I am really having a hard time deciding who is worse these days. This link was sent to me by a friend of mine who happens to be a Marine. To say that he was upset would be an understatement of colossal proportions. The story is about a reporter that was on patrol with Marines in Afghanistan. What happens on that patrol is a very sad and real part of war: Marines die. On this occasion it happened to be a young Marine, Lance Cpl. Joshua M. Bernard who was killed by a rocket propelled grenade.
First and foremost; Thank You to Lance Cpl. Joshua M. Bernard. Thank you for serving your country. Thank you for fighting for my freedom and the freedom of others. And thank you for protecting this county and defending us against all enemies so that I and my family may sleep safely each night. And my condolences to his family. May I never know the pain you are feeling.
This is when things start to fall apart and get really, really wrong. This reporter that has been assigned to this unit (a unit that has been charged with keeping this reporter alive, by the way), decides that it would be appropriate to photograph this wounded soldier as he died. And then have the nerve and complete lack of respect as to make these pictures public. Has she lost her ever loving mind? What possible good could come from publishing these pictures? What did she hope to accomplish? All she did was show a complete lack of respect and consideration for the Marine, his family, the military at large and our Country.
I understand that war is ugly. I know that people die; young people. Citizens and soldiers. But there is no excuse for this kind of sensational reporting with no regard for the consequences. Everyone knows bad things happen in war without having to show such incredible disrespect to a hero to prove a point. I firmly believe in the free press with no external censorship. But, some kind of self governance has to take place.
As far as I am concerned, Ms. Jacobson of the AP should apologize to the family and the Marines and just say thank you. Thank you to a young Marine who was doing his job, so that she was free to do hers.
Support our military. It is the least they deserve.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Monday, September 7, 2009
Did You Miss This Little Gem?
It did not get much press. But seems like there is a bill pending that will give the President "emergency control" of the Internet. The power to "disconnect private sector computers from the Internet." See anything wrong so far? Well, that was the version put forth back in the spring and it seems some Internet companies and civil liberties groups were somewhat concerned. Now they have revised the language, and I personally do not feel a whole lot better.
Read this article: George Orwell should readily come to mind....
Read this article: George Orwell should readily come to mind....
Obama's Spending Spree
Back to Mr. Davidowitz: In this interview I have no arguments with Davidowitz and his analysis of the current administration and their ridiculous spending. His comments are right in line with what most of the rational economist have been saying: the current path of our government is unsustainable. There is no way that we can keep on spending the way we are. There are not enough resources, not enough tax revenue and the economic side effects will be nothing short of a catastrophe.
The US press are not the only ones noticing either. Even the UK press, the great bastion of socialized medicine, knows the President is taking us down the wrong path. This article from the Telegraph reports on a pamphlet from the Institute of Economic affairs says that there are striking similarities between the policies of Barak Obama and the actions of the government during the early 30's not only did not cause economic recovery, but served to prolong and worsen the Great Depression. Comforting isn't it.
Back to Davidowitz: there were some great lines in his interview. Coming right out and saying it, he called Obama's numbers "mad". In just six months his budget has been revised from leading to over a Seven Trillion deficit to Nine Trillion over the next decade. And this "positive" outlook is based on 4% growth in the economy and a health plan costing only $1 Trillion when it is more likely to cost upwards of $3 Trillion or more. Truly mad.
Perhaps the last line of the interview with Mr. Davidowitz says it as good as anything I have heard.
Well said Mr. Davidowitz, well said.
The US press are not the only ones noticing either. Even the UK press, the great bastion of socialized medicine, knows the President is taking us down the wrong path. This article from the Telegraph reports on a pamphlet from the Institute of Economic affairs says that there are striking similarities between the policies of Barak Obama and the actions of the government during the early 30's not only did not cause economic recovery, but served to prolong and worsen the Great Depression. Comforting isn't it.
Back to Davidowitz: there were some great lines in his interview. Coming right out and saying it, he called Obama's numbers "mad". In just six months his budget has been revised from leading to over a Seven Trillion deficit to Nine Trillion over the next decade. And this "positive" outlook is based on 4% growth in the economy and a health plan costing only $1 Trillion when it is more likely to cost upwards of $3 Trillion or more. Truly mad.
Perhaps the last line of the interview with Mr. Davidowitz says it as good as anything I have heard.
Always be loyal to your Country, never be loyal to the people in power. Because they are conning you every day.
Well said Mr. Davidowitz, well said.
Saturday, September 5, 2009
So much to say....
....so little time. I am apparently too busy to keep up with the President and Congress: which is precisely what they are counting on. Their plan is dependent on the public being so wrapped up in their daily lives, so busy, that they do not have time to pay attention to what is going on in Washington.
Lets start with the economy: I was sent these two links (In the tank forever and Obama's spending spree ) last week. Both of them are interviews with "Retail maven Howard Davidowitz", who is apparently an expert on retail trade and the economy (I must be showing my ignorance by not knowing who he is). He paints a pretty gloomy picture, and he has some great points, but lets look at each one:
In the Tank Forever - First of all, I think his analysis of the retail business is pretty much right on. There is no way in this environment that the volume of retailers can be maintained. There are way to many "Big Box" stores at the malls, too many specialty shops and neighborhood strip centers have been seriously overbuilt. All with a declining disposable income among consumers. We have been asking for years how all of the new shopping centers they were building in our area could be supported, and it turns out they can't be. Most of them are sitting close to empty.
