Randy Barnett

My name is RB and I endorsed this message - National Defense

2012-01-17T09:30:00.000-05:00

Delayed posting - very sorry. Last week was busy, then a brief, but needed mini-vacation.

I'm back to laying out my presidential platform planks - explaining what I think are the most important issues facing this country over the next four years. It's a remake of a series I did four years ago, I'll review my comments from then and update as required.

My first issue - the one I think is most important is National Defense. If we don't defend our nation properly, we will have no nation to defend. Even with Osama Bin Laden gone, there are still a lot of people out there who intend to do us harm, and to interrupt our way of life. In 2008, I thought we were due for another terrorist attack, that hasn't happened thanks to some very good police work.

Looking at our defense status, I earlier said "Iraq is over." That's true for our involvement. The US failed to negotiate an extension to our efforts there. I'll talk more about that in my post on foreign policy. I don't think Iraq is a defense concern at this time. They have a limited army and no navy or air force. While Afghanistan is far from over, our involvement will be soon. They are not likely to be a threat and - at least for now - don't seem to be a breeding ground for terrorists. Of course it was our ignorance that led to 9/11 - not watching places like Afghanistan to see who was trying to get rid of us.

The current budget outlook calls for major cuts in defense and we're relying less on boots-on-the-ground and more on drones-in-the-air and special ops. This makes for good politics in the US as drones don't come back in body bags and they don't have pictures taken with prisoners in Abu Ghraib or over dead bodies. But I can't help but wonder what the world thinks of our shoot-first-ask-questions later approach to taking out bad guys. It also seems a little cowardice to pull the trigger from Md where the enemy can't shoot back.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for taking the least dangerous approach to taking these people out. But we were accused of being cowboys for going into these places, how much more will we be seen that way due to drone attacks?

In the area of defense, I'm most concerned about the Pacific rim at this time - N. Korea and China don't like us very much. Fortunately, I don't think either is likely to attack us. They may attack allies, (S. Korea, Taiwan, and countries on the India sub-continent). We will have a choice to either ignore them as we did when the Russians attacked Georgia or to lend aid.

Personally, I think we should continue to work diplomatically in these areas. There is little to be gained from our involvement. In fact, I can't think of a single area in the world at this time that needs our involvement other than possibly Iran and the Straits of Hormuz.

Ships with aircraft should be positioned near the straits to ensure continuous access to the shipping lanes. Dredging ships and other equipment necessary to clear the seaway should be positioned nearby, in case Iran decides to do something stupid (and I would announce it THAT way).

That said, we cannot afford to let out military to fade away like we did in the Carter and Clinton years. We must keep developing skills and weapons both for boots-on-the-ground and for bombs-on-the-ground. We learned a lot in Afghanistan and Iraq, that knowledge should be put to use. Robotic technology that lets soldiers defuse IEDs and spy on the enemy needs to be perfected and produced en masse. We should focus on tools that detect IEDs before they develop.

Piracy off the coast of Africa seems to have settled down, but additional development and vigilance in this area is warranted.

That's my take on national defense, what's yours?

My name is RB and I endorsed this message - Platform priorities

2012-01-05T07:59:00.000-05:00

Yesterday I explained that I wanted to lay out what I thought were important priorities for the Presidency 2012-2016. This will be the planks of my platform should I decide to stick with the idea of the run (it will have to be a write-in campaign).

In preparation, I looked back at what I said in 2008. I think the same issues apply, so I'm going to steal heavily from my ideas back then. One difference I notice between 2008 and 2012 is the lack of focus on change. In 2008, almost every candidate was talking change (both the D's and the R's). Well, change happened, we went from a Republican in the White House to a Democrat. Some might say too much changed, some might say too little. But change happened.

My focus will be pretty much the same as last time, with some change thrown in for good measure. Here are the areas I see that need to be addressed for the next four years. This post won't tell you my opinion on any one topic, but instead will list topics I intend to cover later. They will be somewhat in priority order, but that's subject to change (there's that word) later on.

In my platform, I intend to address these topics:
1. National Defense - Iraq is over. Afghanistan will be soon. The current budget outlook for defense means major cuts. We're relying less on boots-on-the-ground and more on drones-in-the-air and special ops. Where do we go from here?

2) Foreign affars - Russia, Pakistan, Iran, India, Europe, Africa, South America, China (including trade) and Mexico (including immigration) - My only update to this list is to add the Middle East (Egypt, Libya, Israel, Syria, etc) and North/South Korea

3) Isolationism vs. becoming entangled in the affairs of other nations - it seems one candidate wants us to pull back and focus on US alone, I'll look at my ideas four years ago and update them.

4) National economy - Jobs, training, mortgages, housing, taxes and spending. I know you think this should be higher. When I look at the economy, I'll explain why it's ranked #4.

5) Healthcare, education and abortion, global warming, carbon credits (hopefully, I'll explain why I grouped these)

6) Points of light - This is an old George H Bush idea. I mentioned it yesterday in a phone conversation with a friend and think it needs to be addressed.

What did I leave out? What do you, the voter and my readers, want me to address?

My name is RB and I endorsed this message

2012-01-04T07:29:00.000-05:00

I'm in it to win it. I'm the one you Hope to Change. I Believe in America. All of those catchy phrases go here.

You see, 4 years ago yesterday, I started a series of blog posts declaring my candidacy for president. In those posts, I laid out my platform, my ideas on every topic. I also laid out which pieces of that platform I thought were most important and the order of importance.

So, I decided to do that again. I will look back at what I said four years ago. And to start that out, I'm going to cut/paste my comments from that blog post here, so you don't have to go back via links. Here it is with updates in {brackets}:

My name is RB, I endorsed this message and I'm running for president

When I turned 35, I announced to all my friends and neighbors that I was running for president. I had examined all of the recent candidates and announcements and decided I was equally qualified.

However, it was not an election year, so I soon bowed out. Now, 14 {18} years later, I'm re-announcing my candidacy.

Since I'm entering the fanfare a little late, I'll plan a slow entrance. I'll start by announcing and deciding my platform. This will help all of my followers (thanks mom) decide which of the current candidates should be elected to hold my place until I'm truly ready. In fact, he or she could revoke the constitutional amendment that placed term limits on the presidency so that once I win the office, I can retain it forever, in the spirit of my senator, Strom Thurmond.

So, over the next several weeks, I'll post my ideas on the presidency and what I believe are important subjects to be covered. Since I'm a formulas and function kind of guy (see my post on functions), I'll also put some sort of priority or weighting with each idea. This way and astute reader could write a simple function for Excel to decide which of the current candidates best fits my model.

Regular readers will know that I've already stated there was one candidate I could NOT vote for, that's Rudy G. See my reasoning here. They may also note that I've suggested Jenna Bush for president (see here), but it's going to be a while before she's eligible. Other than these two items, I haven't decided who I will vote for. I fully expect to make that decision as a part of this exercise. {My anti-Rudy reasoning has softened some. I'm still not sure I can vote for a man that has committed that particular sin, but over the last four years I've become less focused. Romans 3:23 comes to mind.}

So be looking for my posts. Tell your friends and neighbors, dogs and cats, dead uncles and aunts to all vote for me (it works in Chicago). Seriously read my posts and comment on them. If you disagree with me, feel free to say so. I reserve the right to flip-flop as often as Clinton and Romney have been accused. After all, one man's flip-flop is another man's shoe.

{In reading the comments from my post four years ago, it looks like David of this blogsite, offered to be my Yard Sign Creator. Hoping he's still available}

Do sweat the small stuff

2012-01-03T09:26:00.000-05:00

Sometime back, a popular saying was "Don't sweat the small stuff". This was usually followed by the corollary, "and it's all small stuff." Lately, this has been on my mind a lot, or more correctly, the opposite has been on my mind - "do sweat the small stuff."

It's by sweating the small stuff - mastering those seemingly meaningless tasks - that we gain the abilities we need to do the big stuff. In his book "Outliers", Malcom Gladwell mentioned the "10,000 hour rule claiming that the key to success in any field is, to a large extent, a matter of practicing a specific task for a total of around 10,000 hours." That seems like a lot of time to become a master, but if you look at it as 40 hrs/wk for 5 years, that seems to fit accreditation requirements in a lot of jobs. Five years to become an "expert" seems reasonable. Five years of sweating the small stuff doesn't seem that ridiculous. Gladwell points to The Beatles and Bill Gates as examples of his "10,000 hour rule" (read the book for more details).

When my kids were young, we handed out chores. We started with small tasks, for example cleaning there room with our help, and expanded to bigger tasks (loading the dish-washer, cutting grass). In our work lives, we typically follow a similar process, working with co-workers at first, then leading projects. By sweating the small stuff, we show our employers that we are capable of moving on to bigger stuff.

It turns out this idea is not new, I didn't invent it and neither did Gladwell. I keep repeating Matthew 25:23 which says "You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things."

Sweating the small stuff means different things to different people. It may mean showing up on time for a job that you really don't like. It may mean a little extra polish in the spit-and-polish (and a little less spit). It may just mean doing the things you know need to be done without expecting any recognition.

What does sweating the small things mean to you?

My response to Occupy Wall Street

2011-12-12T12:49:00.000-05:00

Last week I published a summary of my interpretation of Occupy Wall Street. The movement has sprung up in many cities and appears to be similar in all of these. This is my response to those movements.

First, let me say that I get it. There's a lot of frustration out there. People are out of jobs and worse yet, they feel their future has been stolen by financiers who haven't been and won't be punished for their incompetence. People like Patrick Meighan have been arrested (read his story here) and jailed over non-violent protests. I know that there have been some criminal acts committed by some of the Occupiers, but that doesn't change the message these people are trying to bring (it doesn't excuse it, but that's a different story).

I also agree with parts of the message of the Occupy movement, the financiers should be punished. The banks should have been allowed to fail and the people creating the mess should certainly not be in charge of the business that I involuntarily bailed out. And like them, I'm not convinced that the system can work itself out - I'm just that cynical.

But I also know that we live in the United States of America, a country with a system of laws and that we have to obey those laws. Even if politicians and bankers committed fraud and theft, that doesn't give me the right to break laws. If someone refused to leave when instructed by police, they deserve to be arrested. When Mr. Meighan (same story as above) was arrested, he complained in his blog that in most situations of this type, "the police just give you a ticket and let you go. It costs you a couple hundred dollars." One thing that is different in his case is that he would have gladly taken the ticket and ripped it up and never left the park he occupied. Police have an obligation to enforce the law (which he acknowledges in his blog) and in that case that meant physically removing the Occupiers and cleaning out the park.

I also know that it's possible to move up in the world. I grew up in a not-too-priviledged environment. I won't go into the details, but my college was paid on a combination of scholarships and grants (until I lost the grant because I made too much in a below-minimum wage job). I have worked at one job or another (and sometimes two at the same time) since 1973. My father taught me that there is always a job available for someone who was willing to work. This past weekend, I heard that Scheider National Trucking needs to hire 41,000 and Pizza Hut needs to hire 28,000. These may not be jobs that people want or may not pay as much as their last job, but they are jobs. And they pay at least minimum wage.

I decided sometime back to adopt the slogan "Think Globally, Act Locally." What that means to me is to elect the kind of representatives who push an agenda of personal responsibility. I believe this is the only way (if there's a way) to fix our national problem. By encouraging people to work, even at low-paying jobs, to pay off debts and to support the family, politicians begin encouraging a way out. As for acting locally, charity begins at home, helping the people in your community. I can't help Mr. Meighan in LA, but I can help the single lady in our church who sells real estate and hasn't sold any in a while. I can help the people who will come to me in February through April to file their tax returns (without charging them) so they can get the refunds and credits that are available under current law. I can help the couple whose husband is in a wheel chair and unable to work.

So while I understand the Occupy movement, I can't say I agree with it. I believe that instead of protesting, the occupiers would be better of returning to work and starting their own personal recovery. That's my thoughts, what are yours?

What is Occupy Wall Street?

2011-12-08T09:27:00.000-05:00

I've been trying to wrap my head around what's going on in the Occupy Wall Street movement. It's gotten a lot of attention from the press, yet there seems to be very little understanding about what is really going on. Some of the bloggers I read have published stories about crime in the Occupy movement, stories that have seem limited airtime on national news. But my goal has been to avidly read every story I could find, to determine what it's all about. These people are exerting a lot of time and in some cases money, I'd like to find out why. In this post, I'll try to explain what I've learned. In a later post, I'll give my thoughts and opinion on that information.

Two of the best stories I've read come from Bloomberg Businessweek, both available online here and here. While there are more stories out there, these stories do a better job of explaining the movement than most. I encourage reading them. I also plan on reading a book described in the article titled "Debt: The First 5,000 years" by David Graeber, the so-called "Man behind the mask."

The article says that Graeber "as been an anarchist since the age of 16." What's unique is that Graeber would not mind being an anarchist. He admits that "most people don’t think anarchism is (just) a bad idea. They think it’s insane." But unlike most people, "Graeber’s father, (has) seen it work."

The Occupy movement is made of a lot of other individuals, each with their own view of what is going on. As a group, they are still trying to define what all of this means. But there are groups within the movement that have similarities and they attract people sympathetic to their views (I doubt we see many Reagan conservatives at these rallies). They are against money in politics and the crushing effect of "debt: mortgages, credit-card debt, student loans, and the difference in how the debts of large financial companies and those of individual borrowers" get settled.

If there is one defining trait of the Occupiers - it's that. It's the "where's MY bailout" story. Where's the bailout for the middle-aged man, who took out first and second mortgages, credit cards and bought the American Dream on payments, then lost his job in the 2008 fiasco and saw his interest rates skyrocket, while the Bank paid executives huge salaries? Where's the bailout for the college graduate who took out student loans, now can't find a job to pay them back?

The timing of the movement, amidst this overwhelming debt by individuals, bail-outs and unemployment has been the triggering action to bring these people together. Top that off with a conservative movement that wants to cut all forms of aid because they think it's the only way to recover and they hate big government and the movement ignites. The Occupiers "oppose cutbacks and austerity of any kind." (Wikipedia defines austerity as budget cutting, lower spending, reduction of benefits). This comes from the anarchy that Graeber's father saw in Spain after the IMF mandated spending cuts, austerity that is now being imposed on Greece, other nations and even individuals in the US.

What bothers me the most about watching the movement from the sidelines is the similarities between this movement and some movements I've watched from afar in Egypt, Libya and France. Movements in those countries started not as political movements, but as movements by unemployed. When large numbers of people become unemployed and can't find work to pay for basic necessities, they look for answers and frequently rise up against the government. Instead of answers, they see the government keeping them down. I've read other articles that compared debt to slavery, this idea feeds the movement as well.

At the end of the article, reference is made to a policy recommendation in Graeber's book calling for "jubilee" - a forgiveness of all international and consumer debt. I understand the term and have even written about it (although I referred to a city of refuge). I thought it was uniquely Judeo-Christian in concept, but the article says that jubilees occurred "in ancient Babylon, Assyria, and Egypt." The article goes on to say that the "alternative, ... was rioting and chaos in years when poor crop yields left lots of peasants in debt."

Is that where we're headed? Rioting and chaos (which we've already seen)? Is anarchy, or small democracy the answer? Must banks be run as non-profit organizations? Should all debt be wiped clean every seven years? I'm not sure I have the answers, but I'll give my opinion in my next post.

When Hubert met Rose

2011-12-03T14:09:00.000-05:00

This is the story of how my father-in-law was introduced to my mother-in-law. I've heard the story told numerous times and it always warmed my heart.

The story starts in 1955, when Hubert Lawrence became a widow. He and his 17 year old son Tommy were living alone after the death of his first wife Della. Tommy worked at a local mill as a doffer, someone who replaced bobbins in the machines where the (mostly) ladies were sewing. One of those ladies was Rose.

Apparently, Tommy had a mischievous streak. Something that he did aggravated Rose that day and she told him "I'd like to be your mother for just one day." It's never been clear to me if she knew his mother had died a few weeks earlier or not, but I can just imagine her pointing her crooked finger at him as she said it (her finger probably wasn't crooked then, but it was all the time I knew her).

That night, Tommy told his father that there was a lady at the mill who wanted to meet him. So Hubert went to meet Rose at the boarding house where she lived. When she told the story about his big shoes clomping up the stairs to the porch, you could hear the sound it made.

About five weeks later (sometimes this was as short as five days when Rose told the story) he picked her up in his car to take her for a ride. When she asked where they were going he replied "to get a marriage license." I guess that served as a proposal.

Her answer was a simple "oh, ok" (which I guess meant "yes") and a day later they were married at the preacher's house. Unknown to them at the time, her brother Claude got married the same day in the next state about 45 miles away.

Now some will question the romance of this short courtship, but somehow it must have worked. Hubert and Rose were married just short of 40 years before he passed away on Dec 3, 1994. She lived alone for 17 years and her blue eyes always sparkled when she told this story. On November 26, 2011, Rose met Hubert again in heaven.

Is China a treat (economically)?

2011-11-11T13:32:00.000-05:00

A recent Bloomberg Businessweek article (available here) said that "China will soon overtake the US as the world's biggest economy." However, the remarks aren't all bad when you look at the facts. The authors point to a 10.5% annual increase in GDP in China since 2001 and a 1.7% annual increase in the US in the same time period.

However, looking at the GDP per capita (remember China has A LOT more people than the US), USA is at $47,600, China is at $4,400 (according to CIA World Factbook). Even if the growth rate continues at the same rate it has for the last 10 years, it will be another 28 years before China surpasses the US when you examine the dollars this way.

The article was interesting in the comments about the approach to expenditures. It points out that the US "spends, borrows and patches," while China "saves, invests and builds." Of course the current administration likes the term "invest" and "build," so the Chinese way makes sense for these parts (and they would like to ignore the "save" part.

Overall, I like Bloomberg, but you have to read the articles carefully.

My mom will be homeless at Thanksgiving

2011-11-11T11:43:00.000-05:00

If all goes as planned, my mom will be homeless in just under two weeks. It's not as bad as it sounds, she's selling her duplex with the plan of moving into an assisted living center in the near future (in the mean time, she'll shuttle between my two sisters' houses). So for a while, she will be homeless.

Several years ago, several people asked mom where she was going for Thanksgiving dinner. They knew that she was widowed and her six kids were scattered across multiple states (and maybe even one of the Pacific Ocean island-nations depending on the year). They also knew that she visited her kids regularly and was seldom alone. She proudly responded that she was going to the Salvation Army. This horrified her friends who immediately invited her to their house for turkey. She laughed as she explained that she would be serving meals to the homeless. All of us kids were disappointed that she didn't come to our house, but we understood her need to serve.

Mom's always been one to see others that were less fortunate. Growing up we didn't have a lot, but when we outgrew clothes, we passed them to one of the local charities (if there was no one to pass them down to). She knew that there were people who could make use of them.

So, hats off to mom - I hope I can be the servant she has been.

God helps those who help themselves

2011-11-03T10:53:00.000-04:00

Did he really say that? Yes, he did. (see here for text). To be fair, it wasn't the president, it was his spokesman. And he corrected it later in the day. And many people use this same mis-quote much of the time.

The president actually said "God wants to see us help ourselves by putting people back to work." I think it's interesting that he thinks God wants us to help ourselves, but by that he means the government helping us. But then I've always said that we're not electing a theologian in chief. I occasionally had problems with the previous president's theology and I'm sure I'll have problems from time to time with the next president as well.

