It's the Jobs, Stupid

It's a good that the Obama White House controls the media, otherwise, the country might actually hear about how huge of a miscalculation the President has made on "job creation."

According to the Republican Way and Means Committee, at the end of September 2009, the country has lost 2.7M jobs year-to-date. Obama expects 3.4M jobs to be created by year-end. That's a difference of ~6.2M jobs!!!

The stimulus has failed. It failed for the exact reason that non-partisan economists said it would fail; the money stayed in the public economy instead of being spent in the private economy. The public economy (government) creates debt. The private economy creates growth, jobs, industry. Stimulating the public economy wasn't going to create jobs but rather put more burden on the Americans who still have jobs.

Sooner or later the media will have to report this failure and Obama will have to respond. The best thing Washington can do is reduce spending and cut taxes. Of course doing so would be an admission that Regan-era free market economics are far superior to tax-and-spend socialism.

Pay Cuts!!!

Exercising questionable authority, the Obama Administration is ordering (via Treasury) bailout firms to dramatically reduce executive level pay and bonuses.

Couple of thoughts...

1. When you sleep with dogs... These bailout firms should have known better! Hopefully the government will soon get out of private enterprise, but if it doesn't, some of these firms would have been better off failing. Failure would have allowed bankruptcy protection/restructuring and at worst would have left market share in the free market rather than under government control.

2. We can't expect recovery when the best talent can't be compensated. Do you work for free? Neither do I and the best execs expect a paycheck as well. You can disagree with the amount of compensation all day long. If companies can't pay, they can't attract the talent necessary to recover. This is especially important given that most Wall Street firms, and some big banks, still have bad assets on their sheets. Should interest rates rise, or the mark-to-market rules changes, we'll see fall '08 all over again.

3. The market knows the free market can't recover with this level of government intervention and the Dow demonstrates this. As soon as news of the exec comp limits was released the market went from around +50 to close at -92.12 in about 45 minutes!!!

What It Takes

Like most people who believe in the Constitution, freedom, and America, I've been a little down lately. Okay, more than a little down, more like downright pessimistic about where this country will be in five-ten-twenty years from now.

We seem dead-set on spending "other peoples'" money while leadership lies about the costs of social programs, bailouts, and the effects of turning the IRS into a force for social change. The deficit is huge and getting bigger. Unemployment is increasing. Iran is build nuclear weapons. Afghanistan is out of control and Pakistan may fall to "militants" any day.

The worst part of this is thinking about what it would take to get the nation back on track because it's then that I realize it likely won't happen. The real sacrifice (not the Obama brand [i.e. someone else's sacrifice]) it will take to restore the country is immense. The individual strength it will take to hold fast to the Bill of Rights and ideals in the face of Democratic populism (the "me, me, me" entitlement block) is seldom seen in everyday life.

I don't think we have what it takes. I could still be convinced otherwise, but I fear the Republic is doomed.

And then I stumble upon this op-ed (via Rossputin.com) written by Wendy Button a former speechwriter for "John Edwards, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Barack Obama, and Mayor Tom Menino of Boston as well as other national and international leaders..." This is definitely worth a read if you can stomach the "growths in my uterus" bit.

Ms. Button learned something about her failed ideology; it creates consequences. Those individual consequences were unknown to her while she was promoting health care "reform" (i.e. socialism). She drank the collectivist Kool Aid and didn't understand there was a personal price she would pay for creating "social and economic justice." Now that the bill has come due, Ms. Button is singing a different tune--I wonder if her former employers are listening?

This is where I find my silver lining; consequence. When the individual consequences are fully known, individuals tend to make relatively good decisions. Had Americans known Social Security would be broke within 80 years and the Federal government would use the "fund" as a piggy bank for all sorts of budget misappropriations, the New Deal may have never happened in the first place.

Collective consequences are easier to stomach. We can always fix problem x with person y's money. Where y can be the "rich" or future generations of Americans. But it's the individual consequences that sting!

What it may take to get all Americans (including former liberals) to see the danger of socialism is individual consequences. And despite all of Obama's empty promises, the everyday, working class American will be the most impacted by these policies.

If consequences will be the start of a movement to restore this country to its Constitution, then I welcome them.

In the meantime, I'll be at the bar.

