The Feeble FED of Fate

The Federal Reserve is now the topic of discussion upon the Stoa this afternoon.

I get the impression that many folks around the country and the world sort of gave a feeble, mixed, "yea" when Bernanke said that interest rates will be kept near zero and that he remained mum on QE3.

Businesses yawned, since they don't have a liquidity problem. The bond markets dropped, gold rose, the housing market fell, and the Fed really does not know what to do with itself. The stock market rallied, but only because they are interested in short term profits. Money getting injected into the economy will pass through the stock market via more than one route. They will get a slice. Of course they are happy. This does not mean that their happiness is good for the country, though.

People saved more than they spent the last six months, which is good for the country, but then everyone really cheered when people spent more money in July then the last July. People were spending again, the Fed trumpeted. People saved less, put more on credit, and consumed more.

Let's think back to what got us into this mess. Cheap credit, check. Easy lending, check. Out of control consumer spending, check. Debt ratios not sustainable by raises in income, check.

So now lets see what the Fed is really up to. Keeping lending rates near zero, check. Printing huge amounts of money to bail out banks who get in over their heads, check. Encouraging people to spend, check. Discouraging savings, check.

What is the deal here folks. Between Barney Frank and Dodd ginning up Freddie and Fannie, the Fed with their irresponsible printing, one might get the idea that they are simply trying to re-inflate a bubble that popped and splattered all over the world. Why re-inflate it? You think prices will not get unsustainable again?

The American people as a whole know that they can no longer just spend and borrow and hope the job will come through with a raise or bonus this year. They are saving up to buy the next purchase. They are fixing their homes and their cars rather than sell them and buy a new one. They are eating out less and spending less because they don't know what next week will bring.

Businesses are mostly wise to what is going on as well as they are hoarding cash and not hiring. Banks are failing as much because of the cost of compliance with the new regulations anymore as they are due to old fashioned failure.

The people know what is going on. The businesses know what is going on. The Feds and the government seem to no know what is going on. They create the mess and then feel that they are the only ones who can fix the mess...a mess they blame on "capitalism". The Fed created one bubble after another and blamed the bubble popped sector for the mess. Regulators step in and choke the sector to near-death and then demand that the sector hire more people.

For the good of the economy is something I have heard as well. Give me a break. A company is not going to hire workers out of charity. They are in the business to stay in business. This means earning more money then they generate in expenses. Sounds simple. Obama and Immelt demand that corporations are healthy enough to hire again, even as Immelt puts thousands out of work (lightbulbs) and shelters his income from Federal Corporate taxation.

The Fed needs to be dismantled, as all the other central banks were dismantled in our history. They had it right each time. Why do people think that they are immune to the evils of any centralized system, be it a bank or a government?

Live well.

--Zavost

Egghead Idiocy

Atop the Stoa this bright morning, I am telling myself that starting the day irritated is no way to start a day, especially since I have no direct ability at this time to affect change. There, feeling better already.

I state this as the fawning media, in this case, some writers at the WSJ are included, who can not say enough good things about Mr. Obama's choice for his chief advisor for economic affairs and business development. They will go on and on about how he has worked in the Treasury, taught at Harvard (this alone disqualifies him in my book), how he has his Ph.D in Economics and on and on and on. The man began teaching right out of University. The man has never earned an actual paycheck in his life. He is in charge of an economy he has never had to participate in?

I have known many people who were educated beyond their intelligence. Smart people, yes, but perfectly ill-suited to run anything other than a lemonade stand under the watchful supervision of the local 8 year old girl. I have a brilliant cousin that holds two Ph.Ds, yet lives a casual, ego-centric life. No entanglements with women or children, though he has both. Little interaction with the larger family and a rather flippant attitude towards most things not involving him. This is a man, who as a kid made a commercially available, child-safe chemistry set explode, setting his house on fire and blowing out a wall. He did it only to show that he could. He did not think about the results of his labor, he simply did it as a personal challenge.

We have Ben Bernanke, who wrote his thesis on the causes of the Great Depression, who is now staggering his way down the identical path towards financial ruin. Is he not smart enough to notice this? We have union bosses who are now working in government-owned entities. How messed up is that? Unions have a direct correlation between lack of productivity and lack of profits. Unions will suck a host dry until it goes out of business, and now we have union bosses holding large stakes in GM and Chrysler. Who's bright idea was that? Oh, yeah, it was the intellectual egg-heads in Washington that made that unholy alliance.

Gee, it looks so nice and Socialist on paper. Why is it not working? Since neither Mr. Obama, Mr. Geitner, Mr. Kruger, Mr. Krugman (I include him because he might as well work for Obama) have never really been involved in the private sector except to extort, regulate, and otherwise stifle it. More people under Obama are educated intellectuals and not business veterans than any president before him and it shows.

We need Trump as Treasury Secretary. We need someone from Microsoft or Apple as the Commerce Secretary. We need an Ex-military officer as the Secretary of Defense. The trend I'm citing here is experience over the sector they will be responsible for advising the President upon. No ivory tower weenie-tots. Experience. It was done before to great results and it can be done again.

Amateur hour is over, kids. Time to let the grown-ups back into the driver's seat. I don't necessarily mean you, either, Mr. GOP man. You go back to theorizing in make-believe university land where your actions will not destroy the country. Actually, stop doing that as well since you are turning out copies of yourselves like a virus. Go somewhere else and play your games, stop mucking up my back yard.

Live well,

--Zavost

Union Schmucks

Today upon the Stoa I would like to discuss the auto unions, Ford Motor Co., and Government Motors.

I have read some of the most idiotic prose in a long time, and I read government documents frequently for my employment. Let's see, where to start. Ok, we have the UAW union boss afraid that his rank and file will rebel since they see him getting ready to place a deal in front of the members that maintains many of the agreements that were put in place to keep Fords from going under in 2007 and 2008. They are upset that they are not getting any big raises, nor are they going to go back to the seniority rules, pension rules, and retirement benefits of 2006. However, the Union boss thinks that if he is able to negotiate a $5,000 bonus for every employee then perhaps they will be less angry.

I can not stand idiots. Ignorance is forgivable, but willful idiots make the bile rise.

Being raised in Michigan, in the Detroit suburbs, I know too well what the rank and file UAW workers are like. They are not deep thinkers at all. They just want the good paychecks to keep coming, to keep getting bigger, and pay for all the toys they love to play with. Oh, and to take care of them when all the drinking and partying catch up to them when they are 50.

One would wonder if the rank and file are capable of understanding the events that have brought them to this point, here in 2011. Decades of draining the blood of the big 4 (AMC, GM, Chrysler, and Ford) saw the demise of AMC in the 1980's, due to the insurgence of the Japanese auto companies, lazy quality, and crappy designs. Rather than reserve the strength to fight off the competition, they allowed AMC to vanish. The Japanese gained a foothold and placed more pressure on the American auto companies. Chrysler had to get a government bailout lest it join AMC in oblivion.

The American industry became moribund, existing only to feed the parasites called UAW workers. Market share continued to erode and eventually Chrysler finally succumbed to the free market forces. Like a hot potato, various owners passed it around until it is now owned by a prior bicycle company in Italy. Oh, how they fall.

GM died convulsing under the tender ministrations of the government, carved in such a way that it would never have passed legal muster if done solely in the private sector. The GM of old is truly dead, only debts remain and broken warrantee promises. The new company, also bearing the name General Motors (2.0) struggles to get out from under the grip of a government, now reluctant to give up its direct ability to manipulate an economic sector (gee, who could have seen that coming?)

Only Ford truly remains as the last auto company in the United States. It seems fitting. They were the first to use automation and to bring the automobile to the masses, they should be the last to do the same.

The union rank and file circle the crippled giant, looking for any signs of vitality. Here in 2011, they see a faint pulse, as the company is doing a little better, and immediately cry out for the blood to be drained and distributed again. They have been denied and will be denied no longer.

The UAW boss may have some understanding of both worlds, which is why he is reluctant to put too much strain on Ford. GM and Chrysler, he knows, may not bow to their demands as easily as the Rank and File believe. Now that the UAW partly owns those entities, they will be reluctant to shave off THEIR profit margins for the unwashed dues-payers. They have businesses to run and margins to make, now. The rank and file can not be permitted to damage them they way they wrecked the companies when they were actual corporations. No, they are in for a rude awakening, which is why they focus on Ford.

Now, back to the $5,000 bonus. This may mollify them for the moment, but bribes, and this is what it amounts to, have a habit of getting bigger and bigger. The less-dim among the rank and file may note that the $5,000 is nothing compared to what they would get in their check if they actually got the raise that they demanded. When that happens, look out Mr. UAW man.

I depart the Stoa for the moment.

Live well.

--Zavost

What they could have been

From atop the battered and leaf-strewn Stoa (Irene, you bitch) I ponder how many degrees from "normal" one can be before they are labeled "criminal" or "wizard".

The other night, with power flickering, walls shaking and trees leaning ominously over my abode, I pondered the differences between a criminal mastermind and a business "wizard" like Buffett or Trump.

In very few words one can say that one follows the laws of the land to obtain their wealth and the other one does not. Well of course. However, what I'm looking at why an individual would choose to earn their money one way or the other.

Both describe the "high" of the challenge; the quest for riches is simply the residue of combat. The accumulation of wealth is merely the "score card" to demonstrate their prowess. Why would one choose to do so within the "rules" and why does one feel the need to this outside of the established set of rules.

