Dog Brothers Public Forum
Return To Homepage
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 28, 2015, 09:50:03 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
87206 Posts in 2280 Topics by 1069 Members
Latest Member: ctelerant
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 97 98 [99] 100 101 ... 132
4901  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2012 Presidential on: March 29, 2011, 01:27:03 PM
From CCP: "Republicans MUST...address the wealth gap and how the middle class is not going to continue falling behind and ever more government entitlements paid for by taxpayers including years of retirement, health care, is not the answer to sustain a middle class lifestyle."
One example of wealth gap: Black unemployment is up 25.4% under Obama.  That causes more dependency, but it is also evidence of failure. 

The message (IMO) needs to put a new opening of optimism, opportunity and economic growth - for all.  Contrast that with the current message of abject pessimism - we collapse if we don't spend trillions in pretend stimuli.

The bully pulpit needs to mention that we also need our best and the brightest to design and build products, invest and hire in the private sector, not just agitators and regulators.  smiley
4902  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: Supplements: Legal and Illegal, steroids, growth hormone, etc on: March 29, 2011, 11:13:19 AM
“He changed sexually, in his testicles and performance and that.”

And so it goes for a right to privacy.  sad

I understand Bonds wanting to hit more home runs, but I don't understand a man feeling more manly by abnormally bulking up at the expense of causing the body to stop the production of natural testosterone, cause sexual dysfunction, health risks, etc.  Strange priorities.

4903  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Rules of the Road/Fire Hydrant on: March 29, 2011, 10:45:34 AM
Welcome back BBG!!!  smiley 
4904  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Housing Crisis Explained and Questions Answered on: March 28, 2011, 02:42:23 PM
"You mention the 1 to 1 factor of people needing homes, and those coming to market.  I don't know where you live, but here in CA, that is completely off."

pp: What I was trying to say was that after we accept that there is already a huge number vacant homes in America, each new foreclosure releases one additional house to the market and one additional family to the market.  Each additional house foreclosed will tend to drive the prices down, but the family still needs to rent, buy or move in with family; they are still some part of demand for housing.  In other words, it is a net loss to the housing market, but not a total loss.  People foreclosed in the third (fourth?) year of this are underwater but not necessarily unemployed, hopeless or even with terrible credit except for this one new foreclosure.  They will be moving down in the market but not completely out.  Did that make any more sense?
4905  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Newt Gingrich on: March 28, 2011, 02:11:42 PM
Very Funny GM.  The marriage joke flew right over my head - three times.

One point I noticed unreported about the so-called past infidelity is that the potential new first lady, Mrs. Newt, that Newt so badly wants us to get to know, was also a knowing and consenting participant in the 'home wrecking' chapter.  Someone try to tell me that married women, the majority are Republican, will be forgiving of that.
4906  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: US Foreign Policy on: March 28, 2011, 02:04:40 PM
Yemen and Syria would be 2 examples of countries more strategic to our interests than Libya. Egypt, Israel, Bahrain perhaps, Saudi, Jordan, Iran, Pakistan, etc. are more strategic to our interests.  Sec. Gates says Libya is not in our vital interest.  Tonight the President will imply something else.  I am not trivializing the importance of Libya, but can anyone name all the countries more strategic to our interests at this moment than Libya?

Regarding NFZ's in Syria and Yemen, I do not know.  Yemen voted for the no fly zone in Libya.  My understanding is that the 'rebels' in Yemen are even more clearly al Qaidi affiliates than Libya's rebels and that the leadership is more with us on anti-terror, and less tied to things like shooting done American civilians.  In normal times we would be more on the side of the regime than with the rebels (I would think).  With Obama in charge, who knows.  In that sense an NFZ doesn't make sense.  Obama ruled out troops a year ago,  but again, who knows.

Yemen was once North and South Yemen, the south was a cold war Communist state.  Yemen supported Saddam's invasion of Kuwait.  Now they fight against their own harboring of terrorists and camps. (?)  A sea border with Somalia only thickens the plot.  Yemen is deserving of its own thread if only we knew enough to post in it.
4907  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Newt Gingrich on: March 28, 2011, 01:21:48 PM
Crafty: "Did Newt flip flop or is it a bum rap?"

They all have this problem, including Obama and Sec. Gates.  The point with Gingrich is that he wants to be held to a higher standard.  He is (?) the one with experience, who has lived through tough policy questions, thought deeper and is most ready to take the 3am phone call and have the right reaction.  Looks to me like all of them have been all over the map on this.

One hit job on Gingrich I was not going to post is here:    Excerpts:

"For someone who holds himself out as a public intellectual, Gingrich comes across all too often as more glib than thoughtful..."

Consider the former speaker’s position(s) on Libya.

On March 7, before US military action against Moammar Khadafy had begun, Fox News Channel’s Greta Van Susteren asked Gingrich what he would do about Libya. Without hesitation, he called for aggressive American intervention and derided the president for not having ordered it already:

“Exercise a no-fly zone this evening,’’ Gingrich demanded. “The idea that we’re confused about a man who has been an anti-American dictator since 1969 just tells you how inept this administration is . . . This is a moment to get rid of him. Do it. Get it over with.’’

So eager was Gingrich for action that he wanted it done unilaterally:

America “doesn’t need anybody’s permission,’’ he said. “We don’t need to have NATO . . . We don’t need to have the United Nations . . . All we have to do is suppress [Khadafy’s] air force, which we could do in minutes.’’

Two weeks later, as the UN Security Council voted for a Libyan no-fly zone, Gingrich intensified his criticism. The Obama White House, he told Sean Hannity, “is maybe the most passive and out-of-touch presidency in modern American history.’’ Khadafy was still in place two weeks after the president said he had to go, Gingrich observed, and “there is no evidence that the no-fly zone by itself will be effective.’’

The next day, Gingrich told Politico that the president’s position on Libya “makes us look weak and uncertain and increases the danger in the Persian Gulf.’’

Yet by Sunday, with US missile strikes on Libyan air defense systems underway, Gingrich’s tune began to change. Now Obama was guilty of “opportunistic amateurism without planning or professionalism,’’ he said, and the only thing that could explain the administration’s decision was “opportunism and news media publicity.’’

On Wednesday, March 23, Gingrich went on NBC’s “Today’’ show to condemn the entire operation. “I would not have intervened,’’ he told Matt Lauder. “I think there were a lot of other ways to affect Khadafy.’’ For good measure he labeled the military campaign, which so far has gone pretty well, “about as badly run as any foreign operation in our lifetime.’’ That will come as news to anyone who can remember Vietnam, Somalia, or Iraq before the surge.

Thus in the space of three weeks, Gingrich went from blasting Obama for not imposing a no-fly zone in Libya “this evening’’ to blasting Obama for imposing a no-fly zone in Libya. On March 3 he wanted the president to tell Khadafy “that slaughtering your own citizens is unacceptable and that we’re intervening.’’ By March 23 he was mocking “humanitarian intervention’’ as an unserious “public relations conversation.’’

But if the only consistent note in Gingrich’s ever-evolving position on Libya is that Obama is always wrong, just who is the unserious one?
I did not see the Chris Wallace interview.  Quote his explanation of different positions:

On Libya, Gingrich told Wallace that it was the president who changed the rules on the Libyan game.

“I said [originally] we should be for replacing Gadhafi, without using the U.S. military. Now the president on March 3rd changed the rules of the game,” Gingrich said. “The president came out publicly and said: ‘Gadhafi must go.’ My original position was: If you’re not in the lake, don’t jump in; once you’re in the lake, swim like crazy.

“Now that the president has said ‘Gadhafi must go,’ our goal should be the defeat of the Gadhafi government, and the replacement of Gadhafi as rapidly as possible,” he said. “Ideally, by using Western air power, with Arab forces — including I think Egyptian and Moroccan and other advisers to help with the ground campaign — but I see no reason for American ground troops to go in.

“But I think the president has positioned us; once the president says Gadhafi must go, we have an obligation as a country to get rid of him,” Gingrich added. “It should be unequivocal.”
4908  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of His Glibness on: March 28, 2011, 12:06:56 PM
[48% approve]' This is what we get when 50% pay no Federal Income Tax.'

True, I thought about the CCP doctrine ) as I wrote that.  I would just point out the the G.E. phenomenon proves their thinking to be wrongheaded.  It is actually the supply-siders who are trying to maximize growth and revenues that would be available to spend on those goodies for the unproductive 50%.  Once again high tax rates were just proved to chase away production and not raise revenues.  At the time Pelosi, Reid and Obama took the majority in congress promising to raise taxes, companies like GE were rearranging their affairs to limit exposure, the polar opposite of maximize growth and hiring.

Obama et al partially understand that you don't raise taxes in a recession.  With all those ivy league smarts, why don't they recognize the corollary of that 'law' that it has the same dragging effect on the economy all the time.
4909  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Fed, Monetary Policy, Inflation, & the US Dollar on: March 27, 2011, 12:06:14 PM
"National Inflation Association (NIA)..."  - I see they now have over 300 million members. (attempt at gallows humor)

"The Federal Reserve is Buying 70% of U.S. Treasuries."  - That says it all.  No one is buying our debt.  It isn't future inflation or potential inflation, it is inflation by definition.

"...because of the Fed's money printing, stock prices are rising because people don't know what else to do with their dollars"  - Translated, if and when easy money ends, stock prices will collapse.

"The Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) itself is meaningless because it averages together the dollar based movements of 30 U.S. stocks."  - Maybe they read the forum, I described it as more and more dollars chasing fewer and fewer companies'.
"NIA has been saying for years that being a landlord will be the worst business to be in during hyperinflation, because it will be impossible for landlords to increase rents at the same rate as overall price inflation. Food and energy prices will always increase at a much faster rate than rents."

