Tonight things went a little crazy with my circle of friends and I sort of engaged the nuclear option. In my ongoing study into the mechanisms that we all use to interact and make our society work I think it's strange that my personal life should so perfectly dovetail with what I've been reading. It's tempting to try and over dramatize the breakdown in interpersonal relationships but ultimately it all comes back down to a very simple perspective problem. Friendships are essentially a micro-crowd. The forces that effect a crowd, to expand it and make it crumble, all have their parallels in the Friendship Circles.
All things have a natural lifespan. Biological break down puts a definite limit factor on all living things. Companies rise and fall in accordance with need and market force. Crowds spring up and die as issues appear and resolve themselves. Friendships are a tempting target for the label of permanence but that's a very naive way to look at the whole exchange. In reality friendships continue until one party has too much to gain by removing the "Friend" who has become a roadblock. Sentimental loyalty combined with a dash of nostalgia and a healthy awareness of the uses of a particular friend may dictate sacrificing a little more in the name of "keeping my friends" but I'm a firm believer in the old adage that "Everyone has a price".
It follows from that, "Everyone has a value"
I found out my value tonight...
How much do you think you're worth?
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
China getting ready to cash out?
Bloomberg news reported yesterday that our man in the treasury Tim Geithner was begging China not to liquidate a large portion of the $801.5 Billion dollars they own in U.S. Treasury bonds. ( http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aaVGe5smuZAU ) The U.S. Budget in it's entirety is roughly 3 Trillion dollars a year. So calling in that debt would pretty much chop a nice 1/3 out of that... I can see why Timmy is so set on keeping Chinese dollars in the United States. The problem is that China is moving in pro-business directions across it's economy. The average Chinese business seems to have much less red tape to cut through then comparable US companies.
Treasury Bond ownership is traditionally proportional to the amount of private sector money invested in an economy. Given, China can sometimes blur the line between Govt and Private funds (an entry for another date) but the way to keep Chinese money here is to boost our domestic companies. Treasury Bonds are investments in the governments ability to make money, but more then then that they ease the tax burden on all of us.
Obama is following in Bush's footsteps with all this "stimulus money". The Chinese are worried about the security of their 801 billion dollar investment.
Our current outstanding public debt in the United States is accelerating in growth, it recently topped 11.6 Trillion.
So the natural question is where is the stimulus money coming from? While many of my "dish out the government cash" friends have trite little social-obligation answers, (little to no economic answers to that particular cash flow problem), it's becoming obvious that our foreign investors are asking the same damn questions.
Treasury Bond ownership is traditionally proportional to the amount of private sector money invested in an economy. Given, China can sometimes blur the line between Govt and Private funds (an entry for another date) but the way to keep Chinese money here is to boost our domestic companies. Treasury Bonds are investments in the governments ability to make money, but more then then that they ease the tax burden on all of us.
Obama is following in Bush's footsteps with all this "stimulus money". The Chinese are worried about the security of their 801 billion dollar investment.
Our current outstanding public debt in the United States is accelerating in growth, it recently topped 11.6 Trillion.
So the natural question is where is the stimulus money coming from? While many of my "dish out the government cash" friends have trite little social-obligation answers, (little to no economic answers to that particular cash flow problem), it's becoming obvious that our foreign investors are asking the same damn questions.
Friday, July 24, 2009
I'm not alone out here!
So it turns out that my good friend Martell Harris started an online radio show, which can be found at http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Martell-Harris
Everyone should give him at least a running listen because he knows what's going on. A little crazier then I am but in this day in age I'm coming to view that as the only appropriate response to what's going on.
You're going to see a lot more posts, and I'll be appearing on his show as often as he'll have me. It's just good to know that I'm not the only one of my friends out here trying to get things out.
New posts starting tomorrow! (But check back tonight in case I'm feeling extra motivated)
Everyone should give him at least a running listen because he knows what's going on. A little crazier then I am but in this day in age I'm coming to view that as the only appropriate response to what's going on.