Let's take Donald Trump as an example of someone who has demonstrated a way of making money within the rules. This man has been bankrupt on more than one occasion, only to fight his way back to wealth. This man has demonstrated the ability to survive as an apex predator within a tank full of apex predators. He has destroyed his opponents, crushed their abilities and bereft them of the ability to make more money than him.

All of this has been done without jail time. Billions of dollars over decades and not one week in jail.

Let's look at Bernie Madoff now. This man made billions as well. Made other people rich too. He was able to cook the books and juggle like no one else around him. He threw off the regulatory hounds on more than one occasion and was able to continue his crimes undetected for decades.

Unlike Trump, he made his money in a manner similar to Buffett. Moistening his finger and choosing which stocks will go up and which will go down. Some say this takes skill, others say luck. All I know is that Trump builds things that I can put my hand upon...but I digress.

Bernie Madoff used his intellect and connections to hide his wrongdoing while raking in money. Bill Clinton used his intellect and connections to wriggle out of Whitewater and other stinky deals. If these people are so smart why can they not play by the rules? What are the rules really but a maze of regulations in which the successful are able to find the loopholes and still make money?

Did I just answer my own question? Are the criminals among that class of geniuses simply lazy?

I love questions that have simple answers, but that answer does not satisfy me. There must be something more because these people work hard...very, very hard to cover up what they do. Could it be that the rules are boring to them and by breaking the rules they add another layer of enjoyment? Does breaking the rules make one richer, faster?

On the other end of the spectrum, you have your common criminals. I have noted a high level of intelligence among them as well, despite a poor education. Many of them, if given a chance earlier in life, could have made something much more out of themselves. Am I advocating Socialism? Hell, no. If you think that then you have not been reading my articles.

Mentoring goes a long way towards giving someone a goal to surpass. It is the dream of every master that the pupil surpass them, as it is the dream of every pupil to surpass the master. There is something here that I will have to ponder upon for another entry...

I still have to wonder what drives a person into criminality. I'll stay away from Federal law, since it seems that by stepping on the wrong patch of grass will get you years in jail...I'll just leave them alone.

Easy money? Quick success? A distaste for the rules? Thrill-seeking?

I'm just as stumped as before. Sometimes a criminal is merely a matter of perception. To me, Che Guevara was a bloody lunatic communist who simply loved the thrill of dealing death; observing expressions on one's face upon death. NUT. To others he is a knight who fought for justice. In his mind, he was the hero, not the villain. Does the criminal have the same thoughts? Does Madoff simply feel that the rules are stupid and irrelevant?

Do they justify the breaking of the rules as part of a larger problem they they are rebelling against?

I'm beginning to think that they simply feel that the rules are put in place to protect the little guy from their predatory intellect. To break the rules is to "stick it to the man" and to make money despite the attempt at shackling them. Perhaps it is just another layer of thrill, the fear of getting caught, the thrill of sticking it to the system while they rake off billions. This would answer for the vast number of corrupt politicians as well. Only chumps follow the rules. Only the intelligent know which rules to follow and which rules to beat over an opponent's head.

Perhaps that is it. Thoughts, class?

Live well.

--Zavost

We Must Abandon The Earth.

From one of my many information sources upon the Stoa I have come upon a very interesting story. The article was written by a fellow that is about 20 years older than me.

This means that he is old enough to remember the energy of the space race, the pride of Apollo, and promise of Skylab. I was only two weeks old when man landed on the moon for the first time, so my joy was the Space Shuttle program that Obama took the axe to last year.

"They" promised much in the way of the future. "They" being the SF writers of the 40's through 90's. Those novels were written by GI, Silent, and Boomers who all had that initial spark and drive for the stars. They understood the perils and the wonders of leaving our home behind.

This article was not about the energy of yesterday, but the letdown of today. If space exploration had continued on its spending path, we would have been launching manned missions to Mars from the surface of the moon by 2000. We would already have manufacturing and fabrication plants in orbit producing the materials that we would need to further colonize the moon and Mars, not to mention taking care of our people back on Terra without having to dig up the mountains (do you hear me, hippies, in West Virginia?).

Instead, our efforts were squandered in an attempt to take care of those who were deemed unable to take care of themselves. It all sounds so altruistic until you realize that government dependency is just another form of servitude. Not so altruistic after all.

Carl Sagan and others used to use the argument that for the cost of a single ICBM you could send several unmanned missions into space, and if Defense spending were reduced, that money could go into further manned exploration.

For such intelligent people, who already had a collective (i.e. Socialist) bend, I'm amazed that they overlooked the obvious.

Defense spending was also space exploration. The military needed satellites in orbit for the Internet, GPS, weather prediction, missile defense, and also just good old fashioned spying. They also failed to notice that small reductions in the rate of GROWTH for social programs could have funded the same space exploration missions. No reductions in spending, just the growth of spending. The entire 30 year Shuttle program cost less than 300 billion dollars. A fraction of THIS YEAR'S Medicare spending. A FRACTION!

Now, lets get all Socialistic, but from a more altruistic angle.

We will have to agree on certain foundational agreements:
1. Humans are polluting the Earth with our very presence, let alone the residue of our technology.
2. To save the Earth for the other life forms, we must either commit mass suicide, in such a way that we become food or fertilizer for the animals; or we leave.
3. No other countries, other than the US and/or Europe need to participate, though ALL will by the end, and I'll tell you why.

Rather than bending our national will towards "solving" a social problem that has been with us since time immemorial, we bend our national will towards evacuation. Yes, evacuate the Earth to save the Earth.

We reorganize society to the needs of evacuation. Over time, the Federal government may have to nationalize certain industries or create a nexus where corporate coordination can occur. We need to give ourselves a window, like 50 years or so to vacate the property. Nothing motivates like a deadline. Socialists would love this plan.

Our schools begin to graduate the skill sets needed for Genetics, Metallurgy, Aeronautics, Astrophysics, Astronomy, Geology, Biology, Xenobiology; the spectrum of science and industry must be ramped up at all costs. Those without jobs are GIVEN a job in this new mobilization. If you can only drop a seed packet into a preservation capsule then that is your job. No idleness. If you are uneducated, then you will have a job commensurate with your skills, whether it is decontaminating the Uranium ore processors or cleaning out the biodegrading sump pumps (think poo pumps) then that is what you will be doing.

Gangs? Forget it. Drugs? Nope, no time, those dealers will be busy working. Criminals? They will be put to work, be it in forced labor mining camps (not as bad as it sounds...this isn't the Soviet Union after all) or the assembly lines. Heck, how many people will actually realize their potential in this new, driven society? Many, I promise you.

All consumer spending will be geared towards providing useful items for colonizing the planets of our Solar System, with the full expectation of building near-light speed vessels within 50 years. Not as far fetched as it sounds. Ion propulsion drives have that ability NOW. Bet you didn't know that. How much better would we be if we funded it with full mobilization in mind? Your Xbox 360 would not have useless games, it would have simulator programs, teaching children how to control thruster nodules, control magnetic fields, and understand the dangers and hazards of stellar radiation. Fitness programs would ramp way, way up as millions volunteered for pilot and crew positions on the hundreds of missions that will be flown EVERY YEAR. Participation like you've never seen it. The creation of the infrastructure, the Star Ports, and the Terran industry required to build this endeavor will be breath taking.

Space is not just the final frontier, it is the ultimate high ground.

By building hundreds of space stations, manned and ARMED, we will have uncontrolled supremacy not over just the orbital tracks, but everything beneath it. We don't have to drop nukes on cities to destroy them...that is messy. We can just shoot orbital debris or small asteroids at targets on the surface. End of story and no radioactive fallout.

Countries will be forced to sign on with US, to merge their resources with us, since we will have the insurmountable edge in space technology. Religious fundamentalism? Keep it back on Earth, pal. No time to rail against the infidel when there is a deadline to meet.

Eventually, every nation will have full employment, geared towards evacuation.

By the 25th year, the moon will have robust facilities and launch bases to push out on to Mars. Some may head towards Venus with solar harvesters, intent on filling energy cells and capacitors or setting up robotic manufacturing and refining facilities. Automated and manned facilities in the asteroid belt, slinging rocks back to Venus for processing (don't want to miss and hit the Earth...Venus won't care or notice that we nuke it by accident once in a while).

Before long we will be around Jupiter and Saturn, colonizing moons nearly the size of Mars and the Earth. What wonders will we discover or uncover? Technology will advance in leaps and bounds. New discoveries fueling the expansion. Lessons learned will lesson the amount of life lost in the journey and make our expansion more effective and efficient. The quality of life will rise for everyone and not just a few.

Back on Earth, things will be winding down. A cold calculation will have to be made at one point. As teams of people return to the surface to dismantle the infrastructure, harvesting what we need in terms of salvage, a decision will have to be made by those that insist on staying behind.

In my estimation, they will either have to be eliminated in cold blood, or told that they have to live in the absence of technology. Period. Mankind has risen out of near extinction on more than one occasion to dominate the planet. Monitoring stations will have to be left behind in orbit. In fact, we should maintain extensive colonies around the Earth indefinitely. If the ones that are left behind begin to re-discover fossil fuel technology then they will have to be interfered with. Perhaps even recruited to join their older brothers in space. After the first few generations, the inhabitants should be given the option of joining the movement into space, though their education will take longer if they don't start until their teenage years.

