Meanderthal

Incompetents Giving Advice

Really, think about just who you might go to for advice.  Even within a specific subject group, we do not take advice from just anyone, we look for the successful, the accomplished, the knowledgeable.  One would have to be crazy to blindly take advice on one's health from a physician who had patients routinely and inexplicably die.  If a bum on the streets gives you financial advice, no one will think you are silly for ignoring it.  Guys with white canes, dark glasses and, dogs are not the goto folk for advice on how to run a particular NASCAR track. 

So why in the name of all that's holy and most that aint would anyone take advice from George W. Bush on how to effectively deal with terrorists, would be or actual?  Can you even think of anyone who is a more spectacular failure from a national security standpoint?  His methods, attitudes and, actions lead to the success for the worst act of terror on American soil in the last century or so.  He has failed to capture the primary planner and face of al Quaeda.  By the assessment of independent agencies, we are at best no safer and at worst, significantly less protected from attack now that Bush has had 7+ years to institute his policies.

Bush's comments to the Knesset were, in my opinion, inappropriate but even worse, they cannot help but lead thinking people to the observation that he is singularly unqualified to give the world advice on dealing with terrorists.  That he would presume to do so is a national embarrassment of unprecedented scope.

CAFKIA

In Denial

I just saw a political cartoon that showed Uncle Sam pondering the issue of what to do about the energy crisis while sitting on a barrel labeled "Untapped Domestic Reserves".  Amazingly enough, the pundit signed his work (Gorrell) thereby letting us know that he is an idiot in denial.

India and China are quite literally, in the drivers seat on this issue.  Both nation's economies have the potential to reduce ours to insignificance.  As their middle class grows and they require more petroleum products to fuel their cars and produce geegaws and gadgets that they will spend their newfound disposable income on, they are the one's that will buy the oil at, for now, whatever price.  They will also not be exporting much, if any, of their domestically produced petroleum.  They are both in periods of significant and aggressive economic growth, a beast that demands to be fed energy

So, let's just use our imaginations for a minute.  Say that we go hog wild and drill in ANWR, construct coal liquification plants all over Pa and Wv, and develop the means to extract the petroleum form the oil shale reserves in Rockies.  What happens then?  Well, if it is damn near any capitalistic American and/or a company with shareholders, they will sell the final product where ever they can get the best price.  Alternatively, if they are existing oil companies, they will simply divert shipments that currently come here to other places that need them (say, for instance, China and India) so as to avoid "flooding" the market here and causing prices to drop.  They will NOT intentionally set up a situation wherein they make less money.  And you are an idiot if you think they will.  You're an idiot if you think they would be allowed to by their board of directors and/or shareholders.

The only way out of this conumdrum is to establish new energy sources from new and smaller companies.  One favored fantasy is roofing every house with solar panels and each household sells the excess power to the company that manages the grid to be redistributed where needed.  It might not happen exactly that way but, that is the kind of situation we need.  Multiple sources in an incredibly broad base that has nothing to do with established coal and petroleum providers.

Neither this nation nor the world, have any problems that can be solved by finding and using more oil.  Economic and environmental effects will ensure the truth of that statement.  Of course, any politician that tells you that truth or any of several others will probably not get your vote, much less be elected.

CAFKIA

Bush/neoCON tax cuts explained

If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail.
Abraham Maslow

Private Thoughts

A long time ago I read a science fiction story that comes to mind today.  The basic plot line was that the earth had for thousands of years been in an interstellar fog of unknown make up.  The effect of this fog was that it disrupted the flow of thoughts outside one's head.  The edge of the fog was pretty sharp and within a few days, as the edge passed over, everyone could read other's thoughts.  Actually, that isn't well put.  Everyone broadcast all of their thoughts and everyone in range got them.  Neither sender nor receiver had any choice in the matter.

The story was a treatment of what happens when the social filters are taken away from communication.  Most of us think things that we would never say out loud.  Things like, "Damn that is the ugliest child I have ever seen!" or "This moron is as dumb as a box of hammers.  Why in the hell am I still listening to him?".  I could go on but you get my drift.  We pick and choose what to make public because we want to avoid hurting someone or, we don't want to start a fight or, we are ashamed of an action etc.  Whatever the reason, we count on our ability to filter our thoughts so that what is communicated is appropriate for the mores and sensitivities of our target audience.  In the scifi story, society degenerated pretty quickly and all anyone wanted was the ability to mute the incoming thoughts.  They wanted to not be able to hear what others were thinking.

When Rev Jeremiah Wright, Barack Obama's friend and former pastor, delivered his now infamous sermon that included the statement that God would damn America for it's treatment of a variety of peoples, he had an appropriate set of filters for his target audience.  Those folks in the pews understood what he was saying and they understood why.  Many of those not born to privilege that I have spoken with on this matter understand.  Those who through the use of technology, have listened in after the fact, those who have actively circumvented the social filters, are in effect eavesdropping.  They are choosing to listen to thoughts not meant for them and then they are choosing to be insulted and appalled that they could possibly hear something  that describes them in less than complimentary terms when they do.  They are idiots.  They are con men.

It matters not what Wright said.  At issue in this situation is what was at issue in the scifi story.  Do you want to hear the raw thoughts of everyone or, would you perhaps rather wait for the socially filtered version that streams from their mouths, pens, or computers?  I'm not even a little bit conflicted on this.  I don't need your thoughts.  I'll happily hold on for the words.

CAFKIA

Perfectly Said (Drawn?)

Ah, Sweet Normalcy

Saddam has been executed.  Now after all the celebrations and threats, death is getting back to normal.  See, this was just a sideshow and now, death must go on.  People must get up and get blown up on their way to work.  The children have to be fed a daily dose of violence.  The short, laughable, unlaudable holiday from fear is finally over and terror returns to it's normal and rightful place.  Lets not let Iraqis be the only ones who experience this moment.  Turn to the person closest to you and tell them how you hate them.  Make sure that everybody knows that your Gawd is far superior to their Gawd and so, you are superior to them.  Then kill them.

Republicans are the same all over.

CAFKIA

A Tax on the Truly Stupid

BY CAM SIMPSON

Chicago Tribune

WASHINGTON - (KRT) - From the Indian Ocean tsunami to the church around the corner, Americans have shown time and again they are willing to open their pocketbooks for charity, for a total of about $250 billion last year alone.

But now, amid pleas for aid after Hurricane Katrina, the Bush administration has launched an unusual effort to raise charitable contributions for another cause: the government's attempt to rebuild Iraq. ...

I laughed when I saw this on Alternate Brain.   (Who got it from Atrios)  Is a tax that is voluntarily paid not a tax?  I think it is.  As a matter of fact, I KNOW it is.  So this, ladies and germs, is a tentative tax increase.  If it doesn't work, (and as stupid as I think reich-wingers are, surely they are not this stupid) and I don't think it will, look for the Bush  (mis)administration to try some other under the table tax increase. 

It would appear that we are seeing the blind flailings of a drowning political movement.  Look to the polls to see if we are stupid enough to throw them the line they're asking for.  Personally, I intend to let them sink.

CAFKIA

UPDATE:

Bush plea  for cash to rebuild Iraq raises $600    

 

Mark Townsend in Houston

Sunday    September 25, 2005

The Observer 

   

An extraordinary appeal to Americans from the Bush administration for money to help pay for the reconstruction of Iraq has raised only $600 (£337), The Observer has learnt. Yet since the appeal was launched earlier this month, donations to rebuild New Orleans have attracted hundreds of millions of dollars.

Thanks to Shakespeares Sister for the clue.  Go read the rest, it is from a UK newspaper so you can probably trust it.  They still have a free press.

CAFKIA

 

Public Television

I tuned in late tonight to watch The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, probably my favorite news show since the 1970s. It was halfway through the show, and Gwen Ifill was throwing softball questions at a blatant Bush partisan from the comfort of his own office. It was quite a long interview, and the second such world-class ass-kissing by PTV that I've witnessed recently.

After watching for what seemed like an awfully long time, I was so disgusted I switched channels to CNN and listened to some crap from a Botox partisan instead about the wonders of Botox. Beat hell out of listening to some Bush partisan spout off about the wonders of the Bush presidency to a supposedly objective PTV star "reporter."

I assume this is the fallout from the right wing takeover of the Public Broadcasting Corp. I'm pretty much done with PTV after that. I hunted for probably 10 minutes before I could even find a way on their website to send an email to them. They evidently no longer put feedback anywhere near the top of their priority list. Pretty much like the Bush administration: he talks, everyone else listens, and he really doesn't care what anyone else thinks. Now PTV has adopted the same attitude.

I would have been willing to double or triple my contribution to Public Television if they had ever given me the choice between White House controlled "news" and their former, admirably objective reporting. I think they can survive on viewer contributions. In many cities, government support is only a small minority of their funding anyway. They could band together across a state to share funding for programming, like they do in a number of cities in South Carolina.

They didn't give me that choice, though. I was never asked, they never talked about continuing without government support that I ever heard.  They are spineless cowards so addicted to government handouts that nothing else occured to them. The fascists called them on the carpet for not being "objective" enough (we know what that means), like Joseph McCarthy did movie producers in the 1940s and early '50s. The House then took a meat axe to their funding.

They simply caved in to the far right with hardly more than a whimper. The assassins of objectivity said, "Here's your funding back (heh, heh). Goooood doggie!" Pat, pat. Clearly, government support and eyeballs are far more important to PTV now than honesty, objectivity and high journalistic standards. Hell, the reason I used to watch PTV is that I don't want to watch talking heads bought and paid for by the government.

Public Television, Jim Lehrer, Gwen Ifill and the rest of your ilk - You make me sick.

What's in YOUR Future?

What We Now Know (WWNK) is a fun and informative newsletter written by numerous different friends and associates of Doug Casey. The latest one's lead article, Raptured, Part II, is a fun read about those deluded sods who think the Rapture is coming any day now.

"According to a 2002 Time/CNN poll, 36% of Americans believe that the Bible is the word of God and should be taken literally. 59% believe the events in the Book of Revelation are going to come true. And close to a quarter think the Bible predicted the WTC attack."

If you are really worried about this, you can even go to the Rapture Index, a site that gives us a numerical indicator of how close we are to the real deal. Right now we are at 148. Oh, well, maybe it's time to add a little more to my long term bond fund. I wonder if I can get a ticker running across the bottom of my screen that will give me all the updates? Can't be too careful, you know.

The irony is that Americans, of all people, are telling the Saudis that THEY should stop teaching fanatical and hateful ideas to their children! The difference, of course, is that in America they go into politics and become Republicans. Over there at least they have the decency to blow themselves to smithereens. Be more fun to watch 'em sizzle and pop, but I guess that's asking a bit much.

I'd say it's a tossup which society has the larger percentage of barking mad, religious whackos ready to run out and begin slaughtering unbelievers in the name of God. As usual, Americans turn out to be Jabba the Hypocrite on the issue. No wonder people like that scare Bush silly. He knows how they think because he's one of 'em!

I wonder how many of these nutcases have retirement accounts? Or contribute to their church's capital development fund? or buy lottery tickets? Maybe the Rap will be by lottery!

Woo-hoo!

Reply to a Friend

A friend recently sent me this link:

http://newyork.craigslist.com/mnh/rnr/84047209.html

It's an allegory of 10 guys who go to dinner, and how much each of them pays, in order to illustrate the fairness of our current tax system in America. Here's my reply:

"Interesting way of illustrating a very screwed up tax system, Brian. Thanks for the link. Looking at a tax system as a reflection of the moral values of a people is in intriguing exercise.

