I finally take time to address you the reader personally and thank you.
Hey everyone. I’d like to first say thank you all for reading my blog. I check my stats constantly to see who’s reading. While I do have lots of readers, I don’t seem to get a lot of genuine comments. I say genuine, because I receive a lot of spam. In fact 99.999% of all comments I receive are spam. I even receive hand written spam comments. Now, I don’t understand what’s the point of trying to post spam comments. Do you see any spam comments on my blog? No! Why? Because I delete them all before they are even posted. I welcome each and everyone to comment. Even if you disagree with me. I love a good conversation as well as a heated debate. I think I even let someone comment that called me racist. Which is sort of strange, seeing as nearly all of my idols, if he took the time to read my blog, are nearly all white: Peter Schiff, Ron Paul, Bob Barr, Ludwig Mises, Jim Rogers, etc…
Anywho…
I’d like to announce my new blog @ Shakaama Live . I’ve made this step to allow me the opportunities, wordpress doesn’t allow, afford, think of. On that blog you can find all sorts of great posts like: self improvement; financial opinion; stock market opinion; public policy opinion.
I also have a blog on my website Las Vegas DUI Lawyer and the blog is the latest and greatest DUI Blog. That blog isn’t quite up and running but, always keep a look out.
But, back to shakaama live, I just wanted to personally invite you to come read my blogs there and also invite your comments on there. The comments are, of course, based on approval, so nothing crazy will ever get through, nor will spam.
We have had one hell of two weeks here with all the famous deaths: Michael Jackson – a personal favorite of mine; Farah Fawcett – who didn’t age so well; Ed McMahon – ahhh when America could be real adults and watch Johnny Carson [who i also was sad when he passed]. I don’t know if I’m a storm crow, coming in after such sad news with my glad news. Or, maybe I’m a morning glory, bringing cheerful tidings after the storm. I have high hopes for all my blogs and websites.
Oh I almost forgot. If you really want to get in shape, gain muscle lose fat, hop over to my website Gain Muscle Lose Fat. It’s for both people who want to finally lose fat and stay completely fit and for those that want to gain muscle and get the body they have dreamed of. I tell myself, if I ever got the body of my dreams, I would immediately move to hollywood and be an action actor. So I’m following it too. It’s all good stuff. I concentrate on both outter body and inner body: healthy heart; healthy organs; cholesterol; excellent diet for life.
I’d be glad if you checked out all my projects really. But, I never address you, my readers, directly, so I thought I’d do it for a change, give a personal touch and let you know i’m human. I pray for each and every U.S. born, tax paying, citizen of America. We have it hard and I think we’re being swindled. I hope everyone can hear my voice so we all can be uplifted together.
Recently one of my Shakaama Live on youtube viewers asked me about the disparity between the rich and the poor and how my explanation about the Austrian Business Cycle could help people understand. Below fine my brief response to him.
The Problem
One of the key aspects of the founders of the fed was to make sure no one knew who actually founded it; take over public education so that everyone was dumbed down; and make people completely dependent on the banking system.
Before, people nor businesses took out loans. AT ALL! For any reason! Imagine for one second, no car loan; no home loan; no school loan! If you wanted it, you saved and bought it.
Fast forward about 50 years after the creation of the Federal Reserve Bank, no one saved any more. Everyone was now in debt.
This is what happened. It’s not just about abolishing the Fed, it’s about returning the American way of life. Remember the saying “pull yourself up by your own boot straps”. That’s because if you wanted something, you worked hard, saved your money and got it. THEN, no one could take it away from you; not your land; not your car; not your furniture. There was no repo man. He didn’t exist. There was no such thing as credit. Credit was for rich people, and i mean the filthy rich people.
As wall street became more and more successful at their game of putting people in debt, the middle class began to slip into poverty. Imagine people with no self restraint. Why save when you can buy on credit, when you can take out a loan. When you take out a loan and buy on credit, not only do you not own the thing, you also owe all your money to someone else. You are basically working for them. People throw around the words “modern day slavery”, but it’s actually true.
The Solution
The first lesson any of these get rich quick people tell you or those motivational speakers say is “get out of debt first”. Why? Because then you own yourself. They say, pay off your credit cards, pay off your loans. That’s the first step. Now, if even the motivational speakers all agree on this, it should dawn on people what’s going on. To a man they all agree on this notion. And, this is from nearly every monitary speaker, or economic salesman with a book. They know that at the very least, if their plan to market whatever they are personally selling, they will be 70% ahead of the game if they get everyone out of debt that they are selling to.
Mine you I am not calling any of those people wrong or am I lambasting them. I’m simply saying that whatever their formula is -> over there, they know that <- over here you have to get out of debt just to start to get ahead. So if even the best and worst of the bunch, even the charlatans agree on this simple principle and they are not tin foil hat, conspiracy theorist, abolish the fed, libertarians, there must be something at the core foundation of sound money that says, get out and stay out of debt.
Even in the old testament, and a lot of my Jewish friends ascribe to this, never put yourself in debt to anyone. In fact this is repeated in the new testament where it basically says, go pay off all your debts first then come to your brother or father or enemy and have a reasonable discussion among equals.Once again you see that notion of the the disparity between rich and poor stripped away, simply by paying off your debts. Even some versions of the Lord’s Prayer has it as saying “forgive us out debts as we forgive our debtors“. You might be reading this and be atheist, but the wise man takes advice from every possible wise source, even if he doesn’t believe in the source. Good advice can be found in fools at times. [don't prejudice yourself against something simple because you don't like the package]
Get out of debt and stay out of debt. Throw away and destroy all credit cards.
With tears streaming down my face, holding my breath, I clicked play on the video. I watched in silence and clicked replay before I took a breath. My shaking hand moved from the mouse button and grabbed a tissue to wipe my shirt and face. I had just witnessed the beginning of the end. Hope had come at last. We have fleet cars. We have fleet electric cars.
