture that we have a number of TV shows that show people suing each other.
I admit it can be entertaining, if also a bit ridiculous.
If you happen to be involved in an incident that gets publicized you will be, generally, approached by lawyers wanting to represent you.
Some of the lawsuits or threats are more for public relations than anything else. Others serve as backdoors to try to litigate "crimes" past the statute of limitations.
The GOP candidate for the senate just said he is contemplating suing his accusers for defamation. Can't imagine that actually happen, mostly because they are probably telling the truth, but he needs to act like they aren't to sway some voters in the campaign.
It might work.
I'm sure there will be a ton of law suits related to all the unproven sexual harassment claims that are coming out of the woodwork. Certainly a lot of the allegations are true but because of the statute of limitations few are going to result in criminal charges.
I read that people who survived the shooting in Las Vegas are filing suits against the hotel, although as bad as it was, it really seems to be the fault of a single lunatic.
Guess the hotel should have noticed all those rifles.
However, filing a law suit is one of the most American things we can do, so it was almost inevitable.
Tuesday, November 21, 2017
Protect Freedom
The one thing a government needs to do is to protect its citizens from all threats, foreign and domestic.
This is enshrined in our constitution and in the oaths of office.
It is clear then that if a foreign power is trying to subvert our republic, every government official, including the president is oath bound to defend us.
So since we have conclusive evidence of such behavior we should have pretty universal condemnation and action to prevent and stop it.
It's not universal.
When you look at the history of colonization, you find a tactic that was used in many parts of the world with a lot of success.
You find a faction that is not quite strong enough to seize power and you help them in return for certain commitments. This makes them to some extent your puppet and as your exclusive rights grow and your influence increases, the government becomes more and more dependent on your support to continue.
It is something that works for the puppet rulers and the colonial power, but not so much for the inhabitants who are deprived of economic and political freedom over time.
This attack on our freedoms is what is dangerous and it is being attacked by both foreign and domestic sources. Business is often more interested in a puppet regime, it is simply easier to deal with, or bribe.
The people need to be aware of the danger and demand that our elected officials honor their pledge of office, or replace them.
This is enshrined in our constitution and in the oaths of office.
It is clear then that if a foreign power is trying to subvert our republic, every government official, including the president is oath bound to defend us.
So since we have conclusive evidence of such behavior we should have pretty universal condemnation and action to prevent and stop it.
It's not universal.
When you look at the history of colonization, you find a tactic that was used in many parts of the world with a lot of success.
You find a faction that is not quite strong enough to seize power and you help them in return for certain commitments. This makes them to some extent your puppet and as your exclusive rights grow and your influence increases, the government becomes more and more dependent on your support to continue.
It is something that works for the puppet rulers and the colonial power, but not so much for the inhabitants who are deprived of economic and political freedom over time.
This attack on our freedoms is what is dangerous and it is being attacked by both foreign and domestic sources. Business is often more interested in a puppet regime, it is simply easier to deal with, or bribe.
The people need to be aware of the danger and demand that our elected officials honor their pledge of office, or replace them.
Monday, November 20, 2017
Wake Up America
It seems like the dotard didn't mean it when he reversed an Obama policy on elephant trophies. I'm sure he is willing to reverse any policy his predecessor signed without thinking or reading it, but in this case it annoyed people almost everywhere who weren't going to Africa to collect elephant ears.
He clearly isn't heavy into doing research and in his past careers he didn't need to be.
Real estate like many other things is a situation where you want to buy low and sell high.
Buying into Manhattan when it was having hard times might have seemed risky but was as close to a sure thing as there is, if you have enough resources to hold long enough.
In that case it wasn't even that long as the city rebounded. However, its not like he's great at this, he did mange to have multiple business bankruptcies and to a certain extent his brand and fortune were saved by having a successful reality show.
The dotard has turned his name into a brand and it does allow him to profit to some extent.
The attributes he had in those days haven't changed. He was a bit of a playboy around town but managed to get his name associated with more attractive women than he ever dated.
He used to manipulate page 6 the way he uses twitter today, to keep his name in the news.
There are many much richer people in New York who manage hedge funds who you never hear of because they don't parade around and they work long hours.
In some ways, his only real career was being a celebrity and it still is.
Its sad that he was able to appeal to enough deplorables to capture the republican party and I do think that the rise of the Steve Bannon's will lead to a republican party that drives out any moderates.
The question is clearly at what point do the non-deplorables wake up?
Some already have.
He clearly isn't heavy into doing research and in his past careers he didn't need to be.
Real estate like many other things is a situation where you want to buy low and sell high.
Buying into Manhattan when it was having hard times might have seemed risky but was as close to a sure thing as there is, if you have enough resources to hold long enough.
In that case it wasn't even that long as the city rebounded. However, its not like he's great at this, he did mange to have multiple business bankruptcies and to a certain extent his brand and fortune were saved by having a successful reality show.
The dotard has turned his name into a brand and it does allow him to profit to some extent.
The attributes he had in those days haven't changed. He was a bit of a playboy around town but managed to get his name associated with more attractive women than he ever dated.
He used to manipulate page 6 the way he uses twitter today, to keep his name in the news.
There are many much richer people in New York who manage hedge funds who you never hear of because they don't parade around and they work long hours.
In some ways, his only real career was being a celebrity and it still is.
Its sad that he was able to appeal to enough deplorables to capture the republican party and I do think that the rise of the Steve Bannon's will lead to a republican party that drives out any moderates.
The question is clearly at what point do the non-deplorables wake up?
Some already have.
Sunday, November 19, 2017
Women and Men
Interactions between men and women have been going on since there have been men and women. Its demonstrated by the fact that we are still here as a species.
I don't know though if at any time the two groups actually understood each other.
It's been something that has been written about since ancient times although because of the nature of those times most of the writings relate to how women are incomprehensible to men.
It doesn't seem like that should be the case, but it pretty much is.
To some extent no one knows what anyone else is actually thinking, but with other men I feel fairly confident that I have an idea.
This is largely because they react in fairly predictable ways, at least to me.
Women on the other hand tend to be simply unpredictable.
I don't know if women have the same issue, it seems like they understand men better than men understand women, but maybe they don't.
Somehow the two groups have managed to procreate, and rather profusely.
However this is the area that seems to be the most perplexing.
I remember a skit by Jerry Seinfeld in which he posits the question as to why men resort to honking or calling out to pretty strangers and he answers his own question with because that's the best we have come up with. While a joke it comes close to the truth.
