Humorous Quote

Ban those dirty banks!!

In 1837 America fell into a 'panic'--or a 'depression'. During the years prior to the panic, many states had opened banks for the sole purpose of providing funds to the dominant political party of that state. The management of these banks was stacked, of course, to ensure loans were given to that particular party. And, of course, the banks got 'breaks' because of the political interests of the state gov't--run by the dominant party. These banks operated almost exclusively in states dominated by the Jacksonian party--it was their system.
(The Jacksonians were the early Democrats).

When the Panic of 1837 set in, these banks couldn't hold up and many collapsed. The Jacksonians were so burned by this, that in some states they banned banks altogether. The economy inevitably revived by itself, but the states where banks had been banned--by the Jacksonians--hung in bankruptcy. One of these states was Missouri which resorted to using fur as currency during that time because there was no money.

Let's recap--the Jacksonians spend years setting up state banks for the purpose of supplying themselves with money--these banks then fail in a bad economy because they operated on political whims and not market principles--so the Jacksonians ban ALL banks and this ban further inhibits economic recovery? It's interesting--isn't it?

Are there institutions operating under political whims now? Unions? Freddie Mac? Fannie Mae? Banks? Automobile industry? Whether it's through stacked management or intrusive regulations--it's the same. Are some of these institutions now failing because of the political hands that have been messing with them or running them altogether? Are guilty parties trying to cover up their ineptness (or corruptness) by going after the 'crooks' with show stopping fierceness? Are bailouts about helping the American people or about covering up failed schemes because the sooner they correct it the less we find out?

In light of all that is going on right now with the housing crisis, failing corporations, bail outs, claw backs, salary caps, and 100% taxation on bonuses, this historical account gives me pause. Is history repeating itself? Did someone get burned in their schemes?

Ban those dirty banks!

Ronald Reagan is one of my new favorite people. He was pretty funny---and I hear he was a good president. (I was a teenager back then so I wasn't paying much attention.)

Anyway, here is a good Reagan quote;

"I have wondered at times what the Ten Commandments would have looked like if Moses had run them through Congress."

Want another one? Ok, ok, one more...

"Republicans believe everyday is the Fourth of July, Democrats believe everyday is April 15th."

Boy, oh boy, how loud that truth is going to ring over the next 4 years.

Vocabulary

sagacious - adj. - shrewd and wise

Apparently, neither the legislature or administration is sagacious enough to oversee all the bail out funds.

I always thought 'shrewd' meant 'ruthless' but it doesn't.....

shrewd - adj. - discerning; astute

uh..........

astute - adj. - having a cunning, clever mind; perceptive; insightful

Waiting on the rooftop....

Last year I read Bill O'Reilly's book A Bold Fresh Piece of Humanity. Mostly, it's an autobiography. It's pretty funny--I laughed out loud a lot. He reminds me of Tom Sawyer. One lesson he learned growing up was the value of work and self reliance and to help illustrate it he offered a recap of Hurricane Katrina.

He describes the awful aftermath of Katrina. People were left without resources--food, water, utilities, bathroom facilities--and many were left stranded on overpasses and rooftops for days waiting for help. He agrees that neither the government of New Orleans or Louisiana was prepared--they should have been the FIRST branch of gov't to have an emergency plan in case of a hurricane. He also agrees that the federal government was not prepared for such a catastrophe and was slow in reacting. But most of the victims did not have a personal plan in case of evacuation due to a hurricane.

The mainstream media and of course hollywood (the mainstream media's BFF) claimed it was because of race--'no one cares for the black people'. Through research and interviews with victims, O'Reilly finds out most of the victims were poor and didn't have money for a trip and a hotel. This is where O'Reilly inserts is lesson;

"New Orleans is not about race; it's about class. If your're poor, you're powerless, not only in America but also everywhere on earth. If you don't have enough money to protect yourself from danger, danger is going to find you. And all the political gibberish in the world is not going to change that.
The aftermath of Hurrican Katrina should be taught in every American school. If you don't get educated, if you don't develop a skill and force yourself to work hard, you'll most likely be poor. And sooner or later, you'll be standing on a symbolic rooftop waiting for help.
Chances are that help will not be quick in coming."

I totally agree with his opinion. As harsh as it is--it's true. I've learned this in my own life.

