I can't help but wonder what the world is coming to these days. I cannot go a day without reading an article, and most recently, multiple articles that make me want to scream. Since when has our country started to frown upon entrepreneurship and striving to be successful. Sadly, now it seems that it isn't just limited to the United States. I don't know if you are aware, but Europe decided to start an antitrust suit against Google. Search engines that operate in Europe are claiming that Google has a command on the market over there and it is impossible to compete. My question to these companies is if it is really impossible to compete with Google, or does Google just do things that much better than you that you can't take the time or effort to make your search engine better.
We have gotten to a point in society where the desire to succeed is overshadowed by the easy way out. We don't want to try to be the best, or even try to improve on what we have. We want it handed to us by the government or a branch thereof. There was a time when entrepreneurship was encouraged, people tried to succeed in life, people would feel ashamed and embarrassed to ask for a handout. If this trend continues where will we be in 25, 50, or even 100 years.
Another article that comes to mind with this is that there was a group that said it is the government's job to create enough jobs for everyone in the country. That is all well and good, and sadly I must say there probably are enough jobs in this country for everyone, but people need to be willing to work those jobs. The unemployment benefits that are available take precedent it seems to a hard days work in jobs people view as menial and below them. People today don't seem to want to work towards everything, and again I must reiterate, people want everything handed to them. Instead of accepting a job that is at a lower level and working up to being in management, people seem to be opting out and waiting for that management position to magically appear.
I can complain all night so I will stop for now.
-a
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Financial Reform...1st of many
I will let anyone who reads this blog to read this article and form your own opinion. This comes to me as no big surprise and it will only get worse.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2010/07/28/sec-says-new-finreg-law-exempts-public-disclosure/
-a
http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2010/07/28/sec-says-new-finreg-law-exempts-public-disclosure/
-a
Friday, July 23, 2010
Signal the End of the World...
I always knew the end of the world would come from the hands of a woman. A woman caused the downfall and sin of man in the beginning, it is only fitting that a woman causes the destruction. I am speaking of course about U.S. Secreatry of State Hillary Clinton and her fued with North Korea.
If you haven't heard yet, the U.S. (not the U.N.) is impossing sanctions on North Korea because of their accused sinking of a South Korean ship. I am not saying that I don't believe they are doing it, but the accusations are coming without conclusive evidence. The U.S. is taking it further by planning to conduct naval exercises in South Korea amid rising tensions. North Korea's response is a threat of "physical" response. Wait, she is taking it even a step further and voiced her concerns about potential atomic collaboration between North Korea and Myanmar or Burma as you may know it. Her attack and comments made by Myanmar are sure to upset China who asserts sovereignty over the countries in the South China Sea.
If we overstep our boundaries one more time and upset China, who is, in my opinion, the key to the stability of that entire region, the fallout could be disasterous. I understand that it today's world a problem in one developed, or near a developed country, echoes through all of the developed world. It is not our duty as a country to impose our views and flex our muscle and try and control the world. I don't blame some countries for getting upset with our attempt at control over them under the guise of the U.N. or any other organization we front.
If you haven't heard yet, the U.S. (not the U.N.) is impossing sanctions on North Korea because of their accused sinking of a South Korean ship. I am not saying that I don't believe they are doing it, but the accusations are coming without conclusive evidence. The U.S. is taking it further by planning to conduct naval exercises in South Korea amid rising tensions. North Korea's response is a threat of "physical" response. Wait, she is taking it even a step further and voiced her concerns about potential atomic collaboration between North Korea and Myanmar or Burma as you may know it. Her attack and comments made by Myanmar are sure to upset China who asserts sovereignty over the countries in the South China Sea.
If we overstep our boundaries one more time and upset China, who is, in my opinion, the key to the stability of that entire region, the fallout could be disasterous. I understand that it today's world a problem in one developed, or near a developed country, echoes through all of the developed world. It is not our duty as a country to impose our views and flex our muscle and try and control the world. I don't blame some countries for getting upset with our attempt at control over them under the guise of the U.N. or any other organization we front.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Too Big to Fail: Wall Street vs America
I tried to sidestep this and not let this get to me, but it has to be said. The financial regulation bill, that just passed scares the shit out of me and is in my opinion, the worst thing that can happen in these troubling times. This monster piece of legislation weighs in at a staggering 2,300 pages and gives the government new powers to break up teetering companies, that if allowed to fail, would threaten the economy, creates a new agency to protect consumers in their financial transactions, and shadow financial markets.
