Most of us go through life saying that we would like to learn how to (insert your interest here) water ski, weld, learn Spanish, play the banjo, whatever. When you reach 55 or so your realize that you never did most of those things things, and worse yet, you never will. I am pretty sure at some point in my life, I could have learned to play a mean banjo. Heck, I already own the banjo. I had really good intentions.
So what happens to us that we don't go for it? We all have lots of excuses, the job, the family, money pressure, peer pressure, and the list goes on. For most of us it turns out that it is just a basic law of physics - - inertia! We all learned it in school, Sir Issac Newton defined it, the resistance of an object to change its state of motion. That explains why it is so hard for me to get out of my recliner!
Most of us never step off the path and make that first step in a new direction. It is clearly our loss and leads to many regrets.
I have always admired those that don't seem fettered by the same chains that seem to bind me whenever I think about doing something different.
Take my buddy Rick. He does not seem to be bound by the same rule of physics that gets me all bound up. His feet move toward new things effortlessly, while mine seem stuck fast in clay. Rick is an engineer who quit a good job to go back to school to become a teacher! He learned to make beautiful furniture. He wanted to restore an old pick up, so he learned how, and is doing it. Metal casting, camping, cooking, welding, and metal machining are just a few of the things he is into actively.
All that said, that is not what makes my buddy Rick stand out. What makes Rick stand out is the fact that he encourages others to take the journey with him. He prodded me into welding last year. I had always wanted to learn welding, but I would never have done it. I talked about attending a class for years, but never overcame the inertia and actually signed up.
I encourage each of you to step off the path, and try that thing that you have always talked about doing. It is most likely worth the effort, and even if it is not, it will help you get rid of the "if onlys" and the "I wishes". You know "if only" I had takent the time, I could have - - - or "I wish" I had made that trip to Spain when I was younger.
Stepping off the path is hard. If you can't make yourself do it, then I hope you have a buddy like Rick with a cattle prod to help you along the way. I will warn you now, a buddy like Rick is hard to find, so you might want to try a little harder on your own to take that first step. If you do find that you can do it on your own, then maybe you could be somebodies Rick and help them make that step.
Now where did I out that banjo?
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Monday, February 9, 2009
I am very sad
I am very sad this morning, and I think I know why - - I have lost all confidence in our elected officials. What a mess! Would you ever say "it is not as important what we do, it is only important that we do it fast" WHAT! I sometimes tell the joke in the car, "that I don't know where we are going , but we are sure making good time". It generally gets a chuckle because it is a joke, if it were true nobody would be laughing. Our elected and appointed officials made the rounds Sunday on the talk shows and made just that argument. "We are in uncharted water", "we are not sure what to do, but we must do something fast", "we don't know how much money is needed, but we know it has to be bold". They don't know where we are going but they sure are in a hurry to make good time.
What would you think of a doctor who told you he was not sure why your thumb hurt, but he was going to be bold and cut off your arm in hopes that it fixed the problem? I think you would say wait a minute let's talk about this, I need to understand what is going on. If he then told you there was no time to discuss it, you had to be bold and act right now, you would. Only your action would be to get up, walk out of his office, and call the American Medical Association to report the quack!
The one thing that all the economist seem to agree on is the fact that the mess we are in was caused by our collective determination to live above our means. We bought houses that were to big for our needs, we bought cars that were impractical, and we did it all with easy money loans that clearly we could not afford to pay back. We were borrowing to support a lifestyle we could not afford. And what is the answer now? The government will borrow several trillion dollars, that we can not afford to pay back, to buy "things". Buying "things", or "investing" in them as the politicians like to say, will stimulate the economy. I suppose that is true. The politicians argue that if they gave us the money, we might save it and not spend it as needed. Interesting that saving has become evil. I suppose it is true that most Americans are concerned (see scared) and might want to hold on to some of their money, of course if we had been doing that for the last few years, we would not be here today. Non the less we need to spend, we need to buy cars and houses and shoes and TVs to get our economy rolling. I would be willing to do that if I had any confidence that our government was not driving us toward a real depression.
It is also true that a big part of this financial mess was caused by greedy charlatans on Wall Street, and they are being dealt with - - -by giving them several hundred billions in bailout compliments of the tax payer!
There are those that argue that government spending is more effective than spending in the private sector. That argument generally comes from those folks who are living off the taxes of the private sector and are not the least bit worried about losing their jobs. You and I would never pay $1000 for a toilet seat or spend millions of dollars to study the sex life of badgers.
