Unintended Truths

On this inappropriately named holiday upon the Stoa, I find myself chuckling, still, about a commercial by CNN. You know, the Communist News Network.

While I was puttering around in the kitchen, I heard an ad for the "CNN's GOP and Tea Party debate". Really? The Tea Party is actually running a candidate? I didn't know the Tea Party was an actual "Party". Does this mean that the DNC debates this year will feature a Democrat, a Socialist, and a Progressive? The difference between the GOP and the Tea Party is that there is a real difference in fiscal and social agendas. The only difference between a Democrat, a Socialist, and a Progressive is the speed at which you reach abject poverty and misery.

Of course the good ol' neutral journalists at CNN were not trying to imply that there was something actually wrong with the Tea Party, they just wanted to make sure that everyone knew that there were those on the debate that they liked and those they did not like.

These days, the progressives actually like the GOP because they are folks the "can work with". Those folks in the Tea Party just do not know how to "compromise".

CNN actually swerved into the truth on this one. They may not be able to recognize the truth when they trip over it, but it is there to be seen. The American public does indeed need to be able to recognize and sort out the GOP from the TP candidate. There are GOP folks running that are trying to drape the mantle of "outsider" or "Tea Party" over their shoulders (I'm looking at you Romney!). It is really easy for those of like mind to pick out the fakes.

If you ask two people two each claim to be the inheritors of our Founders' philosophies, a straight up question on taxes or freedom, just look for the fellow who waffles, or, talks for twenty minutes and does not say much. That will be the GOP. A Tea Party candidate will have an immediate answer and will not equivocate or get into nuance. This is what I've told you to start looking out for. The RINO GOP will fall to the TP candidate and the GOP will become what it once was, again. Just as the DNC was hijacked by the socialists, the TP will purify the GOP. CNN is actually afraid of this development and are trying again to peddle fear among the population. Sweet move.

Sometimes I think that the only way the truth gets out on the TV is either by accident or through smearing gone wrong. Not everyone who watches CNN is a kettle head. I wonder how often a few of those people cock and ear when they hear that crap and actually start thinking for themselves.

So on this day, first developed to honor the Unions in this country, I will bid you fare well. Things to do and things to eat. Look for the truth lest you trip over it.

--Live well.

Zavost

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