The bad idea: the Kyoto Treaty.
Making it worse: the Chicago Climate Exchange.
Remember back when the Kyoto Treaty was making the news? After it failed as a global initiative, environmentalists and social policy wonks made their way around the hurdle with a loophole called the Global Climate initiative. Well, that got carried one step further, and the Chicago Climate Exchange was created for actually buying and selling the pieces of paper intended to save us from climate change through excessive pollution.
You see the problem with this, don’t you?
One, the Kyoto Treaty (or Global Climate initiative, as it reincarnated into) isn’t going to solve anything if absolutely EVERYONE isn’t on board.
Two, the pieces of paper with pollution absolution on them don’t actually stop any pollution from occurring. Polluters still pollute with climate exchange trader blessing.
Three, like every other commodity, traders will buy and sell these things like corn, hog bellies, or even crude oil, jacking up the price so those who feel they need them the most can no longer afford to buy them--the comes the inevitable crash. This is just like the Beanie baby craze of the nineties—adults took a kids’ toy and made it an expensive commodity, bet the house on its appreciation, and wound up losing big in the end.
The only winners will be those who got in early, bid up, then got out at the top--just like real estate flippers and the current "stuck" homeowners left holding the depreciation bag. It may already be too late to profit here.
What really slays me is the hideous amount of puffery in this whole issue. Previously, I wrote an article on how to easily solve the supposed pollution problem by simply planting trees. It seems the issue has taken on a life of its own in the opposite direction: we’re not solving anything—we’re CAPITALIZING on it!
The Global Climate Initiative is one giant feel-good window dressing job on an old issue, and by making pieces of paper (pollution credits) into industrial blessings from heaven (or at least the EPA), putting a face value on them, then trading them on a newly-created marketplace solves nothing except where to put money for the sucker’s bet. In looking into it, I’ve found that the EU has become the biggest sucker of them all, falling for this scheme hook, line, and sinker.
Listening to a CNBC broadcast just yesterday, I found that small farms are also falling for this scheme, but for different issues: fertilizers, wastewater runoff, and diesel fuel use. So American farmers have been duped into buying absolution for activities they do as a normal course of business—putting food on our tables. Nothing else of their practices will change but the buying of credits to continue doing the same old thing.
The guest even encouraged individuals to get involved with the program. Other than helping to bid up the price of pollution credits, I just don’t see how individuals belong in this scheme--is someone going to buy credits for driving a diesel car, or maybe taking too long in the shower, or adding Miracle Grow to their houseplants?
Am I the only one who thinks this whole thing is nothing more than a tax on conscience, and that ingenious jackals from Chicago are gaining from the activities of hapless do-gooders? Once again, we capitalists have created something from nothing—much like the value of our money (backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government, which is meaningless). All this may as well have the Pope's blessing and seal, for all the good THAT'LL do!
I'm hoping that one day we'll be able to include them in our retirement portfolios by petitioning for pre-tax purchase status, or IRA-eligible credits, or maybe an index will be formed by then. THAT’S how individuals can participate in this otherwise ridiculous scheme and tax on conscience.
Individuals who are sincere about saving the planet can just plant trees and learn to live with themselves for maximum effect and a lot less money.
Thursday, November 30, 2006
Monday, November 27, 2006
Concrete Jungles Give Birth to Downtown Deserts
Recently, a new term has been coined to denote areas of food sale shortage, or at least extremely limited choices of food for sale: “food deserts.”
Now when we think of “deserts,” we think of the Sahara, the Gobi, Saudi Arabia, Death Valley—all extremely hot and covered with sand. Not exactly the most hospitable places for growing food, if you catch my drift.
Now, transfer this line of thinking to the urban downtown areas of America, you know, the concrete jungles of the U.S.—all extremely paved, developed, usually car-covered, and not a favorable environment for growing food, except maybe on the weekends.
Years ago, when the manufacturing sector was red-hot in this country, living downtown (or close to it) was THE thing—the living was cheap, jobs were everywhere, there was plenty of access to public transportation, one could walk to nearly everything, and food stalls and small grocery retailers abounded. Not any more.
Fast-forward to the 20th century and suburbia: the need (or perceived need) for more space, cleaner air, more privacy, and most importantly, grass, drove successful families out into the suburbs in search of better schools, better, more stable employment, and even a place to work from home with growing room to spare. Because the people went, so did the stores—including grocery stores.
Looking back at the 20th century and urban living: some people never made it out of the downtowns of America, and as a result, suffer from a drought of food supplies. The cheap living and the access to public transport still exist, and one can STILL walk to nearly everything, but there’s nowhere to walk to! The stores and retailers are no longer there, and the downtowners are forced into making some pretty scary choices for food purchases, namely convenience store, gas station mini-mart, and fast food fare. Now why the fast food places stuck around is beyond me, unless it was to provide the remaining working stiffs downtown a place to eat lunch. But what happens to weekend sales? They must fall off a cliff!
There’s a flip-side to these downtown deserts: out-in-the-middle-of-nowhere deserts in the wooded areas, rural towns and farm communities, and little places between big towns that don’t hold enough population to support a regular grocery store. They, too, eat in horrendous places like gas station mini-marts, convenience stores, and fast food restaurants when they can’t grow their own.
As we all know, these kinds of stores don’t always carry the best, most nutritious fare, and produce is practically unheard of. Those who have the means for travel to cheaper stores do so, while others make do with what they have, or what they can get. Downtowners, for example, go to a food bank for filling in the diet holes—but even food banks have trouble getting and keeping fresh food fresh, so many make do with canned vegetables.
I recently read a story about a man who lives in New Hampshire near the Canadian border, and he gladly drives 400 miles round trip just to get food he can afford, and is nutritious for him. He does this monthly because he lives on a fixed income, and his little bitty town only has two convenience stores to its name. This means no produce, and in far northern New Hampshire, none will easily grow. He supplements his purchases with locally-picked fiddlehead ferns and dandelion greens.
I’m wondering why he doesn’t just get a passport and go north into Canada, where the shopping is even cheaper than the U.S.—maybe because the nearest Canadian town is further away than the nearest U.S. town, or maybe he has a fear of metrics and currency conversion. All I know is that while we lived in South Texas, lots of people were doing their shopping in Mexico—the canned food is the same, with the same brands, but the labels are in Spanish, and the weights are metric. The graphic, though, was the giveaway—Green Giant is Green Giant, Libby’s is Libby’s, and so forth. Also, crushed tomatoes have generally the same graphics on the label there as here, which is a picture of tomatoes and sauce. In other words, it doesn’t take a genius rocket scientist to figure out a lot of the stuff for sale in Mexican stores, and it shouldn’t in Canadian stores either—especially when Canadian labels are in English.
It’s entirely possible that since 9/11, there have been severe restrictions out on what can come back over the border, and maybe, just maybe, there’s some sort of tax or duty he’d have to pay for bringing stuff back from Canada that I’m completely unaware of. There reasons would make someone turn the other direction and drive so far to save money.
The Mom-and-Pop stores that used to fill these now-desert niches have gone under due to lack of business, or an introduction of a new competitor, i.e., Wal-mart or some other big-box grocer. Someone came to town (or close to it), offered better bargains and bigger selections, and people went for it, leaving Mom and Pop holding the half-empty bag. Not being able to sell a half-empty bag, Mom and Pop got the hint and left town.
The migration of retailers, especially food retailers, to the suburbs has left us with food deserts in the most vulnerable places in this country. Some people live in areas where they can grow some produce for themselves, and should try doing so. Otherwise, it’s time to saddle up and go on a food-shopping trip (not easily done by bus when you have small kids in tow and only two arms to carry bags). Another alternative would be to change where you live as opposed to shopping grounds—this is what working America has already done. When the employment base shifted from downtown manufacturing to suburban high-tech and service sector, the people went where the jobs were, and the retailers followed the people. Demand followed demand.
Some retailers have acknowledged this “food desert” problem, and are taking steps to combat it through the creation of shopettes, mini-stores, and online catalogs with local delivery systems. Other retailers are making their way back to downtowns and urban areas in small versions too, mainly because real estate and land prices are so prohibitive, and regulations are so tight. Business smells a profit, no matter how small, and will pursue it any way they can, bringing life into these modern-day “deserts.”
Now when we think of “deserts,” we think of the Sahara, the Gobi, Saudi Arabia, Death Valley—all extremely hot and covered with sand. Not exactly the most hospitable places for growing food, if you catch my drift.
Now, transfer this line of thinking to the urban downtown areas of America, you know, the concrete jungles of the U.S.—all extremely paved, developed, usually car-covered, and not a favorable environment for growing food, except maybe on the weekends.
Years ago, when the manufacturing sector was red-hot in this country, living downtown (or close to it) was THE thing—the living was cheap, jobs were everywhere, there was plenty of access to public transportation, one could walk to nearly everything, and food stalls and small grocery retailers abounded. Not any more.
Fast-forward to the 20th century and suburbia: the need (or perceived need) for more space, cleaner air, more privacy, and most importantly, grass, drove successful families out into the suburbs in search of better schools, better, more stable employment, and even a place to work from home with growing room to spare. Because the people went, so did the stores—including grocery stores.
Looking back at the 20th century and urban living: some people never made it out of the downtowns of America, and as a result, suffer from a drought of food supplies. The cheap living and the access to public transport still exist, and one can STILL walk to nearly everything, but there’s nowhere to walk to! The stores and retailers are no longer there, and the downtowners are forced into making some pretty scary choices for food purchases, namely convenience store, gas station mini-mart, and fast food fare. Now why the fast food places stuck around is beyond me, unless it was to provide the remaining working stiffs downtown a place to eat lunch. But what happens to weekend sales? They must fall off a cliff!
There’s a flip-side to these downtown deserts: out-in-the-middle-of-nowhere deserts in the wooded areas, rural towns and farm communities, and little places between big towns that don’t hold enough population to support a regular grocery store. They, too, eat in horrendous places like gas station mini-marts, convenience stores, and fast food restaurants when they can’t grow their own.
As we all know, these kinds of stores don’t always carry the best, most nutritious fare, and produce is practically unheard of. Those who have the means for travel to cheaper stores do so, while others make do with what they have, or what they can get. Downtowners, for example, go to a food bank for filling in the diet holes—but even food banks have trouble getting and keeping fresh food fresh, so many make do with canned vegetables.
I recently read a story about a man who lives in New Hampshire near the Canadian border, and he gladly drives 400 miles round trip just to get food he can afford, and is nutritious for him. He does this monthly because he lives on a fixed income, and his little bitty town only has two convenience stores to its name. This means no produce, and in far northern New Hampshire, none will easily grow. He supplements his purchases with locally-picked fiddlehead ferns and dandelion greens.