We are looking for answers without pain, and I am not sure there are any. I don't know the answer. I know that the problem is very complex, and the solution is even more so. I also know that whenever someone tells you that they don't have time to explain the solution or discuss it, that is a bad sign. We all sign legal papers all the time that we don't understand. Not a good practice but we do it anyway. We are usually comforted by the fact that we are invited and encouraged to read the documents, and to ask questions about anything we do not understand. What if you sat down to sign those same documents and they were covered up? What if you wanted to read them and you were told there was not time? What if you protested and were told, "just trust me, I am looking out for you." Would you, or would you say wait a minute you have some explaining to do, I am not signing anything.
The economy will not collapse if they take time to explain the "stimulus package" to the American people. One trillion dollars explained in 800 pages of legislation. At a cost of a little over one billion dollars per page, that might be worth reading.
They cried wolf and we gave them 700 billion dollars without any idea of what it was being used for, or accountability of where it went. We have a new president and he said the 700 billion was handled irresponsibly, I will do better. He is now crying wolf for a trillion more dollars. Don't ask any questions, just hurry and give it to me where I can save you. (with your own money I might add)
"Change we can count on" - - if "count on" means the same old pigs at the trough getting what they want, looks like we got it. I have children and grandchildren who will never see this money paid off. I was hoping for more.
What would you think of a doctor who told you he was not sure why your thumb hurt, but he was going to be bold and cut off your arm in hopes that it fixed the problem? I think you would say wait a minute let's talk about this, I need to understand what is going on. If he then told you there was no time to discuss it, you had to be bold and act right now, you would. Only your action would be to get up, walk out of his office, and call the American Medical Association to report the quack!
The one thing that all the economist seem to agree on is the fact that the mess we are in was caused by our collective determination to live above our means. We bought houses that were to big for our needs, we bought cars that were impractical, and we did it all with easy money loans that clearly we could not afford to pay back. We were borrowing to support a lifestyle we could not afford. And what is the answer now? The government will borrow several trillion dollars, that we can not afford to pay back, to buy "things". Buying "things", or "investing" in them as the politicians like to say, will stimulate the economy. I suppose that is true. The politicians argue that if they gave us the money, we might save it and not spend it as needed. Interesting that saving has become evil. I suppose it is true that most Americans are concerned (see scared) and might want to hold on to some of their money, of course if we had been doing that for the last few years, we would not be here today. Non the less we need to spend, we need to buy cars and houses and shoes and TVs to get our economy rolling. I would be willing to do that if I had any confidence that our government was not driving us toward a real depression.
It is also true that a big part of this financial mess was caused by greedy charlatans on Wall Street, and they are being dealt with - - -by giving them several hundred billions in bailout compliments of the tax payer!
There are those that argue that government spending is more effective than spending in the private sector. That argument generally comes from those folks who are living off the taxes of the private sector and are not the least bit worried about losing their jobs. You and I would never pay $1000 for a toilet seat or spend millions of dollars to study the sex life of badgers.
We are looking for answers without pain, and I am not sure there are any. I don't know the answer. I know that the problem is very complex, and the solution is even more so. I also know that whenever someone tells you that they don't have time to explain the solution or discuss it, that is a bad sign. We all sign legal papers all the time that we don't understand. Not a good practice but we do it anyway. We are usually comforted by the fact that we are invited and encouraged to read the documents, and to ask questions about anything we do not understand. What if you sat down to sign those same documents and they were covered up? What if you wanted to read them and you were told there was not time? What if you protested and were told, "just trust me, I am looking out for you." Would you, or would you say wait a minute you have some explaining to do, I am not signing anything.
The economy will not collapse if they take time to explain the "stimulus package" to the American people. One trillion dollars explained in 800 pages of legislation. At a cost of a little over one billion dollars per page, that might be worth reading.
They cried wolf and we gave them 700 billion dollars without any idea of what it was being used for, or accountability of where it went. We have a new president and he said the 700 billion was handled irresponsibly, I will do better. He is now crying wolf for a trillion more dollars. Don't ask any questions, just hurry and give it to me where I can save you. (with your own money I might add)
"Change we can count on" - - if "count on" means the same old pigs at the trough getting what they want, looks like we got it. I have children and grandchildren who will never see this money paid off. I was hoping for more.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Just in case you did not understand lastime!
Ok Ok so you did not follow yesterdays post on the bailout. Let's try it one more time and I will keep it simple.
Case in Point: Bank of America
1) The government gives Bank Of America 25 billion dollars and says go forth and lend. Being prudent bankers, they are not about to loan that money to anybody. After all they may not pay it back.
