Thursday, December 2, 2010

Been a while, but ...

... the nonsense has finally pushed me over the edge.

Took a lot, didn't it?

I don't think things are perfect. Great, even. This country, and this world, have a LOT of major issues. No need to go into them here as we all know what they are, right? That isn't what pushed me to jot down a little rant.

Heck, I even 'get' that people are upset and need to vent. I get why they tossed all the Republicans out 2 years ago, and tossed the Democrats from control of the House last month. Things are not as good as they were 10 years ago ... or 20, or 30. We have seen great prosperity under Reagan and Clinton and even did well under Bush, comparatively to how we are doing now. Again, I don't wish to go into what I think the causes are, or who is to blame, or even how this all could be / should be fixed. That isn't what made me sit to write this out.

What I am sick and tired of is the whining. The complaining with no solution offered. Those who feel free to write down anything and everything to make it appear as if we, the US, are in such a drastic state of decline that we cannot recover. That our lives are terrible now, and we were so much better off before. How we, as a generation, ruined it all as it was so perfect when our parents were growing up.

That is a load of horsecrap.

What prompted this need to vent? Another OpEd piece by Fox about how the Democrats have ruined this country? No. An editorial by CNN about how horrible the Republicans are? Nope. A stupid email. Trite little sayings strung together on a Powerpoint presentation (with pictures of modern day Hong Kong, for a great non-sequitor). I've received the same email in different forms for over 10 years. Attributed to comedian Steven Wright, then George Carlin, a Columbine HS student, Robin Williams, ... any number of name changes for the sender to think it would have more impact. It was used against Clinton, Bush, and now Obama. For those who do not think, it substitutes for modern day philosophy. Spoon fed and bite size single servings of bumper sticker philosophy that should be laughed at, yet not only doesn't it go away it was actually used to try to make a point today. By a friend who I admire and is very intelligent, even if prone to outrage for its own sake. Here is the foolish fluff (titled Paradox Of Our Time) which you probably all have received at some point wrapped up as if it is news, or deep philosophy:

The paradox of our time in history is that we have taller buildings, but shorter tempers; wider freeways, but narrower viewpoints; we spend more, but have less; we buy more, but enjoy it less.

We have bigger houses and smaller families; more conveniences, but less time; we have more degrees, but less sense; more knowledge, but less judgment; more experts, but more problems; more medicine, but less wellness.

We drink too much, smoke too much, spend too recklessly, laugh too little, drive too fast, get angry too quickly, stay up too late, get up too tired, read too seldom, watch TV too much, and pray too seldom.

We have multiplied our possessions, but reduced our values. We talk too much, love too seldom, and hate too often. We've learned how to make a living, but not a life; we've added years to life, not life to years.

We've been all the way to the moon and back, but have trouble crossing the street to meet the new neighbor. We've conquered outer space, but not inner space; we've done larger things, but not better things.

We've cleaned up the air, but polluted the soul; we've split the atom, but not our prejudice.

We write more, but learn less; we plan more, but accomplish less. We've learned to rush, but not to wait; we have higher incomes, but lower morals; we have more food, but less appeasement; we build more computers to hold more information to produce more copies than ever, but have less communication; we've become long on quantity, but short on quality.

These are the times of fast foods and slow digestion; tall men, and short character; steep profits, and shallow relationships. These are the times of world peace, but domestic warfare; more leisure, but less fun; more kinds of food, but less nutrition.

These are days of two incomes, but more divorce; of fancier houses, but broken homes. These are days of quick trips, disposable diapers, throw away morality, one-night stands, overweight bodies, and pills that do everything from cheer to quiet to kill.

It is a time when there is much in the show window and nothing in the stockroom; a time when technology has brought this letter to you, and a time when you can choose either to make a difference, or to just hit delete...


It was actually written by Dr. Moorehead, a pastor in Seattle, back in the early 90s. A side note? 17 members of the church claimed the pastor sexually assaulted them, but I suppose the man's character has little to do with what he wrote anyway, right?

The problem is that while unemployment is up, it is not as high as it was in the 80s, let alone in the 30s. Real estate values, stock portfolios, 401ks, retirement accounts, etc.? Not what they were during the DotCom boom and, yes, a lot of people lost a lot of money. But are we really saying people haven't made / aren't making more in RE and the Market than any other time in history? Sure we had to deal with 9-11, have terrorism and wars in the Middle East, have a mountain of debt, etc. but are we losing sight of what we have dealt with in the past? We had planes being hijacked and people killed on them, the Olympics stormed by terrorists, gangsters shooting up cities in turf wars, Pearl Harbor attacked, and have had many more serious wars in our history than those in the Middle East now. We have fought against Communism and extremists many times.

I hear, on one hand, about how my father's generation had it better and easier ...and did things 'right'. I hear how we have ruined it all. Really? Really? They were a great generation and bore a lot on their shoulders. They had it TOUGH. My father was an infant during the Depresssion where Americans lost homes, families, and wandered through the country as beggars. He saw Europe and Asia kill millions and millions of Chinese, Russians, and Jews. He saw a world at war, families wiped out, neighbors lose every make child in a household. We have it tough?!

"...more conveniences, but less time; ..."

Really? Less time? I spend MUCH more time with my kids than my dad did, and so do all my friends and acquaintances. My dad was ALWAYS working.

"...we have more degrees, but less sense; "

Less sense than Hitler, Stalin, or Pol Pot? Less sense to build safer buildings, toys, and cars? Less sense to not let your kids play in the street or to lock up your gun collection? As a group, there have ALWAYS been those with no common sense. We are not worse now, certainly.

"...more knowledge, but less judgment; ..."

Judging by what my own father had to go through, I'm not guessing judgement was in such high quantities then, either.

"... more medicine, but less wellness."

Really? People live far longer, far healthier lives now. We take care of ourselves better and have much higher quality of life in our senior years.


"We drink too much,..."

Yup, but less than we did.

" smoke too much, ..."

Yup, but less than we did.

"...spend too recklessly,..."

Okay, that one is true. ;-)

"... laugh too little, ..."

" I'm not sure the hard working generation prior or the ones before that that had to work long and hard all day, every day laughed a whole lot more. Saying it doesn't make it true.

"...drive too fast,"

Well, I do. But is it worse in general? As soon as cars were invented people started to race them. It is in our nature to 'push'.

