Sunday, March 29, 2009

I'm Opposed To Taxation Without Representation - So TEA Party 4 Me

There's a TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party Coming April 15th Near You. Check it out at: http://www.teapartyday.com/

I don't know about you but I'm with our founding fathers and the Declaration of Independence on this. Taxation without representation has no place in this country. We fought a war against an oppressive government for freedom from such tyranny and it's worked out pretty well for over 200 years.

If you don't think that is happening, consider this:
  1. The bills being passed to deal with this economic mess commit us to record spending. That means record taxes too you know ... where do you think they get the money they're spending? It's OUR money ... ALL of us.
  2. Elected Republican representatives are being shut out of participating in formulation of those bills that address one of the most severe economic crises in our history. That means that some 40% of Americans have no representation in the creation of the bills or, therefore, in determining the consequences but we WILL be told we have to pay for it. (And so will our kids and their kids and ...) That's taxation with NO way for our interests to be heard. If we will be forced to pay for this shouldn't we have something to say about it in the first place? Wasn't that what the Declaration of Independence was all about?
  3. It's actually worse than that. Fact is, NO citizen can be sure his interests are being represented because those voting on these bills aren't even taking the time to read them much less understand them! How can they be sure their vote represents the will of the people they supposedly represent? They don't know the will of the people and they obviously don't care to know before they vote. They're not even interested in debating it for at least the principle of it. The process sounds kinda unconstitutional doesn't it?
  4. The Democratic leadership has denied Republican participation in the legislative process and won't allow alternative proposals a fair hearing much less debate. So which party is actually "the party of no"? At least when Bush pressed for his tax cuts he discussed it with the minority Democrats and made a compromise for them (he changed it from a permanent tax cut to a temporary one because of Democratic opposition). (BTW, what Democrats are calling tax cuts in their bill are NOT tax cuts that Republicans support so it's completely disingenuous to claim those tax cuts are a compromise to Republicans.)
  5. Bottom line: historical, economy-choking and wealth-stealing tax increases are in process by unilateral action of one political party with no effort to ensure it represents the will of a single American (see #3 above). It boggles my mind to think that even Democratic citizens are okay with this with respect to principles in/behind the Constitution and Declaration of Independence.
So, I think I need to attend the TEA party on April 15th. Even our smallish community is participating. If you want to check into it and see if there's one near you, check out the link at the top of this blog.

Wednesday, March 25, 2009

Mortgage Meltdown: Can't Fix The Problem Correctly Without Understanding It's REAL Causes

Isn't it logical that any fix we arrive at for a given problem will be more effective if we understand what caused the problem? Asked another way, how can we expect a fix to work if we don't even know whether it addresses the actual cause? Isn't it logical, if we don't understand a problem's cause, that our 'fix' even has a good chance of making the problem worse?

If your car won't start would you just get out your tool kit and replace the electronic ignition system? How much would that help if the gas tank were empty and you just forgot to look at the gas guage or the fuel filter was clogged shut?

Two key actions are actually what led to this meltdown. First president Clinton issued an executive order forcing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to make half their holdings be highly risky sub-prime loans (loans that were mostly given to people who actually couldn't afford them and wouldn't qualify for them under sensible criteria of the past). Low interest, no down payment and no real credit check. A disaster in the making. But that alone wouldn't have caused this disaster because the type of insurance needed to protect companies from defaults on this type of loan was regulated and it held this type of investment in check.

Then on December 21, 2000 lame-duck president Clinton signed into law a bill that significantly deregulated the credit default swap insurance industry and literally overnight these highly risky sub-prime mortgages started flooding the market. It was just a matter of when, not if, these would cause a collapse in the market.

Democrats love to say that 'eight years of Bush' and 'Republican deregulation' caused this economic meltdown when, in fact, eight years of Clinton and Clinton deregulation(!) caused it by his two actions described above. And several Democrats were prominent in the push for so-called 'affordable housing' as well as resistance to Bush's attempted corrections. In FACT, President Bush proposed legislation to re-regulate this industry and it was defeated by Democrats, led by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd who (irrationally and foolishly) insisted that Fannie and Freddie were healthy. Bush and other Republicans understood the risk to our economy and tried to INCREASE regulation of the credit default swap insurance industry. Ironically the party (Republicans) that didn't cause it but tried to fix it is the party being blamed for it.

