Don't Trust Economists, Financial "Experts", Bankers, Et Al

American economists, financial "experts", stock market analysts, and bankers (to name a few) have been paid (on average and throughout the years), significantly more than American workers that have commensurate experience and education but are employed in other professions. Yet economists, financial "experts", stock market analysts, and bankers (to name a few) are not held to the same strict standards that, virtually, all American workers are held to.

Indeed, it appears that economists, financial "experts", stock market analysts, and bankers (to name a few) can get away with virtually anything as evidenced by the fact that a substantial portion of the government bailout money, doled out to those financial and banking institutions deemed "too big to fail", wound up in the pockets of "too big to fail" workers in the form of bonuses and raises.

Economists, financial "experts", stock market analysts, and bankers (to name a few), indeed, have a good thing going while many Americans (those that still have a job) live pay-check to pay-check and struggle to make ends meet.

When a structural engineer signs off to a bridge design, he or she knows full well what the consequences will be if the bridge collapses. And when a civil engineer signs off to a dam project, he or she knows that an entire region can be flooded and that many lives can be lost if there's a single flaw in the design. And when a soldier, policeman, nurse, doctor, mechanic, plumber, carpenter, electrician, or any other American working man or woman screws up, they know what the consequences will be.

Not so with economists, financial "experts", stock market analysts, and bankers (to name a few).They are a protected species--exempt from the economic foibles that they've subjected their fellow countrymen to. They are merchants without a country. They are government sanctioned scam artists. They are corporate welfare recipients and the biggest welfare cheats of all. They sit at their desks and hunt and peck at their keyboards and torture the statistics until the statistics confess.

Unemployment Rate High For Millions of First Time Job Seekers

Since April 2009, over a million first-time American job seekers have been looking for a job every month but there are no jobs out there for them.

• Unemployment Rate Climbs In November To 9.8 Percent
• America's Economy A Train Wreck It's Rice And Beans From Here Out
• Don't Trust Economists, Financial "Experts", Bankers, Et Al
• Wall Street Execs Set To Receive $Billions More In Bonuses
• Economists Failed To Predict The Recession But They Say It's Over
• New York Mayor Says Deporting Illegals Will Devastate Economy
• State Of The Union: Unemployment, Economy, Voter Approval Index

According to the latest monthly unemployment figures issued by the Bureau Of Labor Statistics (BLS), there are over 15 million Americans unemployed. However that number is a drastic under count of the actual amount of unemployed Americans. The reason for the under count is because the BLS simply doesn't count a worker that's unemployed as being unemployed if that worker has given up looking for a job or didn't look for a job four weeks prior to the monthly BLS unemployment survey. The actual and current unemployment rate in America is more than double the latest BLS figure of 9.8 percent. The highest unemployment rate at the height of the Great Depression during the 1930s was about 25 percent.

There is an upward trend in the amount of first-time workers entering the American work force every month. Currently there are over 1.2 million new entrants entering the American workforce every month who can't find jobs (see above chart). At the same time, the amount of American workers who voluntarily left their jobs and are actively engaged in looking for new jobs has flat-lined at about the 800,000 level. In other words, there are currently 400,000 more first-time job seekers competing with voluntary job-leavers every month for jobs and the amount of first-time job-seekers is steadily rising.

Economists disagree on what constitutes a "full employment level". But a ball-park figure for "full-employment" is in the 5 percent range. For America to achieve "full employment" within the next six years will require the creation of about a half million new jobs every month if present unemployment trends continue.

Republicans Still Singing The One Note Tax Samba And Droning On

As a one-time recovering Republican and now a small "r" republican/independent my two cents here, for what it's worth, is as follows: the Republicans would have us believe that reducing taxes for businesses is the magic pill that will get the economy back on track and get small businesses to hire workers and therefore reduce the unemployment rate. The facts are that the federal tax rate is at one of its lowest historical rates. Another thing that Republicans would have us believe is that by eliminating the Minimum Wage Laws, more businesses will hire workers. Yes! That's true! Look at all the illegal immigrants that Republicans hire!

The Republicans are for "free trade". And if they had their way, most American jobs would be outsourced to places such as China in the name of "free trade" and the only jobs left here in America would be at Walmart and McDonalds for less than minimum wage because the Republicans would eliminate the minimum wage. Indeed if the Republicans had their way, they'd take all the money in the federal budget that goes to "welfare" for individual Americans and give it to businesses that ship American jobs overseas.

Nothing hypocritical about it. Just because I didn't include the Democrats in my little diatribe doesn't mean that I don't blame them. I blame them for stuff all the time and anyone that's read my writings and comments knows that. But the Republican party continues to play the One Note Tax Samba as if that's the key to economic prosperity. And at this point, that one note is nothing but an annoying drone. Taxes have very little to do with America's current economic plight. If taxes were the key, then what explains all the good American economies during the times throughout America's history when tax rates were much higher? You can only lower tax rates so much before society suffers the negative consequences. And when that occurs, Republicans will start complaining too. And then who's the hypocrite?

We've got two political parties here in America that are equally bereft of new ideas and leadership. It's the same-old same-old whether it be the Republicans or Democrats in power. By the way: The federal income tax rate on America's largest corporations is 35%. But the reality is that many corporations don't even pay taxes because they're effectively subsidized by the American taxpayer. Also corporations are subject to very liberal tax laws such as accelerated depreciation, stock options, tax credits, and offshore tax sheltering to name a few. In other words, the fat cats are going around crying the blues over how much they have to pay in taxes, yet the Corporate Blues Brothers, in many cases, are not even paying taxes because of all the shelters and loop holes in the tax system. Do you think that corporations would put their money where their mouth is if the government lowered their tax rates to say 10 percent and at the same time eliminated all forms of deductions and tax shelters?

I'm often telling Democrats, "progressives", liberals, et al, that most of those in the Tea Party were ticked off at Bush years ago as well as being ticked off at the Blue Blood/Country Club Republicans. The Tea Party sentiments just didn't happen as a result of Obama's election. Those sentiments were long in the making. And I think that the underlying force which drives the legitimate Tea Party members is that they know they've been getting hosed by the Federal Govt. for years and virtually no politician gives a crap. It's business as usual in Washington.