  - How does one quit that job?  sad  Actually the rent increases mostly need to pay for property taxes which (for me) are more than food, shelter, clothing and energy costs combined.  These years of no home building have actually been good for landlording.  Foreclosed homes have a huge delay back to market, many never make it, while the foreclosed person needs housing immediately.  The rental business is highly regulated, code compliance, rental licenses, asbestos, lead paint, mold issues, city orders, tight money for repairs/improvements, licensed contractor requirements, changing laws, etc. Neither the foreclosed owner nor the bank is up on the roof or checking the foundation during the last year before possession reverts worrying about water damage for example.  It was actually the boom years while everyone was buying and building that was worst time to landlords, the best renters (and a lot of mediocre ones) left the rental pool.   What housing needs simply is a better economy for income and employment, which necessarily includes a smaller government burden, rightsized regulations, and a stable dollar.

4910  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Cognitive Dissonance of His Glibness: A Deplorable Lack of Curiosity on: March 27, 2011, 11:03:37 AM
"this sort of nonsense is exactly what one gets with the Mussolini approach to economics"

Yes.  My anger in this case is aimed personally and professionally at the President.  We have 3 wars going on, a 3 year economic collapse, 50 states with revenue shortfalls, U6 unemployment approaching 20% and borrowing / mostly printing more than a trillion a year to keep a bloated government open while a 10 vehicle motorcade heads out for his 64th, 6 hour round of golf.  (I love golf and G.E. is a fine, government directed company, doing exactly as they are told.) This clip was my first time seeing his new spokesmodel. Nothing but lies about what his direction has been for over 2 years as President, over 4 years in power and over 6 years since he became the rock star of the movement and the direction he is still headed.  Communist China with a lower rate already than ours lowered their rate in Jan. 2008 and took a much softer hit in the downturn.  Japan, the only country in the developed world with a rate higher than ours has their s coming down next week, April 1, 2011.  GE is doing fine under punitive taxation, proving that a global company can adjust.  Obama is completely stuck on stupid, still talking about taxing the rich harder while dishing out more and more tax incentives for this and tax incentives for that, a soft 'Mussolini' style of government directing what our no-longer-private businesses do with their products and investments.  Then send out a paid mouthpiece to step up and say exactly the opposite.  No attempt to tell the truth, no clue what is going wrong and no curiosity or interest whatsoever about how to solve it - or WHEN?!  If there is reform it will be with the President dragged and screaming. 

GE for their part is just doing as directed, building wind turbines etc. (offshore) and controllers for subsidized seasonal golf carts to replace the automobile. No different than offering to pay an inner city mom to drop out of school, stay unmarried, stay out of productive work, and have more children, and then find out she dropped out of school, stayed unmarried, unemployed and is having more children.

Sargent Schultz to Colonel Klink: "I know nothing, I know NOTHING!"

Herr Zeller: I've not asked you where you and your family are going. Nor have you asked me why I am here.
Captain von Trapp: Well, apparently, we're both suffering from a deplorable lack of curiosity.

Jake Tapper, ABC: 'G.E. made $14 billion in profits and paid no taxes the last 2 years...'
White House Spokesman: "The President is committed to corporate tax reform."

What President? Where?  There is no business in the world that heard that 'commitment' and acted on it to move productive and profitable operations back to the U.S.  We all know it is complete BS and yet 48% approve of the job he is doing huh

The honest answer was, "Jack, our tax code is no longer intended to tax evenly or even to collect the revenues we need to pay for our government.  It is designed only as a complex experiment in government directed social engineering; it barely pays for 60% of our expenditures.  We print the rest.  Can't you see that?  Next question."
4911  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Cognitive Cluelessness of His Glibness: GE is adviser, donor,pays no taxes? on: March 26, 2011, 12:42:21 PM
Complete amateur hour at the White House.  Is this part of the Hoax? I get the impression this young fellow has never met the President, doesn't know how to reach him and is a million miles away from being able to confront him on a tough question before a press briefing.  Someone told him to just say the President is commited to corporate tax reform, over and over and over.  It is f*kcing YEAR THREE in the Obama administration and YEAR FIVE of being in power in Washington.  His not the least bit committed to any kind of ANY kind of tax reform that is complet b*llSh*t.  GE is a highly powered lobbying company immersed in industries that are heavily subsidized by a target-this and target-that form of government that we replaced our equal protection system with.  The head of G.E. is Obama's CHAIR of the 'Competitiveness Council'.  News story: GE is a FORMER American company with $14 billion in profit, makes most of it overseas ande pays no US tax.  This kid is aware of the story, it isn't the first year this has happened, he has no idea how to reach the President or what to say if he did.  (And we talk about Republicans having no one ready for leadership??) April 1, US will have the highest corporate income tax rate in the developed world - highest incentive to dodge, hide, move and pay none.  What part of supply-side policies that increases revenues do these anti-capitalism clowns not get? All of it!  (G.E. off course pays enormous taxes, property taxes, sales taxes, payroll taxes, excise taxes, state taxes, local taxes, etc. etc. but they don't get that either.)
This is the SPOKESMAN for the President!
4912  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / US Foreign Policy: The Middle East Crisis Has Just Begun For the U.S. - Kaplan on: March 26, 2011, 10:17:01 AM
This sums up our problems for the next 100 years pretty well.

The Middle East Crisis Has Just Begun
For the U.S., democracy's fate in the region matters much less than the struggle between the Saudis and Iran

Despite the military drama unfolding in Libya, the Middle East is only beginning to unravel. American policy-makers have been spoiled by events in Tunisia and Egypt, both of which boast relatively sturdy institutions, civil society associations and middle classes, as well as being age-old clusters of civilization where states of one form or another have existed since antiquity. Darker terrain awaits us elsewhere in the region, where states will substantially weaken once the carapace of tyranny crumbles. The crucial tests lie ahead, beyond the distraction of Libya.

The United States may be a democracy, but it is also a status quo power, whose position in the world depends on the world staying as it is. In the Middle East, the status quo is unsustainable because populations are no longer afraid of their rulers. Every country is now in play. Even in Syria, with its grisly security services, widespread demonstrations have been reported and protesters killed. There will be no way to appease the region's rival sects, ethnicities and other interest groups except through some form of democratic representation, but anarchic quasi-democracy will satisfy no one. Other groups will emerge, and they may be distinctly illiberal.

Whatever happens in Libya, it is not necessarily a bellwether for the Middle East. The Iranian green movement knows that Western air forces and navies are not about to bomb Iran in the event of a popular uprising, so it is unclear what lesson we are providing to the region. Because outside of Iran, and with the arguable exceptions of Syria and Libya itself, there is no short-term benefit for the U.S. in democratic revolts in the region. In fact, they could be quite destructive to our interests, even as they prove to be unstoppable.

Yemen, strategically located on the Gulf of Aden, as well as the demographic core of the Arabian Peninsula and a haunt of al Qaeda, is more important to American interests than Libya. In Yemen, too, a longtime ruler, Ali Abdullah Saleh, has shot protesters in the street to keep order. Yemen constitutes the most armed populace in the world, with almost four times as many firearms as people. It is fast running out of ground water, and the median age of the population is 17. This is to say nothing of the geographical, political and sectarian divisions in the sprawling, mountainous country. However badly Mr. Saleh has ruled Yemen, more chaos may follow him. Coverage by Al Jazeera can help to overthrow a government like his, but it can't help to organize new governments.

In Jordan, at the other end of the Arabian Peninsula, democratic pressure will force King Abdullah to give more power to the Islamists and to urban Palestinians. The era of a dependable, pro-Western Jordan living in peace with Israel may not go on indefinitely. Bahrain, meanwhile, may descend into a low-level civil war. The country's Shia have legitimate complaints against the ruling Sunni royal family, but their goals will play into Iranian hands.

Yemen, Jordan, Iraq, Bahrain and the other Gulf states are all individually more important than Libya because they constitute Saudi Arabia's critical near-abroad. In this era of weakening central authority throughout the Middle East, the core question for the U.S. will be which regime lasts longer: Saudi Arabia's or Iran's. If the Saudi monarchy turns out to have more staying power, we will wrest a great strategic victory from this process of unrest; if Iran's theocracy prevails, it will signal a fundamental eclipse of American influence in the Middle East.

Criticize the Saudi royals all you want—their country requires dramatic economic reform, and fast—but who and what would replace them? There is no credible successor on the horizon. Even as Saudi Arabia's youthful population, 40% of which is unemployed, becomes more restive, harmony within the royal family is beginning to fray as the present generation of leaders gives way to a new one. And nothing spells more trouble for a closed political system than a divided elite. Yes, Iran experienced massive antiregime demonstrations in 2009 and smaller ones more recently. But the opposition there is divided, and the regime encompasses various well-institutionalized power centers, thus making a decapitation strategy particularly hard to achieve. The al Sauds may yet fall before the mullahs do, and our simplistic calls for Arab democracy only increase that possibility.

Democracy is part of America's very identity, and thus we benefit in a world of more democracies. But this is no reason to delude ourselves about grand historical schemes or to forget our wider interests. Precisely because so much of the Middle East is in upheaval, we must avoid entanglements and stay out of the domestic affairs of the region. We must keep our powder dry for crises ahead that might matter much more than those of today.

Our most important national-security resource is the time that our top policy makers can devote to a problem, so it is crucial to avoid distractions. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the fragility of Pakistan, Iran's rush to nuclear power, a possible Israeli military response—these are all major challenges that have not gone away. This is to say nothing of rising Chinese naval power and Beijing's ongoing attempt to Finlandize much of East Asia.

We should not kid ourselves. In foreign policy, all moral questions are really questions of power. We intervened twice in the Balkans in the 1990s only because Yugoslav dictator Slobodan Milosevic had no nuclear weapons and could not retaliate against us, unlike the Russians, whose destruction of Chechnya prompted no thought of intervention on our part (nor did ethnic cleansing elsewhere in the Caucasus, because it was in Russia's sphere of influence). At present, helping the embattled Libyan rebels does not affect our interests, so we stand up for human rights there. But helping Bahrain's embattled Shia, or Yemen's antiregime protesters, would undermine key allies, so we do nothing as demonstrators are killed in the streets.