You're going to see a lot more posts, and I'll be appearing on his show as often as he'll have me. It's just good to know that I'm not the only one of my friends out here trying to get things out.
New posts starting tomorrow! (But check back tonight in case I'm feeling extra motivated)
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Well I heard there was a secret chord...
This one is a little bit more personal then most of my posts. I'll try to keep it from getting over gushy, and I'll keep it tied into the general and try to stay away from specific pining.
I've been reading a lot about crowds, crowd instinct, and control of crowds lately. Elias Canetti wrote "Crowds and Power" which is a great read to be sure. Everyone should take at least a passing look at the opening chapters to get a very different look at the formation of crowds, how the behave, and (the part that is pertinent to this post) the very important function that they serve in the human experience.
I've had this urge for the past couple weeks to just scream at the sky over some personal losses I've had. And my goal here is to kill two birds (and sort of elevate my own need to spill all of this nonsense out) by coupling my outpouring with a consideration on the need to do so.
Canetti holds as a central idea that humans validate their experiences and emotions in the sharing thereof. This makes a lot of sense, observation adds a special validation to the human experience. I think in a way we just feel better with the knowledge that others are aware of our sufferings and internal pain, and of our joys and personal triumphs. It's key not to become bogged down by them, that sort of thing leads to a melancholic self obsession that holds you back and breaks you down.
The sharing of experience is something uniquely human, (one of many things in such a category) and while I'd hesitate to name anything as the "linchpin of society" it's definitely a top running candidate. The need to share experience and the euphoria that results from it can be attested to by anyone who has seen a riot or mob. The amazing thing is that the energy and power of these emotions manifests itself in very real very physical results. In riots both positive (a sports championship win) and negative (bread riots) the shared joy/misery of the crowd creates a pent up force that must be applied and directed in some vector. The body reacts to the crowd, the will of the crowd in that sense swallows up the individual in a complete and total way.
Perhaps that is the root of our need to cry out that we are in pain. Because when others respond to that cry it is a step closer to losing yourself and your identity, however briefly, to the crowd. And in that loss you distance yourself from the need to miss people, the need to be loved, the need to struggle on with dealing with your problems... however temporary that relief may be.
This is a lot more esoteric then most of my posts, and I recognize that I'm in a way sort of corrupting the idea I'd had for this blog by mixing in the personal.
I've been reading a lot about crowds, crowd instinct, and control of crowds lately. Elias Canetti wrote "Crowds and Power" which is a great read to be sure. Everyone should take at least a passing look at the opening chapters to get a very different look at the formation of crowds, how the behave, and (the part that is pertinent to this post) the very important function that they serve in the human experience.
I've had this urge for the past couple weeks to just scream at the sky over some personal losses I've had. And my goal here is to kill two birds (and sort of elevate my own need to spill all of this nonsense out) by coupling my outpouring with a consideration on the need to do so.
Canetti holds as a central idea that humans validate their experiences and emotions in the sharing thereof. This makes a lot of sense, observation adds a special validation to the human experience. I think in a way we just feel better with the knowledge that others are aware of our sufferings and internal pain, and of our joys and personal triumphs. It's key not to become bogged down by them, that sort of thing leads to a melancholic self obsession that holds you back and breaks you down.
The sharing of experience is something uniquely human, (one of many things in such a category) and while I'd hesitate to name anything as the "linchpin of society" it's definitely a top running candidate. The need to share experience and the euphoria that results from it can be attested to by anyone who has seen a riot or mob. The amazing thing is that the energy and power of these emotions manifests itself in very real very physical results. In riots both positive (a sports championship win) and negative (bread riots) the shared joy/misery of the crowd creates a pent up force that must be applied and directed in some vector. The body reacts to the crowd, the will of the crowd in that sense swallows up the individual in a complete and total way.
