tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3029918764006054332024-03-05T11:05:51.763-05:00Keep the ChangeWhen injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty. -- T. JeffersonRestitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.comBlogger147125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-56350304562536227312012-02-12T19:43:00.000-05:002012-02-12T19:43:58.188-05:00Congressional ElectionsA plurality (43%) of voters nationwide believes a group of people randomly <a href="http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/february_2012/43_say_random_choices_from_phone_book_better_than_current_congress" target="_self">selected from a telephone book</a> would do a better job than the current legislators. Thirty-eight percent (38%) disagree, while another 19% are not sure.<br />
<a href="http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/weekly_updates/what_they_told_us_reviewing_last_week_s_key_polls">Rasmussen </a>Restitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-20851937522784599082012-01-29T15:40:00.001-05:002012-01-29T15:47:56.883-05:00What Were They Thinking?!?You just have to wonder. The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), is a mandate that requires a certain
amount of ethanol be blended into gasoline every year at increasingly
greater amounts.<br />
<br />
Under the RFS, 15.2 billion gallons of renewable fuel must be blended into transportation fuel in 2012, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2011/01/11/11climatewire-much-touted-cellulosic-ethanol-is-late-in-ma-13070.html?pagewanted=all" target="_blank">eventually ramping up to 36 billion gallons in 2022</a>.
Of that 36 billion number, the United States must produce 16 billion
gallons of cellulosic ethanol, 15 billion gallons of traditional
corn-based ethanol, 4 billion gallons of advanced biofuels and 1
billion gallons of biodiesel.<br />
<br />
You first have to wonder about those product-specific targets. The EPA doesn't just want ethanol, they want cellulosic ethanol. The idea behind cellulosic ethanol is to turn municipal and farm waste into fuel. I certainly am no proponent of corn-based ethanol. It is really one of the dumbest ideas we've cooked up since it takes as much (or more) energy to produce as it provides, and from all the wrong sources (e.g., coal). But where does the cellulosic ethanol come from? The target for 2010 was 5 million gallons. The amount actually made was less than 1 million. The target for 2011 was 6.6 million and that was significantly lowered by EPA below the law's requirements. How many commercial sources for the product? Zero.<br />
<br />
How they are going to get from 1 million gallons to 36 BILLION gallons, an increase of 36,000%, is unknown. DoE and EPA just figure if they say so, you will build it. While I think manufacturing (e.g., value added activity) is the way out of the economic mess we are in, I am certainly not convinced that we can ramp up for this requirement, and besides, the product isn't for export anyway. We just become our own energy hostages.<br />
<br />
Next you have to wonder what happens if the fuel blenders cannot meet the targets? The are required to purchase cellulosic biofuel waiver credits. Ummmhumm, a tax or penalty for not buying what doesn't exist. So much for turning shit to shinola. Let me flog your wallet for failing to buy enough of my non-existent crap-carbs.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2011/01/11/11climatewire-much-touted-cellulosic-ethanol-is-late-in-ma-13070.html?pagewanted=all" target="_blank">NY Times</a><span style="font-size: small;"> </span><br />
<h2 class="openbooktitle" style="font-weight: normal;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=13105&page=1">Renewable Fuel Standard: Potential Economic and Environmental Effects of U.S. Biofuel Policy</a> (2011) </span></h2>
<h2 class="openbooktitle" style="font-weight: normal;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span class="org"><a href="http://www.bioenergywiki.net/Renewable_Fuels_Standard">BioEnergy Wiki</a></span></span></h2>
And for my next example of "what were they thinking," I offer California's Low Carbon Fuel Standard, which has been enjoined by the U.S. District Court in Fresno. This collection of CARB rules establishes a cap and trade policy, establishes fuel economy standards and renewable energy requirements. The rules are based on life-cycle analysis, which considers factors such as land use, transportation and manufacturing costs and the carbon contribution of the energy used to create the renewable energy. These are summed to come up with a carbon intensity score. Which is pretty much why the judge threw it out - it treats electricity produced in the mid-west differently than electricity produced in California and penalizes producers based on their distance from the consumer, which of course discriminates against interstate commerce. So, chemically identical biofuel from Iowa has a carbon index higher than biofuel from Fresno. What is a biofuel manufacturer to do in order to have a competitive CI? Well of course, buy surplus low-carbon fuel credits. <br />
<br />
What about that life-cycle formula for arriving and a carbon index? Sounds reasonable on the face of it, but when you dig into the life
cycle factors and how they are weighted, you find many opportunities for
political and economic corruption. CARB’s life-cycle analysis “calibrates CI scores so that they regulate,
among other things, deforestation in South America, how Midwest farmers
use their land, and how ethanol plants in the Midwest produce animal
nutrients.” For example, CARB “imposes a substantial penalty — more than
30% of the CI score for corn ethanol — for ‘indirect land use.’ That
penalty is used to discourage farmers around the world from converting
nonagricultural land into farmland to enter the corn market.”<br />
<br />
You can see how this "model" can be arbitrarily used to discriminate against any particular source, government, economic factor or simply to collect money for carbon credits where a target is impossible to achieve. One can only hope that the result would be manufacturers outside of CA would simply sell their products elsewhere and leave CA to its own resources. Of course, CA has neither the agriculturally viable land, surplus electricity nor water to fend for itself. You can also see how trying this on a state-by-state or regional basis is just going to create a carbon credit bubble much like playing commodity futures, default credit swaps and all the other ways that government can force money to exchage hands with no value added.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.globalwarming.org/2012/01/05/federal-judge-blocks-enforcement-of-california-low-carbon-fuel-standard/">Global Warming Org article</a><br />
I am providing both the current like to Gary Harwick's presentation on this and the cache version since I keep getting a 504.<br />
<a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/28562346/Gary-Herwick-LCFS-Implication-Opportunities">Low Carbon Fuels Policy</a><br />
<a href="http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:s8syNkV5ipkJ:www.scribd.com/doc/28562346/Gary-Herwick-LCFS-Implication-Opportunities+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a">Low Carbon Fuels Policy - cached</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204301404577171531838421366.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop">WSJ Editorial</a> <br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Alarmism over climate is of great benefit to many, providing government
funding for academic research and a reason for government bureaucracies
to grow. Alarmism also offers an excuse for governments to raise taxes,
taxpayer-funded subsidies for businesses that understand how to work the
political system, and a lure for big donations to charitable
foundations promising to save the planet. </blockquote>
16 international scientists who dare to show their skepticism publicly.<br />
Amen.<br />
<br />
I always think I can just write a short blurb and then end up with an essay. If you made it this far, thanks for listening.<br />
<br />Restitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-38218509965399326072012-01-25T16:49:00.002-05:002012-01-25T16:49:55.513-05:00Republican presidential candidatesFrom Captain and Commander:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0079273/">Dr. Stephen Maturin</a></b>:
...I would choose the right hand weevil; it has... significant advantage in both length and breadth.
