SAGE ADVICE FROM HONEST ABE

As the US Presidential election rhetoric heats up this summer and our big "national decision" looms this Nov. 4, it would pay us all to spend some time researching timeless ideas, philosophical and economic precepts, and sage advice from history that reflect light on our ethical ideals. Why not have an idea of WHY we vote the way we do? What are the underlying ethics of the candidates and parties? What are the identifiable critical assumptions and ideals of the candidates? What it is that we actually BELIEVE - and WHY?

It is incredibly annoying to me to hear so much drivel on cable news programs about "what a good speaker" Obama is, or the fact that John McCain is "old," or shallow things like this. As regards both candidates, few are commenting on what these individuals truly BELIEVE; what are the foundations (as expressed in philosophical and intellectual history, for instance - one of the main themes of my Blog) of these beliefs, and how do they stand the test of time? Hint: you might want to take a look at Obama's Chicago church (now, cleverly, the "former church") and the hateful rhetoric coming from the "Reverend" Jeremiah Wright for years; not to mention Obama's associations with brain dead wretches like Bill Ayers, et.al. Compare all of that with a man of honor like John McCain...

I wonder if we in the US will ever get over the silly stuff like: gee, he "looks good," or "speaks well," or "looks presidential," or "brings JFK to mind," etc. = you fill in the blank of trite expressions.

I recently came across a brilliant little something from Abraham Lincoln here in my office, something I had long ago snipped out of a church bulletin. I believe this thing was originally entitled the "Ten Cannots," though in my version I have only nine.


1.) You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
2.) You cannot help small men by tearing down big men.
3.) You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
4.) You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer.
5.) You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income.
6.) You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred. (emphasis mine)
7.) You cannot establish security on borrowed money.
8.) You cannot build character and courage by taking away man's initiative and independence.
9.) You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should be doing for themselves.

Timeless wisdom - for both (and all) political parties - and thoughts to reflect upon as we embark on what is sure to be one of the most important elections in our recent history.

TTC

The USA: TOWARDS A NEW ENERGY POLICY

No doubt we are all sick of escalating fuel prices and the disruptions to our economy, our jobs, and our lives. I have seen this and lived with this my whole life. Of course, there were the tranquil days when I was a kid back in the 60s and 70s (and gas prices of ca. 30-50 cents per gallon, believe it or not - the lowest I remember was around 30 cents!), but the whole global picture changed in 1973 with the economic "shot (or "shock"!) heard round the world" - the Arab oil embargo due to the 1973 Arab/Israeli war. Nothing has been the same since.

We now have oil availability pretty much dictated to us by the OPEC oil cartel, formed as a response to all of this in the early 70s. Funny - everybody (especially on the left) yaps on and on about "international law" (whatever that is - try and define it) when they have some grievance against George Bush and/or the US political right, but nobody ever wants to reprimand OPEC for being a cartel and illegally price fixing a barrel of oil ( why do we do business with criminals?).

We have lived through oil shocks and "crises" before; this time around, it's truly playing out on the world stage. We must consider the demand factor as well: 1 billion new capitalists in India thirsting for oil; 1.3 billion in China. The actual demand for crude from emerging market nations (think the "BRICs," among others) just surpassed that of the US for the first time in history. If you've been reading any of my posts, you realize this is one of my big "themes" - the emergence on the world stage of all these countries as global, powerful, and monied "players." I've been to many of these countries, and I have seen firsthand their emerging prosperity.

The US does not dictate the price of commodities any more; and, when our economy is weak (as now), it is not necessarily a guarantee that the rest of the world will be obliged to suffer along with us. This is something I've never seen until now in my lifetime. And the ramifications are huge for us here in the US; the effects to our wallets and portfolios will not be so desirable.

It's past time for a new direction in domestic energy policy, and while government is, most of the time, best left out of the process, the stakes for this situation are just too high and there are certainly, at the very least, tax incentives that the Govt. can put in place to encourage domestic development of the right resources. Moreover, Govt. can assist in putting in place the right laws (and get away with bad ones) to encourage a "Manhattan Project" for domestic energy development, and hopefully down the line, energy independence. Finally, the current energy situation impacts our national security and national financial well being, and this is definitely the domain of correct government.

We need to face the facts, though - most all of the things we use in our everyday lives have some relationship, at least tangentially, with the price of crude oil. Think plastics, most all fuels, household items, transportation, among many other products and services. Moreover, we have a couple more billion capitalists on the globe competing for the same resources. Supply and demand dictate that prices will continue to rise, so long as the current situation holds. We wanted everyone to be capitalists, so look at what we've now got!