I’m wondering why he doesn’t just get a passport and go north into Canada, where the shopping is even cheaper than the U.S.—maybe because the nearest Canadian town is further away than the nearest U.S. town, or maybe he has a fear of metrics and currency conversion. All I know is that while we lived in South Texas, lots of people were doing their shopping in Mexico—the canned food is the same, with the same brands, but the labels are in Spanish, and the weights are metric. The graphic, though, was the giveaway—Green Giant is Green Giant, Libby’s is Libby’s, and so forth. Also, crushed tomatoes have generally the same graphics on the label there as here, which is a picture of tomatoes and sauce. In other words, it doesn’t take a genius rocket scientist to figure out a lot of the stuff for sale in Mexican stores, and it shouldn’t in Canadian stores either—especially when Canadian labels are in English.
It’s entirely possible that since 9/11, there have been severe restrictions out on what can come back over the border, and maybe, just maybe, there’s some sort of tax or duty he’d have to pay for bringing stuff back from Canada that I’m completely unaware of. There reasons would make someone turn the other direction and drive so far to save money.
The Mom-and-Pop stores that used to fill these now-desert niches have gone under due to lack of business, or an introduction of a new competitor, i.e., Wal-mart or some other big-box grocer. Someone came to town (or close to it), offered better bargains and bigger selections, and people went for it, leaving Mom and Pop holding the half-empty bag. Not being able to sell a half-empty bag, Mom and Pop got the hint and left town.
The migration of retailers, especially food retailers, to the suburbs has left us with food deserts in the most vulnerable places in this country. Some people live in areas where they can grow some produce for themselves, and should try doing so. Otherwise, it’s time to saddle up and go on a food-shopping trip (not easily done by bus when you have small kids in tow and only two arms to carry bags). Another alternative would be to change where you live as opposed to shopping grounds—this is what working America has already done. When the employment base shifted from downtown manufacturing to suburban high-tech and service sector, the people went where the jobs were, and the retailers followed the people. Demand followed demand.
Some retailers have acknowledged this “food desert” problem, and are taking steps to combat it through the creation of shopettes, mini-stores, and online catalogs with local delivery systems. Other retailers are making their way back to downtowns and urban areas in small versions too, mainly because real estate and land prices are so prohibitive, and regulations are so tight. Business smells a profit, no matter how small, and will pursue it any way they can, bringing life into these modern-day “deserts.”
Friday, November 24, 2006
“Help! I’ve Fallen and Can’t Reach My Microwave Burrito” or This Thing Called Hunger
Thanksgiving day, I watched the C-SPAN channels hoping for something I could sink my teeth into—the rest of the channel rerun lineup was about to kill me!
I stumbled upon the back half of an interview with Marco Grimaldo, interim director of Bread for the World, and he was discussing hunger in the U.S. and how the government had recently changed its term from “hunger’ to “food insecurity” to denote poverty-level eating and nutrition.
I grabbed the phone to call in a comment, but was unable to get through. I then elected to e-mail Mr. Grimaldo at the Bread for the World website, and my message got sent back.
While still full of fire and gumption about the whole “hunger” issue, I’ll post it instead.
Mr. Grimaldo’s contention is that if we throw enough money at the problem, it’ll go away—either at the recipient level, the farm subsidy level, or both. If we rewrite the Farm Bill or increase the amount of food stamps and other various aid to poor people, charities, and agencies set up to temporarily alleviate hunger, this will fix the problem—but you and I know this isn’t the case.
The letter:
“I saw your interview, and had this to add, but couldn't get my call in:
The microwave has become our biggest bane to poor people and food. There
are at least two generations (maybe more) that didn't get Home Ec education
in schools, and therefore cannot eat unless the food is either pre-prepared
----- Message truncated -----”
My rant was about how people rely too heavily on food that’s either pre-prepared (by some sort of third party), or microwaveable. If you were to give a poor person today 2 cups of flour, ½ cup of sugar, an egg, 1 t. baking soda, and some milk, they wouldn’t know what to do with it. This, by the way, is the recipe for basic pancakes—it cannot be casually tossed into the microwave in any but the finished form.
I’ve written about hunger before, and it took on the view of a two-sided coin of malnutrition: one side of not enough calories, and the other side of too many calories. There’s also a third side: WRONG calories.
Food stamp programs, church dinners, food banks, soup kitchens, and anyone else who provides free food to the poor all have one thing in common: WRONG calories. They tend to emphasize what will fill a person up for the least money and effort. What’s REALLY needed is a return to basics—Home Ec classes, shopping classes, nutrition classes, and how to read a cookbook. We need to make friends with Betty Crocker again.
At least two generations (possibly more) have grown up without public school access to Home Ec classes—and with mothers marching off to work, leaving kids at home to fend for themselves, the microwave has replaced the mother as the main source of nourishment. As we well know, food engineered for the microwave leaves a LOT to be desired when it comes to good nutrition, and it doesn’t help matters when bad shopping skills, a lack of nutritional knowledge, and a lack of preparation skills are thrown in.
As far as “hunger” and “food insecurity” go, the government is right—there is NO hunger here in America. More accurately and to the point, there is a food security problem, meaning that people have trouble accessing GOOD food, not food entirely, as the term “hunger” denotes. There is also a new term floating around to denote food insecurity, and it’s called “food deserts,” which I plan to write about in an upcoming article.
With all the food banks, church-served meals, soup kitchens, grocery store dumpsters, and stores and restaurants that leave separately-bagged reusable food out for street people to get at, how can anyone actually BE HUNGRY in this country? The people who regularly starve to death on the streets of Bangladesh in full public view wish they had it this good!
It’s just another Liberal heart-string emotional blackmail pseudo-crisis fundraiser opportunity. Today, I could’ve had Thanksgiving dinner for free at any number of churches in my area—ALL of them were serving!
Remember the Save the Children ads from years ago, where a man would walk through the streets of some misbegotten village and show filthy kids half naked and fly-encrusted, picking through a trash heap? Those ads today don’t feature such children—nowadays, the children are fully clothed, clean, fly-less and chubby-cheeked. Hardly anything to jerk tears over any more, huh? Our generosity and largesse has spread all around the world and boosted the lives of millions, yet we’re supposed to be upset about people here in America who’ve fallen and can’t reach their microwave burrito.
I stumbled upon the back half of an interview with Marco Grimaldo, interim director of Bread for the World, and he was discussing hunger in the U.S. and how the government had recently changed its term from “hunger’ to “food insecurity” to denote poverty-level eating and nutrition.
I grabbed the phone to call in a comment, but was unable to get through. I then elected to e-mail Mr. Grimaldo at the Bread for the World website, and my message got sent back.
While still full of fire and gumption about the whole “hunger” issue, I’ll post it instead.
Mr. Grimaldo’s contention is that if we throw enough money at the problem, it’ll go away—either at the recipient level, the farm subsidy level, or both. If we rewrite the Farm Bill or increase the amount of food stamps and other various aid to poor people, charities, and agencies set up to temporarily alleviate hunger, this will fix the problem—but you and I know this isn’t the case.
The letter:
“I saw your interview, and had this to add, but couldn't get my call in:
The microwave has become our biggest bane to poor people and food. There
are at least two generations (maybe more) that didn't get Home Ec education
in schools, and therefore cannot eat unless the food is either pre-prepared
----- Message truncated -----”
My rant was about how people rely too heavily on food that’s either pre-prepared (by some sort of third party), or microwaveable. If you were to give a poor person today 2 cups of flour, ½ cup of sugar, an egg, 1 t. baking soda, and some milk, they wouldn’t know what to do with it. This, by the way, is the recipe for basic pancakes—it cannot be casually tossed into the microwave in any but the finished form.
I’ve written about hunger before, and it took on the view of a two-sided coin of malnutrition: one side of not enough calories, and the other side of too many calories. There’s also a third side: WRONG calories.
Food stamp programs, church dinners, food banks, soup kitchens, and anyone else who provides free food to the poor all have one thing in common: WRONG calories. They tend to emphasize what will fill a person up for the least money and effort. What’s REALLY needed is a return to basics—Home Ec classes, shopping classes, nutrition classes, and how to read a cookbook. We need to make friends with Betty Crocker again.
At least two generations (possibly more) have grown up without public school access to Home Ec classes—and with mothers marching off to work, leaving kids at home to fend for themselves, the microwave has replaced the mother as the main source of nourishment. As we well know, food engineered for the microwave leaves a LOT to be desired when it comes to good nutrition, and it doesn’t help matters when bad shopping skills, a lack of nutritional knowledge, and a lack of preparation skills are thrown in.
As far as “hunger” and “food insecurity” go, the government is right—there is NO hunger here in America. More accurately and to the point, there is a food security problem, meaning that people have trouble accessing GOOD food, not food entirely, as the term “hunger” denotes. There is also a new term floating around to denote food insecurity, and it’s called “food deserts,” which I plan to write about in an upcoming article.
With all the food banks, church-served meals, soup kitchens, grocery store dumpsters, and stores and restaurants that leave separately-bagged reusable food out for street people to get at, how can anyone actually BE HUNGRY in this country? The people who regularly starve to death on the streets of Bangladesh in full public view wish they had it this good!
It’s just another Liberal heart-string emotional blackmail pseudo-crisis fundraiser opportunity. Today, I could’ve had Thanksgiving dinner for free at any number of churches in my area—ALL of them were serving!
Remember the Save the Children ads from years ago, where a man would walk through the streets of some misbegotten village and show filthy kids half naked and fly-encrusted, picking through a trash heap? Those ads today don’t feature such children—nowadays, the children are fully clothed, clean, fly-less and chubby-cheeked. Hardly anything to jerk tears over any more, huh? Our generosity and largesse has spread all around the world and boosted the lives of millions, yet we’re supposed to be upset about people here in America who’ve fallen and can’t reach their microwave burrito.
Wednesday, November 22, 2006
The Politician Primer (L-O-N-G)
In case you haven’t guessed, politicians are expedient too, meaning they take the straightest path from where they are to what they want. They also offer some form of “something-for-nothing” that will favor their political base and ensure votes.
It’s all a giant marketing ploy as far as I’m concerned—each party promises to DO something, to FIGHT FOR something, to FIGHT AGAINST something, or DEFEND AGAINST something. In stereotypical Hatfield-McCoy-speak, “Them’s selling words.”
REAL public servants—you know, the few honorable ones—run for office to work for legislation that rewards and encourages saving, investing, and wealth production that society depends on for continued growth and opportunity. An honest politician will work to allow taxpayers to keep more of their hard-earned money, as well as reduce the preponderance of ways people get caught in the traps of government program dependency.
It has been said that politicians are those who think about the next election, and statesmen are those who think about the next generation. Ask yourself who YOUR candidate is watching out for—himself or your grandkids.
The four steps to a political career and life:
1. Getting power through the vote
2. Holding onto power by increasing it or consolidating it
3. Defending and consolidating power
4. Getting re-elected
Lather, rinse, repeat.
Lots and lots of heavy-duty marketing is involved with each and every step, including campaigning for and against others (as well as yourself), writing and voting for and against legislation, campaigning and maneuvering for choice committee assignments, and finding ways to get your fingers in the pot for virtually guaranteed home projects—whether necessary or not. There just isn’t enough free public money to go around, so politicians must fight like dogs to get any scrap they can BECAUSE it serves to feed their political careers from Step One onward.
