BloggeRhythms 12/31/2012

First, foremost and most important of all, best wishes for the coming New Year to all.

 

Scanning the items across the web news sites this morning, there’s really not very much worth typing about at all. Of course there are blurbs all over the place about how hard the parties are “working” to avoid the dreaded fiscal cliff, however, I think the issue will somehow miraculously resolve in time. 

 

And if it doesn’t happen today, they’ll fix it next week, or the week after that. Because the one thing that’s certain is that those involved in this so-called “negotiation” aren’t going to put themselves at risk with the electorate. They’ve never done it before, are incapable of good judgment and if they were, we wouldn’t be in this horrible fix in the first place.

 

But, cliff issues aside, while perusing Drudge, I came across a link buried among many other subjects. The link was titled: “Opec cartel to reap record $1trillion.”  

 

Appearing in the Financial Times on-line (ft.com), written by Javier Blas, Commodities Editor, the article reports that “The Opec oil cartel, led by Saudi Arabia, will pocket a record of more than US$1tn in net oil revenues in 2012 as the annual average price for Brent, the benchmark, heads to an all-time high in spite of weak economic growth.”

 

The “windfall” most benefits the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait and “with one trading day left before the year-end, Brent oil prices are on the point of seeing an average for the year of about $111.5 a barrel, higher than the previous all-time high set in 2011 of $110.9.”  The US Energy Information Administration, statistical arm of the US Department of Energy says a decade ago, “Opec countries made just under $200bn selling their oil.”

 

So, tying today’s two topics together, here we have a bunch of worthless politicos going through motions regarding avoidance of impending taxes that never should have been imposed in the first place while Middle Easterners enjoy the largest profits they’ve ever had. 

 

However, when it comes to drilling our own oil, thereby putting these foreign thieves out of business, we say, Oh no, we can’t do that because the ring-tailed, powder puffed, barn sparrow might not breathe clean air.

 

In conclusion, then, what I’ve got to ask once more at year end is: How long are folks going to sit there, watch this lunacy go, on and take it? Because as I read the news each day, I’m certain I’m not alone in my outrage. But, then again, considering how much these politico’s get away with unbridled…maybe I really am all by myself.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms 12/30/2102

According to American’s For Tax Reform’s (ATR) website via Drudge, “Obamacare contains twenty new or higher taxes. Five of the taxes hit for the first time on January 1. In total, Americans face a net $1 trillion tax hike for the years 2013-2022, according to the Congressional Budget Office.”

 

I’ve included a link, so you can read the short article illustrating the five new taxes and their individual costs for yourself: $1 Trillion Obamacare Tax Hike Hitting on Jan. 1

 

However, my thought for today is, that while the ridiculous circus continues in D.C, regarding the looming fiscal cliff which by itself will irreparably harm the economy if not avoided, the socialist currently at the nation’s helm will likely continue to wreck it further through other damaging, anti-growth legislation.

 

To get the drift of the business-crippling costs to come due to a socialist mindset, all one need do is look at the first item listed today by ATR, which states: “Medical device manufacturers employ 409,000 people in 12,000 plants across the country. Obamacare imposes a new 2.3 percent excise tax on gross sales – even if the company does not earn a profit in a given year.  In addition to killing small business jobs and impacting research and development budgets, this will increase the cost of your health care – making everything from pacemakers to artificial hips more expensive.”

 

So what we have here is clear evidence of what happens when you force those who produce to support those who don’t. And what’s worse is that the economically unskilled legislators either don’t know or don’t care that their upside-down enactments are really fiscal double-whammy’s whereas they not only reduce total revenue, they kill the chance for economic growth and increased taxes from accelerated productivity and the additional employment that results.

 

But, when you have the fiscally inept leading the intellectually dense, I guess the nation’s downward slide is to be expected. Yet I do really have to wonder exactly how dumb one has to be to keep seeing horrendously bad results, yet still not lifting a finger to try to fix the problems no matter. And what’s worse than that is, the rest of us are still finding out how misguided these folks are, but can do just about nothing about it.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms 12/29/2012

Were it not for the fiscal cliff, there wouldn’t be any news at all. It seems like everything else has taken a holiday vacation which is fine with me and as I keep suggesting, ought to be done all year round. Because it seems that when no one’s there to oversee, meddle around or muck things up, everything runs smoother and we’re all better off. 

 

But in the meantime, I did get a laugh today while scanning Fox News on-line and read that the incumbent said “he’s ‘modestly optimistic’ (about a cliff deal) but that if Reid and McConnell fail, the Senate should allow an up-or-down vote on a scaled-back proposal the president is pushing.”

 

The incumbent then went on to state that "The hour for immediate action is here, it is now. We're now at the last minute, and the American people are not going to have any patience for a politically self-inflicted wound to our economy. ... We've got to get this done."

 

The part that got me was his claiming that the “American people are not going to have any patience for a politically self-inflicted wound to our economy” when all this guy’s done for four years is intentionally ruin it. Everything that should be going up economy-wise is going down, and the reverse is true for what should be improving. And every iota of is his absolute fault. Businesswise this guy’s not only a pariah, he’s as dense as a fire hydrant without a single prayer of getting smarter.

 

And while its certainly true that the securities markets are doing well lately, they no longer reflect the core economy and simply respond to programmed investing, especially because there’s little else where these traders can park their money even though businesses are not performing as well as they should be.

 

And then we can add to that the false hope of an improving job market which my bet is simply reflecting holiday hiring even though the Labor Department swears the numbers are adjusted for seasonality. However, at the same time business owners can only manage to what they know, and not what they pray for or perhaps suspect. Which means that right now the expectation is that the cliff will occur as legislated. So simple common sense says they’re not hiring anywhere near like they should be and the fault lies at the incumbent’s doorstep.