Of course, just because we can't help everywhere does not mean we can't help somewhere. President Barack Obama has steered a reasonable middle course. He was right to delay action in Libya until the Arab League, the United Nations Security Council, France and Great Britain were fully on board, and even then to restrict our military actions and objectives. He doesn't want the U.S. to own the Libyan problem, which could drag on chaotically for years. President Obama is not feeble, as some have said; he is cunning.

Like former President George H.W. Bush during the collapse of the Soviet Union, he intuits that when history is set in motion by forces greater than our own, we should interfere as little as possible so as not to provoke unintended consequences. The dog that didn't bark when the Berlin Wall fell was the intervention of Soviet troops to restore parts of the empire. The dog that won't bark now, we should hope, is the weakening of the Saudi monarchy, to which America's vital interests are tied. So long as the current regime in Iran remains in place, the U.S. should not do anything to encourage protests in Riyadh.

In the background of the ongoing Middle Eastern drama looms the shadow of a rising China. China is not a "responsible stakeholder" in the international system, as we proclaim it should be; it is a free rider. We are at war in Afghanistan to make it a safe place for China to extract minerals and metals. We have liberated Iraq so that Chinese firms can extract its oil. Now we are at war with Libya, which further diverts us from concentrating on the western Pacific—the center of the world's economic and naval activity—which the Chinese military seeks eventually to dominate.

Every time we intervene somewhere, it quickens the pace at which China, whose leaders relish obscurity in international affairs, closes the gap with us. China will have economic and political problems of its own ahead, no doubt, and these will interrupt its rise. But China is spending much less to acquire an overseas maritime empire than we are spending, with all our interventions, merely to maintain ours.

The arch-realist approach would be to forswear a moral narrative altogether and to concentrate instead on our narrow interests in the Middle East. The problem is that if we don't provide a narrative, others will, notably al Qaeda, whose fortunes will rise as the region's dictators, with their useful security services, struggle to survive. But we should craft our narrative with care. It should focus on the need for political and social reform, not on regime change.

Order is preferable to disorder. Just consider what happened to Iraq after we toppled Saddam Hussein. The U.S. should not want Iraq's immediate past to be a foretaste of the region's future.
4913  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Pathological Science on: March 26, 2011, 10:07:19 AM
JDN, Thanks. Yes, that is the Prindle 18-2.  Goes like a rocket - in the right conditions  smiley.  It took your Wisc. background to know the tundra under the ice and snow isn't just wasteland.  Ice boating: I've wanted to, but... a very cold sport with a winter wind, a very short season. You need ice safely frozen but limited snow on it, not the 85 inches we had this year, also today's boats are solo. In my Dad's youth, the boats handled a group of friends, more like our 'E' boat.  When you fall overboard or any other crash, no soft landing.

On a different note since I know you are a racquet sports enthusiast, another outdoor winter sport we play is paddle tennis (Platform tennis).  Because of the continuous flow of the game, all doubles, one serve, using the screens, long points (high speed chess), it keeps your blood flowing for a couple of hours to where zero to 20 degrees is ideal and anything much more than that is too warm to play.
4914  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Housing Crisis Explained and Questions Answered on: March 25, 2011, 05:34:47 PM
Meandering on a few points raised...
Wesbury is excessively bullish but I don't share the negative view of him.  Maybe it's just lower expectations but I only hold the economists to their explanations of what has already happened.  I think economists like Wesbury and Scott Grannis track the best data that they know.  The NAR objective is well noted, but in many cases they are tracking or making better adjustments than the so-called real professionals (like the Fed).  I learn a lot from the charts, but future based statements are by definition about an unknown.  The optimists didn't see crashes coming and the pessimists saw it coming 5 years too soon.

Un-mortgaged Properties?

I saw a local television news piece on percentage of mortgages underwater that led me to a question.  They said at one point "percent of mortgaged property", which begs the question, what percent of American single family homes are not mortgaged (that are left out of these percentages)?

R.E. market still dropping? Yes, more than it needs to.

Comment/question regarding the people behind on their mortgages right now: All these foreclosures coming certainly make a large downward force on prices.  That said, the number of houses coming onto the market and the number families in need of a home coming onto the market make up something like a one to one ratio.  Certainly some younger people and some older people will end up moving in with family, but generally speaking, a foreclosure separates a family from a house.  The house needs a new owner and the family needs a residence.  Both the house and the family re-enter the market as slightly damaged goods.  What I am getting at is the magnitude of the negative effect has a lot to do with the economy otherwise in terms of income and employment and the inefficiency of this process of turnover.

As a landlord I benefit from these families re-entering as renters.  The buyers of the foreclosures find the homes with the furnace sometimes stripped out, sometimes with the whole kitchen stripped out, a heaved sidewalk, roof leak, etc.  The bank-based property owners like FNMA amaze me with what they are not willing to do to prepare a property for a retail sale.  Buyers of foreclosures, I can tell you, are exhausted and I mean that in two ways.  No matter how much money one started with, the funds are used up after three years of buying opportunities.  If they want to re-sell damaged goods to turnaround artists at this late date in the cycle, they should offer funding based on a track record of successfully turning around properties, without strict adherence to conventional requirements of loan qualification.  Frankly, for those of us who reinvest everything into deductible repairs are not going to be showing good income on the 1040 during the intense turnaround years.  Instead damaged homes can only sell for cash because they can't immediately pass inspection for homeowners insurance or a mortgage.  Meanwhile nearly 100% of residential homebuilding workers are unemployed, collecting their only income from some other branch of the government and not rebuilding the homes.  There is a deplorable lack of curiosity and effort from all directions of how to solve any of this IMO.  Comments?


Housing is an Investment?

pp wrote: "Essentially, the cost is Real Dollars today is equal to the cost in 1890...Housing is an "Investment"?    I don't think so................"

Agree!  It is a depreciating asset.  A quarter century later my house is 25 years older in the same location with the same view.  And houses are highly taxed assets.  Especially the home you live in is not an investment - it is largely a cost of living.  The principle you buy down on your mortgage might be like a forced savings plan, but very inaccessible, unless you keep borrowing, defeating the whole purpose.   Rental property has rental income, perhaps.  The 'appreciation' is inflation.  Then you get taxed on it.  The capital gains tax on the inflation is going up federally by 60% just under Obamacare, not counting the increases postponed by the last budget deal.  Plus states tax your gain as ordinary income, and you can't move the property with you out of the high tax state. The exclusions on principle residence have limits as well, only 250k if you are single.  In the high end properties (or in hyperinflation) that becomes less of a protection from taxation on sale.
4915  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Global Warming? Spring has sprung in MN on: March 25, 2011, 03:38:17 PM
Reporting from my assigned weather station, the earth did not boil over.  We know about the email fraud and the changing data tweaking algorithms, also what we see with our own lying eyes. 'Climate' changes more day to day and year to year than what is alleged in a century, and only a smidgen of that is man-caused.

Here I offer my own 'backyard' today (March 25) showing snowdrifts covering a wind powered watercraft awaiting a melting of the still snow covered view of Minnesota's busiest lake, still frozen with feet-thick ice.  Spring so far has been 2 days of blizzard and 2 days of 15 degree sunshine.  The earliest recorded ice-out was March 11, 1878, and the latest recorded date was May 8, 1856.  This year looks to be around mid-April, roughly the 100 year average.  - More proof of global warming (sarc.)

In May the water will be a sky blue reflection and the trees a beautiful shade of forest green, just like 100-150 years ago. The Pianese flowers will bloom in full color the second week of June, like clockwork.
4916  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Egypt on: March 25, 2011, 10:12:21 AM
The turn of events in Egypt or at least coverage all seems to be negative for freedom and positive for the MB.  I thought I would look up the Prof. from U of MN Humphrey Institute, Cairo native, who was so optimistic earlier to see what he is saying now. Couldn't find anything more recent than this fluff piece in MSNBC March 1 about young people and hope and change.  Can they really be that naive? yes.  Is there any chance we are wrong about this turning into a new oppressive regime? I hope so.  It is a little ironic that he compares to the Tiananmen protesters.  That did not work out very well.
Egyptian activist Jihan Ibrahim, 24, during the protests in Cairo that led to the fall of President Hosni Mubarak.

Mideast 'baby boomers': Shock troops of protests
By Miranda Leitsinger Reporter
Demographics play a key role in unrest sweeping volatile region

The wave of protests breaking across the Mideast and North Africa has a common leading edge — in each case, the unrest was triggered by young people lacking jobs or a viable future.

The youthful revolts and protests are in many ways predictable, experts say, combining a population boom that has produced a high percentage of teenagers and young adults with social conditions that are as volatile as the oil that fuels the region’s economy.

“Young people without jobs, young people who are waiting for a chance, young people without hope … they’re waiting, waiting, waiting,” said Tarik Yousef, dean of the Dubai School of Government. “At some point, you reach a threshold of patience.”

Jihan Ibrahim, a 24-year-old Egyptian activist who was shot in the back with a rubber bullet during one of the protests and fled through a rain of tear gas and water cannons, said the pain and terror were “the price of freedom under this kind of a regime.”

“I want to be able to elect who I want to represent me. I want my government to be transparent,” said Ibrahim, who lived in California for several years when she was younger. “I want free education and decent health care, and decent wage and job opportunities — just like any reasonable human being would ask for.”

Young adults like Ibrahim are part of a regional “youth bulge,” a situation that occurs when infant mortality declines during a period of improved medical technology and families continue to have many children.

Overall, 15- to 24-year-olds make up about 20 percent of the population across the Mideast and North Africa, and 30 percent when that range is extended to 15- to 29-years old, according to a report by the Brookings Institute, a Washington, D.C., think tank.

In the U.S., 15- to 24-year-olds and 15- to 29-year-olds make up 14.1 percent and 21.3 percent of the population, respectively.
Advertise | AdChoices

'Like the baby boom generation’
“It’s a bit like the baby boom generation in this country,” said Ragui Assaad, an Egyptian-American and professor of planning and public affairs at the University of Minnesota. “But it’s not because there are more babies — it’s because more babies are surviving.

