Perhaps equally notably is a few paragraphs below that when FDR says and I quote “Finally, in our progress toward a resumption of work we require two safeguards against a return of the evils of the old order; there must be a strict supervision of all banking and credits and investments; there must be an end to speculation with other people’s money, and there must be provision for an adequate but sound currency.”.

Huh? Strict regulations of all banking and credits and investments?  That was 1933.  67 YEARS AGO!!! Talking about the EXACT SAME THING!!!!  Wtf?  Have we learned nothing or what we have tried to do since then didn’t or hasn’t worked in the long run??

It makes me wonder how much we actually know about our own history or even how we can begin to understand the cohesinvess functioning of the Government.  I don’t know about you, but I haven’t gotten a clue?  Math and Science were promoted as ‘important’.  Perhaps there is a valid need for the recommended appreciation of a working timeline of US historical events in laymans terms.  Kind of like a brief summary of Amerrican history in pictures from conception to now.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

For most people, most individuals, we were sold on the illusion or the rather the goal that was the American Dream. A house, a dog, 2.5 kids, gainfully employed until 60 or so and being happily married, ready and stable enough to enjoy reitrement and the golden odlies lifestyle.

However as a country as a whole, what direction are we headed in?

Amazingly, we are still trying to track down and kill terrorists who attacked us 8 years ago. We are now trying to help a country rebuild whom we attacked for no valid reason. We are at the highst unemployment rate since the early 80’s. The stock market has lost 60% of it’s value almost within a year. We are now officially in a recession and politicians are convinved freeing up ‘credit’ is the solution. People just need to keep buying, banks need to keep on lending and the country will recover.

But to what ends? What’s the point? ANd what are our goals not only as a country, but as individuals.

What happened if most Americans realized that buying things and amusing ourselves until we died was NOT ultimately working all that well. Just keep watching TV, in fact buy a bigger larger more colorful TV with more features. That’s the answer to Americas main problem. People aren’t buying enough stuff. I don’t know about you but my house is overflowing with stuff.

Why? Again, what’s the point? And guess what? Now we’re living longer thanks to medical science. Oh goodie….we ccan now live longer to buy more stuff. My question is… what for?

Unless you truly have something to live for, a passion, a goal, or an outcome you really want, how hard as Americans are we going to work for it?? We’ve outsourced a large part of our workforce to 3rd world countries. And now we are wondering why 1 out of every 12 americans don’t have a job??

So let’s look at some of the goals the US has and you’ll notice some conflicts in beliefs as well.

For example, the US wants to make the world a safer place. But there are people who have different religous beliefs who are making even that a difficult thing. And the conflict is that who are we to dictate our beliefs and our lifestyle, which doesn’t even seem to be working right now, on a whole other coutry or race of people?

Ok, well, there’s global warming and we are making a sincere effort to go “GREEN”. I don’t see that. IN my city, land is being developed faster than you can say “oxygen debt”. The problem is that it’s supposdedly irreversible and that it’s already too late for this planet. And that it would take us 100 years to begin reversing the direction. Not to mention a friend of mine who talked to some folks at NASA and said that ALL THE PLANETS ARE HEATING UP in this solar system. So who really knows?

What about the collapse of the automotive industry? I look, outside and see everyone on my street has at least one car, if not 3 or more. And that cars can last 10 years or so. How many cars do you really need these days? And what if American Dr. Demming never taught the Japansese how to measure and improve quality…or better yet, what if we as Americans had listened to him.

In the 60’s we had the space program and the race to be first in space / on the moon. That was a goal the country had. But to what ends? The nearest inhabitable planet is generations away if it’s even out there.

So if we as Americans are at the highest unemployment rate since 1982 or so, what’s the one thing that happened in 1982 that MIGHT have made a difference, not only with this country but the world economy as a whole?

The advent and release of the PERSONAL COMPUTER. How much has that one invention carried, stimulated and saturated our economy? If you really look back in the last 25 - 30 years, what invention has revolutioned the world as much as the PC did in the eighties and nineties?? I can’t think of any.

So realistically, what are the goals of companies these days? What iconic inventions are surfacing these days? What’s the one thing that we don’t have that would be life changing to the degree that the personal computer has been? The cell phone? Nope that hasn’t even begun to influece American companies as a whole when compared to dominating the world and making a ton of money the way the PC did.

I am sure Google was thankful for the advent of the PC…email…video gamges…business production/spreadsheets…..YouTube, etc.

So I end this ramble with the same question….what monumental direction besides trying to get out of debt is this country headed towards.

Getting out of debt is NOT GOOD ENOUGH!!!! We need loftier goals. We need something that motivates, that challenges the American people and the American workforce. Something the government and the American people can become more united and can benefit from and put forth their best foot forward to support and make happen.