Who decides what is to big to fail? You can argue that any company, if allowed to fail, could threaten the economy; ranging from the little mom and pop store on the corner to the biggest of corporations. What defines a threat to the economy? It is also stated that a failing institution would be liquidated and the costs assessed on their surviving peers. If the industry is responsible for those who fail are they allowed to create their own "club"? Shouldn't then financial institutions be allowed to say if and when a bank can open? The Federal Reserve is granted new powers, while coming under expanded congressional oversight. It is like the blind leading the blind. There has to be some level of independence and accountability here ladies in gentlemen. Not only on the part of the financial instituions, but also on the part of the government.
The financial collapse that happened back in 2008 is as much to blame on the government's lack of oversight in the first place as it was to the greedy investors on Wall Street. I will even go as far as to argue that this financial collapse is the fault of all people who inhabit this earth. The developed countries of this world lived for years on a bubble, and all bubbles pop. We were spending way beyond our means using credit as an equivalent to cash, buying overpriced houses that were way beyond what we should have been buying, and succoming to the greed of the almighty dollar. Just like the .com boom back in the late 90s it popped and the fallout was immense. I am not preaching that I am not guilty of this, as I am far from it, but I know that is my problem and do not expect anyone to assist me.
The financial industry is one of, if not the most, regulated industries in the United States. Oversight existed prior to the collapse and was meant to monitor the market and detect potential problems. Where was this and I guess adding more will make it better? It is almost being frowned upon for people to want to make money. Interest rates are at a low and the only way to get a worthwhile return for your money is through investing. If you follow the market at all you know that it has it's ups and downs, some companies do well and some companies do bad. Hedging, which is at the root of the evil, is a way to counteract this and protect your investment from the cyclical nature of the market. The problem lies in that some companies hedge against their own consumers. For example, a mortgage company can issue a mortgage to an individual knowing that that individual cannot afford that mortgage. This individuals mortgage is placed into what is called a mortgage backed security. The issuing company can then go out and hedge or bet against the individual they already know can't afford their mortgage and make money off of it.
Again I preach change. Real change; not this fake change that is happening through unprecedented legislation. It is up to individuals to make the change in themselves. If I walk into a bank and have an annual salary of $35,000 / year and get approved for a $150,000 mortgage, that should raise a red flag in your mind. There is no possible way you can afford this, hell it is even hard to afford this when you are making double this annual salary. Common sense would tell you that something is wrong and maybe I should think again. Same thing goes for investing. If it seems to good to be true, then it probably is. Using your head and going with human nature's inate insticts can do the world a lot of good. We don't need anyone to sit there and tell us what we should, shouldn't and probably now aren't allowed to do.
This bill pledges "no more" Wall Street bailouts. My question to anyone who reads this is when will we be footing to bill to bailout the government of the United States of America? Where is the consumer protection against this entity? This will not create jobs, this will destory jobs and only create headaches that we can only imagine at this point.
All I can say is welcome the First National Bank of the United States of America. Not only will they be receiving your tax money, but soon they will control all of it. But remember, this bill has you, the consumer, in mind and is protecting you from the evil that lurks. No thank you. Let me take my chances on my own. I am a big boy now, let me make my mistakes, and please don't catch me when I fall.
Do not impose on others what you yourself do not desire.
- Confucius
-a
Who decides what is to big to fail? You can argue that any company, if allowed to fail, could threaten the economy; ranging from the little mom and pop store on the corner to the biggest of corporations. What defines a threat to the economy? It is also stated that a failing institution would be liquidated and the costs assessed on their surviving peers. If the industry is responsible for those who fail are they allowed to create their own "club"? Shouldn't then financial institutions be allowed to say if and when a bank can open? The Federal Reserve is granted new powers, while coming under expanded congressional oversight. It is like the blind leading the blind. There has to be some level of independence and accountability here ladies in gentlemen. Not only on the part of the financial instituions, but also on the part of the government.