<br />
[<i class="fine">the captain thumps his fist in the table</i>]
<br />
<b><a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000128/">Capt. Jack Aubrey</a></b>:
There, I have you! You're completely dished! Do you not know that in the service...
<br />
[<i class="fine">pauses</i>]
<br />
<b><a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000128/">Capt. Jack Aubrey</a></b>:
...one must always choose the lesser of two weevils. </blockquote>
<br />
I've been in Washington a looong time. According to <a href="http://www.creators.com/opinion/r-emmett-tyrrell.html">Emmett Tyrrell</a> Newt has more skeletons than a body snatcher. I don't know how many that is, but I'm sure they won't all fit in his closets. <br />
<br />
Huckster, shill, scheister, carney, do these sound any better than what they call Romney?<br />
So, if those two aren't workin for ya, you are left with Santorum and Paul. How terribly pathetic. <br />
<br />
And just to complement how tacky I think Newt is, let me add this:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkV78O-gq8OfKSUCrcXdgeRj9JGjcgiUTFjtxnRRUh7arVGSrmyyNXOO6aOC4Jf8K1kDZNkoblH8k-IRcZlsrW_LbTmLOhXLOpkBGr4uK_AKSz5EAdp8yJoAImCMfByr2_3uL01Me0gNlN/s1600/runningskeletongif-banner.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="59" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkV78O-gq8OfKSUCrcXdgeRj9JGjcgiUTFjtxnRRUh7arVGSrmyyNXOO6aOC4Jf8K1kDZNkoblH8k-IRcZlsrW_LbTmLOhXLOpkBGr4uK_AKSz5EAdp8yJoAImCMfByr2_3uL01Me0gNlN/s320/runningskeletongif-banner.gif" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhd6KKfC73iKg9lXGghdegu_k1oWvYuAoOLfT1kQuaZiw08ZkwZ8ItthUXSD3KfbjeMCh2h_7AT7ITUgDoaZ0tZYdNzJJoOLL_9Glv5qA4-khHXdQLHH1sdSaB3-OHUCY3L_4VhTJYz1iRU/s1600/skeleton+unc+sam.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhd6KKfC73iKg9lXGghdegu_k1oWvYuAoOLfT1kQuaZiw08ZkwZ8ItthUXSD3KfbjeMCh2h_7AT7ITUgDoaZ0tZYdNzJJoOLL_9Glv5qA4-khHXdQLHH1sdSaB3-OHUCY3L_4VhTJYz1iRU/s1600/skeleton+unc+sam.gif" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhMQDPRpxNhNLYGzjI9Ec7veX9Zczr6QYAXYMr_F9F9Zl4N2XEiAu2Xzw8149zxUuS9DPZH569xUaB3SyTp8CclhRRsrbb3F0kpr3NvSFtQ8z5zWQtiBzAE0mE7OZDstzf6KI_EMmgfIvqK/s1600/skeleton_3+grateful+dead.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhMQDPRpxNhNLYGzjI9Ec7veX9Zczr6QYAXYMr_F9F9Zl4N2XEiAu2Xzw8149zxUuS9DPZH569xUaB3SyTp8CclhRRsrbb3F0kpr3NvSFtQ8z5zWQtiBzAE0mE7OZDstzf6KI_EMmgfIvqK/s1600/skeleton_3+grateful+dead.gif" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVQBfOKK5YRRH93aj7ZcDMCAVEekF35hV9oGOMIYSab8ZihNN4LnRnDwEQxLSEuzJFwVxrti-d9uDA-5Qtol8nm02PuH68-_3y6t987gtCcDapOpsUOpjAtGN1uyaoGkmDK9g2MGXSaw3o/s1600/skeleton_13.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVQBfOKK5YRRH93aj7ZcDMCAVEekF35hV9oGOMIYSab8ZihNN4LnRnDwEQxLSEuzJFwVxrti-d9uDA-5Qtol8nm02PuH68-_3y6t987gtCcDapOpsUOpjAtGN1uyaoGkmDK9g2MGXSaw3o/s1600/skeleton_13.gif" /></a> and <img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjstV_-mwr9GQ3YtPJ48ql3vorJAXOKObsNdFq5g1e_96USqSOhX1PZ9JGq0BS-ma0eilvkG88wEszK-0CG2Tv7VDyy08yDv_OyAied8Elf_pPX9g1kqjULnxIPJlpFKx4MD0eTfbYBHISv/s1600/animatedskeleton-1.gif" /> and <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiqaJwF6-9amHd7R7w_7NCV4-vRq7kztZx8a5mZYzOu15Q7NgbHlMbTCEbaRrEsa8eA0dTkW0J-_JL_wTj8O8TVstL-Pb24hlax8yH836ddmauLIV2yFivyS7MMHGIv9yj-L-OzSRhy3Jo9/s1600/skeleton-4.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiqaJwF6-9amHd7R7w_7NCV4-vRq7kztZx8a5mZYzOu15Q7NgbHlMbTCEbaRrEsa8eA0dTkW0J-_JL_wTj8O8TVstL-Pb24hlax8yH836ddmauLIV2yFivyS7MMHGIv9yj-L-OzSRhy3Jo9/s1600/skeleton-4.gif" /></a></div>
<br />Restitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-63876931322251030452011-12-22T12:25:00.000-05:002011-12-22T12:25:14.110-05:00What are my cats thinking?I have spent way too much time at <a href="http://theoatmeal.com/tag/cats">The Oatmeal</a><br />
<a href="http://www.heyquiz.com/quiz/cat_kill"><img alt="Is your cat plotting to kill you?" src="http://www.heyquiz.com/bimage/14_83.jpg" /> </a><br />
Find out more at <a href="http://www.catswhothrowupgrass.com/kill.php">cats who throw up grass</a><br />Restitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-67916126455360874152011-12-04T21:22:00.001-05:002011-12-04T21:38:02.377-05:00Federal budget illustration<div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Arial Black; font-size: small;"><span lang="EN">. U.S. Tax revenue:
$2,170,000,000,000</span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Arial Black; font-size: small;"><span lang="EN">. Fed budget:
$3,820,000,000,000</span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Arial Black; font-size: small;"><span lang="EN">. New debt: $
1,650,000,000,000</span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Arial Black; font-size: small;"><span lang="EN">. National debt:
$14,271,000,000,000</span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Arial Black; font-size: small;"><span lang="EN">. Recent budget cut: $
38,500,000,000</span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #0000a0; font-family: Comic Sans MS; font-size: medium;"><span></span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Arial Black; font-size: small;"><span lang="EN">Now, remove 8 zeros and pretend it's a
household budget.</span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #0000a0; font-family: Comic Sans MS; font-size: medium;"><span></span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Arial Black; font-size: small;"><span lang="EN">. Annual family income:
$21,700</span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Arial Black; font-size: small;"><span lang="EN">. Money the family spent:
$38,200</span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Arial Black; font-size: small;"><span lang="EN">. New debt on the credit card:
$16,500</span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Arial Black; font-size: small;"><span lang="EN">. Outstanding balance on credit card:
$142,710. </span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Arial Black; font-size: small;"><span lang="EN">. Total budget cuts:
$385</span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #0000a0; font-family: Comic Sans MS; font-size: medium;"><span lang="EN"></span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Arial Black; font-size: small;"><span lang="EN">Sort of brings the issue "home" doesn't
it?</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Arial Black; font-size: small;"><span lang="EN">Yahyah, I hear it. "You can't compare the national budget to a family budget. Unexpected things come up and the country has to invest in the things that will drive the economy in the future (like broadband)." So, when is enough enough? Eventually we will be one disaster over the amount some far east country is willing to lend. Maybe it's time to start charging premiums for disaster relief, since everyone seems to think it means "just like it never happened." Since when did we start expecting the government to kiss the calamity booboo and make it all better?</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Arial Black; font-size: small;"><span lang="EN"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Arial Black; font-size: small;"><span lang="EN">H/T DougH</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Arial Black; font-size: small;"><span lang="EN"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Arial Black; font-size: small;"><span lang="EN"> </span></span></div>
