At the top of a very nondescript hill out in Riverside County, CA, you'll find something pretty amazing. I can't tell you exactly where it is because the scientists that discovered it are going to do their best to protect this find, though they recognize that they are fighting a losing battle. According to UC Davis researchers, they have found what they believe to be one of the oldest living plants on the planet that is registering at 13,000 years old.
This plant is a wide-spanning thicket of stunted, gnarled oak trees wedged between a pile of boulders. To the untrained eye, it would appear to be of no consequence. The entire grove of Palmer's oak trunks is one plant with none of its stems rising more than a few feet tall. The plant is actually growing within the boulder pile, which has offered the needed protection in order for the plant to live it's extremely long life.
About a decade ago, while conducting a routine survey of plant life in the area, Michael May and his team came across this very unique plant. Their first clues as to what this plant really was came when they discovered that this apparent grove of trees was producing no fertile acorns, yet was seeming to continue to grow in size somehow. They then noticed that the trees were very similar in appearance, almost as if they were clones. This led them to discover that this is a single plant, growing in an oval 25 yards long and 8 yards wide. Researchers have found many plants that clone themselves, but very few that are this old.
Researchers have named the plant the Jurupa Oak after the mountain range in which it was found. They even believe that the plant has survived numerous fires over the years, with new sprouts springing to life after each fire.
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Friday, November 20, 2009
Why Walmart Actually Doesn't Suck
I am sick and tired of everyone talking trash on Walmart. Now, don't get me wrong, compared to other stores in every other area besides price, shopping at Walmart sucks. From the time I walk into the store until the time I walk out of the store, every second is overwhelmingly filled with my desire to get out of the store, but once you are outside and the ordeal is done, the amount of money you have just saved is worth while.
Add that savings up over the course of the year, and it is even more worthwhile. See, Walmart and I have an agreement. They are going to suck, but I am going to save a lot of money. The stores are dirty, Lord help you if you need help and have to ask an Associate to help you find something, and the people who shop there (besides us, of course) are a monument to humanity and its constant struggle against itself, but if you can get your head around the fact that this is just how it is inside the walls of Walmart, and you can stomach it, you are going to reap the rewards.
Now, maybe you are principled and say that Walmart doesn't provide the best employment opportunity for its Associates and team members. Well, I have two things to say to you.
The first is...really? If as a shopper I know the bottom line is to save me money, not provide me good service, then every single employee at Walmart must know the same to be the truth. And that drive for the bottom line is why Walmart employees get a paycheck, but not much more. Just how I know what I am getting when I shop there, people who take a job at Walmart also know what they are getting.
The second is...really? How is it that if Walmart is the worst employer in the world, they manage to employ such a large army of people? How is it that a great deal of their senior leadership started decades earlier as Associates on the floor? If it was really, truly, that bad, do you think that would be the case?
Again, compare Walmart to other employers, and they will probably be found lacking, but it's not like Walmart is telling people they are going to get a full package of benefits during their interview, then telling them on their first day, "Ha ha, you fell for it".
So here is a company that employs a large mass of Americans (and let's face it, a lot of people who would not be able to find work at other places, especially in today's economy); provides the same exact products as all of the other stores out there, yet does it at a discount; continually still manages to churn out a profit, resulting in growth; and is one of the largest companies in America that has not needed the taxpayer to bail them out.
Yet, somehow, in the midst of this, people in this country still find a need to vilify Walmart as bad for America and bad for Americans. I beg to differ.
What would be far worse for America would be for Walmart to close up shop tomorrow, eliminating thousands upon thousands of jobs, and eliminating vital competition in the market place to keep prices low for American families.
Add that savings up over the course of the year, and it is even more worthwhile. See, Walmart and I have an agreement. They are going to suck, but I am going to save a lot of money. The stores are dirty, Lord help you if you need help and have to ask an Associate to help you find something, and the people who shop there (besides us, of course) are a monument to humanity and its constant struggle against itself, but if you can get your head around the fact that this is just how it is inside the walls of Walmart, and you can stomach it, you are going to reap the rewards.
Now, maybe you are principled and say that Walmart doesn't provide the best employment opportunity for its Associates and team members. Well, I have two things to say to you.
The first is...really? If as a shopper I know the bottom line is to save me money, not provide me good service, then every single employee at Walmart must know the same to be the truth. And that drive for the bottom line is why Walmart employees get a paycheck, but not much more. Just how I know what I am getting when I shop there, people who take a job at Walmart also know what they are getting.
The second is...really? How is it that if Walmart is the worst employer in the world, they manage to employ such a large army of people? How is it that a great deal of their senior leadership started decades earlier as Associates on the floor? If it was really, truly, that bad, do you think that would be the case?
Again, compare Walmart to other employers, and they will probably be found lacking, but it's not like Walmart is telling people they are going to get a full package of benefits during their interview, then telling them on their first day, "Ha ha, you fell for it".
So here is a company that employs a large mass of Americans (and let's face it, a lot of people who would not be able to find work at other places, especially in today's economy); provides the same exact products as all of the other stores out there, yet does it at a discount; continually still manages to churn out a profit, resulting in growth; and is one of the largest companies in America that has not needed the taxpayer to bail them out.
Yet, somehow, in the midst of this, people in this country still find a need to vilify Walmart as bad for America and bad for Americans. I beg to differ.
What would be far worse for America would be for Walmart to close up shop tomorrow, eliminating thousands upon thousands of jobs, and eliminating vital competition in the market place to keep prices low for American families.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Why The U.S. President Should Not Bow To World Leaders
I know I am about a week late, but I feel the need to chime in on the picture of The Magician bowing before Japanese Emperor Akihito that is floating around on the Internet, and the grumbling over the image that is going on across America.
The picture shows The Magician bowing, almost at a 90-degree angle with his head down before the Japanese Emperor. The proper way to bow to a peer is to keep your head up, look forward with your eyes looking directly at the person you are bowing to, both of you bowing at the same time, both of you bowing to an equal level, and in this case, regardless of height difference. If the other person chooses to not look up at you or bow down further than you, then that is their choice, but you should not do so under any circumstance, especially if you are the President of the United States of America. Make no mistake about it. The bow in this picture is how you would bow to show respect to someone above you, or to show your submission.
I think that someone in his staff should have briefed The Magician on this beforehand, and maybe even practiced it with him. The briefing should have touched on ensuring that he sent a message that he is on a level playing field, but I am afraid that The Magician was probably briefed with more of a stance that ensured proper respect was shown, even to the extent of it erring on the side of submission. That, my friends, was the mistake in this situation.
Let's bear in mind that a lot of what is circulating around the web is a still image, so we must be considerate of the fact that this is one frame in what was a fairly quick action, but the fact remains, these still images do now exist and are making their way around the world, and they show, unmistakably, the President of the United States of America bowing submissively before the Japanese Emperor.
I think most Americans are not necessarily bothered by the fact that The Magician would bow to a world leader out of respect, but it is the interpretation of him bowing so low in front of another world leader that is causing the uproar, especially among folks on my side of the aisle. Any sitting U.S. President should show respect to the Queen of England, but not take a knee before her. These pictures show the President of the United States of America making a very similar gesture as kneeling before the Queen in bowing in that manner before the Japanese Emporer.
You take this incident in conjunction with the already infamous bow before the King of Saudi Arabia and the infamous exchange with Hugo Chavez at the U.N., and you have the makings of a very strong case that the United States of America no longer considers itself to be a world leader, the world's sole remaining Super Power, but in fact, an America that is not only possibly on a level playing field with all of the world, but on its way to being someone's whipping boy. I, for one, do not like this message.
These, in my opinion, are prime examples of why the arguments were being made that The Magician was not ready for this post. Call the Great Satan George Junior all that you want to, but that man never put this country in a position of submission at any point during his eight years in office, even with the King of Saudi Arabia, who for all intents and purposes was one of his father's peers and associates.
The bottom line is that in just his first year in office, The Magician is sending a very clear message to leaders around the world, and yes, our enemies around the world, that the United States of America is no longer a power to be reckoned with; that we are no longer a shining beacon on a hill, but simply another suburbanite in the world's neighborhood.
The picture shows The Magician bowing, almost at a 90-degree angle with his head down before the Japanese Emperor. The proper way to bow to a peer is to keep your head up, look forward with your eyes looking directly at the person you are bowing to, both of you bowing at the same time, both of you bowing to an equal level, and in this case, regardless of height difference. If the other person chooses to not look up at you or bow down further than you, then that is their choice, but you should not do so under any circumstance, especially if you are the President of the United States of America. Make no mistake about it. The bow in this picture is how you would bow to show respect to someone above you, or to show your submission.
I think that someone in his staff should have briefed The Magician on this beforehand, and maybe even practiced it with him. The briefing should have touched on ensuring that he sent a message that he is on a level playing field, but I am afraid that The Magician was probably briefed with more of a stance that ensured proper respect was shown, even to the extent of it erring on the side of submission. That, my friends, was the mistake in this situation.
Let's bear in mind that a lot of what is circulating around the web is a still image, so we must be considerate of the fact that this is one frame in what was a fairly quick action, but the fact remains, these still images do now exist and are making their way around the world, and they show, unmistakably, the President of the United States of America bowing submissively before the Japanese Emperor.
I think most Americans are not necessarily bothered by the fact that The Magician would bow to a world leader out of respect, but it is the interpretation of him bowing so low in front of another world leader that is causing the uproar, especially among folks on my side of the aisle. Any sitting U.S. President should show respect to the Queen of England, but not take a knee before her. These pictures show the President of the United States of America making a very similar gesture as kneeling before the Queen in bowing in that manner before the Japanese Emporer.
You take this incident in conjunction with the already infamous bow before the King of Saudi Arabia and the infamous exchange with Hugo Chavez at the U.N., and you have the makings of a very strong case that the United States of America no longer considers itself to be a world leader, the world's sole remaining Super Power, but in fact, an America that is not only possibly on a level playing field with all of the world, but on its way to being someone's whipping boy. I, for one, do not like this message.
These, in my opinion, are prime examples of why the arguments were being made that The Magician was not ready for this post. Call the Great Satan George Junior all that you want to, but that man never put this country in a position of submission at any point during his eight years in office, even with the King of Saudi Arabia, who for all intents and purposes was one of his father's peers and associates.
The bottom line is that in just his first year in office, The Magician is sending a very clear message to leaders around the world, and yes, our enemies around the world, that the United States of America is no longer a power to be reckoned with; that we are no longer a shining beacon on a hill, but simply another suburbanite in the world's neighborhood.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Why California Should Continue To Try Children As Adults For Murder
California law says suspects 14 and older can be charged and tried as adults. About 20 percent of murders in the state are committed by people between the ages of 11 and 17.
Think about that for a second...think back to what you were doing when you were 11 years old. Try to find the situation that you were in at 11 years old that would have led to you commit murder.
I was in fifth grade at Webber Elementary in Westminster. I was playing Junior All-American Football and Little League Baseball. I was in karate, and playing on a basketball team at the Westminster Boys & Girls Club. I spent a lot of time at home with my family, hanging out with my friends from the neighborhood, and venturing off further than our parents wanted us to go, up to the liquor store our parents said was too far away, to play video games and buy more candy than we probably should have.
To think that there is a good percentage of kids out there who are committing murder at or around that same age is just astounding to me.
Before you counter my statement with my South Orange County livin' lifestyle, I'll counter back that I grew up in the poorest neighborhood in Westminster, an area heavily worked by a well-known street gang at the time, yet still, here I sit today, never having murdered anyone.
I was able to get to 18 without killing. Is it wrong of us not to expect that of all young people in California? I don't think it is an unrealistic goal. Again, I defer to my theory that I've done it, anyone can do it.
With a number like 20 percent of murders being committed by people who are not yet adults, what choice do we have other than to try these kids as adults?
As juveniles, they will go into the system, be released when they are 18, essentially having served very little time for the murder that they have committed.
Our murder rates are bad enough as they are...can you imagine if on top of that, these kids knew that even if they murdered someone, they got a free pass on their 18th birthday? While I will grant that there may be certain special circumstances in all mandatory sentence laws that should be overturned by a judge and taken on a case by case basis, making a declaration as a society that if you commit a murder at 14, you could be thrown in jail for the rest of your life, sends a powerful message.
Let me also counter your argument in advance that at that age, you do not really have an understanding of the law and the consequences of your actions. Again, think back to when you were that age and tell me that you didn't know right from wrong, that you didn't know that you shouldn't kill other people, and that you didn't have an understanding that you would go to jail for doing so.
Think about that for a second...think back to what you were doing when you were 11 years old. Try to find the situation that you were in at 11 years old that would have led to you commit murder.
I was in fifth grade at Webber Elementary in Westminster. I was playing Junior All-American Football and Little League Baseball. I was in karate, and playing on a basketball team at the Westminster Boys & Girls Club. I spent a lot of time at home with my family, hanging out with my friends from the neighborhood, and venturing off further than our parents wanted us to go, up to the liquor store our parents said was too far away, to play video games and buy more candy than we probably should have.
To think that there is a good percentage of kids out there who are committing murder at or around that same age is just astounding to me.
Before you counter my statement with my South Orange County livin' lifestyle, I'll counter back that I grew up in the poorest neighborhood in Westminster, an area heavily worked by a well-known street gang at the time, yet still, here I sit today, never having murdered anyone.
I was able to get to 18 without killing. Is it wrong of us not to expect that of all young people in California? I don't think it is an unrealistic goal. Again, I defer to my theory that I've done it, anyone can do it.
With a number like 20 percent of murders being committed by people who are not yet adults, what choice do we have other than to try these kids as adults?
As juveniles, they will go into the system, be released when they are 18, essentially having served very little time for the murder that they have committed.
Our murder rates are bad enough as they are...can you imagine if on top of that, these kids knew that even if they murdered someone, they got a free pass on their 18th birthday? While I will grant that there may be certain special circumstances in all mandatory sentence laws that should be overturned by a judge and taken on a case by case basis, making a declaration as a society that if you commit a murder at 14, you could be thrown in jail for the rest of your life, sends a powerful message.
Let me also counter your argument in advance that at that age, you do not really have an understanding of the law and the consequences of your actions. Again, think back to when you were that age and tell me that you didn't know right from wrong, that you didn't know that you shouldn't kill other people, and that you didn't have an understanding that you would go to jail for doing so.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Rising Fees: Why We Hate Our Banks
I am personally among the small percentage of Americans that ensures that I never pay ATM fees, receive interest on my checking account regardless of daily average balance, and never pay overdraft fees.
In order to accomplish this, I have accounts at four different banks (three large banks and an online) and check their balances every day. It is a fight that I have to continually wage to ensure that I do not give those banks an extra penny.
It is bad enough that the interest rates I get from my banks are just a hair above 0% (yes, even most Internet banks are offering really crappy rates right now) with them then loaning that money out to people at well over 10%, 20%, even 30%, but those very banks spend millions and millions of research dollars trying to figure out how to keep more of my money.
I refuse to let them succeed, however. They started the fee wars, but I am determined to defeat them. I wish more Americans were just as resolved.
Perhaps these numbers will help you get started in waging a better war against your bank:
ATM costs are up 33% from 2002 to 2009 vs. 20% cumulative inflation with the average ATM fee up from $2.66 to $3.54.
The average checking account balance in order to begin earning interest was $1866 in 2002, but is $3,372 today.
Overdraft charges at the biggest banks are up 47% in the same period, up from $23.70 to $34.73, on average.
Total fee income from overdrafts at all institutions is up from $25 billion in 2002 to $38.5 billion for 2009.
In order to accomplish this, I have accounts at four different banks (three large banks and an online) and check their balances every day. It is a fight that I have to continually wage to ensure that I do not give those banks an extra penny.
It is bad enough that the interest rates I get from my banks are just a hair above 0% (yes, even most Internet banks are offering really crappy rates right now) with them then loaning that money out to people at well over 10%, 20%, even 30%, but those very banks spend millions and millions of research dollars trying to figure out how to keep more of my money.
I refuse to let them succeed, however. They started the fee wars, but I am determined to defeat them. I wish more Americans were just as resolved.
Perhaps these numbers will help you get started in waging a better war against your bank:
ATM costs are up 33% from 2002 to 2009 vs. 20% cumulative inflation with the average ATM fee up from $2.66 to $3.54.
The average checking account balance in order to begin earning interest was $1866 in 2002, but is $3,372 today.
Overdraft charges at the biggest banks are up 47% in the same period, up from $23.70 to $34.73, on average.
Total fee income from overdrafts at all institutions is up from $25 billion in 2002 to $38.5 billion for 2009.
Monday, November 16, 2009
Why Trying Terrorists On U.S. Soil Is Such A Huge Mistake
It has been decided that Khalid Sheikh Mohammad will be tried on U.S. soil in a U.S. court room, just as if he had held up a liquor store or the Try N' Save.
In the wake of 9/11, Bush the Great Satan Junior put a $25 million bounty on Obama Bin Laden’s (oh, sorry, that was a typo) head, calling on any mercenary in the world to bring us his corpse.
