BrotherDan’s Investing for No Dummies
A big investment trend in the bucolic Clinton years (don’t you miss them?) was the Green Fund, a means for investors to ensure that their monies were improving rather than degrading the planet. Such thinking is so Twentieth Century! Now that we’re deep into Bushtime, we need investment vehicles that fit the times! I propose the GOP version of the Green Fund; let’s call it the Greed Fund. It’s a fund that invests in companies that will do well under Bush policies. We got the idea the other day at the office. Scott posed this question: “if Bush is spending so much of my money to rebuild New Orleans, how can I invest to get some of that back. My answer was “But Scott, it’s not YOU who is paying for this; it’s my new Grandaughter! Just for good measure, I forwarded the message to Danny (AKA BrotherDan, who did that great “Rancho Boguso” entry in this journal earlier this summer. Here are is picks for a greed fund: “Go long on weapons manufacturers, casket companies, big pharma, big oil, big gas, companies that sell bandages of any kind, artificial limb manufacturers, logging interests, mining firms ... dump auto, even Bush can't save them in the long run. Sell short: Environmental services companies, alternative energy firms -- careful with agribusiness stocks, with mad cow and PCBs in fish being big concerns, though careful spin of the one or two scary factoids that squeak out of a locked down government can mitigate the risk ... Better yet, do this -- the list of Republican donors is available from the RNC. Get it, look up the companies they own, and buy like a demon ... you too can feel like an inside trader!”
09.17.05 @ 08:39 PM EDT [link]
Feature of the Week
The events of 2005 so far have revealed the bankruptcy of the right wing point of view, a bankrptcy we're all along for the ride on. For a convenient summary of this point of view, and a point by point comparison with reality, see Side by Side.
09.16.05 @ 10:29 PM EDT [link]
Pared to the Bone
Washington Times Headline: “DeLay declares 'victory' in war on budget fat.” "House Majority Leader Tom DeLay said yesterday that Republicans have done so well in cutting spending that he declared an 'ongoing victory,' and said there is simply no fat left to cut in the federal budget. Mr. DeLay was defending Republicans' choice to borrow money and add to this year's expected $331 billion deficit to pay for Hurricane Katrina relief. Some Republicans have said Congress should make cuts in other areas, but Mr. DeLay said that doesn't seem possible. 'My answer to those that want to offset the spending is sure, bring me the offsets, I'll be glad to do it. But nobody has been able to come up with any yet,' the Texas Republican told reporters at his weekly briefing. Asked if that meant the government was running at peak efficiency, Mr. DeLay said, 'Yes, after 11 years of Republican majority we've pared it down pretty good.'"
Wife to Husband: “Honey, I know you’re upset about the statement but I’ve been cutting the household budget to the bone for the last 11 years. You just don’t bring home enough to cover it, so I had to run up the credit card.”
Child to Mother: “Mom, I’m down to the minimum number of outfits Barbie needs per month, and my allowance is too small. You need to give me little Petey’s allowance too.”
Driver to Mechanic: “I’ve reduced the repairs to the minimum needed to make the car drivable, but I don’t make enough to cover the bill. You’ll need to make up the difference for me.”
Criminal to Judge: “Why did I do it, Your Honor? I went straight for 11 years, but didn’t make enough to get by, so I just had to knock off that elementary school!”
09.15.05 @ 10:33 PM EDT [link]
Top o’ the News
I recently saw something interesting about the New York Times. It is a Times editorial standard to place the most significant news item of the day in the upper right hand column of the front page. If memory serves, it was Safire who revealed this interesting tidbit on what the paper of record is most interested in recording for history. So what news item did the Times most want posterity to know about September 13, 2005? It was that Bush actually, perhaps for the first time of his Administration (and maybe his life?) took responsibility for the results of an organization he heads, in this case the Federal executive branch. This was also headline news on the other papers I read. (And not to be cynical, but all he really did was confirm his job description as President. He still hasn’t admitted any mistakes or accepted blame as opposed to responsibility). What’s striking about this picture is that it should be any kind of news at all that any leader of any organization would admit responsibility for unambiguous results. Or maybe it’s just me – at West Point they pounded into our heads that the Commander is responsible for everything his unit does or fails to do. Considering that Bush revels in his Constitutional role as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, to the point of even returning military salutes, perhaps some of this military ethos has finally rubbed off on him. I think it more likely that Karl Rove got some focus group results indicating that people were tired of Bush trying to squirm out of responsibility, for example by staying on message with the Bush Administration’s catch phrase since Katrina: “Blame Game.” Every time Bush or his surrogates used that phrase (and they’ve been using it a lot ), the clear message is “don’t blame me! Besides, in this case the Base won’t be too unhappy for Bush taking some responsibility. They’ll just keep repeating the theme we’ve seen in so many recent letters to the editor: “Bush didn’t cause the hurricane.” They hold the same attitude about public expectations that was expressed by George W. Bush in this actual quote: “One of the common denominators I have found is that expectations rise above that which is expected.” Not to mention flood waters!