</div>
</div>Restitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-53344368269984246792011-11-30T21:48:00.001-05:002011-11-30T21:52:10.411-05:00History Repeats Itself, example 14,954,769,152.76<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhlmWk_E0c1rrSC0-OoHYbj0nA4W57rbZHB00CK6vDy4qb4pLf6HcoQQHQXbtI6nX1qs4FsnHrxCqssLLrexCL6GdFlWdw-W9q-RH73tUg2jlPmE0fHZVAMwrVXZIMC32fa2w7yDuo2csZJ/s1600/Daily_News_Nov4_1949.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhlmWk_E0c1rrSC0-OoHYbj0nA4W57rbZHB00CK6vDy4qb4pLf6HcoQQHQXbtI6nX1qs4FsnHrxCqssLLrexCL6GdFlWdw-W9q-RH73tUg2jlPmE0fHZVAMwrVXZIMC32fa2w7yDuo2csZJ/s1600/Daily_News_Nov4_1949.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
H/T DougRestitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-76172350181765691252011-10-29T15:13:00.002-04:002011-10-29T15:14:03.202-04:00Lies, Damn Lies and StatisticsOMG! Did you hear? The top 20% have more money than the bottom 20%!!!<br />
Well, duh. And if the top 20% had the same amount of money as the bottom 20%, they wouldn't be on top, would they?<br />
Let's say you have $100 and you are in the bottom 1/5.<br />
Let's say the next 1/5 has 20% (1/5) more and so on.<br />
Top 1/5 $207<br />
2nd 1/5 $173<br />
3rd 1/5 $144<br />
4th 1/5 $120<br />
You $100<br />
That top bastich has twice as much as you!<br />
Remember, the top 1% already pay 36% of the tax burden.<br />
And nearly 50% don't pay income tax at all.Restitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-22002695469702251212011-10-29T13:49:00.001-04:002011-10-29T13:49:30.570-04:00Bad banks, or bad attitude?I remain astounded that a groundswell of public angst would arise because BoA decided to add a $5 fee for using your debit card. I mean, you DO use it, and it is a cost to the bank, duh. Every transaction requires a series of actions from crediting the merchant to debiting your account and all of the banks changing money in between. You don't work for free, why should they? So, why do people think that it should be free? It wasn't free before, someone else was paying for it -- merchants.<br />
This is the essential problem with entitlement society. It isn't what people do or don't do that leads them to some expectation. It is what everyone else does or doesn't do that is viewed through the lens of personal desire. I want it, you aren't giving it to me, therefore you are a bad actor.<br />
When did this change-up occur? More importantly, how do we undo it?<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>Take the bank situation again. People have choices, they don't need to use BoA. It isn't particularly convenient to change banks, but the banks have no obligation to provide you the same service (or more service) at the same cost for your lifetime. <i>If you don't like it, act like a capitalist, like a</i><b><i> free</i></b> <i><b>American </b>and take your business somewhere else!</i><br />
<br />
We removed a primary source of compensation for the use of those debit cards through a stupid law designed to protect the interests (pocketbooks) of business. Not like 20 cents a swipe is going to lead to any employment. Congress was just mad (because you are mad) and took it out on banks. Is a predictable consequence and unintended consequence? Or just stupid behavior? What on earth did congress think banks were going to do, operate at a loss??? I actually don't have a problem with it because it puts the cost burden back on the party that is causing it in the first place.<br />
<br />
Now, if you want to get mad, get mad about this: credit card interest rates. The government interest rate on bank borrowing is virtually zero, meaning that as long as a bank has sufficient capital, they can borrow from the fed for zero and loan it to you for -- 30%!?!??!!!???? And if you act like a responsible person and pay off the bill every month, then they are going to charge you a monthly fee of -- $12??!!???? And you are still bitching about $5 for a debit card? OMG, be glad you have money in the bank.<br />
<br />
I don't have a fundamental problem with people protesting or with people being mad about the way the money institutions have treated American citizens throughout this crisis. I just have a problem that people are complaining about something so stupid that they look like petty whiners and like they are too dumb to see the real problems. I mean, if you happen to be living hand to mouth, with a $10K credit card balance as a result of increased gas, energy and food prices over the last 30 months and then the bank decides to jack up your interest rate by 10%, really where are you going to take that business? Most people do not have credit card companies begging for their business anymore. (Why should they with that kind of interest rate and a captive consumer?)<br />
<br />
Seems to me it comes down to this: irresponsible government encouraged/allowed irresponsible citizens to rack up irresponsible debt based on home equity. Equity is not real money. Then irresponsible government looked the other way while banks covered their butts with credit swaps. When the housing market crashed (which I still say is a direct consequence of increased energy costs that jacked up the price of everything else <i>but </i>housing), the banks lost. So, they can only loose so much and then they are out of business -- failed banks which the government then has to cover for personal assets -- the money you have in your account that you withdraw with that debit card. The banks have to make up the losses somehow and obviously the somehow is on the backs of the remaining customers, whether they are individuals or businesses. But any way you cut it, as a taxpayer with a bank service, you are going to lose, too. If the bank stays in business, you lose. If the bank goes out of business, you lose. The banks are just playing by the rules government writes.Restitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-28772371330462210022011-10-19T23:42:00.001-04:002011-10-20T00:05:14.980-04:00Maybe it's just me, but is there a family resemblance?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEihCt4usw-VZi1tEvddTH-xUFN6k5SkL9lic2qLI0IxAPLzmVfQAxt0Eq6F0lBTYinRGyr5GueRLzpa1HbCxhD0sRvXxv5ro6kHle4ulSrk5okqr7I08nI6vXmyUYZcfvOnDuRi-9k5m1Hs/s1600/crs2a.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEihCt4usw-VZi1tEvddTH-xUFN6k5SkL9lic2qLI0IxAPLzmVfQAxt0Eq6F0lBTYinRGyr5GueRLzpa1HbCxhD0sRvXxv5ro6kHle4ulSrk5okqr7I08nI6vXmyUYZcfvOnDuRi-9k5m1Hs/s320/crs2a.jpg" width="206" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgyHHTW59xYx62370aAyxizecA1Cmf8gxcHSMpUj7vbgdtVnTK2rtVFnkhhlWeGtA9cETb0is9o2IvVGCrrbGkhyphenhypheneVSM7H2Y5t_fxiMZehh1wuFteNd3dCu_60SnPMBORi8J5uRTANxjx7b/s1600/crs2br.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgyHHTW59xYx62370aAyxizecA1Cmf8gxcHSMpUj7vbgdtVnTK2rtVFnkhhlWeGtA9cETb0is9o2IvVGCrrbGkhyphenhypheneVSM7H2Y5t_fxiMZehh1wuFteNd3dCu_60SnPMBORi8J5uRTANxjx7b/s1600/crs2br.