2) B of A now has $25 Bil. burning a hole in it's pocket, and goes looking for a bargain to buy. Yes this is the same money they were supposed to be lending to their customers.
3) Merrill Lynch is in trouble because of poor business practices and can be bought for a mere $50 billion.
4) B of A knows a good deal when they see one, so they buy Merrill. I mean in reality who could resist, that Merrill logo of a big raging bull is really cool.
Now don't get the wrong idea, B of A did not take the check Uncle Sam gave them and write their own check to buy Merrill. After all they were still 25 billion short right. No like any good company they just issued more shares and exchanged those shares for Merrill shares, so they got Merrill and still have the 25 billion we gave them. Now that is one smart deal.
5) The deal closes 12/31/08. Somebody deserves a big bonus!
6) January 14, oops we did not look at Merrill close enough. Turns out in the last 14 days we have discovered they are losers.
7) Hello Uncle Sam, can you please send us a few more billion dollars, we are a little short. We need to keep that balance sheet strong.
8) Uncle Sam says sure, we got your back on this deal, who could have seen this coming. You guys sorta messed up here so somebody needs to be punished, at least a little.
9) B of A says sure, we understand. How about we all keep our year end bonuses but we cut the dividend of all of our unsuspecting stockholders by 50%?
10) Uncle Sam says, it really hurts me to get tuff, but we must. That dividend reduction may not be enough punishment, you acted irresponsibly.
11) B of A says we understand we are willing to sacrifice more in the way of dividends to our stockholders if we have to. We understand somebody must be made to pay.
12) Uncle Sam says, call me if you need more, my pocket is always open!
I am sure no in the government or anyone at Bank of America sees it this way. I am sure both would say this is way to simplistic, and that I just don't understand. I will confess that I truly do not understand, do you?
All I know, is if the president of B of A or somebody from the Treasury had to got to Mrs. Jones 3rd grade class and explain this deal, and he wasn't directly involved - -I think explain it like I just did.
Buy the way, the porn industry has a lobbyist asking for several billions to save jobs in that industry. I am sure that in Washington it will sound perfectly reasonable, and may even be considered.
I just think if you can't justify it to a 3rd grader, it may not be a good deal for the taxpayers.
Case in Point: Bank of America
1) The government gives Bank Of America 25 billion dollars and says go forth and lend. Being prudent bankers, they are not about to loan that money to anybody. After all they may not pay it back.
2) B of A now has $25 Bil. burning a hole in it's pocket, and goes looking for a bargain to buy. Yes this is the same money they were supposed to be lending to their customers.
3) Merrill Lynch is in trouble because of poor business practices and can be bought for a mere $50 billion.
4) B of A knows a good deal when they see one, so they buy Merrill. I mean in reality who could resist, that Merrill logo of a big raging bull is really cool.
Now don't get the wrong idea, B of A did not take the check Uncle Sam gave them and write their own check to buy Merrill. After all they were still 25 billion short right. No like any good company they just issued more shares and exchanged those shares for Merrill shares, so they got Merrill and still have the 25 billion we gave them. Now that is one smart deal.
5) The deal closes 12/31/08. Somebody deserves a big bonus!
6) January 14, oops we did not look at Merrill close enough. Turns out in the last 14 days we have discovered they are losers.
7) Hello Uncle Sam, can you please send us a few more billion dollars, we are a little short. We need to keep that balance sheet strong.
8) Uncle Sam says sure, we got your back on this deal, who could have seen this coming. You guys sorta messed up here so somebody needs to be punished, at least a little.
9) B of A says sure, we understand. How about we all keep our year end bonuses but we cut the dividend of all of our unsuspecting stockholders by 50%?
10) Uncle Sam says, it really hurts me to get tuff, but we must. That dividend reduction may not be enough punishment, you acted irresponsibly.
11) B of A says we understand we are willing to sacrifice more in the way of dividends to our stockholders if we have to. We understand somebody must be made to pay.
12) Uncle Sam says, call me if you need more, my pocket is always open!
I am sure no in the government or anyone at Bank of America sees it this way. I am sure both would say this is way to simplistic, and that I just don't understand. I will confess that I truly do not understand, do you?
All I know, is if the president of B of A or somebody from the Treasury had to got to Mrs. Jones 3rd grade class and explain this deal, and he wasn't directly involved - -I think explain it like I just did.
Buy the way, the porn industry has a lobbyist asking for several billions to save jobs in that industry. I am sure that in Washington it will sound perfectly reasonable, and may even be considered.