This past winter we saw several big snowstorms--nothing debilitating--but we certainly had alot of snow to shovel. The condo association we are part of pays a company to shovel our snow for us--of course, other people are paying the same company for the same service. I have noticed in the time I've lived here that the bigger the storm, the longer it takes for them to get to our house and clear our walks and driveway. It usually takes 24 full hours for them to get to us. In the meantime, we are trompin' snow all over our house, our cars are snowed in, and overnight the snow freezes and then you can't clear it away very easily at all. So we don't wait around at our house--we dig out our own car then clear our walkway and put ice melt on it. (When the service finally shows up and starts on the other walkways--they scrape off what they can and a then throw sand on it for traction. I hate that sand! It tracks through the house like crazy!!) You should see the difference in how our walkway looks compared to the people who wait for the service--ours is always cleaner and safer! The fact is, we care more about our family, our safety, our convenience, and our walkway than any service does. We do a better job of providing for ourselves because we have an immediate interest in our well being.

My point is this; I don't know who's driveway gets shoveled first when the snow falls but I know it isn't ours. And the longer we wait around for that service the more of an inconvenience it is for us.

Here is another point--we live in a very affluent community. They are probably shoveling the big mansions first--because that's where the money is!!!! The wealthy probably give them tips--and if I was getting tips that's where I'd go first. Money is power and clout because everybody needs and wants it!!!! That's human reality and that will never change! And most people who have money have worked for it--they deserve it.

What's that you say? The government could and should regulate this inequality and make it fair? Why should the amount of money I have dictate how many breaks I get? Well, geez I don't know-maybe as incentive to work hard and earn money?

Can anyone really believe that the government will take a personal interest in me and my little town house and set up regulations to ensure that we all get taken care of at the same time with the same quality? (I've never heard of a program like this ever being proposed, but, I've heard of plenty that operate under the same delusional principle). It's impossible to take care of many people all at once in any quality way--someone will end up last--and the quality will still stink. In airplanes they tell you that in case of emergency, put on your own oxygen mask first and then help your neighbor because you are no help to anyone if you can't breathe. Should we make putting on our oxygen masks part of the stewardess' job description? Remember--you'll be waiting in line (hope it doesn't take as long as that snack cart). We should not rely on the government for any more than we absolutely have to--and that isn't much. This is one reason why our founders included the right to bear arms in the Constitution--they didn't even trust the government to protect us from our enemies all the time!

With all of 'its' good intentions, the government cannot possibly provide for large amounts of people with the same quality that the people could provide themselves individually and "all the political gibberish in the world is not going to change that."

Like O'Reilly said--anyone who isn't willing to work hard and gain skills will sooner or later find themselves sitting on that symbolic rooftop crying for help that isn't coming fast enough.

Humorous Quote

"Me? I'm dishonest--and a dishonest man you can always trust to be dishonest. Honestly, it's the honest ones you want to watch out for."
~Captain Jack Sparrow

A truth....

"Growing up is such barbarous business."

~Captain Hook

Vocabulary

ubiquitous - adj. - omnipresent; seeming to be everywhere at the same time.

My house is a realm of ubiquitous clutter.

Just a thought.....

We cannot cling to ALL of our ideals ALL the time.

We often have to pick and choose.

Alexander Hamilton

Barack Obama compared his new Secretary of the Treasury, Tim Geithner, to Alexander Hamilton yesterday. That's funny, I've never heard that Alexander Hamilton didn't pay his taxes.

ha ha ha

Ok, I read--on what I think was a conservative blog--that Alexander Hamilton was a 'good ole boy' crony--totally in it for the elitest rich. Until recently, the only thing I knew about Alexander Hamilton was that he was a prominent early American and he was shot by Aaron Burr. But here is what I have read in my history book--written by a man contesting liberal historical claims. I quote ;

"Hamilton was so suspicious of government that he thought the only way to keep it from spinning out of control was to tie it to the wealthy......'The only plan that can preserve the currency is one that will make it the immediate interest of the moneyed men to cooperate with the government.' Whether agreeing or not with his solutions, few could doubt that his reports constituted masterful assessments of the nation's economic condition."

The United States was in debt $102 million at the end of the revolution. It was bankrupt. Hamilton's challenge was to address all this debt (individual state debts, bonds, and Washington's IOUs to soldiers), establish credit and finance the nations upcoming expenses.