I'm all for a fair and equitable tax system and I'd like nothing better than to see the IRS tax codes reduced to about 50 pages and all of the loop holes for corporations eliminated. But I'd much rather hear Republicans talk about what they're going to do about enforcing the immigration laws and keeping jobs here in America instead of outsourcing them. If and when the American economy picks up, have no doubt that the illegal immigrant floodgates will open wide and the result will be lower wages and American citizens competing with illegal immigrants for low-paying jobs. And the Republicans won't do a damn thing about it, because the majority of Republican politicians are in the back pocket of corporate interests. And as we all know, American corporations like nothing better than an endless supply of cheap labor that keeps on getting cheaper and cheaper. All in the name of "free trade"!

When one takes an in-depth look at the current unemployment statistics, one can only come to the conclusion that millions of American workers will remain unemployed permanently. And those that are lucky enough to find a job will wind up working in jobs that don't pay them anywhere near what they were getting paid prior to the time that this American economic debacle occurred. As a result, their standard of living and quality of life will decline dramatically. That translates into a lot of angry Americans and a consequent complete and total mistrust of government and the business community.

Curiously, the only industries in America that have been maintaining unemployment rates well below the national average are the banking, finance, insurance, and securities industries along with the health, education, and government sector. Every other industry is FUBAR! What hope is there for an economy that merely consists of a bunch of pencil-pushing/white-collar/"financial experts", bankers, insurance workers, health-care workers, "educators", and government workers? The American people should be outraged over the fact that the unemployment rate for most industries is double that of the bunch that caused America's current economic woes.

American Employment Skewed Toward White Collar, Clerical, Health

The American economy in its present form is unsustainable. Indeed it's a false economy--a voodoo economy--based on thin paper and false hopes and promises. Every month, throughout the past three years, American consumers and businesses spent an average of $523 billion more on products and services from overseas than they did on American products and services. And the only job sectors that have maintained unemployment levels well below the national unemployment rate are white-collar, temporary clerical, government, health, and education.

The average unemployment rate since the end of the recession and through Nov. 2010 was 9.7 percent. In the month of November, the unemployment rate was 9.8 percent. During that same period, the average combined unemployment rate for white-collar professions, which include banking, finance, securities, and insurance, was 5.8 percent. Health care workers averaged 5.9 percent and government workers averaged 4.3 percent. The construction industry averaged 19.8 percent, the manufacturing industry 11.3 percent, and the durable goods industry averaged 12.1 percent. During that time, the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) rose slightly and fell slightly. The GDP is a measure of all goods and services produced in the United States whether the goods are produced by American or foreign owned companies.

There are now "officially" over 15 million Americans unemployed. However that amount significantly understates the actual unemployment numbers by millions, because unemployed workers are dropped from the "official" final unemployment count every month. The 15 million that are counted as unemployed have been unemployed for an average of 8 months. That is the highest average duration of unemployment since the Bureau of Labor Statistics began compiling those statistics. Moreover, since 1948 we haven't seen numbers anywhere close to that. We did however see those kind of numbers during the Great Depression which occurred throughout the 1930s and up through WWII.

Since the recession was declared officially over in June 2009, America has experienced an average net job loss of over 86,000 per month. In order to bring the unemployment rate down within the next two years to 5 percent (which is considered by many economists to be a "full employment level"), it will require the creation of at least 450 to 500 thousand new jobs every month beginning in January 2011.

America experienced a major recession in the early 80s during the Reagan Administration. The recession was severe and prolonged because the Federal Reserve put the breaks on the economy in order to reign in the inflationary spiral that occurred during that time. That recession began in July 81 and was declared over in Nov. 82. The unemployment rate at the beginning of the recession was 7.2 percent. It took until June 1984 before the unemployment rate went back down to 7.2 percent. During that time, substantial net job gains only started occurring in March 1983 at the average rate of 400,000 per month and totaled over 6 million.

America's last recession was declared officially over in June 2009. Since June 2009, the average monthly job growth has been minus 86,000. In other words, we haven't experienced any net job gains for the 18 month period beginning June 2009 and ending Nov. 2010. It's true that in some months during that period jobs were added. However it's now 18 months later and we still haven't made up for the 1.5 million jobs that were lost during that time let alone make up for half of the 15 million workers that remain unemployed as well as the 100,000-plus new monthly entrants to the American workforce.

Unless we start seeing positive job growth in the neighborhood of 200,000 to 300,000 consistently and without fail every month, we're not even beginning to get out of the unemployment woods. We've got a serious long term unemployment problem here in America and the Bureau of Labor Statistics understates the problem by millions every month in its "Employment Situation Summary".

Unemployment Rate Climbs in November To 9.8 Percent

According to the latest unemployment figures issued by the Bureau Of Labor Statistics (BLS), the unemployment rate increased to 9.8 percent in November. It was 9.6 percent during the months of August, September, and October.

There are officially 15.1 million Americans unemployed. However the actual unemployment numbers are much higher than that, because the BLS doesn't count those workers who didn’t look for a job within the 4 weeks preceding its unemployment survey as being unemployed. For example, 2.5 million unemployed Americans were not counted in the November survey because they essentially were “discouraged” and gave up looking for a job. If those 2.5 million workers were included in the November unemployment figures, the unemployment rate would be 11.4 percent. This begs the question: If millions of the unemployed are not included in the unemployment figures every month, then how many American workers are actually unemployed? 25 million? 30 million? 40 million? More?

The BLS monthly unemployment figures also don’t include the 9 million workers that are working part time and not by choice, but because of “unfavorable business conditions” and their inability to find full-time work. Those part time workers are counted as being employed. The BLS defines a part time worker as someone that works 1 to 34 hours per week. The average work week for all private (non-farm) employees in November was 34.3 hours. In other words, according to the BLS data, if the average American worker has his or her work-week cut by 18 minutes, then he or she will be considered a part time worker.

In November, there was a net gain of 39,000 jobs. According to labor experts, it takes the creation of about 100,000 new jobs each month just to absorb new entrants into the American workforce. In other words, it will take the creation of 400,000 new American jobs every month for the next two years to absorb new entrants into the work force and bring the unemployment level down to 5 percent which is considered to be a "full employment" level by many economists.

November’s leaders in new job creation were Temporary Help Services (39,500), Education and Health Services (30,000), and Health Care and Social Assistance (23,100). Retail Trade lost 28,100 jobs. The Goods Producing Industry lost 15,000 jobs. The Manufacturing Industry lost 13,000 jobs. And the Construction Industry lost 5,000 jobs. The unemployment rate in Management, Business, Financial, Professional, Health Care, Education, and Government occupations continues to be well below the national unemployment rate, averaging about 4.7 percent which is the rate which many economists would consider as “full employment”.