This all brings me to my point. Over the next year, many of the candidates will say things that they don't have a chance to think through. Look beyond that. What is he really trying to say? What does his record say? What does he say in position speeches and papers? Those really determine what the person will do if he reaches office.

I'm not surprised that President Obama thinks that God wants the government to step in and help people who need jobs. This has been his approach all along. You may agree with the idea and you may disagree. But you shouldn't be surprised.

The power of the consumer

2011-11-02T13:08:00.000-04:00

Over the last few weeks, banks have slowly backed off their plans to charge fees for debit cards (I expected this. See here for my prediction) The consumer has the power to effect change.

The first time I saw a change like this was back in the mid 1980's. At that time, the country of South Africa was under increased scrutiny due to Apartheid (see details here). It was discovered that many business interacted with South Africa and a large movement was made to force these businesses to stop. One bank, which has since been merged into other banks, was heavily involved and did not change their policies.

After several months of trying to get the bank to change, a group emerged that petitioned the bank for policy changes. The group said that if the bank did not change, the signees of the petition would open an account at the bank and then close it the next day. And there were a lot of signees.

The day after this information came out, the bank "clarified" their position on Apartheid. They explained that they made loans to businesses in South Africa and not to the government. Their loans were actually helping the people of that country and would give them a chance to change the government.

The petitioners were unimpressed. Even with the "clarified" position, they vowed to go on with their opening and closing of accounts. They responded publicly to the bank and planned to start the following week. Before they started, the bank announced a change in policy and stopped making loans to businesses in South Africa. The consumer had voted and US businesses (largely) stopped supporting Apartheid.

By 1994, South Africa had elected it's first non-white president. There are a lot of side-stories that come out of this incident, but the story relevant here is that consumers have the power to change a nation. Without violence, threats or even name calling, consumers can vote with their wallets. Individuals can change too. You have the right to decide what services you want from a bank (or any company) and evaluate the cost. If it's too much, you have the right to change providers.

Help for homeowners

2011-10-25T13:57:00.000-04:00

Yesterday, President Obama unveiled a "new" plan to help home-owners who may be able to benefit from re-financing (see article here). From what I have read, I think the program is good, but I'm not sure how successful it may be.

The program is designed as an aid to homeowners who want to refinance and take advantage of today's lower rates. Nothing that I have read says it will reduce the amount of the loan, only the interest rate. Let's say someone took out a loan on a $300,000 home in 2004 with a rate of 5.5%. If they had chosen a fixed rate, that's a payment of about $1700. If they can refinance to a 4% loan today, that's a payment of about $1430 and leaves $270 in their pocket.

So who loses the $270? Well, the new program is for people whose loans are owned by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mach, so they are obvious losers in the deal. Also, banks may lose as older loans are paid off earlier. However, banks will get some refinance $$ in their pocket as well as a better loan. If the old loan defaulted, banks were sure to lose.

So what is the down-side to the program? Well, refinancing costs money and some of that burden will be paid by the tax payer. I don't think that's a lot of money (compared to loan defaults), so I think this is a good program overall.

Trouble is, it doesn't address the amount owed. In my example above, I assumed the entire $300,000 would be refinanced. In reality, if they were current, they would only owe $262,000 at this point. But the problem comes in that the value of the house may have dropped. The house may only be worth $200,000 now and in that case, they wouldn't be able to refinance. under today's rules, but would be able to under the new rules.

The program looks like it helps out some people in certain circumstances and therefore I have no objection to it. I'm not overly excited, because it doesn't seem like it will affect many people. Maybe the president is trying to tackle the economic issues in small bites rather than a sweeping program that no one can pass.

The 9-9-9 tax and the flat tax

2011-10-20T08:59:00.000-04:00

Herman Cain has gotten a lot of attention for his 9-9-9 tax plan. I've looked into one part of the plan and decided I can't support it. Your responses are appreciated.

The plan is close to the Fair Tax that was discussed a few years ago. I confess, I didn't study the Fair Tax as I felt it had near-zero chance of being passed. I was forced to go look at it some. From what I've read the 9-9-9 plan has not laid out all the details and someone pointed me to the "prebate" part of the Fair Tax for more information.

The problem is that low income people today pay no income tax and will be forced to pay sales tax under 9-9-9. This additional burden on low income people would be offset (under the Fair Tax) by a "prebate", money given to them at the beginning of each month.

However, there is no mention of what happens to the current EITC and it appears to be eliminated. For those unfamiliar, the EITC is a refundable tax credit given to low income workers. The amount of the credit is based on the family size and the amount a person works. As the person's income increases, the EITC increases until it reaches a mid-point. Then it decreases, slower than the increase, until it gets to zero. Think of a standard curve, slightly skewed to the right.

EITC has been touted as "workfare, not welfare" because it encourages people to work. If the person has no earned income, they have no EITC. None other than conservative President Ronald Reagan pushed this program. You may not think the EITC is fair or that some people pay no income tax is not fair, but that's not part of my discussion today. Today, the EITC is the law and it gives low income workers additional cash. Taking that away may be revenue neutral to the government, but not to individuals.

Any tax plan that involves eliminating the EITC should include a plan (tax or otherwise) to address program. If a candidate decides not to replace it, he/she should clearly state that.

The President's teleprompter is stolen

2011-10-19T10:41:00.000-04:00

I know, this sounds like a joke. It's not. It's true. To be fair, it wasn't just a teleprompter, it was a truck which contained sound equipment, podiums and yes, a teleprompter. The truck was later found in a hotel parking lot several miles away.

This happened about 1/2 mile from the Hampton Inn where I stay when I go to Richmond. I promise, I was no where near where the incident occurred. As for other comments, on the advice of counsel, I have no additional comments at this time.

Click here for the story from Richmond Times Dispatch.

Marx to market (Bloomberg Businessweek 9/19-25)

2011-10-13T10:23:00.000-04:00

I'm a little behind on reading, but this article in Bloomberg Businessweek caught my attention. Follow this link to read the article. While not mentioning the Occupy Wall Street movement, it certainly seems to apply (although I confess, I haven't read all of the details on OWS).

The article/editorial talks about how times have changed, yet we seem to be going back to some Marxist ideas and it says this in a not-negative tone. "You might even say the Bearded One (Karl Marx) has rarely looked better." The article notes that with "U.S. unemployment rate is still more than 9 percent" and Marx had predicted that "companies would need fewer workers as they improved productivity." Peter Coy (the author of the editorial) points out that the blue-collar workers' condition is "still a far cry from the subsistnence wage and 'accumulation of misery' that Marx conjured" but he adds that "it's not morning in America, either." The last line is a reference that few conservatives would miss.

The article also stresses Marx' point that "the proletariat isn't paid enough to buy the stuff capitalists produce (a point I disagree with - all of the unemployed have very nice cell phones, TVs, etc).

The editorial says that it's "time for another burst of enlightenment" and says we are facing a "crisis of capitalism". He thinks that "grasping the ways in which Marx was right is the first step toward making sure that... predictions of capitalism's downfall remain wrong."

Might it be that Coy is correct? Are the rumblings of the OWS group rumblings from Marx' grave? Are these people anti-capitalists? I'm certain that I don't know and am looking for answers

Bank fees

2011-10-06T15:04:00.000-04:00

Unless you've been living under a rock, you've heard the mess about bank fees. At least four of the major banks (Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Sun Trust and Regions) are planning to start charging debit card holders a monthly fee of anywhere from $3 to $5. Citibank is increasing the fees on checking accounts. The president has said that the banks don't have the right to certain profits (more on that later).

The banks say that they have to do this to make up for the lost fees charged to retailers. In theory, retail prices should come down as their fees go down (I'm not holding my breath). Consumers are complaining it's not fair. My suggestion is simple. Change accounts or change banks.

Most banks have some accounts that will still be free. Simply sitting down with someone at the bank or calling the bank can help you understand your options. Before you do, write down your expectations/requirements. Do you use an ATM? Do you use other banks' ATM's? Do you use your debit card? Do you keep a balance? Do you have other accounts with the bank?

Also, banks may have other options available based on your age (I found out I'm a "senior" at age 52 at one bank) or school status (student checking is often free). Smaller banks or credit unions may have benefits based on your employer.

If the bank has no free account that fits your need, consider changing banks. Tell the person you've talked to at your current bank that you're planning to look at other banks. Be prepared to follow through.

My honest opinion is that this fuss will not last if consumers start changing banks. They will find ways to keep depositors from jumping ship. But there's no reason you should pay fees.

The President's job speech - Reaction Part 2

2011-10-04T11:04:00.000-04:00

This is a continuation of my previous post on the President's job speech. Part 1 is found here.

We are told that the President's bill (which was not released until days after the speech) will give companies an extra tax credit if they hire veterans. While this is a good idea, I'm not sure this will provide a lot of jobs and I don't think it belongs in a jobs bill. Was it added here so that the President could say that anyone who opposes this bill opposes veterans? I shouldn't be so cynical.

The bill offers "companies... a $4,000 tax credit if they hire anyone who has spent more than six months looking for a job." This is like the HIRE act I mentioned in Part 1 of my review, but it brings up an important point: why not limit unemployment benefits to six months as well? This way, you motivate both the employer and the employee.

The President promises us that the "typical working family will get a $1,500 tax cut next year." This is on top of the $2,000 we have already gotten. Anyone know where this comes from? It comes from Social Security payments we all make through payroll deduction. Someone should point out that this actually helps to remove the illusion that Social Security is anything but a tax.

President Obama promises that "the American Jobs Act will not add to the deficit." MSNBC (not exactly an anti-Obama source) in their fact-check of the President's speech explains this by saying "it will only be paid for if a committee he can't control does his bidding." To mis-quote President Truman, "the buck stops there" not with the current president.

Finally, about half-way through his speech, the President admits "this approach is basically the one I've been advocating for months." Nothing new. But pass this bill. Right away.

The speech goes on (my printed copy continues for five more pages), but as he said, there's not much new. The programs outlined are programs the President has been pushing for months or extensions of existing programs created and pushed with the last stimulus package. They didn't work then, and they won't work now. Congress should kill this bill. Right away.

The President's job speech - Reaction Part 1

2011-09-30T17:35:00.000-04:00

Ok, I'm a little slow in posting my comments to the jobs speech. The President spoke three weeks ago, and I've just gotten around to starting my comments. My apologies if you were waiting. But I promise to complete this fairly quickly. The speech was long, I printed it and it took 10 pages. My response will be long too,

I commented right after the jobs speech that I was glad the President spoke. I should have also said I was impressed with his speech. I was amazed the first time I heard him speak at the 2004 Democratic National Convention. I knew then, that he was going places. He's a good speaker and has good speech writers.

When I read the President's speech (found here), my first impression was that he gets it. He understands. He used words like "an urgent time" and said that we "face an economic crisis." These are strong, but accurate words. He understands that "millions of Americans... don't care about politics," they just want the problem solved. And he understands that the problem is unemployment. If we fix this problem, we fix the economy (and most likely the deficit).

But I begin to have problems when he began to talk about a "compact." He accurately depicted "an America where hard work and responsibility paid off" and where "if you did the right thing, you could make it." But I'm not sure that's a compact. And then he followed by saying that "Washington has not always put [the people's] interests first." While I'm certain that part is true, I'm not sure what, if anything, Washington's role should be in the compact between people and their employers.

After this aside, the President returned to the track that I agree with. He says that "our recovery will be driven not by Washington, but by our businesses and our workers." These kinds of statements give me hope that he may actually see the right way to run this country. But then he began to give details on his plan - The American Jobs Act. He repeatedly tells Congress that they "should pass [this bill] right away." Only there was no bill. For four days. After he had delayed his speech for several days. But right away, they should pass it.

Once President Obama began talking about parts of the to-be-delivered bill, I noticed a familiar refrain. First, he talks about cutting taxes for small businesses that hire new workers. This is similar to the HIRE Act of 2010 that I discussed here. This didn't stimulate hiring then, is there any reason to believe it will work now?

Next the President talks about putting "people to work rebuilding... decaying roads and bridges." Can someone say "shovel ready?" While I do believe transportation costs affect the economy more than any single factor, I don't think that just because "construction companies... [are] waiting to get to work" we should throw good money after bad. This didn't work in the previous stimulus, it won't work now. We may need to rebuild our infrastructure, but let's not call it a jobs program.

President Obama tells us that the American Jobs Act will "repair or modernize at least 35,000 schools." While I agree our schools need help (see here and here for two recent posts on schools), the best help would be for Washington to step away and let the states manage them.

The speech goes on with a promise to "rehabilitate homes and businesses in communities hardest hit by foreclosures." Wasn't this tried before? Didn't we pass a Mortgage Reform Act to reduce foreclosures? And how's that working out?

(more notes on the speech to come. Please feel free to comment now or wait).

Debt collectors calling your cell phone? * Updated *

2011-09-29T10:04:00.001-04:00

Not many people know it, but debt collectors are not supposed to call your cell phone. That's part of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, but it may change soon due to the proposed deficit reduction plan. Certainly many people don't have landlines any more and this is the only way to contact them, however, it's not been widely publicized.

Everyone hates debt collectors, I suspect even debt collectors hate other debt collectors. They tend to make lawyers look good. But unfortunately, their job is essential and one way to avoid them is to pay your bills. I know, that's easy for me to say and a little bit callous. To protect the collectee, there are rules that collectors must follow. A lot don't and the FTC says there were 140,000 complaints against debt collectors last year alone. I suspect there were a lot more issues that never got reported. Many people won't register a complaint because they know they legitimately owe the debt.

Bankrate.com does a good job of explaining this change and lists some of the guidelines debt collectors are supposed to follow in this posting.

According to this report from Fox News, "apply only to cases in which money is owed the government." I guess we'll know more as the details come out

Let's Reclaim the Post-9/11 Unity

2011-09-09T13:11:00.000-04:00

I was looking for the President's speech from last night. Before I found it, I found this op-ed written by Pres. Obama asking for Americans to "regain the sense of common purpose that stirred in our hearts 10 years ago."

In the op-ed, President Obama also notes "that our differences pale beside what unites us and that when we choose to move forward together, as one American family, the United States doesn't just endure, we can emerge from our tests and trials stronger than before."

Mr. President, I couldn't agree more. I promise to work towards the civility that you, and others have asked for. I'd like you to lead and stop blaming Republicans for everything as I saw in your speeches last week. I'd like you to use your leadership influence and ask those around you to stop bashing Tea Partiers, those in other (or the same) wealth class and whoever the target-du-jour happens to be.

I promise to do my part, will you do yours?

The President's speech - American Job Act

2011-09-08T20:24:00.000-04:00

The president's speech motivates me to start my blog back. I saw some things in the speech that I needed to comment on. I'll wait to comment in detail until I can read the speech, but some things need immediate attention.

My first comment - did you notice that there was no Republican response? Apparently, they read my blog post from January (here) A response tonight would have been premature as President Obama's speech had not been publi8shed. The R's could have written a speech a few days ago, making some guesses about what the president was going to say. Instead the let the president have his say. Hopefully this trend will take off and we won't have a response every time the president speaks.

My second comment is regarding the congressmen who were absent. One of my senators had indicated he would not be there. I think this is disrespectful. While I may not like the current president and don't agree with most of his ideas, I do believe he deserves a certain amount of respect because of his office. I intend to send him a note indicating my displeasure.

I noticed that the president said this bill would be paid for. However, the devil's in the details. He said he would challenge congress with paying for it as a part of their upcoming budget. To me, that sounds like he's hoping they will pay for it.

I noticed that the President did not blame Republicans, past or present, for the problems. Too often he has done that and too often while he's on the campaign trail he complains about Republicans. Hopefully, he won't do this when he starts pushing this bill.

Overall, I did like the fact that the President spoke. I believe this president has been reluctant to lead too many times in the past. Instead this time, he is introducing a bill. I may not agree with it, but at least he's started the process.

I will be reading the jobs act in the near future and will publish my thoughts.

A different election?

2011-08-19T08:41:00.000-04:00

In my reviewing the 2008 election, I saw it as a foregone conclusion. President Obama had been running for the office for over four years and was specifically groomed for the office. Anyone who doubts that should only go back to his 2004 speech at the DNC. He wrote books to carefully lay out his views and everything he did in the Senate was to head him in that direction.

It was a candidate who could not lose. He was in the party that could not lose. The political and economic wind was blowing at the Democrats' back and in the Republicans' face. The war in Iraq and to a lesser degree in Afghanistan made the Democratic candidate an almost foregone conclusion.

And he was pitted against a candidate who could not win. Sen McCain was not a strong candidate. He admitted openly that he was not an expert in the economy and was more interested in debating than deciding.

Now it's 2012 (well, will be soon). I just heard an interview on WLFJ 660 AM with Michelle Bachmann and I am impressed. (I'm hoping to find the interview on their archives and will post a link here if I find it). Her answer during the debate to the "submit" question was amazing. I've also posted recently about Gov Perry's approach to solving school problems.

It's still early, but it seems to me that the Republicans have a much stronger group of candidates than they did in 2008. Will this be a different election?

Rep Gowdy sees his term in office as a lost opportunity

2011-08-17T13:07:00.000-04:00

Most of my readers probably don't know Rep. Gowdy. He's one of the congressmen swept into office last year on a conservative wave. He represents my part of SC, a traditionally conservative area, and beat out Rep. Bob Inglis in the primaries. I can't be certain who I voted for in the primaries, but I know I voted for Gowdy in the general election.

Earlier this week, Gowdy said he saw his first six months in office as "a lost opportunity." (Source: Greenville News). Gowdy acknowledged that be "really did not have a frame of reference because [he'd] never served in the Legislature before." And he noted that "There’s more civility in a criminal trial (his former job was a prosecutor) than there is in politics."

Well, Rep Gowdy, I guess I see this as a lost opportunity too, if you decide to give up. Let me remind you that there was a lot less civility in the primary fights in your discussions about then-Rep. Inglis (and most of it was deserved). Part of the reason I and others like me voted for you is that you had never been in legislature before, we were tired of the ever compromising status-quo.

That's not to say I don't believe in compromise, I do. But I also know (as do you) that we will not fix our budget problems simply raising taxes on one group of people. "Shared sacrifice" needs to actually be shared and that means cutting spending.

I'm going to trust that the Greenville News caught you on a bad day, after a budget battle that left everyone unhappy. And, having a deal that no one likes, is not necessarily a good solution (some people call that compromise - I call it a mess). Instead, I look to you and others like you to lead, to look ahead to what's coming and take the necessary action to really resolve matters, not just make it easier on some politicians until after the next election.

I sympathize with how hard your job is on a day-to-day basis. I know you don't "like the travel between Washington and [your] home in South Carolina, where [your] family is living." But as you said, you knew the job was in Washington when you ran for election. There is certainly "a role for a fact-centric ... hopefully persuasive, argument" in Congress like you dream of. Unfortunately, sometimes it will be uncivil. You knew that too, back at election time.

I hope you will take this as helpful criticism and go back and finish the job you started, the job you were elected to do. It will be hard, as we expect you to hold ground on reducing spending and many will paint you in a bad light because of that. But we are depending on you.