Hamilton's theory was that " A national debt, if not excessive, is a national blessing." He believed that owing people money bought some security--because debt is a lenders 'investment' in us and it's in their best interest to get a return on it. (So...if the debt does get 'excessive' and our lenders know we can never pay it back--what happens then?)

"Hamilton had no illusions about the dangers inherent in big government. He had rightly understood that over the long term, prices did not lie. Monetary values reflect real value in short order. While the will of the people might swing wildly, depending on emotions, news coverage, propaganda or other factors, markets generally are constrained by reality, and he wanted to let that reality enforce its discipline on American finances. It worked; when Hamilton's plan took effect in 1791, U.S. debt per capita, in real dollars, stood at $197 million, but within 20 years it had plummeted to $49 million." That's three-quarters of the national debt in 20 years--which, according to this author, is pretty good.

It may be worth noting that Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson were bitter political rivals. They had different ideas on things. For instance, Thomas Jefferson wanted no national debt, whatsoever. Each generation had to pay off their own debt and shouldn't accrue more than they could pay off. Ironically, Jefferson accrued one of the largest debts up to date (at the time)in a single transaction when he acquired the Louisiana Purchase. Apparently, even for Thomas Jefferson, debt was sometimes justifiable.

Anyway, it is this authors opinion that like it or not Alexander Hamilton was the right man for the job at the right time and he got this nation off to a good economic start while paying down the nations debt.

Though I do pity him a little, maybe we should wait to see if Tim Geithner's policies can pay off three-quarters of the new multi-trillion dollar debt in 20 years before we compare him to Alexander Hamilton--who as far as we know--paid his taxes.

Here is a good visual for understand how much a trillion is;

http://www.pagetutor.com/trillion/index.html

Vocabulary

Largesse -- n. 1. liberality in giving; 2. money or gifts bestowed

The United States of.....Columbia?

Have you ever wondered why we are named 'America' after the Florentine, Amerigo Vespucci instead of 'Columbia', after Columbus?

Columbus reached the American continent the first time in 1492. He returned to Europe but made 2 more voyages to the New World before 1501 when Amerigo Vespucci, a passenger on a Portuguese voyage, started writing letters to friends back home describing the New World. His letters circulated faster than any of Columbus' personal accounts so people started thinking of the New World as Amerigo's world. So, we are the United States of America.

There is an element of this tale that I find funny. This would happen to me. I don't know why Columbus' accounts didn't circulate well, but if by some miracle I made an amazing discovery I'd have to wait until I got home to email anyone. I'd procrastinate calling, I'd stop at the grocery store on the way home, and the next thing I'd know is my great discovery has been named for some organized wiz with a blackberry!!! ha ha ha! It's true.

Boston..I mean, Cincinnati Tea Party

Here is a news article done by Brett Baier at Fox News Political Grapevine...

Police in Cincinnati say at least 4,000 people showed up Sunday for a grassroots protest of wasteful government spending in general, and President Obama's stimulus package and budget in particular.
It was one of many tea party protests around the country — inspired by the Revolutionary War era Boston Tea Party protesting British taxation. Protesters had signs reading "Give us liberty, not debt" and "Where's my bailout?"
One report states there are more than 150 tea parties scheduled across the nation in the upcoming months. The events so far have been largely ignored by the mainstream media, but several blogs are tracking them.
Noel Sheppard, associate editor for the conservative NewsBusters.org writes on the coverage so far: "Compare that to how these networks practically fell all over themselves to report war protests after the public's opinion changed concerning Iraq in late 2003."

Interesting--the tea party thing and the news coverage thing.

Quote

It's easy for anyone to say that they 'want to help kids learn', [but] it's hard to tell the truth about why they aren't learning.

~Bill O'Reilly

Bill O'Reilly asserts that it is a lack of discipline at school (not only of the children but among administrators as well) and lack of parental guidance at home that prevent children from learning and graduating--not a lack of money.


Read statistics that support his theory here:
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Education/ednotes111.cfm

Vocabulary

INVEIGLE--to lead astray or win over by flattering or deceiving; to obtain through flattery or deceit.

I was inveigled today by my own 10 year old son--I need to get smarter.