41.9 percent of those currently counted as unemployed (6.3 million) have been out of work for 6 months or more. Of course that figure doesn’t include the millions of unemployed which the BLS doesn’t count every month because they gave up looking for a job.



You Won't Know Until You're Dead

One of the most frustrating things is watching someone continue down the road to perdition. Frustrating because one may have many of the right answers and the right strategies to help that person get on track and lead a productive life and therefore avoid the hell (if there is a hell) that they'll inevitably be faced with if they continue down that road. But the only way to do that is to get the person that's hell bent on destroying themselves out of their destructive environment. Similar to taking a kid out of the inner city and sending him to boot camp. The old carrot and the stick routine. Rewards and punishment. Everyone is familiar with the drill.

The rewards necessarily have to be more enticing than the behavior, mindset, and life style, that will get the hell-bound punished. It's a slow and seemingly inexorable process. A truly dirty, heart wrenching, and thankless job. We immediately inject ourselves into a situation where a person with a gun is about to commit suicide. In that case, we have no qualms about jumping in and rescuing that person. However the only difference between the person with the gun and the person that continues to walk the road to perdition is the time lapse between life and death. Why are we then not as willing to jump in and rescue the slow suicide victim?

Suicides, like everyone else, have no idea of what they'll face once they're dead. Indeed once they cross the fine line between life and death, there's no turning back. Their decision is final and eternal. Suicide is not a rational act just as continuing to walk the path toward perdition is not a rational act. No one knows what awaits them in death until they're dead. And no one knows what awaits them in hell. We can only take rational decisions based on prior knowledge and experience. We have no prior knowledge or experience of what occurs once we're dead. We have no prior knowledge or experience of hell--only what we think hell might be like.

For many on their death beds, regrets swim around in their heads. Regrets often times to the point where the dying drown in their sorrows. No one knows what awaits them once the inevitable occurs. No one knows whether there's a God, a Devil, a Heaven, or a Hell. No one knows whether there's a Karma, a reincarnation, or a simple peaceful non-existence consequent and subsequent to death. We can speculate and philosophize and engage in wishful thinking all that we want when it comes to this life and the next life if there is in fact a next life. But all of that amounts to nothing but intellectual gymnastics. We know absolutely nothing about death or life after death until we've experienced it. Anyone that claims to know is full of crap. Once we experience death, it's too late to avoid death. It's quite possible that we really don't know anything at all until we're dead.

A Narrow American Perspective

We grew up during the late 50s and 60s in a comfortable middle/middle-class American environment. We lived in relatively small to medium-sized homes, in a relatively small and insular neighborhood, but with the benefit of a panoramic view of the Manhattan skyline, no less, and a 23 acre park, just blocks away, with rolling hills situated between the East River and the Long Island Sound. Two cars, boats, many good friends, church, choir, piano lessons, Sunday School, Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, and so on and so forth were the norm.

In virtually all respects, we never went without, as it were. In other words, we grew up in a very stable, comfortable, and well-fed environment and in a very average American way. As a result, we're secure today, to the point of arrogance in some people's minds, in our knowledge of what we are, who we are, where we came from, and where we've been. There's no doubt that we're the lucky ones and there's no doubt that we'd like nothing better than for our children and grandchildren to be even luckier than we are.

Other than in a feel good sense, what someone does for a living, or how much money someone makes or has, or how much "formal" education someone has, or what kind of neighborhood they live in, or how much they pay for their kid's college, is meaningless. Just like there's always and necessarily an "opportunity cost" in any economic endeavor, there's necessarily an opportunity cost associated with any road or path we choose to take in this life. Life always reaches a point of balance and equilibrium for the average American. What goes around comes around.

The reality is that for all of us, there's no escaping the hard times just as there's no escaping the good times. Indeed when the foibles start pinching and slapping at our faces and ultimately the sorrows follow and come in battalions, we're all on equal footing. Rich and poor alike, and everyone else in between, cry that life isn't fair and ask themselves what they've done to deserve all their pain and suffering. Life is what it is! We need to make the best of it! But in order to make the best of our lives, we need to take chances at times, live on the edge at times, and think outside the box. If we fail we fail! But at least we've tried.

A Race To Nowhere

One of my favorite movies is the Dead Poets Society. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097165/ There's always been pressure put on kids to get into "the college of their choice". I, myself, attended an elite private high school the first year it opened. That lasted about 6 months (LOL and thank God it did) because I played hooky one day (I was literally on a boat) and got expelled and wound up in a public high school. I was accused of being the "ring leader" and the idiot administrators took the other kid's word over mine because the other kid's parents were doctors and lawyers and such, Mommas don't let your babies grow up to be cowboys! LOL!

I agree that kids nowadays have more pressure put on them when it comes to scholastic achievement, etc, however the pressure has always been there to an extent. It's just that nowadays, more kids are attending colleges and universities, therefore there's more competition. Talk to many "successful" first and second-generation Americans, for instance, that are in their 50s and 60s and they'll tell you that they were pushed to over-achieve. As I've said: There's an "opportunity cost" for every road or path we head down. There's an opportunity cost for every kid that grows up in an upper middle class neighborhood just as there is for a kid that grows up in a poor neighborhood. The parents can only guide, but in the end, the kid has to make up his or her own mind about what direction they'll head.

Have you read Erich Fromm's, The Sane Society? http://www.amazon.com/Sane-Society-Erich-Fromm/dp/0805014020#reader_0805014020 I honestly believe that there are many more mentally ill "successes" out there than we're led to believe. The problem with American society is that nut cases are often given a pass because they're "successful" and have a lot of dough. I'd rather associate with ignorant crackers in many cases, because at least they're honest and don't put on airs.

It's definitely "a race to nowhere" http://www.racetonowhere.com/nowadays for many kids that want to be accepted to elite American universities. Some kids can handle it and some kids can't. But this is what American society has become: Namely overly competitive to the point where people will sacrifice everything (including their kid's peace of mind and well-being) in order to "get ahead" and make the big bucks. I think it's pathetic and when I see pompous "successes", full of hubris walking around strutting their stuff with their chest out, like their shit doesn't stink, I cringe because they're more often than not the most shallow, callous, and ignorant individuals out there. And I'm not alone in my sentiments. Indeed many here in America and throughout the rest of the world view Americans as I've described them in the above.

America Has Become The Domain Of White Trash With Disposable Income

HA! I have the utmost respect for people's property rights and I make it a point to check and double check in order to make sure I'm within my bounds. Others need to do the same.