Some of the things coming out are clearly wrong, others not so much, at least to my view, which is a male one.
The problem is that many of these accusations include the fact that a person in power in some ways imposed their will on another person. Some of these accusations are based on obvious measurable things but some are based on people's perceptions.
The "me too" movement has uncovered that a majority of American women have felt harassed or abused at least once in their lifetimes. Maybe that honking and calling out has gone too far.
However, we don't have anything better. It's perplexing.
I don't know though if at any time the two groups actually understood each other.
It's been something that has been written about since ancient times although because of the nature of those times most of the writings relate to how women are incomprehensible to men.
It doesn't seem like that should be the case, but it pretty much is.
To some extent no one knows what anyone else is actually thinking, but with other men I feel fairly confident that I have an idea.
This is largely because they react in fairly predictable ways, at least to me.
Women on the other hand tend to be simply unpredictable.
I don't know if women have the same issue, it seems like they understand men better than men understand women, but maybe they don't.
Somehow the two groups have managed to procreate, and rather profusely.
However this is the area that seems to be the most perplexing.
I remember a skit by Jerry Seinfeld in which he posits the question as to why men resort to honking or calling out to pretty strangers and he answers his own question with because that's the best we have come up with. While a joke it comes close to the truth.
Some of the things coming out are clearly wrong, others not so much, at least to my view, which is a male one.
The problem is that many of these accusations include the fact that a person in power in some ways imposed their will on another person. Some of these accusations are based on obvious measurable things but some are based on people's perceptions.
The "me too" movement has uncovered that a majority of American women have felt harassed or abused at least once in their lifetimes. Maybe that honking and calling out has gone too far.
However, we don't have anything better. It's perplexing.
Saturday, November 18, 2017
Sunrise
I was driving from Virginia to New York last night and I like to do it when there is no traffic so I left about 3 AM.
Clearly that's the middle of the night and the sky is simply dark.
For some reason, I think in Delaware I noticed the first change in the east from dark to, well, not dark.
It was just a hint of the sunrise to come and I've driven this same route many times around the same time and I know the sun is going to rise, but something about the first glimmer of the day just attracted me.
Of course I was still driving so I couldn't stare at it, but in Southern Jersey I noticed it again, more not dark, but not quite light.
Its a natural thing and as I drove up the East Coast for the next hour I sort of tracked the progress of the sunrise.
The sky in the east was blue around the Penn Turnpike exit and by Elizabeth the whole sky was bright.
I finally saw the sun in Staten Island, and since I was driving almost directly into it, it was blinding and causing traffic to slow.
Oddly the man on the radio commented how it was a beautiful sunrise today and I must say until the sun blinded me it was.
No real point to any of this, just how I passed time on the New Jersey Turnpike and appreciated a thing that happens every day.
Until it tried to blind me.
Clearly that's the middle of the night and the sky is simply dark.
For some reason, I think in Delaware I noticed the first change in the east from dark to, well, not dark.
It was just a hint of the sunrise to come and I've driven this same route many times around the same time and I know the sun is going to rise, but something about the first glimmer of the day just attracted me.
Of course I was still driving so I couldn't stare at it, but in Southern Jersey I noticed it again, more not dark, but not quite light.
Its a natural thing and as I drove up the East Coast for the next hour I sort of tracked the progress of the sunrise.
The sky in the east was blue around the Penn Turnpike exit and by Elizabeth the whole sky was bright.
I finally saw the sun in Staten Island, and since I was driving almost directly into it, it was blinding and causing traffic to slow.
Oddly the man on the radio commented how it was a beautiful sunrise today and I must say until the sun blinded me it was.
No real point to any of this, just how I passed time on the New Jersey Turnpike and appreciated a thing that happens every day.
Until it tried to blind me.
Friday, November 17, 2017
Paying their Debt
The monkey house passed a "tax reform" bill that manages to pay their owners significant amounts by taking it from the rest of us either now or in the future.
The argument that this is going to be good for the economy is so shaky that I find it hard to believe any of them believe it, but being monkeys they might.
Now attention turns to the Senate where we will see if they can pass something that enables the two bills to go to conference.
I realize that we have seen the wealthy take over the Government via money and they have gotten people elected who are only concerned about keeping the donations flowing.
I would have thought that the American people would realize what was happening, but when you realize all the news most people absorb has to be in short soundbites or headlines, it is too easy to convince enough of the uninformed to vote for a monkey.
We will get you a good paying job, although you have no skills and just a rudimentary education.
We guarantee your children will be no more educated than you are by privatizing our schools and letting our donors make money for not educating them.
In fact we will make sure the people who donate to us can privatize more and more things so that a hefty percentage of the taxes get to them so they can donate some to us.
You live in a state where they supply public services? Well stop indirectly subsidizing you socialists by double taxing you.
It doesn't matter to us as long as we get enough donations to run TV ads telling you we are going to make your life better, but have a gun.
You are addicted to opioids? Well we are defunding programs that could help you but just vote for us and we will take care of you.
We are gong to strip your pension and disability benefits but you can buy a gun.
It's the best retirement plan we can think of.
The argument that this is going to be good for the economy is so shaky that I find it hard to believe any of them believe it, but being monkeys they might.
Now attention turns to the Senate where we will see if they can pass something that enables the two bills to go to conference.
I realize that we have seen the wealthy take over the Government via money and they have gotten people elected who are only concerned about keeping the donations flowing.
I would have thought that the American people would realize what was happening, but when you realize all the news most people absorb has to be in short soundbites or headlines, it is too easy to convince enough of the uninformed to vote for a monkey.
We will get you a good paying job, although you have no skills and just a rudimentary education.
We guarantee your children will be no more educated than you are by privatizing our schools and letting our donors make money for not educating them.
In fact we will make sure the people who donate to us can privatize more and more things so that a hefty percentage of the taxes get to them so they can donate some to us.
You live in a state where they supply public services? Well stop indirectly subsidizing you socialists by double taxing you.
It doesn't matter to us as long as we get enough donations to run TV ads telling you we are going to make your life better, but have a gun.
You are addicted to opioids? Well we are defunding programs that could help you but just vote for us and we will take care of you.
We are gong to strip your pension and disability benefits but you can buy a gun.
It's the best retirement plan we can think of.
Thursday, November 16, 2017
America's Greatness
The phrase "Make America Great Again" implies of course that America went from great to, I guess, less than great.