Post War Revolutions.......

In the 19 years following the Revolutionary war, Americans arose in revolt 3 times. Each revolt was driven by the same thing---taxes. Hey--isn't that what also set off the Revolutionary war itself? Mm.
I've not done an in-depth study of the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution, but one source I read claimed that it was Marie Antoinette's lavish parties that set off the French population. They were starving and cold, and the King and Queen were having extravagant get togethers. When approached with concerns on behalf of the general population the Queens response was "Let them eat cake!" Well I guess the French people decided they would have cake--they were going to eat the Queen's cake in the palace right after they cut off her head. Chop. Chop. Interestingly, the author claims that by all accounts King Louis and Marie Antionette were nice, amiable people, but, they were accustomed to wealth and oblivious to the plight of the common man.

Don't mess with people's money!! We all accept that we must be taxed, but only take what you need and use it wisely!!

Work, what is it good for?

In the book I'm currently reading, A Patriots History.....the author claims that one of the primary reasons the colony of Jamestown was brought to the brink of failure was the lack of willingness among the people to work. The population of Jamestown was primarily made up of wealthy gentleman who were not accustomed to work and refused to do it because it was beneath them. At one point John Smith implored the London Company (who owned the charter for the colony) to send "30 carpenters, husbandmen, gardeners, fishermen, blacksmiths, masons, and diggers up of trees.... [instead of] a thousand of such as we have." Eventually, Smith imposed martial discipline over the colony and famously proclaimed "he who will not work, will not eat." His efforts succeeded in stabilizing the colony and the rest is history.

Interestingly, several years later this issue of 'work' came up among another group. As we all know, the new freedom in America encouraged a boom of ideas. Religious practices that had not been allowed to flourish in previous societies found outlets in the free air of America. Utopians were free to try out their ideas too. A Utopian is one who believes a society can be created where there is no suffering or hardship. One such group was founded by two men named Robert Dale Owen and Charles Fourier. Their sect, sought to eradicate individualism through education--they valued 'head work' (education) over 'hand work' (physical labor). In fact, they despised physical work(probably because they believed it to be a 'hardship'). Well, needless to say, their sect didn't last very long because no one wanted to work! The group ran out of food and Robert Dale Owens lost millions trying to maintain it.

So, I conclude, based on these two examples (and there are more I'm sure) that in order to fully enjoy the benefits of ideas and opportunity...or just to simply SURVIVE!... one must be willing and able to work.

Vocabulary

I've read many nonfiction books over the last 9 months--ok, only 4--but I have come across many words that I either had never heard before, or that I had heard I just didn't know the meaning of. Sadly, it became such a problem that I started keeping a notebook of all the new words and last week I went through and looked them all up in the dictionary. Honestly, it was very entertaining. There are so many quirky words.

So here's one: BELLICOSE

Has anyone heard or used this word before? If you have you are smarter than me!
Here it is in a sentence....

Andrew Jackson had a bellicose disposition.........and so did I growing up!!!

A Patriots History.......

I love history, and I've always been especially fascinated with American History. Naturally, when I saw this book on the shelf, A Patriots History of the United States with it's bold red, white and blue cover, I was drawn to it. The word 'Patriot' got my attention. I wondered why a 'patriots' history would be any different from regular history? I read the foreword in which the author, Larry Schweikart claims that because liberals dominate our education system it is liberals who decide what goes into the history books our children learn from in school and they are construing history to suit their political agendas. One case in point he mentioned; of the many history books he and his co-author examined, most will have a whole chapter on Bill Clinton's virtues but none on Ronald Reagan, and only a paragraph (average)about Abraham Lincoln. He claims they also seek to minimize honorable virtues in history which means they marginalize 'good' and 'bad' and religion generally.

This was all very juicy and intriguing, so I bought it and have been reading it ever since.
The author Larry Schweikart is a professor of history at the University of Dayton and has written several history books including some on finance/banking history, and national defense. His co-author is a professor of history at a University of Washington in Tacoma.

I love history. I suppose it's true that if we can control what people understand about history, to some extent, we control the future. After all, ' if we do not learn from history, we are bound to repeat it.'

Humorous Quote:

Governments view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases; If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize it.

~Ronald Reagan

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
Actually..... it doesn't seem so funny right now.