DOW 10,000!!!

Recession cancelled!!!

Not quite...

The fundamentals necessary for recovery are still lacking. Unemployment is increasing with no growth in GDP. So what's propping up the DOW?

Fear.

One would think that fear would tank the markets rather than create a ~1,000 point rally, right? It's not fear in the equities market, but rather fear of inflation.


Gold prices are probably the best forward looking predictor of inflation we have. Government data (CPI) won't come out for at least a year after inflation starts hitting while gold prices are driven by the market and reported by the exchanges in real-time.

Look at the same chart as above compared to GLD (a gold ETF tracking just under 1/10 spot price)...

The fact that GLD and the DJIA are correlated during this "rally" shows it's no stock rally at all but rather a flight from USD based securities and reserves into equities. What's worse, than a misreported rally, is that because the fundamentals are lacking, the market is poised for another fear induced sell-off. Investors will think "oh no, not this AGAIN!" at the first sign of bad news and we could quickly enter another sell-off cycle.

Also, consider that the Fed has kept rates between 0% and 0.25% for almost a year now. If we do start to see inflation the Fed may raise rates to kept it in check creating a new wave of bankruptcies as credit is constricted and interest payments increase--this could also crash the DJIA.

[No, I'm not telling anyone to buy gold or GLD! This is not that kind of blog.]

I'm hopeful the economy can recover but we have a long way to go. What's disappointing about the recent upbeat economic news (which I believe is more political than economical) is that we haven't addressed the underlying issues of this recession.

Historically, recessions can be a good time to re-tool, re-educate, and re-direct capital towards new business opportunities and growth. Recessions have a way of purging old business models that have failed and encourage new successful ones to take their place. I don't see any of this happening and all of Washington's promises on job creation (green jobs) have failed.

Olympic Fail

After an impassioned campaign, Team Obama/Oprah failed to deliver the 2016 Olympic Games to Chicago and the games will be hosted in Brazil.

Americans are in shock over this (primarily European) rejection. We thought the world loved us for electing Barack Obama. Were we wrong?

Long before the name Barack Obama was dropped Europe frequently reminded us that we consumed too much. Enjoyed too much individual freedom. We were told we were too wealthy and needed to transfer that wealth to various global government agencies for crisis x or problem y. Americans instead continued living the lifestyles we wanted, continued growing our economy, and used charity (choice rather than tax) to address world needs. This further angered the Europeans and put leadership at great risk; how does one justify sky high taxes in Europe while the Yanks enjoy lower taxes, better lives, and end up doing more good for the world? Impossible!

The world never wanted a competent, strong, moral President to run the United States. They wanted someone who believed as they do and could be manipulated into subjecting the US to the same kind of group-think that has destroyed Europe. They found that in Barack Obama. Yes, they love America for being stupid enough to elect a socialist, but that love isn't going to translate into progress or achievement.

Many conservatives are giddy today, happy with the news that Obama has been shown the door. I believe the 2016 Olympic games would have been good for Chicago and America and losing that opportunity isn't something to be celebrating given our economic situation.

The silver lining is that Americans get to see what European love is really worth. And that should be celebrated!

Recommended Training

If you have some time before self-serving a-hole finds another camera to get in front of, it's all about the pre-season...

So Sorry Joe

I can only hope that the folks pounding Joe Wilson's site are giving him support.

If it's any consolation the founding fathers were a little rowdy themselves. They were probably impolite to their tyrannical government as well. Shame on Wilson for questioning the emperor even after he called more than half the country liars himself!

When the wheels fall off, and they are working that way, the American people will need alternatives to the current leadership. They won't remember the GOP that sat on it's hand, staying silent and obedient. They won't remember the aisle crossers who participated in the incremental destruction of the Republic. They will remember the men and women of courage who stood up.

The Health Care One - Two

Obama's speech last night clarified the one-two punch he and the Dems are planning for our health care system (wreck the private system, force the public system). Lots of noise in the media today about the distractions, but there are a few things that stuck out for me...

