Make a Simple Toilet Roll Bird Feeders
9 years ago
Friday, February 27, 2009
Welcome back gets shut down.....
So I might be back but my employer decided this was a good week to block "social networking and personal sites." I can view my blog, but they have blocked the ability to post to it at work. me having the motiviation to do so at home is SEVERELY limited. I will try my best though, no promises......
Monday, February 23, 2009
welcome back to me. quote of the day...
"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it."
Dr. Adrian Rogers
Dr. Adrian Rogers
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Another good Peggy Noonan this week.
I like her writing style alot. Very simple. Observational.
Read it here.
Two interesting excerpts.....
Read it here.
Two interesting excerpts.....
It's Sully and Suleman, the pilot and "Octomom," the two great stories that are twinned with the era. Sully, the airline captain who saved 155 lives by landing that plane just right—level wings, nose up, tail down, plant that baby, get everyone out, get them counted, and then, at night, wonder what you could have done better. You know the reaction of the people of our country to Chesley B. Sullenberger III: They shake their heads, and tears come to their eyes. He is cool, modest, competent, tough in the good way. He's the only one who doesn't applaud Sully. He was just doing his job.
This is why people are so moved: We're still making Sullys. We're still making those mythic Americans, those steely-eyed rocket men. Like Alan Shepard in the Mercury rocket: "Come on and light this candle."
But Sully, 58, Air Force Academy '73, was shaped and formed by the old America, and educated in an ethos in which a certain style of manhood—of personhood—was held high.
What we fear we're making more of these days is Nadya Suleman. The dizzy, selfish, self-dramatizing 33-year-old mother who had six small children and then a week ago eight more because, well, she always wanted a big family. "Suley" doubletalks with the best of them, she doubletalks with profound ease. She is like Blago without the charm. She had needs and took proactive steps to meet them, and those who don't approve are limited, which must be sad for them. She leaves anchorwomen slack-jawed: How do you rough up a woman who's still lactating? She seems aware of their predicament.
Politicians keep saying, "People have to begin to understand we're in bad shape," and "People should realize it's a crisis." I think they know, Sherlock. Do you? Our political leaders are like a doctor who rushes to the scene of a terrible crash, bends over a hemorrhaging woman and says, "This is serious, lady, you can't take it lightly." She looks up at him: "Help me, do something, I'm bleeding out!" The doctor, to the local TV cameras: "I hope she knows she's in trouble."
A follow up to my "talking up" the economy post from the other day...
By Bradley Schiller
President Barack Obama has turned fearmongering into an art form. He has repeatedly raised the specter of another Great Depression. First, he did so to win votes in the November election. He has done so again recently to sway congressional votes for his stimulus package.
![[Commentary]](http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/OB-DD305_oj_sch_E_20090213211613.jpg)
APIn his remarks, every gloomy statistic on the economy becomes a harbinger of doom. As he tells it, today's economy is the worst since the Great Depression. Without his Recovery and Reinvestment Act, he says, the economy will fall back into that abyss and may never recover.
This fearmongering may be good politics, but it is bad history and bad economics. It is bad history because our current economic woes don't come close to those of the 1930s. At worst, a comparison to the 1981-82 recession might be appropriate. Consider the job losses that Mr. Obama always cites. In the last year, the U.S. economy shed 3.4 million jobs. That's a grim statistic for sure, but represents just 2.2% of the labor force. From November 1981 to October 1982, 2.4 million jobs were lost -- fewer in number than today, but the labor force was smaller. So 1981-82 job losses totaled 2.2% of the labor force, the same as now.
Job losses in the Great Depression were of an entirely different magnitude. In 1930, the economy shed 4.8% of the labor force. In 1931, 6.5%. And then in 1932, another 7.1%. Jobs were being lost at double or triple the rate of 2008-09 or 1981-82.
This was reflected in unemployment rates. The latest survey pegs U.S. unemployment at 7.6%. That's more than three percentage points below the 1982 peak (10.8%) and not even a third of the peak in 1932 (25.2%). You simply can't equate 7.6% unemployment with the Great Depression.
Other economic statistics also dispel any analogy between today's economic woes and the Great Depression. Real gross domestic product (GDP) rose in 2008, despite a bad fourth quarter. The Congressional Budget Office projects a GDP decline of 2% in 2009. That's comparable to 1982, when GDP contracted by 1.9%. It is nothing like 1930, when GDP fell by 9%, or 1931, when GDP contracted by another 8%, or 1932, when it fell yet another 13%.