Perhaps over time, everyone will leave home and join the rest of the species in space. We will take animals and plants with us and seed them wherever they may take. The Earth will be free of us and free to evolve new forms of life, which we will watch over and keep safe from asteroid strikes (though would that not be interfering?).

We must bend our will towards leaving the Earth and realizing our potential as a race, instead of plumbing the DEPTHS with reality TV and tax/government servitude.

Think on all that and the implications on culture, society and technology.

With those thoughts, I leave you. Hello, Irene.

Live well.

--Zavost

Alternative Histories

Atop the soon to be windswept Stoa this morning (thank you Irene), I wish to talk about some of the grand 'what ifs' that never were.

Last night there was a show about what the US would be like if the Germans had won WWII. I have actually written extensively about just that topic over the years and I felt the show took a simplistic view of things. I'll assume that you know the history and will simply start running down a list.

The show made the assumption that D-day could have been stopped had Hitler allowed the Me-262 to go into production years earlier, instead of shifting resources into bombers. I have to state that D-day, in its historical form would not have happened. D-day would never have been launched without air supremacy, which, if the Me-262 were already a known quantity, could not have been achieved.

It would, however, have allowed Hitler to have the much needed air supremacy over Britain when he needed it most in 1940. The Battle of Britain would have been won, and Hitler's military could have done a reverse D-day 4 years earlier (Operation Sea Lion).

The show also went on to say that if Hitler had gotten the Atomic bomb first, they would have used sub-based missiles to launch on Boston and New York. Doubtful in the extreme.

The only reason why we got the bomb first was because Hitler drove out all the Jews and non-aryans who happened to also hold advanced degrees in Theoretical Physics, Applied Physics, and Mathematics. They clumped here and allowed us to get there first. The Germans may have discovered Fission first, but their path to the bomb was a dead end. Plus, even the V2 was not powerful enough to deliver the type of bomb they would have been able to build.

Another point I'd like to make is that the American people would not have surrendered so easily. Yes, the loss of life would have been terrible until we could have evacuated the large cities, or increased our naval patrols along the coast to catch their subs. They could also have delivered via long-range jet-bombers, which they were developing, but again, we likely would have been able to catch those.

We are simply too big for them to have controlled, much less conquered. I think the show was just showing what the US would have been if Bush were in power for another 4 years...

Also, the Soviet Union would have likely fallen since there would have been no Western Front with the fall of Britain. He would have been free to pick apart the sleeping bear...and fight his partisan war there for the next 70 years, since the Soviet Union would also have proven to be too big to control effectively.

Now, on to other things.

I do wish, often, that Martin Luther King Jr. had not been assassinated. I weep, knowing that the blacks of today do not live in the vision he preached. His apostles, Jackson, Sharpton, and others have simply used race to enrich themselves and to score chicks. What could have been.... They will have to answer to him when they are called back to the other side. They will have to deal with their failures, if not in this life, then in the next.

I wish that JFK had not been assassinated. I doubt that he would have done 1/3rd of what LBJ did to the economy, Vietnam, and the Black culture. He would hardly be welcomed in the Republican Party of today for his views on Communism, let alone the Democrat Party.

I wish we could have kept up the pace of manned space exploration. We would already be on Mars today and looking to the asteroid belt for natural resources. I am sure of that. Don't doubt me.

I wish that the MSM had kept with the philosophy of Franklin and not become the Marxist mouth piece that it has become today.

I wish that religion were still a part of the American fabric. Many of the social ills facing us today did not plague us when we practiced a religion...any religion.

I wish that the Roman Empire had extended its solid control over all of the Saudi Arabian peninsula. This would have mainstreamed the Arabs of the day. After the fall of Rome, the flow of time would have been such that a Mohammed would likely never have risen to prestige. Think of a world without radical Islam. Heck, all he had to do was fall off his camel and history could have been better.

I could go back wards and look in contemporary years. We all have to understand that you can not draw effective 'what ifs' if you don't look at the broad trends of history. Sometimes history is too big to move. People like MLK are able to make a difference when the world has become ready to listen. There have been lots of people like him over time, but the Civil Rights movement was HIS time. He stepped forward and filled the role history needed of him.

Hitler came to power only after the ground had been prepared for him. His Munich rebellion in the 20's was a good example of this.

Look to affect the future and do not dwell over much on the past. It is prologue. Actively write your own future in today's present.

Live well.

--Zavost

Wealth does not a leader make

Sitting upon the Stoa, I read and observe much. One item I constantly see is the one to one connection between reality and whatever a copy editor decides to print. Political leanings are easy to see. Fairness is easy to see as well. Protestations aside, I can tell very quickly where a publication stands.

One article talked at length about Vice President Joe Biden's visit to China and how China is 'revealing' its leadership credentials. It spoke about several high level Chinese leaders who are "poking their heads out on the international scene". The article went on and on about how China holds so much of our debt and that we deserve to have someone watching over us who appears to be more responsible about managing money than we are.

Crap, crapola,craptascular (hat tip to Klavan), is what I call that last paragraph. China stopped purchasing our debt in any serious amounts years ago, thus QE1, QE2, and upcoming QE3...monetizing in the absence of "loans" from China. China has serious issues internally with infrastructure loans to government-owned corporations and other entities. So many that I would need another posting to cover them all.

China is doubling its military spending every other year for "defensive" purposes only. Right. If the US has chosen not destroyed China by now, it is not going to. India is not a threat nor is Russia. They have proven already that they can crush internal rebellion. So just who are they "defending" themselves from.

Likely, they are creating a world-class military (with all that American money we gave them in return for rubber dog poo since 1980) to protect its economic interests in the near future. They have been buying up oil rights around the world, making trade deals in Africa and South America...all that needs to be protected in the future.

The Chinese are not a benevolent people. They do not have our history of restraint. I can hear the various arguments taking shape around me, but I'm right on this. China will bully and bend other countries to the point that they are nothing but vassal states, not just dependents. Just because they hold a lot of wealth now does not mean that they are not the people who conquered Tibet in our modern times. It does not mean that they are not the people of Tiananmen Square fame. Has anyone heard from the guy who stood in front of the tank? Anyone? Didn't think so.

They listen only to their own council and will pursue only their own goals. All nations act out of their own self-interest. That is a fact.

The United States is a Judeo-Christian nation that is more interested in peaceful trade and co-existence. The Chinese invaded Vietnam in 1979 just to test out a new ranking system in their military. We value life, as a people. Mao willingly starved tens of millions in pursuit of a theory that was abandoned in 1980.

These papers and sites I read with their writers panting about the rise of China best study a few points of history before they go gaga for China. How about they try to get an exclusive interview with the guy who squared off with the tank. Bet he is still unavailable.

Live well.

--Zavost

The Past is Prologue

From the Stoa today I wish to discuss Americans, America, and Generational turn-over.

I finished reading an article by an interesting fellow. Anyone who reads Rudyard Kipling is a realist in my book, and this fellow is a realist. You can read his entire article on "American Thinker, 082111", Martial Virtues and the survival of civilizations by James G. Wiles.

He hits on some very good points, points I've made for years, actually. There is a point in his article where I wish to expound. He goes into great, and very useful detail, about the larger political policy shifts on entitlement from the Civil War forward, but I wish to discuss the human and generational aspect of his article.

Here is the paragraph where I will continue my version of his article, in parallel with his own: "Thus, is it the chicken or the egg? Over at Canada's National Post, Fr. Raymond de Souza reviews Mark Steyn's important new book, After America. De Souza asks the correct question. Did the expanding state wither the individual, or did the withering of the individual lead to an expansion of the state?"

An outstanding question made by a man I respect, as much as I respect Mr. Steyn. Good men.

Now, this is where Mr. Wiles explores the macro sweeps of time, economics, China and such. I want to get back to the marrow the question that was posed. What did come first?

In a nutshell, the people who had the power to make those changes came first. I look at the wrecks that are called "citizens" of the welfare state and I see so much failed potential. So much waste in terms of money, humanity, and progress, both technological and cultural. But they are weak people, reliant on others for their support. Part of the hostility and sense of self-entitlement comes from, I believe, their conscience grinding on their every waking moment. It is not an easy thing being dependent upon others. They are not so stupid to not realize that the only reason they are able to eat, have a roof over their heads, and are able to drive to the next booze party is on the charity of others. Forced charity, that is, by a Democrat or well-intentioned useful idiot Republican.

Ponder that for a moment. The Democrats realized that they could create an eternal underclass, dependent upon them for money, food, booze, and shelter while in return, they keep voting for them to into office. However, it was not until the end of WWII and the 1950's that this really became possible.

Yes, there was T. Roosevelt and Wilson that lead the Progressive charge in the early 20th century, both from different motives, but that movement failed in large part. The prosperity of Coolidge allowed people to forget the terrible evil represented by Progressivism. T. Roosevelt was Progressive because he was sympathetic to the little man. He felt that guaranteeing charity and safety they could then grow to be who they were destined to be, as he did. Wilson was Progressive because he felt that this inferior rabble needed a shepherd and he was going to create the political over-class to see after them.

FDR warped the fabric further with his Socialistic power grab, but had much of his work undone in the Supreme Court. Enough got through, though. Enough was passed to doom his grandchildren. So that is the political rise. Policies that lead to the welfare state were passed by powerful people of each party. Each for their own intellectual reasons. Wilson, though, was more realistic in his forethought, though. This makes him a very bad man and Teddy a very ignorant one.

