News Flash. The remarkable governor of California, a man to be reckoned with, married to one of our very own princesses, a man who can ride a motorcycle and shoot a gun and save the punk kid savoir of mankind all at the same time while looking real cool with his shades on has now reached for the stars and modestly asked you and me, us and them, the citizens of the other 49 states, the humans that made him a very wealthy man, to loan our good names and cosign his debt.
TheFundamentals believes in self reliance. Self reliance is simply defined this way – bankruptcy, pal. Embrace it. You will find your salvation at the steps to the federal courthouse. Forget about loans and more debt. As General Powell said so brilliantly and simply, you fool, “You broke it, you own it.”
Here’s another suggestion: (as usual TheFundamentals seeks no remuneration for these ideas that politicians pay handsomely large consulting fees for in their constant quest to seek the best advice) Have a garage sale. TheFundamentals is not sure what you’ve really got out there but put it up for sale on EBay and Craig’s List. See the bridges, sell the canyons, and sell the views. Sell all those crappy mansions hanging onto the edge of a cliff and that park where that lightened up fellow with the barely hanging on nose lives. Sell those welfare rolls. Sell your constitutional amendment process and your gay marriage ideas. Sell your airports and your highways. Sell the movie lots. Sell your silicon valley and Yosemite park. Sell death valley desert; hey the Arabs are big on sand and they gots lots of dough. Sell your emission standards and your public sector union benefit packages. Sell your vineyards and your artichoke farms. Head on down to the federal court and have at it. They love to liquidate. Sell it all. Sell the islands – Catalina and Alcatraz.
Are you feeling lucky? Ah’ll be back. Sell the movie lots. Sell the big tall trees. Sell the marijuana farms and the hippie hangouts.
As the community organizer says, “It’s time for change.” Sell it all. You’ll get some change.
Friday, May 29, 2009
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
American Idolatry
In a very brief period of time, we have become witnesses to an American phenomenon. We are able to see ourselves as other see us. This is not usually granted to mere mortals. The gods have given us TV. Now what do we do?
We witness the phenomenon of one person leading a group of sycophants closer and closer to the edge of the precipice. While the world watches, while the unquestioning and unaware media observe and blather, while those with their own specific and limited agendas impose and influence and direct; the principles, the values and the very purpose and objectives of a wonderful experiment are discarded for the momentary euphoria of hope, change and expanded, continued promiscuity.
In a brief time period, inexperience and relief has captured enough influence to dominate the printed and electronic press in the form of cult like popularity of a personage. Thousands appear for a slightly modified and well told campaign speech; weekly magazines and daily papers that are no longer read by enough subscribers to pay the bills showcase his visage and fill their shrinking pages with words produced by employees desperate for one or two more paychecks; college presidents hoping to grasp a mere fleeting touch of the hem of his garments bestow honorariums and listen to his garbled nonsense while their very principles are discarded in front of them; and citizens who have to pay their bills and teach their children values and principles pretend and hope that some good will come of this even while well knowing that it is not hope they are witnessing but the silliness of the uninformed and unexperienced and unaware.
From far away they come to visit the emperor and praise his new transparent clothing. Others play with the atom as children with toys. Most recently the new but used leader of a desperate state appears with an agenda that can only be imposed by playing an influence card that violates the very principles of the powerful state. And while the visitor feigns attention he also calculates his tactics. The host dances around with unintended transparency and the visitor waits patiently until he has the opportunity to wedge the host into complicity in his plans. He strikes and leaves and smiles. Does the new emperor have a clue?
In the meantime, the lenders plot their alternatives and the children, trusting and expecting the wisdom of their elders, move ever so closer to a day of reckoning. The idols - elected and appointed, don their see through jester costumes, perform and display their shortcomings.
We witness the phenomenon of one person leading a group of sycophants closer and closer to the edge of the precipice. While the world watches, while the unquestioning and unaware media observe and blather, while those with their own specific and limited agendas impose and influence and direct; the principles, the values and the very purpose and objectives of a wonderful experiment are discarded for the momentary euphoria of hope, change and expanded, continued promiscuity.
In a brief time period, inexperience and relief has captured enough influence to dominate the printed and electronic press in the form of cult like popularity of a personage. Thousands appear for a slightly modified and well told campaign speech; weekly magazines and daily papers that are no longer read by enough subscribers to pay the bills showcase his visage and fill their shrinking pages with words produced by employees desperate for one or two more paychecks; college presidents hoping to grasp a mere fleeting touch of the hem of his garments bestow honorariums and listen to his garbled nonsense while their very principles are discarded in front of them; and citizens who have to pay their bills and teach their children values and principles pretend and hope that some good will come of this even while well knowing that it is not hope they are witnessing but the silliness of the uninformed and unexperienced and unaware.
From far away they come to visit the emperor and praise his new transparent clothing. Others play with the atom as children with toys. Most recently the new but used leader of a desperate state appears with an agenda that can only be imposed by playing an influence card that violates the very principles of the powerful state. And while the visitor feigns attention he also calculates his tactics. The host dances around with unintended transparency and the visitor waits patiently until he has the opportunity to wedge the host into complicity in his plans. He strikes and leaves and smiles. Does the new emperor have a clue?
In the meantime, the lenders plot their alternatives and the children, trusting and expecting the wisdom of their elders, move ever so closer to a day of reckoning. The idols - elected and appointed, don their see through jester costumes, perform and display their shortcomings.
Monday, May 25, 2009
In Memoriam
In Flanders Fields
By: Lieutenant Colonel John McCrae, MD (1872-1918)
Canadian Army
In Flanders Fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.
We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.
Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.