 

So, politically speaking he can promote all the hype, smoke and mirrors about the economy that he wants. But as a practical matter he’s the guy more responsible than any other for tanking it. And in that regard, should the dreaded cliff occur and the nation bear the brunt, when it all topples over I hope he’s in front and right under it.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms 12/28/2012

A few minutes ago, I thought I was reading Drudge on-line but had to re-check. Because one of the headlines made me think perhaps I’d tuned in to an episode of Rod Serling’s Twilight  Zone TV show from the 60’s, based on the unrealities of science fiction.

 

However, the Drudge item indeed was fact and here’s the headline from The Weekly Standard on-line: “Obama Orders Pay Raise for Biden, Members of Congress, Federal Workers.”

 

So, here we are in a nation on its way to 17 trillion in debt, stalemated over legislation likely to cripple the economy altogether, with leadership that’s absolutely incapable of running a nation and totally inept at whatever they touch, giving itself pay increases for the worst job of governance that ever existed.

 

Highlights of the article included: “President Barack Obama issued an executive order to end the pay freeze on federal employees, in effect giving some federal workers a raise. One federal worker now to receive a pay increase is Vice President Joe Biden. According to disclosure forms, Biden made a cool $225,521 last year. After the pay increase, he'll now make $231,900 per year.

 

Members of Congress, from the House and Senate, also will receive a little bump, as their annual salary will go from $174,000 to 174,900. Leadership in Congress, including the speaker of the House, will likewise get an increase.”

Now, what I’ve got to ask is, except for businesses taken over by government and basically funded by taxpayers via bailouts, what business employees on earth in the real world could fail as miserably as these clowns have and still have a job? And then, where would the money for pay increases come from? When real entities are mismanaged as badly as public sector operations, customers leave, employees get fired, doors close and management ordinarily departs whereas there’s no further use for any of them.

So, once again I’ll ask the same question as yesterday and many, many times in the past. Precisely how much are taxpayers going to accept from the totally useless nits holding public office? Because this kind of pocket-picking is not only despicable, it equates to outright theft for which so-called “leaders” ought be arrested and then be locked up for quite a long time.

That’s it for today folks.

Adios

BloggeRhythms 12/27/2012

Back on December 20th, I wrote about former UN Ambassador John Bolton’s comment regarding Hillary Clinton's supposed illness, preventing her from testifying in Congress about Benghazi. The Ambassador said: “This is a diplomatic illness to beat the band. I mean, I hope it’s nothing serious. But this was revealed in a way that I think was not transparent and I think there is an obligation here.”

 

My next paragraph that day was as follows: “Now, I’m certainly not surprised at the Ambassador's comments, I wrote about the very same subject yesterday in another context, and have very little doubt that Hillary’s lying through her teeth.”

 

Now today, a week later, I read the following in the New York Post on-line: “Many Americans were incensed last week when four mid-level State Department officials appeared to take the full fall for the Sept. 11-anniversary terrorist strike in Benghazi and were forced to resign. Boy, were they wrong.”

 

The Post article then recaps the Benghazi events in calendric order. First the lie about the presence of a group of “protesters” outside the Benghazi consulate on 9/11; then concocting the “terrorist attack” on  anti-Islamic video on YouTube. And then today the article goes on that the “pettiest lie” of all was later assuring the public that it was holding its own people accountable for what went wrong.

 

Because as it turns out, according to the article, “Assistant secretary of state for diplomatic security, Eric Boswell, still has a job, and the other three officials are on administrative leave; they’re expected to be back in Foggy Bottom soon. Which means they’re basically on an extended Christmas vacation right now. And it means that the only State Department official who lost his job due to Benghazi was Ambassador Stevens.”

 

So my question for today is one I’ve asked many times before, but exactly how long are folks going to sit there and take lie after lie from anything the Clinton’s go near and tolerate it willingly? And although I know the whole current administration's duplicitous and incompetent for bottom to top, this kind of lying is especially egregious because it cost lives that should have never been lost. 

 

But even more disturbing is how this pattern of dishonesty continues, yet the perpetrators themselves don’t even blink. They just concoct some phony illness and go on as if people dying around them doesn’t even matter a whit. And so I guess, we now have another crystal clear example of who comes first in the Democrat hierarchy, where broke constituents, dead subordinates and lying leadership are all par for the course and inconsequential to those in power.

 

That's it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms 12/26/2012

Nothing much in the news, making me realize how lucky we’d all be if every day was Christmas and the government shut down altogether. And though I understand we really do need firemen, cops and the military without doubt, the rest of the bunch wouldn’t be missed at all.

 

However, it’s not only government that’s capable of incredibly poor decision-making, because the press continually proves that its easily as obtusely self-serving as most of those in the public sector. And today’s item is as good an example as we’ll ever get.

 

I’m sure that many readers are already aware of the subject but I’ve pasted below directly from The Huffington Post on-line. In an article by Rebecca Shapiro she wrote: “In a piece titled, "The gun owner next door: What you don't know about the weapons in your neighborhood," the (New York) Journal News requested (and published) the names and addresses of local residents who are licensed to own handguns through Freedom of Information Law requests. The paper requested information from Westchester, Rockland and Putnam counties. The paper was only given the names and addresses of those who have a license to own a handgun. The paper was denied its requests for the amount and type of guns owned by those who have licenses."

 

Now, at this point I’d ordinarily post my own comments about the subject, and then go on from there. But in this case, Ms. Shapiro included some feedback from readers that make my case far better than I could, so I pasted them in too, as follows: “Do you fools realize that you also made a map for criminals to use to find homes to rob that have no guns in them to protect themselves? What a bunch of liberal boobs you all are," one commenter wrote on the newspaper's website. Others worried that the names would expose law enforcement officials. "You have judges, policemen, retired policemen, FBI agents — they have permits. Once you allow the public to see where they live, that puts them in harm’s way," Paul Piperato, the Rockland county clerk, told Journal News reporter Worley.”

 

Then, as I read the material back, a memory flashed where a headline-seeking, egotistical egocentric put himself and his career above else when writing an inside story while embedded with our armed forces.

 

Back in 2003, Geraldo Rivera was traveling with the 101st Airborne Division in Iraq for Fox News. And during a broadcast he began to disclose an upcoming operation, even going so far as to draw a map in the sand for his audience. According to Wikipedia, “The military immediately issued a firm denunciation of his actions, saying it put the operation at risk, and nearly expelled Rivera from Iraq. Two days later, he announced that he would be reporting on the Iraq conflict from Kuwait.”

 

Now, in the two preceding cases of journalism gone considerably too far, especially regarding audience's need to know, I simply wish that the reporters had used themselves alone as examples, gave out their own home addressees and furthermore…stay there a lot alone and unarmed.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms 12/25/2012

Hope everyone’s having a happy, healthy holiday season. And I guess most folks must be cerebrating somewhere, because there’s not very much going on in the news.

 

I did, however, stumble across an article on Drudge this morning that helps confirm a conviction of mine regarding Democrat’s intellectual capabilities. Because, considering their inability to grasp basic economics, and in many cases even simple arithmetic, I’ve always assumed that dimwittedness was rampant amongst the party base and now have another proof of my theory.

 

The article I found quotes Sam Donaldson, no less, and here’s part of what he said: “The minorities re-elected president Obama, but I'm going with Katty. It's the Tea Party and thinking of the Tea Party and people like that that are driving the Republicans out of contention as a national party. You cannot win nationally if you don't know something about the way the country's changed, and the Tea Party seems to think the country can go back 25 or 30 years. The greatest slogan that I hated during this last campaign was “We want to take back our country.” Guys, it's not your country anymore - it's our country and you're part of it, but that thinking is going to defeat Republicans nationally if they don't get rid of it.”

Now, not to mince words, but the last time I looked at the election results, the vote was pretty much split down the middle. And yes it’s true, the incumbent won reelection but not by much, and were it not for Hurricane Sandy’s shocking arrival, he might very well have lost.

So, before Mr. Donaldson gets carried away in claiming who won what or who’s country it is, he ought to learn some basic math. Because his guy barely squeaked in and one things for certain, this country’s not his, nor Sam’s, nor anyone else’s.

Nonetheless, I can surely understand why Mr. Donaldson reacted as he did. Because he comes from the same semi-literate segment of the population that the incumbent’s base does. And consequently he doesn’t understand that 50% isn’t a hundred, but only half. Which is  why that when attending school he likely thought he was getting grades twice as high as they actually were. However, his teachers couldn’t grasp percentages either, and promoted him anyway so that today we can all see he still knows nothing at all about the subject in question and even less about fundamental arithmetic.

That’s it for today folks.

Adios

 

BloggeRhythms 12/24/2012

Thinking about yesterday’s comments regarding high-taxpayers fleeing California, a particular item stuck in my mind, which was Governor Brown’s “suggesting that high-earners must shoulder the largest burden in bailing out the state, particularly its debt-ridden public school system.”

I guess the governor’s position remained with me because I’ve never thought of California as being particularly strong education-wise, but not knowing the facts, I looked a few up.
First I found that the state system ranks about thirtieth in the nation, just about middling. 

I then found a column,  John Fensterwald’s, Educated Guess in a Silicon Valley Education Foundation publication which says: “This year California ranked 43^rd among the states and Washington, D.C.; last year it was 46th. The $8,852 spent per pupil in 2008 – before the full impact of the recession hit California’s schools – was $2,371 below the national average of $11, 223. It will probably be headed lower once 2009 and 2010 figures are out. California is  squeezed between #42 Washington, just ahead of Arizona, and a free-fall behind top-spending, low-cost Wyoming’s adjusted figure of $17,114.”

I then found another column  by Phil Yarbrough and Donald P. Wagner of the Orange County Register, saying that the state’s “Prop 30 is a fabrication with the true intention of funding pensions that increase by $200 million this year .” And that “This year's budget is already $15.7 billion out of balance. Pensions and other retirement programs for state employees will cost $6.4 billion this year and they will increase to $7.6 billion by 2016, and they will keep increasing thereafter, forever until California is bankrupt.”

Now, considering the tax hikes the incumbent’s tying to jam down the throats of the few really making any bucks under his upside down vision of economics, I’m glad I did the preceding research about California. Because it truly helps me to make my point, whereas it’s obvious that state’s budget shortfalls, lack of funds and need for increased taxation has nothing to do with “education” at all.

The state already has billions invested in its educational system, yet ranks in the middle nationally quality-wise, while it’s spending per pupil ranks down near the bottom. But, in the meantime, “pensions and other retirement programs for state employees” keeps increasing at a pace that will soon bankrupt the system completely.

So, here we have a perfect example of governmental mismanagement, and a seemingly total disregard for those who provide the income that supports this gross financial injustice. However, as I wrote yesterday, California's top earners are not all just sitting still, they’re beginning to depart for elsewhere in droves.

And now that I’ve done the research and seen the statistics I can easily foretell that those who remain in the state will not only be flat broke, thanks to teaching being so poorly performed, they’ll remain ignorant as well.

That's it for today folks.

Adios

BloggeRhythms 12/23/2012

I mentioned yesterday that I’ve never understood Democrats inability to grasp basic fiscal fundamentals, regardless of how many times they’re exposed to the simplest of financial realities. 

 

I sometimes think this shortcoming is due to disinterest in these kinds of matters, whereas Dem’s tend to prefer focusing on social and personal preferences, rather than the hard realities of life. Their attitude seems to be one where others take care of their monetary needs. So why worry or bother to learn about economics? Then again, my rationale gives them credit for making a conscious decision to ignore details perceived unneeded .

 

But, perhaps I’m overrating them and the fact instead is that they’re simply outright ignorant, card-carrying, self-defeating morons.

 

I’m going to go with option two this morning because of an article I read on Fox News on-line by Joseph Weber, headlined “New tax increases in California stir debate about adding to exodus.”

 

Mr. Weber writes that, “A vote last month that makes Californians among the highest-taxed residents in the country is sparking debate about whether the Democrat-back initiative will backfire, by forcing high-earners to join a long exodus from the cash-strapped state.

 

Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown successfully pushed the tax increase by suggesting that high-earners must shoulder the largest burden in bailing out the state, particularly its debt-ridden public school system. However, high unemployment and government debt have already sent residents fleeing in large numbers – an estimated 225,000 annually for the past 10 years.

 

And the recently passed tax increase for families making more than $250,000 each year could further shrink the tax base for California, whose 2012 budget deficit is projected to hit $28 billion.

 

Ex-Californians over the past decade have already put roughly $5.67 billion into Nevada’s economy as well as $4.96 billion into Arizona and $4.07 billion in Texas, according to Manhattan Institute study titled “The Great California Exodus: A Closer Look.”

 

Now, what I absolutely can’t fathom is exactly how dumb you really have to be not to realize that the smart guy’s in the room, and almost always the one’s making all the money, aren’t going to sit around and permit anyone, deadbeats in particular, to  keep on picking their pockets. Especially so when the spending is due to gross governmental mismanagement and continual wasting of billions upon billions of top-rung taxpayer’s hard-earned assets.

 

So, as I’ve written before many times, my predication is that buffoons like Gerry Brown along with the incompetent in the White House are going to wind up surrounded by the largest contingent of flat-broke nitwits in existence, because all the smart bucks are going to go elsewhere or underground.

 

But now, having seen the obvious problem facing California, along with the total failure of every socialist state that ever existed, I come back to my original question: How fundamentally limited are Democrats intellectually? I guess I’ll have to check with Nancy Pelosi and Barbara Boxer on that one.

 

That's it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms 12/22/2012

Despite yesterday’s entry regarding the ancient Mayans, I didn’t  know very much about them or their calendar. So I looked them up this morning to find that their prediction of world-ending apocalypse was made 5,125-years ago.

 

Which brings me to my question for today, which is: How in the world could they foresee the results of the aftermath of the incumbent’s re-election that many eons ago? And what’s even more incredible: How come Democrats can’t see the vividly clear writing on the walls around them even today?

 

In regard to the Incumbent, I read that he left for Hawaii for another vacation but the story didn’t say vacation from what. But now that’s he’s got another four years living rent-free in the White House, maybe this time around he’ll let us know what he really does with his time, because one thing’s for sure…he doesn’t do anything productive at all.

 

Before he left to sit on the beach for a while, the incumbent announced his selection of John Kerry as Secretary of State, which is a position he’s actually very well qualified for. Because Hillary’s proven it takes no experience, no talent and no wisdom to handle the job, all you need is a desire to get away from home and a spouse who likes it better when you're gone.

 

And maybe now Kerry'll get another chance to visit Viet Nam and Cambodia and win a few more Purple Hearts. However, today in Southeast Asia it’s tougher to get medals for wounds in action on foreign soil, because even those nations now put mats in the bathtubs.

 

That's it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms 12/21/2012

Today’s the day the ancient Mayan's predicted the world would end. But since I’m still sitting here typing, obviously they were wron

BloggeRhythms 12/20/2012

The Los Angeles Times' Paul Richter, via Drudge, writes that former U.N. Ambassador, John Bolton, who served during the George W. Bush administration said, “that (Hillary) Clinton’s claim that she had fainted because of the flu, hitting her head and suffering a concussion, was what foreign service officers call a ‘diplomatic illness,’ intended to free a diplomat from an unpleasant duty."

 

Bolton continued that, “This is a diplomatic illness to beat the band. I mean, I hope it’s nothing serious. But this was revealed in a way that I think was not transparent and I think there is an obligation here.”

 

Now, I’m certainly not surprised at the Ambassador's comments, I wrote about the very same subject yesterday in another context, and have very little doubt that Hillary’s lying through her teeth. However, I’m mentioning  her again today out of complete and utter confusion.

 

I have very little doubt that most folks, certainly those capable of rational thought, clearly understand what the Clinton’s, and most self-serving, duplicitous, political pond scum are all about. Yet day after day, time after time, they’re permitted to get away with incredible abuses of power and immeasurable ineptitude without outraged demands from the public for their removal from office, or even jail time in many, many cases.

 

So my question for today is, why does the public permit this to happen? Are we so inured to the fact most politicos are worthless that we just ignore them, accept their dysfunctional performance and move on with our lives? Or perhaps, are they so insignificant to us we don’t even pay attention to their self-serving aims at all?

 

And, if that’s truly the case, I can surely understand that. Because I’ve no use for any of them either,  but I still think our attitude is wrong, whereas in just about any other walk of life folks are held accountable for their performance, and if substandard, unfit or illegal, they pay the price. But not politicos who skip away Scott free just about every time.

 

In fact, one of the main reasons I sit here and type these entries every day is to try and inform readers of things they might have missed or don't have time to search for themselves. And one of the things I found early on was that it was hard to believe some of the outrageous stuff I came across. What's more, thinking back on the majority of items I’ve posted, it’s overwhelming that so much of it concerns the worthlessness and cost to the public of just about all politicians. 

 

So, therefore, I truly believe we’ve all got to get together and find some way to not just boot these bloodsucking leeches out of office, but to make them pay a commensurate price. And along those lines, there needs to be an enforceable, severe penalty for ineptitude, mistakes and illegalities. Then, if we did that we might wind up with competent, professionals in office who know how to do their jobs, just like it works in the real world.

 

That's it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms 12/19/2012

Something I’ve mentioned several times before, for different reasons, is that I’ve learned over the years, if nothing else, people are always consistent. Therefore, whether matters are personal, business, social or otherwise, folks may appear to change for varying periods of time, however, sooner or later they’ll revert back to their basic natures.

I thought of my consistency theory this morning while reading an AP story on Drudge saying: “The leaders of an independent panel that blamed systematic State Department management and leadership failures for gross security lapses in the deadly Sept. 11 attack on a U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya will explain their findings to Congress on Wednesday.”

According to the panel, “Systematic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department resulted in a Special Mission security posture that was inadequate for Benghazi and grossly inadequate to deal with the attack that took place."

Now, as far as consistency goes, here’s what the story says to me.

It’s my belief that Hillary’s been on a travel junket for the past four years, doing pretty much nothing at all but seeing the world while avoiding Bill. And, jobwise, she’s no more qualified to hold the position of Secretary of State than the man in the moon is, it’s simply part of the D.C. patronage game. However, that’s been pretty much the story of her life. Hanging around, going through motions and using connections to better herself.

 

In the meantime though, on her supposed watch, four lives were lost in Benghazi. Which is remindful of the rumors and innuendo's about 50 or so who expired that were each somehow related to the Clinton’s back in Arkansas some time ago. Totaling 60 altogether if the arithmetic’s right.

And although I have no hard information, or even the slightest clue as to the truth of these matters, if there’s any substance here whatsoever, it seems a lot of folks have met their demise while in proximity to this self-serving pair, their shortcomings, and their ambitions.

That’s it for today folks.

Adios

BloggeRhythms 12/18/2012

A long career in financial sales taught me well regarding the extreme importance of fiscal matters to the overwhelming majority of people. Especially those who are the most successful.  And, despite any image they might wish to portray about benevolence, good will toward all and charitable concerns, every one of them knows that if they don’t maximize usage of every dime in their coffers, they likely won’t be around very long in highly expensive and competitive environments.

In that regard, that’s why I write so many entries about how poorly the government, and the current administration in particular, manages other people's money, whereas they don’t have a cent of their own. It’s also beyond belief to me that they not only get away with what they do without being held accountable, but continue to make monetary decisions though having no concept of finance whatsoever, even at the most basic of levels. Most households are run fiscally better than the gibberish that comes out of the White House.

But, what’s even worse in my opinion is that above and beyond the total absence of the barest of financial understanding, the incumbent compounds the issue via attitude and overbearance. And what set me off about that was a blurb in a column on Fox News on line today saying, “Obama, though, is demanding far more” than what Republicans have currently offered regarding the upcoming fiscal cliff.

Now, as the negotiation about the cliff continues, I’ve no clue as to whether a solution will be reached in time or not. My point regards the incumbent’s “demands,” whereas to my knowledge this is still a democracy and he’s not a monarch, which means he can ask, he can beg, he can wheedle, he sometimes can even make unilateral decisions, but as far as “demanding” in this case goes, he can’t ever do that without a majority of votes. So, if he wants to demand, let him go into a closet somewhere and dictate to himself.

In the meantime though, this is a perfect follow on to yesterday’s subject about myopia. Because if he continues to obstinately insist on the passage of crippling fiscal legislation all he’ll really accomplish is further slowing the nation's growth while shrinking the tax base in the process.

As I wrote at the outset today, all of those potentially harmed by increased taxation aren’t going to just sit still and pay it. Instead they’ll reorganize into smaller units, hire less people, make less profit on paper, and likely reduce investment substantially. And alongside that, the underground economy will take off like a rocket. 

 

So, in the end the financial genius on Pennsylvania Avenue can demand all he wants to, but in the real world he really ought to consider being nice, polite, and quiet. And then perhaps he’ll have a better chance at getting nearer to what he wants because all he's raising now is hostility.

That’s it for today folks.

Adios

BloggeRhythms 12/17/2012

Awaking late last evening, unable to fall back to sleep I was pondering the totally inept performance of the administration in virtually all aspects of governance. And especially so regarding the economy, business and misuse of taxes already collected.

 

I then remembered an article I read many years ago which was focused on marketing, but I think  also provides a nearly perfect example of why and how most politicians, especially leftists, have virtually no idea of how our economy works at all. And as a result of politicizing basic elements, they manufacture false enemies that could easily generate needed fiscal help immensely if befriended, thereby killing the part of the system that fiscally permits everything else to work.

 

Then, I got a shock this morning while Googling to find that not only is the article mentioned, but recapped by Harvard Business Review perfectly for my point as follows:

 

"“Marketing Myopia” is the quintessential big hit HBR piece. In it, Theodore Levitt, who was then a lecturer in business administration at the Harvard Business School, introduced the famous question, “What business are you really in?” and with it the claim that, had railroad executives seen themselves as being in the transportation business rather than the railroad business, they would have continued to grow. The article is as much about strategy as it is about marketing, but it also introduced the most influential marketing idea of the past half-century: that businesses will do better in the end if they concentrate on meeting customers’ needs rather than on selling products. “Marketing Myopia” won the McKinsey Award in 1960.

• The railroads did not stop growing because the need for passenger and freight transportation declined. That grew. The railroads are in trouble today not because that need was filled by others (cars, trucks, airplanes, and even telephones) but because it was filled by the railroads themselves. They let others take customers away from them because they assumed themselves to be in the railroad business rather than in the transportation business. The reason they defined their industry incorrectly was that they were railroad oriented instead of transportation oriented; they were product oriented instead of customer oriented.

• Hollywood barely escaped being totally ravished by television. Actually, all the established film companies went through drastic reorganizations. Some simply disappeared. All of them got into trouble not because of TV’s inroads but because of their own myopia. As with the railroads, Hollywood defined its business incorrectly. It thought it was in the movie business when it was actually in the entertainment business. “Movies” implied a specific, limited product. This produced a fatuous contentment that from the beginning led producers to view TV as a threat. Hollywood scorned and rejected TV when it should have welcomed it as an opportunity—an opportunity to expand the entertainment business."

So now, let’s take Theodore Levitt’s theory and apply it to political strategy.

What makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever is politicians alienating those most successful financially in our nation. Making them hated targets tax and otherwise not only forces them to hide assets, but also loses their support altogether. And in that regard, since Warren Buffet and George Soros glaringly prove that the wealthy can easily be bought by government, why not try to do that with others across the board? Then in that way the biggest financial brains in the nation come to your side instead of trying their damnest to get you out of office. And as soon as the money starts pouring in from their successes, the deficit quickly begins to melt away.

 

And what about the oil industry? By incenting them to think and work as “energy” providers and permitting them to drill for oil right here instead of abroad, you then get them to build the windmills, electric motors and whatever else the greenies or whoever want them to do, as well. Then when they quickly lower prices at the pump, everybody does better, providing the needed cash to get all of it done the way it should have been in the first place.

 

Then, as you go down the list, even for things like healthcare, education and just about all else, look for the synergies, the things that fit, and try to put them together instead of tearing them apart and creating alienation. 

 

However, the real problem is that a guy like Theodore Levitt is very smart. And his focus was trying to get people in business to work together, thereby building something better for all involved. But politicians, unfortunately are the reverse and division is their stock and trade. Because if the system actually worked as it easily can and really should, they know we’d all figure out in a New York minute that we really don’t need them at all and likely never did.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms 12/16/2012

I found this item this morning on line: “House Speaker John Boehner has proposed raising tax rates on people making more than $1 million, a source familiar with the talks told Fox News, in a development that could signal at least some movement toward a deal with President Obama. 

 

According to the source, the latest offer is not being rejected, but there are still issues remaining and there is a serious effort to work out the difference.”

 

I then found a website via Google, The Obama Debt, which claims that the national debt increased a bit over $5.74 trillion under the incumbent in his first three and a half years in office. That suggests the amount would soar to $13 trillion, or so, after a total of eight years if his policies continue without change and serious steps toward debt reduction.   

 

The same site shows  that in all eight years under “W” Bush, debt grew slightly more than $4.89 trillion, a bit more than a third of the current amount in total.

 

Now, I know there are arguments all over the map as to who’s responsible for the miserable state of the economy, and fingers get pointed 24/7/365 regarding where, how and when debt reductions ought to be instituted and in what form, if any at all. However, my point for today is to simply consider the amount of debt itself, how unbelievably horrendous it is, and what it implies.

 

As a starting point, no matter how you look at the debt situation or whom you blame in government as its cause, a totally inept, unconscionably deplorable job was done by all. And if the same kind of performance were to occur in the real world, those responsible would be out of business in a heartbeat, likely in lawsuits up to their ears, or depending on circumstances …even in jail.

 

But no matter the reasons for private sector managerial incapability's, there’d be no chance of a bailout from taxpayer's in any way shape or form whereas in a free market everyone hauls their own load.

 

And that’s the part that galls me. Because although I don’t clear more than a million per annum, I‘ve spent my business life taking responsibility for my performance, reaping rewards for positive achievement and taking the hits for all the mistakes myself, regardless. And I believe with no equivocation whatsoever, that’s how it should be for everyone  no matter their incomes, large or small. 

 

But these worthless dregs in office do nothing more than shoot their mouths off, point fingers, and throw other folk’s money away in boatloads, yet do absolutely nothing to earn it whereas it comes from all of us that do. 

 

So, as far as Mr. Boehner’s concerned, while he “proposes” taxing high earners in talks with the pompous, arrogant incumbent who’s never worked a day in his life, I’d like to “propose” that they pay for their own economic mistakes just like I do. And if they can’t cover the tab themselves, shut the hell up, get the hell out, and give their jobs to people who know what they’re doing for once, just like all us real people do. 

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms 12/15/2012

Thinking about yesterday’s entry regarding Andrea Mitchell inane commentary about Susan Rice’s withdrawal as nominee for Secretary of State, reconfirmed the tendency among liberals to politically slant just about every imaginable issue. And that’s understandable, I suppose.

 

But what I don’t really comprehend is that considering how often the statements, stories and fables they come up with make them look like absolute, abject morons, I wonder why they keep walking into the same walls verbally.

 

After considerable thought on the matter, I concluded that they're either truly too thick to comprehend the most basic situations of any type or simply don’t mind or care about appearing dense as granite. Or perhaps, they grasp the fact that their base is so intellectually dim they’ll buy anything presented by anyone representing them.

 

And that got me perusing about this Mitchell’s husband, Alan Greenspan. Because he did an outstanding job as Fed Chairman for four presidents, beginning in 1987 for Ronald Reagan, then H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and continuing on to W” later on.

 

In that regard, I’ve always believed it was Greenspan’s spectacular performance at the Fed that made Slick Willy’s presidency seem as successful as it was, giving Willy the room for all the colossal screw-ups that otherwise might have sunk him. Because as long as the economy hums, most Americans don’t care very much about who’s in the White House or what else those clowns do while there.

 

But coming back to today’s subject. I also recall some comments Greenspan made after leaving the Fed. In critiquing his own performance there, he said something along the lines of not being as flawless as perceived and perhaps focusing only on money isn’t the best thing for people. And I think he said that because he was spending more time with his wife, Mitchell, and also suspected she was on his back demonizing him as a money-hungry Republican.

 

Now, whether that’s really case, I surely don’t know. But in any event, I do believe that trying to explain the financial system of the most complex economy on the planet to all on a daily basis as Fed chairman had to be an easier job than dealing with a world-class simpleton at home.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms 12/14/2012

I think there must be some kind of test applied to intellectual qualification as a liberal commentator, likely similar to IQ grading. And if your score is above sixty or so, you’re rejected whereas you’re too bright for the job and not to be trusted.

 

In that regard, Fox News on-line posted an article yesterday saying “It didn't take long for NBC's Andrea Mitchell to turn Susan Rice's withdrawal from the secretary of state-stakes into a racial issue. Asked for her analysis on MSNBC's ‘The Cycle’ Mitchell swiftly claimed that Rice's withdrawal would be bad for Republicans because she is a black woman -- intimating that her skin color and gender were somehow a factor.” 

 

Mitchell went on to say, "I think that this had become sort of an impossible challenge for her to be confirmed, that she realized that -- the White House realized it as well. I think they know that they are on good political solid ground. This is not going to ... help Republicans at all, the fact that a woman and a woman of color has been forced out of a confirmation process even before she was nominated."

 

However, the article then goes on to point out that “Never mind that the first black female secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, was nominated by a Republican, George W. Bush. In fact, both parties can lay substantial claim to diversifying the nominee pool for that post. Under Bill Clinton, Madeleine Albright became the first female secretary of state. Under Bush, Colin Powell became the first black secretary of state, only to be succeeded by Rice.”

 

So it seems that here we have this dolt Mitchell trying to create a racial issue where none exists whatsoever, while displaying either outright ignorance of historical fact or attempting to mislead and ignite whatever audience she might have.

 

But what’s most remarkable to me is that Mitchell and Susan Rice must have been cut from exactly the same mold, because both did exactly the same thing as far as the basic issue is concerned. And that issue is: job qualification.

 

In Susan Rice’s case she stepped down because she either misinformed the public while a representative of the administration, misstating facts, covering truths and permitting politics to override actuality or if not, failed to research the issue before making her incorrect statements. And that's what disqualified her, nothing else. 

 

And now we have this Mitchell woman doing precisely the same thing. Because the facts refute her ridiculous comments which means she either did no homework before shooting her mouth off or is simply a leftist grasping for points to support her incorrect spouting's. But, either way, she’s incredibly stupid and dense as a tree trunk.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms 12/13/2012

I’ve written often lately about how hard it is to figure out if the incumbent’s a fanatical zealot who doesn’t care how much damage he does to the nation’s economy while pursuing his socialist agenda or is simply someone holding a job that’s so far over his head he doesn’t know which way is up. But, either way his tenure so far is an abject total financial disaster.

 

In article today on Fox on-line by Judson Berger titled “Medical companies brace for 'devastating' ObamaCare tax, prepare for layoffs” Berger writes that “The Affordable Care Act imposed the 2.3 percent tax on medical devices with the goal of raising nearly $30 billion over the next decade. Manufacturers say the impact of the tax is far greater than meets the eye -- the 2.3 percent tax is on gross sales, meaning it's a much greater percentage of net income.” 

 

One business owner says his total tax burden on profits will rise from 43 percent to 65 percent next year, while The Advanced Medical Technology Association estimates that the tax ultimately could cost up to 43,000 jobs. 

 

So here we have another example of how health care reform is doing exactly what it’s title says, however the reformation is taking the greatest medical system in the world and gutting it to the extent that quite soon people will be leaving here to get treated in Canada, or maybe Venezuela, because what’s been built in the U.S. will no longer exist.

 

And the most remarkable part of it all is the consistency of Democrat’s inability to grasp, or unwillingness to accept, fundamental economics. Because it doesn’t take very much sense to realize that if you give productive people’s money away the shortfall created has to either be replaced through growth or else there have to be cutbacks in spending.

 

And since businesses aren’t like the government, they can’t simply write themselves checks to cover what’s been lost. What’s more and worse is, that increasing businesses’ costs via taxes not only takes away their expansion potential, but likely reduces their total income creating a “Catch 22” and spurring a downward financial spiral for all.

 

Which leads me to the bottom line of this which is that I really don’t think that one who wants to re-test an economic theory that's never worked throughout history should do it as POTUS. Because the White House just doesn’t seem the right place for learning fiscal fundamentals the hard way, and besides that puts the costs of the huge pile of mistakes on those fortunate enough to be making a few bucks, but apparently won’t be for very much longer.

 

On another subject, I have to add the following because the timing’s perfect considering what I wrote yesterday about that two-bit phony, Warren Buffet.

 

According to Reuters via Drudge, “Warren Buffett's $1.2 billion share buyback from a single unnamed investor likely helped that person's estate save substantially on taxes, just one day after the Berkshire Hathaway CEO said the rich should actually be paying more, not less, when they die.

 

With the "fiscal cliff" looming and estate taxes set to rise dramatically in less than three weeks, the timing was seen as advantageous - and, according to Berkshire watchers, also out of place in the context of Buffett's recent tax activism.”

 

Anthony Sabino, a professor of business at St. John's University stated that ."I would say 'Warren, would you please just keep your nose out of this.' He's not in a position to criticize what's good for America and for everyone else's estate. He's no doubt utilized the present tax code to maximum effect."

 

Berkshire said it bought 9,200 Class A shares from "the estate of a long-time shareholder," whom it did not name, at $131,000 per share, a price in line with where Berkshire has traded in recent weeks.

 

So, here we have a case where my suspicion was right on the money (no pun intended.) I’ve felt for quite a while now that Buffet’s no more than a self-serving shark who backed POTUS due to receiving favorable insider status in D.C. And I also think his premise of giving all his assets away on demise was based on the simple fact that he doesn’t really believe he’ll ever expire, he’s far too wealthy for that. Dying and giving fortunes away is for little people, not him.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms 12/12/2012

I didn’t notice until this morning, but Monday’s entry was my 1000th. That adds up to almost three books, which is pretty good I guess, except there’s no plot, no hero, no villains, no cover and no binding, just lot’s of words on folk’s computer screens. There’s also one thing that’s for certain…I’m not going to print it all out.