How about some different questions to start thinking in new directions?

What would be good for the earth?
What would help make peoples life better?
What would be good for humanity?
How can we connect with each other at a deeper level?
How can a sustainable company with zero footprint… or even one that contributes to the health of our planet and to our society?

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

I wasn’t for the bill for wall st. to begin with. And now, it’s just gotten ridiculous.

However, let’s consider just how much 18 BILLION dollars actually is…

The averrage salary in the US for the entire 2008 year was ~$44,000. In 2002, it was only $36k.

So let’s put 18.2 BILLION in BONUSES in persepctive here.

$18,200,000,000 / $44,000 = 413, 636 people’s annual salary. What they work for in a year!

So that amount of money would pay 413,636 people an entire years worth of the US average salary. That’s the size of a medium sized city. I mean just how many people are there on Wall St receiving bonuses??

Ok, so now mow many President’s of the US could we pay with that money?

45,500 people could receive Presidential lke salaries at $400,000 per person…

And of course Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani defended corporate bonuses saying it would hurt job employment in New York City. Well, let’s put this into some perspective using simple math…

The 8.2 Million people in New York City would mean about 1 out every 20 New York City folk could receive the average US yearly salary of $44,000 just as a BONUS??

OR every person in New York city, all 8.2 MILLION of them could receive $2200 in bonus cash paid in part by you and me.

$18 Billion in BONUSES is criminal, especially if tax payers are flipping the bill. And to support greed on Wall St is truly unacceptable. Particularly in times of a desperate economy.

And the real tragic part of this whole fiasco is that I am one of the tax payers and not one of the bonus receivers!!

I certainly wouldn’t mind being one of the 45,000 people to get a Presidential like $400,0000 salary/bonus for all my hard work last year. I mean, hey, where’s the love?

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

The main question is how to fix the ever downward spiral of the US economy. Housing, credit, automotive industires are all a mess. The treasury secretary thinks that getting credit flowing again will jump start the economy.

Personally, I think that’s crazy. Credit or giving credit to companies and individuals who couldn’t afford it in the first place is what got us into this mess. Lenders were giving away credit like it was no big deal.

If the US economy needs credit to repair itself, then the economy is indeed in deep trouble. Does it make any sense to go more in debt to get out of debt? It doesn’t to me. Giving people more credit only hurts people more. People shouldn’t be buying stuff if they don’t have the money. Even Warren Buffett says get rid of your credit cards (and he owns a credit card company).

So thinking that Americans need to rely on credit to get the economy going again is like thinking we need to more into debt to help out the economy. That isn’t financial strength, that’s just a deeper hole. to me.

How generating ways to get out of this crisis without putting us more in debt as a country??

For example, one idea would be to legalize soft drugs in this country and tax the hell out of them. According to the news, people are using these drugs anyway, so we could save all the money we spend on the ‘war on drugs’ which isn’t working and stop throwing these people in jail and start taxing the sales of drugs instead. It would be essentially like taxing tobacco, or alcohol. That would most definitely generate income for the US. Perhaps even pay of the debt in just a few years.

The potential future secretary of state Bill Richardson believes in the legaliazation of certain drugs for numerous reasons. It isn’t a far fetched idea. If people are already using the drugs, we could bring it out in the open and instead of treating these people like criminals, we could generate income from the sale of this drugs, could control the quality, and it would help protect the US National Parks (which are being devistated by marijuana growers and peticides) and help put things into a healthier perspective.

I think we need to generate other idea for economic growth instead of going deeper in debt and relying on credit to get us out of this mess, when it was credit that was the cause of this problem. That just doesn’t make any sense to me. Leveraging our future to help improve the immediate times is not a good strategy.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

It shows me their creativity is limited. And to say the exact same things, using the exact same words, and ignoring the quesiton to attack their opponent is piss poor at best. The format of the debate also sucked. Watching their backs is not helpful during the debate.

Now at this point, I am wondering why we just have 2 candidates. This black and white choice option for Presdiency is archaic and keeps us locked into a lack of specific options. Most people I know like some qualities of both parties. But they are forced to vote for only one and not for someone who matches most if not all of their belief system. This is because folks like the Libertarian Candidate or the Green party aren’t allowed on the national stage. Again, absolutely disgusting.

I believe Americans are smart enough to handle more than 2 options. Republicans and Democrats are not the only 2 options. The more I learn and the more I read, the more I suspect the Libertarians (people who want to follow the Constitution as it was originally drawn out) should be taken more seriously. Libertarian Ron Paul forecasted this economic downfall precisely well more than 2 years ago.