Our forefathers knew that cultural change was but a generation or two away. Evolution and extinction, just a generation away. Lenin and Hitler knew this. Reagan and Jefferson as well. By indoctrinating the children, you will change the far future. Those are just two evil examples, but lets explore the less evil examples.

Let's assume that LBJ was not an SOB out to turn the blacks of the 1960's into Democrat plantation slaves and assume that he passed his sweeping policies out of altruistic sources. His intention was to create a society where people were productive and inclusive. What he created was single moms and absent black fathers. People are not stupid. Humans have had about the same level of intellect for 50,000 years. They may be poor, ignorant and uneducated, but this underclass is not stupid by any measure of the word.

They saw quickly how the system could be gamed to their advantage. They were rewarded by not marrying. They were rewarded for every child they brought into the world. If you give away free money to a group of people, you will grow that group of people. Simple concept.

The British Empire went from being filled with tough-minded, industrious individuals to arrogant wastes of genetic material. You may know them by all the statues scattered across the GLOBE, reminding those who see them that the British were once a great people. Now, they are just like the inner city black and rural white trash. An ever expanding underclass that produces nothing but more underclass; and consumes ever more resources. The recent riots in London and elsewhere are flares warning everyone that something is seriously wrong with this way of life.

Social Security was started to help the elderly and to lessen the burden on the family that had to care for Grandma. It started at 65, which was well into elder hood and beyond the average life expectancy for that day. Over time, politicians saw an opportunity to expand the program to include more and more people for more and more reasons. People lived longer even as benefits were expanded. I'll continue to assume that this was done out of a Christian sense of altruism.

Medicare and Medicaid are similar examples. Programs that started with the best of intentions but have been expanded, fattened, and distorted until the very fabric of society has begun to unwind.

In the 1960's, I'm sure there were many an elderly black that shook their heads at the loss of pride their youngers had to suffer by going on the dole. I'm sure the first ones on the dole must have felt a sense of loss as well. However, it is THEIR children that grew up accepting that hand out. They never had to work for it, nor did they ever work for their keep. Now they feel entitled to that money, and angry that it does not grow along with their appetites for the finer things in life. Let the theoretical rich pay for everything, they are the ones who put me in my situation after all...they are more correct than they suspect.

So what came first? The children of the Great Depression, the ones who then went off to fight WWII and Korea; they are the ones I'm looking at. They had such a hard life as children that they did not want their children to suffer the same way. There was the economic boom after WWII and the Boom in children. They were going to create the world anew. Yes, they did GREAT things, that generation. But they also expanded these programs and spent the economic expansion well into the future, in the hopes that things would keep expanding. Their altruism and good intentions have lead to the expansion of this serf-like underclass. Our "Greatest Generation" has undone our Founding Fathers.

Think about that. The Yin and Yang of things. Our saviors and our destroyers.

I look forward to reading the future history of things to see how this plays out. We are not dead yet, as a martial people. There is MUCH life left within us yet. I am ever optimistic.

Live well.

--Zavost

The Omnipotent Federal Government

From this Stoa this day, I wish to discuss how the government "knows" things and how the government disseminates information within itself.

Contrary to popular belief, the government does not know everything about everyone at any given moment. Sure, they CAN find out everything about YOU if they have a desire to. Take Joe "the Plummer" for instance.

No, the government is huge, bloated, fractured and does not communicate well with any given segment of itself. However, there are certain things that certain administrations take a special interest in. Any liberal Democrat administration loves to focus on domestic terrorism, guns, the restriction of civil liberties in the interest of granting civil liberties, etc.

So, given this intense interest in guns and the people who may use them, think white, male, religious, Tea Party; I have heard the most asinine thing in a long time. And I hear a lot of asinine things.

Eric Holder, heir of RFK and J. Edgar Hoover, states that they were unaware of the "Fast and Furious" program that ran guns down to the Mexican drug lords currently working to overthrow any semblance of civilization in Mexico. Man, that one is a whopper. Police agencies, FBI agencies and the like have been detecting these weapons and throwing up flares that US made assault weapons are ending up at crime scenes. This was ignored by those in the government that were running the program, and this means you, Mr. Holder and Mr. Obama.

These weapons were ferried over the border, knowingly by the Obama administration, for whatever reasons they wish to profess.

How do I know that the government must know? Have you ever seen a reality TV show where someone buys a regular old gun? Sometimes it takes weeks to actually get your hands on it. Paperwork and all that. The government demands to know who you are and what you are doing with that gun. How about automatic or assault style weapons? Now we are talking many weeks to months to obtain.

So how does someone, even in the government, make an "unofficial" transfer of thousands of assault rifles, many seized from gangs and drug lords here in the States by Federal authorities to illegal elements within Mexico?

You mean to tell me that Mr. Holder does not know anything about that? You are joking, right?

This is bigger than Watergate. This is bigger than any old birth certificate. Why is the MSM giving Obama a pass on this? Tens of thousands of people have died in Mexico as a result of these weapons and everyone just yawns?

A hurricane hits New Orleans and the MSM speculates, or gives airtime to those who do, that the hurricane was manufactured by a secret government program and that President Bush was able to steer it to New Orleans because of it being predominately black and Democrat. Media swoons and begins to dog Bush relentlessly.

An oil well pumps millions of barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico and Obama gets a pass. Thousands of guns turn up in Mexico that should be in Federal storage lockers and Obama gets a pass. Holder gets a pass.

Palestinians kill dozens of Israelis over night and the PA gets a pass. Assad cleans out a Palestinian 'camp', tens of thousands of people go missing and scatter and Assad gets a pass. Israel responds by bombing a legitimate military target to kill a PA militant and they get dogged by the anti-semites of the world.

The world may be a cold and miserable place, but at least that world makes sense to me. One where reality is manufactured, sterilized, and packaged by the Federal Government, with the aid and assistance of the MSM then it is a reality that only George Orwell truly understands.

You have much to answer for, Mr. Holder, Mr. Obama. I'm not your judge, but the voters are. The legal system will not always be under your control and influence. Even Roman Consuls were subject to legal reviews when their terms were ended. Yours will end and the legal system will eventually catch up to you.

Live well.

--Zavost

Money Motivates

Upon the Stoa tonight, I again shake my head in disappointment. I have worked in the healthcare industry for almost 20 years and have seen what people can do to each other. I've also seen the industry evolve.

As the years have gone there were times where there were medicine shortages, but they were few and far in between. Over the last 7 years, the frequency has picked up. Today, there are hundreds of drugs that can not be ordered or administered due to production or ingredient issues.

How does this happen? The reality of economics slamming head first with the reality of piss poor governmental policy and regulation. Due to the expense of labor, the expenses of litigation, and the difficulties of regulation; plus a thinner and thinner margin due to overseas competition, American manufacturers of some of the worlds best medicines have stopped producing them.

R&D dollars are spent on blockbusters, not aspirin. The American medical system now must rely on unreliable supplies and manufacturing centers. Centers that are overseas and in plants that may or may not meet our standards. This is intolerable. This is America. ObamaCare has not even kicked in yet. Just wait for that.

So what is the answer to this? Well, Obama feels that, wait for it...More government is the answer. They want to purchase the dry ingredients, store them, and then distribute them when they are needed. Right. Drugs that are in short supply already and they want to stock pile them. What is wrong with that reasoning?

Here is a crazy idea. How about companies are given tax breaks based on the amount of older drugs they produce? This would actually free up cash for the ongoing development of newer drugs. There are more ideas but it is late and I wish to hang up my toga for the night. Sure hope I don't need routine medication any time soon.

Live well.

--Zavost

Chamber a round for S&P

As the smoke billows about the Stoa from the fire at the Great Dismal Swamp, I wish that I were not always so correct on things. No this is not bravado for I am way more humble than you; comfortable with my Stoicism.

I said some time ago that Europe's troubles started in 2007/8 when the PIIGS began showing debt structuring pain and that the Euro was not nearly as strong as everyone thought it was (another item was right on about). It was the rating agencies that shot up the flare warning people that all was not right in the old country.

This was just prior to the debt market/credit market meltdown here in the States, of which the rating agencies had fears of, yet failed to shout loud enough to be taken seriously. There may also be a lot of cases where leadership from within the agencies muted the call in order to keep the money coming in return for good credit ratings.

Either way, it is time for the agencies to pay. Did the Feds have any problems with the PIIGS downgrades of 2007/08? Nope. Did they have issues with the agencies warning the world about the Euro? Nope. Did the Feds have any issues with European insolvency? Not really, we just printed up a few hundred billion greenbacks and floated them a loan.

All this chaos cause by "the rating agencies" and the Feds just shrugged and said, "what are you gonna do?" The Europeans were ticked because the agencies have their headquarters in the US and they felt that there was something fishy going on.

Well, the credit downgrade finally came to us and we were appalled. Appalled, I say! I just waited for the coordinated stories to come out and today I've finally seen enough to know the effort is underway to "Alinsky" the rating agencies.

Lets see, in the span of 48 hours I have seen:
The Justice Department is investigating S&P for not reporting the risk of the credit/debt swaps of the last 12 years.
The JD is investigating S&P for silencing reports of the same by their leadership.
Cities and other municipalities are blaming the agencies, Moody's in this case, for downgrading their bonds, sometimes giving them "super downgrades", that is, a multi-level reduction in their credit-worthiness.

There are so many more. The flag dropped and the MSM is away and running with sob stories and stories of evil agencies. So predictable.