"...get angry too quickly, stay up too late, get up too tired, ..."

Tell that to all those who worked long hours every day... basically everyone prior to the 60s.

"...read too seldom, watch TV too much, and pray too seldom."

Maybe. But are we reading, collectively, less than they did 50 years ago? 100 years ago? We should read more and watch less TV, but comparatively we are doing better than ever before and have more leisure time to pursue than ever before.

I'll stop going through it line by line as I hope you get my point. People read this fodder and believe it because 'if I read it, it must be true'. Its BS. A very flawed man's opinion who was preaching to his Christian flock about how they need to be better. Now we get it emailed around by every person trying to make a political statement about how bad things are now.

And some of you reading this fall for it.

Our times have challenges and troubles. We need to work at them and look for solutions, and - while we do so - some areas will get worse. But minorities and women have it FAR better than they did in the past. We work less than our dads, spend more time with our families. Education is better, access is better. We have more time to use imaginations, create art, and less time spent doing drudgery. We have safety nets for those who try and fail, and have higher expectations for our children than ever on this planet. We are healthier, wealthier, and more savvy than ever. Basically we have too much free time to feel sorry for ourselves and examine how tough we have it relevant to how easy we want it to be.

So just stop. Think. Stop reading OpEd pieces on news channels and thinking they are news. They aren't. They are opinions. Stop getting your opinions fed to you. Think with your own brain. If you aren't interested in politics, fine. Not everyone is. Its okay to not have an opinion and leave some things to others who research issues. It sounds condescending but isn't meant to be. Why do we feel we have to have opinions on everything, even things we know little about? Please don't spend 15 minutes to hear what some columnist thinks and absorb it as your own. Maybe that columnist truly studied it and believe deeply in what they wrote. It still wouldn't make it a fact or correct. And maybe they are trying to sell a show or magazine or book or newspaper by either being controversial or pandering to their fans.

We all have worries but we always have had them. Ours are minuscule compared to that which our parents grew up with, let alone those before that. Be grateful. Appreciate what you have as you strive to make things better.

But enough with all the whining, okay?






Wednesday, September 1, 2010

Day: 17, Calories: 0


Log EntryDaily Note:
Okay, two weeks of 'prep' and this week I'm well into the P90X... Still had trouble getting through an entire Plyometrics 'Jump Training' routine yesterday, but maybe next week. Back to Resistance Traing today for Shoulders and Arms...

Thursday, July 30, 2009

Newport JazzFest?

Thinking about Jazz in Newport. I can't call it the Newport Jazzfest, eve though that is what it is, as the name is copywritten and the group that bought it seems to have gone bankrupt or dropped the ball in putting the festival together. George Wein (the original producer/promoter) has stepped back in to make sure we don't go without a festival (as NY did), but its creatig a bit of confusion....

Anyway, here is the deal:

We used to go down early Sat., hit Jazzfest, stay over, hit the festival on Sunday and then head home after. It got so big though that a lot of hotels have a two night minimum stay now, so the last 3 or 4 years the family has been going down on Friday... we spend the day there, hit the pool, etc. Then dinner Friday eve, then go to JazzFest on Sat. for the day. Dinner that night, then JazzFest on Sunday and roll home afterward. We don't have our rooms yet, but I'll try to book them in the next few days. Its pricey (trying not to, but we've paid $450 a night, 2 night minimum before) to stay close by.

Your other options (in addition to doing what we do and biting the bullet expense-wise) are heading down for just one day (either Sat or Sun) and driving home afterward, or staying over but doing so in a hotel / motel a bit further away. You'd get a better price, maybe only a one night stay, and still be able to go to the festival both days if you are interested.

More details:

Get there early (starts around 11, full by noon) if you want a decent view and don't want to be in the weeds.

Bring a blanket and/or folding chairs.

They sell beer there (which I don't drink) but I have heard of people who smuggle in rum or vodka in water bottles...

Food is good and plentiful. Lots of options and usually very tasty.

In the past, there have been three stages, continuous acts on each. I'm not sure they'll do that this year (see below for reason). If you are thinking of a day trip, check out: George Wein's CareFusion Jazz Festival 55 | Newport, RI I think I personally will like Saturday a bit more as its more for the jazz lover. Sunday will be busier though as Tony Bennett will be there, as well as Dave Brubeck (Take 5, you'd know it).

Ticket costs are down as there was some confusion this past year about who would put it together and promote it... The gentleman who did it for years stepped back in late and put it together, but ticket prices have dropped from $50-$75 to $15-$30. I'm guessing that means fewer acts.

That's all I can think of for now, but write and comment if you have any questions...

- E

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Stimulus...

A lot of us have heard the figures... If the Gov. gave the billions they sent to the banks and auto companies (to say nothing of the billions given to local and state govs. as 'stimulus' and to businesses) all American taxpayers would receive upwards of $250,000 each. That started me thinking...

If what the gov. wanted to do was to make sure the banks did not fail do to bad RE investments, that RE values stabilized, the public slide into bankruptcies were halted, and that banks were paid off for the loans then why not simply give the bailout cash to the public under the condition that it pay off outstanding loans and mortgages? The end result would have been for people to have less debt and therefor be more willing to buy goods, the banks would have the bad investments paid off (as well as some of the good ones) and would have healthier balance sheets and not be saddled with either property or bad mortgages. They would be willing to lend (under new tighter restrictions to keep this from happening again) out monies they had (and hadn't lost), and small businesses would benefit as capital to them would not be tied up... No one would lose and everyone and every sector would gain.

The car companies? Rather than bail them out with loans and cash of $9 Billion, why doesn't the federal government buy 450,000 cars at $20,000 each? The government could sell them to the public for pennies on the dollar, or gift them to worthy poor people, or heck, have a lottery... Or just put in a program funded by the monies they would have given in gift payments to the car manufacturers whereby the public could get grants for 50% off an American car, etc. Whatever. There are many ways of passing the money out to make sure both the public benefits (it is our money, right?) and the car companies still are helped. The car companies would have a huge increase in sales which could help them become profitable, the public would get new cars, the environment would benefit from all the older cars being taken off the road, etc. Another win/win situation instead of our current plan which has citizens still paying their money for questionable quality American cars made by companies that may not be around to service them while their tax dollars go into the companies with the same failed management strategies that got them into the trouble in the first place.