Payday loans in Missouri

2011-08-16T14:26:00.000-04:00

I saw some articles today about payday loans in Missouri and it touched me off. Seems that in Missouri there are "325 McDonald's restaurants, 157 Starbucks coffee outlets and 1,040 payday loan stores." (as of 2010. source: Bankrate article). Now my personal opinion is that Starbucks is overpriced, but I'm thinking 10 times as many Payday lending stores as Starbucks is a little much. And you can always get things on the dollar menu at McDonalds.

In reality, the article was NOT drawing a conclusion about the number of McDonalds and Starbucks vs payday lending, it was just comparing numbers in terms that most people can relate to. The goal is to get you to say "gee, that's way too many payday lending stores." So why would there be so many? Well to quote a well-known bank robber who was asked why he robbed banks - "because that's where the money is" (Wikipedia). Payday lenders flock to Missouri because they know they can make a good profit. "The APR allowed by Missouri’s statutes of 1,950% based on a two-week loan of $10" (BBB paper)

The same BBB paper indicates there are some nursing homes that have payday lending companies at the homes. The article doesn't mention if they loan money to the residents (let's hope not), but they do loan to workers, then allow them to pay back with payroll deductions. I'm reminded of the Tennessee Ernie Ford song "Sixteen Tons" which said "I owe my soul to the company store." (Video here)

Payday lending companies like to point out that they loan money to people who need quick cash. The loans are very short term and the APR doesn't really mean much, most loans aren't kept open for a year. They also point out that their fees are lower than past-due charges and overdraft fees. In my research about three years ago (see here), I showed that these companies need to charge these rates to stay in business.

However, three years ago I also compared payday loans to crack cocaine. They are just as addictive and just as dangerous. The BBB article calls them debt traps. A couple of years ago, I commented that "this conservative who prefers less government interference spoke in favor of more government regulation and less payday loans." (here) My position is unchanged.

I still believe that the best payday loan is your own payday loan. Put $500 in the bank for the emergencies that come up. When an emergency comes up, pull it out, then put it back just like a payday loan. You'll save yourself large fees and maybe even gain a little interest.

Comments, even opposing, are welcome and will be published as long as they do not contain profanity, address this subject and are directed to me. If you want to call me an idiot, that's fine, don't call my readers names. You can debate their comments, but I will not allow them to be mistreated. Posting your real name and email address is not required, but appreciated.

Previous posts in reverse chronological order:

Western Sky

Is your cash well?

Anyday Pay day how about today, revisited

Any day payday, how about today - part 3

Any day payday, how about today - part 2

Any day payday, how about today - part 1

Blog changes

2011-08-12T11:36:00.000-04:00

After my vacation mentioned a few days ago, I decided to open up my blog to all comments (previously, you had to sign in). My hope is to encourage more comments from all people, even people who want to remain anonymous. However, I've enabled moderation in order to filter out the garbage.

Well, it seems to have worked, I've received three anonymous comments in three days. Trouble was, they were all spam. The last one bothered me a little. The comment praised my general idea (gotta love that), but criticized my lack of specifics. As I read the note trying to decide whether to approve or disapprove, I chucked about the criticism, the comment itself lacked specifics.

What made me decide NOT to post the comment was the hot-links at the bottom for various websites. But it did make me think and decide to explain my reasoning for moderation and my approval process.

If I see a comment that is on subject (or even off subject somewhat), has no profanity and no advertising, I will publish it, whether I agree with it or not and whether it's praise, criticism or something else. I will allow a link to your blog if you include one, but I will check it out first (to protect my readers).

Readers - I encourage you to click on the "comments" in each blog post and add comments to the stream. A comment in the stream does not mean I agree with or endorse the ideas, but it does mean I've read the comment and feel it's clear of profanity and advertising spam. If the comment includes a hot-link, click on it at your risk, but I will typically comment on whether or not I checked it out.

Thanks again for your readership.

More on education - this time with prison

2011-08-11T08:37:00.000-04:00

Yesterday I posted some ideas on education. Thanks for the comments, both online and via email. After my post, I saw this editorial on the Cato Institute's website. Now before you go read it, I should warn you that these folks tend to be a little different. In some ways, they are ultra-conservative. In other ways, they are very liberal. They tend towards a libertarian viewpoint, where the best government is no government. (OK, maybe I overplayed that a little).

In this editorial, recognizes a little-know idea in Texas trying to fix a problem with a pipeline from school to prison. The article gives credit to Governor Rick Perry who is often mentioned by Republicans as a candidate for president. He most recently was in the news with a Day of Prayer for our country.

The premise of the idea is that too many of our kids get kicked out of school (suspended, expelled, etc) and end up in jail. My assumption would then be that the prisons teach these kids how to be "better" criminals and then they come back out, only to wind up back in prison for something serious. The programs mentioned take these kids and instead of kicking them out of school, gives them "guidance and rehabilitation services in or near their communities."

There's a lot that's NOT said in this article, for example no results are given. What happens to school discipline when these kids are NOT suspended or expelled? And what is the cost of these programs? (I suspect less than incarceration, but no facts are given).

Even with these questions, it still looks to me like this is a good idea and should be evaluated. I don't think SC has the same ratio of problem kids that Texas might have, but each state should look at the option. We just might end up saving a few kids in the process.

What do you think?

A fix for education

2011-08-10T08:05:00.000-04:00

Last week I was on vacation and entered into a discussion about the debt crisis. Discussion moved over to the topic of education and specifically some ways to "fix" education. A close friend, who tends to be more liberal than me, offered some ideas I found intriguing. I promised to post them here to see if I got any response.

The first suggestion was regarding pay and benefits. As an SC teacher, my friend is an SC employee and she feels that the people who make decisions for SC education should be on the same pay and benefits plan. This would be somewhat tricky as some of the decisions are made by federal employees (US Senators and US Representatives, Department of Education, etc.), and other decisions are already made by SC employees (SC State Department of Education). But this is a good idea for all areas of government, put them on the same pay and benefit schedule as the people they govern.

The second idea she had was regarding office term limits. Specifically, any administrator - from principals on up - should be limited to 5 years in a particular position. After that time, they have to return to the class room. I specifically asked if this included our local district superintendent (who is well thought of in both conservative and liberal camps) and she answered yes. The idea is to make these people aware of the impact of their decisions.

So what do you think? Would this help education? Would schools do better or cost less? What impact would it have in your area?

What do you do with your money?

2011-08-09T08:52:00.000-04:00

Back in the last century (1990's), I attended a 6-week workshop titled "Master Your Money." Maybe it was a symptom of where I was in my life at the time, but it struck me then, and several times since, as the best approach to personal financial management I've ever seen. That's not to knock some of the others like Larry Burkett or Dave Ramsey (who recently acknowledged both Burkett and Blue in his Great Recovery presentation). And I'm currently following Joe Sangl (see my post here), who credits Dave Ramsey for a lot of his ideas. But Blue's approach focused on tracking spending, not just budgeting. I was so impressed I took the course twice, then taught it around a half dozen times. The course is dated now, but still has some great ideas.

Ron Blue said there are basically four things you can do with money: 1) Give it away, 2) pay taxes {groan}, 3) repay debt and 4) spend it. Anything left over after these four constitutes your cash margin which can be used to accomplish your long range objectives. Only by increasing the cash margin can you really make a difference in your long term plans. Once Blue walks you through tracking your past expenses, he asks a Dr. Phil question - "How's that working out for you?" (Ok, he really didn't ask that back in 1990, but he could have). Blue asks you to look at each area of your expenditures and determine if you want that to go up or go down. Would you like to give more or less over the next few months? Do you want to spend more or less on eating out? Do you want to pay more or less in credit card interest?

Another focal point I learned from Ron Blue's course was that there are no independent financial decisions. Every dollar you spend at McDonald's is a dollar you can't spend on a new house. A dollar spent on wine can't be spent on books. And a dollar spent on cigarettes can't be spent on clothes. He calls this integrated planning and says it's the "allocation of limited resources to unlimited alternatives." (Joe Sangl says that Income minus Outgo must equal Exactly Zero or I-O=EZ - he's so proud of that idea he trademarked it).

A couple of months back, I told you (if you read my blog here) that you would probably earn $1million in your lifetime. The question is, what will you do with it? Dave Ramsey says you can go through life "like Gomer Pyle on valium" or you can track and plan your life. Which will you do?

Vacation - a time of rejevenation

2011-08-08T08:54:00.000-04:00

Last week, I went to the beach (Myrtle) on a family vacation. We've done this before, but it's been a couple of years. With my wife, our five children, four children-in-laws, 5 year old grandson, four 2year old granddaughters, one 3week old granddaughter, close friends, their 5 year old daughter, 13 year old niece, sister, son's friends (age 21) and daughter-in-law's mother, we had a house full (for the record, not everyone was there all week).

The 2 year olds behaved like you'd think 2year olds would behave, immeasurably cute one minute, complete melt-down when they were told no. Grandma and grandpa don't say no very often, so I suspect parents will have to readjust some this week.

As we did on our last big family vacation, we let our kids cook for us. Each one chose a night. This time, we also specified that they had to clean also (lesson learned 2 years ago). This worked well, with even the 21year old and his friends cooking (burgers, infused with bacon and cheese - my cholesterol is up).

One family member twisted my arm and asked for a photo shoot - posed pictures of their two year old. My goal is to do these photo shoots regularly for all of the grand-kids.

The family largely obeyed my censorship demand - no facebook or tweets about vacation until it was over (thank you very much). I felt it better if 99% of the US didn't know that we left our house unattended. Yes, we had a neighbor watching the house and we had two different people who came by while we were gone (for two very different reasons), but I still felt better not having the social network communities broadcasting my vacation plans.

As a result of a relaxing week at the beach, I plan to restart my blog - or reboot (a new use for a word I've known a long time from a description of the new movie Planet of the Apes - see here)

Over the next few weeks, expect to see posts on family, the economy, education (courtesy vacation discussion), politics and personal finance. As usual, I won't stick to a single topic. And your comments are always welcome.

Tax on corporate jets

2011-07-11T08:47:00.000-04:00

I've been told that I have a mind like a steel trap - it's just that sometimes, it won't open (somehow, I don't think that was intended like a compliment). But this talk about a tax or corporate jets has been stirring around in my mind lately and it has sounded vaguely familiar. After a little research using my favorite search engine, I found the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1900 (OBRA-90).

Republicans and Democrats will remember OBRA-90 as the bill where President George H. Bush broke his "No new taxes" promise. According to this Connecticut Law Tribune article, it included "a new luxury tax on luxury autos, aircraft, jewelry and yachts." The thinking at the time was we can stick it the rich and make them pay dearly for those luxuries. After all, it would be fair, they have more money, why should they be spending it on frivolous items, when poor people can't buy gas and food? Not only would it stick it to rich, it would provide more tax revenue for the government to give to the folks who could buy gas and food.

However, the luxury tax didn't work out quite as well as expected - it "took in less than one half of the projected income." People who previously could afford these luxuries simply stopped buying them or - even worse - bought them overseas. "Boat Builders ... were particularly hard-hit with yacht sales dropping 77 percent and builders laying off an estimated 25,000 people." Wait a minute! A tax increase caused job losses? 25,000 of them? I thought the luxury tax was supposed to stick it to the rich? Instead, 25,000 boat builders, average middle class people, lost their jobs? Who'da thunk it?

Any new taxes on corporate jets is likely to have the same effect. Anyone who proposes these taxes needs to look back to recent history and explain why they think this time will be any different. Oh, by the way, OBRA-90 also "included the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 which established the "pay-as-you-go" or "PAYGO" process for discretionary spending and taxes." (source) and we all know how well that has worked.

Side notes: I found out that none-other than Lion of the Senate Ted Kennedy supported the luxury tax (no surprise), then when his home state of Massachusetts was affected, tried to reverse course with the Kennedy Boat Building Investment Act of 1999. (can anyone say flip-flop?). I do not know if he was successful. I also found this George Will commentary written in 1999. In it, he said "But perhaps every quarter-century or so government--it cannot help itself--must go on a fairness bender, the memory of the hangover from similar misadventures having faded." - Let's see, the last time was 1990, this is 2011 - that's only 21 years. Maybe the cycle is shortening due to Global Warming....

In full disclosure I have to document that I have never owned a luxury car or yacht and never owned a corporate jet. I did own a canoe for a few years, but after it flipped on me once I decided to sell it. I think I had a net loss of $50 on the purchase/sell over a 3 year period. I did not claim the loss on my taxes.

What would you do with $1million

2011-06-30T13:24:00.000-04:00

I think I saw this question on Facebook recently (I never respond to these types of things) and today was reading a few financial blogs that explored similar territory. Most of us (myself included) like to daydream about what we'd do if Ed McMahon told us we'd won the Publisher's Clearinghouse or what we'd do if Bill Gates suddenly included us as one of his charties.

But it struck me that most of the people reading this WILL have $1million in their lifetime. If you work from age 25 (assuming a late start) to age 65 and make an average of $25,000 a year, you will have earned $1million. That's only about $12.50/hour.

So, what will you do with the $1million you will earn?

How much trouble can we get into?

2011-06-29T14:44:00.001-04:00

My friends over at ChristianPF did a blog post on why it's important to have $1000 set aside in an emergency fund. I commented that sometimes that's not enough and other agreed. I was reminded of the first time I saw this, although at age 10 I know I didn't understand it.

My older brother and his roommate were preparing to take me for a weekend of sailing on a local lake. They loaded up the sailboat, a tent and camping supplies for the weekend and the three of us (and their dog) were ready to go. Just before we left, my brother asked his room-mate how much cash they had. They totaled the bills in their wallets and my brother said "how much trouble can we get into?"

When we got to the lake, we took binoculars and found an island suitable for camping. We prepared to sail to the island and realized we'd left the rudder and daggerboard back home. Not good for sailing. We decided to paddle the sailboat to the island, my brother and I would set up camp while his roommate made a trip back home for the pickup. When the roommate got back, he flashed his headlights at us (no cellphones) and my brother set out paddling to pick him up.

Did you know there are laws preventing the use of boats on the water after dark without lights? In hindsight, this seems like a good idea, but at the time we didn't know. My brother was picked up by some sort of lake patrol who escorted him back to our island. Since I was watching I knew something bad was going on, so I picked the only defensive weapon I could find, an axe, and went to defend my brother. I'm sure the lake patrol thought it was funny, to be greeted by a 10 year old boy with an ax.

The fines were due immediately and my brother paid them. The lake patrol took him to get his roommate, which created another funny story, but not for today. The next day, we sailed the lake without problems.

The moral of the story is to always think "how much trouble can we get into?" Car troubles can easily run into hundreds of dollars and if you need your car for work, that's an emergency. Heat/AC troubles can exceed $1000 and in SC weather, a breakdown can be an emergency (and we frequently use both in the same week in spring/fall). The question of how much you need in an emergency fund is based on "how much trouble can we get into?" If you rent an apartment, you can probably get into less trouble than a homeowner.

Libya and the War Powers Act

2011-06-24T17:29:00.000-04:00

It looks like Congress doesn't know what to do about Libya. On the one hand, they are frustrated that President Obama hasn't asked permission for his actions there, on the other hand they don't want to publicly say that he can do what he's already doing (see story here). The real question is, does the president have the authority.

The War Powers Act came into being when Richard Nixon was in power and the Vietnam War had been going on forever. John Kennedy sent troops there and the US never officially declared war. Congress tolerated it through his short time in office and through Johnson's. After Nixon became president, Congress decided to tie his hands.

Presidents since then have complained about the constitutionality of the law. But they also followed it. There seemed to be a delicate balance of power, not completely unlike what the framers of the constitution wanted. President Obama has stated that he didn't think the law applied, the biggest reason being that we don't have troops on the ground.

Actually, I support the president on this, but there has to be some caution. The next president (in 2012 or 2016) may be a Republican and may use this argument also. In fact, I've found myself agreeing with the president a lot more lately, his decision to surge in Afghanistan, his decision not to pull all troops at once, his decision to leave troops in Iraq, his decision not to close Guantanamo. I think he's come to the realization that this presidential job is a lot harder than he believed when he asked for the job.

Regrets, I've had a few... too few to mention

2011-06-22T08:54:00.000-04:00

The subject line is from a song sang by many different people, best done by Frank Sinatra. It ends with the line "I did it my way." The song comes to mind every now and then, not for the ending, but for the line I put in the title, the line about regrets.

I've always said I lived my life without regrets. I think most people feel that way. The country group Rascal Flatts sings about it in their song "God blessed the broken road that led me straight to you." Even the bad things in life have a way of working out. Darius Rucker's song "This" says "maybe it didn't turn out like I planned, maybe that's why I'm such, such a lucky man" says the same thing. Without the bad things in my life, I wouldn't be where I am today. The things that don't kill you make you stronger. All of those kinds of ideas.

So of all the bad things that have happened in the past, all of the mistakes I've made and all of the really, really stupid things I've done, all of those were good? Is that the rational conclusion of all of this? Or maybe, just maybe I SHOULD have some regrets?

Just thinking right now, more to come....

Is heaven just for Christians? Apparently atheists think so

2011-06-21T16:20:00.000-04:00

All dogs go to heaven. You've seen the movie. You know a friend who is a different religion and you think they go to heaven. Or you believe that a loving God wouldn't send anyone to hell, so everyone must go to heaven.

Well, it appears the American Atheists disagree. This article quotes David Silverman the president of American Atheists as saying "Heaven is a specifically Christian place." The article basically says that the city of New York has renamed a street to "Seven in Heaven Way" to honor seven who died in the 9/11 attack. As a result, the atheists aren't happy.

Silverman said that "all memorials for fallen heroes should celebrate the diversity of our country." Now I would have thought that the memorials should point directly to those fallen heroes, but I guess I'm wrong. He also said "these heroes might have been Jews, they might have been atheists" which implies to me that he hasn't even tried to find out. It would be interesting to find out if he would change his mind about the street name if he learned that the seven heroes were all indeed Christians. I kinda doubt he would, atheists seem to want to eradicate every mention of heaven and God. Maybe we'll have to start calling these words the "h-word" or the "G-word".

But the one thing I took from this article was the atheists believe that heaven is uniquely Christian place.

Storage Wars - Local Edition

2011-05-11T13:06:00.001-04:00

If you haven't seen the show Storage Wars on A&E, I recommend it. Basically, they auction of the contents of a storage room at one of these storage facilities. The people who had rented the room had stopped paying rent, so the facility auctions it to the highest bidder.

I've long wanted to attend an auction of any kind, and heard about a storage auction today at a local facility. I managed to get the time to go and wanted to see if it was like the TV show. I arrived a couple of minutes late, but didn't miss any action.

The first thing the auctioneer said was that if we were expecting any "buh-de-buh-by" type auction, that wasn't him. But he did a pretty good job. He explained the rules (you have 5 minutes to inspect the storage room, you can't touch anything, can't go inside), opened the door and moved out of the way.

The first unit was #616 and contained (as far as I could see) a couple of lawn mowers, a chain saw, some other lawn equipment, a couple of old (stained) mattresses and who knows what else. Bidding started at $300 (the first bidder started bidding before the official bids began). When the bidding was over, the unit sold for $475.

The second unit was #632 and it was not full like the first (and later) units. It looke like someone had closed out a florist shop or something. There were imitation ficus trees, lots of vases, some racks for holding clothes (or plants?). There was less interest in this unit, it sold for $325.