“What makes the youth bulge particularly problematic is its combination with economic conditions that have made it hard to employ these young people in productive ways.”

Unemployment among the young is stubbornly high in many countries in the region. In 2009, Algeria and Iraq had unemployment rates of 45 percent for 15- to 24-year-olds, according the Brookings report . In Libya, where the government of Moammar Gadhafi is clinging to power amid a massive revolt, the rate was 27 percent in 2005, the most recent data available. And in Egypt, where youth-led protests forced regime change, the rate was 25 percent.

Compare that with an unemployment rate for young Americans of 19.1 percent in July 2010 and 20 percent across the 27 nations of the European Union, as of August 2010.

“The Middle East and North Africa have the highest youth unemployment rate amongst all regions,” Credit Suisse said in a Feb. 25 report on the region’s demographics. “The effect of unemployment in some of these countries is felt even more strongly due to high inflation.”

The surge in the youth population creates “a primary condition for potential destabilization” if this situation “does not translate into youth achievement,” said Yousef, the Dubai educator.

“It sets up a demand for social-economic transformation, modernization that has to be focused on addressing the needs of this particular segment of the population,” he said. “Most of the governments in the regions have precisely failed to do that. Their approach and response to it has been one of, ‘Let’s repress it.’”

As a result, sometimes an individual can ignite a revolution.

The suicide of a 26-year-old unemployed university graduate in Tunisia, who set himself on fire on Dec. 17 after authorities said he did not have a permit to sell fruits and vegetables, was one of the triggers of the youth-led protests in that country and was widely seen as helping spark the protests sweeping the region.

Educated and underemployed
Ibrahim, the Egyptian activist, said educated and underemployed young people organized the early demonstrations. She recalled one protest outside of the Ministry of Petroleum in Cairo that was led by a group of unemployed graduate engineering students.

“We have a ministry that’s supposed to employ them and they don’t,” she said, noting the students were instead “selling sandwiches off of carts.”

“You have people that have time on their hands, they’re oppressed politically and treated horribly by the police, and then unemployed or underemployed, and they’re educated,” she said. “So that definitely has to build up a lot of anger.”

In Iran, where the government has cracked down hard on recent protests and employment is 20 percent among 15- to 24-year-olds, the lack of economic opportunity also has motivated many youth to organize anti-regime protests.

Interactive: Young and restless: Demographics fuel Mideast protests (on this page)

Among them is an anti-government activist who identified himself as a 26-year-old man after being contacted by He said he has only been able to find a part-time job despite looking for work for two-and-a-half years.

“Injustice. Oppression. Lack of freedom. Our resources used for terrorism and not for jobs, or making Iran better. No future,” he wrote to, declining to identify himself out of fear for his safety.

Though he was beaten by the hardline Basiji militiamen, he said he wouldn’t stop.

“My blood is no less value then Neda … and all of our martyrs,” he wrote, referring to a young woman slain in the initial 2009 opposition protests in Iran. “… We need to free Iran.”

Assaad, the University of Minnesota professor, noted that youth were not willing to accept the “authoritarian bargain” that their parents had agreed to, giving up their freedoms in return for economic stability.

'We are not getting anything in return'
“These young people are saying, ‘We are not getting anything in return, why should we accept that bargain,’” he said. “And so they are demanding a say in how their countries are run.”

Some parallels in history of this youth bulge — and ensuing protests — can be found in the anti-government demonstrations in China’s Tiananmen Square in 1989, the 1986 “People Power” movement in the Philippines that brought down Ferdinand Marcos and the post-World War II protests in Europe and the U.S., Assaad said.

“It’s not a coincidence that the late 1960s in the U.S. where you saw the greatest protests on the part of young people — whether it’s a civil rights movement, or the student movement in the late ‘60s, the anti-war movement — those were led by young people,” Assaad said. “That’s the peak of where the baby boomers were becoming young adults and that same phenomenon was occurring also in Europe as the post-war generation was coming of age.”

Story: China's well-oiled security apparatus stifles calls for change

“Their demands were less economic and more cultural in nature,” he said. “I see the 1968 revolts as more, ‘We want a say in the society and we want to be able to assert ourselves culturally in ways that are different from the previous generation.’”

The Tiananmen protesters also were not primarily making economic demands. “It was a question of, ‘Now that we have this higher level of economic achievement, we would like to have also a say in running our country,’” Assaad said.

But the presence of a youth bulge does not necessarily mean there will be violence or unrest, Assaad said.

“Youth bulges basically create dynamics for things to happen that involve youth and these things could be quite different depending on the conditions in each context,” he said. “It could be cultural demands and counterculture, as well as demands for human rights and marginalized groups, like what happened in the U.S. … In the case of the Middle East, it’s a combination of economic and political.”

In East Asia — Korea, Taiwan, China — and parts of Southeast Asia, for example, the “youth bulge actually coincided with tremendous growth in the economy and good employment opportunities, and as a result, resulted in even more rapid growth” in the ’80s and early ’90s, Assaad said.

Though the Mideast protests have been led by youth, they have grown to include others disgruntled with their governments.

“The government has put the people in a situation where they live in constant fear and I think that’s one of the main reasons why so many people have come out, because they have just had enough,” said Maryam Alkhawaja, a 23-year-old activist in Bahrain who fled her home last year out of fear of imprisonment but returned to document and participate in the protests there.

The peak of the youth bulge was reached somewhere between 2005 and 2010 in much of the Mideast and is now declining in many countries there. But the youth have made a lasting impact, along the same scale of what happened in Eastern Europe in 1989, Assaad said.

“The genie is out of the bottle. You cannot bring those people back to being apolitical and apathetic. They’re going to be there, they’re going to be active, they know now how to do it,” he said. “This region had been the region where democracy had been the slowest to come in the world. … I think that’s going to change now.”
4917  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Tea Party, Glen Beck and related matters on: March 25, 2011, 12:01:26 AM
From GM's link: "Samantha Powers, the wife of Cass Sunstein, who was instrumental in advising Obama on Libya... has called for a Mammoth Protection Force against Israel."

On radio, Beck said we don't need to follow her advice and fund a massive force against Israel.  We just got that for free in Egypt, they are called the Muslim Brotherhood.
4918  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Political Rants & interesting thought pieces on: March 24, 2011, 11:56:57 PM
Iraq 2 - 'What would things look like now if we had NOT gone in?'

a) Iraq Study Group: part of saying no imminent threat was that Saddam was 5-7 years away (like that is a long time) from nuclear weapons - in 2002 - meaning not until 2007-2009 - 2-4 years ago.  Time flies.  Without Iraq 2, the best info says he would easily be emboldened by now with nuclear weapons.

b) We didn't find WMD stockpiles, but we know he produced and used them previously. ISG said he hid or destroyed them but retained the ability and inclination to re-start.  Pretty likely he would have stockpiles of Chemical and biological WMD again by now, along with nuclear, if not for Iraq 2.

c) ISG said no "collaborative operational relationship" with al Qaida, a straw argument, no one said they were best friends or daily work partners.  Saddam's ties to terror were plenty, 25k checks to families of suicide bombers - that was true,  Harbored other terrorists cf. Abu Nidal, Iraqi passports used in WTC bombing the first time, shared a common enemies - Israel and USA, and Saddam's state newspaper named bin Laden's  targets of 9/11 two months prior - in flowery but prescient, unmistakable terms.  This was entered into the congressional record by Sen. Fritz Hollings D-SC one year after 9/11.  Iraq did not commit 9/11 but Saddam's ties to terror were plenty.

d)  Iraq Unveils Ambitious Plan to Boost Oil Output‎ - Wall Street Journal - MARCH 23, 2011 - about the only good news in the world today.
4919  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Political Rants & interesting thought pieces on: March 24, 2011, 02:42:34 PM
CCP, Interesting thoughts.  Where you wrote "Prominent republicans were against at least Iraq 2 if not 1", I think you meant no prominent Republicans opposed? Pat Buchanan excluded.

Whether Iraq was worth it is a tough call, depends on whether a functional society is the result that is not an enemy of our interests.  I am still optimistic.  Saddam deserved deposing.  The Colin Powell we break we fix it doctrine is BS to me. We found it broken.  We could have deposed and left, but only if we were willing to repeat each time a new enemy states emerges. Same goes for Libya. 

The worst thing that happened in Iraq (beyond the fatalities) was that by the end the message became the opposite to the rest of the world, that we did not have the stomach to fight enemies with any consistent staying powers.  Now we hope Ghadafy steps down just as we say we are only staying a minute and won't put a single pair of boots on the ground.  What I read from that is the whole action is a head fake.  We will weaken his forces, scare him a little, then leave him in power and hope his dictatorship benevolence improves.

The point about coalitions is well put; they are a mixed blessing.  It gives legitimacy but limits the mission to failure, as in the case of leaving Saddam in power with the need to come back later costing far more in lives and dollars.  Who with a straight face believed he would honor his 1991 surrender agreement?

"Iraq 1 I believe was because we couldn't let Saddam control 25% of more of the World's oil supply."

I think it was about the sovereignty of Kuwait and Saudi - regarding oil.  I proposed at the time that if it is okay to invade neighbors for oil without consequence, instead of helping Kuwait we should have invaded Canada.
4920  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2012 Presidential on: March 24, 2011, 01:44:21 PM
"I saw that Newt apparently was for an invasion of Libya a few weeks ago, until now he was against it."

I think a number of the so-called candidates have that same problem, Romney, Pawlenty, Palin, and Huckabee also come to mind.  It is very easy to criticize no matter the policy choice, and very hard to put a successful policy in place. 

Huckabee, for one, at least acknowledged some of that while Obama was dithering: "I'm always a little careful to say, here's what I would do, because I think you have to base a decision based on good intelligence and information which a person in my capacity as an ordinary citizen at this point simply doesn't have."

Giuliani said regarding Obama's disengagement and travels: A leader would WANT to be right there in the middle of the discussions and negotiation and critical decision making that was going on without leadership.