Back to my original point. So, if we allow ourselves to believe the outright lie(!) that Republicans, especially Bush, caused this when, in fact, it was Democrats, what are the chances we'll arrive at the most effective fix (courtesy of the party that caused it)? The answer is a resounding NONE! That should make every American screaming mad! The Democrats' dishonesty and deceit should give us pause regarding pretty much all the legislation they're pushing through the legislature that is devoid of participation by Republicans.

Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Said I Was Done Messing W/Sprinkler Systems ... But

The guy who built our house used terrible fill dirt in the front and back yards. Just plain dirt, no organic material in it at all best we can tell. Not only does it not nourish plants, water runs through it like a sieve before plants can absorb much. So says the people who worked on our landscaping when I started complaining to them about how poorly our plants were doing.

One thing is clear to me. Having a ring of evergreens around our back yard and basic plants along the house on the same drip line (as it was installed) makes no sense. Can't control soil moisture well via only one drip line for trees that need deep watering and plants that need less. So I want to get the ring of trees on a separate drip line. Per a local sprinkler system installer, one new valve (including running wire to the existing controller), a water filter and misc connection materials ... $500! Gads! Who can afford that in this economy?

I looked into the cost of doing it myself ... $80. Is it worth crawling around in the dirt and digging stuff up? Let's see ... $420 savings = no-brainer! Plus, what red-blooded American male doesn't like playing in dirt and, if he's lucky, mud? Ha! Then there's tearing apart the existing contraption followed by gluing stuff together. The boy in me is happy. It also involves figuring out a clever way to fit more stuff into the 'vault' currently housing other valves so I have to design something that actually works. The engineer in me is happy too.

Got the parts. Next time it hasn't rained for a couple days this thing gets done!

Monday, March 16, 2009

On 'Getting' Educated: More Money Is NOT The Answer!

An education isn't something that can be 'given' to someone. We'll make better progress improving education if we'll accept this fact. Too many people irrationally think that giving more money to the education bureaucracy translates automatically (and magically) into giving our kids a better education. To become educated one must decide to learn. It is a personal choice, a personal action. What we adults (ie, taxpayers) must do is provide the environment, material and instruction in just a reasonably competent way. The rest (ie, actual learning!) is up to the students.

Problem is, once children become teenagers it becomes difficult to channel them to acceptance of anything, including an education. Sometimes, especially an education! If a teenager doesn't want to learn he/she won't. Take a couple other examples to illustrate my point. Parents can put a good meal on the table but a lot of kids can't/won't eat it because they're full of fast food or would rather go out with their friends for fast food. We can tell kids to get more exercise but, in the end, it's something they have to accept responsibility for doing, as it is for becoming educated. We can't give them a healthy cardio-vascular system any more than we can put educational materials in their heads.

I'm hoping this is an 'aha' moment for the more liberal folks who might be reading this. Are you beginning to understand that money cannot fix it the way it needs to be fixed? Read on for further proof and solutions.

So, why is it that high school test scores are unchanged since the Department of Education was created nearly 30 years ago (according the the Department of Education's own statistics)? Nearly 50% of all states' budgets go to education and the federal Department of Education budget has doubled in the past 10 years. My God! In the absolute sense, why isn't that enough money? What do we have to show for so much money going into the education system? Not much! At what point do we accept two things:
  1. Mind-boggling amounts of money hasn't fixed it yet so maybe it's time we accept it's illogical to think more money will fix it and

  2. Teenagers tend to be biased (by hormones, peer-pressure, disillusionment with and loss of respect for adults and/or adult authority, etc) against most any kind of attempted indocrination or act of authority by adults (at least those who don't do well in school) and we LET them get away with their unacceptable attitudes.

Maybe We Should Try ...
  1. Parents should be more responsible for their kids' education, making it their responsibility at least as much as it's the responsibility of schools (and taxpayers!).

  2. More accountability needs to be placed on the kids for becoming educated. Parents should be the primary 'enforcers'.

  3. Fewer excuses for kids who don't want to learn. Life is challenging to say the least and these young adults need to start realizing that their future is becoming THEIR responsibility as they enter high school.

  4. Boundaries in many areas, especially at home. Bad grades = fewer privileges. For example, reduced/no TV, computer, cell phone, and car use. Curfews and grounding from social activities.

  5. Stricter rules. Homework comes first ... before socializing, TV, computer, cell phone, etc. Homework and good grades become their primary responsibility. For those getting bad grades, very strict rules with no exceptions until exceptions are ... drumroll ... earned via improved grades!

