Dial a wrong number and what do you get? An unknown someone and indiscernible of sex on the other end who speaks in slurred English, apparently in a hazy daze from the affects of medications, possibly subscribed for pain management, or just as likely bought on the sly from unscrupulous pill-pushers. Mention the word “oxy” and the tone would have changed to a perky mood at the prospects of making a friend - one more contact to feed the need.
Witness a delivery truck dislodge a mailbox, then discuss the situation with the greasy-haired and rotten-toothed driver, and where does the conversation lead? To avoid an insurance claim the guy pays cash out of hand and, in response to relating a story about a friend who had done the same to multiple mailboxes because he was on too high a dose of mood stabilizers, his interest is apparent when he mentions he might be interested if the meds are of the right mixture. Not what he was hoping for.
Go to an emergency room and what does the doctor tell you? That too many people just like yourself seek medical attention in desperation from the negative affects of being too long on certain prescription drugs. The medical professional also states that 25% of emergency room patients are there for the same reason.
Every age group, from teens to the eighty’s, find their minds and bodies unable to cope with the withdrawal of the opiate ingredients found in oxycodone products manufactured as Percocet, Percodan, OxyContin and Vicodin.
Intended to be time-released, habitual users crush the tablets, dissolve them in water and shoot the mixture directly into the bloodstream for a quick fix. Better yet, “roxies” are made to order without the added step of injection. Since oxycodone is extremely habit-forming, once a person is hooked, the dosage must be progressively increased.
Roxy Music, a 70s rock group fronted by Brian Ferry and a major influence on punk rockers, compared drug use with lovemaking. In fact, a YouTube music video of their first pop hit “Love Is A Drug” displays the lyrics superimposed over the image of two hearts with a syringe taking the place of the traditional arrow – a heart-breaking picture.
How about the words and music of Amy Winehouse, “They tried to make me go to rehab, I said no, no, no”? A very catchy tune but face it, not exactly the type of music a parent wants their kids to admire.
The same goes for Lil Wyte with the chorus “Oxycontin, Xanax bars, Percocets and Lortabs. Valiums, morphine patches, Ecstacy… and it’s all up for grabs”. Second verse same as the first… all together now… It’s a rapper’s paradise of fortunes at the expense of youth.
Drug use has become a national heritage, a war against which was doomed when President Richard Nixon first introduced the term “war on drugs” in 1971. It was primarily about marijuana but over the years it’s encompassed all kinds of nasty concoctions we’ve become familiar with, especially in the past decade: cocaine, heroin, opium and methamphetamines – they’re all a “crack” in our social makeup – a bad complexion.
Take a hard look at where our society is right now. Baby boomers, who were the initial users of hallucinatory drugs, have delivered to our institutions greed and self-interest as never before in history. Too many have shamed our generation as we all pay the price for their deranged guidance. Flower power wasn’t supposed to include poppy seeds.
What does the future hold for this country? Two decades from now, those on drugs now may have finagled through their 20s and founded a degree of success to gain access to influential positions, with executive privileges, and put America through another round of economic and political indiscretions.
Hopefully, my assumptions of the affects of drug use by our leaders are unfounded.
These little story quips come not from personal experiences but as told by friends. But there is a tale of a friendly acquaintance who was legitimately on pain medications, oxy’s, that he quit cold turkey by choice. It took a month to become fully un-hooked but, due to an unemployment situation, the lucrative business of selling (dealing) prescriptions for a profit (a couple grand a month) keeps the doctor with cash in hand and the individual being able to meet living expenses.
It’s a game of successful entrepreneurship. Without drug trade the economy would be further in jeopardy. It keeps money in circulation, flowing freely thanks to supply and demand. The costs in lost wages, government-subsidized health care and jail time costs will widen the cracks in taxpayers’ piggy banks. Oh ya, the affects on people's lives is a major concern too, if anyone really cares.
Bedroom communities, such as Hernando County, Florida, have been ripe for excessive drug abuse because they were planned development areas to attract retirees and not working class children. These poor unfortunate kids are the ones faced with not enough options to keep themselves busy and stay out of trouble with the law, whether by use of drugs or joy riding that result in traffic violations. The combination of both keep them in a vicious cycle of confrontation with law enforcement, a virtual career in offenses that lead to jail if not prison time.
Too many retail jobs and menial manual labor with parents finding themselves also in a bind to find sustainable upward moving employment opportunities should have found parents picking up their families and relocating, possibly out of Florida entirely. The economy is too reliant on low-paying jobs in the family entertainment business - amusement parks - where minimum wage and few, if any, other benefits are poor career choices.