Living in Florida, these past 12 years, has taught me many lessons about America and Americans. One lesson is that there are an awful lot of arrogant pricks out there that drive around in fancy spanking clean vehicles and actually believe that their shit doesn't stink. And virtually all of them are white and many of them come from the Central Mid-West and Northern Mid-West.

Another lesson that I've learned is that some of the most ignorant Americans (ignorant in the literal sense of the word) are those that have more money than the average American. I coined a term for those types long ago: "White Trash With Disposable Income". LOL!

It amazes me to no end that all too many Americans, that should know better, equate one's financial worth with one's mental and emotional capacity. In my neighborhood, for example, many of my neighbors drive around in 50 and 60 thousand dollar vehicles, yet they are so uneducated and truly ignorant that it's impossible to hold any sort of intelligent conversation with them. This is what America has become: namely the domain of white trash with disposable income.

HA! Have no doubt that I've been railing against the blatant materialism and commercialism that exists here in America for decades. I sound like a pinko . . . don' t I? LOL! I didn't come to my opinions overnight. There was a time, when .most stores were closed on holidays such as Thanksgiving. Now it seems like every store is open and it's business as usual. I know that many claim that the business of America is business. But nowadays, the merchant has no country so it seems. I am struck but the amount of truly ignorant Americans that have amassed a small financial fortune throughout the years and that have gone out and purchased crap that winds up on the junk pile only a couple of years down the road. I have no doubt that Americans will literally buy shit on a stick if the shit and the stick are marketed properly.

I have never before seen, in my 56 years, the amount of self-absorbed/narcissistic ignoramuses with disposable income which I now see. It is truly frightening! America has turned into a society where millions upon millions are fixated on and obsessed with gadgets of all sorts which run the gamut of cell phones to SUVs. And what's worse is that never before has the American population ingested the amount of mind-altering prescription drugs that they're now ingesting. Americans have always been fascinated with various gadgets but we're at the point of critical mass. We are indeed saturated with crap that winds up being obsolete or on the junk heap within a years time.



A Conspiracy Theory?

Yes! Many people imagine conspiracies! And the funny thing is that there are conspiracies and always have been. I find it interesting that the long-time director of the FBI (J Edgar Hoover) denied the existence of organized crime for decades (and Americans believed him) while at the same time he was hanging out with Frank Costello and getting tips from Costello on the horse races and eating breakfast with him up in the Waldorf Towers. And then there's the good old Federal Reserve that literally fabricates recessions and controls the nation's money supply and interest rates, yet the Fed is accountable to no one and has been doing whatever it feels like doing since about 1913 and keeps everything a secret.

Not so funny is some of the stuff that we only now know about and which occurred decades ago. Can you imagine all the stuff that's going on currently that we don't know about? The current economic situation is a case in point: In that case, a small and select group of lawmakers from both sides of the political isle got together a few years back and essentially gave the green light to financial institutions to devise all sorts of exotic mortgage-backed security schemes that those in the know knew would cause the real estate market to implode and send housing prices plunging. Yet the financial institutions that were in on the "conspiracy" made money on the scheme because they actually hedged their bets against the housing market to the tune of billions of dollars and then got "bailed out" no less by the American taxpayer.

When people such as myself allude to "conspiracies" this is the type of stuff that we're referring to. And there is no doubt that what occurred in the above case was in fact a conspiracy on the part of a select and very elite group of individuals. People may think that if the average American suffers financially and economically, then the financial and banking industries suffer commensurately. But that's not the case for a number of reasons. One reason being that the financial and banking industries have billions invested in overseas funds. Another reason is that the outstanding debt that the banks and finance markets hold on the part of large debtors who are still solvent continues to be paid back at interest rates which are much higher than today's market rates.

Progressive Hate Speech and why PC Kills

There's a pandemic that's spread throughout the Western World and it's called political correctness--PC for short. The PC pandemic wasn't officially recognized and diagnosed until the late 80s in spite of the fact that it began festering in the 60s and had its roots in the 50s.

PC is an extremely pernicious virus, in that it attacks the human mind, soul. and nervous system, as opposed to the physical body. In other words, otherwise normal, healthy-looking, and prima facie intelligent people have succumbed to the PC virus.

Those that are afflicted with the PC virus will exhibit the following symptoms: A complete and total failure to think for themselves; a complete and total failure to distinguish between up and down, backwards and forwards, and black and white; an inability to add two and two and come up with four; a fanatical attachment to a particular political and social ideology along with a blind/faith-based/dogmatic and fanatical attachment and defense of any politician and/or public figure that espouses that ideology; an inability to distinguish between shit and shine; and above all, an inability to realize that they are, in essence, committing a slow and collective suicide.

Unfortunately for the rest of us that are immune to the PC virus (due to the grace of God or some benevolent universal force), we have to suffer these PC mental and emotional basket cases because we've allowed them to seize the reins of political power to an extent, here in the U.S., Canada, and throughout much of the Western World.

American Politicians and Ideologues Have Gotten Away With Manipulating and Dividing America For Way Too Long

Since 1945 and the reelection of FDR, for the third time, to the presidency, the Democrats have been in control of the U.S. House of Representatives almost 4 times longer (3.7 times to be exact) than have the Republicans. Since 1945, the Democrats have also been in control of the U.S. Senate twice as long (2.3 times longer) than have the Republicans. After President Obama finishes his term of office in 2012, the Republicans will have controlled the White House for only one term (4 years) longer than have the Democrats.

Since 1945, the Democratic Party has simultaneously controlled the White House, the House, and the Senate, for a total of 22 years, which is five and a half times longer than the Republicans have. Since 1945, there was only one Republican President (George W. Bush, 2003 to 2006) whose party was the majority party in the House and Senate.

Since 1945, three major wars erupted, or were already under way, when Democratic presidents were in office: WWII, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War. By the way. WW I also occurred under a Democratic president and the Civil War, which was America's bloodiest war, was fought as a result of the Democratic Party's secession from the U.S. and its insistence that slavery remain legal throughout the southern U.S. Two wars since 1945 erupted under Republican presidents: The Gulf War in 1991 and the Gulf War in 2003. In both of the Gulf Wars, there were no where near the amount of American casualties as there were as a result of the wars that began under Democratic administrations.