The financial collapse that happened back in 2008 is as much to blame on the government's lack of oversight in the first place as it was to the greedy investors on Wall Street. I will even go as far as to argue that this financial collapse is the fault of all people who inhabit this earth. The developed countries of this world lived for years on a bubble, and all bubbles pop. We were spending way beyond our means using credit as an equivalent to cash, buying overpriced houses that were way beyond what we should have been buying, and succoming to the greed of the almighty dollar. Just like the .com boom back in the late 90s it popped and the fallout was immense. I am not preaching that I am not guilty of this, as I am far from it, but I know that is my problem and do not expect anyone to assist me.
The financial industry is one of, if not the most, regulated industries in the United States. Oversight existed prior to the collapse and was meant to monitor the market and detect potential problems. Where was this and I guess adding more will make it better? It is almost being frowned upon for people to want to make money. Interest rates are at a low and the only way to get a worthwhile return for your money is through investing. If you follow the market at all you know that it has it's ups and downs, some companies do well and some companies do bad. Hedging, which is at the root of the evil, is a way to counteract this and protect your investment from the cyclical nature of the market. The problem lies in that some companies hedge against their own consumers. For example, a mortgage company can issue a mortgage to an individual knowing that that individual cannot afford that mortgage. This individuals mortgage is placed into what is called a mortgage backed security. The issuing company can then go out and hedge or bet against the individual they already know can't afford their mortgage and make money off of it.
Again I preach change. Real change; not this fake change that is happening through unprecedented legislation. It is up to individuals to make the change in themselves. If I walk into a bank and have an annual salary of $35,000 / year and get approved for a $150,000 mortgage, that should raise a red flag in your mind. There is no possible way you can afford this, hell it is even hard to afford this when you are making double this annual salary. Common sense would tell you that something is wrong and maybe I should think again. Same thing goes for investing. If it seems to good to be true, then it probably is. Using your head and going with human nature's inate insticts can do the world a lot of good. We don't need anyone to sit there and tell us what we should, shouldn't and probably now aren't allowed to do.
This bill pledges "no more" Wall Street bailouts. My question to anyone who reads this is when will we be footing to bill to bailout the government of the United States of America? Where is the consumer protection against this entity? This will not create jobs, this will destory jobs and only create headaches that we can only imagine at this point.
All I can say is welcome the First National Bank of the United States of America. Not only will they be receiving your tax money, but soon they will control all of it. But remember, this bill has you, the consumer, in mind and is protecting you from the evil that lurks. No thank you. Let me take my chances on my own. I am a big boy now, let me make my mistakes, and please don't catch me when I fall.
Do not impose on others what you yourself do not desire.
- Confucius
-a
Friday, July 16, 2010
The Iroquois National Lacrosse Team...
...to my knowledge is still not playing in the Lacrosse World Cup this year. And that is a travesty. The team is comprised of members who are Hodinoshoni, known around the world as the Six Nations Iroquois Confederacy. They are a sovereign state located within parts of the US and Canada. Being a sovereign state they travel internationally using their own Iroquois Nation passports and have done so for many many years.
The problem now, however, is that this is the first Lacrosse World Cup held across true borders, in England to be specific, since 9/11. (The last event was held in Canada). The UK government has denied the team access to the country since they could not guarantee that they would be allowed reentry to the US due to the new, stricter passport regulations that have come about in this post 9/11 world we live in. How this is possible is beyond me. For those not familiar the Iroquois have an extremely strong tradition in lacrosse. Practically inventing the game to be exact. They have always participated in the Lacrosse World Cup as an independent nation, and this year's team was ranked at fourth in the world. For them to be denied from this event is ludicrous, and is a sign of the deep trouble we face in this age of "security." What we truly live in is a world of draconian laws and regulations that make it nearly impossible for regular people to do as they please. The Iroquois are a sovereign nation. Their passports are no less legitimate than any other country in this world. Yet in the eyes of the American and British governments this is not enough. The US wants the team to have American issue passports in order to travel. Now I know some people would argue that there is no big harm in that, but those same people would have very little understanding of Iroquois (and other Native American) culture.
They are very proud, and want to travel to these events under their own banner and not be required to carry the documentation of a (in terms of the games) rival nation. For anyone that still cannot get their mind around why this is a big deal, imagine that you wanted to travel to a foreign country. You have your passport, which you have used for many years with no problem, and are ready to go. But suddenly the country you wish to travel to refuses your entry because they want you to have a, let's just say, Mexican passport in order to return to your own nation. Now, for this example anyway, you are not a Mexican citizen, and you already have a passport that you and other people from your country have used for decades in order to travel abroad. Why now should you be forced to claim another nation just to have the right to travel?