  6. A decent study environment somewhere at home.

  7. Exercise. A healthy body is conducive to better learning and a better attitude toward becoming educated.

  8. Good food (especially limits on fast food). A healthy body is conducive to better learning and a better attitude toward becoming educated. Most kids need wayyyyy less caffiene, sugar and saturated fats in their diets.

  9. Adequate sleep. A healthy mind and body are conducive to better learning and a better attitude toward becoming educated.

  10. No TV, gaming consoles, phones, or computers in kids' rooms. When kids use computers their parents should know the kinds of things they're doing with/on them.

  11. Chores. It's good for kids to understand that with approaching adulthood comes with increased family responsibilities. Less of a free ride.

  12. Cars are a privilege for kids ... period. They're a need, sure, but NOT a right.

  13. Both parents must be involved in kids' progress by checking homework, helping with homework as necessary, checking test grades, and proactively checking in with teachers.

  14. Most students need to avail themselves of school and public library resources for extra help. For example, I found that different math books often helped me understand a new concept because a different author approached explanations with a bit different view that made it clearer for me. Doing this requires the student to accept responsibility for it.

  15. When I started making 'being an effective student' MY responsibility I learned material better, learned it faster and retained it longer. The main revelation I had in this regard was Plane Geometry in high school. I was failing the first nine weeks and was so scared of not passing that I started doing ALL the problems in the book, not just the ones the teacher assigned ... and I turned them all in. Another thing I did was move to the front of the class which forced me to be attentive even when I didn't feel like doing it. Even if a teacher has a seating arrangement he/she doesn't want to change, if a student who is struggling were to ask permission to move to the front row I doubt that many teachers would say no. The important thing to do is to take ownership for 'what =>I<= can do to become a better student'. The rest of my story in Plane Geometry is that I went from straight "F" work in the first nine weeks to straight "A" work the next nine weeks. And that happened because I started taking responsibility for being a good student. After starting to do this and other things I'm outlining herein, I never again worried about bad grades. One of my most interesting and important revelations was that teachers' competence mattered a whole lot less after I started taking personal responsibility for results in my life. My bad grades in Plane Geometry was a problem that didn't require ANY more taxpayer money to fix. In addition, my fix was a whole lot more effective.

  16. When I took OWNERSHIP of 'really/actually learning the material' my grades improved even more. There's a very important distinction in this. If 'a passing grade' is your objective that's about all you'll get, sometimes not even that however. If 'getting by with not reading all reading assignments' (ie, scanning rather than 'studying' the material) about all you'll get is a passing grade, sometimes not even that. If you're doing math problems assigned without rechecking your work or having someone else check it over all you'll get is a passing grade, sometimes not even that. When your objective becomes actually learning the material rather than turning in homework just to be turning something in, you'll not only succeed, you will get lots of A's.

  17. Another important step up for me was becoming more proactive in the classroom. Volunteering to put math and science problems on the board was a good move. It was scary at first but the more I did it, the more confidence I gained. Plus it's a really, really good way to hold yourself accountable to do homework well and actually learn the material. Raising my hand more to answer teachers' questions is another example. By the way, I started by volunteering for the easier problems/questions and worked my way up to volunteering for the most difficult ones.

  18. ALL Freshmen should be required to attend a well-structured class/seminar on Study and Learning Skills. Maybe it should be a special class given the week before the normal school year begins. Most high school students don't have very good study habits. Even those who do, however, could improve their learning skills. Things to cover in such a seminar include memorization skills/techniques, what constitutes an effective study environment, effective methods to learn a given subject tailored to what's most effective for each subject type, skills for reading faster with better rentention, time-management for students, note-taking skills (for use during lectures),test-taking skills, and effective participation in class.

  19. ALL parents should attend a seminar that covers such things as the bullet items above. For one thing, most parents could benefit in their personal lives from this information.

The items listed are valuable life skills too. In this increasingly high tech world, it's clear that learning is more of a lifetime requirement than ever before.

Ensuring the students are doing these things ought to be primarily the responsibility of their parents but one of the key things schools must do is provide tutoring help. Senior students could help with this as well as parents and others in the community. Mentoring is equally important for many students, especially when a student has only one parent or none at home.