When automakers around the world claim that there is no consumer demand for electric or alternative fuel vehicles, they are not talking about you and I. [although I'm more important than you. I'm just saying.] They are talking about fleet orders. Fleet orders drive the auto industry. If fleet owners and buyers are not in the market to care about alternative fuel vehicles, you can bet that auto makers are not going to go out of their way to do the R&D for the cars. Why spend billions to refit their plants when their largest buyers are not asking for it at all.
Of course fleet buyers, in the end, do not care about fuel economy. In fact, that doesn’t even enter into their accounting equation, nor their buying prospects. The end user in a fleet is a company man that either deposits the vehicle for someone else to fill up or uses a company gas card, with the rule that it must be filled before returning it to the yard. With such a disconnect to the actual cost of gas, or even a concern for fuel economy, there would never have been a need nor concern for an EV [electric vehicle] fleet car.
Who said EV’s had to be small golf carts with barely a windshield wiper. The new entry into the market of the top EV’s have sparked a world wide rivalry.
Tesla Roadster
Aptera 2e
I’ll be going over new eletric cars and going into detail about the cars and the car companies.
Frtiz Henderson CEO of General Motors made the rounds today announcing the new restructuring plan of GM. He describe it as aggressive and they will come out leaner. He said the new restructure has 3 points:
1. they had to introduce a business plan that’s more stable and viable
2. they had to accelerate the Feb 17th restructuring plan due to the mandate placed on them by the treasury department
3. they had to strengthen their balance sheet; bond restructure; and have a solid plan for future investments
They will be getting rid of 4 brands: Hummer, Saab, and Saturn which will be completely phased out by the end of 2009; Pontiac will be over by 2010. He also announced an accelerated and larger plant closure from the former 47 to a 27 plants left in North America.
GM CEO Fritz Henderson
They want a break even mark at 10 million units, previously the break even was at 11.4 million units, but the treasury department did not agree with that. This is the 3rd restructuring plan. GM CEO says this is the final plan. It will focus on 4 core brands, giving up pontiac in the process. Pontiac has a history with the company as the muscle car and accounts for 10% of sales and profits. They think this restructure is more aggressive. They have until June 1 to comply with treasury mandates. The harshest part of the restructure comes at the expense of bond holders, who now hold 27 billion dollars in bonds. He wants to eliminate 24 billion dollars of that and they would only get a 10% equity stake. However, the UAW through viva payment would eliminate 20 billion dollars but get a 80% equity stake in the company, but only decrease 21,000 jobs. The treasury told them they would not support a recovery to bond holders over 10%.
Treasury Symbol
The decision on the 4 core brands to remain, centered on fleet sales not regular consumer sales. They think they can maintain market share with the 4 core brands. They want to 3600 dealerships over the next 5 years. However, they can’t just tell dealerships, which are private companies to close. Franchise laws prevent a company from nixing a dealership. They are in place to protect the dealer. However, experts say GM is grossly over subscribed and has been for decades.
This is not a bankruptcy at all. They are simply caving into the treasury department and will not go to bankruptcy court. The bond holders can take them to bankruptcy court if they don’t like the 10% equity stake and devaluing their 27 billion dollars down to nearly under 10% of its value. At 27 billion dollars I don’t see how GM can avoid going to bankruptcy court over this.
A G.M. Delearship
I got the sense from reading the CEO’s face that this entire deal is simply to save his skin. Everyone agrees that GM needs to go to bankruptcy court and completely restructure the company, including the union contracts. The unions in this case are the ones making the company completely unprofitable. The obligations to the union are staggering. And, the company cannot move into new technologies in the automobile industry. Even under this proposed restructure they are not going to retool any of their remaining 27 plants.
A lot of people are being hoodwinked and led down a path that if fraught with danger and bad times ahead. I’m counting an extra $10 trillion introduced into the economy since 2007. [I'm counting both the very open bailouts and the under the table cash infusions by the federal reserve bank, which Ben Bernanke says he doesn't have to disclose to congress] The problem is the politicians are talking about economics, a subject most adults in America know nothing about, and they sound logical and reasonable about.
They say
” the problem is credit has stagnated and we wish to avoid credit from being unavailable to the general public. We need to get banks lending money, but they can’t since they have so many toxic assets on their books and if they lend more money they will be far more overleveraged and they refuse to do it. If we infuse the banks with cash and lower interest rates, then you the general public will continue to be able to purchase cars and homes and big screen t.v.s and our economy is based on consumer spending.”
If the economy indeed is based on consumer spending, then 1. freeing up credit markets will allow me to make purchases / loans at a reasonable level 2. lowering interest rates are in my best interest so I don’t have to pay for a house at a high interest rate 3. infusion of cash to banks allow them to lend me money.
Federal Reserve Bank Chairman Ben Bernanke
The problem is, this entire premise, is completely false, a lie and evil. Why do i say evil? If they are trying to convince you that our economy is based on consumer spending, then they are then allowed, BY YOU, to do whatever they need to free up lending so that you can continue to consume, at all costs, including devaluing your money. Also, if that’s the case, then the value of your dollar NEVER matters. For idiots that don’t understand, if you buy the notion that our economy is based on consumer spending then, if you have $1,000 in the bank, they can inflate the economy so you have only $500 effective buying power, because all prices have risen.
This means that no work you do; no matter what improvements your boss makes; no discoveries in efficiency to lower production costs will have any impact on the economy because they can wipe all that ingenuity away by inflating the economy overnight. If you understood that sentence , then my explanation about the Austrian Business Cycle will be easy. Reread that sentence and understand it and we can move forward.
John Maynard Keynes
How does your salary increase? Most Keynesian economist would say “pay me more money“. It’s a very ignorant statement to make and I’ll explain why shortly. To this end Keynesian economist say, to increase the amount of money people have, we need to raise the minimum wage. [since they can't control other wages directly] Keynesian economist think that if you increase minimum wages then the workers can buy more, since they make more. You sitting at home immediately probably already figured out if you raise the minimum wage, a lot of people are going to be fired, so that the ones left can be paid more, OR if they pay the workers more, they increase the prices. So raising the minimum wage completely is thwarted by raising prices. If everyone raises their prices, the minimum wage raise buys less and you have a zero sum gain.
