From flybrad at gmail.com Fri May 1 07:51:17 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 06:51:17 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Brad, you saved me the effort In-Reply-To: <491F61EC3AE44DD78F15CAE1017FCB9C@YOURB88038198E> References: <491F61EC3AE44DD78F15CAE1017FCB9C@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: <400985d70905010451q69946c69rfecd8b81aaed113b@mail.gmail.com> Ed, Attached is another observation on "Banana Republic" capitalism. I blamed Bush 43 for lending passenger airlines billions after 9/11. Had he allowed one or two of the weaker ones to fail (they were doing a good job of it before 9/11) the rest of the carriers would have been healthy. How does stiffing the investors and lenders at Chrysler benefit society and the economy in total? Is this fair to the Hyundai worker in Alabama, or Honda in Ohio, or Toyota in Kentucky? This is political pay-off in its most naked form. BTW, I had a conversation with a small banker from Wichita earlier in the week. My aircraft had a lien on it from 1962 that the FAA had never removed and I've been lazy about taking care of the matter. The bank was still in business and my case got 'run-up-the-flagpole' all the way to the bank Presidents office. We got started talking about TARP and he became livid. His bank was still profitable (didn't get greedy and make silly loans) but now he had to compete with subsidized banks. I thought I'd witnessed a lot of government stupidity after Katrina. Hell, we're just getting started! Brad ------------- April 30, 2009 Posted by John at 10:28 PM The Chrysler reorganization is shaping up as another milestone in the decline of the rule of law under Barack Obama. We've said for quite a while that bankruptcy is the only viable option for Chrysler and General Motors, not--as Obama claims--because they don't know how to make the right kinds of vehicles, but because their unsustainable union contracts make it impossible for them to be profitable. That reality has now been turned on its head, as the administration has tried to bully Chrysler's secured creditors into going away, while the United Auto Workers Union, solely on the basis of political clout, would be paid at an implied rate of 50 percent and would emerge owning 55 percent of the company, with the government also holding a stake. This is banana republic capitalism at its worst. Political influence, rather than the law, dictates the rights of the parties. When some of the secured creditors refused to be intimidated, Obama libeled them in the press, saying, outrageously, "I don't stand with those who held out when everyone else is making sacrifices." Actually, under Obama's plan the politically favored parties, principally the UAW, will benefit--will steal money, to put it crudely--from the parties who held out. Those parties call themselves the "non-TARP lenders." This highlights the government's conflict of interest in this transaction, as in so many others now underway. Some of Chrysler's secured creditors are banks who received TARP money. As the New York Times put it, those lenders are "beholden to Washington" and "defying the administration was never a serious option." It remains to be seen what will happen in bankruptcy court. Already one key player, Perella Weinberg Partners, "under intense pressure from the White House," has caved in and agreed to accept Obama's terms. Whatever the ultimate result, this episode will have consequences. The Wall Street Journal notes: If the current plan is pushed through, then good luck to any unionized firm trying to raise secured debt on decent terms in the future. For Chrysler, the administration's plan spells disaster. It is inconceivable that the UAW, the principal source of Chrysler's problems, will manage the company back to profitability. More likely, Chrysler will become a vehicle through which the federal government provides uneconomic subsidies to unionized auto workers and retirees. Barack Obama's conduct in this affair has been disgraceful. Our bankruptcy laws are well developed and are fairly implemented by experienced bankruptcy judges. Priority among creditors is established according to legal rules and precedents. The process is transparent and subject to appellate review. But in this case, the law did not favor the parties who have the most influence with the White House--notably, the United Auto Workers--so Obama substituted political threats and bullying for due process. Il Duce would have approved. On 4/30/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > I have a reference to look up Brooks latest article. You found it for me. > Thanks. > > Did you see the jerks comments on the tea party people? > > Ed K From flybrad at gmail.com Fri May 1 08:07:37 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 07:07:37 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Nothing New Under the Sun Message-ID: <400985d70905010507r53c8bff1t2f6944cf0b6c2e10@mail.gmail.com> Dr. Hanson at his best! Brad -------------- Nothing New Under the Sun Posted By Victor Davis Hanson On April 29, 2009 @ 10:36 am The Same Old Equality of Result Rather than nitpick about Obama?s envisioned brave new world, I think it wiser to see it in the larger context of age-old divides over the nature of Western democratic and liberal society. Nothing that we have seen proposed since January 20 is novel; everything is merely the promise of the past outfitted with a new snazzier veneer of hope and change. Take his domestic policies. What overarching philosophy seems reflected in raising taxes, borrowing trillions to spend trillions more on new entitlements, creating a new health care bureaucracy, cap-and-trade, allotting trillions more for education, and the expectation of the appointment of more liberal judges? It?s old? In a word, it is adherence to the idea of equality of result rather than an equality of opportunity, the age-old debate that goes back to the Greeks. From Aristotle?s Politics and Plato Laws, we learn of the original dilemma: a stable city-state of roughly similar property owners, who vote as equals, and fight as comrades in the phalanx, tragically, but inevitably, soon becomes tragically unequal. Divide the land up equally to found the polis; give everyone an similarly-size plot (kl?ros); and then health, luck, brains, accident, strength, ambition, character, and a myriad of other factors, some understandable, some capricious, conspire to create inequality. I agree with Aristotle; I have seen it with families and communities in which equal inheritances soon led to radically different outcomes, as one sibling on rocky ground thrives, while another in deep loam starves; one town with abundant resources goes broke, while another without natural advantages thrives. As Aristotle saw, some lose, some expand their original homesteads, and suddenly we have Hoi beltistoi and Hoi polloi-and the rallying cry that someone?s liberty to do as he pleases means that egalitarianism of the lowest common denominator becomes impossible. American vs. French The notion of freedom then butts up against equality, as if they are as often antithetical as symbiotic. (NB: note the French Revolutionary sloganeering of ?fraternity? and ?egalitarianism? versus the American Revolutionary emphasis on ?Give me liberty, or give me death?, ?Don?t Tread on Me!?, ?All men are created equal? [by opportunity rather than by result]. And note Obama?s references to the French ideal.) In response, the state has two choices to preserve its original ideal of equality (and we see elements of this further debate voiced in the Old Oligarch, Aristolte Plato, Hobbes, Hume, etc, as well as in histories of the middle and late Roman Republic). One, the state and culture at large can be coercive to ensure a equality of result-in the modern liberal world by high redistributive taxes, generous means-tested entitlements, inflationary monetary policies to diminish the power of capital (in the ancient world by forbidding the alienability of land, mandating the maximum size of estates, coining cheap bronze/silver coated money in vast amounts, redistribution of property, cancellation of debt, etc.). Such efforts at commonality are what we are now witnessing with income take hikes, $1.7 trillion dollar deficits, inflationary federal spending and borrowing, along with huge new entitlements. Its extreme form is the European Union, its extreme, extreme manifestations are the failed -isms and -ologies of the bloody 20th century where authoritarian elites broke the requisite eggs for the omelet of ?for the people? and in service to ?equality.? The Tragic Or instead of the therapeutic mode, we get the tragic acceptance of innate inequality combined with the notion of personal responsibility to care for one?s fellow citizen. That is, in the American version of equality of opportunity, we accept some will always end up poor, some rich, some in-between due to factors both in, and beyond, our control. But rather than sacrifice liberty to use the coercive powers of the state to enforce equality, we set a foundation at the bottom, a safety net to ensure a minimum level of support for the poor, and laws at the top to prevent buccaneering and piratical behavior?in theory. Then the tragic view accepts that some will be very wealthy, but assumes that the race for individual riches will, first, create greater prosperity for society at large (the much caricatured ?trickle down?). And, two, a host of private mechanisms exists to channel individual bounty back for the general welfare: the status; and/or sense of right of giving to non-profits, charities, etc; the shame of living it up to an excessive degree; the patriotic call upon one to invest their riches in the public good; the informal practice of lending and giving to family and friends, etc. In other words, millions risk dying to leave temperate, naturally rich equality of result Mexico to enter the once equality of opportunity United States. Been there, done that It seems to me that on three occasions during the last seventy-five years we have someone who really did believe in the therapeutic, equality of result-FDR, LBJ, and Jimmy Carter (Truman, JFK and Clinton proved to be centrists in comparison). FDR had the rhetorical gifts and personal genius to implement such an agenda; LBJ and Carter tried, but were inept and poor messengers. And now we have a fourth avatar, who, given the current alignment of the planets, has a real chance to complete the FDR mandate-not in the dark days of the Great Depression replete with real want and starvation, but in a recession during the greatest age of affluence in the history of civilization-making both success and failure obsolete, and turning us into a sort of egalitarian polis much like Sweden or France. I Don?t Owe You Any More Turn on the radio: ads blare out how to renounce mortgage debt; get out of maxed out credit-cards; short the IRS; be eligible for a subsidized government loan, or new entitlement. Other ?buy gold? ads warn: plenty of danger, but no money in passbook accounts, stocks, real estate, as the debtor gains on the creditor, and capital earns little in comparison to protected salaries. To match a $100, 000 government salary (as an upper-level bureaucrat), the despised capitalist, at a 2% interest payout on his stash, would need $5 million in accumulated cash: advantage bureaucrat. Ironies galore Obama rather brilliantly counts on two great constituencies (other than the professional Ivy League technocracy whose responsibility is to figure out how to borrow and tax the money, lavish it on constituencies, and do rather well themselves as government overseers). One is the hyper-rich, the Kerrys, the Soroses, the Gateses, and their appendages in universities, government, foundations, and the media. These power players either make enough to be unconcerned with high taxation, or are so well connected politically (cf. the machinations of a Daschle, Dodd, Geithner, Rangel, ) that the coercive state rules simply do not apply. Instead the hyper-wealthy receive a sort of psychic gratification in helping the ?poor?, and romanticizing the underprivileged, thereby alleviating the guilt of being blessed, and at relative small cost-and so they quite enthusiastically support the equality of result state. Again, the poor present no challenge, offer no threat to the hyper-wealthy, but are thankful client recipients of ensured government largess. In contrast, the fellow elites have the necessary taste and education to satisfy the demands of aristocratic society. And the Upper Middle Class? But those in between, and especially those of the upper-middle class?the hardware store owner, the dentist, the paving contractor, the successful restaurateur, the real estate agent? These grasping who wish and aspire and may reach a mythical $250,000 salary some day (again, the threshold where one becomes the hated ?they?), well now, they are not poor, need no government or private help, and offer no psychological alleviation of guilt to the elite. Romanticize a gardener or farm worker, or even clerk or teacher, but how does one mythologize a successful optometrist or insurance agent? And yet they are not usually sophisticated in the snobbish sense, not opera- goers, not familiar with museums, not symphony buffs. Their children don?t necessarily attend Stanford or Harvard. In other words, they are near-to-wells, wannabees, without requisite culture, deserving of neither cultural awe and acceptance nor noblisse oblige. A leftist elitist would always prefer the dubious (and now upscale, tax avoiding) huckster Al Sharpton, Tawana Brawley and all, to Sarah Palin, former mayor of Wasilla and Idaho U. graduate. Joe the Plumber, the Cuban upper-middle class of Miami, the local talk show host, anyone who wants to get ahead, but shows so visibly the scars of the struggle to do so, lacks the refinement and taste of the more affluent, yet is in the crosshairs of the Obama revolution. The only impediment to our new polis? There are not simply enough of these entrepreneurial dinosaurs to pay the taxes to feed the new $3.6 trillion annual beast. One can take all the income of the $250,000 ?them?, and their won?t be enough to pay down the $9 trillion in new debt. In short, Bush = lower taxes, more spending, and more debt; Clinton = higher taxes, more spending, and less debt; Obama = more taxes, more spending, and a lot more debt?and the same old dream that we can make everyone equal in the end?or else! From flybrad at gmail.com Fri May 1 09:04:38 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 08:04:38 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Smoke, Meet Mirror Message-ID: <400985d70905010604r25716644ne4d69c579559b15c@mail.gmail.com> Yup, people really are stupid enough to believe that 95% of you would get a tax cut. I'd be laughing my ass off right now if this all weren't so sad. I could really use an extra $13 per week. Brad ----------------------------------- INSIDE WASHINGTON: Taxpayers to get rude surprise INSIDE WASHINGTON: Millions of couples, retirees may have to repay some of Obama tax credit * Stephen Ohlemacher, Associated Press Writer * On Thursday April 30, 2009, 6:55 pm EDT WASHINGTON (AP) -- Millions of Americans enjoying their small windfall from President Barack Obama's "Making Work Pay" tax credit are in for an unpleasant surprise next spring. The government is going to want some of that money back. The tax credit is supposed to provide up to $400 to individuals and $800 to married couples as part of the massive economic recovery package enacted in February. Most workers started receiving the credit through small increases in their paychecks in the past month. But new tax withholding tables issued by the IRS could cause millions of taxpayers to get hundreds of dollars more than they are entitled to under the credit, money that will have to be repaid at tax time. At-risk taxpayers include a broad swath of the public: married couples in which both spouses work; workers with more than one job; retirees who have federal income taxes withheld from their pension payments and Social Security recipients with jobs that provide taxable income. The Internal Revenue Service acknowledges problems with the withholding tables but has done little to warn average taxpayers. "They need to get the Goodyear blimp out there on this," said Tom Ochsenschlager, vice president of taxation for the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. For many, the new tax tables will simply mean smaller-than-expected tax refunds next year, IRS spokesman Terry Lemons said. The average refund was nearly $2,700 this year. But taxpayers who calculate their withholding so they get only small refunds could face an unwelcome tax bill next April, said Jackie Perlman, an analyst with the Tax Institute at H&R Block. "They are going to get a surprise," she said. Perlman's advice: check your federal withholding to make sure sufficient taxes are being taken out of your pay. If you are married and both spouses work, you might consider having taxes withheld at the higher rate for single filers. If you have multiple jobs, you might consider having extra taxes withheld by one of your employers. You can make that request with a Form W-4. The IRS has a calculator on its Web site to help taxpayers figure withholding. So do many private tax preparers. Obama has touted the tax credit as one of the big achievements of his first 100 days in office, boasting that 95 percent of working families will qualify in 2009 and 2010. The credit pays workers 6.2 percent of their earned income, up to a maximum of $400 for individuals and $800 for married couples who file jointly. Individuals making more $95,000 and couples making more than $190,000 are ineligible. The tax credit was designed to help boost the economy by getting more money to consumers in their regular paychecks. Employers were required to start using the new withholding tables by April 1. The tables, however, don't take into account several common categories of taxpayers, experts said. For example: --A single worker with two jobs making $20,000 a year at each job will get a $400 boost in take-home pay at each of them, for a total of $800. That worker, however, is eligible for a maximum credit of $400, so the remaining $400 will have to be paid back at tax time -- either through a smaller refund or a payment to the IRS. The IRS recognized there could be a similar problem for married couples if both spouses work, so it adjusted the withholding tables. The fix, however, was imperfect. -- A married couple with a combined income of $50,000 is eligible for an $800 credit. However, if both spouses work and make more than $13,000, the new withholding tables give them each a $600 boost -- for a total of $1,200. There were 33 million married couples in 2008 in which both spouses worked. That's 55 percent of all married couples, according to the Census Bureau. -- A single college student with a part-time job making $10,000 would get a $400 boost in pay. However, if that student is claimed as a dependent on a parent's tax return, she doesn't qualify for the credit and would have to repay it when she files next year. Some retirees face even bigger headaches. The Social Security Administration is sending out $250 payments to more than 50 million retirees in May as part of the economic stimulus package. The payments will go to people who receive Social Security, Supplemental Security Income, railroad retirement benefits or veteran's disability benefits. The payments are meant to provide a boost for people who don't qualify for the tax credit. However, they will go to retirees even if they have earned income and receive the credit. Those retirees will have the $250 payment deducted from their tax credit -- but not until they file their tax returns next year, long after the money may have been spent. Retirees who have federal income taxes withheld from pension benefits also are getting an income boost as a result of the new withholding tables. However, pension benefits are not earned income, so they don't qualify for the tax credit. That money will have to paid back next year when tax returns are filed. More than 20 million retirees and survivors receive payments from defined benefit pension plans, according to the Employee Benefit Research Institute. However, it is unclear how many have federal taxes withheld from their payments. The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees union raised concerns about the effect of the tax credit on pension payments in a letter to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner in March. Geithner responded that Treasury and IRS understood the concerns and were "exploring ways to mitigate that effect." Rep. Dave Camp of Michigan, the top Republican on the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, said Geithner has yet to respond to concerns raised by committee members. "So far we've got the, 'If we don't address this maybe it will go away' approach," Camp said. IRS withholding calculator: http://www.irs.gov/individuals/article/0,,id96196,00.html From ekroposki at charter.net Fri May 1 12:45:29 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 12:45:29 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] This is rather long ... but interesting? Message-ID: <75053F71090E4849A15BD0F5CCDB8A48@YOURB88038198E> go to and it gets better toward the end... http://www.metacafe.com/watch/2218860/her_name_is_ms_ann/ Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090501/2449fc43/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Fri May 1 13:46:52 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 12:46:52 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] This is rather long ... but interesting? In-Reply-To: <75053F71090E4849A15BD0F5CCDB8A48@YOURB88038198E> References: <75053F71090E4849A15BD0F5CCDB8A48@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: <400985d70905011046i6e19624aj6d56a9b3f8c01f85@mail.gmail.com> Ed, Read "Native Stranger" by Eddy Harris - http://tinyurl.com/dyb9do Harris grew-up about 60 miles from where I did and also wrote a great boating book, "Mississippi Solo". His summary in "Native Stranger" is very close to the summation by the Pastor in the sermon on the video. Race baiting has developed into a full blown industry in the USA. Obama is just the latest and "slickest" practitioner of the trade. I'm a bit disappointed that the Pastor didn't acknowledge Condi Rice, who experienced the loss of her childhood friends being blown-up in a church bombing, or Clarence Thomas, who grew-up in poverty in Georgia. But, that misses the point. The guys at my hangar row were gathering for lunch yesterday and listening to the conclusion of a story by a retired dentist about his flying exploits in Vietnam. He concluded with a careless word, something about "chinks". The decision of the group was to go for Chinese food. I reminded them that I get enough "chink" food at home. Was there any point in going 'ape shit' over a word? We worry about words and images and ignore the real problems. This is a challenge for everyone: name one problem Obama solved for his "community" in Chicago. I'm waiting. With a resume so thin, what makes anyone think he can solve any problem for you? Brad On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Ed Kroposki wrote: > go to and it gets better toward the end... > > http://www.metacafe.com/watch/2218860/her_name_is_ms_ann/ > > Ed K > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > From ekroposki at charter.net Sat May 2 18:04:59 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sat, 2 May 2009 18:04:59 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] flu Message-ID: <3C1D7351A5B64FF79E79BE07957D28F4@YOURB88038198E> see attachment... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090502/645fc252/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 49612 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090502/645fc252/attachment-0001.jpe From flybrad at gmail.com Sun May 3 06:54:13 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 3 May 2009 05:54:13 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Haj Message-ID: <400985d70905030354j2337a4c0m283fa1fa658484dd@mail.gmail.com> Anyone going to Haj this year? Here's some of your company if you do go - http://www.arabianbusiness.com/553813-hydar-chief-accompany-obamas-grandmother-on-haj- http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009\05\03\story_3-5-2009_pg7_14 On a completely unrelated note, does anybody know who paid for The One's (TM) education at Columbia and Harvard? Just asking. Brad From flybrad at gmail.com Sun May 3 07:19:26 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 3 May 2009 06:19:26 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chrysler - The Chicago Way Message-ID: <400985d70905030419ub5d979cj385b27a85b59bf5a@mail.gmail.com> There's so many things that are disturbing and disgusting about the Chrysler bailout it's hard to pick a starting point. Forget everything you learned in business or law school, study Italian history during the Mussolini period or the Chicago mob to understand how to do business in the current climate - maybe just watch re-runs of the Sopranos. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GPNvjec-DA&feature=player_embedded Well, actually, someone from the MSM is watching - http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/05/bankruptcy-atto.html Does any sane and rationale person really believe that a company owned by the US government and the UAW can really compete? What level position will a cost accountant be, GS-11? A car designer, GS-13? Will you be able to have payments for a "Peoples Car" deducted from your paycheck like Hitler forced Germans to do for VW's. Don't laugh, you'll be paying for Chryslers whether you drive one or not! Brad From flybrad at gmail.com Sun May 3 07:21:45 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 3 May 2009 06:21:45 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Haj In-Reply-To: <400985d70905030354j2337a4c0m283fa1fa658484dd@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905030354j2337a4c0m283fa1fa658484dd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70905030421i2ff5f986ye0f5fe1dfa6034fe@mail.gmail.com> link correction - http://tinyurl.com/cncbhc On 5/3/09, Brad Haslett wrote: > Anyone going to Haj this year? Here's some of your company if you do go - > > http://www.arabianbusiness.com/553813-hydar-chief-accompany-obamas-grandmother-on-haj- > > http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009\05\03\story_3-5-2009_pg7_14 > > On a completely unrelated note, does anybody know who paid for The > One's (TM) education at Columbia and Harvard? Just asking. > > Brad > From ekroposki at charter.net Sun May 3 07:29:10 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sun, 3 May 2009 07:29:10 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Brad asked Message-ID: <728E8974CC004385B11C52093B2B1E73@YOURB88038198E> Brad asked, "On a completely unrelated note, does anybody know who paid for The One's (TM) education at Columbia and Harvard? Just asking. Brad, I saw some references to that question early in the campaign, but I do not have an answer. I suspect that you will need super sleuth Bill Efros to find web information before that information was sanitized. Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090503/4df744c8/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun May 3 08:53:14 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Sun, 3 May 2009 07:53:14 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chrysler - The Chicago Way In-Reply-To: <400985d70905030419ub5d979cj385b27a85b59bf5a@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905030419ub5d979cj385b27a85b59bf5a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905030553y4bc43f44u11ef8d4fa57964c6@mail.gmail.com> Brad, This is kinda like the most juicy part of the article, right here: "He donated $10,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee in 2008 and $1,000 to then-Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, in 2006." Do you think he's learning anything from this experience?? Personally, I always thought it would be a great idea for the employees of the car companies to buy out their employers. It would have been fun to watch those fools as they came to understand that you can't pay people exorbitant wages with benefits fit for a king and compete in the market place. The best part would be when they came to understand that they could not only not receive their fat pay checks, but getting paid full price for their second 30 year career, the one where they don't create any value (retirement) was not possible either. But hey, we'll never know how an employee buyout would have worked out. The gov't is going to steal it and give it to them. Sacrifices, my ass. Nothing will have been learned here and nothing will be accomplished. In a year or two the unions will have burned through all the cash the gov't stole from the investors for them and we'll be looking at this same scenario all over again. Rik On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 6:19 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > There's so many things that are disturbing and disgusting about the > Chrysler bailout it's hard to pick a starting point. Forget > everything you learned in business or law school, study Italian > history during the Mussolini period or the Chicago mob to understand > how to do business in the current climate - maybe just watch re-runs > of the Sopranos. > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GPNvjec-DA&feature=player_embedded > > Well, actually, someone from the MSM is watching - > > http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/05/bankruptcy-atto.html > > Does any sane and rationale person really believe that a company owned > by the US government and the UAW can really compete? What level > position will a cost accountant be, GS-11? A car designer, GS-13? > Will you be able to have payments for a "Peoples Car" deducted from > your paycheck like Hitler forced Germans to do for VW's. Don't laugh, > you'll be paying for Chryslers whether you drive one or not! > > Brad > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090503/4f4ec78e/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun May 3 10:27:18 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Sun, 3 May 2009 09:27:18 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chrysler - The Chicago Way In-Reply-To: <400985d70905030419ub5d979cj385b27a85b59bf5a@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905030419ub5d979cj385b27a85b59bf5a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905030727j4107e641q198646d7a39964d3@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Here's some more about the bailouts and a little added bonus stuff from Mauldin and Mike Shedlock. Rik __________________ Stupidity Squared John Mauldin's weekly E-Letter, Sell in May and Go Away, is a good read. My favorite portion of the E-Letter is the section "A Dangerous End Game". Let's take a look. The Fed and the Obama administration are playing a dangerous game. The Fed is going to print trillions of dollars to forestall deflation and try to re-ignite the economy. But for a variety of reasons we will go into next week, a real, sustainable recovery may be a few years away. What happens when the market start balking at high and unsustainable national deficits? What happens when inflation (finally) does return? Can the Fed remain independent and take back the money it is printing in the face of what will likely be a tepid recovery? And if they don't, what happens to the dollar? Next year, we will be entering what will certainly be the most dangerous era in my lifetime for the US economy. It is not clear what will happen. There are a lot of paths that can be taken, though some are more likely than others. For those who are convinced that high inflation and a falling dollar are absolutely, unequivocally in the future I have just one word: Japan. Yes, there are differences, but there are a lot of similarities. While I think the most likely outcome is a long Muddle Through recovery, the likelihood of a lost decade of deflation a la Japan is a very real potential outcome. And the possibility of stagflation and a seriously impaired dollar is also quite real. Investors, businessmen, and entrepreneurs need to be as nimble as possible. A free market will figure out what paths to take, and I am still optimistic about the long term. But we have some very dangerous times in front of us, and we need to be realistic. And before I close, let me make a few comments about the Chrysler and GM issues. I tell my kids all the time that actions have consequences. If I hold senior secured debt of a company and the government tells me I have to take less than unsecured junior debtors, I am not going to be happy. I may have been dumb to make the loans in the first place, but I did it under a very specific contract and the rule of law. If the Obama administration arbitrarily changes those rules to favor a political class (unions), then that is going to have a chilling effect on future lending to all corporations. As an aside, they are spending $12 billion to save 54,000 Chrysler jobs (at $22,000 per job). With 600,000 jobs a month being lost, why are these 54,000 jobs more special than those of the rest of the unemployed, who get a fraction of that amount in unemployment benefits? Actions have consequences. The lenders who are forcing the Chrysler deal into bankruptcy court are not all "predatory hedge funds." They are mutual funds, pension funds, and other financial firms with small stakeholders as their investors. Cerberus, the hedge fund that originally bought Chrysler, deserves to lose their money. They made a bad investment. But those who lent money deserve to be treated in accordance with the contracts they signed. Demonizing investors and businessmen is hardly helpful. They are precisely the people we need to help get this economy moving. Governments don't create true job growth, businesspeople do, and mostly small businesses. I am not certain why small business owners, the job creation engine of the country, should see their taxes raised in order to protect bond holders of automobile companies or banks, or for union jobs to be preserved in companies that are clearly not competitive. Consequences Indeed Somehow Bernanke, Geithner, and Obama think they can ignore (or get away with) fraudulent bailout schemes, shameful treatment of auto bondholders to help out unions, and cotton candy treatment of bank bondholders. While banks are happy and financial bondholders are ecstatic with the bailouts (at least for now), taxpayers are taking it on the chin. What Happens ....? In his article, Mauldin asks bunch of "What Happens?" type questions. He does not answer them. Perhaps there are no answers, at least not yet. However, it's important to remember we are in this mess because Greenspan elected to blow another bubble rather than face what would likely have been a short-term recession of limited consequences. Instead, Greenspan elected to bail out his banking buddies who were in deep trouble with loans to dot-com companies and Latin America. The fruits of Greenspan's attempt to bail out banks were worldwide housing and credit bubbles of epic proportion that have now popped, leaving banks much worse off than before. Compounding Greenspan's errors, the trio of Bernanke, Geithner, and Obama, like the trio of Bernanke, Paulson, and Bush before them, all seem to think the results will be better this time if we just do it again with more force. I have news for all of them. While we may not be able to predict for certain the consequences of "Stupidity Squared" we can say for certain the result cannot possibly be any good. Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List Stupidity Squared *Posted by Michael Shedlock at 10:21 PM* On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 6:19 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > There's so many things that are disturbing and disgusting about the > Chrysler bailout it's hard to pick a starting point. Forget > everything you learned in business or law school, study Italian > history during the Mussolini period or the Chicago mob to understand > how to do business in the current climate - maybe just watch re-runs > of the Sopranos. > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GPNvjec-DA&feature=player_embedded > > Well, actually, someone from the MSM is watching - > > http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/05/bankruptcy-atto.html > > Does any sane and rationale person really believe that a company owned > by the US government and the UAW can really compete? What level > position will a cost accountant be, GS-11? A car designer, GS-13? > Will you be able to have payments for a "Peoples Car" deducted from > your paycheck like Hitler forced Germans to do for VW's. Don't laugh, > you'll be paying for Chryslers whether you drive one or not! > > Brad > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090503/6cd8b37c/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sun May 3 12:36:54 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 3 May 2009 11:36:54 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chrysler - The Chicago Way In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0905030727j4107e641q198646d7a39964d3@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905030419ub5d979cj385b27a85b59bf5a@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905030727j4107e641q198646d7a39964d3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70905030936i60c6db7co58d458c8052c0690@mail.gmail.com> Rik, This goes back to the original intent of the founding fathers. Federal Bankruptcy court is clearly part of the Judicial Branch. If you loan me money and I choose not to pay, you take me to COURT. If I think I can't pay and want a second chance to get my financial affairs in order, I go to bankruptcy COURT. But, what if I'm a friend of the POTUS (like the UAW)? Why bother with COURTS when I've got the PREZ in my hip pocket? So what if we agreed on certain terms and you took your risks based on the current law and well established precedents, I've got the PREZ on my side and he's willing to take illegal action against you, or at least use his influence and power to destroy you. As the author of the article you posted points out in so many words, this scares the hell out of prudent investors when the rules are constantly changing or are ignored. Roosevelt described the Great Depression as "capital on strike". "Strike, my ass!" Gone into hiding or looking for a new country is the better description. No one is going to invest where there are no solid, well understood, and fairly enforced rules. China is already looking down the road and has decided they don't want to be paid back in inflated dollars. You think anyone else wants to invest in the United States or US based companies when the rules change daily? I don't (and I'm not). Elections have consequences. When you elect a street thug, you get street thug rules. Ya think ACORN and the ACLU are up to running a car company? Brad On 5/3/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > Here's some more about the bailouts and a little added bonus stuff from > Mauldin and Mike Shedlock. > > Rik > > __________________ > > Stupidity > Squared > > John Mauldin's weekly E-Letter, Sell in May and Go > Away, > is a good read. My favorite portion of the E-Letter is the section "A > Dangerous End Game". Let's take a look. > > The Fed and the Obama administration are playing a dangerous game. The Fed > is going to print trillions of dollars to forestall deflation and try to > re-ignite the economy. But for a variety of reasons we will go into next > week, a real, sustainable recovery may be a few years away. What happens > when the market start balking at high and unsustainable national deficits? > What happens when inflation (finally) does return? Can the Fed remain > independent and take back the money it is printing in the face of what will > likely be a tepid recovery? And if they don't, what happens to the dollar? > > Next year, we will be entering what will certainly be the most dangerous era > in my lifetime for the US economy. It is not clear what will happen. There > are a lot of paths that can be taken, though some are more likely than > others. For those who are convinced that high inflation and a falling dollar > are absolutely, unequivocally in the future I have just one word: Japan. > > Yes, there are differences, but there are a lot of similarities. While I > think the most likely outcome is a long Muddle Through recovery, the > likelihood of a lost decade of deflation a la Japan is a very real potential > outcome. And the possibility of stagflation and a seriously impaired dollar > is also quite real. > > Investors, businessmen, and entrepreneurs need to be as nimble as possible. > A free market will figure out what paths to take, and I am still optimistic > about the long term. But we have some very dangerous times in front of us, > and we need to be realistic. > > And before I close, let me make a few comments about the Chrysler and GM > issues. I tell my kids all the time that actions have consequences. If I > hold senior secured debt of a company and the government tells me I have to > take less than unsecured junior debtors, I am not going to be happy. I may > have been dumb to make the loans in the first place, but I did it under a > very specific contract and the rule of law. > > If the Obama administration arbitrarily changes those rules to favor a > political class (unions), then that is going to have a chilling effect on > future lending to all corporations. As an aside, they are spending $12 > billion to save 54,000 Chrysler jobs (at $22,000 per job). With 600,000 jobs > a month being lost, why are these 54,000 jobs more special than those of the > rest of the unemployed, who get a fraction of that amount in unemployment > benefits? > > Actions have consequences. The lenders who are forcing the Chrysler deal > into bankruptcy court are not all "predatory hedge funds." They are mutual > funds, pension funds, and other financial firms with small stakeholders as > their investors. > > Cerberus, the hedge fund that originally bought Chrysler, deserves to lose > their money. They made a bad investment. But those who lent money deserve to > be treated in accordance with the contracts they signed. > > Demonizing investors and businessmen is hardly helpful. They are precisely > the people we need to help get this economy moving. Governments don't create > true job growth, businesspeople do, and mostly small businesses. I am not > certain why small business owners, the job creation engine of the country, > should see their taxes raised in order to protect bond holders of automobile > companies or banks, or for union jobs to be preserved in companies that are > clearly not competitive. > > Consequences Indeed > > Somehow Bernanke, Geithner, and Obama think they can ignore (or get away > with) fraudulent bailout schemes, shameful treatment of auto bondholders to > help out unions, and cotton candy treatment of bank bondholders. > > While banks are happy and financial bondholders are ecstatic with the > bailouts (at least for now), taxpayers are taking it on the chin. > > What Happens ....? > > In his article, Mauldin asks bunch of "What Happens?" type questions. He > does not answer them. Perhaps there are no answers, at least not yet. > > However, it's important to remember we are in this mess because Greenspan > elected to blow another bubble rather than face what would likely have been > a short-term recession of limited consequences. Instead, Greenspan elected > to bail out his banking buddies who were in deep trouble with loans to > dot-com companies and Latin America. The fruits of Greenspan's attempt to > bail out banks were worldwide housing and credit bubbles of epic proportion > that have now popped, leaving banks much worse off than before. > > Compounding Greenspan's errors, the trio of Bernanke, Geithner, and Obama, > like the trio of Bernanke, Paulson, and Bush before them, all seem to think > the results will be better this time if we just do it again with more force. > > I have news for all of them. While we may not be able to predict for certain > the consequences of "Stupidity Squared" we can say for certain the result > cannot possibly be any good. > > Mike "Mish" Shedlock > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com > Click Here To Scroll Thru My > Recent Post List > Stupidity > Squared > *Posted by Michael Shedlock at 10:21 PM* > > On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 6:19 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> There's so many things that are disturbing and disgusting about the >> Chrysler bailout it's hard to pick a starting point. Forget >> everything you learned in business or law school, study Italian >> history during the Mussolini period or the Chicago mob to understand >> how to do business in the current climate - maybe just watch re-runs >> of the Sopranos. >> >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GPNvjec-DA&feature=player_embedded >> >> Well, actually, someone from the MSM is watching - >> >> http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/05/bankruptcy-atto.html >> >> Does any sane and rationale person really believe that a company owned >> by the US government and the UAW can really compete? What level >> position will a cost accountant be, GS-11? A car designer, GS-13? >> Will you be able to have payments for a "Peoples Car" deducted from >> your paycheck like Hitler forced Germans to do for VW's. Don't laugh, >> you'll be paying for Chryslers whether you drive one or not! >> >> Brad >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From flybrad at gmail.com Sun May 3 21:04:39 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 3 May 2009 20:04:39 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Hey, Wasn't Christine a Chrysler Product? Message-ID: <400985d70905031804p6baf6d2dld346af53285a536e@mail.gmail.com> She was! A 1958 Plymouth Fury to be exact. I'm not in the market for a vehicle but if I was looking for an 'American' car, I'd be looking at a Ford (or a Hyundai, Honda, Toyota, Mitsubishi, etc. - all made in the USA). Brad ----------------- SHERMAN FREDERICK: 'Sometimes dead is better' Chrysler is alive -- and scary The Stephen King '80s horror novel "Pet Sematary" told the story of a supernatural Indian burial ground behind the town's pet cemetery. Generations of children learned that if they buried their pets in the rocky soil, overnight they would return alive. The novel's lead character, Louis, buried his cat "Church" there only to find the reanimated cat strange and different. Meaner, smelly and "a little dead," Church hunted mice and birds only to rip them apart without eating them. President Barack Obama would do well to remember the simple lessons of this novel as he proceeds to bury the nation's auto industry into the rocky soil of socialism. Dead companies that re-emerge zombies of the state won't behave quite right. They will be new creatures propped up by taxpayer cash, stumbling around in an American consumer system with no fear of the normal consequences of failure. Absent free-market pressures, Obama Motors will produce cars born by congressional fiat (pardon the pun). Picture the Henry Waxman and the Maxine Waters limited edition models -- won't run, but the left-turn signals work great! It's a scary prospect. It was a mistake to put Chrysler on life support with bailout money. It wasted precious cash. It's a bigger mistake to put the corpse of Chrysler in the grave of a government-guided bankruptcy and reanimate it as a company owned primarily by the Obama administration and big labor. That's worse than death because just as Stephen King's "Church" the cat emerged just "a little dead," so will Chrysler. It will have the competitive instincts of the Department of Motor Vehicles instead of the good sense that can be learned only by business risk. You can already see the signs. Chrysler no longer hears the voice of the marketplace. Chrysler hears the voice of its new politically correct masters. And what do those voices whisper? Well, the mad scientists at the White House already claim Chrysler will build super-green cars, not because Americans necessarily "want" greener Chryslers, but because Americans "need" them. And to heighten the drama, the United Auto Workers (because, as unions always say, workers and their dues have already sacrificed too much) will make sure Chrysler's cost structure in no way adjusts to the market by lowering worker costs. So, Chrysler will build cars you don't want at a price you won't pay. But fear not. When that inevitability becomes apparent, the Obama administration will bribe consumers with increased "green" tax incentives. At that point the horror show will be complete. Chrysler's most popular brand, the rugged and cool Jeep, will undergo an Obama makeover. Four-wheel drive? Fun? Good looking? Thirteen miles per gallon? Not in this new world order, pal. The new, "Pet Sematary" Jeep is three-wheel drive, boring, ugly and capable of outperforming a golf cart -- barely. You can almost hear the sales pitch. "Pick yourself up and drop yourself off at your nearest government office to buy the new electric Jeep. It can't go off-road anymore, but that's OK because who wants to pay the $10-per-gallon off-road vehicle gasoline tax in this time of environmental crisis?" If we had any sense, we'd heed the warning given the main character in "Pet Sematary" before he went mad and moved from burying his dead cat to burying his dead wife in that old Indian burial ground. The warning was simple: There are places not to "go beyond, no matter how much you feel you need to." Chrysler's alive. It shouldn't be. Not like this. Sherman Frederick (sfrederick at reviewjournal.com) is publisher of the Las Vegas Review-Journal and president of Stephens Media. From ekroposki at charter.net Mon May 4 06:56:05 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 06:56:05 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] The environment - Message-ID: <5BA9BBAEABCD4E799251F5DF12079F53@YOURB88038198E> May. 04, 2009 Copyright ? Las Vegas Review-Journal Sierra wolverine likely from Idaho Scientists say animal came from Rockies THE ASSOCIATED PRESS TRUCKEE, Calif. -- A wolverine spotted two straight winters in the northern Sierra Nevada most likely came from Idaho, according to a study. The findings of 10 federal, state and university scientists, published in the latest edition of Northwest Science, show the predator is most closely related to the Rocky Mountain population. Researchers said the results show a 73 percent confidence level in the conclusion the animal most likely came from Idaho. By comparison, the wolverine had less than a 5 percent probability of belonging to most other North American wolverine populations evaluated. The wolverine's discovery on national forest land north of Truckee a year ago surprised scientists, who feared the elusive animal was driven out of the Sierra long ago by human activity. Wolverines previously had not been spotted in California for 86 years. "We still can't be sure how this animal came to the Tahoe National Forest," said Bill Zielinski, one of the study's authors and a research ecologist at the Forest Service's Pacific Southwest Research Station. "But this peer-reviewed study shows that other scientists agreed with our interpretation that it likely traveled here from the Rockies," he added. Zielinski said the animal would have traveled more than 400 miles to reach the Sierra if it naturally dispersed from the nearest Rocky Mountain population. If the wolverine were accidentally or deliberately transplanted, he said, it would have more likely originated from an area where wolverines are more common and legally trapped, such as Alaska. The wolverine was caught on research cameras late this past winter on private timber land, 15 miles away from where it was spotted the previous winter. Scientists confirmed it was the same animal through DNA from hair samples collected at camera stations used for wildlife surveys on Sierra Pacific Industries land. Find this article at: http://www.lvrj.com/news/44289347.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090504/3d9f7ce1/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 43 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090504/3d9f7ce1/attachment.gif From flybrad at gmail.com Mon May 4 08:26:26 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 07:26:26 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Kleptrocacy Message-ID: <400985d70905040526l1d8f27c4h44a525cfa1c16975@mail.gmail.com> Someone must have read my post over the weekend. Brad - ------------------ May 04, 2009 Obama to Secured Creditors: Drop Dead By Bill Frezza Are you following the disembowelment of Chrysler?s secured creditors with an eye not just toward what it means for the moribund car company but for what it could do to the very concept of secured debt? Has it dawned on you what the consequences will be if the President gets his way and consideration is given to creditors not according to contracts, rules, and established legal precedents but according to which group is most politically favored? And do you believe the President advanced the cause of economic recovery by publicly excoriating ?speculators? who once hoped to profit by lending money against hard assets to an ailing company? Profit? There?s no profit to incentivize risk taking in this country, only sacrifice! Law? There?s no law to protect the politically unfavored in this country, only derision! According to U.S. bankruptcy code, secured creditors - that is lenders who have a contractual security interest or claim to specific collateral - have to be paid before unsecured creditors. Unsecured creditors' claims are prioritized according to explicit rules defined by law. With the exception of short-term payments approved by a bankruptcy judge to keep a company running during the reorganization process, each priority level has a right to be paid in full before creditors with the next lowest priority get a dime. That is why secured debt can be had at a lower interest rate than unsecured debt. In fact, that is why troubled companies have any ability at all to raise money. Credit flows because everyone knows the rules of the game, even in bankruptcy. Well, at least they used to. The system is not supposed to deliver equal outcomes or demand equal sacrifice. If it did money could only be borrowed at the highest rates of interest, if at all. Under the law, payment priorities can only be modified if all debtors agree. The ability to hold out and force a company into bankruptcy court is baked into the price of a loan or the discount at which bonds trade. In Chrysler?s case the TARP-backed lenders, " that is, banks-to-big-to-fail now living on the dole" chose to kowtow to the executive branch. What they ?sacrificed? was the economic interests of their shareholders in favor of the political interests of their management. The non TARP-backed lenders, in this case a handful of hedge funds trying to protect the pension funds, university endowments, and insurance companies that invested in them, balked at getting lower consideration for their secured debt than the UAW is getting for its unsecured obligations. Hence, a trip to court and a tongue lashing by the president. Forget about the law for a moment. Forget about right and wrong. This exercise should be getting easier now that pragmatism is the basis of government policy, right? So think for a moment only about the pragmatic consequences of the administration?s reorganization plan. Why would anyone lend money to heavily unionized companies knowing that if things went wrong, the president and his men could trash their security interests by executive decree, hold them up to public vilification, and subject them to future retribution by regulators? Why would anyone buy the shares of TARP-backed banks or invest alongside them knowing that their executives have proven their willingness to sacrifice shareholders? interests and throw co-investors under the bus any time the president snaps his fingers? Why would foreigners buy the distressed debt of American companies knowing that this debt cannot be secured by law but only by political clout? How is the Federal Government supposed to unwind its ownership in the growing number of companies it has nationalized if prospective buyers know that should things ever take a turn for the worse, Uncle Sam will be back demanding extralegal ?sacrifice? in the name of ?saving? jobs? How is private credit supposed to ?start flowing again? if the United States of America morphs into a caudillo-run kleptocracy whose explicit policy is to ?empower the workers,? chasing ever higher poll numbers by demonizing the very people whose job it is to provide credit? The fate of Chrysler and its workers pale in comparison to the wrecking ball that would be taken to economic order if bankruptcy judge Arthur Gonzalez approves the administration?s plan to give Chrysler?s secured creditors the shaft. And what prize will we-the-people get in return? A doomed third-rate car company majority owned by its militant union run by Italian management building congressionally designed ?green? cars no one wants to buy financed by taxpayers into perpetuity because no private investor in their right mind will touch the company with a ten foot pole. Is this supposed to be economic policy or comic opera? How many more billions do you think will be flushed down this rat hole before the fat lady is allowed to sing? Bill Frezza is a partner at Adams Capital Management, an early-stage venture capital firm. He can be reached at bill at vereverus.com. If you would like to subscribe to his weekly column, drop a note to publisher at vereverus.com. From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon May 4 09:10:27 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 08:10:27 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Kleptrocacy In-Reply-To: <400985d70905040526l1d8f27c4h44a525cfa1c16975@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905040526l1d8f27c4h44a525cfa1c16975@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905040610g36de57c1p8dc134aa91b74a8a@mail.gmail.com> Brad, That is an excellent representation of the current shenanigans and the probable results. It is also what one gets when one is foolish enough to elect a president that has never operated so much as a hotdog cart. Our messiah does not understand how bread gets buttered, let alone which side of the bread the butter is on. Guess he wasn't paying much attention in "law" school. I guess the real question is: If he can F*** things up this badly in three months, what the hell is country going to look like after four years??? Off to city hall to see about a building permit. I wonder how many hoops our tin horn city bureaucrats will have me jumping through to put up a damned garage. Rik On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 7:26 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Someone must have read my post over the weekend. Brad - > > ------------------ > > May 04, 2009 > Obama to Secured Creditors: Drop Dead > By Bill Frezza > > Are you following the disembowelment of Chrysler?s secured creditors > with an eye not just toward what it means for the moribund car company > but for what it could do to the very concept of secured debt? Has it > dawned on you what the consequences will be if the President gets his > way and consideration is given to creditors not according to > contracts, rules, and established legal precedents but according to > which group is most politically favored? And do you believe the > President advanced the cause of economic recovery by publicly > excoriating ?speculators? who once hoped to profit by lending money > against hard assets to an ailing company? > > Profit? There?s no profit to incentivize risk taking in this country, > only sacrifice! > > Law? There?s no law to protect the politically unfavored in this > country, only derision! > > According to U.S. bankruptcy code, secured creditors - that is lenders > who have a contractual security interest or claim to specific > collateral - have to be paid before unsecured creditors. Unsecured > creditors' claims are prioritized according to explicit rules defined > by law. With the exception of short-term payments approved by a > bankruptcy judge to keep a company running during the reorganization > process, each priority level has a right to be paid in full before > creditors with the next lowest priority get a dime. That is why > secured debt can be had at a lower interest rate than unsecured debt. > In fact, that is why troubled companies have any ability at all to > raise money. Credit flows because everyone knows the rules of the > game, even in bankruptcy. > > Well, at least they used to. > > The system is not supposed to deliver equal outcomes or demand equal > sacrifice. If it did money could only be borrowed at the highest rates > of interest, if at all. Under the law, payment priorities can only be > modified if all debtors agree. The ability to hold out and force a > company into bankruptcy court is baked into the price of a loan or the > discount at which bonds trade. > > In Chrysler?s case the TARP-backed lenders, " that is, > banks-to-big-to-fail now living on the dole" chose to kowtow to the > executive branch. What they ?sacrificed? was the economic interests of > their shareholders in favor of the political interests of their > management. The non TARP-backed lenders, in this case a handful of > hedge funds trying to protect the pension funds, university > endowments, and insurance companies that invested in them, balked at > getting lower consideration for their secured debt than the UAW is > getting for its unsecured obligations. Hence, a trip to court and a > tongue lashing by the president. > > Forget about the law for a moment. Forget about right and wrong. This > exercise should be getting easier now that pragmatism is the basis of > government policy, right? So think for a moment only about the > pragmatic consequences of the administration?s reorganization plan. > > Why would anyone lend money to heavily unionized companies knowing > that if things went wrong, the president and his men could trash their > security interests by executive decree, hold them up to public > vilification, and subject them to future retribution by regulators? > > Why would anyone buy the shares of TARP-backed banks or invest > alongside them knowing that their executives have proven their > willingness to sacrifice shareholders? interests and throw > co-investors under the bus any time the president snaps his fingers? > > Why would foreigners buy the distressed debt of American companies > knowing that this debt cannot be secured by law but only by political > clout? > > How is the Federal Government supposed to unwind its ownership in the > growing number of companies it has nationalized if prospective buyers > know that should things ever take a turn for the worse, Uncle Sam will > be back demanding extralegal ?sacrifice? in the name of ?saving? jobs? > > How is private credit supposed to ?start flowing again? if the United > States of America morphs into a caudillo-run kleptocracy whose > explicit policy is to ?empower the workers,? chasing ever higher poll > numbers by demonizing the very people whose job it is to provide > credit? > > The fate of Chrysler and its workers pale in comparison to the > wrecking ball that would be taken to economic order if bankruptcy > judge Arthur Gonzalez approves the administration?s plan to give > Chrysler?s secured creditors the shaft. And what prize will > we-the-people get in return? A doomed third-rate car company majority > owned by its militant union run by Italian management building > congressionally designed ?green? cars no one wants to buy financed by > taxpayers into perpetuity because no private investor in their right > mind will touch the company with a ten foot pole. Is this supposed to > be economic policy or comic opera? > > How many more billions do you think will be flushed down this rat hole > before the fat lady is allowed to sing? > Bill Frezza is a partner at Adams Capital Management, an early-stage > venture capital firm. He can be reached at bill at vereverus.com. If you > would like to subscribe to his weekly column, drop a note to > publisher at vereverus.com. > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090504/3b311459/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Mon May 4 09:36:58 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 09:36:58 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] kleptocracy Message-ID: Brad, Thank you for all your recent posts. However, you keep me forwarding many for educational purposes. This should get posted to Rhodes List for those legal profession (?) supporters of Obama thereon to expain. You know Ben C. Captain Crawford, Michael Wager, et at. Maybe even Stan could explain this when he is not busy. Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090504/017d5aa5/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Mon May 4 10:26:53 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 10:26:53 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Do you feel safer today? Message-ID: <40827989F88A4B8BB17A6026E82919EF@YOURB88038198E> Panic Time for Pelosi by Jed Babbin (more by this author) Posted 05/01/2009 ET House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has had a bad week. Caught between her own involvement in the CIA interrogations now condemned as torture and her party's inquisitions, Pelosi floundered. Her fear and frustration have apparently given way to panic after word reached her of the CIA's reaction to the damage she, President Obama and other Democrats have done to the spy agency in the last three months. Pelosi -- as I wrote earlier in the week -- was one of the few members of Congress briefed in detail on the harsh interrogation methods and who could have stopped them but didn't. Pelosi first said that she wasn't briefed about waterboarding. Then she sort of admitted she had, inserting that the CIA only said that they might do it, not that they were going to do it. Which could have been plagiarized from John Kerry's 2004 circular explanation of his vote for the war in Iraq. As badly as that hurt Pelosi, what apparently pushed her into a panic was the feedback she and other Democrats are getting from the CIA. Pelosi learned that her actions, and those of President Obama and other Democrats over the past ninety days have so damaged CIA morale that the agency's ability to function could be in danger. As a result, two emergency closed-door meetings were called this week on Capitol Hill. The first meeting, on Tuesday evening, was attended by Pelosi, Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-Tx) and others. The following night, Pelosi and some or all of the other attendees met with CIA Director Leon Panetta, also behind closed doors. No Republicans were invited to either meeting which means the Democrats were assessing the damage and deciding how to maneuver their way out from under the responsibility for it. Spin and strategy. Morale among in the spy agency is so low because of the relentless assault on the CIA in President Obama's first 100 days. The first blow to the CIA was his decision to close the terrorist detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba without any plan on what to do with the 240 dangerous detainees housed there. Many CIA employees believe these people to be killers, responsible for the deaths of CIA operatives overseas. Many in the CIA apparently see this as a betrayal. The Obama administration plan to set some of these people loose in the US was despite CIA objections. And then came the president's decision to release the so-called "torture memos" and the disavowal of CIA interrogation methods. The president's on-again, off-again promise to not prosecute CIA operatives who had conducted the harsher interrogations has left many in the CIA uncertain of his real intentions. Leaving up to the Attorney General whether to prosecute the Bush-era lawyers who wrote the "torture memos" has added to the already great doubt about the safety and security of CIA interrogators' jobs, and more. By the end of the meeting Wednesday, Pelosi, Reyes and Panetta apparently determined that damage control had to begin immediately. Later Wednesday evening, Reyes sent an unprecedented letter to CIA director Panetta making a sort of apology to the CIA. Reyes' cover letter asks Panetta to ".disseminate it to the CIA workforce as soon as possible." (At this writing, the letter has not yet been distributed.) The letter to CIA employees is a very odd mixture of praise for the CIA and CYA for Reyes. (Click here to read the letter) Reyes begins, "In recent days, as the public debate regarding CIA's interrogation practices has raged, you have been very much in my thoughts," expressing his ".deep gratitude for the work you do each day." But then Reyes retreats into lawyer-isms: "First and foremost, I wholeheartedly support the President's decision that no CIA officer or contractor will be prosecuted for authorized actions they took in the context of interrogations." In other words, if some young prosecutor or Capitol Hill staffer decides you did something unauthorized, you're sunk. And then comes the CYA for Reyes: "One important lesson to me from the CIA's interrogation operations involves congressional oversight. I'm going to examine closely ways in which we can change the law to make our own oversight of the CIA more meaningful; I want to move from mere notification to real discussion." The fact that "mere notification" of the interrogation methods was comprised of a virtual tour of them matters not at all: Reyes' letter says Congress should be held innocent of any wrongdoing. If CIA morale was bad before the letter, it will be vastly worse after it. Worst of all is the next sentence: "Good oversight can lead to partnership, and that's what I am looking to bring about." If there's anything that could possibly make the CIA even less effective than it was before 9-11, that's it. The nation's security requires that the CIA be strengthened and more effective, not bogged down with congressional tourism. And, by the way, what Reyes proposes is unconstitutional because it violates the separation of powers doctrine. Not that Reyes would care. But the prospect of more Congressional involvement is just another morale killer. Obama's first 100 days did enormous damage to our entire intelligence community. It's all too clear that Speaker Pelosi will do much more if she believes it will help her out of the corner she's in. Panicked people make mistakes. Pelosi has made a big one in propelling the inquisition into the CIA interrogations She will make more, and the damage to our intelligence gathering ability may be fatal to many Americans. Mr. Babbin is the editor of Human Events and HumanEvents.com. He served as a deputy undersecretary of defense in President George H.W. Bush's administration. He is the author of "In the Words of our Enemies"(Regnery,2007) and (with Edward Timperlake) of "Showdown: Why China Wants War with the United States" (Regnery, 2006) and "Inside the Asylum: Why the UN and Old Europe are Worse than You Think" (Regnery, 2004). E-mail him at jbabbin at eaglepub.com. Advertise | Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions Copyright ? 2009 HUMAN EVENTS. All Rights Reserved. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090504/c85e0386/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 9982 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090504/c85e0386/attachment-0004.gif -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 43 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090504/c85e0386/attachment-0005.gif -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 3397 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090504/c85e0386/attachment-0006.gif -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 2692 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090504/c85e0386/attachment-0007.gif From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon May 4 10:45:04 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 09:45:04 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Do you feel safer today? In-Reply-To: <40827989F88A4B8BB17A6026E82919EF@YOURB88038198E> References: <40827989F88A4B8BB17A6026E82919EF@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905040745v5cffc5dfqbf1a2f5667e08b13@mail.gmail.com> Ed, I believe that Nancy Pelosi is natures way of showing us how best to waste perfectly good air. I don't suppose this will be enough to awaken her constituents to the reality that she is a complete and utter moron..... as well as a rather poor liar! Rik On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 9:26 AM, Ed Kroposki wrote: > *Panic Time for Pelosi * by Jed Babbin (more > by this author) > Posted 05/01/2009 ET > > > House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has had a bad week. Caught between her own > involvement in the CIA interrogations now condemned as torture and her > party?s inquisitions, Pelosi floundered. Her fear and frustration have > apparently given way to panic after word reached her of the CIA?s reaction > to the damage she, President Obama and other Democrats have done to the spy > agency in the last three months. > > Pelosi -- as I wrote earlier in the week -- > was one of the few members of Congress briefed in detail on the harsh > interrogation methods and who could have stopped them but didn?t. Pelosi > first said that she wasn?t briefed about waterboarding. Then she sort of > admitted she had, inserting that the CIA only said that they might do it, > not that they were going to do it. Which could have been plagiarized from > John Kerry?s 2004 circular explanation of his vote for the war in Iraq. > > As badly as that hurt Pelosi, what apparently pushed her into a panic was > the feedback she and other Democrats are getting from the CIA. Pelosi > learned that her actions, and those of President Obama and other Democrats > over the past ninety days have so damaged CIA morale that the agency?s > ability to function could be in danger. > > As a result, two emergency closed-door meetings were called this week on > Capitol Hill. > > The first meeting, on Tuesday evening, was attended by Pelosi, Intelligence > Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-Tx) and others. The following night, > Pelosi and some or all of the other attendees met with CIA Director Leon > Panetta, also behind closed doors. > > No Republicans were invited to either meeting which means the Democrats > were assessing the damage and deciding how to maneuver their way out from > under the responsibility for it. Spin and strategy. > > Morale among in the spy agency is so low because of the relentless assault > on the CIA in President Obama?s first 100 days. The first blow to the CIA > was his decision to close the terrorist detention facility at Guantanamo > Bay, Cuba without any plan on what to do with the 240 dangerous detainees > housed there. Many CIA employees believe these people to be killers, > responsible for the deaths of CIA operatives overseas. Many in the CIA > apparently see this as a betrayal. > > The Obama administration plan to set some of these people loose in the US > was despite CIA objections. > > And then came the president?s decision to release the so-called ?torture > memos? and the disavowal of CIA interrogation methods. > > The president?s on-again, off-again promise to not prosecute CIA operatives > who had conducted the harsher interrogations has left many in the CIA > uncertain of his real intentions. Leaving up to the Attorney General > whether to prosecute the Bush-era lawyers who wrote the ?torture memos? has > added to the already great doubt about the safety and security of CIA > interrogators? jobs, and more. > > By the end of the meeting Wednesday, Pelosi, Reyes and Panetta apparently > determined that damage control had to begin immediately. > > Later Wednesday evening, Reyes sent an unprecedented letter to CIA director > Panetta making a sort of apology to the CIA. Reyes? cover letter asks > Panetta to ??disseminate it to the CIA workforce as soon as possible.? (At > this writing, the letter has not yet been distributed.) The letter to CIA > employees is a very odd mixture of praise for the CIA and CYA for Reyes. (Click > here to read the letter > ) > > Reyes begins, ?In recent days, as the public debate regarding CIA?s > interrogation practices has raged, you have been very much in my thoughts,? > expressing his ??deep gratitude for the work you do each day.? > > But then Reyes retreats into lawyer-isms: ?First and foremost, I > wholeheartedly support the President?s decision that no CIA officer or > contractor will be prosecuted for authorized actions they took in the > context of interrogations.? In other words, if some young prosecutor or > Capitol Hill staffer decides you did something unauthorized, you?re sunk. > > And then comes the CYA for Reyes: ?One important lesson to me from the > CIA?s interrogation operations involves congressional oversight. I?m going > to examine closely ways in which we can change the law to make our own > oversight of the CIA more meaningful; I want to move from mere notification > to real discussion.? > > The fact that ?mere notification? of the interrogation methods was > comprised of a virtual tour of them matters not at all: Reyes? letter says > Congress should be held innocent of any wrongdoing. If CIA morale was bad > before the letter, it will be vastly worse after it. > > Worst of all is the next sentence: ?Good oversight can lead to > partnership, and that?s what I am looking to bring about.? If there?s > anything that could possibly make the CIA even less effective than it was > before 9-11, that?s it. The nation?s security requires that the CIA be > strengthened and more effective, not bogged down with congressional > tourism. > > And, by the way, what Reyes proposes is unconstitutional because it > violates the separation of powers doctrine. Not that Reyes would care. But > the prospect of more Congressional involvement is just another morale > killer. > > Obama?s first 100 days did enormous damage to our entire intelligence > community. It?s all too clear that Speaker Pelosi will do much more if she > believes it will help her out of the corner she?s in. Panicked people make > mistakes. Pelosi has made a big one in propelling the inquisition into the > CIA interrogations She will make more, and the damage to our intelligence > gathering ability may be fatal to many Americans. > > Mr. Babbin is the editor of Human Events and HumanEvents.com. He served > as a deputy undersecretary of defense in President George H.W. Bush's > administration. He is the author of "In the Words of our Enemies"(Regnery,2007) > and (with Edward Timperlake) of "Showdown: Why China Wants War with the > United States" > (Regnery, 2006) and "Inside the Asylum: Why the UN and Old Europe are > Worse than You Think" > (Regnery, 2004). E-mail him at jbabbin at eaglepub.com > . > > Advertise | Privacy Policy| Terms > and Conditions > Copyright ? 2009 HUMAN EVENTS. All Rights Reserved. > > > > MoveObjectContents('tempprintsponsor','printsponsor'); > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090504/7fb8fe96/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 9982 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090504/7fb8fe96/attachment-0004.gif -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 2692 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090504/7fb8fe96/attachment-0005.gif -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 3397 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090504/7fb8fe96/attachment-0006.gif -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 43 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090504/7fb8fe96/attachment-0007.gif From flybrad at gmail.com Mon May 4 14:59:15 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 13:59:15 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Comic Opera Message-ID: <400985d70905041159y5494e6feu8415623bd3e02d7@mail.gmail.com> This is a borrowed phrase from an earlier post today, "when does it become comic opera?" Maybe "comic Oprah" would be more appropriate. - "Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner joined Obama for the announcement. He said the proposals would end "indefensible tax breaks and loopholes which allow some companies and some well-off citizens to evade the rules that the rest of America lives by." - This is from a guy who couldn't (chose not to) figure his own taxes using TurboTax. Here's the background article - http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090504/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_taxes Ladies and Gentlemen, I really don't care who I piss off these days by pointing out the obvious. Go read "Animal Farm" to understand the current government lexicon. This really isn't that entertaining anymore. Almost 40% don't care because the don't fund the federal government, another 20% or so are employed by the 'gubment', and half the rest don't have a clue. Good luck with this program! Every 'tin horn' dictator had an enemy - for Hitler it was the Jooooos. I guess anyone with a job and some savings is the target now. Brad From flybrad at gmail.com Mon May 4 15:27:38 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 14:27:38 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Education Message-ID: <400985d70905041227h44c0d384qb2a44320b6e10b4f@mail.gmail.com> Look up the results of the "Chicago Annenberg Challenge'. Who wrote the program? Where was the office located? Who also had offices on the same floor? What did they teach? What did they achieve? What do you desire for your children, grand-children, and great grand-children? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7FS5B-CynM&feature=player_embedded This isn't about public v private school, this is about hypocrisy and pure power politics. People get the government they deserve! You have time to correct this problem. Pick a party - they're both corrupt but it doesn't matter which team you root for out of tradition. Make these people hear your voice! But PLEASE, make some noise. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7FS5B-CynM&feature=player_embedded Do you have a clue where your federal government is heading? Do you? Brad From mweisner at ebsmed.com Mon May 4 17:18:32 2009 From: mweisner at ebsmed.com (Michael D. Weisner) Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 17:18:32 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] FYI: New Solar Energy company Message-ID: <417441E0B2AE471C9B680B3CC6D809C4@ebsoffice> Since I live in the northeast, solar energy has been a wait-and-see technology due to the tremendous installation cost and poor output unless you live in the southwest. This might have just changed for the better by some "outside the box" thinkers. Skyline Solar is a newcomer and doesn't have much of the "energy company" agenda that you find in a BP Solar or Shell Energy (producers of much of the photovoltaics out there.) I think that it may finally be time to look seriously at an alternative energy source for my needs, both home and business. These folks seem to have something different and have said their systems will be much lower cost and significantly higher output. Check them out at http://www.skyline-solar.com/architecture.htm I would like to have solar capability before the next wave of energy increases. Mike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090504/a2e6de4e/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Mon May 4 18:35:42 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 18:35:42 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Cruise idea Message-ID: See attached flyer about latest cruises... Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090504/a3edfb05/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Cruise.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 230345 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090504/a3edfb05/attachment-0001.jpg From flybrad at gmail.com Mon May 4 21:45:17 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 20:45:17 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] FYI: New Solar Energy company In-Reply-To: <417441E0B2AE471C9B680B3CC6D809C4@ebsoffice> References: <417441E0B2AE471C9B680B3CC6D809C4@ebsoffice> Message-ID: <400985d70905041845o3e62aa6aib22acbca4557deff@mail.gmail.com> Mike, My employer is one of the largest users of energy in the US, second only to UPS (mostly jet fuel and diesel). When my boss looks at alternative energy, I assume it is nearly competitive in the marketplace because he generally doesn't throw away good money on silliness. Our hub in Oakland recently installed a huge array of solar panels. Mr. Smith announced this week that our goal was to be "30 in 30", meaning, he wanted 30% of our fleet (both trucks and jets) running on bio-fuels from algae by 2030. If I had a big enough lot I'd go geo-thermal for our heating and cooling. The payback used to be 10 years but that will drop dramatically with cap-and-trade taxes. We're upgrading the downstairs A/C unit and air handler package at our house to a 16+ SEER rating replacement to take advantage of the $1500 tax credit that has been extended. It is time Americans got serious about energy. I don't have a problem with a carbon tax, in fact, I've advocated one for quite some time. Cap-and-trade is a bureaucrat's dream and a businessman's nightmare - too many opportunities for graft and special interests. Put a straight tax on carbon and the market will settle things out (and goodbye ethanol). From strictly an environmental point of view, I'm not sure solar and hybrid cars are any better than oil and coal when you factor in the mining and disposal issues involved with the raw materials for manufacture. All fuel comes from sunshine, it is just a matter of aging. If solar technology is finally becoming cost effective we'll all be hoping for more global warming (alas, the data may very well indicate we're heading in the opposite direction). What does your neighborhood Nazi architecture committee have to say about solar panels? I know mine would balk. Brad On 5/4/09, Michael D. Weisner wrote: > Since I live in the northeast, solar energy has been a wait-and-see > technology due to the tremendous installation cost and poor output unless > you live in the southwest. This might have just changed for the better by > some "outside the box" thinkers. Skyline Solar is a newcomer and doesn't > have much of the "energy company" agenda that you find in a BP Solar or > Shell Energy (producers of much of the photovoltaics out there.) > > I think that it may finally be time to look seriously at an alternative > energy source for my needs, both home and business. These folks seem to > have something different and have said their systems will be much lower cost > and significantly higher output. > > Check them out at http://www.skyline-solar.com/architecture.htm > > I would like to have solar capability before the next wave of energy > increases. > > Mike From flybrad at gmail.com Mon May 4 21:56:07 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 20:56:07 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Cruise idea In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <400985d70905041856s28e3c06o66158b758da892d@mail.gmail.com> Ed, I'd sign up for that cruise in a heartbeat. Here's a piece of trivia for you - Alex Haley, the author of "Roots", was a US Coast Guard seaman in his youth. He used to book passage on freighters because it gave him "isolation" and time to write. Brad On 5/4/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > See attached flyer about latest cruises... > > Ed K From flybrad at gmail.com Mon May 4 23:09:01 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 22:09:01 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Welcome Back Carter! Message-ID: <400985d70905042009r764470c8v213dfed73aedad27@mail.gmail.com> No, not the TV show, the inflation of the late 70's, you dummy! Rik and I have been saying it for weeks, now this fool chimes in - http://tinyurl.com/cokpyt "Fixed income investments" - that's all of you who are retired. Bill E said it best when he suggested that kids frying burgers at McDonalds would be making 50 grand a year. Whoopie! Or, Whopper! Sorry, wrong franchise. Anyway, at 50G you pay taxes and are no longer in the 95% that get a "tax cut". Welcome to "New Math". What? Don't worry if you don't understand it yet, your education will be "free". Brad From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon May 4 23:21:56 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 22:21:56 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Welcome Back Carter! In-Reply-To: <400985d70905042009r764470c8v213dfed73aedad27@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905042009r764470c8v213dfed73aedad27@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905042021i28a0ddfdl8db42ae28fad436@mail.gmail.com> Brad, When they get that going, I hope all of us here own some gold, real, physical gold, not some paper investment. That just might be the only way to keep what you have when the inflation finally kicks in. Rik On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 10:09 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > No, not the TV show, the inflation of the late 70's, you dummy! Rik > and I have been saying it for weeks, now this fool chimes in - > > http://tinyurl.com/cokpyt > > "Fixed income investments" - that's all of you who are retired. Bill > E said it best when he suggested that kids frying burgers at McDonalds > would be making 50 grand a year. Whoopie! Or, Whopper! Sorry, wrong > franchise. Anyway, at 50G you pay taxes and are no longer in the 95% > that get a "tax cut". Welcome to "New Math". What? Don't worry if > you don't understand it yet, your education will be "free". > > Brad > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090504/0c9ded37/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon May 4 23:50:03 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 22:50:03 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] FYI: New Solar Energy company In-Reply-To: <400985d70905041845o3e62aa6aib22acbca4557deff@mail.gmail.com> References: <417441E0B2AE471C9B680B3CC6D809C4@ebsoffice> <400985d70905041845o3e62aa6aib22acbca4557deff@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905042050v3c7de69dx11263310aed5aee9@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Your lot may be big enough for geo-thermal. You can run those wells vertically instead of horizontally. No need for a lot of space then. Rik On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 8:45 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Mike, > > My employer is one of the largest users of energy in the US, second > only to UPS (mostly jet fuel and diesel). When my boss looks at > alternative energy, I assume it is nearly competitive in the > marketplace because he generally doesn't throw away good money on > silliness. Our hub in Oakland recently installed a huge array of > solar panels. Mr. Smith announced this week that our goal was to be > "30 in 30", meaning, he wanted 30% of our fleet (both trucks and jets) > running on bio-fuels from algae by 2030. If I had a big enough lot > I'd go geo-thermal for our heating and cooling. The payback used to > be 10 years but that will drop dramatically with cap-and-trade taxes. > We're upgrading the downstairs A/C unit and air handler package at our > house to a 16+ SEER rating replacement to take advantage of the $1500 > tax credit that has been extended. It is time Americans got serious > about energy. I don't have a problem with a carbon tax, in fact, I've > advocated one for quite some time. Cap-and-trade is a bureaucrat's > dream and a businessman's nightmare - too many opportunities for graft > and special interests. Put a straight tax on carbon and the market > will settle things out (and goodbye ethanol). From strictly an > environmental point of view, I'm not sure solar and hybrid cars are > any better than oil and coal when you factor in the mining and > disposal issues involved with the raw materials for manufacture. All > fuel comes from sunshine, it is just a matter of aging. If solar > technology is finally becoming cost effective we'll all be hoping for > more global warming (alas, the data may very well indicate we're > heading in the opposite direction). What does your neighborhood Nazi > architecture committee have to say about solar panels? I know mine > would balk. > > Brad > > On 5/4/09, Michael D. Weisner wrote: > > Since I live in the northeast, solar energy has been a wait-and-see > > technology due to the tremendous installation cost and poor output unless > > you live in the southwest. This might have just changed for the better > by > > some "outside the box" thinkers. Skyline Solar is a newcomer and doesn't > > have much of the "energy company" agenda that you find in a BP Solar or > > Shell Energy (producers of much of the photovoltaics out there.) > > > > I think that it may finally be time to look seriously at an alternative > > energy source for my needs, both home and business. These folks seem to > > have something different and have said their systems will be much lower > cost > > and significantly higher output. > > > > Check them out at http://www.skyline-solar.com/architecture.htm > > > > I would like to have solar capability before the next wave of energy > > increases. > > > > Mike > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090504/a59b90e0/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon May 4 23:52:26 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 22:52:26 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Cruise idea In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6634e19e0905042052m22a414afpbf2bedf39394a634@mail.gmail.com> Ed, Now THAT is a bargain. Sign me up :-) Rik On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Ed Kroposki wrote: > See attached flyer about latest cruises... > > Ed K > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090504/a613298c/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Tue May 5 00:01:13 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 23:01:13 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Welcome Back Carter! In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0905042021i28a0ddfdl8db42ae28fad436@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905042009r764470c8v213dfed73aedad27@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905042021i28a0ddfdl8db42ae28fad436@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70905042101s708baaf7r8aa9660d16700c0e@mail.gmail.com> Rik, In the event you struggle with math like I do, here's a visual - http://tinyurl.com/cbmr8r We're screwed! Brad On 5/4/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > When they get that going, I hope all of us here own some gold, real, > physical gold, not some paper investment. That just might be the only way to > keep what you have when the inflation finally kicks in. > > Rik > > On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 10:09 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> No, not the TV show, the inflation of the late 70's, you dummy! Rik >> and I have been saying it for weeks, now this fool chimes in - >> >> http://tinyurl.com/cokpyt >> >> "Fixed income investments" - that's all of you who are retired. Bill >> E said it best when he suggested that kids frying burgers at McDonalds >> would be making 50 grand a year. Whoopie! Or, Whopper! Sorry, wrong >> franchise. Anyway, at 50G you pay taxes and are no longer in the 95% >> that get a "tax cut". Welcome to "New Math". What? Don't worry if >> you don't understand it yet, your education will be "free". >> >> Brad >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Tue May 5 00:52:31 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 23:52:31 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Welcome Back Carter! In-Reply-To: <400985d70905042101s708baaf7r8aa9660d16700c0e@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905042009r764470c8v213dfed73aedad27@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905042021i28a0ddfdl8db42ae28fad436@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905042101s708baaf7r8aa9660d16700c0e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905042152k21a8e5c9g2b454e6bfd8d2574@mail.gmail.com> Brad, What a great illustration. Probably would be a good thing if a lot more people saw that. When they first announced the "spending cuts" a couple weeks ago, the first words out of my mouth were, 'Well hell, that's only about 3 zeros short of being worth the trouble". But hey, a hundred million sounds like a lot of money to most of the lumps out there, surely enough to make them believe that an honest effort is being made. I do believe that is the point of this exercise..... A little freshener for the koolaid. Rik On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 11:01 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > In the event you struggle with math like I do, here's a visual - > > http://tinyurl.com/cbmr8r > > We're screwed! > > Brad > > > On 5/4/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > > Brad, > > > > When they get that going, I hope all of us here own some gold, real, > > physical gold, not some paper investment. That just might be the only way > to > > keep what you have when the inflation finally kicks in. > > > > Rik > > > > On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 10:09 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> No, not the TV show, the inflation of the late 70's, you dummy! Rik > >> and I have been saying it for weeks, now this fool chimes in - > >> > >> http://tinyurl.com/cokpyt > >> > >> "Fixed income investments" - that's all of you who are retired. Bill > >> E said it best when he suggested that kids frying burgers at McDonalds > >> would be making 50 grand a year. Whoopie! Or, Whopper! Sorry, wrong > >> franchise. Anyway, at 50G you pay taxes and are no longer in the 95% > >> that get a "tax cut". Welcome to "New Math". What? Don't worry if > >> you don't understand it yet, your education will be "free". > >> > >> Brad > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090504/0c5be7a2/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Tue May 5 07:36:31 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 07:36:31 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Understanding O'bama's new math to finance his plans Message-ID: <00B57F4FDD74467DA0C942E891375D00@YOURB88038198E> Brad, thank you for those two posts. I have combined and edited as below to forward to those who have not locked me off their email recipients list and sent that to them. We all have a few who on our email list who would benefit from these post. Ed K ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ First get Warren Buffet's opinion on financing the Obama Budget. Remember that Buffet is a big Obama Democrat. http://tinyurl.com/cokpyt Now understand the size of budget and Obama's announced cuts. http://tinyurl.com/cbmr8r This comparison of his math is submitted for your education. Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090505/02ebc5e0/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Tue May 5 08:07:00 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 07:07:00 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chrysler and the Constitution Message-ID: <400985d70905050507x6a543fbcy3c8d51918ec8aafd@mail.gmail.com> People should be paying more attention to how the Chrysler deal unfolds. This isn't just another boring business deal, how this plays out has huge consequences for our nation. Whether a single car company survives or fails is immaterial. History is full of failed automobile companies and we still have plenty of new cars. Go back and read some of Bill E's and my posts on Rezco Properties and CON's (no pun, CON is the acronym for Certificate of Need) and study how deals are cut in Chicago and Illinois. The Chrysler deal is a huge test to see if we as a nation are going to be ruled by laws or by thugs. Study history and review how FDR tried to intimidate and pack the courts. He was a rank amateur compared to these gangsters. The Federal government dropped 290 pages of filings on the bankruptcy court under the cover of darkness and the creditors had just hours to respond. When they refused to give-up their rights, they were chastised in public as "greedy", "vultures", etc. Study the history of the Cultural Revolution in China to develop a sense of how a leader can steer the masses away from common sense. Listen to speeches of Hugo Chavez justifying the seizure of private property "for the good of the citizens" to understand how a message can be manipulated to justify illegal actions. You may hate hedge fund managers, corporate lawyers, the investor class, etc., but you better hope they prevail in defending their rights in the Chrysler deal. It will be a sad, dark chapter in the history of our nation and the survival of constitutional rights if they don't. - read attached- Brad -------------------- Goldman Sachs Foreshadowed UAW?s Chrysler Coup: Kevin Hassett Share | Email | Print | A A A Commentary by Kevin Hassett May 4 (Bloomberg) -- I feel like I have seen this bad gangster movie before. In the opening scene, a naive investor buys some bonds, explaining to his staff that they are a sound investment secured by hard assets. Even if the company goes under, the investor explains, bond investors stand to get about 80 percent of their money back. The next day, a government official calls and offers to buy up the bonds at 33 cents on the dollar, while giving controlling interest in the company to the labor unions. The investor refuses. That night, a man shows up at his home. ?We?re not saying anything bad is going to happen to you,? the tough says, ?but the big boss is going to be very disappointed in you if you don?t take the deal. By the way, how?s your little girl? Is she still going to school down on Federal Street?? The investor caves. The evolution of the Chrysler LLC bankruptcy seemed almost as bad. The Obama administration brokered a deal that gave labor unions a 55 percent equity stake in Chrysler, putting their interests ahead of the secured interests of bondholders. The bondholder response to the deal was positively creepy. Politicians were probably offering them a worse deal than they could expect to get in bankruptcy court. Bondholders that have been participating in the government bailout program for banks -- and thus are especially susceptible to political pressure -- agreed to accept the deal. But many of the independent investors balked. ?Financial Sacrifices? The reasoning of the hold-outs was captured in a statement by OppenheimerFunds Inc., which said the government ?unfairly asked our fund shareholders to make financial sacrifices greater than those being made by unsecured creditors.? Stories circulated that the Treasury Department exerted extreme pressure behind the scenes when investors refused to take the deal. Public pressure was exerted as well. President Barack Obama went to the podium to criticize the recalcitrant investors, and Democratic Representative John Dingell of Michigan pressed the threats even harder: ?The rogue hedge funds that refused to agree to a fair offer to exchange debt for cash from the U.S. Treasury -- firms I label as the ?vultures? -- will now be dealt with accordingly in court,? Dingell said. All the government stops were being pulled out to present the United Auto Workers with a sweetheart deal that, incredibly, gives its retiree health-care fund majority ownership of Chrysler. Yes, those are the same workers who pushed the firm toward bankruptcy in the first place with their extraordinarily generous compensation packages. DaimlerChrysler AG?s average cost to employ a UAW worker in 2006, including benefits, was 1.7 times that of Japanese automakers, according to company estimates. Expensive to Fire Firing that worker is expensive, too. The 2007 collective- bargaining agreement required the automakers to pay up to $140,000 in severance to a worker whose position was eliminated and who agreed to leave with no additional benefits. The spectacle should sicken any fair-minded citizen, especially since organized labor contributed about $68 million to Democrats in the last election cycle. The sad truth is there is enough data on the government rescue efforts to indicate decisively that OppenheimerFund would have received a much better deal if it was politically well- connected. It?s an especially good idea to have connections in both parties. For comparison?s sake, consider the treatment of Goldman Sachs Group Inc. When American International Group Inc. crumbled, threatening Goldman Sachs with huge losses, the government stepped in and made the firm whole. It funneled a whopping $12.9 billion to Goldman Sachs through the AIG bail-out. Part of Club Might the government have been so generous because Henry Paulson, Treasury secretary under President George W. Bush, and Robert Rubin, an Obama adviser, are both former Goldman Sachs men? Maybe it?s just a coincidence, but time after time, it is precisely the politically well-connected players who present so much systemic risk that the government needs to protect them at all costs. Obama recently conceded to an interviewer that ?the only thing less popular than putting money into banks is putting money into the auto industry.? With Democrats riding a winning streak, it?s clearly a political risk he is willing to take. If this were a Hollywood production, a virtuous politician played by Tom Hanks or Jimmy Stewart would speak out against the bailouts and sweep the corruption out of Washington. Sadly, in real life, it seems there is nobody in either party ready to stand up and fill that role. (Kevin Hassett, director of economic-policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, is a Bloomberg News columnist. He was an adviser to Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona in the 2008 presidential election. The opinions expressed are his own.) To contact the writer of this column: Kevin Hassett at khassett at bloomberg.net Last Updated: May 4, 2009 00:01 EDT From sanderico1 at gmail.com Tue May 5 08:24:00 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 07:24:00 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Understanding O'bama's new math to finance his plans In-Reply-To: <00B57F4FDD74467DA0C942E891375D00@YOURB88038198E> References: <00B57F4FDD74467DA0C942E891375D00@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905050524hd5ab485xa1876bbc9503b7f3@mail.gmail.com> Ed, Good luck with that. I spent most of a couple years back in 05 and 06 trying to tell my friends to get away from real estate and then about a year later the stock market. Get out of debt and into cash, be happy to draw some interest. They didn't get it, thought I was goofy as a pet coon. I told them, for a while here it will be the ones who don't lose their money as opposed to making money that will be ahead in the long run. Sometimes I think that people don't value an opinion unless they're paying a lot of money for it. Even Warren Buffet smart as he is about investing, has lost a ton of money in the last couple of years. Fortunately for him, he has to lose about 4 tons of money before he has to worry about being broke. Most of us don't have that luxury. Rik On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 6:36 AM, Ed Kroposki wrote: > > Brad, thank you for those two posts. > > I have combined and edited as below to forward to those who have not locked > me off their email recipients list and sent that to them. > > We all have a few who on our email list who would benefit from these post. > Ed K > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > First get Warren Buffet's opinion on financing the Obama Budget. Remember > that Buffet is a big Obama Democrat. > > http://tinyurl.com/cokpyt > > Now understand the size of budget and Obama's announced cuts. > > http://tinyurl.com/cbmr8r > > This comparison of his math is submitted for your education. > > Ed K > > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090505/3da0e823/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Tue May 5 13:02:30 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 12:02:30 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] This Isn't Funny In China Message-ID: <400985d70905051002h530364bck4c516fdd303eee1d@mail.gmail.com> Watch - http://www.theonion.com/content/video/treasury_department_issues We're spending money we don't have to buy, Chryslers? The people who have the money to loan us don't buy this shit! How many Chrysler's do you see on the streets of Beijing? Well, there's Beijing Jeep, I saw a lot of them 10 years ago, now, not so many. The Chinese have the same choices you do - Toyota, Hyundai, Honda, Ford, Shanghai Buick (GM), Mazda, etc. They 'ain't' buyin' Chrysler products. China is the worlds largest market for autos now. If you can make it there you can make it anywhere (apologies to Sinatra). Chrysler ain't ' I can make it anywhere there', there. The last time a group of union employees took over a company was United Airlines pilots in the late 90's. I felt pretty small having turned down a job there while my 'buds' were all millionaires on paper and out earning me during that period. Times have changed. Watch Chrysler. Watch China. China ain't buyin' Chrysler or the way the deal is being cut! In fact, China ain't buying US Treasuries. Now where is all that 'hopenchange' gonna come from. Think about it! Paybacks are hell! Brad From sanderico1 at gmail.com Tue May 5 21:38:50 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 20:38:50 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Understanding O'bama's new math to finance his plans In-Reply-To: <00B57F4FDD74467DA0C942E891375D00@YOURB88038198E> References: <00B57F4FDD74467DA0C942E891375D00@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905051838k5ec27f1cp8f5e438d773fdc3d@mail.gmail.com> Ed and All, If I could have said this as well back in 05, 06, Some folks I know would be in a lot better shape now. Below is what I was trying to say, but failing at. Rik ________________ *No, the Free Market Did Not Cause the Financial Crisis* by Thomas E. Woods, Jr. Auburn, Alabama In March 2007 then-Treasury secretary Henry Paulson told Americans that the global economy was "as strong as I've seen it in my business career." "Our financial institutions are strong," he added in March 2008. "Our investment banks are strong. Our banks are strong. They're going to be strong for many, many years." Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke said in May 2007, *"We do not expect significant spillovers from the subprime market to the rest of the economy or to the financial system."* In August 2008, Paulson and Bernanke assured the country that other than perhaps $25 billion in bailout money for Fannie and Freddie, the fundamentals of the economy were sound. *Then, all of a sudden, things were so bad that without a $700 billion congressional appropriation, the whole thing would collapse.* In the wake of this change of heart on the part of our leaders, Americans found themselves bombarded with a predictable and relentless refrain: the free market economy has failed. The alleged remedies were equally predictable: more regulation, more government intervention, more spending, more money creation, and more debt. *To add insult to injury, the very people who had been responsible for the policies that created the mess were posing as the wise public servants who would show us the way out.* And following a now-familiar pattern, government failure would not only be blamed on anyone and everyone but the government itself, but it would also be used to justify additional grants of government power. The truth of the matter is that intervention in the market, rather than the market economy itself, was the driving factor behind the bust. F.A. Hayek won the Nobel Prize for his work showing how *the central bank's intervention into the economy gives rise to the boom-bust cycle, making us feel prosperous until we suffer the inevitable crash.