One of the things I've learned over the years is that I could learn some of the most difficult subjects EVEN when the teacher wasn't all that effective. EVERYONE has ineffective teachers from time to tome. Students (AND PARENTS!) need to get over it and not let that be an excuse for doing poorly because learning, in the end, is their responsibility. I found that as long as I had good textbooks I could learn most any subject pretty well. Regardless of how supportive my parents were too. By the way, in case you're thinking I had a situation or capabilities that gave me an advantage to do this, I was just a middle-class kid whose father died when I was seven. And an IQ test I was forced to take in high school showed I had average intelligence. I had no special help and was fatherless but I became successful in school when I took personal responsibility for learning the subjects. No one, and I mean NO one, thought I'd accomplish something like a Master's Degree in Engineering from Stanford but that's what I did. While learning a subject more on your own requires a lot more discipline than when teachers are very competent and effective it's important to understand how much is possible to achieve.

I firmly believe that, with the proper personal commitment to learning, a student can learn any subject well enough to get, at a minimum(!), passing grades. The study of foreign languages may be an exception but for most basic courses in English, Literature, Math, Science, Government, History, and the like, a person can learn any subject pretty well armed only with a good quality new or used textbook and determination. What that tells me is that money isn't nearly the answer to the problems as the media, government, 'scholars' in the field of education, a large percentage of parents, and others would have us believe.

Sunday, March 15, 2009

US Department of Education: Budget, Conclusions and Recommendations Plus State Spending Postscript


The US Department of Education budget has grown from $14 Billion in 1980 when it was created and funded to around $70 Billion in recent years ... 5 times greater in 20 years. The greatest increase was during the Bush years. That'll be a surprise to most people because they won't hear the truth from the media. ED funding spiked to $100 Billion in 2006 when an extra one-time(!) $25 Billion was allocated as initial funding for the Federal Family Educational Loans program so that peak is kind of an anomaly in an otherwise reasonably consistent upward curve.

Democrats, especially President Obama, are playing political games with the curve and telling everyone that ED funding decreased under Bush ... which it has ONLY if you compare Bush's last two years with the year that had that one-time peak in it. Overall, ED funding increased about 80% under Bush. And you won't hear that Clinton's ED spending record is much worse than Bush's. (Note: there's a reason why Clinton was able to balance his budget ... ie, by cutting spending on education, military, national security, etc.). Stating the facts in a misleading way is what politicians and their willing accomplices in the media do in general.

Examine the curve and you'll see that ED funding increased about 80% during Bush's two terms. Compare it with Clinton's two terms. Bush increased it about 80% without even having a tech boom to help pay for it. So who's done a good job? Republicans or Democrats? Clinton or Bush? People need to seek out all the facts and not just drink the liberal Cool-Aid.

CONCLUSIONS:
In my previous blog, US Department of Education Report Card, I quoted that department's own statistics on what's happened with high school test scores. Basically they've pretty much remained unchanged since that department first started functioning in 1980. A reasonable person might assume that the results would have been the same if not better if the department had never been created. What have we gotten for those Billions? Certainly no improvement but it's not for lack of trying.

My wife and I experienced lots of experimenting with our kids' education. Various liberal 'fixes' to the stagnant level of quality included going to closed classrooms to open classrooms and back to closed classrooms, old math to new math to old math and lately to a new more intuitive math, and lots more experiments. NO ONE in the field of education can say we parents haven't been supportive of their experimenting on our kids in terms of either spending or support for their various new teaching methods. Nearly half of every state's budget goes to education alone and funding has doubled at the federal level in the past 10 years. Don't ask me to believe we're not spending enough! What do we have to show for it? No improvement and lots of excuses that are increasingly losing credibility after years of this nonsense.

RECOMMENDATIONS:
Now our new president, wants to pump wayyyy more Billions into education and, after seeing it double in this decade already, we haven't heard any explanation why we should blindly go along this time as we have for more than 20 years, especially at a time when we're in the middle of an economic crisis. After suffering through 20+ years of broken promises to get high school graduates more ready for the real world surely we can slow down just a little on this increase? At least long enough for someone to convince us why it WILL work this time to ensure we're not just throwing money at the problem that we can ill afford this time. In fact, many of us think it would be best to dismantle the federal Department of Education and much (most?) of the bureaucracy at the state level. Then send the savings, fairly apportioned, directly to the classroom level. I think many of us are ready to try this experiment: tell the bureaucrats, unions(!) and education theorists to get out of the way, stop messing with our schools and kids and let educators on the front line do what they've been trained to do!

As I said in my blog about education test score results, it appears that the greatest need is to direct our attention to high school test score improvements. I pointed out that test scores for all PRE-high school grades have increased significantly and consistently over the years while high school test results show no improvement. Therefore, all the consistent claims, mostly from liberals, about the need for pre-kindergarten education is difficult to understand and certainly can't be explained on the basis of test results, especially when compared with high school. If all pre-high school levels show consistent improvements but high school doesn't, where do YOU think we should be focusing our attention ... and taxpayer money?