It’s as if the actual “legislating” part of their jobs is now an afterthought.
Political marketing tactics include negative campaigning, demonizing the opposition, character assassination, and spinning an issue so the underlying facts are not readily seen or understood (until it’s too late). These are the tactics politicians use on us the voters, and on each other. Re-election is vital, because it’s their only means of job security—every two years, someone is up for re-election somewhere, so there isn’t a whole lot of time to get the actual work done. Most of their time is spent campaigning or meeting with campaign staff to engineer the next battle plans.
The desire for political power comes from two possible sources: the appropriation of free money, and societal benevolence. Expedient politicians are only in it for the money, which will serve to shore up their voting base, while benevolent politicians are long-term thinkers (with short-term office cycles and much competition, unfortunately). Long-term thinkers, of which we are in painfully short supply, seek to tap into the expediency of people to increase economic opportunities and prosperity for the greatest number of them.
There are two sides to the political marketing coin: the real reason, and the one that will earn the most votes. This is the best explanation I can give for my use of the terms “fact” and “emotional blackmail,” and every candidate is prone to use whichever one that will most easily win the election for him/her. Expediency is EVERYWHERE!
Politics operates as it does because there is no incentive to do otherwise. In other words (and no doubt you’ve heard this before), you have to practically kill someone to lose a federal job, unless it requires re-election. In the private sector, people get fired instantly for not performing to specified standards, whereas in the public sector, horrific incompetence has grown, festered, and retired over and over again. Politics is often a last resort for people who can’t get hired anywhere else, believe it or not—and why not? By any account, it’s a dream job—working only three days a week, voting yourself a pay raise in the middle of the night as often as you want, shooting down legislation beneficial to the next generations in favor of legislation beneficial to your ongoing success and financial backers, and no incentives or consequences in sight as long as the re-election machine is well-fed and well-lubed.
To keep their machines well-fed and well-lubed, politicians are going to follow the money that comes from special interest groups, who provide incentives in the form of privileges unattainable by satisfying the people in some way. Let’s face it—Jane and John Q. Public, citizen voters, cannot write a check for millions to a particular party, and don’t have the clout to offer free trips around the world or entrance to highly-exclusive events like special interest can. THERE’S the incentive for politicians, and it’s no wonder special interests get the attention they do. Nobody asks who benefits and who pays.
Speaking of incentives, we the people are given some incentives of our very own. Some of these incentives include the “other people’s tax dollars” giveaway (through government programs) and the inclusion of beneficial and stimulative legislation through the tax code (enticing us to start businesses and do more for ourselves). Certain behaviors are rewarded with tax deductions and credits, while other behaviors are rewarded with free medical, housing, and food benefits. All are designed with vote-getting in mind.
A heartless way to look at it all is this way: the parties each represent two very large unions. The Republicans represent those who can do and think for themselves, and are economically productive, and the Democrats represent those who cannot (or will not) do and think for themselves, and may not be as economically productive. Tell me, which ones do you think are more capable of building a life for themselves and their future generations—the ones with the capacity and ability to save, or the ones who don’t?
Because government programs can be voted in or out, increased or decreased with a stroke of a pen, and don’t serve to benefit the politicians themselves, the tax code will ultimately stand the test of time—perhaps not always in the same exact form, but always with incentives and loopholes for all (sounds like the ending of a new Pledge of Allegiance, doesn’t it?).
This is why it’s crucial for you to know the issues, know the voting records, and know the incentives your candidate responds to best before ever casting a vote. If you can’t find the information, or don’t like what you find, then use the fallback position and vote your wallet. This way, at least YOU will have voted incentives for yourself, your money, and the ability to get and make more, just like the jackals in Washington.
Politics should never be about emotion. Politics should be about removing barriers and increasing opportunity. Find and elect those who best fit this bill today and in future years—this is how you get to participate in and influence the political machinery, and it doesn’t take big contributions, free trips, or exclusive events to do it.
It’s all a giant marketing ploy as far as I’m concerned—each party promises to DO something, to FIGHT FOR something, to FIGHT AGAINST something, or DEFEND AGAINST something. In stereotypical Hatfield-McCoy-speak, “Them’s selling words.”
REAL public servants—you know, the few honorable ones—run for office to work for legislation that rewards and encourages saving, investing, and wealth production that society depends on for continued growth and opportunity. An honest politician will work to allow taxpayers to keep more of their hard-earned money, as well as reduce the preponderance of ways people get caught in the traps of government program dependency.
It has been said that politicians are those who think about the next election, and statesmen are those who think about the next generation. Ask yourself who YOUR candidate is watching out for—himself or your grandkids.
The four steps to a political career and life:
1. Getting power through the vote
2. Holding onto power by increasing it or consolidating it
3. Defending and consolidating power
4. Getting re-elected
Lather, rinse, repeat.
Lots and lots of heavy-duty marketing is involved with each and every step, including campaigning for and against others (as well as yourself), writing and voting for and against legislation, campaigning and maneuvering for choice committee assignments, and finding ways to get your fingers in the pot for virtually guaranteed home projects—whether necessary or not. There just isn’t enough free public money to go around, so politicians must fight like dogs to get any scrap they can BECAUSE it serves to feed their political careers from Step One onward.
It’s as if the actual “legislating” part of their jobs is now an afterthought.
Political marketing tactics include negative campaigning, demonizing the opposition, character assassination, and spinning an issue so the underlying facts are not readily seen or understood (until it’s too late). These are the tactics politicians use on us the voters, and on each other. Re-election is vital, because it’s their only means of job security—every two years, someone is up for re-election somewhere, so there isn’t a whole lot of time to get the actual work done. Most of their time is spent campaigning or meeting with campaign staff to engineer the next battle plans.
The desire for political power comes from two possible sources: the appropriation of free money, and societal benevolence. Expedient politicians are only in it for the money, which will serve to shore up their voting base, while benevolent politicians are long-term thinkers (with short-term office cycles and much competition, unfortunately). Long-term thinkers, of which we are in painfully short supply, seek to tap into the expediency of people to increase economic opportunities and prosperity for the greatest number of them.
There are two sides to the political marketing coin: the real reason, and the one that will earn the most votes. This is the best explanation I can give for my use of the terms “fact” and “emotional blackmail,” and every candidate is prone to use whichever one that will most easily win the election for him/her. Expediency is EVERYWHERE!
Politics operates as it does because there is no incentive to do otherwise. In other words (and no doubt you’ve heard this before), you have to practically kill someone to lose a federal job, unless it requires re-election. In the private sector, people get fired instantly for not performing to specified standards, whereas in the public sector, horrific incompetence has grown, festered, and retired over and over again. Politics is often a last resort for people who can’t get hired anywhere else, believe it or not—and why not? By any account, it’s a dream job—working only three days a week, voting yourself a pay raise in the middle of the night as often as you want, shooting down legislation beneficial to the next generations in favor of legislation beneficial to your ongoing success and financial backers, and no incentives or consequences in sight as long as the re-election machine is well-fed and well-lubed.
To keep their machines well-fed and well-lubed, politicians are going to follow the money that comes from special interest groups, who provide incentives in the form of privileges unattainable by satisfying the people in some way. Let’s face it—Jane and John Q. Public, citizen voters, cannot write a check for millions to a particular party, and don’t have the clout to offer free trips around the world or entrance to highly-exclusive events like special interest can. THERE’S the incentive for politicians, and it’s no wonder special interests get the attention they do. Nobody asks who benefits and who pays.
Speaking of incentives, we the people are given some incentives of our very own. Some of these incentives include the “other people’s tax dollars” giveaway (through government programs) and the inclusion of beneficial and stimulative legislation through the tax code (enticing us to start businesses and do more for ourselves). Certain behaviors are rewarded with tax deductions and credits, while other behaviors are rewarded with free medical, housing, and food benefits. All are designed with vote-getting in mind.
A heartless way to look at it all is this way: the parties each represent two very large unions. The Republicans represent those who can do and think for themselves, and are economically productive, and the Democrats represent those who cannot (or will not) do and think for themselves, and may not be as economically productive. Tell me, which ones do you think are more capable of building a life for themselves and their future generations—the ones with the capacity and ability to save, or the ones who don’t?
Because government programs can be voted in or out, increased or decreased with a stroke of a pen, and don’t serve to benefit the politicians themselves, the tax code will ultimately stand the test of time—perhaps not always in the same exact form, but always with incentives and loopholes for all (sounds like the ending of a new Pledge of Allegiance, doesn’t it?).
This is why it’s crucial for you to know the issues, know the voting records, and know the incentives your candidate responds to best before ever casting a vote. If you can’t find the information, or don’t like what you find, then use the fallback position and vote your wallet. This way, at least YOU will have voted incentives for yourself, your money, and the ability to get and make more, just like the jackals in Washington.
Politics should never be about emotion. Politics should be about removing barriers and increasing opportunity. Find and elect those who best fit this bill today and in future years—this is how you get to participate in and influence the political machinery, and it doesn’t take big contributions, free trips, or exclusive events to do it.
Monday, November 20, 2006
Reader Request: Why We Skip the Holidays Altogether (Rerun)
Yep, Wenchypoo and Wenchmaster skip the holiday hullabaloo altogether and here’s why:
• We have no children to obligate us to participate.
• We have no friends or relatives that need impressing.
• We’re Atheist, but that doesn’t even matter. Most of what we consider “holidays” are actually Catholic railroad-equivalents to original Pagan holidays.
• Holidays have become excuses to consume, wildly distorting the original meaning for celebrating these particular events.
• Most holiday traditions have become rip-offs.
• We have cats that climb Christmas trees, steal turkey from the table, walk through the Easter egg dye, etc. On second thought, I guess we DO have kids…
• A lot of holiday stuff just gets thrown (wrapping) out or flushed down the toilet (food), and it costs money.
• What do you get people who already have everything, besides more of it? This is pointless and senseless.
• We “celebrate” all year round, so why are some particular calendar days so special? They aren’t.
Remember when holidays (originally Holy Days) meant something? Families used to gather together from far reaches of the country, perhaps attend some religious service or other, and have a nice meal afterward—the intent being to gather and share a meal.
What has happened since those good ol’ days? Everything. Mostly, business picked up the scent of profit, and followed it to the current conclusion.
Rather than participate in all this madness we call holidays, we just sit them out and focus on the days that are meaningful to us: birthdays and anniversaries (the big 21 is coming next week). Gift-giving in both our families has been boiled down from the frivolous to the practical, then to the spiritual. When we need what we need, we go out and get it instead of saving it up for some trumped-up “holiday.” What WE wait for is sales, not special reasons to buy.
My dad used to complain about how President’s Day and Veteran’s Day became excuses for stores to have white sales. “We fought for your freedom to go out and buy discounted bed sheets, by golly, starting with George Washington!”
The fact that we’re Atheist doesn’t really matter in this issue, because if we believed in a god, we’d pay homage and honor him every day, as a good believer would. Attending services once or twice a year doesn’t adequately pay homage for a true believer, I think.