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjLXzOjdmColmI0JDnmQP2EfpRqPjBB0oWS9rePgzFn1VNk6oJHzz4UvZyYw4MdBxk84o00P-bDwi3-sCMTSo2Pdbrz7RECFzK5dsaX-tdQKTz5qTILTYD1r6q_oHxTIIUmtGYdGDy1Us6O/s1600/crs3a2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjLXzOjdmColmI0JDnmQP2EfpRqPjBB0oWS9rePgzFn1VNk6oJHzz4UvZyYw4MdBxk84o00P-bDwi3-sCMTSo2Pdbrz7RECFzK5dsaX-tdQKTz5qTILTYD1r6q_oHxTIIUmtGYdGDy1Us6O/s1600/crs3a2.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5jfhPeD08UESNo1adhaoiZxFl8d_11UcmgmSCofoLA00TduMoyZC62TtdGLgx-eQX1TkpBhQFz6L2jRVRb6bDJY2NWdJVkkwR7785C2NV3LsjlDz9btkzASTd6fZz87oS78wT9p6ZoDqZ/s1600/crs3a2b.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="173" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5jfhPeD08UESNo1adhaoiZxFl8d_11UcmgmSCofoLA00TduMoyZC62TtdGLgx-eQX1TkpBhQFz6L2jRVRb6bDJY2NWdJVkkwR7785C2NV3LsjlDz9btkzASTd6fZz87oS78wT9p6ZoDqZ/s320/crs3a2b.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNEUTcgXzmdRaq9GSXUdGL1CaWk8pyiQODcPNQrO-_75r4HvtVFJqe-nYmdduCX_c7yZsKkYafpbOz4YtZ6_fjth_FljEN6gt5X_vtZHgyS1WPa6YRXY8r8VwbCvbd_MMyJkx3uOmhNKJX/s1600/crs3b1r.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNEUTcgXzmdRaq9GSXUdGL1CaWk8pyiQODcPNQrO-_75r4HvtVFJqe-nYmdduCX_c7yZsKkYafpbOz4YtZ6_fjth_FljEN6gt5X_vtZHgyS1WPa6YRXY8r8VwbCvbd_MMyJkx3uOmhNKJX/s200/crs3b1r.jpg" width="127" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiusibdfvso_tRQhQT7NIGP3hwwPiLCJT_YIxCvfppPc-yHyHJOvqRzmNTeScxSjEwmjgiy1PRkeVIIhFT-vri4fT-w1KA7b37tUsGPgGsWaMu2Y8Ksrc7SGoVG-1IP72y6rLcgV8XK-lpx/s1600/crs3b2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiusibdfvso_tRQhQT7NIGP3hwwPiLCJT_YIxCvfppPc-yHyHJOvqRzmNTeScxSjEwmjgiy1PRkeVIIhFT-vri4fT-w1KA7b37tUsGPgGsWaMu2Y8Ksrc7SGoVG-1IP72y6rLcgV8XK-lpx/s200/crs3b2.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiNcC32f5tn8EP6T1JY2ruJoKtloumizx3r0TPYcMFk80xeijbgi_6vpc-GQgoorPvzltG_oAQX6pvo7kYFUQypkJ6UUJazeHYUw2atYhQfeSJJAlHxUeI1wzQ7KreBsWAme00RsK0QT1Kb/s1600/crs4a.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiNcC32f5tn8EP6T1JY2ruJoKtloumizx3r0TPYcMFk80xeijbgi_6vpc-GQgoorPvzltG_oAQX6pvo7kYFUQypkJ6UUJazeHYUw2atYhQfeSJJAlHxUeI1wzQ7KreBsWAme00RsK0QT1Kb/s200/crs4a.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzwoYNR2y8EQT0nQeNQ8cm0tqolir9nkJ1bpgNaY2Hogw8NPviHUkMPB7UZunL5luO_du_SXm1WikDwFpd-vbaJv4OtX0Dxspk0F9MjKBMNcFGALK3oVQxbkyMJLVASPf2x4zxskg-mrBf/s1600/crs4b.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzwoYNR2y8EQT0nQeNQ8cm0tqolir9nkJ1bpgNaY2Hogw8NPviHUkMPB7UZunL5luO_du_SXm1WikDwFpd-vbaJv4OtX0Dxspk0F9MjKBMNcFGALK3oVQxbkyMJLVASPf2x4zxskg-mrBf/s1600/crs4b.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEix2HUDRG8lqvOhJ0hdBTr4zsA01WJ-6JhH8vz-8Qca0OwfH836JZDSQhCGv3I0O4Q3c8MBhgviZyThBa3wDVecss2rOrxHbT8x9p_XPGR8nP7YJykeaxbysWXWs9BUMp0LVI_VHriLsF9W/s1600/crs5ar.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEix2HUDRG8lqvOhJ0hdBTr4zsA01WJ-6JhH8vz-8Qca0OwfH836JZDSQhCGv3I0O4Q3c8MBhgviZyThBa3wDVecss2rOrxHbT8x9p_XPGR8nP7YJykeaxbysWXWs9BUMp0LVI_VHriLsF9W/s1600/crs5ar.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhCc2mbPeVpLVuEDXqfjQHg6RY-yu-pi3k0mMP8bSmQ5yGuv4v1Kjuu-GIm6To9dUsy8L48mrOoZGIXMJAE_pLnKw0aUQdhmMsxEW9bcRiF1RTmcEjE84jT96LsYz4Vdr0rMVPdvRriJ1DF/s1600/crs5br.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhCc2mbPeVpLVuEDXqfjQHg6RY-yu-pi3k0mMP8bSmQ5yGuv4v1Kjuu-GIm6To9dUsy8L48mrOoZGIXMJAE_pLnKw0aUQdhmMsxEW9bcRiF1RTmcEjE84jT96LsYz4Vdr0rMVPdvRriJ1DF/s1600/crs5br.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />Restitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-9839391187394111222011-10-16T17:21:00.000-04:002011-10-16T17:21:08.307-04:00There has been discussion about entitlement society and how government leads to dependence - that individuals learn to rely on government to solve their personal problems. Personal benefits such as food stamps, seemingly endless unemployment insurance, healthcare and retirement income actually do allow (in some cases enforce) dependence on state and federal government on a month to month basis. It's like you can't get away from it, and many/most people can't afford to pay for both the entitlement and an alternative that doesn't manage and control their day-to-day lives.<br />
<br />
But wait, there's more. States are in the same pickle. The stimulus gave states untold billions to shore up unemployment, supposedly. And like others, I asked what happens when this faucet/firehose of funds get's shut off?<br />
<br />
Well the answer is that states cry woe, we will have to lay off teachers, police and emergency responders because the mean old government didn't send us their paychecks. Forget we spent all our money on their benefits. And not like states are hiring most of these people anyway, local government is.<br />
<br />
But why is local government relying on the federal government to cough up the money for their employees? Isn't that kind of careless? Did they really think the gravy train has no caboose? Look people, as long as the teachers and the county sheriffs are working for federal programs, they aren't working for you. Do you really want to give up control like that? Because the federal government will come calling with those "conditions." The money is never free.Restitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-82503258397512089322011-09-12T22:11:00.000-04:002011-09-12T22:11:23.951-04:00Putting the National Debt in Perspective - another analogyThese numbers change pretty quickly, but they are close enough for government work, anyway.<br />
<br />
• U.S. Tax revenue: $2,170,000,000,000 <br />
• Fed budget: $3,820,000,000,000 <br />
• New debt: $ 1,650,000,000,000 <br />
• National debt: $14,271,000,000,000 <br />
• Recent budget cut: $ 38,500,000,000 <br />
............. <br />
Now, remove 8 zeros and pretend it's a household budget. <br />
• Annual family income: $21,700 <br />
• Money the family spent: $38,200 <br />
• New debt on the credit card: $16,500 <br />
• Outstanding balance on credit card: $142,710 <br />
• Total budget cuts: $385<br />
<br />
Sorta brings the issue "home" doesn't it ?Restitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-54848828193626994762011-09-01T22:24:00.000-04:002011-09-01T22:24:00.575-04:00Let's talk energyClimate change is a close relative, I don't want to go there. I just want to lay out some thoughts on energy.<br />
<br />
According to Pickens, in 2009, the US imported 63% of our oil at a cost of $265 billion. And that was fairly cheap oil. Let's assume in 5 years, we could decrease our imported oil costs by 20%. That is a potential value of $53 billion, assuming oil in constant dollars. That is $53 billion more circulating in our own economy. Over 10 years, we should be able to bring nuclear power stations online, reducing dependence on oil and natural gas for electricity. Is another 30% reduction in oil imports reasonable in a second five year period? That's another $80 billion for a total of $186 billion over 10 years. That's money circulating in our economy instead of Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, etc.<br />
<br />
If I am missing something please correct me.<br />
We have a lot of natural gas reserves - 100 years if you believe Pickens.<br />
Compressed natural gas vehicles have been around for years. I have seen them in Wash DC for at least the last 6 years, passenger cars, taxis and buses.<br />