How should wages be increased? I’ve already alluded to it right in the last paragraph but I’ll point it out blatantly. You don’t get paid more money, what happens is, we become better at what we do. What does that mean? You do your same job. You get paid the same salary. Your boss however, makes improvements to the company to make your job easier, so you spend less time doing more. The store owner buys in larger bulk and gets a larger price cut per item. He then, lowers the price of goods. People discover new innovations to make your job even more efficient, so you spend less time doing the same tasks. Therefore you can do more stuff in the same amount of time, because each task is now easier to do. Your boss can now lower prices because each item is cheaper to produce.
Salary Raise in an Austrian Economist Scenario
So far, the store owner lowered prices, your boss lowered prices, and production lowered prices. Check this out. You make the same amount of money you did yesterday, but ALL PRICES OF GOODS AND SERVICES HAVE BEEN LOWERED, so your salary can buy much more.
If the system is left alone, these innovations can occur all the time and prices can be lowered and lowered. A house would take far less to produce and should cost less today than it did 10 years ago. And, because all other goods and services were lowered, you would be able to purchase a much larger house today, than you could before.
Next, let’s visit credit, because I talked about it above. Let’s think about my perfect scenario, but with banks now. Because your salary can now go further, let’s assume you don’t feel a dieing need to spend every last dime you have. You go and open a savings account, so does your neighbor, your pastor and your cousin. After several years all of you have nice lump sums in the bank. The bank says,
“oh my we have quite a bit of money in the bank. you know what we can make lots of money if we lent to more people, let’s lower interest rates.” So the bank lowers interest rates. The store owner sees interest rates go down and thinks, people have more money to spend, and interest rates are lower, let me go take a loan and expand my business. So he does. One day you walk by and now your local store has groceries and a barbershop with an old fashion shave by razor. You then decide to stop by every week and get a nice shave and haircut while you shop. The store owner pays back his loan and the bank makes money. Because of all these shaves you and your cousin have been getting, your bank accounts have gone down by half. The bank raises interest rates and less people take out loans. And, life goes on.
Ludwig Von Mises Proponent of the Austrian School of Economics
Are you getting angry yet? Is the light coming on? Are you putting 2 and 2 together? Yes, let’s go back the Keynesian economists? They think the government has to oversea you, and your boss and the store owner. If the store owner says, “oh no I bought to much corn meal, I’m going to lose my shirt over this” they say no problem, we’ll infuse cash to you, so you don’t lose your shirt. They just stopped all the progress you, your boss, and production have been making, because prices are now inflated. In essence, they stole from you. They also lower interest rates artificially. Then the store owner is confused and thinks he should take out a loan and expand his business. However, you and your boss don’t make what you should be making due to the new inflation. You stop by the shop and shake your head when you see the new addition, because you don’t have the money for it. After about 6 months to a year, the store owner goes completely out of business because he can’t pay back that loan he took out because no one gets haircuts and shaves.
Which brings me to the Austrian Business Cycle.
“The theory views business cycles (which they also call credit cycles) as the inevitable consequence of inherently damaging and ineffective central bank policies, which cause interest rates to remain too low for too long, resulting in excessive credit creation, speculative economic bubbles and lowered savings. According to the theory, the business cycle unfolds in the following way. Low interest rates tend to stimulate borrowing from the banking system. This expansion of credit causes an expansion of the supply of money, through the money creation process in a fractional reserve banking system. This in turn leads to an unsustainable boom during which the artificially stimulated borrowing seeks out diminishing investment opportunities. This boom results in widespread malinvestments, causing capital resources to be misallocated into areas that would not attract investment if the money supply remained stable. A correction or “credit crunch” – commonly called a “recession” or “bust” – occurs when credit creation cannot be sustained. Then the money supply suddenly and sharply contracts when markets finally “clear”, causing resources to be reallocated back towards more efficient uses.The theory proposes that a sustained period of low interest rates and excessive credit creation results in a volatile and unstable imbalance between saving and investment.”
Production Increases Prices Lower
The boom comes from The Federal Reserve lowering interests rates [not because the banks have a lot of people who have large savings accounts] and business owners start a building frenzy or opening new businesses or whatever the latest fad is. The bubble is created because all these people are put to work, that didn’t work before. There’s all this money infused into something that wasn’t at the same volume before.
The burst comes from when you, YEAH YOU, don’t go out and buy these widgets from them. Why? Because you never said you wanted them in the first place. And, you never said you wanted them at twice the price. Did you?
So what’s the answer? First we need to do away with the entire federal reserve structure and dismantle all of their banks in America. We do not need a central bank dictating to everyone, including non-business people, such as yourself, by taking your savings away from you. We need to reduce regulation on businesses. It’s just taxes that takes away buying power from businesses. The only regulation we need from the government, is protecting your constitutional rights, and protecting you from being gouged economically. We need to go on a gold standard so this entire process can never occur again. On a gold standard you, your pastor, your neighbor and your boss all can rely on what a dollar is today and tomorrow. On a gold standard, if you put money in a savings account, the government can’t come steal it. On a gold standard, although your salary won’t increase, your dollar will increase due to the price of gold increasing. We were just on the gold standard all the way up until 1971 when Richard Nixon, by himself, took us off the gold standard. [wasn't he a great guy?] On a gold standard a bank can gouge you either.
Jackie Chan is in the news. He made comments that he personally believed. Supposedly there is going to be some backlash from it, but… I don’t see who could be influential enough and take offense to the comments that Jackie Chan would care. At some point we need to stop getting offended because people are speaking their mind. Why are we putting microphones into people’s faces that realistically mean nothing to us, other than they are a curiosity for our entertainment. Actors, basketball players, singers, these people are not role models, they are entertainment. When these media icons say stuff we need to take it with a grain of salt. I know that they can make insane amounts of money from endorsements, but if we as parents or a society actually base any life decisions on what an actor or basketball player says, we need to go commit suicide post haste.
[ I'd like to point out in the AP news report they say the "Chinese race". Why are we still paying attention to the media when they are so ignorant as to call Chinese a race? ]
Jackie Chan
HONG KONG – Jackie Chan’s comments that freedom may not be good for China were taken out of context, his spokesman said Tuesday, while Facebook users and Chinese scholars condemned the veteran actor on the Internet in a spreading backlash.