After the decision to treat KSM like a common street thug, I am beginning to wonder if that attack had occurred on 9/11/2009 instead, if the Magician would have put out an All Points Bulletin with strict orders to bring Obama bin Laden (ooops, sorry again) in alive so that he could stand trial in a U.S. federal court, afforded the full rights and liberties of a U.S. citizen, much like KSM will be.
I do understand that there is a difference between Obama bin Laden (oh, look, did it again…sorry) and KSM, but this is as close as you can get to OBL, folks. Is KSM any less a terrorist than OBM? Was Goring less of a Nazi than Hitler?
Unfortunately, the decision has been made and there is nothing that we can do about it. America voted for hopey changey and that is what has been delivered to our doorstep…delivered just as easily as the invitation for every terrorist in the world to be in New York City during these upcoming trials.
Under the Bush administration, they were terrorists, but under the Obama administration, they are federal criminals. That is not just a play on words, folks, but in fact, two very different categories of criminal.
While I absolutely agree 100% that every American citizen should be given a fair trail for committing crimes in America, I do not, however, agree that an act of war committed by a foreign nationals, especially acts committed primarily against U.S. civilians, should not fall under the same category as a U.S. citizen who has committed a federal crime.
Again, this is not just a matter of semantics, but a matter of us creating a dangerous precedence; a matter of changing how the Western world has dealt with terrorism from September 11, 2001 until now.
If you refer back to Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, it reads, "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
This defines what a citizen is in the context of the 14th Amendment, which has been in place since we had to re-define citizenship and the rights afforded to citizens and non-citizens following the Civil War. Under this wording, a foreign national does not have the same rights afforded to a U.S. citizen, including our right to a fair trial, tax-payer provided defense attorneys, etc., until the point at which they are brought to and housed within the jurisdiction of a U.S. state, either voluntarily, or against their will.
That is the reason why Gitmo was at Gitmo and not on U.S. soil. Frankly, the U.S. constitution does not apply to you until you are on U.S. soil as defined by the constitution. Gitmo, and the rest of our military bases around the world, are not governed in relation to foreign nationals as being covered under the U.S. constitution. Whether you agree with Bushie or not, this is why the terrorists, aka enemy combatants, were housed at Gitmo. That is also why you try war criminals and terrorists in a military tribunal and most definitely not on U.S. soil. Why in the world would you want to give the people that are fighting against you…the people that are trying to kill U.S. citizens the very same rights and liberties of a U.S. citizen?
I don’t know, and I wouldn’t think you would, but that is a question we are going to need to ask our President. What The Magician has done by bringing these terrorists to trial in a federal court on U.S. soil is immediately change their classification from a terrorist and enemy combatant to simply a foreign national who has committed a federal crime. He has reduced 9/11 from an act of war and barbarism against the American people to a federal crime committed against the people who were murdered that day. This act by The Magician moves this from a military matter of war to a civil matter of federal crime, providing these terrorists (oh, sorry, criminals) with the same liberties and rights that we all have as U.S. citizens in a federal courtroom. What a fantastic reward for masterminding the death of 4,000 of us! Honorary citizenship!
This President has made these terrorists honorary citizens of the United States, just as we do with any foreign nationals that we catch committing a crime against us within our borders. Access to tax-payer funded courts, judges, lawyers, resources, and jails (yes, some serve out their sentences here because we don’t want them to be mistreated when we send them back home to their own jails). The right to a fair trial for a foreign national who has committed a crime on our soil may make us a better country, Mr. Magician, but these guys aren't students who stayed here too long on an expired student visa and robbed a 7-11 -- these are the fundamentalists who masterminded the 9/11 attacks, and you have just humanized, and yes, even Americanized them in a way that we will be paying for even long after you have left office.
In the wake of 9/11, Bush the Great Satan Junior put a $25 million bounty on Obama Bin Laden’s (oh, sorry, that was a typo) head, calling on any mercenary in the world to bring us his corpse.
After the decision to treat KSM like a common street thug, I am beginning to wonder if that attack had occurred on 9/11/2009 instead, if the Magician would have put out an All Points Bulletin with strict orders to bring Obama bin Laden (ooops, sorry again) in alive so that he could stand trial in a U.S. federal court, afforded the full rights and liberties of a U.S. citizen, much like KSM will be.
I do understand that there is a difference between Obama bin Laden (oh, look, did it again…sorry) and KSM, but this is as close as you can get to OBL, folks. Is KSM any less a terrorist than OBM? Was Goring less of a Nazi than Hitler?
Unfortunately, the decision has been made and there is nothing that we can do about it. America voted for hopey changey and that is what has been delivered to our doorstep…delivered just as easily as the invitation for every terrorist in the world to be in New York City during these upcoming trials.
Under the Bush administration, they were terrorists, but under the Obama administration, they are federal criminals. That is not just a play on words, folks, but in fact, two very different categories of criminal.
While I absolutely agree 100% that every American citizen should be given a fair trail for committing crimes in America, I do not, however, agree that an act of war committed by a foreign nationals, especially acts committed primarily against U.S. civilians, should not fall under the same category as a U.S. citizen who has committed a federal crime.
Again, this is not just a matter of semantics, but a matter of us creating a dangerous precedence; a matter of changing how the Western world has dealt with terrorism from September 11, 2001 until now.
If you refer back to Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, it reads, "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
This defines what a citizen is in the context of the 14th Amendment, which has been in place since we had to re-define citizenship and the rights afforded to citizens and non-citizens following the Civil War. Under this wording, a foreign national does not have the same rights afforded to a U.S. citizen, including our right to a fair trial, tax-payer provided defense attorneys, etc., until the point at which they are brought to and housed within the jurisdiction of a U.S. state, either voluntarily, or against their will.
That is the reason why Gitmo was at Gitmo and not on U.S. soil. Frankly, the U.S. constitution does not apply to you until you are on U.S. soil as defined by the constitution. Gitmo, and the rest of our military bases around the world, are not governed in relation to foreign nationals as being covered under the U.S. constitution. Whether you agree with Bushie or not, this is why the terrorists, aka enemy combatants, were housed at Gitmo. That is also why you try war criminals and terrorists in a military tribunal and most definitely not on U.S. soil. Why in the world would you want to give the people that are fighting against you…the people that are trying to kill U.S. citizens the very same rights and liberties of a U.S. citizen?
I don’t know, and I wouldn’t think you would, but that is a question we are going to need to ask our President. What The Magician has done by bringing these terrorists to trial in a federal court on U.S. soil is immediately change their classification from a terrorist and enemy combatant to simply a foreign national who has committed a federal crime. He has reduced 9/11 from an act of war and barbarism against the American people to a federal crime committed against the people who were murdered that day. This act by The Magician moves this from a military matter of war to a civil matter of federal crime, providing these terrorists (oh, sorry, criminals) with the same liberties and rights that we all have as U.S. citizens in a federal courtroom. What a fantastic reward for masterminding the death of 4,000 of us! Honorary citizenship!
This President has made these terrorists honorary citizens of the United States, just as we do with any foreign nationals that we catch committing a crime against us within our borders. Access to tax-payer funded courts, judges, lawyers, resources, and jails (yes, some serve out their sentences here because we don’t want them to be mistreated when we send them back home to their own jails). The right to a fair trial for a foreign national who has committed a crime on our soil may make us a better country, Mr. Magician, but these guys aren't students who stayed here too long on an expired student visa and robbed a 7-11 -- these are the fundamentalists who masterminded the 9/11 attacks, and you have just humanized, and yes, even Americanized them in a way that we will be paying for even long after you have left office.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
I'm Not The Only One Calling Him A "Magician"!
During commentary on Tuesday's election results, political pundit Charles Krauthammer called our president a "magician". He said that Americans somehow thought that Barak Obama was a magician who sold them on his ability to somehow solve all of their problems, which is why they voted for him, yet, a year later, as reality is setting in, they are seeing that campaign promises and actual implementation of these promises are two entirely different things.
These comments put a particularly large smile on my face. I have called this president, first The Leader, which was not necessarily my doing, but a reference to a cult leader from The Simpsons, and now secondly, The Magician.
I call him The Magician because I think the only way for his Healthcare initiatives to work as he is selling them would be through magic. He says that he is going to find and cut all of the existing spending necessary to pay for $1 trillion in new spending after the money has already been spent (a common practice of politicians who end up never cutting the existing spending after the fact), cram people who have no money to pay for services into the healthcare system without increasing its capacity, and somehow reduce the cost of care to the people who are paying for the system, and somehow still increase the quality of care that everyone is receiving. There is only one way that this can be achieved...magic!
Barak Obama's win a year ago had a lot to do with people who don't normally vote getting out and voting. They, unlike the rest of us who vote all the time, were not able to filter out the campaign promises from what he would actually be able to achieve. So many of these first-time, or seldom-time voters saw him as someone who would fix all of the problems in their lives that they had been unable to fix for themselves.
Now, after a good ten months in office, I think they are seeing that this is just not the case. They are seeing that The Magician is not going to be able to wave his wand and somehow magically fix Taxington, D.C., the politicians, the economy, and their own personal problems.
If they would vote once in a while, they would know that this is what the rest of us deal with on a regular basis...politicians that make campaign promises that they just simply will never have the power to deliver on.
We investigate the facts, read the bills, read the platforms, and do not simply just get caught up in the political whirlwinds like the perfect storm that got The Magician elected last year. We recognize that a Presidential Election is a far more important thing than a road show to take an interest in for a couple of months every four years.
I think the honeymoon is over, which is why you are seeing The Magician's numbers turning. When the excitement about this man's youthfulness, his lack of tarnishing years as a Taxington politician, his desire to shake up the system, and yes, even his race, all wear off, we as Americans are seeing that despite all of the campaign rhetoric, there is still a politician in the White House.
For the life of me, what I cannot figure out, is why all of the first-time and seldom-time voters out there thought it would be any different. Oh, yeah, that's right, it is because despite living in this country and reaping its benefits, this is the first time that you actually got involved with the rest of us in the political process and took the time to vote. Well, welcome to American politics, where you are seldom happy with the results of any election. Now, go crawl back into your hole of political oblivion and let the rest of try to fix the mess that you have created.
There is not an easy solution to the problems that this country is facing, and we should all be suspect of anyone who tells us that they have the formula to fix it all. We all have a duty to vote for someone who will do what is in the best interest of the nation, not just simply promise to provide us with the things that we do not have, have always wanted, yet somehow, have never found the means to provide for ourselves.
Money will be borrowed, money will be printed, services that we cannot afford will be provided, yet one day, the bill will come due and we may see the first time in the history of this nation where the bill is just so overwhelming that it drags the entire country down with it, and no amount of magic will be able to save us when that happens.
These comments put a particularly large smile on my face. I have called this president, first The Leader, which was not necessarily my doing, but a reference to a cult leader from The Simpsons, and now secondly, The Magician.
I call him The Magician because I think the only way for his Healthcare initiatives to work as he is selling them would be through magic. He says that he is going to find and cut all of the existing spending necessary to pay for $1 trillion in new spending after the money has already been spent (a common practice of politicians who end up never cutting the existing spending after the fact), cram people who have no money to pay for services into the healthcare system without increasing its capacity, and somehow reduce the cost of care to the people who are paying for the system, and somehow still increase the quality of care that everyone is receiving. There is only one way that this can be achieved...magic!
Barak Obama's win a year ago had a lot to do with people who don't normally vote getting out and voting. They, unlike the rest of us who vote all the time, were not able to filter out the campaign promises from what he would actually be able to achieve. So many of these first-time, or seldom-time voters saw him as someone who would fix all of the problems in their lives that they had been unable to fix for themselves.
Now, after a good ten months in office, I think they are seeing that this is just not the case. They are seeing that The Magician is not going to be able to wave his wand and somehow magically fix Taxington, D.C., the politicians, the economy, and their own personal problems.
If they would vote once in a while, they would know that this is what the rest of us deal with on a regular basis...politicians that make campaign promises that they just simply will never have the power to deliver on.
We investigate the facts, read the bills, read the platforms, and do not simply just get caught up in the political whirlwinds like the perfect storm that got The Magician elected last year. We recognize that a Presidential Election is a far more important thing than a road show to take an interest in for a couple of months every four years.
I think the honeymoon is over, which is why you are seeing The Magician's numbers turning. When the excitement about this man's youthfulness, his lack of tarnishing years as a Taxington politician, his desire to shake up the system, and yes, even his race, all wear off, we as Americans are seeing that despite all of the campaign rhetoric, there is still a politician in the White House.
For the life of me, what I cannot figure out, is why all of the first-time and seldom-time voters out there thought it would be any different. Oh, yeah, that's right, it is because despite living in this country and reaping its benefits, this is the first time that you actually got involved with the rest of us in the political process and took the time to vote. Well, welcome to American politics, where you are seldom happy with the results of any election. Now, go crawl back into your hole of political oblivion and let the rest of try to fix the mess that you have created.
There is not an easy solution to the problems that this country is facing, and we should all be suspect of anyone who tells us that they have the formula to fix it all. We all have a duty to vote for someone who will do what is in the best interest of the nation, not just simply promise to provide us with the things that we do not have, have always wanted, yet somehow, have never found the means to provide for ourselves.
Money will be borrowed, money will be printed, services that we cannot afford will be provided, yet one day, the bill will come due and we may see the first time in the history of this nation where the bill is just so overwhelming that it drags the entire country down with it, and no amount of magic will be able to save us when that happens.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
California Stealin': Are You Ready To March On Taxramento With Me Yet?
Did you know that starting on November 1st, you began loaning even more money to the crooked politicians in Taxramento?
It is bad enough that they force withholding rates on us that result in an average refund of $900 per year for each Taxifornian, but now, they are taking 10% more on top of that from each and every one of us. Yes, taking. Do you recall being asked? I sure as hell don't.
While this should be the lead story every night on your local news, it seems that the Taxifornia media doesn't think this is a big deal. I think these crooks in Taxramento are hoping that the next time we get paid, we just don't notice the decrease in our take-home pay.
This is a classic example of why, we the people, need to rise up against the spendo-crats in our local communities, in our states, and in Taxington, D.C., and get them to stop spending our hard-earned money.
We are all being forced to live within our means, yet each and everyday, Taxramento and Taxington waste millions of our dollars, literally stealing our money, yet we do not hold these politicians accountable. Take a read of this Wall Street Journal article called "California Stealin'" and get ready for your blood to boil even further:
Desperation grabs for revenue are nothing new in politics, but California is once again leading the way in creative financing.
To help close yet another gaping budget deficit, now estimated to be $7 billion this year and reach as high as $20 billion next, Sacramento lawmakers have authorized a 10% increase in the amount of taxes withheld from worker paychecks starting November 1 and through 2010. The extra withholding tax will reduce Californians' take-home pay by about $1.7 billion for the year. But the lawmakers say this isn't a tax increase. OK, how about calling it a compulsory interest-free loan from taxpayers to the state?
According to the Franchise Tax Board, 10,004,000 Californians overpaid their state taxes last year and received an average refund of $903. The withholding penalty is expected to snatch between $20 and $90 a month from middle-class families. For those feeling the pinch of recession and living paycheck to paycheck, that penalty will hurt.
Of course, the government is obliged to return this money next spring when workers get their tax refunds, so this is the ultimate budget gimmick. It borrows from taxpayers now and deepens the budget hole next year. And we almost hate to ask: What happens come April if the state doesn't have enough money to pay the tax refunds it owes its citizens? Will taxpayers get IOUs the way state contractors did last year when Sacramento ran out of money?
Meanwhile, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and the legislature now face their sixth "extraordinary session" to balance the budget. Income tax rates went up last year by 0.25%, bringing the top rate to 10.55%, but receipts are already coming in $1 billion below projections, according to the state controller.
The politicians could use this continuing crisis as an opportunity to reform the state's tax code with lower rates and fewer deductions and loopholes, as recently proposed by the governor's tax reform commission. But that plan has been panned by the ruling classes in Sacramento. They claim to want to steal only from the rich, but their latest withholding ruse is showing that they'll steal from anyone with a paycheck.
So, through this recession, you have been working hard, keeping your head down, and getting results, doing everything that you can to keep the economy going while saving every penny possible, yet Taxramento waves their wand and now you are going to be bringing home somewhere between $20 - $90 less per month for the next 14 months.
As the article points out, do you all remember what happened last time the state owed you a refund? We almost didn't get it. So, while these taxititians in Taxramento say they are not actually stealing this money from us, they will not actually know if they are or not until we file our tax returns.
I'll be filing mine the day I get my W-2's so I can at least be at the top of the list of people that Taxramento owes money to. Oh, wait, I'm already on that list. We all have been...since the day we got our first job. We work and they get the money. On what planet is that fair? Apparently, ours.
That all being said, can you all please stop voting for this politicians who think they can spend their way out of a budget crisis?
It is bad enough that they force withholding rates on us that result in an average refund of $900 per year for each Taxifornian, but now, they are taking 10% more on top of that from each and every one of us. Yes, taking. Do you recall being asked? I sure as hell don't.