The third unit was #208 and contained a bed (frames & mattresses), an armoire, some end tables, a glass top coffee table (the bottom looked like a cat or something had gotten to it), a love seat and some living room chairs. and a clothes butler rack. But the prize in this unit was a grandfather clock. I looked and couldn't see a name of the manufacturer. I noticed that the pendulums were off, but in the clock itself. It's impossible to know if it was working. This unit ended up selling for $725.

Unlike the show, I didn't get to find out what was in the parts of the units that I couldn't see or find out the value of the units in the end. But it was an interesting day. I'll go to another auction and maybe buy something that time.

Thoughts on the death of Bin Laden

2011-05-06T17:04:00.000-04:00

By now, you're probably tired if hearing about the death of Bin Laden. If you can stand some more talk, I want to share some of my thoughts.

1) I'm glad he's dead. I still wonder why it took so long. I'm not gloating, I actually would have liked for him to realize the error of his ways. But that wasn't likely. And now, he has finally realized the error of his ways. He knows the Truth.

2) I'm not upset that his body was dumped nor that he was given the Muslim equivalent of last rites. Part of me is, but in reality, I think his body should have been (and was by all accounts was) treated with civility. That's a lot more than he gave to others, but it's the right thing to do.

3) I'm glad the pictures of his body were not released. I see no value in it and a lot of possible problems. I wish the same had been done with pictures of Abu Ghraib. (Hat tip to Cal Thomas). But that happened under a different leader.

4) I've noticed that some newspapers are using the name Bin Laden instead of Osama Bin Laden. I think this is because of the tendency of people to say "Obama" when they mean "Osama". It's tripped up many a commentator.

5) All people, politicians, bloggers, etc. should carefully examine their feelings and what they say to make sure they are consistent. An example of inconsistency would be the comment in September of 2006 "[E]ven if [Osama bin Laden] is caught tomorrow, it is five years too late. ... And even to capture him now I don’t think makes us any safer."

This was followed this week by the same person with the comment "The death of Osama bin Laden marks the most significant development in our fight against al-Qaida. . . . (His) death ... is historic." (both spoken by Nancy Pelosi and reported here)

Has President Obama evolved?

2011-05-03T08:33:00.000-04:00

I've been wondering for some time that President Obama has changed in several ways since he first took office. His decision to send Navy Seals into Pakistan was actually "predicted" during the debates with Sen. McCain, so that doesn't really reflect a change. But his decision to use intelligence gathered at Guantanamo Bay, most likely as a result of "enhanced techniques" seems contradictory to his prior attitude.

Keeping Guantanamo Bay open was not entirely the President's decision, but he did not fight hard to keep his earlier promises. Troops have stayed in Iraq longer than he ever intended and he supported a surge in Afghanistan. President Obama even supported a new war (Libya) albeit not to the extent of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

So my question is, has President Obama evolved in his thinking? Has he come to realize that maybe President Bush wasn't as far off the mark as the current president believed when he was campaigning?

And most importantly, if his attitude on these things have changed, can it be changed in other areas? Might we see a move to less government? Might we see the removal of Obamacare? Might we see a return to his campaign attitude of "it's above my paygrade"?

Ding Dong the wicked witch is dead Updated

2011-05-02T10:43:00.001-04:00

I don't mean to minimize the death of Osama Bin Laden by the silly title. Instead, a part of me wants to celebrate, just as the munchkins in The Wizard of Oz. After 10+ years of being America's Enemy #1, OBL has been eliminated.

My hat goes off to the Navy Seals who took care of the matter. I wish that Marcus Luttrell could have been in on the final operation (see his story here and I highly recommend this book).

I listed to most of the President's speech (TV/DVR errors made me miss part of the middle) and have read the speech this morning. I think he was "spot on". This is a significant event. There may be some reprisals from Al Qaeda (I expect there will be). The war on terror is not over.

I was especially impressed that President Obama took the time to call President Bush (and possibly President Clinton). The former president(s) deserved that. It's a show of respect from the current to the former.

There are lots of questions that should be answered. What took so long? Why did one helicopter have problems? Who will take over Al Qaeda actions and what will our attitude be towards him? But for today, and maybe tomorrow, we should all recognize that this event was significant. I listened to a local conservative radio personality this morning and was glad that he felt the same way. No bashing of the current (or former) president. No complaints. Job well done.

* Update * Just heard the Cal Thomas commentary on local radio. Thomas used the same title for today's commentary (5/4/11). I didn't know Mr. Thomas read my blog, but I'm pleased he used it. Hopefully he will share his fees for the day with me...

Obama Birth Certificate

2011-04-27T14:51:00.000-04:00

News today is that President Obama has released his long form birth certificate. The LA Times is also reporting that a "self-annointed leader of the so-called "birther" movement" still has doubts (no one should be surprised).

I'm hoping this issue can now be put to rest. But I have one question: The issue has been going on for over 3 years, why release the form now? Why wasn't it released 3 years ago?

I suspect that instead of resolving issues, new ones will come up....

School budget problems resolved - Auburn, Maine

2011-04-11T07:57:00.000-04:00

Auburn Maine school department has found a way to solve their budget problems. Details in the accompanying article are sketchy (non-existent), but evidently it's true. Rather than spend public funding on more books, more material for the classroom or even more teachers or aides, the school department has decided that the money would be better spent on iPads.

The iPads have apps for "learning your letters from books, that can be read, (and) finger painting your name" so it's easy to see why Superintendent Tom Morrill sees why "it's absolutely something we must do." It's amazing that anyone was ever able to learn their letters in the past.

I know you're thinking that iPads cost a lot of money, but these only ended up costing the school department a little over $700 each - 285 for only $200,000. You're probably thinking you could have bought a lot of real books for that money and maybe even some blank paper and real finger paint, but wouldn't that get the kids' hands messy? Why you might even have to buy paint aprons and how many of those can you buy for $200,000?

Hiring another teacher is out of the question. Hiring teacher's aides for the classroom is out of the question (you know, those people who only make about $15k each? 10 more teacher's aides won't do as good as an iPad). If the money had not been spent on iPads I'm sure it would have been spent on another administrator trying to Race for the Top (while sinking to the bottom).

This "cutting edge technology will boost literacy rates from 62 percent to 90 percent in two years" (or it's hoped it will).

I'm not sure what they did to solve their budget problems, but I think every school district in the US should fly to Auburn to see what they've done and immediately implement the same plan. Times being hard, trips will be limited to 3 days and district employees will have to fly coach...

Memo to congress - thanks for doing your job

2011-04-09T08:26:00.000-04:00

I say this almost sarcastically. Congress has finally done what they were supposed to do last fall. Apparently. There's still more haggling to come, the budget bill signed last night is really only for another week, the final bill will be hammered out in the coming week.

Understand that the main issue here is spending. We want it cut. It's not just because of the recent deficit (although that's what woke everyone up), we wanted spending to be cut before that. It's not just about the threats to cut military pay (which by the way were uncalled for), it's about planning and living by a plan. It's not about telling federal workers on Friday that they may not have a job on Saturday, it's about providing for the common defense and if a worker isn't doing that, he/she needs to find a real job that helps the US, not drags it down.

It's not about throwing women under the bus, it's about removing funding from an organization that doesn't fulfill the job it portrays to do and kills babies, protects rapists and hides pimps instead. It's not about which radio station you listen to it's about what radio station the government should pay for (I'll give you a hint - none) and which ones should be paid for with private funds (another hint - all of them).

I could go on an on, but I won't. Instead I'll say "Thank-you" to congress - "you did your job". However, most of us in the real tax-paying world understand that just doing your job once a year isn't enough. Now you need to go back in there and do your job AND MORE for the rest of the year. Remember, elections are coming!

Budget crisis solution - Mr. Pruitt style

2011-04-07T21:20:00.000-04:00

Watching the mess in Washington made me think of a solution. It involves Mr. Pruitt - the teacher I had for wood shop in the 8th grade. I think some of his teaching solutions would help out.

Mr. Pruitt taught at Hughes Middle School and at the time, only boys took the class (I think my younger sister was the first girl to take wood shop. Mr Pruitt retired soon after that, I don't think he could handle girls). 8th grade boys being what they were, they would occasionally get in fights. When this happened, Mr. Pruitt would put the chairs in a circle and we would all stand around while he encouraged the two boys to go at it. They would walk around with fists up, looking at each other. Mr. Pruitt would push one towards the other and they would both back away. As Mr. Pruitt would say, one was scared, the other was glad.

I think his solution to the budget crisis would be similar. He'd get a group of citizens to stand around the Capitol and let Congress go at it until they finished the job we hired them to do. He'd push the Democrats and watch the Republicans back away. One would be scared and the other would be glad.

At the end of the day, we'd have a budget. It might not be the best budget, but it would be a budget. And no one would be pointing fingers. I think Mr. Pruitt could solve a lot of our problems.

Schools on strike

2011-03-29T15:47:00.000-04:00

I have to confess, I haven't paid much attention to the issues in Wisconsin regarding schools and government employees and the right to collective bargaining. Living my entire life in the south, in a right-to-work state, I'm not affected by unions and don't know a lot. It just doesn't affect my day-to-day living. I admit to being somewhat ignorant. As a kid, I remember wishing my teachers would go on strike and I could miss school (never happened).

That's not the point of this post, so don't comment on that please. The point is I read an article about universities in Wisconsin joining the union. As a parent of a young adult in a university, it made me think about what would happen if his university professors joined a union and then went on strike.

As a consumer, I can choose where to spend my money. I can buy groceries at numerous grocery stores. If one store goes on strike, I can honor their strike or go to another store. It gets more complicated with schools. And universities.

So my question is, if the university goes on strike, do I get a refund? When I send in my $$ at the beginning of the semester, I'm basically contracting with them for 3-4 months' worth of education (although it's somewhat questionable if he absorbs that much). Aren't they obliged to fulfill their end of the contract?

Is it time to rethink my economic ideas?

2011-03-23T10:50:00.000-04:00

I'm not sure rethink is the right word, but I do believe I may change some of my ideas. I'm a supply-sider and always have been. Watching Micheal Moore's documentary on capitalism had no effect on me, I've been a capitalist since before 1973 (my first year with a W2).

But I recently did some research on the HIRE act of 2010 (Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act - details here). Most of the people I've talked to didn't know anything about this law, signed by President Obama a litle over a year ago. There were attempts to extend the act into 2011, but those failed.

Basically, the law gave a break to small businesses who hired an employee who had been unemployed for at least 60 days. Employers would not have to pay the 6.2% Social Security tax for those employees for the remainder of the year and would be eligible for an additional $100 tax credit if the employee stayed a year. One small businessman I talked to (who had never heard of the act) explained that if you hired two or three employees that way, you might be able to hire another worker.

Had I heard about this law early last year, I would have agreed that it was good. (Yes, I would have agreed that an Obama plan was good). I've heard of plans like this before and always thought they were good. It gets unemployed people back to work. That's good. They pay taxes. That's good. All good.

But I never heard about the act then. And neither did my small-business friend. And apparently, neither did a lot of other people. Was it a lack of publicity? Or a lack of enthusiasm? I suspect the latter. And I'm beginning to believe that acts like this have little or no impact on the economy. Unemployment went up most (all?) of last year, this act should have reduced unemployment.

So my question is, what CAN we do to increase employment?

What does Michael Moore have in Common with the Tea Party?

2011-03-21T09:13:00.000-04:00

Over the weekend, I watched Michael Moore's documentary "Capitalism: A Love Affair". It was the first Moore film I've ever watched and you're probably saying "Why is a dyed-in-the-wool conservative like Randy even watching such a film?" Well it wasn't as bad (or as good) as I'd been told about his films and it was interesting to hear his opinions first hand, rather than through someone else's filter.

As expected, the film was very anti-Bush, but also took some shots at several Clinton and current presidential appointees. One had to listen carefully to catch them, but they were there. Senators Dodd and Frank (both with a "D" after their name) were shown in a bad light, so both parties were skewered. There were several anti-Obama ads played that talked about Socialism. To me, the tie-in was weak, but the attempt was to show that Obama is not a socialist.

There were some random, seemingly unconnected portions of the movie, it focused on GM shutdowns, foreclosures, a group called the Low Income Families Fighting Together (see here) and a sit-down strike at Republic Windows and Doors (see here). Moore also had a segment on the low pay for pilots. To me, the main (only?) tie in these stories was that unions were shown in a positive light in each case, standing up for the little man against the big-bad company.

There was a segment on dead-peasant policies. To be honest, this puzzled me. Dead-peasant policies exist when a company, (Wal-Mart was highlighted) takes out a life insurance policy on their workers with the company as a beneficiary. Then if the employee dies, the company makes money. I'm trying to figure out why I should care. Assuming of course, the company doesn't do something to hasten the final event. In my case, I'd like the challenge to show the company that they would lose money on the insurance, I'd outlive their interest.

This makes me wonder about the business model of the life insurance company. Surely they have the actuarial numbers to show that over a large number of people, Wal-Mart can't make money in this game. Otherwise, the insurance companies are charging too little for this policy.

There was praise for FDR and his attempt to pass a 2nd Bill of Rights. The film said that Germany, Italy and Japan have these in their constitution. Frankly for me, that doesn't speak well. I for one, am not interested in emulating any of those countries. (As a side note, the film ends with Moore making the dramatic statement that he's not leaving the US, I'm guessing he's heard the people suggest he move to whatever country he thinks is better).

The movie ended saying that Capitalism is evil and should be replaced by democracy. It showed some companies that are run purely democratically. One was a small engineering firm, the other a bakery. It would be interesting to read more about these companies (sorry, I didn't get their name), to see how they got started, how did they manage their funds. How do they pay their CEO and how do they recruit given their democratic approach. I don't recall the companies names, so that research won't get done by me.

One of the questions I kept asking was about protection of property. Suppose I own a house and decide to sell it to you. After you've been in it for a few years, you find you can't make the payment. Shouldn't I have the right to foreclose? If you can't pay me what you owe me, can't I at least get my property back? Moore's film kept showing reasons that the big banks shouldn't be allowed to foreclose (and some were legitimate), but what happens to the bank's property rights? Do we stomp all over those? That question was never answered.

Oh and lest I close without answering the title question - what DO Michael Moore and the Tea Party have in common? Both are solidly opposed to TARP and think the whole fiasco was created by the Treasury Secretary and Wall Street. I wonder, will Moore show up at the next Tea Party Rally?

It's an odd month - Have you checked your credit report?

2011-03-18T09:59:00.000-04:00

I decided a few years ago that I was going to check my credit report regularly. Each person is allowed to check once per year with each of the three agencies, and rather than pull them all at once, I like to spread them out. Combined with my wife, we can pull a credit report every other month. So, if you pull reports in odd months (January, March, May, etc), you'll be following my plan.

While there is a commercial with a catchy tune and funny costumes, regardless what they say their credit report isn't free. You end up signing up for a service. Instead what you want to do is go to www.annualcreditreport.com. Once there, you'll fill in your state, then some basic information. One option I highly recommend specifies that on printed reports, only the last 4 digits of your social security number are printed. You may not print your reports (I do), but there's no sense printing on paper, on disk or even on the screen your full social any more than required.

Next you'll select one of the three agencies. This could cause some people some grief. "Which one do I pull first?" you might be saying. The answer is simple - any one you want. If you haven't pulled a report in the last year, my suggestion is to take the one at the top. If you've pulled that report, take the second on the list. The order may change, so don't count on it being the same next time, write down which report you pulled.

Once you've selected an agency, you'll be taken directly to that agency. Here you'll be asked some questions to verify that you really are you. You may be asked about old addresses, old accounts, details on your mortgage or recent credit changes. It might be best to have access to your records at this point, to know what your mortgage payment is, who your banker is and where you have accounts.

Once you get your credit report, you should review it carefully, If you find mistakes, you should call to find out details on the mistake. If you want the information corrected, don't settle for a call, write the owners of the account. My approach is to write to the owners first, then write to the credit agency if I don't get resolution. You could write to both at the same time.

I keep a copy of the credit report, at least until I pull another one from the same agency (a year later). You may decide not to keep a copy on paper, but I'd recommend keeping a copy on disk in that case.

How to un-elect your local politician

2011-03-16T07:53:00.000-04:00

Seems that in Florida, voters have gotten wise and un-elected their Mayor. Seems the Mayor was "politically tone deaf during troubled economic times", easily shown by raising taxes and raising the pay and benefits for public employees.

Citizens of Miami-Dae have overwhelmingly voted to kick this Republican, soon-to-be former Mayor Carlos Alvarez, out of office. Over 700 of the 809 precincts have reported in and 88% of voters favored the recall vote.

We should all take note of this action and we should print a copy of the article and mail it to our politicians. They can be un-elected.

(Full article is here)

Happy Pi day

2011-03-14T09:03:00.000-04:00

Ok, I know I can be a bit of a nerd, but when two of the people in my family don't even get it when I send a text that says "Happy Pi Day", something's wrong. They had even seen comments (likely on Facebook, likely from teachers) talking about celebrating Pi Day and still didn't get it.

For those who don't know, Pi is one of those "special" numbers in math. They seem to turn up over and over, so someone, somewhere named it. Pi is used to determine the area of a circle. Most have heard the joke, Pi are squared - no Pi are round.

Anyway, the value if Pi is 3.14. Today is 3/14. Notice the similarity? Today, I was reminded of Pi day by an entry on Wikihow explaining how to celebrate Pi day. What better way than with a pie? They show some pictures with the symbol for Pi on the pie. Or maybe the numbers for Pi on the pie. Either approach is acceptable. If you want to get technical about it, you should celebrate the exact minute, at 1:59 today.

While I've never celebrated Pi day before, I think it's a good idea. We've celebrated Ground Hog day at my house along with some other obscure holidays. Any holiday focused on a desert can't be a bad idea. So, maybe I'll go out and buy a Pi (or is that buy a pie?) today. Apple sounds really good right about now.

Happy Pi Day everyone!

(I should also wish my brother and his wife a happy birthday. I wonder how long it took them to find someone with the same birthday to marry?)

Western Sky

2011-03-13T16:28:00.000-04:00

Today I saw an ad for Westernsky.com. This is a company owned and operated by Native Americans. The ad offered about $2500 in a loan. They will put the money in your checking account overnight. No collateral is required and there are no fees for early pay off.

I was curious, this sounded suspiciously like payday loans I talked about here or the Cashwell company I talked about here. When I found their website, I saw that they claim to have lower rates than payday loans. From looking at their rates, they are lower than Cashwell.

But they aren't cheap. For a loan of $2525, you'll pay a $75 fee right off the bat. Then you start paying almost 140% in interest. If you pay it off over the required 36 months, you'll pay over $10,000.

The website explains that Western Sky operates "within the boundaries of the Cheyenne River Sioux Reservation, a sovereign nation located within the" USA. I don't know if that means they operate under different rules. I wonder if they can pursue US citizens who don't pay them in the same way US companies. Or maybe they get to play under US rules in some cases and their own rules in other cases.

It would scare me to work with a company that might not operate under US laws. It would scare me even more to pay 140% interest. (I should note that this was their least offensive loan. If you only borrow $1000, you'll pay almost 195% interest)

Bullying about road rage

2011-03-12T07:01:00.000-05:00

Yesterday, I asked for statistics about the growth of road rage. So far, I haven't seen any (if you have some, please post here or on yesterday's post). But I have a theory and the theory is related to road rage. Let me explain.