Saturday, May 23, 2009
The Soldier
The Soldier: - By Charles M. Province
It is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us freedom of the press.
It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech.
If you can read this message thank a teacher, If you are reading it in English of your own free will THANK A SOLDIER!
It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, who has given us the freedom to demonstrate.
It is the soldier, not the lawyer, who has given us the right to a fair trial.
It is the soldier, who salutes the flag, who serves under the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag,who allows the protester to burn the flag.
To all the brave men and women who have dedicated or given their lives to protecting this country and it's freedoms: Thank you.
It is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us freedom of the press.
It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech.
If you can read this message thank a teacher, If you are reading it in English of your own free will THANK A SOLDIER!
It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, who has given us the freedom to demonstrate.
It is the soldier, not the lawyer, who has given us the right to a fair trial.
It is the soldier, who salutes the flag, who serves under the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag,who allows the protester to burn the flag.
To all the brave men and women who have dedicated or given their lives to protecting this country and it's freedoms: Thank you.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Hippocratic Oath
Here's the original oath, translated into English:
I swear by Apollo, the healer, Asclepius, Hygieia, and Panacea, and I take to witness all the gods, all the goddesses, to keep according to my ability and my judgment, the following Oath and agreement:
To consider dear to me, as my parents, him who taught me this art; to live in common with him and, if necessary, to share my goods with him; To look upon his children as my own brothers, to teach them this art.
I will prescribe regimens for the good of my patients according to my ability and my judgment and never do harm to anyone.
I will not give a lethal drug to anyone if I am asked, nor will I advise such a plan; and similarly I will not give a woman a pessary to cause an abortion.
But I will preserve the purity of my life and my arts.
I will not cut for stone, even for patients in whom the disease is manifest; I will leave this operation to be performed by practitioners, specialists in this art.
In every house where I come I will enter only for the good of my patients, keeping myself far from all intentional ill-doing and all seduction and especially from the pleasures of love with women or with men, be they free or slaves.
All that may come to my knowledge in the exercise of my profession or in daily commerce with men, which ought not to be spread abroad, I will keep secret and will never reveal.
If I keep this oath faithfully, may I enjoy my life and practice my art, respected by all men and in all times; but if I swerve from it or violate it, may the reverse be my lot.
Source: Wikipedia
I swear by Apollo, the healer, Asclepius, Hygieia, and Panacea, and I take to witness all the gods, all the goddesses, to keep according to my ability and my judgment, the following Oath and agreement:
To consider dear to me, as my parents, him who taught me this art; to live in common with him and, if necessary, to share my goods with him; To look upon his children as my own brothers, to teach them this art.
I will prescribe regimens for the good of my patients according to my ability and my judgment and never do harm to anyone.
I will not give a lethal drug to anyone if I am asked, nor will I advise such a plan; and similarly I will not give a woman a pessary to cause an abortion.
But I will preserve the purity of my life and my arts.
I will not cut for stone, even for patients in whom the disease is manifest; I will leave this operation to be performed by practitioners, specialists in this art.
In every house where I come I will enter only for the good of my patients, keeping myself far from all intentional ill-doing and all seduction and especially from the pleasures of love with women or with men, be they free or slaves.
All that may come to my knowledge in the exercise of my profession or in daily commerce with men, which ought not to be spread abroad, I will keep secret and will never reveal.
If I keep this oath faithfully, may I enjoy my life and practice my art, respected by all men and in all times; but if I swerve from it or violate it, may the reverse be my lot.
Source: Wikipedia
Monday, May 18, 2009
Teachable Moment
Some quotes from the University of Notre Dame website re: yesterday’s graduation ceremonies:
‘Obama’s visit, in the face of discord about his position on abortion, placed the University under a barrage of criticism and protest. Both he and University President Rev. John I. Jenkins, C.S.C., addressed the discord as a teachable moment.”
Father Jenkins was interrupted for applause when he noted, “Most of the debate has centered on Notre Dame’s decision to invite and honor the President. Less attention has been focused on the President’s decision to accept,” he said. “President Obama has come to Notre Dame, though he knows well that we are fully supportive of Church teaching on the sanctity of human life, and we oppose his policies on abortion and embryonic stem cell research.”
While his stance on abortion was likely unacceptable to some, he (Obama) said he aims to a dialogue of “fair minded words.”
A more somber “first” went to Judge John Noonan, who stepped in to make Laetare remarks when Mary Ann Glendon, Learned Hand Professor of Law at Harvard University and former U.S. ambassador to the Vatican, declined the 2009 Laetare Medal. “Debate is not now about to close,” on the subject of abortion, he said. “At its center are the claims of conflicting consciences.”
TheFundamentals wonders just when “debate” and “dialogue” became substitutes for principles and values? Do words now speak louder than action? Teachable moment? For whom? What Church teaching was taught in this kumbaya moment? Are fair minded words the culture of convenience’s new stand in for fundamental values? Let’s all come together and have a big group hug. We’ll talk. In the meantime at least half of us are headed where we want to be going. You folks in the minority can come along and we’ll chat. Such a deal!
Just imagine where we would be if the minority in 1776 sought more dialogue and debate.
Each of these good intentions moves the road a bit closer to its certain destination.
The community organizer should have noted these “fair minded words” in this teachable moment:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
‘Obama’s visit, in the face of discord about his position on abortion, placed the University under a barrage of criticism and protest. Both he and University President Rev. John I. Jenkins, C.S.C., addressed the discord as a teachable moment.”
Father Jenkins was interrupted for applause when he noted, “Most of the debate has centered on Notre Dame’s decision to invite and honor the President. Less attention has been focused on the President’s decision to accept,” he said. “President Obama has come to Notre Dame, though he knows well that we are fully supportive of Church teaching on the sanctity of human life, and we oppose his policies on abortion and embryonic stem cell research.”