The 55-year-old star of the ” Rush Hour ” action films caused a huge uproar after he told a business forum on Saturday that it may not be good for authoritarian China to become a free society .
“I’m not sure if it’s good to have freedom or not,” Chan said Saturday, adding freedoms in his native Hong Kong and Taiwan made those societies “chaotic.” Taiwan, which split from China in 1949, is democratic and Hong Kong , a separately ruled Chinese territory, enjoys some free elections.
“I’m gradually beginning to feel that we Chinese need to be controlled. If we’re not being controlled, we’ll just do what we want,” he said.
Hong Kong and Taiwanese legislators lashed out at the comments, with some accusing Chan of insulting the Chinese race.
Solon So, the chief executive of Chan’s company JC Group and his main spokesman, told The Associated Press in a phone interview Tuesday the actor was referring to freedom in the entertainment industry and not Chinese society at large.
Chan was speaking at a panel discussion about Asian entertainment industries and was asked to discuss movie censorship in China.
“Some people with ulterior motives deliberately misinterpreted what he was saying,” So said.
Meanwhile, the public backlash against Chan grew.
A group of Chinese scholars published a letter on the Internet on Monday accusing Chan of “not understanding how precious freedom is,” even though “free Hong Kong provided the conditions for you to become an international action star.”
A Facebook group set up by Hong Kong users calling for Chan to be exiled to North Korea had drawn more than 2,600 members by Tuesday. The group also posted form letters urging Hong Kong’s Baptist University and Academy for Performing Arts to strip Chan of honorary degrees they gave the actor.
The Hong Kong Tourism Board , for which Chan serves as an ambassador, had received 17 complaints as of Monday that his comments “hurt the image of Hong Kong and aren’t reflective of Hong Kong people ,” a publicist said. She declined to give her name because of company policy.
Opposition Taiwanese politicians on Monday demanded that the city government of Taipei strip Chan of his role as ambassador of the Deaf Olympic Games to be held in the Taiwanese capital in September.
THIS IS HOW LIBERTY DIES, WITH THUNDEROUS APPLAUSE!
Obama's Economic Speech
In the end the crux of his speech centered around one word: government, Government, GOVERNMENT! Of course he promised hope for the economic future; investment in our education; getting green jobs; free health care for everyone; and university tuition relief [which was met with thunderous applause at the university]
The constitution is clearly dead. Due to the actions the congress has recently taken, Obama assumes in his speech that government should be the ultimate authority for the private sector. Many times he alluded to the totally assumed fact that government should be the ultimate authority when it comes to determining fair wages, bank lending, lines of credit, investments for renewable resources. At no point did he ever mention that he would be taking a backseat and applauding the private sector for taking initiative, without government intervention.
- On entitlement: the largest expenditure admittedly in the governmental budgeting, proposes entitlement reform supposedly but then he turned around and pushed for universal health care reform, not real entitlement reform. In fact he was so dastardly that he said he would push for universal socialized health care reform this year.
- On financial planing: Again he totally assumed that government should oversee retirement. [ I am not making this up ]
- On military spending: He went off on a tangent about a suggestion made about military overspending. He then went into rhetoric about how we have spent so much in military spending and are yet “no closer to be safer”. However, he did not mention removing troops from any foreign soil, the single most largest expenditure in the governmental budget.
Obama's Economic Speech
At one point Obama quotes the scripture of the Wise man that build his house on Rock instead of sand, but then equates it to complete government oversight, trouncing the constitution in the meantime. He said it only to put forth the idea that the government will NEVER AGAIN allow this crisis to happen. This completely ignores the business cycle. In fact most economist has state [who are not kenesian whack jobs] that there never was a crisis. Corporate bailouts of wall street commercial banks is not a proper indicator of a nationwide economic crisis. Housing ARM mortgage rate adjustments for individuals who were over leveraged is not a proper indicator of nationwide economic crisis.
The final straw was when he was again stepping all over the constitution and taking the lead from congress recent bill passage which specifically taxed wall street executive who took bailout money at 95% on their bonuses, in direct contravention of the constitution…. I mean he says it right in the constitution “thou shall not pass taxes targeting specific people”. *sigh* Obama said “we will implement rules that makes sure you get paid the correct amount for work that you have done” …….. since when did the government dictate salaries? This congress is out of control and this presidency is not far behind it. Bush laid the foundation for this debacle.
We’re in a crisis alright. A crisis of the constitution going under and government taking over all of our civil liberties. It won’t be long now that the gestapo will be goose stepping down the street demanding to see how much you make and how long you worked. It won’t be long now that you’ll receive your weekly stipend from the government and the rest will be set aside for retirement and non existant social security and medicare. It won’t be long now that the government will seize your bank and tell them they are paying their sales people too much in commission checks and that they are outselling their nearest competitor. It won’t be long now that the police will knock on your door and demand to see your guns and ransack your house for contraband. [they already do it to poor Black people I know, just kidding]
The S.E.C. announces the reimplementation of the uptick rule. The uptick rule had been in place for over 70 years. It was removed two years ago in 2007. At the time everyone was amiss as to why the rule was removed. But, now the indication is that they want to implement it, to punish or get rid of naked short sellers, or short sellers in general. commission chairman Mary Schapiro says she’s feeling the heat from investors, exchanges and companies about short sellers. The staff are discussing five different short selling proposals, two versions of the uptick rule was discussed. There will be a period for them to vent the discussion amongst investors to get feedback on the rule. They unanimously decided to put them out for public comments up for 60 days.
The uptick rule was implemented back in 1929 along with the rule to separate investment banks from commercial banks. The bank rule was dismantled in 1999 and the uptick rule was taken away 2 years ago. It is very telling that both these rules, along with others were removed and here we are back in a position similar to 1929.