And there is my point. This whole situation is a farce. There is no way the Iroquois Nation Lacrosse Team poses a serious threat to US national security, but the government is denying their right to be a sovereign nation now, and the UK is backing this play by not allowing the team entrance to their country either.
I know Lacrosse might not be high on everyone's priority list, but the implications here run far deeper. And even when you look at the issue itself it is a major blow to national sovereignty, not to mention personal pride.
The opening ceremony for the Lacrosse World Cup was supposed to be yesterday. The Iroquois were supposed to be part of the opening exhibition with the UK team. Instead they played a scrimmage game and ran a lacrosse camp in Bayville, Long Island. That's fair, right?
-T
The problem now, however, is that this is the first Lacrosse World Cup held across true borders, in England to be specific, since 9/11. (The last event was held in Canada). The UK government has denied the team access to the country since they could not guarantee that they would be allowed reentry to the US due to the new, stricter passport regulations that have come about in this post 9/11 world we live in. How this is possible is beyond me. For those not familiar the Iroquois have an extremely strong tradition in lacrosse. Practically inventing the game to be exact. They have always participated in the Lacrosse World Cup as an independent nation, and this year's team was ranked at fourth in the world. For them to be denied from this event is ludicrous, and is a sign of the deep trouble we face in this age of "security." What we truly live in is a world of draconian laws and regulations that make it nearly impossible for regular people to do as they please. The Iroquois are a sovereign nation. Their passports are no less legitimate than any other country in this world. Yet in the eyes of the American and British governments this is not enough. The US wants the team to have American issue passports in order to travel. Now I know some people would argue that there is no big harm in that, but those same people would have very little understanding of Iroquois (and other Native American) culture.
They are very proud, and want to travel to these events under their own banner and not be required to carry the documentation of a (in terms of the games) rival nation. For anyone that still cannot get their mind around why this is a big deal, imagine that you wanted to travel to a foreign country. You have your passport, which you have used for many years with no problem, and are ready to go. But suddenly the country you wish to travel to refuses your entry because they want you to have a, let's just say, Mexican passport in order to return to your own nation. Now, for this example anyway, you are not a Mexican citizen, and you already have a passport that you and other people from your country have used for decades in order to travel abroad. Why now should you be forced to claim another nation just to have the right to travel?
And there is my point. This whole situation is a farce. There is no way the Iroquois Nation Lacrosse Team poses a serious threat to US national security, but the government is denying their right to be a sovereign nation now, and the UK is backing this play by not allowing the team entrance to their country either.
I know Lacrosse might not be high on everyone's priority list, but the implications here run far deeper. And even when you look at the issue itself it is a major blow to national sovereignty, not to mention personal pride.
The opening ceremony for the Lacrosse World Cup was supposed to be yesterday. The Iroquois were supposed to be part of the opening exhibition with the UK team. Instead they played a scrimmage game and ran a lacrosse camp in Bayville, Long Island. That's fair, right?
-T
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Cut the Fat
I figured I would start things off right. This has been bugging me for months and I just finished reading an article that furthers my anger. I am talking about the Center for Disease Control and their never ending battle against obesity.
According the the CDC the number of obese children in America has more than tripled in the past 30 years and their blame is on fast food restaurants. They are now seeking to hold someone accountable and that appears to be the fast food industry. And using the logic of most, to get the most out of it go for the largest target which in this case is McDonald's. When reading this please take the viewpoint of the fight against obesity, not from the viewpoint that McDonald's is a large "evil" corporation or other problems that might be associated with them as I know there are some. I am not defending them all aspects of their operations.
First there was a big ordeal with McDonald's and their "deceptive" marketing towards children. Watchdog groups were and still are upset because said franchise's advertisements were geared towards children and in turn make parents feel guilty for telling their kids no. I am sorry, but as a parent you should be the one who decides where your kid eats and you should have the power to say no. In letting these groups win they are in essence the ones parenting your kids. I for one find this appalling, does anyone else agree? This disdain then moved on aimed at McDonald's most beloved character, Ronald McDonald. Since he is a clown and is always having fun he makes kids want to come and eat there.