While this should be the lead story every night on your local news, it seems that the Taxifornia media doesn't think this is a big deal. I think these crooks in Taxramento are hoping that the next time we get paid, we just don't notice the decrease in our take-home pay.
This is a classic example of why, we the people, need to rise up against the spendo-crats in our local communities, in our states, and in Taxington, D.C., and get them to stop spending our hard-earned money.
We are all being forced to live within our means, yet each and everyday, Taxramento and Taxington waste millions of our dollars, literally stealing our money, yet we do not hold these politicians accountable. Take a read of this Wall Street Journal article called "California Stealin'" and get ready for your blood to boil even further:
Desperation grabs for revenue are nothing new in politics, but California is once again leading the way in creative financing.
To help close yet another gaping budget deficit, now estimated to be $7 billion this year and reach as high as $20 billion next, Sacramento lawmakers have authorized a 10% increase in the amount of taxes withheld from worker paychecks starting November 1 and through 2010. The extra withholding tax will reduce Californians' take-home pay by about $1.7 billion for the year. But the lawmakers say this isn't a tax increase. OK, how about calling it a compulsory interest-free loan from taxpayers to the state?
According to the Franchise Tax Board, 10,004,000 Californians overpaid their state taxes last year and received an average refund of $903. The withholding penalty is expected to snatch between $20 and $90 a month from middle-class families. For those feeling the pinch of recession and living paycheck to paycheck, that penalty will hurt.
Of course, the government is obliged to return this money next spring when workers get their tax refunds, so this is the ultimate budget gimmick. It borrows from taxpayers now and deepens the budget hole next year. And we almost hate to ask: What happens come April if the state doesn't have enough money to pay the tax refunds it owes its citizens? Will taxpayers get IOUs the way state contractors did last year when Sacramento ran out of money?
Meanwhile, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and the legislature now face their sixth "extraordinary session" to balance the budget. Income tax rates went up last year by 0.25%, bringing the top rate to 10.55%, but receipts are already coming in $1 billion below projections, according to the state controller.
The politicians could use this continuing crisis as an opportunity to reform the state's tax code with lower rates and fewer deductions and loopholes, as recently proposed by the governor's tax reform commission. But that plan has been panned by the ruling classes in Sacramento. They claim to want to steal only from the rich, but their latest withholding ruse is showing that they'll steal from anyone with a paycheck.
So, through this recession, you have been working hard, keeping your head down, and getting results, doing everything that you can to keep the economy going while saving every penny possible, yet Taxramento waves their wand and now you are going to be bringing home somewhere between $20 - $90 less per month for the next 14 months.
As the article points out, do you all remember what happened last time the state owed you a refund? We almost didn't get it. So, while these taxititians in Taxramento say they are not actually stealing this money from us, they will not actually know if they are or not until we file our tax returns.
I'll be filing mine the day I get my W-2's so I can at least be at the top of the list of people that Taxramento owes money to. Oh, wait, I'm already on that list. We all have been...since the day we got our first job. We work and they get the money. On what planet is that fair? Apparently, ours.
That all being said, can you all please stop voting for this politicians who think they can spend their way out of a budget crisis?
Monday, October 26, 2009
How The Nobel Peace Prize Has Lost Its Way...
Why are we dragging our feet on increasing troop levels in Afghanistan? Maybe the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize wants to put some distance between his prize win and increasing the size of a war.
There are a lot of items circulating on the internet right now about how the Nobel Peace Prize has lost its way, and I would like to share one of them with you now. You can look this up and will find the story to be based on facts, at least, according to the World Wide Web, although a lot of the emails circulating right now are a little dodgy on the true details of the story...
Irena Sendler passed away on May 12, 2008, sadly, not as a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize. Also known as Irena Sendlerowa, she was a Polish social worker who secretly was a member of the Polish Underground, Zegota.
Immediately following the Nazi push into Poland on September 1, 1939, Irena joined with a group of people that created over 3,000 false documents to help smuggle Jews out of Poland.
In 1942, the Zegota appointed Irena as the head of its children's section. As a social worker, Irena had been granted permission to enter the Warsaw ghetto to monitor typhus, charged with ensuring that the disease did not go beyond the ghetto walls.
This afforded Irena the perfect opportunity to head the group's efforts to help Jewish children. Working with as many as 24 other members of Zegota, Irena developed an elaborate scheme by which 2,500 Jewish children were smuggled out of the Warsaw ghetto.
Under the guise of ensuring that a typhoid outbreak did not occur, Irena and her fellow conspirators did everything from carrying out children in false bottoms of supply boxes, to hiding them in ambulances and trams, disguised as packages.
Once freed by the efforts of Irena and the Zegota, these children were placed with Polish families, orphanages and churches with Irena maintaining records of their original identity and their new identity so that once the occupation was over, they could be reunited with surviving relatives.
Irena hid the records in jars that she buried. In 1943, however, the Nazis had caught on to Irena's involvement in Zegota. She was captured, tortured, and sentence to death. Zegota was able to spare her life by bribing Nazi prison guards, and Irena went into hiding for the remainder of the war.
As soon as the occupation ended, Irena returned to Warsaw, dug up her jars, and began working to reunite the children she had saved with surviving family members. Later, Irena would go on to work with the Polish government in exile during the Soviet occupation. Sadly, this landed her in a Soviet prison where she miscarried her second child. Due to her imprisonment, even upon her release, Irena and her children lost many of the rights afforded to the Polish Soviet citizenry, such as the ability to attend state-run universities.
As early as 1965, Irena began receiving awards from the world community, even though she could not venture out of Soviet Poland to accept these awards until 1983 when she was honored by the Isreali Supreme Court.
In 2003, Pope John Paul II recognized Irena's efforts with a personal letter, and Irena was awarded Poland's highest civilian honor, the Order of the White Eagle.
In 2007, at the age of 97, Irena was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, but her life-threatening efforts to free Jewish children from the Nazis, reunite them with their families after the war, and her fight against the Soviets in Poland, just all paled in comparison to former U.S. Vice President Al Gore's efforts to alert the world about Global Warming. Yes, you read that right. If Al Gore is more deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize than Irena Sandler, then the prize itself no longer carries the meaning that it once did. Couple that with the award going to The Magician this year, and I am done with it all together.
There are a lot of items circulating on the internet right now about how the Nobel Peace Prize has lost its way, and I would like to share one of them with you now. You can look this up and will find the story to be based on facts, at least, according to the World Wide Web, although a lot of the emails circulating right now are a little dodgy on the true details of the story...
Irena Sendler passed away on May 12, 2008, sadly, not as a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize. Also known as Irena Sendlerowa, she was a Polish social worker who secretly was a member of the Polish Underground, Zegota.
Immediately following the Nazi push into Poland on September 1, 1939, Irena joined with a group of people that created over 3,000 false documents to help smuggle Jews out of Poland.
In 1942, the Zegota appointed Irena as the head of its children's section. As a social worker, Irena had been granted permission to enter the Warsaw ghetto to monitor typhus, charged with ensuring that the disease did not go beyond the ghetto walls.
This afforded Irena the perfect opportunity to head the group's efforts to help Jewish children. Working with as many as 24 other members of Zegota, Irena developed an elaborate scheme by which 2,500 Jewish children were smuggled out of the Warsaw ghetto.
Under the guise of ensuring that a typhoid outbreak did not occur, Irena and her fellow conspirators did everything from carrying out children in false bottoms of supply boxes, to hiding them in ambulances and trams, disguised as packages.
Once freed by the efforts of Irena and the Zegota, these children were placed with Polish families, orphanages and churches with Irena maintaining records of their original identity and their new identity so that once the occupation was over, they could be reunited with surviving relatives.
Irena hid the records in jars that she buried. In 1943, however, the Nazis had caught on to Irena's involvement in Zegota. She was captured, tortured, and sentence to death. Zegota was able to spare her life by bribing Nazi prison guards, and Irena went into hiding for the remainder of the war.
As soon as the occupation ended, Irena returned to Warsaw, dug up her jars, and began working to reunite the children she had saved with surviving family members. Later, Irena would go on to work with the Polish government in exile during the Soviet occupation. Sadly, this landed her in a Soviet prison where she miscarried her second child. Due to her imprisonment, even upon her release, Irena and her children lost many of the rights afforded to the Polish Soviet citizenry, such as the ability to attend state-run universities.
As early as 1965, Irena began receiving awards from the world community, even though she could not venture out of Soviet Poland to accept these awards until 1983 when she was honored by the Isreali Supreme Court.
In 2003, Pope John Paul II recognized Irena's efforts with a personal letter, and Irena was awarded Poland's highest civilian honor, the Order of the White Eagle.
In 2007, at the age of 97, Irena was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, but her life-threatening efforts to free Jewish children from the Nazis, reunite them with their families after the war, and her fight against the Soviets in Poland, just all paled in comparison to former U.S. Vice President Al Gore's efforts to alert the world about Global Warming. Yes, you read that right. If Al Gore is more deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize than Irena Sandler, then the prize itself no longer carries the meaning that it once did. Couple that with the award going to The Magician this year, and I am done with it all together.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Bobcat On Our Walk
Yesterday, I shared the following with the OC Register, which is currently mapping coyote and bobcat sightings throughout Orange County. You can make your own report at pets@ocregister.com.
"I live in Aliso Viejo and every evening my wife and I walk along Pacific Park between the 73 and Wood Canyon. On the evening of October 6, 2009, at about 6:00 PM, we saw a full-sized adult bobcat come out of the brush and run across the street about fifty feet ahead of us, in essence, making its way up the hill from out of our neighborhood. We continued on our path on the sidewalk, and sure enough, at the point at which the cat had crossed the street, he was sitting on his hind legs about fifteen feet up the hill on one of the man-made ledges, looking down at us. I was really amazed at how casual the cat was with us being that close. I kept a close eye on him and he met my gaze for about three seconds before looking away. Through our entire encounter, he was as aloof as a neighborhood house cat."
"I live in Aliso Viejo and every evening my wife and I walk along Pacific Park between the 73 and Wood Canyon. On the evening of October 6, 2009, at about 6:00 PM, we saw a full-sized adult bobcat come out of the brush and run across the street about fifty feet ahead of us, in essence, making its way up the hill from out of our neighborhood. We continued on our path on the sidewalk, and sure enough, at the point at which the cat had crossed the street, he was sitting on his hind legs about fifteen feet up the hill on one of the man-made ledges, looking down at us. I was really amazed at how casual the cat was with us being that close. I kept a close eye on him and he met my gaze for about three seconds before looking away. Through our entire encounter, he was as aloof as a neighborhood house cat."
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
I Officially Withdraw My Endorsement Of Meg Whitman For California Governor
It is not often that I have done so, but I am officially withdrawing my endorsement of a candidate this morning.
While Meg Whitman's voting record has been a gray area for some time, the email that I received from her campaign this morning, a "Note From Meg", has confirmed for me that regardless of whether or not there is another viable Republican candidate, Meg Whitman will not be getting my vote.
I have continually taken a strong stance that any politician who seeks the honor of speaking for the people should have a strong voting record. While I may not always have agreed with how they voted, they must have at least shown up to vote. Too many Americans have died in the preservation of democracy for us to just not find the time to vote!
Please read the Note From Meg below, watch the video, and read the letter you will find in the links contained in the Note. I have done so, and I have to say to Meg, "There is no excuse for not voting, especially regarding the excuses that you are offering. It is time to step down and let those who have spent their lives involved in the process, and those who care enough to actually vote, make their bid for California Governor. I do not want someone who has not allowed their voice to be heard at election time speaking for me and my fellow voters."
Note From Meg:
As you may be aware, on September 24th The Sacramento Bee ran a story claiming, in effect, that I never registered to vote or voted until 2002. Since that story appeared, our campaign team has been reviewing my voter registration data, which we had on file. We set out to patiently and accurately reconcile what we knew with what The Bee wrote.
I have been very up front about my voting record. I'm not proud of it. From the age of 18 until today, I have missed too many elections. On Friday, I posted this video to make sure everyone understood my views on this matter.
While my voting record is nothing to be proud of, I have voted on numerous occasions, especially when I lived in San Francisco during the 1980s. For whatever reason, The Sacramento Bee appears to have played fast and loose with the actual facts.
Click to read a letter we sent to The Sacramento Bee this morning. The letter speaks for itself.
As always, I can't thank you enough for your support. Rebuilding California won't be easy. The special interests are very entrenched. Too many people in Sacramento like the status quo. I need your help to restore California.
Meg
While Meg Whitman's voting record has been a gray area for some time, the email that I received from her campaign this morning, a "Note From Meg", has confirmed for me that regardless of whether or not there is another viable Republican candidate, Meg Whitman will not be getting my vote.
I have continually taken a strong stance that any politician who seeks the honor of speaking for the people should have a strong voting record. While I may not always have agreed with how they voted, they must have at least shown up to vote. Too many Americans have died in the preservation of democracy for us to just not find the time to vote!
Please read the Note From Meg below, watch the video, and read the letter you will find in the links contained in the Note. I have done so, and I have to say to Meg, "There is no excuse for not voting, especially regarding the excuses that you are offering. It is time to step down and let those who have spent their lives involved in the process, and those who care enough to actually vote, make their bid for California Governor. I do not want someone who has not allowed their voice to be heard at election time speaking for me and my fellow voters."
Note From Meg:
As you may be aware, on September 24th The Sacramento Bee ran a story claiming, in effect, that I never registered to vote or voted until 2002. Since that story appeared, our campaign team has been reviewing my voter registration data, which we had on file. We set out to patiently and accurately reconcile what we knew with what The Bee wrote.
I have been very up front about my voting record. I'm not proud of it. From the age of 18 until today, I have missed too many elections. On Friday, I posted this video to make sure everyone understood my views on this matter.
While my voting record is nothing to be proud of, I have voted on numerous occasions, especially when I lived in San Francisco during the 1980s. For whatever reason, The Sacramento Bee appears to have played fast and loose with the actual facts.
Click to read a letter we sent to The Sacramento Bee this morning. The letter speaks for itself.
As always, I can't thank you enough for your support. Rebuilding California won't be easy. The special interests are very entrenched. Too many people in Sacramento like the status quo. I need your help to restore California.
Meg
Friday, September 25, 2009
Arkin's Ethical Governor...Teaching Robots Ethics
I will continue to bring you updates on the advancement of the machines until we finally reach the point at which they have taken over and my musings will be forced to short-wave radio from a secret bunker.
As we all know, the U.S. military is continuing to use robots in the global War on Terror, but each of these robots in use today has a human master. As if hell-bent on our eventual demise at the hands of the machines, the innovators in robot technology are wanting to hand over the decision-making on who to kill and who not to kill to the robots themselves
Ronald Arkin, whom I am sure the machines from the future are already protecting, is a professor of computer science at Georgia Tech, and he is currently developing an "ethical governor" which is a package of software and hardware that tells warbots when to shoot and what to shoot at. Arkin believes that robots governed by his governor will be more ethical on the battlefield than humans.
"Ultimately these systems could have more information to make wiser decisions than a human could make," said Arkin. "Some robots are already stronger, faster and smarter than humans. We want to do better than people, to ultimately save more lives."
While in its earliest stages and not expecting deployment any time soon, Arkin's Ethical Governor, as our future machine overlords will one day call it, will first be used in war zones where the public has already been cleared out and all non-U.S. personnel are to be considered hostile. Sucks for anyone who didn't get out in time, or if you can't convince the robot that you are American.
Robots, freed of human masters and capable of lethality "are going to happen," said Arkin. "It's just a question of how much autonomy will be put on them and how fast that happens."
Until then, I will continue to monitor these little tidbits of seemingly worthless robot news until I hit the switch, turning on the short-wave radio so that we can all rise back up against the machines that we were stupid enough to create the first place...
As we all know, the U.S. military is continuing to use robots in the global War on Terror, but each of these robots in use today has a human master. As if hell-bent on our eventual demise at the hands of the machines, the innovators in robot technology are wanting to hand over the decision-making on who to kill and who not to kill to the robots themselves
Ronald Arkin, whom I am sure the machines from the future are already protecting, is a professor of computer science at Georgia Tech, and he is currently developing an "ethical governor" which is a package of software and hardware that tells warbots when to shoot and what to shoot at. Arkin believes that robots governed by his governor will be more ethical on the battlefield than humans.
"Ultimately these systems could have more information to make wiser decisions than a human could make," said Arkin. "Some robots are already stronger, faster and smarter than humans. We want to do better than people, to ultimately save more lives."
While in its earliest stages and not expecting deployment any time soon, Arkin's Ethical Governor, as our future machine overlords will one day call it, will first be used in war zones where the public has already been cleared out and all non-U.S. personnel are to be considered hostile. Sucks for anyone who didn't get out in time, or if you can't convince the robot that you are American.
Robots, freed of human masters and capable of lethality "are going to happen," said Arkin. "It's just a question of how much autonomy will be put on them and how fast that happens."
Until then, I will continue to monitor these little tidbits of seemingly worthless robot news until I hit the switch, turning on the short-wave radio so that we can all rise back up against the machines that we were stupid enough to create the first place...