Sometime in 1987 or 1988, some news reporters on TV coined the phrase "road rage" to describe the anger some drivers felt towards other drivers. AAA talked about how bad it was and called for investigations. Psychologists searched for reasons to explore the phenomenon. And police officers dutifully began reporting it when they saw it.

Road rage was real, but did these TV reporters create the wave that spread? Not just by encouraging copycats, (which they did) but also by reporting on something that had been there all along. The term didn't exist in 1986, so the statistical count was zero. The number of reported incidents incidents had no where to go but up. (for more on this media invention see here)

So, are we seeing the same thing with bullying? Certainly it is real and has been around a LONG time. But are we 1) creating copycats and 2) counting a problem we never counted before? Doesn't change the seriousness of it and I for one am glad parents are aware of it, but it doesn't make it a national problem.

Bullying statistics - Historical data

2011-03-11T08:37:00.000-05:00

Has anyone seen any statistics on bullying that cover the growth? Specifically, if we look back 1, 2, 5, even 10 years ago, is bullying more prevalent today than it was then?

All of the numbers I've seen indicate how bad it is now, or stats from 2009 or some other year. The numbers are staggering and I don't mean to minimize them. I'm just looking for some historical perspective and haven't found it yet.

If you find a link, post it here.

What a difference a bank makes

2011-03-01T09:44:00.000-05:00

This morning I called my small "home-town" bank because my debit card is broken. This bank has a feature where they transfer an extra $1 into savings every time you use the card. But they charge me a monthly fee of $5. Each time I use the card, they deduct 50cents from that fee, so if I use it 10 times, there's no fee.

Another reason I signed up for this account is that in March of this year (which started today), they are going to give me a bonus and match all of the dollars they've transferred to savings. I think in my case that will exceed the service charges I've paid.

Anyway, back to replacing my debit card. Martha at the bank was very nice and was ready to send me a new card. Then she told me there was a $5 charge. I told her to hold off.

Then I called one of the big credit card companies and told them that the card I have for them is broken (I'm rough on cards in my wallet). Michele was very nice and offered to send one out right away. I talked to her about the rewards program and she offered to upgrade my card in two different ways. The first was no charge (I pay no annual fee now) and would give me trip cancellation benefits (not a big deal, but if it's free). The second would give me more rewards, but cost an annual fee of $59. I declined the second and accepted the first.

My point here is this: people like to bash the big credit card companies and praise the little guy, but my experience is the opposite. What's your experience?

Should I itemize on my taxes?

2011-02-15T10:58:00.000-05:00

One of the most frequent questions I get from the folks who come to me to have their taxes done is "Should I itemize?" A lot of these clients don't even know what the question means, but they ask anyway. And the answer I always give is that we will look at their situation and determine the best answer, because the answer is different for everyone.

To explain what it means, the IRS gives everyone a standard deduction. You can choose to take the standard deduction or itemize. Typically, you will choose which ever gives you the best tax break (while it sounds silly, there is at least one good reason not to choose the best, but I'll ignore that for now). This deduction is the amount of your income that is not taxable. Supposed you're single and make $50,000 a year income. You won't have to pay taxes on the entire income, the first $5700 is not taxable.

The standard deduction as mentioned about is $5700 for single people or for married people who file separately. For married people who file together, the deduction is exactly twice the single deduction or $11,400. There is another class of people, Head of Household and their deduction is $8400. I won't go over those choices in this blog post, I'll assume you know which filing status you fall into.

In order to decide on itemizing, you can simply look at your items and see the total. If they total more than the standard, you're better off itemizing. So what items are significant? My experience is that home mortgage interest is typically the larges. If your home is mortgaged, you should get a from from your bank that tells how much interest you paid.

People of faith also tend to have charitable contributions. And of course we all pay state taxes, you can choose to deduct your state income tax or state sales tax. Don't forget real estate taxes and property taxes on your automobiles. If the total of all of these items exceeds the standard, by all means itemize.

There are two other areas that are common: Medical expenses and miscellaneous deductions. Each of these is subject to some minimums. For example, medical expenses that exceed 7.5% of your income are deductible. For the person listed above making $50,000, that's $3750. If your expenses are less than that or are covered by insurance, you can't deduct them. If your expenses are higher, you can only deduct the difference. For example, if your expenses are $5000, you can only deduct $1250.

For miscellaneous expenses (job travel, union dues, etc), these have to exceed 2% of your income.

I purposely omitted Casualty and Theft losses as they aren't that common. By all means you should study the law yourself and not take my comments as always true. But hopefully, this will help you decide if you want to itemize.

Twenty-one years ago

2011-02-14T09:33:00.000-05:00

Twenty-one years ago, my wife was pregnant with what was to be our third child. Everyone (except me) thought it would be sweet if the child was born on Valentines Day. We woke up that morning with my wife thinking this was the day. We hurriedly got our two girls up and gave them their Valentines presents, knowing we may not be home that night. Then we called a neighbor to take care of the girls before and after school.

We hadn't chosen a girl's name yet (which turned out not to be a problem). I had decided that if the child was a boy, he should inherit my middle name as his middle name. I hadn't made that decision with the first two, which was ok, since both girls would have seemed silly with James as a middle name. During the labor process, my wife thought about changing the first name, but all her choices started with "J" and the idea of JJ just didn't seem right. Little did we know, even without the JJ moniker, we were due for some dynamite (the link shows my age).

A few hours later, we were in the delivery room, still with no girl's name, but at least settled on a boy's name. Ultrasounds were not common and we didn't know what to expect. We had experienced similar but opposite problems the first two times around (no boy's name chosen back then). When our pediatrician told use we had a "little Muggsy", we knew we didn't have a problem this time either. I guess with what the doctor charged for his short time in the room, he could afford to be a big Hornet's fan.

After the birth, I went to the nurse's station to get some ice & water. OB nurses are always excited and asked "what did you have?" New dads (even experienced new dads like me) can be counted on to say something stupid, my answer was "just some water." After they laughed and explained their question better, I told them we had a boy.

Today, my youngest celebrates his big day. We've been through a lot together. I have the privilege of taking him on baseball trips every few years, camping now and then and other father-son experiences. He's seen enough changes to last him a lifetime, but I'm sure more changes are on their way. Hopefully, these changes have prepared him for a bright future. He certainly deserves it.

Adam is now a student, a bass player in a Christian band (when he can), and more than that, a young man. Happy Birthday Adam! Enjoy your special day. We love you.

procession of presidencies - part 2

2011-02-04T10:22:00.000-05:00

It took me longer to get back to this than I thought. When I last left off, I had explained my theory on presidential elections. Basically, I had gone through presidents from JFK to JEC showing that the results of each election was predictable. It's almost as if some "invisible hand" was guiding not just economics, but elections too.

The last president I covered was President Carter. He took over after Ford, the only un-elected president we've ever had. America wasn't too happy with America. We'd been through the Vietnam war, then a crooked president. Then a president who tried to patch things up (Ford), but never seemed to do anything of note (except the Mayaquez incident). Inflation was high, unemployment was high. And things didn't get much better after Carter stepped in.

The hostage crisis in Iran sealed President Carter's image. Fairly or not, Americans felt defeated. A rescue attempt failed, costing the lives of 8 servicemen. The hostages were taken deeper under cover and were not released until after Carter left office.

America need to regain confidence in American. Ronald Reagan was the man for the job. Reagan was every man's grandfather. It didn't matter what he said, you just liked him. He believed in himself and he believed in America. He wanted to take the country back. I heard back then, that there was a huge boost in the sales of American flags. With him in office, America recovered. The economy got better, we ended the Cold War with the Russians and we actually made progress. We bombed Libya (on my birthday) and showed we would not put up with terrorism. Reagan surrounded himself with some very smart people, he may have been the last president to do so.

After 8 years of Reagan, control of the presidency went to his VP, George H.W. Bush. His time was lackluster. And his timing was worse. Americans had 8 years of Reagan and saw Bush as a continuation. They made fun of his "points of light" and everything else he did. When it was time for re-election, the economy was down and he seemed to not care.

In walked Bill Clinton. Like JFK, he held a Prince Charming appeal. America wanted a younger person in office, someone with charisma (a value Bush never was accused of). Sure, he was a womanizer, but he was a good looking womanizer. Men would laugh, women didn't care. And he said he would fix the economy.

At the end of his first stint, the economy looked good, so he was reelected. But after eight years, America decided it wasn't just the economy that was important, it was credibility also. They were tired of the snickers and back room jokes. Tired of the womanizer or maybe he had just grown too old? American wanted credibility again an reminisced about the days of a man named Reagan. He wasn't available and his VP Bush hadn't been all that good, but another Bush stepped in.

On George W. Bush's first presidency, 9/11 happened. Americans everywhere were convinced he was the right man for the job. There was even a political cartoon that showed Tipper Gore saying she thought he was a better choice. He was locked in for 8 years, primarily on the vote of Obam Bin Laden.

Americans can't be patient with anything and at the end of 8 years, the economy was again in a bad situation.Terrorism was no longer considered as big a threat as in 2004 and the reminiscing of Reagan fell flat. America wanted a change again, someone younger. A fresh view of the world. Someone who wasn't a cowboy. Someone who could negotiate.

In a perfect storm, a young candidate named Obama showed up. Not just a change, THE change. He wasn't Bush and he wasn't Clinton. He cared about people. He was a minority, but not too much of one. Americans could identify with him.

So what does this mean for 2012? Well predictions are easy in hindsight. It's the forward looking predictions that are hard. But I believe most presidential elections revolve around the economy. If the economy rebounds, President Obama will have no trouble getting reelected. If there is another 9/11 attack and if President Obama responds, he will have no trouble getting reelected. (I don't think there will be another 9/11, Bin Laden has no incentive) If on the other hand, the economic recovery still lags (and I think it will), the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan still linger and we have new issues crank up (Korea, Tibet, etc), I think he will face strong opposition.

It will be up to his opponents (both Democrats and Republicans) to surface a new face, one that shows confidence. One that shows patriotism (I think we're headed back to that).

What do you think?

procession of presidencies

2011-01-31T07:40:00.000-05:00

I have this theory that our choice of presidencies for the last several years has been overall very predictable by the circumstances at the time. This probably isn't popular with the R's or the D's because it says that the next one will be just as predictable. But let me expound.

My theory starts in the early 1960's. JFK was a young, handsome president, everyone's Prince Charming. A beautiful wife and beautiful children. After his death, Johnson took over as president. When reelection came a year later, America's love for JFK held over to his successor and Johnson was elected in 1964.

In 1968, Johnson refused to run for reelection. America was tired of the war in Vietnam and wanted us out. After RFK's assassination, the Democrats chose Hubert Humphrey to run against Nixon. But again, the demand for change won out. After 8 years of increasing violence in Southeast Asia, riots in the streets and a seeming status-quo, Americans elected a Republican.

Nixon lived up to his promise of getting the US out of Vietnam. But his paranoia led to his downfall. Watergate is the single event most people remember about Nixon. Exactly what he did or what anyone else did seems irrelevant. Americans remember that despite his statements, he was a crook. After his exit from office, Gerald Ford became our first unelected president. Most Americans can't remember anything about him except that he pardoned Nixon. For that and more, he didn't stand a chance for reelection.

In 1976, the Democratic candidate was James Earl Carter. In response to the Nixon presidency, Congress went out of it's way to emasculate the role of the President. The economy was in the dumps and America was too. A small nation that most Americans couldn't find on the map abducted some of our citizens and held them hostage. This became Carter's defining moment. But it lasted longer than a moment and America went further into the dumps.

Tomorrow I'll conclude this story. You know how it turns out, but do you agree with my reasoning?

Climate advisor steps down - Who should replace?

2011-01-25T06:58:00.000-05:00

I just read this news article that says Carol Brown, the president's climate advisor, is resigning from her post. Now you may be like me and didn't realize we had a climate advisor. But even though I didn't realize there was such a position, I'm impressed.

Obviously, this lady has done her job well. We in SC, have had more snow this year than in 4 average years and we're in the middle of a month long snap. Brown has advised away all effects of Global Warming in the two short years she's been in the job. (I'm assuming she took the job in 2009, I really don't know)

I have a suggestion to President Obama regarding her replacement. I think he has an opportunity to show his leadership skills, show is fiscal strength and show his climate change knowledge all at the same time. When he studies the matter and looks for a replacement hopefully, he will heed my advice. Next candidate for climate advisor? Nobody.

State of the Union Preview

2011-01-24T10:33:00.001-05:00

About a week ago, I made a joke about a mayor's "State of the City" address. Unfortunately, I'm not sure the humor came through. But it seems like it must be a slow news cycle because all of the internet is buzzing about something that hasn't happened yet, President Obama's third State of the Union speech.

There's discussion on which Supreme Court Justices will show up. Last year, the president took the Constitution-required speech and added political comments criticizing the Supremes. If they don't show up, it won't be the first time, but it's sure to garner a lot of attention.

And there's a lot of talk about what the President will say. So I thought I'd lay out my predictions:

- One of the survivors of the Tucson shooting will be present and the President will early on offer support for Rep. Giffords. The President will talk about civility, words that heal and not hurt, etc. There will be a moment of silence for the Federal Judge and others who lost their lives.

- The President will talk about the Obamacare law, how good it is and how the congress should not repeal it. He'll vow to fight for the law

- The President will talk about jobs & the economy. He'll talk about how he inherited this mess and it's much worse than anyone thought. But he'll say that he's accepting responsibility for fixing it.

- The President will say something about the recent Chinese President Hu Jintao.This will be related to economics and will make the president look good. (I think this will be something that no one expected).

- After 30-45 minutes of applause, etc, the President will spend 1-2 minutes talking about foreign policy, Afghanistan, Iraq, Korea and other countries of the world.

- There will be a Republican presponse to the State of the Union. They will focus on the economy, repealing Obamacare and say some nice things about Rep. Giffords and the Tucson shooting.

- No one will talk about gun control. It's a topic no one wants to touch.

- Republicans may talk about TARP and other past stimulus packages.

So, watch the speeches and give me a score.. If you want to make your own predictions, feel free, I'll score you also...

*Update* I'm also predicting Pres. Obama will speak preemptively about the debt ceiling. By doing so, he will box Republicans in a corner.

Running for president

2011-01-21T10:24:00.000-05:00

About two years ago, I announced I was running for president. (see here) While I didn't garner quite enough votes to beat out then-Senator Obama, I did managed to spend a few blog posts detailing my ideas of what the next president should do.

It turns out, I may have started too late. I found this article today that says 76 people have already registered to run in 2012. Maybe I should throw my name into the hat once again?

From the article, it looks getting my name on the ballot in my home state. SC requires candidates to get signatures from 10,000 register voters. I know my mom will sign, that's only 9,999 more to go (I might be able to count on my wife, depends on if I took out the garbage last night - which I don't remember). It might be easier to start on the ballot in New Hampshire, where all you have to do is pay a $1,000 fee and fill out a form.

I'm already behind in my fund raising, one of my soon-to-be competitors, Randy Knill (gotta love that first name), from my neighboring state has already raised $349. That's about $348 more than I raised in my last election attempt. And the competition will be fierce, one of the candidates is Rutherford B. Hayes. My first thought was that he won the presidency before and he would be a little old by the time he was elected (he was 188 on his last birthday). But it turns out this Hayes is younger and no relationship to President #19. (This Hayes is only 42)

As a side note, I found out that the election of the first Rutherford B. Hayes was very close, a difference of 19 electoral votes. Additionally, 20 of the electoral votes were in question and could have changed the election all together. According to this article, Hayes was awarded the presidency in return for ending Reconstruction. South Carolina and Florida played a crucial role. I guess there were hanging chads in the election of 1876.

House of Representatives votes to repeal Obamacare

2011-01-20T13:02:00.000-05:00

Unless you missed the news, you already knew this. No surprise, this was what many representatives ran their campaign on. The vote was 245 to 189, with three Democratic representatives crossing party lines to join all 242 republicans.

Reports I had read called this "bi-partisan", but I'm not convinced. I haven't see all of the details, but sounds like this was almost 100% party line split. That disappoints me.

Reading this report from Comedy Central, I found an interesting line. Read it very carefully:

It's always adorable when the Senate reminds the House, "You're just a ginormous receptacle for Americans who actually believe in the delusion of representative democracy."

Sadly, I think the writer's correct. The Senate doesn't believe we should have the delusion of a representative democracy. I guess in 2 years, we have to show them.

Fist Time Home Buyer's Tax Credit - Payback Time

2011-01-16T06:08:00.000-05:00

If you're one of the people who bought a home in 2008 and received the $7,500 tax credit it's payback time. (For those who purchased in 2009 or 2010 and received the $8,000 credit, this does not apply, as long as you still own the home). The original First Time Home Buyer's Tax credit was actually a loan. The $7,500 has to be paid back over 15 years, starting this year.

The loan is interest fee, so you only have to pay back $500 each year. Form 5405 contains instructions for the payback. You also have to pay back the credit (either $7,500 or $8,000) if you keep the house less than three years. In this case, the amount is due back in the tax year that you sold the house. The amount of repayment is limited to any gain you might have on the sale of the home. Some other exclusions apply, but read the form and instructions for full details.

It may seem unfair to the 2008 home buyer that he only received $7,500 and has to pay it back while the 2009 or 2010 home buyer received $8,000 and he gets to keep it. Fair or not, that's the tax law. It's possible that congress would change to law to forgive the $7,500 loan, but my guess is, it won't. The current congress is more interested in reducing the debt than helping one small group of taxpayers. The realtors who fought so hard for the credit have now moved on to new buyers and aren't likely to fight for a tax break for the buyer from three years ago.

One bit of good news is that the $7,500 was real money. If you had taken that money and invested in a small CD making 2% interest (I know that's hard to find now, but let's assume), you would end up with over $2,000 at the end of the payback time. Of course, the intent of the tax credit was to stimulate the economy, so it's better if you actually spent that money instead of bankrolling it.

You're yelling so loud, I can't hear what you're saying...

2011-01-13T13:12:00.000-05:00

In the last several days, there have been a lot of outcries from both left and right about the Tucson shooting. Unfortunately, I'm not sure if anyone is listening. Instead, both sides are shouting as loud as they can, trying to drown out the other party. In the end, no one wins and we all become a little more deaf.

In his speech, President Obama suggested that we should talk to each other in a manner "that heals, not in a way that wounds." Like many times before, I agree with the President. I hope he means what he says and (more importantly) I hope that he does what he says. He is our leader and he needs to lead. This means that in political speeches, he needs to stop lashing out at those that disagree with him. I saw a list of things he'd said about his opposition and I won't repeat it here. But my point is, if he wants things to change, he should lead.

We also need to find a way to listen to others when we disagree. For too long, that hasn't been the case (on both sides). Instead, we push the ideas completely aside and ignore the message. If a person is in favor of abortion, shouldn't we try to understand why? If a person is opposed, shouldn't we listen, instead of just saying they must be a religious fanatic? (and yes, I chose a very divisive topic to make my point).

And most of all, shouldn't we listen even when the other party is yelling?

A couple of examples come to mind. A year ago, I posted about Pat Robertson and his opinions on Haiti. Seems Robertson said some things (as usual) that folks didn't like. His real message included a call for help and prayer for the Haitians. Now who could disagree with that? Another example is the so-called Westboro Church. They protest at funerals. Yet when you listen or read some of the details of what they say, they aren't much different than those in mainstream churches. The MANNER in which they say it and the TIMING are all designed to inflame -- and they do that quite well.