What's the point of even trying to improve kindergarten level performance if the benefit can't be maintained, much less improved on, in high school? Instead of putting more effort and money into pre-kindergarten education, why don't we fix what's actually, undeniably broken? The only explanation I can think of for the left's emphasis on pre-kindergarten 'education' is that it's really taxpayer paid day care masquerading as 'education reform' which sounds all noble but is entirely smoke and mirrors.

STATE SPENDING EXAMPLE:
The states' own budgets for K-12 education is an equally difficult bang-for-the-buck challenge to swallow. For example, did you know that California's K-12 education budget was $50 Billion (approximately HALF the entire state budget) for the school year 2007-2008 and that education spending from all sources, including federal ($6.7 Billion!) was around $70 Billion? That translates into $12,000/pupil for grades K-12. One thing I've always found interesting is that, in California, liberal legislators call it a CUT in education funding if the governor or Republican legislators want to remove something from the proposed budget even though the remaining amount would still be more than the previous year's allocation.

With K-12 funding consuming close to half of every state's budget, how can anyone argue that the fix is to SPEND more? It's fundamentally illogical, especially since all this money we're spending has led to no significant improvement.

Friday, March 13, 2009

US Department of Education Report Card

The Department of Education, was created by laws passed in 1979 and it began official operations on May 4, 1980. Here are its own statistics (ie, From the National Center for Education Statistics at the U.S. Department of Education's Institute of Education Sciences on their website: http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/ltt/results2004/).

These are the average scores for 17-year olds about to graduate from high school. (Note: The first scores are for the earliest years reported by the website.)

Reading ("Average Scale Scores"):
1980: 285
1992: 290
2004: 285

Writing ("Average Scale Scores"):
1998: 150
2007: 153

Math ("Average Scale Scores"):
1980: 300
1992: 307
2004: 307

Science ("Average Scale Scores"):
1996: 150
2005: 147

Reading scores are the same today as the day ED, the Department of Education, started operating. It's true that the scores increased slightly between then and now to a peak of 290 but it's a pretty small peak and scores have decreased steadily since then.

Writing scores are the only ones that increased but it wasn't much and to the extent what we see written in opinion pages, general media, advertising, and other sources is an indication of competency in grammar and general expression, the writing ability of our high school and even college graduates is none too impressive.

Math scores haven't improved since the early 90's. We got a little value out of ED before then but nothing since.

Science scores decreased slightly since the early 1990's. Considering that high tech endeavors are increasingly driving the economic engines of successful countries this is very discouraging.

Test scores in all areas of learning did increase substantially and consistently(!) for grade school and middle school children in all areas of learning but what good is that if such increases cannot be sustained through high school since, at graduation, they become the students' tools in the real world. For that reason I haven't included those statistics. High school graduates' scores are the ones that matter as a tool for measuring likely success as adults and those are the scores that stagnated at least 20 years ago.

An important point to make is that all the hubbub over pre-kindergarten education and 'getting children ready for grade school' is way overblown based on test results that show CONSISTENT increases for all for pre-high school grades. I have a revolutionary idea, why don't we pay more attention to the areas in which test scores show there is an actual measurable need? Duh! That would be, drum roll, high school! Hello? With all grades except high school making improvements, by what warped logic can anyone claim pre-kindergarten (or any other pre-high school level) is where we need to focus? The education 'experts' tell us with their own data(!) that all grades except high school are improving and then they say that where we need to focus is getting children better prepared for grade school. Grade schools are improving and high schools aren't so we need to fix grade schools? Say, what? These are supposed to be our smart people fixing this. With thinking like this is it any wonder our high school graduates aren't any more skilled than those from 20 years ago or more? And with logic like this, what are the chances it'll improve any time soon?

Indeed, intuition and annecdotal information also strongly speak to multiple needs highschoolers have that aren't being met besides strictly academic ones. I strongly disagree with the focus I hear from mostly liberal circles that we need more emphasis on pre-kindergarten education or, for that matter, on kindergarten, grade school or middle school either. Why not fix what's wrong at the high school level first since their own test results show that's what needs fixing? Could it be that this pre-kindergarten education need is actually tax-payer funded day care masquerading as 'education reform'?

Wednesday, March 11, 2009

An Inconvenient Document

The Declaration of Independence made our founding fathers' intentions clear. This was to be a Republic. Separate writings and the Pledge of Allegiance attest to this too so it's undeniably true. What that means is that all citizens are supposed to have fair representation. To fully understand what that means one has to read other writings. They were dead set against control by one political party.

Unfortunately we do have one-party control now because Democrats lock our elected Republican representatives out of the room when creating legislation and they steamroller their bills through the legislature. In fact, Democratic leaders in the legislative and executive branches declared openly that "we won ... we get to do it OUR way, period". Brazen? Oh yeah. Arrogant? Definitely. It's wrong in any regard but especially in the context of that apparently insignificant and pesky little document called The Declaration of Independence. That document declared this to be a Republic whose government is a government of, by and for ALL The People. How do Democrats square their behavior and principles with that founding document? Obviously they can't. It is, therefore, an Inconvenient Document and is clearly antithetical to their aims and even principles.

Then there's the Constitution. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that our founding fathers intended for this to be a two-party (at least) system. Not only was the Constitution constructed for that but for a balance of powers among the three branches of government. Clearly they sought BALANCE of power among parties and branches. What do you think they'd say to one party's leaders saying "we won ... we get to do it OUR way, period"? What would they say to some 40% of Americans not having their concerns voiced, much less debated, on the floor of the House or Senate? What would they say to a $1 Trillion spending bill being passed without a single representative in the House or Senate having time to read the bill, much less understand and digest it? It was passed not because it was a good bill (because no one can know without reading it) but for partisan, agenda-serving and special interest-serving reasons. This was a bill that began significant government reform AND committed record amounts of national debt, yet The People weren't given a chance to hear what was in it much less express their will. This bill was totally the will of one party. Well, doesn't that fly in the face of the Constitution and constitutional principles expressed by our founding fathers? How do Democrats square their behavior and principles with that founding document? Obviously they can't. It ALSO is, therefore, an Inconvenient Document and is clearly antithetical to their aims and even principles.

So much for fair representation. Remember what we told the Iraqis about forming their government ... that their government MUST include the interests of Sunni's, Shiites AND even the small minority Kurds? They were told that there must be fair and representative OUTCOMES in legislation too. We're good at telling other countries what's fair to their citizens but arrogant control prevails within the ruling party in America. Ruling party? Doesn't that sound kinda like a dictatorship or autocracy? Even if you're a Democrat, doesn't that sound like it's probably not good for our country?

Sunday, March 8, 2009

Planning The Fly Fishing Trip With Matt Is Progressing

















Pics: Mighty Mo (Missouri River), Son Matt

Matt (who lives in Rathdrum ID with his wife, Heather, and pup, Johnny Cash) and I will be off on a fishing trip in the Helena MT area Sept 17-19 using our 26' Nash trailer for lodging. We have a half-day guided float trip planned the afternoon of the 17th, the day we arrive, followed by a full-day guided float the next day. Both will most likely be on the Missouri River, an excellent fishery. We'll decide what to do (chilling, fishing, whatever) the first half of the 19th when we drag ourselves out of bed and I'll return Matt to his wife later that day.

Fishing the Missouri River can be a lot of fun. There are plenty of good-size trout in the river and they put up a good fight. One never knows how the fishing will be but the time Matt and I have together will be sweet no matter how well the fish are cooperating. We haven't done anything like this together before just the two of us. (The move from PA to San Jose doesn't count cause that wasn't just chillin' and doing 'guy stuff'.)

How I'm going to get up there from here in Roseburg is a whole other adventure with my wife that will be a good subject for another blog.

(Note: Might Mo photo courtesy of Missouri Riverside Outfitters in MT.)

Saturday, March 7, 2009

Planning The Fly Fishing Trip With Chris Is Progressing














Pics: Upper Sacramemto River, Son Chris

(Note: I'm planning fly fishing trips with both of my sons, Chris and Matt. The one with Matt is later in the year and a blog is coming on that one as more details are known.)

Chris and I will find ourselves on the Upper Sacramento River in early June using our trailer for lodging. I'll be arriving in the area a week or two ahead of him in order to find a good campground, get the trailer set up and scope out the best places for us to spend our time fishing.

Originally we were going to the Quincy CA area (an hour's drive East of the Sacramento River) where I have more fishing experience but environmental concerns have led CA's Dept of Fish & Game to stop stocking rivers in much of Plumas County there. I've heard lots of good reports about rivers in other areas of NorCal so I'm comfortable trying them out. Like a lot of things in life, this unexpected need to change plans will probably work out better. Whatever happens, time with Chris is its own reward as it will be with Matt too when we hit the Mighty Mo together in September.