Perhaps that is the root of our need to cry out that we are in pain. Because when others respond to that cry it is a step closer to losing yourself and your identity, however briefly, to the crowd. And in that loss you distance yourself from the need to miss people, the need to be loved, the need to struggle on with dealing with your problems... however temporary that relief may be.
This is a lot more esoteric then most of my posts, and I recognize that I'm in a way sort of corrupting the idea I'd had for this blog by mixing in the personal.
Saturday, June 20, 2009
Orwell Said This Would Happen
"Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. "
"The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns, as it were, instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish squirting out ink."
George Orwell.
So it turns out that the closest city to me, Lancaster PA, is now one of the most camera infested cities in America. I can't help but noticed that Mayor Grey, one of the leftest leaning mayors I can remember, was in office when this change came about. I'm very nervous about the level of acceptance with a literal Big Brother incursion. I think that the world of Orwell's 1984 must have come about just as gradually. I wonder about the sacrifice here, and if it really equates itself to greater security. This is not a new argument, and I'll allow the reader to consider the debate on it's own merits as laid out by those far better equipped then myself.
The biggest shock to me is how quietly it was able to be achieved. I'm sure I must have heard about the plan in some context, but I don't recall anything this encompassing or this intrusive being described.
The goals of a leftist government are summed up in control of the activities of the every day population. Information is and observation are the key tools. Something done is secret has a power all it's own because the powers that be cannot observe it. I think that a certain level of crime is an unfortunate byproduct of individuality. The best way to eliminate crime is to destroy all individuality.
Nobody ever got mugged in an ant farm
"The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns, as it were, instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish squirting out ink."
George Orwell.
So it turns out that the closest city to me, Lancaster PA, is now one of the most camera infested cities in America. I can't help but noticed that Mayor Grey, one of the leftest leaning mayors I can remember, was in office when this change came about. I'm very nervous about the level of acceptance with a literal Big Brother incursion. I think that the world of Orwell's 1984 must have come about just as gradually. I wonder about the sacrifice here, and if it really equates itself to greater security. This is not a new argument, and I'll allow the reader to consider the debate on it's own merits as laid out by those far better equipped then myself.
The biggest shock to me is how quietly it was able to be achieved. I'm sure I must have heard about the plan in some context, but I don't recall anything this encompassing or this intrusive being described.
The goals of a leftist government are summed up in control of the activities of the every day population. Information is and observation are the key tools. Something done is secret has a power all it's own because the powers that be cannot observe it. I think that a certain level of crime is an unfortunate byproduct of individuality. The best way to eliminate crime is to destroy all individuality.
Nobody ever got mugged in an ant farm
Thursday, June 18, 2009
The importance of disent
I'm reading a compilation called "The Anti-Federalist", compiled by Herbert J. Storing.
Hopefully my readers are familiar with the collection called "The Federalist Papers". It's easy to imagine the framers of the Constitution working in a vacuum, but it's really not the case. The reason we have the bill of rights is because the dissenters made their points clearly and aggressively.
Dissent can be patriotic, absolute compliance results in unchecked government.
I aim to have more up on this later, after I take care of a few things.
Hopefully my readers are familiar with the collection called "The Federalist Papers". It's easy to imagine the framers of the Constitution working in a vacuum, but it's really not the case. The reason we have the bill of rights is because the dissenters made their points clearly and aggressively.
Dissent can be patriotic, absolute compliance results in unchecked government.
I aim to have more up on this later, after I take care of a few things.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Getting this thing going again
It's been a while, but I'm back in the groove now and there's plenty of good stuff bubbling to get posted.
My first new post after work will be up at around 8pm Eastern
My first new post after work will be up at around 8pm Eastern
Sunday, March 15, 2009
"You can't unpull a trigger"
You can never really undo an action. You can try to make amends. You can try to counteract. You can attempt to neutralize. You might even go so far as to make things better then they were before your initial misdeed. But at the end of the day, you still haven't undone your original misdeed.