When asked whom I am going to vote for, and I respond Libertarian, then every single person, except my Dad (who has voted Republican his whole life) has told me it was a wasted vote. I don’t think so. I think it’s Option C. Just because option A and B are getting all the media, there are other options. And by supporting people who I think are intelligent and understand our country is going in the wrong direction, if I can show support for them, then it’s not a wasted vote.

And it gives me the option to bitch about whatever guy gets elected. Because just as there are qualities I like about each candidates policies, there are a lot I don’t care for.

LIke I don’t like mandatory health care for anyone. That’s NOT good. Don’t get me started on how bad our health care system is. And I am talking about modern medicine. It’s a joke at best. We have one of the worlds worst health care systems. 3rd world counties outrank us, according to the World Health Organization. Having government run healthcare is dangerous for our freedom of choice.

Laws were intended to PROTECT our FREEDOMS, not take it away. Legislatures have seem to forgotten this. By making more and more laws that remove our freedom is not American. It’s not at the heart of this county’s original purpose. Our Freedom is fundamental to being an American citizen. And by the way, our freedom of choice and having more than 2 options is also very American.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

I don’t think anyone had any doubts about Joe Biden and his performance coming into this debate. They weren’t wondering how well he would debate. He’s only been a senator for 36 years. He knows the issues inside and out. And for someone one heartbeat away from President of the United States, that says something, in my opinion.

When people have doubts about your ability to lead, or even speak intelligently, then that’s a clear signal that that person is not qualified to be President of the United States. You could totally disagree with someones philosophy and still think they could lead the country, but when people wonder if she can even talk for an hour or two intelligently, then that too is a very clear signal.

The Republicans being interviewed now were saying she performed well tonight. Because I believe they really weren’t sure how well she would do. Namely because she hasn’t performed even remotely well with spontaneous uncoached answers in the past. And they know this, the McCain campaign wouldn’t even let her talk to the media, because when she did, it was disasterous.

Obviously, I don’t think she is anywhere near qualified to be President of the country. And I hope it never even becomes close that she will be.

I was surprised they didn’t talk more about the environment. It’s a fundamental difference. For example, Sarah Palin supports the aerial gunning of wolves and bears in Alaska. That means people with guns in helicopters now shoot wolves and bears from the air for SPORT. IN fact she created a reward system for hunters a cash bonus of $150 for each foreleg they brought in from gunned down wolves. Wolves have not killed a human being in the US since 1910 in my research. This is barbaric and let’s you get a better glimpse of Palin.

She wants to drill in the Alaskan Wildlife Refuge. We wouldn’t even get oil from that for 10 years and the amount of oil from the Refuge is minimal in comparison to our needs. It is not an answer to our energy ‘crisis’. In the 10 years it would take to get oil from that Refuge, we could have developed usable solar and wind technology. We need to make a decision. Either our wildlife refuges are refuges or they are not. THe Bush administration has done more harm to our national environment than any other President in the history of the US.

But that just shows the environment isn’t that important to the candidates. Just drill, baby, drill. WRONG! Solar, Wind, & Clean Coal, Baby.

But with regards to this debate and the election in general, I would simply trust Joe Biden to be President. I do not trust Sarah Palin.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

I bet if you asked people who Henry Paulson was before 2 weeks ago, you’d have gotten an answer of “I don’t have a clue?”. But now, they probably at least know he has something to do with this bailout and maybe even many Americans might be able to tell you that he’s the Secretary of the Treasury who wanted $700 Billion with essentially no questions asked. Not bad for the former CEO of Goldman Sachs. Many people on Wall Street are saying how smart Paulson is and how lucky we should be to have him as our Secretary of the Treasury. Really? But wasn’t it Paulson who just months ago said the economy was very strong. And now if we don’t give him money that the economy will sink into a deep depression? Hmmmm…..

So I think the good thing is that Americans are taking more of a personal interest in our economy. And that’s the critical part here. It’s OUR economy. It’s the taxpayers. The average citizen. Who perhaps before today might not have had much of an interest in our government or our economy. But when we start seeing a decline in our portfolios or watch oil companies earn all time record profits and see gas top $4 per gallon then we start taking more of a personal interest.

SO even though things look all gloom and doom, at least more Americans might be starting to wake up and notice someone needs to take out the trash…

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Will it last? OR will fear win out and a newly revised bill be passed? I hope not. At some point, the market has to self correct itself. We should take our losses now, allow the economy to recede now, liquidate these companies assets (instead of bailing them out and having the government take ownership - which is socialistic) and allow them and the market to self correct now, before things get worse. Allow prices to drop. It might suck for a whle. But I think it would be far better for us in the long run.