This approach, providing stimulus to companies and institutions that need assistance by providing assistance to the public, would work far better than passing out checks to managers (in business or gov. agencies) that have already shown they cannot distribute funds well or manage a department profitably. It can be done everywhere and in every sector, too, including disaster relief. Billions poured into New Orleans after Katrina yet the city is a shell of its former glory, residents have no way of moving back and have to start over, crime is up... How about giving anyone who lost their home $200k towards a new one, plus $30k per person to replace possessions lost (to renters and homeowners alike). Strings attached, of course. Would there be abuses and those who spent the money on drugs by selling their vouchers to others? Sure. No system is foolproof. But not only would retail places see a boom, but contractors would as well. Want to help rebuild its standing and bring back some measure of 'normalcy' to the region? The gov. could pay 50% of travel costs and / or hotel costs for people willing to vacation there. It would bring people back to spend money in an area that lived off tourist dollars, people that currently won't / can't go back to spend money there. The economy would thrive. People would move in to provide the services to a community flush with cash. Those who lost everything could rebuild. Heck, those who helped by paying taxes could get a cheaper vacation! Everyone would benefit. Sure, the gov. would still have to rebuild schools, the levees, etc. but even with those expenditures the costs would be lower than the billions that are poured into the area, most of which have either not been handed out or have disappeared with so much of the city and so many of the former inhabitants still in a terrible position.

While not a fan of huge government, I am all for stimulating the economy at times like these rather than letting the current economy snowball as it runs downhill... This is why we have a government: NOT for when times are good and the economy is growing and threats abroad are minimal, but for when we need a push, a prod, or some protection. To be there to right wrongs that we alone cannot correct, not to run our lives all the time and make people dependent upon the government. But while I agree the government should be helping certain people and sectors, and I do not think handing out cash to people 'willy nilly' is the answer, I do think a controlled program of spending with strings and controls would be FAR better than our current way of 'helping' by handing out cash and 'loans' which barely help the public who's taxes are paying for the loans and who's children will bear much of the burden for paying them.

There is a better way and we have to start looking for it and demanding it.

Sunday, March 1, 2009

Stimulus Plan Necessary But Not Enough


E - As I said long ago, this economy is worse than even the White House is projecting or has been reported... Even with the Stimulus Plan (thank goodness) we are in for a few long years. High unemployment, inflation, reduced availability of credit, dropping RE values for 2 or 3 more years, etc. The money put into the economy by the gov. will help, but it will not be enough to stop this economy. Its the 800 lb. gorilla in the room that no one wants to admit is there, but we are already in a free fall and there is no true end in sight. Not to be too doom and gloom guys, but the last year they have propped things up to look better than they were and the Obama Admin. is still doing its best to put a positive spin on things to restore consumer confidence... Things are much worse than some report...

The fortunes of the American economy have grown so alarming and the pace of the decline so swift that economists are now straining to describe where events are headed, dusting off a word that has not been invoked since the 1940s: depression.

Economists are not making comparisons with the Great Depression of the 1930s, when the unemployment rate reached 25 percent. Current conditions are not even as poor as during the twin recessions of the 1980s, when unemployment exceeded 10 percent, though many experts assert this downturn is on track to be significantly worse.

Rather, economists are using the word depression — a subjective term with no academic definition — to describe a condition of broad and extreme economic distress that remains stubbornly in place for much longer than a typical downturn.

This is more than a matter of semantics. As the government determines its spending plans, readying another infusion of cash for troubled banks while contemplating an additional bailout for the auto industry, the magnitude of those needs will hinge on the extent of the damage.

Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody’s Economy.com, now places the odds of “a mild depression” at 25 percent, up from 15 percent three months ago. In that view, the unemployment rate would reach 10.5 percent by the end of 2011 — up from 7.6 percent at the end of January — average home prices would fall 20 percent on top of the 27 percent they have plunged already, and losses in the financial system would more than triple, to $3.7 trillion.

Allen Sinai, chief global economist at the research firm Decision Economics, sees a 20 percent chance of “a depressionlike possibility,” up from 15 percent a week ago.

“In the housing market, the financial system and the stock market, we’re already there,” Mr. Sinai said. “It is a depression.”

Yet, in drawing up the budget, the White House assumed the economy would expand by a robust 3.2 percent in 2010, with growth accelerating to 4 percent over the next three years.

“It’s a hope, a wing and a prayer,” Mr. Sinai said. “It’s a return to a sanguine view of the economy that is simply not justified.”

If, as is widely anticipated, the economy grows more slowly than the White House assumes, revenue will be lower, forcing the government to cut spending, raise taxes or run larger deficits.

Economists also criticized as unrealistically hopeful the assumptions by the Federal Reserve as it began so-called stress tests to gauge the health of the nation’s largest banks. In testimony, Ben S. Bernanke, the Fed chairman, said that the nation’s unemployment rate would most likely reach 8.8 percent next year.

“That forecast just doesn’t seem realistic,” said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, “and I don’t think it helps the Fed’s credibility to make these sorts of forecasts right now.”

As federal regulators estimate potential losses at banks, the harshest assumptions they are testing entails the unemployment rate topping out at 10.3 percent — the highest level since 1983, but hardly the worst case.

By Mr. Baker’s reckoning, the unemployment rate may exceed 12 percent — the highest level since tracking began in 1948.

“We continue to see across-the-board numbers coming in worse than we expected,” Mr. Baker said.

By Mr. Zandi’s estimation, in the most likely case, the unemployment rate will reach 9.3 percent next year. The distress in the financial system, the job market and real estate have become inextricably intertwined.

As troubled banks remain hesitant to lend, even healthy companies are laying off workers. As more Americans lose jobs, they are cutting spending, depriving businesses of revenue, and falling behind on house, car and credit card payments, multiplying losses in the financial system. As more homes land in foreclosure and would-be buyers fail to secure mortgages, housing prices fall further, adding to the losses of the banks — a downward spiral.

Many economists expect that the labor data to be released next Friday will show that as many as 700,000 jobs disappeared in February, lifting the unemployment rate near 8 percent and pushing total job losses to more than four million since the recession began in December 2007.

Given the brutal forces at play, some experts question the administration’s decision to publicize the bank stress tests, as opposed to conducting them quietly.