I find much of the conservative radio reaction immature (Hannity comes to mind).  Parroting the Bush-haters, everything is an opportunity to attack Obama.  These candidates become the guests on these shows doing much of the same.  US policy and involvement in the Middle East and North Africa is more important than that.  A serious candidate needs to instead lay out a serious case for what criteria goes into all these questions,  who leads the coalition, whenr to go to congress, how to communicate what we are doing to the American people and what we want to communicate to others who will read something into our actions, such as the tyrants and rebels in other countries. 
4921  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Big Government on: March 23, 2011, 02:46:21 PM
(From CCP: ""Seize the Moment" is the last one I wanted to post but it won't let me")
A special report on the future of the state
Seize the moment
The prospects for reforming the state have improved, but it will be a long haul

Mar 17th 2011 | from The Economist print edition

HOW far and how fast could reform of the state go? For now that question seems fanciful, like asking how a man who has been getting fatter for decades would do in a marathon. Yet fatalism about an unreformable state seems misguided.

To begin with, the patient is not in his current condition by design. In a forthcoming book about the role of the state, Vito Tanzi, an Italian-born economist, shows that it changed dramatically during the 20th century. Demands on it grew continuously, and theories of what it might capably do expanded to meet those demands. What began as a “normative” state, designed to offset market failures and help the poor, broadened immensely to become an active redistributor of wealth and creator of universal public goods, hoovered up by the middle class in particular.

“If something cannot go on for ever”, Herb Stein once pointed out, “it will stop.” There are several reasons to think that some time soon—maybe next year, maybe later this decade—the seemingly endless expansion of the state will begin to go into reverse. One is the political pressure from deficits. The shape of the state could be the main issue in America’s presidential election next year. Even left-wing governments are increasingly looking at the spending side of the ledger.

Globalisation is another. Commerce has proved stickier than the proponents of borderless capitalism proclaimed in the 1990s, but it is less sticky than it was. The mobility of talent, technology and capital surely puts some limit on governments’ ability to keep on raising taxes. Government is becoming a more competitive business, not just in terms of lower spending but also in what it offers for the money.

Above all, the incremental benefits of ever bigger government, even assuming it was somehow affordable, become ever smaller. Decent-sized government can reduce inequality and poverty, but most of the evidence is that gargantuan government merely gets in the way of social progress. A state that takes up more than half the economy begins to deliver an ever worse deal to ever more people in the middle: the extra benefits become harder to detect, the extra costs harder to hide.

Guessing when this penny will eventually drop is a little like speculating when an investment bubble will burst or a dictator will fall. There are always reasons for delay but, once things begin to move, they do so quickly. A revolution in government would come in three stages.

The first, which this special report has concentrated on, might simply be described as good management. Purely by copying what other countries (or bits of their own system) do well, governments could save a huge amount of money. The path forward is pretty clear—towards a small central state buying in services from a variety of different providers. Technology could speed things up. A huge quantity of information about just how poorly bits of government are doing is becoming available—and, thanks to Facebook and other new media, shareable. Transparency will also affect demand. Too many voters are “Californians”: they think they can enjoy ever more services without paying for them. When they see the true cost of government, they may change their minds.

Within the public sector, mayors and senior civil servants could play a pre-eminent role. Not only do many public services, such as education and the police, work best at city level; cities are natural test-tubes for experimentation. In the urban West, mayors can still change things visibly: think of what Rudy Giuliani did for crime in New York. As for senior civil servants, most feel despised, underpaid and deeply frustrated. More than anybody else, they stand to gain from a world where government works.

Good management sounds a little worthy, but it could achieve a lot. Imagine, for instance, that Mr Cameron succeeds in creating a “post-bureaucratic” state in Britain. You might end up with a government that delivered the same range of services—defence, justice, education, health care and so on—but consumed perhaps 40% of GDP, roughly ten points less than it does now.

Could it go further? The second stage is more difficult: limiting the scope of those services, especially the universal benefits enjoyed by most Western voters. Social transfers have accounted for a large part of the growth in the state: they also explain why even a well-run version of Britain’s all-you-can-eat “buffet” state would be twice the size of Singapore’s. Unless Western governments start to reform entitlements, the state will swell again in line with their ageing populations.

Some universal benefits can be trimmed across the board. State pension ages, for instance, are on the rise. But governments also need to start redirecting social programmes at the truly needy.

Persuading middle-class voters to give up their perks will be extremely hard. One possible avenue is to hand them greater control over their own benefits, perhaps by switching pay-as-you-go systems to individual savings accounts (like Singapore’s Central Provident Fund). That has not had much success yet—in part because most people, especially the young, are in the dark about how much the current system is really costing them. Tax simplification would help. A bipartisan commission on fiscal reform last year said that if the American government abolished all tax breaks (including middle-class ones like mortgage-interest relief), it could reduce the top individual tax rate from 35% to 23% and still generate $80 billion more revenue. Again, limiting benefits will be a colossal struggle.

Rules not OK

The final stage—untangling the web of rules—would on the face of it be less controversial. Everybody agrees that there are too many regulations. But in practice it could be the most fiddly to sort out. The European Parliament does not cost much to run, but it litters the continent with expensive rules. One in five American workers needs a licence to do his job. Sunset clauses to make laws expire in the absence of political reapproval would help.

This special report has tried to be pragmatic, focusing on what works. At the moment it is hard to see that society would gain much from even larger government, and easy to spot the gains in productivity, efficiency and personal freedom that would come from smaller government. States exist not only to lead society towards common goals; they must also provide people with the liberty to live their own lives. Over the past century government has moved too far towards the former. Now is the time to turn the dial back. Nothing would add more to the sum of human happiness in the West than a smaller, better state.
4922  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Housing Crisis Explained and Questions Answered on: March 23, 2011, 11:37:30 AM
New home sales had to plunge.  We didn't build any last year.  When we still have too many, the right number to build is somewhere near zero.
4923  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Media Issues: The Anatomy of a Smear on: March 23, 2011, 11:32:21 AM
A long piece on Powerline by John Hinderacker.  A very good read about how biased media works.
(This is the conclusion.  You need to read the whole story to judge the facts for yourself.)
"What we see here is incest to the third degree. The disgusting morass of left-wing blogs, funded by far-left billionaires like George Soros, spew up an endless stream of slimy attacks on mainstream citizens, like Charles and David Koch, and mainstream politicians, like Mike Pompeo. Democratic Party outlets that are generally presumed to be more respectable, like the New York Times and the Washington Post, watch the dirt flow by and periodically, when they see something promising, pluck it out of the swamp and take it mainstream in order to benefit their party. The Post isn't as bad as some--I have referred to it as the most respectable voice of the Democratic Party--but when it follows this disgusting practice, plucking out the vilest unsubstantiated smear and promoting it for purely partisan purposes, it is hard to distinguish the Post from the most disreputable far-left rags, like Think Progress and the New York Times."
4924  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2012 Presidential: Obama, Mitt on: March 23, 2011, 11:05:58 AM
My prediction that Obama won't be the nominee of his own party still looks absurd, but pieces of that puzzle slowly begin to fall into place.  a) Dems are starting to notice his unique combination of inexperience, incompetence and unattainable expectations, b) Any perceived move away from hard left is a move against the angriest wing of politics today, the ones coincidentally who spearheaded his election in the first place.  Obama now is what they once called General BetrayUs.

I've never seen the left turn so hard against one of their own as the quotes coming out now against Pres. Obama.  Losing his base does not bring him support from the middle -ask Bush about that.  When the key charges are incompetence, cluelessness and disengagement, support can erode from all directions.

Speaking of troubled candidacies, I was reading about frontrunner Mitt today, found  a couple of items that don't help him win with conservative activists.

Judicial appointments: 9 out of 36 were Republican.  From  “Of the 36 people Romney named to be judges or clerk magistrates, 23 are either registered Democrats or unenrolled voters who have made multiple contributions to Democratic politicians or who voted in Democratic primaries, state and local records show. In all, he has nominated nine registered Republicans, 13 unenrolled voters, and 14 registered Democrats.”

HealthCare Form HC Massachusetts:  Take a look.  Square this up with a right to privacy or with a movement seeking smaller government.  It doesn't fit.
4925  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: US Foreign Policy on: March 22, 2011, 02:01:58 PM
"Maybe we should forget "doctrines".Every situation is unique..."- CCP

My doctrine is full of caveats.  In Iraq, I would say that if your neighbor's house is on fire, and you are standing there with a fire hose, then it might make sense to help out.  That assumes that by neighbor they share some form of positive humanity, by fire hose that means something that helps put out the fire, not makes the fire worse etc.  It doesn't mean that when you are done you also build them a new house.

I agree with the Lockerbie charge if we have evidence / access to witnesses.  Murder in our law does not have a statute of limitations.  This also was terror so he can sit for trial in Obama's Guantanamo if captured.

OTOH, the 'Rebels' stronghold is also the area of largest per capita recruitment for al Qaida to Iraq:   "A 2007 US Military Academy study of information on al-Qaida forces in Iraq indicate that by far, Eastern Libya made the largest per capita contribution to al-Qaida forces in Iraq.

Like Saddam in hiding and what GM wrote about catching him, if we were going to go in by executive order without consultation or declaration from congress, then we could have done that on Feb.23 when the resigned governor of Alaska suggested it, better yet before the uprising with an element of surprise, instead of with advance notice and 3 1/2 weeks to hide.
4926  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Deaths from natural disaster 22,000 times greater than from nuclear power? on: March 21, 2011, 06:26:11 PM
Zero radioactive deaths so far, though still too early to conclude anything about the nuclear accident in Japan.  The news cycle has changed quickly to Libya and other flashpoints.  Earthquake and tsunami fatalities in Japan could be 22,000.  Unimaginable from where I sit.  Not the worst of all-time natural disasters, but this tragedy will be on the list:

As the number dead and missing went into the tens of thousands, the media story moved quickly to nuclear disaster, where the measurable damage so far actually sounds more like a bad traffic accident:

"...there has been one confirmed death, but not at the Daiichi plant at all: a worker who was in a crane cab at the separate Fukushima Daini plant (where all reactors are now confirmed to be safely in cold shutdown) was killed when the quake hit. Two more workers, this time at the Daiichi plant, are still listed as missing since the quake and tsunami hit. Six more required medical help following the quake, one suffering two broken legs.