09.14.05 @ 07:49 PM EDT [link]
Some Precursors to the Great New Orleans Flood Disaster
Once the political leadership takes up the “hate the government” mantra, is it any surprise that others will take up the chorous?
- We must care for each other more, and tax each other less. Bill Archer
- Death and taxes may be inevitable, but they shouldn't be related. J.C. Watts, Jr.
- The income tax created more criminals than any other single act of government. Barry Goldwater
- Collecting more taxes than is absolutely necessary is legalized robbery. Calvin Coolidge
- Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys. P.J. O'Rourke
- A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away. Barry Goldwater
- Blessed are the young, for they shall inherit the national debt. Herbert Hoover, attributed
- When government accepts responsibility for people, then people no longer take responsibility for themselves. George Pataki
- Morphine and state relief are the same. You go dopey, feel better and are worse off. Martin H. Fischer
- Bureaus are extrusions from the body politic - they are pus. Martin H. Fischer
- You know why there are so many whitefish in the Yellowstone River? Because the Fish and Game people have never done anything to help them. Russell Chatham
- The Lord's Prayer is 66 words, the Gettysburg Address is 286 words, there are 1,322 words in the Declaration of Independence, but government regulations on the sale of cabbage total 26,911 words. National Review
- Government is an unnecessary evil. Human beings, when accustomed to taking responsibility for their own behavior, can cooperate on a basis of mutual trust and helpfulness. Fred Woodworth
09.13.05 @ 08:15 PM EDT [link]
Grover Norquist True to Form
Grover, a frequent skeweree of this journal, has weighed in on the meaning of the great New Orleans disaster of 2005. His prescription to address the $200+ Billion needed? No surprise: he says we need tax cuts! In honor of his consistency, we reprise a funny story about old Grover.
09.12.05 @ 10:52 PM EDT [link]
The Right Wing Reveals its True Values
The political right clearly feels its back is against the wall and is coming out swinging. While they doubtless see their increased energy level as an appropriate rallying to the defense of their political hegemony, I see it more as a revelation of their true nature. It’s a truism that disaster brings out the best and worst in people, and this disaster is certainly no exception. What good right-wing values are on display? Certainly callousness. A recurring theme in right wing responses to the devastation boils down to “they asked for it, so it’s not our problem.” They place great import on the vulnerabilities of the Gulf Coast and particularly New Orleans to hurricanes, and cite this is a reason to just walk away. Am I exaggerating? Anyone following the news has heard and read the phrase “it will just flood again” over and over. Here are some quotes from our Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert: “We ought to take a second look at it” "some real tough questions to ask," and "It looks like a lot of that place could be bulldozed." These remarks are echoed by many on the right wing. They clearly aren’t thinking through the implications of what they’re saying. Are we to abandon every city for which there is a disaster risk? The obvious problem with that approach is that every region faces some kind of risk, whether natural or, in these dangerous times, man-made. Should we raze San Francisco to avoid the need to rebuild after the next inevitable earthquake? Should we clear out tornado alley to eliminate its periodic involuntary mode of natural urban renewal? Should we empty out coastal cities in the face of a tsunami threat made all the more tangible by the events of the 2004 holiday season? Should we not build any more tall buildings because they’re vulnerable to 9/11 style attacks? Conversely, should disaster strike, should we point to known risk factors (and there are always risk factors) and sniff “they asked for it, so it’s not our problem?” In addition to being callous, this is also cowardly. What else but cowardice is running away from every challenge? The rational approach is to assess the risks that each unique part of our great nation faces with open eyes, investing where necessary to preempt disaster, and budgeting for the capability to respond to and rebuild from disaster. So I would ask anyone who has said “they asked for it, so it’s not our problem” to consider whether they would have the rest of the country adopt this attitude when disaster strikes on their own turf.
09.11.05 @ 08:52 PM EDT [link]