The whole problem with the way of thinking and taxing illustrated by the allegory in your link is that we are taxing income instead of personal consumption. When a society becomes as wealthy as Americans have, and has so much spendable (otherwise investable) income, the wrong-headed incentives built into our tax system start to become glaringly obvious. Our tax structure turns into a powerful incentive to consume instead of to save and invest. It doesn't matter what we do with our money, we'll get taxed the same amount anyway. May as well have all the fun we can with it. Hey, you only go around once, etc., etc.

The result is a far greater proportion of our earnings going into real estate than into productive capital investment. The result is borrowing from the future, even from our grandchildren yet unborn. The result is Americans borrowing everything they can out of their houses to blow it on 'stuff,' instead of saving it or investing it, because the only tax break we get on spending is by buying personal residential estate. The result is that our national economy is now hostage to foreign Central Banks like those of the Chinese and Japanese, who own the majority of our debt.

This tax break drives more home buying and higher prices from all the tax-driven demand, so as incomes increase we begin to get bubble conditions in housing, out of which people are pulling all the money they can for pretty much no other reason than to blow it so they can feel good. The Wall Street Journal even makes excuses for and exalts this kind of personal profligacy in its editorial pages. They exalt killing innocent children in Iraq also, so not much surprise there. Consider the source. So it shouldn't be much of a surprise to anyone that their houses now make up most of Americans' personal net worth.

The result of our distorted up tax system is Americans with the lowest savings rate in the civilized world, personal net worth built mostly on borrowing and on asset inflation (a very dangerous way to live, indeed!), baby boomers who aren't prepared for retirement, and a population that is extraordinarily vulnerable to any financial conditions unfavorable to asset inflation.

The result of our tax system is a morality driven by borrowing and consumption, not by saving up money for what we need. The result is a morality that's driven by money, and by how much stuff we can display as an indicator of social status, not how much we are actually worth as an indicator of thrift, intelligence and personal responsibility. The result is greater pollution and bigger garbage dumps from so much consumption, and a resistance to the merits and morality of thrift taught by every religion on the planet.

Yeah, it's their own damn fault, but government incentives push everyone powerfully, over decades, in the wrong direction as well, for them personally, and for our economy. I hate to say it, but most people are so shallow that tax incentives trump their religious teachings and beliefs any day. Just look at all the expensive new SUVs at any mega-expensive suburbanite mega-church on a Sunday morning. The follow them home to see where they live. Jesus would weep.

After 9-11, Bush's reaction was to buck up everyone by telling them to go out and do some shopping! That tells us a lot about the quality of our leadership in this country, and what we think is important in our lives.

I'm betting that if those diners in your parable were taxed on what they spent, they would never have beaten up the tenth guy, never would have had an argument about who got treated fairly and who didn't, and the big spenders wouldn't need to leave the country to avoid taxes, because how much they pay in taxes is to a large degree within their control. The money would have been invested in productive capital instead of tax shelters, big homes and expensive meals, and everyone would have been earning more as a result. And if osmeone wanted a more expensive meal, he would have had to pay more in taxes and no one else to blame but himself.

A lot of conservatives actually support a tax system based on how much we consume instead of how much we earn, supported by the morality of thrift and productive investment, instead of personal consumption, but don't hold your breath, with the biggest bunch of spendthrifts in U.S. history running the country into the ground.

In case you are wondering, I used to be a part of everything I am criticizing, make the same excuses, do the same dumb things, and in many cases still do. I'm learning better, but it's taking me a long time, so I don't expect everyone else to get religion right this instant just because I have, but I do think it's a discussion we should stimulate in this country.

Conservatives are an endangered species in the U.S. today, I'm sorry to say.

Fun debate! I hope all is well with you at your new firm!

Robert