Many people have natural gas to their house.<br />
Delivering CNG to main highways wouldn't be any more costly than replacing all the existing gas storage tanks (that has been going on for years because the tanks leak).<br />
<br />
We should be able to turn over 20% of the passenger vehicles, municipal buses, taxis and light delivery trucks in 5-7 years, about the time we will need to ramp up CNG delivery infrastructure.<br />
<br />
It seems like a reasonable goal then to reduce our dependence on foreign oil imports by both increasing our own output, converting to CNG and at least in the short term rely on coal.<br />
<br />
How many jobs would that $186 billion create?Restitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-77646287730128561352011-08-28T16:59:00.000-04:002011-08-28T16:59:00.263-04:00Selling your foot to spite your nose.OK, that is such a mixed metaphor it is non-sense.<br />
But then so is this: USA companies are selling refineries???<br />
Global oil companies are building them elsewhere? And then what, ship it to the US?<br />
OMG, please, someone stop the madness!<br />
If some other country is out there buying refinery products, should we not be all about selling it to them?<br />
http://money.cnn.com/2011/05/02/news/companies/oil_refinery_gas_prices.fortune/index.htmRestitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-30491185979901504092011-08-25T11:32:00.000-04:002011-08-25T11:32:35.100-04:00Forget race, sex, religion and disability as reasons for bigotryWe have a new (yet old) act in town this year (2011).<br />
<br />
Economic Inequality<br />
Somehow, the prosperous seem to be the root of all evil. And all along, I thought it was envy. Oh wait, it's still envy. <br />
<br />
The dialog this year has been ever-more frequently decrying the disparity between them that have and those who have not. Define that however you like; and that is the problem - any definition seems to work in this scheme. This is more than class warfare. Frankly, I find the concept a pointless waste of emotional energy, but that has yet to stop a progressive from bleating in the dark of economic night.<br />
<br />
Look, if you are going to beat this sorry drum from centuries past, try pointing out the disparity between oil-rich middle east theocratic oligarchies and just about everyone else in the world. We give them our money because we want their product. It's that simple.<br />
<br />
The fact that some people in this country are well-off and some aren't is just a fact of life. The price of stuff is set by the amount of money people who want the stuff are willing to pay. What have our efforts to increase access to home ownership, education and health care by lower income citizens accomplished? Raised the price of homes, education and health care to even higher absurd levels. Taking money away from those with more and giving it to people with less does increase demand - but it also increases cost and results in the same net effect -- the same people are at the bottom. You would think that the number of people with the wealth would decrease, and perhaps it has. But also note that the people with the wealth now have more of the wealth. Conclusion: wealth redistribution has the effect of trickling up, not down. So theoretically, we can perpetuate hate for this minority (the top 1, 2, 5 percent) as long as we like.<br />
<br />
If this country wishes to make demons of the well-to-do and rob the rich to pay the poor, it will find the rich departing to more welcoming countries. This applies to corporations as well as individuals. Face it, one doesn't need America to be rich, one needs product. One doesn't need money to develop product, one needs energy and a tolerant environment. Given the means and the venue, the money will follow.<br />
<br />
This zero-sum game of wealth-envy and piss on the prosperous is being played out every where from the environmentalists (we'll save the planet when YOU buy/use less) to a spiritual message.<br />
<br />
Links to a sample the progressive poor me messages du jour:<br />
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/02/opinion/02kristof.html?ref=opinion" linkindex="280">Eliminating Inequality is Good for the Soul</a> (or you have lies, damn lies and then there are statistics)<br />
<a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-mcmanus-twous-20110102,0,5332722.column">The Upward Mobility Gap</a> <a href="http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-reich-20110102,0,3755068.story" linkindex="281">Bipartisanship in 2011? No Chance</a>Restitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-36334039995944486792011-08-25T11:23:00.000-04:002011-08-25T11:23:53.008-04:00A paradigm shift in commodity pricesThat means energy, food, minerals and therefore all the stuff that is thereby derived<br />
http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2011/04/28/the-coming-commodity-price-nightmare/<br />
<br />
What the price of gas is doing to American consumers and therefore to the economy<br />
http://money.cnn.com/2011/05/05/news/economy/gas_prices_income_spending/index.htm?section=money_topstoriesRestitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-86714773609137172982011-08-24T13:39:00.000-04:002011-08-24T13:39:06.835-04:00Suddenly economics is entertainmentThis is well produced and entertaining video. Which should start a whole new discussion about education, but I'm not going there.<br />
Fight of the Century at <a href="http://econstories.tv/2011/04/28/fight-of-the-century-music-video/">econstories</a>Restitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-22670392231607471502011-08-20T14:43:00.000-04:002011-08-20T14:43:35.740-04:00Can we solve this problem with more taxes?Um. NO.<br />
You would have to confiscate every dollar from every person who earns $200,000 or more. Imagine what that would do for the economy? But in any event, what would you do next year? Because obviously, those people would not be working those jobs and making those investments anymore. Let's see, work at 7-11 for $30K or work at Goldman-Sachs for nuthin. No brainer.<br />
<a href="http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/warren-buffett-s-tax-solution-won-t-solv">Tax Foundation</a> <br />
<br />
IT'S NOT A TAX PROBLEM, IT'S A SPENDING PROBLEM!<br />
Fix the spending problem first. Then use additional revenue to PAY DOWN THE DEBT!<br />
<br />
Maybe we should have a tax revolt instead of a tea party. Reduce your withholding as much as you can without incurring a penalty. Send the IRS a notice that you are taking the additional amount you owe off of the nation's tab. Too bad we can't send money to the treasury earmarked for debt reduction (not deficit reduction, the debt we already owe). No, you can't keep it, you would have to put it in an escrow account. But hey, interest rates are going up so at least you will be earning some money for the government, right?<br />
<br />
Why worry about the debt? Because we are paying interest on it. And the interest, if we keep spending like drunken sailors, will consume the entire annual federal revenue in just a few short years, not decades (somewhere between 2021 and 2041 depending on interest rates).<br />