The Feds feel that by shooting the messenger they will dampen the message. Actually, they are only ignoring reality. The rating agency is the fire alarm, designed to warn the government and public when the debt situation is getting worse (among other things).

Taking an axe to the alarm does not put out the fire.

Why the Super-downgrades, I was asked? Good question.

Well, before the melt down in 2008, the agencies just sort of worked in the margins of society and people did not pay them a whole lot of attention. Decades of service and only the financial type business or government folks really knew much about them. They had been mandated years ago to make sure that things like the Great Depression didn't happen again, by giving fair warning for when the indicators were turning south. Well, it seems like they were not a very transparent bunch, because most people didn't care much about what they did. When the agencies began having to rate these "securitized mortgage debt swaps" they didn't really know what to do with them. On the face of it all, they didn't really pose too much of a risk since the risk was being spread around.

Then the debt vehicle began to evolve and the debt swaps got more complicated, fractured (sliced smaller to make more money) and the trading velocity and penetration to other markets gathered speed. I'm sure many within the rank and file of these agencies began to have their doubts, but there were so many requests for ratings that they were making some serious cash.

So, fast forward past the carnage. Fast forward past the people being foreclosed on by a bank that can not even prove they hold the deed for the mortgage. Fast forward throughout the Trillions in stimulus spending that went down the black hole.

Enter onto the scene, the architects of the financial crisis, the dynamic destroyers of wealth, Dodd/Frank, or Frank/Dodd, depending on who is in charge that day. They will bring transparency where once there was opacity. They will bring fairness where once there was discrimination. They will make sure that those who were wronged by their bungling can SUE to get their money out of these agencies.

See where this is going? Under Dodd/Frank, the agencies can be sued if they exposed clients to risk that should have been easily avoided. Their activities are now out in the open for all to see.

So, what is a consequence of these regulations? Since the agencies are now at increased risk of being wrong, they will err on the side of caution. This means that in years past the agency may have given a municipality the benefit of the doubt. NOT ANYMORE. So, once S&P downgraded the credit of the United States as a whole, the agencies began to pull down the ratings on States and cities. Actually, those downgrades were long overdue and already under way prior to the S&P announcement.

They have seen the government books, Federal, State, and Local and understand how they "finance" their debt. We are in the fast lane towards Greece and the rest of Europe. The agencies are simply laying on the horn and shouting warnings to change course.

Think about all that. Political grandstanding within the realm of national finance is NEVER appropriate. Their actions are mucking up things across the board and delaying the efforts of the market to correct itself.

There are many reforms that need to be undertaken, but most of those are the surgical removal of government and government regulations. The market will take care of itself and has proven that it can time and time again. Study up on your Calvin Coolidge.

With respirator on, I make my way into the smoke banks.

Live well.

--Zavost

I'll bet Syria is acting on Israel's orders

From atop the Stoa this evening, the bile rises. As the hypocrisy of the Obama administration increases, so does the concentration of acid in my stomach.

Assad, the familial ruler of Syria, has been shooting the crap out of his country, butchering anyone who sneezes in his direction, and generally getting a pass for it from his good friends, Obama and Co.

Today, tanks rolled in, and over, a Palestinian "refugee" camp in Syria. I guess some of them were caught saying some negative things about Assad butchering fellow Arabs. Therefore, "send in the tanks!"

This act has been caught on camera, cell phone, telephone, and eye witness. However, the PA denies that anything untoward is happening in the city, despite the fact that everyone in authority is unreachable by phone, internet, or personal visitor. Guess the visitors are too busy trying to not get shot by their buddy in Damascus.

The Israelis know it is going on and are staying out of it. Wise move. Hamas, who has its headquarters in Damascus, was also saying that there was nothing to see, move along, move along. If they said anything other then that, I think they too would drop off the airwaves in short order...if they have not already.

If the Israelis build a house or apartment building, ON THEIR OWN LAND then they are assaulted by everyone on the planet, including liberal Jews here in America. Assad rolls tanks over Palestinians and Obama yawns. Ghadaffi gives up his nukes, disavows terrorism and Obama launches a war against Libya. Not saying I'm a big fan of Libya, but at least they were no longer exporting terrorism.

Obama and his administration treats the Tea Party and anyone who vaguely disagrees with him as terrorists, yet when Assad begins blasting thousands of his own people, Obama can't find a negative thing to say about him.

The PA nut cases and Jew-haters in the Middle East went so far as to say that last summer the Israelis had trained sharks to attack Arabs in the Red Sea. I'm not making it up people. Those nuts actually said this with a straight face. Somehow, these sharks were able to tell the difference between Jew and Arab and everyone else. Eeeeahhhhh, sigh.

Obama has a moral compass. He does act according to his nature. The MSM and the other slavering sycophants can't paint over the piles of corpses that Obama ignores. Period. Think hard about where that compass points. Who are you going to believe? Him or your lying eyes?

Live well people.

--Zavost

The Day the Earth Didn't Notice

Atop the Stoa this day, I am forced to remember the movie I watched pieces of last night. It was the 2008 remake of the Day the Earth Stood Still. I had told myself in 2008 that I had no interest in seeing it as it was revealed to me by others that it was basically another movie about environmentalism. Interest lost.

However, yesterday I stumbled across it and decided that the special effects were cool and that I'd see what they did with Gort. He was cool, I'll admit.

I have to say that the original was more believable than the remake. The premise of the remake is so full of holes I don't know where to start. Well, I guess the place to start is at the beginning.

The point of the movie is basically this: we have proven to be incompetent shepherds of the planet and aliens have decided that they have to call an exterminator on us so that they can save a "rare" planet that can support complex life. They have determined that they have more of a right to the planet then we do. Kind of like when Europeans determined that they had more right to gold bearing lands than the Indians. They could have the dusty scorpion infested land in Oklahoma and North Texas. Well, until we found oil there, then they lost those rights too, but I digress.

First off, the Earth has not been like it is today for the past 3 billion years. It was not like this 300 million years ago, nor was it this way 65 million years ago. Heck, it was not this way 15,000 years ago! Earth supported life during all of those time frames. Different life than today, but life nonetheless. The Earth has nearly been rendered uninhabitable on several occasions. In the Permian, volcanoes and gasses from the ocean bed nearly exterminated all life. There has been at least one, and perhaps two times, where the Earth became an Ice Ball due to orbital wobbling. Where was Klatuu and his people then? Where were they 65 million years ago when the asteroid in pact in Mexico nearly exterminated life on Earth? Asteroids have caused more than one mass extinction. Where were they all those times?

How about volcanoes? Do they have a trick about neutralizing the gasses that they emit? Gasses that on an annual basis exceed the levels that humans have produced since we learned how to burn wood?

Why does this guy need to use a car (a Prius no less!) to smush a cop and then bring him back to life, when he knows that the guy is going to be nanite kibble in a few days?

The Earth has been both vastly hotter and far colder than it is today. There have been times where life has been abundant and times where life has been scarce. Even if humanity is killing off everything it does not consume, eventually, mankind will either go extinct itself or it will wander into the stars and leave its crib behind. The Earth will be free to re-evolve all sorts of new life forms.

The Earth is vast and it is old. It has the scars to prove it. It will neither care or notice the little vermin scratching away at its upper most dermis.

If Klatuu were telling the truth, he would tell the leaders of Earth that he has claimed the Earth for the collective uses of the aliens around Sol. Is this not Imperialism? Is this not what every liberal abhors, even when they commit it? They have determined that we are an infestation. They have determined that we are violent and need to be irradiated (contradiction). They are the ones with the doomsday weapons, despite their obviously peaceful and benevolent nature. Why do they need Gort if they are all such peaceful little aliens?

Like I stated, the first movie was far more likely in my book to occur. I can see aliens coming here and telling us that they have noticed our probes, our nukes, and our penchant for killing each other in ever increasing numbers. I can see them coming here and telling us that if we so much as lift a pointed stick at one of their worlds that they will turn us into a glowing ember in 10 minutes. That I can understand. That I can believe.

Calling Exterm-a-Sapien is not likely...at least not due to environmentalist concerns. Land, resources, huge amounts of water? Yes. Polluting the water? No.

Live well.

--Zavost

A Nation of Immigration Laws

Atop the Stoa this fine morning I find myself slightly shaking my head in disgust and sympathy.

Having just read an article in today's WSJ, I felt I needed to unburden myself before I can start a productive day. Sometimes, ignorance really is bliss.

We are a nation of Laws. They have not always been fair laws, nor just laws, but laws nonetheless. This is why our Framers gave us the ability to petition to have laws changed, so that behavior that was once illegal can be made legal. Such as taking a bath in the winter in Montana. May have been illegal before there was hot water or reliable housing there. Heck, probably before there was running water.

Our immigration laws were passed due to the dominant beliefs/values of the constituents of those law makers (I sure hope so). Since the 1960's, the hippy generation began to dream of a world without borders and began to "selectively decide which laws they were morally obligated to ignore". They chose immigration, bathing, shaving, and hair-cutting.

The country was flooded with illegal immigrants from the early 1960's to recently. Reagan gave amnesty in the hopes that this would stem the flow. Proof that even the Great Reagan was no God was the fact the signed this worthless document into law.

The laws have been on the books, sometimes made even tougher when a politician wanted to be seen as taking a tough stand on immigration. However, those laws, like the earlier ones were simply not enforced.