As I’ve written before, when it comes to holiday food, especially whole turkeys, many of them are rip-offs. Hollow carcasses ridden with ice don’t make for a pretty picture at the register or for the cost per serving—especially when sold by the pound. Besides, turkey is cheap year-round—sometimes cheaper at any other time of year besides November. Obviously they freeze well, so why save up the turkey-buying for November?
The same holds true for lamb, ham, pumpkin pie, sweet potato pies and casserole, and all the other food rituals we save for special days.
To waste our time spending good money on things that nobody really needs or wants, or that aren’t really worth the money in the first place, is truly a waste that we no longer care to indulge in or afford. To have no real reason for indulging is another reason why we just sit them out and watch you guys go bananas over at the mall or over in the turkey aisle. My favorite is the fistfights that break out at WallyWorld over some heavily-marked-down electronic doodad or other, or the poor people who get trampled by the crowd gathered outside the stores at 4 a.m. when the doors suddenly open. I watch these disgusting displays of greed and hedonism from the comfort of my own home, and for some odd reason, these things make the evening news every year!
What you think is a discount to you is still someone else’s profit. Why give them the chance to profit, when you yourself could reap the rewards of re-thinking and scaling back. Screw social expectations and put yourself and your family first. Choose what means the most to you and go with it.
As for me, I’m going to “hell” (if you believe in it) with a fistful of pumpkin pie and a smile on my face, regardless of time of year. If you care to join me, do bring some whipped cream. "Satan" asks if anyone’s bringing a covered dish. :)
• We have no children to obligate us to participate.
• We have no friends or relatives that need impressing.
• We’re Atheist, but that doesn’t even matter. Most of what we consider “holidays” are actually Catholic railroad-equivalents to original Pagan holidays.
• Holidays have become excuses to consume, wildly distorting the original meaning for celebrating these particular events.
• Most holiday traditions have become rip-offs.
• We have cats that climb Christmas trees, steal turkey from the table, walk through the Easter egg dye, etc. On second thought, I guess we DO have kids…
• A lot of holiday stuff just gets thrown (wrapping) out or flushed down the toilet (food), and it costs money.
• What do you get people who already have everything, besides more of it? This is pointless and senseless.
• We “celebrate” all year round, so why are some particular calendar days so special? They aren’t.
Remember when holidays (originally Holy Days) meant something? Families used to gather together from far reaches of the country, perhaps attend some religious service or other, and have a nice meal afterward—the intent being to gather and share a meal.
What has happened since those good ol’ days? Everything. Mostly, business picked up the scent of profit, and followed it to the current conclusion.
Rather than participate in all this madness we call holidays, we just sit them out and focus on the days that are meaningful to us: birthdays and anniversaries (the big 21 is coming next week). Gift-giving in both our families has been boiled down from the frivolous to the practical, then to the spiritual. When we need what we need, we go out and get it instead of saving it up for some trumped-up “holiday.” What WE wait for is sales, not special reasons to buy.
My dad used to complain about how President’s Day and Veteran’s Day became excuses for stores to have white sales. “We fought for your freedom to go out and buy discounted bed sheets, by golly, starting with George Washington!”
The fact that we’re Atheist doesn’t really matter in this issue, because if we believed in a god, we’d pay homage and honor him every day, as a good believer would. Attending services once or twice a year doesn’t adequately pay homage for a true believer, I think.
As I’ve written before, when it comes to holiday food, especially whole turkeys, many of them are rip-offs. Hollow carcasses ridden with ice don’t make for a pretty picture at the register or for the cost per serving—especially when sold by the pound. Besides, turkey is cheap year-round—sometimes cheaper at any other time of year besides November. Obviously they freeze well, so why save up the turkey-buying for November?
The same holds true for lamb, ham, pumpkin pie, sweet potato pies and casserole, and all the other food rituals we save for special days.
To waste our time spending good money on things that nobody really needs or wants, or that aren’t really worth the money in the first place, is truly a waste that we no longer care to indulge in or afford. To have no real reason for indulging is another reason why we just sit them out and watch you guys go bananas over at the mall or over in the turkey aisle. My favorite is the fistfights that break out at WallyWorld over some heavily-marked-down electronic doodad or other, or the poor people who get trampled by the crowd gathered outside the stores at 4 a.m. when the doors suddenly open. I watch these disgusting displays of greed and hedonism from the comfort of my own home, and for some odd reason, these things make the evening news every year!
What you think is a discount to you is still someone else’s profit. Why give them the chance to profit, when you yourself could reap the rewards of re-thinking and scaling back. Screw social expectations and put yourself and your family first. Choose what means the most to you and go with it.
As for me, I’m going to “hell” (if you believe in it) with a fistful of pumpkin pie and a smile on my face, regardless of time of year. If you care to join me, do bring some whipped cream. "Satan" asks if anyone’s bringing a covered dish. :)
Sunday, November 19, 2006
The Ninth Wonder of the World: The S-T-R-E-T-C-H IRA
Yep, I’ve been reading again, and this time it’s the book Parlay Your IRA into a Family Fortune by Ed Slott.
So many of us worry about outliving our money, but there are those who will clearly not, and that money has to go somewhere. A will takes care of a lot of things, but it also has the capacity to incur great pain at tax time if details aren’t handled properly to avoid it.
Residual monies left in an IRA account after death can be parlayed not only to enrich your beneficiaries, but in a big way. Just as you will be required to take withdrawals at age 55, your beneficiaries will be required to take lifetime withdrawals, albeit at a much slower pace due to a much younger age. An inherited IRA can be just as tax-deferred or tax-free to the beneficiary as the original owner as long as lump-sums are not paid out.
Hint: if correctly set up according to federal and state laws for your location, monthly IRA withdrawal payments to beneficiaries DO NOT have to be spent—if the beneficiary is very young, and in no immediate need of the money, that IRA can go on working and earning money just as it did for the original owner. Also, as far as I can tell, withdrawal payments don’t have to be SPENT—they can be re-deposited into an Education Savings account or an IRA of one’s own, to continue to grow and serve the beneficiary in more ways than one. Nothing says that money MUST be spent, and anyway, how could someone prove it wasn’t?
Basically, Grandma’s money moves from her purse to your piggy bank, tax-deferred or even tax-free, depending on the original IRA designation—a traditional IRA will incur taxes eventually, and a Roth IRA will not.
Young workers or new entrants into the workforce can always use some help in starting a savings plan—they don’t always get paid enough to start one with maximum contributions right off the bat. Grandma’s monthly checks would come in handy to fill in the balance until Junior earns enough money to do it himself. Even later on, when Junior DOES earn enough money, Grandma could be paying him enough each month to make the full contribution alone—lucky Junior, having Grandma to pay for his retirement with her own, even after her death!
There are some things you need to do and consider before converting all your wealth to the s-t-r-e-t-c-h IRA plan:
1. Name an IRA beneficiary NOW.
2. Make sure your IRA custodial agreement allows the stretch. Some do not.
3. Roll company plan funds (such as a 401k) into an IRA as soon as you can—usually right after you retire of change jobs.
YOU must do these things, and they must be done while you’re still alive. They cannot be enacted or legally overwritten once you die, and your heirs stand to lose what could add up to millions to unnecessary taxes. Why feed Uncle Sam?
An enduring rule about estate planning: the more money you have, the more beneficiaries stand to inherit. Most of us have more than one child or grandchildren who will inherit, and there is a way to accomplish that with a s-t-r-e-t-c-h IRA plan. The IRS says that when multiple beneficiaries are designated, the life expectancy of the oldest one determines the withdrawal schedule for all beneficiaries. The LOOPHOLE in this scenario is the “separate accounts rule,” which allows the inherited IRA to be split into separate inherited IRAs to trigger individual beneficiary withdrawal schedules, which will decrease the monthly amount withdrawn, but stretches out the time the money lasts—this enables the new separate IRA to go on earning money while producing monthly checks. Those monthly checks, again, can be deposited right back into other retirement accounts or an Education Savings account for future college expenses.
The “separate accounts rule” comes in handy when Grandma is a co-beneficiary along with grandchild #2, triggering a life expectancy withdrawal schedule of just a few years—not much time to build up interest or returns, meaning a huge loss of tax-sheltering and saving power for the grandchild. Grandma’s $100,000 residual IRA monies could end up being worth over $8 million over grandchild #2’s lifetime with compounding and tax savings.
There’s much more you need to know if you’re interested in stretching your IRA to enrich your family rather than the IRS, and the book goes into all aspects and contingencies of carrying this maneuver out. Ed Slott advises for long-term planning and earning, not to make a quick buck or cheat the taxman. I urge you to get a copy of this book and learn how to make your hard-won savings do double-duty after you’re gone.
You've heard the term "trust fund babies"? Your great-great grandkids have the opportunity to become "s-t-r-e-t-c-h IRA babies" if this wealth transfer scenario is kept up for a couple of generations. Judging by the way the economy, the business world, and the job market is going NOW, they might NEED it just to survive then.
So many of us worry about outliving our money, but there are those who will clearly not, and that money has to go somewhere. A will takes care of a lot of things, but it also has the capacity to incur great pain at tax time if details aren’t handled properly to avoid it.
Residual monies left in an IRA account after death can be parlayed not only to enrich your beneficiaries, but in a big way. Just as you will be required to take withdrawals at age 55, your beneficiaries will be required to take lifetime withdrawals, albeit at a much slower pace due to a much younger age. An inherited IRA can be just as tax-deferred or tax-free to the beneficiary as the original owner as long as lump-sums are not paid out.
Hint: if correctly set up according to federal and state laws for your location, monthly IRA withdrawal payments to beneficiaries DO NOT have to be spent—if the beneficiary is very young, and in no immediate need of the money, that IRA can go on working and earning money just as it did for the original owner. Also, as far as I can tell, withdrawal payments don’t have to be SPENT—they can be re-deposited into an Education Savings account or an IRA of one’s own, to continue to grow and serve the beneficiary in more ways than one. Nothing says that money MUST be spent, and anyway, how could someone prove it wasn’t?
Basically, Grandma’s money moves from her purse to your piggy bank, tax-deferred or even tax-free, depending on the original IRA designation—a traditional IRA will incur taxes eventually, and a Roth IRA will not.
Young workers or new entrants into the workforce can always use some help in starting a savings plan—they don’t always get paid enough to start one with maximum contributions right off the bat. Grandma’s monthly checks would come in handy to fill in the balance until Junior earns enough money to do it himself. Even later on, when Junior DOES earn enough money, Grandma could be paying him enough each month to make the full contribution alone—lucky Junior, having Grandma to pay for his retirement with her own, even after her death!
There are some things you need to do and consider before converting all your wealth to the s-t-r-e-t-c-h IRA plan:
1. Name an IRA beneficiary NOW.
2. Make sure your IRA custodial agreement allows the stretch. Some do not.
3. Roll company plan funds (such as a 401k) into an IRA as soon as you can—usually right after you retire of change jobs.