Auto production last year declined by roughly 25%. That looks good compared to 1932, when production shriveled by 90%. The failure of a couple of dozen banks in 2008 just doesn't compare to over 10,000 bank failures in 1933, or even the 3,000-plus bank (Savings & Loan) failures in 1987-88. Stockholders can take some solace from the fact that the recent stock market debacle doesn't come close to the 90% devaluation of the early 1930s.
Mr. Obama's analogies to the Great Depression are not only historically inaccurate, they're also dangerous. Repeated warnings from the White House about a coming economic apocalypse aren't likely to raise consumer and investor expectations for the future. In fact, they have contributed to the continuing decline in consumer confidence that is restraining a spending pickup. Beyond that, fearmongering can trigger a political stampede to embrace a "recovery" package that delivers a lot less than it promises. A more cool-headed assessment of the economy's woes might produce better policies.
Mr. Schiller, an economics professor at the University of Nevada, Reno, is the author of "The Economy Today" (McGraw-Hill, 2007).
Friday, February 13, 2009
Stimulus, what stimulus??
Will the stimulus actually stimulate?
Economists say no.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/62082.html
Economists say no.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/62082.html
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Since Woody thinks I'm a "Republican whore" for my post from Bloomberg the other day, I thought I would throw in a second source...
Is the Wall St. Journal respectable, even if it does appear on the opinion page?
As a side note, I find these days its hard to find anything actually covered that might be divisive OUTSIDE of the opinion pages.
A Health-Tech Monopoly
Another surprise in the stimulus fine print.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123431432273870909.html
As a side note, I find these days its hard to find anything actually covered that might be divisive OUTSIDE of the opinion pages.
A Health-Tech Monopoly
Another surprise in the stimulus fine print.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123431432273870909.html
How much is a trillion dollars?
Well, considering I was a failed math major, lets take this one step at a time. How much is a billion? If I gave you, (which I won't) $1 per second, it would take 31.7 years to have a billion dollars. Now, if I recall, there are 1,000 billion in a trillion....... so, $1,000,000,000,000 would take 31,700 years to receive if I gave you $1 per second (which I won't). Thats a long time. The really amazing part is, congress did it in 17 days. Too bad I don't build electric golf carts, haven't spent wildly in excess of my state budget, or need a digital converter box to watch digital tv, I could get me some of that.
Another way to look at it is that the US economy cranks out somewhere around $10 trillion worth of goods and services a year. So far since about mid last year, we have managed to either spend or guarantee assets of approximately $9.7 trillion. Basically, its like we as a country could have just called in sick for a year. Granted, that doesn't mean we will spend that whole amount, but its still on the line.
Must be nice to have a printing press in your basement.
Another way to look at it is that the US economy cranks out somewhere around $10 trillion worth of goods and services a year. So far since about mid last year, we have managed to either spend or guarantee assets of approximately $9.7 trillion. Basically, its like we as a country could have just called in sick for a year. Granted, that doesn't mean we will spend that whole amount, but its still on the line.
Must be nice to have a printing press in your basement.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Wednesday is Lost
So, back in the day, you local people used to get your scoop and insight on Lost from Preston and Steve. Now, they seem more intent on tatooing someone than covering Lost. Even when they do, the more I listen, the more I think they don't even watch the show. Usually I wish I could put my head in a meat grinder. After a few slow seasons, finally the show is getting intereting again and its good to hear some insight and get pointed back to things that happened in the past so you know what the heck is going on.....Check out Entertainment Weekly's site. On Wednesdays they have a feature that goes over some stuff from last week and has some tidbits for this week's episode. On Thursdays they have a great recap piece, usually with some really indepth stuff. This Doc Jensen guy clearly has too much time on his hands, but makes for some good reading. Enjoy.
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,1550612_20245769_20258405,00.html
And now, a word from my man crush....
The Hell With Our Constitution
Walter E. Williams
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Dr. Robert Higgs, senior fellow at the Oakland-based Independent Institute, penned an article in The Christian Science Monitor (2/9/2009) that suggests the most intelligent recommendation that I've read to fix our current economic mess. The title of his article gives his recommendation away: "Instead of stimulus, do nothing -- seriously."