“It invited the interpretation that this was the beginning of triage for the banks, that we were going to start lining them up and shooting them,” said Alan S. Blinder, a former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve and a professor at Princeton. “There are some things in the bank supervisor role that you just keep secret.”

Others argue that the tests could sow needed assurance. “The stress test could create transparency,” said Alan D. Levenson, chief economist at T. Rowe Price in Baltimore.

As the gruesome data accumulates, this much is already clear: Transparency is not for the squeamish.

Mr. Levenson noted that the weakening economy was destroying demand for goods and services even faster than the $787 billion stimulus program could replace it.

E - The time to put aside the partisan bull is here... without the additional gov. spending and projects to keep millions employed, spending, paying taxes, and off the unemployment rolls pulling money from the system, the upcoming years would be worse than anything we have seen in our lifetime. It still may be.

Tuesday, February 3, 2009

QRW's Best $12 And Under California Wines

Cabernet Sauvignon

2003 Coastal Ridge, California - $7
2005 Fat Cat, California - $10
2004 Forest Glen, California - $11
2004 ForestVille, California - $6
2003 Harlow Ridge, Lodi - $10
2006 Napa Ridge, Napa Valley - $12
2006 Red Truck, Central Coast - $12
2006 Redwood Creek, California - $8
2005 Round Hill, California - $9

Merlot

2005 Forest Glen, California - $11
2004 Napa Ridge, Napa Valley - $12
2006 Redwood Creek, California - $8
2005 Round Hill, California - $8

Zinfandel / Shiraz

2005 Bonny Doon Vineyard Syrah, Le Pousseur, Central Coast - $10
2005 ForestVille Zinfandel, California - $6
2005 Harlow Ridge Shiraz, Lodi - $10
2003 Napa Ridge Syrah, Napa Valley - $12

Red Blends

2006 Red Truck Petite Sirah, California - $10
2005 Grand Pacific Starliner Red - $12

Whites - Chardonnay, Sauvignon Blanc, Blends

2006 Fat Cat Chardonnay, California - $10
2005 Gallo of Sonoma Reserve Chardonnay, Sonoma - $12
2005 Grand Pacific Steamliner White - $12
2005 Mont Pellier Chardonnay, California - $7
2005 Napa Ridge, Napa Valley - $12
2006 Round Hill Chardonnay, California - $9
2006 White Knight Sauvignon Blanc, Lodi - $12
2005 White Knight Viognier, Clarksburg - $12

For details or the article, you'll have to get the Quarterly Review Of Wines, Summer 2008 edition...  Besides, this gives you a jumping off point.  You have recommendations to start, right?  Isn't experimenting and trying them to see what YOU like the pint, anyway?


Friday, January 23, 2009

Grape Varietals In France

   Do any of you find French wines to be exceptionally confusing? 
   Well - they can be!  Unlike most wines from the US, New Zealand, Australia, etc., the French wine labels do not usually name the grape varietals. Instead, they list the country of origin, the region, the vintage, the estate, or "maker", the winery and/or vineyard, and occasionally the shipper or négotiant.
   This (very generalized!) list outlines the primary varietals found in a few important regions: 
Burgundy:
Reds: Pinot Noir
White: Chardonnay 
Bordeaux:
Reds: Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot, Petit Verdot, Cabernet Franc, Malbec
Whites: Sauvignon Blanc, Semillion, Muscadelle

Loire:
Reds: Cabernet Franc, Gamay, Pinot Noir, Cabernet Sauvignon
Whites: Chenin Blanc,  Melon De Burgogne, Sauvignon Blanc
Alsace:
Whites: Gewuztraminer, Muscat, Pinot Blanc, Pinot Gris, Riesling
Rhone:
Reds: Grenache, Syrah, Mouvedre, Cinsault
Whites: Grenache Blanc, Clairette, Bourboulenc, Roussanne, Picpoul

Tuesday, January 20, 2009

A rebuttal regarding Obama

[The original comment I took exception to:]

C - "I too want our president to suceed.
The national pride we all should share in a color blind election where the most capable and competent person just happens to be black or a woman... is the epitomy of democracy.
And no, McCain was not that person. Maybe no republican could have been this year.
No it was Hillary's year but race and style trumped ability and everyone-even the fanatical gleam in the eye white hypocrites whose lack of self awarness to this fact does not excuse the reprehensible origins of their loyalty to Hussien-knows this and that's what makes it inexcusable."


[My comment in response]

E - What a load of hooey.

 

McCain would have beaten Hillary.  It was never her year as it will never be.  She would have won the Dem nomination, but she had too many people who hated her to win.  Males would have left the Dems, even after all this, in droves.  McCain would have never nominated a fluff like Palin and would have taken the White House.  You want to trivialize Obama's win or write it off with trite explanations, but it was simple: Best man for the job.  He was inspirational when the nation needed to be inspired, charismatic and an obviously driven leader when we were tired of what the ass in the Oval Office was trying to sell us.  He is intelligent and educated, and we wanted that after finding out Texas hokum doesn't work when running anything larger than a BBQ.  And while the problems we face seem like it would condemn an inexperienced man to failure in the election, America didn't want a 30 year Senator who helped get us where we are or a close connection to the past administration, tainted and full of scandal that it was.  He lost votes because he was black (as is evidenced by Dem areas in the south that voted for McCain) but won because he was young, intelligent, hard working, well spoken, committed, and basically the anti-Bush.  

 

Will he do as well as everyone hopes?  How could he possibly?  Will some of his plans be disliked?  Sure, as no one is ever pleased by everything.  What I may like, you may dislike (and vice versa).  But I think he has earned the right - through his own well run campaign and hard work as well as through the failures of the past administration - to give it a shot and have the support of the people.

 

The simple fact so many people now have hope in this country should tell you something about his ability to inspire and how desperate the populace is for the country to go in a different direction in many areas.  And his ability to inspire and bring 'hope' back to the people will do more for this troubled economy than any program he initiates or vetoes.

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

'Progressive Taxation? I think mine is more about progress..