YOU must do these things, and they must be done while you’re still alive. They cannot be enacted or legally overwritten once you die, and your heirs stand to lose what could add up to millions to unnecessary taxes. Why feed Uncle Sam?
An enduring rule about estate planning: the more money you have, the more beneficiaries stand to inherit. Most of us have more than one child or grandchildren who will inherit, and there is a way to accomplish that with a s-t-r-e-t-c-h IRA plan. The IRS says that when multiple beneficiaries are designated, the life expectancy of the oldest one determines the withdrawal schedule for all beneficiaries. The LOOPHOLE in this scenario is the “separate accounts rule,” which allows the inherited IRA to be split into separate inherited IRAs to trigger individual beneficiary withdrawal schedules, which will decrease the monthly amount withdrawn, but stretches out the time the money lasts—this enables the new separate IRA to go on earning money while producing monthly checks. Those monthly checks, again, can be deposited right back into other retirement accounts or an Education Savings account for future college expenses.
The “separate accounts rule” comes in handy when Grandma is a co-beneficiary along with grandchild #2, triggering a life expectancy withdrawal schedule of just a few years—not much time to build up interest or returns, meaning a huge loss of tax-sheltering and saving power for the grandchild. Grandma’s $100,000 residual IRA monies could end up being worth over $8 million over grandchild #2’s lifetime with compounding and tax savings.
There’s much more you need to know if you’re interested in stretching your IRA to enrich your family rather than the IRS, and the book goes into all aspects and contingencies of carrying this maneuver out. Ed Slott advises for long-term planning and earning, not to make a quick buck or cheat the taxman. I urge you to get a copy of this book and learn how to make your hard-won savings do double-duty after you’re gone.
You've heard the term "trust fund babies"? Your great-great grandkids have the opportunity to become "s-t-r-e-t-c-h IRA babies" if this wealth transfer scenario is kept up for a couple of generations. Judging by the way the economy, the business world, and the job market is going NOW, they might NEED it just to survive then.
Friday, November 17, 2006
Utopia Crashes to Earth
Sadly, this is not the newest science fiction title to grace bookstore shelves. This is about how liberal idealism and Utopian politics have had swords stabbed through their heart.
The tenets of liberal Democratic Party politics (that would be 2/3 to the left of center) have pretty much all suffered from a good dose of underlying truth and fact airing, especially last week’s multiple revelations on key issues:
• Health care
It’s been shown and revealed that illegal aliens and new immigrants use much less healthcare than previously thought or reported. (scroll down to the last story)
Also, a new revelation about socialized medicine and “Hillary-care”: A woman from London, England called the Glenn Beck radio show last Wednesday to tell how the system works over there, and stated that older patients who are sick with non-cost-effective illnesses get shoved aside in favor of younger people who can recover and work to continue supporting the system. She also added that babies born with non-cost-effective birth defects are allowed to die or are put to death. Money (meaning the state’s) is the determining factor in who gets care and what kind—parents and families are NOT the last legal say in treatment options. That right has been handed over to the state (in this case Britain). Guess what Hillary tried to do once here in America, and what the Dems are going to try again? This would solve two intertwined problems—Medicare costs and Social Security, because you can’t receive a check while you’re waiting to die in the Old Folks wing. Grandma’s Social Security check would go straight to Medicare, meaning Uncle Sam’s money just changes pockets.
The Dems also want to re-write the Medicare Drug plan to include the allowance for federally-negotiated prices, and this is too little too late. The states individually, as well as Wal-Mart, have already beaten them to this punch. How much cheaper can they ever hope to get below $4.00 prescriptions?
• Minimum wage
The minimum wage hue and cry has also been revealed to be much ado about nothing, because only 2% of the working population actually receives it, and doesn’t stay on it very long.
Large retailers have already come out publicly and said they could care less about raising it, because they already pay much more than the federally stated $5.15/hour anyway. Raising it to the proposed $7.50/hour would actually be a step BACKWARD for these workers!
• Alternative energy
As I’ve been railing for months now (but not much recently), this huge farce has finally come to a resounding crash with the recent release of the oil deposit numbers—increased from the previous 1.78 trillion barrels to 3 trillion barrels—making alternative energies a waste of time and a bad investment. Crude oil itself is now an out-of-favor investment to all but crack spread traders (crack spread is the difference between crude and refined prices).That hybrid that started out as a bad deal is now even worse—there is no real reason to own one in light of oil supplies, and the market value has now fallen through the floor. The sky is not falling, the air is not getting any cleaner, and oil is not getting more expensive from here on out.
• Gender issues
Just when the last of the old-line feminists tried to rear their ugly heads and beat their battered drums about women’s advancement in the workplace, out come revelations about women who once thought they could have it all, tried to have it all, and are miserable with what they DO have and DID accomplish. Many are secretly still waiting for Price Charming to come rescue them from the working world so they can go home, do dishes, cook, clean, and have babies.
The news and web keep running stories of how the Republicans need to fall back and regroup for ’08. I think it’s the other way around—the Dems need to fall back and assess their ongoing existence as a political party. As we get closer to ’08, it looks like our choices will be Republicans and Anti-Republicans. Once more and more people get a better handle on the issues, the underlying facts, how it all affects their wallets, and what this “something for nothing” free benefit-seeking crowd will mean in terms of dollars and cents to each of us, there will be a sweeping political sea change in voting. For once, emotion won’t be playing a role in who gets (or keeps) their jobs. Instead of voting with heart and mind, people will begin voting with dollars in mind. War will no longer be a referendum issue.
Money makes the world go ‘round, and those who have it (or know how to get it) will always vote to protect it from unreasonable taxes, while those with poor personal economies will always vote for something-for-nothing. Peter will always vote not to be robbed to pay Paul, even if Paul resorts to emotional blackmail and shady pseudo-science in his quest for power.
The tenets of liberal Democratic Party politics (that would be 2/3 to the left of center) have pretty much all suffered from a good dose of underlying truth and fact airing, especially last week’s multiple revelations on key issues:
• Health care
It’s been shown and revealed that illegal aliens and new immigrants use much less healthcare than previously thought or reported. (scroll down to the last story)
Also, a new revelation about socialized medicine and “Hillary-care”: A woman from London, England called the Glenn Beck radio show last Wednesday to tell how the system works over there, and stated that older patients who are sick with non-cost-effective illnesses get shoved aside in favor of younger people who can recover and work to continue supporting the system. She also added that babies born with non-cost-effective birth defects are allowed to die or are put to death. Money (meaning the state’s) is the determining factor in who gets care and what kind—parents and families are NOT the last legal say in treatment options. That right has been handed over to the state (in this case Britain). Guess what Hillary tried to do once here in America, and what the Dems are going to try again? This would solve two intertwined problems—Medicare costs and Social Security, because you can’t receive a check while you’re waiting to die in the Old Folks wing. Grandma’s Social Security check would go straight to Medicare, meaning Uncle Sam’s money just changes pockets.
The Dems also want to re-write the Medicare Drug plan to include the allowance for federally-negotiated prices, and this is too little too late. The states individually, as well as Wal-Mart, have already beaten them to this punch. How much cheaper can they ever hope to get below $4.00 prescriptions?
• Minimum wage
The minimum wage hue and cry has also been revealed to be much ado about nothing, because only 2% of the working population actually receives it, and doesn’t stay on it very long.
Large retailers have already come out publicly and said they could care less about raising it, because they already pay much more than the federally stated $5.15/hour anyway. Raising it to the proposed $7.50/hour would actually be a step BACKWARD for these workers!
• Alternative energy
As I’ve been railing for months now (but not much recently), this huge farce has finally come to a resounding crash with the recent release of the oil deposit numbers—increased from the previous 1.78 trillion barrels to 3 trillion barrels—making alternative energies a waste of time and a bad investment. Crude oil itself is now an out-of-favor investment to all but crack spread traders (crack spread is the difference between crude and refined prices).That hybrid that started out as a bad deal is now even worse—there is no real reason to own one in light of oil supplies, and the market value has now fallen through the floor. The sky is not falling, the air is not getting any cleaner, and oil is not getting more expensive from here on out.
• Gender issues
Just when the last of the old-line feminists tried to rear their ugly heads and beat their battered drums about women’s advancement in the workplace, out come revelations about women who once thought they could have it all, tried to have it all, and are miserable with what they DO have and DID accomplish. Many are secretly still waiting for Price Charming to come rescue them from the working world so they can go home, do dishes, cook, clean, and have babies.
The news and web keep running stories of how the Republicans need to fall back and regroup for ’08. I think it’s the other way around—the Dems need to fall back and assess their ongoing existence as a political party. As we get closer to ’08, it looks like our choices will be Republicans and Anti-Republicans. Once more and more people get a better handle on the issues, the underlying facts, how it all affects their wallets, and what this “something for nothing” free benefit-seeking crowd will mean in terms of dollars and cents to each of us, there will be a sweeping political sea change in voting. For once, emotion won’t be playing a role in who gets (or keeps) their jobs. Instead of voting with heart and mind, people will begin voting with dollars in mind. War will no longer be a referendum issue.
Money makes the world go ‘round, and those who have it (or know how to get it) will always vote to protect it from unreasonable taxes, while those with poor personal economies will always vote for something-for-nothing. Peter will always vote not to be robbed to pay Paul, even if Paul resorts to emotional blackmail and shady pseudo-science in his quest for power.
Thursday, November 16, 2006
From the Archives: Why We Skip the Holidays Altogether
Seeing as how the Thanksgiving holiday is right around the corner, with Christmas hot on its heels, I thought I'd rerun this little ditty from last holiday season.
Tuesday, November 14, 2006
Lost: Simple Basic Yard Sale
Recently, I was asked by a reader to write about the absurd and out-of-control regulations regarding yard sales. Turning to Google, I found a bewildering array of requirements from all over the country, and could NOT find any consistencies other than relentless roadblocks and someone with their hand out.
Some locales don’t require anything at all except for ample parking that doesn’t interfere with normal traffic for the area. Other locales require a multitude of layers of things, starting with permits and inspections, and ending with the sign dimensions, number of signs allowed, and the placement of such. Some of these requirements leave you in the hole before the sale ever gets started, and the proceeds may not be enough to pull you out of the red!
Now I believe I know why we donate to thrift stores—it’s much easier, although money-losing. Besides, we live in an out-of-the-way apartment complex where merchandise display space and parking seem to be big issues we can’t overcome.
I have to ask this question: if there are so many hurdles involved with getting rid of stuff, how come there aren’t just as many for GETTING the stuff in the first place? Nobody requires permits, inspections, specific dimensions or locations of anything, or restricts you to indoor or out-of-sight shopping! Now that I think about it, maybe that’s what the businesses who sell to us have to contend with.
Uncle Sam, or rather his state or local cousin, has found a way to profit from the booming underground economy. Harmless, innocuous things like yard sales and babysitting once roamed freely without regulation—and raked in bucks for the effort. Now, someone wants a cut or demands a hoop be jumped through in the name of conformity and uniformity. Someone smells money!