America being great is something which might need some discussion, what qualifies as great and how would we achieve it.
We clearly are the greatest military power in the world and that hasn't changed, although it comes at a pretty great price.
We don't match many countries in social programs and I don't think the current people in office are trying to.
Many of our citizens face discrimination and people are often condemned for their sexual preferences.
Recently we see that sexual harassment is pervasive and it think we are seeing the tip of the iceberg on that so far.
We have the world's biggest economy and in general the lifestyles of most Americans exceed most of the world, although not all of it.
Our health care is great for people with money and a little below average for most others, although costly.
What also needs to be discussed is when was this greatness that we aspire to recapture?
It seems like it is focused on the period after World War 2 when our major competitors were facing significant devastation to their infrastructures or Communist regimes that stifled economic improvement. you want to recreate that period, which did include significant fear of a nuclear holocaust you would have to bomb a lot of major cities.
No, in most ways, the challenges facing America have been in existence for the whole time and while we did cover them up a little better in the past, that isn't really better.
America was great for most of its history because it was the land of opportunity where people, oppressed or impoverished in their home countries could come and start anew. This greatness was recognized around the world and it was what made us a shining example, everyone could come here and provide their families better opportunities than anywhere else.
So those talking about making America great again, who also want to build a wall really just don't get it.
Not even close.
America being great is something which might need some discussion, what qualifies as great and how would we achieve it.
We clearly are the greatest military power in the world and that hasn't changed, although it comes at a pretty great price.
We don't match many countries in social programs and I don't think the current people in office are trying to.
Many of our citizens face discrimination and people are often condemned for their sexual preferences.
Recently we see that sexual harassment is pervasive and it think we are seeing the tip of the iceberg on that so far.
We have the world's biggest economy and in general the lifestyles of most Americans exceed most of the world, although not all of it.
Our health care is great for people with money and a little below average for most others, although costly.
What also needs to be discussed is when was this greatness that we aspire to recapture?
It seems like it is focused on the period after World War 2 when our major competitors were facing significant devastation to their infrastructures or Communist regimes that stifled economic improvement. you want to recreate that period, which did include significant fear of a nuclear holocaust you would have to bomb a lot of major cities.
No, in most ways, the challenges facing America have been in existence for the whole time and while we did cover them up a little better in the past, that isn't really better.
America was great for most of its history because it was the land of opportunity where people, oppressed or impoverished in their home countries could come and start anew. This greatness was recognized around the world and it was what made us a shining example, everyone could come here and provide their families better opportunities than anywhere else.
So those talking about making America great again, who also want to build a wall really just don't get it.
Not even close.
Wednesday, November 15, 2017
Dream on
It is pretty simple. Those who have wealth and power like it and generally want more.
Those who don't would like to be part of that group.
Most of us never will but the idea that we might is a great motivator for many.
Its one of the reasons so many Americans will support things that do them absolutely no good.
They are betting on winning.
Everyone knows that most people are going to live ordinary lives, but each person thinks he or she is the exception.
We start telling children very early on that they can be anything, even though in most cases they can't.
The myth is perpetuated by the fact that the very few who succeed tend to relate those stories and write memoirs. The very many who fail don't.
So yes, maybe the odds are one in a million, but why can't you be the one?
Those who don't would like to be part of that group.
Most of us never will but the idea that we might is a great motivator for many.
Its one of the reasons so many Americans will support things that do them absolutely no good.
They are betting on winning.
Everyone knows that most people are going to live ordinary lives, but each person thinks he or she is the exception.
We start telling children very early on that they can be anything, even though in most cases they can't.
The myth is perpetuated by the fact that the very few who succeed tend to relate those stories and write memoirs. The very many who fail don't.
So yes, maybe the odds are one in a million, but why can't you be the one?
Tuesday, November 14, 2017
Winners and Losers
Everybody tends to complain about taxes and of course that is going to continue no matter what comes out of the monkey house.
The complaints that got this ball rolling though really seem to come down to two that bother business and wealthy people.
The business tax is too high.
The Government imposes an estate tax on large estates.
The other things in the tax discussion, number of brackets, too many complex deductions etc. simply serve as smokescreens to cover up the fact that tax "reform" is designed to help business and allow the wealthy to keep their money in the family.
Neither of those objectives are particularly bad and if the tax rate is in fact suppressing business we probably should adjust it, although the evidence for this is slim.
Similarly, passing on your estate to your heirs isn't a bad thing, although it could be argued that years ago the top tax rate was lowered with the understanding the estate tax would collect at the end.
However, for every dollar given back to business or the wealthy, it has to come from one of two places, increased taxes for others or an increase in the debt.
This therefore creates a big pool of potential losers, but a plan that simply gives money to those that don't need it and takes it away from those who do is simply not going to pass, so it had to be additionally complicated so the losers are not as obvious.
Of course the $1.5 trillion increase in borrowing made this easier, but that money has to be paid by future people, unless of course we simply default. Its like refinancing your house to pay current bills or to buy a car, it sort of works on a short term basis but leaves you owning less of your house. If the house value just keeps rising it works OK, but watch out for a financial crisis.
Similarly increasing the deficit is potentially painless if the economy grows enough to generate more tax revenue to pay it off in the future. That's very unlikely although it is the smoke and mirror the monkey house is relying on.
That is still not enough so you have to make other citizens pay more, over time to cover the difference and keep within the budget guidelines.
The shifts are complex and some Americans think they are getting a reduction (for the first few years) and others will pay more immediately. Most will pay more over time but as I said, the smoke and mirrors took a lot of time to put together so its almost as complex as what we already had.
Homeowners, people in states with income taxes or high property taxes or people with high medical bills are losers right off the bat.
The retirement savings is an attractive target, take away money from middle class savers so wealthy people can leave more to their heirs.
I guess we know who the winners are.
The complaints that got this ball rolling though really seem to come down to two that bother business and wealthy people.
The business tax is too high.
The Government imposes an estate tax on large estates.
The other things in the tax discussion, number of brackets, too many complex deductions etc. simply serve as smokescreens to cover up the fact that tax "reform" is designed to help business and allow the wealthy to keep their money in the family.
Neither of those objectives are particularly bad and if the tax rate is in fact suppressing business we probably should adjust it, although the evidence for this is slim.
Similarly, passing on your estate to your heirs isn't a bad thing, although it could be argued that years ago the top tax rate was lowered with the understanding the estate tax would collect at the end.