Also, since when was marketing your brand an evil thing in America? McDonald's spent years creating their brand and image and has always been geared towards children. What about the stupid mouse in the Chuck E. Cheese commercials? They not only have character geared towards children, but they also show games and prizes. The food that is served there can by no means be any more healthy than that served at a McDonald's and they promote the playing of video games, which could be another target coming in the future.
Now the "Center for Science In the the Public Interest" (never knew they existed, so much for my interest), says they will file a lawsuit against McDonald's citing that "McDonald's uses deceptive marketing strategies by trying to 'lure' children to its restaurants by offering a free toy inside the Happy Meal." The CSPI further cites that "not only is this contributing to the childhood obesity epidemic...but also alleges that McDonald's could be breaking some consumer rights laws in a handful of states." This is clear cut libel on the part of the CSPI. They know there is no legal action that would ever hold up in court; they are just out to blemish the name of McDonald's and try to curb society away from eating at fast food restaurants. Trying to get society to do what they want is used by another group, but that is a completely different topic and I do not want to delve into that without T.
For now I think the CDC should just stop looking for people to blame and shift focus to educating. Education is, in my mind, at the cornerstone of change (be on the lookout for a post coming about education as I know T has a lot to say on that). They need to also stop calling obesity a disease. In calling it a disease it just provides ammunition for people to blame the disease not their sedentary lifestyle.
What are your thoughts on this? Do you feel that McDonald's is in the wrong for marketing towards children? Is this really the leading cause of obesity in this country?
-a
According the the CDC the number of obese children in America has more than tripled in the past 30 years and their blame is on fast food restaurants. They are now seeking to hold someone accountable and that appears to be the fast food industry. And using the logic of most, to get the most out of it go for the largest target which in this case is McDonald's. When reading this please take the viewpoint of the fight against obesity, not from the viewpoint that McDonald's is a large "evil" corporation or other problems that might be associated with them as I know there are some. I am not defending them all aspects of their operations.
First there was a big ordeal with McDonald's and their "deceptive" marketing towards children. Watchdog groups were and still are upset because said franchise's advertisements were geared towards children and in turn make parents feel guilty for telling their kids no. I am sorry, but as a parent you should be the one who decides where your kid eats and you should have the power to say no. In letting these groups win they are in essence the ones parenting your kids. I for one find this appalling, does anyone else agree? This disdain then moved on aimed at McDonald's most beloved character, Ronald McDonald. Since he is a clown and is always having fun he makes kids want to come and eat there.
Also, since when was marketing your brand an evil thing in America? McDonald's spent years creating their brand and image and has always been geared towards children. What about the stupid mouse in the Chuck E. Cheese commercials? They not only have character geared towards children, but they also show games and prizes. The food that is served there can by no means be any more healthy than that served at a McDonald's and they promote the playing of video games, which could be another target coming in the future.
Now the "Center for Science In the the Public Interest" (never knew they existed, so much for my interest), says they will file a lawsuit against McDonald's citing that "McDonald's uses deceptive marketing strategies by trying to 'lure' children to its restaurants by offering a free toy inside the Happy Meal." The CSPI further cites that "not only is this contributing to the childhood obesity epidemic...but also alleges that McDonald's could be breaking some consumer rights laws in a handful of states." This is clear cut libel on the part of the CSPI. They know there is no legal action that would ever hold up in court; they are just out to blemish the name of McDonald's and try to curb society away from eating at fast food restaurants. Trying to get society to do what they want is used by another group, but that is a completely different topic and I do not want to delve into that without T.
For now I think the CDC should just stop looking for people to blame and shift focus to educating. Education is, in my mind, at the cornerstone of change (be on the lookout for a post coming about education as I know T has a lot to say on that). They need to also stop calling obesity a disease. In calling it a disease it just provides ammunition for people to blame the disease not their sedentary lifestyle.
What are your thoughts on this? Do you feel that McDonald's is in the wrong for marketing towards children? Is this really the leading cause of obesity in this country?
-a
First post v. 0.5
Just wanted to get something typed up here to get this thing started. The goal is that, hopefully, within the days to come we'll start getting a lot of information up here along with heavy amounts of our own comments and insight. So sit tight and give us a chance, you might not like what you see but it will be guaranteed to make you think.
-T
-T
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)