Stimulus package debate is over how much money should be spent, whether some should given to the National Endowment for the Arts, research sexually transmitted diseases or bail out Amtrak, our failing railroad system. Dr. Higgs says, "Hardly anyone, however, is asking the most important question: Should the federal government be doing any of this?" He adds, "Until the 1930s, the Constitution served as a major constraint on federal economic interventionism. The government's powers were understood to be just as the framers intended: few and explicitly enumerated in our founding document and its amendments. Search the Constitution as long as you like, and you will find no specific authority conveyed for the government to spend money on global-warming research, urban mass transit, food stamps, unemployment insurance, Medicaid, or countless other items in the stimulus package and, even without it, in the regular federal budget."
By bringing up the idea of constitutional restraints on Washington, I'd say Dr. Higgs is whistling Dixie. Americans have long ago abandoned respect for the constitutional limitations placed on the federal government. Our elected representatives represent that disrespect. After all I'd ask Higgs: Isn't it unreasonable to expect a politician to do what he considers to be political suicide, namely conduct himself according to the letter and spirit of the Constitution?
While Americans, through ignorance or purpose, show contempt for our Constitution, I doubt whether they are indifferent between a growing or stagnating economy. Dr. Higgs tells us some of the economic history of the U.S. In 1893, there was a depression; we got out of it without a stimulus package. There was a major recession of 1920-21; though sharp, it quickly reversed itself into what has been call the "Roaring Twenties." In 1929, there was an economic downturn, most notably featured by the stock market collapse, after which came massive government intervention -- you might call it the nation's first stimulus package. President Hoover and Congress responded to what might have been a two- or three-year sharp downturn with many of the policies President Obama and Congress are urging today. They raised tariffs, propped up wage rates, bailed out farmers, banks and other businesses, and financed state relief efforts. When Roosevelt came to office, he became even more interventionist than Hoover and presided over protracted depression where the economy didn't fully recover until 1946.
Roosevelt didn't have an easy time with his agenda; he had to first emasculate the U.S. Supreme Court. Higgs points out that federal courts had respect for the Constitution as late as the 1930s. They issued some 1,600 injunctions to restrain officials from carrying out acts of Congress. The U.S. Supreme Court overturned as unconstitutional the New Deal's centerpieces such as the National Industrial Recovery Act and the Agricultural Adjustment Act and other parts of Roosevelt's "stimulus package." An outraged Roosevelt threatened to pack the Court, and the Court capitulated to where it is today giving Congress virtually unlimited powers to tax, spend and regulate. My question to my fellow Americans is: Do we want a repeat of measures that failed dismally during the 1930s?
A more fundamental question is: Should Washington be guided by the Constitution? In explaining the Constitution, James Madison, the acknowledged father of the Constitution, wrote in Federalist Paper 45: "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce." Has the Constitution been amended to permit Congress to tax, spend and regulate as it pleases or have Americans said, "To hell with the Constitution"?
Walter E. Williams
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Dr. Robert Higgs, senior fellow at the Oakland-based Independent Institute, penned an article in The Christian Science Monitor (2/9/2009) that suggests the most intelligent recommendation that I've read to fix our current economic mess. The title of his article gives his recommendation away: "Instead of stimulus, do nothing -- seriously."
Stimulus package debate is over how much money should be spent, whether some should given to the National Endowment for the Arts, research sexually transmitted diseases or bail out Amtrak, our failing railroad system. Dr. Higgs says, "Hardly anyone, however, is asking the most important question: Should the federal government be doing any of this?" He adds, "Until the 1930s, the Constitution served as a major constraint on federal economic interventionism. The government's powers were understood to be just as the framers intended: few and explicitly enumerated in our founding document and its amendments. Search the Constitution as long as you like, and you will find no specific authority conveyed for the government to spend money on global-warming research, urban mass transit, food stamps, unemployment insurance, Medicaid, or countless other items in the stimulus package and, even without it, in the regular federal budget."
By bringing up the idea of constitutional restraints on Washington, I'd say Dr. Higgs is whistling Dixie. Americans have long ago abandoned respect for the constitutional limitations placed on the federal government. Our elected representatives represent that disrespect. After all I'd ask Higgs: Isn't it unreasonable to expect a politician to do what he considers to be political suicide, namely conduct himself according to the letter and spirit of the Constitution?