Every time there are deportations, the liberals and the MSM (did I just repeat myself?) bring up sob-stories about families being torn apart, children staying in the country while one or both parents are deported....and on and on.

The illegal immigrants ARE NOT the victims here. The true victims are the children of those illegals that are born here (though that law needs to change as well, but that is another blog entry), and those legal immigrants and natural born Americans who are unable to find work.

The government is not responsible for the trauma and dislocation that a deportation can cause. Think on this. The blame lays with the illegal immigrant that came here unlawfully and then had children here. They are responsible for this, not the children or the government.

Businesses say that illegal immigrants do the jobs that Americans will not do. That is a myth. It is true that Americans may not do the work for the illegal wages that are paid to aliens, but that is no proof that they will not work for the legal wages. After the ICE raids of companies from 2009-2011, those companies had to shed thousands of illegal immigrants. The companies then announced that they were able to replace all of the open positions. This tells me that Americans did indeed wish to perform that work.

With millions of Americans out of work, this is the right thing to do. Punish the employers and deport the aliens (though this current Administration refuses to deport them). Sorry, but it is the law. Laws that are less onerous than the immigration laws of Mexico, Germany, or Turkey.

If this seems cruel, then we must decide, AS AN ELECTORATE what to do. Strike down the laws and erase our southern border? Then do so. Build a wall so high and deep that rain has trouble getting over it? Then do so. Either way, as long as it is the will of the people and elected officials do WHAT THEY WERE ELECTED TO DO.

Sounds simple.

I do feel for these people, but it is our law. My wife immigrated here legally. So did many others I have met in my life. If you want to live here, there is a LEGAL way to do. Just do it.

I am sorry that your homeland, of which you are so proud of, is a corrupted sh*t hole where decent life is impossible. Change that. I am sorry that your elected officials simply rob the electorate. Change that. I am sorry the drug cartels are ripping apart your country, fighting the government for the right to fleece your people. Change that.

Don't come here and put an American out of work because you are a willing slave. All those people that the article talked about, those that lived here for ten years and more; they bought homes, sent their kids to school and used the healthcare of this country. They also paid taxes (I hope so), but all of that was wrong. This was their fault and the fault of liberals who chose not enforce our own laws. They were wrong to come here illegally in the beginning, and they were wrong to have children and lay down roots in a place where THEY KNEW they were there illegally.

It is time for me to improve the American life this day. I depart.

Live well.

--Zavost

Bachmann, Step One: Win Straw Poll in Iowa - Check

Perched atop my wet and humid Stoa this morning I take with a note of pleasure the victory of Michele Bachmann in the Iowa Straw Poll. I generally do not put much into those, however, the candidates do. If they do not do well in this poll then donors drop away and back stronger candidates, the candidates themselves change their approach (or themselves) in order to do better at the next poll.

I listened to many of the candidates yesterday and I still feel that Bachmann is the best. I also like Mr. West, though I don't know if he will be able to hang in the race against a Romney or a Perry. I see Romney and Perry as more of the same cookie cutter pressed GOP candidates since 1991. Romney and Perry look "too much" the presidential image. I don't trust that. Nor do I like the glaring fact that Romney passed universal healthcare as governor and has wrecked his state's healthcare system. The experiment has been a good one and it has shown that it does not work. Not like observing Europe was not proof enough.

I don't like Perry either, as he has to trumpet to the world that he is religious. I prefer the person who lives by their Christian values. One where their positions on issue make clear where their heart and mind stand. Perry has been trying way to hard. I also think that his tenure in Texas has not been what it could be. Yes, Texas is doing better than most states, but I don't put the credit in the Governor's office, I give credit to the average Texan. Perry has severe RINO tendencies that are being masked, just as Romney's were masked in the last election, though he didn't fool me.

I like Rand Paul, though he is not running. I don't know enough about Santorum, though I've heard good things. I don't think he is going to make it in the primaries, so I'm not going to spend too much time studying him. Ron Paul is ideologically pure and I do like that, I just don't think that it is the right way to go now. We've been bingeing on world politics, money, taxes, money, power, power, immigration, etc. for so long that going cold turkey will do more damage than good. People like Ron Paul want to pretend that we are not affected by what happens in the larger arena of the world. Ignoring the rest of the world does not mean that the rest of the world will ignore us. We need a Bachmann who will give us a swift hard jolt of reality, but not break our grip on day to day life. That will simply doom her in the same way as Obama jolted the average American with his uber tax and spend philosophy. Rand Paul would then be a great follow up to Bachmann. He would continue what she started. Perhaps a VP post for Mr. Paul and then the big chair himself in 2020?

One can only dream. Gosh it is beautiful for miles around the Stoa. There are plenty of students of all colors and races, willing to listen, if not agree. Listening is all I ask. Agreement is irrelevant. It is what one does with the information and how one filters it through their reality bubble that is relevant.

Live well and enjoy the day.

--Zavost

Idealists, Realists, and Useful Idiots

I find myself pondering, upon the Stoa this morning, the difference between someone who is an Idealists, a Realist, and a Useful Idiot. In my travels, I have found that many of us are one, the other, or two of them all at the same time.

When politicians are speaking, they cloak themselves in morality and righteousness. Their views are the correct views, their beliefs, reflective of the people voting for them, are the RIGHT beliefs. Does the politician believe what they are saying or do they say what they say just dupe their audience?

I believe that, for the most part, an Idealist believes what they are saying. A realist says what they feel they need to in order to manipulate those around them to act or believe what they feel they must. Neither good, nor bad, at this point. Simply a belief that what they know is best. The Useful Idiot are those who act or think with out really thinking. The one that sees a Democrat ad depicting granny going over the cliff in a wheelchair and then make the assumption that a Republican will make that happen if a Democrat is not elected.

Sometimes, an Idealist can be used, and often is, as a Useful Idiot by a Realist. In fact, I would assume that they are the natural flock of the charismatic realist. However, as I alluded to earlier, there are good realists and bad realists. A good realist is a George W. Bush. A person who feels that they must "abandon the free market to save the free market". Sounds like his idealism was taken advantage of by a well-intentioned realist. A bad realist is someone like a Mayor Emmanuel. He knows exactly what he is about and does not give a whit about who has to be squashed to get where he wants to go. An idiot Obama was perfect fodder for him to use. An Idealist that is too dumb to realize just how dumb he really is.

I worry about this latest crop of Republicans running for office. I worry about the Tea Party, though not in a bad way. I think that many of the Tea Party are Idealists that wish to roll back the clock on the Republic. I fear that the forces of culture and history have been underway for so much time that this movement will take a hundred years to restore the Republic. Even then, you can not step in the same river twice. Everything has changed since the founding of the Republic and it can never truly be restored. The spirit of the Founders can guide us, but we are on our own in creating the next, just, Meritocracy.

I believe that the MSM is full of Idealists who have been weened on Socialistic dogma and are too blind to really understand the implications of that which they seek. They talk to Cubans, yet seem to miss the fact that they are impoverished and desperate people. Why bring this same misery here? You think we will do a better job?

I believe that Bill and Hillary Clinton are Realists of the pure-type. Bill is a criminal that knows how to survive just about anywhere. He says a lot of things that are meaningless to him. He is interested in money, power, influence, and women who are not Hillary (no complaints there, Bill). I can deal with a Bill Clinton because I can understand him. He was smart enough to change course when his party was hammered in 1994. Not so with Obama. So sure that his is the just and right course there is no reasoning with him. He will pull us all down the same empty black hole his heart sits within.

I wonder about this crop running for President. The Governor of Texas holds prayer sessions even while he sells the rights to toll roads in Texas to companies outside of the United States. Bachmann is an idealist who is founded in her self-being and could be manipulated by crafty people within her administration. I like Paul, but the younger one, not the father. All in all, I'd rather have a Bachmann than anyone else, Palin included.

Things are busy upon the Stoa this day. With my thoughts left half formed, I depart. Another day.

Live well.

--Zavost

The Fish starts to rot from the Head

Atop the Stoa this day, I ponder all sorts of things related to civilization and society. The old saying, adapted for the title of this entry is technically wrong, since fish rot from the guts first, but I liked it as a useful metaphor. Let me begin for the class today.

Professionals: I read the other day that the number of medical research studies, many performed by physicians and research scientists, have been retracted from their professional journals. Journals such as Lancet, an ancient publication going back over 170 years. In the decades prior to the 1990's, perhaps a handful of articles around the world would be retracted. This year alone, by July, more than 200 had been pulled. 200 research studies discredited in seven months. How many years of work went into just a single study? How much money went into producing that study?

75% of the retracted studies were pulled due to sloppy research and lazy science. 25% were due to suspected fraud. Either way, those numbers are huge considering the history of pulled studies in the past. I know, I know, with computers it is easier to catch fraud and slop. On the flip side, computers should make it far easier to put together a quality study in the first place, so I ain't buyin' it. Lazy. Incompetent. Unqualified.

Government: Up until FDR, we were on a metals based currency, just as the Founders intended. After the depression and WWII, we abandoned it, completely in 1971. Since then, we have slowly inflated our monetary supply while depressing the value of our money. Intentionally, I submit. Why? To get what we want. To buy the things we wanted as a nation and to create the programs we wanted as a nation. Irresponsible, yes. Failing monetary systems world-wide!