Prior to 1945, and beginning officially in August 1929, the Great Depression began under a Republican president, Herbert Hoover, and a Republican controlled House and Senate. The Great Depression lasted 11 years and 7 months. It ended, officially, in March 1942 during the height of WWII. For nine years during the Great Depression (1933-1942) FDR together with the Democrat controlled House and Senate presided over the worst economic downturn in American history. FDR and the Democrats tried everything that they could during the nine years that they were in control of the government to pull America from the depths of the Great depression to no avail. The only thing that pulled America out of the depression was WWII. Indeed, it can be said that WWII and FDR's consequent policies sowed the seeds and paved the way for the American Military Industrial Complex.

The United States has experienced 12 recessions since 1945. The current recession, which began under George W. Bush in December 2007 and under a Democrat controlled House and Senate, is termed by some as the Great Recession. Indeed, it has been going on for 2 years and 8 months. With the exception of the Great Depression, it is the longest economic downturn in U.S. history.

Forgetting about the Great Depression, which a Democratic President, House, and Senate presided over for nine years, nine of the 12 U.S. recessions since 1945 began under a Republican President. Those nine recessions, if added up, lasted 101 months. Under Democratic Presidents since 1945 (and this includes the 22 months of the current recession under Obama) the total recession duration is 47 months. In other words, it would be accurate to state that since 1945, recessions have lasted 2.15 times longer under Republican Presidents than under Democratic Presidents. It would also be accurate to state that, with the exception of the March-November 2001 recession, the Democrats were in control of the House for 93 out of the 101 months of recessions that Republican Presidents presided over. It would also be accurate to state that, out of the 101 months of recessions that a Republican President presided over, the Democrats controlled both the House and Senate for 67 of those months.

In theory and in simple and very general terms, the U.S. Government consists of three separate but equal branches: The executive branch, the legislative branch, and the judicial branch. The legislative branch writes the laws and passes the laws. The judicial branch interprets the laws and determines whether they conform to the Constitution. The executive branch formulates policy, sees that the laws are enforced, and vetoes legislation that Congress has passed if not in agreement with the legislation.

There are many more political facts that can be stated here, but for the sake of brevity, I only touched upon a few that most Americans don't seem to be aware of in terms of their government. The point of this piece, for those of you that don't get it and don't want to get it, because your head is full of PC and/or ideological and partisan crap and conditioning, is simply this: You need to take off your ideological blinders, take a long step back, take a deep breath, purge your long-ingrained biases and prejudices, and take a good, long, thoughtful look, at the big American political picture. You also need to brush up on your American history. Given all of the above historical facts in regard to what the Democrats and Republicans have been up to, both together and separately, since the end of WWII, it is completely irrational and self-destructive for any American to put their faith in one political party over the other. 

And faith--blind faith at that and no different from religious zealotry and fanaticism----is all that dyed-in-the-wool political ideologues, whether they be Democrats or Republicans, are basing their political choices and votes upon. There is absolutely no empirical, factual, and statistical evidence to support the assertion that one of the two major American political parties, left to its own devices, has benefited the American people as a whole, any more or any less than the other major political party. Certainly one can make the argument that the Democrats and the Republicans both benefit certain special interest groups or particular socio-economic segments and subgroups of the American population. But a narrow special-interest benefit bestowed upon a narrow segment and sub-group of the American population by one of the two major American political parties is a far cry from benefiting American society as a whole.

The political and social ideologues will forever remain ideologues for many reasons. One reason is that many--if not most--ideologues suffer from various forms of mental illness and emotional distress. Some of them simply engage in transference (Transference is a phenomenon in psychoanalysis characterized by unconscious redirection of feelings from one person to another) and projection (Psychological projection or projection bias (including Freudian Projection) is the unconscious act of denial of a person's own attributes, thoughts, and emotions, which are then ascribed to the outside world, such as to the weather, the government, a tool, or to other people).

If America does, in fact, need saving, then the only ones that can save it are the American people themselves. And the only way that they can begin saving America is to first take off their ideological blinders and stop picking and choosing political leaders out of the narrow ideological ranks as if they were picking out a tube of toothpaste off a supermarket shelf. Indeed many more American voters than not need to undertake a little political and historical research, start thinking for themselves, and look at the big picture and what the future holds instead of focusing on which politician or political party makes them feel good for the moment and tells them what they want to hear. But above all, stop believing in and putting your faith in false political prophets and saviors and don't listen to the propaganda. American politicians have gotten away with manipulating and dividing the American people for way too long . . . .

Republican Selective Memory

I've mentioned before that I'm a registered Republican but in essence a small "r" republican. What I mean by small "r" republican is that I retain faith in the US Constitution and the wisdom (and intellect) of America's founding fathers. You know . . . guys like Madison, Hamilton, Franklin, Jefferson, et al. For quite a few years now, I've pretty much had it with both the Republican and Democrat parties. And at this point, I consider myself to be a political independent. I would love to vote for a serious third-party candidate, however the two controlling political parties have such a financial hold (via lobbyists, etc.) on our political system that a viable third-party candidate (that has a chance of winning) doesn't seem to be on the horizon.
I am sick and tired of the political idealogue's "my party is better than your party" nonsense. Blind adherence to political ideaology and dogma is not helpful to the nation. Indeed, the economic mess that America is now mired in is a result of actions (or inactions) on the part of both Republicans and Democrats. With that said, however, George Bush was in the White House for eight years and for you dyed-in-the-wool Republicans, out there, to beat up on President Obama's policies at this very early stage in his presidency is ridiculous. When the Republican Party alienates guys like me, then the party has a major problem. It's going to take an awful lot of work for the Republican party to recover from the disaster that it inflicted upon itself and the nation.

In theory, I prefer the "free market system" and capitalism over socialism. But the reality is that the "free-market" capitalists apparently can't be trusted to do the right thing. Does anyone doubt that assertion in light of recent events? Yes! I know that the government can't be trusted to do the right thing either! So where does that leave the average American? Mr. and Mrs. America: you need to turn off American idol and the like, get up off your collective butt, and start educating yourselves in regard to the state of your nation. Things are not going to get any better until you start taking an active role in your government and in your community. . . . .

"IT'S A GOOD JOB TO LOSE!"

YES! It's a good job to lose! Seems like I've heard that statement before . . . . The quote is from John Irving's book, Until I Find You. I Googled the quote, and what I came up with was a bunch of stuff about people losing their jobs and I've yet to find a mention of the quote within the context of Irving's book. You'd think that a quote from a best-selling author, that sold millions of books no less, would pop up on the first page of a Google search. That it didn't, is indeed a sign of the times and an ominous portent. The more that I read and hear about what the big-wigs in the banking and financial industries have done (or not done) with the American taxpayer's "bail-out" money, the angrier I get. The arrogance on the part of American CEOs and corporations, in general, is an outrage! And I'm now starting to apply that old 60s term, PIGS, in reference to not only the CEOs, but to the entire hierarchy of the American corporate world.
The merchant has no country . . . and if the present-day American corporate hierarchy continues acting like PIGS they will, in fact, have no country and no one to sell their shit-on-a-stick to . . . .