We have a love affair in this country with "people turning things around."
Tookey Williams writes a few kids books and suddenly it's a tragedy that he's on death row.
We have a love affair in this country with "hidden intellect and personal tragedy."
Anna Nicole Smith dies after a life of prostituting herself, gross excess, and cheap horrid thrills.
It's nothing new, we treated Marylin Monroe the same way.
We have a sick love in this country with the twisted and the cruel.
Look at all the books about serial killers, murderers, rapists, and criminal minds. We treat these people like they are "fascinating".
We make movies and write articles about them, they are our entertainment.
Here's the thing about lives of excess... people have the right to live them. I'm not arguing with that. If you're not infringing on the rights of others... do as you will. I'm a huge fan of Hunter Thompson, because he lived his life of extremes and excesses but never hid the truth that, at it's core, it was what he picked for himself and he never expected anything more then to be left alone to do it.
That is not what destroys a nations moral compass.
In the graphic novel "V for Vendetta" the Terrorist V points out that the crime increase across the state that erupts in the short term as a result of his actions is not the goal in and of itself. The excess and vice are not good things. They never can be. "This is not the land of do-as-you-please... it is the land of take-what-you-want".
I'm pointing at the apparent lack of a moral compass anymore. And it's not the sort of thing that can be legislated, at least not entirely.
Work ethic... national pride... these things can save us.
We don't need to outlaw excess and personal freedom. We need to embrace it. Let all people face the consequences of their choices. Providing a path to excess that has no personal downside creates an unsustainable situation.
We have a love affair in this country with "people turning things around."
Tookey Williams writes a few kids books and suddenly it's a tragedy that he's on death row.
We have a love affair in this country with "hidden intellect and personal tragedy."
Anna Nicole Smith dies after a life of prostituting herself, gross excess, and cheap horrid thrills.
It's nothing new, we treated Marylin Monroe the same way.
We have a sick love in this country with the twisted and the cruel.
Look at all the books about serial killers, murderers, rapists, and criminal minds. We treat these people like they are "fascinating".
We make movies and write articles about them, they are our entertainment.
Here's the thing about lives of excess... people have the right to live them. I'm not arguing with that. If you're not infringing on the rights of others... do as you will. I'm a huge fan of Hunter Thompson, because he lived his life of extremes and excesses but never hid the truth that, at it's core, it was what he picked for himself and he never expected anything more then to be left alone to do it.
That is not what destroys a nations moral compass.
In the graphic novel "V for Vendetta" the Terrorist V points out that the crime increase across the state that erupts in the short term as a result of his actions is not the goal in and of itself. The excess and vice are not good things. They never can be. "This is not the land of do-as-you-please... it is the land of take-what-you-want".
I'm pointing at the apparent lack of a moral compass anymore. And it's not the sort of thing that can be legislated, at least not entirely.
Work ethic... national pride... these things can save us.
We don't need to outlaw excess and personal freedom. We need to embrace it. Let all people face the consequences of their choices. Providing a path to excess that has no personal downside creates an unsustainable situation.
Friday, March 13, 2009
Globalism and You... what you can do to make sure we all fail together
The trend to globalism has been slowing down under the weight of a global economic crisis. It makes sense, you can't really argue for increasing jobs in your home country when you're buying everything import from Asian manufacturing. Money spent in foreign countries really is risky, because it has a much lower recirculation value here at home.
The Economist (Feb 7th 2009) Ran an article about the rise of Nationalization and "Why Barack Obama needs to take the lead to bury it again."
The swing against globalism is hardly anything new or surprising. In fact if you look through the Nov/Dec 2008 Foreign Affairs journal there is a brilliant article written by Marc Levinson, ( http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/64614/marc-levinson/freight-pain ) that points to a number of factors (not the least of which is the implications of "going green") that are causing the formerly artificially low price of shipping to rise to a more realistic cost.