Some things we need to do to HELP OURSELVES for a change and stick it to OPEC (with "friends" like OPEC - who needs enemies?):

1.) encourage more nuclear power - in every state and city - to power our electricity needs. It would provide more good, local jobs, and come from an inexhaustible source - nature (though we do need the uranium). The nuclear power industry is far advanced and more safe from where it was in the 1970s; we here in the US are in a time warp of Three Mile Island-induced fear, and this need not be the case. Countries like France and China are far ahead of us in this regard. We have no choice but to encourage more nukes...

I would be happy to buy a hybrid car; get twice the gas mileage I now get, and have the whole thing powered electrically by a local power plant providing my household electricity. Take that, OPEC!

2.) More solar and wind incentives; tax breaks, etc. Sure, the argument has been made innumerable times, correctly, that we cannot expect to get all of our needs this way, but we could, if we really tried, get a significant fraction. Over Christmas, I worked on a Habitat for Humanity project locally, and all the new homes we were helping to build were given complimentary solar panels to put on the new homes' roofs - donated by the local power company - SRP. Unbelievable... I only wish I could've been on the receiving end of some new solar panels for my own home!! We have plenty of sun here in the Phoenix valley, so it's an inexhaustible, free resource and could make a significant dent in any home's monthly power consumption. (Electricity bills during the Phoenix summer are atrocious!) Also, the power that you do not use can be sold back to the power company; sweet deal.

We are also way behind here as compared to other countries: I saw ubiquitous solar panels on homes in the sunny Caribbean 10-20 years ago as I worked and traveled this area. One sees solar panels all over the place in just about any area of the world these days. I even saw them powering street signs and lights in Spain fairly recently. It should be standard on new homes in this country...

3.) More domestic oil and gas drilling and extraction - we have located massive finds in places such as the Bakken oil field (North Dakota) and others (Utah, Montana, Colorado, Nevada). If we could get the antiquated environmental regulations out of the way, we could cash in on what appear to be fields larger than even Saudi Arabia's or Canada's oil sands (Alberta). Stay tuned - these are new developments and brand new companies have sprung up to cash in on this new American gold mine.

4.) Domestic coal: we are the "Saudi Arabia of coal," and there are new technologies that enable the environmentally cleaner extraction and use of coal (some of it liquefied, for instance) for power needs. Why aren't we developing this resource more?

5.) Finally - ethanol. There's plenty of evidence that ethanol is not really any kind of answer, since it inevitably runs up the price of corn, and hence, food costs. Although Brazil seems to do great things for themselves with their superlative ethanol initiatives, it doesn't seem to be a helpful part of the equation in the US, especially since we are already rich in coal, and untapped oil, gas, and nuclear power solutions.

I don't know about you, but I am REALLY tired of my country's economy being held hostage by the OPEC cartel, dated thinking from environmentalists and out of the loop politicians, and automobile manufacturers who still, after all these years (and I've heard the same "song" for many years), just don't get it. There are some notable exceptions, though, and the picture is brightening up somewhat, thanks to increased consumer demand; people coming to their senses, economic expediency, etc. Thank you, Toyota, for the Prius - you were the first. Decent looking car and gets 50 miles per gallon. If you and I are going to pay twice as much for gas, why not get twice the mileage?

Of course, ultimately, prices will find some kind of ceiling (as they always do in a market economy) where consumers will finally give it up and adjust their behavior, wasteful or otherwise. "The cure for high prices is high prices," in other words. When cauliflower is too expensive at my local store, I switch to broccoli. When green peppers are more expensive than the equally nutritious orange peppers, I switch to orange. Obviously, we don't have all that much "choice" when it comes to our gas at the pump. However, we have some choice - we can individually choose to not drive as much as we have; take public transportation whenever feasible, walk, ride a bike; whatever. I don't know about you, but I refuse to overpay. And if I have a choice, I move on. And so it goes...

Europeans are paying the equivalent of $9 + per U.S. gallon of gas, and their squeals of pain are just now starting to be heard on cable news. We here in the US are paying $ 4+ now ($5 + in Hawaii, Alaska, and CA), and I'm really starting to hear folks squeal. Perhaps we'll finally get politicians and private business in action now to do what we should've been doing all along. At the very least, this will slow the economy, and lessen demand for crude - at least from our country.

During the political campaigns and debates, one thing struck my ear coming from John McCain: he spoke of a "Manhattan Project" for domestic energy. Let's hope, should he be elected, that he will actually, sincerely follow up on it. It is desperately needed, and I wish him (or whomever) all the best in moving towards this goal.

As unpleasant as are higher costs at the pump (and considering the damage it does to our macro economy, the stock markets, etc.), this latest crisis will hopefully get us off our duffs here in the US and on towards new frontiers in domestic energy and more towards at least a significant measure of "independence." Couldn't come too soon...

TTC

OBAMA - "CHANGE" YOU REALLY SHOULDN'T BELIEVE IN

Right about the beginning of 2008 (and at the time of my last post re: the Presidential race), most of us thought we were looking at a two way race "locked in" between Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton, leaving all their competitors in the dust. Funny how things worked out...