Stock Market
Discussion on MSNBC pointed out that credit default swaps will do the same thing as short selling anyway, so the uptick rule will not do anything to circumvent or punish short selling in general. They think that the uptick rule will restore confidence, if nothing else for psychological peace of mind. But, you can connect a credit default swap, with out of the money puts, and then short without the uptick and drive the stock down. So the credit default swaps, synthetics, derivatives, exchange traded funds which are all forms of shorting. Clearly this uptick rule is not the magic bullet, but it will be for the S.E.C. to decide along with the investors they listen to.
Lehman was called when they were bubbled up. AIG was called well before it was even thought to be falling. Shorters serve a purpose just as traders do.
To Detarp or Not Detarp
The treasury department is refusing large banks to pay back their tarp money. Some of the major banks have asked to de-tarp themselves. There is some debate if the government would accept it. They think that if one of the large banks paid their Tarp money back, the other ones would feel pressured to pay back theirs.
Lehman Brothers
The debate is if they pay it back and come back six months later, we are in the same position as we were before. The rational issue then is should we let them fail if they pay the money back and then come back six months later. If not you there goes the government inflating to running companies even more so. We would have the government firing CEOs, guaranteeing lube jobs for your car from GM, handing out toasters at the local bank. It’s as if America is sleeping and the government is in fact become a George Orwellian big brother.
Indianapolis v. Edmond, No. 99-1030 (decided Nov. 28, 2000)
U.S. Supreme Court
Drug Roadblocks: Are they unreasonable searches and seizures?
The Supreme Court previously has upheld roadblocks to check for the presence of illegal aliens (United States v. Martinez-Fuerte [1976]) and to check for signs of impaired driving (Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz [1990]). In Indianapolis v. Edmond, the Court was asked to look at the use of police roadblocks for the purpose of interdicting drugs.
The Case The case arose when the city of Indianapolis, Indiana, began setting up roadblocks on the highways to stop a predetermined number of vehicles. The officers at these roadblocks would ask for a driver’s license and registration and then explain to the driver that he or she had been stopped at a drug checkpoint. The police looked for signs of driver impairment and then visually inspected the outside of the vehicle.
What made these roadblocks different from others that the Supreme Court has looked at in the past is that the city’s (written) roadblock policy also emphasized that “a drug detection dog will walk around and examine every vehicle stopped at the checkpoint.” If a dog “alerted,” the police would then have sufficient probable cause to search the vehicle.
Some drivers in the Indianapolis area asked the courts to stop these roadblocks.
U.S. Supreme Court
The Decision The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of the drivers and against the city of Indianapolis.
“Because the primary purpose of the Indianapolis checkpoint program is ultimately indistinguishable from the general interest in crime control, the checkpoints violate the Fourth Amendment” protection against unreasonable searches, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor wrote for the majority.
Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, dissented. The drug roadblocks only involved a “minimal intrusion on the privacy” of the occupants of the vehicles, Rehnquist said.
One of the most intriguing opinions, however, was written by Justice Thomas, who wrote separately to say that although he agreed with the chief justice that the roadblocks had to be upheld under the Court’s precedents, he would be willing to consider overruling those precedents. Taken together, Justice Thomas said: “[O]ur decisions in Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz, 496 U. S. 444 (1990), and United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U. S. 543 (1976), stand for the proposition that suspicionless roadblock seizures are constitutionally permissible if conducted according to a plan that limits the discretion of the officers conducting the stops. I am not convinced that Sitz and Martinez-Fuerte were correctly decided. Indeed, I rather doubt that the Framers of the Fourth Amendment would have considered ‘reasonable’ a program of indiscriminate stops of individuals not suspected of wrongdoing.
Marble Justice
“Respondents did not, however, advocate the overruling of Sitz and Martinez-Fuerte, and I am reluctant to consider such a step without the benefit of briefing and argument. For the reasons given by The Chief Justice, I believe that those cases compel upholding the program at issue here. I, therefore, join his opinion.”
As the Seventh Circuit before it, the Supreme Court in this case reasoned that even though some roadblocks had been allowed in previous cases, the drug roadblocks in this case violated the Fourth Amendment.
The Court said that it agreed with the Seventh Circuit that whether a particular roadblock policy is constitutional depends on the “primary purpose” of the checkpoint program. It said that if the program’s primary purpose is to detect evidence of “ordinary criminal wrongdoing,” the Court will strike it down as unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment rule that a search or seizure is generally unreasonable absent individualized suspicion of wrongdoing.
If the Indianapolis roadblocks were unconstitutional because they were designed primarily to uncover general criminal activity, why were the roadblocks that the Court upheld in previous cases treated differently? The Court explained that each of those roadblocks was permissible because they had a different purpose:
Gavel
It said the roadblocks in United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. 543 (1976), were different because they had an “antismuggling purpose.” Read the Court’s 1976 opinion in Martinez-Fuerte.
It said the DUI roadblocks in Michigan v. Sitz 496 U.S. 444 (1990), were different because they were primarily concerned with “highway safety.” Read the Court’s 1990 opinion in Sitz.
Finally, it suggested that roadblocks also might be permissible if their primary purpose was to verify drivers’ licenses and registrations, because then they, too, could be viewed as being primarily concerned with highway safety. Read the Court’s 1979 opinion in Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648 (1979).
I’m not defending Obama today. However, I’m not so naive that I can’t see what is going on. Today I will review the first 90 days.
It amazes me that people are so shocked that Obama gets into office and all of a sudden it’s politics as usual. I am neither saddened by his actions so far, nor am i angered by his policies so far.
I have a political science degree. So I am very aware of everything that is going on. And, lets discuss this.
The bailouts
Everyone is so upset by the bailouts. But, for every 2 people upset about the bailouts there is 1 person that is thankful for them. You have to understand that the millions of Americans that are talking about “let them fail” do not think about the 30,000, 100,000 or million of employees of these companies that would be out of work. So when these giant companies come to Washington, this is what Obama is looking at. It is very easy to sit back and armchair quarterback this mess, but it’s a totally different story when a union 2 million strong comes through the door with the company president and they both beg for help. It would take a nearly omniscient being to wade through this, and not have millions of people hurt.