However, for every dollar given back to business or the wealthy, it has to come from one of two places, increased taxes for others or an increase in the debt.
This therefore creates a big pool of potential losers, but a plan that simply gives money to those that don't need it and takes it away from those who do is simply not going to pass, so it had to be additionally complicated so the losers are not as obvious.
Of course the $1.5 trillion increase in borrowing made this easier, but that money has to be paid by future people, unless of course we simply default. Its like refinancing your house to pay current bills or to buy a car, it sort of works on a short term basis but leaves you owning less of your house. If the house value just keeps rising it works OK, but watch out for a financial crisis.
Similarly increasing the deficit is potentially painless if the economy grows enough to generate more tax revenue to pay it off in the future. That's very unlikely although it is the smoke and mirror the monkey house is relying on.
That is still not enough so you have to make other citizens pay more, over time to cover the difference and keep within the budget guidelines.
The shifts are complex and some Americans think they are getting a reduction (for the first few years) and others will pay more immediately. Most will pay more over time but as I said, the smoke and mirrors took a lot of time to put together so its almost as complex as what we already had.
Homeowners, people in states with income taxes or high property taxes or people with high medical bills are losers right off the bat.
The retirement savings is an attractive target, take away money from middle class savers so wealthy people can leave more to their heirs.
I guess we know who the winners are.
Monday, November 13, 2017
Lets hope Abe was right
A lot of the issues we tend to get excited about don't impact most of us very directly.
Generally we get up we go to work or engage in various activities regardless of the latest items being debated. Of course the ultimate outcome may have a significant impact on our lives but it also may not.
In fact for most of us the less the Government is involved the better. We want Government to be like a referee or umpire who enforces the rules but is barely noticed.
What the rules are is of course important and we want the rules to be fair and evenly applied.
However many of our politicians have clearly traded their integrity for political donations and support and have to take care of the people who bought them.
Ultimately they still have to get votes and depend on most people being susceptible to sound bites and misleading headlines.
This techniques which is not new found new power as we saw the rise of social media and web sites the pretended to report news but really were just propaganda outlets.
It has led us to the point we are at now, where we see a lot of smoke obscuring the truth.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion but it helps if the opinion is based on factual information, not propaganda.
The good news is that you can't keep reporting things that don't match reality for very long.
Abe Lincoln famously said that you can't fool all of the people all of the time.
Lets hope he was right.
Generally we get up we go to work or engage in various activities regardless of the latest items being debated. Of course the ultimate outcome may have a significant impact on our lives but it also may not.
In fact for most of us the less the Government is involved the better. We want Government to be like a referee or umpire who enforces the rules but is barely noticed.
What the rules are is of course important and we want the rules to be fair and evenly applied.
However many of our politicians have clearly traded their integrity for political donations and support and have to take care of the people who bought them.
Ultimately they still have to get votes and depend on most people being susceptible to sound bites and misleading headlines.
This techniques which is not new found new power as we saw the rise of social media and web sites the pretended to report news but really were just propaganda outlets.
It has led us to the point we are at now, where we see a lot of smoke obscuring the truth.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion but it helps if the opinion is based on factual information, not propaganda.
The good news is that you can't keep reporting things that don't match reality for very long.
Abe Lincoln famously said that you can't fool all of the people all of the time.
Lets hope he was right.
Sunday, November 12, 2017
Life is Hard but Worth It
I've come to the conclusion, possibly erroneously, that we are not making it clear to our children and grandchildren how hard life actually is.
When I was growing up my parents had lived through the great depression and World War 2 and they had no illusions about how life was a struggle and this got communicated to me and my compatriots in many ways.
Of course we had it a lot easier than they did, although of course we had Vietnam which for many was devastating and individuals had their trials but all in all the years I grew up in were just easier and different than the past.
We also had TV which, more than radio, showed you a rosy view of the world and how all problems got solved. You had families that seemed too perfect to be true (they were) and everyone was good looking, well dressed and in a mere 30 minutes to an hour less commercials, the situations got resolved.
Of course for many of us life wasn't like T.V. but we all wanted it to be like that and disregarding the fact that bad things did happen to some people, we were able as a generation to celebrate the sexual revolution, the age of Aquarius, the overall success of the economy and the abundance of good paying jobs.
We had been taught by the prior generation that things could be hard, but most of the time they weren't and when they did go bad we had identity crises.
The ideas and values we passed along were very different than the ones we were raised with and the new reality was reinforced by technology which was explosive in development and usage.
Our children weren't sent out to play, they went on play dates, carefully arranged to be with the right people.
They didn't play pick up games, they engaged in organized sports supervised and watched.
We started awarding people for participation instead of winning and while at some point winning was rewarded, losing wasn't your fault anymore.
The list goes on and on and of course there are exceptions but the world the latter generations grew up in was presented as less dangerous and more reliable.
It wasn't though, its still hard and so when things like the financial crisis or tech bust came along, the reaction of many wasn't to get up and work harder, it was to look for someone to blame.
Others looked for someone who promised to fix it.
I have a lot of faith in humanity and ultimately people will rise to the occasion, they always have. I'm a afraid though we did many a disservice and because of that they might have to deal with harder times than they should have.
Don't give up. It might seem harder than it looked (it is) but life is a glorious thing and when you finally do what you need to do to get past your troubles, it will all be worth it.
It really will because in the end life is actually all about participation so participate.
When I was growing up my parents had lived through the great depression and World War 2 and they had no illusions about how life was a struggle and this got communicated to me and my compatriots in many ways.
Of course we had it a lot easier than they did, although of course we had Vietnam which for many was devastating and individuals had their trials but all in all the years I grew up in were just easier and different than the past.
We also had TV which, more than radio, showed you a rosy view of the world and how all problems got solved. You had families that seemed too perfect to be true (they were) and everyone was good looking, well dressed and in a mere 30 minutes to an hour less commercials, the situations got resolved.
Of course for many of us life wasn't like T.V. but we all wanted it to be like that and disregarding the fact that bad things did happen to some people, we were able as a generation to celebrate the sexual revolution, the age of Aquarius, the overall success of the economy and the abundance of good paying jobs.
We had been taught by the prior generation that things could be hard, but most of the time they weren't and when they did go bad we had identity crises.
The ideas and values we passed along were very different than the ones we were raised with and the new reality was reinforced by technology which was explosive in development and usage.
Our children weren't sent out to play, they went on play dates, carefully arranged to be with the right people.