Both of these are extreme examples of how the yelling overpowers what is being said. So are these people at fault or are the people complaining about them? Both. If it weren't for all the complaints, the people would (eventually) go away. In a free society, there will be those who speak out in an inflammatory manner. All we can do is ignore them and hope for some real leadership.

Donations for Haiti

2011-01-11T17:16:00.000-05:00

This blogpost makes note of the anniversary of Haiti in a not-too-positive way. The blogger notes that the Red Cross raised $32million on text messages alone - $10 at a time. But the blogger also notes that there's very little accounting for where the money went.

One side note is the blogger mentioned that the Disaster Accountability Project asked 200 charities where the money went and only 38 responded. The blogger does give details on the 200 or the 38. This is one reason I believe blogging will never replace real reporting, but the blogger isn't trying to report, just to make a point.

The question to take away from this is how should we help countries like Haiti when disasters like this strike? Should we ignore them altogether as some in the comments have said? Why not go in, take over the government, fix everything and give it back? It would be cheaper.

Unfortunately, there are things like sovereignty that get in the way. And there's no guarantee that if we did this we could find capable people to accept it when we finished.

I'm a firm believer in helping these people out, and helping them in a small, direct way. Agencies like Samaritan’s Purse have a low overhead and directly help people. One of the commenters to the blog note that we should take in more water purifiers, porta-potties, etc. This is a win-win solution, US wins because we manufacture some of those things and Haiti wins because they need them.

There are several people who commented that the people can't be helped until the government changes. While that's probably true, there's little you or I can do to change the government. We can either continue to send money in useless ways or we can find better ways to spend our money (or we can just ignore the situation).

See also my post about the Haiti Relief effort and Pat Robertson here.

Should we treat congressmen like everyone else?

2011-01-10T12:02:00.000-05:00

Yesterday, I posted some comments about the shooting in Arizona. One major concern I have is for the democratic process in this country, that congress will start interacting with constituents less than they have in the recent past.

Seems a congressman from my very state has already begun to think that way. Jim Clyburn, from the Charleston SC area, thinks congress should be treated differently than common people like you & me. It seems that Clyburn is uneasy going through airports (how that's related to a parking lot shooting, I'll never understand). Specifically, he said “We’ve had some incidents where TSA authorities think that congresspeople should be treated like everybody else." (see more about his time on Fox News yesterday in this post).

In looking at this, I'm reminded of two quotes from "The Miracle at Philadelphia", a book on the writing and ratification of our constitution. It said "in America, one saw a member of congress seated in a stage coach beside a laborer who had voted for him." It also said "here the equality of man... was put into practice, accepted as an everyday fact."

Sadly, some in Congress see themselves as more equal than the rest of us.

Shooting in Arizona

2011-01-09T17:30:00.000-05:00

Yesterday, I was studying with the television on when the news station broke into regularly scheduled news with news about the shooting in Arizona. For over 3 hours, the news program did not break for a commercial, but gave out the news as it came in.

They did some verification of the information, probably as best they could. Other news stations were quicker to give out information (they quoted NPR a couple of times and were wrong almost every time they did).

I've already seen some information from both sides showing how the shooting was the other sides' fault. At this point, it looks to me like the fault lies with one very deranged individual.

My immediate concern is for the families of those involved in the shooting. Rep Giffords and her family, Judge Roll's family and the family of Christina-Taylor Green, the nine year old girl who was killed.

Longer term, I am concerned about our American Democracy. Rep. Giffords was meeting her constituents when she was targeted. In the last election, a lot of congressmen and congresswomen had their town hall meetings broken up by people who wanted to make their points and ignored the other people in the room.

But I'm also concerned that we have come to the point where we are afraid to speak our minds for fear that some deranged individual will go off shooting at people.

Pray for the families involved and pray for our country.

To itemize or not to itemize - that is the question

2011-01-08T09:31:00.000-05:00

Ok, I'm not a poet. But someone asked me about itemizing deductions this week and I couldn't resist the title. So, should you itemize your deductions on your taxes? As always, the easy answer is "it depends."

For couples who file jointly, are under 65 and are not blind, the standard deduction is $11,400. That means you have to have deductions higher than $11,400 to make itemizing worthwhile. What can be itemized? Mortgage interest, state and local taxes (income tax or sales tax - but not both), real estate taxes, taxes on a new motor vehicle and gifts to charity are fully deductible. If these total up (or come close to) your standard deduction, then itemization makes good sense. In SC, taxes aren't high enough to force the issue alone, so mortgage interest and charitable giving usually are the factors that answer the question.

There are other deductions too. Medical and dental expenses that exceed 7.5% of your adjusted gross income is deductible. That sounds hard, but start by taking a look at your income and multiply by .075. If your medical expenses are more than that, proceed, if not, just let them go.

Years ago, someone told me you could deduct shoe polish. The logic was you polished your shoes for work, so it was a job expense. While I would question shoe polish under any circumstance, job expenses have to exceed 2% of your adjusted gross income. Most people that have a job that requires polished shoes have a high income and shoe polish won't come up to that much money.

By all means you should do the math every year to see if itemization helps you. Some people worry about being audited. My advise follows Will Rogers' saying "I'm happy to be an American and happy to pay my taxes. But I could be a lot happier for a lot less money." In other words, don't worry about being audited, do what's right, document your numbers and take every deduction that is legally allowed.

So what do you think? Will you itemize this year?

Taxes!!!

2011-01-06T22:25:00.000-05:00

It's that time of year again, the time when we all start looking at income taxes. This year, we get an extra 3 days to fill out the forms, they aren't due until April 18. That's because April 16 falls on a Saturday. Confused? Well, April 16 is Emancipation Day, a holiday in Washington DC. This marks the anniversary of the date Lincoln freed the 3100 slaves living in the District of Columbia.

Since Emancipation Day falls on Saturday, residents of DC will celebrate the holiday (by taking a day off work) on Friday, April 15. Since tax returns can't be processed on a holiday, they aren't due until Monday, April 18.

We may need that extra time, because many people are being asked to wait until mid-to-late February to file. This IRS bulletin indicates that anyone who 1) itemizes deductions, 2) claims the deduction for higher education or 3) claims the Educator Expense Deduction should wait. Of course, you can start your return earlier, but you'll do better to wait until the final forms are available.

If you don't fall into one of the three categories above, you can start on your 2010 taxes anytime. If your income us $49,000 or less, you qualify to have your taxes done for free by IRS trained volunteers. Also, the IRS helps the elderly with their taxes. And there are many websites that allow free filing for taxpayers.

So start gathering your receipts and get your taxes ready. There are only 102 days left.

Wal-Mart Part 2

2011-01-04T12:43:00.000-05:00

Yesterday I posted a long blog entry about the video Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Prices. If you can watch the video with an open mind, I recommend it. Basically, it's 97 minutes of anti-Wal-Mart propaganda. In my post, I promised to give my opinions on Wal-Mart.

Personally, I don't like the store. Wal-Mart is all about low prices at whatever cost. As noted in the comments, they buy a lot of Chinese products, so buying at Wal-Mart sends a lot of money to China. I don't consider this a big deal, but would rather that money stay in a country friendly to the US. Of course, if a US company could make the same product as cheaply as a Chinese company, I have no doubt that Wal-Mart would switch. And I'm a strong capitalist, you go with the lowest cost product.

But Wal-Mart also seems to play some stock games. I've noticed that the stores have frequent stock-outs. I think there are a couple of reasons for this, one is that they are popular. Customers go in and buy all of an item and the store can't get it restocked quickly enough. Or, in some cases, I believe they intentionally have stock-outs in order to get you to come back the next day. And in some cases, they are trying to keep inventory costs down, so they let shelves stay empty.

Wal-Mart also favors low prices at the expense of service. Finding an employee when you're shopping is difficult, finding a knowledgeable employee is almost impossible. Ask where is an item and you'll get a better answer from the mom shopping with a baby than you will from an employee. When it's time for check-out, you'll see they have 28 registers and only 4 of them open (the local Wal-Mart has gotten better at this).

Wal-Mart is not on my list of favorite stores. But I still visit. They have everything. I can be (barring stock-outs) assured that I can go in one time and find everything I need. And if I'm out of town, they are usually easy to find. What do you think of the store?

Wal-Mart

2011-01-03T10:59:00.000-05:00

For Christmas, my wife and I gave ourselves a Wii. More about that later, but one of the benefits of the Wii is the ability to stream Netflix to our aging, non-HD, non-digital, non-flat screen TV. So, we also reactivated our Netflix account and watched some movies. I've had some documentaries on my list for a while, so I watched "Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Prices"

Most of you who know me probably are surprised that I would even watch this movie. The trailers at the end give credit to Moveon.org, ACLU, ACORN and AFL-CIO along with a lot of others. Not exactly my top 4 BFF's. But I wanted to see what the anti-Wal-Mart movement is all about.

I initially thought the documentary was well done, however one error blew that away. In showing some newsclips, the video showed a story about a crime committed in a Wal-Mart parking lot in Taylors, SC. The newscaster was from one of the major towns close to Taylors and she accurately pronounced the town name. However, the caption super-imposed on the story said "Taylor, SC". Now a missing "s" might not be noticeable to those outside the upstate, but it stood out to me. My father was born near Taylors and I bought my first car in that area. My sister lives in that zip code and my daughter's in-laws are either in Taylors or Greer depending on the way the wind blows. My advice to Wal-Mart haters is to at least get the names of the towns right, it's important to some people.

The beginning of the video focused on towns laying down the red carpet for Wal-Mart. Later it talked about subsidies, in the form of towns paying for infrastructure: access roads, sewer, water, etc. It also talked about the small family businesses that were run out of business by Wal-Mart. I have to agree with this mantra to a certain extent. Towns and counties need to be very careful when enticing big business into the area. We've had some dispute about bringing a Bass-Pro shop to the area and I don't believe we should do it by giving away tax breaks we don't give to small businesses. The opposite side of this coin is the tax breaks we gave to big manufacturers (notably BMW and Boeing) that bring jobs and other business to the state. If a competitor to these big manufacturers wants to come to SC, we should give them the same tax breaks.

The video gave some stories that seemed to conflict with each other. For example, they would talk about the shortage of workers, forcing people to work longer hours and work on days off. Then they talked about how Wal-Mart doesn't let workers get enough hours and threatening them with replacement.

One part of the story focused on security in Wal-Mart parking lots. It was suggested that Wal-Mart have security patrols ride through the parking lot regularly. I don't know of any store that does this. I've been to malls in several cities, Costco stores, and grocery stores that have parking lots that could also be dangerous: no patrols. When there are patrols, the frequency is so low as to easily be missed. I don't see how this reduces parking-lot crime.

It was pointed out that Wal-Mart has cameras, but it was suggested that these were for anti-union activities. Maybe being anti-union has benefits? The Wal-Marts close to us do have cameras, and SC is far from a union hot-bed (although some manufacturing plants are unionized - a story for another day). One "security expert" said the cameras at Wal-Mart do nothing for security unless someone is watching them, however he completely ignored the deterrent effect. Also, even if someone was watching the camera, I don't believe they could stop a crime in process.

One part of the video focused on the discrimination that it claims is prevalent at Wal-Mart. When I complained about some problems at the local Wal-Mart, I was called back by a manager who was an African-American female. I guess Wal-Mart isn't as discriminatory in the south.

Most of the video focused on the way workers were treated: low pay and low/no benefits. I'm a believer in an employees right to work. If an employee doesn't like his job or feels he deserves more pay and/or benefits, he should get another job. If he doesn't have a degree that would allow him to get a better job, he should go back to school.

One aspect I found interesting was the claim that Wal-Mart encourages workers to seek out government assistance in the form of WIC and medicaid. By paying low-wages and offering no benefits, they are relying on government "subsidies" the video declares. Seems like a simple solution would be for the government to stop these subsidies and force Wal-Mart employees to look for other employment. This same argument would apply to subsidies for infrastructure mentioned above. But this flies in the face of more medicaid, Obamacare and more welfare. Maybe this is one inconsistency Michael Moore doesn't see.

The movie ended with a redeeming quality. It told communities how to fight Wal-Mart. Two communities were noted: Chandler, Az and Inglewood, Ca. These communities didn't want Wal-Mart to come in, so they had community meetings to educate residents. The processes they used were (mostly) above board and legal. The video shots did show one minister mis-quoting the Bible, but most shots seemed very clear. I'm all for communities voicing their issues this way, but I'm opposed to legislating a business out of business the way some anti-Wal-Mart'ers would do.

I did note the list of cities/towns where the video-maker claims Wal-Mart has been stopped. One interesting town listed was Belmont, NC. However, Belmont was also featured in the portion of the video on Wal-Mart's lack of environmental care. Seems that maybe Wal-Mart was not completely stopped. I also noted other cities that were listed that I believe have Wal-Marts (I'll check on these later). Cities determined to stop Wal-Mart need to realize that Wal-Mart may build 5 miles outside city and the area will still have the same problems, with none of the benefits.

Overall, the video was interesting and educational. I'm glad I watched it. I think it requires an open mind when viewing and don't recommend it to everyone. I don't think Wal-Mart is a bad as they are made out to be and will post my personal views on Wal-Mart tomorrow. But for today, I think I'm going to watch another documentary...

Happy New Year - 2011 style

2011-01-01T11:03:00.000-05:00

I don't know about you, but I'm thinking 2011 is going to be a great year. I'm not usually one to make resolutions and this year I don't want to break the trend. But I have pseudo-resolved to do more blogging, more reading and maybe even a little more exercise.

I've set a goal of climbing Table Rock (a nearby mountain) by my birthday in mid-April. I'm planning to do the Volunteer Income Tax Assistance thing again this year (it will be my third year) and I'm hoping to certify at a higher level. I've done a little financial coaching one-on-one (or rather two-on-one and one-on-two) and want to continue with that as well.

From a job standpoint, I'm hoping this year will be better than last. In 2010, I started with a lot of questions and went through 6 months with no direction. To have ended the year as well as I did seems to indicate that 2011 will be even better.

How about you? Any resolutions, goals or predictions?

Merry Christmas - 2010

2010-12-25T11:10:00.000-05:00

As I write this post, we're between shifts in our Christmas. Some of our kids alternate Christmas morning with their in-laws and come see us in the afternoon. This is their year to show up for lunch. The others see us every Christmas morning, so we got up and celebrated Christmas 2010 First Shift at about 8am. Eight adults and two 2-year olds (one is only 1+1/2, but that's close). Second shift means five of the adults leave and four new ones come in (Mom-in-law works split shift, she came in mid-first shift and stays for second). The two little ones leave and two new 2-year olds (ok, another 1+1/2 year old) and a 4 year old come in their place. It will be a busy household all day.

This year we've been blessed in many ways. I want to take this moment to wish you and your family blessings from the (very) extended Barnett Household. Merry Christmas!

Is war ever worth fighting

2010-12-16T09:35:00.000-05:00

My last post included a video of Joan Baez singing "Where have all the flowers gone?" The song was recorded by just about everyone in the 60's and it seemed to be a statement about the war in Vietnam. I was too young to really understand, but it seemed like a good time to be against something and the Vietnam war was an easy target (war as a target, that's something). Songs like this and "One, two, three, four, what are we fighting for?" (officially "I feel like I'm fixing to die" found here with mild profanity) were about as rebellious as I ever became. By the time I was draft age, the Vietnam War was a memory, a bad memory for a lot of people.

You may have seen that the review of the Afghanistan War is out, to be made official tomorrow. This comes at a time when "a record-high 60 percent of Americans think the war is not worth fighting," according this this article. The war has been raging on for just over 9 years now and an end is far away by anyone's judgment.

It made me think - is war ever worth fighting? Our President has said that this is a war of necessity (one of the few times he has agreed with former President Bush). A year ago he approved a surge, much like the one in Iraq, to send 30,000 more troops in, while also announcing an end date. Many on the left disapproved of this surge, wishing instead to get all troops out.

To me, the answer to the question can be found in a poem put to music by Pete Seeger, the same person who put "Where have all the flowers gone?" to music (the poem is found in the Bible, written by Solomon, the other Seeger song was from an old Ukranian folk song according to Wikipedia, not sure if Seeger actually wrote anything himself). According to the song (and to Solomon), "To every thing there is a season" and more importantly there is "a time of war, and a time of peace." If the Byrds sang it, it has to be so.

The real key is understanding when is the time for war and when is the time for peace. Most Americans would agree that 1776 was a time for war. Through a long fought battle, that wasn't popular with all Americans, we gained our freedom and began a democratic experiment that goes on today. Most people today blame Southerners for the Civil War, and while we did fire the first shot, the war would never have begun if the Union states had left the Confederate states alone. If you believe that the war was over slavery and that slavery needed to be ended (and I do to both), you'll have to say that 1861 was a time for war.

I may not always (often?) agree with this President, but I have to say that I believe he understands this concept. Sometimes, there is a time for war. We may soon find out if this is a time for war in Korea. I hope not. But I hope this President will continue to grow in his understanding of the phrase "a time to every purpose under the heaven:"

Where have all the bloggers gone?

2010-12-14T12:11:00.000-05:00

Seems a lot of the blogs I follow have gone silent with one blog even completely being deleted. Some of these had started and never followed through (or are using Facebook/Twitter to share), others are out doing things like the Nutcracker Ballet (I think).

My schedule has made it more difficult to follow a regular schedule, although I think that's changing as we near the end of 2010. But it made me think of this song.

Ok, I don't like the political commentary she added in, but the song is from a different era, a different time.

A Quarter of a Century

2010-12-09T08:58:00.000-05:00

Quarter of a Century. Saying it that way makes it sound like a long time, doesn't it? Twenty-five years ago, my wife & I were expecting our second child. She awoke early and couldn't sleep, so she went in the other room. Around 5am, she came and told me we needed to think about the fact that she might be in labor. Being the loving, supportive husband I was, I told her she probably wasn't and rolled over.

When I heard the slamming of the door accompanied with a muttered "FINE!", I made a wise decision. I got up. After sitting with her a few minutes, we decided it was time to go to the hospital. We finished packing and called a neighbor who had agreed to take care of our 2-year old daughter. As we finished packing her things, he called back and told us to remember a car-seat and something and something and something. I told him that he was more nervous than I was.

On the way to the hospital on the planned route (this was still pre-rush hour traffic) I saw a road-sign that looked familiar. I was pretty sure I knew where the other end of this road was and it would be a quicker route, so I decided to try a road never travelled before (at least by me). The funny thing about roads in Charlotte, they all have similar names. There's Sharon Rd, Sharon Lane, Sharon Amity and I ain't Sharin' Sharon. No wait, that last one is a song by Jim Stafford.

Anyway, when I got the end of Sharon something it wasn't quite where I thought it would be, but it was close. My wife was not amused or impressed. We still got to the hospital before rush hour and in plenty of time.

Ultrasounds were not as common 25 years ago, so we had no idea if we were expecting a girl or a boy (even in that day, those were still the only two choices). We entertained a lot of ideas about determining the sex, tried a boiled egg resting on the belly and a few other tricks, but these were mainly for fun. Our nurse that day told us that the baby's heartbeat would tell you, but many times it was wrong. But she had great confidence when she told us THIS one was a boy.