He is the one
Is that bad to think about those people? No. However, I’m pointing out the difficulties involved in this. We give away millions upon millions of dollars every year to foreign countries. JUST GIVE IT AWAY! as “aide”. People complain about that under their breath, but no one speaks up. All the American lobbyist who go to Washington for those countries, waddle right up to capitol hill for their clients. Now the shoe is on the other foot. However, no one is speaking for the people directly. What are my hopes?
I would hope that Obama would be so charismatic that He didn’t have to be beholden to all these screaming memes around him. Can you imagine if he had given 10 trillion dollars directly to us? That would have boosted the economy. Inflation would have skyrocketed overnight, but at least it would save our economy. As it stands now, we don’t see the benefit and we still get the inflation. Sadly.
President Obama Signs bill Alone
Is Obama doing a good or bad job? He’s the president. He’s the wizard behind the curtain. What can he do?
Ok understand this is politics. It’s not as simple as black and white.
He has to answer to people
He has to gain / call / demand political favors
He has moochers
He has blackmailers [no pun intended]
all of these factors go into every single word he speaks, and every single agreement / document he signs.
Talk about a walking target. This guy, unlike GHW and GW, is a newcomer and has to climb the ladder before throwing his weight.
Note i’m not defending Obama or anyone. Just want everyone to realize this is politics. Yes we Americans want something, but capitol hill is a rat race unlike any other on the planet. It’s sad, but true. Listen to Peter Schiff and rely on yourselves. I’m proud of Obama as a black man. I’m sad about and for Obama as a Political scientist. But as a political scientist I understand the wizard behind the curtain.
Recently Warren Buffet has been appearing on the national scene, moreso than before. He is now the darling of both the press and Washington.
He figured prominently during the bailout talks when he invested $5 billion in Goldman Sachs. There was a proverbial gasp heard
The Warren Buffet Way Click Here
round the investing nation at the time because everyone knew the financials were in trouble, in general, banking in specific. But, let’s look at his deal. At the time the stock seemed like a steal. In fact, many thought he was taking advantage of the venerable bank. For Berkshire Hathaway, it bought a US$5 billion equity stake in the dominant player of the industry, and for its money receives a guaranteed dividend of 10 per cent a year on its perpetual preferred shares. On top of that Goldman’s gave Berkshire 5 year warrants which give Berkshire the right to buy 43.5 million common shares of Goldman Sachs at a strike price of US$115 at any time before 2013. However, banking stocks tanked, the crisis deepened, Goldman shares hit a low of US$47.41 on November 21st. After writing an op-ed piece for the New York Times on why he buys America, Mr. Buffet came in for criticism.
However, we are talking about Warren Buffet. I’m often reminded of the movie “Wall Street” when i think of him. Anything he purchases will sooner or later gather stragglers, who mistrust their own investment skills. Goldman shares have doubled since November, closing at $111.93 last Monday.
“The Investment bank has had to change its business model, and reduce the amount of leverage it carries on its balance sheet, but some business areas are positively on fire with flow or client driven trading benefiting from wide spreads being charged and really bringing in the moolah.” [what a shocker, that actually works]
Benjamin Graham Click Here
For every silver lining however there is a cloud. The GE deal Berkshire got, with those same warrants, don’t look so delicious. The warrants were for an aggregate cost of $3 billion @ $22.25 per share. Ge closed at $10.43. Yeah, not so much.
Warren Buffet Click Here
Which brings me to the next point. Disciples of the value strategy, like Berkshire Hathaway’s Warren Buffett, focus on the long-term intrinsic value of a company, hoping to buy shares in good companies at reasonable prices. For financial stocks—some of which haven’t or won’t survive the crisis—it’s nearly impossible to identify the long-term value, whether through profits, cash flow, or other measures.
But what are companies worth these days? What is the value of a company that accepts TARP money? Hard isn’t the proper word for what investors are up against when trying to figure this out, impossible is more like it. And these atrocious bailouts and stimulus packages flowing out of Washington and the Federal Reserve [secretly, psssst hey AIG, come here in the alley i got some more money for ya] are only hurting the situation. In the mean time Buffet is seen publicly on T.V. talking about he praises Obama for his efforts and he’s optimistic for the long term. Was that on a Hallmark card Warren? “Get Well Soon America” from your buddy Warren.
Bull Moves by Peter Schiff Click Here
He’s lost it. In fact if you go back and look at Berkshire Hathaway’s performance versus the dow over the past 20 years, it has underperformed. GASP!!! Not the sage of Omaha!!! Oh brother. Yes he’s lost it. Hell, he got lucky in the first place. He never “had” it. A study was done once, some university economists [this is no joke, this is serious research here] wallpapered their class with the Wall Street Journal [yay free plug WSJ] blind folded several students, gave them darts and had them throw them. They picked the stocks they landed on and invested. [don't try this at home kids, these guys have PhDs] Every single student’s stocks out performed the DOW. GASP!!! [and i would have gotten away with it if it weren't for you meddling kids] Apparently they did this study for years. They concluded that the big performer investors are simply lucky and actually have no “magical skills” to predict good stocks. [ha what do those snotty nosed professors of economics know]
So Warren [we're on a first name basis] says he’s optimistic for the economy and Obama’s the bee’s knees. Wellllllllll Peter Schiff, Ron Paul, Lou
Crash Proof by Peter Schiff Click Here
Rockwell, Judge Napolitano, Glen Beck [I had to mention him so people who Google his name read this blog teehee], all say the exact opposite. And, I agree with them [but who listens to me *sigh* I need a hug]. Can vultures pick up the pieces Warren Buffet leaves behind? Sure, mull over the carcasses of the straggler investors who follow him blindly. But, be wary and trust your own learning. Read Adam Smith. Be an “Austrian” school of economics disciple. These Keynesian economist are the darlings of Washington right now, since they chant spend, spend, spend.
Jim Rogers
For the rest of us, invest in gold. Buy dividend paying stocks OVERSEAS. Stay away from cash and the dollar. When this hyper-inflation hits, [oooooh boy don't you dare argue with me there] and it will hit, all of your cash is going to go up in smoke.
How many billionaires…. were removed off the Forbes Billionaire list.