They didn't play pick up games, they engaged in organized sports supervised and watched.
We started awarding people for participation instead of winning and while at some point winning was rewarded, losing wasn't your fault anymore.
The list goes on and on and of course there are exceptions but the world the latter generations grew up in was presented as less dangerous and more reliable.
It wasn't though, its still hard and so when things like the financial crisis or tech bust came along, the reaction of many wasn't to get up and work harder, it was to look for someone to blame.
Others looked for someone who promised to fix it.
I have a lot of faith in humanity and ultimately people will rise to the occasion, they always have. I'm a afraid though we did many a disservice and because of that they might have to deal with harder times than they should have.
Don't give up. It might seem harder than it looked (it is) but life is a glorious thing and when you finally do what you need to do to get past your troubles, it will all be worth it.
It really will because in the end life is actually all about participation so participate.
Saturday, November 11, 2017
Veterans Day
I wonder how the fates arranged for the dotard to be in Vietnam on Veteran's day? He was avoiding that place like the plague at one point in his life.
Seems like our recent deserter may get back pay for the time he was in captivity after walking away from his post.
Bergdahl back pay
Guess if we are making draft dodgers president this is about right.
I always thought desertion was a pretty serious thing, although the whole thing with Bergdahl seems psychotic to me. Still back pay seems a bit much.
I saw "Thank You for your Service" and it is certainly worth seeing. The way they depict the VA doesn't match my experience with the organization, so I think being a movie you need to realize its not a documentary. Still good viewing.
I was looking at my DD214 since I need to show it to get today's discounts and noticed how it clearly displays my SSN as well as my service number. Guess I should cover it, but those were simpler days.
A lot of that is due to the Internet and how so much is done without actual contact. Now we have people who can fight remotely using drones.
My main wish as a veteran would be that all current veterans be happy and healthy and that in the future we have fewer and fewer of us as we resolve ongoing conflicts.
Seems like our recent deserter may get back pay for the time he was in captivity after walking away from his post.
Bergdahl back pay
Guess if we are making draft dodgers president this is about right.
I always thought desertion was a pretty serious thing, although the whole thing with Bergdahl seems psychotic to me. Still back pay seems a bit much.
I saw "Thank You for your Service" and it is certainly worth seeing. The way they depict the VA doesn't match my experience with the organization, so I think being a movie you need to realize its not a documentary. Still good viewing.
I was looking at my DD214 since I need to show it to get today's discounts and noticed how it clearly displays my SSN as well as my service number. Guess I should cover it, but those were simpler days.
A lot of that is due to the Internet and how so much is done without actual contact. Now we have people who can fight remotely using drones.
My main wish as a veteran would be that all current veterans be happy and healthy and that in the future we have fewer and fewer of us as we resolve ongoing conflicts.
Friday, November 10, 2017
True Deplorables
When this term was used in the election last year to refer to some of the dotard's supporters, many of his supporters who didn't consider themselves actually deplorable used it as a rallying cry.
It actually helped him to some extent since the use of it added some momentum.
Now the fact that the context in which it was use was pretty much that the dotard appeals to the worst our society has to offer. Others supported him for whatever reason, but clearly the racists, misogynists, homophobes certainly supported him, probably enough to get him elected.
Of course if you lie down with dogs you are likely to wake up with fleas.
I generally don't understand how people who I think should know better believe the propaganda being spread by the alt right and their media.
America had never been more free or inclusive and as much as the propaganda rails against things like political correctness or patriotism, neither of those things are real issues.
Some Americans are caught in the change from manual to automated production and the switch over to service vs manufacturing but unfortunately all economic evolutions have some victims.
Many of those who lost their jobs in the rust belt were the descendants of farmers who were disrupted by the change from family farms to industrial farms (see Grapes of Wrath).
Nothing guarantees that the world will stand still, it doesn't and if you don't keep up you will be passed by.
What is deplorable is when in order to chase illusions you turn a blind eye to the very people who are willing to rape you and say you wanted it.
The tax "reform" packages struggle to look like they reduce taxes on the middle class when in reality they don't. Some things help the people who already pay very few taxes, and many things help business and the wealthy, but if you are in the middle you will end up needing a rape kit.
Even worse, it increases the deficit and passes the bill down the road.
The people behind these bills are the real deplorables, they have sold themselves to the highest bidder, and that's not the general public.
See them for what they rally are.
The true deplorables.
It actually helped him to some extent since the use of it added some momentum.
Now the fact that the context in which it was use was pretty much that the dotard appeals to the worst our society has to offer. Others supported him for whatever reason, but clearly the racists, misogynists, homophobes certainly supported him, probably enough to get him elected.
Of course if you lie down with dogs you are likely to wake up with fleas.
I generally don't understand how people who I think should know better believe the propaganda being spread by the alt right and their media.
America had never been more free or inclusive and as much as the propaganda rails against things like political correctness or patriotism, neither of those things are real issues.
Some Americans are caught in the change from manual to automated production and the switch over to service vs manufacturing but unfortunately all economic evolutions have some victims.
Many of those who lost their jobs in the rust belt were the descendants of farmers who were disrupted by the change from family farms to industrial farms (see Grapes of Wrath).
Nothing guarantees that the world will stand still, it doesn't and if you don't keep up you will be passed by.
What is deplorable is when in order to chase illusions you turn a blind eye to the very people who are willing to rape you and say you wanted it.
The tax "reform" packages struggle to look like they reduce taxes on the middle class when in reality they don't. Some things help the people who already pay very few taxes, and many things help business and the wealthy, but if you are in the middle you will end up needing a rape kit.
Even worse, it increases the deficit and passes the bill down the road.
The people behind these bills are the real deplorables, they have sold themselves to the highest bidder, and that's not the general public.
See them for what they rally are.
The true deplorables.
Thursday, November 9, 2017
LBO Tax Reform
One of the things that mystifies me is how convinced our congressional monkeys seem to be that Americans want tax reform.
I would argue that most don't care very much about it, although they would like lower taxes.
Who wouldn't.
The people who donate to their campaigns are looking for payback so they want "tax reform" even if it only means laying more debt on future generations.
Wealthy people don't care, they can always take care of themselves.
The idea that these things help anyone but themselves is simply not true.
Take the leveraged buy out tactic that is responsible in large part for our retail issues.
Lots of debt restrict your options.
But if a company is doing well but has undervalued assets, you can buy a majority interest and borrow enough money to buy back all the stock at a great profit, saddling the company with long term debt.