It gets much worse when there’s food involved—another layer of bureaucracy, another government agency, and another layer of risk. Lawyers salivate like Pavlov’s dog when there’s risk of any sort around! Food is probably best left out of the sale unless you have found low-restriction regulations (unlikely with the Health Dept.), or can abide by regulations regarding the resale of pre-packaged or pre-manufactured foods. Otherwise, it’s a food prep safety class, plenty of site inspections of equipment and methods, plenty of sale day inspections for food storage temps, etc.--all to sell a few hot dogs or brownies at a yard sale! At some point, you have to ask yourself if it’s worth it.
The same can be said for said for the yard/garage sale: is it all worth it just to sell off some junk? Would it be easier (and possibly more profitable) to donate it, sell it on E-bay, or give it away instead? Cities and localities get you coming and going—they tax and hurdle you to death trying to sell it, and charge dump entry fees just to get a look at what others have thrown out!
This is why so many of us now go curbside shopping or dumpster diving—as gross as it may sound, it’s about the only way left to shop-n-swap without incurring expenses or encountering regulatory hurdles. As for me, there’s never room for Uncle Sam or his cousins to ride in the back of my pickup, especially the night before or morning of trash day.
All I can recommend is this: get to know your area’s regulations regarding yard sales, estate sales, and any other method of selling off junk from one’s home—there are many classifications, including rummage sales, porch sales, garage sales, estate sales (be prepared to prove someone died), and bazaars—and find out which one would be least restrictive (in terms of money and hoops), or find out where loopholes exist.
Some examples: in Olympia, WA, an “estate” sale is free for 1 weekend, but a yard sale has permit requirements (so Aunt Minnie died years ago—who’s asking?) In Norfolk, VA, a church can hold two one-day yard sale/bazaar sales a year without permits or sign regulations because of their tax status (and members take ample advantage of this loophole). All that’s charged is a small table fee, because the church uses this event as a fundraiser. In south Texas, we got lucky enough to encounter lax rules—no food, no signs on city property (including utility poles), and all signs must be removed promptly when the sale ends.
Other than working within rules or loopholes, you might want to look into flea market stalls. There, you might not even need so much as a business license—check the rules first.
Some locales don’t require anything at all except for ample parking that doesn’t interfere with normal traffic for the area. Other locales require a multitude of layers of things, starting with permits and inspections, and ending with the sign dimensions, number of signs allowed, and the placement of such. Some of these requirements leave you in the hole before the sale ever gets started, and the proceeds may not be enough to pull you out of the red!
Now I believe I know why we donate to thrift stores—it’s much easier, although money-losing. Besides, we live in an out-of-the-way apartment complex where merchandise display space and parking seem to be big issues we can’t overcome.
I have to ask this question: if there are so many hurdles involved with getting rid of stuff, how come there aren’t just as many for GETTING the stuff in the first place? Nobody requires permits, inspections, specific dimensions or locations of anything, or restricts you to indoor or out-of-sight shopping! Now that I think about it, maybe that’s what the businesses who sell to us have to contend with.
Uncle Sam, or rather his state or local cousin, has found a way to profit from the booming underground economy. Harmless, innocuous things like yard sales and babysitting once roamed freely without regulation—and raked in bucks for the effort. Now, someone wants a cut or demands a hoop be jumped through in the name of conformity and uniformity. Someone smells money!
It gets much worse when there’s food involved—another layer of bureaucracy, another government agency, and another layer of risk. Lawyers salivate like Pavlov’s dog when there’s risk of any sort around! Food is probably best left out of the sale unless you have found low-restriction regulations (unlikely with the Health Dept.), or can abide by regulations regarding the resale of pre-packaged or pre-manufactured foods. Otherwise, it’s a food prep safety class, plenty of site inspections of equipment and methods, plenty of sale day inspections for food storage temps, etc.--all to sell a few hot dogs or brownies at a yard sale! At some point, you have to ask yourself if it’s worth it.
The same can be said for said for the yard/garage sale: is it all worth it just to sell off some junk? Would it be easier (and possibly more profitable) to donate it, sell it on E-bay, or give it away instead? Cities and localities get you coming and going—they tax and hurdle you to death trying to sell it, and charge dump entry fees just to get a look at what others have thrown out!
This is why so many of us now go curbside shopping or dumpster diving—as gross as it may sound, it’s about the only way left to shop-n-swap without incurring expenses or encountering regulatory hurdles. As for me, there’s never room for Uncle Sam or his cousins to ride in the back of my pickup, especially the night before or morning of trash day.
All I can recommend is this: get to know your area’s regulations regarding yard sales, estate sales, and any other method of selling off junk from one’s home—there are many classifications, including rummage sales, porch sales, garage sales, estate sales (be prepared to prove someone died), and bazaars—and find out which one would be least restrictive (in terms of money and hoops), or find out where loopholes exist.
Some examples: in Olympia, WA, an “estate” sale is free for 1 weekend, but a yard sale has permit requirements (so Aunt Minnie died years ago—who’s asking?) In Norfolk, VA, a church can hold two one-day yard sale/bazaar sales a year without permits or sign regulations because of their tax status (and members take ample advantage of this loophole). All that’s charged is a small table fee, because the church uses this event as a fundraiser. In south Texas, we got lucky enough to encounter lax rules—no food, no signs on city property (including utility poles), and all signs must be removed promptly when the sale ends.
Other than working within rules or loopholes, you might want to look into flea market stalls. There, you might not even need so much as a business license—check the rules first.
Sunday, November 12, 2006
Midterm Elections and Your Wallet
Well, another horse race is over…thank god. Now a new genre of TV coverage has begun, as in predictions of how the newly-elected party members will push legislation that affects your bottom line.
Already the rumors fly. Channel after channel hosts legions of hysterical doomsayers predicting massive tax increases, gridlock, wholesale retreat from Iraq, hearings galore, and the bottom falling out of the prescription drug market.
Here’s the REAL truth: the president still holds the veto pen, and he is Republican.
No matter how many Democrats got elected, and no matter what position they get to hold, the president is still the ultimate authority for another two years. This means the tax code won’t change, the drug market is safe (especially in light of the Wal-Mart $4.00 deal), and we aren’t leaving Iraq in one fell swoop…at least not yet.
Unless and until a Democrat gets elected to the presidency, virtually nothing will get changed as far as the tax code, regulations, trade, the war, and anything else. The newly-elected politicians don’t even take office until January, and even then, very little will actually get accomplished until 2008. Even then, a lot of things beneficial to our wallets cannot be touched until they expire in 2010.
So you see, it isn’t 2007 or even 2008 we have to worry about—it’s 2010 and beyond. So brace yourselves, save as much money as you can, use as many tax code loopholes as you can, and plan for the worst to come in three years. There’s no way to predict how the 2010 elections will go—all I know is that if a Democrat gets elected president, we’re all screwed as far as our wallets go.
In order to prepare yourselves, your wallets (including your portfolios), and your tax moves for that time, pay careful attention to what the Democrats propose—now and in the next three years. This will be the best indicator of what’s to come for 2010 until we actually get there.
Right now, it seems that social justice is high on the to-do list, meaning the “something-for-nothing” crowd has its head up and hand out, judging by the proposed minimum wage legislation. But there is a truer, flip side to this particular social justice: in spite of the tear-jerking, heart-rending stories about how many families live at or below the poverty level thanks to $5.15/hour, only 2% of the working population actually EARNS a minimum wage! Most of the rest of us started somewhere at minimum wage and worked our way AWAY from it, and people don’t stay at minimum wage for long.
My question: who in their right mind would think they could afford to HAVE, let alone RAISE a family on minimum wage? And who in their right mind is willing to STAY at the minimum wage level for a long period of time?
Ah, but then we have the typical Liberal emotional blackmail again, and they’re using it to gain some sort of “social justice” for its believers. THIS is what we capitalists have to defend ourselves from—through careful study of the issues, the legislation, the proposed legislation, and the tax code in whatever form it may take.
Remember—no matter what happens to the tax code and tax tables, politicians of every stripe are rich and want to protect their own wealth. As subjects to their own laws, they aren’t about to write too much into law that ends up screwing them too. We just have to be diligent about finding and using legal loopholes and shelters.
More info from CNNMoney here.
Already the rumors fly. Channel after channel hosts legions of hysterical doomsayers predicting massive tax increases, gridlock, wholesale retreat from Iraq, hearings galore, and the bottom falling out of the prescription drug market.
Here’s the REAL truth: the president still holds the veto pen, and he is Republican.
No matter how many Democrats got elected, and no matter what position they get to hold, the president is still the ultimate authority for another two years. This means the tax code won’t change, the drug market is safe (especially in light of the Wal-Mart $4.00 deal), and we aren’t leaving Iraq in one fell swoop…at least not yet.
Unless and until a Democrat gets elected to the presidency, virtually nothing will get changed as far as the tax code, regulations, trade, the war, and anything else. The newly-elected politicians don’t even take office until January, and even then, very little will actually get accomplished until 2008. Even then, a lot of things beneficial to our wallets cannot be touched until they expire in 2010.
So you see, it isn’t 2007 or even 2008 we have to worry about—it’s 2010 and beyond. So brace yourselves, save as much money as you can, use as many tax code loopholes as you can, and plan for the worst to come in three years. There’s no way to predict how the 2010 elections will go—all I know is that if a Democrat gets elected president, we’re all screwed as far as our wallets go.
In order to prepare yourselves, your wallets (including your portfolios), and your tax moves for that time, pay careful attention to what the Democrats propose—now and in the next three years. This will be the best indicator of what’s to come for 2010 until we actually get there.
Right now, it seems that social justice is high on the to-do list, meaning the “something-for-nothing” crowd has its head up and hand out, judging by the proposed minimum wage legislation. But there is a truer, flip side to this particular social justice: in spite of the tear-jerking, heart-rending stories about how many families live at or below the poverty level thanks to $5.15/hour, only 2% of the working population actually EARNS a minimum wage! Most of the rest of us started somewhere at minimum wage and worked our way AWAY from it, and people don’t stay at minimum wage for long.
My question: who in their right mind would think they could afford to HAVE, let alone RAISE a family on minimum wage? And who in their right mind is willing to STAY at the minimum wage level for a long period of time?
Ah, but then we have the typical Liberal emotional blackmail again, and they’re using it to gain some sort of “social justice” for its believers. THIS is what we capitalists have to defend ourselves from—through careful study of the issues, the legislation, the proposed legislation, and the tax code in whatever form it may take.
Remember—no matter what happens to the tax code and tax tables, politicians of every stripe are rich and want to protect their own wealth. As subjects to their own laws, they aren’t about to write too much into law that ends up screwing them too. We just have to be diligent about finding and using legal loopholes and shelters.
More info from CNNMoney here.