A further 15 non-radiological injuries have resulted from hydrogen explosions at the site, though some of these were minor in nature and the individuals concerned returned to duty shortly after.

As to radiation-related issues, there has been one case of measurable significance. Earlier in the week when workers were still limited to a total dose of 100 millisievert, one individual breached this limit during venting operations and consequently was evacuated to hospital. As noted above, personnel are now permitted to sustain doses of 250 millisievert.

In summary it appears that health consequences from reactor damage will be extremely minimal even for workers at the site. It will now be a surprise if anyone who has not been inside the plant gates this week is affected by the situation at at all – apart from all the people worldwide who have been taking iodide pills or eating salt unnecessarily."
4927  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Arabian Peninsula: Bahrain rebellion could prove calamitous for the West on: March 20, 2011, 09:44:12 PM
Bahrain has the fastest growing economy in the Arab world. Bahrain also has the freest economy in the Middle East according to the 2011 Index of Economic Freedom published by the Heritage Foundation/Wall Street Journal, and is tenth freest economy overall in the world.  Now it is also center of distrust and conflict between Saudi and Iran.

Why the Bahrain rebellion could prove calamitous for the West

Saudi Arabia's support for the Gulf state risks drawing Iran into the conflict, writes Con Coughlin.

By Con Coughlin 8:39PM GMT 17 Mar 2011

The issue occupying diplomats at the UN yesterday was how best to respond to the Libyan crisis. But an even graver threat to our future prosperity and security is unfolding in the tiny Gulf state of Bahrain.

At first glance, the decision by Bahrain's Sunni royal family to call in the Saudis to help quell an anti-government revolt by Shia protesters might seem the logical outcome to a dispute that showed no sign of a peaceful resolution. Ever since the protesters made the Pearl roundabout the epicentre of their campaign in mid-February, the ruling family has made strenuous efforts to meet their demands. Sheikh Salman al-Khalifa, the Crown Prince, has repeatedly sought to open a dialogue with the demonstrators, with a view to addressing their concerns. But the more the royal family has attempted to reach out, the more intransigent the demands of the protest movement have become.

When I visited the country with William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, in early February, the first rumblings of discontent were evident. Leaders of the Bahraini Shia, who constitute a clear majority of the population, were seeking to replicate the anti-government protests then taking place in Egypt's Tahrir Square.

But unlike the Cairo protests, which demanded the removal of President Hosni Mubarak, I was assured by our diplomats that the Bahrainis' agenda was more modest. They weren't calling for the overthrow of the Sandhurst-educated King Hamad al-Khalifa; they were more interested in reform than revolution. Like many protesters throughout the Arab world, their main concern was to improve their economic lot. As one diplomat put it: "The protests are anti-government rather than anti-Khalifa."

But the mood darkened considerably in the weeks after the demonstrators set up camp on Pearl roundabout, not least because of the security forces' heavy-handed response to the initial protests, which led to several deaths and many injuries. There was a dramatic escalation in the protesters' demands, with the more militant calling for the removal of the royal family and the establishment of a Shia state.

The Sunni-Shia divide in the country is particularly problematic because of the close family connections many Shia have to Iran. An estimated 30 per cent of Bahraini Shia are of Persian descent, and maintain contact with relatives in Iran. In the past, this has enabled Iran's Revolutionary Guards to establish terrorist cells in the kingdom, aimed at destabilising the monarch. In 1981, a Tehran-organised plot to overthrow the government was uncovered. Bahraini security officials are constantly on the alert for signs of Iranian meddling, and have accused some members of the opposition Shia movement of being funded by Tehran.

The issue is further complicated by Iran's long-standing insistence that it has a legitimate territorial claim over Bahrain. A recent Iranian newspaper editorial claimed that the kingdom was in fact a province of Iran. It is because of these simmering tensions between the states that the royal family's decision this week to call for Saudi reinforcements is fraught with danger.

Since the 1979 Islamic revolution, the ayatollahs have assumed a protective role over the world's Shia. They will not have taken kindly to the sight of 1,000 Saudi troops driving across the 15-mile causeway that links their country to Bahrain, in support of their fellow Sunni royalists.

Iran's relations with the fundamentalist Wahhabi Sunni sect that dominates Saudi Arabia is strained at the best of times. Iran was accused of planning a truck bomb attack that destroyed the US military base at Dharhran in 1996, and in 2003 the Revolutionary Guards were implicated in a series of similar bombings in Riyadh, the Saudi capital. Saudi also accuses the Revolutionary Guards of trying to foment unrest among its own Shia, who constitute around 5 per cent of its 19 million population. The majority live in the Eastern Province, which is also the location of Saudi's vast oil wealth. Last week, when Saudi anti-government demonstrators attempted to stage a "day of rage", most of the disturbances took place in the Shia towns, where the security forces fired tear gas and rubber bullets.

Iran has responded to the Saudi intervention by cutting diplomatic ties with Bahrain and denouncing the reinforcements as "unacceptable". There is considerable concern within British security circles that the situation could spread into a wider conflict between Iran and Saudi Arabia, with calamitous consequences for the West. "They are always squaring up to each other," a senior Whitehall security official told me this week. "But just imagine if it spilled over into open conflict. Not only would we have a major conflict on our hands in the Gulf: the West would be cut off from its major energy supplier."
4928  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: budget slashing - NOT on: March 20, 2011, 02:27:29 PM
"One-Third of a French Fry Short of a Big Mac Meal"

Thank you GM.  Part of winning is to quit giving up the ownership of the language and the terms of the debate.  The deficit problem and the debt problem are both measured in the trillions, not billions. Not remotely similar even though they rhyme. And the only time frame worthy of discussion if you are an elected official is the rest of your term, not 10 year budgets or 30 year goals.  These cuts are $0.006 trillion (assuming they are cuts at all).  Significant maybe, maybe not, but let's call them what they are.

My congressman released the following statement "...after the House of Representatives passed $6 billion in spending cuts..."Today, my colleagues and I took another step forward in curing Washington’s spending problem and removing the barriers to job creation...”
Now try that again in English.  'After passing spending cuts of $0.006 trillion out of a $1.2 trillion gap, conservative Rep. xxx said he was very pleased with himself and expected to keep moving forward into key committee assignments and leadership positions by caving on all principles including the principles of 2nd grade arithmetic.'  - Closer to the truth but doesn't sound as impressive.
4929  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Government programs, spending, budget process: House Republicans Fund ObamaCare on: March 20, 2011, 01:31:41 PM
Largely unreported in detail, so all of this is hard to follow. Please verify and call your congressman.

In some symbolic votes, the House has voted to do certain things their supporters sent them there to do, repeal and de-fund Obamacare are examples, de-fund the nation's largest abortion provider, de-fund NPR, etc.  In the latest CR, they voted to do the opposite.

54 Republicans would not support the latest continuing resolution, so it was constructed to pass with the support of 85 Democrats.  Also had to be something the Senate would also pass in order to succeed in not shutting down the government, so it continues funding for Obamacare, Planned Parenthood etc. - for 3 weeks.

Perhaps this was the wrong time for real confrontation and potential shutdown with Japan in crisis needing our help and while we need to also to dither and then focus on Libya. 

I like Sen. Rubio's explanation of his willingness to vote no.  Asked repeatedly if he was willing to vote to shut the government down if the bill didn't contain this or that reform, he refused to accept the premise.  He was sent there to enact reform and he stands ready and willing to vote yes for responsible funding of the government.  It is the other side talking about a willingness to shut down for perceived political gain.

My conclusion is that nothing good has happened in these 2 continuing resolutions except to schedule the unaddressed questions to come right back up to be resolved by April 8.

Within 3 weeks, I will either be reasonably impressed with real progress on spending reform (doubtful) or be calling loudly for new leadership in the House.
4930  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Libya and other Arab countries on: March 20, 2011, 11:55:38 AM
To JDN's question: "why not say thank you President Obama?  Is that so hard?"  

My take is a little different.  I agree with the no fly zones.  I think the process might lead to removal of Ghadafy.  Marginally better to take him alive than dead but I place no moral value on that, taking a phrase from Marianne Pearl, he is a 'nuisance to humanity'.  Down a civilian jetliner like beheading a journalist, if we can't take action against things that egregious, our species doesn't deserve the oxygen we breathe on the planet. The reason I don't give immediate and full credit to Obama is the delay.  Power that shifted during the delay, ground was lost and lives were lost.  He captured back most of the country while we argued within the administration, evaluated brackets and waited for return phone calls from Europe.  Maybe this will all turn out so well that the delay was insignificant to the result.  In Iraq, the 6 months notice we gave our enemy while we dithered with ally and international approvals were extremely costly.  

Consultations and cooperation of allies is great.  That process needs to happen faster - hours, not weeks and months.
4931  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Cognitive Dissonance of His Glibness: Administration to push for privacy on: March 19, 2011, 06:06:46 PM
First note, the theme of the video in the previous video might be what finally brings him down.  It covers the disengagement very well!  Second I note that 64 senators sent a letter to the President asking him to engage on entitlement reform.  He was not present, in Rio, not available to receive the letter. Third I would note that regarding basketball a different presumed candidate led her team as point guard to a Cinderella story state championship for highly underrated Wasilla.  The incumbent candidate is talking about spectator sports - aka sitting on the couch watching government controlled monopoly television.

Isn't it strange how every story about the administration seems to keep falling under the themes of glibness or cognitive dissonance.

This one, "White House to Push Privacy Bill" flies in the face of all the new invasions on privacy, like HEALTHCARE, and everything we learned from the year of WikiLeaks, that our government can't keep national security information private - private conversations with our closest allies, how are they going to protect the national database of women who had abortions or any other sensitive area of heathcare information.