<br />
In 2010, we spent more in interest than we did on Health and Human Services (medicare/medicaid) More than Transportation, Veterans Affairs, Agriculture, Energy, HUD, Justice, DHS, Commerce, Labor, Small Business Admin, Treasury. <i><b>Combined</b></i>. In the last 20 years, we have spent $8 trillion just on interest - nice income for other countries.<br />
<br />
If Congress stopped <i>all spending</i> today and paid $100 million per day, it would take 389 years to pay off the national debt. And that was in 2010, so it is closer to 500 years now.<br />
<a href="http://governmentgonewild.org/">Government Gone Wild</a>Restitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-72407219434607485062011-08-03T00:40:00.001-04:002011-08-03T00:40:13.185-04:00A debt analogySo, instead of amassing another $10 trillion in debt over the next decade, we will amass only $7.5 trillion more? As Ron Paul said, whoopee.<br />
My son's analogy: So instead of crashing the plane into the tarmac at a 90 degree angle, we will just crash it at a 70 degree angle instead.<br />
<br />
And instead of addressing the spending problem that adds another $trillion to the debt every year, we will whine and threaten and demagogue to no end tax cuts for the wealthy and tax breaks for the richest corporations (picking winners and losers again) which, if we went ahead and did what is suggested, would result in only several billion more in revenue. Why? Because the really wealthy people that are constantly being demonized don't earn the money from income. Therefore income tax increases don't increase affect them. And most people who would be affected aren't pulling wages in the $200,000+ brackets, they are business owners. If the government isn't taking their income (not wages), then it is available to reinvest in the business, thereby improving the economy, increasing the number of wage-earners and therefore income tax revenue. The millionaires and billionaires are not going to be paying any more in income tax - it isn't earned income to begin with. So much for fair share, so much for the "protecting the wealthy" argument, they are all protecting the wealthy by keeping capital gains taxes low and keeping capital expensing and amortization periods favorable. No one pays attention to how the rich are taxed except for the rich, so no one knows it is a completely different system.<br />
<br />
Loved these articles from Reason <a href="http://reason.com/archives/2011/07/29/the-facts-about-spending-cuts">spending-cuts, taxes and revenue</a><br />
Page 2, <a href="http://reason.com/archives/2011/05/27/the-facts-about-taxes-and-spen/1">taxes and spending</a><br />
<a href="http://reason.com/blog/2011/02/28/total-tax-burdens-rising-on-th">Percent of taxes by income share</a>Restitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-87473236947735768452011-08-02T23:59:00.001-04:002011-08-02T23:59:04.801-04:00A debt analogyRestitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-35059924449580463482011-07-26T09:14:00.000-04:002011-07-26T09:14:48.822-04:00The gap between wealthy and everyone elseHere's a thought: <br />
<br />
Find out how the rich guy made the money. And do the same. Study the wealthy for how they got there, not because they have things you don't. We don't get anywhere by blaming the wealthy for what we don't have.<br />
<br />
Honestly, I am not disparaging those who have less than the average bear. And I'm not saying that no one needs a helping hand - for all those people who are out of a job and lost their wealth when the value of their house was cut in half - you really are at a disadvantage. A family can probably lose their equity, a job or their health, but losing more than one is darned difficult to get through and the older you are, the more difficult to overcome. Still, it is not the wealthy person's job to take care of you. There is a difference between a charitable obligation and government confiscation.<br />
<br />
I'm just saying that what made America in the past were people who said "I want that and I'm going to find out how to get it," and not "I deserve that and I'm going to find out how to take it."<br />
<br />
It used to be that wealth was accumulated through wages, savings, home equity and retirement investments. Not great wealth but comfortable wealth. No more. I don't have the answers, I just can plainly see that what worked in the past is not part of the paradigm we live in now. Restitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-13313168684086373732011-07-24T23:44:00.000-04:002011-07-24T23:44:36.485-04:00The other half...I was going to post something about this class warfare demagoguery, but then I received this. Which gets to the point so well.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjJbCbzcgKTBGaH0RpQOKInOdv5WZEJcb2norYnC1dlHOfz_85_04uLIYaT5kvJAi26i4e-CVK0BhN8YDufM5WeRRnsCP-A9luo-CMhDZnCzFBKUP9T3iMfIX2yoqhAzOB61fKL9DeOmt1o/s1600/which+half.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="302" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjJbCbzcgKTBGaH0RpQOKInOdv5WZEJcb2norYnC1dlHOfz_85_04uLIYaT5kvJAi26i4e-CVK0BhN8YDufM5WeRRnsCP-A9luo-CMhDZnCzFBKUP9T3iMfIX2yoqhAzOB61fKL9DeOmt1o/s400/which+half.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>Restitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-52549346664867597912011-07-13T19:36:00.000-04:002011-07-13T19:36:41.218-04:00First, we can't go back to those happy days1. Things change. Adaptation is necessary. Pretending that doing the same things will produce the same results doesn't change reality. It wastes time and that limits the options. The population is getting older and sicker and is unemployed for longer. The first two facts are obvious and aren't changing. The last one may change, but not any time soon. Not unless/until we start producing things in this country and stop sending more money overseas than we bring in. <br />
2. It doesn't matter how high we increase taxes. If we take all the money from people making more than $250,000 per year, it still won't be enough. So the middle/working class is going to pay too, directly and indirectly. The idea that we can close loopholes for corporate jets to pay for college scholarships is ludicrous. <br />
3. It doesn't matter how much we cut discretionary spending. Not far short of simply closing the federal government (meaning the good and the bad - cancer research, national parks, border patrol, too), cutting the budget still won't be enough.<br />
4. If we do nothing, medicare will run out of money and <i>everyone </i>loses benefits. The longer we wait to fix it, the more people will be affected. We can preserve benefits as they are for people 55 and older including those who are already getting benefits - if we act now. If we wait for a new congress, it will be people 60 and over. So whether you are over 55 or under, you have no incentive to put this off. The status quo is not an option.<br />