Selling Shit-On-A-Stick (or Try My Combo Barbecue Special)

The following thoughts are in response to a sociopath that identifies himself as Ed S. His last name is Strnad, however I more appropriately address him as STUNAD: 'We all swallow "shit" in one form or the other--literally and figuratively. Indeed, in order to survive we, as humans, have no choice but to. I've been of the opinion for many years that one can get rich by selling excrement--if the proper marketing and advertising techniques are applied and if the product's stench is neutralized. In other words, a "good" businessman/salesman can sell "shit-on-a-stick" and have people begging for more.

The selling "shit" concept first occurred to me back in the eighties during a conversation that I had with a Russian immigrant by the name of "Steve". Steve and I were standing in the main kitchen of the Waldorf Astoria and Steve was telling me about his restaurant management experience. He told me a number of stories about his experiences and one of his stories was this: Steve managed a mid-sized restaurant in Brooklyn. Late one Saturday night, after the restaurant had closed, his walk-in-meat-box (the large refrigerator where a restaurant's meat is stored) malfunctioned. His restaurant was closed on Sunday. On Monday, Steve opened the door to the meat-box, and as soon as he opened the door the stench from the rotten meat overwhelmed him. There was about two-thousand dollars worth of meat (steaks, pork, chicken, hamburgers, etc.) in the box. Steve didn't throw out the meat though . . . he just did what most enterprising American businessmen do if they can get away with it--he exercised creative mangement skills in order to turn his losses into profits. Steve, simply, held his nose, and got his kitchen crew to throw all the spoiled meat into a large crock-pot along with ten gallons of cheap barbeque sauce. Steve left the spoiled meat to marinate in the barbeque sauce overnight and the next day, he "marketed" the spoiled meat as a "Combo Barbecue Special". And Steve's customers couldn't get enough of "the special" . . . imagine that!

I'm so fascinated by the power of marketing and advertising and what it takes to be a successful businessman that I wrote a novella (unpublished . . . who the hell would publish my shit) entitled "A Little Brown Commodity And The American Dream".'



I pose the following question to you, America, in reference to the above comment: were Steve's "creative management skills"--skills that resulted in his turning "losses" into "profits"--a bad thing or a good thing in economic and social terms?

The above is by no means a trick question . . . but before you attempt to answer the question, I'll offer you a few hypothetical "small-business scenarios" that Steve may have, in fact, been confronted with: Let's suppose, for the sake of the scenario, that Steve's uncle owned the restaurant that Steve managed. And that Steve's uncle had full faith and confidence in Steve's loyalty and Steve's ability to make a good buck. Let's suppose, further, that Steve's uncle was getting on in years and he was not up to spending the remainder of his days in Brooklyn running a restaurant. Steve's uncle came to the conclusion that it was financially feasible (and financially safe and secure) to retire to Florida and, therefore, hand over full control of his restaurant to his trusted nephew. Steve's uncle was content with playing golf, putzing around the house, and, in general, soaking up the Florida sunshine. He retained trust in his nephew's loyalty and abilities, because he received frequent and cheerful business updates, from his nephew, and on the first of every month his nephew sent him a check for a few thousand dollars along with fifteen-hundred in cash.


Let's also suppose that Steve's "book-keeping" methods were no different from the "book-keeping" methods of many small businessmen--and that Steve kept three sets of accounting "books": One "book" that would pass the scrutinity of his uncle (and the authorities if the need should arise); one "book" that he kept locked up in a safe at his home; and one unwritten "book" that he retained solely in his heart and mind. Let's further suppose that the latter book was the only true "book"--in that it is was the only "book" that contained accurate facts and figures. And let's further suppose that Steve purchased seventy-five-percent of his "meat" on a strictly cash basis from a couple of guys that had the talent and peculiar ability to supply him with meat at a cost, substantially, below market prices . . . . It was a sweet and compelling deal for Steve; for his substantially below-market-meat-costs enabled him to mark-up the price of seventy-five-percent of his hamburger patties, steaks, chicken, and pork as much as two-thousand-percent; and even after the obligatory kick-backs and "palm-grease" Steve was still able to maintain a nice two-hundred-to three-hundred-percent skim "off the top" of his trusting uncle's business.

But there was a potentially bitter component to Steve's sweet deal; and it was this: in order for Steve to maintain the "sweet deal", and the uninterrupted flow of meat at a cost "substantially below market prices", he entered into a tacit agreement with his meat suppliers. The tacit agreement was that the "meat" transactions never occurred and that Steve would continue to purchase, in perpetuity, the majority of his meat from a "couple of guys". Steve knew full-well the downside of the "tacit agreement" . . . but in Steve's opinion, the rewards of a two-thousand-percent mark-up were worth the risks.

The "tacit" agreement precluded Steve from writing off the meat losses. i.e., he couldn't risk claiming a loss on inventory that was obtained via a transaction that "never occurred". Steve was therefore on the hook for two-thousand bucks--but not for long. Steve was a sharp businessman; and like all sharp businessmen, he came up with a plan to recoup his losses and he passed off those losses to his customers without even raising his prices. A "Combo Barbecue Special" . . . what a concept!

Do The Presidential Polls Really Reflect The Outcome?

Throughout the years, I've often paid attention to the various pre-election poll results--i.e., the compilation of statistically filtered and "weighted" answers, to questions such as, "Which presidential candidate would you vote for if the presidential election were held today?" I am, by no means, an expert in political polling--however, I'm familiar with the ingredients that make up a poll and I have somewhat of a background in statistics along with a hobbyist's interest and knowledge of American politics and history. In other words, I'm no one to question the professional pollsters--I'm merely an American citizen that makes a sincere effort to ascertain the political facts. On the basis of those facts I go into the voting booth and pull the lever (or touch the screen or punch the card) and hope that I made the right decision. What disturbs me , however, is that my vote is more often than not based on which candidate I believe will have less of a detrimental impact on the future of our nation. In other words, my vote is cast for the lesser of two evils. Obama will, therefore, be America's first minority president. I have many concerns about both presidential candidates and the effect that their leadership( or lack thereof) will have upon the future of the nation. One of my concerns is one-party rule. In other words, if Obama wins the election, the future of the country is, virtually, in the hands of the Democrat party. I'd be just as concerned if the Republican party held the presidency and majorities in the house and senate.