Same administration, same week, is pushing for school administrators to track children's posts on facebook more closely.

The worst private information seizure I have faced was from trying to change the bank account my state required car insurance gets taken  from.  They needed DOB, SS no, bank info obviously, all secret questions answered etc, and the only reason I was switching was because of other federal mandates on banks causing that account to be service charged to death and forcing me to use other accounts.

Cognitive dissonance.  Stop taking all our data would be the best way for government to help with privacy.
4932  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Housing Crisis Explained and Questions Answered on: March 19, 2011, 01:40:58 PM
"No one should consider buying in this environment."
    - Ooops, made a buy yesterday.  But I understand your point.

Going back a couple of days:  "the FICO Score and the Loan to Value are the "primary" considerations on loan approvals.  All other factors are considered as "Contributory Risk Factors".  They are assigned little importance."

  - Do you mean FICO and LTV are primary along with income verification, or is it possible to borrow favorably today with perfect credit and clear title, but not provide tax returns?
4933  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2012 Presidential - Are you better off now... on: March 19, 2011, 12:31:21 AM
GM posted this elsewhere: "US Cost of Living Hits Record, Passing Pre-Crisis High"
Read differently, if incomes are flat, and cost of living hits record, then the standard of living is falling.  Begs the reelection question, are you better off now than you were...

I would judge Presidents by the success or failure of their policies, not the chronology of the days their name was on the door.  This was a 6 year experiment in leftism. Power in Washington changed in Nov 2006.  That's when Obama came into the ruling majority and when Bush became fully a lame duck, at least on economic policies.  In Nov 2008 it was all-Dem, even during transition.  In Nov 2010 it switched halfway back, to stalemate, with two parties to fight over policy.  R's can't quite repeal what happened and Dems can't enact any more of it.  So the most telling part about these policies is the part between the elections in 2006 and the elections in 2010.  Coincidentally perhaps the worst economic times of our lives - for most of us.  Unemployment doubled, revenues imploded, spending and deficits exploded, energy prices, all the best investments have gold in their name, etc.  Not everything that went wrong was 100% their fault (RINOs have their fingerprints over all of it too, and same goes for the Fed), but buy now people hopefully see some correlation.  Maybe things grow from here, we'll see.  I'm predicting sputtering, mixed results, near zero growth.  Certainly not consistent growth of more than the 3.1% or so we need just to break even.  Whatever the case, this is the record he will run on.  Kind of hard for any core constituency to get ecstatic about.  I can't quite hear the sound yet of full stadiums with the styrofoam Greek columns chanting:  'Four More Years!'

The flip side of my argument is that if Obama succeeds in framing it as coming into power after these crashes, the are you better off question becomes more like a 50-50 rather than a slam dunk against him.  Then it just comes down to how well he can spin his accomplishments of spend and regulate.

Contrast Obama's record with the President he likes to contrast with, Reagan was having 6 consecutive quarters of nearly 8% economic growth at this point in his Presidency and went on to win 49 states.  The difference: Reagan enacted pro-growth policies, Obama and his allies enacted anti-growth policies.  That, over time, goes from conjecture to that which is readily apparent.
4934  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2012 Presidential on: March 18, 2011, 11:34:23 PM
"A popular vote majority is a rather rare presidential election.  Don't read too much in Clinton's inabilty to get 50% or more. "

 - This is true. I remember in 2000 that Al Gore won with only 48.4% of the vote.   smiley,_2000
4935  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: American History on: March 18, 2011, 11:23:08 PM
"Blacks have every right to be angry."

Some truth in that, but that anger should not be indiscriminate.  Speaking of our heritage only, some whites were only on the side of freeing slaves and gave blood and lives for that.  Some black ancestors such as from Kenyan roots might have been slave owners, slave sellers or slaves.  One can not tell by color of the skin which side of history's horrible struggles people's ancestors were on.

A more timely question would be, what atrocities are going on now and what can we do about them.
4936  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / 2012 Presidential: Obama's Strategy? Ohio or Colorado on: March 18, 2011, 02:10:54 PM
Obama sympathetic strategists look at the table set for 2012 from the Obama perspective:

In a nutshell, they debate whether he forms the same coalition as 2008 with minorities, young people, socially liberal women and other upscale, upper middle class voters, or working class whites, or fight back after the college-educated whites, which swung 18 points to the Republicans in just 2 years.  Everyone is in a group in their world.  No mention of targeting AMERICANS.

My take is that he is screwed either way IF he faces a strong competitor.  smiley
4937  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Nuclear Power on: March 18, 2011, 01:51:05 PM
CCP: "we shouldn't be building them in earthquake zones"


Those people can have coal, or hook up their exercise machines to run the lights and charge the iphones.

If we want power generation further from the population and further from the earthquake zone, plan on using more power to do that.  "Energy losses are directly proportional to the square of the current." - James Prescott Joule
4938  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: US Foreign Policy on: March 18, 2011, 01:39:10 PM
CCP: "Or just kill the Ghaddafi and get it over with."
GM: "Bingo!"

There was a nice, longer explanation by GM recently to ya about how we don't just do the hit and run, scorched earth type of hit.  True, that was the thinking behind Iraq and Afghanistan.  It started with or was articulated by Powell.  If we break it, we have to fix it.  But IraQ and Afghanistan were certainly already broken.  I believe we had a right to act with either a hit and run or the full 10 years and running plan.

With Ghadafy, no one seemed to question Reagan much for an attempted assassination of a foreign leader - who executed the Lockerbie mass murder.  We missed and still accomplished the mission - scaring the #*@& out of him.  From my point of view, if we are right in our information, that these people like Saddam, Moammar are murderous thugs, it is okay with me to take them out without full followup.  The concept in law and morality is that innocent people are facing imminent death, a concept with equal standing to self defense, if I understand correctly. 

Regarding no-fly zone, I believe it was presumed candidate of no substance Palin who called for exactly that on Feb. 23, how many innocent deaths ago?
4939  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Next few days critical. Too soon to write off nuclear power - Washington Post on: March 18, 2011, 09:11:22 AM
Washington Post Editorial today:

Too soon to write off nuclear power

FIRST CAME an earthquake so powerful that it shifted Japan’s largest island, Honshu, eight feet eastward. Thirty minutes later a tsunami washed away thousands of lives. Now, a third disaster threatens as technicians desperately try to keep the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station from releasing radioactive material.

During all of this, the Japanese people have reacted with fortitude. In a rare television appearance, the emperor asked Japanese to “hand in hand, treat each other with compassion and overcome these difficult times.” That seems to be exactly what they are attempting; and the skeleton staff at Fukushima Daiichi is taking on more than its share, only briefly evacuating the site after detecting a radiation spike on Tuesday, then returning to continue cooling the reactors.

Though the reactors are shut down, they are still producing immense quantities of heat. It doesn’t appear that catastrophic levels of radiation have leaked from the plant’s thick containment barriers, but U.S. officials still have few details. The next few days will be critical.

On this side of the Pacific, the crisis has reinvigorated a debate on nuclear safety. Opponents of atomic power say this crisis proves that the risks can never be eliminated. That’s true. There will always be challenges that designers don’t fully anticipate.

Yet Energy Secretary Steven Chu insisted Wednesday that he and President Obama want to retain nuclear energy as an option, and they have good reason to do so. Generating electricity carries risks, no matter how you do it. Burning fossil fuels pumps harmful gases and particulates into the air every day, causing respiratory illness and cancer in thousands. People die in explosions of coal mines, oil drilling rigs and natural gas pipelines. Unlike nuclear energy, burning fossil fuels contributes to the gravest environmental threat of our time — climate change, which is likely to affect not thousands or millions of people, but billions.

Nuclear accidents pose a uniquely frightening danger: the prospect, in a worst case, of large swaths of territory being poisoned and uninhabitable for decades or longer. Mr. Chu and Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chairman Gregory B. Jaczko are right to have the government closely examine what happens in Japan and adjust U.S. policy as necessary. But the Fukushima plant is old. New plants would use more sophisticated technology, such as small-scale high-temperature gas reactors that use fuel in forms that shrink the risk of meltdown further still. A proposed nuclear plant in Georgia would not require backup power in order to activate emergency cooling systems.

Events in Japan will affect the “nuclear renaissance” to some extent, no matter what Mr. Chu or anyone else says, and all the more if the damage is not contained. Our thoughts, as ever, are with the Japanese people struggling to cope; beyond that, it is too soon to form broad and absolute judgments on relative risks.
4940  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Food Chain and Food Politics: US life expectancy surpasses 78, a new record on: March 17, 2011, 09:12:46 PM
From all the things I have read about how we live wrong and botch up our food supply in particular, with altered cows, stressed chickens, unhealthy school lunches, processed everything, fats, salts, sugars, overuse of pesticides, etc., I was surprised to read, again, that life expectancy just keeps going up:
4941  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Clinton prepares to jump from the SS Obamatanic on: March 17, 2011, 09:01:43 PM
Hillary parting company with Obama as his ship begins to sink has one of two meanings. One is like she said, an end to all public life.  The other... (is there an emoticon for screaming in horror?)
4942  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Tax Policy on: March 17, 2011, 08:57:20 PM
"...cut the top U.S. tax rate to 25% for individuals and corporations..."

This is a great proposal.  Better would be to cap both at 25% in a constitutional amendment.  Better still would be a constitutional amendment to cap spending at 18% of GDP. with a supermajority required to approve spending in excess of the limit.

States need to take some action on tax rates as well, particularly state capital gains taxes that tax false inflationary gains as ordinary income.  If you want to increase revenues, you need to grow the economy.  Blocking capital from flowing to its most productive use does not get you there.

On April 1, if we take no action, the U.S. will have the highest corporate income tax rate in the developed world.
4943  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Fed, Monetary Policy, Inflation, & the US Dollar on: March 17, 2011, 08:50:03 PM
"So, who thinks that Japan may be the final straw?"