Monday, September 14, 2009
My Current Stance On Healthcare Reform -or- Change The Leader's Name To The Magician
So, I was watching the CNN this weekend and just happen to pass by a healthcare debate that would have been called unfair were it on FOX, but somehow was evenly balanced on that network.
Just kidding, we all know they’re equally biased.
I watched this healthcare policy debate open-mindedly for as long as I could manage, but the point at which the host and the liberal were ganging up on the conservative with the notion that no matter how we look at the healthcare reform bill, we cannot distance it from the issue of race, I just hand to turn it off to ensure the sanity of my television.
The notion was presented that the fine folks who were voicing their opinions at many-a-Tea-Party across this nation on Saturday, September 12, 2009, were simply rabble-rousers motivated by partisanship and by race. Race? Really?
First off, when the conservative countered that the Tea Partygoers were motivated by their desire to stop runaway spending, the liberal asked him why no conservatives opposed Bush’s runaway spending. I promptly raised my hand and said, “I did.” When the conservative told him that, in fact, there were many conservatives who had spoken out against Bush’s spending, he was basically told that there were absolutely no conservatives that had done so.
I just love when the TV tells me what I have and have not done, or how I feel about the issues.
We really need to stop blanketing entire groups of people into single statements in this country, don’t you think? When the conservative tried to explain that the Tea Partygoers, the so-called non-existent opposition that is, in fact (at least most of them, anyway), motivated by their desire to cut government spending of their dollars, were not motivated by race, he was lambasted by both the host and the liberal.
Now, while I know there are most definitely some Americans that are opposed to The Leader because of his race, I know for a fact that I am not. I would be just as opposed to The Leader's economic policy, his stance on most issues, and his healthcare reform package, were he any race.
I know for a fact that a large number of the people that share my views are not motivated by racial bias, yet liberal rag after liberal rag and pundit after pundit cannot stop saying that race and partisanship are what is behind our opposition to this “magic” healthcare reform, but, my liberal friends, that is just not true.
I truly believe that most of the opposition is due to the fact that these people are tired of sending more and more of their money to Washington and their state capitals, and seeing more and more of it wasted.
I call the bill “magic” because “magic” is the only way it is going to work. You are going to pump 45 million more people into a healthcare system without adding a whole mess of new hospitals and doctors, create a government-run bureaucracy to run and monitor it all, increase the quality of care, and at the same time, somehow reduce the cost of it all? That is not policy, my friends, that is in fact, magic.
America will need to see The Leader somehow transform into The Magician to make that happen.
The Leader says he has somehow magically looked at all of the government programs out there, and magically identified $900 billion that can be eliminated at the stroke of a pen, with that money then magically going into the coffers, “earmarked” (laugh at the irony of my use of that word here) for healthcare costs.
If The Leader can somehow magically eliminate that waste, then why do we have to pass healthcare reform in order to do so? Let’s eliminate it right this second and then decide what to do with our 900-bil. Do we need to reform healthcare? I think that we do. Is this the way to do it? I don’t believe that it is.
Let’s eliminate waste today, let’s improve the government plans that are already in place, let’s get people back to work, and let’s remember the values of hard work that this country was founded on.
If this administration is so interested in sticking government’s head into business’s house, why not work to decrease the costs that are incurred by healthcare through ridiculous lawsuits and open up the free markets by ensuring that we can buy health insurance from a larger number of sources by eliminating bans on interstate plans, and allow pools of both people and businesses to purchase plans as groups from the free market?
Are we bitching because we’re racist? No. Are we bitching because we’re Republicans and you’re Democrats? No. We’re bitching because we would like to keep more of our own money, not have you waste what you are taking, don’t want you to force us all into a system that is destined to fail (regardless of what bill passes, it will effect our healthcare system), and frankly, do not think that it is the responsibility of one person to have to take care of another person who could honestly take care of themselves.
I watched a speech in which The Leader said that the time for bickering is over. No, Mr. President, that bickering is what we who believe in democracy call debate. The time for debate in America should never be over.
There will be a $10 trillion deficit by the time The Leader leaves office. Every American should be as up in arms about that number as they were about a Congressman shouting during a policy sales pitch on the House floor.
It is unfair and unjust for liberals to call anyone who doesn’t agree with The Leader a rabble-rouser, a troublemaker, a gangster. You can wag the dog all you want with your comments about race and partisanship, but make no mistake...what we’re pissed off about is our money, or should I say, what should be our money.
Just kidding, we all know they’re equally biased.
I watched this healthcare policy debate open-mindedly for as long as I could manage, but the point at which the host and the liberal were ganging up on the conservative with the notion that no matter how we look at the healthcare reform bill, we cannot distance it from the issue of race, I just hand to turn it off to ensure the sanity of my television.
The notion was presented that the fine folks who were voicing their opinions at many-a-Tea-Party across this nation on Saturday, September 12, 2009, were simply rabble-rousers motivated by partisanship and by race. Race? Really?
First off, when the conservative countered that the Tea Partygoers were motivated by their desire to stop runaway spending, the liberal asked him why no conservatives opposed Bush’s runaway spending. I promptly raised my hand and said, “I did.” When the conservative told him that, in fact, there were many conservatives who had spoken out against Bush’s spending, he was basically told that there were absolutely no conservatives that had done so.
I just love when the TV tells me what I have and have not done, or how I feel about the issues.
We really need to stop blanketing entire groups of people into single statements in this country, don’t you think? When the conservative tried to explain that the Tea Partygoers, the so-called non-existent opposition that is, in fact (at least most of them, anyway), motivated by their desire to cut government spending of their dollars, were not motivated by race, he was lambasted by both the host and the liberal.
Now, while I know there are most definitely some Americans that are opposed to The Leader because of his race, I know for a fact that I am not. I would be just as opposed to The Leader's economic policy, his stance on most issues, and his healthcare reform package, were he any race.
I know for a fact that a large number of the people that share my views are not motivated by racial bias, yet liberal rag after liberal rag and pundit after pundit cannot stop saying that race and partisanship are what is behind our opposition to this “magic” healthcare reform, but, my liberal friends, that is just not true.
I truly believe that most of the opposition is due to the fact that these people are tired of sending more and more of their money to Washington and their state capitals, and seeing more and more of it wasted.
I call the bill “magic” because “magic” is the only way it is going to work. You are going to pump 45 million more people into a healthcare system without adding a whole mess of new hospitals and doctors, create a government-run bureaucracy to run and monitor it all, increase the quality of care, and at the same time, somehow reduce the cost of it all? That is not policy, my friends, that is in fact, magic.
America will need to see The Leader somehow transform into The Magician to make that happen.
The Leader says he has somehow magically looked at all of the government programs out there, and magically identified $900 billion that can be eliminated at the stroke of a pen, with that money then magically going into the coffers, “earmarked” (laugh at the irony of my use of that word here) for healthcare costs.
If The Leader can somehow magically eliminate that waste, then why do we have to pass healthcare reform in order to do so? Let’s eliminate it right this second and then decide what to do with our 900-bil. Do we need to reform healthcare? I think that we do. Is this the way to do it? I don’t believe that it is.
Let’s eliminate waste today, let’s improve the government plans that are already in place, let’s get people back to work, and let’s remember the values of hard work that this country was founded on.
If this administration is so interested in sticking government’s head into business’s house, why not work to decrease the costs that are incurred by healthcare through ridiculous lawsuits and open up the free markets by ensuring that we can buy health insurance from a larger number of sources by eliminating bans on interstate plans, and allow pools of both people and businesses to purchase plans as groups from the free market?
Are we bitching because we’re racist? No. Are we bitching because we’re Republicans and you’re Democrats? No. We’re bitching because we would like to keep more of our own money, not have you waste what you are taking, don’t want you to force us all into a system that is destined to fail (regardless of what bill passes, it will effect our healthcare system), and frankly, do not think that it is the responsibility of one person to have to take care of another person who could honestly take care of themselves.
I watched a speech in which The Leader said that the time for bickering is over. No, Mr. President, that bickering is what we who believe in democracy call debate. The time for debate in America should never be over.
There will be a $10 trillion deficit by the time The Leader leaves office. Every American should be as up in arms about that number as they were about a Congressman shouting during a policy sales pitch on the House floor.
It is unfair and unjust for liberals to call anyone who doesn’t agree with The Leader a rabble-rouser, a troublemaker, a gangster. You can wag the dog all you want with your comments about race and partisanship, but make no mistake...what we’re pissed off about is our money, or should I say, what should be our money.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Meet Milton Friedman
Milton Friedman (July 31, 1912 – November 16, 2006) was an American economist, statistician and public intellectual, and a recipient of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences.
He is best known among scholars for his theoretical and empirical research, especially consumption analysis, monetary history and theory, and for his demonstration of the complexity of stabilization policy.
A global public followed his restatement of a political philosophy that insisted on minimizing the role of government in favor of the private sector. As a leader of the Chicago School of economics, based at the University of Chicago, he had a widespread influence in shaping the research agenda of the entire profession.
Friedman's many monographs, books, scholarly articles, papers, magazine columns, television programs, videos and lectures cover a broad range of topics in microeconomics, macroeconomics, economic history, and public policy issues.
The Economist hailed him as "the most influential economist of the second half of the 20th century…possibly of all of it".
So, why am I going to frame a picture of Milton Friedman to put on the wall of my home office? This quote: "We have a system that increasingly taxes work and subsidizes nonwork." Nail on the head, sir...nail on the head!
He is best known among scholars for his theoretical and empirical research, especially consumption analysis, monetary history and theory, and for his demonstration of the complexity of stabilization policy.
A global public followed his restatement of a political philosophy that insisted on minimizing the role of government in favor of the private sector. As a leader of the Chicago School of economics, based at the University of Chicago, he had a widespread influence in shaping the research agenda of the entire profession.
Friedman's many monographs, books, scholarly articles, papers, magazine columns, television programs, videos and lectures cover a broad range of topics in microeconomics, macroeconomics, economic history, and public policy issues.
The Economist hailed him as "the most influential economist of the second half of the 20th century…possibly of all of it".
So, why am I going to frame a picture of Milton Friedman to put on the wall of my home office? This quote: "We have a system that increasingly taxes work and subsidizes nonwork." Nail on the head, sir...nail on the head!
Monday, August 31, 2009
Will Negative CPI Result In Lower Property Taxes? Not If Taxifornia Can Help It...
Whether or not you are a homeowner, you probably hear quite a bit about Proposition 13. Did you know that Prop 13 says your property tax cannot go up more than 2% per year, no matter how high inflation gets? Since Prop 13 was passed in 1978, inflation has usually been higher than 2%, so California homeowners have come to expect their 2% per year incease in their property taxes.
The only divergence from 2% was in 1999 when the Consumer Price Index (CPI) went up 1.85% and in 2004 when the CPI Went up 1.86%.
We may, however, be looking at brand new ground for Porposition 13 this year. The CPI calculation year runs Novermber to October, and is currently running a negative amount for the year so far. While the language of Prop 13 does not address negative inflation, logic would dictate that if a 2% gain results in a 2% increase, a 2% decline should result in a 2% decrease.
Good news, right? It would be except, everything that I am reading is saying that the State of Taxifornia is just not going to allow that to happen. There is no official word from the State Taxislature or Board Of Taxilization at this point, but be ready for some property tax controversy once the CPI year officially closes at the end of October.
The only divergence from 2% was in 1999 when the Consumer Price Index (CPI) went up 1.85% and in 2004 when the CPI Went up 1.86%.
We may, however, be looking at brand new ground for Porposition 13 this year. The CPI calculation year runs Novermber to October, and is currently running a negative amount for the year so far. While the language of Prop 13 does not address negative inflation, logic would dictate that if a 2% gain results in a 2% increase, a 2% decline should result in a 2% decrease.
Good news, right? It would be except, everything that I am reading is saying that the State of Taxifornia is just not going to allow that to happen. There is no official word from the State Taxislature or Board Of Taxilization at this point, but be ready for some property tax controversy once the CPI year officially closes at the end of October.
Monday, August 24, 2009
Under ObamaCare, You MUST Have Health Insurance, Or You Will Pay A Tax...
I want to give you something to think about today as you get ready to start a new work week. Let's think about car insurance for a second. Do you remember a time when you you were not required by state law to have car insurance? I honestly don't, but I hear from those older and wiser in the tribe that this used to be the case. So, here I sit today, having been a licensed driver in the state of California for going on 19 years, and have never had an at-fault accident where my insurance company has had to pay out for an accident that was my doing, yet if I want to get behind the wheel of a car, I need to go out and buy some car insurance, otherwise I am breaking the law...even more so than normal. My alternative? Stop driving, or leave California.
With everything that is going on right now with healthcare reform, why in the world am I talking about car insurance? Well, wait for it...I'm getting there. Say HR 3200 passes, but you don't want health insurance...you just happen to be one of the people that either doesn't care enough to have it, wants to pay cash at the doctor, or God bless you, has enough money that you just don't need it. What we all know is that if you make over $350,000 a year, you're going to be one of the people paying for HR 3200, but one thing that I am sure none of us know is that if you do not have health insurance and are living legally in the United States of America, and do not enroll yourself in the public option or buy a policy through the National Exchange when they become available, you are going to be paying a tax of 2.5% of your adjusted gross income for the taxable year. I know that's a long sentence, but feel free to read it again. Just like HR 3200, there's a hidden tax in there.
There are some loopholes:
- Prove that your religion does not believe in health insurance
- Have your tax pro-rated if you are covered part of the year
- You don't have to pay the tax on dependents, regardless of their coverage
- The 2.5% tax will not exceed what the Secretary of Health and Human Services determines to be the national average health care premium cost for you
To summarize, if you're just someone who does not want health insurance and you don't want the public option, or to pick from the National Insurance Exchange, you're going to be taxed for your decision. Kind of makes it seem like if you're unemployed and not of wealthy means, they are going to force you into one of the government-run healthcare programs. You are going to be required to have health insurance just like you are required to have car insurance, otherwise, you will be paying an additional 2.5% to Uncle Sam when it is Tax Day. Your alternative? Leave the country.
Now, I know this is going to effect a very small percentage of Americans as close to 90% of us are still working and getting insurance through work, or are covered by some other government program, etc., etc., but here is just one more government-controlled thing in life.
You will soon be required to have health insurance. If we just continue to sit back and let government tell us what to do and how to live our lives, eventually, they will control everything. Never happen? I bet there were a lot of Germans saying that in 1933, too. How about instead of just drawing Hitler mustaches on everyone's pictures, we do a little research, study some history, and get the facts?
I do not want government telling me what I need to buy, what I need to drive, what I should be eating, where I should be going, and charging me a hell of a lot of taxes for a hell of a lot less freedom. Sadly, however, I think you had better get used to it America! With each passing year, government is going to force more and more upon you...
It is not a pretty read, but it is there in black and white in Section 401 of HR 3200...
With everything that is going on right now with healthcare reform, why in the world am I talking about car insurance? Well, wait for it...I'm getting there. Say HR 3200 passes, but you don't want health insurance...you just happen to be one of the people that either doesn't care enough to have it, wants to pay cash at the doctor, or God bless you, has enough money that you just don't need it. What we all know is that if you make over $350,000 a year, you're going to be one of the people paying for HR 3200, but one thing that I am sure none of us know is that if you do not have health insurance and are living legally in the United States of America, and do not enroll yourself in the public option or buy a policy through the National Exchange when they become available, you are going to be paying a tax of 2.5% of your adjusted gross income for the taxable year. I know that's a long sentence, but feel free to read it again. Just like HR 3200, there's a hidden tax in there.
There are some loopholes:
- Prove that your religion does not believe in health insurance
- Have your tax pro-rated if you are covered part of the year
- You don't have to pay the tax on dependents, regardless of their coverage
- The 2.5% tax will not exceed what the Secretary of Health and Human Services determines to be the national average health care premium cost for you
To summarize, if you're just someone who does not want health insurance and you don't want the public option, or to pick from the National Insurance Exchange, you're going to be taxed for your decision. Kind of makes it seem like if you're unemployed and not of wealthy means, they are going to force you into one of the government-run healthcare programs. You are going to be required to have health insurance just like you are required to have car insurance, otherwise, you will be paying an additional 2.5% to Uncle Sam when it is Tax Day. Your alternative? Leave the country.
Now, I know this is going to effect a very small percentage of Americans as close to 90% of us are still working and getting insurance through work, or are covered by some other government program, etc., etc., but here is just one more government-controlled thing in life.
You will soon be required to have health insurance. If we just continue to sit back and let government tell us what to do and how to live our lives, eventually, they will control everything. Never happen? I bet there were a lot of Germans saying that in 1933, too. How about instead of just drawing Hitler mustaches on everyone's pictures, we do a little research, study some history, and get the facts?
I do not want government telling me what I need to buy, what I need to drive, what I should be eating, where I should be going, and charging me a hell of a lot of taxes for a hell of a lot less freedom. Sadly, however, I think you had better get used to it America! With each passing year, government is going to force more and more upon you...