While his stance on abortion was likely unacceptable to some, he (Obama) said he aims to a dialogue of “fair minded words.”
A more somber “first” went to Judge John Noonan, who stepped in to make Laetare remarks when Mary Ann Glendon, Learned Hand Professor of Law at Harvard University and former U.S. ambassador to the Vatican, declined the 2009 Laetare Medal. “Debate is not now about to close,” on the subject of abortion, he said. “At its center are the claims of conflicting consciences.”
TheFundamentals wonders just when “debate” and “dialogue” became substitutes for principles and values? Do words now speak louder than action? Teachable moment? For whom? What Church teaching was taught in this kumbaya moment? Are fair minded words the culture of convenience’s new stand in for fundamental values? Let’s all come together and have a big group hug. We’ll talk. In the meantime at least half of us are headed where we want to be going. You folks in the minority can come along and we’ll chat. Such a deal!
Just imagine where we would be if the minority in 1776 sought more dialogue and debate.
Each of these good intentions moves the road a bit closer to its certain destination.
The community organizer should have noted these “fair minded words” in this teachable moment:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Saturday, May 16, 2009
Mary Ann Glendon's Letter
April 27, 2009
The Rev. John I. Jenkins, C.S.C
President
University of Notre Dame
Dear Father Jenkins,
When you informed me in December 2008 that I had been selected to receive Notre Dame’s Laetare Medal, I was profoundly moved. I treasure the memory of receiving an honorary degree from Notre Dame in 1996, and I have always felt honored that the commencement speech I gave that year was included in the anthology of Notre Dame’s most memorable commencement speeches. So I immediately began working on an acceptance speech that I hoped would be worthy of the occasion, of the honor of the medal, and of your students and faculty.
Last month, when you called to tell me that the commencement speech was to be given by President Obama, I mentioned to you that I would have to rewrite my speech. Over the ensuing weeks, the task that once seemed so delightful has been complicated by a number of factors.
First, as a longtime consultant to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, I could not help but be dismayed by the news that Notre Dame also planned to award the president an honorary degree. This, as you must know, was in disregard of the U.S. bishops’ express request of 2004 that Catholic institutions “should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles” and that such persons “should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.” That request, which in no way seeks to control or interfere with an institution’s freedom to invite and engage in serious debate with whomever it wishes, seems to me so reasonable that I am at a loss to understand why a Catholic university should disrespect it.
Then I learned that “talking points” issued by Notre Dame in response to widespread criticism of its decision included two statements implying that my acceptance speech would somehow balance the event:
• “President Obama won’t be doing all the talking. Mary Ann Glendon, the former U.S. ambassador to the Vatican, will be speaking as the recipient of the Laetare Medal.”
• “We think having the president come to Notre Dame, see our graduates, meet our leaders, and hear a talk from Mary Ann Glendon is a good thing for the president and for the causes we care about.”
A commencement, however, is supposed to be a joyous day for the graduates and their families. It is not the right place, nor is a brief acceptance speech the right vehicle, for engagement with the very serious problems raised by Notre Dame’s decision—in disregard of the settled position of the U.S. bishops—to honor a prominent and uncompromising opponent of the Church’s position on issues involving fundamental principles of justice.
Finally, with recent news reports that other Catholic schools are similarly choosing to disregard the bishops’ guidelines, I am concerned that Notre Dame’s example could have an unfortunate ripple effect.
It is with great sadness, therefore, that I have concluded that I cannot accept the Laetare Medal or participate in the May 17 graduation ceremony.
In order to avoid the inevitable speculation about the reasons for my decision, I will release this letter to the press, but I do not plan to make any further comment on the matter at this time.
Yours Very Truly,
Mary Ann Glendon
The Rev. John I. Jenkins, C.S.C
President
University of Notre Dame
Dear Father Jenkins,
When you informed me in December 2008 that I had been selected to receive Notre Dame’s Laetare Medal, I was profoundly moved. I treasure the memory of receiving an honorary degree from Notre Dame in 1996, and I have always felt honored that the commencement speech I gave that year was included in the anthology of Notre Dame’s most memorable commencement speeches. So I immediately began working on an acceptance speech that I hoped would be worthy of the occasion, of the honor of the medal, and of your students and faculty.
Last month, when you called to tell me that the commencement speech was to be given by President Obama, I mentioned to you that I would have to rewrite my speech. Over the ensuing weeks, the task that once seemed so delightful has been complicated by a number of factors.
First, as a longtime consultant to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, I could not help but be dismayed by the news that Notre Dame also planned to award the president an honorary degree. This, as you must know, was in disregard of the U.S. bishops’ express request of 2004 that Catholic institutions “should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles” and that such persons “should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.” That request, which in no way seeks to control or interfere with an institution’s freedom to invite and engage in serious debate with whomever it wishes, seems to me so reasonable that I am at a loss to understand why a Catholic university should disrespect it.
Then I learned that “talking points” issued by Notre Dame in response to widespread criticism of its decision included two statements implying that my acceptance speech would somehow balance the event:
• “President Obama won’t be doing all the talking. Mary Ann Glendon, the former U.S. ambassador to the Vatican, will be speaking as the recipient of the Laetare Medal.”
• “We think having the president come to Notre Dame, see our graduates, meet our leaders, and hear a talk from Mary Ann Glendon is a good thing for the president and for the causes we care about.”