No wonder Florida has a poor educational system and youth and young adults, if not their parents, are reliant on drug-induced personal entertainment. Too much idle, unproductive idle time on their hands and minds.
It’s a lost cause to expect responsible parenting. There are too many outside, easily accessible influences that undermine the otherwise sensible minds of innocent children.
Monday, February 16, 2009
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Buy American?!?!
“Buy American” must be the choice of the consumer, not the federal government. Otherwise, it’s acid rain on the free market system, the very premise of capitalism. Worse yet, it’s protectionist and has an alarming affect on free trade between nations.
Economic growth would tumble head over heals like a snowball growing in size, picking up debris and becoming larger than life in a downward cycle reflective of what’s happening on Wall Street and other investment vehicles – crash and boom.
It makes little sense to divert infrastructure funds from rebuilding deteriorating roads, bridges and dams to construct what states may deem new and improved transportation routes. Both have merit but when money is limited it makes more sense to put unemployed workers on jobs that have been too long ignored and will eventually have catastrophic results on people’s lives.
There should be no delay with these upgrades. Over time, when structures crumble, costs increase and other traffic routes become overcrowded, adding travel time, wasting precious dollars on unnecessary fuel costs, spewing more green house gases into the atmosphere and having a negative affect on employee productivity as they put angry discussion with coworkers of more importance for mental stability than performing their job functions.
These changes need not be done strictly with American steel and other domestic materials.
Buy American was a patriotic theme of Barack Obama as he edged closer to his eventual election victory. No sooner had he given his acceptance speech than I heard people talking about “eight years”. I was appalled at their expectation that he will actually take such miraculous actions to bring America back to its historical place as the land of good and plenty.
Obama will have to prove his worth during the next forty some months before I decide which box I’ll mark in the 2012 presidential election. I want he and the Democratic Party to show their professed bipartisanship theme just as much as Republicans.
More important, consumers should to decide which products and services they purchase rather than be herded in the direction that would be most damaging to world peace and harmony. Competition is good.
Economic growth would tumble head over heals like a snowball growing in size, picking up debris and becoming larger than life in a downward cycle reflective of what’s happening on Wall Street and other investment vehicles – crash and boom.
It makes little sense to divert infrastructure funds from rebuilding deteriorating roads, bridges and dams to construct what states may deem new and improved transportation routes. Both have merit but when money is limited it makes more sense to put unemployed workers on jobs that have been too long ignored and will eventually have catastrophic results on people’s lives.
There should be no delay with these upgrades. Over time, when structures crumble, costs increase and other traffic routes become overcrowded, adding travel time, wasting precious dollars on unnecessary fuel costs, spewing more green house gases into the atmosphere and having a negative affect on employee productivity as they put angry discussion with coworkers of more importance for mental stability than performing their job functions.
These changes need not be done strictly with American steel and other domestic materials.
Buy American was a patriotic theme of Barack Obama as he edged closer to his eventual election victory. No sooner had he given his acceptance speech than I heard people talking about “eight years”. I was appalled at their expectation that he will actually take such miraculous actions to bring America back to its historical place as the land of good and plenty.
Obama will have to prove his worth during the next forty some months before I decide which box I’ll mark in the 2012 presidential election. I want he and the Democratic Party to show their professed bipartisanship theme just as much as Republicans.
More important, consumers should to decide which products and services they purchase rather than be herded in the direction that would be most damaging to world peace and harmony. Competition is good.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Unlucky Protectionism
“Protectionism”, if it becomes a widespread practice, will do further damage to the already tumultuous financial situation and none the better for the long-term prospects of a healthy global economy.
As such, “Buy American” must be the choice of the consumer, not the government. Otherwise, capitalism is doomed.
The definition in any given dictionary is pretty much the same, referencing the act of a government to impose restrictions on foreign competition to protect domestic producers against unfair trading policies. It verges on paranoia when one country jumps the gun by instigating tariffs, or subsidizes its own industries, and institutes a stance of nationalism; “me first” puts every citizen’s well-being in last place, regardless the country of origin.
It takes years, even decades, for trading partners to resolve concerns that imports and exports between them will be beneficial to each. One nation may come out on the negative end of the trade balance but that’s when a third, then a forth, fifth and upward numbers of trading partners make the round of economic growth a success for everyone. Will the circle remain unbroken or will it spin out of control in a tornado whirlwind of self-interest?
Addressing trade disputes among nations began shortly after WWII with GATT, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trades (1947-1994), growing from 23 to 128 countries and resulting in over $500B of tariff concessions… money in the pockets of the working-class.
GATT was intended as a temporary means to promote international trading guidelines.
The International Trade Organization (ITO) was to have been a permanent governance body but Congress deemed it too restrictive to growth with provisions that would dictate rules of employment and international investments, roadblocks to sovereignty.
GATT was maintained as a means for trade negotiations until it evolved into the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1994. The WTO now has 153 members that represent 95% of world trade.
The WTO condemns protectionist practices but has little influence to resolve disputes since it is a de facto governance whereby it relies on the “honor system” between trading partners rather than by direct fines. If a country is deemed at fault in a dispute, the threat of sanctions from other countries can be a fairly mute point.
Take for instance the recent dispute between the US and China on “intellectual property rights” violations, in particular the piracy of copyrighted music and movies. Although the WTO ruled in favor of the US, the lack of strict Chinese anti-piracy laws will have little impact to restrict continued violations.
To further dilute the effectiveness of the WTO, once a country files a complaint to the Dispute Settlement Body, the appeals process can prolong the resolution for 2 to 3 years, after which there is still a grace period before implementation of the settlement.
Still, as pointed out on the WTO website, “Sales people are reluctant to fight their customers”. You can translate this as being a means to avoid trade wars.
Trade-offs are made in the best interests of everyone in the global economy with a broader range of quality and choices of products, stimulating economic growth by expanding employment opportunities. The importance of trade agreements was demonstrated by the result of trade barriers in the ‘20s and ‘30s, increased tariffs and subsidies that led to short supplies of certain products and services which in turn increased the costs in other segments of the economy.
The Fordney-McCumber Tariff Act of 1922 authorized President Harding to raise or lower tariff rates 50%. Increases ran rampant and led to somersaults in financial markets. During the term of President Hoover, the Tariff Act of 1930, known as the Smoot-Hawley Act, was originally intended to protect farming interests but expanded to nearly every segment the economy. This led to increased tariffs and subsidies of 20,000 products.
World trade declined 65% from 1929 to 1934, thus the Great Depression. To make matters worse, FDR paid for the New Deal by imposing excise fees (taxes) to Americans on all sorts of products, including electricity, cars, tires and even some food products.
China recently accused the US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner of implying the yuan is undervalued to keep the trade imbalance between the two countries to benefit Chinese exporters. This has been an on-going contention for years but with worsening economic conditions members of Congress are strongly hinting at legislation that would offset the “dumping” of Chinese products by imposing import tariffs.
The US and China will be major players of international protectionism. Will the Eagle be able to fend of the Tiger? Or, since Russia isn’t a member of the WTO, will the Bear claw and maim them both?
Protectionism is a nasty, unlucky thirteen-letter word.
As such, “Buy American” must be the choice of the consumer, not the government. Otherwise, capitalism is doomed.
The definition in any given dictionary is pretty much the same, referencing the act of a government to impose restrictions on foreign competition to protect domestic producers against unfair trading policies. It verges on paranoia when one country jumps the gun by instigating tariffs, or subsidizes its own industries, and institutes a stance of nationalism; “me first” puts every citizen’s well-being in last place, regardless the country of origin.
It takes years, even decades, for trading partners to resolve concerns that imports and exports between them will be beneficial to each. One nation may come out on the negative end of the trade balance but that’s when a third, then a forth, fifth and upward numbers of trading partners make the round of economic growth a success for everyone. Will the circle remain unbroken or will it spin out of control in a tornado whirlwind of self-interest?
Addressing trade disputes among nations began shortly after WWII with GATT, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trades (1947-1994), growing from 23 to 128 countries and resulting in over $500B of tariff concessions… money in the pockets of the working-class.
GATT was intended as a temporary means to promote international trading guidelines.
The International Trade Organization (ITO) was to have been a permanent governance body but Congress deemed it too restrictive to growth with provisions that would dictate rules of employment and international investments, roadblocks to sovereignty.
GATT was maintained as a means for trade negotiations until it evolved into the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1994. The WTO now has 153 members that represent 95% of world trade.
The WTO condemns protectionist practices but has little influence to resolve disputes since it is a de facto governance whereby it relies on the “honor system” between trading partners rather than by direct fines. If a country is deemed at fault in a dispute, the threat of sanctions from other countries can be a fairly mute point.
Take for instance the recent dispute between the US and China on “intellectual property rights” violations, in particular the piracy of copyrighted music and movies. Although the WTO ruled in favor of the US, the lack of strict Chinese anti-piracy laws will have little impact to restrict continued violations.