 As an advocate of the Flat Tax (but an advocate that realizes accountants, the IRS, and lawyers have too much to lose to ever let it happen), I wrote this in response to someone who advocated steeply progressive taxation.  They believe the rich need to pay a lot more.  I don't think that progressive taxation is just unfair to the wealthy, but to everyone.  Here was my response:

"You don't see it at work in the real world... Union guys turning down work they want because they'll lose most of it in taxes if they get bumped... Under the table jobs for a lot of blue collar workers so they won't get bumped up - it isn't just the taxes on the other job, its the affect on the main one.  I know of a contractor who makes $35/hr and his boss charges $50/hr. for him.    The contractor works as much as possible outside the loop now - he makes no more, the homeowner saves a little, the boss loses money, the gov. loses money in taxes and fees...  Why?  Why would the contractor do that when he makes no more?   Because if he does it through his boss he'll get bumped to a new bracket and lose out.  THAT is the real world. "

" Rather than say every citizen should pay the same (as we all have the same army, same roads, etc.) if you want to say that someone makes 100 times what you do then they should pay 100 times what you do then I agree.  But 'Progressive' Taxation is un-American.  That said, I could still get behind it IF it were on an extreme income...  ie, EVERYONE under $35,000 pays nothing (as they are just getting started or need every penny they earn to live).  At $35,000 to $55,000 the population would pay 5% (to ease into paying taxes.   From $55,000 to $350,000 we would all pay 10%.  From $350,000 to $1,000,000 we would pay 20%.  Over $1,000,000 a year you pay $35%. "

"Would it make people earning $950,000 stop and think about a yarly salary increase?  Sure would. But how many are getting that?  And those that get more than $1,000,000 per year in compensation usually make substantially more or it is based on performance (through bonuses).  Would some not take the 'raise'?  Maybe, but the money would then be reinvested somewhere rather than taken in compensation.  The gov. wouldn't get it in taxes but it would still help the economy.  Meanwhile, everyone from $35,000 on up would be encouraged to work more, work harder, try to get ahead, etc.  The increments would be small enough that the raise or additional work would not be chewed away, and those we need to encourage to work harder and take risks would be the benefit of their risks and hard work, not see it get taken in taxes."

I'm sure there are holes in the plan and I still think a straight 10% (or whatever) Flat Tax would be better as it addresses corporate taxes as well, but it is far better than what we have now.

 

Thursday, October 30, 2008

A Friend's Synopsis

I wish I wrote this but a very good friend did...  Eloquent and pithy, I think:


__


I do not root for failure. I also do not say my country right or wrong. The invasion was a mistake because Hussein was already defeated and completely contained. He kept his psychotic people under control, through fear but so what? That was their problem. Finding and eliminating Bin laden and Al Qaeda was our problem. Hussein also kept Iran in check. Now none of this is happening. IT WAS A MISTAKE! Now when we leave it will fall apart but that was not the case before w. went in and his father and his men knew that. HOWEVER, if you go, employ the Powell doctrine. Kick ass, take control not allow an army to be disbanded and therefore spring up as a series of tribal insurgent armies supplied with arms we were unable to secure. THIS WAS A MISTAKE! This is horrible for our country! It never should have happened. Wrong from it’s conceit, it’s justification which was all lies, it’s concept, it’s design and lack of follow through. The world is either horrified or emboldened by our now clearly seen weakness. We can not fight simultaneous wars even when in the same region. We cannot afford this war, especially when giving massive tax cuts at the same time. So let’s enrich another enemy, China. Fucking brilliant! Wrong in it’s ENTIRETY!

I do not root for my country to fail. I do not turn a blind eye to its folly. An American victory would have been to vanquish the Taliban and shown for however long it may have lasted that a religion of such monstrous intolerance and backward looking yearnings for the human race would not be allowed to establish itself in the league of nations. That is not the future for mankind. Al Qaeda would not have been so strong if we cut off it’s head and it would not have so many new recruits. We should have gone after the root cause of this conflict and tried to see what could be done to improve. We should follow the money to Saudi Arabia and choke that off.

            Now of course the situation is this: When we leave, whenever we leave Iraq, it falls apart. Iran steps into the vacuum. Everyone hates us, our children died for nothing, the Iraqi oil is doing us no good but w, sure showed his father who was the better man.

            I can not live up to Christ’s mandate. I can never forgive this asshole, I hate him and always will. You know why? It is because I love and root for the best of the United States of America. This is not it.

Avanti WineFridge

Just a complete rant that I will take down if the company makes this right...  If not, I'll post that, too, as well as a link to a website I'll set up.

(11/9/08 - NOTE:  They have sent a new unit which - so far - is working well; details below)

Anyway...  

Ordered an Avanti wine fridge mid January 2007 on-line while buying appliances for a kitchen remodel at our house...  It was delivered in February and installed mid March 2007.  
It stopped working while we were on vacation in July 2007.

After calling the seller (to find out they didn't do repairs) and then Avanti (who referred me to a local repair place for warranty work) we called A-Z Appliance.  They came out in August 07, took one look and said they couldn't fix it as it was the electrical panel and 'those always go bad".  They would order parts but 'they are terrible about shipping quickly".

The part was ordered but was back ordered and unavailable..  until December of 07.  A-Z came out and installed the part and left (no one was home).  

Obviously it still didn't work.  

Two weeks later they were back out to check it out.  They said it would have to go back to the shop... but they couldn't take it as the truck was full.  Later that week theyame out and took fridge in for repair.

I finally got them to bring it back in mid- Feb.  Happy to finally have a working wine fridge instead of a gaping hole in the cupboards as we did over the holidays, we were frustrated but finally satisfied customers.

The unit worked 3 months and stopped by the end of May, again.

After numerous calls to A-Z who wasn't sure what they could realistically do any longer, they said unit is defective with an internal leak and cannot be repaired.  A new one would be necessary.  With both A-Z and myself calling Avanti, in early August, Avanti called me to say unit cannot be repaired, per a discussion with the repairshop, and that new one is necessary.  I was to send $10. (?!) to them to do so.

Check sent the next day on 8/7.

Check was cashed by Avanti on 8/13.

By late Sept., I called A-Z and Avanti wondering why I had not heard anything.  Unable to get any answers, leaving many messages, I finally spoke to someone on 10/1 at Avanti who said it had been too long  and that the item was out of warranty!  No fridge was to be sent, despite cashing check, despite acknowledging it cannot be fixed, despite it never working correct and being out of service for all but 6 or 7 months of the 20 months I had it...