1. Obama plans to make exclusion of pre-existing conditions illegal along with lifetime benefit limits. This will exponentially increase the cost of coverage for private payers. Initially, insurance companies will compensate by increasing premiums and deductibles. But at some point, companies and individuals will no longer be able to afford coverage and will be forced into the public option. Or the public option will actually provide superior coverage with the private system heavily regulated and burdened--remember the government runs the public option to compete with the private system and makes the rules that regulate the private system.

2. Every American will be required to have health insurance under force of law. This is remarkable and I was speechless when I heard it. Sure, the idea has been floated around and implemented in Massachusetts, but now the President believes every American has to be licensed just for being?!? If this isn't bold-fact fascism I don't know what is and it certainly isn't American.

3. Illegal immigrants will be excluded from the system but there is no mechanism by which this can happen. Mandatory treatment laws will still be in effect and the nation's ERs and urgent care facilities will be open to whoever needs treatment. This is a huge problem for the status quo and our inability to address will destroy whatever utopian solution Democrats can dream up to guarantee votes.

4. If the plan turns out to add to our deficit, other spending cuts will be required elsewhere in the budget. This is an obvious false promise and I don't even think liberals believe this one.


Overall, I'm pleased with the President's speech. He made commitments and promises that are now on the record.

Although I don't like the idea of having to carry a card with me proving I'm insured, I'll take some solace in the fact that the alternative lifestyle groups (non-workers), who heavily support radical left causes, will be impacted more than I. This aspect of the plan might actually employer-sponsered plans (attached to full-time jobs) more attractive, at first!

I also like that the promised free lunch is getting harder and harder to find in all of this. Many folks thought this would be free. It won't be. It's guaranteed to cost all of us more with less coverage and services.

In ten years there will be a "Health Care Then and Now" analysis and Obama's speech will mark the turning point.

Survey Fail

Not 100% sure on which government run/sponsored entity is ultimately at fault for the following; the Post Office or RTD.

On Thursday of this week I got a survey card from RTD asking me how often I used RTD buses or light rail. The survey offered some from free ride coupons which I may be able to use which was nice of them. I completed the survey and put the card in the mail.

On Saturday, two days later, guess what I found in the mailbox? The same survey card! It had my name and address on one side and RTD's on the other with the "No postage necessary..." postage.

Side 1...

Side 2...

I'm no Post Office expert, but I'm assuming the card was re-delivered to me because my name and address was scanned instead of RTDs. A human obviously wouldn't make this mistake since the postage and the delivery address are on the same side--pretty simple.

I'm also assuming that either side of this card has a 50/50 chance of being read by the Post Office scanner for delivery.

We know the population of Denver, Aurora, and Boulder alone was 2,998,878 in 2007. The RTD service area is actually much larger, but I'm having a hard time finding the stats. We can assume a 10% survey sample rate (conservative as I've done nothing to my knowledge to end up on RTD's list and I was selected).

The postage on a postcard is $0.28, assuming RTD didn't get any kind of discount.

As most folks in the Denver Metro know, RTD is heavily subsidized by taxpayer money and has never been self-sustainable. So how much taxpayer money did RTD just waste?

(2,998,878 * .10) * .28 * .50 = $41,984.29

And if the sample size was 25%?

(2,998,878 * .25) * .28 * .50 = $104,960.73

Not a lot by today's standards, but I find it interesting that even the simple exercise of collecting data from local residents on what is essentially a government service creates waste.

Why is Dining Out Legal?

Last night at Pappadeaux, as I sat eating blackened catfish with a side a fries, I wondered, why is eating out legal?

The fish was swimming in butter and the fries, well, are fries. Now this is a rare treat for me and I am overall very healthy. A meal like this comes along once every other month or so. But the freedom to decide what I was going to eat for dinner resulted in a very bad choice. The government could have made a much better decision for me and I would be healthier for it, not to mention the collective consequences of my decision (medical costs).

Why are Democrats letting people eat out for dinner when they could be at home enjoying tofu and brussel sprouts?

Then there's the environmental impact, "...your diet has a direct impact on the environment." All that fossil fuel used to catch and ship fresh seafood. The environmental impact of building and running that restaurant; criminal!

Thankfully, the catfish I ate last night doesn't yet have the ability to sue me. But it's just a matter of time.