You then issue new stock to raise even more cash at the right time, which of cause goes to the private owners.
The reward is immediate and the pain is long lasting. If in the future the company can't manage them, it has to declare bankruptcy, causing the new stockholders and creditors to lose money.
Works very well for the ones who set it up and not so well for everyone else.
The simple idea is to milk all the value out of a company, like Sears and Toys-R-Us among others and get out while you can. The changes will generate growth and income in the future (ha ha).
Pretty much the way the new "tax reform" republican plan is supposed to work.
Or not, but the wealthy get the money and get to keep it without an estate tax.
I would argue that most don't care very much about it, although they would like lower taxes.
Who wouldn't.
The people who donate to their campaigns are looking for payback so they want "tax reform" even if it only means laying more debt on future generations.
Wealthy people don't care, they can always take care of themselves.
The idea that these things help anyone but themselves is simply not true.
Take the leveraged buy out tactic that is responsible in large part for our retail issues.
Lots of debt restrict your options.
But if a company is doing well but has undervalued assets, you can buy a majority interest and borrow enough money to buy back all the stock at a great profit, saddling the company with long term debt.
You then issue new stock to raise even more cash at the right time, which of cause goes to the private owners.
The reward is immediate and the pain is long lasting. If in the future the company can't manage them, it has to declare bankruptcy, causing the new stockholders and creditors to lose money.
Works very well for the ones who set it up and not so well for everyone else.
The simple idea is to milk all the value out of a company, like Sears and Toys-R-Us among others and get out while you can. The changes will generate growth and income in the future (ha ha).
Pretty much the way the new "tax reform" republican plan is supposed to work.
Or not, but the wealthy get the money and get to keep it without an estate tax.
Wednesday, November 8, 2017
Swamp Monster
The dotard ran on a platform that included draining the swamp, but as it turns out he actually meant he was going to destroy environmentally important wetlands.
Despite all the scientific consensus including a report issued by the US Government itself he fails to accept that climate change is caused by carbon emissions.
The good news is that he's about the only one.
Even the propaganda channel's people know its real, even if they have to have faux experts on to say otherwise.
Sort of the way paid spokesmen tried to defend cigarettes, long after the manufacturers knew better.
The energy companies are looking to the future and developing cleaner natural gas, which has its own issues but is better than coal or oil.
Solar and wind are being adopted and getting more affordable and because they are all domestically available it will reduce our trade deficit and help the environment at the same time.
Of course draining the swamp is getting harder as the water levels rise due to climate warming, but considering the dotard's policies, maybe it will save a few species.
I was listening to him berate South Korea about the trade agreement. The agreement does what it should do but I know math isn't his strong point so let me explain something.
We have the worlds largest economy and a population that is quite a bit larger than South Korea's. If a South Korean company sells a product to every American and a American company sell a product to every South Korean, they sell more products since there are more Americans. For them to buy as much from us as we do from them, they would have to buy a lot more each.
Also, since Americans have more disposable income each Korean would have to spend more relatively.
So far in 2017 we have imported $53 billion from South Korea and exported $36 billion. They have a population of 50 million and ours is over 300 million. They are buying more per capita of our goods than we are of theirs.
Its also a much larger percentage of their GDP.
There are other dynamics involved, but if each South Korean spent the same amount on US goods as we do on South Korean goods, sort of what the dotard was saying, the deficit would be much worse.
Its simple math really.
Despite all the scientific consensus including a report issued by the US Government itself he fails to accept that climate change is caused by carbon emissions.
The good news is that he's about the only one.
Even the propaganda channel's people know its real, even if they have to have faux experts on to say otherwise.
Sort of the way paid spokesmen tried to defend cigarettes, long after the manufacturers knew better.
The energy companies are looking to the future and developing cleaner natural gas, which has its own issues but is better than coal or oil.
Solar and wind are being adopted and getting more affordable and because they are all domestically available it will reduce our trade deficit and help the environment at the same time.
Of course draining the swamp is getting harder as the water levels rise due to climate warming, but considering the dotard's policies, maybe it will save a few species.
I was listening to him berate South Korea about the trade agreement. The agreement does what it should do but I know math isn't his strong point so let me explain something.
We have the worlds largest economy and a population that is quite a bit larger than South Korea's. If a South Korean company sells a product to every American and a American company sell a product to every South Korean, they sell more products since there are more Americans. For them to buy as much from us as we do from them, they would have to buy a lot more each.
Also, since Americans have more disposable income each Korean would have to spend more relatively.
So far in 2017 we have imported $53 billion from South Korea and exported $36 billion. They have a population of 50 million and ours is over 300 million. They are buying more per capita of our goods than we are of theirs.
Its also a much larger percentage of their GDP.
There are other dynamics involved, but if each South Korean spent the same amount on US goods as we do on South Korean goods, sort of what the dotard was saying, the deficit would be much worse.
Its simple math really.
Tuesday, November 7, 2017
Election Day Thoughts
We live in an age where communications are beyond anything our forefathers could have imagined.
In their day, even with just the East Coast States it took time to travel to the nation's capital and consider issues important to their constituents.
Of curse the constituents who got represented were usually the ones that had an in, either because they had money or were organized, which brings us to the flaw in our representational system of Government.
Who do the monkeys represent?
Many of the founding fathers, being generally landed and wealthy by the standards of the time, had very little use for the "common" man.
They were considered to be of little intellectual capacity and unlikely to be capable of making important decisions.
Real democracy was neither possible nor desirable.
It is now.
Maybe we should try it.
We can certainly use modern technology to give people a greater say in the decisions being made.
Currently a lot of the monkeys look at polls to see what the people want, but why not just ask them?
In their day, even with just the East Coast States it took time to travel to the nation's capital and consider issues important to their constituents.
Of curse the constituents who got represented were usually the ones that had an in, either because they had money or were organized, which brings us to the flaw in our representational system of Government.
Who do the monkeys represent?
Many of the founding fathers, being generally landed and wealthy by the standards of the time, had very little use for the "common" man.
They were considered to be of little intellectual capacity and unlikely to be capable of making important decisions.
Real democracy was neither possible nor desirable.
It is now.
Maybe we should try it.
We can certainly use modern technology to give people a greater say in the decisions being made.
Currently a lot of the monkeys look at polls to see what the people want, but why not just ask them?
Monday, November 6, 2017
Another Mass Murder
Another mass murder committed by a person using a gun. It seems totally senseless but what about this sort of thing could ever make much sense.