* Most Americans know nothing about Hayek's theory (known as the Austrian theory of the business cycle), and are therefore easy prey for the quacks who blame the market for problems caused by the manipulation of money and credit. The artificial booms the Fed provokes, wrote economist Henry Hazlitt decades ago, must end "in a crisis and a slump, and...worse than the slump itself may be the public delusion that the slump has been caused, not by the previous inflation, but by the inherent defects of 'capitalism.'" Although my recently released book, *Meltdown* explains the process in more detail, an abbreviated version of Austrian business cycle theory might run as follows: Government-established central banks can artificially lower interest rates by increasing the supply of money (and thus the funds banks have available to lend) through the banking system. This is supposed to stimulate the economy. *What it actually does is mislead investors into embarking on an investment boom that the artificially low rates seem to validate but that in fact cannot be sustained under existing economic conditions.* Investments that would have correctly been assessed as unprofitable are falsely appraised as profitable, and over time the result is the squandering of countless resources in lines of investment that should never have been begun. If lower interest rates are the result of increased saving by the public, this increase in saved resources provides the material wherewithal to see the additional investment through to completion. The situation is very different when the lower interest rates result from the Fed's creation of new money out of thin air. In that case, the lower rates do not reflect an increase in the pool of savings from which investors can draw. *Fed tinkering, in other words, does not increase the real stuff in the economy.*The additional investment that the lower rates encourage therefore leads the economy down a path that is not sustainable in the long run. Investment decisions are made that quantitatively and qualitatively diverge from what the economy can support. The bust must come, no matter how much new money the central bank creates in a vain attempt to stave off the inevitable day of reckoning. The recession or depression is the necessary, if unfortunate, correction process by which the malinvestments of the boom period, having at last been brought to light, are finally liquidated. The diversion of resources into unsustainable investments out of conformity with consumer desires and resource availability comes to an end, with businesses failing and investment projects abandoned. Although painful for many people, the recession/depression phase of the cycle is not where the damage is done. The bust is the period in which the economy sloughs off the malinvestments and the capital misallocation, re- establishes the structure of production along sustainable lines, and restores itself to health. The damage is done during the boom phase, the period of false prosperity that precedes the bust. It is then that the artificial lowering of interest rates causes the squandering of capital and the initiation of unsustainable investments. *It is then that resources that would genuinely have satisfied consumer demand are diverted into projects that make sense only in light of the temporary and artificial conditions of the boom.* Adding fuel to the fire of the most recent boom was the so-called Greenspan put, the unofficial policy of the Greenspan Fed that promised assistance to private firms in the event of risky investments gone bad. *The Financial Times* described it as the view that "when markets unravel, count on the Federal Reserve and its chairman Alan Greenspan (eventually) to come to the rescue." According to economist Antony Mueller, "Since Alan Greenspan took office, financial markets in the U.S. have operated under a quasi-official charter, which says that the central bank will protect its major actors from the risk of bankruptcy. Consequently, the reasoning emerged that when you succeed, you will earn high profits and market share, and if you should fail, the authorities will save you anyway." *The Financial Times* reported in 2000, in the wake of the dot-com boom, of an increasing concern that the Greenspan put was injecting into the economy *"a destructive tendency toward excessively risky investment supported by hopes that the Fed will help if things go bad."* ?The alleged remedies were equally predictable: more regulation, more government intervention, more spending, more money creation, and more debt.? When things do go bad, pumping more money into the banking system, thereby lowering interest rates once again, only exacerbates the problem, because it encourages the continued wasteful deployment of capital in unsustainable lines that will eventually have to be abandoned anyway, and it forces healthy, wealth-generating firms to have to go on competing with bubble firms for labor and capital. When interest rates are made artificially low, they encourage the kind of investment that would normally occur only if more saved resources existed to fund them than actually do. Continuing to force interest rates down only perpetuates the allocation of capital into outlets that the economy's current resource base cannot sustain. In response to the dot-com and NASDAQ collapses and the modest recession that accompanied them in 2000 and 2001 that Alan Greenspan and the Fed chose to embark on a robust policy of inflation, an approach that culminated in lowering the federal funds rate (the rate at which banks lend to each other) to a mere one percent from June 2003 to June 2004. Already by early 2001 the Fed had begun to ease once again. That year saw no fewer than 11 rate cuts. The unsustainable dot- com boom could not, in the end, be reignited, and thank goodness - the resource misallocations in that sector were unhealthy for the economy. But the Fed's easy money and refusal to allow the recession of 2000 to take its course led to an even more perilous bubble elsewhere. That was the only recession on record in which housing starts did not decline. Not coincidentally, that was also the moment at which people began to conclude that house prices never fall, that a house is the best investment one can make, and so on. By intervening in the market then, the Fed prevented the market from making a full correction, thereby perpetuating unsustainable investment and consumption decisions. *In so doing it merely postponed what it was trying to avoid, and made the crash worse when it finally came.* Fiscal stimulus, meanwhile, merely diverts resources from the productive sector in order to fund money-losing enterprises arbitrarily chosen by government. These artificial expenditures, moreover, interfere with the market's attempt to sort out genuine demand from bubble demand. "Stimulus" spending can in fact keep firms (construction companies, for example) in business that for the sake of genuine economic health need to be liquidated so their resources can be more sensibly employed in more urgently demanded lines of production. The claim that "stimulus" spending is necessary to bring "idle resources" back into use also misfires, since it fails to consider why so many entrepreneurs - who have survived as long as they have on the market because of their skill at anticipating consumer demand - should suddenly have become, all at once, such poor forecasters that they're all saddled with idle resources. The reason for the idle resources is, obviously, some prior act of miscalculation. And what could have created such systemic miscalculation? *Could it be the Fed's artificially low interest rates, that distort entrepreneurial forecasting and encourage the wrong kind of investments at the wrong time?* Consider a restaurant owner who mistakes the temporary demand for his product deriving from the presence of the Olympics in his city with real, sustainable demand. Suppose he opens a new location to accommodate all this new demand. When the Olympics are over, he's left with idle resources - labor with nothing to do and empty restaurant space for starters. Should we want to "stimulate" these resources back into activity? Of course not. They shouldn't have been allocated this way in the first place. We should want the market, guided by the price system, to redeploy them into sensible channels. The problem, therefore, isn't that we lack enough "spending" or "demand," and that we need government to fill in the "missing demand." The problem is that in the wake of Fed-induced misallocations of resources we wind up with structural imbalances, a mismatch between the capital structure and consumer demand. The recession is the period in which the economy repairs this mismatch by reallocating resources into lines of production that actually correspond to consumer demand. The modern preoccupation with levels of spending instead of patterns of spending obscures the most important aspects of the question. *Had the market been allowed to work before the collapse, there would have been no housing bubble and no crisis in the first place.* Had the market been allowed to work when the crisis hit, recovery would have been swift - as it was in 1920-21, when an even worse depression came to a rapid end without any open-market operations by the Fed, and without any fiscal stimulus. (In fact, the federal budget was cut in half from 1920 to 1922.) What, in short, should we do now? Exactly the opposite of what our so- called experts, who in a sane world would be forever discredited, urge upon us. Regards, Thomas E. Woods, Jr. for *The Daily Reckoning* On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 6:36 AM, Ed Kroposki wrote: > > Brad, thank you for those two posts. > > I have combined and edited as below to forward to those who have not locked > me off their email recipients list and sent that to them. > > We all have a few who on our email list who would benefit from these post. > Ed K > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > First get Warren Buffet's opinion on financing the Obama Budget. Remember > that Buffet is a big Obama Democrat. > > http://tinyurl.com/cokpyt > > Now understand the size of budget and Obama's announced cuts. > > http://tinyurl.com/cbmr8r > > This comparison of his math is submitted for your education. > > Ed K > > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090505/19cebfb7/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Wed May 6 08:17:11 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 07:17:11 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Mo Taxes Message-ID: <400985d70905060517i13514af2ucd23cbd84a9f8ee2@mail.gmail.com> This couldn't happen to a better bunch of guys. Remember during the campaign when all the Silicon Valley 'techies' were telling us how brilliant The One (tm) was? Well, you reap what you sow! So far in the first 100+ days, we've nationalized banks, we're nationalizing the auto industry (by seizing assets from secured creditors), we plan to pay off our debts (mostly to China) with inflated dollars, and the health-care industry is next in the cross-hairs. Yeah, the United States is a great place to invest, just like Argentina. Brad --------------------- Obama riles high-tech exec over outsourcing Andrew S. Ross Tuesday, May 5, 2009 President Barack Obama's proposal to impose taxes on corp... Carl Guardino usually comes across as an amenable, mild-mannered Silicon Valley executive. But not on Monday. Not when he watched President Obama promising to end overseas tax breaks for U.S. companies that "create a job in Bangalore, India, (rather than) one in Buffalo, N.Y." Guardino, CEO of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, angrily described Obama's language as "not only discouraging, but divisive." The president's implication that companies such as Cisco Systems and Hewlett-Packard merely "ship jobs overseas," and are being rewarded in the bargain, came as a shock to Guardino, who otherwise described the president as "brilliant and respected by so many in the tech sector who are counting on the administration as their ally." Indeed, Obama's proposal to limit U.S. companies' ability to defer paying U.S. taxes on offshore earnings does put Bay Area companies doing a lot of business overseas directly in the crosshairs. "It would adversely impact our ability to invest and grow our business in the (United States) and to compete against our foreign competitors," said a spokesman for Cisco. Google, whose CEO, Eric Schmidt, is supposed to be a close buddy of Obama's, said it is "too early to evaluate the potential effect on Google's operations, as there will likely be multiple proposals considered." High stakes: Now, to put things in perspective, Cisco, Google and others have done very well by the current setup. Cisco, which had north of $30 billion in cash at last count, earned $5.6 billion overseas in 2008. By deferring taxes on those earnings, it enjoyed a 16 percent reduction in its U.S. tax rate, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of SEC filings. Google got a 17.4 percent break thanks to tax deferrals on $7.7 billion of overseas earnings. HP, which reported a net profit of $1.8 billion in its last quarter, can defer taxes on $12.9 billion worth of foreign earnings, which it plans to reinvest overseas indefinitely, according to an SEC filing reported by the San Jose Mercury News. So, doth Guardino et. al. protest too much? Not according to Atulya Sarin, a professor of finance at Santa Clara University. "It's a bad idea from the word go," said Sarin, who has consulted with the Internal Revenue Service and with Fortune 100 companies on international tax issues. "Increasing these taxes will reduce after-tax profits, which will reduce incentives. Right now, the administration should be helping Silicon Valley maintain its competitive edge, not making it less so. I hope saner minds will prevail." Sang Kim, an international tax attorney at DLA Piper in East Palo Alto, decried Obama's Bangalore-Buffalo reference as "patently unfair and false." While he said the proposals were enticing, given the administration's drive to stimulate the domestic economy and raise more tax revenue, he warned of unintended consequences, including the possibility that more, not fewer, jobs could be shipped overseas. "Let's hope everyone thinks this through," he said. That's the message Guardino and his 50-strong delegation of Silicon Valley executives - who just happen to be in Washington, D.C. - will be taking to their hometown representatives today. How much joy they get remains to be seen. In a statement, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she "welcome(s) the strong initiative outlined by President Obama that will restore fairness to the tax code by closing international tax loopholes." Pelosi said, "I look forward to working with the president and members of Congress to advance these proposals and close these loopholes." In the past, Sen. Barbara Boxer has pointed out there is "a great deal of misunderstanding surrounding these tax issues," said her senior adviser, Natalie Ravitz. Boxer also wants to be sure that any changes "do not result in unintended consequences," Ravitz said. "This may not be Mount Everest, but it's going to be quite a climb," said Guardino, who is also due to meet with White House officials today. "They're smart people and doing their best. But clearly they see the world a little differently than Silicon Valley." From sanderico1 at gmail.com Wed May 6 09:32:51 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 08:32:51 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Mo Taxes In-Reply-To: <400985d70905060517i13514af2ucd23cbd84a9f8ee2@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905060517i13514af2ucd23cbd84a9f8ee2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905060632g1adcb75dsf52cd87e7ab580dd@mail.gmail.com> Brad, It's hard to know whether to laugh or cry over this shit. You have to wonder who those dumb asses thought the O one was talking about during the campaign when he continually spoke of taxing corps. that did business outside the country. He not only talked about it, he beat it like a drum. Now that he's actually close to implementing his ideas it's .... but wait, we didn't think you were talking about us ..... Seems like about everyone who voted for the guy and has since taken a beating, didn't think he was talking about them. Stupider and stupider. Rik On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 7:17 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > This couldn't happen to a better bunch of guys. Remember during the > campaign when all the Silicon Valley 'techies' were telling us how > brilliant The One (tm) was? Well, you reap what you sow! So far in > the first 100+ days, we've nationalized banks, we're nationalizing the > auto industry (by seizing assets from secured creditors), we plan to > pay off our debts (mostly to China) with inflated dollars, and the > health-care industry is next in the cross-hairs. Yeah, the United > States is a great place to invest, just like Argentina. > > Brad > > --------------------- > > Obama riles high-tech exec over outsourcing > > Andrew S. Ross > > Tuesday, May 5, 2009 > President Barack Obama's proposal to impose taxes on corp... > > Carl Guardino usually comes across as an amenable, mild-mannered > Silicon Valley executive. But not on Monday. Not when he watched > President Obama promising to end overseas tax breaks for U.S. > companies that "create a job in Bangalore, India, (rather than) one in > Buffalo, N.Y." Guardino, CEO of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, > angrily described Obama's language as "not only discouraging, but > divisive." The president's implication that companies such as Cisco > Systems and Hewlett-Packard merely "ship jobs overseas," and are being > rewarded in the bargain, came as a shock to Guardino, who otherwise > described the president as "brilliant and respected by so many in the > tech sector who are counting on the administration as their ally." > > Indeed, Obama's proposal to limit U.S. companies' ability to defer > paying U.S. taxes on offshore earnings does put Bay Area companies > doing a lot of business overseas directly in the crosshairs. "It would > adversely impact our ability to invest and grow our business in the > (United States) and to compete against our foreign competitors," said > a spokesman for Cisco. > > Google, whose CEO, Eric Schmidt, is supposed to be a close buddy of > Obama's, said it is "too early to evaluate the potential effect on > Google's operations, as there will likely be multiple proposals > considered." > > High stakes: Now, to put things in perspective, Cisco, Google and > others have done very well by the current setup. Cisco, which had > north of $30 billion in cash at last count, earned $5.6 billion > overseas in 2008. By deferring taxes on those earnings, it enjoyed a > 16 percent reduction in its U.S. tax rate, according to a Wall Street > Journal analysis of SEC filings. Google got a 17.4 percent break > thanks to tax deferrals on $7.7 billion of overseas earnings. HP, > which reported a net profit of $1.8 billion in its last quarter, can > defer taxes on $12.9 billion worth of foreign earnings, which it plans > to reinvest overseas indefinitely, according to an SEC filing reported > by the San Jose Mercury News. > > So, doth Guardino et. al. protest too much? Not according to Atulya > Sarin, a professor of finance at Santa Clara University. "It's a bad > idea from the word go," said Sarin, who has consulted with the > Internal Revenue Service and with Fortune 100 companies on > international tax issues. "Increasing these taxes will reduce > after-tax profits, which will reduce incentives. Right now, the > administration should be helping Silicon Valley maintain its > competitive edge, not making it less so. I hope saner minds will > prevail." > > Sang Kim, an international tax attorney at DLA Piper in East Palo > Alto, decried Obama's Bangalore-Buffalo reference as "patently unfair > and false." While he said the proposals were enticing, given the > administration's drive to stimulate the domestic economy and raise > more tax revenue, he warned of unintended consequences, including the > possibility that more, not fewer, jobs could be shipped overseas. > "Let's hope everyone thinks this through," he said. > > That's the message Guardino and his 50-strong delegation of Silicon > Valley executives - who just happen to be in Washington, D.C. - will > be taking to their hometown representatives today. How much joy they > get remains to be seen. In a statement, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi > said she "welcome(s) the strong initiative outlined by President Obama > that will restore fairness to the tax code by closing international > tax loopholes." Pelosi said, "I look forward to working with the > president and members of Congress to advance these proposals and close > these loopholes." In the past, Sen. Barbara Boxer has pointed out > there is "a great deal of misunderstanding surrounding these tax > issues," said her senior adviser, Natalie Ravitz. Boxer also wants to > be sure that any changes "do not result in unintended consequences," > Ravitz said. > > "This may not be Mount Everest, but it's going to be quite a climb," > said Guardino, who is also due to meet with White House officials > today. "They're smart people and doing their best. But clearly they > see the world a little differently than Silicon Valley." > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090506/ec69af7e/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Wed May 6 11:53:00 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 10:53:00 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Mo Taxes In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0905060632g1adcb75dsf52cd87e7ab580dd@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905060517i13514af2ucd23cbd84a9f8ee2@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905060632g1adcb75dsf52cd87e7ab580dd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70905060853q6914f65ei9353da7c8d9851d6@mail.gmail.com> On 5/6/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > It's hard to know whether to laugh or cry over this shit. You have to wonder > who those dumb asses thought the O one was talking about during the campaign > when he continually spoke of taxing corps. that did business outside the > country. He not only talked about it, he beat it like a drum. Now that he's > actually close to implementing his ideas it's .... but wait, we didn't think > you were talking about us ..... > > Seems like about everyone who voted for the guy and has since taken a > beating, didn't think he was talking about them. > > Stupider and stupider. > > Rik > > On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 7:17 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> This couldn't happen to a better bunch of guys. Remember during the >> campaign when all the Silicon Valley 'techies' were telling us how >> brilliant The One (tm) was? Well, you reap what you sow! So far in >> the first 100+ days, we've nationalized banks, we're nationalizing the >> auto industry (by seizing assets from secured creditors), we plan to >> pay off our debts (mostly to China) with inflated dollars, and the >> health-care industry is next in the cross-hairs. Yeah, the United >> States is a great place to invest, just like Argentina. >> >> Brad >> >> --------------------- >> >> Obama riles high-tech exec over outsourcing >> >> Andrew S. Ross >> >> Tuesday, May 5, 2009 >> President Barack Obama's proposal to impose taxes on corp... >> >> Carl Guardino usually comes across as an amenable, mild-mannered >> Silicon Valley executive. But not on Monday. Not when he watched >> President Obama promising to end overseas tax breaks for U.S. >> companies that "create a job in Bangalore, India, (rather than) one in >> Buffalo, N.Y." Guardino, CEO of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, >> angrily described Obama's language as "not only discouraging, but >> divisive." The president's implication that companies such as Cisco >> Systems and Hewlett-Packard merely "ship jobs overseas," and are being >> rewarded in the bargain, came as a shock to Guardino, who otherwise >> described the president as "brilliant and respected by so many in the >> tech sector who are counting on the administration as their ally." >> >> Indeed, Obama's proposal to limit U.S. companies' ability to defer >> paying U.S. taxes on offshore earnings does put Bay Area companies >> doing a lot of business overseas directly in the crosshairs. "It would >> adversely impact our ability to invest and grow our business in the >> (United States) and to compete against our foreign competitors," said >> a spokesman for Cisco. >> >> Google, whose CEO, Eric Schmidt, is supposed to be a close buddy of >> Obama's, said it is "too early to evaluate the potential effect on >> Google's operations, as there will likely be multiple proposals >> considered." >> >> High stakes: Now, to put things in perspective, Cisco, Google and >> others have done very well by the current setup. Cisco, which had >> north of $30 billion in cash at last count, earned $5.6 billion >> overseas in 2008. By deferring taxes on those earnings, it enjoyed a >> 16 percent reduction in its U.S. tax rate, according to a Wall Street >> Journal analysis of SEC filings. Google got a 17.4 percent break >> thanks to tax deferrals on $7.7 billion of overseas earnings. HP, >> which reported a net profit of $1.8 billion in its last quarter, can >> defer taxes on $12.9 billion worth of foreign earnings, which it plans >> to reinvest overseas indefinitely, according to an SEC filing reported >> by the San Jose Mercury News. >> >> So, doth Guardino et. al. protest too much? Not according to Atulya >> Sarin, a professor of finance at Santa Clara University. "It's a bad >> idea from the word go," said Sarin, who has consulted with the >> Internal Revenue Service and with Fortune 100 companies on >> international tax issues. "Increasing these taxes will reduce >> after-tax profits, which will reduce incentives. Right now, the >> administration should be helping Silicon Valley maintain its >> competitive edge, not making it less so. I hope saner minds will >> prevail." >> >> Sang Kim, an international tax attorney at DLA Piper in East Palo >> Alto, decried Obama's Bangalore-Buffalo reference as "patently unfair >> and false." While he said the proposals were enticing, given the >> administration's drive to stimulate the domestic economy and raise >> more tax revenue, he warned of unintended consequences, including the >> possibility that more, not fewer, jobs could be shipped overseas. >> "Let's hope everyone thinks this through," he said. >> >> That's the message Guardino and his 50-strong delegation of Silicon >> Valley executives - who just happen to be in Washington, D.C. - will >> be taking to their hometown representatives today. How much joy they >> get remains to be seen. In a statement, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi >> said she "welcome(s) the strong initiative outlined by President Obama >> that will restore fairness to the tax code by closing international >> tax loopholes." Pelosi said, "I look forward to working with the >> president and members of Congress to advance these proposals and close >> these loopholes." In the past, Sen. Barbara Boxer has pointed out >> there is "a great deal of misunderstanding surrounding these tax >> issues," said her senior adviser, Natalie Ravitz. Boxer also wants to >> be sure that any changes "do not result in unintended consequences," >> Ravitz said. >> >> "This may not be Mount Everest, but it's going to be quite a climb," >> said Guardino, who is also due to meet with White House officials >> today. "They're smart people and doing their best. But clearly they >> see the world a little differently than Silicon Valley." >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Wed May 6 12:10:35 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 11:10:35 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Mo Taxes In-Reply-To: <400985d70905060853q6914f65ei9353da7c8d9851d6@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905060517i13514af2ucd23cbd84a9f8ee2@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905060632g1adcb75dsf52cd87e7ab580dd@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905060853q6914f65ei9353da7c8d9851d6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905060910y50fde46cs13773f98f30670aa@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Whatever you were trying to say, the text didn't make it. Rik On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > On 5/6/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > > Brad, > > > > It's hard to know whether to laugh or cry over this shit. You have to > wonder > > who those dumb asses thought the O one was talking about during the > campaign > > when he continually spoke of taxing corps. that did business outside the > > country. He not only talked about it, he beat it like a drum. Now that > he's > > actually close to implementing his ideas it's .... but wait, we didn't > think > > you were talking about us ..... > > > > Seems like about everyone who voted for the guy and has since taken a > > beating, didn't think he was talking about them. > > > > Stupider and stupider. > > > > Rik > > > > On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 7:17 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> This couldn't happen to a better bunch of guys. Remember during the > >> campaign when all the Silicon Valley 'techies' were telling us how > >> brilliant The One (tm) was? Well, you reap what you sow! So far in > >> the first 100+ days, we've nationalized banks, we're nationalizing the > >> auto industry (by seizing assets from secured creditors), we plan to > >> pay off our debts (mostly to China) with inflated dollars, and the > >> health-care industry is next in the cross-hairs. Yeah, the United > >> States is a great place to invest, just like Argentina. > >> > >> Brad > >> > >> --------------------- > >> > >> Obama riles high-tech exec over outsourcing > >> > >> Andrew S. Ross > >> > >> Tuesday, May 5, 2009 > >> President Barack Obama's proposal to impose taxes on corp... > >> > >> Carl Guardino usually comes across as an amenable, mild-mannered > >> Silicon Valley executive. But not on Monday. Not when he watched > >> President Obama promising to end overseas tax breaks for U.S. > >> companies that "create a job in Bangalore, India, (rather than) one in > >> Buffalo, N.Y." Guardino, CEO of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, > >> angrily described Obama's language as "not only discouraging, but > >> divisive." The president's implication that companies such as Cisco > >> Systems and Hewlett-Packard merely "ship jobs overseas," and are being > >> rewarded in the bargain, came as a shock to Guardino, who otherwise > >> described the president as "brilliant and respected by so many in the > >> tech sector who are counting on the administration as their ally." > >> > >> Indeed, Obama's proposal to limit U.S. companies' ability to defer > >> paying U.S. taxes on offshore earnings does put Bay Area companies > >> doing a lot of business overseas directly in the crosshairs. "It would > >> adversely impact our ability to invest and grow our business in the > >> (United States) and to compete against our foreign competitors," said > >> a spokesman for Cisco. > >> > >> Google, whose CEO, Eric Schmidt, is supposed to be a close buddy of > >> Obama's, said it is "too early to evaluate the potential effect on > >> Google's operations, as there will likely be multiple proposals > >> considered." > >> > >> High stakes: Now, to put things in perspective, Cisco, Google and > >> others have done very well by the current setup. Cisco, which had > >> north of $30 billion in cash at last count, earned $5.6 billion > >> overseas in 2008. By deferring taxes on those earnings, it enjoyed a > >> 16 percent reduction in its U.S. tax rate, according to a Wall Street > >> Journal analysis of SEC filings. Google got a 17.4 percent break > >> thanks to tax deferrals on $7.7 billion of overseas earnings. HP, > >> which reported a net profit of $1.8 billion in its last quarter, can > >> defer taxes on $12.9 billion worth of foreign earnings, which it plans > >> to reinvest overseas indefinitely, according to an SEC filing reported > >> by the San Jose Mercury News. > >> > >> So, doth Guardino et. al. protest too much? Not according to Atulya > >> Sarin, a professor of finance at Santa Clara University. "It's a bad > >> idea from the word go," said Sarin, who has consulted with the > >> Internal Revenue Service and with Fortune 100 companies on > >> international tax issues. "Increasing these taxes will reduce > >> after-tax profits, which will reduce incentives. Right now, the > >> administration should be helping Silicon Valley maintain its > >> competitive edge, not making it less so. I hope saner minds will > >> prevail." > >> > >> Sang Kim, an international tax attorney at DLA Piper in East Palo > >> Alto, decried Obama's Bangalore-Buffalo reference as "patently unfair > >> and false." While he said the proposals were enticing, given the > >> administration's drive to stimulate the domestic economy and raise > >> more tax revenue, he warned of unintended consequences, including the > >> possibility that more, not fewer, jobs could be shipped overseas. > >> "Let's hope everyone thinks this through," he said. > >> > >> That's the message Guardino and his 50-strong delegation of Silicon > >> Valley executives - who just happen to be in Washington, D.C. - will > >> be taking to their hometown representatives today. How much joy they > >> get remains to be seen. In a statement, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi > >> said she "welcome(s) the strong initiative outlined by President Obama > >> that will restore fairness to the tax code by closing international > >> tax loopholes." Pelosi said, "I look forward to working with the > >> president and members of Congress to advance these proposals and close > >> these loopholes." In the past, Sen. Barbara Boxer has pointed out > >> there is "a great deal of misunderstanding surrounding these tax > >> issues," said her senior adviser, Natalie Ravitz. Boxer also wants to > >> be sure that any changes "do not result in unintended consequences," > >> Ravitz said. > >> > >> "This may not be Mount Everest, but it's going to be quite a climb," > >> said Guardino, who is also due to meet with White House officials > >> today. "They're smart people and doing their best. But clearly they > >> see the world a little differently than Silicon Valley." > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090506/3ddf357f/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Wed May 6 13:17:59 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 12:17:59 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Mo Taxes In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0905060632g1adcb75dsf52cd87e7ab580dd@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905060517i13514af2ucd23cbd84a9f8ee2@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905060632g1adcb75dsf52cd87e7ab580dd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70905061017x627b8331x6c859e08fb36d2f9@mail.gmail.com> Rik, The electricity has been off all morning because of last nights thunderstorms. It just came back on. Did the earth stop spinning with the absence of my leadership? We need to go easy on the people who put their faith in this phony. Actually, he's not a phony, he's lived his whole life as a leftist and a Marxist so people shouldn't complain because of his consistency. Name one success prior to winning the POTUS slot that this man has achieved. Graduating from Columbia and Harvard don't count. Lots of idiots are graduates of those institutions. He ran a successful hot dog stand, yes/no? He used his law degree and was a rising star in a law firm, yes/no? He was a junior legislator in his home (adopted) state and wrote significant legislation, yes/no? He became a US Senator and during his only term in that position (most of which he ran for POTUS) authored significant legislation, yes/no? He bought a house (something all of us know how to do) without the help of a convicted criminal, yes/no? I'm giving blanket amnesty on all who voted for the man, just as I did all my old German friends (mostly dead now) who believed in that failed artist (who was actually Austrian, not German). Even smart people make stupid decisions, and I learned in PSYC 101 (the only class in college I made a D in) that people make stupid decisions in masses. We had a birthday party for Cora Saturday night (7th) with mostly adults (not that there's anything wrong with kids at a kid's birthday party but I prefer adults and I'm paying for it) and I "lost it" on one of my friends. He's a minister who grew-up in Africa with missionary parents. He has a soft spot for Africa, Africans, and African-Americans. I'm tired of wasting my breath talking about facts, ie. Bush 43 spent more money helping Africa than any other President, but that wasn't the point. My friend is all caught-up in Obama being the first "African-American" President. There may have been some merlot talking and I'm going to be really pissed if we declare a trade war on Chile and my "value" priced house swill. I'm done reminding my "friend of Africa" of the accomplishments of Condi Rice, who has first-hand knowledge of classmates being killed in a church bombing, and Clarence Thomas, growing-up in poverty in Georgia. If you recall, this list was a spin-off of the old R-22 list going ape shit over the Bill E "Magic Negro" post. Well folks, I don't give a rat's ass about skin color or culture (and I'd be in big trouble if I did since I sleep with a yellow and am the father of a half-yellow child). Let's cut straight to the chase - who gives a shit about the DNA or the pigmentation of this or any other guy? He's a Marxist! Period, end of story! Forget about all that crap we were fed about how he's a "centrist" and "smart" and he graduated from Harvard Law School. Hell, Lenin attended law school, BFD! The One's (tm) race card has expired with me! Where we going with this? Oh yeah, my buddy the preacher and his attitude. I said, "W@#ner, forgive yourself, you made a mistake, you are in the Messiah business and you temporarily supported 'heaven on earth'. Don't beat yourself up but WAKE UP FOR GOD's SAKE!" Brad On 5/6/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > It's hard to know whether to laugh or cry over this shit. You have to wonder > who those dumb asses thought the O one was talking about during the campaign > when he continually spoke of taxing corps. that did business outside the > country. He not only talked about it, he beat it like a drum. Now that he's > actually close to implementing his ideas it's .... but wait, we didn't think > you were talking about us ..... > > Seems like about everyone who voted for the guy and has since taken a > beating, didn't think he was talking about them. > > Stupider and stupider. > > Rik > > On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 7:17 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> This couldn't happen to a better bunch of guys. Remember during the >> campaign when all the Silicon Valley 'techies' were telling us how >> brilliant The One (tm) was? Well, you reap what you sow! So far in >> the first 100+ days, we've nationalized banks, we're nationalizing the >> auto industry (by seizing assets from secured creditors), we plan to >> pay off our debts (mostly to China) with inflated dollars, and the >> health-care industry is next in the cross-hairs. Yeah, the United >> States is a great place to invest, just like Argentina. >> >> Brad >> >> --------------------- >> >> Obama riles high-tech exec over outsourcing >> >> Andrew S. Ross >> >> Tuesday, May 5, 2009 >> President Barack Obama's proposal to impose taxes on corp... >> >> Carl Guardino usually comes across as an amenable, mild-mannered >> Silicon Valley executive. But not on Monday. Not when he watched >> President Obama promising to end overseas tax breaks for U.S. >> companies that "create a job in Bangalore, India, (rather than) one in >> Buffalo, N.Y." Guardino, CEO of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, >> angrily described Obama's language as "not only discouraging, but >> divisive." The president's implication that companies such as Cisco >> Systems and Hewlett-Packard merely "ship jobs overseas," and are being >> rewarded in the bargain, came as a shock to Guardino, who otherwise >> described the president as "brilliant and respected by so many in the >> tech sector who are counting on the administration as their ally." >> >> Indeed, Obama's proposal to limit U.S. companies' ability to defer >> paying U.S. taxes on offshore earnings does put Bay Area companies >> doing a lot of business overseas directly in the crosshairs. "It would >> adversely impact our ability to invest and grow our business in the >> (United States) and to compete against our foreign competitors," said >> a spokesman for Cisco. >> >> Google, whose CEO, Eric Schmidt, is supposed to be a close buddy of >> Obama's, said it is "too early to evaluate the potential effect on >> Google's operations, as there will likely be multiple proposals >> considered." >> >> High stakes: Now, to put things in perspective, Cisco, Google and >> others have done very well by the current setup. Cisco, which had >> north of $30 billion in cash at last count, earned $5.6 billion >> overseas in 2008. By deferring taxes on those earnings, it enjoyed a >> 16 percent reduction in its U.S. tax rate, according to a Wall Street >> Journal analysis of SEC filings. Google got a 17.4 percent break >> thanks to tax deferrals on $7.7 billion of overseas earnings. HP, >> which reported a net profit of $1.8 billion in its last quarter, can >> defer taxes on $12.9 billion worth of foreign earnings, which it plans >> to reinvest overseas indefinitely, according to an SEC filing reported >> by the San Jose Mercury News. >> >> So, doth Guardino et. al. protest too much? Not according to Atulya >> Sarin, a professor of finance at Santa Clara University. "It's a bad >> idea from the word go," said Sarin, who has consulted with the >> Internal Revenue Service and with Fortune 100 companies on >> international tax issues. "Increasing these taxes will reduce >> after-tax profits, which will reduce incentives. Right now, the >> administration should be helping Silicon Valley maintain its >> competitive edge, not making it less so. I hope saner minds will >> prevail." >> >> Sang Kim, an international tax attorney at DLA Piper in East Palo >> Alto, decried Obama's Bangalore-Buffalo reference as "patently unfair >> and false." While he said the proposals were enticing, given the >> administration's drive to stimulate the domestic economy and raise >> more tax revenue, he warned of unintended consequences, including the >> possibility that more, not fewer, jobs could be shipped overseas. >> "Let's hope everyone thinks this through," he said. >> >> That's the message Guardino and his 50-strong delegation of Silicon >> Valley executives - who just happen to be in Washington, D.C. - will >> be taking to their hometown representatives today. How much joy they >> get remains to be seen. In a statement, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi >> said she "welcome(s) the strong initiative outlined by President Obama >> that will restore fairness to the tax code by closing international >> tax loopholes." Pelosi said, "I look forward to working with the >> president and members of Congress to advance these proposals and close >> these loopholes." In the past, Sen. Barbara Boxer has pointed out >> there is "a great deal of misunderstanding surrounding these tax >> issues," said her senior adviser, Natalie Ravitz. Boxer also wants to >> be sure that any changes "do not result in unintended consequences," >> Ravitz said. >> >> "This may not be Mount Everest, but it's going to be quite a climb," >> said Guardino, who is also due to meet with White House officials >> today. "They're smart people and doing their best. But clearly they >> see the world a little differently than Silicon Valley." >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From mweisner at ebsmed.com Wed May 6 12:38:15 2009 From: mweisner at ebsmed.com (Michael D. Weisner) Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 12:38:15 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] FYI: New Solar Energy company References: <417441E0B2AE471C9B680B3CC6D809C4@ebsoffice> <400985d70905041845o3e62aa6aib22acbca4557deff@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Brad, You don't need a big lot for a geothermal system. In '04 I became a partner in an office building that had an old (60's vintage) geothermal cooling design. None of it worked any longer because most of the HVAC guys had no idea how it functioned or what goes wrong in these designs. We have two wells, one a 150' supply well complete with a jet pump and the other a "diffusion well," which is basically a set of very deep (40') drywells that return the warm water to the ground. The 50-55F cooling water runs though a water to refrigerant heat exchanger and then is returned. Most of the tenants had window A/C units and the core of the building was running on a 100-ton supplemental cooling system, all costing big bucks. The major problem was that the HVAC company was sure that the heat exchanger was clogged with sediment and restricting the flow, preventing normal operation. They wrote off the geothermal system as unrepairable due to excessive cost. I began to investigate and found that during the construction of a nearby Walgreens Drugs, the local utility, LIPA, had driven their overhead electric supply pole, placed on our property via an easement granted by the previous owners of the building, into the return pipe from the building, crushing and rendering it useless. I diverted the water around the damage and the system came to life in the summer of '06! I eventually replaced the jet pump and the well casing for a total cost of about $5K over the next year. The system has saved us at least 50% of the electrical cooling cost and we have removed all of the window A/C units. I am looking into a winter version, although the freezing problem in the northeast may make it difficult unless the well head access vault is protected. I also need a much more efficient secondary system, converting from the simple refrigeration system to a more versatile heat pump design. It all depends on the cost of the conversion and the cost of natural gas. Right now, gas wins hands down, subject to change. Now, if a roof mounted solar array permitted me to generate the electricity for the building heating and cooling system, I would install it today. Mike From: "Brad Haslett" Monday, May 04, 2009 9:45 PM > Mike, > > My employer is one of the largest users of energy in the US, second > only to UPS (mostly jet fuel and diesel). When my boss looks at > alternative energy, I assume it is nearly competitive in the > marketplace because he generally doesn't throw away good money on > silliness. Our hub in Oakland recently installed a huge array of > solar panels. Mr. Smith announced this week that our goal was to be > "30 in 30", meaning, he wanted 30% of our fleet (both trucks and jets) > running on bio-fuels from algae by 2030. If I had a big enough lot > I'd go geo-thermal for our heating and cooling. The payback used to > be 10 years but that will drop dramatically with cap-and-trade taxes. > We're upgrading the downstairs A/C unit and air handler package at our > house to a 16+ SEER rating replacement to take advantage of the $1500 > tax credit that has been extended. It is time Americans got serious > about energy. I don't have a problem with a carbon tax, in fact, I've > advocated one for quite some time. Cap-and-trade is a bureaucrat's > dream and a businessman's nightmare - too many opportunities for graft > and special interests. Put a straight tax on carbon and the market > will settle things out (and goodbye ethanol). From strictly an > environmental point of view, I'm not sure solar and hybrid cars are > any better than oil and coal when you factor in the mining and > disposal issues involved with the raw materials for manufacture. All > fuel comes from sunshine, it is just a matter of aging. If solar > technology is finally becoming cost effective we'll all be hoping for > more global warming (alas, the data may very well indicate we're > heading in the opposite direction). What does your neighborhood Nazi > architecture committee have to say about solar panels? I know mine > would balk. > > Brad > > On 5/4/09, Michael D. Weisner wrote: >> Since I live in the northeast, solar energy has been a wait-and-see >> technology due to the tremendous installation cost and poor output unless >> you live in the southwest. This might have just changed for the better >> by >> some "outside the box" thinkers. Skyline Solar is a newcomer and doesn't >> have much of the "energy company" agenda that you find in a BP Solar or >> Shell Energy (producers of much of the photovoltaics out there.) >> >> I think that it may finally be time to look seriously at an alternative >> energy source for my needs, both home and business. These folks seem to >> have something different and have said their systems will be much lower >> cost >> and significantly higher output. >> >> Check them out at http://www.skyline-solar.com/architecture.htm >> >> I would like to have solar capability before the next wave of energy >> increases. >> >> Mike > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > From ekroposki at charter.net Wed May 6 17:24:34 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 17:24:34 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Montana Firearms Message-ID: <5DDCAAD0471A4439ABB0192B49813E6F@YOURB88038198E> This is for Rik: http://www.norcalblogs.com/post_scripts/2009/05/montana_defies_feds_-_thr.html#more Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090506/9f1ff335/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Wed May 6 17:48:54 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 16:48:54 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Sailing - Sort Of Message-ID: <400985d70905061448j366ede89td345bf07509b3d8d@mail.gmail.com> There is something missing in the article - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/8034027.stm They were rescued by an oil tanker. OIL TANKER! LOL! Brad From sanderico1 at gmail.com Wed May 6 22:06:59 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 21:06:59 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Montana Firearms In-Reply-To: <5DDCAAD0471A4439ABB0192B49813E6F@YOURB88038198E> References: <5DDCAAD0471A4439ABB0192B49813E6F@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905061906x3089f641g5666663480ec5a89@mail.gmail.com> Ed, You go Montana!!! It's a sure bet the pansies running Minnesota would never have the guts to defend it's citizens rights in such a manner. Somebody needs to nip this administration in the butt. They seem to think they have a mandate to socialize the whole place and by God I don't believe that's true. Apparently I'm not alone. Thank the good Lord. Rik On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 4:24 PM, Ed Kroposki wrote: > This is for Rik: > > > http://www.norcalblogs.com/post_scripts/2009/05/montana_defies_feds_-_thr.html#more > > Ed K > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090506/a51e2c98/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Thu May 7 06:53:37 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 05:53:37 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Health Care - Down Memory Hole Message-ID: <400985d70905070353v36ca52abs42bb6bb5356450bc@mail.gmail.com> Watch this while you can - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_MtLyDfXJA The original video has already been removed from YouTube due to a copyright infringement charge. This one will probably be gone soon as well. Listen to what she has to say at 3:30 about putting private health insurance out of business and the cheers from the crowd. That's the whole point of public health care - everyone has access to shitty healthcare, just like in all the other countries with socialized medicine. At least the Canadians have the option of coming to the US for treatment they are denied under government rationing. Where are we going to go? Cuba? There's a "full press" effort to suppress this video just as there was photos of The One training ACORN workers back in the 90's. Private citizens keep copies of things like this so those who aren't drunk on the Kool-Aid can educate themselves. Brad From ekroposki at charter.net Thu May 7 06:58:06 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 06:58:06 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Who on the the Rhodes List? Message-ID: <7C460FA92F6C48EB8126448A8DA9EC50@YOURB88038198E> Who on the rhodes list does this make you think of: See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrHl3UywZg8 EK -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090507/4053512c/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Thu May 7 07:43:20 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 07:43:20 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Health Care - Down Memory Hole Message-ID: <389519931A5544A0BF2502D87205AB70@YOURB88038198E> But Brad, didn't you know that we have infinite resources? Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090507/840d2bb6/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Thu May 7 13:13:33 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 12:13:33 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] My Union Message-ID: <400985d70905071013ub41b10cwba36ad958acbb35e@mail.gmail.com> Boys and Girls, I've been on both sides of this fence, many times. I organized a union at my old employer, twice! I fought the first union attempt at my current employer 20 years ago. I didn't join the succession union, and I fought for the reestablishment of the original union I originally fought against. Lost yet? I've been all over the map. I fight for what is right and against what is wrong. We recently elected a new union President. I know him well. He used to bump me off my dead-head trips to his home town for my 'return-of-favor' letting him have my trips to his home town to make his kid's Little League baseball games. I trust him! Now comes this - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124165379013293871.html I'll post it again in full at the end. I believe in unions. I am a proud member of a union. I don't give my union cart-blanche to negotiate my rights away as a citizen. This is one of the worst power plays to come down the pike in a long time. Even Sen. McGovern can't stomach it! Brad --------------- The 'Free Choice' Act Is Anything But George Meany and binding arbitration. By GEORGE S. MC GOVERN The recent news that Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter has become a member of the Democratic caucus has given new life to legislation that many thought had been put to rest for this Congress -- the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). Last year, I wrote on these pages that I was opposed to this bill because it would eliminate secret ballots in union organizing elections. However, the bill has an additional feature that isn't often mentioned but that is just as troublesome -- compulsory arbitration. This feature would give the government the power to step into labor disputes where employers and labor leaders cannot reach an agreement and compel both sides to accept a contract. Compulsory arbitration is bound to trigger the law of unintended consequences. Currently, labor law maintains a careful balance between the rights of businesses, unions and individual employees. While bargaining power differs depending on individual circumstances, the rights of the parties are well balanced. When a union and a business enter negotiations, current law requires that both sides bargain "in good faith." In a contract negotiation, each party typically perceives the other as too demanding. But no one loses their right to contract willingly or suffers being forced to agree to anything. Employees can strike if they feel that they have been dealt with unfairly, but it is a costly option. Employers are free to reject labor demands they find to be too difficult to accept, but running a business without experienced employees is itself difficult. Both sides have an incentive to press their demands, but they also have compelling reasons not to press their demands too far. EFCA would disrupt that balance by enabling government-appointed lawyers to decide what they believe is fair or reasonable. A federally appointed arbitrator cannot be expected to understand the nuances specific to each business dispute, the competitive market position of the business, or the plethora of other factors unique to each case. Yet fundamental decisions on wages and benefit costs, rules for promotions, or even rules for exiting an unprofitable line of business could fall to federal arbitrators under EFCA. Many labor contracts can run over 100 pages with their requirements of each party. Compulsory arbitration is, in one sense, government dictating to employees what they will win or lose in the deal, with no opportunity to approve the "agreement." Why should employees pay union dues to get such a contract? My perspective on the so-called Employee Free Choice Act is informed by life experience. After leaving the Senate in 1981, I spent some time running a hotel. It was an eye-opening introduction to something most business operators are all-too familiar with -- the difficulty of controlling costs and setting prices in a weak economy. Despite my trust in government, I would have been alarmed by an outsider taking control of basic management decisions that determine success or failure in a business where I had invested my life savings. When it comes to labor disputes, both parties should be guaranteed a real chance for compromise under the joint economic threat of contract breakdowns. George Meany, president of the AFL-CIO for nearly 30 years before retiring in 1979, had it right in condemning mandatory arbitration as "an abrogation of freedom." My party has well-deserved majorities in both houses of Congress, and I am thankful to have an exceptional president in Barack Obama. But while the Democratic majority in Washington confers the power to reward our loyal supporters, today's problems require solutions that transcend party politics. Even when that means taking unpopular stands. Mr. McGovern is a former senator from South Dakota and the 1972 Democratic presidential candidate. From ekroposki at charter.net Thu May 7 15:43:42 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 15:43:42 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] This guy is still at it today Message-ID: <2803E85F1FC64D4382BC5968BEAD743C@YOURB88038198E> An Interview with Jaroslav Romanchuk Karen Minto A Journal for Western Man-- Issue XXVIII-- December 15, 2004 Q: Where did you grow up and what kind of ideas influenced your early thinking? Romanchuk: I grew up in the Soviet Union and the only kinds of ideas available at that time were Communist ideas. But I was brought up in a Catholic family, which is why there was kind of a hybrid ideology, with some ideas of Communism and Catholicism. That is why even in childhood I was somehow confronted with a choice, either official propaganda or family values. When I was studying in the university, I discovered some other things that made me doubtful about both philosophies and ideologies that I was brought up on. Q: What did your father do? Romanchuk: My father is an ordinary electrician, so he did very many odd jobs and my mother worked in a milk factory, so they are quite ordinary people living in a countryside five kilometers from Poland. The town used to be a Polish settlement but after the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact (1938), it was grabbed by Stalin and since that time it remained part of the Soviet Union. I do not see it being given back to Poland ever again. So I was brought up in a very normal ordinary family. Nobody had higher education. So now I am the only one who has. Q: So, what made you start questioning ideas and how did that lead to an interest in Ayn Rand? Romanchuk: I was lucky because I got very good teachers both in high school and at the university, and I wanted to be different from and to challenge the Communist environment. As a child I expressed myself through not drinking or smoking, or listening to hard rock music or having long hair, and not doing sports. There was very little information around. It was kind of a mosaic-the pieces didn't match. You look for something, for some explanation for things going on. I also listened to "enemy voices" ("Radio Liberty," "Voice of America"). They described a very different situation about the world and about the "wild capitalism" and the inhumane treatment of the black people in America and poor people in Western Europe. I started asking questions and I asked them basically wherever it was possible. At the Belarussian Linguistic University, I studied English and American literature, so my first degree was in linguistics. It's a pity that not a single professor in Belarus ever mentioned Ayn Rand's name! The first people who did were Suzanna and Charles Tomlinson. They happened to come to Belarus on a tour in 1992. I am very grateful for my Randfather and Randmother for having introduced me to the great philosophy-Objectivism. They talked about rather controversial things from "their stump." I was thirsty for knowledge and wanted to learn more about the outside world and its rules. Charles and Suzanna sent me Atlas Shrugged. I love to read. You know Russian authors write big books. So I was not startled by the volume of the book. While reading, I was beginning to regret that it was only 1,000-something pages long. Q: What was Belarus before the Soviet Union fell, spiritually, economically and politically? Romanchuk: When Belarus was a part of the Soviet Union, it was the most developed industrial republic. GDP per capita was about US$6000. People who lived in other republics of the Soviet Union envied Belarussians because they were quite well off compared to Azerbaydzhanese or Armenians or Russians. It was an orderly clean Republic closest to the West. It's like a syndrome of East Germany. To create an illusion of prosperity and success of the socialist system and central planning the Kremlin pumped money into Belarus. That is why Belarus did fairly good due to Soviet standards of course. In fact we did not have basic consumer goods like toilet paper, sausage, toothpaste, good shoes and clothes-you name it. At the same time, top communist officials had everything. The concept of "an economic good" (scarcity of something) was unknown to them. Belarus produced a lot of tractors, bearings, trucks, steel, fertilizers. Centralized decision-making and lack of economic calculation and lead to huge disproportions in the structure of capital formation. Ideologically, there was monopoly of communism and its close derivatives. Deviations were banned. The malcontents were sent to Siberia or to "cuckoo's nests." Marxism and Leninism in their crudest forms ruled supreme. Belarussian people were deprived of their security system-the intellectual elite. First communists killed and sent to Siberia thousand of professors, doctors, land owners, merchants, etc. Then during the WWII, every fourth Belarussian was killed in combat and later in Stalin's concentration camps. The totalitarian regime turned the people into a humble crowd armed in totalitarian ideology. So opposition was virtually impossible. Those who were different either emigrated or were sent to the Gulag. Secret police were everywhere. Big Brother was careful enough not to permit any ideological controversies. That was the atmosphere of the 1970s and 80s before the breakup of the Soviet Union. Q: What happened when the Soviet Union was breaking up? What were the conditions then? Was there hope? Confusion? Romanchuk: There was a great chance to establish a democratic state of law based on the principles of the free market economy. Thankfully, there was no war, as Belarus is a peaceful republic. There are no grounds for racial, religious or ethnic conflicts. Separation with Russia was quite smooth, though its shadow is still over Belarus. There was one bad thing about my country. Intellectually, it was not ready to take on all the responsibilities of independence and taking over from the communists. Belarussian ex-communists were frightened and had to pretend that they were in favor of reforms. Opposition does not appear overnight. That is why all major positions in state bodies were still occupied by hard and soft liners. They did not call themselves communists, but in fact they were. The opposition did not have access to capital and mass media so it was being born very slowly. Belarus did not have any dissident movements, and could not rely on the intellectual support of its Diaspora (Belarussians living abroad). Another thing that made the ex-communists last was that the ideological opposition did not have a popular leader. Zenon Pazdnyak, leader of the Belarussian Popular Front, managed to alienate the Russian and Belarussian populations. Communists used to shout "Yankee go home." He said, "Russians go home." In a Republic where 95% of the population speak Russian as their first language, that was political suicide. Nationalists prevented democratic forces from unification and launching a decisive battle with communist. So Belarus' transition was quite slow. Gradually, it began to lose its advantages and capital. Instead of radical shock therapy-price liberalization, privatization, and institutional changes, Belarus decided to put all that on hold as it were and just see what was happening around it. It lost one of the most precious and rare opportunities in the forms of capital, time and trust of the people. Its leaders and nationalist radicals prepared the grounds for the comeback of a neo-communist dictator. Q: What has happened since the fall of the Union? Have there been any intellectuals speaking out? Is there more freedom? Romanchuk: In 1994, due to lack of reforms and coherent opposition, Alexander Lukashenko was elected first President. A new era of Slavic Chauvinism and neo-planned-economy dawned on Belarus. After four years in power, Lukashenko became a real danger-not only to the people of his own country, but became a major threat to Belarus' neighbors. During two years in power, the President violated 19 laws (according to decisions of the Constitutional Court) and did not care about such "trifles" as the division of power, the rule of law, human rights, freedom of expression, private property. In November 1996, he fudged a referendum and dissolved the legally elected parliament. He monopolized all public and business structures and set controls over all major capital flows in and out of the country. Under his rule, Belarus is heading full speed to a centralized planned economy. It is the only country in Central and Eastern Europe that chose "old bottles and old wine." Belarus is ruled like one big collective farm by the whim of its director. But every cloud has a silver lining. Under severe pressure, opposition managed to unite. It is easier with a common enemy. People are getting more knowledge and information about market economies, inalienable human rights and other basic concepts of Western democracies. I began to contribute to the public process of educating people and opening their eyes on the world in 1993 by writing articles in national newspapers and magazines. I read Atlas, The Fountainhead, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, and wanted to share my joy of the great philosophy with other people. After having worked for three years in business, I decided to take an intellectual career to be able to create an educated political and economic elite. I felt that I should do my best to prevent totalitarianism from spreading again. Q: How did you hear about The Institute for Objectivist Studies [now The Objectivist Center]? Romanchuk: Having read Atlas, I wanted to learn more. So I wrote a letter to The Ayn Rand Institute. I thought that all organizations that promote Rand are like brothers, you know. There is a common enemy to fight against-the state. During the ISIL conference in Rome, I met Linda Abrams and Bob Bidinotto. We exchanged just a few words and I exclaimed, "What a small world!" I told them about the Tomlinsons and they said that they knew them. It was great! Linda and Bob told me that IOS was an institution open to reason, common sense and thorough analysis of Objectivism and reality. IOS seemed to have a strategy to make Objectivism not a dogma or pure philosophy for academicians, but an ideology and guidelines for an ordinary person, be it in economics, social life, public activities, election campaigns-anywhere. So I was happy and lucky to meet "the two great couples" that had changed my world and life completely. During the first days of my encounter with Atlas, I was working as the Director of a foreign company. It was a great opportunity to learn microeconomics first hand. In 1995, I decided to choose an intellectual career. I took the job at the Research Center "East-West," a Belarussian independent think tank. The Center provided analysis of various aspects of economic, social and foreign policy of the Belarussian and foreign governments. Later in 1997, Lukashenko closed the Center as a part of the campaign to take control over the third sector (non-government organizations) of the society. Of course, the president could not tolerate a free-market think tank while tightening an iron grip over the rest of the country. Two years ago, I started working on my dissertation in economics, which is heavily based on the Austrian school and the morality of Objectivism. The thesis has been completed and I will have a chance to defend it at the sitting of the Scientific Board of the Belarussian University in December or early next year. It will be difficult, as all members of the Board are either communists or left-Keynesians. I am a columnist of the independent weekly "Belarusskaya Gazeta" and I cover various issues of economic policy and legislation every week. I am also an Advisor to the Shadow Cabinet of Ministers and Chairman of the political party that stands for the free market, the rule of law and private property. Q: What is the Shadow Cabinet of Ministers? Romanchuk: It is probably a European invention. The politicians that were illegally ousted from the parliament and the government decided to form a body to analyze and criticize the president's economic policies. All of its members are in the president's black book. It means they can not be employed by anybody, neither the state nor in private businesses. Every company that dares give them a job is immediately audited and closed on any pretext. They are deprived of their right to live. Shadow ministers are quite influential people in the Republic. Among them there are ex-Chairman of the National Bank, ex-Ministers of Finance, Interior, Foreign Affairs, etc. They have wide contacts with international organizations. Influencing those people, I have a chance to have an impact on their policies and views and shape the future of Belarus in a way. Q: I'm not clear. Is Belarus a Communist country or just a dictatorship with Communist overtones? Romanchuk: Lukashenko is definitely a Communist by background, but he has acquired a different ideology now. He acquired the ideology of Slavic Chauvinism. So he would say "Slavs of all countries must unite but form another Soviet Union." He drafts his claims towards Communists and Chauvinists in Russia and the Ukraine. He wants to run for presidency in Russia. He's got a plan and it's a pity Russian democrats and policy makers underestimate his potential and ability to lie and buy votes. He is in close touch with Russian "red" regional governors. They want to avenge Yeltsin and the democrats for the breakup of the Soviet Union and the defeat of communism. Q: How receptive do you think the people in Belarus and the former satellite republics would be to Ayn Rand's ideas and what sort of plans do you have for spreading them? Romanchuk: The people are receptive. I lecture a lot, so I worked out my course on economic policy at the European Humanities University and traveled around the country and with the same course. The audience was very different, varying from pensioners and students to ex-Communists. When presented in a non-aggressive, logical and consistent way, Objectivism is a very powerful tool and a very consistent ideology and philosophy for common people to acquire. People in post-socialist countries were used to having certain guidelines. Russian Orthodox and Catholic churches are trying to substitute the moral code of "a builder of communism" with The Ten Commandments. They are filling the ideological hole. However, many people are disillusioned, as the church does not answer many questions posed by the people of a country in transition. People look for answers to questions like what to do with economy, what is the balance between personal and social responsibilities, whether to rely on oneself and the family or on the state, and claim perks and subsidies from it. There are some advantages to advertising Objectivism in transitional economies or emerging markets. I firmly believe that Objectivism is the right philosophy in every aspect. I think if properly advertised, it has tremendous potential to become a leading mainstream philosophy in that region. There is a strong sense of a deep crisis, a moral crisis, an ideological crisis, and an economic crisis. So I've got a plan that I've been implementing for a couple of years already. First of all, I have to get professional status-so I'm getting a Ph.D. I will then have the right to talk to more people, because people still trust titles, not individuals. I have almost finished writing a book of my own on transitional economies. It's based on Objectivism, and its contains a lot of facts and figures on transitional economies and some of them are good examples of successful reforms in say, Chile, New Zealand and Hong Kong. I discuss how Hong Kong managed to become one of the freest colonies in the world. So I am working in different directions. The first level is the economic level. Strategically, I'd like to form an Austrian School of Economics in Belarus. It will take at least ten years to lay foundations for it. The next important group to work with is university staff and students. So I teach economic policy for students and for teachers of high school and university. It is necessary to work on the public level as well as with the political elite level, so I work with leaders of political parties and those who shape the policies. Cooperation with different foundations and non-government organizations is essential. The so-called third sector did not exist at all under socialism, but is now developing and is quite active. At present, it unites the most active people in the republic and the more guys you know, the better. The purpose of all these activities is to create a network to spread the ideas around. Q: What kind of successes have you been having in Belarus and what sort of activities have you engaged in to spread Objectivism? Romanchuk: Well, as I already mentioned, I lecture a lot, so I lecture in different institutions for different audiences and age groups and that's very useful. I'm acquiring experience and I'm actually learning the background of people, so it's very useful to me to create marketing devices to present Objectivism in the best possible way. Now I can say that there are at least 30 persons who are consistent Objectivists within the country and the number is growing. I write a lot of articles covering various political and social issues, and issues of economic policy. I write about two articles a week and publish them in major private newspapers in Belarus. I managed to get access to TV and made eight TV programs analyzing various economic issues. The President personally banned my access to TV. So I'm on the black list. Such an honor! Q: How could it be good that he banned you? Romanchuk: If Lukashenko banned somebody, it means the fellow is a good person. Q: Is it a status symbol? Romanchuk: Something like that. He feels it is a danger to his regime. By banning me, he just makes an advertisement for me, so I'm a public figure now. Being an Objectivist is a good thing, right? So the more I am criticized by the present state authorities, the better it is to advertise Objectivism. Besides, I made reports on welfare states in Europe, privatization of the pension system, the meaning of economic security in information age, morality of capitalism, at various international conferences. I had to defend capitalism in a capitalist environment from the people who called themselves capitalists. The ISIL conference was different of course, because they are all libertarians and Objectivists. The worst thing is that I had to fight Western experts who come to Belarus to preach and to call themselves defenders of capitalism, but in fact they are not. They are welfarists, or statists or inflationists-whatever-you name any kind of state intervention. So I am a radical expressing my viewpoint on the West, and at the same time, I provide facts about the state of the economy and public life in both America and Europe. You'd be surprised, but very few academicians in Europe consider America a welfare state. A lot of people are sure that America is laissez-faire capitalism, and that the state is very limited and that it is a perfect society to copy. One of the worst things in Belarus is that Germany and France and Italy are imposing their own models of economic structure and social security systems. And the model that failed in their countries is likely to fail sooner or later in transitional countries. Q: What can "fellow traveler Objectivists" here in the United States do to help you spread Objectivism and perhaps make the world a safer place? Romanchuk: I very much appreciate the help of Objectivists at IOS. It's a great opportunity to deal with liked-minded people here in Boulder at the summer seminar. I have one plan for Objectivists in America to help not only Belarussian Objectivists but Objectivists at the international level. It involves primarily sending out Ayn Rand books and books of prominent Objectivists on various issues to my address (see the end of this interview). Another thing is writing to Belarussian mass media. I have a column that is called "Austrian View," and while I cover various topics, it would be useful if some prominent American economists wrote to Belarussian newspapers, and I promise that all of these materials will be published. That would be important intellectual support. Those articles should cover major international issues and major issues of domestic policy in the States, such as the Social Security system, health care, etc.-because Belarus is sure to pass similar legislation. The intellectual influence of Objectivists is a must in this situation. Another form of support would be to come and take part in various conferences and seminars in Belarus. It would be an honor and pleasure to have David Kelley or someone from Cato or Reason Foundation to come to our seminars. Also, we could not afford sponsoring or finding money for that, because the money we have is from grants supplied by intellectual organizations that usually work with the government. And I tried to get Bob Bidinotto and Linda Abrams invited to conferences, but they told me that they did not have any options for them. At the same time, they sent some socialists who just talked nonsense about the importance of Jack London stuff that was outdated fifty years ago! Another possible form of support would be to invite some experts from Belarus to come to where interesting events happen, like this Summer Seminar, or any other event where serious issues are discussed. I know that some of Ayn Rand's books have been translated and published in Russian, but copies are so limited that they are not on sale in Belarus. We should work out a marketing strategy on how to promote her books in former Soviet countries. Q: When you first came to America, what was your impression of the country, the people, the stores? Do you have any stories to tell? Romanchuk: I first came to America a year ago. It was on the U.S.-European security tour and I was in a group of seventeen socialists from Europe. So it was a challenge to be there and not get lost. Anyway, it was a great experience thanks to the support of the U.S. government. I've been interested in American culture and history and I love English. That's why coming here is a great event. I was happy to see Washington and New York, San Francisco, and meet friendly people and I'm sure that America is full of great people like Charles and Suzanna and Bob and Linda. It is better to see it once than listen to it many times on the radio or T.V. I've got the impression that America has potential. But you know, as Rand wrote, that intellectuals failed to do their job correctly and so you should somehow expand your marketing strategy on intellectual products. Americans are great in marketing software products, burgers, and military equipment, but you failed to market Objectivism, so you failed to protect capitalism and the ideas of your Founding Fathers. I met some guy from the IMF and World Bank, and they were surprised when I showed them Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal and The Adventures of Jonathan Gullible by Ken Schooland. These are the best things we've ever read about capitalism! So go translate them into Russian and make one million copies, this would be the best intellectual help for transitional economies. The World Trade Organization does not do a good job in supporting new democracies in that part of the world because they pursue the policy of mercantilism and protectionism, so they do let their goods out, they do not let their people be employed in their countries so I predict a collapse of Western Europe soon. And that would make Objectivism a very useful and valuable intellectual product. The right thing at the right place at the right time! Mises and Austrian Economists were among the few who predicted the great depression in America. Nobody believed them, but it happened. The same thing will happen in Western Europe if it does not pursue the basic policies of the free market. Karen Minto was a reporter for Full Context magazine while it remained in existence. Presently, her interview with Mr. Romanchuk is no longer available on the Full Context website, and has been salvaged by The Rational Argumentator as a document of vital importance deserving public exposure. http://www.geocities.com/rational_argumentator/Romanchuk.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090507/439b639d/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Thu May 7 19:18:02 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 18:18:02 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Hi, I'm From the Obama Administration And I'm Here To Help You Message-ID: <400985d70905071618p144bbef1lebc4f5fe0df1a046@mail.gmail.com> "Who the fuck do you think you're dealing with? We'll have the IRS audit your fund. Every one of your employees. Your investors. Then we will have the Securities and Exchange Commission rip through your books looking for anything and everything and nothing we find to destroy you with." Read the whole thing - http://www.businessinsider.com/the-white-house-is-now-refusing-to-respond-to-chrysler-threat-stories-2009-5 This story has been repeated by several reputable sources. Welcome to HopenChange - the Chicago Way! Brad From ekroposki at charter.net Fri May 8 06:41:16 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 06:41:16 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] This is of interest to Rik... Message-ID: Montana Governor Signs New Gun Law Executive Summary - The USA state of Montana has signed into power a revolutionary gun law. I mean REVOLUTIONARY. The State of Montana has defied the federal government and their gun laws. This will prompt a showdown between the federal government and the State of Montana . The federal government fears citizens owning guns. They try to curtail what types of guns they can own. The gun control laws all have one common goal - confiscation of privately owned firearms. Montana has gone beyond drawing a line in the sand. They have challenged the Federal Government. The fed now either takes them on and risks them saying the federal agents have no right to violate their state gun laws and arrest the federal agents that try to enforce the federal firearms acts. This will be a world-class event to watch. Montana could go to voting for secession from the union, which is really throwing the gauntlet in Obama's face. If the federal government does nothing they lose face. Gotta love it. Important Points - If guns and ammunition are manufactured inside the State of Montana for sale and use inside that state then the federal firearms laws have no applicability since the federal government only has the power to control commerce across state lines. Montana has the law on their side. Since when did the USA start following their own laws especially the constitution of the USA , the very document that empowers the USA . Silencers made in Montana and sold in Montana would be fully legal and not registered. As a note silencers were first used before the 007 movies as a device to enable one to hunt without disturbing neighbors and scaring game.. They were also useful as devices to control noise when practicing so as to not disturb the neighbors. Silencers work best with a bolt-action rifle. There is a long barrel and the chamber is closed tight so as to direct all the gases though the silencer at th e tip of the barrel. Semi-auto pistols and revolvers do not really muffle the sound very well except on the silver screen. The revolvers bleed gas out with the sound all over the place. The semi-auto pistols bleed the gases out when the slide recoils back. Silencers are maybe nice for snipers picking off enemy soldiers even though they reduce velocity but not very practical for hit men shooting pistols in crowded places. Silencers were useful tools for gun enthusiasts and hunters. There would be no firearm registration, serial numbers, criminal records check, waiting periods or paperwork required. So in a short period of time there would be millions and millions of unregistered untraceable guns in Montana . Way to go Montana ! Discussion - Let us see what Obama does. If he hits Montana hard they will probably vote to secede from the USA . The governor of Texas has already been refusing Federal money because he does not want to agree to the conditions that go with it and he has been saying secession is a right they have as sort of a threat. Things are no longer the same with the USA . Do not be deceived by Obama acting as if all is the same, it is not. Text of the New Law HOUSE BILL NO. 246 INTRODUCED BY J. BONIEK, BENNETT, BUTCHER, CURTISS, RANDALL, WARBURTON AN ACT EXEMPTING FROM FEDERAL REGULATION UNDER THE COMMERCE CLAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES A FIREARM, A FIREARM ACCESSORY, OR AMMUNITION MANUFACTURED AND RETAINED IN MONTANA ; AND PROVIDING AN APPLICABILITY DATE. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MONTANA : Section 1. Short title. [Sections 1 through 6] may be cited as the "Montana Firearms Freedom Act". Section 2. Legislative declarations of authority. The legislature declares that the authority=2 0for [sections 1 through 6] is the following: (1) The 10th amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government elsewhere in the constitution and reserves to the state and people of Montana certain powers as they were understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those powers is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889. (2) The ninth amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the people rights not granted in the constitution and reserves to the people of Montana certain rights, as they were understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those rights is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889. (3) The regulation of intrastate commerce is vested in the states under the 9th and 10th amendments to the United States constitution, particularly if not expressly preempted by federal law. Congress has not expressly preempted state regulation of intrastate commerce pertaining to the manufacture on an intrastate basis of firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition. (4) The second amendment to the United States constitution reserves to the people the right to keep and bear arms as that right was understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889, and the guaranty of the right is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889. (5) Article II, section 12, of the Montana constitution clearly secures to Montana citizens, and prohibits government interference with, the right of individual Montana citizens to keep and bear arms. This constitutional protection is unchanged from the 1889 Montana constitution, which was approved by congress and the people of Montana , and the right exists, as it was understood at the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889. Section 3. Definitions. As used in [sections 1 through 6], the following definitions apply: (1) "Borders of Montana " means the boundaries of Montana described in Article I, section 1, of the 1889 Montana constitution. (2) "Firearms accessories" means items that are used in conjunction with or mounted upon a firearm but are not essential to the basic function of a firearm, including but not limited to telescopic or laser sights, magazines, flash or sound suppressors, folding or aftermarket stocks and grips, speedloaders, ammunition carriers, and lights for target illumination. (3) "Generic and insignificant parts" includes but is not limited to springs, screws, nuts, and pins. (4) "Manufactured" means that a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition has been created from basic materials for functional usefulness, including but not limited to forging, casting, machining, or other processes for working materials. Section 4. Prohibitions. A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Montana and that remains within the borders of Montana is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the legislature that those items have not traveled in interstate commerce. This section applies to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured in Montana from basic materials and that can be manufactured without the inclusion of any significant parts imported from another state. Generic and insignificant parts that have other manufacturing or consumer product applications are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition, and their importation into Montana and incorporation into a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition manufactured in Montana does not subject the firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition to federal regulation. It is declared by the legislature that basic materials, such as unmachined steel and unshaped wood, are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition and are not subject to congressional authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition under interstate commerce as if they were actually firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition. The authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce in basic materials does not include authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition made in Montana from those materials. Firearms accessories that are imported into Montana from another state and that are subject to federal regulation as being in interstate commerce do not subject a firearm to federal regulation under interstate commerce because they are attached to or used in conjunction with a firearm in Montana . Section 5. Exceptions. [Section 4] does not apply to: (1) A firearm that cannot be carried and used by one person; (2) A firearm that has a bore diameter greater than 1 1/2 inches and that uses smokeless powder, not black powder, as a propellant; (3) ammunition with a projectile that explodes using an explosion of chemical energy after the projectile leaves the firearm; or (4) a firearm that discharges two or more projectiles with one activation of the trigger or other firing device. Section 6. Marketing of firearms. A firearm manufactured or sold in Montana under [sections 1 through 6] must have the words "Made in Montana " clearly stamped on a central metallic part , such as the receiver or frame. Section 7. Codification instruction. [Sections 1 through 6] are intended to be codified as an integral part of Title 30, and the provisions of Title 30 apply to [sections 1 through 6]. Section 8. Applicability. [This act] applies to firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition that are manufactured, as defined in [section 3], and retained in Montana after October 1, 2009. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090508/e1f1cb58/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Fri May 8 07:12:04 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 06:12:04 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chrysler Update Message-ID: <400985d70905080412y1600b667kb460efb6b30bc802@mail.gmail.com> More news on the Chrysler deal. The MSM can't hide this forever. What you saw happen to "Joe the Plumber" during the campaign (private government records released - public repudiation by Obama) is now being writ large on the business community. I'm amazed by the number of Kool-Aid drinkers who have taken a "the ends justify the means" attitude. Really? Is that what we've come to as a nation? http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/05/07/politics/otherpeoplesmoney/main4997900.shtml http://www.american.com/archive/2009/may-2009/why-the-chrysler-deal-would-horrify-a-new-dealer http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=326589766764151 Thank God for brave men like this one - http://www.stumblingontruth.com/# BTW, the US had a weak treasury auction yesterday (meaning the cost of everything rises - home mortgage interest, your part of the national debt, etc.). Does that surprise you? Would you loan money to a thug like Hugo Chavez knowing his penchant for ignoring the rule of law? What makes you think prudent investors see Team Obama any differently? How about China? Listen for the sound of printing presses pouring out money in five....four....three....two.......whooooosh! Brad From flybrad at gmail.com Fri May 8 09:27:02 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 08:27:02 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Hi, I'm From the Obama Administration And I'm Here To Help You In-Reply-To: <400985d70905071618p144bbef1lebc4f5fe0df1a046@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905071618p144bbef1lebc4f5fe0df1a046@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70905080627k26a76c62m928de37e4918e800@mail.gmail.com> Good, the Wall Street Journal is on the case (attached). This administration may do more to rescue the reputation of Richard Milhous Nixon than any friendly historian ever could. Everything is relative. Brad -------------- * MAY 8, 2009 Non-TARP Lenders Aren't Making Up the Stories of White House Pressure Does that mean the media will investigate? Not yet. By TOM BLUMER As of early Tuesday evening, according to a report by Liz Moyer at Forbes, the latest news on the Chrysler bankruptcy filing is that: The recalcitrant non-TARP lenders who would not agree to the deal the government attempted to force on them are now attempting to challenge the deal the government and Chrysler have proposed in bankruptcy court. [MRC] These lenders want to keep their identities hidden. In court documents, they have said that "intensifying pressure and name calling by the government threatened to harm them if their identities became public." Bankruptcy judge Arthur Gonzalez "isn't buying it," and has given the lenders until 10 a.m. tomorrow morning to identify themselves or (though not specifically stated) they will apparently lose their standing in court. Meanwhile, John Carney at The Business Insider today expanded on what the lenders' lawyer Tom Lauria first brought out on WJR Radio on Friday, when Lauria told talk-show host Frank Beckmann that "One of my clients was directly threatened by the White House." Carney's read-the-whole-thing report (HT Hot Air) goes further: ..... Although the focus has so been on allegations that the White House threatened Perella Weinberg, sources familiar with the matter say that other firms felt they were threatened as well. None of the sources would agree to speak except on the condition of anonymity, citing fear of political repercussions. The sources, who represent creditors to Chrysler, say they were taken aback by the hardball tactics that the Obama administration employed to cajole them into acquiescing to plans to restructure Chrysler. One person described the administration as the most shocking "end justifies the means" group they have ever encountered. Another characterized Obama was "the most dangerous smooth talker on the planet- and I knew Kissinger." Both were voters for Obama in the last election. One participant in negotiations said that the administration's tactic was to present what one described as a "madman theory of the presidency" in which the President is someone to be feared because he was willing to do anything to get his way. The person said this threat was taken very seriously by his firm. ..... These allegations add to the picture of an administration willing to use intimidation to win over support for its Chrysler plans--and then categorically deny it. Clifford S. Asness, who in a public letter at the Business Insider, rips the administration's tactics, and expresses an understanding that "one by one the managers and banks are said to be caving to the President's wishes out of justifiable fear." So .... the national press is all over this outrage of executive overreach, right? Uh, not exactly. The AP had nothing to say about the alleged threats to non-TARP lenders as of an 11:11 p.m. report, submitting this bland recital (saved here for future reference): Judge Arthur Gonzales says the procedures proposed by Chrysler's lawyers represent a "clear and orderly process." Attorneys for Auburn Hills, Mich.-based Chrysler LLC argued that the automaker had essentially been up for sale for most of the last two years and a speedy sale was needed in order to preserve the value of the company's assets. But those representing a dissident group of Chrysler lenders said more time was needed for other potential buyers to do the research they needed to make an appropriate offer. A 5:43 p.m. AP story is about how some elements of Chrysler's latest concessions agreement with the United Auto Workers union might be helpful to General Motors as it enters the financial netherworld. Zzzzz, ..... Zzzzz. Oh, I'm sorry. The New York Times, in a report by Michael J. de la Merced and Jonathan D. Glater, does note the threats and Gonzales's ruling, and has the following at its second-last paragraph. When the debtholders, calling themselves the Committee of Non-TARP Lenders, made their first public statement last Thursday, they said their group consisted of about 20 investment firms holding about $1 billion. According to their motion to file under seal, the group now claims about $300 million in holdings. de la Merced and Glater were apparently not curious about the possible reasons why the amount involved, and presumably the number of holders, is significantly lower than it was just a few days ago. Maybe it's because the threats are real, guys. On 5/7/09, Brad Haslett wrote: > "Who the fuck do you think you're dealing with? We'll have the IRS > audit your fund. Every one of your employees. Your investors. Then we > will have the Securities and Exchange Commission rip through your > books looking for anything and everything and nothing we find to > destroy you with." > > Read the whole thing - > > http://www.businessinsider.com/the-white-house-is-now-refusing-to-respond-to-chrysler-threat-stories-2009-5 > > This story has been repeated by several reputable sources. Welcome to > HopenChange - the Chicago Way! > > Brad > From flybrad at gmail.com Fri May 8 09:57:57 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 08:57:57 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Obama descretely advocates limiting email communications In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <400985d70905080657y56b90f6dj7c0f2962a349438@mail.gmail.com> Ed, BOHICA! I know Rummy thinks this all some "wing-nut" fantasy. Well, how about this? http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/05/lawmaker-defends-imprisoning-hostile-bloggers/ Put whatever label you want on it, "the camel is sticking its nose under the tent". We have plenty of laws to cover this already. This is cover for something bigger. BTW, I've used the internet under these types of restrictions in China. I pretty much say whatever I want when I'm in an Internet cafe because the police walking around have no idea what I'm typing anyway. But, I'm very careful about what I say and who I say it to using friends and family's IP addresses. This isn't funny anymore, if it ever was. Brad On 4/28/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > Obama surrogate has descretely advocated limited email communications. > > See: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=96301 > > "A system of limitless individual choices, with respect to communications, > is not necessarily in the interest of citizenship and self-government," he > wrote. "Democratic efforts to reduce the resulting problems ought not be > rejected in freedom's name." Cass Sunstein, nominee to head the White House > Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. > > Ed K From sanderico1 at gmail.com Fri May 8 11:15:20 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 10:15:20 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chrysler Update In-Reply-To: <400985d70905080412y1600b667kb460efb6b30bc802@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905080412y1600b667kb460efb6b30bc802@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905080815i707534dcs3e11f050493cd900@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Oh yeah, they're all so polite and civilized .... until they're out of sight or in the backroom somewhere. Then it suddenly becomes clear, friendly, nice or fair, perhaps even honest, are not words one might use to describe these folks. 'Course you and I have said that right along ..... Rik On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 6:12 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > More news on the Chrysler deal. The MSM can't hide this forever. > What you saw happen to "Joe the Plumber" during the campaign (private > government records released - public repudiation by Obama) is now > being writ large on the business community. I'm amazed by the number > of Kool-Aid drinkers who have taken a "the ends justify the means" > attitude. Really? Is that what we've come to as a nation? > > > http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/05/07/politics/otherpeoplesmoney/main4997900.shtml > > > http://www.american.com/archive/2009/may-2009/why-the-chrysler-deal-would-horrify-a-new-dealer > > http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=326589766764151 > > Thank God for brave men like this one - > > http://www.stumblingontruth.com/# > > BTW, the US had a weak treasury auction yesterday (meaning the cost of > everything rises - home mortgage interest, your part of the national > debt, etc.). Does that surprise you? Would you loan money to a thug > like Hugo Chavez knowing his penchant for ignoring the rule of law? > What makes you think prudent investors see Team Obama any differently? > How about China? Listen for the sound of printing presses pouring out > money in five....four....three....two.......whooooosh! > > Brad > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090508/afdc0e29/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Fri May 8 12:26:02 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 12:26:02 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Your Man Message-ID: See attachments: Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090508/e874fb9f/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Handshake.JPG Type: image/jpeg Size: 24741 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090508/e874fb9f/attachment-0002.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: New Torture Techniques.JPG Type: image/jpeg Size: 62354 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090508/e874fb9f/attachment-0003.jpe From flybrad at gmail.com Fri May 8 12:35:18 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 11:35:18 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chrysler Update In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0905080815i707534dcs3e11f050493cd900@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905080412y1600b667kb460efb6b30bc802@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905080815i707534dcs3e11f050493cd900@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70905080935r6a446d81sb8d7860e7d549f37@mail.gmail.com> Rik, This is a real gut-check for our nation. Are we a nation of laws or a nation of thugs? I have friends of many persuasions, both political and otherwise, but this is 'watershed' check for me as to whether I socialize with them again or not; is your support for Obama so strong that you advocate ignoring the rule of law? This argument of "Bush (43) shredded the Constitution" doesn't hack it with me. If he did, prosecute him. We're watching the 'bully pulpit' being used to bully people who are asserting their rights under the law. I'm just guessing here, but I guess if I borrowed a hundred grand from you to buy a new truck, and a year later I came back to you and said, "Rik, this trucking thing didn't work out so well, and you know trucks - I'm paying you back 29 cents on the dollar because this is all your fault and you should have known better, deal? You would probably say, NO, I want my money back or the truck like we agreed on". This Chrysler deal should be the eye-opener for the folks who voted for the attraction of the Kool-Aid package - the one's who actually opened the package, mixed, and drank the stuff are hopeless. I give blanket amnesty to everyone who hoped for HopenChange. Anyone who still believes and supports the methods used to achieve it I can't stomach. Brad On 5/8/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > Oh yeah, they're all so polite and civilized .... until they're out of sight > or in the backroom somewhere. Then it suddenly becomes clear, friendly, nice > or fair, perhaps even honest, are not words one might use to describe these > folks. 'Course you and I have said that right along ..... > > Rik > > On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 6:12 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> More news on the Chrysler deal. The MSM can't hide this forever. >> What you saw happen to "Joe the Plumber" during the campaign (private >> government records released - public repudiation by Obama) is now >> being writ large on the business community. I'm amazed by the number >> of Kool-Aid drinkers who have taken a "the ends justify the means" >> attitude. Really? Is that what we've come to as a nation? >> >> >> http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/05/07/politics/otherpeoplesmoney/main4997900.shtml >> >> >> http://www.american.com/archive/2009/may-2009/why-the-chrysler-deal-would-horrify-a-new-dealer >> >> http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=326589766764151 >> >> Thank God for brave men like this one - >> >> http://www.stumblingontruth.com/# >> >> BTW, the US had a weak treasury auction yesterday (meaning the cost of >> everything rises - home mortgage interest, your part of the national >> debt, etc.). Does that surprise you? Would you loan money to a thug >> like Hugo Chavez knowing his penchant for ignoring the rule of law? >> What makes you think prudent investors see Team Obama any differently? >> How about China? Listen for the sound of printing presses pouring out >> money in five....four....three....two.......whooooosh! >> >> Brad >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From ekroposki at charter.net Sat May 9 07:32:46 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sat, 9 May 2009 07:32:46 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Obama to keep one Bush policy... Message-ID: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30635672/ WASHINGTON - The Obama administration will retain a Bush-era rule for polar bears, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar announced Friday, in a move that angered activists who noted the rule limits what can be done to protect the species from global warming. The administration had faced a weekend deadline to decide whether it should allow government agencies to cite the federal Endangered Species Act, which protects the bear, to impose limits on greenhouse gases from power plants, factories and automobiles even if the emissions occur thousands of miles from where the polar bear lives. "We must do all we can to help the polar bear recover, recognizing that the greatest threat to the polar bear is the melting of Arctic sea ice caused by climate change," Salazar said in a statement. "However, the Endangered Species Act is not the proper mechanism for controlling our nation's carbon emissions."Instead, we need a comprehensive energy and climate strategy that curbs climate change and its impacts - including the loss of sea ice," he added. "Both President Obama and I are committed to achieving that goal." Court action vowed Environmentalists vowed to contest the rule in court. "We need to use every tool at our disposal, including the Endangered Species Act," Andrew Wetzler, wildlife conservation director at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said in a statement. "The rule endorsed today is illegal, and we will continue to fight it in court." Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. and head of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, also protested the decision not to use the act to require emissions cuts. "Monitoring the situation will not tell us more than we know now - that the polar bear is threatened and we need to act," she said in a statement. The species law that affords protection for plants, animals and fish that face possible extinction became entangled with the need to reduce pollution linked to global warming more than a year ago. The Interior Department during the Bush administration declared the polar bear a threatened species, citing the decline of Arctic sea ice due to global warming. Fearful that the declaration putting the bear under the federal species law might be used to force regulation of carbon dioxide, the leading greenhouse gas from burning fossil fuels, the Bush administration issued a special rule: No action outside of the bear's Arctic habitat could be considered as endangering its survival. The limitation, hailed by business groups, prompted lawsuits from environmentalists and action by Congress. In March, federal lawmakers authorized Salazar to rescind the Bush administration's special rule, thus avoiding any complicated and time-consuming regulatory procedures. The deadline for such action was Saturday, 60 days after Congress acted. 