To further dilute the effectiveness of the WTO, once a country files a complaint to the Dispute Settlement Body, the appeals process can prolong the resolution for 2 to 3 years, after which there is still a grace period before implementation of the settlement.
Still, as pointed out on the WTO website, “Sales people are reluctant to fight their customers”. You can translate this as being a means to avoid trade wars.
Trade-offs are made in the best interests of everyone in the global economy with a broader range of quality and choices of products, stimulating economic growth by expanding employment opportunities. The importance of trade agreements was demonstrated by the result of trade barriers in the ‘20s and ‘30s, increased tariffs and subsidies that led to short supplies of certain products and services which in turn increased the costs in other segments of the economy.
The Fordney-McCumber Tariff Act of 1922 authorized President Harding to raise or lower tariff rates 50%. Increases ran rampant and led to somersaults in financial markets. During the term of President Hoover, the Tariff Act of 1930, known as the Smoot-Hawley Act, was originally intended to protect farming interests but expanded to nearly every segment the economy. This led to increased tariffs and subsidies of 20,000 products.
World trade declined 65% from 1929 to 1934, thus the Great Depression. To make matters worse, FDR paid for the New Deal by imposing excise fees (taxes) to Americans on all sorts of products, including electricity, cars, tires and even some food products.
China recently accused the US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner of implying the yuan is undervalued to keep the trade imbalance between the two countries to benefit Chinese exporters. This has been an on-going contention for years but with worsening economic conditions members of Congress are strongly hinting at legislation that would offset the “dumping” of Chinese products by imposing import tariffs.
The US and China will be major players of international protectionism. Will the Eagle be able to fend of the Tiger? Or, since Russia isn’t a member of the WTO, will the Bear claw and maim them both?
Protectionism is a nasty, unlucky thirteen-letter word.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
TARP, ARRP and HARP
We Floridians are all too familiar with “tarp”, especially during summer months when hurricane force winds rip off shingles from rooftops and large sheets of the bright blue canvas are tacked over leaks to protect the inside of the home from additional damages. It takes weeks, even months, for an insurance company to assess the extent and dollar value of a loss.
Tarp is a makeshift remedy with no guarantee that there won’t still be scars on a structure, such as mold or mud-flooding, that aren’t covered by that hefty insurance premium. To make matters worse, if you’re like most people, your savings are pretty much nonexistent and your credit cards are maxed out and you don’t qualify for additional short-term loans. Tarp isn’t the answer to your troubles.
TARP (Troubled Assets Relief Program) has proven to be pretty much the same. The initial disbursement of the $700B government investment of taxpayer dollars was virtually wasted with the cash infusion to banks. The banking industry was given a blanket policy whereby their misdealing was covered by shoddy government workmanship.
The remaining $350B from TARP is being held in escrow with the Obama Administration in a quandary as to how to safely disburse the money without being snookered again by financial institutions. Instead of sparking up loans, banks want to be left alone to fan a smoke screen that will leave the economy smoldering for years and no assurance that in the end there won’t eventually be a raging firestorm of depressing proportions. This isn’t meant to discredit President Obama; it’s just a plain and simple belief that no one really knows what to do. It’s all guesswork.
Now we’re looking head-on at another program, ARRP (American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan), which is too much of a sound-alike to TARP. It’s not a bad omen though, with over $800B of funds to assist in resolving the somersaults of the worsening recession. Its effect on the economic meltdown isn’t likely to be enough to make an immediate difference to corporate or individual financial shortfalls.
For eight years, Democrats too easily played patsy to Bush politics. They had no backbone from the very start of the war in Iraq, doing their part to make billions of dollars available to keep the military ball rolling on foreign oil. Eventually, they tried to backtrack and admit it was a mistake but the alternative at the time was to confront a Republican-controlled Congress and be accused of being unpatriotic, even traitors.
To the very end, Democrats pledged taxpayer money by failing to properly earmark the initial $350B of TARP.
By the end of the Bush reign of errors, most Americans conceded Iraq was poorly planned and much too expensive. Heck, last year the Iraqi government had a surplus of $79B of what can be called as an American taxpayer relief fund. Iraq got a pretty darn good return on American monetary “investments” that cost us anywhere from $600B (Pentagon), $1T to $2T (Congressional Budget Office) or $3T (Joseph Stiglitz, Columbia University Professor, 2001 Nobel Prize in Economics, and 2007 Nobel Peace Prize). It’s kinda like what happened on the home front - trillions of dollars were lost to Wall Street.