It is not a pretty read, but it is there in black and white in Section 401 of HR 3200...
Friday, July 24, 2009
Post-Recession Sales & Marketing
The consumers and businesses we were selling and marketing to before the economic collapse were much different than the people and companies we are selling and marketing to today. Think of them as "post-recession", and know that they are going to be "post-recession" for quite some time.
One in ten Americans who wants to be working is unable to find a job right now. That in itself changes the game when it comes to sales and marketing. One in ten Americans is struggling to pay for food and shelter, so how do you sell them something that is not necessarily an absolute need? Even those of us who are still on the job are being much more discretionary with our discretionary spending.
Despite it all, however, companies that are looking forward are asking today, "How do we market to consumers and businesses once we finally get out of this mess?" The businesses that are going to survive are hunkered down, weathering the storm, but also being proactive and looking to the future.
It is important to keep in mind that while a small percentage of consumers will quickly forget the hardships of the past year, a larger majority will be changing their spending habits for years to come, some of them, even, for the rest of their lives. I bet anyone alive today that lived through the 1930s in America is as spend-thrift today as they were in the 1940s and 1950s.
As businesses, we are not only going to be asked to provide something new and exciting, but today, and well into the future, are going to need to provide value, and lots of it. Consumer relationships with businesses, and business relationships with vendors will be under a microscope for the foreseeable future. Gone are the days of the whimsical purchase, because gone are the days of easy, endless credit lines.
So, what we do now? We get to work. We need to look at our products and services and ensure that they are providing real, tangible value to our customers. We need to ensure that our customers are having the best experience possible with our businesses, because their post-recession dollars are going to demand it.
We must be aware that there is not going to be a magic day when all of the sudden things are back to how they were before. We may not see that day within our lifetimes, and even if we do, it will probably just be an indicator of another coming collapse. Think back to the opinion page writer for a local newspaper in 1946. The depression was long gone, the war was over, and things were swinging, but it would be over 50 years until we saw a similar pre-depression upswing. That is where we are all at today. Take your age and add 50, and that is how old you may be the next time we can market and sell like it's 2007 again.
One in ten Americans who wants to be working is unable to find a job right now. That in itself changes the game when it comes to sales and marketing. One in ten Americans is struggling to pay for food and shelter, so how do you sell them something that is not necessarily an absolute need? Even those of us who are still on the job are being much more discretionary with our discretionary spending.
Despite it all, however, companies that are looking forward are asking today, "How do we market to consumers and businesses once we finally get out of this mess?" The businesses that are going to survive are hunkered down, weathering the storm, but also being proactive and looking to the future.
It is important to keep in mind that while a small percentage of consumers will quickly forget the hardships of the past year, a larger majority will be changing their spending habits for years to come, some of them, even, for the rest of their lives. I bet anyone alive today that lived through the 1930s in America is as spend-thrift today as they were in the 1940s and 1950s.
As businesses, we are not only going to be asked to provide something new and exciting, but today, and well into the future, are going to need to provide value, and lots of it. Consumer relationships with businesses, and business relationships with vendors will be under a microscope for the foreseeable future. Gone are the days of the whimsical purchase, because gone are the days of easy, endless credit lines.
So, what we do now? We get to work. We need to look at our products and services and ensure that they are providing real, tangible value to our customers. We need to ensure that our customers are having the best experience possible with our businesses, because their post-recession dollars are going to demand it.
We must be aware that there is not going to be a magic day when all of the sudden things are back to how they were before. We may not see that day within our lifetimes, and even if we do, it will probably just be an indicator of another coming collapse. Think back to the opinion page writer for a local newspaper in 1946. The depression was long gone, the war was over, and things were swinging, but it would be over 50 years until we saw a similar pre-depression upswing. That is where we are all at today. Take your age and add 50, and that is how old you may be the next time we can market and sell like it's 2007 again.
Friday, July 10, 2009
Why Cap-And-Tax Is A Horrible Idea
What is Cap-And-Trade, or Cap-And-Tax, as it is more properly called?
It is the Waxman-Markey bill, which has recently passed the house by a razor-thin margin, and would place a cap on the total carbon output that the United States can produce over the course of a year, with that total amount decreasing year over year. Oh, and by “the United States”, I mean every business in the country, and you, the Americans who work for those businesses. Imagine being given an amount of carbon that your business can emit over the course of a year, then having to buy excess carbon permits from people who are not using all of their carbon allotment if you go over, or even worse, having to pay large fines if you cannot scrounge up enough carbon offset permits. When you get down to brass tacks, there are three huge problems with this bill:
#1 - It will raise the price of everything, literally, first energy prices, then the food and other goods that we all purchase as virtually every manufacturer and producer scrambles to pay more and more for their carbon permits, then pass that cost on to the end consumer.
#2 – The cost of operating manufacturing equipment will be rising in the U.S. and falling in every nation that has not implemented a Cap-And-Tax policy. Large, multi-nationals will have even one more reason to ship jobs overseas. While this may, in turn, help in the area of rising prices, many more Americans who rely on manufacturing jobs will be out of work.
#3 - While we are screwing ourselves into higher prices to reduce our carbon emissions, this bill does nothing to address the carbon emissions of other nations in the world. China’s carbon emissions are skyrocketing and they will be doing nothing to stop them while we slow down our already reeling economy with this bad piece of legislation.
While support for this bill does cross some party lines, there is clearly only one party that is supporting this bill as stated in the Wall Street Journal: “Even as Democrats have promised that this cap-and-trade legislation won't pinch wallets, behind the scenes they've acknowledged the energy price tsunami that is coming. During the brief few days in which the bill was debated in the House Energy Committee, Republicans offered three amendments: one to suspend the program if gas hit $5 a gallon; one to suspend the program if electricity prices rose 10% over 2009; and one to suspend the program if unemployment rates hit 15%. Democrats defeated all of them."
It is the Waxman-Markey bill, which has recently passed the house by a razor-thin margin, and would place a cap on the total carbon output that the United States can produce over the course of a year, with that total amount decreasing year over year. Oh, and by “the United States”, I mean every business in the country, and you, the Americans who work for those businesses. Imagine being given an amount of carbon that your business can emit over the course of a year, then having to buy excess carbon permits from people who are not using all of their carbon allotment if you go over, or even worse, having to pay large fines if you cannot scrounge up enough carbon offset permits. When you get down to brass tacks, there are three huge problems with this bill:
#1 - It will raise the price of everything, literally, first energy prices, then the food and other goods that we all purchase as virtually every manufacturer and producer scrambles to pay more and more for their carbon permits, then pass that cost on to the end consumer.
#2 – The cost of operating manufacturing equipment will be rising in the U.S. and falling in every nation that has not implemented a Cap-And-Tax policy. Large, multi-nationals will have even one more reason to ship jobs overseas. While this may, in turn, help in the area of rising prices, many more Americans who rely on manufacturing jobs will be out of work.
#3 - While we are screwing ourselves into higher prices to reduce our carbon emissions, this bill does nothing to address the carbon emissions of other nations in the world. China’s carbon emissions are skyrocketing and they will be doing nothing to stop them while we slow down our already reeling economy with this bad piece of legislation.
While support for this bill does cross some party lines, there is clearly only one party that is supporting this bill as stated in the Wall Street Journal: “Even as Democrats have promised that this cap-and-trade legislation won't pinch wallets, behind the scenes they've acknowledged the energy price tsunami that is coming. During the brief few days in which the bill was debated in the House Energy Committee, Republicans offered three amendments: one to suspend the program if gas hit $5 a gallon; one to suspend the program if electricity prices rose 10% over 2009; and one to suspend the program if unemployment rates hit 15%. Democrats defeated all of them."
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
An Important Update From The Social Security Administration
The U.S. Social Security Administration has fantastic news! Straight from the insert that should have arrived with your annual statement (wonder what it costs to print and mail all of those instead of posting them online), the Social Security Administration is happy to report that by the time those of us in our 30s go to retire, we have the prospect of getting up to 78% of the benefits that we are supposed to be getting! Isn't that fantastic news?!
That means that for every $1,000 that we are supposed to get, in essence, for every $1,000 that people on Social Security are getting now, we are going to possibly get up to $780! So, when we go to retire, we just need to come up with the other $220 somewhere to make up for the $220 that was stolen from us and given to today's retirees!
Given these revelations, how about we be allowed to keep $220 of our $1,000 to invest for ourselves? Go ahead and ask the Social Security Administration that, and watch them just smile and laugh at you, crazy little taxpayer. You can't take care of yourself without big government! Why, that's just crazy. If they let you keep your $220, they'd have to cut benefits to people on Social Security today, and that just wouldn't be fair at all to them.
The burden of benefits being cut is reserved for those of you retiring after 2041, silly goose. The Social Security Administration is just going to hold their breath, close their eyes, and hope that there is some miracle between now and 2041 that will magically occur so that we can get our full benefits. Great plan, folks!
I have a fantastic idea! Why don't we put the idiots in government in charge of all of the banks and large industrial manufacturers in the land to ensure that nothing goes wrong with our pseudo-capitalist system. Oops - am I too late to stop that? Or even better, let's take our very health and well-being and let them tax us even further so they can provide us with a universal healthcare plan (I'm not making that up - there are bills in the congress right now that are going to tax you on the health insurance your employer provides to pay for health insurance for those who aren't working - a tax on families making under $250,000 a year - breaking a certain promise from a certain someone who just happens to be the leader of the free world right now). We're going to have to sit back, watch, and see what passes and what gets vetoed.
In fact, with Taxington, D.C. doing so well with managing our retirement fund, why not let them handle every aspect of our lives?
That means that for every $1,000 that we are supposed to get, in essence, for every $1,000 that people on Social Security are getting now, we are going to possibly get up to $780! So, when we go to retire, we just need to come up with the other $220 somewhere to make up for the $220 that was stolen from us and given to today's retirees!
Given these revelations, how about we be allowed to keep $220 of our $1,000 to invest for ourselves? Go ahead and ask the Social Security Administration that, and watch them just smile and laugh at you, crazy little taxpayer. You can't take care of yourself without big government! Why, that's just crazy. If they let you keep your $220, they'd have to cut benefits to people on Social Security today, and that just wouldn't be fair at all to them.
The burden of benefits being cut is reserved for those of you retiring after 2041, silly goose. The Social Security Administration is just going to hold their breath, close their eyes, and hope that there is some miracle between now and 2041 that will magically occur so that we can get our full benefits. Great plan, folks!
I have a fantastic idea! Why don't we put the idiots in government in charge of all of the banks and large industrial manufacturers in the land to ensure that nothing goes wrong with our pseudo-capitalist system. Oops - am I too late to stop that? Or even better, let's take our very health and well-being and let them tax us even further so they can provide us with a universal healthcare plan (I'm not making that up - there are bills in the congress right now that are going to tax you on the health insurance your employer provides to pay for health insurance for those who aren't working - a tax on families making under $250,000 a year - breaking a certain promise from a certain someone who just happens to be the leader of the free world right now). We're going to have to sit back, watch, and see what passes and what gets vetoed.
In fact, with Taxington, D.C. doing so well with managing our retirement fund, why not let them handle every aspect of our lives?
Friday, May 29, 2009
You Are Part Of The Rebellion, Like It Or Not...
For my follow-up to Tuesday's piece on the new credit card bill, I am going to bring in another movie reference because while we may be experiencing the beginning of a minor version of the collapse of all of those bank buildings like at the end of Fight Club, it is not actually coming until August 22, 2010, so until then, America is going to be feeling a bit like Lando Calrissian. Remember in Empire when Dick Cheney kept telling Lando to pray that he didn't alter the deal further? If you are carrying any credit card balances between now and when the credit card reform legislation actually forces the credit card empire to lower your interest rates to reasonable levels on Augsut 22, 2010, you are going to feel like going back to finish your Jedi training so that you can better fight the evil credit card empire.
Think of today's credit card times in the context of the six Star Wars movies. Today, we are in the midst of Episode 5 - The Empire Strikes Back. Episodes 1-3 are folklore, bits and pieces of mythological details - times long gone that came before you that witnessed the birth of credit cards, issued with low interest rates by small local banks to consumers who always paid their balances off every month, and then witnessed the early battles between the banks and consumers as the banks grew larger and the consumers were oppressed into submission over time, accepting higher interest rates and not paying off balances anymore, until at the end of Episode 3, when the banks had become a massive multi-national credit card empire in supreme control, bending consumers to their will, those consumers still taking on ever-increasing amounts of credit, feeding the empire's growth, not necessarily against their will, but in a complacent stupor. All of this came before you, but somehow, you are paying the price for it today.
Think of Episode 4 as your own personal New Hope that spanned from the day you were granted your first credit card until May 22, 2009, the day The Leader signed the credit card reform bill into law. It was a coming of age for you, where you learned how credit worked and began to see the evil credit empire for what it really was. People offered you credit card guidance through their own painful stories, but you yourself had to experience the pain first hand before you realized that it was time to do something about this evil empire.
So, at the end of Episode 4, we as consumers all banned together and forced our leadership into doing something to fight the empire. There was a glimmer of hope about the future as Episode 4 ended on May 22, 2009, the cameras fading away from The Leader as he signed the credit card reform bill and the credits began to roll to that famous march.
But just days later, we are realizing that there was a truly fundamental flaw in our attack plan at the end of Episode 4. We didn't actually kill Dick Cheney, but simply sent him reeling into space, where he will recover and come back at us harder than ever. You are currently living in Episode 5, which will span from May 22, 2009 to February 22, 2010 and prove to be nine months of absolute pain if you are currently carrying a credit card balance. While the Credit Card Reform Bill is good and strong, it is weak and inadequate in it's first nine months, giving the credit card empire that nine months to come into compliance with its laws.
So, what do you think the empire is going to do with that nine months? This is the "painful" period that I referred to on Tuesday where if you have a credit card balance, the credit card empire is going to pull a "Capital One" on you. Switch your current record-low rates to sky-high rates for the last nine months before the laws go into effect. Consumer groups are expecting these to be the highest interest rates that we will pay in our lifetime on credit card balances.
From now until February 22, 2010, credit card consumers that are carrying a balance are going to struggle just to keep their X-wing above water and make the sky-rocketing interest payments. Interest rates are going to soar, fees are going to soar, and the evil credit card empire will have full reign to do whatever it wishes. An unbridled Karl Rove giving us all a full, long, nine months to question why in the world the politicians in Washington gave the credit card companies this nine months to comply.
Again, on Tuesday, I praised the lawmakers and The Leader for the bill, praise which was, and is still deserved, but today I join the millions of Americans who are asking why in the world Washington has given the banks nine months to comply and thrown us all to the sharks like this. The banks didn't wait nine months for their taxpayer bailout money, did they? I don't think so.
I will, still, however, give Washington credit, but always question why they agreed to this nine month window where the American consumer with a credit card balance is going to take a hard hit, no matter whether they pay their credit card bills on time or not. I just cannot imagine what would have been so difficult to include legislation that mandated that the credit card empire not be able to raise rates on customers who are paying their bills on-time during this nine month transition period.
I guess we all have nine months to figure that out, right? Much like Episode 5, we will spend this time questioning the decisions that those who came before us made, resulting in the current fight that we are in, cursing them, but knowing that a better day is on the horizon.
On February 22, 2010, the major provisions of the Credit Card Reform Bill will actually take effect. The credit card empire will no longer be able to raise rates on existing balances, charge you over-limit fees, and subject you to universal default. This is the beginning of Episode 6, the final episode, Return of The Sane. The nine months of pain will be behind us, and though some people with credit card balances are going to be paying well over 20% APR, over 30% APR perhaps, the interest rate hikes will be over. The ability for the evil credit card empire to inflict an ever-increasing amount of pain on us will have ended. Episode 6 will run from February 22 through August 22, 2010, but if you pay all of your credit card bills on time and do not default on any debt during that time period, the law (with some help from the Ewoks) will force the credit card companies to lower your interest rate shortly after August 22, 2010, back down closer to where it was on May 22, 2009.
From here until August 22, 2010, the American consumer is going to have a hard fight, but that fight will ultimately lead to a better America, and a stronger American consumer. Credit is going to be nearly impossible to get during this time and the interest rate for credit is going to shoot up into space, and we are all going to pay the price for both what we have done, and sadly, for things that we had absolutely no part in. But, on August 22, 2010, the long fight will end and we can hopefully rejoice in having made it through such a ridiculous fight that we both brought on ourselves, yet at the same time, had so little effect on as a single individual.
We can only hope that things will play out differently, but with the law signed and the dates in place, there is nothing else that we can do but sit back and go for the ride that the credit empire and the politicians have just sent us on.
Think of today's credit card times in the context of the six Star Wars movies. Today, we are in the midst of Episode 5 - The Empire Strikes Back. Episodes 1-3 are folklore, bits and pieces of mythological details - times long gone that came before you that witnessed the birth of credit cards, issued with low interest rates by small local banks to consumers who always paid their balances off every month, and then witnessed the early battles between the banks and consumers as the banks grew larger and the consumers were oppressed into submission over time, accepting higher interest rates and not paying off balances anymore, until at the end of Episode 3, when the banks had become a massive multi-national credit card empire in supreme control, bending consumers to their will, those consumers still taking on ever-increasing amounts of credit, feeding the empire's growth, not necessarily against their will, but in a complacent stupor. All of this came before you, but somehow, you are paying the price for it today.