'Half done' Environmentalists complained last week when Salazar failed to address the polar bear rule when he rescinded another Bush regulation involving endangered species consultation - one Congress also authorized to be scrapped. "From our perspective the job is half done" without a reversal of the polar bear rule, Noah Greenwald of the Center for Biological Diversity, an advocacy group, said after last week's action. The special rule "significantly undercuts protections for the polar bear by omitting global warming pollution as a factor in the polar bear's risk of extinction," said Jane Kochersperger, a spokeswoman for Greenpeace, which delivered 80,000 petitions to the Interior Department after they were collected by the two environmental groups. Environmentalists also circulated a letter to Salazar, signed by 49 law professors, that urged him to reverse the Bush rule, arguing that its restrictions are so broad as to be illegal under the Endangered Species Act. Concern expressed Business groups had expressed concern about the Endangered Species Act being used to regulate greenhouse gases, especially industrial and power plant emissions. On Thursday, Rep. Doc Hastings of Washington, the ranking Republican on the House Natural Resources Committee, urged Salazar to keep the Bush rule in place. Along with the recent ruling by the Environmental Protection Agency that carbon dioxide is a health hazard, "withdrawing this rule would give the federal government vast new climate change power to regulate any federal or federally permitted activity in our country that emits greenhouse gases," said Hastings. "This reaches far beyond the scope of polar bears in the Arctic and could put jobs and economic activity across the entire nation at risk." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090509/3227ccab/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sat May 9 11:06:44 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Sat, 9 May 2009 10:06:44 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chrysler Update In-Reply-To: <400985d70905080935r6a446d81sb8d7860e7d549f37@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905080412y1600b667kb460efb6b30bc802@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905080815i707534dcs3e11f050493cd900@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905080935r6a446d81sb8d7860e7d549f37@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905090806s126e9beq4e189a23e017a02e@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Yeah, I'm finding myself in about the same boat. I'm already and have been for a while, avoiding places where I might have to spend time listening to a lot of the tripe the messiah's followers espouse. Common sense should easily refute most of the things they say, but it seems common sense rolls of their back like water off a duck. I have little patience for foolishness, especially when I know I will be coerced into taking part. I think for the foreseeable future, I will be just looking people in the eye and saying: You can't always get what you want, but you damned near always get what you deserve. So if you believe the messiah's BS, bend over and get ready.... You may not believe me now, but you will before too long. I've been hearing capitalism blamed for a lot of the things that are wrong with our country lately. I can't even begin to tell how stupid this is. In the more socialist populations around the world, who are the most likely to be affluent in those societies? 1. the top few bureaucrats, 'cause they can steal from the collective at will, and 2. the capitalists. The only difference between the capitalists in those societies and ours is all their business is under the table, but their standard of living is still always among the highest. Why is this so hard to see?? People, even though they may have equal rights, are not and never will be equal. The ambitious or smart always rise to the top and the lumps are always ...... the lumps. Gut check??? Oh yeah, and right now, as a group, now we're failing miserably. Rik On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > This is a real gut-check for our nation. Are we a nation of laws or a > nation of thugs? I have friends of many persuasions, both political > and otherwise, but this is 'watershed' check for me as to whether I > socialize with them again or not; is your support for Obama so strong > that you advocate ignoring the rule of law? This argument of "Bush > (43) shredded the Constitution" doesn't hack it with me. If he did, > prosecute him. We're watching the 'bully pulpit' being used to bully > people who are asserting their rights under the law. I'm just guessing > here, but I guess if I borrowed a hundred grand from you to buy a new > truck, and a year later I came back to you and said, "Rik, this > trucking thing didn't work out so well, and you know trucks - I'm > paying you back 29 cents on the dollar because this is all your fault > and you should have known better, deal? You would probably say, NO, I > want my money back or the truck like we agreed on". > > This Chrysler deal should be the eye-opener for the folks who voted > for the attraction of the Kool-Aid package - the one's who actually > opened the package, mixed, and drank the stuff are hopeless. > > I give blanket amnesty to everyone who hoped for HopenChange. Anyone > who still believes and supports the methods used to achieve it I can't > stomach. > > Brad > On 5/8/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > > Brad, > > > > Oh yeah, they're all so polite and civilized .... until they're out of > sight > > or in the backroom somewhere. Then it suddenly becomes clear, friendly, > nice > > or fair, perhaps even honest, are not words one might use to describe > these > > folks. 'Course you and I have said that right along ..... > > > > Rik > > > > On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 6:12 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> More news on the Chrysler deal. The MSM can't hide this forever. > >> What you saw happen to "Joe the Plumber" during the campaign (private > >> government records released - public repudiation by Obama) is now > >> being writ large on the business community. I'm amazed by the number > >> of Kool-Aid drinkers who have taken a "the ends justify the means" > >> attitude. Really? Is that what we've come to as a nation? > >> > >> > >> > http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/05/07/politics/otherpeoplesmoney/main4997900.shtml > >> > >> > >> > http://www.american.com/archive/2009/may-2009/why-the-chrysler-deal-would-horrify-a-new-dealer > >> > >> http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=326589766764151 > >> > >> Thank God for brave men like this one - > >> > >> http://www.stumblingontruth.com/# > >> > >> BTW, the US had a weak treasury auction yesterday (meaning the cost of > >> everything rises - home mortgage interest, your part of the national > >> debt, etc.). Does that surprise you? Would you loan money to a thug > >> like Hugo Chavez knowing his penchant for ignoring the rule of law? > >> What makes you think prudent investors see Team Obama any differently? > >> How about China? Listen for the sound of printing presses pouring out > >> money in five....four....three....two.......whooooosh! > >> > >> Brad > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090509/104dacb4/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sat May 9 18:06:04 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sat, 9 May 2009 17:06:04 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chrysler Update In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0905090806s126e9beq4e189a23e017a02e@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905080412y1600b667kb460efb6b30bc802@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905080815i707534dcs3e11f050493cd900@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905080935r6a446d81sb8d7860e7d549f37@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905090806s126e9beq4e189a23e017a02e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70905091506v1b6f8ba7mf12ebe47730877a@mail.gmail.com> Rik, The hits just keep coming from Chrysler - http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/chrysler-walks-away-from-lemon-laws/ My 1995 Dodge truck is long out of warranty but recent buyers are pretty much screwed. Who's first in line to buy a 2010 Obamamobile? Not me! Brad On 5/9/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > Yeah, I'm finding myself in about the same boat. I'm already and have been > for a while, avoiding places where I might have to spend time listening to a > lot of the tripe the messiah's followers espouse. Common sense should easily > refute most of the things they say, but it seems common sense rolls of their > back like water off a duck. I have little patience for foolishness, > especially when I know I will be coerced into taking part. > > I think for the foreseeable future, I will be just looking people in the eye > and saying: You can't always get what you want, but you damned near always > get what you deserve. So if you believe the messiah's BS, bend over and get > ready.... You may not believe me now, but you will before too long. > > I've been hearing capitalism blamed for a lot of the things that are wrong > with our country lately. I can't even begin to tell how stupid this is. In > the more socialist populations around the world, who are the most likely to > be affluent in those societies? 1. the top few bureaucrats, 'cause they can > steal from the collective at will, and 2. the capitalists. The only > difference between the capitalists in those societies and ours is all their > business is under the table, but their standard of living is still always > among the highest. Why is this so hard to see?? > > People, even though they may have equal rights, are not and never will be > equal. The ambitious or smart always rise to the top and the lumps are > always ...... the lumps. > > Gut check??? Oh yeah, and right now, as a group, now we're failing > miserably. > > Rik > > On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Rik, >> >> This is a real gut-check for our nation. Are we a nation of laws or a >> nation of thugs? I have friends of many persuasions, both political >> and otherwise, but this is 'watershed' check for me as to whether I >> socialize with them again or not; is your support for Obama so strong >> that you advocate ignoring the rule of law? This argument of "Bush >> (43) shredded the Constitution" doesn't hack it with me. If he did, >> prosecute him. We're watching the 'bully pulpit' being used to bully >> people who are asserting their rights under the law. I'm just guessing >> here, but I guess if I borrowed a hundred grand from you to buy a new >> truck, and a year later I came back to you and said, "Rik, this >> trucking thing didn't work out so well, and you know trucks - I'm >> paying you back 29 cents on the dollar because this is all your fault >> and you should have known better, deal? You would probably say, NO, I >> want my money back or the truck like we agreed on". >> >> This Chrysler deal should be the eye-opener for the folks who voted >> for the attraction of the Kool-Aid package - the one's who actually >> opened the package, mixed, and drank the stuff are hopeless. >> >> I give blanket amnesty to everyone who hoped for HopenChange. Anyone >> who still believes and supports the methods used to achieve it I can't >> stomach. >> >> Brad >> On 5/8/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: >> > Brad, >> > >> > Oh yeah, they're all so polite and civilized .... until they're out of >> sight >> > or in the backroom somewhere. Then it suddenly becomes clear, friendly, >> nice >> > or fair, perhaps even honest, are not words one might use to describe >> these >> > folks. 'Course you and I have said that right along ..... >> > >> > Rik >> > >> > On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 6:12 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> > >> >> More news on the Chrysler deal. The MSM can't hide this forever. >> >> What you saw happen to "Joe the Plumber" during the campaign (private >> >> government records released - public repudiation by Obama) is now >> >> being writ large on the business community. I'm amazed by the number >> >> of Kool-Aid drinkers who have taken a "the ends justify the means" >> >> attitude. Really? Is that what we've come to as a nation? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/05/07/politics/otherpeoplesmoney/main4997900.shtml >> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://www.american.com/archive/2009/may-2009/why-the-chrysler-deal-would-horrify-a-new-dealer >> >> >> >> http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=326589766764151 >> >> >> >> Thank God for brave men like this one - >> >> >> >> http://www.stumblingontruth.com/# >> >> >> >> BTW, the US had a weak treasury auction yesterday (meaning the cost of >> >> everything rises - home mortgage interest, your part of the national >> >> debt, etc.). Does that surprise you? Would you loan money to a thug >> >> like Hugo Chavez knowing his penchant for ignoring the rule of law? >> >> What makes you think prudent investors see Team Obama any differently? >> >> How about China? Listen for the sound of printing presses pouring out >> >> money in five....four....three....two.......whooooosh! >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sat May 9 21:43:17 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Sat, 9 May 2009 20:43:17 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chrysler Update In-Reply-To: <400985d70905091506v1b6f8ba7mf12ebe47730877a@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905080412y1600b667kb460efb6b30bc802@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905080815i707534dcs3e11f050493cd900@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905080935r6a446d81sb8d7860e7d549f37@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905090806s126e9beq4e189a23e017a02e@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905091506v1b6f8ba7mf12ebe47730877a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905091843u6d897d30qf0af6307dd60de72@mail.gmail.com> Brad, You mean the Obamessiah, uh........ lied ........ again??? Who'd believe it??? Rik On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 5:06 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > The hits just keep coming from Chrysler - > > http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/chrysler-walks-away-from-lemon-laws/ > > My 1995 Dodge truck is long out of warranty but recent buyers are > pretty much screwed. Who's first in line to buy a 2010 Obamamobile? > Not me! > > Brad > > On 5/9/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > > Brad, > > > > Yeah, I'm finding myself in about the same boat. I'm already and have > been > > for a while, avoiding places where I might have to spend time listening > to a > > lot of the tripe the messiah's followers espouse. Common sense should > easily > > refute most of the things they say, but it seems common sense rolls of > their > > back like water off a duck. I have little patience for foolishness, > > especially when I know I will be coerced into taking part. > > > > I think for the foreseeable future, I will be just looking people in the > eye > > and saying: You can't always get what you want, but you damned near > always > > get what you deserve. So if you believe the messiah's BS, bend over and > get > > ready.... You may not believe me now, but you will before too long. > > > > I've been hearing capitalism blamed for a lot of the things that are > wrong > > with our country lately. I can't even begin to tell how stupid this is. > In > > the more socialist populations around the world, who are the most likely > to > > be affluent in those societies? 1. the top few bureaucrats, 'cause they > can > > steal from the collective at will, and 2. the capitalists. The only > > difference between the capitalists in those societies and ours is all > their > > business is under the table, but their standard of living is still always > > among the highest. Why is this so hard to see?? > > > > People, even though they may have equal rights, are not and never will be > > equal. The ambitious or smart always rise to the top and the lumps are > > always ...... the lumps. > > > > Gut check??? Oh yeah, and right now, as a group, now we're failing > > miserably. > > > > Rik > > > > On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> Rik, > >> > >> This is a real gut-check for our nation. Are we a nation of laws or a > >> nation of thugs? I have friends of many persuasions, both political > >> and otherwise, but this is 'watershed' check for me as to whether I > >> socialize with them again or not; is your support for Obama so strong > >> that you advocate ignoring the rule of law? This argument of "Bush > >> (43) shredded the Constitution" doesn't hack it with me. If he did, > >> prosecute him. We're watching the 'bully pulpit' being used to bully > >> people who are asserting their rights under the law. I'm just guessing > >> here, but I guess if I borrowed a hundred grand from you to buy a new > >> truck, and a year later I came back to you and said, "Rik, this > >> trucking thing didn't work out so well, and you know trucks - I'm > >> paying you back 29 cents on the dollar because this is all your fault > >> and you should have known better, deal? You would probably say, NO, I > >> want my money back or the truck like we agreed on". > >> > >> This Chrysler deal should be the eye-opener for the folks who voted > >> for the attraction of the Kool-Aid package - the one's who actually > >> opened the package, mixed, and drank the stuff are hopeless. > >> > >> I give blanket amnesty to everyone who hoped for HopenChange. Anyone > >> who still believes and supports the methods used to achieve it I can't > >> stomach. > >> > >> Brad > >> On 5/8/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > >> > Brad, > >> > > >> > Oh yeah, they're all so polite and civilized .... until they're out of > >> sight > >> > or in the backroom somewhere. Then it suddenly becomes clear, > friendly, > >> nice > >> > or fair, perhaps even honest, are not words one might use to describe > >> these > >> > folks. 'Course you and I have said that right along ..... > >> > > >> > Rik > >> > > >> > On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 6:12 AM, Brad Haslett > wrote: > >> > > >> >> More news on the Chrysler deal. The MSM can't hide this forever. > >> >> What you saw happen to "Joe the Plumber" during the campaign (private > >> >> government records released - public repudiation by Obama) is now > >> >> being writ large on the business community. I'm amazed by the number > >> >> of Kool-Aid drinkers who have taken a "the ends justify the means" > >> >> attitude. Really? Is that what we've come to as a nation? > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/05/07/politics/otherpeoplesmoney/main4997900.shtml > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://www.american.com/archive/2009/may-2009/why-the-chrysler-deal-would-horrify-a-new-dealer > >> >> > >> >> http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=326589766764151 > >> >> > >> >> Thank God for brave men like this one - > >> >> > >> >> http://www.stumblingontruth.com/# > >> >> > >> >> BTW, the US had a weak treasury auction yesterday (meaning the cost > of > >> >> everything rises - home mortgage interest, your part of the national > >> >> debt, etc.). Does that surprise you? Would you loan money to a thug > >> >> like Hugo Chavez knowing his penchant for ignoring the rule of law? > >> >> What makes you think prudent investors see Team Obama any > differently? > >> >> How about China? Listen for the sound of printing presses pouring > out > >> >> money in five....four....three....two.......whooooosh! > >> >> > >> >> Brad > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> >> > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090509/0a84bb08/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sun May 10 06:35:40 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 05:35:40 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Inflation - Things That Make You Go Duhhhhhhh.... Message-ID: <400985d70905100335t796f5dd5n47ee8976f8a89be7@mail.gmail.com> Told ya! This is common sense. Anyone who lived through the Carter years knows where this is heading. HopenChange (TM), coming soon to decimate a fixed income near you! BTW, the Chinese haven't been buying long-term US debt since 2007. They've politely said a hundred different ways they're going to quit buying short-term US debt if we continue with the madness. Well? Brad ------------------ ?Terrible? Treasury Auction Exposes Hole in Obama Econ Plan Posted By J.D. Foster On May 8, 2009 @ 2:45 pm In Ongoing Priorities The U.S. Treasury auction of long-term bonds on Thursday was ?terrible? [1], in the words of one Wall Street economist, with the rate on the 30 year bond jumping from 4.1 to 4.3 percent. This is just the first sign that the debt-based Obama economic stimulus plan is about to become a major drag on the recovery, just as expected. The economic news is not all bad. We are seeing signs the rate of contraction is abating quickly, promising a bottom to the recession sometime this summer as many forecasters have expected. But therein lies another piece of the interest rate puzzle, and the trouble ahead. There are two critical consequences to the economy stabilizing. The first is that the massive liquidity injected into credit markets by the Federal Reserve and central banks around the world transforms from economic medicine to inflationary heroin. Central banks are going to face a difficult task of extracting the excess liquidity before inflation soars and without causing another recession. Doubt about the fight against soaring inflation means higher inflation premiums in interest rates. The second dangerous consequence is that President Obama is on course to double the national debt in just four years. After years of complaining about annual deficits of $300 billion or $400 billion and their effects on interest rates [2], liberal commentators are suddenly silent now that the deficit is heading toward $2 trillion under a liberal administration. But now the vaunted ?crowding out? effect from government borrowing is almost a certainty, as are the resulting higher interest rates. [3] Healing financial markets and a stabilizing economy generally translate into higher interest rates for long-term, high-quality bonds like 30-year Treasuries. The effect of the projected massive government borrowing, however, is to drive interest rates as much as a full percentage point higher yet. This will mean higher interest rates for consumer loans, mortgage loans, business loans, etc. Instead of a 6.5 percent mortgage rate, home buyers will face a 7.5 percent rate. The debt-based Obama economic stimulus plan is about to become a major drag on the recovery, just as expected. The release of the bank stress tests the same day and the expectation that credit markets would be quickly tapped by the banks to make up any capital deficiencies are certainly extenuating circumstances as we interpret the spike in Treasury rates. Even so, the Treasury auction signals real trouble ahead. From flybrad at gmail.com Sun May 10 06:46:42 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 05:46:42 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] OSH*T Message-ID: <400985d70905100346v6a7eac26k36f2deba9403c4b3@mail.gmail.com> This from today's UK Times. Again, duhhhhhhh! Brad --------------- Barack Obama's rich supporters fear his tax plans show he's a class warrior Some of Barack Obama's richest supporters fear they have elected a "class warrior" to the White House, who will turn America's freewheeling capitalism into a more regulated European system. By Leonard Doyle in Washington Last Updated: 11:21AM BST 10 May 2009 Barack Obama's rich supporters fear his tax plans reveal him as a class warrior Barack Obama: some of his rich supporters fear he is becoming a class warrior Wealthy Wall Street financiers and other business figures provided crucial support for Mr Obama during the election, backing him over the Republican candidate John McCain as the right leader to rescue the collapsing US economy. But it is now dawning on many among them that Mr Obama was serious about his campaign trail promises to bring root and branch reform to corporate America - and that they were more than just election rhetoric. A top Obama fundraiser and hedge fund manager said: "I'm appalled at the anti-Wall Street rhetoric. It was OK on the campaign but now it's the real world. I'm surprised that Obama is turning out to be so left-wing. He's a real class warrior." Chris Edwards of the Cato Institute, a free enterprise think tank, said Democrats in Congress were unnerved by the president's latest plan to raise $210 billion over 10 years from multinational corporations. The money is needed to pay for a national debt that will double over the next five years; and triple over the next 10 years to $17.3 trillion. But the crackdown already faces fierce Democratic resistance. "These big companies are based in New York Boston, Seattle and Silicon Valley, where Democrats dominate," Mr Edwards said. "Obama's tax plan is already cleaving him from his big corporate supporters," he said. Mr Obama made no secret of his plans to raise taxes on the "working rich" (individuals earning more than $200,000) by imposing a top income tax rate of almost 40 per cent, and there is little surprise that those plans remain on track, even during the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. But Democratic opposition is building in Congress to many of the President's proposals. A plan to reduce tax deductions for charitable gifts by richer people may have to be scrapped, because the charitable sector - which includes hospitals, museums and voluntary service groups - depends heavily on tax-deducted donations. Charles Rangel, the New York chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, which drafts tax legislation, raised a red flag about the proposal last week. "I would never want to adversely affect anything that is charitable or good," he said. Mr Obama also wants to "cap and trade" carbon emissions - seen by business as effectively yet another tax - to tackle global warming. The president's plans are direct repudiation of the model of light touch regulation credited with creating economic growth and wealth in America in recent decades. Setting out his thoughts on the economy, Mr Obama told the New York Times magazine last week: "There was always an unsustainable feel about what had happened on Wall Street over the last 10, 15 years, and it's not that different from the unsustainable nature of what was happening during the dot-com boom - where people in Silicon Valley could make enormous sums of money, even though what they were peddling never really had any signs it would ever make a profit." A senior Wall Street executive who remains an admirer of Mr Obama, told The Sunday Telegraph that the reforms were necessary after years of excess. "I think its refreshing that he has the chutzpah to deal with the previously untouchable abuses of the system like tax dodging and excessive executive pay," he said. "We badly need some European style social democracy, and Obama might as well start with health care reform." That Mr Obama should have radical views on the shortcomings of the US economy is hardly surprising. As a young man he turned down a high paying career in the corporate sector to work as a community organiser in Chicago. "I would imagine myself as a captain of industry, barking out orders, closing the deal, before I remembered who it was that I had told myself that I want to be," he wrote in his memoir Dreams from My Father. With the Republican in deep trouble, the Obama administration is trying to capitalise on the problems in the economy to drive through far-reaching reforms that might otherwise be impossible. Rahm Emanuel, the president's tough-as-nails chief of staff, has coined a phrase which has become a mantra for the administration. "Rule one," he declared, "Never allow a crisis to go to waste. They are opportunities to do big things." Warren Buffet, the wealthy investor regarded by Americans as an economic seer, is among high profile Obama supporters worried that he is attempting too much by pressing ahead with other controversial reforms such as healthcare. "Job one is to win the war, the economic war, job two is to win the economic war, and job three," he said recently. "You can't expect people to unite behind you if you're trying to jam a whole bunch of things down their throat." Mr Obama has so far pushed back against strong protectionist pressures in Congress seeking to force US companies to keep jobs at home. But the business community is alarmed by plans confirmed last week to close down the tax loophole which allows American multinationals to park hundreds of billions of dollars beyond the US tax man's reach in their overseas subsidiaries. Under one of his tax reforms, companies based in the US would be required to pay US taxes on all their overseas earnings. Among those affected by such changes would be some of Mr Obama's most powerful supporters in the election, such as Eric Schmidt, Google's CEO, and other "Silicon Valley" executives whose profits are mostly made abroad. They were taken aback when the President blasting companies for "shirking" their responsibilities by avoiding tax. The plan to end tax breaks for US multinational companies has also drawn the ire of Democrats . Max Baucus, the powerful Montana Democrat who chairs the Senate Finance Committee, declared that "further study" was needed within minutes of the president announcing his proposals. New York Democratic congressman Joseph Crowley said closing the loophole would hurt Citigroup Inc., his New York district's largest employer. It has also dawned on wealthy Americans who flocked to the Obama campaign of "Hope" and "Change" that the president opposes the "trickle down" theories that have guided US economics since President Ronald Reagan was elected with a mandate to slash taxes. Mr Obama said last week that it was "an aberration" that profits in the financial sector had grown so large over the last decade. It was ridiculous he suggested, that "25-year-olds (were) getting million-dollar bonuses, (and) they were willing to pay $100 for a steak dinner and the waiter was getting the kinds of tips that would make a college professor envious." He warned that by the time he was done with them, Silicon Valley and Wall Street would remain large parts of the US economy, but not "half of our economy". Mr Obama has also focused his sights on wealthy individuals who use offshore tax havens to evade tax and is hiring 800 inspectors to track them down. Mr Obama needs to find a way to pay for the $750 billion spending spree Congress authorised after he took office to get the stalled economy going again. From flybrad at gmail.com Sun May 10 07:25:23 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 06:25:23 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Frustrated Newspaper Reporter Message-ID: <400985d70905100425i35637292r835b5b587ec874e7@mail.gmail.com> This is from a North Carolina newspaper - http://tinyurl.com/rxwge7 I'm posting the link instead of the text so you can use the embedded links if you so choose. It's good to see at least one newspaper somewhere not "in the tank" for The One (TM). Brad From ekroposki at charter.net Sun May 10 07:34:04 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 07:34:04 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Rummy on evening spin around lake? Message-ID: <772FB6775E4746F889097C92A5EE7CCB@YOURB88038198E> Was this Rummy on evening spin around lake? http://www.greenvilleonline.com/article/20090509/NEWS/905090342 Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090510/1bf7cbc5/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sun May 10 08:17:55 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 07:17:55 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chrysler Update In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0905091843u6d897d30qf0af6307dd60de72@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905080412y1600b667kb460efb6b30bc802@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905080815i707534dcs3e11f050493cd900@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905080935r6a446d81sb8d7860e7d549f37@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905090806s126e9beq4e189a23e017a02e@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905091506v1b6f8ba7mf12ebe47730877a@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905091843u6d897d30qf0af6307dd60de72@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70905100517r7530989ga8cde660129b7db3@mail.gmail.com> Rik, Maybe those Obamamobile owners can rid themselves of their beasts using the proposed "Cash for Clunkers" those geniuses in DC dreamed-up (see below). We really need to implement mandatory drug testing for 'congress critters'. Brad ------------------- My $4,500 Lemon: Taking the Feds Up on Cash For Clunkers By DAVID VON DREHLE David Von Drehle Sat May 9, 1:25 am ET It's official: our minivan is a toxic asset. The "toxic" part I knew already. Between the catastrophic diaper failure while touring Amish country circa 2004, and the projectile vomiting episode on the way to the beach in '01, my family van has been a rolling Superfund site for years. (See the 50 worst cars of all time.) The news flash is "asset." Thanks to the cash-for-clunkers program cooked up in Congress, our 2001 Honda Odyssey may actually be worth something - up to $4,500 if we trade it in on a new, more efficient vehicle. That works out to nearly a dollar per dent, scratch, stain and tear. Being too rich for foreclosure, but too poor for derivatives, I had begun to think the government would never craft a bailout for me. However, prodded by crafty old John Dingell of Michigan, dean of the House of Representatives, Uncle Sam has selected me to stimulate the economy by buying a new car. This program will pay me to do it. My first reaction to this news was shock. Sometime after I backed into a stump, but definitely before I clipped the neighbor's garage - actually it was around the time the babysitter somehow creased a perfect inch-deep furrow along the entire passenger side, headlight to brake light - I stopped thinking of the van as having any monetary value whatsoever. I resolved to drive it for at least 10 years, or until I developed a capacity for shame, whichever came first. At which point I would pay someone to take it off my hands. Now I see the van with fresh eyes. It's no longer just a sun-bleached hulk with the rear wiper snapped off. It's a wiperless hulk worth thousands. If this is socialism, call me comrade! The idea, I realize, is to lure the Von Drehle clan out of our gas hog and into a phone booth-sized vehicle powered by switchgrass and meditation. Unfortunately, with four kids, all in grade school, we need a minivan. So is this program for us? To find out, I took a ride on the information superhighway to www.fueleconomy.gov, which is an easy way to compare the efficiency of just about every car imaginable. Within a few clicks, I determined that our current van averages 16 miles per gallon in the city and 23 mpg highway, which somehow averages out, according to the government, to 18 mpg. That's right on the cut-off for the program, but let's say they vote me in. Given our relatively light usage - around 8,000 miles per year - this translates to about 5.4 tons of CO2 emissions and 10.1 barrels of oil consumed each year. Could be worse, though in the category called "air pollution" the old van rates a pitiful 1 on a scale of 10 (and that's not counting the stench of fossilized chicken nuggets). Could we do better? We're partial to Honda products, so I clicked on the 2009 Odyssey. The new model averages 20 mpg, two more than our clunker. And that is enough of an improvement under the Dingell plan to earn us $3,500. Upgrading would also cut pollution, shave half a ton from our carbon footprint and reduce our nation's dependence on foreign oil by a full barrel. Not to mention leather seats. Maybe we should buy American, though. I summoned up the stats for the new Chrysler Town & Country - though not without trepidation. Back in the day, Chrysler invented the minivan and made a lot of money on them, but then they had a '70s flashback and let themselves get creamed by the Japanese. Apparently, they're back on track. According to the Edmunds.com review, the new model of Chrysler's top van is "a bona-fide contender for the Best-in-Class sash." Which sounds good - but would the sash count under "receivables" in bankruptcy court? The 4-liter T & C is virtually identical to the Odyssey in fuel efficiency and emissions, which means I could pick up $3,500 for buying one. (See the most important cars of all time.) Of course, I'd still be paying a boatload for such a fine ride, but as a taxpayer, I'm writing regular checks to Chrysler anyway. What's one more? To pocket the large money, the $4,500, I would need to find a buggy that averages five or more miles per gallon above our current wreck's fuel intake. But that's an easy search on this website. In a matter of seconds I discovered the Mazda 5 minivan, with manual transmission, which averages 24 miles per gallon, spews just 4.1 tons of carbon and sips a mere 7.6 barrels per year. It's a van that a guy could proudly drive to a lunch with Al Gore and the Dalai Lama, with just one downside: evidently we would have to grease the kids before squishing them into the tiny backseat. All in all, a tough call. On the one hand, I could get a new car, reacquaint myself with some of the tax dollars I so patriotically pay, and - who knows? - maybe help out a polar bear or two. On the other hand, something about this past year has me feeling less than flush. And there is such a thing as sentimental value. My clunker has loads of that. We raised three babies and a toddler in that old van, which means it was doomed from the start to be both filthy and loved. That trim we sheared off during our first family vacation. The crayon mural across the backseat. The permanent apple-juice glaze at the bottom of the cup holders. The energetic scribble engraved with mommy's keys in the car door. The Cinderella stickers fused to the back window. We have stories, and memories, to match every disgusting inch of that van. I guess it's true what they say. It is hard to put a price on toxic assets. View this article on Time.com Related articles on Time.com: On 5/9/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > You mean the Obamessiah, uh........ lied ........ again??? Who'd believe > it??? > > Rik > > On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 5:06 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Rik, >> >> The hits just keep coming from Chrysler - >> >> http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/chrysler-walks-away-from-lemon-laws/ >> >> My 1995 Dodge truck is long out of warranty but recent buyers are >> pretty much screwed. Who's first in line to buy a 2010 Obamamobile? >> Not me! >> >> Brad >> >> On 5/9/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: >> > Brad, >> > >> > Yeah, I'm finding myself in about the same boat. I'm already and have >> been >> > for a while, avoiding places where I might have to spend time listening >> to a >> > lot of the tripe the messiah's followers espouse. Common sense should >> easily >> > refute most of the things they say, but it seems common sense rolls of >> their >> > back like water off a duck. I have little patience for foolishness, >> > especially when I know I will be coerced into taking part. >> > >> > I think for the foreseeable future, I will be just looking people in the >> eye >> > and saying: You can't always get what you want, but you damned near >> always >> > get what you deserve. So if you believe the messiah's BS, bend over and >> get >> > ready.... You may not believe me now, but you will before too long. >> > >> > I've been hearing capitalism blamed for a lot of the things that are >> wrong >> > with our country lately. I can't even begin to tell how stupid this is. >> In >> > the more socialist populations around the world, who are the most likely >> to >> > be affluent in those societies? 1. the top few bureaucrats, 'cause they >> can >> > steal from the collective at will, and 2. the capitalists. The only >> > difference between the capitalists in those societies and ours is all >> their >> > business is under the table, but their standard of living is still >> > always >> > among the highest. Why is this so hard to see?? >> > >> > People, even though they may have equal rights, are not and never will >> > be >> > equal. The ambitious or smart always rise to the top and the lumps are >> > always ...... the lumps. >> > >> > Gut check??? Oh yeah, and right now, as a group, now we're failing >> > miserably. >> > >> > Rik >> > >> > On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> > >> >> Rik, >> >> >> >> This is a real gut-check for our nation. Are we a nation of laws or a >> >> nation of thugs? I have friends of many persuasions, both political >> >> and otherwise, but this is 'watershed' check for me as to whether I >> >> socialize with them again or not; is your support for Obama so strong >> >> that you advocate ignoring the rule of law? This argument of "Bush >> >> (43) shredded the Constitution" doesn't hack it with me. If he did, >> >> prosecute him. We're watching the 'bully pulpit' being used to bully >> >> people who are asserting their rights under the law. I'm just guessing >> >> here, but I guess if I borrowed a hundred grand from you to buy a new >> >> truck, and a year later I came back to you and said, "Rik, this >> >> trucking thing didn't work out so well, and you know trucks - I'm >> >> paying you back 29 cents on the dollar because this is all your fault >> >> and you should have known better, deal? You would probably say, NO, I >> >> want my money back or the truck like we agreed on". >> >> >> >> This Chrysler deal should be the eye-opener for the folks who voted >> >> for the attraction of the Kool-Aid package - the one's who actually >> >> opened the package, mixed, and drank the stuff are hopeless. >> >> >> >> I give blanket amnesty to everyone who hoped for HopenChange. Anyone >> >> who still believes and supports the methods used to achieve it I can't >> >> stomach. >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> On 5/8/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: >> >> > Brad, >> >> > >> >> > Oh yeah, they're all so polite and civilized .... until they're out >> >> > of >> >> sight >> >> > or in the backroom somewhere. Then it suddenly becomes clear, >> friendly, >> >> nice >> >> > or fair, perhaps even honest, are not words one might use to describe >> >> these >> >> > folks. 'Course you and I have said that right along ..... >> >> > >> >> > Rik >> >> > >> >> > On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 6:12 AM, Brad Haslett >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> More news on the Chrysler deal. The MSM can't hide this forever. >> >> >> What you saw happen to "Joe the Plumber" during the campaign >> >> >> (private >> >> >> government records released - public repudiation by Obama) is now >> >> >> being writ large on the business community. I'm amazed by the number >> >> >> of Kool-Aid drinkers who have taken a "the ends justify the means" >> >> >> attitude. Really? Is that what we've come to as a nation? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/05/07/politics/otherpeoplesmoney/main4997900.shtml >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://www.american.com/archive/2009/may-2009/why-the-chrysler-deal-would-horrify-a-new-dealer >> >> >> >> >> >> http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=326589766764151 >> >> >> >> >> >> Thank God for brave men like this one - >> >> >> >> >> >> http://www.stumblingontruth.com/# >> >> >> >> >> >> BTW, the US had a weak treasury auction yesterday (meaning the cost >> of >> >> >> everything rises - home mortgage interest, your part of the national >> >> >> debt, etc.). Does that surprise you? Would you loan money to a >> >> >> thug >> >> >> like Hugo Chavez knowing his penchant for ignoring the rule of law? >> >> >> What makes you think prudent investors see Team Obama any >> differently? >> >> >> How about China? Listen for the sound of printing presses pouring >> out >> >> >> money in five....four....three....two.......whooooosh! >> >> >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun May 10 09:59:08 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 08:59:08 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] OSH*T In-Reply-To: <400985d70905100346v6a7eac26k36f2deba9403c4b3@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905100346v6a7eac26k36f2deba9403c4b3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905100659h52f300ecxa37373d61619274e@mail.gmail.com> Brad, *"Mr Obama has also focused his sights on wealthy individuals who use offshore tax havens to evade tax and is hiring 800 inspectors to track them down."* Apparently, in law school, they don't teach the theory of large numbers. If they did, our Messiah might understand that 1% of the population's money divided up between the other 99% of the population gives each member of the 99% ..... well, basically jack shit. Any number divided by a large number is a small number. Just as an example, Rick Wagner, the GM CEO made about 16M a year. I agree with everyone that, considering the job he was doing, this was absolutely outrageous. However, if you divided his entire salary up amongst the the rest of the GM employees (350,000 or so at that time) you would find that the amount of money each would end up with is not even a meaningful number .....400 bucks or so annually. The 1% can not make a meaningful change for the 99%, even if you take every dime they have. *"Mr Obama needs to find a way to pay for the $750 billion spending spree Congress authorised after he took office to get the stalled economy going again."* Yep, he sure does. Trouble is ..... there ain't no way. Rik On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 5:46 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > This from today's UK Times. Again, duhhhhhhh! > > Brad > --------------- > > Barack Obama's rich supporters fear his tax plans show he's a class warrior > > Some of Barack Obama's richest supporters fear they have elected a > "class warrior" to the White House, who will turn America's > freewheeling capitalism into a more regulated European system. > > > By Leonard Doyle in Washington > Last Updated: 11:21AM BST 10 May 2009 > Barack Obama's rich supporters fear his tax plans reveal him as a class > warrior > Barack Obama: some of his rich supporters fear he is becoming a class > warrior > > Wealthy Wall Street financiers and other business figures provided > crucial support for Mr Obama during the election, backing him over the > Republican candidate John McCain as the right leader to rescue the > collapsing US economy. > > But it is now dawning on many among them that Mr Obama was serious > about his campaign trail promises to bring root and branch reform to > corporate America - and that they were more than just election > rhetoric. > > A top Obama fundraiser and hedge fund manager said: "I'm appalled at > the anti-Wall Street rhetoric. It was OK on the campaign but now it's > the real world. I'm surprised that Obama is turning out to be so > left-wing. He's a real class warrior." > > Chris Edwards of the Cato Institute, a free enterprise think tank, > said Democrats in Congress were unnerved by the president's latest > plan to raise $210 billion over 10 years from multinational > corporations. > > The money is needed to pay for a national debt that will double over > the next five years; and triple over the next 10 years to $17.3 > trillion. But the crackdown already faces fierce Democratic > resistance. > > "These big companies are based in New York Boston, Seattle and Silicon > Valley, where Democrats dominate," Mr Edwards said. "Obama's tax plan > is already cleaving him from his big corporate supporters," he said. > > Mr Obama made no secret of his plans to raise taxes on the "working > rich" (individuals earning more than $200,000) by imposing a top > income tax rate of almost 40 per cent, and there is little surprise > that those plans remain on track, even during the worst economic > crisis since the Great Depression. > > But Democratic opposition is building in Congress to many of the > President's proposals. A plan to reduce tax deductions for charitable > gifts by richer people may have to be scrapped, because the charitable > sector - which includes hospitals, museums and voluntary service > groups - depends heavily on tax-deducted donations. > > Charles Rangel, the New York chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, > which drafts tax legislation, raised a red flag about the proposal > last week. "I would never want to adversely affect anything that is > charitable or good," he said. > > Mr Obama also wants to "cap and trade" carbon emissions - seen by > business as effectively yet another tax - to tackle global warming. > > The president's plans are direct repudiation of the model of light > touch regulation credited with creating economic growth and wealth in > America in recent decades. > > Setting out his thoughts on the economy, Mr Obama told the New York > Times magazine last week: "There was always an unsustainable feel > about what had happened on Wall Street over the last 10, 15 years, and > it's not that different from the unsustainable nature of what was > happening during the dot-com boom - where people in Silicon Valley > could make enormous sums of money, even though what they were peddling > never really had any signs it would ever make a profit." > > A senior Wall Street executive who remains an admirer of Mr Obama, > told The Sunday Telegraph that the reforms were necessary after years > of excess. "I think its refreshing that he has the chutzpah to deal > with the previously untouchable abuses of the system like tax dodging > and excessive executive pay," he said. > > "We badly need some European style social democracy, and Obama might > as well start with health care reform." > > That Mr Obama should have radical views on the shortcomings of the US > economy is hardly surprising. As a young man he turned down a high > paying career in the corporate sector to work as a community organiser > in Chicago. > > "I would imagine myself as a captain of industry, barking out orders, > closing the deal, before I remembered who it was that I had told > myself that I want to be," he wrote in his memoir Dreams from My > Father. > > With the Republican in deep trouble, the Obama administration is > trying to capitalise on the problems in the economy to drive through > far-reaching reforms that might otherwise be impossible. > > Rahm Emanuel, the president's tough-as-nails chief of staff, has > coined a phrase which has become a mantra for the administration. > "Rule one," he declared, "Never allow a crisis to go to waste. They > are opportunities to do big things." > > Warren Buffet, the wealthy investor regarded by Americans as an > economic seer, is among high profile Obama supporters worried that he > is attempting too much by pressing ahead with other controversial > reforms such as healthcare. > > "Job one is to win the war, the economic war, job two is to win the > economic war, and job three," he said recently. "You can't expect > people to unite behind you if you're trying to jam a whole bunch of > things down their throat." > > Mr Obama has so far pushed back against strong protectionist pressures > in Congress seeking to force US companies to keep jobs at home. But > the business community is alarmed by plans confirmed last week to > close down the tax loophole which allows American multinationals to > park hundreds of billions of dollars beyond the US tax man's reach in > their overseas subsidiaries. > > Under one of his tax reforms, companies based in the US would be > required to pay US taxes on all their overseas earnings. > > Among those affected by such changes would be some of Mr Obama's most > powerful supporters in the election, such as Eric Schmidt, Google's > CEO, and other "Silicon Valley" executives whose profits are mostly > made abroad. They were taken aback when the President blasting > companies for "shirking" their responsibilities by avoiding tax. > > The plan to end tax breaks for US multinational companies has also > drawn the ire of Democrats . Max Baucus, the powerful Montana Democrat > who chairs the Senate Finance Committee, declared that "further study" > was needed within minutes of the president announcing his proposals. > > New York Democratic congressman Joseph Crowley said closing the > loophole would hurt Citigroup Inc., his New York district's largest > employer. > > It has also dawned on wealthy Americans who flocked to the Obama > campaign of "Hope" and "Change" that the president opposes the > "trickle down" theories that have guided US economics since President > Ronald Reagan was elected with a mandate to slash taxes. > > Mr Obama said last week that it was "an aberration" that profits in > the financial sector had grown so large over the last decade. It was > ridiculous he suggested, that "25-year-olds (were) getting > million-dollar bonuses, (and) they were willing to pay $100 for a > steak dinner and the waiter was getting the kinds of tips that would > make a college professor envious." > > He warned that by the time he was done with them, Silicon Valley and > Wall Street would remain large parts of the US economy, but not "half > of our economy". > > Mr Obama has also focused his sights on wealthy individuals who use > offshore tax havens to evade tax and is hiring 800 inspectors to track > them down. > > Mr Obama needs to find a way to pay for the $750 billion spending > spree Congress authorised after he took office to get the stalled > economy going again. > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090510/41283db6/attachment-0001.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun May 10 10:33:54 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 09:33:54 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Frustrated Newspaper Reporter In-Reply-To: <400985d70905100425i35637292r835b5b587ec874e7@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905100425i35637292r835b5b587ec874e7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905100733p31d494aat3f21438d3316cd93@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Do you think we could get Elizabeth to run for president??? Rik On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 6:25 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > This is from a North Carolina newspaper - > > http://tinyurl.com/rxwge7 > > I'm posting the link instead of the text so you can use the embedded > links if you so choose. It's good to see at least one newspaper > somewhere not "in the tank" for The One (TM). > > Brad > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090510/3e735ccd/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun May 10 13:01:28 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 12:01:28 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chrysler Update In-Reply-To: <400985d70905100517r7530989ga8cde660129b7db3@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905080412y1600b667kb460efb6b30bc802@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905080815i707534dcs3e11f050493cd900@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905080935r6a446d81sb8d7860e7d549f37@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905090806s126e9beq4e189a23e017a02e@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905091506v1b6f8ba7mf12ebe47730877a@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905091843u6d897d30qf0af6307dd60de72@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905100517r7530989ga8cde660129b7db3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905101001t5b4ae2bav1d551667c485d27c@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Sure thing, they can take out a second on their house for the rest ...... oh wait .... they don't have a house anymore ...... What a joke. Rik On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 7:17 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > Maybe those Obamamobile owners can rid themselves of their beasts > using the proposed "Cash for Clunkers" those geniuses in DC dreamed-up > (see below). We really need to implement mandatory drug testing for > 'congress critters'. > > Brad > > ------------------- > > My $4,500 Lemon: Taking the Feds Up on Cash For Clunkers > By DAVID VON DREHLE David Von Drehle Sat May 9, 1:25 am ET > > It's official: our minivan is a toxic asset. > > The "toxic" part I knew already. Between the catastrophic diaper > failure while touring Amish country circa 2004, and the projectile > vomiting episode on the way to the beach in '01, my family van has > been a rolling Superfund site for years. (See the 50 worst cars of all > time.) > > The news flash is "asset." Thanks to the cash-for-clunkers program > cooked up in Congress, our 2001 Honda Odyssey may actually be worth > something - up to $4,500 if we trade it in on a new, more efficient > vehicle. That works out to nearly a dollar per dent, scratch, stain > and tear. > > Being too rich for foreclosure, but too poor for derivatives, I had > begun to think the government would never craft a bailout for me. > However, prodded by crafty old John Dingell of Michigan, dean of the > House of Representatives, Uncle Sam has selected me to stimulate the > economy by buying a new car. This program will pay me to do it. > > My first reaction to this news was shock. Sometime after I backed into > a stump, but definitely before I clipped the neighbor's garage - > actually it was around the time the babysitter somehow creased a > perfect inch-deep furrow along the entire passenger side, headlight to > brake light - I stopped thinking of the van as having any monetary > value whatsoever. I resolved to drive it for at least 10 years, or > until I developed a capacity for shame, whichever came first. At which > point I would pay someone to take it off my hands. > > Now I see the van with fresh eyes. It's no longer just a sun-bleached > hulk with the rear wiper snapped off. It's a wiperless hulk worth > thousands. If this is socialism, call me comrade! > > The idea, I realize, is to lure the Von Drehle clan out of our gas hog > and into a phone booth-sized vehicle powered by switchgrass and > meditation. Unfortunately, with four kids, all in grade school, we > need a minivan. So is this program for us? To find out, I took a ride > on the information superhighway to www.fueleconomy.gov, which is an > easy way to compare the efficiency of just about every car imaginable. > > Within a few clicks, I determined that our current van averages 16 > miles per gallon in the city and 23 mpg highway, which somehow > averages out, according to the government, to 18 mpg. That's right on > the cut-off for the program, but let's say they vote me in. Given our > relatively light usage - around 8,000 miles per year - this translates > to about 5.4 tons of CO2 emissions and 10.1 barrels of oil consumed > each year. Could be worse, though in the category called "air > pollution" the old van rates a pitiful 1 on a scale of 10 (and that's > not counting the stench of fossilized chicken nuggets). > > Could we do better? We're partial to Honda products, so I clicked on > the 2009 Odyssey. The new model averages 20 mpg, two more than our > clunker. And that is enough of an improvement under the Dingell plan > to earn us $3,500. Upgrading would also cut pollution, shave half a > ton from our carbon footprint and reduce our nation's dependence on > foreign oil by a full barrel. > > Not to mention leather seats. > > Maybe we should buy American, though. I summoned up the stats for the > new Chrysler Town & Country - though not without trepidation. Back in > the day, Chrysler invented the minivan and made a lot of money on > them, but then they had a '70s flashback and let themselves get > creamed by the Japanese. > > Apparently, they're back on track. According to the Edmunds.com > review, the new model of Chrysler's top van is "a bona-fide contender > for the Best-in-Class sash." Which sounds good - but would the sash > count under "receivables" in bankruptcy court? The 4-liter T & C is > virtually identical to the Odyssey in fuel efficiency and emissions, > which means I could pick up $3,500 for buying one. (See the most > important cars of all time.) > > Of course, I'd still be paying a boatload for such a fine ride, but as > a taxpayer, I'm writing regular checks to Chrysler anyway. What's one > more? > > To pocket the large money, the $4,500, I would need to find a buggy > that averages five or more miles per gallon above our current wreck's > fuel intake. But that's an easy search on this website. In a matter of > seconds I discovered the Mazda 5 minivan, with manual transmission, > which averages 24 miles per gallon, spews just 4.1 tons of carbon and > sips a mere 7.6 barrels per year. It's a van that a guy could proudly > drive to a lunch with Al Gore and the Dalai Lama, with just one > downside: evidently we would have to grease the kids before squishing > them into the tiny backseat. > > All in all, a tough call. On the one hand, I could get a new car, > reacquaint myself with some of the tax dollars I so patriotically pay, > and - who knows? - maybe help out a polar bear or two. On the other > hand, something about this past year has me feeling less than flush. > > And there is such a thing as sentimental value. My clunker has loads > of that. We raised three babies and a toddler in that old van, which > means it was doomed from the start to be both filthy and loved. That > trim we sheared off during our first family vacation. The crayon mural > across the backseat. The permanent apple-juice glaze at the bottom of > the cup holders. The energetic scribble engraved with mommy's keys in > the car door. The Cinderella stickers fused to the back window. We > have stories, and memories, to match every disgusting inch of that > van. > > I guess it's true what they say. It is hard to put a price on toxic assets. > > > View this article on Time.com > > Related articles on Time.com: > > On 5/9/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > > Brad, > > > > You mean the Obamessiah, uh........ lied ........ again??? Who'd believe > > it??? > > > > Rik > > > > On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 5:06 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> Rik, > >> > >> The hits just keep coming from Chrysler - > >> > >> http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/chrysler-walks-away-from-lemon-laws/ > >> > >> My 1995 Dodge truck is long out of warranty but recent buyers are > >> pretty much screwed. Who's first in line to buy a 2010 Obamamobile? > >> Not me! > >> > >> Brad > >> > >> On 5/9/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > >> > Brad, > >> > > >> > Yeah, I'm finding myself in about the same boat. I'm already and have > >> been > >> > for a while, avoiding places where I might have to spend time > listening > >> to a > >> > lot of the tripe the messiah's followers espouse. Common sense should > >> easily > >> > refute most of the things they say, but it seems common sense rolls of > >> their > >> > back like water off a duck. I have little patience for foolishness, > >> > especially when I know I will be coerced into taking part. > >> > > >> > I think for the foreseeable future, I will be just looking people in > the > >> eye > >> > and saying: You can't always get what you want, but you damned near > >> always > >> > get what you deserve. So if you believe the messiah's BS, bend over > and > >> get > >> > ready.... You may not believe me now, but you will before too long. > >> > > >> > I've been hearing capitalism blamed for a lot of the things that are > >> wrong > >> > with our country lately. I can't even begin to tell how stupid this > is. > >> In > >> > the more socialist populations around the world, who are the most > likely > >> to > >> > be affluent in those societies? 1. the top few bureaucrats, 'cause > they > >> can > >> > steal from the collective at will, and 2. the capitalists. The only > >> > difference between the capitalists in those societies and ours is all > >> their > >> > business is under the table, but their standard of living is still > >> > always > >> > among the highest. Why is this so hard to see?? > >> > > >> > People, even though they may have equal rights, are not and never will > >> > be > >> > equal. The ambitious or smart always rise to the top and the lumps are > >> > always ...... the lumps. > >> > > >> > Gut check??? Oh yeah, and right now, as a group, now we're failing > >> > miserably. > >> > > >> > Rik > >> > > >> > On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Brad Haslett > wrote: > >> > > >> >> Rik, > >> >> > >> >> This is a real gut-check for our nation. Are we a nation of laws or > a > >> >> nation of thugs? I have friends of many persuasions, both political > >> >> and otherwise, but this is 'watershed' check for me as to whether I > >> >> socialize with them again or not; is your support for Obama so strong > >> >> that you advocate ignoring the rule of law? This argument of "Bush > >> >> (43) shredded the Constitution" doesn't hack it with me. If he did, > >> >> prosecute him. We're watching the 'bully pulpit' being used to bully > >> >> people who are asserting their rights under the law. I'm just > guessing > >> >> here, but I guess if I borrowed a hundred grand from you to buy a new > >> >> truck, and a year later I came back to you and said, "Rik, this > >> >> trucking thing didn't work out so well, and you know trucks - I'm > >> >> paying you back 29 cents on the dollar because this is all your fault > >> >> and you should have known better, deal? You would probably say, NO, I > >> >> want my money back or the truck like we agreed on". > >> >> > >> >> This Chrysler deal should be the eye-opener for the folks who voted > >> >> for the attraction of the Kool-Aid package - the one's who actually > >> >> opened the package, mixed, and drank the stuff are hopeless. > >> >> > >> >> I give blanket amnesty to everyone who hoped for HopenChange. Anyone > >> >> who still believes and supports the methods used to achieve it I > can't > >> >> stomach. > >> >> > >> >> Brad > >> >> On 5/8/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > >> >> > Brad, > >> >> > > >> >> > Oh yeah, they're all so polite and civilized .... until they're out > >> >> > of > >> >> sight > >> >> > or in the backroom somewhere. Then it suddenly becomes clear, > >> friendly, > >> >> nice > >> >> > or fair, perhaps even honest, are not words one might use to > describe > >> >> these > >> >> > folks. 'Course you and I have said that right along ..... > >> >> > > >> >> > Rik > >> >> > > >> >> > On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 6:12 AM, Brad Haslett > >> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >> More news on the Chrysler deal. The MSM can't hide this forever. > >> >> >> What you saw happen to "Joe the Plumber" during the campaign > >> >> >> (private > >> >> >> government records released - public repudiation by Obama) is now > >> >> >> being writ large on the business community. I'm amazed by the > number > >> >> >> of Kool-Aid drinkers who have taken a "the ends justify the means" > >> >> >> attitude. Really? Is that what we've come to as a nation? > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/05/07/politics/otherpeoplesmoney/main4997900.shtml > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://www.american.com/archive/2009/may-2009/why-the-chrysler-deal-would-horrify-a-new-dealer > >> >> >> > >> >> >> http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=326589766764151 > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Thank God for brave men like this one - > >> >> >> > >> >> >> http://www.stumblingontruth.com/# > >> >> >> > >> >> >> BTW, the US had a weak treasury auction yesterday (meaning the > cost > >> of > >> >> >> everything rises - home mortgage interest, your part of the > national > >> >> >> debt, etc.). Does that surprise you? Would you loan money to a > >> >> >> thug > >> >> >> like Hugo Chavez knowing his penchant for ignoring the rule of > law? > >> >> >> What makes you think prudent investors see Team Obama any > >> differently? > >> >> >> How about China? Listen for the sound of printing presses pouring > >> out > >> >> >> money in five....four....three....two.......whooooosh! > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Brad > >> >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> >> > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090510/db588a0e/attachment-0001.html From mweisner at ebsmed.com Thu May 7 08:52:31 2009 From: mweisner at ebsmed.com (Michael D. Weisner) Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 08:52:31 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Health Care - Down Memory Hole References: <400985d70905070353v36ca52abs42bb6bb5356450bc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Brad, Do not despair that these videos will disappear. You may be interested in a terrific product known as xvst that is able to download YouTube videos (flv format) and convert them to an alternate format (mpeg, avi, etc.) on your local hard drive for archival purposes. It is currently open source and in "alpha" at http://xviservicethief.sourceforge.net/. See the attached video of the Health Care For America Rally - Chicago rally (if the site stores videos.) Mike From: "Brad Haslett" Thursday, May 07, 2009 6:53 AM > Watch this while you can - > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_MtLyDfXJA > > The original video has already been removed from YouTube due to a > copyright infringement charge. This one will probably be gone soon as > well. Listen to what she has to say at 3:30 about putting private > health insurance out of business and the cheers from the crowd. > That's the whole point of public health care - everyone has access to > shitty healthcare, just like in all the other countries with > socialized medicine. At least the Canadians have the option of coming > to the US for treatment they are denied under government rationing. > Where are we going to go? Cuba? There's a "full press" effort to > suppress this video just as there was photos of The One training ACORN > workers back in the 90's. Private citizens keep copies of things like > this so those who aren't drunk on the Kool-Aid can educate themselves. > > Brad > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Health Care For America Rally - Chicago - Rep.mpeg Type: video/mpg Size: 13666304 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090507/69bfa90d/attachment-0001.bin From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun May 10 13:42:37 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 12:42:37 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chrysler Update In-Reply-To: <400985d70905100517r7530989ga8cde660129b7db3@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905080412y1600b667kb460efb6b30bc802@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905080815i707534dcs3e11f050493cd900@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905080935r6a446d81sb8d7860e7d549f37@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905090806s126e9beq4e189a23e017a02e@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905091506v1b6f8ba7mf12ebe47730877a@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905091843u6d897d30qf0af6307dd60de72@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905100517r7530989ga8cde660129b7db3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905101042v541cf6dwc771b684d9e8f1fb@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Here's another view of the issue, in a more general sense. Rik http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/the-bottom-for-credit-thanks-to-peak-oil/ _________________ The Bottom for Credit Thanks to Peak Oil May 8th, 2009 | By James Howard Kunstler | Category: Energy , Featured, Macro Economics , Oil [image: leadimage] Euphoria managed to out-run swine flu last week as the epidemic-du-jour, with ?consumer? confidence jumping and the big bank stocks nudging up. The H1N1 virus fizzled for now, at least in terms of kill ratio, though we?re warned it might boomerang in the fall with a vengeance. No one was surprised to see Chrysler roll over like a possum on a county highway, but the memory of their muscle cars will linger on like a California surfing song. Here in the northeast, where Sundays are not spent at the NASCAR oval, the spring foliage reached the tenderly explosive stage and it was hard to feel bad about anything. For now, the ?bottom? is in ? that is, the bottom of this society?s ability to process reality. It may continue for a month of so, even after the ?stress test? for banks is finally let out of the massage parlor with a ?happy ending.? But events are underway that are beyond the command of personalities. We?re done ?doing business? in all the ways that we?ve been used to, but we just can?t get with the new program. Let?s count the ways: *1)* The revolving credit economy is over. It?s over because we can?t increase energy inputs to the system, which is one way of saying ?peak oil.? Of course hardly anybody believes this right now because the price of oil crashed nine months ago, along with global manufacturing and trade. But nothing has changed on the peak oil scene ? except perhaps that ever more new oil projects have been cancelled for lack of financing, which will boomerang on us (even if swine flu doesn?t) in the form of much lower future oil production. In any case, the credit fiesta is over, and the ?consumer? economy with it, because industrial growth as we have known it is over. It?s over globally, too, though all regions of the world will not experience its demise the same way at the same rate. The Asian nations may swap things around a while longer but China is basically screwed. They have less oil left than we have (which is saying, not much at all) and they won?t corner the rest of the global oil market without starting World War Three. Meanwhile, they?re running out of water and food. Good luck becoming the next global hegemon. Oh, and Japan imports 90 percent of its energy; India over 80 percent. Fuggeddabowdit. Credit will not vanish everywhere overnight ? even in the USA ? because it is not distributed equally everywhere. But it will vanish in layers, and here in the USA a very broad layer of the lower and middle classes are now losing their access to it in one way or another ? personally, in small business ? and they will never get it back. Anyone who intends to thrive in the years just ahead had better plan on doing it on the basis of accounts receivable ? and what they receive might not even necessarily come in the form of US dollars. It may come in the form of gold or silver or in the promise of reciprocal services rendered. This has enormous implications for two of the items in which our credit-dispensing operations are most deeply vested: houses and cars. Unfortunately, these are exactly the things that economic life has been based on for decades in our nation, which leads to the next categories: *2)* The suburban living arrangement is over, along with all its accessories and furnishings. Taken as ?all of a piece,? the suburban expansion was one sixty-year-long orgasm of hypertrophy. We did it because we could. We won a world war and threw a party. We had lots of cheap land and cheap oil. It made lots of people lots of money and all its usufructs have become embedded in our national identity to the dangerous degree that the loss of them will provoke a kind of national psychotic breakdown. In fact, it already has. The completely unrealistic expectation that we can resume this way of life is proof of it. The immediate problem is that we can?t build anymore of it. The next problem will be the failure of the stuff that already exists. The first stage of that is now palpable in the mortgage foreclosure fiasco and, just beginning now, the tanking of malls, strip centers, office parks and other commercial property investments. The latter will accelerate and become visible very quickly as retail tenants bug out and weeds start growing where the Chryslers and Pontiacs once parked. The next stage, which involves large demographic shifts in how we inhabit the landscape, has not quite gotten underway. *3)* The Happy Motoring fiesta is over. You?d think that with Chrysler crawling into the bankruptcy court, and GM just weeks away from the same terminal ceremony, the news media would begin to suspect that the foundation of everyday life in this country was cracking. Instead, all we hear is blather about ?market share? shifting to Toyota. News flash: not only will we make fewer automobiles in the USA, but Americans will buy far fewer cars made anywhere. We?ll keep the current fleet moving a while longer, but when it?s too beat to repair, we won?t be changing it out for a new fleet ? despite all the fantasies about hybrids, plug-and-drive electrics, and so on. The masses will be too broke to buy these things. What?s more, they will be very resentful of the shrinking economic ?elite? who can afford them. And, anyway, our roads and highways are destined to fall apart very quickly because there is no way we can sustain the necessary rate of normal maintenance. Meanwhile, we remain completely un-serious about public transit ? even about fixing the vestiges that still exist. The airline industry, of course, will be toast inside of five years. *4)* Our food production system is approaching crisis. There?s no way we can continue the petro-agriculture system of farming and the Cheez Doodle and Pepsi Cola diet that it services. The public is absolutely zombified in the face of this problem ? perhaps a result of the diet itself. President Obama and Ag Secretary Vilsack have not given a hint that they understand the gravity of the situation. It is probably one of those unfortunate events of history that can only impress a society in the form of a crisis. It also happens to be one of the few problems we face that public policy could affect sharply and broadly ? if we underwrote the reactivation of smaller, local farm operations instead of shoveling money to giant ?agribusiness? (or Citibank, or Goldman Sachs, or AIG?). I maintain that this may be the year that the crisis gets our attention, because capital is suddenly harder to get than fossil-fuel-based fertilizer. All these epochal discontinuities present themselves, for the moment, as a season of muted ?hope? and general apathy. The days are suddenly mild. We?ve resumed old and happy habits of grilling meat outdoors and motoring to those remaining places that were not blanketed with franchised food huts and discount malls. We have a new, charming president with an appealing family. Newly-minted dollars are flowing to the ?shovel-ready.? The new bad news is less bad than the old bad news (or seems to be). And the year just past has been such a bummer that our hard-wired human nature tells us that good things must be just around the corner. Personally, I think a lot of good things await us, but not the ones we?re expecting ? not a return to buying slurpees on credit cards. It will be very salutary to leave behind the junk empire we?ve accumulated and move into an epoch of quality and purpose. For the moment, though, our hopes reside elsewhere. Regards, James Howard Kunstler On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 7:17 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > Maybe those Obamamobile owners can rid themselves of their beasts > using the proposed "Cash for Clunkers" those geniuses in DC dreamed-up > (see below). We really need to implement mandatory drug testing for > 'congress critters'. > > Brad > > ------------------- > > My $4,500 Lemon: Taking the Feds Up on Cash For Clunkers > By DAVID VON DREHLE David Von Drehle Sat May 9, 1:25 am ET > > It's official: our minivan is a toxic asset. > > The "toxic" part I knew already. Between the catastrophic diaper > failure while touring Amish country circa 2004, and the projectile > vomiting episode on the way to the beach in '01, my family van has > been a rolling Superfund site for years. (See the 50 worst cars of all > time.) > > The news flash is "asset." Thanks to the cash-for-clunkers program > cooked up in Congress, our 2001 Honda Odyssey may actually be worth > something - up to $4,500 if we trade it in on a new, more efficient > vehicle. That works out to nearly a dollar per dent, scratch, stain > and tear. > > Being too rich for foreclosure, but too poor for derivatives, I had > begun to think the government would never craft a bailout for me. > However, prodded by crafty old John Dingell of Michigan, dean of the > House of Representatives, Uncle Sam has selected me to stimulate the > economy by buying a new car. This program will pay me to do it. > > My first reaction to this news was shock. Sometime after I backed into > a stump, but definitely before I clipped the neighbor's garage - > actually it was around the time the babysitter somehow creased a > perfect inch-deep furrow along the entire passenger side, headlight to > brake light - I stopped thinking of the van as having any monetary > value whatsoever. I resolved to drive it for at least 10 years, or > until I developed a capacity for shame, whichever came first. At which > point I would pay someone to take it off my hands. > > Now I see the van with fresh eyes. It's no longer just a sun-bleached > hulk with the rear wiper snapped off. It's a wiperless hulk worth > thousands. If this is socialism, call me comrade! > > The idea, I realize, is to lure the Von Drehle clan out of our gas hog > and into a phone booth-sized vehicle powered by switchgrass and > meditation. Unfortunately, with four kids, all in grade school, we > need a minivan. So is this program for us? To find out, I took a ride > on the information superhighway to www.fueleconomy.gov, which is an > easy way to compare the efficiency of just about every car imaginable. > > Within a few clicks, I determined that our current van averages 16 > miles per gallon in the city and 23 mpg highway, which somehow > averages out, according to the government, to 18 mpg. That's right on > the cut-off for the program, but let's say they vote me in. Given our > relatively light usage - around 8,000 miles per year - this translates > to about 5.4 tons of CO2 emissions and 10.1 barrels of oil consumed > each year. Could be worse, though in the category called "air > pollution" the old van rates a pitiful 1 on a scale of 10 (and that's > not counting the stench of fossilized chicken nuggets). > > Could we do better? We're partial to Honda products, so I clicked on > the 2009 Odyssey. The new model averages 20 mpg, two more than our > clunker. And that is enough of an improvement under the Dingell plan > to earn us $3,500. Upgrading would also cut pollution, shave half a > ton from our carbon footprint and reduce our nation's dependence on > foreign oil by a full barrel. > > Not to mention leather seats. > > Maybe we should buy American, though. I summoned up the stats for the > new Chrysler Town & Country - though not without trepidation. Back in > the day, Chrysler invented the minivan and made a lot of money on > them, but then they had a '70s flashback and let themselves get > creamed by the Japanese. > > Apparently, they're back on track. According to the Edmunds.com > review, the new model of Chrysler's top van is "a bona-fide contender > for the Best-in-Class sash." Which sounds good - but would the sash > count under "receivables" in bankruptcy court? The 4-liter T & C is > virtually identical to the Odyssey in fuel efficiency and emissions, > which means I could pick up $3,500 for buying one. (See the most > important cars of all time.) > > Of course, I'd still be paying a boatload for such a fine ride, but as > a taxpayer, I'm writing regular checks to Chrysler anyway. What's one > more? > > To pocket the large money, the $4,500, I would need to find a buggy > that averages five or more miles per gallon above our current wreck's > fuel intake. But that's an easy search on this website. In a matter of > seconds I discovered the Mazda 5 minivan, with manual transmission, > which averages 24 miles per gallon, spews just 4.1 tons of carbon and > sips a mere 7.6 barrels per year. It's a van that a guy could proudly > drive to a lunch with Al Gore and the Dalai Lama, with just one > downside: evidently we would have to grease the kids before squishing > them into the tiny backseat. > > All in all, a tough call. On the one hand, I could get a new car, > reacquaint myself with some of the tax dollars I so patriotically pay, > and - who knows? - maybe help out a polar bear or two. On the other > hand, something about this past year has me feeling less than flush. > > And there is such a thing as sentimental value. My clunker has loads > of that. We raised three babies and a toddler in that old van, which > means it was doomed from the start to be both filthy and loved. That > trim we sheared off during our first family vacation. The crayon mural > across the backseat. The permanent apple-juice glaze at the bottom of > the cup holders. The energetic scribble engraved with mommy's keys in > the car door. The Cinderella stickers fused to the back window. We > have stories, and memories, to match every disgusting inch of that > van. > > I guess it's true what they say. It is hard to put a price on toxic assets. > > > View this article on Time.com > > Related articles on Time.com: > > On 5/9/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > > Brad, > > > > You mean the Obamessiah, uh........ lied ........ again??? Who'd believe > > it??? > > > > Rik > > > > On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 5:06 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> Rik, > >> > >> The hits just keep coming from Chrysler - > >> > >> http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/chrysler-walks-away-from-lemon-laws/ > >> > >> My 1995 Dodge truck is long out of warranty but recent buyers are > >> pretty much screwed. Who's first in line to buy a 2010 Obamamobile? > >> Not me! > >> > >> Brad > >> > >> On 5/9/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > >> > Brad, > >> > > >> > Yeah, I'm finding myself in about the same boat. I'm already and have > >> been > >> > for a while, avoiding places where I might have to spend time > listening > >> to a > >> > lot of the tripe the messiah's followers espouse. Common sense should > >> easily > >> > refute most of the things they say, but it seems common sense rolls of > >> their > >> > back like water off a duck. I have little patience for foolishness, > >> > especially when I know I will be coerced into taking part. > >> > > >> > I think for the foreseeable future, I will be just looking people in > the > >> eye > >> > and saying: You can't always get what you want, but you damned near > >> always > >> > get what you deserve. So if you believe the messiah's BS, bend over > and > >> get > >> > ready.... You may not believe me now, but you will before too long. > >> > > >> > I've been hearing capitalism blamed for a lot of the things that are > >> wrong > >> > with our country lately. I can't even begin to tell how stupid this > is. > >> In > >> > the more socialist populations around the world, who are the most > likely > >> to > >> > be affluent in those societies? 1. the top few bureaucrats, 'cause > they > >> can > >> > steal from the collective at will, and 2. the capitalists. The only > >> > difference between the capitalists in those societies and ours is all > >> their > >> > business is under the table, but their standard of living is still > >> > always > >> > among the highest. Why is this so hard to see?? > >> > > >> > People, even though they may have equal rights, are not and never will > >> > be > >> > equal. The ambitious or smart always rise to the top and the lumps are > >> > always ...... the lumps. > >> > > >> > Gut check??? Oh yeah, and right now, as a group, now we're failing > >> > miserably. > >> > > >> > Rik > >> > > >> > On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Brad Haslett > wrote: > >> > > >> >> Rik, > >> >> > >> >> This is a real gut-check for our nation. Are we a nation of laws or > a > >> >> nation of thugs? I have friends of many persuasions, both political > >> >> and otherwise, but this is 'watershed' check for me as to whether I > >> >> socialize with them again or not; is your support for Obama so strong > >> >> that you advocate ignoring the rule of law? This argument of "Bush > >> >> (43) shredded the Constitution" doesn't hack it with me. If he did, > >> >> prosecute him. We're watching the 'bully pulpit' being used to bully > >> >> people who are asserting their rights under the law. I'm just > guessing > >> >> here, but I guess if I borrowed a hundred grand from you to buy a new > >> >> truck, and a year later I came back to you and said, "Rik, this > >> >> trucking thing didn't work out so well, and you know trucks - I'm > >> >> paying you back 29 cents on the dollar because this is all your fault > >> >> and you should have known better, deal? You would probably say, NO, I > >> >> want my money back or the truck like we agreed on". > >> >> > >> >> This Chrysler deal should be the eye-opener for the folks who voted > >> >> for the attraction of the Kool-Aid package - the one's who actually > >> >> opened the package, mixed, and drank the stuff are hopeless. > >> >> > >> >> I give blanket amnesty to everyone who hoped for HopenChange. Anyone > >> >> who still believes and supports the methods used to achieve it I > can't > >> >> stomach. > >> >> > >> >> Brad > >> >> On 5/8/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > >> >> > Brad, > >> >> > > >> >> > Oh yeah, they're all so polite and civilized .... until they're out > >> >> > of > >> >> sight > >> >> > or in the backroom somewhere. Then it suddenly becomes clear, > >> friendly, > >> >> nice > >> >> > or fair, perhaps even honest, are not words one might use to > describe > >> >> these > >> >> > folks. 'Course you and I have said that right along ..... > >> >> > > >> >> > Rik > >> >> > > >> >> > On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 6:12 AM, Brad Haslett > >> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >> More news on the Chrysler deal. The MSM can't hide this forever. > >> >> >> What you saw happen to "Joe the Plumber" during the campaign > >> >> >> (private > >> >> >> government records released - public repudiation by Obama) is now > >> >> >> being writ large on the business community. I'm amazed by the > number > >> >> >> of Kool-Aid drinkers who have taken a "the ends justify the means" > >> >> >> attitude. Really? Is that what we've come to as a nation? > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/05/07/politics/otherpeoplesmoney/main4997900.shtml > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://www.american.com/archive/2009/may-2009/why-the-chrysler-deal-would-horrify-a-new-dealer > >> >> >> > >> >> >> http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=326589766764151 > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Thank God for brave men like this one - > >> >> >> > >> >> >> http://www.stumblingontruth.com/# > >> >> >> > >> >> >> BTW, the US had a weak treasury auction yesterday (meaning the > cost > >> of > >> >> >> everything rises - home mortgage interest, your part of the > national > >> >> >> debt, etc.). Does that surprise you? Would you loan money to a > >> >> >> thug > >> >> >> like Hugo Chavez knowing his penchant for ignoring the rule of > law? > >> >> >> What makes you think prudent investors see Team Obama any > >> differently? > >> >> >> How about China? Listen for the sound of printing presses pouring > >> out > >> >> >> money in five....four....three....two.......whooooosh! > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Brad > >> >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> >> > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090510/03a6f18b/attachment-0001.html From ekroposki at charter.net Sun May 10 15:51:43 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 15:51:43 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] For your entertainment Message-ID: see video: http://www.minyanville.com/articles/PFE-GSK-lly-VIAGRA/index/a/22581 EK -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090510/377ed50d/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sun May 10 19:14:13 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 18:14:13 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Going Galt! Message-ID: <400985d70905101614s1a2621f3rd2d7c5b81a083e51@mail.gmail.com> No sh*t, it is working! http://fromthemaenianum.wordpress.com/2009/05/10/hemorrhaging-especially-uncle-sam/ Told ya! Brad From flybrad at gmail.com Mon May 11 07:35:46 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 06:35:46 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Corporate Taxes Message-ID: <400985d70905110435j585113d9o32a07e6dfb2207da@mail.gmail.com> - "You lose some of those good management and professional jobs in places like Chicago and New York," says Gary Hufbauer of the Peterson Institute. - An international company you would all recognize (not US based) recently decided to locate a huge R&D facility outside Beijing (got the briefing from one of the decision makers over the weekend). Nearly every Pacific Rim nation competed for the prize. The Philippines actually made the best sales pitch based on taxes, but Mainland China eventually won because of "stability" issues. US corporations already operate at a disadvantage in the world market because of excessive domestic tax rates. Now potential US investors have the issue of politics prevailing over the rule of law to worry about, not unlike doing business in the Philippines. The Toyota plant outside Tupelo, Mississippi is currently on hold as well as the Volkswagen plant outside Chattanooga, Tennessee, both waiting for better economic times. If we continue down this path of finding endless ways to tax companies, confiscate assets by fiat (no pun intended), and throw increasing numbers of roadblocks to expanding businesses, we'll eventually become a shell of our former economic self - kind of like the City of Chicago. Brad -------------------------- May 11, 2009 The Great Tax Dodge Demystified By Robert Samuelson "(The U.S. tax code is) full of corporate loopholes that makes it perfectly legal for companies to avoid paying their fair share." -- President Barack Obama, May 4 WASHINGTON -- Like it or not, ours is a world of multinational companies. Almost all of America's brand name firms (Coca-Cola, IBM, Microsoft, Caterpillar) are multinationals, and the process works both ways. In 2006, the U.S. operations of foreign firms employed 5.3 million workers. Fiat's looming takeover of Chrysler reminds us again that much business is transnational. For most people, the multinational company is a troubling concept. Loyalty matters. We like to think that "our companies" serve the broad national interest rather than just scouring the world for the cheapest labor, the laxest regulations and the lowest taxes. And the tax issue is especially vexing: How should multinationals be taxed on the profits they make outside their home countries? Listen to President Obama, and the status quo seems a cesspool. Pervasive "loopholes" engineered by "well-connected lobbyists" allow U.S. multinationals to skirt American taxes and outsource jobs to low-tax countries. So the president proposes plugging loopholes. Some jobs will return to the United States, and U.S. tax coffers will grow by $210 billion over the next decade. Sounds great -- and that's how the story played. "Obama Targets Overseas Tax Dodge," headlined The Washington Post. But the reality is murkier; the president's accusatory rhetoric perpetuates many myths. Myth: Aided by those overpaid lobbyists, American multinationals are taxed lightly -- less so than their foreign counterparts. Reality: Just the opposite. Most countries don't tax the foreign profits of their multinational firms at all. Take a Swiss multinational with operations in South Korea. It pays a 27.5 percent Korean corporate tax on its profits and can bring home the rest tax-free. By contrast, a U.S. firm in Korea pays the Korean tax and, if it returns the profits to the United States, faces the 35 percent U.S. corporate tax rate. American companies can defer the U.S. tax by keeping the profits abroad (naturally, many do), and when repatriated, companies get a credit for foreign taxes paid. In this case, they'd pay the difference between the Korean rate (27.5 percent) and the U.S. rate (35 percent). Myth: When U.S. multinationals invest abroad, they destroy American jobs. Reality: Not so. Sure, many U.S. firms have shut American factories and opened plants elsewhere. But most overseas investments by U.S. multinationals serve local markets. Only 10 percent of their foreign output is exported back to the United States, says Harvard economist Fritz Foley. When Wal-Mart opens a store in China, it doesn't close one in California. On balance, all the extra foreign sales create U.S. jobs for management, research and development (almost 90 percent of American multinationals' R&D occurs in the United States) and the export of components. A study by Foley and economists Mihir Desai of Harvard and James Hines of the University of Michigan estimates that for every 10 percent increase in U.S. multinationals' overseas payrolls, their American payrolls increase almost 4 percent. Myth: Plugging overseas corporate tax loopholes will dramatically improve the budget outlook as multinationals pay their "fair" share. Reality: Dream on. The estimated $210 billion revenue gain over 10 years -- money already included in Obama's budget -- represents only six-tenths of 1 percent of the decade's tax revenues of $32 trillion, as projected by the Congressional Budget Office. Worse, the CBO reckons that Obama's endless deficits over the decade will total a gut-wrenching $9.3 trillion. Whether or not Obama's proposals would create any jobs in the United States is an open question. In highly technical ways, Obama would increase the taxes on the foreign profits of U.S. multinationals by limiting the use of today's deferral and foreign tax credit. Taxing overseas investment more heavily, the theory goes, would favor investment in the United States. But many experts believe his proposals would actually destroy U.S. jobs. Being more heavily taxed, American multinational firms would have more trouble competing with European and Asian rivals. Some U.S. foreign operations might be sold to tax-advantaged foreign firms. Either way, supporting operations in the United States would suffer. "You lose some of those good management and professional jobs in places like Chicago and New York," says Gary Hufbauer of the Peterson Institute. Including state taxes, America's top corporate tax rate exceeds 39 percent; among wealthy nations, only Japan's is higher (slightly). However, the effective U.S. tax rate is reduced by preferences -- mostly domestic, not foreign -- that also make the system complex and expensive. As Hufbauer suggests, Obama would have been better advised to cut the top rate by ending many preferences. That would lower compliance costs and involve fewer distortions. But this sort of proposal would have been harder to sell. Obama sacrificed substance for grandstanding. From flybrad at gmail.com Mon May 11 09:11:51 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 08:11:51 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] More Chrysler Fallout Message-ID: <400985d70905110611x4f3a2fe1qcd745451637faab8@mail.gmail.com> This turd doesn't smell any better after a few days of sunshine. This story is MUCH bigger than a single car company. BTW, did you see where Chavez seized more oil wells over the weekend? Maybe The One (TM) actually read the book Chavez gave him. Brad ---------------------- * MAY 11, 2009 U.S. Forced Chrysler's Creditors to Blink By NEIL KING JR. and JEFFREY MCCRACKEN President Barack Obama's auto task force heard a blunt message early this spring from J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., the largest lender to Chrysler LLC. In any deal to remake the troubled auto maker, Chrysler would have to repay its lenders all $6.9 billion it owed. "And not a penny less," said James B. Lee Jr., vice chairman at the bank, in a call to auto task-force boss Steven Rattner on March 29. More The next day, Mr. Obama called the banker's bluff. The president stepped before a podium to announce that Chrysler could face a disorderly bankruptcy or even liquidation. His meaning was clear: If that happened, the lenders would get nowhere near $6.9 billion. A few hours later, Mr. Lee called Mr. Rattner back. "We need to talk," he said. The banker's about-face was a vivid example of the government's tightening grip on a humbled financial industry. Pulling a trick from the hedge-fund playbook, the government used its leverage as the sole willing lender to Chrysler, either in bankruptcy court or out, to extract deep concessions from some of the country's biggest banks. The results of these hardball tactics were on display Friday, as the last resisters of a deal to slash the value of Chrysler debt abandoned their effort to fight it in bankruptcy court. That raised the chances for a relatively swift transit through Chapter 11, producing a new Chrysler 55%-owned by a trust for union retirees, 35% by Fiat SpA -- which hasn't even been a Chrysler creditor -- and not at all by the senior secured lenders. That conclusion would upend a longstanding tradition concerning rights in a bankruptcy: Senior secured lenders usually get paid in full before lower-priority creditors get anything. Not this time. The White House's role in restructuring Chrysler has sent a shudder through the community of lawyers and lenders in the field of bankruptcy and corporate workouts. Critics complain that the administration has violated a bedrock principle of American capitalism and unfairly demonized financial firms that are vital to the functioning of the economy and its eventual recovery. Administration officials reply that the Chrysler crisis required bold action. While Chrysler's suppliers, dealers and unionized workers are critical to its survival -- and so is Fiat, which will contribute high-efficiency engines and foreign distribution -- the creditors were expendable. "You don't need banks and bondholders to make cars," said one administration official. The administration could exert such leverage because it was convinced big banks were too tarnished in the public eye to put up a fight. They risked being blamed for Chrysler's demise. And if Chrysler had to liquidate, they and other lenders would have to try to recover their money by selling closed auto plants and other assets that are little in demand. Mr. Rattner forced the issue during the spring negotiations. More than once, he told Mr. Lee: "You can have the company and run it or liquidate it." This account of the fight among Chrysler, its lenders and the government is based on interviews with dozens of people involved in the negotiations, including bankers, financial advisers, lawyers, union and Chrysler officials and Obama aides. The struggle began last year when Chrysler and General Motors Corp. faced a potential meltdown. Chrysler went to the lenders that held 70% of its debt -- J.P. Morgan, Citigroup Inc., Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley. It wanted to know if they would lend more and if they would provide financing in case Chrysler filed for bankruptcy. When they said no, the auto maker turned to Washington. Just before Christmas, the Bush administration agreed to lend Chrysler $4 billion, as well as $13.4 billion to GM. The Treasury gave Chrysler three months to reduce its debt and forge a cost-cutting agreement with the United Auto Workers union. Chrysler turned to the lenders it had just been asking for new loans, but now asked them to agree not to get paid in full for their old loans. It wanted them to chop the $6.9 billion debt to $5 billion. At a meeting in early February, Mr. Lee and other bank executives rebuffed the request. With the government getting so involved in supporting Chrysler, the banks held out for talks with federal officials. The Obama administration's auto task force held scant hope that all of Chrysler's lenders would agree to a compromise. There were 46 debtholders in all, including many small hedge funds and distressed-debt funds. Most of these had acquired their holdings at a discount on the secondary market. With no consumer operations, they had less reputation on the line than the banks did. In addition, unlike banks, they didn't have to worry about saving Chrysler in order to salvage other loans, to parts suppliers and to Chrysler Financial. The task force's Ron Bloom, a former investment banker and steelworkers-union negotiator, agreed to handle talks with the UAW and Fiat. Mr. Rattner, co-founder of private-equity firm Quadrangle Group, would take on the lenders. He soon butted heads with Mr. Lee. Known on Wall Street for his suspenders, white collars and deep Rolodex, Mr. Lee, as the senior deal maker at J.P. Morgan, has lent more money to more companies than almost anyone else on Wall Street. J.P. Morgan faced by far the most Chrysler exposure: $2.7 billion of debt. Monitoring the situation, J.P. Morgan Chief Executive Jamie Dimon called Chrysler Chief Executive Robert Nardelli several times. Mr. Lee's March 29 demand for full repayment reflected a common view among the creditors. "You lend someone $6.9 billion, you would like $6.9 billion back," said one. Many of the lenders believed the administration wouldn't let Chrysler file for bankruptcy. "The plan was to call the government's bluff. The game was to game the government," said a manager of a distressed-debt fund. Then came President Obama's tough talk about the possibility of Chrysler going into bankruptcy or even liquidation, which came just hours after the administration pushed out GM's chief executive, Rick Wagoner. Acting like a bank that is a troubled firm's last hope, President Obama sketched out what Chrysler would have to do to get more federal money. When Mr. Lee spoke to Mr. Rattner again on March 30, the J.P. Morgan man acknowledged the landscape had changed. He sought a meeting that would bring the lenders to Washington. Chrysler's four main lenders were already indebted to the Treasury as recipients of loans from the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the government's pool of emergency aid to financial-system titans. Citigroup had received $45 billion; J.P. Morgan, $25 billion; and Goldman and Morgan Stanley, $10 billion each. Obama aides say they were under White House orders not to use TARP as leverage over the banks. Lawmakers weren't so shy. Rep. Gary Peters, a Democrat whose Michigan district includes Chrysler offices, wrote to the bank CEOs listing their TARP loans and asking them to extinguish most of Chrysler's debt. Mr. Rattner hosted a meeting of senior bank officers on April 2, in an ornate conference room at the Treasury. They heard presentations from Chrysler's Mr. Nardelli and Fiat Chief Executive Sergio Marchionne. The more than 25 listeners were told that deals with Fiat and the UAW were nearly complete. When the issue of the $6.9 billion in debt came up, Mr. Rattner looked at the lending group and said, "We have in mind for you a much lower number." He silenced the room by proposing they get just $1 billion. While that wasn't the administration's bottom line, the task force had determined what was: the amount lenders would get in a liquidation of Chrysler assets. A Chrysler analysis in January estimated that at $2 billion. The UAW and Fiat knew about this figure, and also knew that the task force was first going to offer lenders just $1 billion. But the lenders, having waited so long to engage with the Treasury, were in the dark. The bankers asked the government team for projections of what a combined Chrysler-Fiat alliance would look like. "If you want a response other than 'No,' something like a counteroffer, then we need those new numbers," Mr. Lee said, according to people present in the room. In the following days, the lenders began to realize their leverage was small and dwindling. Only the government had the ability or willingness to finance a bankruptcy reorganization of Chrysler, while also supporting its warranties and suppliers and recapitalizing Chrysler Financial. None of the lenders, some of which had consumer operations in the Midwest near Chrysler plants, had any desire to take over and liquidate the company. Mr. Lee had another problem. Unrest was spreading among creditors as some worried that TARP-recipient banks were open to cutting a deal with the Treasury. Some lenders that hadn't gotten TARP money decided to hire their own lawyer. To calm the smaller debtholders, the banks on April 10 allowed three of them on the group's steering committee: OppenheimerFunds, Stairway Capital Management and Perella Weinberg Partners' Xerion Fund. The Chrysler-Fiat projections sought from the Treasury didn't arrive until Easter, April 12. By then, deals with Fiat and the UAW had largely been hammered out. The lenders spent a week haggling over how to respond to Mr. Rattner. The big banks at first proposed the group offer to cut the debt in half and get no equity stake. That outraged some hedge funds and distressed-debt firms that didn't face the banks' broader concerns and that were accustomed to fighting in the trenches for their interests. The reply, sent April 20, reflected the hardening position of the hedge funds: The lenders would cut just $2.4 billion in debt, in exchange for 40% of Chrysler's equity. The offer landed with a thud. Rep. Peters said the lenders were seeking much more than market value for their debt, "which amounts to a taxpayer subsidy." It was just 10 days until the government's deadline to reach agreements with the UAW, Fiat and lenders if Chrysler was to get more government money. After receiving one more bank counteroffer, the Treasury on April 28 offered what it had planned all along, to buy out the lenders for $2 billion. The only sweetener was that it would be in cash, meaning the lenders didn't have to wait for a reorganized Chrysler-Fiat to pay it. Mr. Rattner called Mr. Lee: "It's $2 billion, take it or leave it." The big banks quickly agreed to the deal -- equal to 29 cents on the dollar. Though that offered a profit to a few firms that bought debt as low as 15 cents on the dollar, most of the lenders had paid 50 cents to 70 cents, and the banks 100 cents. News that the big banks were accepting the offer leaked before they had told the smaller lenders. "To say the least, we were floored," says one. Mr. Lee was nonetheless intent on winning 100% approval from debtholders, to give the government the option of avoiding a Chrysler bankruptcy filing. He asked the Treasury to raise its offer by $250 million, which it grudgingly agreed to do if the lenders answered within 90 minutes. After a flurry of last-minute calls, about 20 firms, mostly small hedge funds, voted no. At noon the next day, April 30, Mr. Obama said Chrysler would file for bankruptcy. He blamed "speculators" who had turned down the $2 billion offer for their $6.9 billion of debt. A lawyer for holdout firms, Tom Lauria, accused the White House of threatening to destroy the reputation of Perella Weinberg. The White House denied exerting pressure on it. Mr. Lauria's clients took their fight into bankruptcy court last week, imperiling the administration's plan to guide Chrysler into and out of court swiftly. But on Friday, the holdouts abandoned the fight as too costly, financially and politically. "The overarching sense of political pressure," Mr. Lauria said, "remained out there till the end." Write to Neil King Jr. at neil.king at wsj.com and Jeffrey McCracken at jeff.mccracken at wsj.com From mweisner at ebsmed.com Mon May 11 09:27:53 2009 From: mweisner at ebsmed.com (Michael D. Weisner) Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 09:27:53 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] More Chrysler Fallout References: <400985d70905110611x4f3a2fe1qcd745451637faab8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Brad, This particularly inflammatory line sums it all up: "You don't need banks and bondholders to make cars," said one administration official. He's probably correct. I would have countered: "You don't need the UAW to make cars, either." Of course, had it been Rattner's to give, they should have taken this offer: "Mr. Rattner forced the issue during the spring negotiations. More than once, he told Mr. Lee: "You can have the company and run it or liquidate it." More for the "under the bus" crowd. Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brad Haslett" To: "Letters to the Editor" Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 9:11 AM Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] More Chrysler Fallout > This turd doesn't smell any better after a few days of sunshine. This > story is MUCH bigger than a single car company. BTW, did you see > where Chavez seized more oil wells over the weekend? Maybe The One > (TM) actually read the book Chavez gave him. > > Brad > > ---------------------- > > * MAY 11, 2009 > > U.S. Forced Chrysler's Creditors to Blink > > > By NEIL KING JR. and JEFFREY MCCRACKEN > > President Barack Obama's auto task force heard a blunt message early > this spring from J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., the largest lender to > Chrysler LLC. In any deal to remake the troubled auto maker, Chrysler > would have to repay its lenders all $6.9 billion it owed. > > "And not a penny less," said James B. Lee Jr., vice chairman at the > bank, in a call to auto task-force boss Steven Rattner on March 29. > More > > > The next day, Mr. Obama called the banker's bluff. The president > stepped before a podium to announce that Chrysler could face a > disorderly bankruptcy or even liquidation. His meaning was clear: If > that happened, the lenders would get nowhere near $6.9 billion. > > A few hours later, Mr. Lee called Mr. Rattner back. "We need to talk," he > said. > > The banker's about-face was a vivid example of the government's > tightening grip on a humbled financial industry. Pulling a trick from > the hedge-fund playbook, the government used its leverage as the sole > willing lender to Chrysler, either in bankruptcy court or out, to > extract deep concessions from some of the country's biggest banks. > > > The results of these hardball tactics were on display Friday, as the > last resisters of a deal to slash the value of Chrysler debt abandoned > their effort to fight it in bankruptcy court. That raised the chances > for a relatively swift transit through Chapter 11, producing a new > Chrysler 55%-owned by a trust for union retirees, 35% by Fiat SpA -- > which hasn't even been a Chrysler creditor -- and not at all by the > senior secured lenders. > > That conclusion would upend a longstanding tradition concerning rights > in a bankruptcy: Senior secured lenders usually get paid in full > before lower-priority creditors get anything. Not this time. > > The White House's role in restructuring Chrysler has sent a shudder > through the community of lawyers and lenders in the field of > bankruptcy and corporate workouts. Critics complain that the > administration has violated a bedrock principle of American capitalism > and unfairly demonized financial firms that are vital to the > functioning of the economy and its eventual recovery. > > Administration officials reply that the Chrysler crisis required bold > action. While Chrysler's suppliers, dealers and unionized workers are > critical to its survival -- and so is Fiat, which will contribute > high-efficiency engines and foreign distribution -- the creditors were > expendable. > > "You don't need banks and bondholders to make cars," said one > administration official. > > The administration could exert such leverage because it was convinced > big banks were too tarnished in the public eye to put up a fight. They > risked being blamed for Chrysler's demise. And if Chrysler had to > liquidate, they and other lenders would have to try to recover their > money by selling closed auto plants and other assets that are little > in demand. > > Mr. Rattner forced the issue during the spring negotiations. More than > once, he told Mr. Lee: "You can have the company and run it or > liquidate it." > > > This account of the fight among Chrysler, its lenders and the > government is based on interviews with dozens of people involved in > the negotiations, including bankers, financial advisers, lawyers, > union and Chrysler officials and Obama aides. > > The struggle began last year when Chrysler and General Motors Corp. > faced a potential meltdown. Chrysler went to the lenders that held 70% > of its debt -- J.P. Morgan, Citigroup Inc., Goldman Sachs Group Inc. > and Morgan Stanley. It wanted to know if they would lend more and if > they would provide financing in case Chrysler filed for bankruptcy. > > When they said no, the auto maker turned to Washington. Just before > Christmas, the Bush administration agreed to lend Chrysler $4 billion, > as well as $13.4 billion to GM. The Treasury gave Chrysler three > months to reduce its debt and forge a cost-cutting agreement with the > United Auto Workers union. > > Chrysler turned to the lenders it had just been asking for new loans, > but now asked them to agree not to get paid in full for their old > loans. It wanted them to chop the $6.9 billion debt to $5 billion. At > a meeting in early February, Mr. Lee and other bank executives > rebuffed the request. With the government getting so involved in > supporting Chrysler, the banks held out for talks with federal > officials. > > The Obama administration's auto task force held scant hope that all of > Chrysler's lenders would agree to a compromise. There were 46 > debtholders in all, including many small hedge funds and > distressed-debt funds. Most of these had acquired their holdings at a > discount on the secondary market. With no consumer operations, they > had less reputation on the line than the banks did. In addition, > unlike banks, they didn't have to worry about saving Chrysler in order > to salvage other loans, to parts suppliers and to Chrysler Financial. > > The task force's Ron Bloom, a former investment banker and > steelworkers-union negotiator, agreed to handle talks with the UAW and > Fiat. Mr. Rattner, co-founder of private-equity firm Quadrangle Group, > would take on the lenders. He soon butted heads with Mr. Lee. Known on > Wall Street for his suspenders, white collars and deep Rolodex, Mr. > Lee, as the senior deal maker at J.P. Morgan, has lent more money to > more companies than almost anyone else on Wall Street. > > J.P. Morgan faced by far the most Chrysler exposure: $2.7 billion of > debt. Monitoring the situation, J.P. Morgan Chief Executive Jamie > Dimon called Chrysler Chief Executive Robert Nardelli several times. > > Mr. Lee's March 29 demand for full repayment reflected a common view > among the creditors. "You lend someone $6.9 billion, you would like > $6.9 billion back," said one. > > > Many of the lenders believed the administration wouldn't let Chrysler > file for bankruptcy. "The plan was to call the government's bluff. The > game was to game the government," said a manager of a distressed-debt > fund. > > Then came President Obama's tough talk about the possibility of > Chrysler going into bankruptcy or even liquidation, which came just > hours after the administration pushed out GM's chief executive, Rick > Wagoner. Acting like a bank that is a troubled firm's last hope, > President Obama sketched out what Chrysler would have to do to get > more federal money. > > When Mr. Lee spoke to Mr. Rattner again on March 30, the J.P. Morgan > man acknowledged the landscape had changed. He sought a meeting that > would bring the lenders to Washington. > > Chrysler's four main lenders were already indebted to the Treasury as > recipients of loans from the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the > government's pool of emergency aid to financial-system titans. > Citigroup had received $45 billion; J.P. Morgan, $25 billion; and > Goldman and Morgan Stanley, $10 billion each. > > Obama aides say they were under White House orders not to use TARP as > leverage over the banks. Lawmakers weren't so shy. Rep. Gary Peters, a > Democrat whose Michigan district includes Chrysler offices, wrote to > the bank CEOs listing their TARP loans and asking them to extinguish > most of Chrysler's debt. > > Mr. Rattner hosted a meeting of senior bank officers on April 2, in an > ornate conference room at the Treasury. They heard presentations from > Chrysler's Mr. Nardelli and Fiat Chief Executive Sergio Marchionne. > The more than 25 listeners were told that deals with Fiat and the UAW > were nearly complete. > > When the issue of the $6.9 billion in debt came up, Mr. Rattner looked > at the lending group and said, "We have in mind for you a much lower > number." He silenced the room by proposing they get just $1 billion. > > While that wasn't the administration's bottom line, the task force had > determined what was: the amount lenders would get in a liquidation of > Chrysler assets. A Chrysler analysis in January estimated that at $2 > billion. The UAW and Fiat knew about this figure, and also knew that > the task force was first going to offer lenders just $1 billion. But > the lenders, having waited so long to engage with the Treasury, were > in the dark. > > The bankers asked the government team for projections of what a > combined Chrysler-Fiat alliance would look like. "If you want a > response other than 'No,' something like a counteroffer, then we need > those new numbers," Mr. Lee said, according to people present in the > room. > > In the following days, the lenders began to realize their leverage was > small and dwindling. Only the government had the ability or > willingness to finance a bankruptcy reorganization of Chrysler, while > also supporting its warranties and suppliers and recapitalizing > Chrysler Financial. None of the lenders, some of which had consumer > operations in the Midwest near Chrysler plants, had any desire to take > over and liquidate the company. > > Mr. Lee had another problem. Unrest was spreading among creditors as > some worried that TARP-recipient banks were open to cutting a deal > with the Treasury. Some lenders that hadn't gotten TARP money decided > to hire their own lawyer. To calm the smaller debtholders, the banks > on April 10 allowed three of them on the group's steering committee: > OppenheimerFunds, Stairway Capital Management and Perella Weinberg > Partners' Xerion Fund. > > The Chrysler-Fiat projections sought from the Treasury didn't arrive > until Easter, April 12. By then, deals with Fiat and the UAW had > largely been hammered out. > > The lenders spent a week haggling over how to respond to Mr. Rattner. > The big banks at first proposed the group offer to cut the debt in > half and get no equity stake. That outraged some hedge funds and > distressed-debt firms that didn't face the banks' broader concerns and > that were accustomed to fighting in the trenches for their interests. > The reply, sent April 20, reflected the hardening position of the > hedge funds: The lenders would cut just $2.4 billion in debt, in > exchange for 40% of Chrysler's equity. > > The offer landed with a thud. Rep. Peters said the lenders were > seeking much more than market value for their debt, "which amounts to > a taxpayer subsidy." It was just 10 days until the government's > deadline to reach agreements with the UAW, Fiat and lenders if > Chrysler was to get more government money. > > After receiving one more bank counteroffer, the Treasury on April 28 > offered what it had planned all along, to buy out the lenders for $2 > billion. The only sweetener was that it would be in cash, meaning the > lenders didn't have to wait for a reorganized Chrysler-Fiat to pay it. > > Mr. Rattner called Mr. Lee: "It's $2 billion, take it or leave it." > > The big banks quickly agreed to the deal -- equal to 29 cents on the > dollar. Though that offered a profit to a few firms that bought debt > as low as 15 cents on the dollar, most of the lenders had paid 50 > cents to 70 cents, and the banks 100 cents. News that the big banks > were accepting the offer leaked before they had told the smaller > lenders. "To say the least, we were floored," says one. > > Mr. Lee was nonetheless intent on winning 100% approval from > debtholders, to give the government the option of avoiding a Chrysler > bankruptcy filing. He asked the Treasury to raise its offer by $250 > million, which it grudgingly agreed to do if the lenders answered > within 90 minutes. After a flurry of last-minute calls, about 20 > firms, mostly small hedge funds, voted no. > > At noon the next day, April 30, Mr. Obama said Chrysler would file for > bankruptcy. He blamed "speculators" who had turned down the $2 billion > offer for their $6.9 billion of debt. A lawyer for holdout firms, Tom > Lauria, accused the White House of threatening to destroy the > reputation of Perella Weinberg. The White House denied exerting > pressure on it. Mr. Lauria's clients took their fight into bankruptcy > court last week, imperiling the administration's plan to guide > Chrysler into and out of court swiftly. But on Friday, the holdouts > abandoned the fight as too costly, financially and politically. > > "The overarching sense of political pressure," Mr. Lauria said, > "remained out there till the end." > > Write to Neil King Jr. at neil.king at wsj.com and Jeffrey McCracken at > jeff.mccracken at wsj.com > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon May 11 10:13:34 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 09:13:34 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Corporate Taxes In-Reply-To: <400985d70905110435j585113d9o32a07e6dfb2207da@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905110435j585113d9o32a07e6dfb2207da@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905110713j777e9180re01c95bc64f1c67e@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Sure, the gov't loves those business taxes, because they are invisible to the average joe consumer. Who can tell how much of the price of any given item we buy is actually paying the taxes of the business we are buying that item from. This is great for the gov't because no one can look at a pay stub or tax receipt and say; I paid HOW MUCH TAX??? Just another example of that *transparency* in gov't the Obamessiah has been promising..... cough, cough... gag. Not that his predecessors weren't guilty too ..... If I were king I'd like to see business taxes done away with altogether and have them replaced by a sales tax or something like it that would make it possible for even the dimmest bulb to understand exactly how much tax he is paying and exactly how far his gov't is sticking it up his, uh .... backside. Rik On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 6:35 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > - "You lose some of those good management and professional jobs > in places like > Chicago and New York," says Gary Hufbauer of the Peterson Institute. > - > > An international company you would all recognize (not US based) > recently decided to locate a huge R&D facility outside Beijing (got > the briefing from one of the decision makers over the weekend). > Nearly every Pacific Rim nation competed for the prize. The > Philippines actually made the best sales pitch based on taxes, but > Mainland China eventually won because of "stability" issues. US > corporations already operate at a disadvantage in the world market > because of excessive domestic tax rates. Now potential US investors > have the issue of politics prevailing over the rule of law to worry > about, not unlike doing business in the Philippines. The Toyota plant > outside Tupelo, Mississippi is currently on hold as well as the > Volkswagen plant outside Chattanooga, Tennessee, both waiting for > better economic times. If we continue down this path of finding > endless ways to tax companies, confiscate assets by fiat (no pun > intended), and throw increasing numbers of roadblocks to expanding > businesses, we'll eventually become a shell of our former economic > self - kind of like the City of Chicago. > > Brad > > -------------------------- > > May 11, 2009 > The Great Tax Dodge Demystified > By Robert Samuelson > > "(The U.S. tax code is) full of corporate loopholes that makes it > perfectly legal for companies to avoid paying their fair share." > -- President Barack Obama, May 4 > > WASHINGTON -- Like it or not, ours is a world of multinational > companies. Almost all of America's brand name firms (Coca-Cola, IBM, > Microsoft, Caterpillar) are multinationals, and the process works both > ways. In 2006, the U.S. operations of foreign firms employed 5.3 > million workers. Fiat's looming takeover of Chrysler reminds us again > that much business is transnational. > > For most people, the multinational company is a troubling concept. > Loyalty matters. We like to think that "our companies" serve the broad > national interest rather than just scouring the world for the cheapest > labor, the laxest regulations and the lowest taxes. And the tax issue > is especially vexing: How should multinationals be taxed on the > profits they make outside their home countries? > > Listen to President Obama, and the status quo seems a cesspool. > Pervasive "loopholes" engineered by "well-connected lobbyists" allow > U.S. multinationals to skirt American taxes and outsource jobs to > low-tax countries. So the president proposes plugging loopholes. Some > jobs will return to the United States, and U.S. tax coffers will grow > by $210 billion over the next decade. > > Sounds great -- and that's how the story played. "Obama Targets > Overseas Tax Dodge," headlined The Washington Post. But the reality is > murkier; the president's accusatory rhetoric perpetuates many myths. > > Myth: Aided by those overpaid lobbyists, American multinationals are > taxed lightly -- less so than their foreign counterparts. > > Reality: Just the opposite. Most countries don't tax the foreign > profits of their multinational firms at all. Take a Swiss > multinational with operations in South Korea. It pays a 27.5 percent > Korean corporate tax on its profits and can bring home the rest > tax-free. By contrast, a U.S. firm in Korea pays the Korean tax and, > if it returns the profits to the United States, faces the 35 percent > U.S. corporate tax rate. American companies can defer the U.S. tax by > keeping the profits abroad (naturally, many do), and when repatriated, > companies get a credit for foreign taxes paid. In this case, they'd > pay the difference between the Korean rate (27.5 percent) and the U.S. > rate (35 percent). > > Myth: When U.S. multinationals invest abroad, they destroy American jobs. > > Reality: Not so. Sure, many U.S. firms have shut American factories > and opened plants elsewhere. But most overseas investments by U.S. > multinationals serve local markets. Only 10 percent of their foreign > output is exported back to the United States, says Harvard economist > Fritz Foley. When Wal-Mart opens a store in China, it doesn't close > one in California. On balance, all the extra foreign sales create U.S. > jobs for management, research and development (almost 90 percent of > American multinationals' R&D occurs in the United States) and the > export of components. A study by Foley and economists Mihir Desai of > Harvard and James Hines of the University of Michigan estimates that > for every 10 percent increase in U.S. multinationals' overseas > payrolls, their American payrolls increase almost 4 percent. > > Myth: Plugging overseas corporate tax loopholes will dramatically > improve the budget outlook as multinationals pay their "fair" share. > > Reality: Dream on. The estimated $210 billion revenue gain over 10 > years -- money already included in Obama's budget -- represents only > six-tenths of 1 percent of the decade's tax revenues of $32 trillion, > as projected by the Congressional Budget Office. Worse, the CBO > reckons that Obama's endless deficits over the decade will total a > gut-wrenching $9.3 trillion. > > Whether or not Obama's proposals would create any jobs in the United > States is an open question. In highly technical ways, Obama would > increase the taxes on the foreign profits of U.S. multinationals by > limiting the use of today's deferral and foreign tax credit. Taxing > overseas investment more heavily, the theory goes, would favor > investment in the United States. > > But many experts believe his proposals would actually destroy U.S. > jobs. Being more heavily taxed, American multinational firms would > have more trouble competing with European and Asian rivals. Some U.S. > foreign operations might be sold to tax-advantaged foreign firms. > Either way, supporting operations in the United States would suffer. > "You lose some of those good management and professional jobs in > places like Chicago and New York," says Gary Hufbauer of the Peterson > Institute. > > Including state taxes, America's top corporate tax rate exceeds 39 > percent; among wealthy nations, only Japan's is higher (slightly). > However, the effective U.S. tax rate is reduced by preferences -- > mostly domestic, not foreign -- that also make the system complex and > expensive. As Hufbauer suggests, Obama would have been better advised > to cut the top rate by ending many preferences. That would lower > compliance costs and involve fewer distortions. But this sort of > proposal would have been harder to sell. Obama sacrificed substance > for grandstanding. > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090511/413ad1fd/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon May 11 10:30:08 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 09:30:08 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] More Chrysler Fallout In-Reply-To: References: <400985d70905110611x4f3a2fe1qcd745451637faab8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905110730m3340189bo4a935aa67184bb20@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Yeah sure, you can make the banks take less of their due, but what does that really accomplish?? It does nothing at all to address the real problem, which is simply that the US car company's cost of production is too high to allow them to price competitively. If this wasn't true, they wouldn't have had need for that debt in the first place. But hey, when you haven't operated even so much as a hotdog cart, how much understanding of the workings of a business can we expect a Messiah to understand??? Rik On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 8:27 AM, Michael D. Weisner wrote: > Brad, > > This particularly inflammatory line sums it all up: > "You don't need banks and bondholders to make cars," > said one administration official. > > He's probably correct. I would have countered: > "You don't need the UAW to make cars, either." > > Of course, had it been Rattner's to give, they should have taken this > offer: > "Mr. Rattner forced the issue during the spring negotiations. More than > once, he told Mr. Lee: "You can have the company and run it or > liquidate it." > > More for the "under the bus" crowd. > > Mike > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brad Haslett" > To: "Letters to the Editor" > > Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 9:11 AM > Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] More Chrysler Fallout > > > > This turd doesn't smell any better after a few days of sunshine. This > > story is MUCH bigger than a single car company. BTW, did you see > > where Chavez seized more oil wells over the weekend? Maybe The One > > (TM) actually read the book Chavez gave him. > > > > Brad > > > > ---------------------- > > > > * MAY 11, 2009 > > > > U.S. Forced Chrysler's Creditors to Blink > > > > > > By NEIL KING JR. and JEFFREY MCCRACKEN > > > > President Barack Obama's auto task force heard a blunt message early > > this spring from J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., the largest lender to > > Chrysler LLC. In any deal to remake the troubled auto maker, Chrysler > > would have to repay its lenders all $6.9 billion it owed. > > > > "And not a penny less," said James B. Lee Jr., vice chairman at the > > bank, in a call to auto task-force boss Steven Rattner on March 29. > > More > > > > > > The next day, Mr. Obama called the banker's bluff. The president > > stepped before a podium to announce that Chrysler could face a > > disorderly bankruptcy or even liquidation. His meaning was clear: If > > that happened, the lenders would get nowhere near $6.9 billion. > > > > A few hours later, Mr. Lee called Mr. Rattner back. "We need to talk," he > > said. > > > > The banker's about-face was a vivid example of the government's > > tightening grip on a humbled financial industry. Pulling a trick from > > the hedge-fund playbook, the government used its leverage as the sole > > willing lender to Chrysler, either in bankruptcy court or out, to > > extract deep concessions from some of the country's biggest banks. > > > > > > The results of these hardball tactics were on display Friday, as the > > last resisters of a deal to slash the value of Chrysler debt abandoned > > their effort to fight it in bankruptcy court. That raised the chances > > for a relatively swift transit through Chapter 11, producing a new > > Chrysler 55%-owned by a trust for union retirees, 35% by Fiat SpA -- > > which hasn't even been a Chrysler creditor -- and not at all by the > > senior secured lenders. > > > > That conclusion would upend a longstanding tradition concerning rights > > in a bankruptcy: Senior secured lenders usually get paid in full > > before lower-priority creditors get anything. Not this time. > > > > The White House's role in restructuring Chrysler has sent a shudder > > through the community of lawyers and lenders in the field of > > bankruptcy and corporate workouts. Critics complain that the > > administration has violated a bedrock principle of American capitalism > > and unfairly demonized financial firms that are vital to the > > functioning of the economy and its eventual recovery. > > > > Administration officials reply that the Chrysler crisis required bold > > action. While Chrysler's suppliers, dealers and unionized workers are > > critical to its survival -- and so is Fiat, which will contribute > > high-efficiency engines and foreign distribution -- the creditors were > > expendable. > > > > "You don't need banks and bondholders to make cars," said one > > administration official. > > > > The administration could exert such leverage because it was convinced > > big banks were too tarnished in the public eye to put up a fight. They > > risked being blamed for Chrysler's demise. And if Chrysler had to > > liquidate, they and other lenders would have to try to recover their > > money by selling closed auto plants and other assets that are little > > in demand. > > > > Mr. Rattner forced the issue during the spring negotiations. More than > > once, he told Mr. Lee: "You can have the company and run it or > > liquidate it." > > > > > > This account of the fight among Chrysler, its lenders and the > > government is based on interviews with dozens of people involved in > > the negotiations, including bankers, financial advisers, lawyers, > > union and Chrysler officials and Obama aides. > > > > The struggle began last year when Chrysler and General Motors Corp. > > faced a potential meltdown. Chrysler went to the lenders that held 70% > > of its debt -- J.P. Morgan, Citigroup Inc., Goldman Sachs Group Inc. > > and Morgan Stanley. It wanted to know if they would lend more and if > > they would provide financing in case Chrysler filed for bankruptcy. > > > > When they said no, the auto maker turned to Washington. Just before > > Christmas, the Bush administration agreed to lend Chrysler $4 billion, > > as well as $13.4 billion to GM. The Treasury gave Chrysler three > > months to reduce its debt and forge a cost-cutting agreement with the > > United Auto Workers union. > > > > Chrysler turned to the lenders it had just been asking for new loans, > > but now asked them to agree not to get paid in full for their old > > loans. It wanted them to chop the $6.9 billion debt to $5 billion. At > > a meeting in early February, Mr. Lee and other bank executives > > rebuffed the request. With the government getting so involved in > > supporting Chrysler, the banks held out for talks with federal > > officials. > > > > The Obama administration's auto task force held scant hope that all of > > Chrysler's lenders would agree to a compromise. There were 46 > > debtholders in all, including many small hedge funds and > > distressed-debt funds. Most of these had acquired their holdings at a > > discount on the secondary market. With no consumer operations, they > > had less reputation on the line than the banks did. In addition, > > unlike banks, they didn't have to worry about saving Chrysler in order > > to salvage other loans, to parts suppliers and to Chrysler Financial. > > > > The task force's Ron Bloom, a former investment banker and > > steelworkers-union negotiator, agreed to handle talks with the UAW and > > Fiat. Mr. Rattner, co-founder of private-equity firm Quadrangle Group, > > would take on the lenders. He soon butted heads with Mr. Lee. Known on > > Wall Street for his suspenders, white collars and deep Rolodex, Mr. > > Lee, as the senior deal maker at J.P. Morgan, has lent more money to > > more companies than almost anyone else on Wall Street. > > > > J.P. Morgan faced by far the most Chrysler exposure: $2.7 billion of > > debt. Monitoring the situation, J.P. Morgan Chief Executive Jamie > > Dimon called Chrysler Chief Executive Robert Nardelli several times. > > > > Mr. Lee's March 29 demand for full repayment reflected a common view > > among the creditors. "You lend someone $6.9 billion, you would like > > $6.9 billion back," said one. > > > > > > Many of the lenders believed the administration wouldn't let Chrysler > > file for bankruptcy. "The plan was to call the government's bluff. The > > game was to game the government," said a manager of a distressed-debt > > fund. > > > > Then came President Obama's tough talk about the possibility of > > Chrysler going into bankruptcy or even liquidation, which came just > > hours after the administration pushed out GM's chief executive, Rick > > Wagoner. Acting like a bank that is a troubled firm's last hope, > > President Obama sketched out what Chrysler would have to do to get > > more federal money. > > > > When Mr. Lee spoke to Mr. Rattner again on March 30, the J.P. Morgan > > man acknowledged the landscape had changed. He sought a meeting that > > would bring the lenders to Washington. > > > > Chrysler's four main lenders were already indebted to the Treasury as > > recipients of loans from the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the > > government's pool of emergency aid to financial-system titans. > > Citigroup had received $45 billion; J.P. Morgan, $25 billion; and > > Goldman and Morgan Stanley, $10 billion each. > > > > Obama aides say they were under White House orders not to use TARP as > > leverage over the banks. Lawmakers weren't so shy. Rep. Gary Peters, a > > Democrat whose Michigan district includes Chrysler offices, wrote to > > the bank CEOs listing their TARP loans and asking them to extinguish > > most of Chrysler's debt. > > > > Mr. Rattner hosted a meeting of senior bank officers on April 2, in an > > ornate conference room at the Treasury. They heard presentations from > > Chrysler's Mr. Nardelli and Fiat Chief Executive Sergio Marchionne. > > The more than 25 listeners were told that deals with Fiat and the UAW > > were nearly complete. > > > > When the issue of the $6.9 billion in debt came up, Mr. Rattner looked > > at the lending group and said, "We have in mind for you a much lower > > number." He silenced the room by proposing they get just $1 billion. > > > > While that wasn't the administration's bottom line, the task force had > > determined what was: the amount lenders would get in a liquidation of > > Chrysler assets. A Chrysler analysis in January estimated that at $2 > > billion. The UAW and Fiat knew about this figure, and also knew that > > the task force was first going to offer lenders just $1 billion. But > > the lenders, having waited so long to engage with the Treasury, were > > in the dark. > > > > The bankers asked the government team for projections of what a > > combined Chrysler-Fiat alliance would look like. "If you want a > > response other than 'No,' something like a counteroffer, then we need > > those new numbers," Mr. Lee said, according to people present in the > > room. > > > > In the following days, the lenders began to realize their leverage was > > small and dwindling. Only the government had the ability or > > willingness to finance a bankruptcy reorganization of Chrysler, while > > also supporting its warranties and suppliers and recapitalizing > > Chrysler Financial. None of the lenders, some of which had consumer > > operations in the Midwest near Chrysler plants, had any desire to take > > over and liquidate the company. > > > > Mr. Lee had another problem. Unrest was spreading among creditors as > > some worried that TARP-recipient banks were open to cutting a deal > > with the Treasury. Some lenders that hadn't gotten TARP money decided > > to hire their own lawyer. To calm the smaller debtholders, the banks > > on April 10 allowed three of them on the group's steering committee: > > OppenheimerFunds, Stairway Capital Management and Perella Weinberg > > Partners' Xerion Fund. > > > > The Chrysler-Fiat projections sought from the Treasury didn't arrive > > until Easter, April 12. By then, deals with Fiat and the UAW had > > largely been hammered out. > > > > The lenders spent a week haggling over how to respond to Mr. Rattner. > > The big banks at first proposed the group offer to cut the debt in > > half and get no equity stake. That outraged some hedge funds and > > distressed-debt firms that didn't face the banks' broader concerns and > > that were accustomed to fighting in the trenches for their interests. > > The reply, sent April 20, reflected the hardening position of the > > hedge funds: The lenders would cut just $2.4 billion in debt, in > > exchange for 40% of Chrysler's equity. > > > > The offer landed with a thud. Rep. Peters said the lenders were > > seeking much more than market value for their debt, "which amounts to > > a taxpayer subsidy." It was just 10 days until the government's > > deadline to reach agreements with the UAW, Fiat and lenders if > > Chrysler was to get more government money. > > > > After receiving one more bank counteroffer, the Treasury on April 28 > > offered what it had planned all along, to buy out the lenders for $2 > > billion. The only sweetener was that it would be in cash, meaning the > > lenders didn't have to wait for a reorganized Chrysler-Fiat to pay it. > > > > Mr. Rattner called Mr. Lee: "It's $2 billion, take it or leave it." > > > > The big banks quickly agreed to the deal -- equal to 29 cents on the > > dollar. Though that offered a profit to a few firms that bought debt > > as low as 15 cents on the dollar, most of the lenders had paid 50 > > cents to 70 cents, and the banks 100 cents. News that the big banks > > were accepting the offer leaked before they had told the smaller > > lenders. "To say the least, we were floored," says one. > > > > Mr. Lee was nonetheless intent on winning 100% approval from > > debtholders, to give the government the option of avoiding a Chrysler > > bankruptcy filing. He asked the Treasury to raise its offer by $250 > > million, which it grudgingly agreed to do if the lenders answered > > within 90 minutes. After a flurry of last-minute calls, about 20 > > firms, mostly small hedge funds, voted no. > > > > At noon the next day, April 30, Mr. Obama said Chrysler would file for > > bankruptcy. He blamed "speculators" who had turned down the $2 billion > > offer for their $6.9 billion of debt. A lawyer for holdout firms, Tom > > Lauria, accused the White House of threatening to destroy the > > reputation of Perella Weinberg. The White House denied exerting > > pressure on it. Mr. Lauria's clients took their fight into bankruptcy > > court last week, imperiling the administration's plan to guide > > Chrysler into and out of court swiftly. But on Friday, the holdouts > > abandoned the fight as too costly, financially and politically. > > > > "The overarching sense of political pressure," Mr. Lauria said, > > "remained out there till the end." > > > > Write to Neil King Jr. at neil.king at wsj.com and Jeffrey McCracken at > > jeff.mccracken at wsj.com > > _______________________________________________ > > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090511/01549b93/attachment-0001.html From ekroposki at charter.net Mon May 11 18:42:31 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 18:42:31 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Going Galt Message-ID: <5513ABD97CF4406DA2C822825DAFF273@YOURB88038198E> Brad, I suspect that I am on the correct page, but to establish that everyone on the forum is, in your eloquent words, explain "going galt". I would like to point out to others what is happening. Why socialism at its heart fails. Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090511/893cc08a/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Tue May 12 09:07:34 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 09:07:34 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Alternative Energy Information Message-ID: This reference is for Mike W and any others interested. The May/June 2009 issue of IEEE Power & Energy Magazine has several articles about Photovoltaic and wind power and their integration into power grids. http://www.ieee.org/portal/site/pes/menuitem.bfd2bcf5a5608058fb2275875bac26c8/index.jsp?&pName=pes_home The current issue is not on line. Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090512/bd87d6f7/attachment.html From mweisner at ebsmed.com Tue May 12 09:19:22 2009 From: mweisner at ebsmed.com (Michael D. Weisner) Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 09:19:22 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Alternative Energy Information References: Message-ID: Ed, If it is not online, why post the link? If there are interesting articles that are not available online, could you post copies? Thanks, Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: Ed Kroposki To: Swift Water Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 9:07 AM Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Alternative Energy Information This reference is for Mike W and any others interested. The May/June 2009 issue of IEEE Power & Energy Magazine has several articles about Photovoltaic and wind power and their integration into power grids. http://www.ieee.org/portal/site/pes/menuitem.bfd2bcf5a5608058fb2275875bac26c8/index.jsp?&pName=pes_home The current issue is not on line. Ed K ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ SwiftwaterGazette mailing list SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090512/4cbb77e1/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Tue May 12 16:19:48 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 16:19:48 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Alternative Energy Information - Mike Message-ID: <3D2962AFD1944A1D8701872577C9E1C9@YOURB88038198E> Mike, As I recall you posted a bunch of information on the subject recently. The magazine exist, if the topics interest you then get a copy. Newsstand, subscribe, what ever way. Consider contacting: http://www.ieee.org/web/publications/journmag/index.html and inquire about how to get a copy. Maybe they will send you one as a sample? http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/RecentIssue.jsp?punumber=8014 Consider calling your local power company and ask if they have a copy. Do you have a technical university near you? Library? When I am referred to a current article in an available magazine, I often buy a copy. For example, I do not subscribe to Scientific America but once or twice a year will buy a copy. Not all issues of that publication deal with solar and wind power. That issue has several articles on those alternative energy sources, their usefulness and integration into power systems. Anyway, I just passed along its existence for those interested in current alternative energy research. As to why don't they give the articles away? I guess to maintain the editorial staff to pay for initial publishing. The costs of putting together those articles is not cheap. And it is an international club of high power members. Most of the articles in that magazine are the result of organized research. Many of the articles are digested doctoral thesis's. Many articles contain proprietary information from companies involved. The sources are world wide, for example in that issue there are articles from Japan, Germany, and USA. Is is what is called a peer review professional journal. Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090512/ce88cd97/attachment.html From mweisner at ebsmed.com Tue May 12 17:26:48 2009 From: mweisner at ebsmed.com (Michael D. Weisner) Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 17:26:48 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Alternative Energy Information - Mike References: <3D2962AFD1944A1D8701872577C9E1C9@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: <5F7E0BCBDEB642088E8F4D045DE793D6@ebsoffice> Ed, Thanks. What I meant was if you had read the articles, would you please post a copy. I am aware of the many IEEE journals. I subscribe to IEEE Transactions on Bioengineering and IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology. I am not aware that any issues are for sale (on a newsstand) other than through subscription. Yes, I can read them in the Stony Brook University library. Maybe I will add this IEEE society journal to my annual renewal. Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: Ed Kroposki To: Swift Water Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 4:19 PM Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Alternative Energy Information - Mike Mike, As I recall you posted a bunch of information on the subject recently. The magazine exist, if the topics interest you then get a copy. Newsstand, subscribe, what ever way. Consider contacting: http://www.ieee.org/web/publications/journmag/index.html and inquire about how to get a copy. Maybe they will send you one as a sample? http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/RecentIssue.jsp?punumber=8014 Consider calling your local power company and ask if they have a copy. Do you have a technical university near you? Library? When I am referred to a current article in an available magazine, I often buy a copy. For example, I do not subscribe to Scientific America but once or twice a year will buy a copy. Not all issues of that publication deal with solar and wind power. That issue has several articles on those alternative energy sources, their usefulness and integration into power systems. Anyway, I just passed along its existence for those interested in current alternative energy research. As to why don't they give the articles away? I guess to maintain the editorial staff to pay for initial publishing. The costs of putting together those articles is not cheap. And it is an international club of high power members. Most of the articles in that magazine are the result of organized research. Many of the articles are digested doctoral thesis's. Many articles contain proprietary information from companies involved. The sources are world wide, for example in that issue there are articles from Japan, Germany, and USA. Is is what is called a peer review professional journal. Ed K ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ SwiftwaterGazette mailing list SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090512/9c776f30/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Tue May 12 18:47:15 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 18:47:15 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Mike, IEEE Journals Message-ID: <3C4E02ABCBCF4277A7B4B9BAA4C842B5@YOURB88038198E> Mike, This is a pretty technical journal and all issues are not on these subjects. I recommend you look at the issue and decide. As to posting a copy on the net, I refrain from posting copywrighted stuff unless it not available otherwise or so old that the copywright is likely history. I just went thru this on another web site where I would not post a sailing article because it is still availble. Bill Effros went thru this subject some years ago on the Rhodes List. Now political stuff is another matter. And most of that is posted on the list elsewhere. Anyway, at your leisure look up the current issue at Stony Brook. Then if you want to copy it for personal use, that is another thing. This issue is so recent that it may not be on the shelves of libraries - mine came from an author. Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090512/ea50bb6f/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Tue May 12 19:04:50 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 19:04:50 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Mike, now this is poltical with citation Message-ID: <2B89C4E555C24A5A874C9ABC6CEB3503@YOURB88038198E> Barack Obama and the CIA: why does President Pantywaist hate America so badly? Posted By: Gerald Warner at Apr 24, 2009 at 18:41:00 [General] Posted in: Foreign Correspondents , Politics , Eagle Eye Tags:Barack Obama, CIA, Condoleezza Rice, dick cheney, waterboarding If al-Qaeda, the Taliban and the rest of the Looney Tunes brigade want to kick America to death, they had better move in quickly and grab a piece of the action before Barack Obama finishes the job himself. Never in the history of the United States has a president worked so actively against the interests of his own people - not even Jimmy Carter. Obama's problem is that he does not know who the enemy is. To him, the enemy does not squat in caves in Waziristan, clutching automatic weapons and reciting the more militant verses from the Koran: instead, it sits around at tea parties in Kentucky quoting from the US Constitution. Obama is not at war with terrorists, but with his Republican fellow citizens. He has never abandoned the campaign trail. That is why he opened Pandora's Box by publishing the Justice Department's legal opinions on waterboarding and other hardline interrogation techniques. He cynically subordinated the national interest to his partisan desire to embarrass the Republicans. Then he had to rush to Langley, Virginia to try to reassure a demoralised CIA that had just discovered the President of the United States was an even more formidable foe than al-Qaeda. "Don't be discouraged by what's happened the last few weeks," he told intelligence officers. Is he kidding? Thanks to him, al-Qaeda knows the private interrogation techniques available to the US intelligence agencies and can train its operatives to withstand them - or would do so, if they had not already been outlawed. So, next time a senior al-Qaeda hood is captured, all the CIA can do is ask him nicely if he would care to reveal when a major population centre is due to be hit by a terror spectacular, or which American city is about to be irradiated by a dirty bomb. Your view of this situation will be dictated by one simple criterion: whether or not you watched the people jumping from the twin towers. Obama promised his CIA audience that nobody would be prosecuted for past actions. That has already been contradicted by leftist groups with a revanchist ambition to put Republicans, headed if possible by Condoleezza Rice, in the dock. Talk about playing party politics with national security. Martin Scheinin, the United Nations special investigator for human rights, claims that senior figures, including former vice president Dick Cheney, could face prosecution overseas. Ponder that - once you have got over the difficulty of locating the United Nations and human rights within the same dimension. President Pantywaist Obama should have thought twice before sitting down to play poker with Dick Cheney. The former vice president believes documents have been selectively published and that releasing more will prove how effective the interrogation techniques were. Under Dubya's administration, there was no further atrocity on American soil after 9/11. President Pantywaist's recent world tour, cosying up to all the bad guys, excited the ambitions of America's enemies. Here, they realised, is a sucker they can really take to the cleaners. His only enemies are fellow Americans. Which prompts the question: why does President Pantywaist hate America so badly? http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/gerald_warner/blog/2009/04/24/barack_obama_and_the_cia_why_does_president_pantywaist_hate_america_so_badly -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090512/6e5ccd3e/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Wed May 13 08:44:19 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 07:44:19 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Going Galt In-Reply-To: <5513ABD97CF4406DA2C822825DAFF273@YOURB88038198E> References: <5513ABD97CF4406DA2C822825DAFF273@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: <400985d70905130544v7faa4732w6e0d054d9f16ed97@mail.gmail.com> Ed, The term "going Galt" (as I'm sure you already know) comes from Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged". In the present context, it means people are choosing to minimize their income and adjust their lifestyle accordingly. If you are a restaurant owner, why expand your business if the additional marginal income will be stolen by the government? Why would a physician see additional patients when the marginal rate of return for the additional time spent decreases. For me personally, I can refuse to teach or fly additional trips. My wife and I have very little debt, live frugally, and save a lot. We could be out buying toys, wide screen TV's, corporate bonds & Treasury bills, etc., exactly the things the economy needs to rebound. We're not because we refuse to support an economic system that punishes success. If a significant portion of the 5% who are targeted by the Obama administration sponsored class warfare scale back their earnings and consumption, the effect will be substantial and immediate. We're seeing the effects of that already. Of all the commodities in the world, capital is the most free to go where it is desired and treated with respect. This administration has already used Chicago style mob tactics to ignore the rule of law regarding capital. Trust me, investors around the world have taken notice. There is no sane or rational explanation that anyone can give to describe how the US government is going to pay off the massive debt it is taking on. Forgive me for sounding arrogant on this issue but I am arrogant on this issue - 95% of the population don't realize that for every dollar the US government is spending in 2009, we're borrowing 45 cents. It only gets worse in 2010 thru 2012. This is nuts! Those in the 95% who think they are going to benefit from this class warfare, or that it isn't going to effect them, are NUTS! In the past few months, I've been offered some incredible deals on boats, airplanes, construction equipment, etc. I'm not playing. If this country morphs into a socialist "heaven on earth", we plan to pick up our "bat and ball and glove" and go play ball on a new diamond. Most people don't have that option but we do. In the meantime, we'll just "go Galt". Brad On 5/11/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > Brad, > > I suspect that I am on the correct page, but to establish that everyone on > the forum is, in your eloquent words, explain "going galt". > > I would like to point out to others what is happening. Why socialism at its > heart fails. > > Ed K From mweisner at ebsmed.com Wed May 13 09:23:34 2009 From: mweisner at ebsmed.com (Michael D. Weisner) Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 09:23:34 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Going Galt References: <5513ABD97CF4406DA2C822825DAFF273@YOURB88038198E> <400985d70905130544v7faa4732w6e0d054d9f16ed97@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <25C30DB6960146DA8A86EFAE10C3F5B4@D9X7C761> Brad, "Going Galt" is about the only real option we all have at this time. Unfortunately, "Shrugged" did not have a happy ending, much as you foresee for the US. The option to go play in a new ball park may very well exist, although my limited experience in the new neighborhood is not good. Round eyes are always discriminated against and the park is ruled by real bullies that play for more than your money. At least here, they are only interested in my dollars, not my life. Reconsider the real options. Mike From: "Brad Haslett" Wednesday, May 13, 2009 8:44 AM > Ed, > > The term "going Galt" (as I'm sure you already know) comes from Ayn > Rand's "Atlas Shrugged". In the present context, it means people are > choosing to minimize their income and adjust their lifestyle > accordingly. If you are a restaurant owner, why expand your business > if the additional marginal income will be stolen by the government? > Why would a physician see additional patients when the marginal rate > of return for the additional time spent decreases. For me personally, > I can refuse to teach or fly additional trips. My wife and I have > very little debt, live frugally, and save a lot. We could be out > buying toys, wide screen TV's, corporate bonds & Treasury bills, etc., > exactly the things the economy needs to rebound. We're not because we > refuse to support an economic system that punishes success. If a > significant portion of the 5% who are targeted by the Obama > administration sponsored class warfare scale back their earnings and > consumption, the effect will be substantial and immediate. We're > seeing the effects of that already. Of all the commodities in the > world, capital is the most free to go where it is desired and treated > with respect. This administration has already used Chicago style mob > tactics to ignore the rule of law regarding capital. Trust me, > investors around the world have taken notice. > > There is no sane or rational explanation that anyone can give to > describe how the US government is going to pay off the massive debt it > is taking on. Forgive me for sounding arrogant on this issue but I am > arrogant on this issue - 95% of the population don't realize that for > every dollar the US government is spending in 2009, we're borrowing 45 > cents. It only gets worse in 2010 thru 2012. This is nuts! Those in > the 95% who think they are going to benefit from this class warfare, > or that it isn't going to effect them, are NUTS! > > In the past few months, I've been offered some incredible deals on > boats, airplanes, construction equipment, etc. I'm not playing. If > this country morphs into a socialist "heaven on earth", we plan to > pick up our "bat and ball and glove" and go play ball on a new > diamond. Most people don't have that option but we do. In the > meantime, we'll just "go Galt". > > Brad > > > On 5/11/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: >> Brad, >> >> I suspect that I am on the correct page, but to establish that everyone >> on >> the forum is, in your eloquent words, explain "going galt". >> >> I would like to point out to others what is happening. Why socialism at >> its >> heart fails. >> >> Ed K > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > From flybrad at gmail.com Wed May 13 09:58:25 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 08:58:25 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Going Galt In-Reply-To: <25C30DB6960146DA8A86EFAE10C3F5B4@D9X7C761> References: <5513ABD97CF4406DA2C822825DAFF273@YOURB88038198E> <400985d70905130544v7faa4732w6e0d054d9f16ed97@mail.gmail.com> <25C30DB6960146DA8A86EFAE10C3F5B4@D9X7C761> Message-ID: <400985d70905130658h4a17fe1et5b1591acefaf8bdd@mail.gmail.com> Mike, With the opening of the Hong Kong pilot domicile we have a unique opportunity that would save us a substantial amount on US income taxes. That would be offset by increased education expenses, but we could hire an American school teacher, pay her living expenses and salary, and still be way ahead (and she could put a butt-load of money away in her savings). Moving isn't something we really want to do, but I've only got, at best, 12 years of flying left and we need to maximize the return on what's available. Even after the 40% or so decline in our 401K's we're doing alright, but I'm not convinced that 401K's are safe from conversion by the government. Some Dems made some noise about retirement savings conversions last year, and lately Pelosi, Reid & company have been behaving badly. Who knows what is coming down the pike? This much is certain, the United States can't possibly tax their way out of debt (not that it won't try). Warren Buffet "nailed" it when he said we'll inflate our way out of debt. It is almost a certainty. There's some things that could happen to stop this train wreck - the Congress could flip in 2010, the Blue Dog Dems could quit drinking the Kool-Aid and start acting responsibly, or the public mood could change. I'm not betting on any of the three. When you elect someone for POTUS that spent his whole life being educated by leftists, discussed dinner table politics with terrorists (foreign and domestic), worshiped in an American hating church for 20 years, and played hardball politics in the dirtiest, most corrupt political system in the nation (but didn't see any of the corruption), what does anyone expect? The Chrysler deal should have been a wake-up call for the blindest of Kool-Aid drinkers. I can't over emphasize what a watershed event that is for the rule-of-law, business, and political ethics. Alas, we're discussing a cult movement not the rational ebb and flow of politics as usual. My wife has already been through one cult movement and she isn't the slightest bit interested in another. We'll see! Brad On 5/13/09, Michael D. Weisner wrote: > Brad, > > "Going Galt" is about the only real option we all have at this time. > Unfortunately, "Shrugged" did not have a happy ending, much as you foresee > for the US. The option to go play in a new ball park may very well exist, > although my limited experience in the new neighborhood is not good. Round > eyes are always discriminated against and the park is ruled by real bullies > that play for more than your money. At least here, they are only interested > in my dollars, not my life. Reconsider the real options. > > Mike > > From: "Brad Haslett" Wednesday, May 13, 2009 8:44 AM >> Ed, >> >> The term "going Galt" (as I'm sure you already know) comes from Ayn >> Rand's "Atlas Shrugged". In the present context, it means people are >> choosing to minimize their income and adjust their lifestyle >> accordingly. If you are a restaurant owner, why expand your business >> if the additional marginal income will be stolen by the government? >> Why would a physician see additional patients when the marginal rate >> of return for the additional time spent decreases. For me personally, >> I can refuse to teach or fly additional trips. My wife and I have >> very little debt, live frugally, and save a lot. We could be out >> buying toys, wide screen TV's, corporate bonds & Treasury bills, etc., >> exactly the things the economy needs to rebound. We're not because we >> refuse to support an economic system that punishes success. If a >> significant portion of the 5% who are targeted by the Obama >> administration sponsored class warfare scale back their earnings and >> consumption, the effect will be substantial and immediate. We're >> seeing the effects of that already. Of all the commodities in the >> world, capital is the most free to go where it is desired and treated >> with respect. This administration has already used Chicago style mob >> tactics to ignore the rule of law regarding capital. Trust me, >> investors around the world have taken notice. >> >> There is no sane or rational explanation that anyone can give to >> describe how the US government is going to pay off the massive debt it >> is taking on. Forgive me for sounding arrogant on this issue but I am >> arrogant on this issue - 95% of the population don't realize that for >> every dollar the US government is spending in 2009, we're borrowing 45 >> cents. It only gets worse in 2010 thru 2012. This is nuts! Those in >> the 95% who think they are going to benefit from this class warfare, >> or that it isn't going to effect them, are NUTS! >> >> In the past few months, I've been offered some incredible deals on >> boats, airplanes, construction equipment, etc. I'm not playing. If >> this country morphs into a socialist "heaven on earth", we plan to >> pick up our "bat and ball and glove" and go play ball on a new >> diamond. Most people don't have that option but we do. In the >> meantime, we'll just "go Galt". >> >> Brad >> >> >> On 5/11/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: >>> Brad, >>> >>> I suspect that I am on the correct page, but to establish that everyone >>> on >>> the forum is, in your eloquent words, explain "going galt". >>> >>> I would like to point out to others what is happening. Why socialism at >>> its >>> heart fails. >>> >>> Ed K >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > From flybrad at gmail.com Wed May 13 11:16:22 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 10:16:22 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] New Reality! Message-ID: <400985d70905130816o46171bafl948602410a95021f@mail.gmail.com> Alarm Sounded On Social Security You can read the original article with the graphs here - http://tinyurl.com/o4gfvm I've been predicting this for years, it's simple demographics. My return on Social Security has been good since it is all my parents have been living on for almost three decades. I've gotten my money's worth out of Medicare as well since the 'gubment' has done what us kids would have had to do otherwise. But, it isn't sustainable. Every collective experiment in the history of mankind has failed, EVERY SINGLE ONE - kibbutz's in Israel, the Pilgrims at Plymouth Rock, New Harmony, Indiana in the 1800's, The Farm in Tennessee (1970's), China, the Soviet Union, and Eastern Bloc countries, all failed. Remember, we're just talking about the federal government so far, wait till you dive into the accounting records of the States and local municipalities! They are technically insolvent as well. We'll eventually do what the Communist Party in China did, and that is to "retire" people on 50 cents on the dollar (RNB) of what they were promised and tell them "tough shit". Now a new 'Dear Leader' is going to make it work? Ain't gonna happen! I studied economics and finance at the wrong undergraduate and grad schools for relevance to today's events. A Latin American university would have provided a much better education. Welcome to the Banana States of America! Brad ------------------------------------ Report Also Warns Of Medicare Collapse By Amy Goldstein Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, May 13, 2009 The financial health of the Social Security system has eroded more sharply in the past year than at any time since the mid-1990s, according to a government forecast that ratchets up pressure on the Obama administration and Congress to stabilize the retirement system that keeps many older Americans out of poverty. The report, issued yesterday by the trustees who monitor the government's two main forms of help for the elderly, shows that Medicare has become more fragile as well and is at greater risk than Social Security of imminent fiscal collapse. Starting eight years from now, the report says, the health insurance program will be unable to pay all its hospital bills. The findings put a stark new face on the toll the recession has taken on the two enormous entitlement programs. They also intensify a political debate, gathering strength among Democrats and Republicans, over how quickly President Obama should tackle Social Security when health-care reform is his administration's most urgent domestic priority. In announcing the results of the trustees' annual forecast with other Cabinet members, Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner said, "The president explicitly rejects the notion that Social Security is untouchable politically." Still, he reiterated that the administration intends to "work to build a bipartisan consensus to ensure the long-term solvency of Social Security" only after it collaborates with Congress to slow health-care spending and enable more Americans to obtain medical insurance. Congressional Republicans and some Democrats seized upon the findings to argue that the administration should work rapidly to ward off the looming insolvency of Social Security and Medicare. Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), who withdrew from nomination as Obama's commerce secretary, said yesterday's report shows that the recession is "accelerating the arrival of a massive, trillion-dollar entitlement crisis on our doorstep." He added: "Trying to kick the can down the road will not make it go away. We need to take meaningful action now." Specifically, the trustees' report predicts that the trust fund from which Social Security payments are made will be unable to pay retirees full benefits by 2037, four years earlier than forecast a year ago. In particular, the trustees single out the financial weakness of the part of the program that subsidizes disabled Americans, saying that fund will run out of money in 2020. Only three times in the past 15 years have the trustees predicted that Social Security would run out of money sooner than previously expected. Last year, they forecast no change from the 2007 prediction, and in 2007, they predicted that the fund would last a year longer than they had previously thought. Yesterday's report also said the Social Security trust fund will begin to spend more money than it takes in through tax revenue in 2016, one year sooner than predicted a year ago. Administration officials said that if Congress were to act immediately, the impending gap could be filled three ways: by raising workers' Social Security payroll taxes by 2 percentage points, from 12.4 percent to 14.4 percent; by reducing benefits by 13 percent; or a combination of the two approaches. The officials briefed reporters on the condition of anonymity on the technical aspects of the trustees' findings. Medicare's financial health, the report shows, deteriorated less sharply in the past year than Social Security's, but it remains the more urgent problem. The trust fund that pays for hospital care under Medicare is now predicted to run out of money in 2017, two years earlier than forecast a year ago. That fund does not involve the parts of Medicare that cover doctor's visits or coverage for prescription drugs. The nation's economic downturn has added to the fragility of Medicare and Social Security because worsening unemployment means that fewer workers are contributing to the two trust funds through payroll taxes. Since the recession began in December 2007, the country has lost 5.7 million jobs. But even if the economy were stronger, the programs would be facing pressure in coming years as the large baby-boom generation reaches old age and people tend to live longer, leaving comparatively fewer workers to pay benefits for a large cadre of retirees. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius sought to use the report to build momentum for health-care reform, reiterating the administration's contention that the best way to strengthen Medicare's finances is to, as she put it, "fix what's broken in the rest of the health-care system." If Americans have health insurance and receive adequate medical care when they are younger, she said, they will be healthier and less expensive patients when they become old enough to join Medicare, usually at age 65. Some key lawmakers in both parties have said they want to devise a plan to keep the retirement program solvent by increasing the retirement age, slowing the growth in the size of retirement checks to wealthy Americans and bringing in new revenue. Several Democrats and Republicans would prefer to create an independent commission to propose Social Security reforms, but congressional leaders, particularly in the House, have balked, saying the matter should be handled by Congress's regular committees. Last week, House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) said Congress could start work on the retirement program this fall if it passes health-care legislation by late summer -- a timetable that others called unrealistic. Yesterday, Hoyer said he was encouraged that Geithner, the Treasury secretary, "stated the administration's support for moving forward with Social Security reform after health-care reform has passed." Staff writer Lori Montgomery contributed to this report. From sanderico1 at gmail.com Wed May 13 12:20:02 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 11:20:02 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] New Reality! In-Reply-To: <400985d70905130816o46171bafl948602410a95021f@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905130816o46171bafl948602410a95021f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905130920l5142fd78u583d911bb6ece33b@mail.gmail.com> Brad, "Some key lawmakers in both parties have said they want to devise a plan to keep the retirement program solvent by increasing the retirement age, slowing the growth in the size of retirement checks to wealthy Americans and bringing in new revenue." So as usual, if you worked the hardest, smartest, or longest and paid in the most ..... you can expect to get the least back. What a great country we live in. Is this what they call equal treatment under the law?? Hell if I could'a put all the money they took all those years in a simple savings account, I wouldn't need their damned program. AND, truth be known, if we all had that savings in a bank somewhere, like we should, there would probably be a lot less trouble in the banking industry right now too. All these years I've been suspicious of IRAs/401ks, etc. turns out I was right. I was suspicious of S-S too, but was not given the choice whether to participate. Well, my guess is this will turn out to be the most expensive bad investment I ever made .... by a country mile. ____________________________________ http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/401k-investors-cant-get-money/ [image: leadimage] Looks like I started kicking myself too soon. A few weeks ago I explained why I?m going to have to spend the next few years as an indentured servant to the feds to pay the taxes and penalty on my 401(k) withdrawal?but if I hadn?t done it when I did, I may never have seen that money again. The *Wall Street Journal * reports that 401(k) investors are finding that they can?t get their money. ?When Ed Dursky was laid off from his job at a manufacturing company in March, he couldn?t withdraw $40,000 from his 401(k) retirement account?? ?I hate to be whiny,? said Mr. Dursky, ? but it is my money,? Turns out that the money you put into the 401(k) can be locked up a lot longer than you?d like. Most plans allow investors to borrow from their own accounts and some even allow outright withdrawal of matched funds?with the requisite 10% penalty and income tax. The only way to get all of it, however, has been to terminate employment?but now even that?s not good enough. Of course if you?re the kind who pays attention to things like history and human nature, you?d have noticed the funny smell around the defined benefits plan a long time ago. And you would have seen this coming. Here at Whiskey Bar we never stop casting a suspicious eye at the government and we turn our noses at their offers for help. We regret that this time around the feds aren?t the ones keeping voluntary and involuntary retirees from their cash. Still, if the entire mess hasn?t filled you with fear and loathing, then I?ll have what you?re having. General economic collapse means that fund managers are finding it in their best interests to limit reallocation and withdrawal by 401(k) investors. It doesn?t matter if you?re a 69-year-old recent retiree or a laid-off schlimazel who was counting on the money you?d saved to see you through a few months of unemployment. Folks are starting to catch on to how important it is to own gold. We harp about that every day in these pages. Not a one of you reading this doubts for a moment that the value of little green pieces of paper that so many others take for granted is only good as a politician?s promise. So what escapes me is why anyone smart enough to save in gold and silver would still tuck money away in a defined benefits plan. The circumstances concerning retrieval have always been extreme. We were assured this was for our own good. After all, this was supposed to be retirement money; the rules had to discourage us from getting at it ahead of time! But the whole set up smacked of the sort of paternalism that really should have raised our hackles. And now we discover that fund managers can keep our retirement funds?even after we?ve retired?or been separated from the payroll under less pleasant circumstances. Looks like in some cases, some folks may never see that retirement money. The value of their locked investments may dwindle to nothing or they may die of old age before things are sorted out in the courts. I remember years ago when I began my working life and didn?t know enough to be wary of the state?s siren songs about financial security. I thought the 401(k) such a wonderful idea. As suspicion toward leviathan grew I still harbored a child?s hope that at least this whole ?invest pre-tax and get a company match? thing wasn?t a trap. Of course, turns out it was? The federal government itself hasn?t yet taken a turn at freezing 401(k) accounts, but this sudden if inevitable betrayal by fund managers should serve as a warning. Please don?t let this happen to you. No matter how the feds try to lure you with tax-deferrals, no matter how tempting the company match is, don?t fall for it. Granted, money you deposit anywhere besides your mattress can be nationalized or misappropriated, but putting funds into something like a 401(k) is akin to forcing your head into the mouth of the lion. So what can you do? Well, you don?t have to bind your retirement money with government red tape. Fellow editor Jim Nelson sits just a few feet from the *Whiskey* Bar and in response to my outraged cussing over this news about 401(k) freezes he?s offered to share his own strategy for building retirement wealth. And this is money that can?t be penalized by the feds for early withdrawal, or kept from you by callous fund managers? Be sure to be reading when Jim Nelson stops by tomorrow to tend the bar. Regards, Gary Gibson Managing Editor, *Whiskey & Gunpowder* On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Alarm Sounded On Social Security > You can read the original article with the graphs here - > > http://tinyurl.com/o4gfvm > > I've been predicting this for years, it's simple demographics. My > return on Social Security has been good since it is all my parents > have been living on for almost three decades. I've gotten my money's > worth out of Medicare as well since the 'gubment' has done what us > kids would have had to do otherwise. But, it isn't sustainable. > Every collective experiment in the history of mankind has failed, > EVERY SINGLE ONE - kibbutz's in Israel, the Pilgrims at Plymouth Rock, > New Harmony, Indiana in the 1800's, The Farm in Tennessee (1970's), > China, the Soviet Union, and Eastern Bloc countries, all failed. > Remember, we're just talking about the federal government so far, wait > till you dive into the accounting records of the States and local > municipalities! They are technically insolvent as well. We'll > eventually do what the Communist Party in China did, and that is to > "retire" people on 50 cents on the dollar (RNB) of what they were > promised and tell them "tough shit". > > Now a new 'Dear Leader' is going to make it work? Ain't gonna happen! > I studied economics and finance at the wrong undergraduate and grad > schools for relevance to today's events. A Latin American university > would have provided a much better education. Welcome to the Banana > States of America! > > Brad > > ------------------------------------ > > > Report Also Warns Of Medicare Collapse > > By Amy Goldstein > Washington Post Staff Writer > Wednesday, May 13, 2009 > > The financial health of the Social Security system has eroded more > sharply in the past year than at any time since the mid-1990s, > according to a government forecast that ratchets up pressure on the > Obama administration and Congress to stabilize the retirement system > that keeps many older Americans out of poverty. > > The report, issued yesterday by the trustees who monitor the > government's two main forms of help for the elderly, shows that > Medicare has become more fragile as well and is at greater risk than > Social Security of imminent fiscal collapse. Starting eight years from > now, the report says, the health insurance program will be unable to > pay all its hospital bills. > > The findings put a stark new face on the toll the recession has taken > on the two enormous entitlement programs. They also intensify a > political debate, gathering strength among Democrats and Republicans, > over how quickly President Obama should tackle Social Security when > health-care reform is his administration's most urgent domestic > priority. > > In announcing the results of the trustees' annual forecast with other > Cabinet members, Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner said, "The > president explicitly rejects the notion that Social Security is > untouchable politically." Still, he reiterated that the administration > intends to "work to build a bipartisan consensus to ensure the > long-term solvency of Social Security" only after it collaborates with > Congress to slow health-care spending and enable more Americans to > obtain medical insurance. > > Congressional Republicans and some Democrats seized upon the findings > to argue that the administration should work rapidly to ward off the > looming insolvency of Social Security and Medicare. Sen. Judd Gregg > (R-N.H.), who withdrew from nomination as Obama's commerce secretary, > said yesterday's report shows that the recession is "accelerating the > arrival of a massive, trillion-dollar entitlement crisis on our > doorstep." He added: "Trying to kick the can down the road will not > make it go away. We need to take meaningful action now." > > Specifically, the trustees' report predicts that the trust fund from > which Social Security payments are made will be unable to pay retirees > full benefits by 2037, four years earlier than forecast a year ago. In > particular, the trustees single out the financial weakness of the part > of the program that subsidizes disabled Americans, saying that fund > will run out of money in 2020. > > Only three times in the past 15 years have the trustees predicted that > Social Security would run out of money sooner than previously > expected. Last year, they forecast no change from the 2007 prediction, > and in 2007, they predicted that the fund would last a year longer > than they had previously thought. > > Yesterday's report also said the Social Security trust fund will begin > to spend more money than it takes in through tax revenue in 2016, one > year sooner than predicted a year ago. > > Administration officials said that if Congress were to act > immediately, the impending gap could be filled three ways: by raising > workers' Social Security payroll taxes by 2 percentage points, from > 12.4 percent to 14.4 percent; by reducing benefits by 13 percent; or a > combination of the two approaches. The officials briefed reporters on > the condition of anonymity on the technical aspects of the trustees' > findings. > > Medicare's financial health, the report shows, deteriorated less > sharply in the past year than Social Security's, but it remains the > more urgent problem. The trust fund that pays for hospital care under > Medicare is now predicted to run out of money in 2017, two years > earlier than forecast a year ago. That fund does not involve the parts > of Medicare that cover doctor's visits or coverage for prescription > drugs. > > The nation's economic downturn has added to the fragility of Medicare > and Social Security because worsening unemployment means that fewer > workers are contributing to the two trust funds through payroll taxes. > Since the recession began in December 2007, the country has lost 5.7 > million jobs. > > But even if the economy were stronger, the programs would be facing > pressure in coming years as the large baby-boom generation reaches old > age and people tend to live longer, leaving comparatively fewer > workers to pay benefits for a large cadre of retirees. > > Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius sought to use > the report to build momentum for health-care reform, reiterating the > administration's contention that the best way to strengthen Medicare's > finances is to, as she put it, "fix what's broken in the rest of the > health-care system." If Americans have health insurance and receive > adequate medical care when they are younger, she said, they will be > healthier and less expensive patients when they become old enough to > join Medicare, usually at age 65. > > Some key lawmakers in both parties have said they want to devise a > plan to keep the retirement program solvent by increasing the > retirement age, slowing the growth in the size of retirement checks to > wealthy Americans and bringing in new revenue. > > Several Democrats and Republicans would prefer to create an > independent commission to propose Social Security reforms, but > congressional leaders, particularly in the House, have balked, saying > the matter should be handled by Congress's regular committees. > > Last week, House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) said Congress > could start work on the retirement program this fall if it passes > health-care legislation by late summer -- a timetable that others > called unrealistic. Yesterday, Hoyer said he was encouraged that > Geithner, the Treasury secretary, "stated the administration's support > for moving forward with Social Security reform after health-care > reform has passed." > > Staff writer Lori Montgomery contributed to this report. > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090513/976bdd94/attachment-0001.html From ekroposki at charter.net Wed May 13 14:12:00 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 14:12:00 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Going Galt Message-ID: Brad, I was on the same page in that term and style. Ironically looking at tax rates, person health from employer stress, and my wife having a job she was happy with, I really went Galt 5 years ago. In the medical field the executives resented M.D.'s and other medical personnel making as much or more than they did. So when they demanded more with less safeguards for people who they put in the line of liability, I quite working full time. Then when a change of supervisors sought to have part timers work 12 shifts, I phased myself out. When you know the correct and safe way to perform complex medical procedures in an accurate and professional manner but you know that after 8 hours you or anyone is more likely to make an error and they want to put people in that situation, it was time to say no. That is when I went out a bought the project boat. Now if I had a blue water boat... Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090513/993281ef/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Wed May 13 21:58:17 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 20:58:17 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Gov'ts benevolence, altruism, yada yada yada...... Message-ID: <6634e19e0905131858p5d03553cua9515ab27c34a4ad@mail.gmail.com> Good Evening, All For your reading pleasure this evening I offer this from the Mises Institute. This should help to instill in you even greater faith in our gov't and especially the Fed ...... or not Rik http://mises.org/story/3446 ___________________ Never-Ending Government Lies About Markets *Mises Daily* by Thomas J. DiLorenzo| Posted on 5/13/2009 12:00:00 AM The purpose of government is for those who run it to plunder those who do not. Throughout history, governments have used violence, intimidation, coercion, and mass murder to enforce this system. But governments' first line of "defense" is always a blizzard of lies ? about its own alleged benevolence, altruism, heroism, and greatness, along with equally big lies about the "evils" of the civil society, especially the free market. The current economic crisis, which was instigated by the government's central bank and its boom-and-bust monetary policies, among other interventions, has once again been blamed on "too little regulation" and too much freedom. Will Americans ever catch on to this biggest of all of government's Big Lies? When the Pilgrims came to America, they nearly starved to death because they adopted communal agriculture. When William Bradford, leader of the Mayflower expedition, figured this out he reorganized the Massachusetts pilgrims in a regime of private property in land. The incentives created by private property promptly created a dramatic economic turnaround and the rest is history. Most history books ignore this reality, however, and blame the starvation crisis of the Pilgrims on corporate greed on the part of the Mayflower company. After the American Revolution, it was imperative to build roads and canals so that commerce could expand and the economy thrive. George Washington's Treasury secretary, Alexander Hamilton, declared in his famous *Report on Manufactures* that private road and canal building would never succeed without government subsidies. President Thomas Jefferson's Treasury secretary, Albert Gallatin, concurred. Meanwhile, private capital markets and the private "turnpike" industry were busy financing thousands of miles of private roads without any governmental assistance. When government did intervene in early-American road building, it was a financial catastrophe almost everywhere, so much so that by 1860 only Missouri and Massachusetts had not amended their state constitutions to prohibit the use of tax dollars for "internal improvements." Americans have been taught by their government-run schools that the post-1865 Industrial Revolution was bad for the working class, which made government regulation of work and wages, and the creation and prospering of labor unions necessary. In reality, people left the farms for factories because the latter offered far *better* wages and working conditions. Between 1860 and 1890, real wages increased by 50 percent in America, as myriad new products were invented, and made available to the common working person thanks to low-cost, mass production. It was capital investment that dramatically increased the productivity of labor, allowing hours worked to decline from an average of 61 hours per week in 1870 to 48 hours by 1929. Higher worker productivity, fueled mostly by capital investment by entrepreneurs and private investors, also made it less necessary for families to force their children to work. Child labor was on the wane for decades before government got around to regulating or outlawing it. And when it did so it was to protect unionized labor from competition, not to protect children from harsh working conditions. The "robber barons" of the late 19th century robbed no one. Most of them made their money by providing valuable ? if not revolutionary ? goods and services to the masses at lower and lower prices for decades at a time. John D. Rockefeller, for example, caused the price of refined petroleum to drop from 30 cents per gallon in 1869 to 8 cents in 1885, and continued to drop his prices for many years thereafter. James J. Hill built the most efficient and profitable transcontinental railroad without a dime's worth of government subsidy. In return for their remarkable free-market success the government prosecuted both of these men, kangaroo court style, under the protectionist "antitrust" laws. The real "robbers" were *politically connected* businessmen like Leland Stanford, a former California governor and senator, who succeeded in getting laws passed that granted his company a monopoly in the California railroad business. $14 The federal antitrust laws were passed beginning with the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 because the government informed Americans that industry was becoming "rampantly cartelized" or monopolized. In reality, prices everywhere were plummeting as new products and services were being invented everywhere. The entire period from 1865 to 1900 was a period of price * deflation*. As I show in *How Capitalism Saved America *, all of the industries accused of being monopolies by Congress in 1889?1890 had been *dropping* their prices for at least a decade thanks to vigorous competition. And it was not a result of the idiotic theory of "predatory pricing." No sane businessperson would intentionally lose money *for decades* by pricing below cost with the hope that he would somehow frighten away all competition forevermore. Everyone "knows" that President Herbert Hoover was a staunch advocate of laissez-faire economics, and it was his lack of interventionism that caused the Great Depression. This is the biggest governmental lie in the history of America. Hoover was a "progressive" (as today's socialists, also known as "Democrats," have taken to calling themselves). Hoover strong-armed corporate executives into raising wages at a time when wages needed to adjust downward in the free market in order to minimize unemployment. He devoted 13% of the federal budget to a failed "stimulus" program of pork-barrel spending and imposed some of the biggest tax increases in history to fund it all. He was a protectionist who signed the notorious Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which increased the average tariff rate to nearly 60 percent and spawned a worldwide trade war that shrunk world trade by two-thirds in three years. He cartelized the agricultural industry with "farm boards" that began the insane practice of paying farmers for *not * growing crops or raising livestock. He pioneered the politicization of capital markets by crating the Reconstruction Finance Corporation. And he ranted and raved against "greedy capitalists" while launching numerous government "investigations" of investors and the stock market. FDR's top domestic advisor, Rexford Tugwell, said that his fellow New Dealers "owed much to Hoover," who began many of the policies that they simply extended. Every time the price of gasoline goes up significantly, Congress convenes a Nuremburg Trial?style inquisition of oil-company executives. This practice began in the 1970s when the government's own foolish price controls on petroleum products caused massive shortages, and it needed someone to blame. Oil company executives are never *praised* when gasoline prices fall, as they have in the past year from over $4/gallon to under $2/gallon in many parts of the United States. Most recently, the current economic crisis is said to be caused by the "excesses" of economic freedom and "too little regulation" of the economy, especially financial markets. This is said by the president and numerous other politicians, with straight faces, despite the facts that there are a dozen executive-branch cabinet departments, over 100 federal agencies, more than 85,000 pages in the *Federal Register*, and dozens of state and local government agencies that regulate, regiment, tax, and control every aspect of every business in America, and have been doing so for decades. Laissez-faire run amok in financial markets is said to be a cause of the current crisis. But the Fed alone ? a secret government organization that is accountable to no one and which has never been audited ? performs hundreds of regulatory functions, in addition to recklessly manipulating the money supply. And it is just one of numerous financial regulatory agencies (the SEC, Comptroller of the Currency, Office of Thrift Supervision, FDIC, and numerous state regulators also exist). In a Fed publication entitled "The Federal Reserve System: Purposes and Functions," it is explained that "The Federal Reserve has supervisory and regulatory authority over a wide range of financial institutions and activities." That's the understatement of the century. Among the Fed's functions are the regulation of - Bank holding companies - State-chartered banks - Foreign branches of member banks - Edge and agreement corporations - US state-licensed branches, agencies, and representative offices of foreign banks - Nonbanking activities of foreign banks - National banks (with the Comptroller of the Currency) - Savings banks (with the Office of Thrift Supervision) - Nonbank subsidiaries of bank holding companies - Thrift holding companies - Financial reporting - Accounting policies of banks - Business "continuity" in case of an economic emergency - Consumer-protection laws - Securities dealings of banks - Information technology used by banks - Foreign investments of banks - Foreign lending by banks - Branch banking - Bank mergers and acquisitions - Who may own a bank - Capital "adequacy standards" - Extensions of credit for the purchase of securities - Equal-opportunity lending - Mortgage disclosure information - Reserve requirements - Electronic-funds transfers - Interbank liabilities - Community Reinvestment Act subprime lending requirements - All international banking operations - Consumer leasing - Privacy of consumer financial information - Payments on demand deposits - "Fair credit" reporting - Transactions between member banks and their affiliates - Truth in lending - Truth in savings That's a pretty comprehensive list, the result of 96 years of bureaucratic empire building by Fed bureaucrats. It gives the lie to the notion that there has been "too little regulation" of financial markets. Anyone who makes such an argument is either ignorant of the truth or is lying. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090513/1adba861/attachment.html From mweisner at ebsmed.com Thu May 14 08:28:01 2009 From: mweisner at ebsmed.com (Michael D. Weisner) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 08:28:01 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Bioelectricity May Outperform Ethanol Message-ID: This morning's biofuel read: http://www.ciw.edu/news/bioelectricity_promises_more_miles_acre_ethanol I support nearly anything to get us away from more ethanol based fuels. Mike Bioelectricity Promises More 'Miles Per Acre' Than Ethanol Thursday, May 7, 2009 STANFORD, CA - Biofuels such as ethanol offer an alternative to petroleum for powering our cars, but growing energy crops to produce them can compete with food crops for farmland, and clearing forests to expand farmland will aggravate the climate change problem. How can we maximize our "miles per acre" from biomass? Researchers writing in the online edition of the May 7 Science magazine say the best bet is to convert the biomass to electricity, rather than ethanol. They calculate that, compared to ethanol used for internal combustion engines, bioelectricity used for battery-powered vehicles would deliver an average of 80% more miles of transportation per acre of crops, while also providing double the greenhouse gas offsets to mitigate climate change. "It's a relatively obvious question once you ask it, but nobody had really asked it before," says study co-author Chris Field, director of the Department of Global Ecology at the Carnegie Institution. "The kinds of motivations that have driven people to think about developing ethanol as a vehicle fuel have been somewhat different from those that have been motivating people to think about battery electric vehicles, but the overlap is in the area of maximizing efficiency and minimizing adverse impacts on climate." Field, who is also a professor of biology at Stanford University and a senior fellow at Stanford's Woods Institute for the Environment, is part of a research team that includes lead author Elliott Campbell of the University of California, Merced, and David Lobell of Stanford's Program on Food Security and the Environment. The researchers performed a life-cycle analysis of both bioelectricity and ethanol technologies, taking into account not only the energy produced by each technology, but also the energy consumed in producing the vehicles and fuels. For the analysis, they used publicly available data on vehicle efficiencies from the US Environmental Protection Agency and other organizations. Bioelectricity was the clear winner in the transportation-miles-per-acre comparison, regardless of whether the energy was produced from corn or from switchgrass, a cellulose-based energy crop. For example, a small SUV powered by bioelectricity could travel nearly 14,000 highway miles on the net energy produced from an acre of switchgrass, while a comparable internal combustion vehicle could only travel about 9,000 miles on the highway. (Average mileage for both city and highway driving would be 15,000 miles for a biolelectric SUV and 8,000 miles for an internal combustion vehicle.) "The internal combustion engine just isn't very efficient, especially when compared to electric vehicles," says Campbell. "Even the best ethanol-producing technologies with hybrid vehicles aren't enough to overcome this." The researchers found that bioelectricity and ethanol also differed in their potential impact on climate change. "Some approaches to bioenergy can make climate change worse, but other limited approaches can help fight climate change," says Campbell. "For these beneficial approaches, we could do more to fight climate change by making electricity than making ethanol." The energy from an acre of switchgrass used to power an electric vehicle would prevent or offset the release of up to 10 tons of CO2 per acre, relative to a similar-sized gasoline-powered car. Across vehicle types and different crops, this offset averages more than 100% larger for the bioelectricity than for the ethanol pathway. Bioelectricity also offers more possibilities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions through measures such as carbon capture and sequestration, which could be implemented at biomass power stations but not individual internal combustion vehicles. While the results of the study clearly favor bioelectricity over ethanol, the researchers caution that the issues facing society in choosing an energy strategy are complex. "We found that converting biomass to electricity rather than ethanol makes the most sense for two policy-relevant issues: transportation and climate," says Lobell. "But we also need to compare these options for other issues like water consumption, air pollution, and economic costs." "There is a big strategic decision our country and others are making: whether to encourage development of vehicles that run on ethanol or electricity," says Campbell. "Studies like ours could be used to ensure that the alternative energy pathways we chose will provide the most transportation energy and the least climate change impacts." ### This research was funded through a grant from the Stanford University Global Climate and Energy Project, with additional support from the Stanford University Food Security and Environment Project, The University of California at Merced, the Carnegie Institution for Science, and a NASA New Investigator Grant. # # # View the graphic here Listen to the audio interview with Chris Field Video feature from Stanford News Service Follow us online! Twitter: twitter.com/carnegiescience Facebook: Carnegie Institution for Science -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090514/a39d6cf9/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 33725 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090514/a39d6cf9/attachment-0001.jpe From bill at effros.com Thu May 14 08:41:31 2009 From: bill at effros.com (Bill Effros) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 08:41:31 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Bioelectricity May Outperform Ethanol In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4A0C117B.4010503@effros.com> Why is petroleum not considered a biofuel? B. Michael D. Weisner wrote: > This morning's biofuel read: > http://www.ciw.edu/news/bioelectricity_promises_more_miles_acre_ethanol > > I support nearly anything to get us away from more ethanol based fuels. > > Mike > > > > Bioelectricity Promises More 'Miles Per Acre' Than Ethanol > > Thursday, May 7, 2009 > > *STANFORD, CA *- Biofuels such as ethanol offer an alternative to > petroleum for powering our cars, but growing energy crops to produce > them can compete with food crops for farmland, and clearing forests to > expand farmland will aggravate the climate change problem. How can we > maximize our "miles per acre" from biomass? Researchers writing in the > online edition of the May 7 Science magazine say the best bet is to > convert the biomass to electricity, rather than ethanol. They > calculate that, compared to ethanol used for internal combustion > engines, bioelectricity used for battery-powered vehicles would > deliver an average of 80% more miles of transportation per acre of > crops, while also providing double the greenhouse gas offsets to > mitigate climate change. > > "It's a relatively obvious question once you ask it, but nobody had > really asked it before," says study co-author Chris Field, director of > the Department of Global Ecology at the Carnegie Institution. "The > kinds of motivations that have driven people to think about developing > ethanol as a vehicle fuel have been somewhat different from those that > have been motivating people to think about battery electric vehicles, > but the overlap is in the area of maximizing efficiency and minimizing > adverse impacts on climate." > > Field, who is also a professor of biology at Stanford University and a > senior fellow at Stanford's Woods Institute for the Environment, is > part of a research team that includes lead author Elliott Campbell of > the University of California, Merced, and David Lobell of Stanford's > Program on Food Security and the Environment. The researchers > performed a life-cycle analysis of both bioelectricity and ethanol > technologies, taking into account not only the energy produced by each > technology, but also the energy consumed in producing the vehicles and > fuels. For the analysis, they used publicly available data on vehicle > efficiencies from the US Environmental Protection Agency and other > organizations. > > Bioelectricity was the clear winner in the > transportation-miles-per-acre comparison, regardless of whether the > energy was produced from corn or from switchgrass, a cellulose-based > energy crop. For example, a small SUV powered by bioelectricity could > travel nearly 14,000 highway miles on the net energy produced from an > acre of switchgrass, while a comparable internal combustion vehicle > could only travel about 9,000 miles on the highway. (Average mileage > for both city and highway driving would be 15,000 miles for a > biolelectric SUV and 8,000 miles for an internal combustion vehicle.) > > "The internal combustion engine just isn't very efficient, especially > when compared to electric vehicles," says Campbell. "Even the best > ethanol-producing technologies with hybrid vehicles aren't enough to > overcome this." > > The researchers found that bioelectricity and ethanol also differed in > their potential impact on climate change. "Some approaches to > bioenergy can make climate change worse, but other limited approaches > can help fight climate change," says Campbell. "For these beneficial > approaches, we could do more to fight climate change by making > electricity than making ethanol." > > The energy from an acre of switchgrass used to power an electric > vehicle would prevent or offset the release of up to 10 tons of CO2 > per acre, relative to a similar-sized gasoline-powered car. Across > vehicle types and different crops, this offset averages more than 100% > larger for the bioelectricity than for the ethanol pathway. > Bioelectricity also offers more possibilities for reducing greenhouse > gas emissions through measures such as carbon capture and > sequestration, which could be implemented at biomass power stations > but not individual internal combustion vehicles. > > While the results of the study clearly favor bioelectricity over > ethanol, the researchers caution that the issues facing society in > choosing an energy strategy are complex. "We found that converting > biomass to electricity rather than ethanol makes the most sense for > two policy-relevant issues: transportation and climate," says Lobell. > "But we also need to compare these options for other issues like water > consumption, air pollution, and economic costs." > > "There is a big strategic decision our country and others are making: > whether to encourage development of vehicles that run on ethanol or > electricity," says Campbell. "Studies like ours could be used to > ensure that the alternative energy pathways we chose will provide the > most transportation energy and the least climate change impacts." > > ### > > This research was funded through a grant from the Stanford University > Global Climate and Energy Project, with additional support from the > Stanford University Food Security and Environment Project, The > University of California at Merced, the Carnegie Institution for > Science, and a NASA New Investigator Grant. > > # # # > > > > View the graphic here > > Listen to the audio interview with Chris Field > > > Video feature from Stanford News Service > > > > > /*Follow us online! > Twitter:* twitter.com/carnegiescience > *Facebook:* Carnegie Institution for Science > / > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090514/48ba7cb0/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 33725 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090514/48ba7cb0/attachment-0001.jpe From mweisner at ebsmed.com Thu May 14 08:50:51 2009 From: mweisner at ebsmed.com (Michael D. Weisner) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 08:50:51 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Bioelectricity May Outperform Ethanol References: <4A0C117B.4010503@effros.com> Message-ID: <1E73D0EA8A8C40E3B8EC26AE015BCC31@D9X7C761> I guess it depends on how long ago the plant existed. Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Effros To: SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 8:41 AM Subject: Re: [Swiftwater Gazette] Bioelectricity May Outperform Ethanol Why is petroleum not considered a biofuel? B. Michael D. Weisner wrote: This morning's biofuel read: http://www.ciw.edu/news/bioelectricity_promises_more_miles_acre_ethanol I support nearly anything to get us away from more ethanol based fuels. Mike Bioelectricity Promises More 'Miles Per Acre' Than Ethanol Thursday, May 7, 2009 STANFORD, CA - Biofuels such as ethanol offer an alternative to petroleum for powering our cars, but growing energy crops to produce them can compete with food crops for farmland, and clearing forests to expand farmland will aggravate the climate change problem. How can we maximize our "miles per acre" from biomass? Researchers writing in the online edition of the May 7 Science magazine say the best bet is to convert the biomass to electricity, rather than ethanol. They calculate that, compared to ethanol used for internal combustion engines, bioelectricity used for battery-powered vehicles would deliver an average of 80% more miles of transportation per acre of crops, while also providing double the greenhouse gas offsets to mitigate climate change. "It's a relatively obvious question once you ask it, but nobody had really asked it before," says study co-author Chris Field, director of the Department of Global Ecology at the Carnegie Institution. "The kinds of motivations that have driven people to think about developing ethanol as a vehicle fuel have been somewhat different from those that have been motivating people to think about battery electric vehicles, but the overlap is in the area of maximizing efficiency and minimizing adverse impacts on climate." Field, who is also a professor of biology at Stanford University and a senior fellow at Stanford's Woods Institute for the Environment, is part of a research team that includes lead author Elliott Campbell of the University of California, Merced, and David Lobell of Stanford's Program on Food Security and the Environment. The researchers performed a life-cycle analysis of both bioelectricity and ethanol technologies, taking into account not only the energy produced by each technology, but also the energy consumed in producing the vehicles and fuels. For the analysis, they used publicly available data on vehicle efficiencies from the US Environmental Protection Agency and other organizations. Bioelectricity was the clear winner in the transportation-miles-per-acre comparison, regardless of whether the energy was produced from corn or from switchgrass, a cellulose-based energy crop. For example, a small SUV powered by bioelectricity could travel nearly 14,000 highway miles on the net energy produced from an acre of switchgrass, while a comparable internal combustion vehicle could only travel about 9,000 miles on the highway. (Average mileage for both city and highway driving would be 15,000 miles for a biolelectric SUV and 8,000 miles for an internal combustion vehicle.) "The internal combustion engine just isn't very efficient, especially when compared to electric vehicles," says Campbell. "Even the best ethanol-producing technologies with hybrid vehicles aren't enough to overcome this." The researchers found that bioelectricity and ethanol also differed in their potential impact on climate change. "Some approaches to bioenergy can make climate change worse, but other limited approaches can help fight climate change," says Campbell. "For these beneficial approaches, we could do more to fight climate change by making electricity than making ethanol." The energy from an acre of switchgrass used to power an electric vehicle would prevent or offset the release of up to 10 tons of CO2 per acre, relative to a similar-sized gasoline-powered car. Across vehicle types and different crops, this offset averages more than 100% larger for the bioelectricity than for the ethanol pathway. Bioelectricity also offers more possibilities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions through measures such as carbon capture and sequestration, which could be implemented at biomass power stations but not individual internal combustion vehicles. While the results of the study clearly favor bioelectricity over ethanol, the researchers caution that the issues facing society in choosing an energy strategy are complex. "We found that converting biomass to electricity rather than ethanol makes the most sense for two policy-relevant issues: transportation and climate," says Lobell. "But we also need to compare these options for other issues like water consumption, air pollution, and economic costs." "There is a big strategic decision our country and others are making: whether to encourage development of vehicles that run on ethanol or electricity," says Campbell. "Studies like ours could be used to ensure that the alternative energy pathways we chose will provide the most transportation energy and the least climate change impacts." ### This research was funded through a grant from the Stanford University Global Climate and Energy Project, with additional support from the Stanford University Food Security and Environment Project, The University of California at Merced, the Carnegie Institution for Science, and a NASA New Investigator Grant. # # # View the graphic here Listen to the audio interview with Chris Field Video feature from Stanford News Service Follow us online! Twitter: twitter.com/carnegiescience Facebook: Carnegie Institution for Science ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ SwiftwaterGazette mailing list SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ SwiftwaterGazette mailing list SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090514/9f64f30a/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 33725 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090514/9f64f30a/attachment-0001.jpe From bill at effros.com Thu May 14 10:15:36 2009 From: bill at effros.com (Bill Effros) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 10:15:36 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Free Viagra for Jobless! Message-ID: <4A0C2788.1050006@effros.com> Am I missing something here -- this seems counter-productive? B. From mweisner at ebsmed.com Thu May 14 11:54:37 2009 From: mweisner at ebsmed.com (Michael D. Weisner) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 11:54:37 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Free Viagra for Jobless! References: <4A0C2788.1050006@effros.com> Message-ID: <5784579099FE4B8D80C111FE4B11DA84@ebsoffice> Whatever happened to free vasectomies for jobless? Mike From: "Bill Effros" Thursday, May 14, 2009 10:15 AM > Am I missing something here -- this seems counter-productive? > > B. > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Thu May 14 12:01:50 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 11:01:50 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Free Viagra for Jobless! In-Reply-To: <5784579099FE4B8D80C111FE4B11DA84@ebsoffice> References: <4A0C2788.1050006@effros.com> <5784579099FE4B8D80C111FE4B11DA84@ebsoffice> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905140901r101c4ba1wadcaaff5259c85fc@mail.gmail.com> Bill and Mike, How could one be upwardly mobile if he wasn't able to produce more gov't income via baby making?? Rik On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 10:54 AM, Michael D. Weisner wrote: > Whatever happened to free vasectomies for jobless? > > Mike > > > From: "Bill Effros" Thursday, May 14, 2009 10:15 AM > > Am I missing something here -- this seems counter-productive? > > > > B. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090514/a3b6d60b/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Thu May 14 12:50:17 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 11:50:17 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Free Viagra for Jobless! In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0905140901r101c4ba1wadcaaff5259c85fc@mail.gmail.com> References: <4A0C2788.1050006@effros.com> <5784579099FE4B8D80C111FE4B11DA84@ebsoffice> <6634e19e0905140901r101c4ba1wadcaaff5259c85fc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70905140950v17bfffc5x537ebf2f919eef7b@mail.gmail.com> Rik, Bill, Mike, et al, Being somewhat unemployed myself at the moment, I feel I have some unique experience to comment on this "problem". Wouldn't giving the homeless access to the internet and unlimited access to porn "solve" their ED issues? I think it would be a whole lot cheaper than "little blue pills". Besides, one of the side effects of Viagra is the inability to distinguish between blue and green colors. Taxiways are blue, runways are green. If ever you read a news story about me putting a jet in the dirt, you'll know the real reason weeks before the MSM. Brad On 5/14/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Bill and Mike, > > How could one be upwardly mobile if he wasn't able to produce more gov't > income via baby making?? > > Rik > > On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 10:54 AM, Michael D. Weisner > wrote: > >> Whatever happened to free vasectomies for jobless? >> >> Mike >> >> >> From: "Bill Effros" Thursday, May 14, 2009 10:15 AM >> > Am I missing something here -- this seems counter-productive? >> > >> > B. >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> > >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From flybrad at gmail.com Thu May 14 21:33:26 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 20:33:26 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Obama Admits Long-Term Debt "Unsustainable" Message-ID: <400985d70905141833j3e733f13oc07d200f71b323fa@mail.gmail.com> In other news, NASA scientists reveal startling findings - sh*t stinks and the sun rises in the East! BOHICA - we're being greased for a massive tax increase. Can you say CON MAN? I know you can. Brad ---------------------- Obama Says U.S. Long-Term Debt Load ?Unsustainable? (Update2) Share | Email | Print | A A A By Roger Runningen and Hans Nichols May 14 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama, calling current deficit spending ?unsustainable,? warned of skyrocketing interest rates for consumers if the U.S. continues to finance government by borrowing from other countries. ?We can?t keep on just borrowing from China,? Obama said at a town-hall meeting in Rio Rancho, New Mexico, outside Albuquerque. ?We have to pay interest on that debt, and that means we are mortgaging our children?s future with more and more debt.? Holders of U.S. debt will eventually ?get tired? of buying it, causing interest rates on everything from auto loans to home mortgages to increase, Obama said. ?It will have a dampening effect on our economy.? Earlier this week, the Obama administration revised its own budget estimates and raised the projected deficit for this year to a record $1.84 trillion, up 5 percent from the February estimate. The revision for the 2010 fiscal year estimated the deficit at $1.26 trillion, up 7.4 percent from the February figure. The White House Office of Management and Budget also projected next year?s budget will end up at $3.59 trillion, compared with the $3.55 trillion it estimated previously. Two weeks ago, the president proposed $17 billion in budget cuts, with plans to eliminate or reduce 121 federal programs. Republicans ridiculed the amount, saying that it represented one-half of 1 percent of the entire budget. They noted that Obama is seeking an $81 billion increase in other spending. Entitlement Programs In his New Mexico appearance, the president pledged to work with Congress to shore up entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare. He also said he was confident that the House and Senate would pass health-care overhaul bills by August. ?Most of what is driving us into debt is health care, so we have to drive down costs,? he said. Obama prodded Congress to pass restrictions on credit-card issuers, saying consumers need ?strong and reliable? protection from unfair practices and hidden fees. ?It?s time for reform that?s built on transparency, accountability, and mutual responsibility, values fundamental to the new foundation we seek to build for our economy,? the president said. Obama called on Congress to send to him by May 25 a bill that would clamp down on what he says are sudden rate increases, unfair penalties and hidden fees. He also wants the measure to strengthen monitoring of credit-card companies. House Bill The U.S. House of Representatives passed the credit-card bill last month after adding a provision requiring banks to apply consumers? payments to balances with the highest interest rates first. The bill also imposes limits on card interest rates and fees. The Senate continued debating its version of the bill today. It would require credit-card companies to give 45 days? notice before increasing an interest rate. It would prohibit retroactive rate increases on existing balances unless a consumer was 60 days late with a payment. The president said Americans have been hooked on their credit cards and share some blame for the current system. ?We have been complicit in these problems,? he said. ?We have to change how we operate. These practices have only grown worse in the midst of this recession.? The American Bankers Association, which represents card issuers, has warned lawmakers and the Obama administration against taking punitive action or setting requirements that are too stringent. Doing so, the lobby group says, would limit consumer credit and worsen a credit crunch. Obama said that restrictions ?shouldn?t diminish consumers? access to credit.? Uncollectible Debt Uncollectible credit-card debt rose to 8.82 percent in February, the most in the 20 years that Moody?s Investors Service Inc. has kept records. Lawmakers have said they?re under increasing pressure from constituents to respond to rising interest rates and abrupt changes to consumers? accounts. Obama held a White House meeting last month with executives from the credit-card industry, including representatives from Bank of America Corp. and American Express Co. Afterward, he told reporters that credit-card issuers should be prohibited from imposing ?unfair? rate increases on consumers and should offer the public credit terms that are easier to understand. ?The days of any time, any increase, anything goes -- rate hike, late fees -- that must end,? Obama said today at Rio Rancho High School. We?re going to require clarity and transparency from now on.? He also said the steps he has taken to stimulate the economy and start the debate on overhauling the health-care system are beginning to take effect. ?Beginning to Turn? ?We?ve got a long way to go before we put this recession behind us,? Obama said. ?But we do know that the gears of our economy, our economic engine, are slowly beginning to turn.? Taking questions from the audience, Obama repeated his stance that he wants legislation to overhaul the health-care system finished before the end of the year, saying it is vital to the economy. Health-care costs are driving up the nation?s debt and burdening entitlement programs such as Medicare, the government- run insurance program for those 65 and older and the disabled. The programs? trustees reported May 13 that the Social Security trust fund will run out of assets in 2037, four years sooner than forecast, and Medicare?s hospital fund will run dry by 2017, two years earlier than predicted a year ago. To contact the reporters on this story: Roger Runningen in Albuquerque at rrunningen at bloomberg.net; Hans Nichols in Washington at =1871 or hnichols2 at bloomberg.net Last Updated: May 14, 2009 19:40 EDT From flybrad at gmail.com Thu May 14 22:35:28 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 21:35:28 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Accounting Rule Change Message-ID: <400985d70905141935u1faaf0afg81667acc37aebe1b@mail.gmail.com> This is what was so fun about being an accounting major - "balancing the books" is called bookkeeping. Accounting is very creative work and should probably be taught in the Performing Arts department of every university. Don't like the looks of the bottom line? Change the accounting rules. Soooo, the US 'gubmint' took in less money in April 09 (the usual big cash haul month) than it spent, the first time in 26 years. That's not good, so hey, let's "cook the books". The 'gubment' re-defined 175 Billion (that's with a Capital B) of TARP money as an "asset". Why not? Worked for Enron! http://tinyurl.com/oyelrp So, the next time you think accountants are dull folks who wear green eye shades, think again! Hollywood writers have nothing over accountants when it comes to creative talent. Brad From flybrad at gmail.com Thu May 14 22:58:42 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 21:58:42 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Accounting Rule Change In-Reply-To: <400985d70905141935u1faaf0afg81667acc37aebe1b@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905141935u1faaf0afg81667acc37aebe1b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70905141958g53263818qc334671e265d0af8@mail.gmail.com> Just a quick film before I retire to bed (with a really good book). Accounting is fun, but Auditing is REALLY fun! But hey, anyone can have a bad day - http://tinyurl.com/qejw5w It can happen to the "best and brightest". Lose a TRILLION dollars that you can't account for? Sh*t happens! Brad On 5/14/09, Brad Haslett wrote: > This is what was so fun about being an accounting major - "balancing > the books" is called bookkeeping. Accounting is very creative work > and should probably be taught in the Performing Arts department of > every university. Don't like the looks of the bottom line? Change > the accounting rules. Soooo, the US 'gubmint' took in less money in > April 09 (the usual big cash haul month) than it spent, the first time > in 26 years. That's not good, so hey, let's "cook the books". The > 'gubment' re-defined 175 Billion (that's with a Capital B) of TARP > money as an "asset". Why not? Worked for Enron! > > http://tinyurl.com/oyelrp > > So, the next time you think accountants are dull folks who wear green > eye shades, think again! Hollywood writers have nothing over > accountants when it comes to creative talent. > > Brad > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Thu May 14 23:14:26 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 22:14:26 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Obama Admits Long-Term Debt "Unsustainable" In-Reply-To: <400985d70905141833j3e733f13oc07d200f71b323fa@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905141833j3e733f13oc07d200f71b323fa@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905142014t187e4a3cy1854387955975820@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Damn, I must have missed something. "President Barack Obama, calling current deficit spending ?unsustainable,? warned of skyrocketing interest rates for consumers if the U.S. continues to finance government by borrowing from other countries." Yeah, great, so stop already. What a friggin' maroon Rik On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 8:33 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > In other news, NASA scientists reveal startling findings - sh*t stinks > and the sun rises in the East! BOHICA - we're being greased for a > massive tax increase. Can you say CON MAN? I know you can. > > Brad > > ---------------------- > > Obama Says U.S. Long-Term Debt Load ?Unsustainable? (Update2) > Share | Email | Print | A A A > > By Roger Runningen and Hans Nichols > > May 14 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama, calling current deficit > spending ?unsustainable,? warned of skyrocketing interest rates for > consumers if the U.S. continues to finance government by borrowing > from other countries. > > ?We can?t keep on just borrowing from China,? Obama said at a > town-hall meeting in Rio Rancho, New Mexico, outside Albuquerque. ?We > have to pay interest on that debt, and that means we are mortgaging > our children?s future with more and more debt.? > > Holders of U.S. debt will eventually ?get tired? of buying it, causing > interest rates on everything from auto loans to home mortgages to > increase, Obama said. ?It will have a dampening effect on our > economy.? > > Earlier this week, the Obama administration revised its own budget > estimates and raised the projected deficit for this year to a record > $1.84 trillion, up 5 percent from the February estimate. The revision > for the 2010 fiscal year estimated the deficit at $1.26 trillion, up > 7.4 percent from the February figure. The White House Office of > Management and Budget also projected next year?s budget will end up at > $3.59 trillion, compared with the $3.55 trillion it estimated > previously. > > Two weeks ago, the president proposed $17 billion in budget cuts, with > plans to eliminate or reduce 121 federal programs. Republicans > ridiculed the amount, saying that it represented one-half of 1 percent > of the entire budget. They noted that Obama is seeking an $81 billion > increase in other spending. > > Entitlement Programs > > In his New Mexico appearance, the president pledged to work with > Congress to shore up entitlement programs such as Social Security and > Medicare. He also said he was confident that the House and Senate > would pass health-care overhaul bills by August. > > ?Most of what is driving us into debt is health care, so we have to > drive down costs,? he said. > > Obama prodded Congress to pass restrictions on credit-card issuers, > saying consumers need ?strong and reliable? protection from unfair > practices and hidden fees. > > ?It?s time for reform that?s built on transparency, accountability, > and mutual responsibility, values fundamental to the new foundation we > seek to build for our economy,? the president said. > > Obama called on Congress to send to him by May 25 a bill that would > clamp down on what he says are sudden rate increases, unfair penalties > and hidden fees. He also wants the measure to strengthen monitoring of > credit-card companies. > > House Bill > > The U.S. House of Representatives passed the credit-card bill last > month after adding a provision requiring banks to apply consumers? > payments to balances with the highest interest rates first. The bill > also imposes limits on card interest rates and fees. > > The Senate continued debating its version of the bill today. It would > require credit-card companies to give 45 days? notice before > increasing an interest rate. It would prohibit retroactive rate > increases on existing balances unless a consumer was 60 days late with > a payment. > > The president said Americans have been hooked on their credit cards > and share some blame for the current system. ?We have been complicit > in these problems,? he said. ?We have to change how we operate. These > practices have only grown worse in the midst of this recession.? > > The American Bankers Association, which represents card issuers, has > warned lawmakers and the Obama administration against taking punitive > action or setting requirements that are too stringent. Doing so, the > lobby group says, would limit consumer credit and worsen a credit > crunch. > > Obama said that restrictions ?shouldn?t diminish consumers? access to > credit.? > > Uncollectible Debt > > Uncollectible credit-card debt rose to 8.82 percent in February, the > most in the 20 years that Moody?s Investors Service Inc. has kept > records. Lawmakers have said they?re under increasing pressure from > constituents to respond to rising interest rates and abrupt changes to > consumers? accounts. > > Obama held a White House meeting last month with executives from the > credit-card industry, including representatives from Bank of America > Corp. and American Express Co. Afterward, he told reporters that > credit-card issuers should be prohibited from imposing ?unfair? rate > increases on consumers and should offer the public credit terms that > are easier to understand. > > ?The days of any time, any increase, anything goes -- rate hike, late > fees -- that must end,? Obama said today at Rio Rancho High School. > We?re going to require clarity and transparency from now on.? > > He also said the steps he has taken to stimulate the economy and start > the debate on overhauling the health-care system are beginning to take > effect. > > ?Beginning to Turn? > > ?We?ve got a long way to go before we put this recession behind us,? > Obama said. ?But we do know that the gears of our economy, our > economic engine, are slowly beginning to turn.? > > Taking questions from the audience, Obama repeated his stance that he > wants legislation to overhaul the health-care system finished before > the end of the year, saying it is vital to the economy. > > Health-care costs are driving up the nation?s debt and burdening > entitlement programs such as Medicare, the government- run insurance > program for those 65 and older and the disabled. > > The programs? trustees reported May 13 that the Social Security trust > fund will run out of assets in 2037, four years sooner than forecast, > and Medicare?s hospital fund will run dry by 2017, two years earlier > than predicted a year ago. > > To contact the reporters on this story: Roger Runningen in Albuquerque > at rrunningen at bloomberg.net; Hans Nichols in Washington at =1871 or > hnichols2 at bloomberg.net > Last Updated: May 14, 2009 19:40 EDT > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090514/61368a7b/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Fri May 15 08:36:44 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 07:36:44 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Here We Go! War! Message-ID: <400985d70905150536i64563e7bo2281ac02936bc7c@mail.gmail.com> The first shot in the new war has been fired! Can anyone say Smoot-Hawley? I know you can! Let's see, Hoover raised taxes and started a trade war and it did what? Exactly what economic history did Dear Leader learn at the feet of marxists? How many of their ideas actually worked? I've got news for Bambi, that Blackberry you love so much - made in China by a company in Finland. You know that Boeing 747 you're about to wear the wheels off of - built around the world and assembled in Seattle. Since you like to keep the Oval Office warm enough to grow orchids, you do know where a huge chunk of our natural gas comes from - right? Canada, you dumb ass. Wait till they and Mexico slap an export tax on petroleum products. And we're allowed to drill where? BTW, Bambi and Nancy, natural gas comes from the same place as oil, YOU DRILL FOR IT! Quick, who's Brazil's biggest trading partner? It was the US for about seven decades but just this year we were replaced by China. Canada has tar sands - China needs oil - hmmmmm. Oh, and one last thing, remember that gun-totin', baby-maker in Alaska that's supposed to be "dumb as a box of rocks"? She ended a 30 year stalemate on moving a pipeline forward because Big Oil and the politicians they were in bed with wanted it built on their terms. She outsourced it to Canada. Big Oil got off their asses and started negotiating. That's after Miss Caribou let one of them sit in the waiting room of her office all day and then went home, allowing Mr. Big Oil CEO to contemplate his fate. People get the government they deserve! Brad ----------------------- Trade Wars Launched With Ruses, End Runs Outrage in Canada as U.S. Firms Sever Ties To Obey Stimulus Rules By Anthony Faiola and Lori Montgomery Washington Post Staff Writers Friday, May 15, 2009 Is this what the first trade war of the global economic crisis looks like? Ordered by Congress to "buy American" when spending money from the $787 billion stimulus package, the town of Peru, Ind., stunned its Canadian supplier by rejecting sewage pumps made outside of Toronto. After a Navy official spotted Canadian pipe fittings in a construction project at Camp Pendleton, Calif., they were hauled out of the ground and replaced with American versions. In recent weeks, other Canadian manufacturers doing business with U.S. state and local governments say they have been besieged with requests to sign affidavits pledging that they will only supply materials made in the USA. Outrage spread in Canada, with the Toronto Star last week bemoaning "a plague of protectionist measures in the U.S." and Canadian companies openly fretting about having to shift jobs to the United States to meet made-in-the-USA requirements. This week, the Canadians fired back. A number of Ontario towns, with a collective population of nearly 500,000, retaliated with measures effectively barring U.S. companies from their municipal contracts -- the first shot in a larger campaign that could shut U.S. companies out of billions of dollars worth of Canadian projects. This is not your father's trade war, a tit-for-tat over champagne or cheese. With countries worldwide desperately trying to keep and create jobs in the midst of a global recession, the spat between the United States and its normally friendly northern neighbor underscores what is emerging as the biggest threat to open commerce during the economic crisis. Rather than merely raising taxes on imported goods -- acts that are subject to international treaties -- nations including the United States are finding creative ways to engage in protectionism through domestic policy decisions that are largely not governed by international law. Unlike a classic trade war, there is little chance of containment through, for example, arbitration at the World Trade Organization in Geneva. Additionally, such moves are more likely to have unintended consequences or even backfire on the stated desire to create domestic jobs. Buy American Take, for instance, Duferco Farrell Corp., a Swiss-Russian partnership that took over a previously bankrupt U.S. steel plant near Pittsburgh in the 1990s and employed 600 people there. The new buy American provisions, the company said, are being so broadly interpreted that Duferco Farrell is on the verge of shutting down. Part of an increasingly global supply chain that seeks efficiencies by spreading production among multiple nations, it manufactures coils at its Pennsylvania plant using imported steel slabs that are generally not sold commercially in the United States. The partially foreign production process means the company's coils do not fit the current definition of made in the USA -- a designation that the stimulus law requires for thousands of public works projects across the nation. In recent weeks, its largest client -- a steel pipemaker located one mile down the road -- notified Duferco Farrell that it would be canceling orders. Instead, the client is buying from companies with 100 percent U.S. production to meet the new stimulus regulations. Duferco has had to furlough 80 percent of its workforce. "You need to tell me how inhibiting business between two companies located one mile apart is going to save American jobs," said Bob Miller, Duferco Farrell's executive vice president. "I've got 600 United Steel Workers out there who are going to lose their jobs because of this. And you tell me this is good for America?" The United States is not alone in throwing up domestic policies assailed by critics as protectionist. Britain and the Netherlands, for instance, are forcing banks receiving taxpayer bailouts to jump-start lending at home at the expense of overseas clients. French President Nicolas Sarkozy initially insisted that his nation's automakers move manufacturing jobs home in exchange for a government bailout, but backed down after outrage surged among his peers in the European Union, of which France is a central member. But the number of measures, both proposed and enacted, from the Obama administration and Congress in recent months has raised an alarm among foreign governments, pundits and news media outlets. The buy American provisions in the stimulus package, signed into law in February, were just the beginning. Last week, Obama unveiled a series of proposals aimed at increasing taxes by nearly $200 billion over the next decade on U.S. companies doing business abroad. At a White House event, Obama said the measures were designed to "close corporate loopholes" that permit companies to "pay lower taxes if you create a job in Bangalore, India, than if you create one in Buffalo, N.Y." Keeping Jobs at Home A slew of legislative proposals is also aimed at keeping jobs at home. In recent weeks, the House attached additional buy American provisions to a $14 billion clean-water fund that provides loans to local communities and a $6 billion program to finance environmentally friendly school construction projects. Other pending measures would require the federal government to buy 100,000 U.S.-made plug-in hybrid cars, mandate that the president's airplanes be made in the country by an U.S. company, and force several federal agencies, including the Pentagon and Department of Transportation, to use only domestic iron and steel. Last month, Senate Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) introduced a measure with Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) to tighten rules governing the H-1B visa program for guest workers. Among its provisions: Companies seeking to import specialized workers from abroad first must make a good-faith effort to recruit U.S. citizens. "The H-1B program was never meant to replace qualified American workers. It was meant to complement them because of a shortage of workers in specialized fields," Grassley said. "In tough economic times like we're seeing, it's even more important that we do everything possible to see that Americans are given every consideration when applying for jobs." Buy American provisions are not new. Federal transportation projects have been required to use domestic iron and steel since 1982, and some defense contracts are limited to U.S. bidders. But the stimulus package marks the first time a buy American mandate has been broadly applied to projects across an array of federal agencies. No one appears to be more concerned than America's largest trading partner -- Canada. Initial concern north of the border over the buy American provisions died down after a clause, supported by the administration, was inserted in the bill clearly stating that the measure would not supersede existing U.S. trade obligations. During his Feb. 19 trip to Ottawa, Obama additionally pledged to avoid protectionism. Creeping Protectionism As passed, the act keeps that pledge, White House spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki said. "The president is committed to creating jobs in America and committed to global engagement with our trading partners and does not see any contradiction between those two goals," she said. But in recent weeks as federal authorities drafted broad guidelines for implementing the law and hundreds of states and towns have begun preparing for stimulus-related projects, Canadian companies have been surprised to discover that while some federal contracts are still open to Canadian materials and equipment because of trade treaties, most of those issued by state and local governments are not. The Government Accountability Office estimates that state or local officials will administer about $280 billion in stimulus spending, including about $50 billion for transportation projects. But federal authorities have determined that construction projects even partially funded with stimulus dollars must also buy American, dramatically increasing the universe of affected contracts. As a result, John Hayward, president of Hayward Gordon, a Canadian manufacturer of pumps used in water works projects, says U.S. towns, including Peru, Ind., have told him that they can no longer buy his Canadian-made products. "We're not China. We're not even Mexico. We have the same relative cost of labor as you do," he said. "If we have a better price, you should buy from us. That's what competition is supposed to be about." To stay in business, Hayward is considering moving some manufacturing operations to the United States, potentially creating jobs here. That, Peru Mayor Jim Walker notes, is what the stimulus was supposed to be about. "You're trying to get America turned around, trying to put Americans back to work," Walker said. "And if American taxpayers are paying for this, well then, Americans deserve the benefits." From flybrad at gmail.com Fri May 15 08:54:56 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 07:54:56 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] IT'S YOUR MONEY! Message-ID: <400985d70905150554r25c6d328y3461f22ea8967dc4@mail.gmail.com> Well, you paid for it even though you probably don't qualify for it, but maybe that's because you're NOT DEAD! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmcaPkIKGBQ Oh, I can't wait for them to take over health care! That ought ta work! Brad From flybrad at gmail.com Fri May 15 09:18:43 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 08:18:43 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Hey Ed! You Know This Gal? Message-ID: <400985d70905150618q20b814daw8aafd110fbcd2f68@mail.gmail.com> She has a degree in Accounting so she must be smart! http://www.nikki2010.com/ Know anything about her? Brad From ekroposki at charter.net Fri May 15 12:28:31 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 12:28:31 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Hey Ed! You Know This Gal? Message-ID: <22AEB3521E0E430D8D3E21539B27051C@YOURB88038198E> Brad, Not to my knowledge. I was interested in her comments that she supported Stanford. Stanford gets a lot of heat from RINOs and the legislature. An some of us have noted that he has stood up to them. South Carolina is different form most states in that the Govenor has had little to do and less control other than as figure head with title. Until Stanford wrestled the highway department from a legislative committee, state senators told the highway department what to do. He has been in a fight with the legislature over the "Employment Security Commission" where his voice is equal to one senator and one house member. That is the way the state has been run in the past. And seniority was paramont in who in the legislature ran things. So, I was interested in her comment that she was aligned with Stanford. Especially after with my conversation with Gresham Barrett, the front runner. Barrett is a politician, and now I conclude a RINO and a Democrat in Repubican label. I should tell you about the other candidates. So this Palin tag along may sell. Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090515/4d4441d4/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Fri May 15 13:28:05 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 12:28:05 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Hey Ed! You Know This Gal? In-Reply-To: <22AEB3521E0E430D8D3E21539B27051C@YOURB88038198E> References: <22AEB3521E0E430D8D3E21539B27051C@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: <400985d70905151028u2e3b54e2iba1abf3a29134b9b@mail.gmail.com> Ed, Sounds familiar. When I was flying Billy Boy around as Arkansas Guv, a buddy was flying for the Arkansas State Highway Department. Billy chartered or bummed a ride, the AR Highway Department had their own airplane - all you need to know about who controlled the purse strings. Hillary rode on the Rose Law Firm's nickel and I was the senior partner's "fair haired boy" for awhile, but not once did I ever fly her. Arkansas was very kind to me for 12+ years, and my oldest son is just about finished with his second BS degree, this one in Construction Management from UALR (University of Arkansas Little Rock - the school I finally got serious about and earned an undergraduate degree). I give Nikki positive points for being Indian. I know we're supposed to be color blind and culture blind but based on my exposure to Indians (red dots - not feathers) is that they are pretty nonsensical people and logical. Bobby Jindal from Louisiana comes to mind. Sarah? I claim no neutrality where that 'girl' treads. She 'rocked' Alaska's world in politics. We could probably use some more "Rock-n-Roll" in politics. These government sponsored, PC tunes we're listening to these days reminds me too much of Chiang Ch'ing. My wife is probably right. Americans need their noses rubbed in this smell for awhile, exactly the way you train a puppy not to shit on the carpet. Brad On 5/15/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > Brad, > > Not to my knowledge. I was interested in her comments that she supported > Stanford. > > Stanford gets a lot of heat from RINOs and the legislature. An some of us > have noted that he has stood up to them. > > South Carolina is different form most states in that the Govenor has had > little to do and less control other than as figure head with title. > > Until Stanford wrestled the highway department from a legislative committee, > state senators told the highway department what to do. > > He has been in a fight with the legislature over the "Employment Security > Commission" where his voice is equal to one senator and one house member. > That is the way the state has been run in the past. And seniority was > paramont in who in the legislature ran things. > > So, I was interested in her comment that she was aligned with Stanford. > Especially after with my conversation with Gresham Barrett, the front > runner. Barrett is a politician, and now I conclude a RINO and a Democrat > in Repubican label. > > I should tell you about the other candidates. So this Palin tag along may > sell. > > Ed K From flybrad at gmail.com Fri May 15 14:48:16 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 13:48:16 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chart of the Day! Message-ID: <400985d70905151148x85a108xb5499822f1a34821@mail.gmail.com> http://blog.american.com/?p=640 Questions? From sanderico1 at gmail.com Fri May 15 15:17:24 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 14:17:24 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chart of the Day! In-Reply-To: <400985d70905151148x85a108xb5499822f1a34821@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905151148x85a108xb5499822f1a34821@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905151217v5e3f7e7dj64d4a889a87e1945@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Nope. Rik On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > http://blog.american.com/?p=640 > > Questions? > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090515/0e5a212b/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Fri May 15 17:38:24 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 17:38:24 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Fed Ex training facility? Message-ID: See: http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com:80/up/player/popup/index.php?cl=13140642 Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090515/058d6ae1/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Fri May 15 20:01:11 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 19:01:11 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Fed Ex training facility? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <400985d70905151701i28e0790flaef05b3b72efd7d7@mail.gmail.com> Ed, Murtha's days are numbered. Nancy "most ethical Congress, evah" and "we'll drain the swamp" is going down as well. I was glad to see Randy Cunningham go to jail and wasn't upset when Ted Stevens got busted (though in Steven's case the prosecutors blew it by playing dirty themselves). Our current system of seniority in the Congress almost guarantees corruption and wastefulness. I'm not sure term limits is the ultimate solution but I'm willing to give it a try. Obambi should be careful about mocking "tea baggers" of which I am one. Some GOP candidates mistakenly made the assumption that they could "piggy-back" on the movement. They were wrong. I'll support any candidate from any party that is reality based and an honest broker. There aren't many to choose from these days. Brad On 5/15/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > > > > See: > > http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com:80/up/player/popup/index.php?cl=13140642 > > Ed K From flybrad at gmail.com Fri May 15 21:30:34 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 20:30:34 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Driving Too Fast! Message-ID: <400985d70905151830u69c61a0au748314d06c7218ca@mail.gmail.com> Here's something to put spending into perspective - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5yxFtTwDcc&feature=player_embedded From mweisner at ebsmed.com Fri May 15 23:47:09 2009 From: mweisner at ebsmed.com (Michael D. Weisner) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 23:47:09 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Driving Too Fast! References: <400985d70905151830u69c61a0au748314d06c7218ca@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <21D6CB93A251432DA60CC7243A480E34@D9X7C761> Ladies and gentlemen, fasten your seatbelts! From: "Brad Haslett" Friday, May 15, 2009 9:30 PM > Here's something to put spending into perspective - > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5yxFtTwDcc&feature=player_embedded > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sat May 16 00:33:10 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 23:33:10 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Progressive taxation Message-ID: <6634e19e0905152133k5f7bc885v6bc75b584d0bd1b3@mail.gmail.com> Good evening, All For your reading pleasure tonight I offer up this from Whiskey and Gunpowder Isn't it a surprise that when you give the majority a choice of whether to pay some taxes or to have somebody else pay them, they vote for somebody else. I wonder how long we can tax the rich, feed the poor, 'til there are no rich no more. Folks may soon come to realize that they might have been more careful what they wished for. Rik http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/progressive-taxation-an-assault-on-liberty/ ______________________________________ Progressive Taxation, an Assault on Liberty May 15th, 2009 | By Dan Denning| Category: Featured , Macro Economics , Politics [image: leadimage] Societies that use tax law as a way to achieve political or social goals are societies based on envy and resentment. That is, how a nation treats taxes tells you something of the character of a nation. So when you hear anyone say that the level of taxation in a country should be based on the ?ability to pay?, be very afraid. These people are not only coming for your money. They?re coming for your economic liberty too. Ultimately, that means they?re after your political liberty as well. Progressive taxation is the idea the larger your disposable income, the larger percentage of that income you ?should? pay in taxes. Proponents of it?and these days nearly everyone one is?claim it is more ?fair.? But let?s be honest and call things by their right names and say what progressive taxation is really about. Even John Stuart Mill, who favoured it, called progressive taxation ?a mild form of robbery.? That?s because progressive taxation is about using the tax code to redistribute wealth. It?s base on the class-warfare idea that the rich get rich illicitly and conspire to keep the riches of society for themselves. It uses the law (coercion) to correct what some people see as the social and economic injustice meted out by the marketplace. But how people treat private property (and wealth IS private property) determines the character of society. A society that promotes the idea of wealth accumulation and that everyone can get rich is one in which standards of living will rise over time. *It doesn?t mean getting wealthy is the only or even the most important ambition in life.* That?s a matter of personal choice and values. But it just means that if you want to raise standards of living over time, you should guard economic liberty and not use taxation to punish personal incentives. The only fair argument for progressive taxation is that indirect taxes (consumption taxes) hit the poor harder than they hit the rich. This is certainly true for taxes on consumption goods. But it is not true for income taxes, most of which the poor do not pay anyway. A tax on Gucci handbags is less onerous than a tax on a slab of beer. But that doesn?t justify the argument that just because you can pay more taxes, you should. *When is it ever right for a man to come in to your home and take what?s yours simply because he?d decided that someone else needs it more?* And how is the government arbitrarily deciding to raise income tax rates on only certain citizens, based on their ability to pay, any different? Yet that?s the argument for progressive taxation in the modern world. And most people seem to think it?s fair and just. Mind you, that doesn?t mean that free people can?t use legislatures to levy taxes in order to pay for projects they believe should be provided by the State, like roads, bridges and other infrastructure. But there is a difference between that kind of public spending and public spending financed by wealth redistribution to achieve particular social and economic outcomes. How did we get to the point in civil society where a democratic majority that does not pay taxes can, through its elected representatives, legally confiscate the wealth of a minority? Friederich Hayek gives the history in, *The Constitution of Liberty *. ?As is true of many similar measures, progressive taxation has assumed its present importance as a result of having been smuggled in under false pretences. When at the time of the French Revolution and again during the socialist agitation preceding the revolutions of 1848 it was frankly advocated as a means of redistributing incomes, it was decisively rejected. ?One ought to execute the author and not the project,? was the liberal Turgot?s indignant response to some early proposals of this sort. ?When in the 1830?s they came to be more widely advocated, J.R. McCulloch expressed the chief objection in the often quoted statement: ?The moment you abandon the cardinal principle of exacting from all individuals the same proportion of their income or of their property, you are at sea without a rudder or compass, and there is no amount of injustice and folly you may not commit.?? ?In 1848,? Hayek continues, ?Karl Marx and Freidrich Engels frankly proposed ?a heavy progressive or graduated income tax? as one of the measures by which, after the first stage of the revolution, ?the proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degrees, all capital from the bourgeois, to centralise all instruments of production in the hands of the state.? And these measures they described as ?means of despotic inroads on the right of property, and on the condition of bourgeois production?measures?which appear economically insufficient and untenable but which, in the course of the movement out strip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old social order and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionising the mode of production.?? If Marx and Engels are to be taken at their word, progressive taxation was never about fairness. It was about putting production ?in the hands of the State? and ?revolutitionising the mode of production.? In the world of State-run capitalism, this is what we seem like we?re headed towards. Now, we can take a step back and ask whether a State-run, union owned Chrysler makes a better car than the shareholder owned management-run Chrysler. It?s a fair enough question. We?d argue that government-built and designed cars are going to be about as appealing as a leather boot for breakfast. But that is not really the point. The point is that the politicians are lying to you about the goal of progressive taxation. The goal is not to produce more ?fairness? or ?social justice.? *It?s to place the State at the centre of economic production, so it can regulate and tax with impunity.* There is both a psychological and crassly economic motive to this movement to displace the free market with the State as the organiser of economic life. *The smarty pants elitists in both political parties, with their ties to union and corporate money, really believe the world would be better off it was run be benevolent bureaucratic despots.* Or maybe using coercive taxation to steal from the rich is simply envy-based class politics, a kind of populist theft conducted with the consent of a hi-jacked system for passing laws. Once you go down this road of socking it to the rich instead of reducing spending, you get higher and higher rates of taxation that eventually shrink the economy. Britain adopted the income tax in 1910 and the U.S in 1913. At the time, the top tax rates on income were 8.25% and 7% respectively. Yet within 30 years, thanks to the Great Depression and the World Wars, those rates had risen to 97.5% and 91% respectively. ?Thus in the space of a single generation,? Hayek writes, ?what nearly all the supporters of progressive taxation had for half a century asserted could not happen came to pass?All attempts to justify these rates on the basis of capacity to pay was, in consequence, soon abandoned and supporters reverted to the original, but long avoided, justification of the progression as means of brining about a more just distribution of income.? How much a man should reasonably a pay to the State was no longer an economic question about his ?ability to pay.? It was revealed as the purely political decision it always was. Or as Hayek says, it?s ?an attempt to impose on society a pattern of distribution determined by majority decision.? That?s what we meant by the character of society. Do you want to live in a country where over 50% of a man?s income can be taken from him simply because the majority votes for it? In that kind of country you want to live in, where you have no real property rights and you don?t have equality before the law. Upward income mobility is undermined in this kind of society. People don?t try to get rich because there?s no point in it if your gains are going to be confiscated. *The net result of decades of progressive taxation is lower capital formulation, more consumption, less production, and ultimately a lower standard of living for everyone.* In that society, your only means of social and economic advancement is based on your personal connections and political patronage. Not surprisingly, in that society, politicians exercise enormous power. And decisions are not made by businesses that aim to offer consumers better products and services at lower prices; they are made by politicians who aim to cement their electoral position by favouring certain constituencies. Progressive taxation has nothing to do with fairness, justice, or equality. It is unfair, unjust, an unequal. But hey, if that?s the kind of country you want to live in, or if you?re someone who?s getting the check instead of writing it, that might not seem like such a bad deal. We?d just advise you to prepare for a lifetime of dependency on busybody politicians who become increasingly grasping, moralistic, and intrusive. If you?re a free man, you?d better pack your bags and look for some other luckier country. This is not to glorify getting rich as the most important thing in this world (or any other world.) It isn?t. And there are much more important things in life. Whether you choose to pursue material gain is up to you. And just as a government should not use the tax code to punish the rich, it ought to quit tinkering with it and providing so many deductions and rebates that allow anyone with a good accountant to avoid paying large income taxes. A much simpler taxation system based on consumption would be fairer for everyone and it would force the government to finally live within its means. Of course that probably won?t happen. Ever. But it would be nice to think so. In the meantime, a society that discourages wealth creation and capital formation through so-called progressive taxation is eventually going to make itself a lot poorer and a lot less free. Regards, Dan Denning *Australian Daily Reckoning * -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090515/468a36fc/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sun May 17 11:43:32 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 10:43:32 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Why Newspapers Are Going Broke Message-ID: <400985d70905170843i27c6e2dat88f279ea4ed8645c@mail.gmail.com> The Associated Press has been busted so many times for stuff like this you'd think they would learn - http://tinyurl.com/pc77xl Does this guy look "passed out" to you? It doesn't matter how you feel about the issue, that's not the point. The point is, the AP has been caught staging, photo shopping, and faking photos and stories so many times, why does anyone bother to read a newspaper for "news"? Now the story is developing about the New York Times squashing an article about the link between Obama and ACORN last October because it would be a "game changer". I can't wait for both of these companies to go belly-up. Wishful thinking! They'll get a bailout - watch. Brad From flybrad at gmail.com Mon May 18 07:44:38 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 06:44:38 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Swiftwater Scoop! Message-ID: <400985d70905180444l7d307c7cl63ecf0768c573fee@mail.gmail.com> You heard it here first, folks! Bill E predicted this months ago - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124148169574985359.html (print copy attached) Stuff like this is precisely what will have to happen before the real estate market recovers. Watch the video. My brother is a much better operator (and it is a trackhoe, not a backhoe). Brad ----------------------- * MAY 5, 2009 By MICHAEL CORKERY A video of a backhoe knocking down homes in Victorville, Calif., was posted on YouTube by the founder of a Web site called Vision Victory. A Texas bank is about done demolishing 16 new and partially built houses acquired in Southern California through foreclosure, figuring it was better to knock them down than to try selling them in the depressed housing market. Guaranty Bank of Austin is wrecking the structures to provide a "safe environment" for neighbors of the abandoned housing tract in Victorville, a high-desert city about 85 miles northeast of Los Angeles, a bank spokesman said. Victorville city officials said the bank told them the cost of finishing the development would exceed what they could sell the homes for. The bank also faced escalating city fines as vandals and squatters took over the sprawling housing project, leaving behind graffiti and drug paraphernalia, city officials said. video Guaranty Bank of Austin, Texas, is demolishing 16 houses at a housing development that it acquired through a foreclosure action. The bank figured it was more cost effective to wreck the houses than try to finish and sell them. WSJ's Michael Corkery reports. "It's unfortunate," said George Duran, the city's code-enforcement manager. "We would have hoped for these houses to be finished. But it's up to the owner to see what is best for them." Home prices in San Bernardino County, where Victorville is located, have fallen 60% from the housing peak in 2006, according to DataQuick, a research firm. The median new-home price in Victorville is $265,990, according to Hanley Wood Market Intelligence, a housing-research firm. Homes in the Victorville development were priced at a range of $280,00 to $350,000 in early 2008, according to Hanley Wood. Read More Demolishing vacant houses in economically troubled, inner-city neighborhoods is common. But the demolitions in Victorville show how the housing market is weighing on lenders even in once-booming suburbs. The houses were built by a California developer less than two years ago, according to city records. Guaranty Bank has significant exposure to construction loans to home builders. Last month, its parent company, Guaranty Financial Group, was issued a "cease and desist" order by the federal Office of Thrift Supervision, citing the firm's "unsafe and unsound banking practices." [demolish] Many lenders, like Guaranty, have been foreclosing on home builders whose projects have gone bust. Regulators told Guaranty to come up with a plan to dispose of its foreclosed properties. But finding buyers is difficult, as home values remain under pressure. Guaranty spokesman John Wessman said only four of the 16 structures slated for demolition were "substantially complete," while the others were less than half finished and "exposed to the elements." Guaranty obtained the property through foreclosure in December 2008. The builder, Matthews Homes, couldn't be reached. A Guaranty official based in California told the Victorville newspaper, the Daily Press, that it would cost more than $1 million to finish developing the property so it could be occupied. Mr. Wessman said that official wasn't authorized to speak to reporters. He said he didn't know how much it would cost to finish the job. A demolition job of this size would likely cost more than $100,000, according to a person familiar with the matter. A video of the houses being knocked down was posted on YouTube by the founder of a Web site called Vision Victory Manifesto, which has been warning of economic disaster. He declined to give his full name for this story. Many of the appliances had been stripped out of the houses, according to the demolition company. "I was a little surprised they couldn't come up with an alternative" to demolition, said Ron Willemsen, president of Intravaia Rock & Sand Inc. of Montclair, Calif., which did the demolition. Mr. Willemsen said he would grind up much of the wood into mulch for landscaping, while some of the lumber would be sent to Mexico for construction there. Write to Michael Corkery at michael.corkery at wsj.com From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon May 18 09:06:25 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 08:06:25 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Swiftwater Scoop! In-Reply-To: <400985d70905180444l7d307c7cl63ecf0768c573fee@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905180444l7d307c7cl63ecf0768c573fee@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905180606k3f2dd9bawcfd76a7b9d7234d7@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Oh, it's going to be a much longer and rougher road than most people think, if we keep on in the direction we are headed. Knocking down some unfinished houses is just a drop in the bucket. Rik http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/if-youre-not-petrified-of-obama-youre.html _______________ If You're Not Petrified of Obama, You're Not Paying Attention Howard Davidowitz, chairman of Davidowitz & Associates has an interesting take on the economy that I happen to agree with. Please tune into "The Worst Is Yet to Come": If You're Not Petrified, You're Not Paying Attention . The green shoots story took a bit of hit this week between data on April retail sales, weekly jobless claims and foreclosures. But the whole concept of the economy finding its footing was "preposterous" to begin with, says Howard Davidowitz, chairman of Davidowitz & Associates. "We're in a complete mess and the consumer is smart enough to know it," says Davidowitz, whose firm does consulting for the retail industry. "If the consumer isn't petrified, he or she is a damn fool." Davidowitz, who is nothing if not opinionated (and colorful), paints a very grim picture: "The worst is yet to come with consumers and banks," he says. "This country is going into a 10-year decline. Living standards will never be the same." "We're now in Barack Obama's world where money goes into the most inefficient parts of the economy and we're bailing everyone out," says Daviowitz, who opposes bailouts for financials and automakers alike. "The bailout money is in the sewer and gone." Bailout Money Wasted Davidowitz is correct about money going to the most inefficient parts of the economy. Bailing out AIG just so it can payoff Goldman Sachs is hardly a good use of taxpayer money. Nor is forcing a shotgun marriage between Bank of America and Merrill Lynch, only how have taxpayers pick up the tab. Please see Let the Criminal Indictments Begin: Paulson, Bernanke, Lewisfor my take on the coercion Paulson used on Bank of America CEO Kenneth D. Lewis, pressuring Lewis to go along with a merger he clearly knew was not in shareholder best interests. Here is a snip from Geithner's Plan Can Succeed: "The Plan: Dump $500 billion of toxic assets on to unsuspecting taxpayers via a public-private partnership in which 93% of the losses are born by the taxpayer." Chrysler Hijacked Please consider "That's Not the American Way": Chrysler's Bailout and the Road to Ruin . Chrysler's plan to close about 25% of its dealers is the natural outcome of a series of very unnatural events surrounding its bankruptcy, says Howard Davidowitz, chairman of Davidowitz & Associates. Barack Obama's plan is to "sustain the union" in an effort to secure future votes in five key Midwestern states, Davidowitz says, without hesitation. "We the taxpayers are bailing out the union [and] bailing out Chrysler, which is an inefficient company that shouldn't survive and can't survive in the long run, anyway." More generally, the Chrysler saga is evidence of how "we keep putting more money into hopeless companies," he says. "That's not the American way. We let inefficient companies collapse and be replaced by more efficient companies. That's the only way this economy can work." By propping up inefficient companies and keeping zombie banks alive, Davidowitz says "we are exactly on the same path as Japan," which is now two decades into its economic malaise. "That's a big problem for the financial stability of the U.S.," says Davidowitz, who had a hard time envisioning an alternative to a very grim scenario for America: "With big government, mad borrowing, and not letting things fail, there's no way we can have [rising] living standards," he says. Ding, Ding, Ding we have a winner. I have talked about the Zombification of Bankson at least 12 occasions starting no later than March of 2008. By the way, it's not just Chrysler bondholders who are being kicked in the teeth as Karl Denninger points out in Holding GM Debt? Gubbermint Is Robbing You! President Obama and Geithner have declared that it does not matter what the law says - they are going to do whatever the hell they want. They just got done ramrodding Chrysler bondholders with the exact same "deal", shoved down their throats, and allegedly enforced with threats of tax audits and other jackbooted actions if the bondholders resisted in court. FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years UCLA economists calculate FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years . Two UCLA economists say they have figured out why the Great Depression dragged on for almost 15 years, and they blame a suspect previously thought to be beyond reproach: President Franklin D. Roosevelt. After scrutinizing Roosevelt's record for four years, Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian conclude in a new study that New Deal policies signed into law 71 years ago thwarted economic recovery for seven long years. The policies were contained in the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA), which exempted industries from antitrust prosecution if they agreed to enter into collective bargaining agreements that significantly raised wages. Because protection from antitrust prosecution all but ensured higher prices for goods and services, a wide range of industries took the bait, Cole and Ohanian found. By 1934 more than 500 industries, which accounted for nearly 80 percent of private, non-agricultural employment, had entered into the collective bargaining agreements called for under NIRA. Cole and Ohanian calculate that NIRA and its aftermath account for 60 percent of the weak recovery. Without the policies, they contend that the Depression would have ended in 1936 instead of the year when they believe the slump actually ended: 1943. NIRA's labor provisions, meanwhile, were strengthened in the National Relations Act, signed into law in 1935. As union membership doubled, so did labor's bargaining power, rising from 14 million strike days in 1936 to about 28 million in 1937. By 1939 wages in protected industries remained 24 percent to 33 percent above where they should have been, based on 1929 figures, Cole and Ohanian calculate. Unemployment persisted. By 1939 the U.S. unemployment rate was 17.2 percent, down somewhat from its 1933 peak of 24.9 percent but still remarkably high. By comparison, in May 2003, the unemployment rate of 6.1 percent was the highest in nine years. Recovery came only after the Department of Justice dramatically stepped enforcement of antitrust cases nearly four-fold and organized labor suffered a string of setbacks, the economists found. "The fact that the Depression dragged on for years convinced generations of economists and policy-makers that capitalism could not be trusted to recover from depressions and that significant government intervention was required to achieve good outcomes," Cole said. "Ironically, our work shows that the recovery would have been very rapid had the government not intervened." How Democrats Failed to Learn From FDR's New Deal Minyanville Professor Scott Reeves is explaining How Democrats Failed to Learn From FDR's New Deal . Franklin Delanor Roosevelt is popularly regarded as the man who saved democratic capitalism with vigorous governmental intervention. But a distinction must be drawn between FDR the brilliant politician who prepared the nation for World War II and kept Britain afloat after the defeat of France, and FDR the economic illiterate. In the 1930s, the conventional wisdom was that capitalism had failed. FDR apparently never challenged that assumption. But the failure of government ? not the free market ? created the Great Depression. The economic collapse could have been avoided. In many cases, FDR?s policies deepened the depression and created needless hardship for those he sought to help. Here?s how: Tax Hikes FDR nearly tripled the tax burden between 1933 and 1940, boosting excise, income, inheritance, corporate, and dividend taxes and slapping a tax on ?excess profits.? The highest individual tax rate soared to 79%. High taxes sucked money out of the private sector, smothered entrepreneurship and killed incentives to work and invest. By contrast, Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon helped spark an economic boom in the 1920s by backing a plan to slash the top individual tax rate to 25% from 73%. High Employment Costs The New Deal raised the cost of employment, making it expensive to hire new workers and contributing to the nation?s high unemployment rate. The National Industrial Recovery Act and the Davis-Bacon Act mandated artificially high wages, further crimping private employment. The new minimum wage cut demand for unskilled workers. The new Social Security tax raised compensation costs. Compulsory union membership often fostered violent tactics ? and the goal wasn?t increased efficiency or innovative products to grab market share. The WPA and other government agencies ?created? jobs, but at great cost ? private sector employment was lower in 1940 than it was in 1929. Brutalizing Business FDR railed against ?economic royalists? and ?privileged princes? who sought to establish an ?industrial dictatorship? and a ?new despotism.? Roosevelt issued about 3,700 executive orders, many limiting business activity, and let lose a plague of anti-trust lawyers on American industry. New securities laws made it difficult to raise capital. ... Obama is now looking ahead to the next election and is attempting to buy union votes at the expense of everyone else but especially legitimate bondholders with senior rights. In a possible repeat of Smoot Hawley, Congress is again threatening to label China a currency manipulator. And like FDR, Obama is targeting corporation with anti-trust legislation (while consolidating already too big to fail banks into even bigger banks. One thing's for sure. If you're not petrified of what Obama's doing , you're not paying attention. Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 6:44 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > You heard it here first, folks! Bill E predicted this months ago - > > http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124148169574985359.html > > (print copy attached) > > Stuff like this is precisely what will have to happen before the real > estate market recovers. > > Watch the video. My brother is a much better operator (and it is a > trackhoe, not a backhoe). > > Brad > > ----------------------- > > * MAY 5, 2009 > > > By MICHAEL CORKERY > > A video of a backhoe knocking down homes in Victorville, Calif., was > posted on YouTube by the founder of a Web site called Vision Victory. > > A Texas bank is about done demolishing 16 new and partially built > houses acquired in Southern California through foreclosure, figuring > it was better to knock them down than to try selling them in the > depressed housing market. > > Guaranty Bank of Austin is wrecking the structures to provide a "safe > environment" for neighbors of the abandoned housing tract in > Victorville, a high-desert city about 85 miles northeast of Los > Angeles, a bank spokesman said. > > Victorville city officials said the bank told them the cost of > finishing the development would exceed what they could sell the homes > for. > > The bank also faced escalating city fines as vandals and squatters > took over the sprawling housing project, leaving behind graffiti and > drug paraphernalia, city officials said. > video > > > Guaranty Bank of Austin, Texas, is demolishing 16 houses at a housing > development that it acquired through a foreclosure action. The bank > figured it was more cost effective to wreck the houses than try to > finish and sell them. WSJ's Michael Corkery reports. > > "It's unfortunate," said George Duran, the city's code-enforcement > manager. "We would have hoped for these houses to be finished. But > it's up to the owner to see what is best for them." > > Home prices in San Bernardino County, where Victorville is located, > have fallen 60% from the housing peak in 2006, according to DataQuick, > a research firm. The median new-home price in Victorville is $265,990, > according to Hanley Wood Market Intelligence, a housing-research firm. > Homes in the Victorville development were priced at a range of $280,00 > to $350,000 in early 2008, according to Hanley Wood. > Read More > > > Demolishing vacant houses in economically troubled, inner-city > neighborhoods is common. But the demolitions in Victorville show how > the housing market is weighing on lenders even in once-booming > suburbs. The houses were built by a California developer less than two > years ago, according to city records. > > Guaranty Bank has significant exposure to construction loans to home > builders. Last month, its parent company, Guaranty Financial Group, > was issued a "cease and desist" order by the federal Office of Thrift > Supervision, citing the firm's "unsafe and unsound banking practices." > [demolish] > > Many lenders, like Guaranty, have been foreclosing on home builders > whose projects have gone bust. Regulators told Guaranty to come up > with a plan to dispose of its foreclosed properties. But finding > buyers is difficult, as home values remain under pressure. > > Guaranty spokesman John Wessman said only four of the 16 structures > slated for demolition were "substantially complete," while the others > were less than half finished and "exposed to the elements." Guaranty > obtained the property through foreclosure in December 2008. The > builder, Matthews Homes, couldn't be reached. > > A Guaranty official based in California told the Victorville > newspaper, the Daily Press, that it would cost more than $1 million to > finish developing the property so it could be occupied. Mr. Wessman > said that official wasn't authorized to speak to reporters. He said he > didn't know how much it would cost to finish the job. > > A demolition job of this size would likely cost more than $100,000, > according to a person familiar with the matter. A video of the houses > being knocked down was posted on YouTube by the founder of a Web site > called Vision Victory Manifesto, which has been warning of economic > disaster. He declined to give his full name for this story. > > Many of the appliances had been stripped out of the houses, according > to the demolition company. "I was a little surprised they couldn't > come up with an alternative" to demolition, said Ron Willemsen, > president of Intravaia Rock & Sand Inc. of Montclair, Calif., which > did the demolition. > > Mr. Willemsen said he would grind up much of the wood into mulch for > landscaping, while some of the lumber would be sent to Mexico for > construction there. > > Write to Michael Corkery at michael.corkery at wsj.com > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090518/f1cad34d/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Mon May 18 12:33:54 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 11:33:54 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Swiftwater Scoop! In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0905180606k3f2dd9bawcfd76a7b9d7234d7@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905180444l7d307c7cl63ecf0768c573fee@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905180606k3f2dd9bawcfd76a7b9d7234d7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70905180933u6f368dfcx2133de98be400921@mail.gmail.com> Rik, Great links! I haven't finished reading all the material but I will. I got caught-up in a firestorm on my Bo list over this - https://eapis.cbp.dhs.gov/ Flying a personal airplane from the US to Canada or Mexico has become a nightmare. I can't wait for 'gubmint' run health-care. Here's what is so silly about the "new and improved" flight plan program - drugs have flown into this country via airplane for years, they still are. Do you think the "evil doers" are worried about this program? Gun control is no different. The world has gone mad! Brad On 5/18/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > Oh, it's going to be a much longer and rougher road than most people think, > if we keep on in the direction we are headed. Knocking down some unfinished > houses is just a drop in the bucket. > > Rik > > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/if-youre-not-petrified-of-obama-youre.html > > _______________ > > > If You're Not Petrified of Obama, You're Not Paying > Attention > > Howard Davidowitz, chairman of Davidowitz & Associates has an interesting > take on the economy that I happen to agree with. > > Please tune into "The Worst Is Yet to Come": If You're Not Petrified, You're > Not Paying > Attention > . > > The green shoots story took a bit of hit this week between data on April > retail sales, weekly jobless claims and foreclosures. But the whole concept > of the economy finding its footing was "preposterous" to begin with, says > Howard Davidowitz, chairman of Davidowitz & Associates. > > "We're in a complete mess and the consumer is smart enough to know it," says > Davidowitz, whose firm does consulting for the retail industry. "If the > consumer isn't petrified, he or she is a damn fool." > > Davidowitz, who is nothing if not opinionated (and colorful), paints a very > grim picture: "The worst is yet to come with consumers and banks," he says. > "This country is going into a 10-year decline. Living standards will never > be the same." > > "We're now in Barack Obama's world where money goes into the most > inefficient parts of the economy and we're bailing everyone out," says > Daviowitz, who opposes bailouts for financials and automakers alike. "The > bailout money is in the sewer and gone." > > Bailout Money Wasted > > Davidowitz is correct about money going to the most inefficient parts of the > economy. Bailing out AIG just so it can payoff Goldman Sachs is hardly a > good use of taxpayer money. Nor is forcing a shotgun marriage between Bank > of America and Merrill Lynch, only how have taxpayers pick up the tab. > > Please see Let the Criminal Indictments Begin: Paulson, Bernanke, > Lewisfor > my take on the coercion Paulson used on Bank of America CEO Kenneth D. > Lewis, pressuring Lewis to go along with a merger he clearly knew was not in > shareholder best interests. > > Here is a snip from Geithner's Plan Can > Succeed: > "The Plan: Dump $500 billion of toxic assets on to unsuspecting taxpayers > via a public-private partnership in which 93% of the losses are born by the > taxpayer." > > Chrysler Hijacked > > Please consider "That's Not the American Way": Chrysler's Bailout and the > Road to > Ruin > . > > Chrysler's plan to close about 25% of its dealers is the natural outcome of > a series of very unnatural events surrounding its bankruptcy, says Howard > Davidowitz, chairman of Davidowitz & Associates. > > Barack Obama's plan is to "sustain the union" in an effort to secure future > votes in five key Midwestern states, Davidowitz says, without hesitation. > "We the taxpayers are bailing out the union [and] bailing out Chrysler, > which is an inefficient company that shouldn't survive and can't survive in > the long run, anyway." > > More generally, the Chrysler saga is evidence of how "we keep putting more > money into hopeless companies," he says. "That's not the American way. We > let inefficient companies collapse and be replaced by more efficient > companies. That's the only way this economy can work." > > By propping up inefficient companies and keeping zombie banks alive, > Davidowitz says "we are exactly on the same path as Japan," which is now two > decades into its economic malaise. > > "That's a big problem for the financial stability of the U.S.," says > Davidowitz, who had a hard time envisioning an alternative to a very grim > scenario for America: "With big government, mad borrowing, and not letting > things fail, there's no way we can have [rising] living standards," he says. > > Ding, Ding, Ding we have a winner. I have talked about the Zombification of > Bankson > at least 12 occasions starting no later than March of 2008. > > By the way, it's not just Chrysler bondholders who are being kicked in the > teeth as Karl Denninger points out in Holding GM Debt? Gubbermint Is Robbing > You! > > President Obama and Geithner have declared that it does not matter what the > law says - they are going to do whatever the hell they want. They just got > done ramrodding Chrysler bondholders with the exact same "deal", shoved down > their throats, and allegedly enforced with threats of tax audits and other > jackbooted actions if the bondholders resisted in court. > > FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years > > UCLA economists calculate FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 > years > . > > Two UCLA economists say they have figured out why the Great Depression > dragged on for almost 15 years, and they blame a suspect previously thought > to be beyond reproach: President Franklin D. Roosevelt. > > After scrutinizing Roosevelt's record for four years, Harold L. Cole and Lee > E. Ohanian conclude in a new study that New Deal policies signed into law 71 > years ago thwarted economic recovery for seven long years. > > The policies were contained in the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA), > which exempted industries from antitrust prosecution if they agreed to enter > into collective bargaining agreements that significantly raised wages. > Because protection from antitrust prosecution all but ensured higher prices > for goods and services, a wide range of industries took the bait, Cole and > Ohanian found. By 1934 more than 500 industries, which accounted for nearly > 80 percent of private, non-agricultural employment, had entered into the > collective bargaining agreements called for under NIRA. > > Cole and Ohanian calculate that NIRA and its aftermath account for 60 > percent of the weak recovery. Without the policies, they contend that the > Depression would have ended in 1936 instead of the year when they believe > the slump actually ended: 1943. > > NIRA's labor provisions, meanwhile, were strengthened in the National > Relations Act, signed into law in 1935. As union membership doubled, so did > labor's bargaining power, rising from 14 million strike days in 1936 to > about 28 million in 1937. By 1939 wages in protected industries remained 24 > percent to 33 percent above where they should have been, based on 1929 > figures, Cole and Ohanian calculate. Unemployment persisted. By 1939 the > U.S. unemployment rate was 17.2 percent, down somewhat from its 1933 peak of > 24.9 percent but still remarkably high. By comparison, in May 2003, the > unemployment rate of 6.1 percent was the highest in nine years. > > Recovery came only after the Department of Justice dramatically stepped > enforcement of antitrust cases nearly four-fold and organized labor suffered > a string of setbacks, the economists found. > > "The fact that the Depression dragged on for years convinced generations of > economists and policy-makers that capitalism could not be trusted to recover > from depressions and that significant government intervention was required > to achieve good outcomes," Cole said. "Ironically, our work shows that the > recovery would have been very rapid had the government not intervened." > > How Democrats Failed to Learn From FDR's New Deal > > Minyanville Professor Scott Reeves is explaining How Democrats Failed to > Learn From FDR's New > Deal > . > > Franklin Delanor Roosevelt is popularly regarded as the man who saved > democratic capitalism with vigorous governmental intervention. But a > distinction must be drawn between FDR the brilliant politician who prepared > the nation for World War II and kept Britain afloat after the defeat of > France, and FDR the economic illiterate. > > In the 1930s, the conventional wisdom was that capitalism had failed. FDR > apparently never challenged that assumption. But the failure of government ? > not the free market ? created the Great Depression. The economic collapse > could have been avoided. > > In many cases, FDR?s policies deepened the depression and created needless > hardship for those he sought to help. > > Here?s how: > > Tax Hikes > > FDR nearly tripled the tax burden between 1933 and 1940, boosting excise, > income, inheritance, corporate, and dividend taxes and slapping a tax on > ?excess profits.? The highest individual tax rate soared to 79%. High taxes > sucked money out of the private sector, smothered entrepreneurship and > killed incentives to work and invest. By contrast, Treasury Secretary Andrew > Mellon helped spark an economic boom in the 1920s by backing a plan to slash > the top individual tax rate to 25% from 73%. > > High Employment Costs > > The New Deal raised the cost of employment, making it expensive to hire new > workers and contributing to the nation?s high unemployment rate. The > National Industrial Recovery Act and the Davis-Bacon Act mandated > artificially high wages, further crimping private employment. The new > minimum wage cut demand for unskilled workers. The new Social Security tax > raised compensation costs. Compulsory union membership often fostered > violent tactics ? and the goal wasn?t increased efficiency or innovative > products to grab market share. The WPA and other government agencies > ?created? jobs, but at great cost ? private sector employment was lower in > 1940 than it was in 1929. > > Brutalizing Business > > FDR railed against ?economic royalists? and ?privileged princes? who sought > to establish an ?industrial dictatorship? and a ?new despotism.? Roosevelt > issued about 3,700 executive orders, many limiting business activity, and > let lose a plague of anti-trust lawyers on American industry. New securities > laws made it difficult to raise capital. > > ... > > Obama is now looking ahead to the next election and is attempting to buy > union votes at the expense of everyone else but especially legitimate > bondholders with senior rights. In a possible repeat of Smoot Hawley, > Congress is again threatening to label China a currency manipulator. And > like FDR, Obama is targeting corporation with anti-trust legislation (while > consolidating already too big to fail banks into even bigger banks. > > One thing's for sure. If you're not petrified of what Obama's doing , you're > not paying attention. > > Mike "Mish" Shedlock > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com > > > On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 6:44 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> You heard it here first, folks! Bill E predicted this months ago - >> >> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124148169574985359.html >> >> (print copy attached) >> >> Stuff like this is precisely what will have to happen before the real >> estate market recovers. >> >> Watch the video. My brother is a much better operator (and it is a >> trackhoe, not a backhoe). >> >> Brad >> >> ----------------------- >> >> * MAY 5, 2009 >> >> >> By MICHAEL CORKERY >> >> A video of a backhoe knocking down homes in Victorville, Calif., was >> posted on YouTube by the founder of a Web site called Vision Victory. >> >> A Texas bank is about done demolishing 16 new and partially built >> houses acquired in Southern California through foreclosure, figuring >> it was better to knock them down than to try selling them in the >> depressed housing market. >> >> Guaranty Bank of Austin is wrecking the structures to provide a "safe >> environment" for neighbors of the abandoned housing tract in >> Victorville, a high-desert city about 85 miles northeast of Los >> Angeles, a bank spokesman said. >> >> Victorville city officials said the bank told them the cost of >> finishing the development would exceed what they could sell the homes >> for. >> >> The bank also faced escalating city fines as vandals and squatters >> took over the sprawling housing project, leaving behind graffiti and >> drug paraphernalia, city officials said. >> video >> >> >> Guaranty Bank of Austin, Texas, is demolishing 16 houses at a housing >> development that it acquired through a foreclosure action. The bank >> figured it was more cost effective to wreck the houses than try to >> finish and sell them. WSJ's Michael Corkery reports. >> >> "It's unfortunate," said George Duran, the city's code-enforcement >> manager. "We would have hoped for these houses to be finished. But >> it's up to the owner to see what is best for them." >> >> Home prices in San Bernardino County, where Victorville is located, >> have fallen 60% from the housing peak in 2006, according to DataQuick, >> a research firm. The median new-home price in Victorville is $265,990, >> according to Hanley Wood Market Intelligence, a housing-research firm. >> Homes in the Victorville development were priced at a range of $280,00 >> to $350,000 in early 2008, according to Hanley Wood. >> Read More >> >> >> Demolishing vacant houses in economically troubled, inner-city >> neighborhoods is common. But the demolitions in Victorville show how >> the housing market is weighing on lenders even in once-booming >> suburbs. The houses were built by a California developer less than two >> years ago, according to city records. >> >> Guaranty Bank has significant exposure to construction loans to home >> builders. Last month, its parent company, Guaranty Financial Group, >> was issued a "cease and desist" order by the federal Office of Thrift >> Supervision, citing the firm's "unsafe and unsound banking practices." >> [demolish] >> >> Many lenders, like Guaranty, have been foreclosing on home builders >> whose projects have gone bust. Regulators told Guaranty to come up >> with a plan to dispose of its foreclosed properties. But finding >> buyers is difficult, as home values remain under pressure. >> >> Guaranty spokesman John Wessman said only four of the 16 structures >> slated for demolition were "substantially complete," while the others >> were less than half finished and "exposed to the elements." Guaranty >> obtained the property through foreclosure in December 2008. The >> builder, Matthews Homes, couldn't be reached. >> >> A Guaranty official based in California told the Victorville >> newspaper, the Daily Press, that it would cost more than $1 million to >> finish developing the property so it could be occupied. Mr. Wessman >> said that official wasn't authorized to speak to reporters. He said he >> didn't know how much it would cost to finish the job. >> >> A demolition job of this size would likely cost more than $100,000, >> according to a person familiar with the matter. A video of the houses >> being knocked down was posted on YouTube by the founder of a Web site >> called Vision Victory Manifesto, which has been warning of economic >> disaster. He declined to give his full name for this story. >> >> Many of the appliances had been stripped out of the houses, according >> to the demolition company. "I was a little surprised they couldn't >> come up with an alternative" to demolition, said Ron Willemsen, >> president of Intravaia Rock & Sand Inc. of Montclair, Calif., which >> did the demolition. >> >> Mr. Willemsen said he would grind up much of the wood into mulch for >> landscaping, while some of the lumber would be sent to Mexico for >> construction there. >> >> Write to Michael Corkery at michael.corkery at wsj.com >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From flybrad at gmail.com Mon May 18 16:38:41 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 15:38:41 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Bad Day! Message-ID: <400985d70905181338j8e0f2d8o6bacc2b5899e00c@mail.gmail.com> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9cAEkkhngw From flybrad at gmail.com Tue May 19 08:20:24 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 07:20:24 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] You Think Your Job Is Tough? Message-ID: <400985d70905190520x1eee5ce3tec429804f76aae3d@mail.gmail.com> Just when I'm about to start whining about how tough it is to fly for a living, I realize that things could be a lot worse. For example, there's this poor guy - http://tinyurl.com/rx75ej Long hours, low pay, no work rules - Congress should do something! Other jobs have an apprentice program that's just too difficult. Actually, this is something Congress does have experience with - http://tinyurl.com/qh7z39 So, stop complaining! Brad From sanderico1 at gmail.com Tue May 19 12:14:48 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 11:14:48 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] You Think Your Job Is Tough? In-Reply-To: <400985d70905190520x1eee5ce3tec429804f76aae3d@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905190520x1eee5ce3tec429804f76aae3d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905190914m39985abcu22d92169a7fc719a@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Oh man....... Who could put up with having their gun loaded that much and no place to shoot it?? Thanks, but no thanks, man. As to the second job ..... looks like the perfect job for Barney Franks, but I hear he doesn't like girls. Rik On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 7:20 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Just when I'm about to start whining about how tough it is to fly for > a living, I realize that things could be a lot worse. For example, > there's this poor guy - > > http://tinyurl.com/rx75ej > > Long hours, low pay, no work rules - Congress should do something! > > Other jobs have an apprentice program that's just too difficult. > Actually, this is something Congress does have experience with - > > http://tinyurl.com/qh7z39 > > So, stop complaining! > > Brad > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090519/25b706b8/attachment.html From mweisner at ebsmed.com Tue May 19 13:43:54 2009 From: mweisner at ebsmed.com (Michael D. Weisner) Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 13:43:54 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] You Think Your Job Is Tough? References: <400985d70905190520x1eee5ce3tec429804f76aae3d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <892BC22609B747A7827659A80E24216C@ebsoffice> ... and to think that I complained about working for BD where each rectal thermometer is 100% tested! Mike From: "Brad Haslett" Tuesday, May 19, 2009 8:20 AM > Just when I'm about to start whining about how tough it is to fly for > a living, I realize that things could be a lot worse. For example, > there's this poor guy - > > http://tinyurl.com/rx75ej > > Long hours, low pay, no work rules - Congress should do something! > > Other jobs have an apprentice program that's just too difficult. > Actually, this is something Congress does have experience with - > > http://tinyurl.com/qh7z39 > > So, stop complaining! > > Brad > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > From flybrad at gmail.com Tue May 19 21:58:39 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 20:58:39 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Credit Cards Message-ID: <400985d70905191858n572b3793xbdd0b122a1e6fecc@mail.gmail.com> Well, that was fun while it lasted. I got my monies worth out of the b*ast*rds! Thank-you Bank of America and Fidelity Investments for the $10K+ you contributed to my daughters college education. Looks like it will be back to cash. Brad ----------------------- May 19, 2009 Credit Card Industry Aims to Profit From Sterling Payers By ANDREW MARTIN Credit cards have long been a very good deal for people who pay their bills on time and in full. Even as card companies imposed punitive fees and penalties on those late with their payments, the best customers racked up cash-back rewards, frequent-flier miles and other perks in recent years. Now Congress is moving to limit the penalties on riskier borrowers, who have become a prime source of billions of dollars in fee revenue for the industry. And to make up for lost income, the card companies are going after those people with sterling credit. Banks are expected to look at reviving annual fees, curtailing cash-back and other rewards programs and charging interest immediately on a purchase instead of allowing a grace period of weeks, according to bank officials and trade groups. ?It will be a different business,? said Edward L. Yingling, the chief executive of the American Bankers Association, which has been lobbying Congress for more lenient legislation on behalf of the nation?s biggest banks. ?Those that manage their credit well will in some degree subsidize those that have credit problems.? As they thin their ranks of risky cardholders to deal with an economic downturn, major banks including American Express, Citigroup, Bank of America and a long list of others have already begun to raise interest rates, and some have set their sights on consumers who pay their bills on time. The legislation scheduled for a Senate vote on Tuesday does not cap interest rates, so banks can continue to lift them, albeit at a slower pace and with greater disclosure. ?There will be one-size-fits-all pricing, and as a result, you?ll see the industry will be more egalitarian in terms of its revenue base,? said David Robertson, publisher of the Nilson Report, which tracks the credit card business. People who routinely pay off their credit card balances have been enjoying the equivalent of a free ride, he said, because many have not had to pay an annual fee even as they collect points for air travel and other perks. ?Despite all the terrible things that have been said, you?re making out like a bandit,? he said. ?That?s a third of credit card customers, 50 million people who have gotten a great deal.? Robert Hammer, an industry consultant, said the legislation might have the broad effect of encouraging card issuers to become ever more reliant on fees from marginal customers as well as creditworthy cardholders ? ?deadbeats? in industry parlance, because they generate scant fee revenue. ?They aren?t charities. They have shareholders to report to,? he said, referring to banks and credit card companies. ?Whatever is left in the model to work from, they will start to maneuver.? Banks used to give credit cards only to the best consumers and charge them a flat interest rate of about 20 percent and an annual fee. But with the relaxing of usury laws in some states, and the ready availability of credit scores in the late 1980s, banks began offering cards with a variety of different interest rates and fees, tying the pricing to the credit risk of the cardholder. That helped push interest rates down for many consumers, but they soared for riskier cardholders, who became a significant source of revenue for the industry. The recent economic downturn challenged that formula, and banks started dumping the riskiest customers and lowering their credit limits in earnest as the recession accelerated. Now, consumers who pay their bills off every month are issuing a rising chorus of complaints about shortened grace periods, new hidden fees and higher interest rates. The industry says that the proposals will force banks to issue fewer credit cards at greater cost to the current cardholders. Citigroup and Capital One referred comments to the A.B.A. Discover and American Express declined to comment. Bank of America intends to ?provide credit to the largest number of creditworthy customers possible, while also remaining prudent in our lending practices,? said Betty Riess, a spokeswoman. Together with JPMorgan Chase, which has said the changes will force it to limit credit availability and raise fees, these banks account for 80 percent of the credit card industry. Banks are not required to publicly reveal how much money they make from penalty interest rates and fees, though government officials and industry consultants estimate they constitute a growing portion of revenue. For instance, Mr. Hammer said the amount of money generated by penalty fees like late charges and exceeding credit limits had increased by about $1 billion annually in recent years, and should top $20 billion this year. Regulations passed by the Federal Reserve in December to curb unexpected interest charges would cost issuers about $12 billion a year in lost fees and income, according to industry calculations. The legislation before Congress would build on the Fed rules and would further squeeze banks? revenue when they are being hit with a high rate of credit card charge-offs. The government?s stress tests showed that the nation?s 19 biggest banks will take on $82 billion in credit card losses in the next two years. A 2005 report by the Government Accountability Office estimated that 70 percent of card issuers? revenue came from interest charges, and the portion from penalty rates appeared to be growing. The remainder came from fees on cardholders as well as retailers for processing transactions. Many retailers are angry at the high fees and plan to pass them on to shoppers once the Congressional legislation takes effect. Consumer advocates say they have little sympathy for credit card issuers, arguing that they have made billions in recent years with unfair and sometimes deceptive practices. ?The business model will change because the business model doesn?t work for the public,? said Gail Hillebrand, a senior lawyer at Consumers Union. ?In order to do business under the new rules, they?ll actually have to tell you how much it?s going to cost,? she said. With many consumers mired in debt and angry at what they consider gouging by credit card companies, the issue of credit card reform has broad populist appeal. Members of Congress and the Obama administration have seized on the discontent to push reforms that the industry succeeded in tamping down when the economy was flying high. Austan Goolsbee, an economic adviser to President Obama, said that while the credit card industry had the right to make a reasonable profit as long as its contracts were in plain language and rule-breakers were held accountable, its current practices were akin to ?a series of carjackings.? ?The card industry is giving the argument that if you didn?t want to be carjacked, why weren?t you locking your doors or taking a different road?? Mr. Goolsbee said. Ron Lieber contributed reporting. From flybrad at gmail.com Tue May 19 22:12:00 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 21:12:00 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Your Tax Dollars At Work Message-ID: <400985d70905191912j5f75c266hea5b6e457588470c@mail.gmail.com> >From the campaign that never ends - http://tinyurl.com/otz5hr Anyone know of a good publicly traded sign company? Brad From bill at effros.com Wed May 20 07:51:40 2009 From: bill at effros.com (Bill Effros) Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 07:51:40 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Credit Cards In-Reply-To: <400985d70905191858n572b3793xbdd0b122a1e6fecc@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905191858n572b3793xbdd0b122a1e6fecc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A13EECC.1050402@effros.com> Brad, This is a press release from the credit card industry. While I don't support their practices, this narrative is wrong. People with good credit have always gotten an amazingly good deal on credit cards, even if we had to read the fine print to figure it all out. There is nothing wrong, and probably something right with forcing the people who shouldn't get credit out of the ability to simply put their problems "on the card". Credit will surely get a lot tighter for exactly the people who the government is trying to put money into the hands of. Too bad. Now the credit card companies will have to compete for the rest of us, and I don't come cheap. I have made a staggering amount of money by playing them off against each other, and, one way or another, I will continue to be able to do so. B. Brad Haslett wrote: > Well, that was fun while it lasted. I got my monies worth out of the > b*ast*rds! Thank-you Bank of America and Fidelity Investments for the > $10K+ you contributed to my daughters college education. Looks like > it will be back to cash. > > Brad > > ----------------------- > > May 19, 2009 > Credit Card Industry Aims to Profit From Sterling Payers > By ANDREW MARTIN > > Credit cards have long been a very good deal for people who pay their > bills on time and in full. Even as card companies imposed punitive > fees and penalties on those late with their payments, the best > customers racked up cash-back rewards, frequent-flier miles and other > perks in recent years. > > Now Congress is moving to limit the penalties on riskier borrowers, > who have become a prime source of billions of dollars in fee revenue > for the industry. And to make up for lost income, the card companies > are going after those people with sterling credit. > > Banks are expected to look at reviving annual fees, curtailing > cash-back and other rewards programs and charging interest immediately > on a purchase instead of allowing a grace period of weeks, according > to bank officials and trade groups. > > ?It will be a different business,? said Edward L. Yingling, the chief > executive of the American Bankers Association, which has been lobbying > Congress for more lenient legislation on behalf of the nation?s > biggest banks. ?Those that manage their credit well will in some > degree subsidize those that have credit problems.? > > As they thin their ranks of risky cardholders to deal with an economic > downturn, major banks including American Express, Citigroup, Bank of > America and a long list of others have already begun to raise interest > rates, and some have set their sights on consumers who pay their bills > on time. The legislation scheduled for a Senate vote on Tuesday does > not cap interest rates, so banks can continue to lift them, albeit at > a slower pace and with greater disclosure. > > ?There will be one-size-fits-all pricing, and as a result, you?ll see > the industry will be more egalitarian in terms of its revenue base,? > said David Robertson, publisher of the Nilson Report, which tracks the > credit card business. > > People who routinely pay off their credit card balances have been > enjoying the equivalent of a free ride, he said, because many have not > had to pay an annual fee even as they collect points for air travel > and other perks. > > ?Despite all the terrible things that have been said, you?re making > out like a bandit,? he said. ?That?s a third of credit card customers, > 50 million people who have gotten a great deal.? > > Robert Hammer, an industry consultant, said the legislation might have > the broad effect of encouraging card issuers to become ever more > reliant on fees from marginal customers as well as creditworthy > cardholders ? ?deadbeats? in industry parlance, because they generate > scant fee revenue. > > ?They aren?t charities. They have shareholders to report to,? he said, > referring to banks and credit card companies. ?Whatever is left in the > model to work from, they will start to maneuver.? > > Banks used to give credit cards only to the best consumers and charge > them a flat interest rate of about 20 percent and an annual fee. But > with the relaxing of usury laws in some states, and the ready > availability of credit scores in the late 1980s, banks began offering > cards with a variety of different interest rates and fees, tying the > pricing to the credit risk of the cardholder. > > That helped push interest rates down for many consumers, but they > soared for riskier cardholders, who became a significant source of > revenue for the industry. The recent economic downturn challenged that > formula, and banks started dumping the riskiest customers and lowering > their credit limits in earnest as the recession accelerated. Now, > consumers who pay their bills off every month are issuing a rising > chorus of complaints about shortened grace periods, new hidden fees > and higher interest rates. > > The industry says that the proposals will force banks to issue fewer > credit cards at greater cost to the current cardholders. > > Citigroup and Capital One referred comments to the A.B.A. Discover and > American Express declined to comment. Bank of America intends to > ?provide credit to the largest number of creditworthy customers > possible, while also remaining prudent in our lending practices,? said > Betty Riess, a spokeswoman. Together with JPMorgan Chase, which has > said the changes will force it to limit credit availability and raise > fees, these banks account for 80 percent of the credit card industry. > > Banks are not required to publicly reveal how much money they make > from penalty interest rates and fees, though government officials and > industry consultants estimate they constitute a growing portion of > revenue. > > For instance, Mr. Hammer said the amount of money generated by penalty > fees like late charges and exceeding credit limits had increased by > about $1 billion annually in recent years, and should top $20 billion > this year. > > Regulations passed by the Federal Reserve in December to curb > unexpected interest charges would cost issuers about $12 billion a > year in lost fees and income, according to industry calculations. The > legislation before Congress would build on the Fed rules and would > further squeeze banks? revenue when they are being hit with a high > rate of credit card charge-offs. The government?s stress tests showed > that the nation?s 19 biggest banks will take on $82 billion in credit > card losses in the next two years. > > A 2005 report by the Government Accountability Office estimated that > 70 percent of card issuers? revenue came from interest charges, and > the portion from penalty rates appeared to be growing. The remainder > came from fees on cardholders as well as retailers for processing > transactions. Many retailers are angry at the high fees and plan to > pass them on to shoppers once the Congressional legislation takes > effect. > > Consumer advocates say they have little sympathy for credit card > issuers, arguing that they have made billions in recent years with > unfair and sometimes deceptive practices. > > ?The business model will change because the business model doesn?t > work for the public,? said Gail Hillebrand, a senior lawyer at > Consumers Union. > > ?In order to do business under the new rules, they?ll actually have to > tell you how much it?s going to cost,? she said. > > With many consumers mired in debt and angry at what they consider > gouging by credit card companies, the issue of credit card reform has > broad populist appeal. Members of Congress and the Obama > administration have seized on the discontent to push reforms that the > industry succeeded in tamping down when the economy was flying high. > > Austan Goolsbee, an economic adviser to President Obama, said that > while the credit card industry had the right to make a reasonable > profit as long as its contracts were in plain language and > rule-breakers were held accountable, its current practices were akin > to ?a series of carjackings.? > > ?The card industry is giving the argument that if you didn?t want to > be carjacked, why weren?t you locking your doors or taking a different > road?? Mr. Goolsbee said. > > Ron Lieber contributed reporting. > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Wed May 20 09:33:32 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 08:33:32 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Credit Cards In-Reply-To: <400985d70905191858n572b3793xbdd0b122a1e6fecc@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905191858n572b3793xbdd0b122a1e6fecc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905200633v656d4293u71b4950b6af808f2@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Bill, Up until about 5 years ago, I never used credit cards at all. Now I use them a good share of the time. However, I use them like cash and pay the bill in full, every single month. I don't find this much different than having a "charge account" at the gas station or some other retail establishment. If you had those, and that wasn't uncommon in the past, and paid them off at the end of the month, there has never been any "extra" charge for that credit. The card simply gives you a charge account at any place that takes your card. It's been very convenient for me, one check at the end of the month takes cares of all of those accounts vs having to pay them all separately. Certainly the book keeping is much simpler for both me and the people I am buying from. I am dumbfounded at the amount of people that don't understand how interest works. It is certainly not difficult for anyone to look at their credit card paperwork and see that the interest rates are very high for carried balances and past ridiculous for cash advances. If the same people that are bitching about this went to the bank to get a loan, I can just hear the screaming if the bank were to offer them a loan at these rates. Yet, they readily take a loan at these rates from the credit card company...... DUH. Now, the gov't thinks we need to be saved from ourselves yet one more time. Instead of trying to screw the CC companies, how about we reteach second grade math to the friggin boneheads who can't figure out what 20% means. C'mon people, it's an unsecured loan, of course the interest is going to be high. My wife and I too have used credit cards to very good advantage in the past. Borrowed about 75K after a disasterous year at the race track in '02 (13 rainouts and a flood) for three years and paid virtually no interest on the money. Then, there was a steady stream of 0 interest offers coming in the mail every week as the CC companies all played screw your buddy and tried to steal each others business. If you played that right you could borrow quite a lot of money at almost no cost. I suppose I'll have to go back to cash again now, which I can certainly live with, but it's gonna make shopping on the internet kinda tough. Rik On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Well, that was fun while it lasted. I got my monies worth out of the > b*ast*rds! Thank-you Bank of America and Fidelity Investments for the > $10K+ you contributed to my daughters college education. Looks like > it will be back to cash. > > Brad > > ----------------------- > > May 19, 2009 > Credit Card Industry Aims to Profit From Sterling Payers > By ANDREW MARTIN > > Credit cards have long been a very good deal for people who pay their > bills on time and in full. Even as card companies imposed punitive > fees and penalties on those late with their payments, the best > customers racked up cash-back rewards, frequent-flier miles and other > perks in recent years. > > Now Congress is moving to limit the penalties on riskier borrowers, > who have become a prime source of billions of dollars in fee revenue > for the industry. And to make up for lost income, the card companies > are going after those people with sterling credit. > > Banks are expected to look at reviving annual fees, curtailing > cash-back and other rewards programs and charging interest immediately > on a purchase instead of allowing a grace period of weeks, according > to bank officials and trade groups. > > ?It will be a different business,? said Edward L. Yingling, the chief > executive of the American Bankers Association, which has been lobbying > Congress for more lenient legislation on behalf of the nation?s > biggest banks. ?Those that manage their credit well will in some > degree subsidize those that have credit problems.? > > As they thin their ranks of risky cardholders to deal with an economic > downturn, major banks including American Express, Citigroup, Bank of > America and a long list of others have already begun to raise interest > rates, and some have set their sights on consumers who pay their bills > on time. The legislation scheduled for a Senate vote on Tuesday does > not cap interest rates, so banks can continue to lift them, albeit at > a slower pace and with greater disclosure. > > ?There will be one-size-fits-all pricing, and as a result, you?ll see > the industry will be more egalitarian in terms of its revenue base,? > said David Robertson, publisher of the Nilson Report, which tracks the > credit card business. > > People who routinely pay off their credit card balances have been > enjoying the equivalent of a free ride, he said, because many have not > had to pay an annual fee even as they collect points for air travel > and other perks. > > ?Despite all the terrible things that have been said, you?re making > out like a bandit,? he said. ?That?s a third of credit card customers, > 50 million people who have gotten a great deal.? > > Robert Hammer, an industry consultant, said the legislation might have > the broad effect of encouraging card issuers to become ever more > reliant on fees from marginal customers as well as creditworthy > cardholders ? ?deadbeats? in industry parlance, because they generate > scant fee revenue. > > ?They aren?t charities. They have shareholders to report to,? he said, > referring to banks and credit card companies. ?Whatever is left in the > model to work from, they will start to maneuver.? > > Banks used to give credit cards only to the best consumers and charge > them a flat interest rate of about 20 percent and an annual fee. But > with the relaxing of usury laws in some states, and the ready > availability of credit scores in the late 1980s, banks began offering > cards with a variety of different interest rates and fees, tying the > pricing to the credit risk of the cardholder. > > That helped push interest rates down for many consumers, but they > soared for riskier cardholders, who became a significant source of > revenue for the industry. The recent economic downturn challenged that > formula, and banks started dumping the riskiest customers and lowering > their credit limits in earnest as the recession accelerated. Now, > consumers who pay their bills off every month are issuing a rising > chorus of complaints about shortened grace periods, new hidden fees > and higher interest rates. > > The industry says that the proposals will force banks to issue fewer > credit cards at greater cost to the current cardholders. > > Citigroup and Capital One referred comments to the A.B.A. Discover and > American Express declined to comment. Bank of America intends to > ?provide credit to the largest number of creditworthy customers > possible, while also remaining prudent in our lending practices,? said > Betty Riess, a spokeswoman. Together with JPMorgan Chase, which has > said the changes will force it to limit credit availability and raise > fees, these banks account for 80 percent of the credit card industry. > > Banks are not required to publicly reveal how much money they make > from penalty interest rates and fees, though government officials and > industry consultants estimate they constitute a growing portion of > revenue. > > For instance, Mr. Hammer said the amount of money generated by penalty > fees like late charges and exceeding credit limits had increased by > about $1 billion annually in recent years, and should top $20 billion > this year. > > Regulations passed by the Federal Reserve in December to curb > unexpected interest charges would cost issuers about $12 billion a > year in lost fees and income, according to industry calculations. The > legislation before Congress would build on the Fed rules and would > further squeeze banks? revenue when they are being hit with a high > rate of credit card charge-offs. The government?s stress tests showed > that the nation?s 19 biggest banks will take on $82 billion in credit > card losses in the next two years. > > A 2005 report by the Government Accountability Office estimated that > 70 percent of card issuers? revenue came from interest charges, and > the portion from penalty rates appeared to be growing. The remainder > came from fees on cardholders as well as retailers for processing > transactions. Many retailers are angry at the high fees and plan to > pass them on to shoppers once the Congressional legislation takes > effect. > > Consumer advocates say they have little sympathy for credit card > issuers, arguing that they have made billions in recent years with > unfair and sometimes deceptive practices. > > ?The business model will change because the business model doesn?t > work for the public,? said Gail Hillebrand, a senior lawyer at > Consumers Union. > > ?In order to do business under the new rules, they?ll actually have to > tell you how much it?s going to cost,? she said. > > With many consumers mired in debt and angry at what they consider > gouging by credit card companies, the issue of credit card reform has > broad populist appeal. Members of Congress and the Obama > administration have seized on the discontent to push reforms that the > industry succeeded in tamping down when the economy was flying high. > > Austan Goolsbee, an economic adviser to President Obama, said that > while the credit card industry had the right to make a reasonable > profit as long as its contracts were in plain language and > rule-breakers were held accountable, its current practices were akin > to ?a series of carjackings.? > > ?The card industry is giving the argument that if you didn?t want to > be carjacked, why weren?t you locking your doors or taking a different > road?? Mr. Goolsbee said. > > Ron Lieber contributed reporting. > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090520/59f8b6f4/attachment-0001.html From ekroposki at charter.net Wed May 20 12:14:12 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 12:14:12 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] attachment for Brad... Message-ID: <3E08E030F99E4C57A44CA3C2D4797869@YOURB88038198E> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090520/071b6b4f/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Chicago Voters.JPG Type: image/jpeg Size: 86262 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090520/071b6b4f/attachment-0001.jpe From flybrad at gmail.com Wed May 20 12:16:52 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 11:16:52 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Credit Cards In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0905200633v656d4293u71b4950b6af808f2@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905191858n572b3793xbdd0b122a1e6fecc@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905200633v656d4293u71b4950b6af808f2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70905200916i105390ecobb458bc15855b236@mail.gmail.com> Rik, We'll see what happens after the dust settles, but I waiting for the notice from BofA any day now telling me that Cora's $1500 a year "free" money is ending. I give the b*ast*rds credit, (no pun intended) they tried hard to make money off of us. The account is in my name so they never knew they were actually dealing with a Chinese. They probably have a software program that does a scan for "don't lend to the 'slant eyes', they beat us every time". If they go to a program that starts charging interest as soon as you make a purchase, we'll go to a debit card for internet purchases. In fact, depending on how fast the merchants get their money, I'll start asking for a 3-5 % discount. Ah, the law of unintended consequences. BTW, Obambi and wifey lived off of credit quite extensively (especially home equity loans) until 2004. And you wonder where this crap comes from? Brad On 5/20/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, Bill, > > Up until about 5 years ago, I never used credit cards at all. Now I use them > a good share of the time. However, I use them like cash and pay the bill in > full, every single month. I don't find this much different than having a > "charge account" at the gas station or some other retail establishment. If > you had those, and that wasn't uncommon in the past, and paid them off at > the end of the month, there has never been any "extra" charge for that > credit. The card simply gives you a charge account at any place that takes > your card. It's been very convenient for me, one check at the end of the > month takes cares of all of those accounts vs having to pay them all > separately. Certainly the book keeping is much simpler for both me and the > people I am buying from. > > I am dumbfounded at the amount of people that don't understand how interest > works. It is certainly not difficult for anyone to look at their credit card > paperwork and see that the interest rates are very high for carried balances > and past ridiculous for cash advances. If the same people that are bitching > about this went to the bank to get a loan, I can just hear the screaming if > the bank were to offer them a loan at these rates. Yet, they readily take a > loan at these rates from the credit card company...... DUH. > > Now, the gov't thinks we need to be saved from ourselves yet one more time. > Instead of trying to screw the CC companies, how about we reteach second > grade math to the friggin boneheads who can't figure out what 20% means. > C'mon people, it's an unsecured loan, of course the interest is going to be > high. > > My wife and I too have used credit cards to very good advantage in the past. > Borrowed about 75K after a disasterous year at the race track in '02 (13 > rainouts and a flood) for three years and paid virtually no interest on the > money. Then, there was a steady stream of 0 interest offers coming in the > mail every week as the CC companies all played screw your buddy and tried to > steal each others business. If you played that right you could borrow quite > a lot of money at almost no cost. > > I suppose I'll have to go back to cash again now, which I can certainly live > with, but it's gonna make shopping on the internet kinda tough. > > Rik > > > > > > On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Well, that was fun while it lasted. I got my monies worth out of the >> b*ast*rds! Thank-you Bank of America and Fidelity Investments for the >> $10K+ you contributed to my daughters college education. Looks like >> it will be back to cash. >> >> Brad >> >> ----------------------- >> >> May 19, 2009 >> Credit Card Industry Aims to Profit From Sterling Payers >> By ANDREW MARTIN >> >> Credit cards have long been a very good deal for people who pay their >> bills on time and in full. Even as card companies imposed punitive >> fees and penalties on those late with their payments, the best >> customers racked up cash-back rewards, frequent-flier miles and other >> perks in recent years. >> >> Now Congress is moving to limit the penalties on riskier borrowers, >> who have become a prime source of billions of dollars in fee revenue >> for the industry. And to make up for lost income, the card companies >> are going after those people with sterling credit. >> >> Banks are expected to look at reviving annual fees, curtailing >> cash-back and other rewards programs and charging interest immediately >> on a purchase instead of allowing a grace period of weeks, according >> to bank officials and trade groups. >> >> ?It will be a different business,? said Edward L. Yingling, the chief >> executive of the American Bankers Association, which has been lobbying >> Congress for more lenient legislation on behalf of the nation?s >> biggest banks. ?Those that manage their credit well will in some >> degree subsidize those that have credit problems.? >> >> As they thin their ranks of risky cardholders to deal with an economic >> downturn, major banks including American Express, Citigroup, Bank of >> America and a long list of others have already begun to raise interest >> rates, and some have set their sights on consumers who pay their bills >> on time. The legislation scheduled for a Senate vote on Tuesday does >> not cap interest rates, so banks can continue to lift them, albeit at >> a slower pace and with greater disclosure. >> >> ?There will be one-size-fits-all pricing, and as a result, you?ll see >> the industry will be more egalitarian in terms of its revenue base,? >> said David Robertson, publisher of the Nilson Report, which tracks the >> credit card business. >> >> People who routinely pay off their credit card balances have been >> enjoying the equivalent of a free ride, he said, because many have not >> had to pay an annual fee even as they collect points for air travel >> and other perks. >> >> ?Despite all the terrible things that have been said, you?re making >> out like a bandit,? he said. ?That?s a third of credit card customers, >> 50 million people who have gotten a great deal.? >> >> Robert Hammer, an industry consultant, said the legislation might have >> the broad effect of encouraging card issuers to become ever more >> reliant on fees from marginal customers as well as creditworthy >> cardholders ? ?deadbeats? in industry parlance, because they generate >> scant fee revenue. >> >> ?They aren?t charities. They have shareholders to report to,? he said, >> referring to banks and credit card companies. ?Whatever is left in the >> model to work from, they will start to maneuver.? >> >> Banks used to give credit cards only to the best consumers and charge >> them a flat interest rate of about 20 percent and an annual fee. But >> with the relaxing of usury laws in some states, and the ready >> availability of credit scores in the late 1980s, banks began offering >> cards with a variety of different interest rates and fees, tying the >> pricing to the credit risk of the cardholder. >> >> That helped push interest rates down for many consumers, but they >> soared for riskier cardholders, who became a significant source of >> revenue for the industry. The recent economic downturn challenged that >> formula, and banks started dumping the riskiest customers and lowering >> their credit limits in earnest as the recession accelerated. Now, >> consumers who pay their bills off every month are issuing a rising >> chorus of complaints about shortened grace periods, new hidden fees >> and higher interest rates. >> >> The industry says that the proposals will force banks to issue fewer >> credit cards at greater cost to the current cardholders. >> >> Citigroup and Capital One referred comments to the A.B.A. Discover and >> American Express declined to comment. Bank of America intends to >> ?provide credit to the largest number of creditworthy customers >> possible, while also remaining prudent in our lending practices,? said >> Betty Riess, a spokeswoman. Together with JPMorgan Chase, which has >> said the changes will force it to limit credit availability and raise >> fees, these banks account for 80 percent of the credit card industry. >> >> Banks are not required to publicly reveal how much money they make >> from penalty interest rates and fees, though government officials and >> industry consultants estimate they constitute a growing portion of >> revenue. >> >> For instance, Mr. Hammer said the amount of money generated by penalty >> fees like late charges and exceeding credit limits had increased by >> about $1 billion annually in recent years, and should top $20 billion >> this year. >> >> Regulations passed by the Federal Reserve in December to curb >> unexpected interest charges would cost issuers about $12 billion a >> year in lost fees and income, according to industry calculations. The >> legislation before Congress would build on the Fed rules and would >> further squeeze banks? revenue when they are being hit with a high >> rate of credit card charge-offs. The government?s stress tests showed >> that the nation?s 19 biggest banks will take on $82 billion in credit >> card losses in the next two years. >> >> A 2005 report by the Government Accountability Office estimated that >> 70 percent of card issuers? revenue came from interest charges, and >> the portion from penalty rates appeared to be growing. The remainder >> came from fees on cardholders as well as retailers for processing >> transactions. Many retailers are angry at the high fees and plan to >> pass them on to shoppers once the Congressional legislation takes >> effect. >> >> Consumer advocates say they have little sympathy for credit card >> issuers, arguing that they have made billions in recent years with >> unfair and sometimes deceptive practices. >> >> ?The business model will change because the business model doesn?t >> work for the public,? said Gail Hillebrand, a senior lawyer at >> Consumers Union. >> >> ?In order to do business under the new rules, they?ll actually have to >> tell you how much it?s going to cost,? she said. >> >> With many consumers mired in debt and angry at what they consider >> gouging by credit card companies, the issue of credit card reform has >> broad populist appeal. Members of Congress and the Obama >> administration have seized on the discontent to push reforms that the >> industry succeeded in tamping down when the economy was flying high. >> >> Austan Goolsbee, an economic adviser to President Obama, said that >> while the credit card industry had the right to make a reasonable >> profit as long as its contracts were in plain language and >> rule-breakers were held accountable, its current practices were akin >> to ?a series of carjackings.? >> >> ?The card industry is giving the argument that if you didn?t want to >> be carjacked, why weren?t you locking your doors or taking a different >> road?? Mr. Goolsbee said. >> >> Ron Lieber contributed reporting. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From mweisner at ebsmed.com Wed May 20 12:45:57 2009 From: mweisner at ebsmed.com (Michael D. Weisner) Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 12:45:57 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Credit Cards Message-ID: Plum card link: http://www.plumcard.com > Brad & Rik, > > You may be interested in a new credit card that I just applied for at > Amex, the Plum Card. If you pay in full in 10 days, they give you a 1.5% > discount or pay only 10% and pay the balance in 60 days, interest free. > In business terms, we call this (almost) "1.5% 10 / Net 60." It's clearly > not for everyone, but, I thought that you might be interested. > > Mike > > From: "Brad Haslett" Wednesday, May 20, 2009 12:16 PM > Rik, > > We'll see what happens after the dust settles, but I waiting for the > notice from BofA any day now telling me that Cora's $1500 a year > "free" money is ending. I give the b*ast*rds credit, (no pun > intended) they tried hard to make money off of us. The account is in > my name so they never knew they were actually dealing with a Chinese. > They probably have a software program that does a scan for "don't lend > to the 'slant eyes', they beat us every time". > > If they go to a program that starts charging interest as soon as you > make a purchase, we'll go to a debit card for internet purchases. In > fact, depending on how fast the merchants get their money, I'll start > asking for a 3-5 % discount. Ah, the law of unintended consequences. > > BTW, Obambi and wifey lived off of credit quite extensively > (especially home equity loans) until 2004. And you wonder where this > crap comes from? > > Brad > > > On 5/20/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: >> Brad, Bill, >> >> Up until about 5 years ago, I never used credit cards at all. Now I use >> them >> a good share of the time. However, I use them like cash and pay the bill >> in >> full, every single month. I don't find this much different than having a >> "charge account" at the gas station or some other retail establishment. >> If >> you had those, and that wasn't uncommon in the past, and paid them off at >> the end of the month, there has never been any "extra" charge for that >> credit. The card simply gives you a charge account at any place that >> takes >> your card. It's been very convenient for me, one check at the end of the >> month takes cares of all of those accounts vs having to pay them all >> separately. Certainly the book keeping is much simpler for both me and >> the >> people I am buying from. >> >> I am dumbfounded at the amount of people that don't understand how >> interest >> works. It is certainly not difficult for anyone to look at their credit >> card >> paperwork and see that the interest rates are very high for carried >> balances >> and past ridiculous for cash advances. If the same people that are >> bitching >> about this went to the bank to get a loan, I can just hear the screaming >> if >> the bank were to offer them a loan at these rates. Yet, they readily take >> a >> loan at these rates from the credit card company...... DUH. >> >> Now, the gov't thinks we need to be saved from ourselves yet one more >> time. >> Instead of trying to screw the CC companies, how about we reteach second >> grade math to the friggin boneheads who can't figure out what 20% means. >> C'mon people, it's an unsecured loan, of course the interest is going to >> be >> high. >> >> My wife and I too have used credit cards to very good advantage in the >> past. >> Borrowed about 75K after a disasterous year at the race track in '02 (13 >> rainouts and a flood) for three years and paid virtually no interest on >> the >> money. Then, there was a steady stream of 0 interest offers coming in the >> mail every week as the CC companies all played screw your buddy and tried >> to >> steal each others business. If you played that right you could borrow >> quite >> a lot of money at almost no cost. >> >> I suppose I'll have to go back to cash again now, which I can certainly >> live >> with, but it's gonna make shopping on the internet kinda tough. >> >> Rik >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> >>> Well, that was fun while it lasted. I got my monies worth out of the >>> b*ast*rds! Thank-you Bank of America and Fidelity Investments for the >>> $10K+ you contributed to my daughters college education. Looks like >>> it will be back to cash. >>> >>> Brad >>> >>> ----------------------- >>> >>> May 19, 2009 >>> Credit Card Industry Aims to Profit From Sterling Payers >>> By ANDREW MARTIN >>> >>> Credit cards have long been a very good deal for people who pay their >>> bills on time and in full. Even as card companies imposed punitive >>> fees and penalties on those late with their payments, the best >>> customers racked up cash-back rewards, frequent-flier miles and other >>> perks in recent years. >>> >>> Now Congress is moving to limit the penalties on riskier borrowers, >>> who have become a prime source of billions of dollars in fee revenue >>> for the industry. And to make up for lost income, the card companies >>> are going after those people with sterling credit. >>> >>> Banks are expected to look at reviving annual fees, curtailing >>> cash-back and other rewards programs and charging interest immediately >>> on a purchase instead of allowing a grace period of weeks, according >>> to bank officials and trade groups. >>> >>> ?It will be a different business,? said Edward L. Yingling, the chief >>> executive of the American Bankers Association, which has been lobbying >>> Congress for more lenient legislation on behalf of the nation?s >>> biggest banks. ?Those that manage their credit well will in some >>> degree subsidize those that have credit problems.? >>> >>> As they thin their ranks of risky cardholders to deal with an economic >>> downturn, major banks including American Express, Citigroup, Bank of >>> America and a long list of others have already begun to raise interest >>> rates, and some have set their sights on consumers who pay their bills >>> on time. The legislation scheduled for a Senate vote on Tuesday does >>> not cap interest rates, so banks can continue to lift them, albeit at >>> a slower pace and with greater disclosure. >>> >>> ?There will be one-size-fits-all pricing, and as a result, you?ll see >>> the industry will be more egalitarian in terms of its revenue base,? >>> said David Robertson, publisher of the Nilson Report, which tracks the >>> credit card business. >>> >>> People who routinely pay off their credit card balances have been >>> enjoying the equivalent of a free ride, he said, because many have not >>> had to pay an annual fee even as they collect points for air travel >>> and other perks. >>> >>> ?Despite all the terrible things that have been said, you?re making >>> out like a bandit,? he said. ?That?s a third of credit card customers, >>> 50 million people who have gotten a great deal.? >>> >>> Robert Hammer, an industry consultant, said the legislation might have >>> the broad effect of encouraging card issuers to become ever more >>> reliant on fees from marginal customers as well as creditworthy >>> cardholders ? ?deadbeats? in industry parlance, because they generate >>> scant fee revenue. >>> >>> ?They aren?t charities. They have shareholders to report to,? he said, >>> referring to banks and credit card companies. ?Whatever is left in the >>> model to work from, they will start to maneuver.? >>> >>> Banks used to give credit cards only to the best consumers and charge >>> them a flat interest rate of about 20 percent and an annual fee. But >>> with the relaxing of usury laws in some states, and the ready >>> availability of credit scores in the late 1980s, banks began offering >>> cards with a variety of different interest rates and fees, tying the >>> pricing to the credit risk of the cardholder. >>> >>> That helped push interest rates down for many consumers, but they >>> soared for riskier cardholders, who became a significant source of >>> revenue for the industry. The recent economic downturn challenged that >>> formula, and banks started dumping the riskiest customers and lowering >>> their credit limits in earnest as the recession accelerated. Now, >>> consumers who pay their bills off every month are issuing a rising >>> chorus of complaints about shortened grace periods, new hidden fees >>> and higher interest rates. >>> >>> The industry says that the proposals will force banks to issue fewer >>> credit cards at greater cost to the current cardholders. >>> >>> Citigroup and Capital One referred comments to the A.B.A. Discover and >>> American Express declined to comment. Bank of America intends to >>> ?provide credit to the largest number of creditworthy customers >>> possible, while also remaining prudent in our lending practices,? said >>> Betty Riess, a spokeswoman. Together with JPMorgan Chase, which has >>> said the changes will force it to limit credit availability and raise >>> fees, these banks account for 80 percent of the credit card industry. >>> >>> Banks are not required to publicly reveal how much money they make >>> from penalty interest rates and fees, though government officials and >>> industry consultants estimate they constitute a growing portion of >>> revenue. >>> >>> For instance, Mr. Hammer said the amount of money generated by penalty >>> fees like late charges and exceeding credit limits had increased by >>> about $1 billion annually in recent years, and should top $20 billion >>> this year. >>> >>> Regulations passed by the Federal Reserve in December to curb >>> unexpected interest charges would cost issuers about $12 billion a >>> year in lost fees and income, according to industry calculations. The >>> legislation before Congress would build on the Fed rules and would >>> further squeeze banks? revenue when they are being hit with a high >>> rate of credit card charge-offs. The government?s stress tests showed >>> that the nation?s 19 biggest banks will take on $82 billion in credit >>> card losses in the next two years. >>> >>> A 2005 report by the Government Accountability Office estimated that >>> 70 percent of card issuers? revenue came from interest charges, and >>> the portion from penalty rates appeared to be growing. The remainder >>> came from fees on cardholders as well as retailers for processing >>> transactions. Many retailers are angry at the high fees and plan to >>> pass them on to shoppers once the Congressional legislation takes >>> effect. >>> >>> Consumer advocates say they have little sympathy for credit card >>> issuers, arguing that they have made billions in recent years with >>> unfair and sometimes deceptive practices. >>> >>> ?The business model will change because the business model doesn?t >>> work for the public,? said Gail Hillebrand, a senior lawyer at >>> Consumers Union. >>> >>> ?In order to do business under the new rules, they?ll actually have to >>> tell you how much it?s going to cost,? she said. >>> >>> With many consumers mired in debt and angry at what they consider >>> gouging by credit card companies, the issue of credit card reform has >>> broad populist appeal. Members of Congress and the Obama >>> administration have seized on the discontent to push reforms that the >>> industry succeeded in tamping down when the economy was flying high. >>> >>> Austan Goolsbee, an economic adviser to President Obama, said that >>> while the credit card industry had the right to make a reasonable >>> profit as long as its contracts were in plain language and >>> rule-breakers were held accountable, its current practices were akin >>> to ?a series of carjackings.? >>> >>> ?The card industry is giving the argument that if you didn?t want to >>> be carjacked, why weren?t you locking your doors or taking a different >>> road?? Mr. Goolsbee said. >>> >>> Ron Lieber contributed reporting. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>> >>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>> >> > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Wed May 20 15:31:34 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 14:31:34 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Credit Cards In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6634e19e0905201231y9ba8e92y8261c366bed3b30f@mail.gmail.com> Mike, Thanks for that. I'd have no problem using the Amex card in just the way you describe. That's what I'm doing now with my Visa. The trouble I have with Amex is, it isn't as widely accepted as Visa and I hang out in some pretty podunk little towns a lot of the time. I don't know that Amex is the right card for us hayseeds. :-) Rik On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Michael D. Weisner wrote: > Plum card link: http://www.plumcard.com > > > Brad & Rik, > > > > You may be interested in a new credit card that I just applied for at > > Amex, the Plum Card. If you pay in full in 10 days, they give you a 1.5% > > discount or pay only 10% and pay the balance in 60 days, interest free. > > In business terms, we call this (almost) "1.5% 10 / Net 60." It's > clearly > > not for everyone, but, I thought that you might be interested. > > > > Mike > > > > From: "Brad Haslett" Wednesday, May 20, 2009 12:16 PM > > Rik, > > > > We'll see what happens after the dust settles, but I waiting for the > > notice from BofA any day now telling me that Cora's $1500 a year > > "free" money is ending. I give the b*ast*rds credit, (no pun > > intended) they tried hard to make money off of us. The account is in > > my name so they never knew they were actually dealing with a Chinese. > > They probably have a software program that does a scan for "don't lend > > to the 'slant eyes', they beat us every time". > > > > If they go to a program that starts charging interest as soon as you > > make a purchase, we'll go to a debit card for internet purchases. In > > fact, depending on how fast the merchants get their money, I'll start > > asking for a 3-5 % discount. Ah, the law of unintended consequences. > > > > BTW, Obambi and wifey lived off of credit quite extensively > > (especially home equity loans) until 2004. And you wonder where this > > crap comes from? > > > > Brad > > > > > > On 5/20/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > >> Brad, Bill, > >> > >> Up until about 5 years ago, I never used credit cards at all. Now I use > >> them > >> a good share of the time. However, I use them like cash and pay the bill > >> in > >> full, every single month. I don't find this much different than having a > >> "charge account" at the gas station or some other retail establishment. > >> If > >> you had those, and that wasn't uncommon in the past, and paid them off > at > >> the end of the month, there has never been any "extra" charge for that > >> credit. The card simply gives you a charge account at any place that > >> takes > >> your card. It's been very convenient for me, one check at the end of the > >> month takes cares of all of those accounts vs having to pay them all > >> separately. Certainly the book keeping is much simpler for both me and > >> the > >> people I am buying from. > >> > >> I am dumbfounded at the amount of people that don't understand how > >> interest > >> works. It is certainly not difficult for anyone to look at their credit > >> card > >> paperwork and see that the interest rates are very high for carried > >> balances > >> and past ridiculous for cash advances. If the same people that are > >> bitching > >> about this went to the bank to get a loan, I can just hear the screaming > >> if > >> the bank were to offer them a loan at these rates. Yet, they readily > take > >> a > >> loan at these rates from the credit card company...... DUH. > >> > >> Now, the gov't thinks we need to be saved from ourselves yet one more > >> time. > >> Instead of trying to screw the CC companies, how about we reteach second > >> grade math to the friggin boneheads who can't figure out what 20% means. > >> C'mon people, it's an unsecured loan, of course the interest is going to > >> be > >> high. > >> > >> My wife and I too have used credit cards to very good advantage in the > >> past. > >> Borrowed about 75K after a disasterous year at the race track in '02 (13 > >> rainouts and a flood) for three years and paid virtually no interest on > >> the > >> money. Then, there was a steady stream of 0 interest offers coming in > the > >> mail every week as the CC companies all played screw your buddy and > tried > >> to > >> steal each others business. If you played that right you could borrow > >> quite > >> a lot of money at almost no cost. > >> > >> I suppose I'll have to go back to cash again now, which I can certainly > >> live > >> with, but it's gonna make shopping on the internet kinda tough. > >> > >> Rik > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Brad Haslett > wrote: > >> > >>> Well, that was fun while it lasted. I got my monies worth out of the > >>> b*ast*rds! Thank-you Bank of America and Fidelity Investments for the > >>> $10K+ you contributed to my daughters college education. Looks like > >>> it will be back to cash. > >>> > >>> Brad > >>> > >>> ----------------------- > >>> > >>> May 19, 2009 > >>> Credit Card Industry Aims to Profit From Sterling Payers > >>> By ANDREW MARTIN > >>> > >>> Credit cards have long been a very good deal for people who pay their > >>> bills on time and in full. Even as card companies imposed punitive > >>> fees and penalties on those late with their payments, the best > >>> customers racked up cash-back rewards, frequent-flier miles and other > >>> perks in recent years. > >>> > >>> Now Congress is moving to limit the penalties on riskier borrowers, > >>> who have become a prime source of billions of dollars in fee revenue > >>> for the industry. And to make up for lost income, the card companies > >>> are going after those people with sterling credit. > >>> > >>> Banks are expected to look at reviving annual fees, curtailing > >>> cash-back and other rewards programs and charging interest immediately > >>> on a purchase instead of allowing a grace period of weeks, according > >>> to bank officials and trade groups. > >>> > >>> ?It will be a different business,? said Edward L. Yingling, the chief > >>> executive of the American Bankers Association, which has been lobbying > >>> Congress for more lenient legislation on behalf of the nation?s > >>> biggest banks. ?Those that manage their credit well will in some > >>> degree subsidize those that have credit problems.? > >>> > >>> As they thin their ranks of risky cardholders to deal with an economic > >>> downturn, major banks including American Express, Citigroup, Bank of > >>> America and a long list of others have already begun to raise interest > >>> rates, and some have set their sights on consumers who pay their bills > >>> on time. The legislation scheduled for a Senate vote on Tuesday does > >>> not cap interest rates, so banks can continue to lift them, albeit at > >>> a slower pace and with greater disclosure. > >>> > >>> ?There will be one-size-fits-all pricing, and as a result, you?ll see > >>> the industry will be more egalitarian in terms of its revenue base,? > >>> said David Robertson, publisher of the Nilson Report, which tracks the > >>> credit card business. > >>> > >>> People who routinely pay off their credit card balances have been > >>> enjoying the equivalent of a free ride, he said, because many have not > >>> had to pay an annual fee even as they collect points for air travel > >>> and other perks. > >>> > >>> ?Despite all the terrible things that have been said, you?re making > >>> out like a bandit,? he said. ?That?s a third of credit card customers, > >>> 50 million people who have gotten a great deal.? > >>> > >>> Robert Hammer, an industry consultant, said the legislation might have > >>> the broad effect of encouraging card issuers to become ever more > >>> reliant on fees from marginal customers as well as creditworthy > >>> cardholders ? ?deadbeats? in industry parlance, because they generate > >>> scant fee revenue. > >>> > >>> ?They aren?t charities. They have shareholders to report to,? he said, > >>> referring to banks and credit card companies. ?Whatever is left in the > >>> model to work from, they will start to maneuver.? > >>> > >>> Banks used to give credit cards only to the best consumers and charge > >>> them a flat interest rate of about 20 percent and an annual fee. But > >>> with the relaxing of usury laws in some states, and the ready > >>> availability of credit scores in the late 1980s, banks began offering > >>> cards with a variety of different interest rates and fees, tying the > >>> pricing to the credit risk of the cardholder. > >>> > >>> That helped push interest rates down for many consumers, but they > >>> soared for riskier cardholders, who became a significant source of > >>> revenue for the industry. The recent economic downturn challenged that > >>> formula, and banks started dumping the riskiest customers and lowering > >>> their credit limits in earnest as the recession accelerated. Now, > >>> consumers who pay their bills off every month are issuing a rising > >>> chorus of complaints about shortened grace periods, new hidden fees > >>> and higher interest rates. > >>> > >>> The industry says that the proposals will force banks to issue fewer > >>> credit cards at greater cost to the current cardholders. > >>> > >>> Citigroup and Capital One referred comments to the A.B.A. Discover and > >>> American Express declined to comment. Bank of America intends to > >>> ?provide credit to the largest number of creditworthy customers > >>> possible, while also remaining prudent in our lending practices,? said > >>> Betty Riess, a spokeswoman. Together with JPMorgan Chase, which has > >>> said the changes will force it to limit credit availability and raise > >>> fees, these banks account for 80 percent of the credit card industry. > >>> > >>> Banks are not required to publicly reveal how much money they make > >>> from penalty interest rates and fees, though government officials and > >>> industry consultants estimate they constitute a growing portion of > >>> revenue. > >>> > >>> For instance, Mr. Hammer said the amount of money generated by penalty > >>> fees like late charges and exceeding credit limits had increased by > >>> about $1 billion annually in recent years, and should top $20 billion > >>> this year. > >>> > >>> Regulations passed by the Federal Reserve in December to curb > >>> unexpected interest charges would cost issuers about $12 billion a > >>> year in lost fees and income, according to industry calculations. The > >>> legislation before Congress would build on the Fed rules and would > >>> further squeeze banks? revenue when they are being hit with a high > >>> rate of credit card charge-offs. The government?s stress tests showed > >>> that the nation?s 19 biggest banks will take on $82 billion in credit > >>> card losses in the next two years. > >>> > >>> A 2005 report by the Government Accountability Office estimated that > >>> 70 percent of card issuers? revenue came from interest charges, and > >>> the portion from penalty rates appeared to be growing. The remainder > >>> came from fees on cardholders as well as retailers for processing > >>> transactions. Many retailers are angry at the high fees and plan to > >>> pass them on to shoppers once the Congressional legislation takes > >>> effect. > >>> > >>> Consumer advocates say they have little sympathy for credit card > >>> issuers, arguing that they have made billions in recent years with > >>> unfair and sometimes deceptive practices. > >>> > >>> ?The business model will change because the business model doesn?t > >>> work for the public,? said Gail Hillebrand, a senior lawyer at > >>> Consumers Union. > >>> > >>> ?In order to do business under the new rules, they?ll actually have to > >>> tell you how much it?s going to cost,? she said. > >>> > >>> With many consumers mired in debt and angry at what they consider > >>> gouging by credit card companies, the issue of credit card reform has > >>> broad populist appeal. Members of Congress and the Obama > >>> administration have seized on the discontent to push reforms that the > >>> industry succeeded in tamping down when the economy was flying high. > >>> > >>> Austan Goolsbee, an economic adviser to President Obama, said that > >>> while the credit card industry had the right to make a reasonable > >>> profit as long as its contracts were in plain language and > >>> rule-breakers were held accountable, its current practices were akin > >>> to ?a series of carjackings.? > >>> > >>> ?The card industry is giving the argument that if you didn?t want to > >>> be carjacked, why weren?t you locking your doors or taking a different > >>> road?? Mr. Goolsbee said. > >>> > >>> Ron Lieber contributed reporting. > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >>> > >>> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >>> > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090520/a772cd30/attachment-0001.html From mweisner at ebsmed.com Wed May 20 15:41:52 2009 From: mweisner at ebsmed.com (Michael D. Weisner) Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 15:41:52 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] GPS System Could Begin to Fail Within a Year Message-ID: <2FBCE56E5E2745A4A43883E3165587F5@ebsoffice> "Make the next legal U-turn" could become history in GPS navigation systems: www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/165126/gps_system_could_begin_to_fail_within_a_year.html Oh well, gas is going up again anyway ... GPS System Could Begin to Fail Within a Year The Global Positioning System faces the possibility of failures and blackouts, a federal watchdog agency has warned the U.S. Congress. Mismanagement by and underinvestment by the U.S. Air Force places the GPS at risk of failure in 2010 and beyond. The problem: Delays in launching replacement satellites, among other things. According to the Government Accountability Office report, "In recent years, the Air Force has struggled to successfully build GPS satellites within cost and schedule goals" as part of a $2 billion modernization program. "If the Air Force does not meet its schedule goals for development of GPS IIIA satellites, there will be an increased likelihood that in 2010, as old satellites begin to fail, the overall GPS constellation will fall below the number of satellites required to provide the level of GPS service that the U.S. government commits to." Considered by the GAO to be "essential to national security" the GPS is also widely used by business and consumers and is a driver for next-generation location-based mobile applications used with smartphones and other devices. "Such a gap in capability could have wide-ranging impacts on all GPS users," the GAO report states, "though there are measures the Air Force and others can take to plan for and minimize these impacts." It is hard to imagine the U.S. government could allow this to happen. Actually, that's a lie, it's easy to imagine, but there is also time for corrective action to be taken. The first replacement satellite is expected to be launched this November, some three years after the original launch date. Speeding up future launches can solve the problem, but is likely to come at a high price. The American GPS, though the pioneering consumer satnav system, is not alone. Russia, China, and India each have systems of their own, which are being expanded. The European Union's Galileo system, intended as a rival for GPS, is expected to begin its rollout later this year. The delay and potential failure of GPS gives these other nations the potential to rival the U.S. in space, something the U.S. government is unlikely to accept. The report is a black eye for the Air Force, which developed the GPS system during the 1980s and has maintained it since. At last count, David Coursey owned more than a dozen GPS devices and expects his government to keep them working. He Tweets as dcoursey and can be reached using the email form at www.coursey.com/contact. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090520/dda75013/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Wed May 20 17:24:56 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 16:24:56 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] GPS System Could Begin to Fail Within a Year In-Reply-To: <2FBCE56E5E2745A4A43883E3165587F5@ebsoffice> References: <2FBCE56E5E2745A4A43883E3165587F5@ebsoffice> Message-ID: <400985d70905201424y7ff3b803u47fb1895231c8744@mail.gmail.com> Mike, That's been a huge controversy in the airplane community lately. www.gao.gov/new.items/d09325.pdf The new administration is eliminating LORAN so there is no back-up to GPS. The Chinese have already demonstrated their ability to shoot down satellites. How do Muslim goat herders find their way across the desert at night? Coming soon to an airspace near you! Brad On 5/20/09, Michael D. Weisner wrote: > "Make the next legal U-turn" could become history in GPS navigation systems: > www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/165126/gps_system_could_begin_to_fail_within_a_year.html > > Oh well, gas is going up again anyway ... > > > > GPS System Could Begin to Fail Within a Year > The Global Positioning System faces the possibility of failures and > blackouts, a federal watchdog agency has warned the U.S. Congress. > Mismanagement by and underinvestment by the U.S. Air Force places the GPS at > risk of failure in 2010 and beyond. The problem: Delays in launching > replacement satellites, among other things. > According to the Government Accountability Office report, "In recent years, > the Air Force has struggled to successfully build GPS satellites within cost > and schedule goals" as part of a $2 billion modernization program. > > "If the Air Force does not meet its schedule goals for development of GPS > IIIA satellites, there will be an increased likelihood that in 2010, as old > satellites begin to fail, the overall GPS constellation will fall below the > number of satellites required to provide the level of GPS service that the > U.S. government commits to." > > Considered by the GAO to be "essential to national security" the GPS is also > widely used by business and consumers and is a driver for next-generation > location-based mobile applications used with smartphones and other devices. > > "Such a gap in capability could have wide-ranging impacts on all GPS users," > the GAO report states, "though there are measures the Air Force and others > can take to plan for and minimize these impacts." > > It is hard to imagine the U.S. government could allow this to happen. > Actually, that's a lie, it's easy to imagine, but there is also time for > corrective action to be taken. The first replacement satellite is expected > to be launched this November, some three years after the original launch > date. Speeding up future launches can solve the problem, but is likely to > come at a high price. > > The American GPS, though the pioneering consumer satnav system, is not > alone. Russia, China, and India each have systems of their own, which are > being expanded. > > The European Union's Galileo system, intended as a rival for GPS, is > expected to begin its rollout later this year. > > The delay and potential failure of GPS gives these other nations the > potential to rival the U.S. in space, something the U.S. government is > unlikely to accept. The report is a black eye for the Air Force, which > developed the GPS system during the 1980s and has maintained it since. > > At last count, David Coursey owned more than a dozen GPS devices and expects > his government to keep them working. He Tweets as dcoursey and can be > reached using the email form at www.coursey.com/contact. > From ekroposki at charter.net Wed May 20 18:36:11 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 18:36:11 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Obamas travels to Middle East Message-ID: the following was posted to the internet recently by a lady named 'Winnie': Subject: Travel for Obama I was at Blockbusters on Saturday renting videos, and I was going along the wall and there was a video called "Obama". I told the men next to me that I wouldn't waste my time. We talked about Obama. These guys were Arabs and I asked them why they thought Michele Obama headed home following her visit in France instead of traveling on to Saudi Arabia and Turkey with her husband. They said she couldn't go to Saudi Arabia, Turkey or Iraq. I said "Laura Bush went to Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Dubai." They said that Obama is a Muslim and by Muslim law he would not be allowed to bring his wife into the countries that accept Sharia Law. Just thought it was interesting that the Arabs at Blockbuster's accepts the idea that we're being led by a Muslim who follows the Islamic creed. They also said that's the reason he bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia. It was a signal to the Muslim world. Just thought you would like to know. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090520/a6742615/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Wed May 20 22:54:43 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 21:54:43 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chrysler And The Other Shoe Message-ID: <400985d70905201954s78250bcexc7444be678bbabb1@mail.gmail.com> You heard it here months ago. The other issue no one wants to talk about is the insolvency of the states and municipalities. If we apply post Enron accounting to unfunded pension liabilities, school teachers, firefighters, police, etc. should be very, very worried about their retirements. A Ponzi scheme is a Ponzi scheme. Indiana is fighting back. Brad ------------------- (from the Financial Times) Funds move to halt Chrysler restructuring By Bernard Simon in Toronto and Nicole Bullock in New York Published: May 20 2009 20:39 | Last updated: May 20 2009 23:11 Three of Chrysler?s secured creditors are mounting a fresh attempt to thwart the carmaker?s Chapter 11 reorganisation on the grounds that it violates their legal rights and the US government?s authority under the Troubled asset relief programme. The three ? all Indiana state pension funds ? are among a group of 46 creditors that had appeared to back away this month from efforts to derail the process under which a ?new? Chrysler would emerge from bankruptcy protection by July 1. The new entity would be owned by a union healthcare trust, the US government and Italy?s Fiat. Chrysler, with backing from the US Treasury, had offered its secured creditors just under 30 cents on the dollar to settle claims totalling $6.9bn. Four big banks, holding the bulk of the claims, accepted the offer following political pressure from Washington. However, the Indiana State Teachers? Retirement Fund said on Wednesday that it had a fiduciary responsibility to its members to continue the fight. The fund stands to lose $4.6m under the current settlement proposal and has teamed up with Richard Mourdock, Indiana state treasurer, to try to recover those losses. The latest objections could galvanise other lenders to renew their challenge. ?I fully support their motion and believe a number of lenders (including us) will ultimately join their group,? said George Schultze of Schultze Asset Management, one of the creditors that had abandoned an earlier legal fight. In a court filing on Wednesday, the Indiana funds accused the government of adopting a strategy of ?the ends justify the means?. They also said the Treasury ?has taken constructive possession of Chrysler and is requiring it to adopt a sale plan in bankruptcy that violates the most fundamental principles of creditor rights ? that first-tier secured creditors have absolute priority?. The Indiana funds say the current plan will strip their collateral into the new company, benefiting more junior creditors. The funds also allege that Tarp funds were meant to be funnelled only to financial institutions. ?Whatever powers the Treasury department may have under Tarp,? the funds said, ?it does not have the power to control the entire restructuring of a company to the detriment of the company?s secured creditors and for the benefit of other interest groups so that certain broader policy and political objectives may be achieved.? A US bankruptcy judge on Wednesday denied their attempt to halt proceedings in bankruptcy court, but a district court needs to rule on the funds? request for the case to be heard in district court instead. The group also can oppose the final sale agreement, which under the current timeline must be approved by May 27. From mweisner at ebsmed.com Wed May 20 12:44:24 2009 From: mweisner at ebsmed.com (Michael D. Weisner) Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 12:44:24 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Credit Cards References: <400985d70905191858n572b3793xbdd0b122a1e6fecc@mail.gmail.com><6634e19e0905200633v656d4293u71b4950b6af808f2@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905200916i105390ecobb458bc15855b236@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Brad & Rik, You may be interested in a new credit card that I just applied for at Amex, the Plum Card. If you pay in full in 10 days, they give you a 1.5% discount or pay only 10% and pay the balance in 60 days, interest free. In business terms, we call this (almost) "1.5% 10 / Net 60." It's clearly not for everyone, but, I thought that you might be interested. Mike From: "Brad Haslett" Wednesday, May 20, 2009 12:16 PM Rik, We'll see what happens after the dust settles, but I waiting for the notice from BofA any day now telling me that Cora's $1500 a year "free" money is ending. I give the b*ast*rds credit, (no pun intended) they tried hard to make money off of us. The account is in my name so they never knew they were actually dealing with a Chinese. They probably have a software program that does a scan for "don't lend to the 'slant eyes', they beat us every time". If they go to a program that starts charging interest as soon as you make a purchase, we'll go to a debit card for internet purchases. In fact, depending on how fast the merchants get their money, I'll start asking for a 3-5 % discount. Ah, the law of unintended consequences. BTW, Obambi and wifey lived off of credit quite extensively (especially home equity loans) until 2004. And you wonder where this crap comes from? Brad On 5/20/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, Bill, > > Up until about 5 years ago, I never used credit cards at all. Now I use > them > a good share of the time. However, I use them like cash and pay the bill > in > full, every single month. I don't find this much different than having a > "charge account" at the gas station or some other retail establishment. If > you had those, and that wasn't uncommon in the past, and paid them off at > the end of the month, there has never been any "extra" charge for that > credit. The card simply gives you a charge account at any place that takes > your card. It's been very convenient for me, one check at the end of the > month takes cares of all of those accounts vs having to pay them all > separately. Certainly the book keeping is much simpler for both me and the > people I am buying from. > > I am dumbfounded at the amount of people that don't understand how > interest > works. It is certainly not difficult for anyone to look at their credit > card > paperwork and see that the interest rates are very high for carried > balances > and past ridiculous for cash advances. If the same people that are > bitching > about this went to the bank to get a loan, I can just hear the screaming > if > the bank were to offer them a loan at these rates. Yet, they readily take > a > loan at these rates from the credit card company...... DUH. > > Now, the gov't thinks we need to be saved from ourselves yet one more > time. > Instead of trying to screw the CC companies, how about we reteach second > grade math to the friggin boneheads who can't figure out what 20% means. > C'mon people, it's an unsecured loan, of course the interest is going to > be > high. > > My wife and I too have used credit cards to very good advantage in the > past. > Borrowed about 75K after a disasterous year at the race track in '02 (13 > rainouts and a flood) for three years and paid virtually no interest on > the > money. Then, there was a steady stream of 0 interest offers coming in the > mail every week as the CC companies all played screw your buddy and tried > to > steal each others business. If you played that right you could borrow > quite > a lot of money at almost no cost. > > I suppose I'll have to go back to cash again now, which I can certainly > live > with, but it's gonna make shopping on the internet kinda tough. > > Rik > > > > > > On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Well, that was fun while it lasted. I got my monies worth out of the >> b*ast*rds! Thank-you Bank of America and Fidelity Investments for the >> $10K+ you contributed to my daughters college education. Looks like >> it will be back to cash. >> >> Brad >> >> ----------------------- >> >> May 19, 2009 >> Credit Card Industry Aims to Profit From Sterling Payers >> By ANDREW MARTIN >> >> Credit cards have long been a very good deal for people who pay their >> bills on time and in full. Even as card companies imposed punitive >> fees and penalties on those late with their payments, the best >> customers racked up cash-back rewards, frequent-flier miles and other >> perks in recent years. >> >> Now Congress is moving to limit the penalties on riskier borrowers, >> who have become a prime source of billions of dollars in fee revenue >> for the industry. And to make up for lost income, the card companies >> are going after those people with sterling credit. >> >> Banks are expected to look at reviving annual fees, curtailing >> cash-back and other rewards programs and charging interest immediately >> on a purchase instead of allowing a grace period of weeks, according >> to bank officials and trade groups. >> >> ?It will be a different business,? said Edward L. Yingling, the chief >> executive of the American Bankers Association, which has been lobbying >> Congress for more lenient legislation on behalf of the nation?s >> biggest banks. ?Those that manage their credit well will in some >> degree subsidize those that have credit problems.? >> >> As they thin their ranks of risky cardholders to deal with an economic >> downturn, major banks including American Express, Citigroup, Bank of >> America and a long list of others have already begun to raise interest >> rates, and some have set their sights on consumers who pay their bills >> on time. The legislation scheduled for a Senate vote on Tuesday does >> not cap interest rates, so banks can continue to lift them, albeit at >> a slower pace and with greater disclosure. >> >> ?There will be one-size-fits-all pricing, and as a result, you?ll see >> the industry will be more egalitarian in terms of its revenue base,? >> said David Robertson, publisher of the Nilson Report, which tracks the >> credit card business. >> >> People who routinely pay off their credit card balances have been >> enjoying the equivalent of a free ride, he said, because many have not >> had to pay an annual fee even as they collect points for air travel >> and other perks. >> >> ?Despite all the terrible things that have been said, you?re making >> out like a bandit,? he said. ?That?s a third of credit card customers, >> 50 million people who have gotten a great deal.? >> >> Robert Hammer, an industry consultant, said the legislation might have >> the broad effect of encouraging card issuers to become ever more >> reliant on fees from marginal customers as well as creditworthy >> cardholders ? ?deadbeats? in industry parlance, because they generate >> scant fee revenue. >> >> ?They aren?t charities. They have shareholders to report to,? he said, >> referring to banks and credit card companies. ?Whatever is left in the >> model to work from, they will start to maneuver.? >> >> Banks used to give credit cards only to the best consumers and charge >> them a flat interest rate of about 20 percent and an annual fee. But >> with the relaxing of usury laws in some states, and the ready >> availability of credit scores in the late 1980s, banks began offering >> cards with a variety of different interest rates and fees, tying the >> pricing to the credit risk of the cardholder. >> >> That helped push interest rates down for many consumers, but they >> soared for riskier cardholders, who became a significant source of >> revenue for the industry. The recent economic downturn challenged that >> formula, and banks started dumping the riskiest customers and lowering >> their credit limits in earnest as the recession accelerated. Now, >> consumers who pay their bills off every month are issuing a rising >> chorus of complaints about shortened grace periods, new hidden fees >> and higher interest rates. >> >> The industry says that the proposals will force banks to issue fewer >> credit cards at greater cost to the current cardholders. >> >> Citigroup and Capital One referred comments to the A.B.A. Discover and >> American Express declined to comment. Bank of America intends to >> ?provide credit to the largest number of creditworthy customers >> possible, while also remaining prudent in our lending practices,? said >> Betty Riess, a spokeswoman. Together with JPMorgan Chase, which has >> said the changes will force it to limit credit availability and raise >> fees, these banks account for 80 percent of the credit card industry. >> >> Banks are not required to publicly reveal how much money they make >> from penalty interest rates and fees, though government officials and >> industry consultants estimate they constitute a growing portion of >> revenue. >> >> For instance, Mr. Hammer said the amount of money generated by penalty >> fees like late charges and exceeding credit limits had increased by >> about $1 billion annually in recent years, and should top $20 billion >> this year. >> >> Regulations passed by the Federal Reserve in December to curb >> unexpected interest charges would cost issuers about $12 billion a >> year in lost fees and income, according to industry calculations. The >> legislation before Congress would build on the Fed rules and would >> further squeeze banks? revenue when they are being hit with a high >> rate of credit card charge-offs. The government?s stress tests showed >> that the nation?s 19 biggest banks will take on $82 billion in credit >> card losses in the next two years. >> >> A 2005 report by the Government Accountability Office estimated that >> 70 percent of card issuers? revenue came from interest charges, and >> the portion from penalty rates appeared to be growing. The remainder >> came from fees on cardholders as well as retailers for processing >> transactions. Many retailers are angry at the high fees and plan to >> pass them on to shoppers once the Congressional legislation takes >> effect. >> >> Consumer advocates say they have little sympathy for credit card >> issuers, arguing that they have made billions in recent years with >> unfair and sometimes deceptive practices. >> >> ?The business model will change because the business model doesn?t >> work for the public,? said Gail Hillebrand, a senior lawyer at >> Consumers Union. >> >> ?In order to do business under the new rules, they?ll actually have to >> tell you how much it?s going to cost,? she said. >> >> With many consumers mired in debt and angry at what they consider >> gouging by credit card companies, the issue of credit card reform has >> broad populist appeal. Members of Congress and the Obama >> administration have seized on the discontent to push reforms that the >> industry succeeded in tamping down when the economy was flying high. >> >> Austan Goolsbee, an economic adviser to President Obama, said that >> while the credit card industry had the right to make a reasonable >> profit as long as its contracts were in plain language and >> rule-breakers were held accountable, its current practices were akin >> to ?a series of carjackings.? >> >> ?The card industry is giving the argument that if you didn?t want to >> be carjacked, why weren?t you locking your doors or taking a different >> road?? Mr. Goolsbee said. >> >> Ron Lieber contributed reporting. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > _______________________________________________ SwiftwaterGazette mailing list SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette From ekroposki at charter.net Thu May 21 07:12:24 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 07:12:24 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chrysler and the Greedy Hedge Funds Message-ID: Brad, As you recall Obama referred to such creditors as greedy Hedge Funds and Creditors. I am no longer able to post on the Rhodes List but someone ought to post this news report for Ben C., Frone Crawford, Bob aka Moses and the other legal eagles on the Rhodes list since they mostly supported Obama. Maybe even send it to Stan. So the teachers and firefighters retirement funds are 'greedy creditors'? Why should they have to give up their dollars for the auto unions and Fiat? What makes that right? What was interesting is the bankruptcy judge being in Obama's hip pocket. So much for integrity of the bench. Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090521/0816b8a6/attachment.html From bill at effros.com Thu May 21 08:03:39 2009 From: bill at effros.com (Bill Effros) Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 08:03:39 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chrysler And The Other Shoe In-Reply-To: <400985d70905201954s78250bcexc7444be678bbabb1@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905201954s78250bcexc7444be678bbabb1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A15431B.3040105@effros.com> Brad, I can't feel sorry for any of these clowns. They deserve each other. The real story, IMHO, is the California voters rejecting the "budget balancing" propositions. They just said "no". What does it all mean? I think it means that people are starting to accept the notion that you can't carve up a pie that doesn't exist and expect others to bake it for you when you need it. California is huge, and their "direct democracy" is a more accurate opinion poll than any other. They voted to reduce benefits to get them in line with income. This will hurt the economy as a whole, but I can't feel sorry for any of the other clowns, either. Unemployment will go up. (Government is our largest employer, and the number of people working for government will decrease. It's happening here in Greenwich just like everywhere else.) Government employees will have a harder time finding new jobs than anyone else--the revolving door has stopped revolving. More people unemployed will start sharing fewer resources. Many "rich" people aren't rich anymore. The ways they earned their riches are no longer available to them, the poor, or anyone else. Obama didn't create this situation, he just has to manage it. And he's not doing a very good job. Different people are trying to belly up to the same trough, and it will become increasingly obvious that there's no slop left. Rhetoric aside, most people will get "poorer" (at least in terms of their expectations.) Chrysler is just a side show. Teachers pensions should never have been invested in obviously failing car companies. The main show is going to be "what have you done for me lately" -- and nobody seems to have much of an answer for that. "We sent you a check for $250 six months ago" probably won't cut it. B. Brad Haslett wrote: > You heard it here months ago. The other issue no one wants to talk > about is the insolvency of the states and municipalities. If we apply > post Enron accounting to unfunded pension liabilities, school > teachers, firefighters, police, etc. should be very, very worried > about their retirements. A Ponzi scheme is a Ponzi scheme. Indiana > is fighting back. > > Brad > > ------------------- > > (from the Financial Times) > > Funds move to halt Chrysler restructuring > > By Bernard Simon in Toronto and Nicole Bullock in New York > > Published: May 20 2009 20:39 | Last updated: May 20 2009 23:11 > > Three of Chrysler?s secured creditors are mounting a fresh attempt to > thwart the carmaker?s Chapter 11 reorganisation on the grounds that it > violates their legal rights and the US government?s authority under > the Troubled asset relief programme. > > The three ? all Indiana state pension funds ? are among a group of 46 > creditors that had appeared to back away this month from efforts to > derail the process under which a ?new? Chrysler would emerge from > bankruptcy protection by July 1. The new entity would be owned by a > union healthcare trust, the US government and Italy?s Fiat. > > Chrysler, with backing from the US Treasury, had offered its secured > creditors just under 30 cents on the dollar to settle claims totalling > $6.9bn. Four big banks, holding the bulk of the claims, accepted the > offer following political pressure from Washington. > > However, the Indiana State Teachers? Retirement Fund said on Wednesday > that it had a fiduciary responsibility to its members to continue the > fight. The fund stands to lose $4.6m under the current settlement > proposal and has teamed up with Richard Mourdock, Indiana state > treasurer, to try to recover those losses. > > The latest objections could galvanise other lenders to renew their > challenge. ?I fully support their motion and believe a number of > lenders (including us) will ultimately join their group,? said George > Schultze of Schultze Asset Management, one of the creditors that had > abandoned an earlier legal fight. > > In a court filing on Wednesday, the Indiana funds accused the > government of adopting a strategy of ?the ends justify the means?. > > They also said the Treasury ?has taken constructive possession of > Chrysler and is requiring it to adopt a sale plan in bankruptcy that > violates the most fundamental principles of creditor rights ? that > first-tier secured creditors have absolute priority?. > > The Indiana funds say the current plan will strip their collateral > into the new company, benefiting more junior creditors. The funds also > allege that Tarp funds were meant to be funnelled only to financial > institutions. > > ?Whatever powers the Treasury department may have under Tarp,? the > funds said, ?it does not have the power to control the entire > restructuring of a company to the detriment of the company?s secured > creditors and for the benefit of other interest groups so that certain > broader policy and political objectives may be achieved.? > > A US bankruptcy judge on Wednesday denied their attempt to halt > proceedings in bankruptcy court, but a district court needs to rule on > the funds? request for the case to be heard in district court instead. > > The group also can oppose the final sale agreement, which under the > current timeline must be approved by May 27. > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > From ekroposki at charter.net Thu May 21 09:22:32 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 09:22:32 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chrysler And The Other Shoe Message-ID: <1BF09D0BE5CF4D70BAC6A58A9C0BD85C@YOURB88038198E> Bill: It matters not that they should not have been investing in Chrysler. It matters that the credit laws not be changed without their approval after they made such investments. Unilateral change by coercion is not the way we as Americans expect to be treated? Ask Ben C. on the Rhodes List if that is his method after all he is a trial lawyer who supported Obama. There is a difference between totalitarism and negotiations. Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090521/dd4ec040/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Thu May 21 09:57:43 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 08:57:43 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chrysler And The Other Shoe In-Reply-To: <4A15431B.3040105@effros.com> References: <400985d70905201954s78250bcexc7444be678bbabb1@mail.gmail.com> <4A15431B.3040105@effros.com> Message-ID: <400985d70905210657h2225d871uf7cf04ab767e3db9@mail.gmail.com> Bill, They don't deserve sympathy, but they do deserve the rule of law to be applied as it existed at the time they cut the deal. Here's a video of the Speaker of the House in Cali discussing the vote - http://tinyurl.com/p9pytv Two things I found interesting (1) "the voters were confused" and (2) we need loan guarantees to commercial banks from the Feds. Well Sweetheart, I don't think the voters are confused at all, in fact, quite the opposite. They're fed up with snobs like you who think you know how to spend their money better than they do. Next, what happens if California defaults on their commercial bank loans and the banks have to deal with the Feds for payment? After Chrysler, who could blame an investor for saying, "thanks, but no thanks". What happened to all this "Change" we were promised? Bush started bailing out failed businesses, El Douche' is bailing out everyone. Bush was a prolific spender - let's quadruple the spending! Bush sent bad people to Gitmo - let's keep Gitmo open, these guys really are bad! I'd love to be a fly on the wall at the Oval Office and listen to Rahm and Bambi talk. "Damn, this running a country is hard! Let's go back to campaigning!" Brad On 5/21/09, Bill Effros wrote: > Brad, > > I can't feel sorry for any of these clowns. They deserve each other. > > The real story, IMHO, is the California voters rejecting the "budget > balancing" propositions. > > They just said "no". > > What does it all mean? > > I think it means that people are starting to accept the notion that you > can't carve up a pie that doesn't exist and expect others to bake it for > you when you need it. > > California is huge, and their "direct democracy" is a more accurate > opinion poll than any other. > > They voted to reduce benefits to get them in line with income. > > This will hurt the economy as a whole, but I can't feel sorry for any of > the other clowns, either. > > Unemployment will go up. (Government is our largest employer, and the > number of people working for government will decrease. It's happening > here in Greenwich just like everywhere else.) Government employees will > have a harder time finding new jobs than anyone else--the revolving door > has stopped revolving. > > More people unemployed will start sharing fewer resources. Many "rich" > people aren't rich anymore. The ways they earned their riches are no > longer available to them, the poor, or anyone else. > > Obama didn't create this situation, he just has to manage it. And he's > not doing a very good job. Different people are trying to belly up to > the same trough, and it will become increasingly obvious that there's no > slop left. > > Rhetoric aside, most people will get "poorer" (at least in terms of > their expectations.) > > Chrysler is just a side show. Teachers pensions should never have been > invested in obviously failing car companies. > > The main show is going to be "what have you done for me lately" -- and > nobody seems to have much of an answer for that. "We sent you a check > for $250 six months ago" probably won't cut it. > > B. > > Brad Haslett wrote: >> You heard it here months ago. The other issue no one wants to talk >> about is the insolvency of the states and municipalities. If we apply >> post Enron accounting to unfunded pension liabilities, school >> teachers, firefighters, police, etc. should be very, very worried >> about their retirements. A Ponzi scheme is a Ponzi scheme. Indiana >> is fighting back. >> >> Brad >> >> ------------------- >> >> (from the Financial Times) >> >> Funds move to halt Chrysler restructuring >> >> By Bernard Simon in Toronto and Nicole Bullock in New York >> >> Published: May 20 2009 20:39 | Last updated: May 20 2009 23:11 >> >> Three of Chrysler?s secured creditors are mounting a fresh attempt to >> thwart the carmaker?s Chapter 11 reorganisation on the grounds that it >> violates their legal rights and the US government?s authority under >> the Troubled asset relief programme. >> >> The three ? all Indiana state pension funds ? are among a group of 46 >> creditors that had appeared to back away this month from efforts to >> derail the process under which a ?new? Chrysler would emerge from >> bankruptcy protection by July 1. The new entity would be owned by a >> union healthcare trust, the US government and Italy?s Fiat. >> >> Chrysler, with backing from the US Treasury, had offered its secured >> creditors just under 30 cents on the dollar to settle claims totalling >> $6.9bn. Four big banks, holding the bulk of the claims, accepted the >> offer following political pressure from Washington. >> >> However, the Indiana State Teachers? Retirement Fund said on Wednesday >> that it had a fiduciary responsibility to its members to continue the >> fight. The fund stands to lose $4.6m under the current settlement >> proposal and has teamed up with Richard Mourdock, Indiana state >> treasurer, to try to recover those losses. >> >> The latest objections could galvanise other lenders to renew their >> challenge. ?I fully support their motion and believe a number of >> lenders (including us) will ultimately join their group,? said George >> Schultze of Schultze Asset Management, one of the creditors that had >> abandoned an earlier legal fight. >> >> In a court filing on Wednesday, the Indiana funds accused the >> government of adopting a strategy of ?the ends justify the means?. >> >> They also said the Treasury ?has taken constructive possession of >> Chrysler and is requiring it to adopt a sale plan in bankruptcy that >> violates the most fundamental principles of creditor rights ? that >> first-tier secured creditors have absolute priority?. >> >> The Indiana funds say the current plan will strip their collateral >> into the new company, benefiting more junior creditors. The funds also >> allege that Tarp funds were meant to be funnelled only to financial >> institutions. >> >> ?Whatever powers the Treasury department may have under Tarp,? the >> funds said, ?it does not have the power to control the entire >> restructuring of a company to the detriment of the company?s secured >> creditors and for the benefit of other interest groups so that certain >> broader policy and political objectives may be achieved.? >> >> A US bankruptcy judge on Wednesday denied their attempt to halt >> proceedings in bankruptcy court, but a district court needs to rule on >> the funds? request for the case to be heard in district court instead. >> >> The group also can oppose the final sale agreement, which under the >> current timeline must be approved by May 27. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > From flybrad at gmail.com Fri May 22 08:37:15 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 07:37:15 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Banana Republic TV Message-ID: <400985d70905220537o158d96bfv2b29172aa841698c@mail.gmail.com> Every President carefully crafts and protects their image - FDR hid the fact that he was crippled, JFK kept the public in the dark that he constantly experienced pain and was heavily medicated - but no one yet started their own TV network. Now comes this - http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/05/do-you-want-you.html This should be fun to watch. Once the MSM actually starts doing their job (which probably won't happen) TeleBama will give them the "under the bus" treatment everyone else gets when they are no longer useful. More Banana States of America. Brad From flybrad at gmail.com Sat May 23 10:56:21 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sat, 23 May 2009 09:56:21 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Healthcare Message-ID: <400985d70905230756m775566c6i85f0721196572e5f@mail.gmail.com> Pay attention folks - http://tinyurl.com/r39gdk This is straight out of "Rules for Radicals". They intend to impose socialized medicine. Don't be fooled. Brad From flybrad at gmail.com Sat May 23 13:09:27 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sat, 23 May 2009 12:09:27 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chrysler And The Other Shoe In-Reply-To: <400985d70905201954s78250bcexc7444be678bbabb1@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905201954s78250bcexc7444be678bbabb1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70905231009x15436848w2115cec81ab7a418@mail.gmail.com> The evidence continues to build (see below) Brad ---------------------- www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.smith22may22,0,7451798.column baltimoresun.com Baltimore pension dispute illuminates public/private divide Ron Smith May 22, 2009 Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon has withdrawn a pension reform measure that by any logic should have been carried out. Baltimore, like countless municipalities (and states), is faced with a growing gap between pension obligations to its multitude of retired workers and the ability to pay for them. TheBaltimore Sun's Annie Linskey tells us that the legislation that would have eliminated a provision giving all retired fire and police workers a permanent boost in their pension payments in years when the pension fund performs well was withdrawn because, in the words of the mayor's spokesman, "We're looking for a bigger fix to the system." What does that mean? I don't know. I do know that the days of lavish defined pension benefits for public sector workers are coming to an end, despite desperate efforts to maintain them. Mathematically, these plans can't meet their mounting obligations with their dwindling resources. Severe market downturns lay bare any number of Ponzi schemes, and under-funded defined benefits pensions, public and private, can be justly described as such schemes. The problem with private plans is large enough. The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp., which insures the pensions of 44 million Americans, said in a report this week that its deficit has tripled in just six months to a record $33.5 billion. Chances are it will have to be added to the growing list of entities to be bailed out by Uncle Sam. But this is trivial compared to the under-funding in public plans, which cover about 22 million workers. The deficits in the latter systems are said to total more than a trillion dollars. And these are not insured. So, when Mayor Dixon capitulates to Baltimore's public safety unions, withdrawing a pension reform measure and suggesting there is a need for a "bigger fix," we are left wondering what that could possibly be. If the public safety unions had their way in blocking this proposal, how will "more comprehensive changes" be enacted? Yet, how can they be avoided? The gap between the public sector and private business in wages and benefits continues to grow. Last month, USA Today reported federal figures showing that public employees earned benefits worth $13.38 per hour in December 2008, compared to $7.98 for private sector workers. A full-time government worker receives benefits worth an average of $28,830 per year. A private worker's benefits are worth an average of $16,598. Yet in this time of recession/depression, the shrinking private sector foots the bill for massive bailouts of public employees. In the nongovernment world, jobs are being lost by the hundreds of thousands each month. Government workers are secure in theirs. As the ordinary American becomes more aware of the disparity and unfairness of the current system, anger builds. There was a time when people took government jobs for the security they offered. The bargain was that they would sacrifice pay for that security. Over time, the bargain tilted totally in favor of the government workers as they got both job security and higher pay than their counterparts outside government. Can this system be sustained? I think not, but we shall see. Ron Smith can be heard weekdays, 3 p.m. to 6 p.m., on 1090 WBAL-AM and WBAL.com. His column appears Fridays in The Baltimore Sun. His e-mail is rsmith at wbal.com. On 5/20/09, Brad Haslett wrote: > You heard it here months ago. The other issue no one wants to talk > about is the insolvency of the states and municipalities. If we apply > post Enron accounting to unfunded pension liabilities, school > teachers, firefighters, police, etc. should be very, very worried > about their retirements. A Ponzi scheme is a Ponzi scheme. Indiana > is fighting back. > > Brad > > ------------------- > > (from the Financial Times) > > Funds move to halt Chrysler restructuring > > By Bernard Simon in Toronto and Nicole Bullock in New York > > Published: May 20 2009 20:39 | Last updated: May 20 2009 23:11 > > Three of Chrysler?s secured creditors are mounting a fresh attempt to > thwart the carmaker?s Chapter 11 reorganisation on the grounds that it > violates their legal rights and the US government?s authority under > the Troubled asset relief programme. > > The three ? all Indiana state pension funds ? are among a group of 46 > creditors that had appeared to back away this month from efforts to > derail the process under which a ?new? Chrysler would emerge from > bankruptcy protection by July 1. The new entity would be owned by a > union healthcare trust, the US government and Italy?s Fiat. > > Chrysler, with backing from the US Treasury, had offered its secured > creditors just under 30 cents on the dollar to settle claims totalling > $6.9bn. Four big banks, holding the bulk of the claims, accepted the > offer following political pressure from Washington. > > However, the Indiana State Teachers? Retirement Fund said on Wednesday > that it had a fiduciary responsibility to its members to continue the > fight. The fund stands to lose $4.6m under the current settlement > proposal and has teamed up with Richard Mourdock, Indiana state > treasurer, to try to recover those losses. > > The latest objections could galvanise other lenders to renew their > challenge. ?I fully support their motion and believe a number of > lenders (including us) will ultimately join their group,? said George > Schultze of Schultze Asset Management, one of the creditors that had > abandoned an earlier legal fight. > > In a court filing on Wednesday, the Indiana funds accused the > government of adopting a strategy of ?the ends justify the means?. > > They also said the Treasury ?has taken constructive possession of > Chrysler and is requiring it to adopt a sale plan in bankruptcy that > violates the most fundamental principles of creditor rights ? that > first-tier secured creditors have absolute priority?. > > The Indiana funds say the current plan will strip their collateral > into the new company, benefiting more junior creditors. The funds also > allege that Tarp funds were meant to be funnelled only to financial > institutions. > > ?Whatever powers the Treasury department may have under Tarp,? the > funds said, ?it does not have the power to control the entire > restructuring of a company to the detriment of the company?s secured > creditors and for the benefit of other interest groups so that certain > broader policy and political objectives may be achieved.? > > A US bankruptcy judge on Wednesday denied their attempt to halt > proceedings in bankruptcy court, but a district court needs to rule on > the funds? request for the case to be heard in district court instead. > > The group also can oppose the final sale agreement, which under the > current timeline must be approved by May 27. > From flybrad at gmail.com Sat May 23 13:35:29 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sat, 23 May 2009 12:35:29 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] It's Official - "We're Out Of Money Now" Message-ID: <400985d70905231035x52d2d231n59d10214289a5e49@mail.gmail.com> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGo83FofDhU&feature=player_embedded Full transcript below. Now let me see if I understand this - the biggest current expenses we have is Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. The problem is getting much bigger because the Boomers are starting to collect. So as a solution, we expand those benefits to the entire population. Or, we ration health care AND limit the Boomer benefits based on a "means test". People really do get the 'gubmint' they deserve. Brad ------------------------ 'WE'RE OUT OF MONEY' Sat May 23 2009 10:32:18 ET In a sobering holiday interview with C-SPAN, President Obama boldly told Americans: "We are out of money." C-SPAN host Steve Scully broke from a meek Washington press corps with probing questions for the new president. SCULLY: You know the numbers, $1.7 trillion debt, a national deficit of $11 trillion. At what point do we run out of money? OBAMA: Well, we are out of money now. We are operating in deep deficits, not caused by any decisions we've made on health care so far. This is a consequence of the crisis that we've seen and in fact our failure to make some good decisions on health care over the last several decades. So we've got a short-term problem, which is we had to spend a lot of money to salvage our financial system, we had to deal with the auto companies, a huge recession which drains tax revenue at the same time it's putting more pressure on governments to provide unemployment insurance or make sure that food stamps are available for people who have been laid off. So we have a short-term problem and we also have a long-term problem. The short-term problem is dwarfed by the long-term problem. And the long-term problem is Medicaid and Medicare. If we don't reduce long-term health care inflation substantially, we can't get control of the deficit. So, one option is just to do nothing. We say, well, it's too expensive for us to make some short-term investments in health care. We can't afford it. We've got this big deficit. Let's just keep the health care system that we've got now. Along that trajectory, we will see health care cost as an overall share of our federal spending grow and grow and grow and grow until essentially it consumes everything... SCULLY: When you see GM though as ?Government Motors,? you're reaction? OBAMA: Well, you know ? look we are trying to help an auto industry that is going through a combination of bad decision making over many years and an unprecedented crisis or at least a crisis we haven't seen since the 1930's. And you know the economy is going to bounce back and we want to get out of the business of helping auto companies as quickly as we can. I have got more enough to do without that. In the same way that I want to get out of the business of helping banks, but we have to make some strategic decisions about strategic industries... SCULLY: States like California in desperate financial situation, will you be forced to bail out the states? OBAMA: No. I think that what you're seeing in states is that anytime you got a severe recession like this, as I said before, their demands on services are higher. So, they are sending more money out. At the same time, they're bringing less tax revenue in. And that's a painful adjustment, what we're going end up seeing is lot of states making very difficult choices there... SCULLY: William Howard Taft served on the court after his presidency, would you have any interest in being on the Supreme Court? OBAMA: You know, I am not sure that I could get through Senate confirmation... Developing... From ekroposki at charter.net Sun May 24 08:37:48 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sun, 24 May 2009 08:37:48 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] At least one Republican doesn't think it's OK to compare Nancy Pelosi to Pussy Galore Message-ID: Actually I was searching for pre Obama web information about Trinity United Church of Christ and W. E. B. Dubose. It apparently has been cleansed from the Web except where it is referred to on third party web sites that I guess they have not figured out how to remove yet. Or the related sites do not specifically refer to Obama who was a member of that church for 20 years. It becomes obvious that the reason he claims not to have heard that rhetoric is because his head was nodding in agreement. I got into looking for those preachings because our local paper is overtly and aggressively socialistic and anti American in editorials, and this Sunday especially so. Then a reference to this jumped out on one Web site: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22894.html At least one Republican doesn't think it's OK to compare Nancy Pelosi to Pussy Galore. After viewing an RNC video that juxtaposed the speaker with the James Bond villainess, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) told POLITICO Saturday: "I thought it was reprehensible, irresponsible and unpersuasive. If we're going to regain the credibility of the American people, we're going to have to stop with silly antics like that. It may get a snide chuckle inside the Beltway, but it offends most people. We have to get away from the politics of personal destruction," he said of the video. The RNC declined repeatedly to explain the Pelosi/Galore connection, saying only that the video was about the speaker's "lack of leadership." Chaffetz is the only Republican thus far who has been willing to comment on the video. "Policy and public comments are fair game, and there are creative ways to amplify it, but I despise it when Democrats and organizations like MoveOn.org use these types of tactics," Chaffetz said. "I would like our party to be more consistent in calling out inappropriate behavior like this. We've got to show some leadership and get serious about the issues at hand. It just bothers me that we have someone in the bowels of the organization on payroll working on stuff like this." MoveOn.org took flak for its "General Betray Us" newspaper ad that implied that Iraq commander Gen. David Petraeus was disloyal to the country. Chaffetz added that such stunts are not only inappropriate, but in the case of Pelosi and the CIA waterboarding flap, also unnecessary: "All we have to do is show the videos [of Pelosi's explanations] side by side, and that should be enough for people to recognize that she's been terribly inconsistent. I think some people have shown some real leadership here - I think John Boehner has been doing a good job with it. We need others in this party to recognize that this is not a winning tactic." Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090524/899a0c63/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sun May 24 09:02:41 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 24 May 2009 08:02:41 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] At least one Republican doesn't think it's OK to compare Nancy Pelosi to Pussy Galore In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <400985d70905240602t75fdc876h77f930b70bd026a0@mail.gmail.com> Ed, All this righteous indignation by the left over Nancy is a bit hard to stomach. They had no problem vilifying Ms. California for honestly answering a question with a view that is exactly the same as their Dear Leader's public position on the same issue. Note, the Politico (an opinion website) articles are being passed off by the MSM as "news" and unfortunately, most citizens are too stupid to know the difference between news and opinion. Nancy lied and got busted, boo hoo hoo. Open an investigation and it should take all of about five minutes to prove the lie. But no, the house voted 100% along party lines not to investigate the matter. I'm thinking about sending a letter to my adopted Congressman, Gene Taylor, and address him as a Blue Unicorn instead of a Blue Dog since Democrats who don't march lockstep with Nancy seem to be fictional characters. Forget 'Pussy Galore'. I like this guy's video better - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sr56_qxmejQ Brad On 5/24/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > Actually I was searching for pre Obama web information about Trinity United > Church of Christ and W. E. B. Dubose. > > It apparently has been cleansed from the Web except where it is referred to > on third party web sites that I guess they have not figured out how to > remove yet. Or the related sites do not specifically refer to Obama who was > a member of that church for 20 years. It becomes obvious that the reason he > claims not to have heard that rhetoric is because his head was nodding in > agreement. > > I got into looking for those preachings because our local paper is overtly > and aggressively socialistic and anti American in editorials, and this > Sunday especially so. > > Then a reference to this jumped out on one Web site: > > http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22894.html > > At least one Republican doesn't think it's OK to compare Nancy Pelosi to > Pussy Galore. > > After viewing an RNC video that juxtaposed the speaker with the James Bond > villainess, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) told POLITICO Saturday: > > "I thought it was reprehensible, irresponsible and unpersuasive. If we're > going to regain the credibility of the American people, we're going to have > to stop with silly antics like that. It may get a snide chuckle inside the > Beltway, but it offends most people. We have to get away from the politics > of personal destruction," he said of the video. > > The RNC declined repeatedly to explain the Pelosi/Galore connection, saying > only that the video was about the speaker's "lack of leadership." Chaffetz > is the only Republican thus far who has been willing to comment on the > video. > > "Policy and public comments are fair game, and there are creative ways to > amplify it, but I despise it when Democrats and organizations like > MoveOn.org use these types of tactics," Chaffetz said. "I would like our > party to be more consistent in calling out inappropriate behavior like this. > We've got to show some leadership and get serious about the issues at hand. > It just bothers me that we have someone in the bowels of the organization on > payroll working on stuff like this." > > > MoveOn.org took flak for its "General Betray Us" newspaper ad that implied > that Iraq commander Gen. David Petraeus was disloyal to the country. > Chaffetz added that such stunts are not only inappropriate, but in the case > of Pelosi and the CIA waterboarding flap, also unnecessary: > > "All we have to do is show the videos [of Pelosi's explanations] side by > side, and that should be enough for people to recognize that she's been > terribly inconsistent. I think some people have shown some real leadership > here - I think John Boehner has been doing a good job with it. We need > others in this party to recognize that this is not a winning tactic." > > > > Ed K > > > > From ekroposki at charter.net Sun May 24 10:55:56 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sun, 24 May 2009 10:55:56 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Hey Brad, you been copying this guy in on your email? Message-ID: <908E78115DDE435A80A0CE0CC77707F3@YOURB88038198E> The Audacity of Unawareness April 15th, 2009 5:03 PM Barack Obama, through his spokesman, claimed today that he was unaware of the tax day tea parties. Granted, the Mainstream Media has done a good job in suppressing any sort of coverage ahead of time (and the little coverage they did provide was derisive at best). But how out of touch is the Community Organizer in Chief, really? This much. - He was unaware that he was attending a church (for 20 years) with a racist pastor who hates America. - He was unaware that he was family friends with, and started his political career in the living room of, a domestic terrorist. - He was unaware that he had invested in two speculative companies backed by some of his top donors right after taking office in 2005. - He was unaware that his own aunt was living in the US illegally. - He was unaware that his own brother lives on pennies a day in a hut in Kenya. - He was unaware of the AIG bonuses that he and his administration approved and signed into a bill. - He was unaware that the man he nominated to be his Secretary of Commerce was under investigation in a bribery scandal. - He was unaware that the man he nominated to be his Secretary of Health and Human Services was a tax cheat. - He was unaware that the man he nominated to be his Secretary of the Treasury was a tax cheat. - He was unaware that the man he nominated to be the U.S. Trade Representative was a tax cheat. - He was unaware that the woman he nominated to be his Chief Performance Officer was a tax cheat. - He was unaware that the man he nominated to be #2 at the Environmental Protection Agency was under investigation for mismanaging $25 million in EPA grants. For the love of God, there are people in comas that are more aware of world affairs than this guy. Posted by TexasRainmaker http://www.texasrainmaker.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090524/078f1d80/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Sun May 24 17:48:48 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sun, 24 May 2009 17:48:48 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] 72 Virg....... (political humor) Message-ID: <061E616C7A864DCDA504A36A165C8FD9@YOURB88038198E> Osama at the Pearly Gates After getting nailed by a Daisy Cutter, Osama made his way to the pearly gates. There, he is greeted by George Washington. "How dare you attack the nation I helped conceive!" yells Mr. Washington, slapping Osama in the face. Patrick Henry comes up from behind. "You wanted to end the Americans' liberty, so they gave you death!" Henry punches Osama on the nose. James Madison comes up next, and says "This is why I allowed the Federal government to provide for the common defense!" He drops a large weight on Osama's knee. Osama is subject to similar beatings from John Randolph of Roanoke, James Monroe, and 65 other people who have the same love for liberty and America. As he writhes on the ground, Thomas Jefferson picks him up to hurl him to the ground. Osama yells, "This is not what I was promised!" An angel replies: "I told you there would be 72 Virginians waiting for you. What did you think I said?" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090524/f3bf4c8e/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Mon May 25 07:49:27 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 07:49:27 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] It was said, "... Message-ID: <2897A7C8AC644FF1BCB159A2C20112FD@YOURB88038198E> Brad said, "I'm thinking about sending a letter to my adopted Congressman, Gene Taylor, and address him as a Blue Unicorn instead of a Blue Dog since Democrats who don't march lockstep with Nancy seem to be fictional characters." Truth is not a concern of many politicians. A few yes, but then those are not politicians in fact but rather conscientious citizens like you. Obviously, your local representative is a sheepel and not a black sheep. Why not check out what it would take to get on the ballot as an independent? I would not expect you to win as an independent but you do not know unless you try. At the very least you would bring integrity of politicians into play. Recently there were a couple of independents in Congress. Run as Brad the Black Sheep... Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090525/b582c5a7/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Mon May 25 08:39:17 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 07:39:17 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Obama Man Can! Message-ID: <400985d70905250539k2b36f7a1g18c3f2b5d22c8810@mail.gmail.com> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhhkF3dqXR0 From flybrad at gmail.com Mon May 25 08:57:57 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 07:57:57 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] It was said, "... In-Reply-To: <2897A7C8AC644FF1BCB159A2C20112FD@YOURB88038198E> References: <2897A7C8AC644FF1BCB159A2C20112FD@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: <400985d70905250557u5e80325fsc66dc6c220e1e4cf@mail.gmail.com> Ed, Marsha Blackburn is the Congress critter for my district (I live about 100 yards in her district) and I'm pretty happy with her. Here's a clip of her taking on a "gas bag" - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXGkI-mw7Pw There's not a ghosts's chance in hell of moving into Steve Cohen's district (across the street). He'll be lucky to keep his seat even though he's reliably liberal. The local black leaders have openly said, "we can't have a Jew representing a black district". He'll be targeted sooner or later. He has Harold Ford, Jr.'s old seat that Jr gave up to run for the Senate. I'd like to see Jr get back into politics. His family is crooked as hell be he seems to be a "squared away guy". Gene Taylor (South Mississippi) is a nice enough guy, he's worked tirelessly for his district and to help the recovery from Katrina. He even voted against the spending bill, but nobody wants to go up against Queen Nancy. I think she'll implode on her own soon enough. She makes an ass of herself everytime she steps in front of a microphone. Brad On 5/25/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > Brad said, "I'm thinking about sending a letter to my adopted Congressman, > Gene Taylor, and address him as a Blue Unicorn instead of a Blue Dog since > Democrats who don't march lockstep with Nancy seem to be fictional > characters." > > Truth is not a concern of many politicians. A few yes, but then those are > not politicians in fact but rather > conscientious citizens like you. > > Obviously, your local representative is a sheepel and not a black sheep. > > Why not check out what it would take to get on the ballot as an independent? > I would not expect you to win as an independent but you do not know unless > you try. At the very least you would bring integrity of politicians into > play. > > Recently there were a couple of independents in Congress. > > Run as Brad the Black Sheep... > > Ed K > > > > > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Tue May 26 09:15:13 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 08:15:13 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Socialism?? Or just slavery?? Message-ID: <6634e19e0905260615k47399b2am498531079662b275@mail.gmail.com> Good Morning All, Hmmm ...... socialism, is it really a very close relative to another S word? Can you say slavery ....... I knew you could. Here's a few words from someone else that is thinking along the same lines. Rik http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/political-intolerance/ Political Intolerance May 21st, 2009 | By Chris Hitzroth| Category: Featured , Morning Whiskey [image: leadimage] I?ve heard a lot lately about how we need to be tolerant of one another?s political views. I hear this, I suspect, because I?m not tolerant of most people?s politics. I?m told we can have a good argument about our positions on the issues, but when we?re done, we must get over our silly infatuations so we can all be friends again. Because, after all, it?s just an exchange of opinions, right? How about slavery? Suppose one of your friends began to argue in earnest that slavery was not only beneficial in history because the nations of the west were built on free labor from whipped African backs, but that the nations of the world need to return to a slave economy. If it?s the only political position they will entertain, would you continue to be their friend? But suppose to justify the slavery this person said things like, ?these people simply cannot take care of themselves,? ?they?re far too simple and stupid to live free,? and ?they need to be protected from the world and their own bad behavior.? Could you see how they might have a point? Suppose this person said the slaves would be allowed to choose their masters and the work they did to serve those masters. It might be a bit arduous and complicated for the slaves to change their positions, or it may be made simpler with bribes and favors. But either way the slaves may not work if they don?t have a master?s even hand to guide them. And if they work for themselves, their most recent master may hunt them down and force them to work for him or even kill them if they resist. Would that convince you to believe in the righteousness of this person?s plan? Suppose that the slaves this person wants to create were allowed by their master to keep as much as half of what they earned after all accounts with the master were settled?perhaps they could keep as much as three quarters if they weren?t able to earn much?Instead of just the shacks and rags and vegetable patches that were the bulk of the possessions of slaves in the US of old. And suppose also the slaves were allowed to trade what they were allowed to keep with other slaves in ways approved of by the masters. Would you accept their position as reasonable then? Suppose this person insisted everybody?both you and he included?should be enslaved this way. And suppose instead of ?slaves? this person says these people should be called ?citizens,? that the nations of the world may be their masters, and that most of the rest of the people in the world have already submitted to this position. Would that make the enslavement they propose tolerable? Regards, Chris Hitzroth -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090526/a5dc4a88/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Tue May 26 10:23:48 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 09:23:48 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Few politicians "Get It" here's one that does Message-ID: <6634e19e0905260723y15524c4u595801a8f4cb2e9c@mail.gmail.com> Good Morning ...... again, Just thought you all might like to here from a politician that actually has a clue .... for a change. If I could vote for Rand Paul, (son of Ron Paul) I would do it in a friggin heartbeat! Hopefully, the people of Tennessee (I think) will feel the same. Rik http://www.dailypaul.com/node/94020 ____________________ Dr. Rand Paul: Balance the Budget! Posted May 23rd, 2009 by Michael Nystrom by Dr. Rand Paul | May 22, 2009 *The state is the great fiction by which everyone seeks to live at the expense of everyone else.