I suspect that voting for the bailout is kinda like putting a bandaid on a more serious problem. And that is the fundamental issues with the structure of the US economy. Having a Federal Reserve bailing out companies and now owning companies like Fannie Mae without Congress even having a say is NOT good. So the problem runs extremley deep and that the structure of this economy is not working, clearly. We do have the opportunity to stop this problem now while it’s tiny, versus allowing us to throw money at the problem in a hope to correct it without even looking at what caused the problem originally.

How can you pass a $700 billion dollar bailout plan when we are almost 10 trillion dollars in debt? Does it make any sense to go further in debt to get out of debt?? Put simply, we don’t have the money to pass the bailout. The government’s solution is simply to print more money. To create it out of thin air, so to speak. Printing more money only hurts the US dollar further by weakening it’s value further and ultimately will have an impact on the global economy.

It is simply not natural to have consistent and never ending expansion. To me that’s cancer. The natural flow of things in this universe is expansion AND contraction. For example, I think we have hugely artificially inflated housing prices that the average person simply can not afford. And that the value of those properties is exceedingly top heavy. How can house prices explode and the wages the american citizen maintain the same and that not have an effect on the economy in the long run? And yet we are still building more and more houses.

The bill in it’s initial state would not help the average taxpayer. It would not help people who took out mortgages they could not afford. Apparently, it would help the banks who loaned them the money to loan more people money?? And yet both Presidential candidates said they would vote for it?

Well what about people not having access to credit? Is that such a bad thing? Should we be buying things we can’t afford in th illusion that we will pay them back at crazy interest rates over time? Even Warren Buffet who owns a credit card company says people shouldn’t have credit cards OR they shouldn’t keep a balance on their credit cards. But yet some people have to do that just to survive these days.

The whole thing is a mess. But it is encouraging that the house voted no the first time, will it last? It’ll be interesting to find out…that and the debate coming up Thursday evening should be eye opening.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

If you watched the nonverbals, McCain was clearly ignoring Obama. I am not so sure that’s a ‘Presidential’ quality. McCain wouldn’t even look at Obama during the entire debate. Even afterwards, McCain ignored Obama and made no effort to be congenial. Is this a strength or a weakness. Who knows? Typically if you want to really insult someone, you simply ignore them. But in a debate, ignoring your oppoenent is a bit like a horse with blinders on. Because as communicators, ignoring your opponent means that you are also missing most of the more important nonverbal aspects.

What’s clear to to me, is that although they are much better communicators than our current President, they both still need a lot of work. They don’t know how to craft the enviroment to their benefit. There is a lot a person can do to create anchors, and in this case spatial anchors. There are ways to setup communications nonverbally in the very beginning of the debate with hand gestures and body positioning to create a favorable environment throughout the debate.

So it’s kinda funny watching people who are supposed to be elegant communicators and who have been around the sun a few times, to me they both seem to be amateurs. They were more focused a bit on words and less on nonverbals. The latter of which is most of the total communication. I will say Obama came off as more personable and warm. Saying “John, you’re right” is not a sign of weakness as many Republicans would like people ot beleive. In fact it’s a sign of strength. It’s a way of acknowledging your competitor and being respectful. I want a President who is strong enough to recognize that someone else is right about something.

Having said that, I think Obama should have been stronger in his communication and more forceful at times. I think Obama at this stage is a bit softer during times when he needed to be more firm. And as a leader, that’s critical. His running mate, Joe Biden in a quick interview after the debate hammered home the point that McCain was wrong about the war as a whole. But he did more forcefully and more clearly than did Obama.

So in the end, who won? Each party’s representatives are clearly delusional about who won in post interviews. They seemed to watch a different debate than I did, because I wasn’t so sure there was a clear winner. On the foreign policy issues McCain was more confident. But Bush was ‘confident’ about attacking Iraq. And while he was ‘confident’ he was also 100% dead wrong. So confidence is important but only when combined with good judgement.

The one thing I think the debate did achieve was to allow the American people to get to better know the candidates and what we can expect over the next 4 years. Neither one of them said anything new or ground breaking, but it’s always good to see them live and in person.

Now, after digesting the debate a bit, in my opinion, McCain in this debate came off as an elitist to me, by ignoring Obama nonverbally. Obama came off as a real person who is sincerely trying to help the majority of America, which is not the rich and elite.

The next debate is the Vice Presidential debate. That should be interesting for sure. Looking forward to it. It could be a bit like a lion versus a deer in the headlights, because ultimately we aren’t electing just one person, we are electing two.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

This debate should be pretty good. Am looking forward to it personally.

I wonder if they will switch the agenda a bit and focus on financial situation since both leaders met with Bush at the white house yesterday to discuss the $700 billion dollar bailout. I can’t see them not asking about it.

Read my next post and maybe even watch the nonverbal cues given by the nominees and look for incongruencies in their behavior. It’ll make it more interesting for sure.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites