Rhapsodies of Ross

Modern Day Tea Party

2009-04-09T11:18:00.000-07:00

With news of a grassroots campaign organizing a Modern Day Tea Party this April 15th, you have to wonder whether the nation has finally reached its breaking point.

http://www.teapartyday.com/

How much longer will we, as a nation, allow our political leaders to spend their way to another election? How much longer will we sit idly by while those in Washington continue to give those who served before a bad name?

How much longer before we hear the cry come forth once more:

"Give me Liberty, or Give me Death."

Government's Money...

2009-04-01T05:34:00.000-07:00

I don't know if you've heard any of the rumblings lately, but there has been a considerable amount of talk (compared to the amount of coverage) about the 401(k). There has been a lot of conversation about how "The 401(k) was not meant to be the ONLY investment for retirees, it was meant to supplement pensions," and "the 401(k) costs the government too much money," "The average person is not able to save enough to survive on."

I'm pretty sick of these two arguments (the third comment is merely a continuation of the first), but I am willing to ignore the first to cover the second (and most important) comment, that "the 401(k) costs the government too much money."

This is ridiculous. Not the amount of money the government doesn't receive because of this program, but the fact that people believe it "costs" the government money. Despite what many politicians will tell you, the government does not have "first dibs" on your income. The 46 Billion in revenue it misses out on is not a "cost" to the government, it's simply lower receipts than it desires.

I am tired of politicians telling me that the government doesn't have the money to run this program or that program - that taxes have to go up to help pay for everything. This is gloriously ignorant. There is fat in every department; in every program. Trim some of the fat, and then we'll start talking about how much the government "needs."

Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution. "The Congress shall have Power To lay and and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and General Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States."

There can be some debate as to what "common Defence and General Welfare" means. But, for me, "General Welfare" is completely different than "Specific Welfare." Programs should provide for the General Population, not Specific People. Additionally, I do believe that the government 1) has more than covered the "General Welfare" aspect of that conversation, and 2) collects more than enough revenue to deal with any additional programs they feel are necessary.

2,400,000,000,000 - the amount of tax receipts that were collected in 2007.
6,575,342,465.75 - The amount of taxes collected PER DAY.

On average, every single person (including those born today, and those that will die today), will pay $21.50 to the government every single day of the year. Isn't it about time that big brother stopped spending our money?

Isn't it scary that, in order to pay off the debts we've accumulated (because apparently 2.4 Trillion isn't enough), we'd have to give the government an additional 98.93 per day?

Is it worse to know that number is increasing by the minute?

Stupid Mismanagement I, Terrible Asset Reallocation Program, Porkulus II, Bailout for Buttheads (aka the 275B Housing Bailout), Porkulus III, etc.

2009-02-19T09:20:00.000-08:00

As we approach the next set of attempts made by the federal government to "fix" the economy, I have a little food for thought.

Before I go on:
1) No, I'm not heartless.
2) I grasp the concept that there may be many things in the economy I have not been told or do not understand.

Before you go on:
1) I am very concerned about the amount of taxes we will have to pay to get out from the pile of debt we're accumulating.
2) The "rich" cannot possibly be expected to pay for all this. If we try to make them pay for all these problems, they will leave. Where will they go? When you have a lot of money and have a history of creating a lot of jobs, there are many countries that like you and would love to find a way to make you happy.
3) This is nothing more than simple math.

On to the list (I left the zeros to emphasize how big these numbers are).
Population of the US: 299,398,485 (as of 2006 estimates), but since most under 18 depend on their parents, we'll use the number 225,746,457, which represents those who are 18 years or older. All figures are based on the 18+ number.
Bush's Stimulus - 168,000,000,000.00 - 561.13 per person
TARP - 700,000,000,000.00 - 2,338.02 per person
Obama's Stimulus - 787,000,000,000.00 - 2,628.60 per person
Housing Bailout (coming soon) - 275,000,000,000.00 - 918.51 per person.

Just talking about those four big bailouts, we're already at 6,446.26 per person. If you are married, those four bailouts could have been sent to you in check form for almost 13,000 instead of the 1,200 you did receive.

Now I'd like to take you on another journey. But this journey is much longer than the last one. In the interest of time and boredom, I'm going to give you the Cliffs Notes version. If you add in all the other amounts that the Federal Government has given out in the last year, each person could have received a check for 33,919.01. A household with two people who are 18+ would have received 67,838.02. Instead of giving money to failing businesses and pet projects, each person in the United States (18+) could have received 33,919.01.

First, let's temporarily ignore the obvious issue of inflation. Based on anecdotal evidence, I don't believe I'm the only one that is.

Let's say you give everyone the 33,000 listed above:

How many people would go out and pay off their credit card debt? Those that do, decrease the amount of money that has to be retired by credit card companies because it is uncollectible. This raises earnings and makes credit card companies more profitable. Individuals' credit ratings improve.

How many people increase their savings? By increasing the amount of money in savings, banks have more money to loan. By deciding to loan more money, small, medium, and large businesses are able to borrow money and expand, creating jobs. Individuals are able to borrow money, increasing the demand for housing.

How many people will catch up on their mortgage? By becoming current on their mortgage, banks will not have to take write-offs on their loans because they are uncollectible. This increases the profitability of the banks.

How many people buy a new car? GM, Chrysler, Ford, Toyota, Honda, etc. all have great years.

How many people buy stock?

How quickly does the economy recover?

Of course, this brings back to the question of inflation, which I will no longer ignore even if everyone else does. After you give everybody this money, many will spend it. Increased demand for manufactured goods increases costs. After a long economic story (which many would find boring so I'm skipping it), you have a bottle of Mt. Dew that costs $2 instead of $1. Your new car costs $40,000 instead of $25,000. You have to pay taxes to make up for the deficit that was caused by the check you received.

Of course, we've already given this money out. The remaining question is are you ready?

Are you ready for your $2 bottles of Coke ($12 at a ballgame)?
Will $8 for a gallon of gas (or $14 in California) be outrageous?
Will you mind having a tax rate of 98% like Great Britain had in 1974 (yes - this was the marginal rate for 750,000 Britons) to make up for the 'disastrous economy'?

Whether this is as bad as 1930 is debatable. All those trying to sell something will tell you how awful it is today. Those who are just looking at the numbers will tell you it's more comparable to the 1970's and 1980's - bad, just not that bad.

But at this point that doesn't matter. Our current spending has been astounding. Unless the economy recovers quickly, we will continue to spend preposterous sums of money. Soon, the only question that will remain is how much will I have to "pay back" in taxes for all the "gifts" my government gives to others? How much will my children have to pay? Will there even be a country left for my great grandchildren, or will China purchase enough of our debt that we'll be the People's Republic of America?

What to do in a Bear Market

2008-10-10T07:00:00.000-07:00

With the way the market has been acting lately, it seems like everyone is freaking out. Times are tough, there is absolutely no denying it. It almost feels like everything is playing out like it would in a movie. I keep waiting to hear Potter let us know he'll give us fifty cents on the dollar for every share we're willing to give him.

'I may be set to lose a fortune, but I'm willing to guarantee your people too.'

During (what was implied to be) the Great Depression in It's A Wonderful Life, Potter wasn't selling, Potter was buying. And later in the movie, it's declared that Potter made a fortune.
In real life, there are many examples of people taking a down market and turning it into their advantage.

Warren Buffett didn't buy Coca-Cola when the market valued it at its highest, he bought it after the release of "New Coke", when everyone thought the company would fail. He bought $3 billion worth of GE Common Stock on October 2, and $5 billion in Goldman Sachs on September 24. While the last two deals have yet to turn a profit, given Buffett's historical performance, I wouldn't bet against him.

John Templeton bought hundreds of Shares of undervalued stocks in 1939, eventually becoming a billionaire through his investments.

In January 1907, the stock market fell 50% from it's previous year's high (sound familiar?). In this instance JP Morgan (and other bankers) helped infuse $23 million into the New York Stock Exchange to help it avoid closure. Five days later JP Morgan (this time on his own) purchased ~$30 million in Bonds from the City of New York. Without these cash infusions, New York City would have been insolvent and the NYSE would have closed early. Don't worry about JP Morgan though, he made more than a few dollars on the deal.

What can we learn from these investors? Panic and you lose money. Think calmly and you will end up ahead.

10 NFL and Fantasy Truths

2008-08-25T07:55:00.000-07:00

As we approach the beginning of the NFL season, I felt there were a few truths that needed to be expressed.

1. The infected bursa sac of Peyton Manning should not be an issue, provided he doesn't pull a Carl Brashear. He's never had a season with less than 26 touchdowns, and I wouldn't expect this to be the first.

2. Pacman Jones will suffer from his year off. He will still be a great defender.

3. Bill Belichick has not learned his lesson, but will probably leave his camera at home.

4. Drew Brees will quietly have another fantastic season. Over the last two years, he has more passing yards than any other quarterback.

5. Charging PSL's in the NFL (Personal Seat Licenses) for stadiums built with public funds is criminal. You can show your disapproval by not attending games. This will also making it cheaper for me to go.

6. The Patriots will not go 18-1 again this year, but it won't be Brett Favre's fault.

7. Offering any member of the 2007-08 Patriots team members 18 beers and 1 empty shot glass is hilarious. I read about this in an article on ESPN and laugh every time I think about it.

8. Aaron Rodgers will play well enough for the Packers to be happy they kept him, but not well enough that Packers fans won't regret not having Favre.

9. Gene Upshaw was the best thing that ever happened to the NFLPA. Negotiations without him could be, unfortunately, quite different.

10. Chicago fans have hope no matter who starts, because Rex Grossman and Kyle Orton both had more touchdown passes in 2007 than Michael Vick.

Weirdest 9 holes...ever...

2008-08-25T07:03:00.000-07:00

Front 9 Score: 45
Score to Par on Par 3's: +6
Score to Par on Par 4's: +6
Score to Par on Par 5's: (-3)

Yes, I was 12 over on the par 3's and par 4's, and had a birdie and an eagle on the par 5's. No gimmies, no mulligans.

“Free” Speech

2008-07-15T11:34:00.000-07:00

Taking note of recent communication by United States Senator Charles Schumer, I feel I must specifically ask our representatives, and offer a blanket invitation for anyone else to also answer, how free is our free speech? At what point is free speech not free, and at what point do you have a responsibility to learn to keep your mouth shut?

Instances where speech is not free can, of course, be found all over the place. Protesting at a soldier’s funeral can cause you to be incarcerated. Howard Stern can discuss exactly how much an indecent conversation can cost you, having been responsible for $500,000 in fines from the FCC.

Then we get to good old Chucky. Senator Charles Schumer, on June 26th, sent an open letter to the FDIC and the Office of Thrift Supervision stating concerns he had about the resources the bank controlled; the solvency of the bank. Never mind that this blow-hard is on the Finance Committee (specifically on the subcommittees for “International Trade and Global competitiveness,” “Social Security, Pension, and Family policy,” and “Taxation, IRS Oversight, and Long-Term Growth”) as well as the COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSEING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS (specifically the subcommittees for “Financial Institutions,” “Housing, Transportation and Community Development (Chairman),” and “Securities, Insurance, and Investment”).

Stating a belief that the bank was in serious trouble; his quoted intentions were to “toughen up” the Office of Thrift Supervision who, in his opinion, were “weak regulator[s]”. His statements, according to bank regulators, caused 1.3 Billion dollars to be withdrawn over the next eleven days at the IndyMac Bank. This is what would best be described as a modern day run. Regulators estimate that the total cost to restore what federal law covers will end up costing between 4 and 8 Billion dollars, or roughly $26.52 for every single person currently alive in the United States. While your initial reaction may be “oh, it’s not that bad on a per person basis,” let me remind you that amount includes every single person who is on their way in and everyone on their way out. When you count only those who are between the ages of 18 and 65 (best classified as the working class age - but again, counting every single person between those ages, whether they work, go to school, or sit on a beach retired), that dollar amount jumps to over $42 a person.

While it can be understood that, as a Senator, Schumer retains a responsibility to guide the government and its agencies to the best of his ability, the biggest issue with Schumer’s “Toughen Up” stance should be the way he brought his condemnation. As a member of the Subcommittee for Financial Institutions, Schumer has the ability and the responsibility to control the purse strings of the financial regulatory institutions. Simply reminding this agency that, by not doing what is necessary, funds and resources could and would be allotted to other agencies that would be willing to take the responsible steps should have been enough of a “Toughen Up” pep talk (unless the collapse of a large financial institution was his ultimate goal). Instead this Senator publicly trashed a bank (albeit one that was struggling financially), and initiated a run.

To sum of the total cost of Senator Schumer’s comments, we’ll start with the 8 Billion estimated for cost to insure. Add to insurance cost the $81 Million lost in stockholder's stock value since the statement was made, and we’re left with a total cost of $8,081,000,000. That’s how much Senator Schumer’s Free Speech cost the United States government and its people. While this may be a little over-reaching, as there are some that have been quoted as believing IndyMac’s collapse was only a matter of time, we will never know for sure whether this bank would have been able to survive this tumultuous time in its history or whether another couple of weeks would have allowed it enough time to sell itself. Maybe next time a little self-censorship by the Senator would be a wise decision. Maybe next time the bank will be given the chance to sort its own problems out without the government having to rescue it, saving taxpayers large sums of money in the process. Maybe next time this arrogant, narcissistic Senator will be able to walk by a wound without rubbing salt in it.

The Cost of Everything

2008-07-11T07:19:00.000-07:00

I found a comic on the Internet today called “The Joy of Tech”. It is probably one of the funnier and more thought provoking comics I’ve seen in a while. The point it raised was also a message that I felt I needed to share with as many people as possible.

If you’re too lazy to click on the link above, or they move the comic and break the like, the basic premise of the comic is; would you rather have an iPhone or a million dollars?

While the assumptions are a little off (the interest rate used was pretty high for him to be able to get to his $1,000,000 total from the small amounts of money he’d be stocking away - roughly 10% for 45+ years), it was an interesting way of looking at a future purchases. How many times have you actually sat down and thought, prior to making that next big purchase, “I can have ‘X’ or $100,000 when I retire,” or “I can have ‘Y’ or invest in something that will bring in a lot of income over the course of a lifetime.” Sure, $300 here, $1000 there may not seem like a lot of money when talking about a new piece of jewelry, the latest video game system, or that new laptop computer that you absolutely have to have, but over the course of a lifetime the money lost from not saving that can be quite shocking.

As an example, when I graduated from high school, I went out and bought the best laptop computer I could. 7 years later it sits in a box, nearly useless because of it’s antiquated technology. Had I decided to just purchase a tower (which I ended up doing two years later anyways) and saved the difference instead of spending it, it could be worth $1500 today versus the negative $20 it’s currently worth (assuming I drive to the dump to get rid of it). That may not sound like a lot, but take it out over the course of my working life, and that $1000 could have been $42,000! An amazing price to pay just because I had to have that laptop.

I’m, of course, not suggesting that you should not go out and buy what’s important to you. In the comic above, the guy obviously felt that his iPhone was an important purchase, and what’s life without a little fun? But viewing wasteful spending by what it truly costs, and not by the present value, all you’re doing is gaining an appreciation for the true value of money. Which brings us to the most amazing point of this whole converstaion: isn’t it astonishing what a little compounding of interest and dividends will do for you?

Cheating in Baseball

2008-06-26T11:51:00.000-07:00

Even though this is not as timely as my "Big Bad Oil" dissertation it will hopefully lead to a livelier conversation. Also, it is my dream that a few of the noble Hall of Fame voters out there will take this opportunity to heed a very important opinion – mine!

Throughout the course of baseball, there have been many changes in the rules of baseball. Some have had little to do with the actual performance of a player; some had everything to do with what the player was doing to help with his execution. The changes in these rules have come about for many reasons: although there are also other reasons, safety, changes in public opinion, and a desire to increase offensive production tend to be the most common.

To compare the difference between the two, at one time, walk-off homeruns were not counted as home runs (unless they were solo shots). As soon as the winning run crossed the plate, the game was considered finished. If you were tied in the bottom of the 12th with the bases loaded and you hit a grand slam, it counted as a single, with only one run scoring. Compare that to today's rules, where a walk-off grand slam counts as a homerun with four runs scored. Other rule changes included the foul ball line. In Babe Ruth's time, if you hit the foul pole, it was not counted as a homerun, but rather a ground rule double. Additionally, if you hit a ball that cleared the foul pole, and then bent foul after, it was considered foul (today, both instances are counted as homeruns). An example of a change due to safety would be the moving of the pitcher’s mound from 50 feet to 60 feet, 6 inches. This change was brought because of the speed with which the pitchers were throwing the baseball. Steroid use would be the most effective example of a change in public opinion.

A lot of the rule changes have also tended to do have a lot to do with what players were doing to enable them to be better players. The hall of fame is ripe with players who did what today would be considered cheating their way to fantastic stats. Gaylord Perry, one of the better pitchers to ever throw a baseball, was renowned for throwing a doctored baseball. His autobiography was eventually even titled Me and the Spitter. Even after the spitball was banned, there were players that were grandfathered in they were allowed to use it until they retired.

This all encompasses the point of this article. While amphetamines, steroids, other performance enhancing drugs should absolutely be banned, and the idea of grandfathering players in (even though there is historical precedent to do so) would be completely irresponsible, the decision to view this issue against the historical performance of players is completely out of line. Back in 1998 when Mark McGuire was bashing his 70 homeruns, the androstenedione issue was never raised, even though it sitting in his locker, in plain view of reporters. Sure, there were stories about it, and even a mild controversy which contained the “Flintstone Vitamin” response from Sosa, but why, ten years latter, is the public viewing this with such a different stance? McGuire’s “Not here to talk about the past” attitude was always baseball’s attitude on any issue about gained advantage until this instance. Additionally, if this is going to be counted against McGuire, Bonds, Sosa, and others, why isn’t it being taken back further to players such as Willie Mays? John Milner, of the Pittsburgh Pirates Cocaine group, stated that early in his career, Willie Mays and Willie Stargell both handed him ‘greenies’ (amphetamines). Why are their accomplishments not tarnished, while those of Barry Bonds are?

Yes, there is a huge difference between amphetamines and steroids, but it is hard to believe that the biggest reason steroid users have received such an outpouring of hatred is because of Bonds. Had he been a player with Mays’ attitude, “happy-go-lucky and glad to be here”, this whole situation would be different. At the end of the day, a homerun is an amazing show of force, but it’s also a show of fantastic skill. While sometimes you’ll just plain luck out, to average a homerun every other game is amazing.

To quote Ted Williams, “The hardest thing to do in baseball is hit a round ball with a round bat, squarely.” The players of the “Steroid Era” should be recognized and commended for their immense skills, and we should punish those who break the new rules in the future. The American way has always been to celebrate those who managed to make themselves better while following the rules, and close as many loopholes as could be found. One of the most recognized American families is the Kennedy’s, whose fortune was made by trading in stocks and commodities on insider information (which was technically illegal, but the practice was not as regulated back them). Should the government go back to the Kennedy’s and demand restitution because of the loopholes available? No, and Bonds should not be asked to un-hit his homeruns. Bonds may be one of the most unlikable characters in the history of baseball (also see: Cobb, Ty), but he still was an amazing force to watch. And now that the loophole has been identified that allowed him to gain the muscle mass that helped push him enough to become the homerun king, applause should be given for the accomplishments achieved.

What is the next course of action? Wait for the next force to come along, who hopefully will be a lot more like Willie than Barry, and a lot more man than machine.

Big Bad Oil

2008-06-24T08:19:00.000-07:00

Much has been said about Big Oil recently, and much of it has been quite unflattering to the industry as a whole. Screams for lower prices on oil have been constant from everyone, and the politicians have put the companies in their crosshairs. This is all extremely unfortunate. While higher gas prices have been painful for everyone (I personally found it necessary to change jobs and purchase a different car over the higher price of gasoline), the situation should be viewed as an entire issue, not as an individual issue that leads to a desire to restart the Salem witch trials.

Cost of oil

One of the components to the overall cost of gasoline is the direct cost of the barrel of crude oil. Viewing the chart below (and concentrating mainly on the red line, we’ll get to the blue line shortly), you can see what has been obviously apparent to everyone over the past few years: gasoline has skyrocketed; up 100% in the last year, which is why this is the first point. Changes in supply and demand shifts the price of oil. When OPEC increases the supply (and the world’s demand stays constant), the cost of the oil decreases. When the world demands more oil (and OPEC’s supply remains constant) the cost of oil will increase. When both the supply and the demand changes, the price will shift depending on which one changes the most (a slight increase in supply and strong increase in demand will shift the cost up, while a strong increase in supply and slight increase in demand will shift the cost down). For illustrated versions of some of these events, look at the series of charts labeled “Supply and Demand” below. At this point, I need to point out that “Big Oil” isn’t a part of this conversation; most of this is controlled by the OPEC nations. Also note that we’ve just discussed at least a $60 change in cost per barrel.

Change in Currency

Another issue that has had an adverse affect on the price of oil is the change in the value of the dollar. While there certainly are positives to a falling dollar (locally manufactured products and services become inexpensive compared to internationally manufactured products, US Service and Manufacturing becomes less expensive in foreign nations, raw materials such as US Steel becomes less expensive and increases our exports), there are also disadvantages (foreign products become more expensive, travel to foreign countries becomes more expensive, inflation). With the value of the dollar falling, it drives the price of oil up more. You may not realize it in our day-to-day lives (unless you happen to sell BMWs or other foreign vehicles or be in the market to purchase such items – yes, even your Toyotas), but foreign products are getting more expensive due to the decreasing dollar. Looking at the chart above (where the blue currency comparison line follows an eerily similar increase to the red oil costs line) you can see how a single Euro has gotten more expensive in the past year (albeit not at the 100% rate of oil, but this is just another part of the story).

Who Profits

Much has been said about Big Oil and their rising profits from the increased price of oil. While this is true, there have been several parties missing from this argument. I will not disagree, Big Oil obviously has profited from the increase, but my point is this is not the whole story.

To get a better view of the oil profits, we need to start where the oil comes from. Oil Sheiks (specifically the OPEC nations) have experienced a great inflow of cash because of the shift in prices. Follow the numbers, and try not to skip ahead. The OPEC Nations in 2007 produced an average of 30,743,000 barrels of oil a day. Now, last year the prices of oil were lower than they are this year. However, since I intend to use this year’s oil numbers, I’m going to factor in a decrease of oil production (which would shift the supply/demand curve, but this is illustrative – oil production has also gone up this year with additional promises to raise production, if necessary, being given). Assuming a 10% decrease in production (which would be devastating to the world’s economy) we will start with 27,669,000 barrels a day. Multiply that by 366 (leap year) and then by $120/barrel (you’re getting a deal), and that comes to 1.215 trillion dollars being sent to the OPEC nations this year. Makes the 389.30 billion in revenue (and 71.879 million in profit) seem a little smaller, doesn’t it?

Aside from Big Oil and the Oil Sheiks, let’s not forget about YOU! If you invest in Mutual Funds, Index Funds, and stocks, you probably profited from the increase in oil prices as well! Top Mutual Fund holders include the Vanguard 500 Index Fund, the Fidelity Contrafund, Income Fund of America, Washington Mutual Investors Fund, and many others! These funds are owned and operated by people investing for you, your 401(k)/403(b) (check out what you’re invested in!), and your pension funds as well! It doesn’t take the sting away, but don’t forget that you’re helping your retirement fund every time you fill up! (Yes, I’d trade the retirement increase for lower gas prices too, but that's not the point.)

Who It Hurts

I think this one is obvious, but I would be remiss not to discuss those who really struggle with the higher prices. While those who make the most in the country are truly not as concerned with the high prices of gas, those who make the least are severely affected by it. Al Gore* uses an astronomical amount of energy – it was reported that in 2007 he consumed between 12 and 20 times the amount of energy that an average house uses. At the same time, some seniors are forced to choose between heating and eating**. There are also many stories about people working for days to pay for gas in their cars, and other stories discussing the number of days the new Economic Stimulus Checks will pay for.

Besides the actual cost of gasoline, the other side of the story is the availability of hybrid vehicles (and other Flex Fuel vehicles) that would help dampen the affects of the higher cost of gasoline. Not only do many states offer rebates, but the IRS has an offer out as well. However, I view the “fairness” of this policy as questionable. How many people out there, working and living on a household income of $48,201 (with which they’re supporting their family of 3.14 people), would be able to afford a brand new vehicle with a sticker price of $21,500 (Starting price for the very efficient and very small Toyota Prius) plus the corresponding licensing and insurance. It seems to me that these benefits don’t naturally lend themselves to those hit hardest by the higher gas prices.

What Can You Do?

The good news is that there are several things that each of us can do. First, you could always buy a new hydrogen car. While these cars are nice, with the limited supply of hydrogen stations, you’ll have to be very certain of locations to stop before making any road trips in the car. (It should also be noted that these vehicles use hydrogen that is produced through a process that consumes fossil fuels, so our dependence on foreign oil does not dramatically change by shifting demand to these vehicles.) The high price of the car will also be an issue for many Americans. Another option would be for you to pay for hybrid vehicles, but this is a short-term answer to the long-term question, as these vehicles still consume large quantities of gasoline with varying success.

There are also options available that are more financial in nature. By lowering taxes, the Federal and State governments would lower the price of gas. However, the gas taxes pay for a lot of the infrastructure in the United States; highway, interstate, and local road repairs are funded by these taxes. There would also be the unintended side affect that the lower gas prices would push back the desire of Americans to become more self-dependant concerning oil, as well as slowing the desire to increase and discover alternative fuel sources. Neither option is necessarily a good one.

Besides the tax option, there are other financial options available. One option would be to buy gasoline futures which would allow you to set your price over longer periods of time and avoid the day to day fluctuations that can be frustrating (you would need to consider what you would do with a barrel of gasoline though, as placing it in your garage might not be the best idea). Continuing this line of thought, you could also purchase shares of an oil company’s stock. This would allow you to offset your increase in fuel spending with an increase in your investment portfolio (no, they would probably not offset each other, but you might not feel as bad hearing about the “windfall profits” of the oil companies).

*Because of his position on global warming and subsequent availability of personal information, not because of his political stance, Al Gore is used in this example. Yes…yes…yes…huge house, used for business, pleasure, and I don’t care. You’re missing the point. This article has strived to stay completely neutral on the global warming stance. If you read something in this section that offended you, reread it. There is nothing that could or should be viewed as politically leaning. If you’re still offended…go away.

**I tried to find an article without a comment concerning “The Bush Administration giving millions to XYZ for heating costs”. I didn’t try very hard because I again wasn’t concerned about a political lean. I’m not saying “Bush Rules and Gore Sucks”. I’m just using two examples. If you want to do the research and provide other examples (that are not political), email me.

Rich Dad, Richer Dad

2008-06-03T13:45:00.000-07:00

Several things you need to understand: first, I would like to say that I enjoyed every one of the nine books in the Rich Dad, Poor Dad series that I’ve read. Second, I guess you could say I’ve spent a small fortune purchasing these books: I don’t regret one penny. I’ve read a few of them a couple times. And I’ve learned a lot while reading these books, but not everything I learned while reading the books was actually learned from what was written on the pages.

Having read many of the books in Robert Kiyosaki’s Rich Dad, Poor Dad series, I feel that I understand a little bit about how he thinks and works. To start, his series is a set of best sellers that encourage people to do a number of things, mainly get them to start thinking about their financial future. And he is fantastic at what he does: he’s been a motivational speaker in the finance arena since 1985, and has been very successful, amassing quite a large fortune and very valuable name recognition, allowing him to now let others do the work/writing, publish under his name/series, and still make a tidy sum on their sales WITHOUT DOING ANY WORK! You are looking at a man who has practiced what he preached, regardless of whether it was in the area he claims or not.

In Rich Dad, Poor Dad, Kiyosaki’s namesake, he tells the story about the difference between his “Rich” and “Poor” fathers. One biological, one philosophical, he tells of his struggle to marry the two concepts of a successful life. While one taught him to go to school, get a good job with great benefits, and work till the day he retires, the other showed him that education was not as important as many people believe, it is ambition that is the key factor of success. Forgotten by many commentators on this series, Kiyosaki is trying to point out that, more important than the education you receive is the ambition you have. Education will only take you so far; it will be your ambition that takes you to the top.

Many people have done great research on Kiyosaki’s “Rich Dad”, struggling to find out exactly who the man was that taught Kiyosaki the lessons that so many have now read. Much controversy stems from the fact that there is no clear-cut candidate; it has been suggested he is a wide variety of Hawaiian businessmen, but it has also been suggested he is nothing more than a figment of Kiyosaki’s imagination. Kiyosaki does little to stem the controversy, at times even asking "Is Harry Potter real? Why don’t you let Rich Dad be a myth, like Harry Potter?"(as found in the February 2003 issue of SmartMoney). Peter Carbonara and Joan Caplin claim to have talked to Rich Dad’s son, but does is it really matter? By focusing on what we don’t know, we’re forgetting what we do: Kiyosaki is preaching an excellent message – work hard on making yourself wealthy, and you won’t be dependent on anyone else.

It is also unfortunate that Kiyosaki’s message is missed entirely by many groups of people. It isn’t important how much you make, it matters how you’ve invested your money and how it works for you. Many comment on Kiyosaki’s inflammatory statements regarding diversification and desiring investments outside the stock market. I believe these comments are made more to drive attention and research than actual beliefs, but again, not important.

It is also unfortunate that many people open the book expecting a “How to get rich” list. I think everyone remembers at least one other time everyone bought into the hype (take your pick between two good examples; tulips and tech stocks), the results were not pretty. By avoiding specifics, Kiyosaki avoids the responsibility that comes with half-hearted efforts from people who lack ambition. By writing this story, he does what he has worked to do for many years; provide a source of motivation for people who have the ambition. Read the books for the motivation they can provide (and the few details that can be viewed as absolute truths), but also research what investments are right for you (and research the applicable laws that relate to those investment options, as this is one area that is, unfortunately, not covered as well as it should be).

As he claims in his story, “I’m not a best-writing author, I’m a best-selling author” (Rich Dad, Poor Dad). Don’t get lost in the details of his story; focus on the point of the parable.

Universal Truths and Obvious Statements.

2008-05-28T12:53:00.000-07:00

This is a list of what I would call universal truths.

1. Supply and Demand rules all. If you don't believe me, compare the cost of a bottle of Yellow Tail Cabernet Sauvignon, which can be found for $14.29, to a bottle of Château Petrus Pomerol 1945, priced at $3,787.49 (both wines found at Wine.com, and yes, the Yellow Tail is ridiculously overpriced there). And don't say taste has anything to do with it, most sources believe that after 25 years even best wines will start to lose their taste, so certainly after 50 years, any wine will go bad.

2. In the history of the world, someone has said the same thing you just did, but they said it better.

3. "Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit" (Some sources quote Oscar Wilde, but I can't confirm that).

4. Those who take the quote literally just don't get it.

5. Isn't that ironic?

6. "Baseball is 10 minutes of action squeezed into a 3 hour game" (too many sources and too much variety to nail down a single source)". Even given that, baseball is a fantastic sport. Yes, I love football. No, it's not America's favorite pastime. Baseball will always hold a special place in this nation's collective heart.

7. You cannot root against the Tampa Bay Rays. They have a salary in the bottom few, and are beating up on the top spenders. As it is only the first day of June, that may change, but for now, you have to love this team.

8. "A voice came unto me and said 'Smile and be happy, it could always be worse.' So I smiled, and was happy, and it did indeed get worse" (Source Unknown)

9. This is not a pessimistic statement. If all you do is “smile and be happy”, regardless of what happens, life will suck. You need to work. Become a better husband, wife, employer, employee, father, and mother. Figure out what you enjoy and become better at it. It is ok to be unhappy with your situation, provided you are working hard to change your future.

10. Those who argue that our political situation is something we’ve never experienced before should remember the trouble we had creating the Constitution. In 1787, James Madison and the Anti-Federalists argued against the creation of the Constitution because they felt it did little to protect the rights of the people. Only after the creation of the Bill of Rights (which was not ratified until 4 years later) did the arguments diminish (but they were never completely forgotten).

11. Those who believe the Fairness Doctrine is a good idea should review the First Amendment. Government censure of private citizens is unconstitutional. Additionally, if you don't like what you hear on the radio/TV, change the channel and stop whining. If you are that concerned about hearing something you disagree with, try using the "On/Off" button.

12. An alternative to the "On/Off" button is channel 108.1 on your FM dial. I understand that channel is difficult to pickup, but I hear it eliminates opposing views completely. Keep searching, you'll find it eventually.

13. Finance should be required in High School. Topics in this class should include Stocks, Bonds, Savings, Checking, and Credit Cards.

14. Oil is overpriced.

15. Supply and currency fluctuations dictate the cost of oil.

16. OPEC and the US Government (by limiting the amount of drilling done in the Gulf of Mexico, Alaska, and elsewhere inside our nation), not Exxon Mobile, control the supply of oil.

17. As a nation with abundant resources, we have the responsibility to be dependant on ourselves, not relying on other nations that support our expensive habit. We need to begin drilling wherever we can, work on developing oil shale into Oil products, AND work on alternative sources of energy.

18. We should not forget, during our search for alternatives, that the world has a finite supply of everything. Using corn for fuel is a good option if it is feasible, but we shouldn't forget that it also takes away from the supply available.

19. "Windfall Profits" is the most ridiculous phrase I've ever heard.

20. Exxon Mobile had a Profit Margin of 10.85% for Fiscal Year 2007. That hardly sounds like "Windfall Profits" to me.

21. Apple Computers had a Profit Margin of 15.13%.

22. Coca-Cola had a Profit Margin of 20.64%. and is more expensive, per gallon, than gasoline.

23. Coca-Cola's main ingredient is water.

24. If you make $50,000, and manage to save $5,425 in a year (including 401(k), 403(b), or any other retirement savings), should you be forced to pay an extra tax because of "Windfall Profits"?

25. Communism has failed everywhere it has been tried.

26. Socialized Health Care is good in theory.

27. Health Care is better in countries without Socialized Health Care.

28. Used as an example, as our prayers are with him, but Senator Kennedy is staying in the US to try and recover from his brain tumor. Senator Kennedy has long been a supporter of Socialized Health Care. A man with his money will receive the best care money can buy. Note that he's staying in the United States, and not paying to be treated in a nation where Health Care is socialized.

29. Tax Rebates, Tax Credits, Tax Reductions, etc. are NOT gifts from the government, they are simply not taking as much of your money as they were before.

30. The government should operate as efficiently as possible, and use as little of our money as possible. It will take a businessman's mind to correct the current model of "Some income, more expense".

Things I Understand about women

2008-05-24T08:01:00.001-07:00

(This Blog Intentionally Left Blank)

Movies

2008-05-23T11:26:00.000-07:00

I suppose this will be the easiest blog to start, given how much I love this topic. Everyone has an opinion on movies, and so do I. If yours differ from mine, let me know! The good news is I'll listen to your opinion. The bad news is that this is my blog, so my opinions are more important than yours.

This will probably be updated frequently, but not every movie deserves a place in these categories. Some movies are just good/bad without deserving a place below. A good example is "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe": it's a good movie, but doesn't deserve "Classics" status.

Classics - Should be required viewing. Debate is not an option when discussing these movies, they are fantastic.

Lion King - A fantastic Disney movie.

Major League - One of the best baseball movies of all time. Not for kids ears though: the curse-word free version has to be about 23 minutes long.

Young Frankenstein - A Mel Brooks Classic. If you don't find this funny, there is little help for you.

Rough Day - The best movies to watch after a day that would have been better had you not gotten out of bed.

The Alamo - Gotta love the violin. "It's amazing what a little harmony will do."

Band of Brothers - Any episode.

Count of Monte Cristo - The ultimate story of revenge. Fantastic movie (if you can find it and are willing to read subtitles, I hear the French version is amazing).

V for Vendetta - Another fantastic "Rough Day" movie.

Ladies Group - The best movies to earn brownie points.

For the Love of the Game - Great Baseball movie with a terrible love story thrown in. More of a "For both" than a "Ladies Group", as the baseball plot allows for "Male Only" viewing, but because of the love story, it can't go anywhere else. Remove the love story, and this goes to the "Classics" Category.

How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days - It could be worse, at least it's got Kate Hudson in it...

The Little Mermaid - If Ariel can't get you out of trouble, it's time to learn the subtle art of the foot massage, or consider purchasing a more comfortable mattress for the dog house, and installing cable.

The Notebook - Sad story. Use only as a last resort.

P.S. I Love You - Tear-jerker. Use only if The Notebook didn't work.

Only on a Saturday Night...at 2 AM...with friends... - self-explanatory.

Beerfest - Hilarious, but a better movie at 2 AM.

Dodgeball - And the award for "Best cameo in any movie" goes to....Lance Armstrong! (Thunderous Applause).

Harold and Kumar go to White Castle - Three words. Neil.Patrick.Harris.

Duds - No explanation necessary.

About Schmidt - Seriously Jack, was the rent due? And Kathy? Don't ever do that again...

Dude Where's My Car - barely...watchable...

Lorenzo's Oil - Yes, I know it's a good story. No, it shouldn't have ever been made.