While Americans, through ignorance or purpose, show contempt for our Constitution, I doubt whether they are indifferent between a growing or stagnating economy. Dr. Higgs tells us some of the economic history of the U.S. In 1893, there was a depression; we got out of it without a stimulus package. There was a major recession of 1920-21; though sharp, it quickly reversed itself into what has been call the "Roaring Twenties." In 1929, there was an economic downturn, most notably featured by the stock market collapse, after which came massive government intervention -- you might call it the nation's first stimulus package. President Hoover and Congress responded to what might have been a two- or three-year sharp downturn with many of the policies President Obama and Congress are urging today. They raised tariffs, propped up wage rates, bailed out farmers, banks and other businesses, and financed state relief efforts. When Roosevelt came to office, he became even more interventionist than Hoover and presided over protracted depression where the economy didn't fully recover until 1946.
Roosevelt didn't have an easy time with his agenda; he had to first emasculate the U.S. Supreme Court. Higgs points out that federal courts had respect for the Constitution as late as the 1930s. They issued some 1,600 injunctions to restrain officials from carrying out acts of Congress. The U.S. Supreme Court overturned as unconstitutional the New Deal's centerpieces such as the National Industrial Recovery Act and the Agricultural Adjustment Act and other parts of Roosevelt's "stimulus package." An outraged Roosevelt threatened to pack the Court, and the Court capitulated to where it is today giving Congress virtually unlimited powers to tax, spend and regulate. My question to my fellow Americans is: Do we want a repeat of measures that failed dismally during the 1930s?
A more fundamental question is: Should Washington be guided by the Constitution? In explaining the Constitution, James Madison, the acknowledged father of the Constitution, wrote in Federalist Paper 45: "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce." Has the Constitution been amended to permit Congress to tax, spend and regulate as it pleases or have Americans said, "To hell with the Constitution"?
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Stratfor
For those of you who like independent commentary and analysis, you should check out stratfor. No spin, no BS, no partisan crap. it is a subscription site, but they do publish weekly blurbs that I get sent to me by email. Really good third party analysis of whatever is happening currently in the world. I will post some I find interesting.....
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20090209_munich_continuity_between_bush_and_obama_foreign_policies
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20090209_munich_continuity_between_bush_and_obama_foreign_policies
Sylar is the only reason to watch heroes
The first season of heroes was awesome. Good plot, good suspense, good characters. Since then though, I feel like they have turned most of the characters into a joke. There is so much waffling, so much looking like a tool. Hiro, the hero of the first season, was made to look like a complete bumbling clown. Nathan switches his views faster than I can even keep track of. Daphne seems to exist only to get sympathy for Parkman. Parkman who can control anyone else's mind, can't even seem to remember that or even control his own. Claire is constantly whining. Mr. Muggles, don't even get me started on Mr. Muggles, where has he been? They come up with a few good ideas then blow their load with it so fast you barely rember they even brought it up. They could have done a whole season on that crazy puppetmaster dude. I don't know, seems more like recycled xmen plots than anything else.
Despite the best efforts of the writers though, Sylar is the only one who has kept his edge. He is actually committed to the character. Heres to hoping that they keep him on his own tragectory and away from the tornado of a storyline the rest of the clowns are in. I thought it was awesome it looks like they are starting Sylars own little faction of misfits. Maybe they can hit the reset button and spin something off on that at least.
Despite the best efforts of the writers though, Sylar is the only one who has kept his edge. He is actually committed to the character. Heres to hoping that they keep him on his own tragectory and away from the tornado of a storyline the rest of the clowns are in. I thought it was awesome it looks like they are starting Sylars own little faction of misfits. Maybe they can hit the reset button and spin something off on that at least.
Why is everything suddenly a catastrophe?
Is it just me, or do you feel it is the President's job to try to talk UP the country. It seems like everytime I turn on the tv or read the paper or go on the internet it seems like either the President, Larry Summers, or someone in Congress is saying if we don't pass this stimulus business ASAP we are going to go into Armageddon and never coming out. Its not that I don't think we have some serious issues to address, but it just seems that we are jumping the gun a bit.
Personally, I think they are about 4 months late on that call. From this chair, the worst times I have personally seen, not that I have a decades long track record, but I do work with people who do, was the first 2 weeks of October. Those two weeks seemed like the longest days I have ever had. The market was dropping 500+ points per day, banks were going out of business, everything was full meltdown; the system was crumbling, and crumbling FAST. The general populace just didn't see that aspect of it at the time; it hadn't sunk in. Currently, the banking system is still a mess, consumer confidence is in the toilet, business confidence is also in the toilet, but the credit markets (where companies go to get loans and issue debt which is what ultimately allows them to expand or even meet payroll) is starting to thaw out. I do think that heavy measures need to be taken to claw our way back out of this, but no matter what, that is going to take a while. Again, personally, I don't see the need to rush this thing out at the expense of looking at what is going to help the most. It is still a trillion dollars that SOMEONE is going to have to pay for.