* -- Fr?d?ric Bastiat The question is, "How long can that great fiction continue?" For too long Washington has told us that we can live at the expense of future generations -- that we merely "owe it to ourselves." But if the current crisis has taught us anything it is that our decisions have long-term implications and we cannot continue to ignore economic reality. Yes, we owe it to ourselves. But we also owe it to our children. We owe it to them to begin restoring some fiscal sense to Washington so that they are not burdened with our massive debt. Balancing the budget is no longer an academic question but an economic imperative. We are drowning in a sea of debt and the repercussions will come sooner rather than later. I do not believe the debt will simply burden future generations. I believe we will begin to pay for it in the next few years through significant inflation. If we continue along our current course we may see 1979-style inflation, 15-20% or more. Imagine the turmoil when a fourth of one's savings is lost in a year or a fourth of one's income is lost. Imagine what happens to citizens on fixed incomes. For every dollar that the government spends, it must tax a dollar from the real economy. This means that we can either have government spending or economic growth; there's no way to skirt around this economic fact. And just as it is irresponsible for an individual to spend more than he takes in, so too is it irresponsible for the federal government. Balancing the budget is so important because it forces Washington and the current administration to contend with fiscal reality. But the federal government does not like to deal with reality. It likes to operate in a fantasyland where money grows on trees and deficits don't matter. But deficits do matter because at some point we have to pay the piper. We pay for government in three ways: direct taxation, borrowing, and printing money. The first is the most visible. When the government taxes it takes money from entrepreneurs, capitalists, and businessmen and gives it to government contractors, politicians, and bureaucrats. The more money in the hands of politicians, the less money in the hands of people who actually contribute to society. It's that simple. The second way the government finances itself is through borrowing. While many Americans buy government bonds, much of our debt is held by foreign governments. This creates a dangerous situation where our government makes policy based on what's in the best interest of foreign governments and not our own. While free trade is essential to global and American prosperity, government manipulation of currencies is not. But the final, most pernicious way government tries to evade economic reality is through the printing press. Our Federal Reserve System, the unaccountable, semi-private institution that controls our nation's money supply essentially has the power to create money and credit out of thin air. Basic economic principle states that the greater the quantity of any good (including money itself) the less valuable that good is. The more money the Fed creates, the less each dollar in your pocket can buy. So while you aren't taxed directly, your money can buy less and therefore your real income goes down. This is one of the major ways Washington has managed to pay for its welfare and warfare -- through the printing press. Because people don't directly see the consequences of printing money, it is especially popular for the politician. Thus it is all the more important for Americans to know about the Fed, which is why I fully support legislation auditing this institution and making it accountable to the American people. The Republicans have lost a lot of their credibility because they have campaigned on balanced budgets, but once they get to Washington they spend like Democrats. This is why we have been losing elections. While I was campaigning around the country for my father the real story was not who won the Republican primaries, but how small they were. People are fed up with politicians who behave irresponsibly and renege on their campaign promises. Instead of pledging to balance the budget in ten or fifteen years, Republicans need to cut spending now. The longer we wait and the more interest accrues on the national debt, the harder it will be to make the cuts down the line. Throughout the following months, I hope to talk to the American people about the importance of fiscal responsibility. President Obama has told the country it needs to cut back in order to get out of this recession. I say that Washington needs to cut back. Washington needs to get its own house in order before telling us how to run ours. Thirty-two states require that their legislatures and governors pass balanced budgets. When they try to pass the buck on to the next generation, they get massive problems like they are facing in California. Congress, too, has at various times passed a Balanced Budget Amendment. The Senate passed one in 1982 and the House in 1995. Thirty-two state legislatures passed a Balanced Budget amendment to the Constitution, two states short of what would be required to call a Constitutional Convention. Never quite enough resolve to force government to stop the deficits. Republicans have, on occasion, been good at cutting taxes, but have never even attempted to cut spending. We must cut across the board. And not just the "easy" cuts. Republicans like to blame the "welfare queen" for the deficit. Democrats like to blame it all on military spending. The truth is you can never balance the budget unless every facet of the budget is reassessed and pruned. Whenever these sorts of arguments are brought up our politicians try to scare us into thinking the world will end if we cut spending. Here's a little thought experiment: if we simply used the 2002 budget for 2009 we would not be running a deficit. We would still be spending $2.2 trillion dollars and taking in roughly the same. Certainly, civilization would not crumble with a federal government of such magnitude! I hope to make this issue a focal point of my campaign as it speaks to the heart of what I believe America can be. A true politician will lead by example -- he or she will make the tough choices. I say let's focus the debate on a balanced budget. Dr. Rand Paul -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090526/0fcaec9a/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Tue May 26 18:46:03 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 18:46:03 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Utube does a service Message-ID: <15DB8ED0589B4B9789CA7753747C6C96@YOURB88038198E> http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=NeuBB_mOFIA Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090526/ec26c8b4/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Tue May 26 17:38:26 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 17:38:26 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Navy Medicine Message-ID: <6A7E3F02460B4091BACBEFEC16BF1988@YOURB88038198E> See attachment: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090526/dae82b6b/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/bmp Size: 921654 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090526/dae82b6b/attachment-0001.bin From ekroposki at charter.net Wed May 27 16:34:40 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 16:34:40 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Circulating the internet... Maybe Bill should invite these guys? Message-ID: <0F3193D37ADF4A6EBBD857ECFA0BF1F4@YOURB88038198E> Donald P. Basham, CPP/CTI/PE USN/USDOJ - Retired PRYCA - Fleet Captain See you bubbleheads in New London From: Powell, Glenn G. (OIG) [mailto:Glenn.G.Powell at usdoj.gov] Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 4:36 PM To: Don Basham; DUERICKSON at COMCAST.NET; ejpowell at email.msmary.edu; LAXGECKO at AOL.COM Subject: FW: USN Letter From: Beaman, Wayne D. (OIG) Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 7:08 AM Subject: USN Letter -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090527/51517f23/attachment.html From mweisner at ebsmed.com Wed May 27 17:08:51 2009 From: mweisner at ebsmed.com (Michael D. Weisner) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 17:08:51 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Circulating the internet... Maybe Bill shouldinvite these guys? References: <0F3193D37ADF4A6EBBD857ECFA0BF1F4@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: Picture never made it. Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: Ed Kroposki To: Swift Water Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 4:34 PM Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Circulating the internet... Maybe Bill shouldinvite these guys? Donald P. Basham, CPP/CTI/PE USN/USDOJ - Retired PRYCA - Fleet Captain See you bubbleheads in New London From: Powell, Glenn G. (OIG) [mailto:Glenn.G.Powell at usdoj.gov] Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 4:36 PM To: Don Basham; DUERICKSON at COMCAST.NET; ejpowell at email.msmary.edu; LAXGECKO at AOL.COM Subject: FW: USN Letter From: Beaman, Wayne D. (OIG) Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 7:08 AM Subject: USN Letter ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ SwiftwaterGazette mailing list SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090527/256e66c7/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Wed May 27 17:11:29 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 17:11:29 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Dang it, the original text was a picture Message-ID: See if it gets thru.... Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090527/06fb78b9/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Navy doc.GIF Type: image/gif Size: 69345 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090527/06fb78b9/attachment-0001.gif From ekroposki at charter.net Wed May 27 17:15:30 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 17:15:30 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] When I remember to Message-ID: Mike, When I noticed it was a picture and then had to shrink it to fit... Maybe Fed Ex pilots should take this as a review course? Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090527/078069cd/attachment.html From mweisner at ebsmed.com Wed May 27 17:14:32 2009 From: mweisner at ebsmed.com (Michael D. Weisner) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 17:14:32 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Dang it, the original text was a picture References: Message-ID: <7C8E5980D52B48F8A6A42B74CD019BFE@ebsoffice> Loud and clear! ----- Original Message ----- From: Ed Kroposki To: Swift Water Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 5:11 PM Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Dang it, the original text was a picture See if it gets thru.... Ed K ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ SwiftwaterGazette mailing list SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090527/8eda04af/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Thu May 28 12:19:15 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 12:19:15 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Main Stream Media and Global Warming Message-ID: <7A81FC56960F42199475CDFA6C29B533@YOURB88038198E> Al Gore gets constant attention in the MSM about Gobal Warming. Did Gobal Warming cause this? Was this in the MSM? McMurdo buried Storms dump record amounts of snow at research station in April By Peter Rejcek, Antarctic Sun Editor Posted May 8, 2009 A trio of storms in April blanketed McMurdo Station in Antarctica, breaking a 41-year record for snowfall and coming close to challenging a world record for wind speed. By May 1, some snow plowing was still ongoing nearly three weeks after the series of snow storms began. More than 6 feet of snow fell between April 11 and April 25. "We're pretty much dug out. The roads are cleared," said Gary Fromm, McMurdo Station winter site manager with Raytheon Polar Services , the prime contractor to the National Science Foundation (NSF) . "They have some piles that they're dispersing down in the harbor area and places like that." More Information You can find more photos from the storm and other images of life at McMurdo Station on Ken Klassy's Flickr page . Be sure to check out his video of the storm .The first storm began the evening of April 11 and dumped 17.5 inches over four days, including 14 inches in just 24 hours, a new record. The previous record had been 10 inches over a 24-hour period in April 1968, according to Ed Saul, a weather observer working at McMurdo for the winter. Temperatures dropped to about minus 15 degrees Celsius, with winds gusting at 78 knots and sustained winds of up to 55 knots. The heavy snowfall and wind caused long periods of almost zero visibility and immense snowdrifts throughout the station. The condition one storm largely shut down operations for 12 hours while it raged, Fromm said. The U.S. Antarctic Program uses three classifications for storms. The most severe, condition one, involves at least one of the following: wind speeds of greater than 55 knots, visibility of less than 100 feet, or a wind chill of less than or equal to minus 100 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 70 degrees Celsius). Less than a week later, another powerful storm with similar winds dropped nearly 35 inches on McMurdo in just three days, with 20 inches coming in a 24-hour period, breaking the record again and doubling the old 41-year record high. A third storm followed close behind, adding more than 26 inches in four days, though with lesser winds. "Storms such as [these] are common during the change of seasons but can happen any time of the year," Saul said. "Severe weather in April and August seems to come to mind. Weather can also be unsettled in September, October and February." Pretty much the whole station, with a winter population of 153 people, pitched in to restore operations, Fromm said. "Fleet Ops did the bulk of the work with the heavy equipment, but people were out shoveling and running snow blowers and doing a lot of manual work." Work also included repairing building roofs damaged in the storm, frozen pipes and restoring power. "We're doing good," Fromm said. "We're back to order." A team also drove out to Black Island, site of communications equipment across McMurdo Sound, to replace some solar panels that were lost to the wind and make other repairs. Wind gusts reached greater-than-hurricane strength at Black Island, with speeds clocked at 193 knots (211 mph) and sustained winds at 99 knots (114 mph). The all-time surface wind-speed record is 231 mph, recorded during an April windstorm in 1934 at the Mount Washington Observatory. "This was a pretty significant storm," said Fromm, who grew up in cold and snowy Minnesota. http://antarcticsun.usap.gov/features/contenthandler.cfm?id=1768 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090528/43117e4d/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 352 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090528/43117e4d/attachment.gif -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 592 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090528/43117e4d/attachment-0001.gif -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 594 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090528/43117e4d/attachment-0002.gif From flybrad at gmail.com Thu May 28 15:04:11 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 14:04:11 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Main Stream Media and Global Warming In-Reply-To: <7A81FC56960F42199475CDFA6C29B533@YOURB88038198E> References: <7A81FC56960F42199475CDFA6C29B533@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: <400985d70905281204j3ebe72d1n5a717a3bed69cdee@mail.gmail.com> Ed, The whole 'global warming' thing is 'junk science'. Hell, it may be happening, but let's debate both sides of the discussion. Nope! We're right and you're wrong! If Al Gore really believes this shit, er, science, he certainly doesn't live it based on his personal house and houseboat (and G-4 flying habits like Nancy). I've done my part for global warming this week, I deviated from my "going Galt" methodology and bought a new car on Tuesday, a turbo-diesel Volkswagen Jetta Sportswagen. So far I'm getting 38 MPG in mixed city/highway driving. I'd be really excited about that except for the fact that in 1979 I was getting 50 MPG in my diesel VW Rabbit but it wasn't "eco-friendly". As someone who owns a lot of really, really big diesel engines, I want them to run on as little fuel as possible. If you can figure out how to power a track-hoe off the grid that doesn't depend on coal to fuel the battery, let me know. I can save enough fuel on one single flight of my "daily ride" by my flying habits to compensate for everything I'll burn personally for the rest of my life. Airlines retire their old inefficient equipment as fast as it is economically feasible because "it adds to the bottom line". Oh, am I bad? Did I use the profit word? This country is now being run by political thugs! Brad On 5/28/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > Al Gore gets constant attention in the MSM about Gobal Warming. Did Gobal > Warming cause this? Was this in the MSM? > > McMurdo buried > Storms dump record amounts of snow at research station in April > By Peter Rejcek, Antarctic Sun Editor > Posted May 8, 2009 > A trio of storms in April blanketed McMurdo Station in Antarctica, breaking > a 41-year record for snowfall and coming close to challenging a world record > for wind speed. > > By May 1, some snow plowing was still ongoing nearly three weeks after the > series of snow storms began. More than 6 feet of snow fell between April 11 > and April 25. > > "We're pretty much dug out. The roads are cleared," said Gary Fromm, McMurdo > Station winter site manager with Raytheon Polar Services , the prime > contractor to the National Science Foundation (NSF) . "They have some piles > that they're dispersing down in the harbor area and places like that." > > More Information > You can find more photos from the storm and other images of life at McMurdo > Station on Ken Klassy's Flickr page . Be sure to check out his video of the > storm .The first storm began the evening of April 11 and dumped 17.5 inches > over four days, including 14 inches in just 24 hours, a new record. The > previous record had been 10 inches over a 24-hour period in April 1968, > according to Ed Saul, a weather observer working at McMurdo for the winter. > > Temperatures dropped to about minus 15 degrees Celsius, with winds gusting > at 78 knots and sustained winds of up to 55 knots. The heavy snowfall and > wind caused long periods of almost zero visibility and immense snowdrifts > throughout the station. > > The condition one storm largely shut down operations for 12 hours while it > raged, Fromm said. The U.S. Antarctic Program uses three classifications > for storms. The most severe, condition one, involves at least one of the > following: wind speeds of greater than 55 knots, visibility of less than 100 > feet, or a wind chill of less than or equal to minus 100 degrees Fahrenheit > (minus 70 degrees Celsius). > > Less than a week later, another powerful storm with similar winds dropped > nearly 35 inches on McMurdo in just three days, with 20 inches coming in a > 24-hour period, breaking the record again and doubling the old 41-year > record high. > > A third storm followed close behind, adding more than 26 inches in four > days, though with lesser winds. > > "Storms such as [these] are common during the change of seasons but can > happen any time of the year," Saul said. "Severe weather in April and August > seems to come to mind. Weather can also be unsettled in September, October > and February." > > Pretty much the whole station, with a winter population of 153 people, > pitched in to restore operations, Fromm said. "Fleet Ops did the bulk of the > work with the heavy equipment, but people were out shoveling and running > snow blowers and doing a lot of manual work." > > Work also included repairing building roofs damaged in the storm, frozen > pipes and restoring power. "We're doing good," Fromm said. "We're back to > order." > > A team also drove out to Black Island, site of communications equipment > across McMurdo Sound, to replace some solar panels that were lost to the > wind and make other repairs. > > Wind gusts reached greater-than-hurricane strength at Black Island, with > speeds clocked at 193 knots (211 mph) and sustained winds at 99 knots (114 > mph). The all-time surface wind-speed record is 231 mph, recorded during an > April windstorm in 1934 at the Mount Washington Observatory. > > "This was a pretty significant storm," said Fromm, who grew up in cold and > snowy Minnesota. > > > http://antarcticsun.usap.gov/features/contenthandler.cfm?id=1768 From mweisner at ebsmed.com Tue May 26 18:23:35 2009 From: mweisner at ebsmed.com (Michael D. Weisner) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 18:23:35 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] UAW trust to get up to 20 percent of GM shares Message-ID: <81ECF1AA226841BC8C54BC4E51EA3C29@ebsoffice> As Sidney Freeman said so eloquently, "Ladies and gentlemen, take my advice..." GM is definitely on the thin ice. IF THIS WORKS, at least GM will be out of the UAW healthcare business. Ford is watching very carefully. Mike UAW trust to get up to 20 percent of GM shares By TOM KRISHER AP Auto Writer DETROIT (AP) -- A cost-cutting deal between the United Auto Workers and General Motors Corp. will give a union-run health care trust fund up to 20 percent of the company's shares and a seat on the board, but it also could be the catalyst that allows the company to restructure outside of bankruptcy court... http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_GM_UAW?SITE=OHRAV&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090526/9a47f33e/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Fri May 29 18:42:31 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 17:42:31 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Healthy Lifestyle Message-ID: <400985d70905291542x76d23eb0k2dfe61dbd29b011@mail.gmail.com> This just in from a "doctor" on my Bo list (he's a dentist) - ------------- Proven medical fact that you will live longer if you go to Oshkosh below are more medical facts on Health Dr. Kevin Q: Doctor, I've heard that cardiovascular exercise can prolong life. Is this true? A: Your heart is only good for so many beats, and that's it... don't waste them on exercise. Everything wears out eventually. Speeding up your heart will not make you live longer; that's like saying you can extend the life of your car by driving it faster. Want to live longer? Take a nap. Q: Should I cut down on meat and eat more fruits and vegetables? A: You must grasp logistical efficiencies. What does a cow eat? Hay and corn. And what are these? Vegetables. So a steak is nothing more than an efficient mechanism of delivering vegetables to your system. Need grain? Eat chicken. Beef is also a good source of field grass (green leafy vegetable). And a pork chop can give you 100% of your recommended daily allowance of vegetable products. Q: Should I reduce my alcohol intake? A: No, not at all. Wine is made from fruit. Brandy is distilled wine, that means they take the water out of the fruity bit so you get even more of the goodness that way. Beer is also made out of grain. Bottoms up! Q: How can I calculate my body/fat ratio? A: Well, if you have a body and you have fat, your ratio is one to one. If you have two bodies, your ratio is two to one, etc. Q: What are some of the advantages of participating in a regular exercise program? A: Can't think of a single one, sorry. My philosophy is: No Pain...Good! Q: Aren't fried foods bad for you? A: YOU'RE NOT LISTENING!!! ..... Foods are fried these days in vegetable oil. In fact, they're permea ted in it. How could getting more vegetables be bad for you? Q: Will sit-ups help prevent me from getting a little soft around the middle? A: Definitely not! When you exercise a muscle, it gets bigger. You should only be doing sit-ups if you want a bigger stomach. Q: Is chocolate bad for me? A: Are you crazy? HELLO Cocoa beans! Another vegetable!!! It's the best feel-good food around! Q: Is swimming good for your figure? A: If swimming is good for your figure, explain whales to me. Q: Is getting in-shape important for my lifestyle? A: Hey! 'Round' is a shape! Well, I hope this has cleared up any misconceptions you may have had about food and diets. And remember: 'Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways - Chardonnay in one hand - chocolate in the other - body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming 'WOO HOO, What a Ride!' AND..... For those of you who watch what you eat, here's the final word on nutrition and health. It's a relief to know the truth after all those conflicting nutritional studies. 1. The Japanese eat very little fat and suffer fewer heart attacks than Americans. 2. The Mexicans eat a lot of fat and suffer fewer heart attacks than Americans. 3. The Chinese drink very little red wine and suffer fewer heart attacks than Americans. 4. The Italians drink a lot of red wine and suffer fewer heart attacks than Americans. 5. The Germans drink a lot of beers and eat lots of sausages and fats and suffer fewer heart attacks than Americans. CONCLUSION Eat and drink what you like. Speaking English is apparently what kills you. From flybrad at gmail.com Fri May 29 20:56:11 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 19:56:11 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] New Car Report Message-ID: <400985d70905291756h5e6f2dfaga9f060c7c474f6cf@mail.gmail.com> Today is day four with the new VW Turbo-diesel Sportwagen and I've already put 300 miles on her, (two trips to the airport - more on that later). So far, with a roughly 50/50 mix of city and highway driving, I'm averaging 39+ per gallon. We're driving to Southern Illinois over the weekend and I expect to see near 50 mpg on the interstate. This is my 'gazillionith' Volkswagen and my 6th or so plus diesel car so I pretty much knew what I was getting on the front-end. This is a much nicer car than my old Mercedes diesel. No disappointments yet and it's a REAL car, with REAL sheet metal, and can take a direct hit (had an ex-wife test that theory with my brand-new 95' Jetta). So what's the big deal with hybrids? My 1980 diesel Rabbit outperformed the current Prius and this new Jetta wagon is a much better car than the Rabbit. On other matters, United Airlines denied my friends boarding on a flight to Chicago to catch their flight to China because they didn't have the credit card on their person they bought the tickets with three months prior? WTF? The reality is, the flight was full and they found a way to deny boarding without compensation. Don't fly United! Brad From flybrad at gmail.com Fri May 29 21:59:42 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 20:59:42 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Pravda Message-ID: <400985d70905291859t2297360bhc0513e60d80ede64@mail.gmail.com> No comment - ------------------ American capitalism gone with a whimper 27.04.2009 Source: Pravda.Ru URL: http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107459-american_capitalism-0 It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American decent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people. True, the situation has been well prepared on and off for the past century, especially the past twenty years. The initial testing grounds was conducted upon our Holy Russia and a bloody test it was. But we Russians would not just roll over and give up our freedoms and our souls, no matter how much money Wall Street poured into the fists of the Marxists. Those lessons were taken and used to properly prepare the American populace for the surrender of their freedoms and souls, to the whims of their elites and betters. First, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and substandard education system based on pop culture, rather then the classics. Americans know more about their favorite TV dramas then the drama in DC that directly affects their lives. They care more for their "right" to choke down a McDonalds burger or a BurgerKing burger than for their constitutional rights. Then they turn around and lecture us about our rights and about our "democracy". Pride blind the foolish. Then their faith in God was destroyed, until their churches, all tens of thousands of different "branches and denominations" were for the most part little more then Sunday circuses and their televangelists and top protestant mega preachers were more then happy to sell out their souls and flocks to be on the "winning" side of one pseudo Marxist politician or another. Their flocks may complain, but when explained that they would be on the "winning" side, their flocks were ever so quick to reject Christ in hopes for earthly power. Even our Holy Orthodox churches are scandalously liberalized in America. The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama. His speed in the past three months has been truly impressive. His spending and money printing has been a record setting, not just in America's short history but in the world. If this keeps up for more then another year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will resemble the Wiemar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe. These past two weeks have been the most breath taking of all. First came the announcement of a planned redesign of the American Byzantine tax system, by the very thieves who used it to bankroll their thefts, loses and swindles of hundreds of billions of dollars. These make our Russian oligarchs look little more then ordinary street thugs, in comparison. Yes, the Americans have beat our own thieves in the shear volumes. Should we congratulate them? These men, of course, are not an elected panel but made up of appointees picked from the very financial oligarchs and their henchmen who are now gorging themselves on trillions of American dollars, in one bailout after another. They are also usurping the rights, duties and powers of the American congress (parliament). Again, congress has put up little more then a whimper to their masters. Then came Barack Obama's command that GM's (General Motor) president step down from leadership of his company. That is correct, dear reader, in the land of "pure" free markets, the American president now has the power, the self given power, to fire CEOs and we can assume other employees of private companies, at will. Come hither, go dither, the centurion commands his minions. So it should be no surprise, that the American president has followed this up with a "bold" move of declaring that he and another group of unelected, chosen stooges will now redesign the entire automotive industry and will even be the guarantee of automobile policies. I am sure that if given the chance, they would happily try and redesign it for the whole of the world, too. Prime Minister Putin, less then two months ago, warned Obama and UK's Blair, not to follow the path to Marxism, it only leads to disaster. Apparently, even though we suffered 70 years of this Western sponsored horror show, we know nothing, as foolish, drunken Russians, so let our "wise" Anglo-Saxon fools find out the folly of their own pride. Again, the American public has taken this with barely a whimper...but a "freeman" whimper. So, should it be any surprise to discover that the Democratically controlled Congress of America is working on passing a new regulation that would give the American Treasury department the power to set "fair" maximum salaries, evaluate performance and control how private companies give out pay raises and bonuses? Senator Barney Franks, a social pervert basking in his homosexuality (of course, amongst the modern, enlightened American societal norm, as well as that of the general West, homosexuality is not only not a looked down upon life choice, but is often praised as a virtue) and his Marxist enlightenment, has led this effort. He stresses that this only affects companies that receive government monies, but it is retroactive and taken to a logical extreme, this would include any company or industry that has ever received a tax break or incentive. The Russian owners of American companies and industries should look thoughtfully at this and the option of closing their facilities down and fleeing the land of the Red as fast as possible. In other words, divest while there is still value left. The proud American will go down into his slavery with out a fight, beating his chest and proclaiming to the world, how free he really is. The world will only snicker. Stanislav Mishin The article has been reprinted with the kind permission from the author and originally appears on his blog, Mat Rodina ? 1999-2009. ?PRAVDA.Ru?. When reproducing our materials in whole or in part, hyperlink to PRAVDA.Ru should be made. The opinions and views of the authors do not always coincide with the point of view of PRAVDA.Ru's editors. From sanderico1 at gmail.com Fri May 29 22:31:33 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 21:31:33 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Pravda In-Reply-To: <400985d70905291859t2297360bhc0513e60d80ede64@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905291859t2297360bhc0513e60d80ede64@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905291931m63409c67p2dd98fbd88721e2@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Yeah, no comment. What more is there to say ...... ??? Unfortunately, it seems the shoe fits. Rik On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 8:59 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > No comment - > > ------------------ > > American capitalism gone with a whimper > 27.04.2009 Source: Pravda.Ru URL: > http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107459-american_capitalism-0 > > It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American > decent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the > back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I > meant people. > > True, the situation has been well prepared on and off for the past > century, especially the past twenty years. The initial testing grounds > was conducted upon our Holy Russia and a bloody test it was. But we > Russians would not just roll over and give up our freedoms and our > souls, no matter how much money Wall Street poured into the fists of > the Marxists. > > Those lessons were taken and used to properly prepare the American > populace for the surrender of their freedoms and souls, to the whims > of their elites and betters. > > First, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and > substandard education system based on pop culture, rather then the > classics. Americans know more about their favorite TV dramas then the > drama in DC that directly affects their lives. They care more for > their "right" to choke down a McDonalds burger or a BurgerKing burger > than for their constitutional rights. Then they turn around and > lecture us about our rights and about our "democracy". Pride blind the > foolish. > > Then their faith in God was destroyed, until their churches, all tens > of thousands of different "branches and denominations" were for the > most part little more then Sunday circuses and their televangelists > and top protestant mega preachers were more then happy to sell out > their souls and flocks to be on the "winning" side of one pseudo > Marxist politician or another. Their flocks may complain, but when > explained that they would be on the "winning" side, their flocks were > ever so quick to reject Christ in hopes for earthly power. Even our > Holy Orthodox churches are scandalously liberalized in America. > > The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama. His > speed in the past three months has been truly impressive. His spending > and money printing has been a record setting, not just in America's > short history but in the world. If this keeps up for more then another > year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will > resemble the Wiemar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe. > > These past two weeks have been the most breath taking of all. First > came the announcement of a planned redesign of the American Byzantine > tax system, by the very thieves who used it to bankroll their thefts, > loses and swindles of hundreds of billions of dollars. These make our > Russian oligarchs look little more then ordinary street thugs, in > comparison. Yes, the Americans have beat our own thieves in the shear > volumes. Should we congratulate them? > > These men, of course, are not an elected panel but made up of > appointees picked from the very financial oligarchs and their henchmen > who are now gorging themselves on trillions of American dollars, in > one bailout after another. They are also usurping the rights, duties > and powers of the American congress (parliament). Again, congress has > put up little more then a whimper to their masters. > > Then came Barack Obama's command that GM's (General Motor) president > step down from leadership of his company. That is correct, dear > reader, in the land of "pure" free markets, the American president now > has the power, the self given power, to fire CEOs and we can assume > other employees of private companies, at will. Come hither, go dither, > the centurion commands his minions. > > So it should be no surprise, that the American president has followed > this up with a "bold" move of declaring that he and another group of > unelected, chosen stooges will now redesign the entire automotive > industry and will even be the guarantee of automobile policies. I am > sure that if given the chance, they would happily try and redesign it > for the whole of the world, too. Prime Minister Putin, less then two > months ago, warned Obama and UK's Blair, not to follow the path to > Marxism, it only leads to disaster. Apparently, even though we > suffered 70 years of this Western sponsored horror show, we know > nothing, as foolish, drunken Russians, so let our "wise" Anglo-Saxon > fools find out the folly of their own pride. > > Again, the American public has taken this with barely a whimper...but > a "freeman" whimper. > > So, should it be any surprise to discover that the Democratically > controlled Congress of America is working on passing a new regulation > that would give the American Treasury department the power to set > "fair" maximum salaries, evaluate performance and control how private > companies give out pay raises and bonuses? Senator Barney Franks, a > social pervert basking in his homosexuality (of course, amongst the > modern, enlightened American societal norm, as well as that of the > general West, homosexuality is not only not a looked down upon life > choice, but is often praised as a virtue) and his Marxist > enlightenment, has led this effort. He stresses that this only affects > companies that receive government monies, but it is retroactive and > taken to a logical extreme, this would include any company or industry > that has ever received a tax break or incentive. > > The Russian owners of American companies and industries should look > thoughtfully at this and the option of closing their facilities down > and fleeing the land of the Red as fast as possible. In other words, > divest while there is still value left. > > The proud American will go down into his slavery with out a fight, > beating his chest and proclaiming to the world, how free he really is. > The world will only snicker. > > Stanislav Mishin > > The article has been reprinted with the kind permission from the > author and originally appears on his blog, Mat Rodina > > ? 1999-2009. ?PRAVDA.Ru?. When reproducing our materials in whole > or in part, hyperlink to PRAVDA.Ru should be made. The opinions and > views of the authors do not always coincide with the point of view of > PRAVDA.Ru's editors. > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090529/1bb2bf71/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sat May 30 07:17:29 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sat, 30 May 2009 06:17:29 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Pravda In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0905291931m63409c67p2dd98fbd88721e2@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905291859t2297360bhc0513e60d80ede64@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905291931m63409c67p2dd98fbd88721e2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70905300417g24bdba59wb0d857d6de4275b8@mail.gmail.com> Rik, Then, there is this little story - http://tinyurl.com/kq4jlq This shouldn't surprise anyone who was paying attention. It doesn't surprise me. When someone hangs around racist, radicals for two decades, er, maybe they're a racist radical? Brad On 5/29/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > Yeah, no comment. What more is there to say ...... ??? > > > Unfortunately, it seems the shoe fits. > > Rik > > On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 8:59 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> No comment - >> >> ------------------ >> >> American capitalism gone with a whimper >> 27.04.2009 Source: Pravda.Ru URL: >> http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107459-american_capitalism-0 >> >> It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American >> decent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the >> back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I >> meant people. >> >> True, the situation has been well prepared on and off for the past >> century, especially the past twenty years. The initial testing grounds >> was conducted upon our Holy Russia and a bloody test it was. But we >> Russians would not just roll over and give up our freedoms and our >> souls, no matter how much money Wall Street poured into the fists of >> the Marxists. >> >> Those lessons were taken and used to properly prepare the American >> populace for the surrender of their freedoms and souls, to the whims >> of their elites and betters. >> >> First, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and >> substandard education system based on pop culture, rather then the >> classics. Americans know more about their favorite TV dramas then the >> drama in DC that directly affects their lives. They care more for >> their "right" to choke down a McDonalds burger or a BurgerKing burger >> than for their constitutional rights. Then they turn around and >> lecture us about our rights and about our "democracy". Pride blind the >> foolish. >> >> Then their faith in God was destroyed, until their churches, all tens >> of thousands of different "branches and denominations" were for the >> most part little more then Sunday circuses and their televangelists >> and top protestant mega preachers were more then happy to sell out >> their souls and flocks to be on the "winning" side of one pseudo >> Marxist politician or another. Their flocks may complain, but when >> explained that they would be on the "winning" side, their flocks were >> ever so quick to reject Christ in hopes for earthly power. Even our >> Holy Orthodox churches are scandalously liberalized in America. >> >> The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama. His >> speed in the past three months has been truly impressive. His spending >> and money printing has been a record setting, not just in America's >> short history but in the world. If this keeps up for more then another >> year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will >> resemble the Wiemar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe. >> >> These past two weeks have been the most breath taking of all. First >> came the announcement of a planned redesign of the American Byzantine >> tax system, by the very thieves who used it to bankroll their thefts, >> loses and swindles of hundreds of billions of dollars. These make our >> Russian oligarchs look little more then ordinary street thugs, in >> comparison. Yes, the Americans have beat our own thieves in the shear >> volumes. Should we congratulate them? >> >> These men, of course, are not an elected panel but made up of >> appointees picked from the very financial oligarchs and their henchmen >> who are now gorging themselves on trillions of American dollars, in >> one bailout after another. They are also usurping the rights, duties >> and powers of the American congress (parliament). Again, congress has >> put up little more then a whimper to their masters. >> >> Then came Barack Obama's command that GM's (General Motor) president >> step down from leadership of his company. That is correct, dear >> reader, in the land of "pure" free markets, the American president now >> has the power, the self given power, to fire CEOs and we can assume >> other employees of private companies, at will. Come hither, go dither, >> the centurion commands his minions. >> >> So it should be no surprise, that the American president has followed >> this up with a "bold" move of declaring that he and another group of >> unelected, chosen stooges will now redesign the entire automotive >> industry and will even be the guarantee of automobile policies. I am >> sure that if given the chance, they would happily try and redesign it >> for the whole of the world, too. Prime Minister Putin, less then two >> months ago, warned Obama and UK's Blair, not to follow the path to >> Marxism, it only leads to disaster. Apparently, even though we >> suffered 70 years of this Western sponsored horror show, we know >> nothing, as foolish, drunken Russians, so let our "wise" Anglo-Saxon >> fools find out the folly of their own pride. >> >> Again, the American public has taken this with barely a whimper...but >> a "freeman" whimper. >> >> So, should it be any surprise to discover that the Democratically >> controlled Congress of America is working on passing a new regulation >> that would give the American Treasury department the power to set >> "fair" maximum salaries, evaluate performance and control how private >> companies give out pay raises and bonuses? Senator Barney Franks, a >> social pervert basking in his homosexuality (of course, amongst the >> modern, enlightened American societal norm, as well as that of the >> general West, homosexuality is not only not a looked down upon life >> choice, but is often praised as a virtue) and his Marxist >> enlightenment, has led this effort. He stresses that this only affects >> companies that receive government monies, but it is retroactive and >> taken to a logical extreme, this would include any company or industry >> that has ever received a tax break or incentive. >> >> The Russian owners of American companies and industries should look >> thoughtfully at this and the option of closing their facilities down >> and fleeing the land of the Red as fast as possible. In other words, >> divest while there is still value left. >> >> The proud American will go down into his slavery with out a fight, >> beating his chest and proclaiming to the world, how free he really is. >> The world will only snicker. >> >> Stanislav Mishin >> >> The article has been reprinted with the kind permission from the >> author and originally appears on his blog, Mat Rodina >> >> ? 1999-2009. ?PRAVDA.Ru?. When reproducing our materials in whole >> or in part, hyperlink to PRAVDA.Ru should be made. The opinions and >> views of the authors do not always coincide with the point of view of >> PRAVDA.Ru's editors. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From flybrad at gmail.com Sat May 30 08:55:49 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sat, 30 May 2009 07:55:49 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Inflation Anyone? Message-ID: <400985d70905300555i56ee6003r2e7425d0fdb36ec6@mail.gmail.com> For my own personal sake, I hope the author of this Reuters article is correct (see below). I rode the market down and plan to ride it on the "way up". The market really isn't poised to "go up" based on earnings, it's just that it is denominated in dollars and the massive debt we're taking on will continue to batter the dollar for years to come. Commodity prices, especially oil, will "rise". If I had a crystal ball, I'd be out on my yacht today instead of driving a Volkswagen to my parents, but some things are painfully obvious. Hellooooo, inflation! Brad ------------- Global Markets Weekahead: Return of inflation? Fri May 29, 2009 2:28pm EDT By Natsuko Waki LONDON (Reuters) - Surging oil and commodity prices coupled with a falling dollar are prompting some investors to brace for a return of inflation, which would benefit equities and damage most government bonds. Inflation -- which in the short to medium term benefits equities and risky assets because of rising prices -- had all but disappeared after the global economy fell into recession and commodity prices sank last year. However, signs of a global economic recovery -- which next week's manufacturing and service sector surveys and other data could reinforce -- are leading to a renewed surge in energy and commodities and the outperformance of inflation-protected debt securities over benchmark government bonds. Oil prices are nearly double their four-year low in December. The Reuters-Jefferies CRB index, a global commodities benchmark, has hit a six-month high while the Baltic Dry Index, which tracks rates to ship dry commodities, has risen more than 320 percent since the start of the year. To exacerbate matters, the dollar is on track for the worst monthly performance since December 2008, which could further fuel buying in dollar-based commodities. The return of inflationary forces at a time the world is grappling with the threat of deflation, could prompt investors to invest in assets such as stocks because rising prices erode the value of cash. Already struggling government bonds, apart from inflation-linked debt, could come under further pressure. "We're in a reflation trade. Confidence is off its low from March and asset prices are rising. The beneficial period will continue until we find reasons to be pessimistic again," said David Miller, partner and head of alternative investments at Cheviot Asset Management. "People are getting out of the dollar, into commodities, into equities... Selectively there are reasons to buy commodities in a portfolio." Miller said while the commodity supercycle might not materialize, crisis-related factors such as the absence of farmers credit are constraining supply and pressuring prices. The renewed surge in commodities is boosting related stocks. In Europe, basic resource stocks have risen by 45 percent this year, compared with a four percent rise in the pan-European FTSEurofirst 300 index. And investor flows support the move. According to fund flow tracker EPFR Global, fresh money found its way into commodity and energy sector funds in the week to May 27, with these funds posting inflows of $303 million and $153 million respectively. Next week's U.S. personal consumption expenditure data -- the Federal Reserve's favorite measure of inflation -- is likely to show however that price rises remain moderate in the short term. Purchasing managers surveys in manufacturing and services sectors and U.S. jobs data would be key in offering the state of the global economy. Central banks from Britain, the euro zone, Canada and Australia decide on interest rates. BOND ROUT Government bond markets could become a source of destabilization for investors next week given rising concerns about burgeoning Western government debt. The U.S. Treasury alone needs to borrow a record $2 trillion in 2009 to help fund a $1.8 trillion fiscal deficit. Falling government bond prices are pushing up yields, which also affects long-term borrowing costs for governments as well as businesses and threatens to choke off an economic recovery. U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who visits China next week, is expected to reassure Beijing that the Obama administration will move swiftly to get its debt under control. Buying by Asian nations, including China, is crucial in maintaining the stability in the U.S. Treasury market. A weakening dollar is a double-edged sword for buyers as it makes Treasuries cheaper in the long term but it erodes the value of their current holdings in the short term. The benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury yield rose as high as 3.7538 percent on Thursday, its highest since November. The 10-year U.S. breakeven rates -- the yield gap between inflation-linked bonds over equivalent nominal government bonds -- have risen to 1.8760 percent, compared with around 0.2 percent at the start of the year, reflecting the view that fears of deflation have subsided. "Investors are realizing that by investing in an inflation-linked product... they are able to mitigate the risk that these anticipated inflationary pressures pose," said Jonathan Gibbs, fund manager at Standard Life Investments. "The combination of a complex mix of inflationary and deflationary forces at play in the global economy and the great uncertainty which is likely to prevail, means that diversified risk is more important than ever." (Editing by Andy Bruce) From bill at effros.com Sat May 30 12:45:39 2009 From: bill at effros.com (Bill Effros) Date: Sat, 30 May 2009 11:45:39 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Inflation Anyone? References: <400985d70905300555i56ee6003r2e7425d0fdb36ec6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <841325E268E74BDA924E6AF8BD10B98C@BillLENOVO> You are treating stock markets like commodities markets -- they are very different. The value of Enron stock or GM or Chrysler will never return to what they were. How can you ride these stocks back up? Maybe Wal Mart or Google stock will inflate, but not enough to make up for all the stocks that are today worthless. To invest in the market you must believe some new companies will be built the size of Enron, GM, Chrysler, Ford,...combined! So what would those new companies be? You are throwing good money after bad. If you think there will be inflation, play the currency market, or invest in gold. "Riding the market back up" is more of the same gamblers' mentality--if I keep betting my birthday in the lottery, eventually it's got to come in. No it doesn't. Neither does the stock market. B ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brad Haslett" To: "Letters to the Editor" Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2009 7:55 AM Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Inflation Anyone? > For my own personal sake, I hope the author of this Reuters article is > correct (see below). I rode the market down and plan to ride it on > the "way up". The market really isn't poised to "go up" based on > earnings, it's just that it is denominated in dollars and the massive > debt we're taking on will continue to batter the dollar for years to > come. Commodity prices, especially oil, will "rise". If I had a > crystal ball, I'd be out on my yacht today instead of driving a > Volkswagen to my parents, but some things are painfully obvious. > Hellooooo, inflation! > > Brad > > ------------- > > Global Markets Weekahead: Return of inflation? > Fri May 29, 2009 2:28pm EDT > > By Natsuko Waki > > LONDON (Reuters) - Surging oil and commodity prices coupled with a > falling dollar are prompting some investors to brace for a return of > inflation, which would benefit equities and damage most government > bonds. Inflation -- which in the short to medium term benefits > equities and risky assets because of rising prices -- had all but > disappeared after the global economy fell into recession and commodity > prices sank last year. > > However, signs of a global economic recovery -- which next week's > manufacturing and service sector surveys and other data could > reinforce -- are leading to a renewed surge in energy and commodities > and the outperformance of inflation-protected debt securities over > benchmark government bonds. > > Oil prices are nearly double their four-year low in December. The > Reuters-Jefferies CRB index, a global commodities benchmark, has hit a > six-month high while the Baltic Dry Index, which tracks rates to ship > dry commodities, has risen more than 320 percent since the start of > the year. > > To exacerbate matters, the dollar is on track for the worst monthly > performance since December 2008, which could further fuel buying in > dollar-based commodities. > > The return of inflationary forces at a time the world is grappling > with the threat of deflation, could prompt investors to invest in > assets such as stocks because rising prices erode the value of cash. > Already struggling government bonds, apart from inflation-linked debt, > could come under further pressure. > > "We're in a reflation trade. Confidence is off its low from March and > asset prices are rising. The beneficial period will continue until we > find reasons to be pessimistic again," said David Miller, partner and > head of alternative investments at Cheviot Asset Management. > > "People are getting out of the dollar, into commodities, into > equities... Selectively there are reasons to buy commodities in a > portfolio." > > Miller said while the commodity supercycle might not materialize, > crisis-related factors such as the absence of farmers credit are > constraining supply and pressuring prices. > > The renewed surge in commodities is boosting related stocks. In > Europe, basic resource stocks have risen by 45 percent this year, > compared with a four percent rise in the pan-European FTSEurofirst 300 > index. > > And investor flows support the move. According to fund flow tracker > EPFR Global, fresh money found its way into commodity and energy > sector funds in the week to May 27, with these funds posting inflows > of $303 million and $153 million respectively. > > Next week's U.S. personal consumption expenditure data -- the Federal > Reserve's favorite measure of inflation -- is likely to show however > that price rises remain moderate in the short term. > > Purchasing managers surveys in manufacturing and services sectors and > U.S. jobs data would be key in offering the state of the global > economy. Central banks from Britain, the euro zone, Canada and > Australia decide on interest rates. > > BOND ROUT > > Government bond markets could become a source of destabilization for > investors next week given rising concerns about burgeoning Western > government debt. The U.S. Treasury alone needs to borrow a record $2 > trillion in 2009 to help fund a $1.8 trillion fiscal deficit. > > Falling government bond prices are pushing up yields, which also > affects long-term borrowing costs for governments as well as > businesses and threatens to choke off an economic recovery. > > U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who visits China next week, > is expected to reassure Beijing that the Obama administration will > move swiftly to get its debt under control. > > Buying by Asian nations, including China, is crucial in maintaining > the stability in the U.S. Treasury market. A weakening dollar is a > double-edged sword for buyers as it makes Treasuries cheaper in the > long term but it erodes the value of their current holdings in the > short term. > > The benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury yield rose as high as 3.7538 > percent on Thursday, its highest since November. > > The 10-year U.S. breakeven rates -- the yield gap between > inflation-linked bonds over equivalent nominal government bonds > > -- have risen to 1.8760 percent, compared with around 0.2 percent at > the start of the year, reflecting the view that fears of deflation > have subsided. > > "Investors are realizing that by investing in an inflation-linked > product... they are able to mitigate the risk that these anticipated > inflationary pressures pose," said Jonathan Gibbs, fund manager at > Standard Life Investments. > > "The combination of a complex mix of inflationary and deflationary > forces at play in the global economy and the great uncertainty which > is likely to prevail, means that diversified risk is more important > than ever." > > (Editing by Andy Bruce) > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun May 31 06:35:16 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 05:35:16 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Pravda In-Reply-To: <400985d70905300417g24bdba59wb0d857d6de4275b8@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905291859t2297360bhc0513e60d80ede64@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905291931m63409c67p2dd98fbd88721e2@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905300417g24bdba59wb0d857d6de4275b8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905310335g494adc89h6bb2147794222451@mail.gmail.com> Brad, A couple of things are very wrong here. 1. Those people should have been arrested and jailed, right on the spot. This is not and should not be, a civil thing. 2. What the hell is wrong with voters who are intimidated by assholes like these. DUH ..... it's a secret ballot ..... What really should have happened here is, folks go in to vote and then wait 'til they've got about 30 of their friends present, then they all go outside together and clean up the trash in front of the polling place. Where the hell were the police??? Gun and ammo sales are still high. What a surprise. I can feel the tension rising. I wonder if the messiah can. Rik On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 6:17 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > Then, there is this little story - > > http://tinyurl.com/kq4jlq > > This shouldn't surprise anyone who was paying attention. It doesn't > surprise me. When someone hangs around racist, radicals for two > decades, er, maybe they're a racist radical? > > > Brad > > > On 5/29/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > > Brad, > > > > Yeah, no comment. What more is there to say ...... ??? > > > > > > Unfortunately, it seems the shoe fits. > > > > Rik > > > > On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 8:59 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> No comment - > >> > >> ------------------ > >> > >> American capitalism gone with a whimper > >> 27.04.2009 Source: Pravda.Ru URL: > >> > http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107459-american_capitalism-0 > >> > >> It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American > >> decent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the > >> back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I > >> meant people. > >> > >> True, the situation has been well prepared on and off for the past > >> century, especially the past twenty years. The initial testing grounds > >> was conducted upon our Holy Russia and a bloody test it was. But we > >> Russians would not just roll over and give up our freedoms and our > >> souls, no matter how much money Wall Street poured into the fists of > >> the Marxists. > >> > >> Those lessons were taken and used to properly prepare the American > >> populace for the surrender of their freedoms and souls, to the whims > >> of their elites and betters. > >> > >> First, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and > >> substandard education system based on pop culture, rather then the > >> classics. Americans know more about their favorite TV dramas then the > >> drama in DC that directly affects their lives. They care more for > >> their "right" to choke down a McDonalds burger or a BurgerKing burger > >> than for their constitutional rights. Then they turn around and > >> lecture us about our rights and about our "democracy". Pride blind the > >> foolish. > >> > >> Then their faith in God was destroyed, until their churches, all tens > >> of thousands of different "branches and denominations" were for the > >> most part little more then Sunday circuses and their televangelists > >> and top protestant mega preachers were more then happy to sell out > >> their souls and flocks to be on the "winning" side of one pseudo > >> Marxist politician or another. Their flocks may complain, but when > >> explained that they would be on the "winning" side, their flocks were > >> ever so quick to reject Christ in hopes for earthly power. Even our > >> Holy Orthodox churches are scandalously liberalized in America. > >> > >> The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama. His > >> speed in the past three months has been truly impressive. His spending > >> and money printing has been a record setting, not just in America's > >> short history but in the world. If this keeps up for more then another > >> year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will > >> resemble the Wiemar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe. > >> > >> These past two weeks have been the most breath taking of all. First > >> came the announcement of a planned redesign of the American Byzantine > >> tax system, by the very thieves who used it to bankroll their thefts, > >> loses and swindles of hundreds of billions of dollars. These make our > >> Russian oligarchs look little more then ordinary street thugs, in > >> comparison. Yes, the Americans have beat our own thieves in the shear > >> volumes. Should we congratulate them? > >> > >> These men, of course, are not an elected panel but made up of > >> appointees picked from the very financial oligarchs and their henchmen > >> who are now gorging themselves on trillions of American dollars, in > >> one bailout after another. They are also usurping the rights, duties > >> and powers of the American congress (parliament). Again, congress has > >> put up little more then a whimper to their masters. > >> > >> Then came Barack Obama's command that GM's (General Motor) president > >> step down from leadership of his company. That is correct, dear > >> reader, in the land of "pure" free markets, the American president now > >> has the power, the self given power, to fire CEOs and we can assume > >> other employees of private companies, at will. Come hither, go dither, > >> the centurion commands his minions. > >> > >> So it should be no surprise, that the American president has followed > >> this up with a "bold" move of declaring that he and another group of > >> unelected, chosen stooges will now redesign the entire automotive > >> industry and will even be the guarantee of automobile policies. I am > >> sure that if given the chance, they would happily try and redesign it > >> for the whole of the world, too. Prime Minister Putin, less then two > >> months ago, warned Obama and UK's Blair, not to follow the path to > >> Marxism, it only leads to disaster. Apparently, even though we > >> suffered 70 years of this Western sponsored horror show, we know > >> nothing, as foolish, drunken Russians, so let our "wise" Anglo-Saxon > >> fools find out the folly of their own pride. > >> > >> Again, the American public has taken this with barely a whimper...but > >> a "freeman" whimper. > >> > >> So, should it be any surprise to discover that the Democratically > >> controlled Congress of America is working on passing a new regulation > >> that would give the American Treasury department the power to set > >> "fair" maximum salaries, evaluate performance and control how private > >> companies give out pay raises and bonuses? Senator Barney Franks, a > >> social pervert basking in his homosexuality (of course, amongst the > >> modern, enlightened American societal norm, as well as that of the > >> general West, homosexuality is not only not a looked down upon life > >> choice, but is often praised as a virtue) and his Marxist > >> enlightenment, has led this effort. He stresses that this only affects > >> companies that receive government monies, but it is retroactive and > >> taken to a logical extreme, this would include any company or industry > >> that has ever received a tax break or incentive. > >> > >> The Russian owners of American companies and industries should look > >> thoughtfully at this and the option of closing their facilities down > >> and fleeing the land of the Red as fast as possible. In other words, > >> divest while there is still value left. > >> > >> The proud American will go down into his slavery with out a fight, > >> beating his chest and proclaiming to the world, how free he really is. > >> The world will only snicker. > >> > >> Stanislav Mishin > >> > >> The article has been reprinted with the kind permission from the > >> author and originally appears on his blog, Mat Rodina > >> > >> ? 1999-2009. ?PRAVDA.Ru?. When reproducing our materials in whole > >> or in part, hyperlink to PRAVDA.Ru should be made. The opinions and > >> views of the authors do not always coincide with the point of view of > >> PRAVDA.Ru's editors. > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090531/8ec612a0/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Sun May 31 07:24:19 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 07:24:19 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] ? of Bill E. Message-ID: <3C5500ECBA2D498DBC9B1746AD49CAD9@YOURB88038198E> Bill: You had a great augment about stocks, but failed to provide several readily accessible specific alternatives. Your suggestions. How about a sea worthy blue water cruiser to take us away from this? with sexton and instructions on how to use? Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090531/7a1ad2dd/attachment-0001.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun May 31 07:27:01 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 06:27:01 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Inflation Anyone? In-Reply-To: <841325E268E74BDA924E6AF8BD10B98C@BillLENOVO> References: <400985d70905300555i56ee6003r2e7425d0fdb36ec6@mail.gmail.com> <841325E268E74BDA924E6AF8BD10B98C@BillLENOVO> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905310427u5a15fdf6k8ab3f255e2b568f8@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Careful..... What is going on right now in the stock market is commonly called a sucker's rally. What I see coming with the rise in commodities is probably a further pullback in consumer spending as most become even more conservative. This will not bode well for profits. You really have to watch out for ignorant journalists who like to portray things in the most dramatic way possible. Take this guy's claim that the Baltic Dry Index has risen 320%. If you were watching that at all, you'd say ..... but 320% against what??? If you put that index against a 1 to 100 scale and you figure people are making money at 50 on that scale, you'd see that it dropped about 90 percent from it's high. Great, so the low was at about ten on our scale. Now it went back up 320% from it's low, which really isn't all that much. If you looked at it from the other way, which would be a more realistic view, you would say it has gained back about 25% of it's loss, which leaves it in the *still not great* territory. There will be a bottom, but I don't believe it's here yet. We will see another leg down before it's here. Those that are patient, wait it out and still have something to invest when the bottom is in will be the winners in this game. Right now, gold looks like a good inflation hedge. The Chinese are buying gold, bigtime. One thing to consider. Almost all journalists and gov't hacks didn't see this thing coming. How could we expect them to know when it's over?? Rik On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Bill Effros wrote: > You are treating stock markets like commodities markets -- they are very > different. > > The value of Enron stock or GM or Chrysler will never return to what they > were. How can you ride these stocks back up? Maybe Wal Mart or Google > stock will inflate, but not enough to make up for all the stocks that are > today worthless. To invest in the market you must believe some new > companies will be built the size of Enron, GM, Chrysler, Ford,...combined! > > So what would those new companies be? > > You are throwing good money after bad. > > If you think there will be inflation, play the currency market, or invest > in > gold. "Riding the market back up" is more of the same gamblers' > mentality--if I keep betting my birthday in the lottery, eventually it's > got > to come in. No it doesn't. Neither does the stock market. > > B > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brad Haslett" > To: "Letters to the Editor" > > Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2009 7:55 AM > Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Inflation Anyone? > > > > For my own personal sake, I hope the author of this Reuters article is > > correct (see below). I rode the market down and plan to ride it on > > the "way up". The market really isn't poised to "go up" based on > > earnings, it's just that it is denominated in dollars and the massive > > debt we're taking on will continue to batter the dollar for years to > > come. Commodity prices, especially oil, will "rise". If I had a > > crystal ball, I'd be out on my yacht today instead of driving a > > Volkswagen to my parents, but some things are painfully obvious. > > Hellooooo, inflation! > > > > Brad > > > > ------------- > > > > Global Markets Weekahead: Return of inflation? > > Fri May 29, 2009 2:28pm EDT > > > > By Natsuko Waki > > > > LONDON (Reuters) - Surging oil and commodity prices coupled with a > > falling dollar are prompting some investors to brace for a return of > > inflation, which would benefit equities and damage most government > > bonds. Inflation -- which in the short to medium term benefits > > equities and risky assets because of rising prices -- had all but > > disappeared after the global economy fell into recession and commodity > > prices sank last year. > > > > However, signs of a global economic recovery -- which next week's > > manufacturing and service sector surveys and other data could > > reinforce -- are leading to a renewed surge in energy and commodities > > and the outperformance of inflation-protected debt securities over > > benchmark government bonds. > > > > Oil prices are nearly double their four-year low in December. The > > Reuters-Jefferies CRB index, a global commodities benchmark, has hit a > > six-month high while the Baltic Dry Index, which tracks rates to ship > > dry commodities, has risen more than 320 percent since the start of > > the year. > > > > To exacerbate matters, the dollar is on track for the worst monthly > > performance since December 2008, which could further fuel buying in > > dollar-based commodities. > > > > The return of inflationary forces at a time the world is grappling > > with the threat of deflation, could prompt investors to invest in > > assets such as stocks because rising prices erode the value of cash. > > Already struggling government bonds, apart from inflation-linked debt, > > could come under further pressure. > > > > "We're in a reflation trade. Confidence is off its low from March and > > asset prices are rising. The beneficial period will continue until we > > find reasons to be pessimistic again," said David Miller, partner and > > head of alternative investments at Cheviot Asset Management. > > > > "People are getting out of the dollar, into commodities, into > > equities... Selectively there are reasons to buy commodities in a > > portfolio." > > > > Miller said while the commodity supercycle might not materialize, > > crisis-related factors such as the absence of farmers credit are > > constraining supply and pressuring prices. > > > > The renewed surge in commodities is boosting related stocks. In > > Europe, basic resource stocks have risen by 45 percent this year, > > compared with a four percent rise in the pan-European FTSEurofirst 300 > > index. > > > > And investor flows support the move. According to fund flow tracker > > EPFR Global, fresh money found its way into commodity and energy > > sector funds in the week to May 27, with these funds posting inflows > > of $303 million and $153 million respectively. > > > > Next week's U.S. personal consumption expenditure data -- the Federal > > Reserve's favorite measure of inflation -- is likely to show however > > that price rises remain moderate in the short term. > > > > Purchasing managers surveys in manufacturing and services sectors and > > U.S. jobs data would be key in offering the state of the global > > economy. Central banks from Britain, the euro zone, Canada and > > Australia decide on interest rates. > > > > BOND ROUT > > > > Government bond markets could become a source of destabilization for > > investors next week given rising concerns about burgeoning Western > > government debt. The U.S. Treasury alone needs to borrow a record $2 > > trillion in 2009 to help fund a $1.8 trillion fiscal deficit. > > > > Falling government bond prices are pushing up yields, which also > > affects long-term borrowing costs for governments as well as > > businesses and threatens to choke off an economic recovery. > > > > U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who visits China next week, > > is expected to reassure Beijing that the Obama administration will > > move swiftly to get its debt under control. > > > > Buying by Asian nations, including China, is crucial in maintaining > > the stability in the U.S. Treasury market. A weakening dollar is a > > double-edged sword for buyers as it makes Treasuries cheaper in the > > long term but it erodes the value of their current holdings in the > > short term. > > > > The benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury yield rose as high as 3.7538 > > percent on Thursday, its highest since November. > > > > The 10-year U.S. breakeven rates -- the yield gap between > > inflation-linked bonds over equivalent nominal government bonds > > > > -- have risen to 1.8760 percent, compared with around 0.2 percent at > > the start of the year, reflecting the view that fears of deflation > > have subsided. > > > > "Investors are realizing that by investing in an inflation-linked > > product... they are able to mitigate the risk that these anticipated > > inflationary pressures pose," said Jonathan Gibbs, fund manager at > > Standard Life Investments. > > > > "The combination of a complex mix of inflationary and deflationary > > forces at play in the global economy and the great uncertainty which > > is likely to prevail, means that diversified risk is more important > > than ever." > > > > (Editing by Andy Bruce) > > _______________________________________________ > > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090531/eb2e8540/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sun May 31 08:00:04 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 07:00:04 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Inflation Anyone? In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0905310427u5a15fdf6k8ab3f255e2b568f8@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905300555i56ee6003r2e7425d0fdb36ec6@mail.gmail.com> <841325E268E74BDA924E6AF8BD10B98C@BillLENOVO> <6634e19e0905310427u5a15fdf6k8ab3f255e2b568f8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70905310500k68f555cftedccbe6d89ca9b7a@mail.gmail.com> Rik and Bill, More on this after I get home from the road trip. As I implied in my earlier post, equities will rise in price for the wrong reasons. They should be priced, in theory, based on the net present value of future earnings. Future earnings will rise, not because companies produce more or better widgets, but because the underlying value of the dollar is falling. Treasuries will produce a negative return after inflation (remember the Carter years) and bonds will fare worse. For you two guys, sitting on the sidelines, staying out is indeed the best course. For someone like myself, the alternatives look a bit different. I'm pulling some chips off the table next week to take advantage of the "suckers rally" to some degree, but more so to fund some real estate projects on the Gulf Coast. The rest I'll let ride for another ten years. Remember, the 'gubment' already has its tenacles on two-thirds of my portfolio via 401K laws, so it only the one-third I can remove without some draconion penalties (lesson learned). Brad . On 5/31/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > Careful..... > > What is going on right now in the stock market is commonly called a sucker's > rally. > > What I see coming with the rise in commodities is probably a further > pullback in consumer spending as most become even more conservative. This > will not bode well for profits. > > You really have to watch out for ignorant journalists who like to portray > things in the most dramatic way possible. Take this guy's claim that the > Baltic Dry Index has risen 320%. If you were watching that at all, you'd say > ..... but 320% against what??? If you put that index against a 1 to 100 > scale and you figure people are making money at 50 on that scale, you'd see > that it dropped about 90 percent from it's high. Great, so the low was at > about ten on our scale. Now it went back up 320% from it's low, which really > isn't all that much. If you looked at it from the other way, which would be > a more realistic view, you would say it has gained back about 25% of it's > loss, which leaves it in the *still not great* territory. > > There will be a bottom, but I don't believe it's here yet. We will see > another leg down before it's here. Those that are patient, wait it out and > still have something to invest when the bottom is in will be the winners in > this game. > > Right now, gold looks like a good inflation hedge. The Chinese are buying > gold, bigtime. > > One thing to consider. Almost all journalists and gov't hacks didn't see > this thing coming. How could we expect them to know when it's over?? > > Rik > > On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Bill Effros wrote: > >> You are treating stock markets like commodities markets -- they are very >> different. >> >> The value of Enron stock or GM or Chrysler will never return to what they >> were. How can you ride these stocks back up? Maybe Wal Mart or Google >> stock will inflate, but not enough to make up for all the stocks that are >> today worthless. To invest in the market you must believe some new >> companies will be built the size of Enron, GM, Chrysler, Ford,...combined! >> >> So what would those new companies be? >> >> You are throwing good money after bad. >> >> If you think there will be inflation, play the currency market, or invest >> in >> gold. "Riding the market back up" is more of the same gamblers' >> mentality--if I keep betting my birthday in the lottery, eventually it's >> got >> to come in. No it doesn't. Neither does the stock market. >> >> B >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Brad Haslett" >> To: "Letters to the Editor" >> >> Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2009 7:55 AM >> Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Inflation Anyone? >> >> >> > For my own personal sake, I hope the author of this Reuters article is >> > correct (see below). I rode the market down and plan to ride it on >> > the "way up". The market really isn't poised to "go up" based on >> > earnings, it's just that it is denominated in dollars and the massive >> > debt we're taking on will continue to batter the dollar for years to >> > come. Commodity prices, especially oil, will "rise". If I had a >> > crystal ball, I'd be out on my yacht today instead of driving a >> > Volkswagen to my parents, but some things are painfully obvious. >> > Hellooooo, inflation! >> > >> > Brad >> > >> > ------------- >> > >> > Global Markets Weekahead: Return of inflation? >> > Fri May 29, 2009 2:28pm EDT >> > >> > By Natsuko Waki >> > >> > LONDON (Reuters) - Surging oil and commodity prices coupled with a >> > falling dollar are prompting some investors to brace for a return of >> > inflation, which would benefit equities and damage most government >> > bonds. Inflation -- which in the short to medium term benefits >> > equities and risky assets because of rising prices -- had all but >> > disappeared after the global economy fell into recession and commodity >> > prices sank last year. >> > >> > However, signs of a global economic recovery -- which next week's >> > manufacturing and service sector surveys and other data could >> > reinforce -- are leading to a renewed surge in energy and commodities >> > and the outperformance of inflation-protected debt securities over >> > benchmark government bonds. >> > >> > Oil prices are nearly double their four-year low in December. The >> > Reuters-Jefferies CRB index, a global commodities benchmark, has hit a >> > six-month high while the Baltic Dry Index, which tracks rates to ship >> > dry commodities, has risen more than 320 percent since the start of >> > the year. >> > >> > To exacerbate matters, the dollar is on track for the worst monthly >> > performance since December 2008, which could further fuel buying in >> > dollar-based commodities. >> > >> > The return of inflationary forces at a time the world is grappling >> > with the threat of deflation, could prompt investors to invest in >> > assets such as stocks because rising prices erode the value of cash. >> > Already struggling government bonds, apart from inflation-linked debt, >> > could come under further pressure. >> > >> > "We're in a reflation trade. Confidence is off its low from March and >> > asset prices are rising. The beneficial period will continue until we >> > find reasons to be pessimistic again," said David Miller, partner and >> > head of alternative investments at Cheviot Asset Management. >> > >> > "People are getting out of the dollar, into commodities, into >> > equities... Selectively there are reasons to buy commodities in a >> > portfolio." >> > >> > Miller said while the commodity supercycle might not materialize, >> > crisis-related factors such as the absence of farmers credit are >> > constraining supply and pressuring prices. >> > >> > The renewed surge in commodities is boosting related stocks. In >> > Europe, basic resource stocks have risen by 45 percent this year, >> > compared with a four percent rise in the pan-European FTSEurofirst 300 >> > index. >> > >> > And investor flows support the move. According to fund flow tracker >> > EPFR Global, fresh money found its way into commodity and energy >> > sector funds in the week to May 27, with these funds posting inflows >> > of $303 million and $153 million respectively. >> > >> > Next week's U.S. personal consumption expenditure data -- the Federal >> > Reserve's favorite measure of inflation -- is likely to show however >> > that price rises remain moderate in the short term. >> > >> > Purchasing managers surveys in manufacturing and services sectors and >> > U.S. jobs data would be key in offering the state of the global >> > economy. Central banks from Britain, the euro zone, Canada and >> > Australia decide on interest rates. >> > >> > BOND ROUT >> > >> > Government bond markets could become a source of destabilization for >> > investors next week given rising concerns about burgeoning Western >> > government debt. The U.S. Treasury alone needs to borrow a record $2 >> > trillion in 2009 to help fund a $1.8 trillion fiscal deficit. >> > >> > Falling government bond prices are pushing up yields, which also >> > affects long-term borrowing costs for governments as well as >> > businesses and threatens to choke off an economic recovery. >> > >> > U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who visits China next week, >> > is expected to reassure Beijing that the Obama administration will >> > move swiftly to get its debt under control. >> > >> > Buying by Asian nations, including China, is crucial in maintaining >> > the stability in the U.S. Treasury market. A weakening dollar is a >> > double-edged sword for buyers as it makes Treasuries cheaper in the >> > long term but it erodes the value of their current holdings in the >> > short term. >> > >> > The benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury yield rose as high as 3.7538 >> > percent on Thursday, its highest since November. >> > >> > The 10-year U.S. breakeven rates -- the yield gap between >> > inflation-linked bonds over equivalent nominal government bonds >> > >> > -- have risen to 1.8760 percent, compared with around 0.2 percent at >> > the start of the year, reflecting the view that fears of deflation >> > have subsided. >> > >> > "Investors are realizing that by investing in an inflation-linked >> > product... they are able to mitigate the risk that these anticipated >> > inflationary pressures pose," said Jonathan Gibbs, fund manager at >> > Standard Life Investments. >> > >> > "The combination of a complex mix of inflationary and deflationary >> > forces at play in the global economy and the great uncertainty which >> > is likely to prevail, means that diversified risk is more important >> > than ever." >> > >> > (Editing by Andy Bruce) >> > _______________________________________________ >> > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> > >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From flybrad at gmail.com Sun May 31 08:14:12 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 07:14:12 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Illinois Message-ID: <400985d70905310514h5b70d2bbm7f9350c397833380@mail.gmail.com> Boys and Girls, just a quick not before heading out the door. Illinois (where we are for the weekend) is proposing a 67% increase in income taxes. I laughed my ass off when I read the comments from the Tribune article from a resident of Hong Kong. Exactly where did Telebama learn his trade? Brad -------------- http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-legislature-budget-bd-31may31,0,3410412.story Enjoy your Democrat leadership Illinois! And if you think they are not so bad, consider this. Beijing communists handpick my government and I enjoy the following. 0% Sales Tax 0% Services Tax No Social Security Tax No Medicare Tax No State Income Tax 15% Maximum Income Tax (lower unless you make more than 350,000 USD) Cleaner, Faster, and More Efficient Public Transit at about 1/3 the cost No Tax on Utilities No Family Succession to Mayor, County President, Etc.... And for good measure, 85% less crime. Have fun! And remember how "world class" Chicago and Illinois have become. From ekroposki at charter.net Sun May 31 08:41:57 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 08:41:57 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] http://www.charlestonmaritimefestival.com/ Message-ID: <266AF19297A94F13902CB281B8F2379D@YOURB88038198E> http://www.charlestonmaritimefestival.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090531/e7d1f840/attachment.html From bill at effros.com Sun May 31 09:06:29 2009 From: bill at effros.com (Bill Effros) Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 08:06:29 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] ? of Bill E. References: <3C5500ECBA2D498DBC9B1746AD49CAD9@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: Ed, Foreign exchange is easy and accessible. If you think there will be a lot of inflation and you want to ride other currencies up it dwarfs the stock exchange in terms of number of trades, is cheap per trade, easy access to margin, an almost perfect market. B. ----- Original Message ----- From: Ed Kroposki To: Swift Water Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2009 6:24 AM Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] ? of Bill E. Bill: You had a great augment about stocks, but failed to provide several readily accessible specific alternatives. Your suggestions. How about a sea worthy blue water cruiser to take us away from this? with sexton and instructions on how to use? Ed K ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ SwiftwaterGazette mailing list SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090531/a20469d9/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun May 31 09:09:09 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 08:09:09 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Inflation Anyone? In-Reply-To: <400985d70905310500k68f555cftedccbe6d89ca9b7a@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905300555i56ee6003r2e7425d0fdb36ec6@mail.gmail.com> <841325E268E74BDA924E6AF8BD10B98C@BillLENOVO> <6634e19e0905310427u5a15fdf6k8ab3f255e2b568f8@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905310500k68f555cftedccbe6d89ca9b7a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905310609q67a5ccb9y64180a0260c0b884@mail.gmail.com> Brad, When you get back, you may want to read this. Sometimes the best action is to just .... be still. Rik http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/more-prime-foreclosures-more-re.html ___________________ More Prime Foreclosures; More Re-Defaults John Mauldin has another interesting weekly letter called This Way There Be Dragons . Here's a look at the section on housing. Emphasis mine. "Yesterday Fitch ratings estimated that up to 75 percent of the modifications now being done through the administration's Making Home Affordable program will re-default in six months to a year. I'm not talking about the old modifications, which were largely repayment plans that could actually raise monthly payments. I'm talking about the new mods, which lower monthly payments to 31 percent of a person's income. I couldn't understand Fitch's reasoning, so I called them. "Diane Pendley, managing director at Fitch, said the problem is not on that "front-end" ratio, but on the back end, which is all of the borrowers other debt (credit cards, car loans, student loans, etc.). She said that in talking with servicers, she's hearing other debt is so high that most of today's troubled borrowers cannot afford any loan payment at all, even at a very modest debt-to-income ratio. 'Just getting the house payment done doesn't mean their lifestyle is sustainable,' she said. "Another problem is that with home prices continuing to fall, more and more borrowers, who are essentially just renting their mortgages now because they will never see any home equity, are walking away. Even if the mortgage payment is low, the property taxes and home maintenance costs are padding that payment, and without an upside to the investment, there's simply no reason to pay. Suffice it to say, the foreclosure crisis, on the high and low ends, is not getting any better." And it gets worse. More Prime Foreclosures In Our Future The Mortgage Bankers Association noted that a record 12%, or 1 in 8 homeowners, in the US are now behind on their payments or in foreclosure. 10.6% of the mortgages in Florida are now somewhere in the process of actual foreclosure. (My seatmate here on the flight says the prices on the condos where he lives are now back to 1998 levels. It would be scary, he said, if you had to sell. There are new developments that only have 10% actual occupancy, as the bulk of the condos were bought for speculation. Now those 10% of buyers are having to shoulder all the fees for upkeep. Nobody will buy, because the upkeep costs can be more than the mortgage. It is a vicious cycle.) In Nevada foreclosures are 7.8%, Arizona 5.6%, and California 5.2%. 25% of subprime loans are now in foreclosure, 14% of FHA (government, taxpayer-guaranteed) loans and a growing 6% of all prime loans are now in foreclosure. (Note: the seasonal adjustments may overstate the actual numbers, as we are in new territory in terms of actual foreclosures.) Quoting from the MBA press release: "In looking at these numbers, it is important to focus on what has changed as well what continue to be the key drivers of foreclosures. What has changed is the shifting of the problem somewhat away from the subprime and option ARM/Alt-A loans to the prime fixed-rate loans. The foreclosure rate on prime fixed-rate loans has doubled in the last year, and, for the first time since the rapid growth of subprime lending, prime fixed-rate loans now represent the largest share of new foreclosures. In addition, almost half of the overall increase in foreclosure starts we saw in the first quarter was due to the increase in prime fixed-rate loans." Servicer Incentives We are refinancing mortgages at attractive rates, with taxpayers picking up the tab via Fannie, Freddie and the FHA. Let's revisit the Home Affordable Modification Program Guidelinesto see how ridiculous the program is. Servicers will receive an up-front Servicer Incentive Payment of $1,000 for each eligible modification meeting guidelines established under this initiative. Servicers will also receive Pay for Success payments ?as long as the borrower stays in the program ? of up to $1,000 each year for up to three years. Similar incentives will be paid for Hope for Homeowner refinances. One-time bonus incentive payments of $1,500 to lender/investors and $500 to servicers will be provided for modifications made while a borrower is still current on mortgage payments. Taxpayers are forking money over to Countrywide and other servicers at $1,000 a pop (or more) for loan mods, of which 75% will re-default in less than a year because "most of today's troubled borrowers cannot afford any loan payment at all". Is this a great idea or what? No doubt Bank of America supports it 100%. It's all part of Geithner's "Heist America Plan ". Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List More Prime Foreclosures; More Re-Defaults *Posted by Michael Shedlock at 1:23 AM* *.... * Print *.... Email* To sign up for a *free copy* of our Monthly Client Newsletter, please register your email address at the bottom of the Sitka Pacific Commentary Page . Buy Gold and Silver Online at GoldMoney The Best Way to Buy Gold and Silver On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 7:00 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik and Bill, > > More on this after I get home from the road trip. As I implied in my > earlier post, equities will rise in price for the wrong reasons. They > should be priced, in theory, based on the net present value of future > earnings. Future earnings will rise, not because companies produce > more or better widgets, but because the underlying value of the dollar > is falling. Treasuries will produce a negative return after inflation > (remember the Carter years) and bonds will fare worse. For you two > guys, sitting on the sidelines, staying out is indeed the best course. > For someone like myself, the alternatives look a bit different. I'm > pulling some chips off the table next week to take advantage of the > "suckers rally" to some degree, but more so to fund some real estate > projects on the Gulf Coast. The rest I'll let ride for another ten > years. Remember, the 'gubment' already has its tenacles on two-thirds > of my portfolio via 401K laws, so it only the one-third I can remove > without some draconion penalties (lesson learned). > > > Brad > > . > On 5/31/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > > Brad, > > > > Careful..... > > > > What is going on right now in the stock market is commonly called a > sucker's > > rally. > > > > What I see coming with the rise in commodities is probably a further > > pullback in consumer spending as most become even more conservative. This > > will not bode well for profits. > > > > You really have to watch out for ignorant journalists who like to portray > > things in the most dramatic way possible. Take this guy's claim that the > > Baltic Dry Index has risen 320%. If you were watching that at all, you'd > say > > ..... but 320% against what??? If you put that index against a 1 to 100 > > scale and you figure people are making money at 50 on that scale, you'd > see > > that it dropped about 90 percent from it's high. Great, so the low was at > > about ten on our scale. Now it went back up 320% from it's low, which > really > > isn't all that much. If you looked at it from the other way, which would > be > > a more realistic view, you would say it has gained back about 25% of it's > > loss, which leaves it in the *still not great* territory. > > > > There will be a bottom, but I don't believe it's here yet. We will see > > another leg down before it's here. Those that are patient, wait it out > and > > still have something to invest when the bottom is in will be the winners > in > > this game. > > > > Right now, gold looks like a good inflation hedge. The Chinese are buying > > gold, bigtime. > > > > One thing to consider. Almost all journalists and gov't hacks didn't see > > this thing coming. How could we expect them to know when it's over?? > > > > Rik > > > > On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Bill Effros wrote: > > > >> You are treating stock markets like commodities markets -- they are very > >> different. > >> > >> The value of Enron stock or GM or Chrysler will never return to what > they > >> were. How can you ride these stocks back up? Maybe Wal Mart or Google > >> stock will inflate, but not enough to make up for all the stocks that > are > >> today worthless. To invest in the market you must believe some new > >> companies will be built the size of Enron, GM, Chrysler, > Ford,...combined! > >> > >> So what would those new companies be? > >> > >> You are throwing good money after bad. > >> > >> If you think there will be inflation, play the currency market, or > invest > >> in > >> gold. "Riding the market back up" is more of the same gamblers' > >> mentality--if I keep betting my birthday in the lottery, eventually it's > >> got > >> to come in. No it doesn't. Neither does the stock market. > >> > >> B > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Brad Haslett" > >> To: "Letters to the Editor" > >> > >> Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2009 7:55 AM > >> Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Inflation Anyone? > >> > >> > >> > For my own personal sake, I hope the author of this Reuters article is > >> > correct (see below). I rode the market down and plan to ride it on > >> > the "way up". The market really isn't poised to "go up" based on > >> > earnings, it's just that it is denominated in dollars and the massive > >> > debt we're taking on will continue to batter the dollar for years to > >> > come. Commodity prices, especially oil, will "rise". If I had a > >> > crystal ball, I'd be out on my yacht today instead of driving a > >> > Volkswagen to my parents, but some things are painfully obvious. > >> > Hellooooo, inflation! > >> > > >> > Brad > >> > > >> > ------------- > >> > > >> > Global Markets Weekahead: Return of inflation? > >> > Fri May 29, 2009 2:28pm EDT > >> > > >> > By Natsuko Waki > >> > > >> > LONDON (Reuters) - Surging oil and commodity prices coupled with a > >> > falling dollar are prompting some investors to brace for a return of > >> > inflation, which would benefit equities and damage most government > >> > bonds. Inflation -- which in the short to medium term benefits > >> > equities and risky assets because of rising prices -- had all but > >> > disappeared after the global economy fell into recession and commodity > >> > prices sank last year. > >> > > >> > However, signs of a global economic recovery -- which next week's > >> > manufacturing and service sector surveys and other data could > >> > reinforce -- are leading to a renewed surge in energy and commodities > >> > and the outperformance of inflation-protected debt securities over > >> > benchmark government bonds. > >> > > >> > Oil prices are nearly double their four-year low in December. The > >> > Reuters-Jefferies CRB index, a global commodities benchmark, has hit a > >> > six-month high while the Baltic Dry Index, which tracks rates to ship > >> > dry commodities, has risen more than 320 percent since the start of > >> > the year. > >> > > >> > To exacerbate matters, the dollar is on track for the worst monthly > >> > performance since December 2008, which could further fuel buying in > >> > dollar-based commodities. > >> > > >> > The return of inflationary forces at a time the world is grappling > >> > with the threat of deflation, could prompt investors to invest in > >> > assets such as stocks because rising prices erode the value of cash. > >> > Already struggling government bonds, apart from inflation-linked debt, > >> > could come under further pressure. > >> > > >> > "We're in a reflation trade. Confidence is off its low from March and > >> > asset prices are rising. The beneficial period will continue until we > >> > find reasons to be pessimistic again," said David Miller, partner and > >> > head of alternative investments at Cheviot Asset Management. > >> > > >> > "People are getting out of the dollar, into commodities, into > >> > equities... Selectively there are reasons to buy commodities in a > >> > portfolio." > >> > > >> > Miller said while the commodity supercycle might not materialize, > >> > crisis-related factors such as the absence of farmers credit are > >> > constraining supply and pressuring prices. > >> > > >> > The renewed surge in commodities is boosting related stocks. In > >> > Europe, basic resource stocks have risen by 45 percent this year, > >> > compared with a four percent rise in the pan-European FTSEurofirst 300 > >> > index. > >> > > >> > And investor flows support the move. According to fund flow tracker > >> > EPFR Global, fresh money found its way into commodity and energy > >> > sector funds in the week to May 27, with these funds posting inflows > >> > of $303 million and $153 million respectively. > >> > > >> > Next week's U.S. personal consumption expenditure data -- the Federal > >> > Reserve's favorite measure of inflation -- is likely to show however > >> > that price rises remain moderate in the short term. > >> > > >> > Purchasing managers surveys in manufacturing and services sectors and > >> > U.S. jobs data would be key in offering the state of the global > >> > economy. Central banks from Britain, the euro zone, Canada and > >> > Australia decide on interest rates. > >> > > >> > BOND ROUT > >> > > >> > Government bond markets could become a source of destabilization for > >> > investors next week given rising concerns about burgeoning Western > >> > government debt. The U.S. Treasury alone needs to borrow a record $2 > >> > trillion in 2009 to help fund a $1.8 trillion fiscal deficit. > >> > > >> > Falling government bond prices are pushing up yields, which also > >> > affects long-term borrowing costs for governments as well as > >> > businesses and threatens to choke off an economic recovery. > >> > > >> > U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who visits China next week, > >> > is expected to reassure Beijing that the Obama administration will > >> > move swiftly to get its debt under control. > >> > > >> > Buying by Asian nations, including China, is crucial in maintaining > >> > the stability in the U.S. Treasury market. A weakening dollar is a > >> > double-edged sword for buyers as it makes Treasuries cheaper in the > >> > long term but it erodes the value of their current holdings in the > >> > short term. > >> > > >> > The benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury yield rose as high as 3.7538 > >> > percent on Thursday, its highest since November. > >> > > >> > The 10-year U.S. breakeven rates -- the yield gap between > >> > inflation-linked bonds over equivalent nominal government bonds > >> > > >> > -- have risen to 1.8760 percent, compared with around 0.2 percent at > >> > the start of the year, reflecting the view that fears of deflation > >> > have subsided. > >> > > >> > "Investors are realizing that by investing in an inflation-linked > >> > product... they are able to mitigate the risk that these anticipated > >> > inflationary pressures pose," said Jonathan Gibbs, fund manager at > >> > Standard Life Investments. > >> > > >> > "The combination of a complex mix of inflationary and deflationary > >> > forces at play in the global economy and the great uncertainty which > >> > is likely to prevail, means that diversified risk is more important > >> > than ever." > >> > > >> > (Editing by Andy Bruce) > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090531/760f2681/attachment-0001.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun May 31 09:46:26 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 08:46:26 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Got Revenue???? Message-ID: <6634e19e0905310646x168260d2x5e88b7a247c09c1e@mail.gmail.com> Good morning All, The other day Sandy and I were driving back from a doctors appointment in St. Cloud which is about 60 miles away from Long Prairie. Normally, I'd have my cruise set and I wouldn't have to worry about something like this, but this day, for some reason that escapes me, I forgot to set it. Anyway, as is our habit these days, we are cruising up the county highways on the way home, as we like the lack of traffic and the less hurry up feeling. As I said, I hadn't set the cruise control and my speed had wandered on up to about 72. Damned if a deputy doesn't pop over the hill in front of me. I knew he had me and I was fine with that, he caught me fair and square. What happened next was a bit of a surprise though. When the deputy came to the door he was friendly enough and chatted me up about how I liked our HHR and the weather and such for a minute or two. Then he got around to business. Yep, he had clocked me on his radar at 72 in a 55. Now he could write me a ticket (state issued) for that, which easily would have carried a 200+ price tag and a ticket on my record ..... OR, he could give me an administrative ticket from the county which would cost 60 bucks and not show on my record. Would the county option be alright with me, he asked. Well Duh .... "Yes sir, I'd be most happy to donate to the counties coffers", I said. Gov'ts of all shapes and sizes it seems are dreaming up more ways of increasing their revenue, perhaps at the expense of other gov't entities. Watch yourself out there, there's a target on your wallet. Rik http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/click-it-or-ticket-insanity-10-of.html _____________________ Click It or Ticket Insanity; 10% of Texans Have Arrest Warrants Cash strapped cities, states, and municipalities are increasingly looking to raise revenue by issuing tickets instead of cutting expenses. JL writes ... Hi Mish I have had 3 different people tell me they got tickets from the CHP or San Francisco Police over the weekend. One ticket was written for having tinted windows. The officer in SF wasn?t even interested in the fact that the windows were tinted by the Audi Company and by regulation. On one section of 101, where it?s not ?really a highway? the CHP were lying in wait behind bushes-in a multicar queue for a rapid rollover of wallets. The motherload, a carpool violation, was enforced en masse on the Bay Bridge on Friday prior to the holiday. That?s 300 bucks a pop and I saw about 6 tickets being written where normally I see about 2 a week being enforced. Public enforcement of law is fine, but it?s pretty obvious that the authorities have more in mind this year. Click it or TICKET. As if it?s really a big problem these days! CHP Memorial Day Weekend Maximum Enforcement Revenue enhancement was in full swing over Memorial day weekend as noted in CHP Memorial Day Weekend Maximum Enforcement . The three-day holiday is a Maximum Enforcement Period (MEP) for the CHP. All available officers will be patrolling the roadways during the MEP, which begins at 6 p.m. Friday, May 22 and extends until midnight on Monday, May 25. The CHP?s maximum enforcement effort is also part of the state?s recently launched 2009 Memorial Day Next Generation Click It or Ticket mobilization. The start-of-summer campaign is supported by $3 million in traffic safety grants awarded by the California Office of Traffic Safety through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The CHP?s primary mission is to prevent loss of life and injury to all motorists. That mission parallels the Strategic Highway Safety plan, a roadmap for improving safety on the state?s roadways that all state traffic safety organizations follow. An element of the plan is to improve the use of passenger restraints. The Memorial Day MEP is also an Operation Combined Accident Reduction Effort (CARE) holiday. Operation CARE is a joint program of the nation?s highway patrols that places special safety emphasis on interstate highways during holiday periods. CARE highways in California include Interstates 80, 40, 15 and 5. Dallas County Half Its Annual Revenue From Fines And Fees Inquiring minds are investigating interesting trend regarding fines in Texas. Please consider Dallas County looks to traffic ticket revenue for budget shortfall . The February issue of Car and Driver includes a story describing how many jurisdictions are giving more traffic tickets as a revenue booster during tough financial times. In Texas, to my mind, we've already taken this strategy about as far as it can go, to the point that, right now, more than 10% of Texas adults have outstanding arrest warrants - mostly for traffic tickets. Dallas County represents perhaps the most extreme example of this trend in Texas. According to the Dallas Morning News ("Dallas county to vote on withholding vehicle registrations for those who owe fines," Feb. 9), "Unlike most counties, Dallas County gets slightly more than half of its annual revenue from fines and fees. Other counties rely more heavily on property-tax revenue." Now Dallas plans to step up the pressure on even more on folks who can't or don't pay traffic fines, denying vehicle registration to drivers with outstanding traffic tickets. Again, we're talking about more than 10% of the adult population! It seems almost unfathomable to me that a majority of county revenue would come from fines and fees. That's an untenable economic arrangement, but I suppose when more than 10% of adults owe fines, there's a deep well to draw from, though it's still crappy public policy. More likely, more drivers will simply drive unregistered vehicles, which will cause them to accumulate more tickets they can't pay and creating a vicious cycle that makes the situation more chronic and intractable. And since Texas already holds up vehicle registration for drivers without auto insurance, the plan will almost certainly increase the number of uninsured drivers on the road. Just what we need, huh? More than 10% of Texans currently wanted by police Texas State Senator Eliot Shapleigh is talking about Working on the Chain Gang . A couple of weeks ago, the local paper printed names of El Pasoans with outstanding arrest warrants. 