Education: In the 1970's, the liberals really began to tear apart our standards of education, turning our schools first into experimental labs in brain washing, and today into full indoctrination camps. Jimmy Carter nationalized the schools on Union recommendations. Collectivist? Yes. A well intentioned improvement for our children? No. In the 1980's, universities had to spend a year re-teaching students the basics before they could get to their core studies. By the 1990's, the average time to graduate was 5 years, if at all. Education became big business with government subsidies and favorable laws. What is a Bachelor's degree worth today? Well, it is worth a 1959 High School Diploma is what it is worth. What is an MBA worth today? Well, I'd have to say it is worth a Junior College degree from 1964. Our children were dumbed down and rather than prod our children to do better, we lowered the standards, and the quality, of the advanced degrees.

Cultural Ethics: Criminals get their own movie rights, book deals, and in Eliot Spitzer's case, a TV show. Hollywood stars are taken as experts, even though the only thing they are expert in is portraying the thoughts and words of other people. In the 1930's, we created financial laws to prevent or reduce the likelihood of another Great Depression and then Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton disable the safety features because they got in the way of their economic plans. The rating agencies are there to neutrally examine financial vehicles and entities with regard to their business health, not politics, yet Obama calls for their dismantlement. So, he essentially blames the agencies for not calling the debt equity swaps as dangerous, yet he is trying to shut them up for calling out the dangers of unsustainable debt. Talking about taking a sledgehammer to the fire alarm simply because it is too loud. Ignore the fire at your own risk, Obama.

What is all this about? We are rotting. We are rotting from the head. Our doctors don't seem to be as good as they once were. Our engineers don't seem capable of building or planning things like they used to, despite all this technology available to make it easier. We can not build Space Shuttles any longer. Heck, we almost were not able to build the next generation of Nuclear Warheads because the scientists had ALMOST forgot how to build the triggering mechanisms. OOOOPPPPPSSSSS!

In the old days we elected a Washington, a Jackson, and a Lincoln. Today we elect a Carter, a Clinton, and an Obama. Can you imagine Jimmy Carter on the back of a horse, elderly and ill, riding out to Pennsylvania at the head of an army to put down a rebellion on taxing whiskey? No. Can you imagine Clinton taking a bullet, and keeping it lodged in your chest for the rest of his life due to a duel of honor? Hell NO! The duel would likely have been about him groping or raping someone's wife or girlfriend. Does Obama match up to a Lincoln? Hardly. Lincoln freed millions, while Obama enslaves millions (tax slaves). Lincoln restored the Republic and held it together through a civil war. Obama may be the cause of dissolution and civil war.

The quality of our leaders is lacking. The quality of our Graduates is lacking. The quality of our Presidents is lacking. The quality of our people is lacking. Religion is a swear word and hard workers are called "over achievers". You might as well call them academic "uncle Toms". Success is punished and sloth is rewarded.

How can Obama still call us a AAA+ country when we should have lost that status back in the 1970's? Just because we are the United States of America does not mean the the laws of economics are somehow different for us.

Pride goweth before a fall. We have been falling for a long time now and when we land on our faces it is going to hurt.

We are still well placed to be a superpower for the next century, easily, if we just get our financial and cultural house in order. Look at London, Paris, Athens. Those cities are well ahead of us in the debt and decay game. Why would we want to move in that direction ourselves. Veer off.

Start demanding higher standards from our educational staff, not disabling testing requirements. Make THEM accountable to the children, under their tutelage, that can not read. Parents are just as responsible by looking to the schools to be daycare centers. Then again, if the family was not required to work two jobs to put food on the table, then this issue may not be an issue. Put religion back into the schools. We are a Christian nation. I'm Catholic, but I still feel that any bible is better than no bible. No discrimination, belief in something is better than belief in nothing.

Ponder this, my students, and ask yourself: did you earn that "A"? Did you really understand that math problem? Did you really read "Moby Dick" or did you just cheat and watch the movie? Do the hard things. Put away the calculator, do it long hand from time to time. Remember the fundamentals and they will never steer you wrong.

Live well.

--Zavost

Whiners of the World UNITE!

Around my Stoa this day I see the palls of smoke wafting over from London and its burbs. Smoke seems heavy in the air these days as many cities across Europe, North Africa, and the Near East burn almost regularly.

Somehow these people seem to think if you burn down a building that employs people then they will give YOU a job. Somehow these people seem to think if you burn down a government office then they will give you more welfare.
Somehow these people seem to think if you blockade a government office then they will give you goodies.

Morons.

Quit whining, get a haircut, get an education, and be a PRODUCTIVE member of society. We can't all be on the dole. Someone has to pay those crushing taxes and I don't plan on being the last one that has pay out the last dollar (dollar? whats a dollar anymore?).

In Athens, they are rioting because the government is being forced to cut its over-budget spending, read debt driven prosperity. The Greek people have become used to not having to work. They have become used to an ever increasing dole from the government. Gravy times are over and now they are pouting...with gasoline bombs. So, they riot in the town squares and burn businesses down, tear up government offices and then demand more goodies. Goodies that forced the government to cut spending in the first place...what am I missing here? You do get it, don't you? Those days are gone. Cut your hair and take a bath.

In London they are rioting because they say a policeman shot someone, even while they tear up London, shoot people on their own, and shove the police all over the place because the police have no orders to use RUBBER bullets...am I missing something here?

In London, they are burning down the place because they are afraid for their jobs and way of life. Some of that life has been subsidized by the public budget. Sorry, folks. Those days are gone. Put down the pint, brush your teeth, comb your hair and improve your life.

In Israel the people protest over the government not building enough subsidized housing for their immigrants. Why are you providing homes to immigrants again? Let them worry about where they are going to live...oh, you WANT them to live on the front lines of the Arab protests. Where is my free house, where is my subsidized housing...oh yeah, I actually have a sense of SELF WORTH! Wash the yamika, field strip your rifle, and get back to life.

Every time you demand something from the government, you are demanding that something be TAKEN from one person and given to another, be it money, time, or goods. Do you people understand that? If the government has to increase spending, it borrows (which YOU pay back) or it taxes (which YOU pay now). Housing? Education? Healthcare? Yep, all of it has to be taken from someone else.

What if a person just started pulling up your flowers and rolling a car out of your garage? You would call the cops, right? However, if a faceless person in government demands you pay increased taxes so that someone who is not willing to work for their car can have one, then you might as well cut out the middle man and just let the guy TAKE your car.

If a government cuts its welfare subsidies because they are BROKE, then causing millions of dollars in damage is not going to magically create money for you to spend. Forget for a moment that you just torched the store you were going to spend that money in. Dumb ass.

Socialism, in even its most well intentioned forms (and doses), is ultimately fatal to the patient. It breeds sloth, envy, greed, gluttony...heck, I'm really starting to work my way through the deadly sins here, aren't I? It stands, though.

To be blunt, if you give free money away to people who don't work, you will get MORE people who don't work. If you tax (or over-regulate) people who do work, you will get FEWER people willing to work. Common sense, right? Not to difficult to engage a brain cell or two on this and come up with the answers.

Get used to the fact that you will have to work for a living. Get used to the fact that you may have to rely on the family for help, aid, and comfort during your trying times. The government is a massively inefficient way to distribute wealth around a society. That should be done through the free market forces and activities of CHARITIES (thus the word charity). That means that you will have to get a job to participate. Now, shave, shower, and put on a clean outfit. Go to school, quit WHINING and get a life, don't take one.

Live well.

--Zavost

Different Paths

Atop the Stoa this hot day, was and am, pondering about life's paths.

The thought came to me last night as I was dressing a nasty laceration on a little girl's shin. The mom brought her over to my home knowing that I was in the medical field. Her husband is on deployment and she was not sure what to do or if it needed stitches. I could see that she was nervous and a bit queasy about the blood and the sight of the wound and I did my best to put both her and her daughter at ease.

We in the medical profession forget that seeing muscle strands and fat cells exposed on a leg is not a normal thing for most people to see. It is as normal for me to see that stuff as it is for me to see a blue sky. It pays for us to remember this, since part of our duty as caregivers is to place our patients at ease so we may treat them better.

As usual, my mind wandered afterwards, thinking about the mother and this stoic little girl (she did not cry once as I cleaned out her wound). Her life's path brought her to my front door. She did not possess the basic first aid kit needed to dress this wound (neither of us had the Tetanus shot required either), nor did she have the training to do it properly.

This is not a mark against her at all. We all have different skill sets and talents based on our upbringing, life circumstances, and ambitions. Near as I can tell, she is a home maker. I adore this profession, not because I am a knuckle-dragging Neanderthal, but because I see "moms" as being the societal glue that holds the generations together. They transmit the cultural values onto the next generation. They tame the aggressive little boys into individuals who DO NOT hit girls or try to rob them at night. A mom's love may have changed Hitler's outlook on life to be a little less bleak.

Some women are not cut out to be house-moms (hausfrau). My wife, for example, pegs a large portion of her self-esteem and value on her professional training. Being a house-mom is torture for her. Not because she is not good at what she does, she is an incredible mom, but because she knows she is capable of contributing so much more; and the children will not be children forever. Her path is different from my neighbor's path, and rightly so.

Looking back, my path has been a winding one, full of ups and downs. Some more down than up, but so what, it has been a good life over all. I have a wife of almost 20 years, two healthy and intelligent children, I have my health, even if I am too heavy, and I have my iPad 2. Life is good.