It just seems to me that the President's job is to instill confidence in the system, to be the country's cheer leader and to inspire people. What we really have is a crisis of confidence. What are all these assets worth? Will my bank be around tomorrow? Will I have a job? Can I retire? Can I afford....? All need confidence. To me, when I hear if we don't spend $1 trillion right now we are all going to die a horrible slow excrutiating death, but only after we are all on the street foraiging for food, I don't get a whole lot of confidence. Actually, I think it has the opposite effect.
Don't get me wrong, I think the President needs to be straight with people, I just hope we are not sensationalizing for the sake of it, just so egg isn't on someone's approval rating. Regardless of you political viewpoint, Obama has a reputation as a excellent speaker with very charasmatic abilities. I just wish those talents would be used spreading a positive message and being a cheerleader to bring out the best in this country, not trying to sell a package that likely doesn't have the support of the majority of the populace.
Personally, I think they are about 4 months late on that call. From this chair, the worst times I have personally seen, not that I have a decades long track record, but I do work with people who do, was the first 2 weeks of October. Those two weeks seemed like the longest days I have ever had. The market was dropping 500+ points per day, banks were going out of business, everything was full meltdown; the system was crumbling, and crumbling FAST. The general populace just didn't see that aspect of it at the time; it hadn't sunk in. Currently, the banking system is still a mess, consumer confidence is in the toilet, business confidence is also in the toilet, but the credit markets (where companies go to get loans and issue debt which is what ultimately allows them to expand or even meet payroll) is starting to thaw out. I do think that heavy measures need to be taken to claw our way back out of this, but no matter what, that is going to take a while. Again, personally, I don't see the need to rush this thing out at the expense of looking at what is going to help the most. It is still a trillion dollars that SOMEONE is going to have to pay for.
It just seems to me that the President's job is to instill confidence in the system, to be the country's cheer leader and to inspire people. What we really have is a crisis of confidence. What are all these assets worth? Will my bank be around tomorrow? Will I have a job? Can I retire? Can I afford....? All need confidence. To me, when I hear if we don't spend $1 trillion right now we are all going to die a horrible slow excrutiating death, but only after we are all on the street foraiging for food, I don't get a whole lot of confidence. Actually, I think it has the opposite effect.
Don't get me wrong, I think the President needs to be straight with people, I just hope we are not sensationalizing for the sake of it, just so egg isn't on someone's approval rating. Regardless of you political viewpoint, Obama has a reputation as a excellent speaker with very charasmatic abilities. I just wish those talents would be used spreading a positive message and being a cheerleader to bring out the best in this country, not trying to sell a package that likely doesn't have the support of the majority of the populace.
Monday, February 9, 2009
Quote of the day
“Last week I stated that this woman was the ugliest woman I had ever seen. I have since been visited by her sister and now wish to withdraw that statement.”
-Mark Twain
-Mark Twain
According to this email, not being catholic has finally paid off for me.... Sweet.
The Catholic Foundation
As way of improving living condition, The Catholic Foundation will be giving out $2.5 million dollars each to you and 3 other benefactors in the Catholic Charities Project helping you to reach others around your location. For further inquiry, contact the Program Coordinator secretary.
Names; Address; Cell#; Age and Occupation. Honorable Richard Bates
Email:catholic.charitygrantbenefactors@live.com
(Secretary and Treasurer Program Coordinator) Rev John C Gerspach
If you would like to be one of the other three benefactors, email quick. tell 'em Pope P. sent you....
As way of improving living condition, The Catholic Foundation will be giving out $2.5 million dollars each to you and 3 other benefactors in the Catholic Charities Project helping you to reach others around your location. For further inquiry, contact the Program Coordinator secretary.
Names; Address; Cell#; Age and Occupation. Honorable Richard Bates
Email:catholic.charitygrantbenefactors@live.com
(Secretary and Treasurer Program Coordinator) Rev John C Gerspach
If you would like to be one of the other three benefactors, email quick. tell 'em Pope P. sent you....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