After I was done increasing health care costs, destroying the environment, and participating in murder, I got the bill. I realized, not many people could afford a meal like this even for rare occasions. Not really fair is it? Social and economic justice demands a distribution of fine dinning experiences but sadly there's no government agency to facilitate such a redistribution. Yet. Maybe Obama can appoint a restaurant Czar?

I Forgot One!

About a week ago, I gave Democrats some tips on completing their takeover of America in reference to the "Death Panels" and the American response.

I forgot one, well sort of. I said...

"4. The public/private partnership between the mainstream media and leftists must be formalized. Times are turbulent and your movement cannot afford to have a journalist report the reality of what you are doing. Media must be controlled and the information given to the American people must be consistent with Washington is saying. "


I neglected to mention, specifically, that the internet should be either heavily censored or completely shut down. My bad, sorry Democrats. But it looks like you've covered this one pretty well without my help.

The power of the internet cannot be questioned. Would we even known about the Iranian elections or opposition without it?

Obama owns big media (sans Fox). Now he wants to own the little media (internet). And one has to ask, "why?" The answer frightens me and I'll end on that note.

Construction of a Hate Crime

(<-- Does this look like a conservative to you?)

I was watching the evening news on KMGH 7 last night and one of the featured stories was about the Colorado Democratic Headquarters being vandalized. Channel 7 showed the mug shot of Maurice Schwenkler (the suspect) and then interviewed the state Democratic Chairwoman, Pat Waak, who blamed the vandalism on health care "reform" opponents.

Turns out Schwenkler has a history of working for Democrat affiliated organizations. Oops.

Thank God the Denver Police Department caught this Democrat operative in the act! If not, the Dems would have a bona fide "hate crime" that would be used to silence debate on health care.

Democrats have been trying hard to label socialized health care opponents as Nazis, Brownshirts, hateful, and anything else that will stick. They have even gone so far to say this isn't about health care at all and is merely "white backlash" to a black man in power (i.e. if you oppose socialized health care you are a racist). This requires one to divorce all reason and sanity from the debate but connects well with the entitlement groups demanding free health care. Not to mention that the opposition consists of taxpaying, law-abiding citizens and retirees--not a bunch of hooligans.

The Dems are falling apart and you can't fault them for this strategy, it has worked well for them in the past. Get on the right side of PC group-think and there's nothing you can't sell to the American people. The challenge with health care is that they are trying to sell a known failed policy and ideology, and therefore, have to make it about anything other than the issue. You don't have to affirmatively prove socialized health care will work if you can eliminate the opposition.

The other option is to respond to the opposition with honesty and integrity. Create a dialogue and respect the fact that socialized medicine is at odds with American values and our Constitution. Of course, that would be out of character for modern Democrats.

Lake Naming Fail

Bing

Probably not a good thing for Bing that I use Google to get to the site. What can I say, I've gotten lazy over the years and always type URLs into my Google toolbar to validate.

I haven't noticed much difference in web search results between Microsoft's new search engine and Google. I do like some of the features Bing has over Google. Image search with a filmstrip like control on the left is cool.

But my favorite is the travel search with Fare Advisor. This kind of comprehensive/multi-site travel search was available previously, first with SideStep, but having the fare history data is priceless. I'm assuming Microsoft can do this because they have either a different agreement with travel sites or no agreement at all.

I've never been a stingy traveler but it's nice to know what kind of deal you're getting. If you can shave a little off of airfare on an international trip, you can splurge more on meals or stay in nicer hotel. If you're looking for quick weekender and are flexible, you can often save a lot by booking during low demand.

I'm not sure what kind of future Bing will have. I'm not uninstalling my Google toolbar anytime soon but I do find myself on the new MS site a lot more than I did with the old Live Search.

Netflix Working Saturdays?

I've had Netflix for about five years now and aside from a short period of obvious throttling (circa 2004-2005) I've been very happy. For $17/month I get all the movies I have time to see, which makes Netflix a great value. Now that they have Blu-ray even more so, although the subscription is a little more (very worth it).

Occasionally I send a movie back on the weekdays and I've noticed that lately they are being processed on Saturday and sometimes I even get a movie in the mail on a Saturday (Monday delivery). Prior to July this wasn't the case, I would wait until Monday to get a movie checked in if I mailed it on a Friday.

Why Netflix hasn't publicised the increase in service this is beyond me.