Accepting that the gun didn't commit the murders, they wouldn't have been possible in those numbers without it.
While mass shootings get a lot of attention, a lot of people die in this country from gunshots, many of them are suicides.
Guns are lethal and a public danger. If you have a gun and are depressed, even if it would normally pass, the gun can easily make it permanent.
Whether we could identify the potential dangerous individuals and restrict them access to guns is hard to say.
I would think we owe it to the potential victims of the future to try.
For the victims, we can only pray.
Accepting that the gun didn't commit the murders, they wouldn't have been possible in those numbers without it.
While mass shootings get a lot of attention, a lot of people die in this country from gunshots, many of them are suicides.
Guns are lethal and a public danger. If you have a gun and are depressed, even if it would normally pass, the gun can easily make it permanent.
Whether we could identify the potential dangerous individuals and restrict them access to guns is hard to say.
I would think we owe it to the potential victims of the future to try.
For the victims, we can only pray.
Sunday, November 5, 2017
Elections
There are going to be elections in America this Tuesday whether we want them or not.
I know in some cases the races are important but some of the ads I see are about people I never heard of and who, per the opponent's ads should probably be in jail.
Of course that applies to all the candidates.
Negative ads are universally condemned but extremely effective.
I seem to have a choice between a District Attorney for my county who is either corrupt and a puppet or someone that seems to be trying to outtrump the dotard himself.
I should probably look into it more except I'm not even sure why I'm voting for a District Attorney.
Seems like it should be someone above politics.
We vote on a whole slate of people we have no real way to judge, like say judges.
Honestly I would like well qualified judges and attorneys and police chiefs/sheriffs. Voting for the one who runs the best ads or who is a member of your party isn't guaranteed to accomplish that.
Of course they have to come from somewhere and I guess if they get appointed by corrupt politicians it wouldn't be any better.
Based on the political ads I see, we should probably arrest the whole batch and start over.
I know in some cases the races are important but some of the ads I see are about people I never heard of and who, per the opponent's ads should probably be in jail.
Of course that applies to all the candidates.
Negative ads are universally condemned but extremely effective.
I seem to have a choice between a District Attorney for my county who is either corrupt and a puppet or someone that seems to be trying to outtrump the dotard himself.
I should probably look into it more except I'm not even sure why I'm voting for a District Attorney.
Seems like it should be someone above politics.
We vote on a whole slate of people we have no real way to judge, like say judges.
Honestly I would like well qualified judges and attorneys and police chiefs/sheriffs. Voting for the one who runs the best ads or who is a member of your party isn't guaranteed to accomplish that.
Of course they have to come from somewhere and I guess if they get appointed by corrupt politicians it wouldn't be any better.
Based on the political ads I see, we should probably arrest the whole batch and start over.
Saturday, November 4, 2017
Saturday Musings
So Hollywood is basically a den of iniquity, who'd of thunk it?
A lot of this is going to be he said she said or more she said he denied sort of stuff. I'm sure a lot of it happened but I'm not sure anyone can really determine what actually happened.
Well the dotard is in Asia, good chance he might provoke a war.
Republicans are dragging out every silly accusation against Hillary, which, isn't of much concern to anyone really except foxy news and diehard dotardists and second doesn't have the Russian trolls repeating it over and over again.
I don't know if there's much chance the tax cut will pass, something might, they are pretty desperate, but the odds of an average American getting a break are pretty slim.
I think they could easily replace the business tax with a value added tax but that's too complex for this bunch.
There is a simple fact that people need to understand, people pay all the taxes. Now some of it is charged to business who add it to the prices they charge us, some of it is charged direct or on property but we pay all of it. That includes all the foreign taxes built into the prices of their products, so if you drive a German auto you are subsidizing the German social programs.
Think we need an investigation into Australian millionaires interfering in American politics.
I was just in Virginia trying to avoid the ads for the gubernatorial race, but it was hard to do. Some of them are so over the top I can't believe people believe them, but evidence shows that they do. Sad really.
The political discourse in this country has really deteriorated or maybe its just more noticeable. Maybe we need better informed voters.
The administration has issued a scientific analysis the attributes climate change to human behavior, although they individually have tried to deny it. You can't twist science the way you can politics.
Do we get an extra hour of sleep or get back the one they took from us in the Spring? I've lost track.
A lot of this is going to be he said she said or more she said he denied sort of stuff. I'm sure a lot of it happened but I'm not sure anyone can really determine what actually happened.
Well the dotard is in Asia, good chance he might provoke a war.
Republicans are dragging out every silly accusation against Hillary, which, isn't of much concern to anyone really except foxy news and diehard dotardists and second doesn't have the Russian trolls repeating it over and over again.
I don't know if there's much chance the tax cut will pass, something might, they are pretty desperate, but the odds of an average American getting a break are pretty slim.
I think they could easily replace the business tax with a value added tax but that's too complex for this bunch.
There is a simple fact that people need to understand, people pay all the taxes. Now some of it is charged to business who add it to the prices they charge us, some of it is charged direct or on property but we pay all of it. That includes all the foreign taxes built into the prices of their products, so if you drive a German auto you are subsidizing the German social programs.
Think we need an investigation into Australian millionaires interfering in American politics.
I was just in Virginia trying to avoid the ads for the gubernatorial race, but it was hard to do. Some of them are so over the top I can't believe people believe them, but evidence shows that they do. Sad really.
The political discourse in this country has really deteriorated or maybe its just more noticeable. Maybe we need better informed voters.
The administration has issued a scientific analysis the attributes climate change to human behavior, although they individually have tried to deny it. You can't twist science the way you can politics.
Do we get an extra hour of sleep or get back the one they took from us in the Spring? I've lost track.
Friday, November 3, 2017
Bible Economics
In the bible, after Joseph is sold into slavery by his brothers he is asked by the pharaoh to interpret a dream.
Without going into the dream details the interpretation is that Egypt was going to have seven years of plenty followed by seven years of want and that they needed to store up food during the good years to use during the bad years.
Sound advice and it was taken and it made Joseph something of a hero to the pharaoh.
If Joseph had told the pharaoh, just use all the food, and borrow when the time of want comes, I wonder how the bible would have treated his advice
I assume that was the way things were normally done anyways.
Since the financial crisis ended the country's economy has been expanding, albeit at a relatively slow rate. Some of this was because of the regulations which are now being reversed, which restricted certain financial exuberance.