That Hillary is hanging tough (as I write this) is no surprise; the woman is a passionate fighter, notwithstanding the fact that I do not agree with most of her politics. Giuliani - I really don't know what happened there. I really think it had to do with his personal life; issues of trust, etc., and the American people do not like misgivings about those issues, especially vis a vis ex-wives, etc. It's funny that in one of the most sexually libertine societies in human history, Americans still want their Presidential candidates to be, um, "well-behaved" and trustworthy in that area. (no "secrets...")

It has been blindingly obvious over the past year that Obama was getting a huge free ride in publicity from the likes of CNN (the "Collectivist News Network") and all the other mainstream media outlets. Funny, again, that he's the front runner and likely Democratic nominee. I have no idea what Americans are thinking... Well, actually, I do, and I find it pretty scary and astonishing. The guy is a neophyte; somewhat of a charlatan, and very clever at that. I don't think I've ever witnessed a candidate for such high office who was less qualified for the job than Obama. He is merely riding the "sympathy vote" wave and spouting cliche slogans like "change you can believe in." I bet to differ...

Let's take a short look at this: what kind of "change" are we talking about here? Fortunately, we got smart, amended the Constitution, and now require a maximum of only two terms for a US President (after FDR). So, yes, superficially, there will be guaranteed "change." But let me ask you: what kind of change is Obama talking about, since he hasn't really articulated any salient points of his plan as Commander in Chief? Only sloganeering nonsense; generalisms, buzzwords for simpletons, etc.

I fear "change" coming from Government. I fear people feeling that a giant collectivist organization, with the right to confiscate wealth at ever increasing rates from all of the rest of us, has the right to intrude even more into our economy and personal lives, trying to legislate societal ethics and force us all to believe in a monolithic vision of Big Government that "knows better" what we should do, say, read, believe, write, etc. Obama's America is the America of envy, jealousy, worthless remedial government "programs" for this or that "disenfranchised" group; "reforms" and more money for programs that were flawed and/or did not work in the first place (hence they need "reform" - and of course - more money), higher taxes, wealth re-distribution from workers and achievers and given to derelicts, ne'er-do-wells, and basket cases, and - ugh - multiculturalism, and moral and intellectual relativism. Did I mention more abortions ("women's reproductive rights") and gay marriage?

The big lie from the Democratic side is that they know what's best for all of us, from the least individual to the biggest corporations (remember Hillary's "it takes a village to raise a child"?). And they want the power - they want you to hand it to them on a silver platter - to tell you that, make you obey it, and pick your pocket at the same time to fund their grandiose ideas. This is not "change" at all - this is a regurgitation of the same old same old from time immemorial. It's called big government socialism, which leads inevitably to a type of "nanny state" totalitarianism and an even further surrender of our personal and social liberties and rights; let alone ever more of our money.

This is Obama's world - he is the poster child for Affirmative Action and Ivy League liberalism.

How many of you even realize that all Black folks do NOT think alike? Ever heard of great Black conservative and libertarian writers and thinkers such as Shelby Steele, Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell (of the outstanding Hoover Institute at Stanford), and Justice Clarence Thomas? Of course you never hear what they have to say on the mainstream media, since these media outlets are controlled by collectivists and don't want to bother with those pesky guys who dare to think differently (especially if they happen to be black). Imagine that - they think very critically, and for themselves as intellectuals. They do not hold to the official left wing, African-American party line espoused by Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and all the other apostles of envy.

Nope - "change" is just a buzz word, and all who believe that our problems will just sort of disappear after GWB leaves office come next January are going to be sadly mistaken. We play on a global stage now, and there are a lot of other highly qualified and rich players now. It is a vastly changed world, and we need the best leadership we can find to help America navigate these treacherous, globally-connected waters, especially with soaring commodity prices (a function of supply and demand - and - ahem - wake up! - we're not the only ones demanding them these days) and the constant threat of terrorism at the hands of hate-filled lunatics.

I would argue that George W. Bush occupied the office of the Presidency during one of the most difficult times in our nation's history, what with terrorism (he finally had the guts to deal with the long festering problem as opposed to his feckless predecessor), a really, really tough economy (two popped investment bubbles of truly absurd proportions), soaring global commodity prices, and a hapless Federal Reserve that believes easy money is the cure for everything (result: the US Dollar has lost nearly 40% in Bush's presidency, and we have rampant inflation here at home as a result). Moreover,he has high moral and ethical standards and has appointed judges who share those ethics. Bush deserves a lot more credit than most folks seem to want to give him these days.

Bottom line: don't fall for meaningless cliche slogans like "change" and such things. You really ought not to believe that it will change much of anything. Whoever inherits the Presidency this November will have his/her work cut out for him/her. It's going to be a very, very tough job, and I wish - whomever - all the best of luck. They're going to need it...

TTC