One of my hopes is that the next president of the U.S. takes heed of the many blunders (some of those blunders continue to be deadly) that have occurred during the past and present administration's watch--especially in regard to present and future "wars". Another of my hopes is that members of the house and senate make a sincere effort to put party politics aside and start thinking in terms of what's best for America, instead of focusing on getting re-elected. Indeed, members of the U.S. congress have a lower "approval rating" than does President George Bush. To say that my "hopes" are not realistic would be an understatement . . . however, I'm entitled to my fantasies.

Blogs Are A Magnet For The Anonymous

One thing about blogs--they're a magnet for the anonymous. Until recently, I didn't give the "anonymous" aspect to blogs much thought. But after I started posting a number of comments on another blog I noticed that most of the comments to my comments were from "anonymous" commentors.The comments were typically negative, devoid of facts, and full of the usual name calling, e.g., you're a fucking asshole, you're a right-wing nut, you're stupid, etc.. Other than an occasional initial at the end of the comments the commentors didn't leave a trace as to their identities. Why would anyone take the time to put his or her thoughts in writing only to post those thoughts in a totally anonymous manner? The obvious reason is that one who writes under the cover of "anonymous" is afraid to let on to others his or her true thoughts about certain people and certain issues. It's the old "What will the neighbors think?" routine. The "anonymous" are insecure and usually dishonest creatures with fragile egos that dread even the slightest ridicule and criticism--and they are, indeed, afraid of their own shadows.

GRITS and CRACKERS

How Are Yuh?
Fine girl . . . I see you ain't been slackin' .
Aint it the truth . . . Bud please.
Sup?
Fuckin' Hollywood pullin' his stucco shit . . . .
Thought Hollywood and Drywall Mike were up in the Handle?
Yeah, but Hollywood starts talkin' shit and Mike kicked his ass . . . he's down for awhile.
Fuckin' Mike . . . pullin' New York shit on Tim.
It's that Rory guy's fault.
Rory? Rory's a brother . . . .
Rory's bud but he chased down Mike with a cue stick . . . broke the stick! Drywall ain't been the same since!
Who said that?
Jimbo and Big Bubba.
I was there that night Rory broke the stick. . . didn't go down the way you think.
What do yu mean?
Rory broke the stick to get Drywall's attention. Stopped Mike from killin' some sick drugged-out fuck and goin' to jail . . . .
I didn't know . . . .
Now yu know girl . . . Bud please.

Which Presidential Candidate Should I Vote For?

Which presidential candidate should I vote for in the 2008 election? A simple question that requires more than simple thought. Historical precedent dictates (with a few exceptions) that my choice is limited to only two presidential candidates. My choice is further limited by the fact that one candidate is a Democrat and the other candidate is a Republican. And still further limited in that there is by no means enough of a "political record" on the part of the Democrat candidate in which to make an "informed" voting decision. The same is true for the Republican vice presidential candidate that, due to the Republican presidential candidate's age, could wind up (if elected) assuming the role of the presidency at any time.

Then there's the question of political philosophy. Should I vote for a so-called Liberal (Obama) or should I vote for a so-called Conservative (McCain)? There are many Americans that believe, in their heart of hearts, that Obama is an out-and-out socialist (or even a communist) and that Obama has sympathetic ties to Muslim terrorists. Moreover, those same Americans believe that Obama would like nothing better than to see America, as they know it, destroyed. On the other hand, there are many Americans that believe, in their heart of hearts, that McCain is an out-and-out fascist and war-monger that will not hesitate to send Americans off to their graves in defense of corporate/capitalist interests. So, before I can honestly answer the question, "Should I vote for a so-called-Liberal or should I vote for a so-called Conservative?", I need to know exactly what a "Liberal" is and what a "Conservative" is. And my "need to know" goes way beyond looking up simple word definitions in a dictionary or political science textbook. Indeed, "my need to know" requires a careful examination of what the candidates have done rather than what they have said. That minority of American voters, that have held their noses and have undertaken the effort to scratch through the "politics-as-usual" crap know what John McCain has "done" and know what Joe Biden has "done". McCain and Biden have been U.S. senators for many years and, therefore, members of the Washington elite. Consequently, their voting records, statements in support of their voting records, and virtually anything else connected to their "politics" is easily accessible to any American that can read a newspaper or go on-line.

Prior to 1980, I was not affiliated with any political party. In 1976, I voted for Jimmy ('I'll never lie to you.') Carter. Like many American voters, at the time, I was sick of Watergate and I wanted to see a "fresh" face in the White House. Carter won the election and American voters thought that they got a "fresh face" in the White House, along with what appeared to be an honest and decent man. But Jimmy Carter's "fresh face" was about the only "fresh face" in the White House, for he was immediately surrounded with Washington Insiders and international elitists dictating policy to him. Indeed, Jimmy Carter's face turned from "fresh" to "stale" within a relatively short amount of time. In 1979 I had had enough of Jimmy Carter. Consequently, I registered as a Republican. I, subsequently, voted in the 1980 primaries and cast my vote for Ronald ('Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall') Reagan in the general election. Much like Jimmy Carter, I and many other American voters, perceived Ronald Reagan to be an "honest and decent" man with a "fresh face". Reagan won the election and as soon as he entered the White House he was surrounded by Washington Insiders and international elitists (one of them being his two-term VP) dictating policy to him. After Reagan served two terms, George ('Read my lips; no new taxes') Bush, Reagan's two-term VP and father of our current president, was elected president. George Bush had an impressive (within elitist circles) resume: a fighter pilot in WWII; an Ivy League education (Yale); Texas oilman; a Texas congessman; an American ambassador to the UN; an American ambassador to China; head of the CIA, the chairman of the Republican National Committee. The difference between George Bush and both Carter and Reagan is that George Bush was, from day one, a Washington insider and international elitist. Therefore, no one had to dictate policy to him. George Bush ran again only to be defeated by another "fresh face"-- an obscure governor from the state of Arkansas by the name of Bill ('I did not have sex with that woman'/I didn't inhale.') Clinton. Bill Clinton, the first baby-boomer to become president, served two very colorful terms as president. In some circles, he was even described as "the first black president". Clinton was loved by many Americans, but he was equally hated by many Americans. Indeed, many Americans viewed him as "white trash" and, partly, as a result, he was the second US president to be impeached by the US congress. Had Clinton not lied about having sex in the White House he might not have been impeached. And the interesting thing about Clinton's White House sexcapades (lest we forget our history) is that he was more discreet about his "affairs" than was JFK or LBJ (who even bragged about his sexcapades). As for our current president, George Bush (I call him El Presidente Jorge Bush) . . . I can say quite a bit. But for now I'll be kind and just say that George had a tough go at it and, as a result, the American people now have a very low opinion of him. I voted for George the first time around . . . but not the second time around. But please don't take this to mean that I voted for John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election . . . for I sat out the 2004 election for a number of reasons. One reason being that getting up off my duff, driving to the polls, and actually voting for either Bush or Kerry would have been an irrational and unconscionable act on my part. As you can see, I'm not a partisan.