A commencement, however, is supposed to be a joyous day for the graduates and their families. It is not the right place, nor is a brief acceptance speech the right vehicle, for engagement with the very serious problems raised by Notre Dame’s decision—in disregard of the settled position of the U.S. bishops—to honor a prominent and uncompromising opponent of the Church’s position on issues involving fundamental principles of justice.
Finally, with recent news reports that other Catholic schools are similarly choosing to disregard the bishops’ guidelines, I am concerned that Notre Dame’s example could have an unfortunate ripple effect.
It is with great sadness, therefore, that I have concluded that I cannot accept the Laetare Medal or participate in the May 17 graduation ceremony.
In order to avoid the inevitable speculation about the reasons for my decision, I will release this letter to the press, but I do not plan to make any further comment on the matter at this time.
Yours Very Truly,
Mary Ann Glendon
Friday, May 15, 2009
A Simple Plan
It seems that one of America’s two major political parties is suffering the worst of all political maladies – they are being ignored. The politicians who run under the banner of this party are worrying because their cell phones are ringing less, they are not being included in those exciting caucuses where legislation they seldom read or understand is being discussed and formed and, most of all, they just aren’t on the A lists for parties and Sunday morning shows. Oh woe be unto them. What to do?
Well, TheFundamentals can help. And we don’t charge those exorbitant fees that political consultants charge. Here’s all you have to do:
1. Look left. There is a number representing the federal government’s debt that can be easily calculated into a per capita number for each voting American. Let’s make it simple because some of these folk are Ivy League school graduates. Let’s say the debt is $12 trillion; that’s $12,000,000,000,000.00. And, let’s say that we figure that 130,000,000 Americans will vote in the 2010 congressional elections. So, each voting American is on the hook for $90,000.00 of the US national debt. Wow! Holy Smokes! Even TheFundamentals didn’t believe it was that bad. Wait’ll you start publicizing that number.
2. So, in 2010 there will be 435 seats in the House of Representatives up for election, maybe one more for DC, and 36 Senate seats. Right now the ratio between the two parties in the House is 257/178. In the Senate the split is 60/40.
3. So here’s the deal. The only way the $90,000.00, and rapidly rising, debt is going to start to decline is one of the two parties is going to have to make a commitment to start paying it off. The one party with the bigger ratio numbers above is committed to making it go higher. They have already said it will at least double in the next ten years. The marker is down. $180,000.00 per voter by 2018. Vote for us and we will make sure that the $180,000.00 is a certainty.
4. Other guys, listen up. Do you think you could possibly put together a campaign on that simple fact? You may want to consider a bit of a different commitment. It involves the voter, particularly those voters who may think $90,000.00 is either just enough or already too much. So here’s the deal to offer those voters. Vote for us and if the results are as follows here is what we will do:
a. Get the ratio back in balance – House 217/218 and Senate 50/50 and we will stop the number from rising from its level at the time the new congress convenes.
b. Get the ratio to 211/224 and 50/50 and we will reduce the number by 1% per year for as long as we have that ratio.
c. Get the ratio to 178/257 and 40/60 and we will reduce the number by 3% per year for as long as we have that ratio.
For those of you who want your phones to start ringing again, this objective is not all that tough. Here’s what tough. You had the ratios in 4b above and you blew it. Can you ever get people to trust you again? Try it. Don’t screw it up this time!
Well, TheFundamentals can help. And we don’t charge those exorbitant fees that political consultants charge. Here’s all you have to do:
1. Look left. There is a number representing the federal government’s debt that can be easily calculated into a per capita number for each voting American. Let’s make it simple because some of these folk are Ivy League school graduates. Let’s say the debt is $12 trillion; that’s $12,000,000,000,000.00. And, let’s say that we figure that 130,000,000 Americans will vote in the 2010 congressional elections. So, each voting American is on the hook for $90,000.00 of the US national debt. Wow! Holy Smokes! Even TheFundamentals didn’t believe it was that bad. Wait’ll you start publicizing that number.
2. So, in 2010 there will be 435 seats in the House of Representatives up for election, maybe one more for DC, and 36 Senate seats. Right now the ratio between the two parties in the House is 257/178. In the Senate the split is 60/40.
3. So here’s the deal. The only way the $90,000.00, and rapidly rising, debt is going to start to decline is one of the two parties is going to have to make a commitment to start paying it off. The one party with the bigger ratio numbers above is committed to making it go higher. They have already said it will at least double in the next ten years. The marker is down. $180,000.00 per voter by 2018. Vote for us and we will make sure that the $180,000.00 is a certainty.
4. Other guys, listen up. Do you think you could possibly put together a campaign on that simple fact? You may want to consider a bit of a different commitment. It involves the voter, particularly those voters who may think $90,000.00 is either just enough or already too much. So here’s the deal to offer those voters. Vote for us and if the results are as follows here is what we will do:
a. Get the ratio back in balance – House 217/218 and Senate 50/50 and we will stop the number from rising from its level at the time the new congress convenes.
b. Get the ratio to 211/224 and 50/50 and we will reduce the number by 1% per year for as long as we have that ratio.
c. Get the ratio to 178/257 and 40/60 and we will reduce the number by 3% per year for as long as we have that ratio.
For those of you who want your phones to start ringing again, this objective is not all that tough. Here’s what tough. You had the ratios in 4b above and you blew it. Can you ever get people to trust you again? Try it. Don’t screw it up this time!
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Primer on Debt
Some years ago a campaign slogan for a candidate was, “It’s the economy, stupid.” The obvious connotation being that only a dolt would miss the major theme on which to campaign and that theme was worsening economic conditions. For years the originators of silly slogans like that one have won the hearts and seats at the tables of the seldom watched cable TV shows featuring talking at you heads. Now they are being replaced by the clever fellows who bemoaned the accumulation of deficits and debt by GWBush but quickly justify the exponentially larger debt buildup by their current leader as being necessary for the times. A really silly justification of this position can be found in a recent essay in the New Yorker magazine written by one of these cleveristas by name of HHertzberger.