What really struck me though was something else that he touched on. There are two primary causes that will lead to a collapse of many retailers: 1) the significant increase in unemployment and 2) the decrease in available credit. Both of these have significantly contributed to less spending in the retail sector; people are only buying what they need, not what they want and nothing frivolous. That all makes perfect sense. What bugged me about his comments was this: not only did he include available credit as "income" but he seemed appalled by what I considered to be pretty good news; people are starting to save money. His stats were that the consumer has gone from spending 6% more than they make (credit use and debt) to actually saving 7%.
A couple of things that come to mind based Davidowitz's comments. The first is that it is telling that our economy has been growing for years based on irresponsible spending and the misuse of credit. If you look at most of the industries that are in big trouble now, they are mostly dependent on, or providers of, credit: auto, retail, mortgage, banks. It is all fake, a manufactured economy with no basis on anything tangible. [The exception, of course is the mortgage industry; that disaster is the result of lending too much money to people that could not afford it on properties that were not worth it. A subject for another time and already well covered elsewhere.]There have been analyst and economist telling us for years that the over use of credit was going to cause problems some day. It looks that that day is today.
The other thing that occurred to me was something else I recall hearing, from some source I have forgotten, years ago: as a country we have gotten away from a production based economy. We do not produce anything. Industry has been forced overseas and our illusory economic growth has been the result of consumers buying products made in China, Taiwan, India and Mexico and paid for with money they have not actually earned yet.
Is it possible we have too much retail? Too many service based companies? It used to be that a community would grow up around the local factory and supporting businesses (retail, restaurants, doctors, etc) would open to provide for the factory workers. I understand that the nature of our economy has changed: there are not as many factory jobs, there is more automation, etc. But, should it not be a clear sign to the politicians that it is time to do away with burdensome tax policy that forces business to send their production facilities overseas in order to complete. Should we reward companies for employing Americans instead of punishing them for being profitable?
I know retail is a big part of our economy, and I know that more people will lose their jobs if that market segment continues to decline. But i just do not see how it is sustainable in it's current form. And Davidowitz did say that there are going to be some companies that come out of this just fine, possibly even stronger. It is not all bad, it just has to change.
Can that happen with our current government? That is a HUGE concern that I will cover next time. That is enough for one entry.
Lets start with the economy: I was sent these two links (In the tank forever and Obama's spending spree ) last week. Both of them are interviews with "Retail maven Howard Davidowitz", who is apparently an expert on retail trade and the economy (I must be showing my ignorance by not knowing who he is). He paints a pretty gloomy picture, and he has some great points, but lets look at each one:
In the Tank Forever - First of all, I think his analysis of the retail business is pretty much right on. There is no way in this environment that the volume of retailers can be maintained. There are way to many "Big Box" stores at the malls, too many specialty shops and neighborhood strip centers have been seriously overbuilt. All with a declining disposable income among consumers. We have been asking for years how all of the new shopping centers they were building in our area could be supported, and it turns out they can't be. Most of them are sitting close to empty.
What really struck me though was something else that he touched on. There are two primary causes that will lead to a collapse of many retailers: 1) the significant increase in unemployment and 2) the decrease in available credit. Both of these have significantly contributed to less spending in the retail sector; people are only buying what they need, not what they want and nothing frivolous. That all makes perfect sense. What bugged me about his comments was this: not only did he include available credit as "income" but he seemed appalled by what I considered to be pretty good news; people are starting to save money. His stats were that the consumer has gone from spending 6% more than they make (credit use and debt) to actually saving 7%.
A couple of things that come to mind based Davidowitz's comments. The first is that it is telling that our economy has been growing for years based on irresponsible spending and the misuse of credit. If you look at most of the industries that are in big trouble now, they are mostly dependent on, or providers of, credit: auto, retail, mortgage, banks. It is all fake, a manufactured economy with no basis on anything tangible. [The exception, of course is the mortgage industry; that disaster is the result of lending too much money to people that could not afford it on properties that were not worth it. A subject for another time and already well covered elsewhere.]There have been analyst and economist telling us for years that the over use of credit was going to cause problems some day. It looks that that day is today.
The other thing that occurred to me was something else I recall hearing, from some source I have forgotten, years ago: as a country we have gotten away from a production based economy. We do not produce anything. Industry has been forced overseas and our illusory economic growth has been the result of consumers buying products made in China, Taiwan, India and Mexico and paid for with money they have not actually earned yet.
Is it possible we have too much retail? Too many service based companies? It used to be that a community would grow up around the local factory and supporting businesses (retail, restaurants, doctors, etc) would open to provide for the factory workers. I understand that the nature of our economy has changed: there are not as many factory jobs, there is more automation, etc. But, should it not be a clear sign to the politicians that it is time to do away with burdensome tax policy that forces business to send their production facilities overseas in order to complete. Should we reward companies for employing Americans instead of punishing them for being profitable?
I know retail is a big part of our economy, and I know that more people will lose their jobs if that market segment continues to decline. But i just do not see how it is sustainable in it's current form. And Davidowitz did say that there are going to be some companies that come out of this just fine, possibly even stronger. It is not all bad, it just has to change.
Can that happen with our current government? That is a HUGE concern that I will cover next time. That is enough for one entry.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)