FWIW, I do not.  I think Japan will roar back stronger for this in spite of unthinkable tsunami fatalities.  I don't quite see how they replace the electric power lost to reactors permanently shutdown but somehow they will. Freighters from Russia of liquid natural gas perhaps.

The damage we are doing with trillion dollar deficits I think is a slow invisible cancer, getting harder and harder to cure, but not an immediate fatal blow.  Both the rise in interest rates and the rise in energy prices come from economic strength.  As economic strength falters, those increases will slow and delay we sputter until we start thinking straight and decide to fix our negligently misguided policies.  MHO.
4944  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Cognitive Dissonance: The To Be or Not To Be President - VDH on: March 17, 2011, 12:24:38 PM
My prediction that BHO will not be the nominee of his own party is totally wrong - so far, with about a year to go.  A combination of two things would need to happen I think for Obama to throw in the towel, approvals dropping into the 30s and the emergence of a real, Republican challenger.  Maybe neither will happen, we will see, but it is hard to see how approvals won't fall further with the events already set in motion.  62% want Obamcare repealed.  Bumbling over Egypt, blathering over Ghadafy, dithering over Japan, not even present over a domestic energy crisis, handing deterrence to the Russians, clueless about the private economy etc. etc.  VDH says it all so much better...
Victor Davis Hanson

March 17, 2011 12:00 A.M.
President Hamlet
Thinking out every possible side of a question can mean never acting on any of them.

More than 400 years ago, William Shakespeare wrote a riveting tragedy about a young, charismatic Danish prince who vowed to do the right thing in avenging his murdered father. That soon proved easier said than done. As a result, Hamlet couldn’t quite ever act in time — given all the ambiguities that such a sensitive prince first had to sort out. In the meantime, a lot of bodies piled up through his indecision and hesitancy.

President Obama wanted to give us all universal health care. But then he discovered that the country was broke and that most people did not like his massive federal takeover. So we got both his health care and, so far, more than 1,000 exemptions from his landmark plan for unions, corporations, and entire states.

The president wished to please his liberal supporters with more government redistributive programs and higher taxes on the wealthy. But such entitlements cost lots of money — more than $4 trillion in new borrowing in just three years – and scare to death the job-creating private sector. So the president not only borrows at record levels, but also sets up a commission to warn us that his borrowing will soon bankrupt the country. He damns the “fat-cat bankers” and the rich who “at some point” have made enough money, even as he courts them for campaign donations and begs their companies to start hiring new employees.

Obama warned us that we could not drill our way out of the ongoing gas crisis and needed instead to develop new green energy. As proof, he borrowed billions to promote wind and solar power, and stopped most new leases for fossil-fuel exploration in Alaska, the west, and offshore. But it turned out that we still need lots of oil as gas nears $4 a gallon. So the president brags that America is now pumping more oil under his green administration than ever before — but neglects to mention that this is true only because Presidents Clinton and Bush long ago approved the sort of oil leases that Obama had rejected.

President Obama wanted so much to discontinue George W. Bush’s war on terror that he banned the phrase “war on terror” altogether. He apologized to the Muslim world, promised to “reset” our foreign policy, and vowed to close Guantanamo Bay and stop the other nasty Bush antiterrorism protocols. But our “to be or not to be” Hamlet also wanted to continue to keep the country safe from another 9/11-style terrorist attack, so he kept Guantanamo open, quadrupled the number of Predator drone attacks, and either preserved or expanded all the Bush protocols that he had once derided.

Abroad, a new multilateral Obama wished to act only in concert with the United Nations and our allies. He vowed to respect the sovereignty of other countries and not “meddle” in their affairs by imposing American values. And yet the president also embraced eternal and universal human rights and wanted the United States to be on the right side of history. So he criticized our intervention to foster democracy in Iraq even as his vice president praised it. We surged in Afghanistan even as we posted deadlines to leave. We promised not to meddle to support Iranian protestors, and to meddle to support Egyptian protestors.

Hosni Mubarak was a dictator and was not a dictator, who had to leave yesterday, today, or maybe tomorrow. The situation in Libya is deemed “unacceptable,” but how exactly it could be made acceptable is never spelled out. Intervening there to support rebels is said to be good; but apparently so is supporting Saudi troops intervening in Bahrain to put down rebels and protect the status quo.

Middle East strongmen, the president tells us, are cruel and must leave. But the why and how of it all are also never stated. Are they supposed to flee only when protests reach a critical mass? In Egypt and Tunisia, but not in Saudi Arabia, Syria, or Iran?

President Obama has spent most of his life either in, or teaching, school — or making laws that he was not responsible for enforcing. His hope-and-change speeches were as moving in spirit as they were lacking in details.

But now Obama is chief executive, and learning, as did Prince Hamlet, that thinking out every possible side of a question can mean never acting on any of them — a sort of Shakespearean “prison” where “there is nothing either good or bad.” Worrying about pleasing everyone ensures pleasing no one. Once again such “conscience does make cowards of us all.”

Hamlets, past and present, are as admirable in theory as they are fickle — and often dangerous — in fact.
4945  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Japan on: March 17, 2011, 12:04:33 PM
PC,  Good points, I agree, and my gripe was with MSNBC mixing an unthinkable tsunami death toll with the extremely difficult ongoing effort to cool these shutdown reactors in a highly populated area.  - Doug
4946  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Fed, Monetary Policy, Inflation, & the US Dollar on: March 17, 2011, 11:47:26 AM
Geithner: "there was no alternative except for Congress to raise the debt ceiling so that the government can keep borrowing."

The alternative for a country that knows how to take in $2.6 Trillion in revenues, would be to argue about how to spend that $2.6 Trillion  - if we aren't paying back the other 14 Trillion, not argue about spending between 3.799 and 3.8 Trillion. 

It used to be that markets would flinch and panic on just body language of people like a Fed chair or Treasury Secretary.  Markets today seem to know about the hoax theory. The flashback shows that for people like Geithner and Joe Biden, when their lips move, meaningless words can come out.  If these people have no idea what they mean by what they say, how can the markets guess.

I wrote then that countries like China, Saudi etc. do not use the US dollar as a favor to us, it is solely from the lack of a better alternative.  I wonder what an IMF currency backed by Greece, Italy and a nuclear-free Germany would look like without US backing.
4947  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Japan on: March 17, 2011, 11:00:01 AM
Journalism of the worst kind IMHO to mix up these stats.  In a story about nuclear troubles,
"At least 19 workers hurt, 20 exposed to radiation ... More than 5,300 officially listed as dead, but toll expected to top 10,000"

I wish to minimize nothing in any tragedy, but the first stat, 19 hurt, 20 exposed, is what we know so far about the nuclear disaster.  The second stat (5300 dead, expected to top 10,000) has nothing to do with the nuclear plant damage.

We don't know the end of this developing tragedy but a news story should leave the reader more, not less, informed.

Chernobyl was a Soviet disaster built without protective enclosure and set off without an earthquake.  Fukushima was shut down and damaged in perhaps the worst earthquake of Japan in 1100 years.  

It is the Tsunami damage that is far, far, far worse than Chernobyl.  The nuclear toll right now is completely unknown.
4948  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Stratfor: Russia's Great Power Strategy on: March 17, 2011, 10:36:55 AM
"Stratfor:  Russia's Great Power Strategy"

 - Imagine if AMERICA had a great power strategy...

"Russia may be the one country that stands to gain from the various calamities in 2011. First, the general unrest in the Middle East has increased the price of oil by 18.5 percent. As the second largest oil exporter..."

  - If the US strove to be the world's number one in oil (and natural gas) from now until the end of the brief fossil fuel era, a number of things would happen, energy prices would drop and stabilize, America's standard of living would actually increase, employment would improve, the global economy would improve, poverty would decline, reliance on Saudi would decrease, Russia would drop to 3rd and have to increase production to a fall in revenues and experience a decrease in 'power' over its trading partners and bullied neighbors.  Who would want any of that?

4949  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: US Economics, the stock market , and other investment/savings strategies on: March 16, 2011, 02:12:51 PM
Read point c),  specific ticker listed, past performance linked.   smiley
4950  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: US Economics, the stock market: Defensive Strategies on: March 16, 2011, 01:34:32 PM
"...interest rates are going to start really climbing, what investments do we avoid and what do we do to protect ourselves?  What does a hunker down strategy look like?"

a) I am in R.E.  Can't really get out.  I am working on improving the quality of what I own and the intrinsic value for some future sale, as nominal values bounce and fall.  Retail real estate for financed homeowners will go down proportionally with interest rates going up, because affordability is based on the monthly payment.  Still there are some amazing buys out there now and in the next year in terms of cash buying distressed property.  I see a fairly stable market at least here (maybe not where you are) right now, compared to the future(?), to sell quality homeowner property at some fair price.  One theoretically could sell a home at today's retail, and buy at an amazing value on a distressed property to hunker down on if so inclined.

b) In the total real 'meltdown' scenario, a good friend tells me buy silver dimes instead of bars of gold or gold on paper.  You might be able to buy a loaf of bread or an iodine sample with silver dimes.  Show real gold and they might just kill you. Can't make change or conduct basic transactions with bullion.

c) Paper investments, I recommend a mutual fund like T Rowe Price Spectrum Income which is I think one of their more defensive funds.  (I previously mentioned knowing someone managing large funds but cannot recommend their own or give out any information.)  You are brave to still research companies and plan in and out strategies in a game run by pros.  Even buy and hold of great companies is not foolproof.  You can get in and out of a fund like the above any market day with no transaction fee. The costs (0.72%) are in the fund, not something you are charged at the beginning or end.  They provide the professional management and the in and out strategies within the investment.  The Spectrum series has other funds with other mixes.  (I used to buy TRP's more aggressive growth stock funds - offensive strategies only.) Last time the market really tanked, the mgr of this fund was on the cover of Barrons for good performance.  Regarding the future, I have no idea and certainly no inside information.
Pages: 1 ... 97 98 [99] 100 101 ... 132
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!