Thursday, November 09, 2006
When Elderly Need Financial Help
Courtesy of Bankrate.com
There are several warning signs to look for when dealing with elderly parents and their finances—especially in the checkbook and credit card statements, the biggest clue-givers. Here are some signs that could mark a problem:
• Multiple checks in sequential order to the same payee
This could signify that someone has taken advantage of a forgetful person with short-term memory issues, and has slipped in extra bills for services not performed. Think lawn care, home nursing care, and anyone else that comes to the home regularly that requires payment immediately after service.
• A sequence of checks in the register without deposits
Some seniors stop recording deposits, enabling a zero-interest checking account to balloon to excessive amounts. These excessive amounts should be transferred to interest-bearing savings vehicles, such as CDs or money market accounts.
• Lost or missing checks
This may signal that bookkeeping is slipping, or someone else is helping themselves to checks.
• Unusually large check amount
When a check exceeds the normal amount of the highest monthly bill, it could signal that an elderly person has been hustled, swindled, or someone has tapped the account.
• Numerous NSF or DDA fees charged
If a senior is writing checks in excess of the deposited amount, this will trigger NSF fees as high as $25 per occurrence. On the flip-side, a rarely-used checking account will become designated as DDA (dormant demand account) and will incur monthly maintenance fees if the account goes unused for a year or more. Both these fees, together or separately, can add up to quite a financial drain and signify that someone is losing control of their finances.
• Bad math
Haven’t we all been here? If the statement and the checkbook don’t reconcile, and don’t even come close, it could signal the confusion over how to properly fill out a check or the register. Early dementia patients often lose the memory of check-writing, recording, book balancing, or all three.
• Minimum monthly payments
Falling behind on payments (or going from extra principal to bare minimum) can be a sign of impairment—or a sign that extra debt has been taken on. Check into this matter to see if there isn’t swindling, blackmailing, or some other financial advantage being taken before testing for cognitive impairment.
• Multiple purchases for the same amount
Home shopping channels and pay-per-view channels are the usual culprits here. Arthritic fingers on small remote buttons can accidentally trigger pay-per-view selections without realization.
• Repeat payments monthly (or more often) from the same source
A senior may have unknowingly signed up for a service or subscription.
• Unusually high monthly volume
Something’s afoot—check to make sure the cards are in the senior’s possession. If so, then the senior may still be a victim of skimming.
• Unusual purchases
If something unlikely to be purchased by a senior, such as a video game console or I-pod, even a ski vacation, chances are good that it was ordered by complete accident, or someone has stolen a credit card.
• Unnecessary fees
You see the junk mail, and so do they. It’s often filled with life insurance offers, credit card protection programs, and the like. Seniors can sometimes get led down the garden path of “necessity” (or implied necessity) and get snared in these traps for months or years. Junk mail is JUNK for a reason, and they need to be taught or reminded of this. Check the bank statements or credit card statements for these recurring fees on junk items.
There are several warning signs to look for when dealing with elderly parents and their finances—especially in the checkbook and credit card statements, the biggest clue-givers. Here are some signs that could mark a problem:
• Multiple checks in sequential order to the same payee
This could signify that someone has taken advantage of a forgetful person with short-term memory issues, and has slipped in extra bills for services not performed. Think lawn care, home nursing care, and anyone else that comes to the home regularly that requires payment immediately after service.
• A sequence of checks in the register without deposits
Some seniors stop recording deposits, enabling a zero-interest checking account to balloon to excessive amounts. These excessive amounts should be transferred to interest-bearing savings vehicles, such as CDs or money market accounts.
• Lost or missing checks
This may signal that bookkeeping is slipping, or someone else is helping themselves to checks.
• Unusually large check amount
When a check exceeds the normal amount of the highest monthly bill, it could signal that an elderly person has been hustled, swindled, or someone has tapped the account.
• Numerous NSF or DDA fees charged
If a senior is writing checks in excess of the deposited amount, this will trigger NSF fees as high as $25 per occurrence. On the flip-side, a rarely-used checking account will become designated as DDA (dormant demand account) and will incur monthly maintenance fees if the account goes unused for a year or more. Both these fees, together or separately, can add up to quite a financial drain and signify that someone is losing control of their finances.
• Bad math
Haven’t we all been here? If the statement and the checkbook don’t reconcile, and don’t even come close, it could signal the confusion over how to properly fill out a check or the register. Early dementia patients often lose the memory of check-writing, recording, book balancing, or all three.
• Minimum monthly payments
Falling behind on payments (or going from extra principal to bare minimum) can be a sign of impairment—or a sign that extra debt has been taken on. Check into this matter to see if there isn’t swindling, blackmailing, or some other financial advantage being taken before testing for cognitive impairment.
• Multiple purchases for the same amount
Home shopping channels and pay-per-view channels are the usual culprits here. Arthritic fingers on small remote buttons can accidentally trigger pay-per-view selections without realization.
• Repeat payments monthly (or more often) from the same source
A senior may have unknowingly signed up for a service or subscription.
• Unusually high monthly volume
Something’s afoot—check to make sure the cards are in the senior’s possession. If so, then the senior may still be a victim of skimming.
• Unusual purchases
If something unlikely to be purchased by a senior, such as a video game console or I-pod, even a ski vacation, chances are good that it was ordered by complete accident, or someone has stolen a credit card.
• Unnecessary fees
You see the junk mail, and so do they. It’s often filled with life insurance offers, credit card protection programs, and the like. Seniors can sometimes get led down the garden path of “necessity” (or implied necessity) and get snared in these traps for months or years. Junk mail is JUNK for a reason, and they need to be taught or reminded of this. Check the bank statements or credit card statements for these recurring fees on junk items.
Monday, November 06, 2006
Elements of Character
You don’t see or hear a lot about character these days, except maybe on MLK Day. Does anybody even know what “character” is, besides a figure in a book or film, comic book or cartoon?
Let’s start with something simpler: Mazlow’s Hierarchy of Needs
This list is stair-stepped for a reason—as we acquire the items on the lowest level, we move up a step until we’ve reached the top (or absolute fulfillment). When the highest level of needs has been fulfilled, we are at the “enough” state of our lives—we have then acquired all we need as human beings to lead a full, normal, complete life with no wants, no desires, and no worries.
In order to begin acquiring these things with relative ease, one has to have possession of one thing: character. It’s something nobody can buy, give, or inherit. It makes us who we are as people, defines us when nothing else does, and can never be taken from us.
The Six Pillars of Character
TRUST—to be reliable, honest, reputable, courageous, loyal in word and deed
RESPECT—to be tolerant, considerate, peaceful, accepting
RESPONSIBILITY—to have perseverance, restraint, discipline, accountability, consideration
FAIRNESS—to be open-minded, receptive, equitable
CARING—to be kind, compassionate, considerate, forgiving, helpful
*Forgive me--my husband noticed I forgot one--"citizenship". It's on the link I embedded above.
Principles of character:
• Your character is defined by what you do, not what you say or believe.
• Every choice you make helps define the kind of person you are choosing to be.
• Good character requires doing the right thing, even when it is costly or risky.
• You don't have to take the worst behavior of others as a standard for yourself. You can choose to be better than that.
• What you do matters, and one person can make a big difference.
• The payoff for having good character is that it makes you a better person and it makes the world a better place.
Courtesy of the Good Character organization.
Character in word and deed defines the quality of person we are. Now that we have a better understanding of what character is, let’s do all we can to acquire it, demonstrate it in our lives, teach it to our children and communities, and teach their children and their communities. Maybe then Martin Luther King’s dream of judging by character instead of skin color will finally come true. Good character may just be the door-opener people need to get ahead in life and at work, and now we all know how to get it. Let this become an epidemic!
Let’s start with something simpler: Mazlow’s Hierarchy of Needs
This list is stair-stepped for a reason—as we acquire the items on the lowest level, we move up a step until we’ve reached the top (or absolute fulfillment). When the highest level of needs has been fulfilled, we are at the “enough” state of our lives—we have then acquired all we need as human beings to lead a full, normal, complete life with no wants, no desires, and no worries.
In order to begin acquiring these things with relative ease, one has to have possession of one thing: character. It’s something nobody can buy, give, or inherit. It makes us who we are as people, defines us when nothing else does, and can never be taken from us.
The Six Pillars of Character
TRUST—to be reliable, honest, reputable, courageous, loyal in word and deed
RESPECT—to be tolerant, considerate, peaceful, accepting
RESPONSIBILITY—to have perseverance, restraint, discipline, accountability, consideration
FAIRNESS—to be open-minded, receptive, equitable
CARING—to be kind, compassionate, considerate, forgiving, helpful
*Forgive me--my husband noticed I forgot one--"citizenship". It's on the link I embedded above.
Principles of character:
• Your character is defined by what you do, not what you say or believe.
• Every choice you make helps define the kind of person you are choosing to be.
• Good character requires doing the right thing, even when it is costly or risky.
• You don't have to take the worst behavior of others as a standard for yourself. You can choose to be better than that.
• What you do matters, and one person can make a big difference.
• The payoff for having good character is that it makes you a better person and it makes the world a better place.
Courtesy of the Good Character organization.
Character in word and deed defines the quality of person we are. Now that we have a better understanding of what character is, let’s do all we can to acquire it, demonstrate it in our lives, teach it to our children and communities, and teach their children and their communities. Maybe then Martin Luther King’s dream of judging by character instead of skin color will finally come true. Good character may just be the door-opener people need to get ahead in life and at work, and now we all know how to get it. Let this become an epidemic!
Friday, November 03, 2006
Crash Quiz (L-O-N-G)
Yep—another useful piece of junk mail, courtesy of GEICO. See how well you score on it.
1. Which roads are most dangerous for drivers?
A) urban
B) suburban
C) rural
2. What month has the highest number of crashes?
A) January
B) February
C) March
D) April
E) May
F) June
G) July
H) August
I) September
J) October
K) November
L) December
3. What day of the week has the highest number of crashes?
A) Sunday
B) Monday
C) Tuesday
D) Wednesday
E) Thursday
F) Friday
G) Saturday
4. What day of the year has the most crashes in it?
A) New Year’s Eve
B) Memorial Day
C) 4th of July
D) Labor Day
E) Christmas Eve
5. What is the peak time during which most driving fatalities take place?
A) Midnight to 2 a.m.
B) 5 to 7 p.m.
C) 7 to 9 p.m.
D) 9 to 11 p.m.
6. Which five cars have been rated top safety picks for 2006 based on crashworthiness? (Tester not specified here)
A) Mercedes S class
B) Ford 500
C) Subaru legacy
D) BMW 5 series
E) Honda Civic
F) Mercury Montego
G) Saab 9-3
H) Jeep Cherokee
I) Cadillac Escalade
J) Volkswagen Jetta
K) Chevrolet Impala
7. Which group has the highest crash risk?
A) Uninsured motorists
B) Elderly drivers
C) Illegal residents
D) Teenagers
8. What is the #1 cause of death among teenagers?
A) Drug use
B) Congenital health problems
C) Vehicle crashes
9. How many teenagers are involved in vehicle crashes each year?
A) 80,000
B) 800,000
C) 1 million
D) 1.8 million
E) 3 million
10. Among teen drivers, what age group has the highest rate of teenage passenger deaths per licensed driver and mile driven?