 

As for today, I found a short item on Drudge, the source of which I can’t quite figure out, regarding the just-passed right to work law in Michigan saying: “As thousands of protestors gathered at the state capitol on Tuesday, (Jimmy) Hoffa called the legislation a ‘tremendous mistake’ and ‘a monumental decision to make’ by outgoing lawmakers in a lame duck session.”

 

The part that really got my attention though was Hoffa further saying, "What they're doing is basically betraying democracy. If there's any question here, let's put it on the ballot and let the people of Michigan decide what's good for Michigan."

 

Now, to  my knowledge from personal experience, having worked for a couple of years on New Jersey’s waterfront managing longshoremen and teamsters in a Hudson River-side warehouse, there’s no democracy in unions at all. Especially those two.

 

The union guys I worked with couldn't even breathe on their own without some shop steward or boss telling them precisely what to do, when, and how. And as far as management went, they tolerated us because they had to, whereas that’s who owned the operation. However, if anyone on either side of the equation -member or management- got out of line in the union rep’s eyes, they’d shut the whole place down in a heartbeat.

 

What’s more they weren’t exactly civil or polite about how they handled disagreements. So if managers were squeamish or easily backed down by physical intimidation -although assault or weapons weren’t actually applied, only hinted at- they’d be better off finding a new line of work. 

 

Therefore, if Hoffa really believes that unions permit democracy in any manner, he must also think that the KGB is a boy scout troop.

 

On another subject, according to Bloomberg on-line “Billionaire investors Warren Buffett and George Soros are calling on Congress to increase the estate tax as lawmakers near a decision on tax policies that expire Dec. 31.

 

In a joint statement today, Buffett, Soros and more than 20 other wealthy individuals asked Congress to lower the estate tax’s per-person exemption to $2 million from $5.12 million and raise the top rate to more than 45 percent from 35 percent.”

The preceding's an issue I’ve mentioned a few times before, but still irritates me because these two guys are tied at the hip to the administration. Buffet was bought with preferred shares in Citigroup and Soros via loan guarantees in Brazil. 

 

However, even if they weren’t the incumbent’s stooges, I believe what others inherit and how much gets taxed, is none of their GD business. I also know that Buffett intends to give most of his wealth to charity after departure, unless he has some deathbed change of heart which obviously remains to be seen. And perhaps, Soros plans the same. But, if other folks wish to retain as much of what they’ve earned as possible, it’s their right to do so.

As for myself though, I’m certainly not in those guys financial position nor even close. But as far as my own situation’s concerned, if they pushed for my paying higher taxes for any reason and I had the chance to meet them…I’d be happy to show them some of the stuff I learned way back in warehouses, slugging it out with longshoremen and teamsters

That’s it for today folks

Adios 

BloggeRhythms 12/11/2012

Yesterday, the incumbent showed up in Detroit to help roil up crowds of union members protesting Michigan’s potential passage of “right to work” legislation permitting workers to decide for themselves about joining a union. If the law passes, Michigan would become the 24th state to do so, joining the national trend toward removing the yoke of union control from around worker’s necks. 

 

I mention this because it’s one more blatant example of the incumbent’s tendency to come down on the wrong side of major issues. Whereas in 2010, the percentage of workers belonging to a union in the United States was 11.4%. So that means 88.6% of the nation’s work force prefers to remain independent jobwise and negotiate for themselves. 

 

In that regard, if you look at the incumbent’s entire constituency you find that it’s a conglomeration of disparate groups of people that tend to need help to survive, each of them looking for presidential support to bolster their individual weaknesses. And when you add them all up across the nation, they amass enough in total to provide the winning margin in the past election. However, as far as the nation’s economy goes, they’re actually a significant drain which means the revenue needed to support them has to come from somewhere else. In the present case, that comes down to the so-called “rich."

 

The incumbent's problem though, is that those being targeted as rich also happen to be the half of the population that already pays all the bills. And being pressed for more is beginning to really tick them off as almost never before. Which in turn is resulting in reactions like the one I found on Drudge this morning by Bloomberg’s Rich Miller and Alex Kowalski who wrote: “The wealthy look set to enjoy a windfall in the closing weeks of the year as companies push money out the door to beat the higher tax rates advocated by President Barack Obama. 

 

More than 150 companies, from Costco Wholesale Corp. to Las Vegas Sands Corp., have declared special dividends totaling about $20 billion this quarter to avoid anticipated tax increases in 2013, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Others, including law and private-equity firms, probably will pay bonuses, partnership distributions and commissions early for tax reasons, according to Lou Crandall, chief economist at Wrightson ICAP LLC in Jersey City, New Jersey. 

 

'We’re going to have a big jump in household income in the fourth quarter' said Crandall, whose company is a subsidiary of ICAP Plc, the world’s largest broker of transactions between banks. 'It’s going to be in excess of $50 billion.' 

 

Much of that will go to upper-income Americans, the very people Obama has targeted to pay higher taxes, including Las Vegas Sands controlling shareholder and Chief Executive Officer Sheldon Adelson."

 

So here we have another situation where the incumbent put together a plan that made no sense to begin with, and as usual by now, bet on the wrong horse. Because had he sided with those who make the economy hum in the first place, they’d have made enough bucks to help him support whoever he pleased. 

 

But instead he took the wrong road, which reminds me of an old story by the late, great, Henny Youngman in which a man sat down in a diner, glanced at the wall and saw a sign saying “Watch Your Coat.” And while he sat gazing at his garment, somebody stole his lunch.

 

That's it for today folks

 

Adios