So what does this mean for the average consumer, aside from the fact that raw wealth cost (a number different from dollar price to be sure) of good has to go up? It means that unless you are ready to gear up and produce those goods in your home country you will end up having to pay the shipping cost increase. Now, since the shipping cost acts to raise the retail price directly, you will also end up paying an increase in sales tax on the item. Increased cost without increasing the actual wealth (NOT dollar amount) of the average citizen will lead to economic slowdown.
So the markets slow down 7%... so what? 7% sales reduction isn't that bad...
Yes, yes it is.
Business exists on very narrow margins. Any disruption to profit flow means that those enterprises will feel a big pinch... a pinch to the employer means a pinch to the employee.
Now with increased cost of shipping there should be a natural rise in local industry. Globalization only makes sense if you're part of the "one world organism" school of thought.
International trade is fine and good, but it's place should always be below the level of local and national trade markets. If you CAN produce it in America, it behooves our government to allow us to foster those industries here. Industries mean jobs, and jobs mean actual wealth growth.
Nationalistic Growth... it's hardly evil.
The Economist (Feb 7th 2009) Ran an article about the rise of Nationalization and "Why Barack Obama needs to take the lead to bury it again."
The swing against globalism is hardly anything new or surprising. In fact if you look through the Nov/Dec 2008 Foreign Affairs journal there is a brilliant article written by Marc Levinson, ( http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/64614/marc-levinson/freight-pain ) that points to a number of factors (not the least of which is the implications of "going green") that are causing the formerly artificially low price of shipping to rise to a more realistic cost.
So what does this mean for the average consumer, aside from the fact that raw wealth cost (a number different from dollar price to be sure) of good has to go up? It means that unless you are ready to gear up and produce those goods in your home country you will end up having to pay the shipping cost increase. Now, since the shipping cost acts to raise the retail price directly, you will also end up paying an increase in sales tax on the item. Increased cost without increasing the actual wealth (NOT dollar amount) of the average citizen will lead to economic slowdown.
So the markets slow down 7%... so what? 7% sales reduction isn't that bad...
Yes, yes it is.
Business exists on very narrow margins. Any disruption to profit flow means that those enterprises will feel a big pinch... a pinch to the employer means a pinch to the employee.
Now with increased cost of shipping there should be a natural rise in local industry. Globalization only makes sense if you're part of the "one world organism" school of thought.
International trade is fine and good, but it's place should always be below the level of local and national trade markets. If you CAN produce it in America, it behooves our government to allow us to foster those industries here. Industries mean jobs, and jobs mean actual wealth growth.
Nationalistic Growth... it's hardly evil.
"Strange times call for Strange Ideas"
I think that truths of language are a big problem that we're going to have to learn to deal with if we want things to start getting better. Just because something sounds nice we are willing to follow it regardless of holes in logic or lack of research. No wonder the lawyers are kings of our culture, the only purpose they serve is twisting words to fit untruth.
So what does all of this have to do with the DOW?
Well, lets take a closer look at the attitudes we've been taught to accept as par for the course in our society. We are taught that the rich are evil, that success should be punished as pride and greed, that we shouldn't model ourselves after the wealthy. My roommate actually believes that anyone who possesses over 100 million dollars worth of wealth should have their "excessive assets seized".
I'm not some screaming Reganite. But there is a lot to be said for Trickle Down theory. The truth is that the wealthy have disposable income. That income is spent and recirculated back into the economy. People make money, and the more they make the more they spend. But it's not a 1 for 1 ratio. A person worth twice as much recirculates more then twice the amount of money.
The thing is, we're starting to take equality and remake it into a locked and forced stint on growth. Equal rights, equal freedoms, yes all good things.
But if I work harder, have better ideas, and more drive then the guy next to me... should there really be a limit on how successful I'm allowed to be?
Thought for the day... How much of what we don't agree with is based on not liking the implications?