Getting past a customer service representative I spoke to Meaghan, ' a manager'.  After telling her the problem she said she would talk to A-Z to have them confirm the issue and would call me back.  I told her that no one ever called back and I spent a lot of time on hold at Avanti... She promised she would call back by the end of the day.

Obviously, she didn't.

I called that eve, the next day, and other times all week.  Always told I was being transferred in, it alwys was put on voice mail and no one ever called back.

Totally frustrated by the worse customer service I have ever heard about, I asked for her 'boss' and was told to speak to David ______ (head of dept., supposedly).  He instructed me to fax/mail a copy of the sticker from the back of the wine cooler to him and a new cooler would be sent out.  I pulled the unit myself, and then both faxed and mailed it.

Having heard nothing by the end of the month again, I called on 10/30 to check the status.  More time on hold to get through, more time on hold after speaking to a rep and giving her the RA number for the issue...  After being put on hold for some time, the rep returned and  told me she could not even locate the RA number for my problem!  

I asked to speak to David and was given - surprise - his voice mail.  I left yet another message.

As of 3pm I have not heard back from anyone...  We'll see.

More to come, I'm sure...
---
I received a call later that day from a customer service representative who asked if i would be home the following week, lol.   She mentioned I would receive a call from a trucking company about delivery as the wine fridge would be sent right out.

Sure enough, I received a call from a trucker the following week who wanted to bring the unit by.  I pulled the current one out, and wrestled it down the stairs myself in time for the new unit to show up that afternoon.   Bringing the new one in and setting it up (they are 54 bottle units, I believe) it appears to be working well.  While I wish the original unit had worked properly in the first place and that it had not taken so long to get the problem resolved, in the end they did do the right thing, thankfully... 

Sunday, October 26, 2008

What Sarah Palin Has Taught Us



October 24, 2008, 7:00 a.m.

An Instructive Candidacy
What Sarah Palin taught us about ourselves.

By Victor Davis Hanson

Soon this depressing campaign will be over, and we can reflect on what we learned from our two-month introduction to Sarah Palin.

Clearly, it is more than we would have ever wished to know about ourselves.
E - That a small percentage of us can b fooled by winking women with nice legs?


First, there turns out to be no standard of objectivity in contemporary journalism. Palin’s career as a city councilwoman, mayor, and governor of Alaska was never seen as comparable to, or — indeed, in terms of executive experience — more extensive than, Barack Obama’s own legislative background in Illinois and Washington.
E - Nor should it be. 'Councilwoman'?  Mayor of a town so small it could fit in most high school stadiums?  Governor of the most remote and unpopulated state in the country and one of the most remote areas of the world?  Titles and positions don't get you votes.  Abilities do.  She has none.


 Somehow we forgot that a mother of five taking on the Alaskan oil industry and the entrenched male hierarchy was somewhat more challenging than Barack Obama navigating the sympathetic left-wing identity politics of Chicago.
E - Somehow this fluff piece overlooks that a well educated and intelligent member of Congress who can build coalitions and lead people is far more qualified than a hockey mom who has done nothing but get elected based on looks, had a small scandal already, and been appointed to a post she is unqualified for based on nothing more than her gender and ability to appeal a the fringe group who doesn't look deeply but is satisfied with one issue.


So we seem to have forgotten that the standards of censure of her vice-presidential candidacy were not applied equally to the presidential campaign of Barack Obama. 
E - Absolutely unequal.  He has been scrutinized for 4-6 years and she couldn't stand up to 2 months.  He can handle himself with anyone and she would be eaten alive and is unable to stand up to a Today Show host.


The media at times seems unaware of this embarrassment, namely that their condemnation of Sarah Palin as inexperienced equally might apply to Barack Obama — and to such a degree that by default we were offered the lame apology (reiterated by Colin Powell himself) that Obama’s current impressive campaigning, not his meager political accomplishments, was already an indication of a successful tenure as president. The result is that we now know more about the Palin pregnancies — both of mother and daughter — that we do the relationships of Tony Rezko, Bill Ayers, Reverend Wright, and Father Pfleger with our possible next president. 

Indeed, the media itself — in private, I think — 
E - Nice of him to speak for all that he disagrees with...


...would admit that while have learned almost everything about Tasergate and the Bridge to Nowhere, we assume that at some future date a publicity-starved, megalomaniac Rev. Wright will soon offer his post-election memoirs, detailing just how close he and a President Obama were. Or we will learn Barack Obama and Bill Ayers, as long-time friends, in fact, did communicate via phone and e-mail well after Ayers had told the world, about the time of 9/11, that he, like our present-terrorist enemies, likewise wished he had engaged in more bombing attacks against the United States government. And the media never wondered whether a Palin’s falling out with those who ran Alaska might have been more of a touchstone to character than Obama’s own falling in with those who ran Chicago.
E - While you would like to judge Obama by 2 or 3 of the millions he has dealt with, searching for something - anything - that will hurt the campaign, she can be judged on her own proven lack of ability and honesty.


While Gov. Palin’s frequent college transfers and Idaho degree are an item of snickering among pundits, none of them can claim to care much about Barack Obama’s own undergraduate career. To suggest that he release his undergraduate transcript is near blasphemy; to scribble that Sarah Palin’s Down Syndrome child was not her own is journalism as we now know it. 
E - Have any reputable journalists said that?  

To care that Joe Biden is vain, with bleached teeth, the apparent recipient of some sort of strange facial tightening tonic, and hair plugs is deservedly mean and petty; 
E - Yet this author will say it willingly.  NOT PETTY AT ALL, LOL.


...to sneer that the Alaskan mom of five bought a new wardrobe to run for Vice President is, of course, vital proof for the American voter of her vanity and shallowness.
E - Ah, she is simply buying b new outfits.  He is shallow and vain.  Got it.


Second, there does not seem to be much left of feminism any more. Of course, feminists once gave liberal pro-choice Bill Clinton a pass for his serial womanizing of vulnerable subordinates, and Oval Office antics with a young female intern. But they gave the game away entirely when they went after Gov. Palin for her looks, accent, pregnancies, and religion, culminating in assessments of her from being no real woman at all to an ingrate — piggy-backing on the pioneer work of self-acclaimed mavericks like themselves. 
E - Sorry.  Feminism was proven by her being turned down.  It showed that talent and issues and brains is what matters, not boobs.  Feminists should vote on talent and issues, not on any woman just because they are a woman.