So, what’s wrong with debt? Is it safe to say today, “It’s the debt, stupid?” Or is it OK to disregard deficits and debt in the words of RCheney (just think HHertzberger what a bedfellow you have chosen) and pile it up to keep the citizens happy.
We are told that debt did in the Roman empire along with other forms of over-extension. de Tocqueville said in 1830 that debt would do the US in. We know that bankruptcy courts would tell us that debt is the cause of most bankruptcies. We hear tell of people piling up credit card debt and mortgage debt and medical bills and automobile debt and boat debt and so on until they are unable to meet the required periodic payments. So, they “drown in debt.” Not good.
But we also know that with debt we are able to buy a house long before we could buy a house with cash. We know that we can buy an education with debt and earn much more over the years and pay the debt off with the additional earnings.
So, is debt good or bad or what? Ask yourself, "Is fire good or bad?" Not bad when it cooks your steak on the grill. Not good when it burns down your house. Same with debt.
TheFundamentals has long been a student of debt service and cash flow and levels of debt. Debt service is simply the ability to use cash flow to repay debt per contractual terms plus the interest cost of the debt assuming you are not working in the world of Islamic law. (TheFundamentals will address America's apparent gravitation to this latter concept in a later essay.)
So, what makes debt good or bad? Well, if your are the debtor and you intend to repay the debt, the principal criterion of a good debt would be the debtors ability to repay per the contractual terms. If you are the lender that would also be a good definition. Ability to repay per the terms of the debt contract.
Now TheFundamentals has been concerned with the level of debt in the US of A at all levels – local, state and national. Can these debts be repaid per the contractual terms? In a word, NO. They cannot be repaid per the contractual terms unless they can be refinanced - pay off old debt with new debt. Ergo, Ponzi arrives on the scene.
What’s wrong with constantly issuing new debt to pay off old debt? One major problem. The debtor is subject to the whims of the lender. Whims are described as terms of renewed debt or availability of renewed debt. So, the ever borrowing debtor transfers control to the lender.
Well, the debtor could just not repay. Or repay with diluted dollars. Now that's a clever idea. Say the heck with you Mr. Lender. If those possibilities seem likely watch the costs of borrowing rise. Then how do you service the debt? How do you refinance the debt?
You live in a country where the debt you owe cannot be repaid. You have lost control of your future. You will continue to borrow as long as fools continue to lend. Then what?
So, what’s wrong with debt? Is it safe to say today, “It’s the debt, stupid?” Or is it OK to disregard deficits and debt in the words of RCheney (just think HHertzberger what a bedfellow you have chosen) and pile it up to keep the citizens happy.
We are told that debt did in the Roman empire along with other forms of over-extension. de Tocqueville said in 1830 that debt would do the US in. We know that bankruptcy courts would tell us that debt is the cause of most bankruptcies. We hear tell of people piling up credit card debt and mortgage debt and medical bills and automobile debt and boat debt and so on until they are unable to meet the required periodic payments. So, they “drown in debt.” Not good.
But we also know that with debt we are able to buy a house long before we could buy a house with cash. We know that we can buy an education with debt and earn much more over the years and pay the debt off with the additional earnings.
So, is debt good or bad or what? Ask yourself, "Is fire good or bad?" Not bad when it cooks your steak on the grill. Not good when it burns down your house. Same with debt.
TheFundamentals has long been a student of debt service and cash flow and levels of debt. Debt service is simply the ability to use cash flow to repay debt per contractual terms plus the interest cost of the debt assuming you are not working in the world of Islamic law. (TheFundamentals will address America's apparent gravitation to this latter concept in a later essay.)
So, what makes debt good or bad? Well, if your are the debtor and you intend to repay the debt, the principal criterion of a good debt would be the debtors ability to repay per the contractual terms. If you are the lender that would also be a good definition. Ability to repay per the terms of the debt contract.
Now TheFundamentals has been concerned with the level of debt in the US of A at all levels – local, state and national. Can these debts be repaid per the contractual terms? In a word, NO. They cannot be repaid per the contractual terms unless they can be refinanced - pay off old debt with new debt. Ergo, Ponzi arrives on the scene.
What’s wrong with constantly issuing new debt to pay off old debt? One major problem. The debtor is subject to the whims of the lender. Whims are described as terms of renewed debt or availability of renewed debt. So, the ever borrowing debtor transfers control to the lender.
Well, the debtor could just not repay. Or repay with diluted dollars. Now that's a clever idea. Say the heck with you Mr. Lender. If those possibilities seem likely watch the costs of borrowing rise. Then how do you service the debt? How do you refinance the debt?
You live in a country where the debt you owe cannot be repaid. You have lost control of your future. You will continue to borrow as long as fools continue to lend. Then what?
Friday, May 8, 2009
The Big Bet
Let’s say you were a little low on funds. Maybe you lost your job, or if you are a government employee and don’t understand that concept, had a slight cutback in your overtime pay and can’t pay the cable TV bill on time or some other similar hardship has befallen you so that it seems like the really big depression is here. So, let’s say you are considering the alternatives. They might include cutting back on expenses, using up some of your rainy day fund or cutting lawns and delivering newspapers (or writing a blog because that pays real well) until you can get back on your feet. Sound like reasonable alternatives? Sure. But wait. Along comes a fellow with a shiny suit and slicked back hair and a big smile and he says, “No way, Jose. You don’t need to subject yourself to such drastic deprivations. Not in the US of A at least. Here’s what we are going to do.”
And this fellow lays out a very simple plan. He pulls out a credit card with a picture of Uncle Sam on it. The same Uncle whose image was on bond drive posters in WW II. The same Uncle who exclaimed his need for YOU to help out in the past during tough times. And the fellow says take this credit card down to the race track. Use it to make some bets. Just make sure that the horses you choose have names that include or sound like Stimulus, Bailout, Saving Jobs or, even better, Creating Jobs. See if there is a pony or two called Banking System, Investment in the Future or Building for the Future and maybe Looking out for You or Best Times to Come. Other favorites would be Green Jobs, Energy Independence and Corn Pone Fuel. And, he says, “If you are really fortunate, bet on a horse called Reducing Health Care Costs. It’s a sure winner.” He says you can bet up to $11,000.00 on this credit card but then he says, “Do you have a wife? Any Kids?” And you say, “Sure do. I got one of those and two of them.” So, he hands you three more cards and says, “What are you waiting for? You get four cards, each with $11,000.00. Get on down to the track.” Let it roll.
But you are now wondering just what the heck is going on. Where is this money coming from? Who’s going to pay for this? Is this a setup? Are the cops just around the corner? Somebody should blow the whistle on this guy. And you have this skeptical look on your face that suggests that just maybe something a little bit goofy is going on. And the fellow detects this concern because this fellow is rather smart and good with the words. And he says, “Look. I got all these references. I got references from Harvard University and Columbia University and the entire state of California is behind me and one of the biggest corporations in the world is with me so what’s with you questioning me?” Yeah, who am I to question the guy?
Take the cards. Bet on the nags. What’s to lose? Ain’t no horse running named “Too Good to be True.”
And this fellow lays out a very simple plan. He pulls out a credit card with a picture of Uncle Sam on it. The same Uncle whose image was on bond drive posters in WW II. The same Uncle who exclaimed his need for YOU to help out in the past during tough times. And the fellow says take this credit card down to the race track. Use it to make some bets. Just make sure that the horses you choose have names that include or sound like Stimulus, Bailout, Saving Jobs or, even better, Creating Jobs. See if there is a pony or two called Banking System, Investment in the Future or Building for the Future and maybe Looking out for You or Best Times to Come. Other favorites would be Green Jobs, Energy Independence and Corn Pone Fuel. And, he says, “If you are really fortunate, bet on a horse called Reducing Health Care Costs. It’s a sure winner.” He says you can bet up to $11,000.00 on this credit card but then he says, “Do you have a wife? Any Kids?” And you say, “Sure do. I got one of those and two of them.” So, he hands you three more cards and says, “What are you waiting for? You get four cards, each with $11,000.00. Get on down to the track.” Let it roll.
But you are now wondering just what the heck is going on. Where is this money coming from? Who’s going to pay for this? Is this a setup? Are the cops just around the corner? Somebody should blow the whistle on this guy. And you have this skeptical look on your face that suggests that just maybe something a little bit goofy is going on. And the fellow detects this concern because this fellow is rather smart and good with the words. And he says, “Look. I got all these references. I got references from Harvard University and Columbia University and the entire state of California is behind me and one of the biggest corporations in the world is with me so what’s with you questioning me?” Yeah, who am I to question the guy?
Take the cards. Bet on the nags. What’s to lose? Ain’t no horse running named “Too Good to be True.”
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Golf and Men
So, you ask, “What is the appeal of golf to men?” Here is a possible answer.
Most men are competitive. Most men take other men’s measure to see where they stand.
Golf is an excellent medium in which the measurement occurs. Here’s how:
1. Golf requires a degree of skill in both strategy and execution. In 3.5 to 4.0 hours on a golf course a man will be able to measure another man’s ability to make correct decisions about club selection, confidence in same and shot placement/execution. Where else can you see strategy, choice and execution in a matter of moments? In a meeting? On a conference call? Sitting in a lecture? Watching TV? Flirting with women?
2. Golf is played according to a well established, well tested and pretty well understood set of rules. So, when measuring another player, after the determination of strategy and execution, comes the measure of knowing and playing by the rules. Does he know the rules? Does he play by the rules? Does he stretch the rules? Does he cheat? Does he shave strokes or do any one of many little things to help improve his lie; his shot execution; his putt? Does he shave strokes to keep his handicap down and thereby think he looks better to others? Or does he add strokes at unneeded moments to keep his handicap up? And here’s the good part. Everyone knows even though the cheater doesn’t think everyone knows! Messing around on the course is transparent because everyone is watching!
3. Courtesy. Knowing what to do next. Keeping the pace of play going. All of these are unwritten rules of golf. How does a man respect the game through his respect of the others with whom he is playing? Does he stand still, out of the way, keep quiet?
4. Then comes the big one. Competitiveness. You can take the measure of a man’s competitiveness in a short time on a golf course. What does he do when his opponent has hit a good shot? How does he respond? What does he do when he makes a mistake? Do the clubs go sailing through the air? Does he blame the wind? The lie? The grass? The clouds? The sun? The beer cart girl? TheFundamentals once witnessed a male golfer mess up a tee shot and blame the spectacular breasts of the beer cart girl. So there.
5. And maybe, more than anything, golf brings a man face to face with his greatest competitor, his biggest critic, his most constant supporter, himself. Golf mostly works between the ears of the golfer. When it’s cookin’ it’s just plain divine. When it’s sputtering it’s just plain horrible. Golf is life.
Competition, execution, strategy, playing by the rules, temperament, compatibility, friendliness, supportiveness, fair play, sportsmanship and meeting your best friend/worst enemy face to face. Holy cow!
Keep your head down. Slow down. Plant your feet.