“Here’s Boston late night talk radio legend Larry Glick in his prime getting “The story behind the story” from a caller reading a
newspaper article to him. This call was replayed dozens of times by Larry at the request of his callers who almost nightly would ask him to play “The Orangutan”. To his credit he would only play it once every 2-3 weeks. about half way through Larry and the caller are laughing so hard they can hardly speak. Larry’s laugh was so infectious you can’t help but laugh with him. As Larry was WBZ’s overnight host I was on the receiving end of my parents wrath at about 1:30AM when I would be giggling and snorting into my pillow trying to be quiet while hysteria ensued on the air.”
Longtime WBZ radio host Larry Glick died Thursday night in Florida after undergoing 10 hours of open heart surgery. He was 87.
“A typical show might feature a sometimes serious guest, an exchange of repartee with his hapless (and usually less witty) engineer at the station, and free-ranging free associations on current events and life. Some callers became institutions like Larry: Arnold Tarbox, the dry and droll Maine fisherman; Charlie DiGiovanni, a wisecracking Boston cabdriver; the Champagne Lady; Boston newspaper legend, Kenny “The Night” Mayer; and a number of others. A call from some of these regulars could seem like a visit from an old friend.”
Click Here to Purchase
“Prior to ending its run on WHDH in 1992, Larry’s show went out first over WMEX in 1965. By 1967, he had been hired by WBZ, where he would spend the next 20 years. WBZ Radio was a powerful 50,000-watt station that blanketed the six New England states and reached well beyond, from the Maritime provinces of Canada down through the Carolinas in the South and as far west as the Rockies. Third-shift workers and insomniacs throughout much of the eastern seaboard and midwest took comfort when Larry’s unique brand of talk radio came on at midnight. For six hours, Larry’s affable and charismatic voice enfolded a mix of lighthearted chat, sassy sound effects, obscure and funny musical numbers, and lots of generally wacky calls from listeners.”
Larry Glick and Jack Williams
“Long time and famous late night talk show host Larry Glick returned to Boston from his home in Boca Raton, Florida, to celebrate a milestone birthday with friends. Larry and Jack Williams have been close friends since 1975. Jack made frequent appearances on Larry’s talk show on WBZ Radio. Among those in attendance at the big celebration were Roger Berkowitz, president of Legal Sea Foods, and David Mugar. “
Click Here to Purchase
Excerpt from an article one of his regular guests wrote: “
The “Glick University” held its classes very late at night, so if you did attend, your relationship with the president, Professor Glick, became very personal. Many lonely people have told us that his show helped them get through the night. He provided a great public service for years, so it is nice to see that he is richly enjoying his retirement.
I called him today and as always he answered, “Hello, Glick here.” I asked how he was and he whistled and said, “Let me check.” Larry looks and acts 25 years younger than his age and I believe his happy disposition is the major reason. …”
It’s often that people prop legends up to such lofty heights that they cannot conceived of them “doing number 2″ or even worse having a bad day and not wanting to sign autographs. I’ve heard gruesome tales of stars who are complete jerks or worse, angels because they did or did not tip a limo driver. We’re often ravenous to read paparazzi driven rag magazine tales of celebrities gone bad, only to find out that the celebrity in question simply went out to their mailbox at 9a.m. in a house coat.
Case in point? We have basketball legend crying at his son’s state champion win. I personally don’t see the big deal. What’s to marvel at? He’s a father. But the reporters seemed so amazed because
Michael Jordan the Legend
1. do black people cry over their kids when they do awesome deeds like be lead scorer in the state championship?
2. is a basketball legend like Micahel Jordan human enough to shed tears of joy over a mere son of his?
You might think those questions are harsh for me to bring up. But, if you’ve been reading my blog you know that I ask the obvious questions that people are feeling but dare not whisper in public for fear of “seeming” not “P.C.”. I’m pretty sure P.C. led to Nazi Germany coming to power in some shape, form or fashion. Personally, I’d much prefer someone tell me how they honestly feel, than to be confronted with “P.C.” and then stabbed in the back later, wondering where it came from.
Am I personally amazed that Michael Jordan cried at his son’s game? No, it’s non-news. I’m amazed the reporter thought it was amazing, and that the news has spread like wildfire in the white dominated media. It speaks volumes of their state of mind. Here’s the story:
“Jordan’s son wins state championship
Associated Press
PEORIA, Ill. – Michael Jordan celebrated another Chicago basketball championship – his son’s.
Marcus Jordan, son of the Bulls’ six-time champion, scored a game-high 19 points to lead Chicago Whitney Young to a 69-66 victory over Waukegan in the Illinois Class 4A championship Saturday. As Marcus Jordan and his teammates celebrated on the court after the final buzzer, Michael Jordan stood quietly, clapping his hands with tears in his eyes. “Crying?” the NBA great said in response to a reporter’s question. “I’m not crying. Not for me, anyway.” “
Sports betting is the general activity of predicting sports results by making a wager on the outcome of a sporting event. The better pits his wits and skill against time, chance and unfortunately unforseen events. Some might say there is no skill involved in sports betting. But, unlike other forms of gambling, sports betting is in fact all skill. There is less chance involved in the endevor than other forms of gambling, i.e. poker, blackjack, roulette wheel, bacarat. The “ability” to predict future outcomes in sports involves these key subjects: your knowledge of the general history of the sport; your knowledge of the specific history of each teams; your knowledge of the historical probability of location impinging on the outcome; your attention to minutia of each individual athlete, including all of their statistics; your attention to minutia of each team organization and management. This is a daunting list, bar none. But, once mastered, these subjects are the key to your being a successful sports better.
Sports Betters Click Here
Perhaps more so than other forms of gambling, the legality and general acceptance of sports betting varies from nation to nation. In the United States, the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1994 makes it illegal to operate a “betting, gambling or wagering scheme”, except for in the states of Delaware, Nevada, and Oregon. Nevada, however, is the only state currently allowing sports gambling, while in many European nations bookmaking (the profession of accepting sports wagers) is highly regulated but not criminalized. Proponents of legalized sports betting generally regard it as a hobby for sports fans that increases their interest in particular sporting events, thus benefiting the leagues, teams and players they bet on through higher attendances and television audiences.