5. If we do nothing, social security payouts will exceed its income - and benefits will be reduced for everyone. The extra money doesn't come out of the general fund that pays for everything else. While the program is required to be self-sustaining, the benefits that are owed in the future are still obligations that the federal government owns. Increasing income taxes and closing loopholes has no impact on this - it is just changing the subject. Changing payroll SS taxes and retirement ages are required. (There is an issue in that the government has to borrow money to pay back the iou's to the SS program, but no one is proposing not paying them back. One does want to keep the interest as low as possible.)<br />
6. Arguing over things like tax breaks for corporate jets take up more oxygen than the loopholes are worth. $300 million is a joke when we are talking about $trillions we don't have. But singling them out is just mean-spirited. Middle class workers are building those jets after all. Without buyers... does the government take over that industry, too? There are consequences. Take gas/oil taxes. Tax increases result in price increases so the tax ends up being paid by the middle class anyway.<br />
7. The biggest budget killer is interest and the more we borrow, the more of the available budget pie gets eaten by interest. The most important thing is to quit borrowing. The second most important thing is to keep interest rates down. Making investors worried is counter-productive.<br />
8. Reducing the amount the federal budget <i>increases </i>from one year to the next is not a cut, sorry. Borrowing doesn't go down until spending goes down. Don't be fooled by those smoke and mirrors.<br />
9. Taxes are going to increase anyway. The Bush tax cuts expire in 2013 and the 2% cut in payroll taxes expire in 2012. In this environment, there is no way either of those are going to be removed by this congress.<br />
10. It doesn't matter what actually happens on August 3, perception rules. The markets are driven by what the marketeers think will happen. The damage will be done 7-10 days before that. And those damages are not "undone" by taking action on the borrowing ceiling on August 1. The real damage will be the increase in interest rates for everyone - take credit cards for example. When businesses are paying more in interest, then the price of goods goes up as well. <br />
<br />
All this has impact in various ways on jobs - sometimes in unexpected ways.<br />
<br />
There is a smidgen of good news. If you move your 401K to treasuries, those bonds are going to be paying out more interest. If you can take a lump sum and retire to South Vietnam before the Treasury has to pay out, you might just make out. If you can survive inflation until then.Restitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-22844252339270165552011-06-23T17:00:00.000-04:002011-06-23T17:00:12.460-04:00medicare: Is doing nothing an option?So, according to the 2011 Social Security and Medicare Trustees annual report, medicare is projected to pay out more than it collects in every future year (including 2011 and since 2008). But there is a reserve (read IOUs) in the fund cover the difference. The reserve is projected to be exhausted in 2024 (despite that currently, the reserves are being used up at better than 10% each year, which means more like 2019). Where does the money come from to pay out on those IOUs? The general fund, meaning the bank account that pays for everything from corn subsidies to military pay. Currently, the general fund pays about 45% of all medicare expenditures, which triggers a warning, which the President is required by law to address within 15 days.<br />
<br />
That's all the background. When the reserve runs out, the program must reduce expenditures, meaning that the benefits will be cut. And if you look at how much it can't pay for out of revenue now, we are talking about a cut of around 50%.<br />
<br />
Therefore, doing nothing will result in serious reductions in medicare benefits for everyone. As more people become eligible and also claim benefits, the benefits will be reduced even more. So much for keeping the promise. Look at it this way: The government has $100. It has to pass out the benefits equally to everyone who shows up. If 10 people show up, they get 10%. If 100 people show up they each get 1%. Regardless how many people are eligible for the benefits, once the reserves run out, the program can only pay out as much as it brings in. And that is only about 50% of what it pays out now.<br />
<br />
Here are the options:<br />
Do nothing, which will cut benefits by 50% for everyone including people in the program and even more for people entering the program in the future.<br />
<br />
Change the program so that current beneficiaries can continue to rely on the program - because they do not have any alternatives. They don't, there just isn't medical insurance for retired people over 60. But the more benefits you give people now, the less you have available later. Who is in a better position to adjust their retirement plans around these realities, people retired now or people retiring in 10 years?<br />
<br />
Stop the program. I don't think you can cancel it for people who are already using it. And even if you cancel it for future beneficiaries, you still need to tax them in order to cover the current costs.<br />
<br />
Take the revenue and give it to beneficiaries so they can get their own program (insurance, HMO, PPO) hopefully from an exchange of some sort. People will have to pay the difference, but they are going to have to pay the difference in costs anyway. At least if they have to budget for premiums, that is more predictable. You would know that you have to budget $500 a month for your medical care, instead of guessing where between $10 and $1 million you will have to pay any given month.<br />
<br />
Some combination.<br />
<br />
The law says the President must propose something besides do nothing and congress must act on that recommendation with some haste.<br />
<br />
Here is the <a href="http://www.socialsecurity.gov/oact/trsum/index.html">trustee's report</a>. Read it and weep.<br />
<br />
Sure people have been paying into this program all their working lives. You paid for a benefit that isn't going to be there. Sorry about that. Sure, it isn't their fault at least individually. If blissful ignorance is a valid excuse, neither is anyone at fault for Bernie Maddolf. But as a nation, we are responsible for our debts and this just happens to be a really really big one. We could have addressed the issue years ago. No, the (un)affordable health care act doesn't offer any help or relief. All it does is take $500 billion out of the program every year and give it to other people for their healthcare. And then they call it a savings. Yeah, right.<br />
<br />
All I can say is cowboy up and deal with it. Whining about how much we paid, and how awful it is to get screwed is just wasting oxygen.Restitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-21069538653021086912011-05-06T16:54:00.001-04:002011-05-06T16:58:54.733-04:00Gross domestic Product or gross domestic Spending?There a few other interesting items this week and I hope I can get this all captured.<br />