78,000 El Pasoans made the paper! What?s going on here? Here are the facts. Of the 78,000 almost all are for moving violations. When we compared Austin, same story: 11% of Austin has outstanding arrest warrants. Nearly one in ten Texans can?t pay: students, single mothers, working families, essentially low and even middle income Texans whose income can?t keep up with gas, insurance, taxes and tickets too. Our office has interviewed several Texans listed for outstanding warrants to determine the impact to them. Names were changed in order to preserve anonymity. Jane Smith who works in El Paso has close to $3,500 dollars in outstanding tickets. She is behind on her rent. Under Texas Driver Responsibility laws she will also face over $3,000 in surcharges. During the early years of Texas, thousands came here from England and the East Coast to escape debt (and debtor?s prisons). Today, our own tax system uses the threat of prison to collect trauma care money. Working on the chain gang makes it awfully hard to pay for a ticket. More Tickets in Hard Times Car and Driver is reporting More Tickets in Hard Times . Motorists beware: In some communities, police are issuing tickets during these hard times at a rate higher than ever in what critics say is an attempt to raise revenue in order to offset budget shortfalls. Take, for example, the metropolitan Detroit area, which has been reeling economically much longer than has the rest of the country. The number of moving violations issued has increased by at least 50 percent in 18 communities in the metro area since 2002?and 11 of those municipalities have seen ticketing increases of 90 percent or more. The president of a state police union isn?t pretending it doesn?t happen. James Tignanelli, president of the Police Officers Association of Michigan union, says, ?When elected officials say, ?We need more money,? they can?t look to the department of public works to raise revenues, so where do they find it? Police departments. ?A lot of police chiefs will tell you the goal is to have nobody speeding through their community, but heaven forbid if it should actually happen?they?d be out of money,? Tignanelli says. Police Chief Michael Reaves of Utica, Michigan, says the role of law enforcement has changed over the years. ?When I first started in this job 30 years ago, police work was never about revenue enhancement, but if you?re a chief now, you have to look at whether your department produces revenues,? he says. ?That?s just the reality nowadays.? Some police officers, such as Sgt. Richard Lyons of Trenton, Michigan, say they don?t like being pressured to write more tickets. ?That?s not what I got into law enforcement for?to hand out chintzy tickets,? says Lyons, a 21-year veteran. ?Things have changed from when I first started in this job. There was a time when you?d come in, do your job, and go home. But I?ve never felt pressure to bring revenue to the city like we do now. ?It?s a whole different ball game now,? Lyons says. ?They?re trying to use police officers to balance the budget on the backs of drivers, and it?s too bad. The people we count on to support us and help us when we?re on the road are the ones who end up paying the bills, and they?re ticked off about it. We might as well just go door to door and tell people, ?Slide us $100 now since your 16-year-old is going to end up paying us anyway when he starts driving.? You can?t blame people for getting upset.? I got a speeding ticket in California earlier this month. I feel fortunate actually since I keep my proof of insurance in my glove compartment (at home in Illinois). I never thought about the need to carry a copy when traveling. I easily could have received two tickets. The officer decided to let it pass. $372 was a big enough fine as it was. Last week I was stopped a half mile from where I live. I have a tendency to start driving then put on seat belts later. The officer let me go with a verbal warning because I live in the village. Two days ago I was near Woodfield Mall, a huge shopping center in Schaumburg Illinois. Police were parked near all the entrances and exits. Three police cars and a motorcycle were situated at one key spot. It was the mother of all Click It or Ticket operations. 6 people were pulled over in 30 seconds when I went by. I bet they issued hundreds of tickets that day. 1000 would not surprise me. Leave the mall without your seat belt on and get a ticket. In addition, traffic "eyes" are sprouting up everywhere near where I live. Is this making anyone safer? I doubt it. Then again it's not supposed to. Moreover, it's so out of hand that 10% of Texans in some major cities have arrest warrants. How's that for complete insanity? Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List Click It or Ticket Insanity; 10% of Texans Have Arrest Warrants *Posted by Michael Shedlock at 3:36 AM* *.... * Print *.... Email* To sign up for a *free copy* of our Monthly Client Newsletter, please register your email address at the bottom of the Sitka Pacific Commentary Page . Buy Gold and Silver Online at GoldMoney The Best Way to Buy Gold and Silver -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090531/334089f9/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sun May 31 10:02:18 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 09:02:18 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Inflation Anyone? In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0905310609q67a5ccb9y64180a0260c0b884@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905300555i56ee6003r2e7425d0fdb36ec6@mail.gmail.com> <841325E268E74BDA924E6AF8BD10B98C@BillLENOVO> <6634e19e0905310427u5a15fdf6k8ab3f255e2b568f8@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905310500k68f555cftedccbe6d89ca9b7a@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905310609q67a5ccb9y64180a0260c0b884@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70905310702h4a5371edp646051df730129fd@mail.gmail.com> Rik, We've got another hour before the "roller coasters" crank-up (we're staying in a motel outside of Six Flags St. Louis and driving to Carbondale, Illinois later this afternoon) so I'll let rip with our ideas. The article is correct about the real estate markets in general, especially those hardest hit in California, Nevada, Arizona, Florida and Michigan (MI has a different set of problems than the others). But even across the rest of the nation, people bought more house than they could afford and until the market "settles" , the econonomy as a whole won't recover. Our situation on the Gulf is a bit different. The reality is just now sinking-in that building near the water is too expensive because of insurance (rates have quadrupled). The idea that some Donald Trump or wealthy casino developer would buy large swaths of land at inflated prices has faded as well (the casinos are for the most part over-leveraged themselves). We're seeing a rise in demand for "estate lots", 3 to 5 acre tracts at 100' elevation, which means you have to go 15 to 20 miles inland. Some out-of-state "big boys" moved in early with the right idea but over-extended themselves and went belly-up. Our idea is to buy one lot at a time, turn our equipment loose on it, and demonstrate what can be done with flat ground with a little creativity and the right machine operator. If I'm right in my thinking, we'll repeat the experiment. If I'm wrong, well, let's hope I'm not wrong. The worst case scenerao is that we tie up capital in a demo project that we'll use as a showcase for our "dirt moving" talent. Besides, according to the zoning for our operations base, we're supposed to be a nursery. We can just use the additional property as an "overstock" lot for our main operations location (assuming we ever get any nursery stock to begin with). Brad On 5/31/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > When you get back, you may want to read this. > > Sometimes the best action is to just .... be still. > > Rik > > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/more-prime-foreclosures-more-re.html > ___________________ > > More Prime Foreclosures; More > Re-Defaults > > John Mauldin has another interesting weekly letter called This Way There Be > Dragons . Here's a look at the > section on housing. Emphasis mine. > > "Yesterday Fitch ratings estimated that up to 75 percent of the > modifications now being done through the administration's Making Home > Affordable program will re-default in six months to a year. I'm not talking > about the old modifications, which were largely repayment plans that could > actually raise monthly payments. I'm talking about the new mods, which lower > monthly payments to 31 percent of a person's income. I couldn't understand > Fitch's reasoning, so I called them. > > "Diane Pendley, managing director at Fitch, said the problem is not on that > "front-end" ratio, but on the back end, which is all of the borrowers other > debt (credit cards, car loans, student loans, etc.). She said that in > talking with servicers, she's hearing other debt is so high that most of > today's troubled borrowers cannot afford any loan payment at all, even at a > very modest debt-to-income ratio. 'Just getting the house payment done > doesn't mean their lifestyle is sustainable,' she said. > > "Another problem is that with home prices continuing to fall, more and more > borrowers, who are essentially just renting their mortgages now because they > will never see any home equity, are walking away. Even if the mortgage > payment is low, the property taxes and home maintenance costs are padding > that payment, and without an upside to the investment, there's simply no > reason to pay. Suffice it to say, the foreclosure crisis, on the high and > low ends, is not getting any better." > > And it gets worse. > More Prime Foreclosures In Our Future > > The Mortgage Bankers Association noted that a record 12%, or 1 in 8 > homeowners, in the US are now behind on their payments or in foreclosure. > 10.6% of the mortgages in Florida are now somewhere in the process of actual > foreclosure. (My seatmate here on the flight says the prices on the condos > where he lives are now back to 1998 levels. It would be scary, he said, if > you had to sell. There are new developments that only have 10% actual > occupancy, as the bulk of the condos were bought for speculation. Now those > 10% of buyers are having to shoulder all the fees for upkeep. Nobody will > buy, because the upkeep costs can be more than the mortgage. It is a vicious > cycle.) > > In Nevada foreclosures are 7.8%, Arizona 5.6%, and California 5.2%. 25% of > subprime loans are now in foreclosure, 14% of FHA (government, > taxpayer-guaranteed) loans and a growing 6% of all prime loans are now in > foreclosure. (Note: the seasonal adjustments may overstate the actual > numbers, as we are in new territory in terms of actual foreclosures.) > Quoting from the MBA press release: > > "In looking at these numbers, it is important to focus on what has changed > as well what continue to be the key drivers of foreclosures. What has > changed is the shifting of the problem somewhat away from the subprime and > option ARM/Alt-A loans to the prime fixed-rate loans. The foreclosure rate > on prime fixed-rate loans has doubled in the last year, and, for the first > time since the rapid growth of subprime lending, prime fixed-rate loans now > represent the largest share of new foreclosures. In addition, almost half of > the overall increase in foreclosure starts we saw in the first quarter was > due to the increase in prime fixed-rate loans." > > Servicer Incentives > > We are refinancing mortgages at attractive rates, with taxpayers picking up > the tab via Fannie, Freddie and the FHA. Let's revisit the Home Affordable > Modification Program > Guidelinesto > see how ridiculous the program is. > > Servicers will receive an up-front Servicer Incentive Payment of $1,000 for > each eligible modification meeting guidelines established under this > initiative. Servicers will also receive Pay for Success payments ?as long as > the borrower stays in the program ? of up to $1,000 each year for up to > three years. Similar incentives will be paid for Hope for Homeowner > refinances. > > One-time bonus incentive payments of $1,500 to lender/investors and $500 to > servicers will be provided for modifications made while a borrower is still > current on mortgage payments. > > Taxpayers are forking money over to Countrywide and other servicers at > $1,000 a pop (or more) for loan mods, of which 75% will re-default in less > than a year because "most of today's troubled borrowers cannot afford any > loan payment at all". > > Is this a great idea or what? No doubt Bank of America supports it 100%. > It's all part of Geithner's "Heist America > Plan > ". > > Mike "Mish" Shedlock > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com > Click Here To Scroll Thru My > Recent Post List > More Prime Foreclosures; More > Re-Defaults > *Posted by Michael Shedlock at 1:23 AM* *.... * > Print > *.... Email* > > > To sign up for a *free copy* of our Monthly Client Newsletter, please > register your email address at the bottom of the Sitka Pacific Commentary > Page . > > Buy Gold and Silver Online at > GoldMoney > The Best Way to Buy Gold and Silver > > > On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 7:00 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Rik and Bill, >> >> More on this after I get home from the road trip. As I implied in my >> earlier post, equities will rise in price for the wrong reasons. They >> should be priced, in theory, based on the net present value of future >> earnings. Future earnings will rise, not because companies produce >> more or better widgets, but because the underlying value of the dollar >> is falling. Treasuries will produce a negative return after inflation >> (remember the Carter years) and bonds will fare worse. For you two >> guys, sitting on the sidelines, staying out is indeed the best course. >> For someone like myself, the alternatives look a bit different. I'm >> pulling some chips off the table next week to take advantage of the >> "suckers rally" to some degree, but more so to fund some real estate >> projects on the Gulf Coast. The rest I'll let ride for another ten >> years. Remember, the 'gubment' already has its tenacles on two-thirds >> of my portfolio via 401K laws, so it only the one-third I can remove >> without some draconion penalties (lesson learned). >> >> >> Brad >> >> . >> On 5/31/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: >> > Brad, >> > >> > Careful..... >> > >> > What is going on right now in the stock market is commonly called a >> sucker's >> > rally. >> > >> > What I see coming with the rise in commodities is probably a further >> > pullback in consumer spending as most become even more conservative. >> > This >> > will not bode well for profits. >> > >> > You really have to watch out for ignorant journalists who like to >> > portray >> > things in the most dramatic way possible. Take this guy's claim that the >> > Baltic Dry Index has risen 320%. If you were watching that at all, you'd >> say >> > ..... but 320% against what??? If you put that index against a 1 to 100 >> > scale and you figure people are making money at 50 on that scale, you'd >> see >> > that it dropped about 90 percent from it's high. Great, so the low was >> > at >> > about ten on our scale. Now it went back up 320% from it's low, which >> really >> > isn't all that much. If you looked at it from the other way, which would >> be >> > a more realistic view, you would say it has gained back about 25% of >> > it's >> > loss, which leaves it in the *still not great* territory. >> > >> > There will be a bottom, but I don't believe it's here yet. We will see >> > another leg down before it's here. Those that are patient, wait it out >> and >> > still have something to invest when the bottom is in will be the winners >> in >> > this game. >> > >> > Right now, gold looks like a good inflation hedge. The Chinese are >> > buying >> > gold, bigtime. >> > >> > One thing to consider. Almost all journalists and gov't hacks didn't see >> > this thing coming. How could we expect them to know when it's over?? >> > >> > Rik >> > >> > On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Bill Effros wrote: >> > >> >> You are treating stock markets like commodities markets -- they are >> >> very >> >> different. >> >> >> >> The value of Enron stock or GM or Chrysler will never return to what >> they >> >> were. How can you ride these stocks back up? Maybe Wal Mart or Google >> >> stock will inflate, but not enough to make up for all the stocks that >> are >> >> today worthless. To invest in the market you must believe some new >> >> companies will be built the size of Enron, GM, Chrysler, >> Ford,...combined! >> >> >> >> So what would those new companies be? >> >> >> >> You are throwing good money after bad. >> >> >> >> If you think there will be inflation, play the currency market, or >> invest >> >> in >> >> gold. "Riding the market back up" is more of the same gamblers' >> >> mentality--if I keep betting my birthday in the lottery, eventually >> >> it's >> >> got >> >> to come in. No it doesn't. Neither does the stock market. >> >> >> >> B >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> From: "Brad Haslett" >> >> To: "Letters to the Editor" >> >> >> >> Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2009 7:55 AM >> >> Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Inflation Anyone? >> >> >> >> >> >> > For my own personal sake, I hope the author of this Reuters article >> >> > is >> >> > correct (see below). I rode the market down and plan to ride it on >> >> > the "way up". The market really isn't poised to "go up" based on >> >> > earnings, it's just that it is denominated in dollars and the massive >> >> > debt we're taking on will continue to batter the dollar for years to >> >> > come. Commodity prices, especially oil, will "rise". If I had a >> >> > crystal ball, I'd be out on my yacht today instead of driving a >> >> > Volkswagen to my parents, but some things are painfully obvious. >> >> > Hellooooo, inflation! >> >> > >> >> > Brad >> >> > >> >> > ------------- >> >> > >> >> > Global Markets Weekahead: Return of inflation? >> >> > Fri May 29, 2009 2:28pm EDT >> >> > >> >> > By Natsuko Waki >> >> > >> >> > LONDON (Reuters) - Surging oil and commodity prices coupled with a >> >> > falling dollar are prompting some investors to brace for a return of >> >> > inflation, which would benefit equities and damage most government >> >> > bonds. Inflation -- which in the short to medium term benefits >> >> > equities and risky assets because of rising prices -- had all but >> >> > disappeared after the global economy fell into recession and >> >> > commodity >> >> > prices sank last year. >> >> > >> >> > However, signs of a global economic recovery -- which next week's >> >> > manufacturing and service sector surveys and other data could >> >> > reinforce -- are leading to a renewed surge in energy and commodities >> >> > and the outperformance of inflation-protected debt securities over >> >> > benchmark government bonds. >> >> > >> >> > Oil prices are nearly double their four-year low in December. The >> >> > Reuters-Jefferies CRB index, a global commodities benchmark, has hit >> >> > a >> >> > six-month high while the Baltic Dry Index, which tracks rates to ship >> >> > dry commodities, has risen more than 320 percent since the start of >> >> > the year. >> >> > >> >> > To exacerbate matters, the dollar is on track for the worst monthly >> >> > performance since December 2008, which could further fuel buying in >> >> > dollar-based commodities. >> >> > >> >> > The return of inflationary forces at a time the world is grappling >> >> > with the threat of deflation, could prompt investors to invest in >> >> > assets such as stocks because rising prices erode the value of cash. >> >> > Already struggling government bonds, apart from inflation-linked >> >> > debt, >> >> > could come under further pressure. >> >> > >> >> > "We're in a reflation trade. Confidence is off its low from March and >> >> > asset prices are rising. The beneficial period will continue until we >> >> > find reasons to be pessimistic again," said David Miller, partner and >> >> > head of alternative investments at Cheviot Asset Management. >> >> > >> >> > "People are getting out of the dollar, into commodities, into >> >> > equities... Selectively there are reasons to buy commodities in a >> >> > portfolio." >> >> > >> >> > Miller said while the commodity supercycle might not materialize, >> >> > crisis-related factors such as the absence of farmers credit are >> >> > constraining supply and pressuring prices. >> >> > >> >> > The renewed surge in commodities is boosting related stocks. In >> >> > Europe, basic resource stocks have risen by 45 percent this year, >> >> > compared with a four percent rise in the pan-European FTSEurofirst >> >> > 300 >> >> > index. >> >> > >> >> > And investor flows support the move. According to fund flow tracker >> >> > EPFR Global, fresh money found its way into commodity and energy >> >> > sector funds in the week to May 27, with these funds posting inflows >> >> > of $303 million and $153 million respectively. >> >> > >> >> > Next week's U.S. personal consumption expenditure data -- the Federal >> >> > Reserve's favorite measure of inflation -- is likely to show however >> >> > that price rises remain moderate in the short term. >> >> > >> >> > Purchasing managers surveys in manufacturing and services sectors and >> >> > U.S. jobs data would be key in offering the state of the global >> >> > economy. Central banks from Britain, the euro zone, Canada and >> >> > Australia decide on interest rates. >> >> > >> >> > BOND ROUT >> >> > >> >> > Government bond markets could become a source of destabilization for >> >> > investors next week given rising concerns about burgeoning Western >> >> > government debt. The U.S. Treasury alone needs to borrow a record $2 >> >> > trillion in 2009 to help fund a $1.8 trillion fiscal deficit. >> >> > >> >> > Falling government bond prices are pushing up yields, which also >> >> > affects long-term borrowing costs for governments as well as >> >> > businesses and threatens to choke off an economic recovery. >> >> > >> >> > U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who visits China next week, >> >> > is expected to reassure Beijing that the Obama administration will >> >> > move swiftly to get its debt under control. >> >> > >> >> > Buying by Asian nations, including China, is crucial in maintaining >> >> > the stability in the U.S. Treasury market. A weakening dollar is a >> >> > double-edged sword for buyers as it makes Treasuries cheaper in the >> >> > long term but it erodes the value of their current holdings in the >> >> > short term. >> >> > >> >> > The benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury yield rose as high as 3.7538 >> >> > percent on Thursday, its highest since November. >> >> > >> >> > The 10-year U.S. breakeven rates -- the yield gap between >> >> > inflation-linked bonds over equivalent nominal government bonds >> >> > >> >> > -- have risen to 1.8760 percent, compared with around 0.2 percent at >> >> > the start of the year, reflecting the view that fears of deflation >> >> > have subsided. >> >> > >> >> > "Investors are realizing that by investing in an inflation-linked >> >> > product... they are able to mitigate the risk that these anticipated >> >> > inflationary pressures pose," said Jonathan Gibbs, fund manager at >> >> > Standard Life Investments. >> >> > >> >> > "The combination of a complex mix of inflationary and deflationary >> >> > forces at play in the global economy and the great uncertainty which >> >> > is likely to prevail, means that diversified risk is more important >> >> > than ever." >> >> > >> >> > (Editing by Andy Bruce) >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> > >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> > >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun May 31 10:39:36 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 09:39:36 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Inflation Anyone? In-Reply-To: <400985d70905310702h4a5371edp646051df730129fd@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905300555i56ee6003r2e7425d0fdb36ec6@mail.gmail.com> <841325E268E74BDA924E6AF8BD10B98C@BillLENOVO> <6634e19e0905310427u5a15fdf6k8ab3f255e2b568f8@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905310500k68f555cftedccbe6d89ca9b7a@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905310609q67a5ccb9y64180a0260c0b884@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905310702h4a5371edp646051df730129fd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905310739r7ffcd527m17ca5e8430af8da2@mail.gmail.com> Brad, One thing about real estate, conditions can be very localized. There are probably places where the market has bottomed, or if not bottomed, close enough and the area you're in could certainly be one of them. The question is, how long must one hold on before they start up again .... IF they start up again. My feeling is, when the recovery starts, it will be slow, not like the run-up we saw between say, 2000 and '05-6, but more like we saw back in the early 80's where it took several years for things to appreciate 10%. Now, you may be able to add some value with your improvements. If there are enough people around that recognize those improvements, it could work out OK. If not .... well, you know how that goes. IF one could do this without borrowing any money .... Yes, it's not the quick way to riches, but it's not the quick way to the poor house either. Try not to get in a position where the interest can eat you up. People are being pretty cautious right now. You might only want to stick your neck out a little bit. Just my opinion, for whatever that is worth. Rik On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 9:02 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > We've got another hour before the "roller coasters" crank-up (we're > staying in a motel outside of Six Flags St. Louis and driving to > Carbondale, Illinois later this afternoon) so I'll let rip with our > ideas. > > The article is correct about the real estate markets in general, > especially those hardest hit in California, Nevada, Arizona, Florida > and Michigan (MI has a different set of problems than the others). > But even across the rest of the nation, people bought more house than > they could afford and until the market "settles" , the econonomy as a > whole won't recover. > > Our situation on the Gulf is a bit different. The reality is just now > sinking-in that building near the water is too expensive because of > insurance (rates have quadrupled). The idea that some Donald Trump or > wealthy casino developer would buy large swaths of land at inflated > prices has faded as well (the casinos are for the most part > over-leveraged themselves). We're seeing a rise in demand for "estate > lots", 3 to 5 acre tracts at 100' elevation, which means you have to > go 15 to 20 miles inland. Some out-of-state "big boys" moved in early > with the right idea but over-extended themselves and went belly-up. > Our idea is to buy one lot at a time, turn our equipment loose on it, > and demonstrate what can be done with flat ground with a little > creativity and the right machine operator. If I'm right in my > thinking, we'll repeat the experiment. If I'm wrong, well, let's hope > I'm not wrong. The worst case scenerao is that we tie up capital in a > demo project that we'll use as a showcase for our "dirt moving" > talent. Besides, according to the zoning for our operations base, > we're supposed to be a nursery. We can just use the additional > property as an "overstock" lot for our main operations location > (assuming we ever get any nursery stock to begin with). > > Brad > > On 5/31/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > > Brad, > > > > When you get back, you may want to read this. > > > > Sometimes the best action is to just .... be still. > > > > Rik > > > > > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/more-prime-foreclosures-more-re.html > > ___________________ > > > > More Prime Foreclosures; More > > Re-Defaults< > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/more-prime-foreclosures-more-re.html > > > > > > John Mauldin has another interesting weekly letter called This Way There > Be > > Dragons . Here's a look at > the > > section on housing. Emphasis mine. > > > > "Yesterday Fitch ratings estimated that up to 75 percent of the > > modifications now being done through the administration's Making Home > > Affordable program will re-default in six months to a year. I'm not > talking > > about the old modifications, which were largely repayment plans that > could > > actually raise monthly payments. I'm talking about the new mods, which > lower > > monthly payments to 31 percent of a person's income. I couldn't > understand > > Fitch's reasoning, so I called them. > > > > "Diane Pendley, managing director at Fitch, said the problem is not on > that > > "front-end" ratio, but on the back end, which is all of the borrowers > other > > debt (credit cards, car loans, student loans, etc.). She said that in > > talking with servicers, she's hearing other debt is so high that most of > > today's troubled borrowers cannot afford any loan payment at all, even at > a > > very modest debt-to-income ratio. 'Just getting the house payment done > > doesn't mean their lifestyle is sustainable,' she said. > > > > "Another problem is that with home prices continuing to fall, more and > more > > borrowers, who are essentially just renting their mortgages now because > they > > will never see any home equity, are walking away. Even if the mortgage > > payment is low, the property taxes and home maintenance costs are padding > > that payment, and without an upside to the investment, there's simply no > > reason to pay. Suffice it to say, the foreclosure crisis, on the high and > > low ends, is not getting any better." > > > > And it gets worse. > > More Prime Foreclosures In Our Future > > > > The Mortgage Bankers Association noted that a record 12%, or 1 in 8 > > homeowners, in the US are now behind on their payments or in foreclosure. > > 10.6% of the mortgages in Florida are now somewhere in the process of > actual > > foreclosure. (My seatmate here on the flight says the prices on the > condos > > where he lives are now back to 1998 levels. It would be scary, he said, > if > > you had to sell. There are new developments that only have 10% actual > > occupancy, as the bulk of the condos were bought for speculation. Now > those > > 10% of buyers are having to shoulder all the fees for upkeep. Nobody will > > buy, because the upkeep costs can be more than the mortgage. It is a > vicious > > cycle.) > > > > In Nevada foreclosures are 7.8%, Arizona 5.6%, and California 5.2%. 25% > of > > subprime loans are now in foreclosure, 14% of FHA (government, > > taxpayer-guaranteed) loans and a growing 6% of all prime loans are now in > > foreclosure. (Note: the seasonal adjustments may overstate the actual > > numbers, as we are in new territory in terms of actual foreclosures.) > > Quoting from the MBA press release: > > > > "In looking at these numbers, it is important to focus on what has > changed > > as well what continue to be the key drivers of foreclosures. What has > > changed is the shifting of the problem somewhat away from the subprime > and > > option ARM/Alt-A loans to the prime fixed-rate loans. The foreclosure > rate > > on prime fixed-rate loans has doubled in the last year, and, for the > first > > time since the rapid growth of subprime lending, prime fixed-rate loans > now > > represent the largest share of new foreclosures. In addition, almost half > of > > the overall increase in foreclosure starts we saw in the first quarter > was > > due to the increase in prime fixed-rate loans." > > > > Servicer Incentives > > > > We are refinancing mortgages at attractive rates, with taxpayers picking > up > > the tab via Fannie, Freddie and the FHA. Let's revisit the Home > Affordable > > Modification Program > > Guidelines< > http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/reports/modification_program_guidelines.pdf > >to > > see how ridiculous the program is. > > > > Servicers will receive an up-front Servicer Incentive Payment of $1,000 > for > > each eligible modification meeting guidelines established under this > > initiative. Servicers will also receive Pay for Success payments ?as long > as > > the borrower stays in the program ? of up to $1,000 each year for up to > > three years. Similar incentives will be paid for Hope for Homeowner > > refinances. > > > > One-time bonus incentive payments of $1,500 to lender/investors and $500 > to > > servicers will be provided for modifications made while a borrower is > still > > current on mortgage payments. > > > > Taxpayers are forking money over to Countrywide and other servicers at > > $1,000 a pop (or more) for loan mods, of which 75% will re-default in > less > > than a year because "most of today's troubled borrowers cannot afford any > > loan payment at all". > > > > Is this a great idea or what? No doubt Bank of America supports it 100%. > > It's all part of Geithner's "Heist America > > Plan< > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/04/more-ugly-details-emerge-on-geithners.html > > > > ". > > > > Mike "Mish" Shedlock > > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com > > Click Here To Scroll Thru > My > > Recent Post List > > More Prime Foreclosures; More > > Re-Defaults< > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/more-prime-foreclosures-more-re.html > > > > *Posted by Michael Shedlock at 1:23 AM* *.... * > > Print > > *.... Email* > > < > http://www.blogger.com/email-post.g?blogID=11324386&postID=5670567121365951797 > > > > > > To sign up for a *free copy* of our Monthly Client Newsletter, please > > register your email address at the bottom of the Sitka Pacific Commentary > > Page . > > > > Buy Gold and Silver Online at > > GoldMoney > > The Best Way to Buy Gold and Silver > > > > > > On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 7:00 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> Rik and Bill, > >> > >> More on this after I get home from the road trip. As I implied in my > >> earlier post, equities will rise in price for the wrong reasons. They > >> should be priced, in theory, based on the net present value of future > >> earnings. Future earnings will rise, not because companies produce > >> more or better widgets, but because the underlying value of the dollar > >> is falling. Treasuries will produce a negative return after inflation > >> (remember the Carter years) and bonds will fare worse. For you two > >> guys, sitting on the sidelines, staying out is indeed the best course. > >> For someone like myself, the alternatives look a bit different. I'm > >> pulling some chips off the table next week to take advantage of the > >> "suckers rally" to some degree, but more so to fund some real estate > >> projects on the Gulf Coast. The rest I'll let ride for another ten > >> years. Remember, the 'gubment' already has its tenacles on two-thirds > >> of my portfolio via 401K laws, so it only the one-third I can remove > >> without some draconion penalties (lesson learned). > >> > >> > >> Brad > >> > >> . > >> On 5/31/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > >> > Brad, > >> > > >> > Careful..... > >> > > >> > What is going on right now in the stock market is commonly called a > >> sucker's > >> > rally. > >> > > >> > What I see coming with the rise in commodities is probably a further > >> > pullback in consumer spending as most become even more conservative. > >> > This > >> > will not bode well for profits. > >> > > >> > You really have to watch out for ignorant journalists who like to > >> > portray > >> > things in the most dramatic way possible. Take this guy's claim that > the > >> > Baltic Dry Index has risen 320%. If you were watching that at all, > you'd > >> say > >> > ..... but 320% against what??? If you put that index against a 1 to > 100 > >> > scale and you figure people are making money at 50 on that scale, > you'd > >> see > >> > that it dropped about 90 percent from it's high. Great, so the low was > >> > at > >> > about ten on our scale. Now it went back up 320% from it's low, which > >> really > >> > isn't all that much. If you looked at it from the other way, which > would > >> be > >> > a more realistic view, you would say it has gained back about 25% of > >> > it's > >> > loss, which leaves it in the *still not great* territory. > >> > > >> > There will be a bottom, but I don't believe it's here yet. We will see > >> > another leg down before it's here. Those that are patient, wait it out > >> and > >> > still have something to invest when the bottom is in will be the > winners > >> in > >> > this game. > >> > > >> > Right now, gold looks like a good inflation hedge. The Chinese are > >> > buying > >> > gold, bigtime. > >> > > >> > One thing to consider. Almost all journalists and gov't hacks didn't > see > >> > this thing coming. How could we expect them to know when it's over?? > >> > > >> > Rik > >> > > >> > On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Bill Effros > wrote: > >> > > >> >> You are treating stock markets like commodities markets -- they are > >> >> very > >> >> different. > >> >> > >> >> The value of Enron stock or GM or Chrysler will never return to what > >> they > >> >> were. How can you ride these stocks back up? Maybe Wal Mart or > Google > >> >> stock will inflate, but not enough to make up for all the stocks that > >> are > >> >> today worthless. To invest in the market you must believe some new > >> >> companies will be built the size of Enron, GM, Chrysler, > >> Ford,...combined! > >> >> > >> >> So what would those new companies be? > >> >> > >> >> You are throwing good money after bad. > >> >> > >> >> If you think there will be inflation, play the currency market, or > >> invest > >> >> in > >> >> gold. "Riding the market back up" is more of the same gamblers' > >> >> mentality--if I keep betting my birthday in the lottery, eventually > >> >> it's > >> >> got > >> >> to come in. No it doesn't. Neither does the stock market. > >> >> > >> >> B > >> >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> >> From: "Brad Haslett" > >> >> To: "Letters to the Editor" > >> >> > >> >> Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2009 7:55 AM > >> >> Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Inflation Anyone? > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > For my own personal sake, I hope the author of this Reuters article > >> >> > is > >> >> > correct (see below). I rode the market down and plan to ride it on > >> >> > the "way up". The market really isn't poised to "go up" based on > >> >> > earnings, it's just that it is denominated in dollars and the > massive > >> >> > debt we're taking on will continue to batter the dollar for years > to > >> >> > come. Commodity prices, especially oil, will "rise". If I had a > >> >> > crystal ball, I'd be out on my yacht today instead of driving a > >> >> > Volkswagen to my parents, but some things are painfully obvious. > >> >> > Hellooooo, inflation! > >> >> > > >> >> > Brad > >> >> > > >> >> > ------------- > >> >> > > >> >> > Global Markets Weekahead: Return of inflation? > >> >> > Fri May 29, 2009 2:28pm EDT > >> >> > > >> >> > By Natsuko Waki > >> >> > > >> >> > LONDON (Reuters) - Surging oil and commodity prices coupled with a > >> >> > falling dollar are prompting some investors to brace for a return > of > >> >> > inflation, which would benefit equities and damage most government > >> >> > bonds. Inflation -- which in the short to medium term benefits > >> >> > equities and risky assets because of rising prices -- had all but > >> >> > disappeared after the global economy fell into recession and > >> >> > commodity > >> >> > prices sank last year. > >> >> > > >> >> > However, signs of a global economic recovery -- which next week's > >> >> > manufacturing and service sector surveys and other data could > >> >> > reinforce -- are leading to a renewed surge in energy and > commodities > >> >> > and the outperformance of inflation-protected debt securities over > >> >> > benchmark government bonds. > >> >> > > >> >> > Oil prices are nearly double their four-year low in December. The > >> >> > Reuters-Jefferies CRB index, a global commodities benchmark, has > hit > >> >> > a > >> >> > six-month high while the Baltic Dry Index, which tracks rates to > ship > >> >> > dry commodities, has risen more than 320 percent since the start of > >> >> > the year. > >> >> > > >> >> > To exacerbate matters, the dollar is on track for the worst monthly > >> >> > performance since December 2008, which could further fuel buying in > >> >> > dollar-based commodities. > >> >> > > >> >> > The return of inflationary forces at a time the world is grappling > >> >> > with the threat of deflation, could prompt investors to invest in > >> >> > assets such as stocks because rising prices erode the value of > cash. > >> >> > Already struggling government bonds, apart from inflation-linked > >> >> > debt, > >> >> > could come under further pressure. > >> >> > > >> >> > "We're in a reflation trade. Confidence is off its low from March > and > >> >> > asset prices are rising. The beneficial period will continue until > we > >> >> > find reasons to be pessimistic again," said David Miller, partner > and > >> >> > head of alternative investments at Cheviot Asset Management. > >> >> > > >> >> > "People are getting out of the dollar, into commodities, into > >> >> > equities... Selectively there are reasons to buy commodities in a > >> >> > portfolio." > >> >> > > >> >> > Miller said while the commodity supercycle might not materialize, > >> >> > crisis-related factors such as the absence of farmers credit are > >> >> > constraining supply and pressuring prices. > >> >> > > >> >> > The renewed surge in commodities is boosting related stocks. In > >> >> > Europe, basic resource stocks have risen by 45 percent this year, > >> >> > compared with a four percent rise in the pan-European FTSEurofirst > >> >> > 300 > >> >> > index. > >> >> > > >> >> > And investor flows support the move. According to fund flow tracker > >> >> > EPFR Global, fresh money found its way into commodity and energy > >> >> > sector funds in the week to May 27, with these funds posting > inflows > >> >> > of $303 million and $153 million respectively. > >> >> > > >> >> > Next week's U.S. personal consumption expenditure data -- the > Federal > >> >> > Reserve's favorite measure of inflation -- is likely to show > however > >> >> > that price rises remain moderate in the short term. > >> >> > > >> >> > Purchasing managers surveys in manufacturing and services sectors > and > >> >> > U.S. jobs data would be key in offering the state of the global > >> >> > economy. Central banks from Britain, the euro zone, Canada and > >> >> > Australia decide on interest rates. > >> >> > > >> >> > BOND ROUT > >> >> > > >> >> > Government bond markets could become a source of destabilization > for > >> >> > investors next week given rising concerns about burgeoning Western > >> >> > government debt. The U.S. Treasury alone needs to borrow a record > $2 > >> >> > trillion in 2009 to help fund a $1.8 trillion fiscal deficit. > >> >> > > >> >> > Falling government bond prices are pushing up yields, which also > >> >> > affects long-term borrowing costs for governments as well as > >> >> > businesses and threatens to choke off an economic recovery. > >> >> > > >> >> > U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who visits China next > week, > >> >> > is expected to reassure Beijing that the Obama administration will > >> >> > move swiftly to get its debt under control. > >> >> > > >> >> > Buying by Asian nations, including China, is crucial in maintaining > >> >> > the stability in the U.S. Treasury market. A weakening dollar is a > >> >> > double-edged sword for buyers as it makes Treasuries cheaper in the > >> >> > long term but it erodes the value of their current holdings in the > >> >> > short term. > >> >> > > >> >> > The benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury yield rose as high as 3.7538 > >> >> > percent on Thursday, its highest since November. > >> >> > > >> >> > The 10-year U.S. breakeven rates -- the yield gap between > >> >> > inflation-linked bonds over equivalent nominal government bonds > >> >> > > >> >> > -- have risen to 1.8760 percent, compared with around 0.2 percent > at > >> >> > the start of the year, reflecting the view that fears of deflation > >> >> > have subsided. > >> >> > > >> >> > "Investors are realizing that by investing in an inflation-linked > >> >> > product... they are able to mitigate the risk that these > anticipated > >> >> > inflationary pressures pose," said Jonathan Gibbs, fund manager at > >> >> > Standard Life Investments. > >> >> > > >> >> > "The combination of a complex mix of inflationary and deflationary > >> >> > forces at play in the global economy and the great uncertainty > which > >> >> > is likely to prevail, means that diversified risk is more important > >> >> > than ever." > >> >> > > >> >> > (Editing by Andy Bruce) > >> >> > _______________________________________________ > >> >> > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> >> > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> >> > > >> >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> >> > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090531/a85918a7/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sun May 31 11:07:23 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 10:07:23 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Inflation Anyone? In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0905310739r7ffcd527m17ca5e8430af8da2@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905300555i56ee6003r2e7425d0fdb36ec6@mail.gmail.com> <841325E268E74BDA924E6AF8BD10B98C@BillLENOVO> <6634e19e0905310427u5a15fdf6k8ab3f255e2b568f8@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905310500k68f555cftedccbe6d89ca9b7a@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905310609q67a5ccb9y64180a0260c0b884@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905310702h4a5371edp646051df730129fd@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905310739r7ffcd527m17ca5e8430af8da2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70905310807we3629e0o74ad280eddbe14ad@mail.gmail.com> Rik, That's precisely why I'm thinking out loud - I appreciate other points of view and possible aspects (risks) of a project I hadn't considered. Yeah, it will be a cash deal, but the cash will have to come from selling some really beaten down mutual funds. The risk is this; will the property with improvements outperform the mutual funds? The money to fund any project is after-tax dollars and there won't be a gain on the sale of the stocks - there will be on the sale of any property (we hope). We can always offset gains by finding new gizmos to add to add the Bonanza. Some very unrealistic expectations were created right after Katrina because of speculators, outside investors, and the still yet-to-be recognized in 2005 real estate bubble. We may not have seen bottom in the local market, but we're certainly seeing some major corrections in the right direction. The general economic conditions are forcing some sellers to come to grips with what their property is really worth. The buyers's side is a bit trickier to figure out - they're out there though, just not in substantial numbers. I haven't quite figured out what our niche in the construction market is yet, I just know a lot of stuff we don't or won't do; trucking, public work, working for developers, subbing to other contractors unless we're paid at least weekly (not waiting on them to collect their funds from 'gubmint', etc.). That doesn't leave a very broad spectrum of things to do with our equipment. Fortunately for us, we're more of a "lifestyle" firm. My brother likes being semi-retired and I like having an excuse to go fly the airplane. Every thing we do has to pass the "stress test" before we even run it through the profit analysis. "Will this be fun?" is the first thing we ask. That certainly isn't the fast path to riches, but then we never were on that path to start. We've lost a lot of our competitors, but there's still enough left that will work at or below cost to generate cash-flow that we don't bother to compete on a lot of stuff. On the positive side, our equipment is all low-time and paid for - not many little construction companies can say that. Brad On 5/31/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > One thing about real estate, conditions can be very localized. There are > probably places where the market has bottomed, or if not bottomed, close > enough and the area you're in could certainly be one of them. The question > is, how long must one hold on before they start up again .... IF they start > up again. My feeling is, when the recovery starts, it will be slow, not like > the run-up we saw between say, 2000 and '05-6, but more like we saw back in > the early 80's where it took several years for things to appreciate 10%. > > Now, you may be able to add some value with your improvements. If there are > enough people around that recognize those improvements, it could work out > OK. If not .... well, you know how that goes. IF one could do this without > borrowing any money .... Yes, it's not the quick way to riches, but it's not > the quick way to the poor house either. Try not to get in a position where > the interest can eat you up. > > People are being pretty cautious right now. You might only want to stick > your neck out a little bit. > > Just my opinion, for whatever that is worth. > > Rik > > On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 9:02 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Rik, >> >> We've got another hour before the "roller coasters" crank-up (we're >> staying in a motel outside of Six Flags St. Louis and driving to >> Carbondale, Illinois later this afternoon) so I'll let rip with our >> ideas. >> >> The article is correct about the real estate markets in general, >> especially those hardest hit in California, Nevada, Arizona, Florida >> and Michigan (MI has a different set of problems than the others). >> But even across the rest of the nation, people bought more house than >> they could afford and until the market "settles" , the econonomy as a >> whole won't recover. >> >> Our situation on the Gulf is a bit different. The reality is just now >> sinking-in that building near the water is too expensive because of >> insurance (rates have quadrupled). The idea that some Donald Trump or >> wealthy casino developer would buy large swaths of land at inflated >> prices has faded as well (the casinos are for the most part >> over-leveraged themselves). We're seeing a rise in demand for "estate >> lots", 3 to 5 acre tracts at 100' elevation, which means you have to >> go 15 to 20 miles inland. Some out-of-state "big boys" moved in early >> with the right idea but over-extended themselves and went belly-up. >> Our idea is to buy one lot at a time, turn our equipment loose on it, >> and demonstrate what can be done with flat ground with a little >> creativity and the right machine operator. If I'm right in my >> thinking, we'll repeat the experiment. If I'm wrong, well, let's hope >> I'm not wrong. The worst case scenerao is that we tie up capital in a >> demo project that we'll use as a showcase for our "dirt moving" >> talent. Besides, according to the zoning for our operations base, >> we're supposed to be a nursery. We can just use the additional >> property as an "overstock" lot for our main operations location >> (assuming we ever get any nursery stock to begin with). >> >> Brad >> >> On 5/31/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: >> > Brad, >> > >> > When you get back, you may want to read this. >> > >> > Sometimes the best action is to just .... be still. >> > >> > Rik >> > >> > >> http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/more-prime-foreclosures-more-re.html >> > ___________________ >> > >> > More Prime Foreclosures; More >> > Re-Defaults< >> http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/more-prime-foreclosures-more-re.html >> > >> > >> > John Mauldin has another interesting weekly letter called This Way There >> Be >> > Dragons . Here's a look at >> the >> > section on housing. Emphasis mine. >> > >> > "Yesterday Fitch ratings estimated that up to 75 percent of the >> > modifications now being done through the administration's Making Home >> > Affordable program will re-default in six months to a year. I'm not >> talking >> > about the old modifications, which were largely repayment plans that >> could >> > actually raise monthly payments. I'm talking about the new mods, which >> lower >> > monthly payments to 31 percent of a person's income. I couldn't >> understand >> > Fitch's reasoning, so I called them. >> > >> > "Diane Pendley, managing director at Fitch, said the problem is not on >> that >> > "front-end" ratio, but on the back end, which is all of the borrowers >> other >> > debt (credit cards, car loans, student loans, etc.). She said that in >> > talking with servicers, she's hearing other debt is so high that most of >> > today's troubled borrowers cannot afford any loan payment at all, even >> > at >> a >> > very modest debt-to-income ratio. 'Just getting the house payment done >> > doesn't mean their lifestyle is sustainable,' she said. >> > >> > "Another problem is that with home prices continuing to fall, more and >> more >> > borrowers, who are essentially just renting their mortgages now because >> they >> > will never see any home equity, are walking away. Even if the mortgage >> > payment is low, the property taxes and home maintenance costs are >> > padding >> > that payment, and without an upside to the investment, there's simply no >> > reason to pay. Suffice it to say, the foreclosure crisis, on the high >> > and >> > low ends, is not getting any better." >> > >> > And it gets worse. >> > More Prime Foreclosures In Our Future >> > >> > The Mortgage Bankers Association noted that a record 12%, or 1 in 8 >> > homeowners, in the US are now behind on their payments or in >> > foreclosure. >> > 10.6% of the mortgages in Florida are now somewhere in the process of >> actual >> > foreclosure. (My seatmate here on the flight says the prices on the >> condos >> > where he lives are now back to 1998 levels. It would be scary, he said, >> if >> > you had to sell. There are new developments that only have 10% actual >> > occupancy, as the bulk of the condos were bought for speculation. Now >> those >> > 10% of buyers are having to shoulder all the fees for upkeep. Nobody >> > will >> > buy, because the upkeep costs can be more than the mortgage. It is a >> vicious >> > cycle.) >> > >> > In Nevada foreclosures are 7.8%, Arizona 5.6%, and California 5.2%. 25% >> of >> > subprime loans are now in foreclosure, 14% of FHA (government, >> > taxpayer-guaranteed) loans and a growing 6% of all prime loans are now >> > in >> > foreclosure. (Note: the seasonal adjustments may overstate the actual >> > numbers, as we are in new territory in terms of actual foreclosures.) >> > Quoting from the MBA press release: >> > >> > "In looking at these numbers, it is important to focus on what has >> changed >> > as well what continue to be the key drivers of foreclosures. What has >> > changed is the shifting of the problem somewhat away from the subprime >> and >> > option ARM/Alt-A loans to the prime fixed-rate loans. The foreclosure >> rate >> > on prime fixed-rate loans has doubled in the last year, and, for the >> first >> > time since the rapid growth of subprime lending, prime fixed-rate loans >> now >> > represent the largest share of new foreclosures. In addition, almost >> > half >> of >> > the overall increase in foreclosure starts we saw in the first quarter >> was >> > due to the increase in prime fixed-rate loans." >> > >> > Servicer Incentives >> > >> > We are refinancing mortgages at attractive rates, with taxpayers picking >> up >> > the tab via Fannie, Freddie and the FHA. Let's revisit the Home >> Affordable >> > Modification Program >> > Guidelines< >> http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/reports/modification_program_guidelines.pdf >> >to >> > see how ridiculous the program is. >> > >> > Servicers will receive an up-front Servicer Incentive Payment of $1,000 >> for >> > each eligible modification meeting guidelines established under this >> > initiative. Servicers will also receive Pay for Success payments ?as >> > long >> as >> > the borrower stays in the program ? of up to $1,000 each year for up to >> > three years. Similar incentives will be paid for Hope for Homeowner >> > refinances. >> > >> > One-time bonus incentive payments of $1,500 to lender/investors and $500 >> to >> > servicers will be provided for modifications made while a borrower is >> still >> > current on mortgage payments. >> > >> > Taxpayers are forking money over to Countrywide and other servicers at >> > $1,000 a pop (or more) for loan mods, of which 75% will re-default in >> less >> > than a year because "most of today's troubled borrowers cannot afford >> > any >> > loan payment at all". >> > >> > Is this a great idea or what? No doubt Bank of America supports it 100%. >> > It's all part of Geithner's "Heist America >> > Plan< >> http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/04/more-ugly-details-emerge-on-geithners.html >> > >> > ". >> > >> > Mike "Mish" Shedlock >> > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com >> > Click Here To Scroll Thru >> My >> > Recent Post List >> > More Prime Foreclosures; More >> > Re-Defaults< >> http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/more-prime-foreclosures-more-re.html >> > >> > *Posted by Michael Shedlock at 1:23 AM* *.... * >> > Print >> > *.... Email* >> > < >> http://www.blogger.com/email-post.g?blogID=11324386&postID=5670567121365951797 >> > >> > >> > To sign up for a *free copy* of our Monthly Client Newsletter, please >> > register your email address at the bottom of the Sitka Pacific >> > Commentary >> > Page . >> > >> > Buy Gold and Silver Online at >> > GoldMoney >> > The Best Way to Buy Gold and Silver >> > >> > >> > On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 7:00 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> > >> >> Rik and Bill, >> >> >> >> More on this after I get home from the road trip. As I implied in my >> >> earlier post, equities will rise in price for the wrong reasons. They >> >> should be priced, in theory, based on the net present value of future >> >> earnings. Future earnings will rise, not because companies produce >> >> more or better widgets, but because the underlying value of the dollar >> >> is falling. Treasuries will produce a negative return after inflation >> >> (remember the Carter years) and bonds will fare worse. For you two >> >> guys, sitting on the sidelines, staying out is indeed the best course. >> >> For someone like myself, the alternatives look a bit different. I'm >> >> pulling some chips off the table next week to take advantage of the >> >> "suckers rally" to some degree, but more so to fund some real estate >> >> projects on the Gulf Coast. The rest I'll let ride for another ten >> >> years. Remember, the 'gubment' already has its tenacles on two-thirds >> >> of my portfolio via 401K laws, so it only the one-third I can remove >> >> without some draconion penalties (lesson learned). >> >> >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> >> >> . >> >> On 5/31/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: >> >> > Brad, >> >> > >> >> > Careful..... >> >> > >> >> > What is going on right now in the stock market is commonly called a >> >> sucker's >> >> > rally. >> >> > >> >> > What I see coming with the rise in commodities is probably a further >> >> > pullback in consumer spending as most become even more conservative. >> >> > This >> >> > will not bode well for profits. >> >> > >> >> > You really have to watch out for ignorant journalists who like to >> >> > portray >> >> > things in the most dramatic way possible. Take this guy's claim that >> the >> >> > Baltic Dry Index has risen 320%. If you were watching that at all, >> you'd >> >> say >> >> > ..... but 320% against what??? If you put that index against a 1 to >> 100 >> >> > scale and you figure people are making money at 50 on that scale, >> you'd >> >> see >> >> > that it dropped about 90 percent from it's high. Great, so the low >> >> > was >> >> > at >> >> > about ten on our scale. Now it went back up 320% from it's low, which >> >> really >> >> > isn't all that much. If you looked at it from the other way, which >> would >> >> be >> >> > a more realistic view, you would say it has gained back about 25% of >> >> > it's >> >> > loss, which leaves it in the *still not great* territory. >> >> > >> >> > There will be a bottom, but I don't believe it's here yet. We will >> >> > see >> >> > another leg down before it's here. Those that are patient, wait it >> >> > out >> >> and >> >> > still have something to invest when the bottom is in will be the >> winners >> >> in >> >> > this game. >> >> > >> >> > Right now, gold looks like a good inflation hedge. The Chinese are >> >> > buying >> >> > gold, bigtime. >> >> > >> >> > One thing to consider. Almost all journalists and gov't hacks didn't >> see >> >> > this thing coming. How could we expect them to know when it's over?? >> >> > >> >> > Rik >> >> > >> >> > On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Bill Effros >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> You are treating stock markets like commodities markets -- they are >> >> >> very >> >> >> different. >> >> >> >> >> >> The value of Enron stock or GM or Chrysler will never return to what >> >> they >> >> >> were. How can you ride these stocks back up? Maybe Wal Mart or >> Google >> >> >> stock will inflate, but not enough to make up for all the stocks >> >> >> that >> >> are >> >> >> today worthless. To invest in the market you must believe some new >> >> >> companies will be built the size of Enron, GM, Chrysler, >> >> Ford,...combined! >> >> >> >> >> >> So what would those new companies be? >> >> >> >> >> >> You are throwing good money after bad. >> >> >> >> >> >> If you think there will be inflation, play the currency market, or >> >> invest >> >> >> in >> >> >> gold. "Riding the market back up" is more of the same gamblers' >> >> >> mentality--if I keep betting my birthday in the lottery, eventually >> >> >> it's >> >> >> got >> >> >> to come in. No it doesn't. Neither does the stock market. >> >> >> >> >> >> B >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> >> From: "Brad Haslett" >> >> >> To: "Letters to the Editor" >> >> >> >> >> >> Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2009 7:55 AM >> >> >> Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Inflation Anyone? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > For my own personal sake, I hope the author of this Reuters >> >> >> > article >> >> >> > is >> >> >> > correct (see below). I rode the market down and plan to ride it >> >> >> > on >> >> >> > the "way up". The market really isn't poised to "go up" based on >> >> >> > earnings, it's just that it is denominated in dollars and the >> massive >> >> >> > debt we're taking on will continue to batter the dollar for years >> to >> >> >> > come. Commodity prices, especially oil, will "rise". If I had a >> >> >> > crystal ball, I'd be out on my yacht today instead of driving a >> >> >> > Volkswagen to my parents, but some things are painfully obvious. >> >> >> > Hellooooo, inflation! >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Brad >> >> >> > >> >> >> > ------------- >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Global Markets Weekahead: Return of inflation? >> >> >> > Fri May 29, 2009 2:28pm EDT >> >> >> > >> >> >> > By Natsuko Waki >> >> >> > >> >> >> > LONDON (Reuters) - Surging oil and commodity prices coupled with a >> >> >> > falling dollar are prompting some investors to brace for a return >> of >> >> >> > inflation, which would benefit equities and damage most government >> >> >> > bonds. Inflation -- which in the short to medium term benefits >> >> >> > equities and risky assets because of rising prices -- had all but >> >> >> > disappeared after the global economy fell into recession and >> >> >> > commodity >> >> >> > prices sank last year. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > However, signs of a global economic recovery -- which next week's >> >> >> > manufacturing and service sector surveys and other data could >> >> >> > reinforce -- are leading to a renewed surge in energy and >> commodities >> >> >> > and the outperformance of inflation-protected debt securities over >> >> >> > benchmark government bonds. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Oil prices are nearly double their four-year low in December. The >> >> >> > Reuters-Jefferies CRB index, a global commodities benchmark, has >> hit >> >> >> > a >> >> >> > six-month high while the Baltic Dry Index, which tracks rates to >> ship >> >> >> > dry commodities, has risen more than 320 percent since the start >> >> >> > of >> >> >> > the year. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > To exacerbate matters, the dollar is on track for the worst >> >> >> > monthly >> >> >> > performance since December 2008, which could further fuel buying >> >> >> > in >> >> >> > dollar-based commodities. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > The return of inflationary forces at a time the world is grappling >> >> >> > with the threat of deflation, could prompt investors to invest in >> >> >> > assets such as stocks because rising prices erode the value of >> cash. >> >> >> > Already struggling government bonds, apart from inflation-linked >> >> >> > debt, >> >> >> > could come under further pressure. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > "We're in a reflation trade. Confidence is off its low from March >> and >> >> >> > asset prices are rising. The beneficial period will continue until >> we >> >> >> > find reasons to be pessimistic again," said David Miller, partner >> and >> >> >> > head of alternative investments at Cheviot Asset Management. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > "People are getting out of the dollar, into commodities, into >> >> >> > equities... Selectively there are reasons to buy commodities in a >> >> >> > portfolio." >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Miller said while the commodity supercycle might not materialize, >> >> >> > crisis-related factors such as the absence of farmers credit are >> >> >> > constraining supply and pressuring prices. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > The renewed surge in commodities is boosting related stocks. In >> >> >> > Europe, basic resource stocks have risen by 45 percent this year, >> >> >> > compared with a four percent rise in the pan-European FTSEurofirst >> >> >> > 300 >> >> >> > index. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > And investor flows support the move. According to fund flow >> >> >> > tracker >> >> >> > EPFR Global, fresh money found its way into commodity and energy >> >> >> > sector funds in the week to May 27, with these funds posting >> inflows >> >> >> > of $303 million and $153 million respectively. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Next week's U.S. personal consumption expenditure data -- the >> Federal >> >> >> > Reserve's favorite measure of inflation -- is likely to show >> however >> >> >> > that price rises remain moderate in the short term. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Purchasing managers surveys in manufacturing and services sectors >> and >> >> >> > U.S. jobs data would be key in offering the state of the global >> >> >> > economy. Central banks from Britain, the euro zone, Canada and >> >> >> > Australia decide on interest rates. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > BOND ROUT >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Government bond markets could become a source of destabilization >> for >> >> >> > investors next week given rising concerns about burgeoning Western >> >> >> > government debt. The U.S. Treasury alone needs to borrow a record >> $2 >> >> >> > trillion in 2009 to help fund a $1.8 trillion fiscal deficit. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Falling government bond prices are pushing up yields, which also >> >> >> > affects long-term borrowing costs for governments as well as >> >> >> > businesses and threatens to choke off an economic recovery. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who visits China next >> week, >> >> >> > is expected to reassure Beijing that the Obama administration will >> >> >> > move swiftly to get its debt under control. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Buying by Asian nations, including China, is crucial in >> >> >> > maintaining >> >> >> > the stability in the U.S. Treasury market. A weakening dollar is a >> >> >> > double-edged sword for buyers as it makes Treasuries cheaper in >> >> >> > the >> >> >> > long term but it erodes the value of their current holdings in the >> >> >> > short term. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > The benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury yield rose as high as 3.7538 >> >> >> > percent on Thursday, its highest since November. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > The 10-year U.S. breakeven rates -- the yield gap between >> >> >> > inflation-linked bonds over equivalent nominal government bonds >> >> >> > >> >> >> > -- have risen to 1.8760 percent, compared with around 0.2 percent >> at >> >> >> > the start of the year, reflecting the view that fears of deflation >> >> >> > have subsided. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > "Investors are realizing that by investing in an inflation-linked >> >> >> > product... they are able to mitigate the risk that these >> anticipated >> >> >> > inflationary pressures pose," said Jonathan Gibbs, fund manager at >> >> >> > Standard Life Investments. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > "The combination of a complex mix of inflationary and deflationary >> >> >> > forces at play in the global economy and the great uncertainty >> which >> >> >> > is likely to prevail, means that diversified risk is more >> >> >> > important >> >> >> > than ever." >> >> >> > >> >> >> > (Editing by Andy Bruce) >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> >> > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> >> > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From ekroposki at charter.net Sun May 31 11:34:33 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 11:34:33 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] 'Shock And Awe' Statism, by George F. Will Message-ID: <2B14A5FBF55D41B28E498BC23A24B89B@YOURB88038198E> 'Shock And Awe' Statism By George F. Will Sunday, May 31, 2009 Epiphanies are a dime a dozen among congressional Democrats as they discover urgent new reasons to experience the almost erotic pleasure of commandeering other people's money. For example, freshman Rep. Alan Grayson, a Florida Democrat whose district includes Disney World, was recently there and was inspired. The world, he realized, would be a sweeter place if Congress mandated that all companies with 100 or more employees provide a week of paid vacation to those who work at least 25 hours a week. After three years, they would be entitled to two weeks, and companies with more than 50 employees would have to start providing a paid vacation week. Grayson would not mandate that paid vacations be spent at Disney World. With the welfare state approaching insolvency and businesses sagging, this is an odd time to augment Americans' entitlement mentality. But the travel and tourism industries think that Grayson's idea is neat. Members of the Congressional Black Caucus want the Treasury Department to subsidize minority owners of broadcasting properties. The broadcasters are not "too big to fail" and so do not pose a "systemic risk," but, the representatives say, failures of minority broadcasters would diminish diversity. Such government micromanagement of the economy is everywhere. The Post recently reported that Richard Wagoner, the former CEO of General Motors who was removed by the government, remains on GM's payroll "because senior Treasury officials have yet to decide whether he should get the $20 million severance package that the company had promised him." His 2009 compensation -- $1 -- is payable Dec. 31. The $20 million promised to him includes contractual awards, deferred compensation and pension benefits accrued over 32 years with the company. Promise-keeping, including honoring contracts, is the default position of a lawful society. But suddenly, many citizens' legal claims are merely starting points for negotiations with an overbearing government. State governments, too, are expected to accept Washington's whims, but plucky Indiana is being obdurate. Gov. Mitch Daniels, alarmed by what he calls the Obama administration's "shock-and-awe statism," is supporting state Treasurer Richard Mourdock's objection to the administration's treatment of Chrysler's creditors, which include the pension funds for Indiana's retired teachers and state police officers and a state construction fund. Together they own $42.5 million of Chrysler's $6.9 billion (supposedly) secured debt. Compliant, because dependent, banks bowed to the administration's demand that they accept less than settled bankruptcy law would have given them as secured creditors. Next, the president denounced as "speculators" remaining secured creditors, who then folded and accepted less on the dollar than an unsecured creditor -- the United Auto Workers union -- is getting. This raw taking of property from secured investors penalized those "speculators" -- retired Indiana teachers and state police officers who, Mourdock says, are being "ripped off by the federal government." He is asking a court to declare that the Obama administration's actions have violated "more than 100 years of established law by redefining 'secured creditors' to mean something less" and that the actions violate the Fifth Amendment protection against the seizure of private property. Furthermore, he says, the government is guilty of "misuse" of the Troubled Assets Relief Program, which gives the Treasury authority only to aid financial institutions, not industrial companies. One New Deal improvisation not yet emulated by the Obama administration is the September 1933 slaughter -- while the unemployment rate was 25 percent and millions were hungry -- of 6 million young pigs. The purpose was to raise the price of pork by reducing the supply of it. But the "cash for clunkers" idea is a cousin of that. The Wall Street Journal's Joseph B. White reports that proposals percolating in Congress would further subsidize Detroit -- and chill the planet, of course -- by bribing people to turn in old cars and trucks (dealers have 400,000 unsold large pickups) and buy vehicles that get better gas mileage. In one plan, if the new truck gets one mile per gallon more than the old truck, the buyer would get $3,500; a two-mpg improvement would be worth $4,500. Such a policy would counteract the president's environmentally harmful policy of forcing Detroit to quickly produce cars that are much more fuel-efficient -- meaning light, cramped and dangerous. Such products will be powerful incentives for Americans to continue driving their old, more polluting and less fuel-efficient cars. This will deprive Detroit of some customers, but surely the government has thought this through. georgewill at washpost.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090531/dc6e25ec/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 8513 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090531/dc6e25ec/attachment-0001.gif From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun May 31 11:45:09 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 10:45:09 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Inflation Anyone? In-Reply-To: <400985d70905310807we3629e0o74ad280eddbe14ad@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70905300555i56ee6003r2e7425d0fdb36ec6@mail.gmail.com> <841325E268E74BDA924E6AF8BD10B98C@BillLENOVO> <6634e19e0905310427u5a15fdf6k8ab3f255e2b568f8@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905310500k68f555cftedccbe6d89ca9b7a@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905310609q67a5ccb9y64180a0260c0b884@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905310702h4a5371edp646051df730129fd@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0905310739r7ffcd527m17ca5e8430af8da2@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70905310807we3629e0o74ad280eddbe14ad@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905310845i49c89b36h31d132072c3dc6d8@mail.gmail.com> Brad, "On the positive side, our equipment is all low-time and paid for - not many little construction companies can say that." All the while I have been watching the real estate and equities bubbles form, I have been wondering, what ever happened to the idea of actually owning (having equity in) one's business. To me, the way things have been done, basically since the turn of the century and even back into the '90s, have been completely reversed from how I was brought up to think about wealth and successful business. Back in the day, our goal was to have as little debt as possible ....as soon as possible. For the last several years, I have seen just the opposite being the case most of the time. I felt, and I was right, sadly, that it couldn't go on that way forever. It is good to hear that I am not the only one that believes it is best to have little debt and much equity. In tough times, this puts you well ahead of the average debt ridden outfit. Would it be possible to find your buyers first? At least then you'd know that your work, when it's done, wouldn't be for naught. There are still folks that have some money out there. If your ideas are good ones, you shouldn't have too much trouble convincing someone to spend some money on them. Just doing stuff on spec in this environment seems a bit scary. Rik On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 10:07 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > That's precisely why I'm thinking out loud - I appreciate other points > of view and possible aspects (risks) of a project I hadn't considered. > Yeah, it will be a cash deal, but the cash will have to come from > selling some really beaten down mutual funds. The risk is this; will > the property with improvements outperform the mutual funds? The money > to fund any project is after-tax dollars and there won't be a gain on > the sale of the stocks - there will be on the sale of any property (we > hope). We can always offset gains by finding new gizmos to add to add > the Bonanza. Some very unrealistic expectations were created right > after Katrina because of speculators, outside investors, and the still > yet-to-be recognized in 2005 real estate bubble. We may not have seen > bottom in the local market, but we're certainly seeing some major > corrections in the right direction. The general economic conditions > are forcing some sellers to come to grips with what their property is > really worth. The buyers's side is a bit trickier to figure out - > they're out there though, just not in substantial numbers. I haven't > quite figured out what our niche in the construction market is yet, I > just know a lot of stuff we don't or won't do; trucking, public work, > working for developers, subbing to other contractors unless we're paid > at least weekly (not waiting on them to collect their funds from > 'gubmint', etc.). That doesn't leave a very broad spectrum of things > to do with our equipment. Fortunately for us, we're more of a > "lifestyle" firm. My brother likes being semi-retired and I like > having an excuse to go fly the airplane. Every thing we do has to > pass the "stress test" before we even run it through the profit > analysis. "Will this be fun?" is the first thing we ask. That > certainly isn't the fast path to riches, but then we never were on > that path to start. We've lost a lot of our competitors, but there's > still enough left that will work at or below cost to generate > cash-flow that we don't bother to compete on a lot of stuff. On the > positive side, our equipment is all low-time and paid for - not many > little construction companies can say that. > > Brad > On 5/31/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > > Brad, > > > > One thing about real estate, conditions can be very localized. There are > > probably places where the market has bottomed, or if not bottomed, close > > enough and the area you're in could certainly be one of them. The > question > > is, how long must one hold on before they start up again .... IF they > start > > up again. My feeling is, when the recovery starts, it will be slow, not > like > > the run-up we saw between say, 2000 and '05-6, but more like we saw back > in > > the early 80's where it took several years for things to appreciate 10%. > > > > Now, you may be able to add some value with your improvements. If there > are > > enough people around that recognize those improvements, it could work out > > OK. If not .... well, you know how that goes. IF one could do this > without > > borrowing any money .... Yes, it's not the quick way to riches, but it's > not > > the quick way to the poor house either. Try not to get in a position > where > > the interest can eat you up. > > > > People are being pretty cautious right now. You might only want to stick > > your neck out a little bit. > > > > Just my opinion, for whatever that is worth. > > > > Rik > > > > On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 9:02 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> Rik, > >> > >> We've got another hour before the "roller coasters" crank-up (we're > >> staying in a motel outside of Six Flags St. Louis and driving to > >> Carbondale, Illinois later this afternoon) so I'll let rip with our > >> ideas. > >> > >> The article is correct about the real estate markets in general, > >> especially those hardest hit in California, Nevada, Arizona, Florida > >> and Michigan (MI has a different set of problems than the others). > >> But even across the rest of the nation, people bought more house than > >> they could afford and until the market "settles" , the econonomy as a > >> whole won't recover. > >> > >> Our situation on the Gulf is a bit different. The reality is just now > >> sinking-in that building near the water is too expensive because of > >> insurance (rates have quadrupled). The idea that some Donald Trump or > >> wealthy casino developer would buy large swaths of land at inflated > >> prices has faded as well (the casinos are for the most part > >> over-leveraged themselves). We're seeing a rise in demand for "estate > >> lots", 3 to 5 acre tracts at 100' elevation, which means you have to > >> go 15 to 20 miles inland. Some out-of-state "big boys" moved in early > >> with the right idea but over-extended themselves and went belly-up. > >> Our idea is to buy one lot at a time, turn our equipment loose on it, > >> and demonstrate what can be done with flat ground with a little > >> creativity and the right machine operator. If I'm right in my > >> thinking, we'll repeat the experiment. If I'm wrong, well, let's hope > >> I'm not wrong. The worst case scenerao is that we tie up capital in a > >> demo project that we'll use as a showcase for our "dirt moving" > >> talent. Besides, according to the zoning for our operations base, > >> we're supposed to be a nursery. We can just use the additional > >> property as an "overstock" lot for our main operations location > >> (assuming we ever get any nursery stock to begin with). > >> > >> Brad > >> > >> On 5/31/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > >> > Brad, > >> > > >> > When you get back, you may want to read this. > >> > > >> > Sometimes the best action is to just .... be still. > >> > > >> > Rik > >> > > >> > > >> > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/more-prime-foreclosures-more-re.html > >> > ___________________ > >> > > >> > More Prime Foreclosures; More > >> > Re-Defaults< > >> > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/more-prime-foreclosures-more-re.html > >> > > >> > > >> > John Mauldin has another interesting weekly letter called This Way > There > >> Be > >> > Dragons . Here's a look > at > >> the > >> > section on housing. Emphasis mine. > >> > > >> > "Yesterday Fitch ratings estimated that up to 75 percent of the > >> > modifications now being done through the administration's Making Home > >> > Affordable program will re-default in six months to a year. I'm not > >> talking > >> > about the old modifications, which were largely repayment plans that > >> could > >> > actually raise monthly payments. I'm talking about the new mods, which > >> lower > >> > monthly payments to 31 percent of a person's income. I couldn't > >> understand > >> > Fitch's reasoning, so I called them. > >> > > >> > "Diane Pendley, managing director at Fitch, said the problem is not on > >> that > >> > "front-end" ratio, but on the back end, which is all of the borrowers > >> other > >> > debt (credit cards, car loans, student loans, etc.). She said that in > >> > talking with servicers, she's hearing other debt is so high that most > of > >> > today's troubled borrowers cannot afford any loan payment at all, even > >> > at > >> a > >> > very modest debt-to-income ratio. 'Just getting the house payment done > >> > doesn't mean their lifestyle is sustainable,' she said. > >> > > >> > "Another problem is that with home prices continuing to fall, more and > >> more > >> > borrowers, who are essentially just renting their mortgages now > because > >> they > >> > will never see any home equity, are walking away. Even if the mortgage > >> > payment is low, the property taxes and home maintenance costs are > >> > padding > >> > that payment, and without an upside to the investment, there's simply > no > >> > reason to pay. Suffice it to say, the foreclosure crisis, on the high > >> > and > >> > low ends, is not getting any better." > >> > > >> > And it gets worse. > >> > More Prime Foreclosures In Our Future > >> > > >> > The Mortgage Bankers Association noted that a record 12%, or 1 in 8 > >> > homeowners, in the US are now behind on their payments or in > >> > foreclosure. > >> > 10.6% of the mortgages in Florida are now somewhere in the process of > >> actual > >> > foreclosure. (My seatmate here on the flight says the prices on the > >> condos > >> > where he lives are now back to 1998 levels. It would be scary, he > said, > >> if > >> > you had to sell. There are new developments that only have 10% actual > >> > occupancy, as the bulk of the condos were bought for speculation. Now > >> those > >> > 10% of buyers are having to shoulder all the fees for upkeep. Nobody > >> > will > >> > buy, because the upkeep costs can be more than the mortgage. It is a > >> vicious > >> > cycle.) > >> > > >> > In Nevada foreclosures are 7.8%, Arizona 5.6%, and California 5.2%. > 25% > >> of > >> > subprime loans are now in foreclosure, 14% of FHA (government, > >> > taxpayer-guaranteed) loans and a growing 6% of all prime loans are now > >> > in > >> > foreclosure. (Note: the seasonal adjustments may overstate the actual > >> > numbers, as we are in new territory in terms of actual foreclosures.) > >> > Quoting from the MBA press release: > >> > > >> > "In looking at these numbers, it is important to focus on what has > >> changed > >> > as well what continue to be the key drivers of foreclosures. What has > >> > changed is the shifting of the problem somewhat away from the subprime > >> and > >> > option ARM/Alt-A loans to the prime fixed-rate loans. The foreclosure > >> rate > >> > on prime fixed-rate loans has doubled in the last year, and, for the > >> first > >> > time since the rapid growth of subprime lending, prime fixed-rate > loans > >> now > >> > represent the largest share of new foreclosures. In addition, almost > >> > half > >> of > >> > the overall increase in foreclosure starts we saw in the first quarter > >> was > >> > due to the increase in prime fixed-rate loans." > >> > > >> > Servicer Incentives > >> > > >> > We are refinancing mortgages at attractive rates, with taxpayers > picking > >> up > >> > the tab via Fannie, Freddie and the FHA. Let's revisit the Home > >> Affordable > >> > Modification Program > >> > Guidelines< > >> > http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/reports/modification_program_guidelines.pdf > >> >to > >> > see how ridiculous the program is. > >> > > >> > Servicers will receive an up-front Servicer Incentive Payment of > $1,000 > >> for > >> > each eligible modification meeting guidelines established under this > >> > initiative. Servicers will also receive Pay for Success payments ?as > >> > long > >> as > >> > the borrower stays in the program ? of up to $1,000 each year for up > to > >> > three years. Similar incentives will be paid for Hope for Homeowner > >> > refinances. > >> > > >> > One-time bonus incentive payments of $1,500 to lender/investors and > $500 > >> to > >> > servicers will be provided for modifications made while a borrower is > >> still > >> > current on mortgage payments. > >> > > >> > Taxpayers are forking money over to Countrywide and other servicers at > >> > $1,000 a pop (or more) for loan mods, of which 75% will re-default in > >> less > >> > than a year because "most of today's troubled borrowers cannot afford > >> > any > >> > loan payment at all". > >> > > >> > Is this a great idea or what? No doubt Bank of America supports it > 100%. > >> > It's all part of Geithner's "Heist America > >> > Plan< > >> > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/04/more-ugly-details-emerge-on-geithners.html > >> > > >> > ". > >> > > >> > Mike "Mish" Shedlock > >> > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com > >> > Click Here To Scroll > Thru > >> My > >> > Recent Post List > >> > More Prime Foreclosures; More > >> > Re-Defaults< > >> > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/more-prime-foreclosures-more-re.html > >> > > >> > *Posted by Michael Shedlock at 1:23 AM* *.... * > >> > Print > >> > *.... Email* > >> > < > >> > http://www.blogger.com/email-post.g?blogID=11324386&postID=5670567121365951797 > >> > > >> > > >> > To sign up for a *free copy* of our Monthly Client Newsletter, please > >> > register your email address at the bottom of the Sitka Pacific > >> > Commentary > >> > Page . > >> > > >> > Buy Gold and Silver Online at > >> > GoldMoney > >> > The Best Way to Buy Gold and Silver > >> > > >> > > >> > On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 7:00 AM, Brad Haslett > wrote: > >> > > >> >> Rik and Bill, > >> >> > >> >> More on this after I get home from the road trip. As I implied in my > >> >> earlier post, equities will rise in price for the wrong reasons. They > >> >> should be priced, in theory, based on the net present value of future > >> >> earnings. Future earnings will rise, not because companies produce > >> >> more or better widgets, but because the underlying value of the > dollar > >> >> is falling. Treasuries will produce a negative return after > inflation > >> >> (remember the Carter years) and bonds will fare worse. For you two > >> >> guys, sitting on the sidelines, staying out is indeed the best > course. > >> >> For someone like myself, the alternatives look a bit different. I'm > >> >> pulling some chips off the table next week to take advantage of the > >> >> "suckers rally" to some degree, but more so to fund some real estate > >> >> projects on the Gulf Coast. The rest I'll let ride for another ten > >> >> years. Remember, the 'gubment' already has its tenacles on > two-thirds > >> >> of my portfolio via 401K laws, so it only the one-third I can remove > >> >> without some draconion penalties (lesson learned). > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Brad > >> >> > >> >> . > >> >> On 5/31/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > >> >> > Brad, > >> >> > > >> >> > Careful..... > >> >> > > >> >> > What is going on right now in the stock market is commonly called a > >> >> sucker's > >> >> > rally. > >> >> > > >> >> > What I see coming with the rise in commodities is probably a > further > >> >> > pullback in consumer spending as most become even more > conservative. > >> >> > This > >> >> > will not bode well for profits. > >> >> > > >> >> > You really have to watch out for ignorant journalists who like to > >> >> > portray > >> >> > things in the most dramatic way possible. Take this guy's claim > that > >> the > >> >> > Baltic Dry Index has risen 320%. If you were watching that at all, > >> you'd > >> >> say > >> >> > ..... but 320% against what??? If you put that index against a 1 to > >> 100 > >> >> > scale and you figure people are making money at 50 on that scale, > >> you'd > >> >> see > >> >> > that it dropped about 90 percent from it's high. Great, so the low > >> >> > was > >> >> > at > >> >> > about ten on our scale. Now it went back up 320% from it's low, > which > >> >> really > >> >> > isn't all that much. If you looked at it from the other way, which > >> would > >> >> be > >> >> > a more realistic view, you would say it has gained back about 25% > of > >> >> > it's > >> >> > loss, which leaves it in the *still not great* territory. > >> >> > > >> >> > There will be a bottom, but I don't believe it's here yet. We will > >> >> > see > >> >> > another leg down before it's here. Those that are patient, wait it > >> >> > out > >> >> and > >> >> > still have something to invest when the bottom is in will be the > >> winners > >> >> in > >> >> > this game. > >> >> > > >> >> > Right now, gold looks like a good inflation hedge. The Chinese are > >> >> > buying > >> >> > gold, bigtime. > >> >> > > >> >> > One thing to consider. Almost all journalists and gov't hacks > didn't > >> see > >> >> > this thing coming. How could we expect them to know when it's > over?? > >> >> > > >> >> > Rik > >> >> > > >> >> > On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Bill Effros > >> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >> You are treating stock markets like commodities markets -- they > are > >> >> >> very > >> >> >> different. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> The value of Enron stock or GM or Chrysler will never return to > what > >> >> they > >> >> >> were. How can you ride these stocks back up? Maybe Wal Mart or > >> Google > >> >> >> stock will inflate, but not enough to make up for all the stocks > >> >> >> that > >> >> are > >> >> >> today worthless. To invest in the market you must believe some > new > >> >> >> companies will be built the size of Enron, GM, Chrysler, > >> >> Ford,...combined! > >> >> >> > >> >> >> So what would those new companies be? > >> >> >> > >> >> >> You are throwing good money after bad. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> If you think there will be inflation, play the currency market, or > >> >> invest > >> >> >> in > >> >> >> gold. "Riding the market back up" is more of the same gamblers' > >> >> >> mentality--if I keep betting my birthday in the lottery, > eventually > >> >> >> it's > >> >> >> got > >> >> >> to come in. No it doesn't. Neither does the stock market. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> B > >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> >> >> From: "Brad Haslett" > >> >> >> To: "Letters to the Editor" > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2009 7:55 AM > >> >> >> Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Inflation Anyone? > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > For my own personal sake, I hope the author of this Reuters > >> >> >> > article > >> >> >> > is > >> >> >> > correct (see below). I rode the market down and plan to ride it > >> >> >> > on > >> >> >> > the "way up". The market really isn't poised to "go up" based > on > >> >> >> > earnings, it's just that it is denominated in dollars and the > >> massive > >> >> >> > debt we're taking on will continue to batter the dollar for > years > >> to > >> >> >> > come. Commodity prices, especially oil, will "rise". If I had a > >> >> >> > crystal ball, I'd be out on my yacht today instead of driving a > >> >> >> > Volkswagen to my parents, but some things are painfully obvious. > >> >> >> > Hellooooo, inflation! > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Brad > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > ------------- > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Global Markets Weekahead: Return of inflation? > >> >> >> > Fri May 29, 2009 2:28pm EDT > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > By Natsuko Waki > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > LONDON (Reuters) - Surging oil and commodity prices coupled with > a > >> >> >> > falling dollar are prompting some investors to brace for a > return > >> of > >> >> >> > inflation, which would benefit equities and damage most > government > >> >> >> > bonds. Inflation -- which in the short to medium term benefits > >> >> >> > equities and risky assets because of rising prices -- had all > but > >> >> >> > disappeared after the global economy fell into recession and > >> >> >> > commodity > >> >> >> > prices sank last year. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > However, signs of a global economic recovery -- which next > week's > >> >> >> > manufacturing and service sector surveys and other data could > >> >> >> > reinforce -- are leading to a renewed surge in energy and > >> commodities > >> >> >> > and the outperformance of inflation-protected debt securities > over > >> >> >> > benchmark government bonds. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Oil prices are nearly double their four-year low in December. > The > >> >> >> > Reuters-Jefferies CRB index, a global commodities benchmark, has > >> hit > >> >> >> > a > >> >> >> > six-month high while the Baltic Dry Index, which tracks rates to > >> ship > >> >> >> > dry commodities, has risen more than 320 percent since the start > >> >> >> > of > >> >> >> > the year. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > To exacerbate matters, the dollar is on track for the worst > >> >> >> > monthly > >> >> >> > performance since December 2008, which could further fuel buying > >> >> >> > in > >> >> >> > dollar-based commodities. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > The return of inflationary forces at a time the world is > grappling > >> >> >> > with the threat of deflation, could prompt investors to invest > in > >> >> >> > assets such as stocks because rising prices erode the value of > >> cash. > >> >> >> > Already struggling government bonds, apart from inflation-linked > >> >> >> > debt, > >> >> >> > could come under further pressure. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > "We're in a reflation trade. Confidence is off its low from > March > >> and > >> >> >> > asset prices are rising. The beneficial period will continue > until > >> we > >> >> >> > find reasons to be pessimistic again," said David Miller, > partner > >> and > >> >> >> > head of alternative investments at Cheviot Asset Management. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > "People are getting out of the dollar, into commodities, into > >> >> >> > equities... Selectively there are reasons to buy commodities in > a > >> >> >> > portfolio." > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Miller said while the commodity supercycle might not > materialize, > >> >> >> > crisis-related factors such as the absence of farmers credit are > >> >> >> > constraining supply and pressuring prices. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > The renewed surge in commodities is boosting related stocks. In > >> >> >> > Europe, basic resource stocks have risen by 45 percent this > year, > >> >> >> > compared with a four percent rise in the pan-European > FTSEurofirst > >> >> >> > 300 > >> >> >> > index. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > And investor flows support the move. According to fund flow > >> >> >> > tracker > >> >> >> > EPFR Global, fresh money found its way into commodity and energy > >> >> >> > sector funds in the week to May 27, with these funds posting > >> inflows > >> >> >> > of $303 million and $153 million respectively. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Next week's U.S. personal consumption expenditure data -- the > >> Federal > >> >> >> > Reserve's favorite measure of inflation -- is likely to show > >> however > >> >> >> > that price rises remain moderate in the short term. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Purchasing managers surveys in manufacturing and services > sectors > >> and > >> >> >> > U.S. jobs data would be key in offering the state of the global > >> >> >> > economy. Central banks from Britain, the euro zone, Canada and > >> >> >> > Australia decide on interest rates. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > BOND ROUT > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Government bond markets could become a source of destabilization > >> for > >> >> >> > investors next week given rising concerns about burgeoning > Western > >> >> >> > government debt. The U.S. Treasury alone needs to borrow a > record > >> $2 > >> >> >> > trillion in 2009 to help fund a $1.8 trillion fiscal deficit. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Falling government bond prices are pushing up yields, which also > >> >> >> > affects long-term borrowing costs for governments as well as > >> >> >> > businesses and threatens to choke off an economic recovery. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who visits China next > >> week, > >> >> >> > is expected to reassure Beijing that the Obama administration > will > >> >> >> > move swiftly to get its debt under control. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Buying by Asian nations, including China, is crucial in > >> >> >> > maintaining > >> >> >> > the stability in the U.S. Treasury market. A weakening dollar is > a > >> >> >> > double-edged sword for buyers as it makes Treasuries cheaper in > >> >> >> > the > >> >> >> > long term but it erodes the value of their current holdings in > the > >> >> >> > short term. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > The benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury yield rose as high as 3.7538 > >> >> >> > percent on Thursday, its highest since November. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > The 10-year U.S. breakeven rates -- the yield gap between > >> >> >> > inflation-linked bonds over equivalent nominal government bonds > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > -- have risen to 1.8760 percent, compared with around 0.2 > percent > >> at > >> >> >> > the start of the year, reflecting the view that fears of > deflation > >> >> >> > have subsided. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > "Investors are realizing that by investing in an > inflation-linked > >> >> >> > product... they are able to mitigate the risk that these > >> anticipated > >> >> >> > inflationary pressures pose," said Jonathan Gibbs, fund manager > at > >> >> >> > Standard Life Investments. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > "The combination of a complex mix of inflationary and > deflationary > >> >> >> > forces at play in the global economy and the great uncertainty > >> which > >> >> >> > is likely to prevail, means that diversified risk is more > >> >> >> > important > >> >> >> > than ever." > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > (Editing by Andy Bruce) > >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > >> >> >> > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> >> >> > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> >> > >> > > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090531/bfecc6e7/attachment-0001.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun May 31 12:34:28 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 11:34:28 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] 'Shock And Awe' Statism, by George F. Will In-Reply-To: <2B14A5FBF55D41B28E498BC23A24B89B@YOURB88038198E> References: <2B14A5FBF55D41B28E498BC23A24B89B@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: <6634e19e0905310934j7bec4160s4cb4f42a39e1b92b@mail.gmail.com> Ed, "but surely the government has thought this through." Ha ha ha ..... gosh darnit Ed, I hope you aren't holding your breath while you wait. Mandated vacations for everyone.... yeah, that's the ticket. Rik On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Ed Kroposki wrote: > > > > *'Shock And Awe' Statism* > > > > > > *By George F. Will > * > > Sunday, May 31, 2009 > > Epiphanies are a dime a dozen among congressional Democrats as they > discover urgent new reasons to experience the almost erotic pleasure of > commandeering other people's money. For example, freshman Rep. Alan Grayson, > a Florida Democrat whose district includes Disney World, was recently there > and was inspired. > > The world, he realized, would be a sweeter place if Congress mandated that > all companies with 100 or more employees provide a week of paid vacation to > those who work at least 25 hours a week. After three years, they would be > entitled to two weeks, and companies with more than 50 employees would have > to start providing a paid vacation week. Grayson would not mandate that paid > vacations be spent at Disney World. > > With the welfare state approaching insolvency and businesses sagging, this > is an odd time to augment Americans' entitlement mentality. But the travel > and tourism industries think that Grayson's idea is neat. > > Members of the Congressional Black Caucus want the Treasury Department to > subsidize minority owners of broadcasting properties. The broadcasters are > not "too big to fail" and so do not pose a "systemic risk," but, the > representatives say, failures of minority broadcasters would diminish > diversity. > > Such government micromanagement of the economy is everywhere. The Post recently > reportedthat Richard Wagoner, the former CEO of General Motors who was removed by > the government, remains on GM's payroll "because senior Treasury officials > have yet to decide whether he should get the $20 million severance package > that the company had promised him." His 2009 compensation -- $1 -- is > payable Dec. 31. The $20 million promised to him includes contractual > awards, deferred compensation and pension benefits accrued over 32 years > with the company. Promise-keeping, including honoring contracts, is the > default position of a lawful society. But suddenly, many citizens' legal > claims are merely starting points for negotiations with an overbearing > government. > > State governments, too, are expected to accept Washington's whims, but > plucky Indiana is being obdurate. Gov. Mitch Daniels, alarmed by what he > calls the Obama administration's "shock-and-awe statism," is supporting > state Treasurer Richard Mourdock's objection to the administration's > treatment of Chrysler's creditors, which include the pension funds for > Indiana's retired teachers and state police officers and a state > construction fund. Together they own $42.5 million of Chrysler's $6.9 > billion (supposedly) secured debt. > > Compliant, because dependent, banks bowed to the administration's demand > that they accept less than settled bankruptcy law would have given them as > secured creditors. Next, the president denounced as "speculators" remaining > secured creditors, who then folded and accepted less on the dollar than an > unsecured creditor -- the United Auto Workers union -- is getting. This raw > taking of property from secured investors penalized those "speculators" -- > retired Indiana teachers and state police officers who, Mourdock says, are > being "ripped off by the federal government." > > He is asking a court to declare that the Obama administration's actions > have violated "more than 100 years of established law by redefining 'secured > creditors' to mean something less" and that the actions violate the Fifth > Amendment protection against the seizure of private property. Furthermore, > he says, the government is guilty of "misuse" of the Troubled Assets Relief > Program, which gives the Treasury authority only to aid financial > institutions, not industrial companies. > > One New Deal improvisation not yet emulated by the Obama administration is > the September 1933 slaughter -- while the unemployment rate was 25 percent > and millions were hungry -- of 6 million young pigs. The purpose was to > raise the price of pork by reducing the supply of it. But the "cash for > clunkers" idea is a cousin of that. > > The Wall Street Journal's Joseph B. White reports that proposals > percolating in Congress would further subsidize Detroit -- and chill the > planet, of course -- by bribing people to turn in old cars and trucks > (dealers have 400,000 unsold large pickups) and buy vehicles that get better > gas mileage. In one plan, if the new truck gets one mile per gallon more > than the old truck, the buyer would get $3,500; a two-mpg improvement would > be worth $4,500. > > Such a policy would counteract the president's environmentally harmful > policy of forcing Detroit to quickly produce cars that are much more > fuel-efficient -- meaning light, cramped and dangerous. Such products will > be powerful incentives for Americans to continue driving their old, more > polluting and less fuel-efficient cars. This will deprive Detroit of some > customers, but surely the government has thought this through. > > *georgewill at washpost.com* > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090531/54de234d/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 8513 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090531/54de234d/attachment-0001.gif