I just think if you can't justify it to a 3rd grader, it may not be a good deal for the taxpayers.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Just say no! Stop the borrowing!
Act I
It seems widely accepted that we are in this financial mess for 3 reasons: One, we allowed people to borrow money that they could not pay back to buy houses that they could not afford. Two, house prices had become inflated because anybody could borrow all the money they wanted, credit worthy or not. Three, we allowed wild speculation in the financial market with the creation of financial instruments that nobody understood or regulated. "Credit Default Swap" The very name should have raised regulators eyebrows. Trading bad debt for bad debt is good business somehow? I think most high school students would have questioned that one!
Act II
The government told us that if we did not spend $700,000,000,000 right now (not next week), that the world as we know it would end. Total financial melt down. No one would be able borrow money, we would all lose our jobs, we would all be eating out of garbage cans, if we could find one.
Act III
90 days later, $350 billion spent by TARP, and additional trillions of dollars pumped into banks, mortgage house, and insurance companies by the Federal Reserve. (the Fed can spend all they want with NO approval so I am not sure why we needed TARP's $700 Billion) You still can't borrow money, big bonuses are still being paid to the people who blew the deal in the first place. Unemployment is 7%!
ACT IV
In comes the new president and says please release the other $350 billion so that I can make things better, and save our citizens. I know how to spend it "wisely", and we will keep a ledger of where we spent it so we will be accountable. What!
Act V
Who actually got the money? I didn't get any of it, and I am sure that you did not either. But somebody had to have gotten it right? Our 401K got killed, my wife who worked for 35 years is likely to lose her pension and insurance benefits. Our political leaders now call that a "legacy cost" that must be abandoned by the automakers for them to survive. Beware of ever being branded as a "legacy cost". Once that occurs you are no longer a human being. It is much easier to cast aside a legacy cost than a human being.
Act VI
50 years in the future- Our children and grandchildren are still trying to pay off the debt we left them. Their standard of living is not close to what ours is because their tax burden to pay off this debt is huge.
The question is: If this mess was caused by excessive borrowing by un-credit worthy people, how can an un-credit worthy government (we the people) borrow our way back into propriety?
The answer is simple, and every body knows it in their heart of hearts - - -you can't. We just don't like the answer so we turn our heads and let it continue.
Albert Einstein gave the following definition: Insanity- doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Einstein was no economist, but I think all the economist have already left the building!
It seems widely accepted that we are in this financial mess for 3 reasons: One, we allowed people to borrow money that they could not pay back to buy houses that they could not afford. Two, house prices had become inflated because anybody could borrow all the money they wanted, credit worthy or not. Three, we allowed wild speculation in the financial market with the creation of financial instruments that nobody understood or regulated. "Credit Default Swap" The very name should have raised regulators eyebrows. Trading bad debt for bad debt is good business somehow? I think most high school students would have questioned that one!
Act II
The government told us that if we did not spend $700,000,000,000 right now (not next week), that the world as we know it would end. Total financial melt down. No one would be able borrow money, we would all lose our jobs, we would all be eating out of garbage cans, if we could find one.
Act III
90 days later, $350 billion spent by TARP, and additional trillions of dollars pumped into banks, mortgage house, and insurance companies by the Federal Reserve. (the Fed can spend all they want with NO approval so I am not sure why we needed TARP's $700 Billion) You still can't borrow money, big bonuses are still being paid to the people who blew the deal in the first place. Unemployment is 7%!
ACT IV
In comes the new president and says please release the other $350 billion so that I can make things better, and save our citizens. I know how to spend it "wisely", and we will keep a ledger of where we spent it so we will be accountable. What!
Act V
Who actually got the money? I didn't get any of it, and I am sure that you did not either. But somebody had to have gotten it right? Our 401K got killed, my wife who worked for 35 years is likely to lose her pension and insurance benefits. Our political leaders now call that a "legacy cost" that must be abandoned by the automakers for them to survive. Beware of ever being branded as a "legacy cost". Once that occurs you are no longer a human being. It is much easier to cast aside a legacy cost than a human being.
Act VI
50 years in the future- Our children and grandchildren are still trying to pay off the debt we left them. Their standard of living is not close to what ours is because their tax burden to pay off this debt is huge.
The question is: If this mess was caused by excessive borrowing by un-credit worthy people, how can an un-credit worthy government (we the people) borrow our way back into propriety?
The answer is simple, and every body knows it in their heart of hearts - - -you can't. We just don't like the answer so we turn our heads and let it continue.
Albert Einstein gave the following definition: Insanity- doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Einstein was no economist, but I think all the economist have already left the building!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)