We took the nurse's prediction seriously, as we had chosen girl names but no boy names. Between contractions for two hours we discussed names as we had discussed for the last nine months, still with no resolution. Fortunately for us, no decision was needed as our little girl was born early that afternoon. I'm not sure if the nurse ever knew about her mistake.

Happy Birthday Katie. You've gone from being my little "bean green" to a wonderful lady with 2.2 children of your own. We love you. Hope today is as happy for you as my day was 25 years ago.

Elizabeth Edwards dies at age 61

2010-12-07T20:07:00.000-05:00

Unless you missed the news, Elizabeth Edwards passed away today. She was 61.

I wrote about Mrs. Edwards' cancer back in 2007 (here). Let me echo something I said back then. There will be those who say this is God's punishment for something or another. Shame on them.

My heart goes out to the family. She left three children, including a 12 year old and a 10 year old. These children will have to go on without a mother.

One interesting tidbit that I found was that Edwards' son Wade (who was killed in an auto accident at age 16) was honored by then First Lady Clinton for an essay he wrote. After his death, the essay and his obituary were entered into the Congressional Record by Senator Jesse Helms (for those unfamiliar with Helms, he would have seldom agree with the Edwardses politically).

Should we blame God for our mistakes?

2010-11-30T13:13:00.000-05:00

Ok, I'm going to step into a religious discussion again. I rarely do, but this one peaked my interest. Seems Steve Johnson, wide receiver for the Buffalo Bills literally dropped the ball in a football game. Not just any ball drop, a winning touchdown pass in overtime in the end-zone. And he wasn't too happy, so he tweeted about his frustration. The Yahoo! article is titled "Steve Johnson blames God for his overtime drop."

Now when you read his exact tweets, it seems to me that he really didn't blame God. He said "I PRAISE YOU 24/7!!!!!! AND THIS HOW YOU DO ME!!!!! YOU EXPECT ME TO LEARN FROM THIS??? HOW???!!! ILL NEVER FORGET THIS!! EVER!!! THX THO..." He did say he praises God 24/7 and he never really blamed God.

It's hard to tell if his ending "THX THO" is sarcastic or real. Since he said "THO," at the end, I take it as serious. And it seems to me that Johnson expects to learn something, although he can't figure out what it is to learn about. And I also noticed is that Johnson sure likes exclamation points!!!

But ignoring all of that and taking the writer Chris Chase at his word, let's assume Johnson was blaming God. Is it ok to blame God for our mistakes? We often see athletes giving God credit for wins, why not for losses?

Most people would say that God doesn't care who wins or loses a football game. I completely disagree. God cares about the sparrows and they are two for a penny. He knows how many hairs are on your head. If He cares about these little things, don't you think He cares about a football game? (Especially if it's a certain college team that LOST to another college team this past weekend). So what message might be in the loss for Steve Johnson?

I'm not usually one for great discernment, but I have a few ideas. First, I have to say that I'm glad Johnson didn't revert to the Flip Wilson excuse, he could have said the devil made him drop the ball. Possibly, the message that God wants Johnson to get is that he is not the center of the universe. And just to be clear, neither am I (although I think I'm pretty close some of the time). On this Sunday, there were 90 football players on the active game day roster. Add about 16 more on the bench, cheer-leaders, coaches, owners, fans, advertisers and TV viewers and there were a lot of people who had an interest in the outcome. Undoubtedly, some were upset and some were happy.

Did God make Steve drop the ball? I don't think so. Not any more than he made Johnson catch the ball so many times before. That's part of the free-will thing. Does God care about the dropped ball? I think He certainly does. How does God decide when to allow a dropped ball vs. stepping in with a minor miracle, blowing the ball a little? Beats me. That's why He's God and I'm only close to the center of the universe.

Is it Ok to blame God for things like this? Well, it wouldn't be the first time. Several people in the Bible blamed God, asked Him why and asked Him what they were supposed to learn. Johnson's not the first to do this and won't be the last. God's a big guy, with big shoulders, I think He can handle a few questions like the one's in this tweet. The real question, is where does He keep His Blackberry?

The Event

2010-11-29T07:53:00.000-05:00

I've been watching the television show The Event and last night realized the resemblance of The President in the series to President Obama.

The show, subtitled "What will you beLIEve?" could be science fiction as it has people from another planet or place and they have knowledge/power beyond what mere humans have, but really is more of a mild drama. There are no phasers or funny weapons. And they don't bend the laws of science very much.

The President in the series is played by Blair Underwood, a light skinned, good looking African-American. He was elected two years ago and according to his bio is "Moral and idealistic. Hugely popular with the American people and around the world, (he) wants to be a new kind of President, working toward a new America. He's committed to honesty ..." Like our real president, the president in this series is not fully, African-American, he was "born to Cuban refugees in Miami, Florida" and "is very proud of his Afro-Cuban roots. He is a graduate of Yale University."

But last night while watching an episode on my DVR, I noticed a deeper similarity, something in the character of the man that matches President Obama. In the episode, a man who tried to kill the president had been captured and was about to be interrogated. The President demanded that he be allowed to question the individual and that he could get answers. I'd seen it before in the series (although I can't remember the scenes), places where the President got involved in order to handle some seemingly small issue, not letting the experts do their job. The President thinks he can fix anything. He believes that he is Interrogator in Charge, Chief Fence Mender and Overall Head Honcho.

We've seen this in real life, with the mishandling of the Shirley Sherrod case, getting involved before he knew all of the facts. It can be seen in the Henry Gates case, by saying the police "acted stupidly" then having a beer summit to ease the tensions. He weighed in on the 9/11 Mosque, an issue that should have been handled by the residents and officials of New York City. And we've seen the President get involved to fix important things (like medical care) where the government has no business meddling.

Like the President on The Event, President Obama thinks it's his job to fix anything and everything that comes up

For previous posts on related to this see here and here.

Everything You Ever Really Needed to Know About Personal Finance On Just One Page

2010-11-24T08:14:00.000-05:00

What? Can it be true? Can you really get "Everything You Ever Really Needed to Know About Personal Finance On Just One Page"?

Well Trent Hamm has done it. Hamm runs a blog over at The Simple Dollar and lately it's been one of my favorites. His blog posts are typically short and to the point and he always focuses on personal finance issues (unlike me). About a month ago, I posted how you could get Hamm's book titled (coincidentally) The Simple Dollar online through Amazon. If you missed it, you can't get it free anymore, but you can still get it. I reviewed it and recommended it here. I still recommend it, even if you have to pay for it. See my instructions here.

In the one page summary of personal finance, Hamm displays some of his artwork. You'll quickly realize why he's an author, not an artist. Ok, it's not the bad and far above anything I can do, Hamm neatly sketches out everything you need to know. In just one page. He has five ideas to guide you through this process.

Of course to leave it at one page, wouldn't give you the full effect, so Hamm gives you 48 more pages to explain the pictures. The ideas are quickly consumed and give you the arms you need to tackle your particular financial situation. With each idea comes tips to help you reinforce the idea, including 100 tips to live frugally (not cheaply).

I strongly recommend Hamm's one page guide. Oh, did I mention it's free? You can find it on his blog at http://www.thesimpledollar.com/onepage.

Fees from the giant banks now at the highest level ever recorded

2010-11-23T07:42:00.000-05:00

That's the headline from this Clark Howard online article. If you're not familiar with Howard, he has a radio program and a TV show on HLN talking about ways to "spend less, save more and not get ripped off." He's a consumer advocate. While I listen to a lot of Christian financial programs, Howard doesn't put his faith (or lack of) on the air. His show is strictly about money and ways to help.

In his article, Clark sites a newspaper article that says that AM fees, checking fees and overdraft fees have all gone up. But wait, didn't Congress solve this problem? Didn't they pass a law commonly called the CARD Act? Didn't a well-known blogger tell us about that here?

Well you're right, on all of those. Congress has also been targeting bank fees and made it so that you can't overdraft unless you ask for the protection. But banks will continue to find all legal means to turn a buck. That's what banks do. They try to make a profit.

Back in June, the NY Times called this a "New Day for Consumers". A consumer bureau was created and the President appointed (while Congress was on vacation) a head of that bureau who will certainly write new regulations and probably attack this problem once they read my blog.

In the mean time, what do you do about the fees? Clark Howard thinks "the reality is you have so much choice in the marketplace." He suggests "a credit union or small community bank." He also likes online banks, which is a good fit for a lot of people.

So if your bank is charging you fees, shop around. You'll be glad you did.

The Constitution and Obamacare

2010-11-21T18:57:00.000-05:00

I've just finished reading a book on the making of the Constitution. "Miracle at Philadephia: The Story of the Constitutional Convention" covers the summer of 1787 when a group of men gathered together to create the document we all (in the US) live by now.

I took a lot of notes while I read, but I decided not to post all of them as I did with a previous book. However, I was struck by similarities to the recent health-care package that was passed. While I'm no fan of the health-care package, it turns out some very well known people (e.g. Patrick Henry) were no fan of the Constitution.

The Constitution was written in Philadelphia in secret. The conventioneers were very careful not to leave notes where outsiders could see them and were cautioned not to tell anyone what was going on. The press cooperated with the secrecy, even suggesting that they were better off not knowing. While the health-care package was not crafted in complete secrecy, there certainly were people who thought we were better off not knowing all of the details ahead of time.

I've also been involved in a few discussions with people who think the problem with the package was that it just wasn't "sold" well enough. They feel like the health-care bill needs a good PR story. After the Constitution was created and voted on by Congress, the drafters including James Madison went out to "sell" the document.

One final comparison point is that "we the people" never voted on the Constitution. Representatives of the people voted on the document. Many of these representatives felt like the people weren't capable of understanding the paper. They felt they were more educated and knew what was best.

I'm not trying to imply that the Constitution and Obamacare are of equal importance or that they both fall into the same category. I just couldn't help but notice the similarities...

Reflections on a marathon

2010-11-15T11:44:00.000-05:00

This past weekend was the Richmond Sun Trust Marathon. My son-in-law decided to run this year and we decided to go up and be his cheering section. The fact that our grand-daughter was going to be there added to our reasons to go.

Adam has run two marathons before: The Marine Corps Marathon and the NYC Marathon in 2008 (see my post about the 2008 NYC Marathon). This was my first. Since I didn't want to show him up, I elected not to run this year, maybe next year. Then again, maybe pigs will fly next year too.

Since I've been traveling a lot, my wife and I made use of frequent flyer points and hotel reservation points to minimize our cost. We flew up on Thursday and arrived late that night. Friday, we rode through the marathon route. That gave us non-runners a good view of what Adam would be seeing on Saturday and helped get him in the right mind-set. It also showed us all where the hills would be.

On race day, we saw the start of the race. Over 4900 runners started out. I made the mistake of being on the wrong side of the street and didn't get good pictures at this point. I also couldn't get back across the street until after all 4900+ runners passed.

After the start, we hustled over to the first check-point to cheer our runner on. He was looking good and flashed us a thumbs-up.

And of course, the smallest cheer leader even had her own sign:

I'm still processing pictures for uploading. All-in-all, we had a great time. Adam didn't finish in as good a time as he wanted, not sure how his time compares to the previous two. I guess next year I'll have to enter so I can show him how it's done (HA!).

It's that time of year again

2010-11-11T07:43:00.000-05:00

Today is Veteran's day. The day we salute our veterans and those active in the military. Something we should do all year.

A nephew who works for Applebee's posted on his Facebook account that they were giving free meals to all veterans and active duty people (I don't know the details). I received an email from Red Robin that they were offering a free stack of onion rings (I can personally attest that these are good). I'm sure other restaurants are following suit.

I'm not going to list all of the ones I know this year. I looked back at my post from last year and reminded myself of a few of them. As I type this, I'm going to say a silent prayer of gratitude and prayer for safety for each of those.

Thank you for what you did and for what you do. Thank you for your service to your country. Thank you for protecting me.

I'm very glad that the tone of this country is to honor our nation's finest. It's what we should do.

Because I said so!

2010-11-09T10:09:00.000-05:00

As a child/teenager, I hated those words. It seemed like I heard them all the time (probably only 4 or 5 times though) Whenever I asked WHY, I had to do something (e.g. wash dishes, cut grass, make my bed, etc.) I wasn't given an explanation, I was just told "because I said so."

Most often, these words came from my dad. I'm sure they came from mom on occasion, but I can't remember any specific case. Actually, I can't remember any specific case from my dad either, I just know I heard the words and grew to hate them. At some point, I decided - I'm never going to say that to my kids!

My first-born arrived in the early 1980's. My wife & I both had college education (which we thought was the answer to everything) and we agreed we would not use those words. We knew that we could work with our child, explain the reasons and come to a reasonable agreement on what could be done and what should be done. Those of you with children are laughing right now.

When it was time for bed, the question came out - "Why?" We explained why they needed sleep. "Why don't you go to bed?" Because I'm an adult. "Don't you need sleep?" Yes, but not as much.

Of course, the conversation went on. And it wasn't necessarily about bed. It was about any subject that came up. Eventually, I'd get tired and my answer was "Because I'm the Dad!" (it wasn't the words I'd sworn not to use, but it was close).

Eventually, I realized that some subjects couldn't be reasoned out. No amount of discussion was going to convince them that I was right. No amount of discussion was going to convince me that I was wrong. We didn't have to agree with each other, we just had to respect each other's positions and move on.

More on this subject next time...

The Simple Dollar - eBook Review

2010-11-07T07:41:00.000-05:00

About a month ago, I told you how to get a free book (see here). Well, if you didn't act then, you're too late to get it free, but you can still follow the directions I listed and get the book for just $9.99. And I'd say it's worth it.

I want to do a review of Kindle, but I'll save those comments for another day. Today, I want to tell you about the book The Simple Dollar, by Trent Hamm. The author has a blog, conveniently titled The Simple Dollar, that focuses on day-to-day financial management. I strongly recommend his site.

But the book is more than just "How I got rid of credit cards and made my life easier." Trent starts by telling you his story, of being in a "prison made of plastic." But he goes on and talks about life in general, looking at "What's missing?"

Hamm interleaves stories from his personal life along with stories for your personal life. He helps understand the power of goals and the simple fact that life really is more random than you think. He looks at the sense of community in this Facebook/Myspace social networking world. He goes beyond how to get out of debt and discusses how to stay out of debt. It's not just beans-and-rice and rice-and-beans, he discusses alternatives. If you like rice-and-beans, that's fine, but most of us don't. He acknowledges that and shows how to live frugally, while still enjoying life.

But as said earlier, it's not just finances. Hamm talks about family relationships (ok, as they relate to finances) and retirement. I especially liked his discussion of a partial crossover point, a time when you can let go of your current career and start working on something new, something more exciting.

Chapter 15 of Hamm's book talks about Setting Your Child Apart. I've not read any financial planning books that discuss child rearing. He helps parents help their kids. Then he talks about giving. Not just in dollars and cents, but in giving to the community and why you should give (don't expect to be preached at - just reasons to give).

I highly recommend Hamm's book, even if you have to spend a few bucks.

Insurance

2010-11-04T20:17:00.000-04:00

I've talked about insurance some in the past, but I wanted to take a fresh look at it. When should you buy insurance and what is it supposed to do?

The purpose of insurance is to spread the risk or the cost. Basically, you're spreading the cost of a claim across several other people. The more you spread it, the less it costs. Say for example you buy car insurance. If you keep your car for 10 years and 100 people join with you, that's 1,000 times the annual premium that goes to insurance. Now if there are claims in those 10 years that total $10,000, you'd each need to put up $10. It's a simple example, but it works.

Same goes for home owner's insurance and life insurance. Of course insurance companies hire lawyers, secretaries, actuaries, and IT people, so they will actually charge a little more. Hopefully, they will keep the extra cost to a minimum, if not you should go shopping somewhere else.

One insurance policy that behaves differently is medical insurance. Medical insurance gives you group buying power. If your insurance is with Blue Cross, they have negotiated with your doctor to get a special rate. Get an appendectomy for only $99.95 (ok, I exaggerated there a little). However, you can negotiate with doctors on your own. I recently had to pay for some medical expenses and was able to negotiate a sizable discount by telling the medical facility that this was "self-pay". The discounts I received were about the same as if the insurance company had paid.

There are two other types of insurance I wanted to cover. First is pet insurance. I may get in trouble for this, but I don't believe you need pet insurance. You should be able to pay for regular vet bills and these shouldn't be covered by insurance anyway. Given my definition of insurance above, you would only save money if most people didn't use the insurance. Some might argue that a pet could get some kind of cancer and need expensive treatment. My argument back is that IT'S AN ANIMAL, NOT A PERSON. Ok, I shouldn't shout. But again, the discussion above about negotiating prices applies.

The second type of insurance I wanted to cover is Umbrella insurance. By this, I don't mean insuring your umbrella, I mean a kind of insurance that covers you when everything else stops. There are limits on all kinds of insurance, the most common is liability on a car. Suppose you have an accident and it's your fault. You didn't mean to do it, that's why it's called an accident. Your liability insurance will repair the other person's car up to the limits of the policy. If your limit is $50,000 and you hit someone in a nice new Lexus, you might be in trouble. That's where the umbrella policy comes in. It picks up where your regular policy stops and goes to a higher limit. Since it won't be used often (hopefully), the cost is relatively low.

If you have assets that you can't afford to lose (house, boat, 401k, etc), I think you should have an umbrella policy. These are easily obtained by the people who currently have your auto or home policy.

Hope this helps. Any comments?

What the election means to me

2010-11-03T08:54:00.000-04:00

I don't pretend to be a political pundit or to have my finger on the pulse of the electorate. There are plenty of bloggers who will do that and give in depth analysis. Instead, I will simply point out a couple of things yesterday's elections mean to me.

As you've probably read, Republicans won big in many elections, especially in SC. We elected the first ever female governor, a lady of Indian descent (born in SC to Indian parents). We also elected our first African-American Republican Representative, Tim Scott. He's not a representative to my district, but I've seen some very good things about him. For SC to elect these two is very progressive for a state that isn't known for it's progressiveness. We also elected a real conservative Representative (Trey Gowdy) in my district to replace a pseudo-conservative Representative (Bob Inglis).

We passed four amendments in SC, guaranteeing a right for hunting and fishing, a right to a secret ballot in union elections and helping fiscal soundness.

I've already seen reports of voter intimidation and expect we'll see more. These incidents should be dealt with quickly and (if accurate) severely. I would hope that candidates on both (or all) sides will come down hard on these people.

Am I celebrating this morning? Hardly. We still have an economic mess in this nation and it's not going to be over soon. We still have a social mess with the Federal Government trying to get into too many parts of my life and that won't end soon. Our nation is still at risk from terrorists and I see people and politicians willing to close their eyes to avoid looking at it. And we have an abundance of politicians who claim to be leaders that have serious moral issues and personal baggage.

So I guess I'm troubled. Happy that the results went the way I wanted, but nervous that it won't make a difference. Or at least enough of a difference.

Goodbye to Wesley

2010-11-01T16:34:00.000-04:00

A few times in the past I have taken on the duty of saying good bye to someone on my blog. Today is another such day.

Wesley would have been seven months old today. His mom was a close friend of both of my daughters and his maternal grandparents were close friends of mine. A little over two months ago, he started displaying signs of an illness that ended up being something in his immune system. His own body was attacking his red blood cells. On Friday, his fight ended.