Think of Episode 4 as your own personal New Hope that spanned from the day you were granted your first credit card until May 22, 2009, the day The Leader signed the credit card reform bill into law. It was a coming of age for you, where you learned how credit worked and began to see the evil credit empire for what it really was. People offered you credit card guidance through their own painful stories, but you yourself had to experience the pain first hand before you realized that it was time to do something about this evil empire.
So, at the end of Episode 4, we as consumers all banned together and forced our leadership into doing something to fight the empire. There was a glimmer of hope about the future as Episode 4 ended on May 22, 2009, the cameras fading away from The Leader as he signed the credit card reform bill and the credits began to roll to that famous march.
But just days later, we are realizing that there was a truly fundamental flaw in our attack plan at the end of Episode 4. We didn't actually kill Dick Cheney, but simply sent him reeling into space, where he will recover and come back at us harder than ever. You are currently living in Episode 5, which will span from May 22, 2009 to February 22, 2010 and prove to be nine months of absolute pain if you are currently carrying a credit card balance. While the Credit Card Reform Bill is good and strong, it is weak and inadequate in it's first nine months, giving the credit card empire that nine months to come into compliance with its laws.
So, what do you think the empire is going to do with that nine months? This is the "painful" period that I referred to on Tuesday where if you have a credit card balance, the credit card empire is going to pull a "Capital One" on you. Switch your current record-low rates to sky-high rates for the last nine months before the laws go into effect. Consumer groups are expecting these to be the highest interest rates that we will pay in our lifetime on credit card balances.
From now until February 22, 2010, credit card consumers that are carrying a balance are going to struggle just to keep their X-wing above water and make the sky-rocketing interest payments. Interest rates are going to soar, fees are going to soar, and the evil credit card empire will have full reign to do whatever it wishes. An unbridled Karl Rove giving us all a full, long, nine months to question why in the world the politicians in Washington gave the credit card companies this nine months to comply.
Again, on Tuesday, I praised the lawmakers and The Leader for the bill, praise which was, and is still deserved, but today I join the millions of Americans who are asking why in the world Washington has given the banks nine months to comply and thrown us all to the sharks like this. The banks didn't wait nine months for their taxpayer bailout money, did they? I don't think so.
I will, still, however, give Washington credit, but always question why they agreed to this nine month window where the American consumer with a credit card balance is going to take a hard hit, no matter whether they pay their credit card bills on time or not. I just cannot imagine what would have been so difficult to include legislation that mandated that the credit card empire not be able to raise rates on customers who are paying their bills on-time during this nine month transition period.
I guess we all have nine months to figure that out, right? Much like Episode 5, we will spend this time questioning the decisions that those who came before us made, resulting in the current fight that we are in, cursing them, but knowing that a better day is on the horizon.
On February 22, 2010, the major provisions of the Credit Card Reform Bill will actually take effect. The credit card empire will no longer be able to raise rates on existing balances, charge you over-limit fees, and subject you to universal default. This is the beginning of Episode 6, the final episode, Return of The Sane. The nine months of pain will be behind us, and though some people with credit card balances are going to be paying well over 20% APR, over 30% APR perhaps, the interest rate hikes will be over. The ability for the evil credit card empire to inflict an ever-increasing amount of pain on us will have ended. Episode 6 will run from February 22 through August 22, 2010, but if you pay all of your credit card bills on time and do not default on any debt during that time period, the law (with some help from the Ewoks) will force the credit card companies to lower your interest rate shortly after August 22, 2010, back down closer to where it was on May 22, 2009.
From here until August 22, 2010, the American consumer is going to have a hard fight, but that fight will ultimately lead to a better America, and a stronger American consumer. Credit is going to be nearly impossible to get during this time and the interest rate for credit is going to shoot up into space, and we are all going to pay the price for both what we have done, and sadly, for things that we had absolutely no part in. But, on August 22, 2010, the long fight will end and we can hopefully rejoice in having made it through such a ridiculous fight that we both brought on ourselves, yet at the same time, had so little effect on as a single individual.
We can only hope that things will play out differently, but with the law signed and the dates in place, there is nothing else that we can do but sit back and go for the ride that the credit empire and the politicians have just sent us on.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Time To Start A Fight Club...
If you have not seen the movie Fight Club, I urge you to do so. While there's a lot of crazy things going on in that movie that may not be to your liking or taste, there is one thing about that movie that every American should pay attention to -- the destruction of the modern American banking and credit system that takes place in the last couple minutes of the movie, all to a fitting song.
This a bit of a long read, but if you have even one credit card, regardless of whether or not you carry a balance, you need to read it...
This past Thursday, I intended to sit and type out an article, praising the current legislature and president for their credit card legislation bill. No, you read that right -- I am praising the current Democratic-controlled House and Senate and The Leader on a fantastic credit card reform bill that was signed into law last Friday. Again, you read that correctly.
It is going to cause some pain upfront, especially if you hold a balance on a credit card right now, but in the long run, it is going to benefit us all. It reigns back in the run-away credit that banks had been dolling out without any sense over the past decade, which is what led to their industry's collapse and subsequent socialist bailout by the American government to try to fix the failing economy.
While I will still tell you about this bill and still praise the lawmakers that wrote it and passed it, there was a surprise in my mailbox Thursday afternoon that turned this article into an attack on America's banks and credit card companies.
First, let's talk about the bill. Bottom line, it makes it illegal for credit card companies to raise the interest rate on a balance that you already owe them, unless it is a promotional interest rate. This means that days of you charging something on a card at a 9.9% interest rate and having them raise the interest rate the next month before you paid it off to 17.9% for no reason are over. The problem is, that if you owed them a balance the day the law went into effect, there is a still a work around the credit card companies have (more on that later), but any debt that you accumulate after the day the bill become law must always remain at the interest rate that you agreed to, as long as it is a standard interest rate and not a promotional interest rate. This is a great thing for the American consumer and is decades overdue.
The bill also gives your more time to pay your monthly bill from the time the credit card company issues it -- You'll now have at least 21 days from the day your statement is generated until you have to make the payment. It also restricts the credit card companies to having the cutoff before your bill is late be during their normal business hours. A lot of times, you'll get a statement and the bill is due on Sunday, when they are not accepting payments, but will consider it late if you pay on Monday. They also have been doing this for holidays as well. That practice is no longer legal. These are also greatly needed improvements to the credit card contracts and a great win for the American consumer.
Another great win, and one that the banks fought tooth and nail to try to leave out of this bill is the fact that any money you pay over the minimum payment must now be applied to the highest interest rate balance that you owe them. Before, the credit card companies would apply that money to the lowest interest rate. So, say you owed for purchases at 15.9% and owed a cash advance at 23%, when you would pay an extra dollar to the credit card company, they would apply it to the 15.9% balance, not the 23% balance, which obviously gave them a clear advantage in making more money off of you. This new legislation forces them to apply that extra dollar to the 23% balance first, and the 15.9% balance once that 23% balance is gone. This is going to cost them billions and billion of dollars in interest rates. No doubt the banks are going to lash out at the American consumer to make up for this gap of billions (again, more on that later).
Another area that is going to cost the banks billions is a change in over-limit fees. You will now have to "opt-in" to an over-limit fee, meaning that you must request that the bank allow you to go over your limit and charge you an over-limit fee for doing so. If you do not "opt-in" the bank will not allow you to charge over your limit, thus completely avoiding over-limit fees.
Another great benefit to the credit card consumer in this bill is the banning of what is known as "universal default". Under universal default, a creditor is allowed to raise your interest rate that you have with them if you default on any of your loans, even if it is not one you have with them. For instance, if you defaulted on a car loan, it would allow the credit card companies to raise your interest rate to their default rate, even if you had never missed a single payment with them. Universal default is now illegal and is going to save American consumers billions of dollars in the first year alone.
An area that is of less prominence in today's credit card war, but will still benefit the consumer, is that the credit card companies must compute your finance charges on the current billing cycle - meaning, charging you an interest rate on the current month's average balance as opposed to last month's average balance. This was designed to hit you one last time when you paid off a credit card balance. Say, in February, you owed $200 and paid that off. In March, when your statement cycled, with a $0 balance for each day that month, you would still be nailed with a finance charge on the $200 that you owed the previous month. The new legislation makes this practice illegal.
And lastly, while not effecting the actual agreement you have with the banks, the bill requires your statement to cite how long it will take you to pay off your balance if you are making just the minimum payments. I know most American consumers do not want to be reminded of that every month, but it will help you make better financial decisions when it comes to credit, I guarantee it. The statement must also show you how much you would need to send in order to pay off the entire balance in 12, 24, or 36 months, adjusted, of course, for additional monthly interest. This will give you a guideline in paying off your balances in a much more timely manner. You can image the grimaces in bank boardrooms all across the country over this one.
And that's the basics of the bill. It is a good piece of legislation and will benefit America in the long run, however, now, on to the "more on that later" part I told you about earlier. This will show you how the banks are going to try to get around this new legislation and legally continue to stick it to the American consumer.
Bottom line, if you owed $0 the day this legislation become law, you are set. You will know the day you charge something at a regular interest rate, that interest rate cannot be changed once you have completed your transaction. However, if you owed anything on a credit card the day this legislation became law, you are still in a fight with that credit card company until the day you pay that balance down to $0. In short, they will still be able to change the interest rate on the balance that you already owe them, and believe me, the credit card companies have known for months that this was coming and they have already gotten the ball rolling on getting around it. This is how...
Let's talk about one of my credit cards. A Capital One card I got in college with an original whopping $500 credit limit in 1993, that has a whopping $1200 credit limit today. This card has not carried a balance in over a decade and is one of the cards that I keep open solely for the purpose of having old credit lines open to benefit my credit report scores. It originally came with a 16.99% variable APR that after about five years was changed to a fixed 12.9% as my credit history and good payment record lengthened. That 12.9% was in turn lowered to an unheard of (for a credit card, at least) 7.9% fixed rate in April of 2008 - the true pinnacle of the banks' "credit for everyone" days.
Last Thursday, I received a notice regarding a change in terms on this credit card, literally the same day that I read the MSN article on the fact that the credit card reform bill was on the President's desk. So, the credit reform bill changes it so that a credit card company can only raise rates on existing balances if it is a promotional rate. The notice from Capital One said that they were changing the standard 7.9% fixed rate on my card, a rate I have had for over a year, and a card I have had for over 16 years, to a new promotional rate of 7.9% fixed. Do you see what that does for them? The new law says they cannot raise rates on existing balances that have a standard interest rate, but they can raise interest rates on a balance that has a promotional interest rate.
So, the bankers at Capital One not only changed my regular rate to a promotional rate which is exactly the same rate I had before anyway, but they have also done it to every Capital One credit card holder. Since all Capital One credit cards now have this promotional interest rate, after a period of time, which in this case is about 12 months (April 2010), they can then raise the interest rates on their customers' existing balances to whatever the hell they'd like. In my case, an increase from a 7.9% fixed rate to a 17.9% variable rate. Thank God I do not owe a balance on this card, or my interest rate on that balance would literally more than double to start with the option for them to increase it even higher than that.
So, while the new laws are fantastic, you can see that the credit card companies took steps to ensure that they had a new agreement with you prior to the new bill being signed into law. You can opt out of the rate increases by closing your account and your interest rate will remain what it was before the change, and you can pay them back in the same monthly installments that you have been paying them back in already, but you lose the benefits to your credit report for that account once it is closed. In my case, with this Capital One card, I would lose a card account that has been open for 16 years and has a perfect payment record.
So, what to do if you do have a credit card balance that the credit card companies are raising the rate on before the law goes into effect, or by skirting the law like Capital One is doing? You really need to weigh the long term benefits of the card being open and having a good payment record on your credit versus the amount of money that it is going to cost you to keep the card open if you are carrying a balance.
Keep in mind that your payment record will continue to be tracked, it just won't benefit your credit score as heavily because the account is closed. The bottom line always remains that if you are carrying balances on your credit cards, you should be paying them off down to $0 as quickly as possible. Be sure that you are paying the most on the credit cards with the highest interest rates. If you pay a card off, take your monthly payment for that card and add it on top of the monthly payment for the next card, this way you are always increasing the amount of credit card debt that you are paying off every month as your finance charges decrease. It is very easy to want to pay the minimum, especially as that minimum amount due shrinks every month.
You may have seen yesterday that I provided you with a list of the banks that received bail out funds. It was so that I could make this point to you today. What really ticks me off about the bankers at Capital One and a lot of these banks is that they are raising these interest rates on taxpayers within months of having received billions (yes, billions, such as $3.5 billion for the bankers at Capital One) in taxpayer dollars from the federal government. In what world, on what planet, in what dimension, is this in any way, shape, or form fair, or right? Well, just keep this in mind every time that you go to put a balance on a credit card...Fair has nothing to do with it, and in fact, once you are in debt to one of these newly socialized banks, they no longer have to be fair with you at all, even with this new credit card reform bill on the books.
If you have been reading my articles regularly in the past nine years, then you know that I have spent a good deal of time fighting to shed light on the mysteries and evils of the credit card industry. I will continue to do so in the future...
This a bit of a long read, but if you have even one credit card, regardless of whether or not you carry a balance, you need to read it...
This past Thursday, I intended to sit and type out an article, praising the current legislature and president for their credit card legislation bill. No, you read that right -- I am praising the current Democratic-controlled House and Senate and The Leader on a fantastic credit card reform bill that was signed into law last Friday. Again, you read that correctly.
It is going to cause some pain upfront, especially if you hold a balance on a credit card right now, but in the long run, it is going to benefit us all. It reigns back in the run-away credit that banks had been dolling out without any sense over the past decade, which is what led to their industry's collapse and subsequent socialist bailout by the American government to try to fix the failing economy.
While I will still tell you about this bill and still praise the lawmakers that wrote it and passed it, there was a surprise in my mailbox Thursday afternoon that turned this article into an attack on America's banks and credit card companies.
First, let's talk about the bill. Bottom line, it makes it illegal for credit card companies to raise the interest rate on a balance that you already owe them, unless it is a promotional interest rate. This means that days of you charging something on a card at a 9.9% interest rate and having them raise the interest rate the next month before you paid it off to 17.9% for no reason are over. The problem is, that if you owed them a balance the day the law went into effect, there is a still a work around the credit card companies have (more on that later), but any debt that you accumulate after the day the bill become law must always remain at the interest rate that you agreed to, as long as it is a standard interest rate and not a promotional interest rate. This is a great thing for the American consumer and is decades overdue.
The bill also gives your more time to pay your monthly bill from the time the credit card company issues it -- You'll now have at least 21 days from the day your statement is generated until you have to make the payment. It also restricts the credit card companies to having the cutoff before your bill is late be during their normal business hours. A lot of times, you'll get a statement and the bill is due on Sunday, when they are not accepting payments, but will consider it late if you pay on Monday. They also have been doing this for holidays as well. That practice is no longer legal. These are also greatly needed improvements to the credit card contracts and a great win for the American consumer.
Another great win, and one that the banks fought tooth and nail to try to leave out of this bill is the fact that any money you pay over the minimum payment must now be applied to the highest interest rate balance that you owe them. Before, the credit card companies would apply that money to the lowest interest rate. So, say you owed for purchases at 15.9% and owed a cash advance at 23%, when you would pay an extra dollar to the credit card company, they would apply it to the 15.9% balance, not the 23% balance, which obviously gave them a clear advantage in making more money off of you. This new legislation forces them to apply that extra dollar to the 23% balance first, and the 15.9% balance once that 23% balance is gone. This is going to cost them billions and billion of dollars in interest rates. No doubt the banks are going to lash out at the American consumer to make up for this gap of billions (again, more on that later).
Another area that is going to cost the banks billions is a change in over-limit fees. You will now have to "opt-in" to an over-limit fee, meaning that you must request that the bank allow you to go over your limit and charge you an over-limit fee for doing so. If you do not "opt-in" the bank will not allow you to charge over your limit, thus completely avoiding over-limit fees.
Another great benefit to the credit card consumer in this bill is the banning of what is known as "universal default". Under universal default, a creditor is allowed to raise your interest rate that you have with them if you default on any of your loans, even if it is not one you have with them. For instance, if you defaulted on a car loan, it would allow the credit card companies to raise your interest rate to their default rate, even if you had never missed a single payment with them. Universal default is now illegal and is going to save American consumers billions of dollars in the first year alone.
An area that is of less prominence in today's credit card war, but will still benefit the consumer, is that the credit card companies must compute your finance charges on the current billing cycle - meaning, charging you an interest rate on the current month's average balance as opposed to last month's average balance. This was designed to hit you one last time when you paid off a credit card balance. Say, in February, you owed $200 and paid that off. In March, when your statement cycled, with a $0 balance for each day that month, you would still be nailed with a finance charge on the $200 that you owed the previous month. The new legislation makes this practice illegal.