Sports Betters Click Here
Opponents fear that, over and above the general ramifications of gambling, it threatens the integrity of amateur and professional sport, the history of which includes numerous attempts by sports gamblers to fix matches, although proponents counter that legitimate bookmakers will invariably fight corruption just as fiercely as governing bodies and law enforcement do. Most sports bettors are overall losers as the bookmakers odds are fairly efficient. However, there are professional sports bettors that make a good income betting sports, many of which utilize sports information services.
Sports Betters Click Here
However, I did list chance and unforseen events. These are the curve balls [no pun intended] that throws the monkey wrench into the whole careful planning. Let’s take a look at this in a minute.
Odds for different outcomes in a single bet are presented either in European format (decimal odds), UK format (fractional odds), or American format (moneyline odds). Moneyline odds are favoured in the United States. They are the amount won on a 100 stake when positive and the stake needed to win 100 when negative. Moneyline odds of 100 are an even bet.
Bookmakers generally offer two types of wagers on the winner of a sporting event: a straight-up or money line bet, or a point spread wager. Moneylines and straight-up prices are used to set odds on sports such as
Sports Betters Click Here
association football, baseball and hockey (the scoring nature of which renders point spreads impractical) as well as individual vs. individual matches, like boxing. For these sports, bookmakers in Europe and Asia generally use straight-up odds, which are quoted based on a payout for a single bet unit; for example, a 2-1 favorite would be listed at a price of 1.50, whereas an underdog returning twice the amount wagered would be listed at a price of 3.00. American bookmakers generally use moneylines, which are quoted in terms of the amount required to win $100 on a favorite, or the amount paid for a $100 bet on an underdog. The amount “won” in a bet is the net amount over and above the initial bet. If a person wins $200 on a bet of $100, the bookmaker actually pays the winner $300 (i.e. $200 plus the initial bet of $100).
Sports Betters Click Here
Betting, like any gambling, can involve high stakes. As such it is very tempting to take out “chance” and “unforseen events”.
# In 1919, gamblers bribed several members of the Chicago White Sox to throw the World Series. This became known as the Black Sox Scandal and was recounted in book and movie form as “Eight Men Out”.
# In 1951, District Attorney Frank Hogan indicted college basketball players for point shaving from four New York schools, including CCNY, Manhattan College, New York University and Long Island University.
# In 1978, mobsters connected with the New York Lucchese crime family, among them Henry Hill and Jimmy Burke, organized a point shaving scheme with key members of the Boston College basketball team.
# On August 24, 1989, former baseball player Pete Rose voluntarily accepted a permanent ban from Major League Baseball for allegedly betting on Reds games while managing the team. Rose would later confirm the truth of the allegations in his 2004 autobiography, My Prison Without Bars.
Sports Betters Click Here
Those scandals aside, what can the average joe do to help himself get ahead and be a more successful sports better? Taking out the “chance” and “unforseen events” are the only key things out of the better’s control. But one can reduce those two key things so that they don’t affect you as much. How? Learn from someone better. Like I said in the begining, sports betting is a skill. And, like life, there is always someone bigger, faster, stronger, wiser, smarter than you. You aren’t so conceited as to think on thsi planet of multiple billions of people that that’s not the case? I’m sure you’ve might have seen a movie or read an article where people form corporations just to sports bet. Sure, they have a den of M.I.T. kids that have figured out the ultimate formula in horse racing, boxing, baseball, football and soccer matches. If they can figure out how to count a shoe of 5 decks of cards, how hard would it be to piece together a formula for a horse race? I’m not saying this to scare you. I’m not saying this to make you feel unworthy. I’m saying this to encourage you to ever seek more and more and more information, a better player, a wiser guru. Oh and trust in human nature. Everyone loves praise. Everyong craves fans. If a guy has figured it all out in soccer betting or tennis betting, don’t you think he’d be in tears if you came to him telling what a great guy he is and how smart he is for figuring it out and asking him how he did it? He wouldn’t be able to contain himself.
Political activist, father, son and actor Ron Silver, aged 62, died today March 15th, 2009. He lost his battle with esophageal cancer. He is said to have died peacefully in his sleep with his family around him. He battled the cancer for two years. He is survived by both parents, brothers Mitchell and Keith, son Adam, and daughter Alexandra. He was always a beautiful man, outside and in. He had a head full of hair, a disarmingly big smile and a charm and wit for the best of them.
Ron Silver was a prolific actor, yet a staunch political activist. Not only was he just an activist, but he is reported to have had a breadth and depth of political knowledge that would dwarf the most astute and charismatic politician to date on the world stage now. A terribly fierce independent [a man after my own heart] and consumate debator, yet caring intellectual. He was no stranger to the political pundit world, a most erudite and eloquent ambassador of politics if ever there was one. Campaigned for Michael Dukakis in the 1988 presidential race. He had been, in his words “a lifelong Democrat of the Truman mold”. He broke away from the Democratic Party concerning the War on Terrorism. He spoke at the 2004 Republican National Convention in New York City.
Ron Silver was also a fine and consummate actor. He began his acting career on the New York stage in 1971. He won Broadway’s 1988 Tony Award for Best Actor as Charlie Fox in David Mamet’s “Speed the Plow.”
Some of his film and t.v. work includes:
his portrayal of defense attorney Alan Dershowitz in “Reversal of Fortune”;
Click here to purchase the dvd
1998, starred opposite Kirstie Alley for the last 2 seasons of Veronica’s Closet;
Click here to buy the DVD
his portrayal of Muhammad Ali’s boxing cornerman Angelo Dundee in Ali 2001.
Click here to buy the DVD
from 2001 to 2002 and 2005 to 2006, he portrayed presidential campaign advisor Bruno Gianelli on The West Wing.
Click here to buy the DVD
“By inclination I am more of a politician than I am an actor. I care more about public policy. I care more about pro-choice, the environment, homelessness, and nuclear issues than I do about any part.” – Ron Silver (July 2, 1946 – March 15, 2009) rip