Golf. It is one of TheFundamentals.
Most men are competitive. Most men take other men’s measure to see where they stand.
Golf is an excellent medium in which the measurement occurs. Here’s how:
1. Golf requires a degree of skill in both strategy and execution. In 3.5 to 4.0 hours on a golf course a man will be able to measure another man’s ability to make correct decisions about club selection, confidence in same and shot placement/execution. Where else can you see strategy, choice and execution in a matter of moments? In a meeting? On a conference call? Sitting in a lecture? Watching TV? Flirting with women?
2. Golf is played according to a well established, well tested and pretty well understood set of rules. So, when measuring another player, after the determination of strategy and execution, comes the measure of knowing and playing by the rules. Does he know the rules? Does he play by the rules? Does he stretch the rules? Does he cheat? Does he shave strokes or do any one of many little things to help improve his lie; his shot execution; his putt? Does he shave strokes to keep his handicap down and thereby think he looks better to others? Or does he add strokes at unneeded moments to keep his handicap up? And here’s the good part. Everyone knows even though the cheater doesn’t think everyone knows! Messing around on the course is transparent because everyone is watching!
3. Courtesy. Knowing what to do next. Keeping the pace of play going. All of these are unwritten rules of golf. How does a man respect the game through his respect of the others with whom he is playing? Does he stand still, out of the way, keep quiet?
4. Then comes the big one. Competitiveness. You can take the measure of a man’s competitiveness in a short time on a golf course. What does he do when his opponent has hit a good shot? How does he respond? What does he do when he makes a mistake? Do the clubs go sailing through the air? Does he blame the wind? The lie? The grass? The clouds? The sun? The beer cart girl? TheFundamentals once witnessed a male golfer mess up a tee shot and blame the spectacular breasts of the beer cart girl. So there.
5. And maybe, more than anything, golf brings a man face to face with his greatest competitor, his biggest critic, his most constant supporter, himself. Golf mostly works between the ears of the golfer. When it’s cookin’ it’s just plain divine. When it’s sputtering it’s just plain horrible. Golf is life.
Competition, execution, strategy, playing by the rules, temperament, compatibility, friendliness, supportiveness, fair play, sportsmanship and meeting your best friend/worst enemy face to face. Holy cow!
Keep your head down. Slow down. Plant your feet.
Golf. It is one of TheFundamentals.
Friday, May 1, 2009
20 Questions
Some weeks ago, the new US attorney General (seems like a nice young man) opined that Americans weren’t up to discussing at least one “difficult” topic. Well, TheFundamentals is not about to sit idly by and ignore that challenge. So, here are 20 questions (you provide the answers) that never seem to get much discussion in public forums:
1. How long can the US buy more from others than it sells to others? ____yrs. ____mos.
2. What do you do when all the big US urban areas are occupied by majorities of groups of people whose demographics in all major cultural/economic and societal metrics (literacy, employment, illegitimate births, crime and education) are below the national averages?________________________________.
3. What do you do when the people identified in #2 above have the ability to determine, through the democratic process, the taxation and spending policies of the country? ________.
4. What do you do with a religious group, already dominant in the world, when it claims its freedoms in the US even though it will deny those same freedoms to others when it can? ___________. Who will prosecute this group in the US? _______. Who will speak against it in the US?________.
5. Why would anyone seek to address these issues and their unintended consequences when any attempt to even discuss them in the terms of the above language produces derogatory and pejorative representations about the motives of those who seek a discussion?_____________. Mr. Attorney General, why don’t you answer these questions and post your answers?
6. How long can Israel survive? ___yrs. Which of your younger relatives will you encourage to go fight for the state of Israel? _________. Will each member of the House of Representatives and the US Senate answer the same two questions. ___yrs and ____________. On second thought, why bother asking them.
7. When, if ever, do you think investors will be ready to buy more US mortgage backed securities? 20__. How much will foreign bankers buy in 2010? $_____. In 2011? $_____.
8. Have you ever considered earning less and spending less as the easiest way of controlling your taxes? __y or n. Do you think that the government paid folk will ever stop borrowing to pay themselves unless and until there is no one left to loan them another penny?__y or n.
9. How does the US government plan to service the debt of the US when interest rates double? ______. When rates triple?_______.
10. I am going to buy a new car from GM or Chrysler in the next ____ mos? Ford_____mos? Others____mos?
11. Whither goes the states of California, Michigan, New York and Illinois? ______. Would you buy the securities issued by these states or any of their lesser political subdivisions? ___y or n.
12. I support the city of Chicago in selling its assets to pay it workers and its pensioners? ____y or n. I prefer the sale of assets versus more taxation? _____y or n. What do they sell when all the assets are sold?_________.
13. Do you think you can count on the SEC to look out for your investments and make sure that you are forewarned of possible bad investments? _____y or n. When was the last time you remember them warning you away from a bad investment? 198___? 199___? 20___?
14. How long does it make any sense for the US military to engage in overseas missions? _____mos. How long do you really think that the US can afford these forays? ____mos. Name three other countries who have engaged in as many foreign military operations in the last 50 years as the US?_______, ________ and _________. Name one? ______.
15. What grade (A thru F) would you give the Federal Reserve for its assigned tasks of:
a. Maintaining the safety and stability of the banking and financial system? _____
b. Maintaining the strength of the US dollar? ____
c. Maintaining a strong economy to support full employment? _____
16. Would you buy a US treasury security that pays 3.80% for the next 30 years? ____y or n. If not, why not? ___________________________.
17. I’m fine with the debt of the US going to $20 trillion in the next 8 years? ___y or n. I’d prefer if it got there sooner? ___y or n.