And lastly, while not effecting the actual agreement you have with the banks, the bill requires your statement to cite how long it will take you to pay off your balance if you are making just the minimum payments. I know most American consumers do not want to be reminded of that every month, but it will help you make better financial decisions when it comes to credit, I guarantee it. The statement must also show you how much you would need to send in order to pay off the entire balance in 12, 24, or 36 months, adjusted, of course, for additional monthly interest. This will give you a guideline in paying off your balances in a much more timely manner. You can image the grimaces in bank boardrooms all across the country over this one.
And that's the basics of the bill. It is a good piece of legislation and will benefit America in the long run, however, now, on to the "more on that later" part I told you about earlier. This will show you how the banks are going to try to get around this new legislation and legally continue to stick it to the American consumer.
Bottom line, if you owed $0 the day this legislation become law, you are set. You will know the day you charge something at a regular interest rate, that interest rate cannot be changed once you have completed your transaction. However, if you owed anything on a credit card the day this legislation became law, you are still in a fight with that credit card company until the day you pay that balance down to $0. In short, they will still be able to change the interest rate on the balance that you already owe them, and believe me, the credit card companies have known for months that this was coming and they have already gotten the ball rolling on getting around it. This is how...
Let's talk about one of my credit cards. A Capital One card I got in college with an original whopping $500 credit limit in 1993, that has a whopping $1200 credit limit today. This card has not carried a balance in over a decade and is one of the cards that I keep open solely for the purpose of having old credit lines open to benefit my credit report scores. It originally came with a 16.99% variable APR that after about five years was changed to a fixed 12.9% as my credit history and good payment record lengthened. That 12.9% was in turn lowered to an unheard of (for a credit card, at least) 7.9% fixed rate in April of 2008 - the true pinnacle of the banks' "credit for everyone" days.
Last Thursday, I received a notice regarding a change in terms on this credit card, literally the same day that I read the MSN article on the fact that the credit card reform bill was on the President's desk. So, the credit reform bill changes it so that a credit card company can only raise rates on existing balances if it is a promotional rate. The notice from Capital One said that they were changing the standard 7.9% fixed rate on my card, a rate I have had for over a year, and a card I have had for over 16 years, to a new promotional rate of 7.9% fixed. Do you see what that does for them? The new law says they cannot raise rates on existing balances that have a standard interest rate, but they can raise interest rates on a balance that has a promotional interest rate.
So, the bankers at Capital One not only changed my regular rate to a promotional rate which is exactly the same rate I had before anyway, but they have also done it to every Capital One credit card holder. Since all Capital One credit cards now have this promotional interest rate, after a period of time, which in this case is about 12 months (April 2010), they can then raise the interest rates on their customers' existing balances to whatever the hell they'd like. In my case, an increase from a 7.9% fixed rate to a 17.9% variable rate. Thank God I do not owe a balance on this card, or my interest rate on that balance would literally more than double to start with the option for them to increase it even higher than that.
So, while the new laws are fantastic, you can see that the credit card companies took steps to ensure that they had a new agreement with you prior to the new bill being signed into law. You can opt out of the rate increases by closing your account and your interest rate will remain what it was before the change, and you can pay them back in the same monthly installments that you have been paying them back in already, but you lose the benefits to your credit report for that account once it is closed. In my case, with this Capital One card, I would lose a card account that has been open for 16 years and has a perfect payment record.
So, what to do if you do have a credit card balance that the credit card companies are raising the rate on before the law goes into effect, or by skirting the law like Capital One is doing? You really need to weigh the long term benefits of the card being open and having a good payment record on your credit versus the amount of money that it is going to cost you to keep the card open if you are carrying a balance.
Keep in mind that your payment record will continue to be tracked, it just won't benefit your credit score as heavily because the account is closed. The bottom line always remains that if you are carrying balances on your credit cards, you should be paying them off down to $0 as quickly as possible. Be sure that you are paying the most on the credit cards with the highest interest rates. If you pay a card off, take your monthly payment for that card and add it on top of the monthly payment for the next card, this way you are always increasing the amount of credit card debt that you are paying off every month as your finance charges decrease. It is very easy to want to pay the minimum, especially as that minimum amount due shrinks every month.
You may have seen yesterday that I provided you with a list of the banks that received bail out funds. It was so that I could make this point to you today. What really ticks me off about the bankers at Capital One and a lot of these banks is that they are raising these interest rates on taxpayers within months of having received billions (yes, billions, such as $3.5 billion for the bankers at Capital One) in taxpayer dollars from the federal government. In what world, on what planet, in what dimension, is this in any way, shape, or form fair, or right? Well, just keep this in mind every time that you go to put a balance on a credit card...Fair has nothing to do with it, and in fact, once you are in debt to one of these newly socialized banks, they no longer have to be fair with you at all, even with this new credit card reform bill on the books.
If you have been reading my articles regularly in the past nine years, then you know that I have spent a good deal of time fighting to shed light on the mysteries and evils of the credit card industry. I will continue to do so in the future...
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Welcome Back, Now Get To Work...
Welcome back to work, America! I hope you enjoyed your day off. I sure did!
But, now it is time to get back to work because your portion of the federal deficit is $35,000! Wait until 2012 -- you're portion doubles to $70,000 by then.
The fed is going to expect you, the taxpayer, to come up with your share. Well, that is unless you're not one of those idiots out there like me, working so you can give away a total of 50% of your income in income taxes, and sales taxes, and car taxes, and gas taxes, and phone taxes, and pretty soon, I am sure, breathing taxes.
Don't worry, though, that $70,000 figure is based on numbers that are completely skewed and inaccurate that were contrived to undersell you on how much your portion really is, so chances are, you 're probably into the fed's debt for much more than $70,000 by 2012.
While you're stewing on the fact that 50% of all that you earn, on average, America, goes to some form of tax (research it, keep track when you pay your bills and buy gas, and you're gonna be surprised), here is a list of all of the banks that got your money and are now going to be sticking it to you with higher interest rates on any debt that you have with them because America has not given them enough already:
10/28/2008 Wells Fargo & Co. San Francisco Calif. $25,000,000,000
10/28/2008 State Street Corp. Boston Mass. $2,000,000,000
10/28/2008 Bank of America Corp.1 Charlotte N.C. $15,000,000,000
10/28/2008 JPMorgan Chase & Co. New York N.Y. $25,000,000,000
10/28/2008 Citigroup Inc. New York N.Y. $25,000,000,000
10/28/2008 Morgan Stanley New York N.Y. $10,000,000,000
10/28/2008 Goldman Sachs Group Inc. New York N.Y. $10,000,000,000
10/28/2008 Bank of New York Mellon Corp. New York N.Y. $3,000,000,000
11/17/2008 Regions Financial Corp. Birmingham Ala. $3,500,000,000
11/17/2008 UCBH Holdings Inc. San Francisco Calif. $298,737,000
11/17/2008 Bank of Commerce Holdings Redding Calif. $17,000,000
11/17/2008 Broadway Financial Corp. Los Angeles Calif. $9,000,000
11/17/2008 SunTrust Banks Inc. Atlanta Ga. $3,500,000,000
11/17/2008 Northern Trust Corp. Chicago Ill. $1,576,000,000
11/17/2008 Provident Bancshares Corp. Baltimore Md. $151,500,000
11/17/2008 U.S. Bancorp Minneapolis Minn. $6,599,000,000
11/17/2008 TCF Financial Corp.2 Wayzata Minn. $361,172,000
11/17/2008 BB&T Corp. Winston-Salem N.C. $3,133,640,000
11/17/2008 1st FS Corp. Hendersonville N.C. $16,369,000
11/17/2008 Valley National Bancorp Wayne N.J. $300,000,000
11/17/2008 KeyCorp Cleveland Ohio $2,500,000,000
11/17/2008 Huntington Bancshares Columbus Ohio $1,398,071,000
11/17/2008 Umpqua Holdings Corp. Portland Ore. $214,181,000
11/17/2008 First Horizon National Corp. Memphis Tenn. $866,540,000
11/17/2008 Comerica Inc. Dallas Texas $2,250,000,000
11/17/2008 Zions Bancorporation Salt Lake City Utah $1,400,000,000
11/17/2008 Capital One Financial Corp. McLean Va. $3,555,199,000
11/17/2008 Washington Federal Inc. Seattle Wash. $200,000,000
11/17/2008 Marshall & Ilsley Corp. Milwaukee Wis. $1,715,000,000
11/21/2008 City National Corporation Beverly Hills Calif. $400,000,000
11/21/2008 Pacific Capital Bancorp Santa Barbara Calif. $180,634,000
11/21/2008 Heritage Commerce Corp. San Jose Calif. $40,000,000
11/21/2008 First PacTrust Bancorp, Inc. Chula Vista Calif. $19,300,000
11/21/2008 Nara Bancorp, Inc. Los Angeles Calif. $67,000,000
11/21/2008 Webster Financial Corporation Waterbury Conn. $400,000,000
11/21/2008 Centerstate Banks of Florida Inc. Davenport Fla. $27,875,000
11/21/2008 Ameris Bancorp Moultrie Ga. $52,000,000
11/21/2008 Taylor Capital Group Rosemont Ill. $104,823,000
11/21/2008 Porter Bancorp Inc. Louisville Ky. $35,000,000
11/21/2008 Boston Private Financial Holdings, Inc. Boston Mass. $154,000,000
11/21/2008 Severn Bancorp, Inc. Annapolis Md. $23,393,000
11/21/2008 Trustmark Corporation Jackson Miss. $215,000,000
11/21/2008 First Niagara Financial Group Lockport N.Y. $184,011,000
11/21/2008 Western Alliance Bancorporation Las Vegas Nev. $140,000,000
11/21/2008 First Community Corporation Lexington S.C. $11,350,000
11/21/2008 HF Financial Corp. Sioux Falls S.D. $25,000,000
11/21/2008 First Community Bankshares Inc. Bluefield Va. $41,500,000
11/21/2008 Banner Corporation Walla Walla Wash. $124,000,000
11/21/2008 Cascade Financial Corporation Everett Wash. $38,970,000
11/21/2008 Columbia Banking System, Inc. Tacoma Wash. $76,898,000
11/21/2008 Heritage Financial Corporation Olympia Wash. $24,000,000
11/21/2008 Associated Banc-Corp Green Bay Wis. $525,000,000
12/5/2008 Superior Bancorp Inc. Birmingham Ala. $69,000,000
12/5/2008 Manhattan Bancorp El Segundo Calif. $1,700,000
12/5/2008 East West Bancorp Pasadena Calif. $306,546,000
12/5/2008 Cathay General Bancorp Los Angeles Calif. $258,000,000
12/5/2008 CVB Financial Corp Ontario Calif. $130,000,000
12/5/2008 Bank of Marin Bancorp Novato Calif. $28,000,0002
12/5/2008 Oak Valley Bancorp Oakdale Calif. $13,500,000
12/5/2008 Coastal Banking Company, Inc. Fernandina Beach Fla. $9,950,000
12/5/2008 TIB Financial Corp Naples Fla. $37,000,000
12/5/2008 FPB Bancorp, Inc. Port St. Lucie Fla. $5,800,000
12/5/2008 United Community Banks, Inc. Blairsville Ga. $180,000,000
12/5/2008 MB Financial Inc. Chicago Ill. $196,000,000
12/5/2008 First Midwest Bancorp, Inc. Itasca Ill. $193,000,000
12/5/2008 Old National Bancorp Evansville Ind. $100,000,0002
12/5/2008 Blue Valley Ban Corp Overland Park Kan. $21,750,000
12/5/2008 Iberiabank Corporation Lafayette La. $90,000,0002
12/5/2008 Central Bancorp, Inc. Somerville Mass. $10,000,000
12/5/2008 Eagle Bancorp, Inc. Bethesda Md. $38,235,000
12/5/2008 Sandy Spring Bancorp, Inc. Olney Md. $83,094,000
12/5/2008 Old Line Bancshares, Inc. Bowie Md. $7,000,000
12/5/2008 Great Southern Bancorp Springfield Mo. $58,000,000
12/5/2008 Southern Missouri Bancorp, Inc. Poplar Bluff Mo. $9,550,000
12/5/2008 Southern Community Financial Corp. Winston-Salem N.C. $42,750,000
12/5/2008 Bank of North Carolina Thomasville N.C. $31,260,000
12/5/2008 Unity Bancorp, Inc. Clinton N.J. $20,649,000
12/5/2008 State Bancorp, Inc. Jericho N.Y. $36,842,000
12/5/2008 First Defiance Financial Corp. Defiance Ohio $37,000,000
12/5/2008 Central Federal Corporation Fairlawn Ohio $7,225,000
12/5/2008 Southwest Bancorp, Inc. Stillwater Okla. $70,000,000
12/5/2008 Popular, Inc. San Juan Puerto Rico $935,000,000
12/5/2008 South Financial Group, Inc. Greenville S.C. $347,000,000
12/5/2008 First Financial Holdings Inc. Charleston S.C. $65,000,000
12/5/2008 Encore Bancshares Inc. Houston Texas $34,000,000
12/5/2008 Wesbanco Bank Inc. Wheeling W.Va. $75,000,000
12/5/2008 Sterling Financial Corporation Spokane Wash. $303,000,000
12/12/2008 Bank Of the Ozarks Inc. Little Rock Ariz. $75,000,000
12/12/2008 SVB Financial Group Santa Clara Calif. $235,000,000
12/12/2008 Center Financial Corp. Los Angeles Calif. $55,000,000
12/12/2008 Wilshire Bancorp Inc. Los Angeles Calif. $62,158,000
12/12/2008 First Litchfield Financial Corp. Litchfield Conn. $10,000,000
12/12/2008 Wilmington Trust Corp. Wilmington Del. $330,000,000
12/12/2008 The Bancorp Inc. Wilmington Del. $45,220,000
12/12/2008 Indiana Community Bancorp Columbus Ind. $21,500,000
12/12/2008 HopFed Bancorp Hopkinsville Ky. $18,400,000
12/12/2008 LSB Corp. Andover Mass. $15,000,000
12/12/2008 Northeast Bancorp Lewiston Maine $4,227,000
12/12/2008 Citizens Republic Bancorp Inc. Flint Mich. $300,000,000
12/12/2008 Independent Bank Corp. Ionia Mich. $72,000,000
12/12/2008 Capital Bank Corp. Raliegh N.C. $41,279,000
12/12/2008 NewBridge Bancorp Greensboro N.C. $52,372,000
12/12/2008 Citizens South Banking Corp. Gastonia N.C. $20,500,000
12/12/2008 Signature Bank New York N.Y. $120,000,0002
12/12/2008 LNB Bancorp Inc. Lorain Ohio $25,223,000
12/12/2008 Susquehanna Bancshares Inc. Lititz Pa. $300,000,000
12/12/2008 National Penn Bancshares Inc. Boyertown Pa. $150,000,000
12/12/2008 Fidelity Bancorp Inc. Pittsburgh Pa. $7,000,000
12/12/2008 Pinnacle Financial Partners Inc. Nashville Tenn. $95,000,000
12/12/2008 Sterling Bancshares Inc.3 Houston Texas $125,198,000
12/12/2008 TowneBank Portsmouth Va. $76,458,000
12/12/2008 Valley Financial Corp. Roanoke Va. $16,019,000
12/12/2008 Virginia Commerce Bancorp Arlington Va. $71,000,000
12/12/2008 Pacific International Bancorp Seattle Wash. $6,500,000
12/19/2008 BancTrust Financial Group, Inc. Mobile Ala. $50,000,000
12/19/2008 Community West Bancshares Goleta Calif. $15,600,000
12/19/2008 Summit State Bank Santa Rosa Calif. $8,500,000
12/19/2008 Santa Lucia Bancorp Atascadero Calif. $4,000,000
12/19/2008 First California Financial Group, Inc Westlake Village Calif. $25,000,000
12/19/2008 Pacific City Finacial Corporation Los Angeles Calif. $16,200,000
12/19/2008 Exchange Bank Santa Rosa Calif. $43,000,000
12/19/2008 NCAL Bancorp Los Angeles Calif. $10,000,000
12/19/2008 CoBiz Financial Inc. Denver Colo. $64,450,000
12/19/2008 The Connecticut Bank and Trust Company Hartford Conn. $5,448,000
12/19/2008 Seacoast Banking Corporation of Florida Stuart Fla. $50,000,000
12/19/2008 Synovus Financial Corp. Columbus Ga. $967,870,000
12/19/2008 Fidelity Southern Corporation Atlanta Ga. $48,200,000
12/19/2008 Heartland Financial USA, Inc. Dubuque Iowa $81,698,000
12/19/2008 Intermountain Community Bancorp Sandpoint Idaho $27,000,000
12/19/2008 Wintrust Financial Corporation Lake Forest Ill. $250,000,000
12/19/2008 Marquette National Corporation Chicago Ill. $35,500,000
12/19/2008 Bridgeview Bancorp, Inc. Bridgeview Ill. $38,000,000
12/19/2008 Horizon Bancorp Michigan City Ind. $25,000,000
12/19/2008 FFW Corporation Wabash Ind. $7,289,000
12/19/2008 Fidelity Financial Corporation Wichita Kan. $36,282,000
12/19/2008 Citizens First Corporation Bowling Green Ky. $8,779,000
12/19/2008 FCB Bancorp, Inc. Louisville Ky. $9,294,000
12/19/2008 Whitney Holding Corporation New Orleans La. $300,000,000
12/19/2008 Wainwright Bank & Trust Company Boston Mass. $22,000,000
12/19/2008 Berkshire Hills Bancorp, Inc. Pittsfield Mass. $40,000,000
12/19/2008 OneUnited Bank Boston Mass. $12,063,000
12/19/2008 Tri-County Financial Corporation Waldorf Md. $15,540,000
12/19/2008 Patapsco Bancorp, Inc. Dundalk Md. $6,000,000
12/19/2008 Enterprise Financial Services Corp. St. Louis Mo. $35,000,000
12/19/2008 Hawthorn Bancshares, Inc. Lee's Summit Mo. $30,255,000
12/19/2008 Monadnock Bancorp, Inc. Peterborough N.H. $1,834,000
12/19/2008 Flushing Financial Corporation Lake Success N.Y. $70,000,000
12/19/2008 The Elmira Savings Bank, FSB Elmira N.Y. $9,090,000
12/19/2008 Alliance Financial Corporation Syracuse N.Y. $26,918,000
12/19/2008 Mid Penn Bancorp, Inc. Millersburg Pa. $10,000,000
12/19/2008 VIST Financial Corp. Wyomissing Pa. $25,000,000
12/19/2008 AmeriServ Financial, Inc Johnstown Pa. $21,000,000
12/19/2008 Bancorp Rhode Island, Inc. Providence R.I. $30,000,000
12/19/2008 Security Federal Corporation Aiken S.C. $18,000,000
12/19/2008 Tidelands Bancshares, Inc Mt. Pleasant S.C. $14,448,000
12/19/2008 Tennessee Commerce Bancorp, Inc. Franklin Tenn. $30,000,000
12/19/2008 Plains Capital Corporation Dallas Texas $87,631,000
12/19/2008 Patriot Bancshares, Inc. Houston Texas $26,038,000
12/19/2008 Community Bankers Trust Corporation Glen Allen Va. $17,680,000
12/19/2008 Community Financial Corporation Staunton Va. $12,643,000
Enjoy socialism! It's already here..."Whether you like it or not..."