I currently share my path with my wife and children, and hope to remain on this path for quite some time. Some day, my children will take other paths, just as I took my own away from my parents. My wife not only took a new path, but had to take an international jet to get on my path. The day will come someday when death takes me or her from our joint path.

My neighbor appears content to be a military wife. She has 4 children and appears to be a good mom. I'm sure that life is not all honey and roses for her, just as we all have our ups and downs in life. She is on a path and will remain there until she chooses otherwise.

Our current President also had a winding path. One that took him from his father, who gave young Barack something like 17 half-brothers and sisters around the world, and dropped him on a tropical island with his mother. A mother who then abandoned him to the ministering of black supremacists, and if the rumors are correct, at least on child molester. His path took him to the Office of the US President. Not bad, even if he is the most ill-suited person to ever, and I mean EVER, hold that office. President William Henry Harrison was a better president by far.

Look at the old photos you come across out in the world and think about the people in them. Most are likely dead. Same as with all the old black and white films with people in them. Each and every one of them was a baby once, with their own doting, or lazy, parents. Every one of them had the promise of a fresh world for them to explore and conquer. Some succeeded, but most did not. Some had full, rich, and fulfilling lives, but most did not. Historically, the world has been a cold and uncompromising place. Society, a mosh-pit of competing interests and desires. Anyone who can find joy in this world has succeeded in life.

Even if you spend your whole life in a library reading books, you know, those things not in e-format, and never marry, then you have had a happy life; if that is what you desired to do. If you rose to be the CEO and lived through 5 divorces and have 8 children through 6 different women and that is what you wanted to do, then you have succeeded. We all have our differing levels of ambition and commitment to our desires. If one is able to look inward and find that which they want to do in life and are able to do it, then they will have a fulfilled life. Sometimes, responsibility to one's family or organization preclude your ability to lead a fulfilled life, but at least you can still lead a happy one. For me, being happy is my life's fulfillment. An interestingly circular logic there, but it works for me.

Live well.

--Zavost

Loose Lips...

Atop the Stoa this day I purse my lips in irritation and disgust at the attitude of the current administration.

I do not believe that the Taliban attack on our helicopter carrying members of Seal Team 6 and members of other Seal Teams. How many helicopter missions fly in and out of the bases on a daily basis. Even if the Taliban anticipated, planned, and ambushed this mission, what are the odds that the one helicopter hit was the one with the teams on it?

Historically, our heroes work in the shadows of history. Our government, as a matter of policy for decades has always kept the names and unit designations of its Special Forces out of the public record. Not because they wished to hog the glory, but to keep our missions secret, to keep those members safe from reprisal, and to keep their families safe from reprisal.

The President of Afghanistan has been having family members assassinated on a fairly regular basis. One half-brother was killed by a long-time body guard, one that was thought to be above reproach. What is the odds that one of these individuals passed onto their contacts within the Taliban the fact that not just any Seal team was on the move, but Seal Team 6 specifically? The odds are quite high, actually. Enough for me to feel fairly certain.

The person in our government to spill this bit of information was none other than the Vice President himself, Joseph Biden. Even as an Admiral refused to discuss the team, Joe Biden spilled it out for the entire world. On purpose? Possibly. Does not really matter now. His discretion and ability to keep his mouth shut in the past was non-existent, so it is not like it should come as any surprise.

None of the members of Seal Team 6 that terminated Bin Laden were on that helicopter, so this tells me that there will be more attempts on the team, and not only that, but I believe that in short order there will be attempts on the family and friends of ST 6. Failing that, they will begin targeting the families of any special forces personnel utilizing domestics. My old home State of Michigan may have several willing parties as it is the site of the largest population of Muslims living in the United States.

This is one of those times that I wish I were wrong. Let's hope I am. I do.

Live well.

--Zavost

Michele Bachmann: In perspective.

Atop the Stoa this day, I would like to think about perception, perspective, and reality.

Michele Bachmann has been in the news of late, as a Presidential hopeful, a Tea Party Caucus organizer, mother, and wife. The latest I read about her was not what her policies as President would be, or what her agenda currently is in the House of Representatives, but the fact that she played with the child of a supporter on camera.

I'll set the stage for you. Michele Bachman, the Presidential candidate, is in Iowa seeing supporters and being seen by the populace. A supporter comes up to her and offers up her baby in time-honored tradition. Instead of kissing it on the forehead and moving on to the next donor/voter/bundler she takes the baby in her arms and plays a bit with it. Dangling out her bracelet like a mobile for the child to play with. Heartwarming, yes?

Her liberal detractors (Democrats, Republicans, etc.) point out how hypocritical and disingenuous that image is of the Spirit of the Conservative Tea Party. I mean, the image of a contemporary conservative is one that plants a boot on grandma's head while shoving down a disabled person so they can draw a crosshair on an abortion clinic doctor; not one that plays with a baby.

I have always wondered if the people that write that stuff actually believe what they write, or if it is just all media template. I contend that if they believe everything they write then they are ignorant, hate-filled shells that must yearn for meaning in their lives. No one can be so consumed with hatred for another that allowing a baby to play with your bracelet becomes worthy of expensive media air time.

Michele Bachmann needs to be put in the proper perspective and context. She is a mother, and a foster mother. She and her husband have raised many, many children over the years, and raised them well. Quite an accomplishment in this day and age where children tend to be savages let loose to wander the cultural landscape. She has a solid and happy marriage. She has a great career that is personally fulfilling to her. What more could any feminist want? I'll bet she chats with her husband over dinner, when they can, and even talks about the gossip of what is going on in D.C. I can also bet that her husband must put in his two cents from time to time. I'll also bet that she has family and friends that love her very much.

She is also a conservative of the Reagan model. She knows who she is, what she is, and where she is going. The is rooted in herself. She is rooted in her faith and in her abilities. She does not have to ponder the wider issues of a problem that hits her desk. She does not have the "Long, dark tea time of the soul" that many of us have when making a difficult decision. Her faith and her core have the answers already. Moral or immoral? Right or wrong? The answers are not always so easy, though. Many are counter-intuitive. Do I sign a bill that gives single moms a living wage, regardless of whether her job is a McDonalds or at a lemonade stand? The answer is a clear, "no". Sometimes giving someone an easy way out simply enables lazy or un-realized individuals to remain unimproved. If the single mom wants a better life, she needs to better herself, not take hand outs. Women who are sure of themselves are not, "bitches", they are confident. Why is it that a confident and forceful man is considered "in charge" while a woman is a "bitch"?

Likewise, Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama are both mothers and daughters. I'll bet they want the same things for their children that Michele Bachmann wants for hers. They have friends and confidants and husbands that have their two cents to put in all the time. They too are rooted in their belief system, though it is a different system than the one I believe in. They do not have to ponder their moral beliefs as they are sure of who and what they are.

Where I diverge from them in a major way is how one presents themselves in public. Michele Bachmann, the conservative, is Michele Bachman the conservative in public AND in private. She is the same person in front of her family and in front of political donors. When asked a question about conservatism she is proud to call herself a conservative. Will Hillary call herself a Socialist? By any definition of the word that is what she is.

In my opinion, she is "suited" to do what she is doing. An elected, public official must be honest and forthright. Throughout history, politicians have been synonymous with "scum", and for good reason. We are America, damn it, and deserve better. I'd rather have a hundred people just like Michele Bachmann then a single Hillary or Michelle Obama. Why, you say?

Hillary and her husband invented the political game of "triangulation". Its only purpose is to irritate the fewest number of people. If you actually accomplish something, then great. Hillary is a woman who claims that she was named after Sir Edmond Hillary in recognition of his climbing Mt. Everest. Does she not think that we can look the two dates up? She was 6 years old when he climbed Mt. Everest. Can we say useful lie? She stuck with a cheating husband only because she knew he was going somewhere. She had invested too much time and effort into Bill and moved to Arkansas, of all places. She placed her ambition above her sense of morals. Big, big issue for me.

Michelle Obama sat in the VP suite of a hospital simply because her husband was a senator. What is her college degree in? Sociology, with a minor in African American Studies. She got her JD, but is no longer allowed to practice law. So what was she doing to collect that paycheck other than being a senator's wife, you know, someone who can help the hospital with all the pesky government regulations....
Michelle and her warped sense of Social Justice are just offensive when thought about in an intellectual and rational manner. This tells me that she is completely aware of how philosophically bankrupt the concepts are and that the reason she follows Social Justice is that it is an avenue to power and influence. Wrong answer.

Bachmann is someone who may not tell you everything, but she will not lie, even as a lie of omission. Hillary and Michelle would lie to me about the time of day if it served a purpose.

Are they good people? I'm sure that Michelle and Hillary are good to what THEY consider good people, while Michele is good to all people. Not because of politics or 'triangulation' or because of whatever. She is good to everyone because she is a moral and just person.

Character. Principle. Morality. Regardless by what method they come to possess those characteristics, leadership and decency descend from those traits.

Bachmann is suited to her role. Wiener was not. Politicians that go down to scandal go down because they were hiding character flaws that made them ill-suited to the position of public trust. Please, think on that. We hire leaders into private sector jobs based on their "suitability", why not our politicians? Oh, yeah, they lie, don't they?

What I'm talking about is instinctive and not too difficult to grasp. Think on it and don't listen to the TV. If you had to leave your wallet, key to the safety deposit box, and your baby while you ran to the store, who would you leave those items with? Hillary, Michelle O., or Michele B?

I know who I'd pick for that and I also know who I would vote for President.

Live well.

--Zavost