Wesley's mom was like another daughter to me. She was always at my house and I know my girls were often at her house. One of my favorite memories was when she caught me napping (and snoring) on a Sunday afternoon. Her mom & dad helped my family on two major occasions (and numerous minor ones) when we needed it. Even though I moved 100 miles away twelve years ago, there was always the feeling that we would help each other out when needed.

While I travel frequently, only in the last couple of months have I gone to the town where Wesley was hospitalized. Then, out of the blue, I had two trips to the town. I took that as a sign that I was supposed to visit his family. I've said before that I don't believe in coincidence, that I believe in Providence (see here and here). I believe Providence caused me to have two business trips to see Wesley's family. I got to meet his dad and his paternal grandparents. And hopefully, I eased the burden on some old friends.

Goodbye Wesley. Your family will miss you, but rest assured that they are loved and we'll look out for them.

What does Obamacare mean to me?

2010-10-28T08:22:00.000-04:00

I've been relatively quiet on Obamacare and the call by a lot of people to repeal it. A couple of days ago, I received an email that explained the impact to me personally. I have medical insurance through my employer. We are self-insured, that is, the employer ends up paying for all payouts. I pay into the program for family coverage (include medical, dental and vision care) and my employer pays also. All of the money is pooled together to pay out actual costs. The care is managed by one of the big insurance companies.

There are other plans available through my employer, but I've pretty much stuck with the same program over the years. My employer sent the following email (I've edited it to remove personal information):

This year, XYZ Corp had a team working for months to understand health care reform legislation. Some of this work continues, which is one reason we are communicating with you a bit later than we usually do. We understand many of you align your decision-making with that of working spouses or domestic partners, which is why we have worked to keep the actual enrollment for employees on schedule.

You should be aware that health care cost increases for 2011 -- in addition to the normal inflationary trends -- also are affected by health care reform requirements, which affect both XYZ Corp and you. For example, raising the age for dependent coverage from age 23 to 26 contributes somewhat to higher costs for businesses, as we must now all extend coverage to greater numbers of young adults.

There's more to the email, but that pretty much sums it up.

Sort-of Facebook and blog policy

2010-10-26T11:32:00.000-04:00

A little over a week ago, my blog-friend Neil posted his "sort-of Facebook policy" (see it here). I mostly agreed with it and then this morning I violated it. I felt bad afterwards, so as a reminder to myself, I thought I'd specify my facebook policy and my blog policy. Or my sort-of policies. I'll probably deviate from time to time. If you catch me, please point it out.

Like Neil, I keep the Facebook comments generally light and leave the politics and heavier stuff for my blog. A lot of my family eschews these heavy topics and Facebook just doesn't seem to lend itself to in depth discussions. I have found that many times, I can keep up with my family better on Facebook than with the phone. I've also re-established some relationships from when I lived in Charlotte and even a few relationships from school. I don't play games on Facebook and try to hide updates from the games because I really don't care how many jewels you have or need for your crown.

I have a friend who doesn't use Facebook. He worries about the evil that goes on there, the relationships that get started there (he's thinking the extra-marital relationships). He worries about the wasted time (can anyone say Farmville?). He's right to worry. Facebook can be abused just like anything. And if he doesn't want to post, I think it's best he doesn't do it. He's never told me I shouldn't. That's tolerance for both of us.

For my blog, just about anything is open. I will post on any topic, from politics, to cooking, from the books I read to the movies I see. I'll post about the kids and their kids or just something I see that sparks my interest. I'll put together posts on aspects of finances and once did a three-part analysis of payday lending.

In both my blog and Facebook, I'm careful what I post. My theory is that if I don't want my mother or my kids to read it, I shouldn't post it (my mom now uses Facebook and watches my blog). I haven't posted very many of my pictures - not that it's against my policy - it's just too time consuming.

I also take requests on my blog and try to honor those. (For Emily's sake, I often insert how I feel about a subject). If you have something you want me to post about, notify me here, on Facebook or any other way.

And if you catch me going off my policy, let me know. Throw something if you're close enough.

Service with a frown - resolved

2010-10-21T16:33:00.000-04:00

My last post was about a problem with an exterminating company. Today, that problem has (apparently) come to a resolution. I had a conference call with the company and the Better Business Bureau. The BBB representative took my call, then called the business. She thanked each of us and explained the "ground rule" (her words) and that was no interrupting the other person.

I got to speak first and explained my situation (which had been previously done in the letter). The business then explained the issues. I corrected him on a couple of matters and then bluntly asked if he understood why I was upset. It took a minute, but he said he did.

We discussed a few aspects of the inspections they had done, specifically trying to separate the inspection cost from the "insurance" aspect of a termite bond. He said there was no way to separate them. (I would have asked for a refund of the inspection).

I asked him about the reluctance to write a check and he explained that they only wrote checks 1-2x/month and then only when a PO was created. He asked if I would give my credit card number to the BBB. I explained that I was reluctant to give him the number because I still didn't trust the company and if I gave it to the BBB, they would have to give it to him to process the refund. He then offered to send a certified check for the refund.

The total refund I'll be receiving is $100. This is the "discount" that was originally discussed. Had I gotten this refund in September, it would have saved a lot of hassle.

In addition, he explained a couple of ways this could have been prevented, I'm not sure any would have worked. I could have gotten a second estimate, but I felt like I didn't have time for that. He said in his business line, companies are on call 7x24 and make emergency calls within a day. He said my realtor could have called the day of closing and he would have faxed a new estimate (which would have had to go through the lawyer, forced a redo of all the paper-work, delayed closing, etc).

The end result is the discount I originally was promised and I don't have to give my credit card info. I'm not what I would call a satisfied customer and won't give them a good reference, but then they probably don't want a reference anyway. I won't go around bashing them and haven't posted their name here.

Service with a frown

2010-10-19T10:39:00.000-04:00

My last post was on good service. What prompted this in my mind was some incredibly bad service I got from a local exterminator (I'll provide the name to anyone that asks). In fairness, I'm still working with the exterminator to resolve the issues. But the service to date has been so incredibly bad I thought I'd make a post.

The service provided was an annual contract and a certificate for a home sale. It could have been any service. The first bad thing we encountered was when we called for the annual contract. The office treated us rudely and didn't even know what the contract covered. Since the contract was ongoing, we continued to work with the company. The people that came our were easy to work with and trustworthy.

When the time came for a certificate for home sale, we contacted the company again. They found some problems and recommended a remedy. Since we were days from closing, we didn't have time to shop for a better deal. I felt held hostage and called to tell them so.

Rather than try to understand my side of the story, the exterminator became defensive. They gave me several reasons for their findings, many of which were wrong. When I pointed out their errors, they said they were irrelevant. They did agree to discount the price, but the invoice was for the original amount. Again, I was being held hostage by a closing date.

After complaining about the price, I was told that invoices were sent by another person. For one month, I kept trying to get the right person. The lady I spoke with never gave her last name and wouldn't give me any one else to talk to. Finally, they wanted my credit card information to issue me a credit. Now let's see, I've found I can't trust the company and they want my credit card info? I don't think so.

Next step for me was to write a formal complaint letter. Which was ignored. Then a week later, I filed a complaint with the BBB. This got more defensive talk, misspellings of my wife's name and incorrect statements. No attempt to understand my points. After I rejected their settlement offer (again wanting my credit card info), I now have a scheduled call to try to resolve.

My suggestion on service - try to understand your customer. If you feel you truly don't have a mistake, educate the customer. If you want to make a concession, make it easy for the customer to accept.

I'll update this after my scheduled call to resolve.

Service with a smile

2010-10-17T11:24:00.000-04:00

What makes "good service"? There's one company I recently dealt with that made me start thinking about this question. Unfortunately, the company didn't have "good service" and it made me thinking about what set them apart. I decided to initially focus on a company I deal with that does indeed have good service.

The "good service" company is a local dog groomer, I'll gladly share the name with anyone interested. (Since most of my readers aren't local, you probably don't care). We struggle with a couple of dog groomers including one that I'm convinced infected our dog with fleas. Since our older dog (since past away) was getting more and more difficult to transport, we decided to try a "mobile" groomer. These folks come to you with a van and all the equipment. When they leave, the dog's hair has been cut, cleaned and combed.

The first thing that I like about the mobile groomer was the price. They were actually a couple of dollars CHEAPER than the ones with a house. Cheaper is always better in my book! (well, maybe not always, but at least often) They did at least as good as any other place we took the dogs.

Second thing we noticed was that the couple doing the grooming were very polite. They listened to what we wanted, offered advice and did what we asked. Our dog has sensitive skin, so they manage that aspect well (I have no idea what they do, I just remind them to treat her like they did before).

The final aspect of their service that I wanted to mention is the trust. We've used these people several times. On one or two occasions, they've come and we've had to mail them a check. Most recently, we were away and had someone else there to dog sit for us. We forgot to leave the payment and rather than re-schedule, the groomer went ahead and did her work and we mailed a check.

This level of mutual trust is the basis for good, continued service. This business can rest assured that they have earned our business for a long time. Next post will focus on a company that doesn't give good service

Free Book - Yes, free!

2010-10-14T08:07:00.000-04:00

I've been reading a lot of personal finance blogs like Freeby50 and The Simple Dollar. I recommend both of these. Well, it turns out that The Simple Dollar has a book titled (amazingly) The Simple Dollar. And for a limited time, you can get the book for free.

You can download the book for your Amazon Kindle at this site: The Simple Dollar Book. But wait, you say you don't have a Kindle? (I don't). Not to worry, you can download the Kindle app for your iphones, ipads, android, PC or Mac. I did and it was very simple. You start at this site. It took under 5 minutes.

Jet Packs for LA Police

2010-10-11T09:57:00.000-04:00

At dinner Friday night, one of my friends told me this story. Seems the LA Police has ordered jet packs for their police to a tune of about $1BILLION. Seems a little strange, but hey, this is talking about California, land of fruits and nuts. The left coast.

We thought of a lot of problems, those things don't last that long, what happens if you go up for 30 seconds and then run out of jet fuel, the criminals are all on the ground, what good does it do to be up in the air, they can't afford to pay teachers, yet they spend this kind of money (when you live with a teacher, every subject turns to education) etc.

I looked for information about the story this morning and found this item. Seems the story is FALSE. First reported by the Weekly World News (we all know that's a reliable source), then picked up by Fox News. The Fox anchors said they doubted the story, to which I have a question - WHY DID YOU REPORT IT? This doesn't help your credibility at all. Oh, sure, you said it was questionable, but a lot of the folks watching didn't hear that part.

Fox knows the audience and knows that conservatives love stories like this. It's a great chance to make fun of those from "the other side". But this just makes Fox look just as bad as the other networks. I thought Fox wanted to try for a higher standard? I guess I was mistaken.

Pay to Spray

2010-10-06T10:46:00.000-04:00

In this small area in Tennesse, a man's house burned down because he didn't pay the (non-required) fee of $75 for fire coverage. (see story here).

Mr. Cranick lives outside the city limits and doesn't pay city taxes. The city offers fire protection to county residents and (presumably) uses the fees to help fund their fire fighting activities. Mr Cranick admits he didn't pay the fee last year, but has paid for several years in the past. It just slipped his mind last year. He offered to pay when the house was on fire, but fire fighters told him it was too late.

One troubling comment in the story is made by the city manager who said "We have to follow the rules and the ordinances set forth to us." Another part of the article says "When a household has not paid the fee, firefighters are required by law to not respond." (It's not clear what law is referenced here).

I have to confess, I have mixed emotions here. I have serious, unanswered questions, about what law, if any, specifies that the firefighters are required to "not respond". I also feel that, the fire fighters had an obligation to respond.

But I also feel that Mr. Cranick is trying to buy insurance after the fact. What would happen if people only paid when their house caught fire? Supposed you bought cancer insurance after a cancer diagnosis or life insurance after a loved one died?

While my emotions are mixed, it's pretty clear to me where the law should come down on this. My emotions can be satisfied by neighbors helping Mr. Cranick out. And if I lived in the area, I'd pay the $75.

Mood ring

2010-10-01T10:27:00.000-04:00

Ok, I'm probably showing my age here, but when I was (VERY) young in the mid 1970's, they had these things called mood rings. The idea was the stone (or plastic) would change color depending on your mood. This was one of those fads that took off real big and then died just as quickly. You can read about them on Wikipedia here. My biggest memory of them is that they didn't really work, either they didn't change or they changed randomly.

Today, I see that there is now a cell phone app that can determine your mood. (see here). According to the article, "'EmotionSense' uses speech-recognition software and phone sensors in standard smart phones to assess how people's emotions are influenced by factors such as their surroundings, the time of day, or their relationships with others."

While I was never impressed with the original mood rings, I think this has some real potential. If you could set the ringer on your phone to play different ringtones based on the caller's mood, you would really have a marketable product. Wife calls in a good mood? - Answer right away. Wife calls in a bad mood? - Gee, I'm real busy right now. But I'll get back right away.

Somehow, this brings a new meaning to a "mood ring".

Vote early and vote often

2010-09-30T12:09:00.000-04:00

Ok, maybe not more than once per election (unless you live in Chicago), but I truly believe that you should vote every chance you can. And unless you've had your TV turned off and plan to keep it turned off for the next 33 days, you're probably aware that we have an election coming up. On November 2 in fact.

October 2 is the last day to register in SC if you're going to vote in this election. Of course, if you voted last time and nothing has changed, you don't need to re-register. If you've missed voting a time or to, you can easily check to see if your registration is still valid.

But what are we voting on? Well, I needed to know that myself, so I did a quick search on "greenville sc voting locations." (I didn't intend to add the period, but it got stuck in and it worked anyway - that's how easy this is)

Once the search completed, I clicked on the entry for "http://www.greenvillecounty.org/voter_registration/". There they had an item labeled Candidates for November 2010. This brings up a PDF file (4 pages). Now I'm somewhat informed. I'll do some searching on the candidates, but now I know what we're voting on.

Here's a promise I make to all of my readers: if you don't know what you're voting on, I will find this information out for you. Give me a way to contact you and I'll look up your state and district to find comparable information. I won't tell you who to vote for (at least not in this exchange) and won't ask you who you plan to vote for. I'll simply give you the information.

Incidentally, we're voting for state offices (Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, Attorney General, Comptroller, Supt. of Education, Adjutant General and Commissioner of Agriculture), US Senate, US Representative, State House, County offices, School District Representatives and four amendments to our state constitution. What are you voting on?

Remember - vote early and vote often!!

A lot can happen in nine years

2010-09-29T11:07:00.000-04:00

My wife has already told everyone on Facebook that today is our anniversary. Nine years goes by fast. But a lot can happen in that span of time.

Yes, it was nine years ago today that we were married in an outdoor wedding at The Gray House, a small bed & breakfast in Starr, SC (outside Anderson - which is outside Greenville). The wedding itself was unusual, not many couples have their five children in the wedding. The bride's son gave her away, the groom's son was best-man. The bride's daughter was maid-of-honor and the groom's daughters were bridesmaids. It took two ministers to tie the knot and by some miracle, the candles didn't blow out until after we were pronounced man & wife.

Since then, four out of our five children have gotten married and started families of their own. Attending all of those weddings has worn us out. With one grandson and four granddaughters (all the girls born in a six month time period), we feel like our quiver is full, but of course there's always room for more. Our youngest is in college, he comes up when his laundry is able to stand on it's own.

We've shared a lot of joy and a lot of pain (we both had back surgery). We've both been back to school. Through it all, we've grown together. there's a saying that goes "that which does not kill me, makes me stronger." I'd add a part to the middle of that and say "that which does not kill me, or make me kill my spouse, makes us stronger."

So, with that, I'll say Happy Anniversary Nena. It's been a great nine years and I'm looking forward to the next nine. And then the next nine. And the next. And so forth. And so on.

Round up, my way or add $1 checking

2010-09-28T09:49:00.000-04:00

A few months ago, I signed up for one of those checking accounts that moves money from checking to savings every time you use your debit card. Sounds simple enough, it's forced savings. What could go wrong?

Well, I've always been one to track my spending. In college, I balanced my checkbook (out of self-defense) so that I knew how much money I had. This was in the days before debit cards, so I only wrote checks or used the ATM, but I never overdrew my account. Even if it was only $1.67, I knew how much I had.

Now in theory, I could still track my account, just by adding $1 to every purchase or writing down two transactions every time I did one. That's a good theory, but I can't seem to make that work either. Sometimes, the bank doesn't take out $1 (I'm still not sure why) and sometimes they wait several days to take out the $1. So my balance never matches what the bank says.

And as for the forced savings, it's my own money that I'm saving. If I wanted to put money in savings, I could move it myself. It's not like the interest rate on savings is all that much about the rate on checking. So what's the big deal?

Anyone else using these types of accounts? Good, bad or indifferent?

Randy Barnett

My name is RB and I endorsed this message - National Defense

My name is RB and I endorsed this message - Platform priorities

My name is RB and I endorsed this message

Do sweat the small stuff

My response to Occupy Wall Street

What is Occupy Wall Street?

When Hubert met Rose

Is China a treat (economically)?

My mom will be homeless at Thanksgiving

God helps those who help themselves

The power of the consumer

Help for homeowners

The 9-9-9 tax and the flat tax

The President's teleprompter is stolen

Marx to market (Bloomberg Businessweek 9/19-25)

Bank fees

The President's job speech - Reaction Part 2

The President's job speech - Reaction Part 1

Debt collectors calling your cell phone? * Updated *

Let's Reclaim the Post-9/11 Unity

The President's speech - American Job Act

A different election?

Rep Gowdy sees his term in office as a lost opportunity

Payday loans in Missouri

Blog changes

More on education - this time with prison

A fix for education

What do you do with your money?

Vacation - a time of rejevenation

Tax on corporate jets

What would you do with $1million

How much trouble can we get into?

Libya and the War Powers Act

Regrets, I've had a few... too few to mention

Is heaven just for Christians? Apparently atheists think so

Storage Wars - Local Edition

Thoughts on the death of Bin Laden

Has President Obama evolved?

Ding Dong the wicked witch is dead *Updated *

Obama Birth Certificate

School budget problems resolved - Auburn, Maine

Memo to congress - thanks for doing your job

Budget crisis solution - Mr. Pruitt style

Schools on strike

Is it time to rethink my economic ideas?

What does Michael Moore have in Common with the Tea Party?

It's an odd month - Have you checked your credit report?

How to un-elect your local politician

Happy Pi day

Western Sky

Bullying about road rage

Bullying statistics - Historical data

What a difference a bank makes

Should I itemize on my taxes?

Twenty-one years ago

procession of presidencies - part 2

procession of presidencies

Climate advisor steps down - Who should replace?

State of the Union Preview

Running for president

House of Representatives votes to repeal Obamacare

Fist Time Home Buyer's Tax Credit - Payback Time

You're yelling so loud, I can't hear what you're saying...

Donations for Haiti

Should we treat congressmen like everyone else?

Shooting in Arizona

To itemize or not to itemize - that is the question

Taxes!!!

Wal-Mart Part 2

Wal-Mart

Happy New Year - 2011 style

Merry Christmas - 2010

Is war ever worth fighting

Where have all the bloggers gone?

A Quarter of a Century

Elizabeth Edwards dies at age 61

Should we blame God for our mistakes?

The Event

Everything You Ever Really Needed to Know About Personal Finance On Just One Page

Ding Dong the wicked witch is dead Updated