But, now it is time to get back to work because your portion of the federal deficit is $35,000! Wait until 2012 -- you're portion doubles to $70,000 by then.
The fed is going to expect you, the taxpayer, to come up with your share. Well, that is unless you're not one of those idiots out there like me, working so you can give away a total of 50% of your income in income taxes, and sales taxes, and car taxes, and gas taxes, and phone taxes, and pretty soon, I am sure, breathing taxes.
Don't worry, though, that $70,000 figure is based on numbers that are completely skewed and inaccurate that were contrived to undersell you on how much your portion really is, so chances are, you 're probably into the fed's debt for much more than $70,000 by 2012.
While you're stewing on the fact that 50% of all that you earn, on average, America, goes to some form of tax (research it, keep track when you pay your bills and buy gas, and you're gonna be surprised), here is a list of all of the banks that got your money and are now going to be sticking it to you with higher interest rates on any debt that you have with them because America has not given them enough already:
10/28/2008 Wells Fargo & Co. San Francisco Calif. $25,000,000,000
10/28/2008 State Street Corp. Boston Mass. $2,000,000,000
10/28/2008 Bank of America Corp.1 Charlotte N.C. $15,000,000,000
10/28/2008 JPMorgan Chase & Co. New York N.Y. $25,000,000,000
10/28/2008 Citigroup Inc. New York N.Y. $25,000,000,000
10/28/2008 Morgan Stanley New York N.Y. $10,000,000,000
10/28/2008 Goldman Sachs Group Inc. New York N.Y. $10,000,000,000
10/28/2008 Bank of New York Mellon Corp. New York N.Y. $3,000,000,000
11/17/2008 Regions Financial Corp. Birmingham Ala. $3,500,000,000
11/17/2008 UCBH Holdings Inc. San Francisco Calif. $298,737,000
11/17/2008 Bank of Commerce Holdings Redding Calif. $17,000,000
11/17/2008 Broadway Financial Corp. Los Angeles Calif. $9,000,000
11/17/2008 SunTrust Banks Inc. Atlanta Ga. $3,500,000,000
11/17/2008 Northern Trust Corp. Chicago Ill. $1,576,000,000
11/17/2008 Provident Bancshares Corp. Baltimore Md. $151,500,000
11/17/2008 U.S. Bancorp Minneapolis Minn. $6,599,000,000
11/17/2008 TCF Financial Corp.2 Wayzata Minn. $361,172,000
11/17/2008 BB&T Corp. Winston-Salem N.C. $3,133,640,000
11/17/2008 1st FS Corp. Hendersonville N.C. $16,369,000
11/17/2008 Valley National Bancorp Wayne N.J. $300,000,000
11/17/2008 KeyCorp Cleveland Ohio $2,500,000,000
11/17/2008 Huntington Bancshares Columbus Ohio $1,398,071,000
11/17/2008 Umpqua Holdings Corp. Portland Ore. $214,181,000
11/17/2008 First Horizon National Corp. Memphis Tenn. $866,540,000
11/17/2008 Comerica Inc. Dallas Texas $2,250,000,000
11/17/2008 Zions Bancorporation Salt Lake City Utah $1,400,000,000
11/17/2008 Capital One Financial Corp. McLean Va. $3,555,199,000
11/17/2008 Washington Federal Inc. Seattle Wash. $200,000,000
11/17/2008 Marshall & Ilsley Corp. Milwaukee Wis. $1,715,000,000
11/21/2008 City National Corporation Beverly Hills Calif. $400,000,000
11/21/2008 Pacific Capital Bancorp Santa Barbara Calif. $180,634,000
11/21/2008 Heritage Commerce Corp. San Jose Calif. $40,000,000
11/21/2008 First PacTrust Bancorp, Inc. Chula Vista Calif. $19,300,000
11/21/2008 Nara Bancorp, Inc. Los Angeles Calif. $67,000,000
11/21/2008 Webster Financial Corporation Waterbury Conn. $400,000,000
11/21/2008 Centerstate Banks of Florida Inc. Davenport Fla. $27,875,000
11/21/2008 Ameris Bancorp Moultrie Ga. $52,000,000
11/21/2008 Taylor Capital Group Rosemont Ill. $104,823,000
11/21/2008 Porter Bancorp Inc. Louisville Ky. $35,000,000
11/21/2008 Boston Private Financial Holdings, Inc. Boston Mass. $154,000,000
11/21/2008 Severn Bancorp, Inc. Annapolis Md. $23,393,000
11/21/2008 Trustmark Corporation Jackson Miss. $215,000,000
11/21/2008 First Niagara Financial Group Lockport N.Y. $184,011,000
11/21/2008 Western Alliance Bancorporation Las Vegas Nev. $140,000,000
11/21/2008 First Community Corporation Lexington S.C. $11,350,000
11/21/2008 HF Financial Corp. Sioux Falls S.D. $25,000,000
11/21/2008 First Community Bankshares Inc. Bluefield Va. $41,500,000
11/21/2008 Banner Corporation Walla Walla Wash. $124,000,000
11/21/2008 Cascade Financial Corporation Everett Wash. $38,970,000
11/21/2008 Columbia Banking System, Inc. Tacoma Wash. $76,898,000
11/21/2008 Heritage Financial Corporation Olympia Wash. $24,000,000
11/21/2008 Associated Banc-Corp Green Bay Wis. $525,000,000
12/5/2008 Superior Bancorp Inc. Birmingham Ala. $69,000,000
12/5/2008 Manhattan Bancorp El Segundo Calif. $1,700,000
12/5/2008 East West Bancorp Pasadena Calif. $306,546,000
12/5/2008 Cathay General Bancorp Los Angeles Calif. $258,000,000
12/5/2008 CVB Financial Corp Ontario Calif. $130,000,000
12/5/2008 Bank of Marin Bancorp Novato Calif. $28,000,0002
12/5/2008 Oak Valley Bancorp Oakdale Calif. $13,500,000
12/5/2008 Coastal Banking Company, Inc. Fernandina Beach Fla. $9,950,000
12/5/2008 TIB Financial Corp Naples Fla. $37,000,000
12/5/2008 FPB Bancorp, Inc. Port St. Lucie Fla. $5,800,000
12/5/2008 United Community Banks, Inc. Blairsville Ga. $180,000,000
12/5/2008 MB Financial Inc. Chicago Ill. $196,000,000
12/5/2008 First Midwest Bancorp, Inc. Itasca Ill. $193,000,000
12/5/2008 Old National Bancorp Evansville Ind. $100,000,0002
12/5/2008 Blue Valley Ban Corp Overland Park Kan. $21,750,000
12/5/2008 Iberiabank Corporation Lafayette La. $90,000,0002
12/5/2008 Central Bancorp, Inc. Somerville Mass. $10,000,000
12/5/2008 Eagle Bancorp, Inc. Bethesda Md. $38,235,000
12/5/2008 Sandy Spring Bancorp, Inc. Olney Md. $83,094,000
12/5/2008 Old Line Bancshares, Inc. Bowie Md. $7,000,000
12/5/2008 Great Southern Bancorp Springfield Mo. $58,000,000
12/5/2008 Southern Missouri Bancorp, Inc. Poplar Bluff Mo. $9,550,000
12/5/2008 Southern Community Financial Corp. Winston-Salem N.C. $42,750,000
12/5/2008 Bank of North Carolina Thomasville N.C. $31,260,000
12/5/2008 Unity Bancorp, Inc. Clinton N.J. $20,649,000
12/5/2008 State Bancorp, Inc. Jericho N.Y. $36,842,000
12/5/2008 First Defiance Financial Corp. Defiance Ohio $37,000,000
12/5/2008 Central Federal Corporation Fairlawn Ohio $7,225,000
12/5/2008 Southwest Bancorp, Inc. Stillwater Okla. $70,000,000
12/5/2008 Popular, Inc. San Juan Puerto Rico $935,000,000
12/5/2008 South Financial Group, Inc. Greenville S.C. $347,000,000
12/5/2008 First Financial Holdings Inc. Charleston S.C. $65,000,000
12/5/2008 Encore Bancshares Inc. Houston Texas $34,000,000
12/5/2008 Wesbanco Bank Inc. Wheeling W.Va. $75,000,000
12/5/2008 Sterling Financial Corporation Spokane Wash. $303,000,000
12/12/2008 Bank Of the Ozarks Inc. Little Rock Ariz. $75,000,000
12/12/2008 SVB Financial Group Santa Clara Calif. $235,000,000
12/12/2008 Center Financial Corp. Los Angeles Calif. $55,000,000
12/12/2008 Wilshire Bancorp Inc. Los Angeles Calif. $62,158,000
12/12/2008 First Litchfield Financial Corp. Litchfield Conn. $10,000,000
12/12/2008 Wilmington Trust Corp. Wilmington Del. $330,000,000
12/12/2008 The Bancorp Inc. Wilmington Del. $45,220,000
12/12/2008 Indiana Community Bancorp Columbus Ind. $21,500,000
12/12/2008 HopFed Bancorp Hopkinsville Ky. $18,400,000
12/12/2008 LSB Corp. Andover Mass. $15,000,000
12/12/2008 Northeast Bancorp Lewiston Maine $4,227,000
12/12/2008 Citizens Republic Bancorp Inc. Flint Mich. $300,000,000
12/12/2008 Independent Bank Corp. Ionia Mich. $72,000,000
12/12/2008 Capital Bank Corp. Raliegh N.C. $41,279,000
12/12/2008 NewBridge Bancorp Greensboro N.C. $52,372,000
12/12/2008 Citizens South Banking Corp. Gastonia N.C. $20,500,000
12/12/2008 Signature Bank New York N.Y. $120,000,0002
12/12/2008 LNB Bancorp Inc. Lorain Ohio $25,223,000
12/12/2008 Susquehanna Bancshares Inc. Lititz Pa. $300,000,000
12/12/2008 National Penn Bancshares Inc. Boyertown Pa. $150,000,000
12/12/2008 Fidelity Bancorp Inc. Pittsburgh Pa. $7,000,000
12/12/2008 Pinnacle Financial Partners Inc. Nashville Tenn. $95,000,000
12/12/2008 Sterling Bancshares Inc.3 Houston Texas $125,198,000
12/12/2008 TowneBank Portsmouth Va. $76,458,000
12/12/2008 Valley Financial Corp. Roanoke Va. $16,019,000
12/12/2008 Virginia Commerce Bancorp Arlington Va. $71,000,000
12/12/2008 Pacific International Bancorp Seattle Wash. $6,500,000
12/19/2008 BancTrust Financial Group, Inc. Mobile Ala. $50,000,000
12/19/2008 Community West Bancshares Goleta Calif. $15,600,000
12/19/2008 Summit State Bank Santa Rosa Calif. $8,500,000
12/19/2008 Santa Lucia Bancorp Atascadero Calif. $4,000,000
12/19/2008 First California Financial Group, Inc Westlake Village Calif. $25,000,000
12/19/2008 Pacific City Finacial Corporation Los Angeles Calif. $16,200,000
12/19/2008 Exchange Bank Santa Rosa Calif. $43,000,000
12/19/2008 NCAL Bancorp Los Angeles Calif. $10,000,000
12/19/2008 CoBiz Financial Inc. Denver Colo. $64,450,000
12/19/2008 The Connecticut Bank and Trust Company Hartford Conn. $5,448,000
12/19/2008 Seacoast Banking Corporation of Florida Stuart Fla. $50,000,000
12/19/2008 Synovus Financial Corp. Columbus Ga. $967,870,000
12/19/2008 Fidelity Southern Corporation Atlanta Ga. $48,200,000
12/19/2008 Heartland Financial USA, Inc. Dubuque Iowa $81,698,000
12/19/2008 Intermountain Community Bancorp Sandpoint Idaho $27,000,000
12/19/2008 Wintrust Financial Corporation Lake Forest Ill. $250,000,000
12/19/2008 Marquette National Corporation Chicago Ill. $35,500,000
12/19/2008 Bridgeview Bancorp, Inc. Bridgeview Ill. $38,000,000
12/19/2008 Horizon Bancorp Michigan City Ind. $25,000,000
12/19/2008 FFW Corporation Wabash Ind. $7,289,000
12/19/2008 Fidelity Financial Corporation Wichita Kan. $36,282,000
12/19/2008 Citizens First Corporation Bowling Green Ky. $8,779,000
12/19/2008 FCB Bancorp, Inc. Louisville Ky. $9,294,000
12/19/2008 Whitney Holding Corporation New Orleans La. $300,000,000
12/19/2008 Wainwright Bank & Trust Company Boston Mass. $22,000,000
12/19/2008 Berkshire Hills Bancorp, Inc. Pittsfield Mass. $40,000,000
12/19/2008 OneUnited Bank Boston Mass. $12,063,000
12/19/2008 Tri-County Financial Corporation Waldorf Md. $15,540,000
12/19/2008 Patapsco Bancorp, Inc. Dundalk Md. $6,000,000
12/19/2008 Enterprise Financial Services Corp. St. Louis Mo. $35,000,000
12/19/2008 Hawthorn Bancshares, Inc. Lee's Summit Mo. $30,255,000
12/19/2008 Monadnock Bancorp, Inc. Peterborough N.H. $1,834,000
12/19/2008 Flushing Financial Corporation Lake Success N.Y. $70,000,000
12/19/2008 The Elmira Savings Bank, FSB Elmira N.Y. $9,090,000
12/19/2008 Alliance Financial Corporation Syracuse N.Y. $26,918,000
12/19/2008 Mid Penn Bancorp, Inc. Millersburg Pa. $10,000,000
12/19/2008 VIST Financial Corp. Wyomissing Pa. $25,000,000
12/19/2008 AmeriServ Financial, Inc Johnstown Pa. $21,000,000
12/19/2008 Bancorp Rhode Island, Inc. Providence R.I. $30,000,000
12/19/2008 Security Federal Corporation Aiken S.C. $18,000,000
12/19/2008 Tidelands Bancshares, Inc Mt. Pleasant S.C. $14,448,000
12/19/2008 Tennessee Commerce Bancorp, Inc. Franklin Tenn. $30,000,000
12/19/2008 Plains Capital Corporation Dallas Texas $87,631,000
12/19/2008 Patriot Bancshares, Inc. Houston Texas $26,038,000
12/19/2008 Community Bankers Trust Corporation Glen Allen Va. $17,680,000
12/19/2008 Community Financial Corporation Staunton Va. $12,643,000
Enjoy socialism! It's already here..."Whether you like it or not..."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)