A) 19-year-olds
B) 18-year-olds
C) 17-year-olds
D) 16-year-olds
E) 15-year-olds
11. Which are the leading causes of teenage car crashes?
A) Driving small or older cars
B) Driving SUVs
C) Driving at night
D) Driving over the speed limit
E) Driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol
F) Little driving experience
12. What is the legal driving blood alcohol content level for teenagers?
A) .02
B) .06
C) .08
________________________________________________________
Answers:
1. Rural
2. August
3. Saturday
4. 4th of July
5. 5-7 p.m.
6. Ford 500, Subaru Legacy, Honda Civic, Mercury Montego, Saab 9-3
7. Teenagers
8. Vehicle crashes
9. 1.8 million
10. 16-year-olds
11. Driving over speed limit and little driving experience
12. THERE IS NO LEGAL LIMIT FOR TEENS—any use of drugs or alcohol is illegal.
1. Which roads are most dangerous for drivers?
A) urban
B) suburban
C) rural
2. What month has the highest number of crashes?
A) January
B) February
C) March
D) April
E) May
F) June
G) July
H) August
I) September
J) October
K) November
L) December
3. What day of the week has the highest number of crashes?
A) Sunday
B) Monday
C) Tuesday
D) Wednesday
E) Thursday
F) Friday
G) Saturday
4. What day of the year has the most crashes in it?
A) New Year’s Eve
B) Memorial Day
C) 4th of July
D) Labor Day
E) Christmas Eve
5. What is the peak time during which most driving fatalities take place?
A) Midnight to 2 a.m.
B) 5 to 7 p.m.
C) 7 to 9 p.m.
D) 9 to 11 p.m.
6. Which five cars have been rated top safety picks for 2006 based on crashworthiness? (Tester not specified here)
A) Mercedes S class
B) Ford 500
C) Subaru legacy
D) BMW 5 series
E) Honda Civic
F) Mercury Montego
G) Saab 9-3
H) Jeep Cherokee
I) Cadillac Escalade
J) Volkswagen Jetta
K) Chevrolet Impala
7. Which group has the highest crash risk?
A) Uninsured motorists
B) Elderly drivers
C) Illegal residents
D) Teenagers
8. What is the #1 cause of death among teenagers?
A) Drug use
B) Congenital health problems
C) Vehicle crashes
9. How many teenagers are involved in vehicle crashes each year?
A) 80,000
B) 800,000
C) 1 million
D) 1.8 million
E) 3 million
10. Among teen drivers, what age group has the highest rate of teenage passenger deaths per licensed driver and mile driven?
A) 19-year-olds
B) 18-year-olds
C) 17-year-olds
D) 16-year-olds
E) 15-year-olds
11. Which are the leading causes of teenage car crashes?
A) Driving small or older cars
B) Driving SUVs
C) Driving at night
D) Driving over the speed limit
E) Driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol
F) Little driving experience
12. What is the legal driving blood alcohol content level for teenagers?
A) .02
B) .06
C) .08
________________________________________________________
Answers:
1. Rural
2. August
3. Saturday
4. 4th of July
5. 5-7 p.m.
6. Ford 500, Subaru Legacy, Honda Civic, Mercury Montego, Saab 9-3
7. Teenagers
8. Vehicle crashes
9. 1.8 million
10. 16-year-olds
11. Driving over speed limit and little driving experience
12. THERE IS NO LEGAL LIMIT FOR TEENS—any use of drugs or alcohol is illegal.
Thursday, November 02, 2006
***BOOK AVOIDANCE ALERT***
Martha Stewart's Homekeeping Handbook--it should've been titled How to Occupy Your Time While on House Arrest.
If you can't clean your own windows, dust your own knick-knacks, and polish your own silver, I feel dreadfully sorry for you and recommend you trade it all in (not the windows, though) on something more useful that can be hidden behind cupboard doors.
If you can't clean your own windows, dust your own knick-knacks, and polish your own silver, I feel dreadfully sorry for you and recommend you trade it all in (not the windows, though) on something more useful that can be hidden behind cupboard doors.
Wednesday, November 01, 2006
A Revolt on the Revolt of the Fairly Rich
A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep.—Saul Bellow
Recently, there was an article on CNN about how the “fairly rich” were angry and frustrated at how little they had or how hard they had to work for things compared to their wealthier brethren. The boats, luxury cars, and villas seemed to fall from the sky for the ultra-rich, and it seemed none of them had to work any harder or make any sacrifices to keep them.
Pollster Doug Schoen, who counsels Michael Bloomberg and Hillary Clinton, among others, says "if you look at the lower part of the upper class or the upper part of the upper middle class, there's a great deal of frustration. These are people who assumed that their hard work and conventional 'success' would leave them with no worries. It's the type of rumbling that could lead to political volatility."
We’re not talking Mark Cuban or Richard Branson here—we’re talking doctors, lawyers, and other $100,000+ earners.
What do Mark Cuban, Richard Branson, and other stratospheric-level earners have that those doctors and lawyers don’t? Simple: plenty of spare time and clean hands--they make money with their MINDS instead.
When was the last time you saw an ultra-rich person actually taking the wheel and getting himself personally involved and his hands dirty? The truth is, they don’t. That’s what separates the classes—ALL classes—the ability to remove yourself from the daily action and let others do the dirty work for you.
Unfortunately, doctors, lawyers, even politicians have jobs that require them to personally be there to perform it, or it doesn’t get done. These professions may as well be glorified commission jobs! If a doctor or lawyer is out sick, then they don’t make money that day—their jobs are run by “billable hours.”
In order to get paid, they must generate billable hours (or billable treatments), just as a salesman must generate closed sales. Usually a specific goal of X number of transactions must take place in order for the business to stay in business. These professions have a somewhat hands-off position of practice ownership.
The ultra-rich, on the other hand, own practices too—mostly the buildings they occupy. This is as good position to be in, because they get paid regardless of “billable hours”, economic downturn, real estate market downturn, or personal life downturn. This is the security a good long-term lease provides, making the building owner more secure and more hands-off than the occupant.
In other words, the doctors and lawyers are too close to the fire for their own good. To be the professional may be to afford some ego-driven glitz and glamour, but to be the OWNER means to afford it in cash. Remember that commercial with the man on the riding mower in debt up to his eyeballs?
To be an owner means to have several layers of people working for you on your behalf, either directly or indirectly—most of the lawyers in a firm (or doctors in a practice) may not know or care who owns the building, but they unknowingly support the ultra-rich person and his/her family. Now they dare to revolt because they find themselves in a have-not position—this is almost too hysterical!
The rich became ultra-rich by letting go. Surrendering the hectic and dirty for the serenity of ownership is what propelled them into “ultra” status. They took a page from rental real estate ownership and magnified it ten times, then one hundred times. Yes, doctors and lawyers have to work hard for their money and toys, but that’s their downfall—THEY have to work for it, and they HAVE to work for it. Ultra-rich people sit back (on their yachts) and check their wireless broadband-driven bank accounts to see if Hands-Off Property Management deposited a check today.
See the difference? Apparently, a lot of $100,000+ earners don’t. The irony of it all is that an ordinary housewife with no degree (but lots of reading) is pointing this out. It’s enough to make me wonder why these highly-paid people (by comparison to me) don’t take the time or spend the money to go find out how to make more money with less work or sacrifice.
I guess financial laziness (or outright stupidity) isn’t just for low-income earners any more—it seems to have gone right to the top tax brackets. I’m going to get some popcorn and watch the fight. Knowing how to work smarter, not harder, may be worthy of extra butter--if you know what I mean.
Recently, there was an article on CNN about how the “fairly rich” were angry and frustrated at how little they had or how hard they had to work for things compared to their wealthier brethren. The boats, luxury cars, and villas seemed to fall from the sky for the ultra-rich, and it seemed none of them had to work any harder or make any sacrifices to keep them.
Pollster Doug Schoen, who counsels Michael Bloomberg and Hillary Clinton, among others, says "if you look at the lower part of the upper class or the upper part of the upper middle class, there's a great deal of frustration. These are people who assumed that their hard work and conventional 'success' would leave them with no worries. It's the type of rumbling that could lead to political volatility."
We’re not talking Mark Cuban or Richard Branson here—we’re talking doctors, lawyers, and other $100,000+ earners.
What do Mark Cuban, Richard Branson, and other stratospheric-level earners have that those doctors and lawyers don’t? Simple: plenty of spare time and clean hands--they make money with their MINDS instead.
When was the last time you saw an ultra-rich person actually taking the wheel and getting himself personally involved and his hands dirty? The truth is, they don’t. That’s what separates the classes—ALL classes—the ability to remove yourself from the daily action and let others do the dirty work for you.
Unfortunately, doctors, lawyers, even politicians have jobs that require them to personally be there to perform it, or it doesn’t get done. These professions may as well be glorified commission jobs! If a doctor or lawyer is out sick, then they don’t make money that day—their jobs are run by “billable hours.”
In order to get paid, they must generate billable hours (or billable treatments), just as a salesman must generate closed sales. Usually a specific goal of X number of transactions must take place in order for the business to stay in business. These professions have a somewhat hands-off position of practice ownership.
The ultra-rich, on the other hand, own practices too—mostly the buildings they occupy. This is as good position to be in, because they get paid regardless of “billable hours”, economic downturn, real estate market downturn, or personal life downturn. This is the security a good long-term lease provides, making the building owner more secure and more hands-off than the occupant.
In other words, the doctors and lawyers are too close to the fire for their own good. To be the professional may be to afford some ego-driven glitz and glamour, but to be the OWNER means to afford it in cash. Remember that commercial with the man on the riding mower in debt up to his eyeballs?
To be an owner means to have several layers of people working for you on your behalf, either directly or indirectly—most of the lawyers in a firm (or doctors in a practice) may not know or care who owns the building, but they unknowingly support the ultra-rich person and his/her family. Now they dare to revolt because they find themselves in a have-not position—this is almost too hysterical!
The rich became ultra-rich by letting go. Surrendering the hectic and dirty for the serenity of ownership is what propelled them into “ultra” status. They took a page from rental real estate ownership and magnified it ten times, then one hundred times. Yes, doctors and lawyers have to work hard for their money and toys, but that’s their downfall—THEY have to work for it, and they HAVE to work for it. Ultra-rich people sit back (on their yachts) and check their wireless broadband-driven bank accounts to see if Hands-Off Property Management deposited a check today.
See the difference? Apparently, a lot of $100,000+ earners don’t. The irony of it all is that an ordinary housewife with no degree (but lots of reading) is pointing this out. It’s enough to make me wonder why these highly-paid people (by comparison to me) don’t take the time or spend the money to go find out how to make more money with less work or sacrifice.
I guess financial laziness (or outright stupidity) isn’t just for low-income earners any more—it seems to have gone right to the top tax brackets. I’m going to get some popcorn and watch the fight. Knowing how to work smarter, not harder, may be worthy of extra butter--if you know what I mean.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