Since Chris and I are fishing in an area unfamiliar to both of us I decided on one day of guided fishing and picked the Upper Sacramento River which I've always wanted to check out. When I've used guides on other fishing excursions it was always for a float trip by boat. This time we'll be walking which is good because we both prefer that over fishing from boats. The guide, Michael Caranci (The Fly Shop in Redding CA), says we'll be 'pocket fishing' which is also a little different for both Chris and me. It's good to expand our horizons and learn something different so we're looking forward to the experience.

More info coming as more details are worked out. (By the way, the Upper Sac River photo is courtesy of The Fly Shop in Redding CA)

Materialism and Greed Got Us Into This Trouble - It Won't Get Us Out

We cannot spend our way out of this economic nightmare. Not by any level of spending ... federal, state and local government, company or individual. Greed and materialism got us into this. More insane spending won't fix the underlying cause and the problem will only get worse.

We've built an economy on debt with American enterprise and work ethic as collateral. A little debt is helpful to grow the economy if we use it to invest in our future. However, spending like crazy just to have better 'stuff' than the next person is economically sick. It doesn't say much for our values and principles either. Whatever happened to living within one's means? Being in debt used to be thought of as something to be avoided. It would be best for us to get back to those kinds of principles.

Now the President is encouraging us to just 'spend' to get our economy going again but that isn't the answer. We don't have the money to spend. It's gone. So how does more debt help fix this problem? If we could go cold-turkey on mindless spending and credit card debt our economy would recover faster and in a much healthier way. Problem with that is it means the obvious pain of companies going out of business because they've become so dependent on Americans going into debt to buy 'stuff'. But people, even the President, don't seem to understand that just 'spending' is even more painful because this level of debt in our country (especially if we increase it by trying to spend our way out) will kill our economy for farther into the future than we can possibly imagine.

The best solution is practicing better fiscal responsibility at all levels ... government, companies and individuals. Restrained spending and more saving (ie, living within our means) will be really, really good for us in the long run. Swallow the bitter pill now for a much healthier future.

Friday, March 6, 2009

Unrepresentative Government

Regarding my previous blog about Congress and the President not representing the people, consider the following comparison and the implications.

Take the Iraq government for example. There are approximately twice as many Shiite's as Sunni's in Iraq and Kurds represent a very small minority of its citizens. We all know how well publicized it was that our government insisted on fair representation of not only the two large groups but of even the SMALL Kurdish minority as well. (This is consistent with a republic form of government which ours is ... or at least was as founded.) The recent history of Iraq's new government is very clear that while the Iraq government was being formed and while Iraqis' elected representatives were considering historic government and economic reforms, our government (Democrats, Republicans, the State Department, and President) INSISTED ON fair and balanced participation, consideration and OUTCOMES that included the interests of all three groups of people, including the small minority Kurdish population.

Compare that with what's going on in our own country. Republicans are not even being allowed in the room while leading Democrats decide the contents of legislation and what nature of legislation gets pursued. In fact, the Democratic leaders in the legislative and executive branches made a point multiple times of saying(!) "we won so we get to say what's in legislation [regardless what Republicans want]". In fact, bills' voting percentages SCREAM that Republicans aren't being allowed ANY semblance of a voice in what becomes law in our country ... even for these large and sweeping reforms currently under way.

Our government insisted on fair representation of ALL groups in Iraq's government and instisted that the outcome include fair representation of all people's interest. Yet we allow one party complete control over sweeping government, economic and other reforms, including record mind-boggling debt that ALL Americans will have to pay for, not just the Democrats who are creating that debt.

We (arrogantly?) held our own constitution and republic-based principles up to the Iraqis as the standard. Not only do our current actions show us for the hypocrites we are but it shows in dramatic fashion how far we've strayed from our own republic-based principles as contained in both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

This is wrong, simply wrong! How can any American citizen stand for this? What's going on in our own legislative and executive branches is unconscionable, demonstrably unconstitutional and definitely not consistent with the principles of a republic that our founding fathers intended nor that they in fact created vis a vis the constitution and other documents such as the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.

I, for one, am outraged! I fear great harm can come to our country running it this way.

Congress and President: How Can This Be Called Representing The People and The Constitution?