First, this is an interesting analysis of our economy over the last 13 years. As the author points out, we tend to think that the nineties were good and then 2001 and then we got good again, then 2008. Starting with the premise that GPD is actually a measure of spending more than making, and pointing out that real GDP growth has been at a lame 2.2% since 1998, whereas public and private debt has risen by over 3 times that rate. Meaning that the illusionary GDP growth above 2.2 percent is just us spending borrowed money. And Rob Arnott of Research Associates of California states: "GDP that stems from new debt — mainly deficit spending — is phony: it is debt-financed consumption, not prosperity," Take the debt part out and our prosperity is nearly unchanged from 1998.<br />
GDP is our estimator of wealth. In other words, we produce more, we exchange more, therefore we make more and we increase our assets. This faux wealth was spent, not invested. Had we successfully invested it, there would be better returns than 2.2%<br />
This like is borrowing the assets in your retirement account and then expecting the money to be in there later when you retire. Not! If you have $100,000 in your 401K but you borrow $350,000 and go buy stuff, your 401K isn't worth more because of that big IOU to yourself. The money in your pocket isn't earning anything. Spending it isn't earning anything, either. Instead, when you square up accounts, you are in the hole, massively. The $350,000 you borrowed wasn't working for you and neither was any return on that investment likewise increasing your wealth. And the amount your $100,000 earned you isn't going to make the monthly payments, let alone pay it off.<br />
You can't unring the bell and you can't unspend the buck. And if the last 13 years are any indication, we can't grow out of this, either. Instead, we need to turn our attention to how we build real wealth. Not how we transfer it from high income earners to the government, or from Exxon to the government. Because really, after this payment comes due (the space between the blue line and the red line below), there isn't enough to go around anymore. Thoughts on how to do that later.<br />
Ack! forgot the reference: <a href="http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2011/04/20/lost-decade-weve-already-had-one/">CNN</a><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgo4mq7mQCrIAErXo4VEzmCZEm7Fcc9BenqqRQ_eLR7RN2fG-FnIHwmV92AULxB-3g-QD-By4wUmPOjd2R880KN58o0kpbF9t2IIIiEGJi5OJPHPUEK-IT1Dvs-oKjTtrUbjx6_7EGMXxby/s1600/chart_gdp_vs_credit_market_debt_2.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="235" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgo4mq7mQCrIAErXo4VEzmCZEm7Fcc9BenqqRQ_eLR7RN2fG-FnIHwmV92AULxB-3g-QD-By4wUmPOjd2R880KN58o0kpbF9t2IIIiEGJi5OJPHPUEK-IT1Dvs-oKjTtrUbjx6_7EGMXxby/s320/chart_gdp_vs_credit_market_debt_2.gif" width="320" /></a></div>Restitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-302991876400605433.post-22060458329562982742011-04-25T13:49:00.000-04:002011-04-25T13:49:13.548-04:00More news to brighten AprilI love spring. It's a season of renewal, awakening (allergies). But this spring is feeling more and more ominous. I expect thunderstorms in spring. I wish I wasn't expecting the coming economic storm.<br />
So, here's part 1: The IMF has declared that the "Age of America" will end in approximately 2016, when the economy of China surpasses us.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiikgymfBrwKC4ZTM3Wg-PNT1oN8ba2fXHqoNOa0OxS_mjrhkiYPFROL3s4GlZDe3KYqJjOV_NNQZTX5efXlTNTPveabcMm6Y_TT7q3GKtvgOXb4gsqH7XLaMiMV8YPey4l187kRIXx_dvX/s1600/age+of+China.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiikgymfBrwKC4ZTM3Wg-PNT1oN8ba2fXHqoNOa0OxS_mjrhkiYPFROL3s4GlZDe3KYqJjOV_NNQZTX5efXlTNTPveabcMm6Y_TT7q3GKtvgOXb4gsqH7XLaMiMV8YPey4l187kRIXx_dvX/s320/age+of+China.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />
This assessment is based on "purchasing power parities," not exchange rates (which as we can see, are gross indicators affected by numerous factors, speculation not being the least). This actually compares what people can earn and spend. China has a prospering middle class, while the US has a dwindling one - and not because our population is getting richer. The age of Chinese hegemony will be quite different. One reason not cited in the source article is this contrast. Our national wealth is tied up in raw resources (property and the rights to exploit them), multinational corporations (GE) and a few very wealthy individuals who have "capitalized" on the world market changes of the last 40 years or so. Chinese wealth is in their manufacturing capabilities, equity markets to an extent and mostly in their sovereign funds. Meaning China itself can pretty much buy whatever it wants to accomplish whatever purposes it wants. And it has the capacity to make and sell things the world needs to maintain this path.<br />
Source: <a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/story/imf-bombshell-age-of-america-about-to-end-2011-04-25?link=MW_home_latest_news">Marketwatch</a><br />
The second item of bad news is that China looks like it will be "diversifying" about $2 trillion in sovereign wealth it currently has wrapped up in US treasuries. That is a whopping 2/3 of their dollar reserves which they propose to use to invest in their own industries and markets, strategic resources (to feed those), and (other) foreign investments. Well, duh, why would they want to keep holding those $turkeys? It's not like they are earning much interest.<br />
Source: <a href="http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/china/2011-04/23/c_13842843.htm">Xinhuanet</a> but this news has been on any number of sources during 2011.<br />
No, it probably won't happen next month or even be completed this year. But if China decides to just quit adding dollars to the reserve (+$197 billion in Q1 2011), we will need to find other buyers and that means we will need to pay more interest. And there you have the wicked combination of rising interest and rising inflation (leading to rising interest and more inflation). <br />
Which brings me back to the weak dollar. According to this <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/42703813">article on CNBC</a>. "If things were to somehow go into freefall (see below) or there were disorderly markets (see above), or if it is associated with a rise in interest rates (necessitated by above), there could be some concerns there," said Josh Feinman, chief global economist at Deutsche Bank Advisors. "But that's not happening at all. Rates in the US are still very, very low. At the margin, (a weak dollar) is a slight easing in financial conditions." Meanwhile, "Panic dollar selling is setting in," according to Dennis Gartman, a hedge fund manager and author of "The Gartman Letter."<br />
How low can it go? Well if a 2/3 divestiture of dollar reserves by China and no market for US debt because of the free-falling dollar, and the kinds of inflation and interest we have not seen in decades is not cause for concern, I don't know what is. With just exactly what are we going to grow this economy back into some sort of stability, let alone hegemony? Selling off our assets is about all we have left.Restitcheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17569919882244415334noreply@blogger.com0