Of course as we see a certain economic prosperity, for many if not all, we have decided to collect less taxes and increase our debt.
There is a certain belief that collecting less taxes will result in faster growth, and its likely that given the chance consumers will in fact spend more. I doubt very much businesses will expand because of the simply supply and demand factors, and what the consumers buy may or may not be produced in this country.
Of course since there aren't corresponding cuts in Government spending, the actual impact is to increase the debt by the amount of the tax cut less increased revenue, if any, from the increased economic activity.
Even worse, history tells us that at some point we will go into recession. Just when is hard to predict, but increased debt coupled with an increase in interest rates may be a factor. At that point, we would most likely need to spend more to try to stem the impact, when we already will have a troubling deficit.
This passes the burden to our children and grandchildren who will have to deal with crippling public debt, devastating climate change, and increased international tensions.
Where is our Joseph?
Without going into the dream details the interpretation is that Egypt was going to have seven years of plenty followed by seven years of want and that they needed to store up food during the good years to use during the bad years.
Sound advice and it was taken and it made Joseph something of a hero to the pharaoh.
If Joseph had told the pharaoh, just use all the food, and borrow when the time of want comes, I wonder how the bible would have treated his advice
I assume that was the way things were normally done anyways.
Since the financial crisis ended the country's economy has been expanding, albeit at a relatively slow rate. Some of this was because of the regulations which are now being reversed, which restricted certain financial exuberance.
Of course as we see a certain economic prosperity, for many if not all, we have decided to collect less taxes and increase our debt.
There is a certain belief that collecting less taxes will result in faster growth, and its likely that given the chance consumers will in fact spend more. I doubt very much businesses will expand because of the simply supply and demand factors, and what the consumers buy may or may not be produced in this country.
Of course since there aren't corresponding cuts in Government spending, the actual impact is to increase the debt by the amount of the tax cut less increased revenue, if any, from the increased economic activity.
Even worse, history tells us that at some point we will go into recession. Just when is hard to predict, but increased debt coupled with an increase in interest rates may be a factor. At that point, we would most likely need to spend more to try to stem the impact, when we already will have a troubling deficit.
This passes the burden to our children and grandchildren who will have to deal with crippling public debt, devastating climate change, and increased international tensions.
Where is our Joseph?
Thursday, November 2, 2017
Taxes and the Economy
The argument for cutting taxes and increasing the debt is that the economy will grow so much that in the end the taxes collected from everybody working will reduce outflows and increase inflows, actually reducing the debt.
Take a simple example. If someone is getting unemployment insurance and not paying taxes but because the economy grows so much he gets off unemployment and starts paying taxes, he offsets some of the reductions.
Two things are required for this to happen though, there have to be people who are getting benefits who will go back to work when jobs are available.
There is no real evidence to support this considering the unemployment rate is so low and companies are complaining about the lack of skilled workers.
The other thing that has to happen is that the tax breaks result in more jobs.
This is pretty clearly not the case for large well established businesses which have excess capital already and are not increasing production, at least no in any great degree.
There could be a certain number of jobs that get created here if the math makes it more profitable to build here because of the cuts.
The question isn't about a few jobs here and there but about a number of jobs to reduce our unemployment rate.
That is a problem since we are already at full employment.
Small businesses on the other hand might expand but the problem is still that the excess workers aren't there.
We are seeing the baby boomers reach retirement age and beginning to draw social security and Medicare. Tax cuts aren't going to make them younger and once they can actually afford to retire unlikely to send them back into the workforce.
So unless we allow substantial immigration, there aren't enough workers, and I don't need to discuss the immigration thing here.
So tax cuts will help some people buy groceries or pay for health care but most of it will benefit people who already have savings and investments.
They can donate some to their favorite monkey..
Take a simple example. If someone is getting unemployment insurance and not paying taxes but because the economy grows so much he gets off unemployment and starts paying taxes, he offsets some of the reductions.
Two things are required for this to happen though, there have to be people who are getting benefits who will go back to work when jobs are available.
There is no real evidence to support this considering the unemployment rate is so low and companies are complaining about the lack of skilled workers.
The other thing that has to happen is that the tax breaks result in more jobs.
This is pretty clearly not the case for large well established businesses which have excess capital already and are not increasing production, at least no in any great degree.
There could be a certain number of jobs that get created here if the math makes it more profitable to build here because of the cuts.
The question isn't about a few jobs here and there but about a number of jobs to reduce our unemployment rate.
That is a problem since we are already at full employment.
Small businesses on the other hand might expand but the problem is still that the excess workers aren't there.
We are seeing the baby boomers reach retirement age and beginning to draw social security and Medicare. Tax cuts aren't going to make them younger and once they can actually afford to retire unlikely to send them back into the workforce.
So unless we allow substantial immigration, there aren't enough workers, and I don't need to discuss the immigration thing here.
So tax cuts will help some people buy groceries or pay for health care but most of it will benefit people who already have savings and investments.
They can donate some to their favorite monkey..
Wednesday, November 1, 2017
Terrorism and Media
Whenever there is a terrorist attack you wonder what can we do to prevent future ones.
Unfortunately it doesn't seem like we can do much against things conducted by a single individual with no obvious ties to a terrorist organization.
Even those who have passing ties are not likely to be stopped, I believe the number of suspects far outweighs our ability to monitor them.
The only thing we can do is not to overreact to them, taking away the publicity the attacks are designed to create.
Of course that isn't likely to happen since our media is pretty sure to provide exactly what the terrorists organizations crave, publicity to make them look powerful and help them recruit.
In a country with a free press there is no way to prevent this and it makes more attacks more likely.
The victims were innocent and certainly didn't deserve this. Their families deserve our sympathy and prayers and to be left to grieve.
I doubt the media circus will allow that.
Unfortunately it doesn't seem like we can do much against things conducted by a single individual with no obvious ties to a terrorist organization.
Even those who have passing ties are not likely to be stopped, I believe the number of suspects far outweighs our ability to monitor them.
The only thing we can do is not to overreact to them, taking away the publicity the attacks are designed to create.
Of course that isn't likely to happen since our media is pretty sure to provide exactly what the terrorists organizations crave, publicity to make them look powerful and help them recruit.
In a country with a free press there is no way to prevent this and it makes more attacks more likely.
The victims were innocent and certainly didn't deserve this. Their families deserve our sympathy and prayers and to be left to grieve.
I doubt the media circus will allow that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)