Why don't they get it? We The People Want AND The Country NEEDS:
  1. NO EARMARKS in any bill at least until one year after the economy recovers.
  2. REDUCED GOVERNMENT SPENDING ... across the board so that income exceeds outgo for at least one year.
  3. REDUCED TAXES to prime the economic pump where most jobs are created most effectively ... in small to medium size companies.
Why can't government do what all citizens are having to do right now ... reduce our budget/spending? Why do they care more about political agendas than our economic stability? Why don't they understand that they work for us and do not have a right OR responsibility to tell us what to do?

This is supposed to be a representative form of government. That means:
  1. They have a constitutional responsibility/duty to find out what We The People want them to do then do that.
  2. They have a constitutional responsibility/duty to ensure fair participation of all political parties represented by membership in the house and senate.
  3. By way of #1 and #2 above, they are constitutionally prohibited from putting party, politics, agendas, etc ahead of either the will of the people, the welfare of our citizens or the best interests of our country.
  4. By way of #1 and #2 above, they are constitutionally prohibited from locking minority parties out of fair and representative participation in the legislative process.
  5. They're obliged to honor their oath of office by which they swear(!) to serve the people and the constitution. The constitution and people do not serve their desires, period!
The principles at the heart of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution aren't complicated and neither is their oath of office. So what's going on here?

Thursday, March 5, 2009

Bailing Out Companies In This Much Trouble In This Kind Of Economy Is A Fool's Errand

As many of us conservatives have been saying since September, trying to bail out companies in that much trouble, especially when the economy is in this much trouble, is a fool's errand. We said then and we say now that throwing money at the problem does three (BAD) things:

  1. It creates only an illusion of helping solve the problem. Makes one feel like he's 'doing something'. Of course 'something' must be done. While it's unattractive in the absolute sense and is certainly painful, a structured bankruptcy has to be considered more seriously.
  2. It creates the false hope that severe economic pain can be avoided. There are elements of our society that are highly invested in avoiding pain, no matter the cost and no matter how much a waste of time, energy and resources it is. Pain is unavoidable. But pain is good because it helps us be more effective and resolute in preventing it the next time the same circumstances start materializing that caused the pain before.
  3. Turning off the money spigot is extremely difficult when the companies come crawling back for more. And they will because the spigot and, perhaps, the reservoir itself aren't big enough. The bucket we're pouring that money into has at least a couple of holes in the bottom. One is the product and how it's been managed in a way that helped create the problem. Another hole is the bad economy. Another way to look at it is we're throwing money at the symptoms while the root problems go unresolved for the most part. We're treating symptoms (money is a nice bandage) while the disease (holes in the bucket) continues killing the patient.
Businesses can't and don't survive using this kind of model (throwing mind-boggling amounts of money at a problem) but federal bureaucrats in government don't have to concern themselves with keeping the bottom line healthy. After all, they can just print more money!

When companies start developing a new product they start by committing significant money to the project. What managers of successful companies know is that it's better to kill the project when the money being spent no longer appears to be capable of producing a desired result. What they know is that the money spent so far is sunk cost and should have NO bearing on a decision whether to continue funding the project. They look at the options ahead of them and do a cost/benefit analysis of each. What's been spent is spent. They can't do anything about that now. Often, heading off down a different path than they started down is the best option for the FUTURE of the company. They can walk away from something that turned out to be a bad decision and feel good about it because it's the right thing to do now. They're more interested in the survival of the company and don't live in denial like people with political agendas do.

There's even an old saying about pouring even more money into something that's not working out: throwing good money after bad. Stopping an effort when it begins to look fruitless is also called cutting your losses. Sure, it hurts to have spent all that money and get nothing for it. But pursuing the folly hurts more! You can't avoid pain at that point but you get to choose which pain you're willing to suffer. The folly of keeping up a hopeless effort and the huge price one pays for doing that are key lessons learned in Business 101 ... by those who paid attention.

Tuesday, March 3, 2009

I Enjoy Windows OS Updates Almost As Much As A Tooth Extraction

Installing the SP2 update to XP was such torture. It took three attempts trying different approaches to disabling stuff and removing some old 3rd party software. The SP3 update isn't going any better even though I'm doing everything Microsoft's website recommends for preparing my computer for that update. After two failed SP3 update attempts I'm giving up. After many, many hours wasted on these two updates I'm inclined to just leave it at the SP2 level and not voluntarily undergo this torture again.

Monday, March 2, 2009

There It Goes Right Down The Crapper!

Hear that sound? It's our economy AND and the Constitution's two-party representative principles being flushed right down the toilet.