Feminism, it turns out, is no longer about equal opportunity and equal compensation, but, in fact, little more than a strain of contemporary elitist identity politics, and support for unquestioned abortion. Had Gov. Sarah Palin just been a mother of a single child at Vassar rather than of five in Alaska, married to a novelist rather than a snow-machiner, an advocate of pro-choice, who shot pictures of Alaskan ferns rather than shot moose — feminists would have hailed her as a principled kindred soul, and trumpeted her struggles against Alaskan male grandees. 
E - If she was not a woman picked to look pretty but repeat what she was told to, a woman picked on talent and not the fact she was anti-abortion to appeal to the far right, she would have had a chance.  No woman who wants equal rights thinks that picking a backwoods hockey mom - simply because she wears a dress - advances any of their causes.  And this writer's complete misunderstand and misrepresentation of it shows he doesn't have a clue.


So there was something creepy about droves of irate women, in lock-step blasting Sarah Palin from the corridors of New York and Washington, when most of them were the recipients of the traditional spoils of either family connections, inherited money, or the advantages that accrue from insider power marriages. Indeed, very few of Palin’s critics on their own could have emerged from a small-town in Alaska, with an intact marriage and five children, to run the state of Alaska.
E - A former beauty contestant who gets elected to office by oil workers being compared to any real politician is silly.  Inflating her accomplishments and belittling others wins no points or votes.


We have come to understand that — for a TV anchorwoman, op-ed columnist, or professor — it would be a nightmare to birth a Down Syndrome child in her mid-forties, or to have had her pregnant unwed teen actually deliver her baby. 
E - Foolish and stupid comment.  She has been praised for both and its been hands off on any complaints about her daughter.  Empty whining.


In the world outside Sarah Palin’s Wasilla, these are career-ending blunders that abort the next job promotion or book tour— or the future career of a prepped young daughter on her way to the Ivy League.

Third, from the match-up of Joe Biden and Sarah Palin, we discovered that our media does not know anything about the nature of wisdom — how it is found or how it is to be adjudicated. For the last eight weeks, Palin has been demonized as a dunce because she did not, in the fashion of the class toady with his hand constantly up in the first row, impress in flash-card recall, the glasses-on-his-nose Charlie Gibson, or clinched-toothed Katie Couric. 
E - She has been recognized as a dunce because she doesn't know the issues or facts, doesn't know she doesn't know, and is even too stupid to parrot back the slogans the McCain camp has tried to teach her.  They now know what a fool she is and have instructed her to speak on 3 or 4 issues and disregard any other question asked as she is incapable of learning the response they want her to make.  It is proof even her boss, McCain, realizes how bad she is.


Meanwhile Joe Biden has just been Ol’ Joe Biden — which means not that he can get away with the occasional gaffe, but that can say things so outrageous, so silly, and so empty that, had they come out of the mouth of Sarah Palin, she would have long ago been forced to have stepped aside from the ticket.
E - She couldn't repeat his gaffes as they have more than 1 syllable words in them.


Factual knowledge? Biden, in the midst of a financial meltdown on Wall Street, apparently thinks that the last time it happened in 1929, we heard FDR rally us on television. And such made-up nonsense came in the form, as many of Biden’s gaffes do, of a rebuke to the supposedly obtuse George W. Bush.

Sobriety? Biden now admits that dangerous powers abroad will immediately test a President Obama. He warns that the results of such a crisis will be very disappointing to the American electorate, and thus Team Obama/Biden will need loyal supporters to rally as their polls sink. Yet remember that Biden himself has been a fierce and opportunistic critic of Bush, who despite a frenzy of congressional demagoguery, initiated the successful surge and ignored the very polls that the for-the-war/against-the-war Biden so carefully tracked. More importantly, if an Ahmadinejad, Chavez, or Putin ever had any doubts about carving out new spheres of uncontested influence, they may entertain very few now.
E - They are getting stronger now.  And Palin, who can't stand up to a newscaster, would be eaten alive.
  

Veracity? If one were to think that Biden’s past brushes with plagiarism, inflated bios, and falsehood were exceptional rather than characteristic, the last two months confirmed otherwise. For all the false recall, it is hard to remember anything he said in his Palin debate that was true, whether describing the status of Hezbollah in Lebanon or his own past remarks about the wisdom of burning coal. 
E - What I do remember is that he debated and answered questions asked, instead of giving canned responses apropos of nothing they were speaking about.  
  

Silliness? Imagine the following outbursts, mutatis mutandis, from the mouth of a Sarah Palin — “
John McAmerica,” “a Palin-McCain administration,” “Senator George Obama,” “Congressman Joe Biden,” who is both “good looking,” and “drop-dead gorgeous.” Or “I guarantee you, John McCain ain’t taking my shotguns. . . . If he tries to fool with my Beretta, he’s got a problem. I like that little over and under, you know? I’m not bad with it. So give me a break.”
E - Give me a break. Of Biden winked and repeated canned statements and stumbled and mumbled and was locked away until the debate trying to memorize soundbites or said he wouldn't debate but would just say whatever he wanted on whatever subject he wanted... IF he did that he would have been torn apart.  Yet she gets praise for the debate because she didn't drool on herself.


Or “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.” Or “Mitt Romney is as qualified or more qualified than I am to be vice president of the United States of America. Quite frankly he might have been a better pick than me.” 

The list could go on ad nauseam. But we got the picture. Biden has devolved from the ridiculous to the unhinged, confident that in-house journalism would understand that the law graduate with 36 years in the Senate was simply being Joe, while a Sarah Palin, who flinched when asked to parse the Bush Doctrine, was a Neanderthal creationist.
E - Talk about spin!  Digging up all the ridiculous stuff from Biden and overlooking Palin repeating, word for word, foolish responses to different questions asked by Couric...  


 I thought by now the You-tubed exchange of a Congressional Finance Committee hearing between the pompous Harvard Law School graduate Barney Frank and the conniving Harvard Law School graduate Franklin Raines — at the proverbial moment of conception of the financial meltdown — would have put to rest the notion that graduation from law school was any proof of either wisdom or morality.
E - It proves nothing.  Saying a Harvard degree means nothing is nothing but pandering to the foolish.


I don’t know whether Sarah Palin would make a great vice president. 
E - Fortunately the majority of the country does.