So what does all of this have to do with the DOW?
Well, lets take a closer look at the attitudes we've been taught to accept as par for the course in our society. We are taught that the rich are evil, that success should be punished as pride and greed, that we shouldn't model ourselves after the wealthy. My roommate actually believes that anyone who possesses over 100 million dollars worth of wealth should have their "excessive assets seized".
I'm not some screaming Reganite. But there is a lot to be said for Trickle Down theory. The truth is that the wealthy have disposable income. That income is spent and recirculated back into the economy. People make money, and the more they make the more they spend. But it's not a 1 for 1 ratio. A person worth twice as much recirculates more then twice the amount of money.
The thing is, we're starting to take equality and remake it into a locked and forced stint on growth. Equal rights, equal freedoms, yes all good things.
But if I work harder, have better ideas, and more drive then the guy next to me... should there really be a limit on how successful I'm allowed to be?
Thought for the day... How much of what we don't agree with is based on not liking the implications?
A little Teaser about tonights post
So a few thoughts on the stock market.
All wealth starts as "bubbles". We have to work hard to build solidity under the bubbles that stand a chance and to not get caught up in the bubbles that aren't viable.
That's how wealth is grown.
I'm going to compile the numbers and do the legwork for you today, and hopefully I'll have something more concrete to post later this afternoon.
All wealth starts as "bubbles". We have to work hard to build solidity under the bubbles that stand a chance and to not get caught up in the bubbles that aren't viable.
That's how wealth is grown.
I'm going to compile the numbers and do the legwork for you today, and hopefully I'll have something more concrete to post later this afternoon.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Good lord it's been too long since I wrote here
It's been sometime since I wrote anything here, much has changed.
Lets' get rolling with this. I know the press has beaten to death all the current Limbaugh nonsense, the talking heads on both sides of the news are already chirping away... and even into the windout... I think this thing is safely behind us.
The DJI jumped about 300 pts yesterday and that makes me really nervous. I always get nervous when stocks jump for no reason. Of course most companies are trading UNDER liquidity value so it shouldn't really be that surprising that they come up a little closer to it. I just get a little antsy because nothing has really changed as far the original problems are concerned.
God Damn you Timmy... you're messing up everything. Another TARP can't be the answer.
Mark to Market... what can I say but overhaul it? I don't think you can eliminate it, but it needs to be more accurately reflective.
I can't believe people are really blaming this stuff on the Short Stockers. Shorting stock only WORKS in a downspiral. I don't like shorting because it's risky and scary and you're BETTING on failure... with money you really don't have yet.
Fractual reserve banking practices are finally being drug into the light of day.
Lets see what we can find there.
Socialists... are... EVERYWHERE! Beware of these freakjobs.
Ok that's all for today, I promise more in depth looks at some of this stuff tomorrow.
Lets' get rolling with this. I know the press has beaten to death all the current Limbaugh nonsense, the talking heads on both sides of the news are already chirping away... and even into the windout... I think this thing is safely behind us.
The DJI jumped about 300 pts yesterday and that makes me really nervous. I always get nervous when stocks jump for no reason. Of course most companies are trading UNDER liquidity value so it shouldn't really be that surprising that they come up a little closer to it. I just get a little antsy because nothing has really changed as far the original problems are concerned.
God Damn you Timmy... you're messing up everything. Another TARP can't be the answer.
Mark to Market... what can I say but overhaul it? I don't think you can eliminate it, but it needs to be more accurately reflective.
I can't believe people are really blaming this stuff on the Short Stockers. Shorting stock only WORKS in a downspiral. I don't like shorting because it's risky and scary and you're BETTING on failure... with money you really don't have yet.
Fractual reserve banking practices are finally being drug into the light of day.
Lets see what we can find there.
Socialists... are... EVERYWHERE! Beware of these freakjobs.
Ok that's all for today, I promise more in depth looks at some of this stuff tomorrow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)