When it comes down to prior political experience determining the success or non-success of a president, I'll say this: Lincoln served eight years in the Illinois legislature and one term as U.S. congressman. Woodrow Wilson was president of Princeton University and governor of New Jersey. FDR was a state senator for a brief period, assistant navy secretary, and New York governor. Harry Truman was a local administrator, a U.S. senator, and VP for less than three months before assuming the role of president. Dwight Eisenhower was a general. JFK served six years as a U.S. congressman and seven years as a U.S. senator. LBJ served twelve years as a U.S. congressman and twelve years in the U.S. senate and as VP under JFK. Nixon was VP for two terms and prior to that he was a U.S. congressman and senator. Gerald Ford served twenty-four years in the congress and was house minority leader. Jimmy Carter served two terms in the Georgia senate and one term as governor. Ronald Reagan, a former Democrat turned Republican, served two terms as governor of California. George Bush (Reagan's VP) served three years as a U.S. congressman and two terms as VP. Bill Clinton served as attorney general for the state of Arkansas and served as governor for eight years. Our current president, George Bush, was governor of Texas.

As to presidential appointments of judges to the various U.S. courts, history supports the following: All of the above presidents have appointed a number of U.S. judges that, on many occasions, expressed contemporaneous written opinions contrary to the political philosophy and actions of the president that appointed them. That's one of the advantages to being a U.S. judge as opposed to a politician per se: i.e., once a judge is appointed, he or she has leeway when it comes to expressing his or her true opinion. I venture to say that if presidents, senators, and congressman, expressed their "true opinion" to the American public, America would be on the verge of a civil war.

It would benefit the country greatly (and perhaps the rest of the world, too) if Americans were to crack open their history books and their "civics" books--and any other book, for that matter--prior to going to the polls and casting their votes for the next president of the United States. At this point, Americans need to take a long and hard look at themselves, in the mirror, in order to determine who and what they are, what they've become, and where they're headed. To not do so means that American's are content with engaging in a presidential "crap-shoot" every four years.

A Brown Commodity and the American Dream

During the trial, the media reported that Jaunita showed "no remorse" and at times there appeared to be "joy" on her angelic face and in her dark, pretty eyes.

Excerpts from Jaunita's statement to the jury:

I have suffered the process of jury selection, for throughout that process I noticed that virtually all of the potential jurors comprised the largest concentration of vacuous stares and ignorance that I have ever witnessed. The very few that exhibited anything more than a bundle of emotions were promptly dismissed and are no where to be seen in this courtroom.

The only difference between the prosecutor and the advertisements on the billboards that I saw, while dangling above Park Avenue, is that the prosecutor is less succint and colorful in his message. The prosecution is a walking, talking, self-promoting ad-man for the American justice system. And like all ad-men he relies upon deceptions and outright lies to sell his product.

Your American Dream shines on the surface and shimmers around its edges. And cast against the sullen backdrop of the world, your dream forms the perfect incongruity. But beneath its shining surface, your American Dream is stark in its darkness. Your dance to The Crap and Crackle Hop has deafened you to the torment of your conscience and the pleading of your soul. You Americans are very good at attaching colorful labels to things that you don't understand . . . all for the sake of convenience. But to understand requires much effort and careful thought. Understand this: I am not a little brown commodity.

No, I do not regret ripping Rich Bill's eyeball out of his head anymore than I regret my condemnation of the prosecutor, you the jurors, and your American Dream. You're so-called dream is an illusion brought about through the clever promotion and deception of the dream keepers. I now know that to achieve the American Dream requires much less honest sweat from the brow than it requires the abandonment of all self-doubt and the consequent leap over the threshold into the world of anti-doubt where one forever remains a slave to delusion and a procreator of deception.

You, members of the jury, have the American smirk of certitude all over your faces. And certitude is the most abject form of ignorance. And in your eyes is the look of pigs troughing at the heart of humanity. Solitude and certitude can never coexist . . . .

Juanita's ode to the jurors:

Journey down from your high top silly American race;

and look in your mirror at the lie on your face.

Citizens scaling mountains with gunny sacks

returning to their mirrors in their run-down shacks?

Those that break no commandments earn your scorn and hate

and those that break all commandments, live a prospered fate.

The angel that broke one commandment is in a filthy cell;

joyful and laughing; for a dirty white boy fell.

You stumble and bumble through life's cold uncertain mist . . .

Your solitude and certitude can never coexist

Rich Bill, a man of certitude (and a dirty white boy, too)

Rich Bill was so secure in the rectitude and certitude of his "mantra", and the philosophy contained therein, that he would take advantage of any occasion to espouse its tenets and demonstrate his contempt for non-adherents by pointing out to non-adherents what fatalistic fools they be. On one such occasion, while Rich Bill was in a lower-Manhattan "working-man's" bar with his corporate staff consisting of twenty-something MBA's, he overheard the man, sitting next to him at the bar, talking nonsense with a friend, about the-luck-of-the-draw and when your number's up, it's up! The man, sitting next to Rich Bill, was in his mid-to-later- fifties, and the right side of his face was deeply scarred and it appeared to have suffered severe burns, and part of his skull was "caved in". Rich Bill laughed and said to himself, "this pathetic loser looks like hell". Rich Bill turned to the twenty-something MBA, sitting next to him, put his hand on her thigh, his mouth up to her ear, and said, "listen to this fatalistic loser sitting next to me . . . he's a prime example of what can happen to you if you allow externalities to invade the equation of your existence". Rich Bill turned toward the man that looked like hell and shouted, "you make me sick!" The friend of the man that looked like hell immediately got up and walked over to rich Bill. "What did you say?" Rich Bill turned his head, smiled at his MBAs, gave them a wink and said, "Watch this!" He turned back toward the man and said, "I said that your friend is a fatalistic loser and he makes me sick!"