The blame game is fairly pointless, although George “The Scourge” Bush is the primary culprit with his commandant-in-chief attitude, convincing every American that they too can become a homeowner. The resultant excesses of lackey lending institutions helped create the 10-digit budget deficit, a dollar figure that makes no sense.
And yet, Republicans in general are proving themselves to be afflicted with same-minded ideas with a rehash of the monetary policies of the past eight years. When the House passed the $819B stimulus package, Republicans in unison barked up the wrong money tree with their insistence that tax cuts and reduced spending would be an appropriate action to stimulate the economy. It was probably a token stance of solidarity – Senate Republicans will likely give passage to ARRP.
The National Republican Party is way out there in right field, no pitcher, no catcher, just a shortstop with Democrats hitting one left field hit after another. And yet, red and blue states alike are already making plans to spend their share of relief funds. Just how many friends (voters) do Republicans think they’ll make with such game plans?
Which leads me to suggest that any recovery package that Republicans might drum up would be labeled HARP (Hapless Anemic Republican Program). Let’s lay that idea to rest and canvas such a leaky premise with an oversized blanket of tarp.
Tarp is a makeshift remedy with no guarantee that there won’t still be scars on a structure, such as mold or mud-flooding, that aren’t covered by that hefty insurance premium. To make matters worse, if you’re like most people, your savings are pretty much nonexistent and your credit cards are maxed out and you don’t qualify for additional short-term loans. Tarp isn’t the answer to your troubles.
TARP (Troubled Assets Relief Program) has proven to be pretty much the same. The initial disbursement of the $700B government investment of taxpayer dollars was virtually wasted with the cash infusion to banks. The banking industry was given a blanket policy whereby their misdealing was covered by shoddy government workmanship.
The remaining $350B from TARP is being held in escrow with the Obama Administration in a quandary as to how to safely disburse the money without being snookered again by financial institutions. Instead of sparking up loans, banks want to be left alone to fan a smoke screen that will leave the economy smoldering for years and no assurance that in the end there won’t eventually be a raging firestorm of depressing proportions. This isn’t meant to discredit President Obama; it’s just a plain and simple belief that no one really knows what to do. It’s all guesswork.
Now we’re looking head-on at another program, ARRP (American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan), which is too much of a sound-alike to TARP. It’s not a bad omen though, with over $800B of funds to assist in resolving the somersaults of the worsening recession. Its effect on the economic meltdown isn’t likely to be enough to make an immediate difference to corporate or individual financial shortfalls.
For eight years, Democrats too easily played patsy to Bush politics. They had no backbone from the very start of the war in Iraq, doing their part to make billions of dollars available to keep the military ball rolling on foreign oil. Eventually, they tried to backtrack and admit it was a mistake but the alternative at the time was to confront a Republican-controlled Congress and be accused of being unpatriotic, even traitors.
To the very end, Democrats pledged taxpayer money by failing to properly earmark the initial $350B of TARP.
By the end of the Bush reign of errors, most Americans conceded Iraq was poorly planned and much too expensive. Heck, last year the Iraqi government had a surplus of $79B of what can be called as an American taxpayer relief fund. Iraq got a pretty darn good return on American monetary “investments” that cost us anywhere from $600B (Pentagon), $1T to $2T (Congressional Budget Office) or $3T (Joseph Stiglitz, Columbia University Professor, 2001 Nobel Prize in Economics, and 2007 Nobel Peace Prize). It’s kinda like what happened on the home front - trillions of dollars were lost to Wall Street.
The blame game is fairly pointless, although George “The Scourge” Bush is the primary culprit with his commandant-in-chief attitude, convincing every American that they too can become a homeowner. The resultant excesses of lackey lending institutions helped create the 10-digit budget deficit, a dollar figure that makes no sense.
And yet, Republicans in general are proving themselves to be afflicted with same-minded ideas with a rehash of the monetary policies of the past eight years. When the House passed the $819B stimulus package, Republicans in unison barked up the wrong money tree with their insistence that tax cuts and reduced spending would be an appropriate action to stimulate the economy. It was probably a token stance of solidarity – Senate Republicans will likely give passage to ARRP.
The National Republican Party is way out there in right field, no pitcher, no catcher, just a shortstop with Democrats hitting one left field hit after another. And yet, red and blue states alike are already making plans to spend their share of relief funds. Just how many friends (voters) do Republicans think they’ll make with such game plans?
Which leads me to suggest that any recovery package that Republicans might drum up would be labeled HARP (Hapless Anemic Republican Program). Let’s lay that idea to rest and canvas such a leaky premise with an oversized blanket of tarp.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)