18. Do you intend to keep paying taxes so that city and state employees receive job security and pay levels above those available to you? __y or n. Do you intend to continue to pay taxes so that these employees can receive benefits, vacation and overtime pay and pension plans that are substantially more generous than anything you can receive from private employers? ____y or n. I like this system? __y or n.
19. The constitution of the US empowers the federal government in many ways explicit and implicit and restricts the powers available to the individual states? ____y or n.
20. The republicans are responsible for the mess we’re in? ____y or n. The democrats are solving the mess we’re in? ____y or n. Doesn't it seem like we're always in a mess?____y or n.
Extra Credit:
21. HClinton has asked for $900 million to underwrite the cost in Gaza of Israel’s war games. How much of that cost are you personally willing to underwrite? $__.
22. It is OK for the US to bomb locations anywhere in the world and cause innocent civilian deaths and maiming as part of the it’s war games? ___y or n.
23. There should be no liability to any US citizen for the activities in #22 above? ___y or n.
24. Water boarding fat (or skinny) terrorists (see photo at left), however, is a crime? ___y or n.
25. Is HClinton’s flying around the world part of Obama’s plan to IMPROVE America’s image abroad? ___y or n. What designer told HClinton that she looks good in bright greens, yellows and blues? _______. Would not a darker color camouflage some of her nates? ___y or n. Sooee.
1. How long can the US buy more from others than it sells to others? ____yrs. ____mos.
2. What do you do when all the big US urban areas are occupied by majorities of groups of people whose demographics in all major cultural/economic and societal metrics (literacy, employment, illegitimate births, crime and education) are below the national averages?________________________________.
3. What do you do when the people identified in #2 above have the ability to determine, through the democratic process, the taxation and spending policies of the country? ________.
4. What do you do with a religious group, already dominant in the world, when it claims its freedoms in the US even though it will deny those same freedoms to others when it can? ___________. Who will prosecute this group in the US? _______. Who will speak against it in the US?________.
5. Why would anyone seek to address these issues and their unintended consequences when any attempt to even discuss them in the terms of the above language produces derogatory and pejorative representations about the motives of those who seek a discussion?_____________. Mr. Attorney General, why don’t you answer these questions and post your answers?
6. How long can Israel survive? ___yrs. Which of your younger relatives will you encourage to go fight for the state of Israel? _________. Will each member of the House of Representatives and the US Senate answer the same two questions. ___yrs and ____________. On second thought, why bother asking them.
7. When, if ever, do you think investors will be ready to buy more US mortgage backed securities? 20__. How much will foreign bankers buy in 2010? $_____. In 2011? $_____.
8. Have you ever considered earning less and spending less as the easiest way of controlling your taxes? __y or n. Do you think that the government paid folk will ever stop borrowing to pay themselves unless and until there is no one left to loan them another penny?__y or n.
9. How does the US government plan to service the debt of the US when interest rates double? ______. When rates triple?_______.
10. I am going to buy a new car from GM or Chrysler in the next ____ mos? Ford_____mos? Others____mos?
11. Whither goes the states of California, Michigan, New York and Illinois? ______. Would you buy the securities issued by these states or any of their lesser political subdivisions? ___y or n.
12. I support the city of Chicago in selling its assets to pay it workers and its pensioners? ____y or n. I prefer the sale of assets versus more taxation? _____y or n. What do they sell when all the assets are sold?_________.
13. Do you think you can count on the SEC to look out for your investments and make sure that you are forewarned of possible bad investments? _____y or n. When was the last time you remember them warning you away from a bad investment? 198___? 199___? 20___?
14. How long does it make any sense for the US military to engage in overseas missions? _____mos. How long do you really think that the US can afford these forays? ____mos. Name three other countries who have engaged in as many foreign military operations in the last 50 years as the US?_______, ________ and _________. Name one? ______.
15. What grade (A thru F) would you give the Federal Reserve for its assigned tasks of:
a. Maintaining the safety and stability of the banking and financial system? _____
b. Maintaining the strength of the US dollar? ____
c. Maintaining a strong economy to support full employment? _____
16. Would you buy a US treasury security that pays 3.80% for the next 30 years? ____y or n. If not, why not? ___________________________.
17. I’m fine with the debt of the US going to $20 trillion in the next 8 years? ___y or n. I’d prefer if it got there sooner? ___y or n.
18. Do you intend to keep paying taxes so that city and state employees receive job security and pay levels above those available to you? __y or n. Do you intend to continue to pay taxes so that these employees can receive benefits, vacation and overtime pay and pension plans that are substantially more generous than anything you can receive from private employers? ____y or n. I like this system? __y or n.
19. The constitution of the US empowers the federal government in many ways explicit and implicit and restricts the powers available to the individual states? ____y or n.
20. The republicans are responsible for the mess we’re in? ____y or n. The democrats are solving the mess we’re in? ____y or n. Doesn't it seem like we're always in a mess?____y or n.
Extra Credit:
21. HClinton has asked for $900 million to underwrite the cost in Gaza of Israel’s war games. How much of that cost are you personally willing to underwrite? $__.
22. It is OK for the US to bomb locations anywhere in the world and cause innocent civilian deaths and maiming as part of the it’s war games? ___y or n.
23. There should be no liability to any US citizen for the activities in #22 above? ___y or n.
24. Water boarding fat (or skinny) terrorists (see photo at left), however, is a crime? ___y or n.
25. Is HClinton’s flying around the world part of Obama’s plan to IMPROVE America’s image abroad? ___y or n. What designer told HClinton that she looks good in bright greens, yellows and blues? _______. Would not a darker color camouflage some of her nates? ___y or n. Sooee.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)