But I did learn that by the standard of John Kerry’s pick of John Edwards, and now Barack Obama’s choice of Joe Biden, as running mates, she is wise and ethical beyond their measure.
E - And I have learned that in a long record of foolish picks for VP candidates by both parties, John McCain stooped to a new low in poor judgement.


Thursday, May 15, 2008

Musing ...

While we want to think that we are a composite of our ideals and beliefs, we are - in reality - a composite of our actions.

Monday, May 12, 2008

The Caucus System and Delegates


Below is an excerpt from an e-mail debate:

BA - Do anyone of you believe in the party system?
EE - Yes. It has its flaws but I do think it works better than any others. I think the partys do need to change though, to become the COnservative and Liberal Parties rather than cloak them behind Democrat and Republican labels.

BA - Do you actually know what the dem or rep platform is?

If you say yes then tell me how how they don't put it together until the convention
EE - The problem is that the party should let the nominee set the platform as he/she is who the public wants. Instead the party sets the platform and supposedly the nominee is to work for that goal.


BA - No one has the balls to rock the system. The party system should be over same with the electoral college.
EE - Again, it has its flaws but has worked better than any other. It needs some changes, but I do not think it should be tossed. As far as the electoral college, I think the whole country should have primaries on the same day. The system where a candidate gets knocked out because he didn't do well in Utah and New Hampshire when they might win in Ohio and Pennsylvania is ridiculous. Barring that, we need a system where delegates vote on the public behalf. For example: Joe, Jim, and Fred are running for office and Fred and Jim are very, very similar in views. Joe is very different. Joe wins 40% of the vote. Jim wins 39% of the vote, and Fred wins only 21%. If all votes go to the winner of the state, 60% are unhappy. If Fred drops out and it comes to a fight, his delegates should be able to support Jim. We need a system that addresses that... one where you are locked in for your candidate as long as they are in, but can switch if they drop out or are voted out.

Just one man's opinion.
K - You are not alone my good man.

Sunday, May 11, 2008

40 Tips For Better Life

From a site I stumbled upon... I have added comments (in green) where I thought appropriate.

40 Tips for Better Life - 2008

1. Take a 10-30 minute walk every day. And while you walk, smile. It is the ultimate anti-depressant.
E - Not sure about this one but I have heard it often...
2. Sit in silence for at least 10 minutes each day.
E - Even if its in the car while you drive. Try not turning on the radio for 10 minutes. Or use the last 10 minutes before you fall asleep to think.
3. Buy a DVR and tape your late night shows and get more sleep.
E - Watch those you really want to see when you have time, instead of watching the other garbage and staying up to see late night programs. I may stay up late but never to just watch television.
4. When you wake up in the morning complete the following statement, ‘My purpose is to __________ today.’
E - Or at least think about what you would like to accomplish or what you would like changed. Then do something about it.
5. Live with the 3 E’s — Energy, Enthusiasm, and Empathy.
6. Play more games and read more books than you did in 2007.
7. Make time to practice meditation and/or prayer. They provide us with daily fuel for our busy lives.
E - More good advice I don't listen to... Yet.
8. Spend time with people over the age of 70 and under the age of 6.
9. Dream more while you are awake.
10. Eat more foods that grow on trees and plants and eat less food that is manufactured in plants.
E - Everyone 'wants' to look good and be fit. But it doesn't come by accident. If you take the easy road and make the easy choices (eating sugary and fatty foods, not exercising) then you will shorten your life and eventually look like someone who eats sugary and fatty foods and doesn't exercise. It isn't rocket science.
11. Drink green tea and plenty of water. Eat blueberries, wild Alaskan salmon, broccoli, almonds & walnuts.
E - Avoid things with saturated fat, Crisco, etc. If it doesn't spoil or break down, why would you want it in your body surrounding your organs and floating through your veins? Does that even sound like a remotely good thing?
12. Try to make at least three people smile each day.
13. Clear clutter from your house, your car, your desk and let new and flowing energy into your life.
14. Don’t waste your precious energy on gossip, OR issues of the past, negative thoughts or things you cannot control. Instead invest your energy in the positive present moment.
E - Probably the most important step here. It goes well with Step 40.
15. Realize that life is a school and you are here to learn. Problems are simply part of the curriculum that appear and fade away like algebra class but the lessons you learn will last a lifetime.
16. Eat breakfast like a king, lunch like a prince and dinner like a college kid with a maxed out charge card.
E - Unless, to you, that means boxed Mac N Cheeze ;-)
17. Smile and laugh more. It will keep the negative blues away.
18. Life isn’t fair, but it’s still good.
19. Life is too short to waste time hating anyone.
20. Don’t take yourself so seriously. No one else does.
21. You don’t have to win every argument. Agree to disagree.
22. Make peace with your past so it won’t spoil the present.
23. Don’t compare your life to others’. You have no idea what their journey is all about.
24. No one is in charge of your happiness except you.
E - Sure things can always get better or less stressful. But do not let that make you unhappy where you are now.
25. Frame every so-called disaster with these words: ‘In five years, will this matter?’
E - And "Can I change this so that it won't matter so much?"
26. Forgive everyone for everything.
E - FOrgive even if you can't forget.
27. What other people think of you is none of your business.
28. Remember God heals everything.
E - God or Time, whichever. Everyone has bad events befall them. Don't let them continue to drag you down any more than they have to.
29. However good or bad a situation is, it will change.
30. Your job won’t take care of you when you are sick. Your friends will. Stay in touch.
31. Get rid of anything that isn’t useful, beautiful or joyful.
32. Envy is a waste of time. You already have all you need.
33. The best is yet to come.
34. No matter how you feel, get up, dress up and show up.
35. Do the right thing!
E - Not because someone will know. Not because you feel God is watching. Not because you'll get credit. Do it on principle and to make yourself a better person that you yourself can be proud of.
36. Call your family often.
37. Each night before you go to bed complete the following statements: I am thankful for _______. Today I accomplished ____.
38. Remember that you are too blessed to be stressed.
39. Enjoy the ride. Remember this is not Disney World and you certainly don’t want a fast pass. You only have one ride through life so make the most of it and enjoy the ride.
40. Laugh when you can, apologize when you should, and let go of what you can’t change.
E - And, of course, Treat others as you want to be treated. Do not do things you wouldn't want done to you.