Rio Vista, California is yet another morality tale about how government spending, which includes public sector benefits, has spun out of control:
Link1 [replaced dead link]
Link 2 [replaced dead link]
In Vallejo, CA, another city that had to file bankruptcy, police and firefighter unions tried to force the city out of bankruptcy court so they could preserve their own government benefits--at the expense of the general taxpayers. How many more California cities have to go bankrupt before our government starts protecting taxpayers from unreasonable government spending, which includes comparatively much higher salaries and benefits in the public sector? (See Malanga article for comparison of private vs. public employees)
The costs of pensions and lifetime health care benefits depend on employees' lifespans and are difficult to estimate, because some employees may live longer or may need care that far exceeds the estimated costs. As a result, it's very difficult to ascertain employee pension liabilities because so many unpredictable factors are involved. Inevitably, because of the uncertainty involved in calculated how many years a public employee has to be paid after retirement, the government will have under-funded pensions. The result is that the taxpayers--and our children--will suffer as a result of the government continuing to provide itself with generous and hard-to-estimate benefits. Almost no private sector employees receive pensions anymore because companies figured out they shouldn't be in the insurance business. If a voluntary 401(k) or 403(b) plan is good enough for most engineers, nurses, and lawyers, why isn't it acceptable for government workers, firefighters, and police officers? Who exactly is the government protecting and serving?
"And if an epitaph be my story, I'd have a short one ready for my own: I had a lover's quarrel with the world." -- Robert Frost
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Cisco's Annual Shareholder Meeting (2008)
Cisco's (CSCO) annual shareholder meeting was held on November 13, 2008 at the Santa Clara Convention Center. The meeting was open to all--Cisco did not check to see if anyone was actually a shareholder. The food spread was above average--OJ, cranberry juice, bagels, fruit, and Starbucks coffee (what I call "the Convention Center special").
Cisco ran its meeting professionally, almost too much so--at times, the meeting felt like a stiff, over-starched white-collared shirt. No one was allowed to ask spontaneous questions, because all questions had to be written down and submitted to employees, who would pick and choose which ones they wanted to display to the CEO. The meeting was designed to run smoothly, and with no unexpected problems or risks. Well, you know what they say--"Man plans, God laughs."
During one of the shareholder proposals relating to China, an older Chinese shareholder stood up and demanded to be heard. He held his hand in the air continuously and would not sit down, even after a Cisco employee came up to him. He had an issue with shareholder proposals being voted on without soliciting public comments. He had a point, but his heavily-accented English made him hard to understand. To his credit, CEO John Chambers later addressed the gentleman's concerns. Mr. Chambers said, towards the end of the informal presentation, that Cisco did not modify its equipment for any customer--the equipment is the same, i.e. "no unique capabilities [are given] to any government in the world." He also made a point of walking towards the gentleman to garner his support. I've never seen a CEO make an effort to approach an audience member who appeared somewhat aggressive, and Mr. Chamber's pro-active behavior made him instantly likable. After the meeting, I saw someone from Cisco talking politely with the gentleman, who appeared to be hawking his book. This high level of corporate professionalism is much talked about, but rarely practiced.
The formal part of the meeting had two presentations, one by Harrington Investments, and another by Boston Common Asset Management. Both focused on human rights issues and transparency. Ms. Carol Malnick (of Boston Common) made very interesting points. She said that censorship would decrease Internet traffic in the long run by discouraging new Internet users and limiting the use of existing users. Cisco's growth, of course, depends on more Internet users. It basically sells products that gets computers to talk to each other over the Internet, and the more computers sold with Internet capability, the more Cisco grows. She asked Cisco not to exit certain international markets, but to be transparent. She listed several countries she felt were Internet censors, including Saudi Arabia, China, Algeria, and Syria. I thought Carol Malnick's presentation was much more effective and polished. Others agreed--only 68% voted against her proposal, while 98% voted against the Harrington proposal. After her presentation, CEO Chambers made a point to use the word, "transparent" several times while looking directly at Ms. Malnick, as if to say, "We hear you, and even though we defeated your proposal, we are working on it." This was a very gracious and conscious move by Mr. Chambers.
CEO Chambers had a video and spoken presentation. The opening slide spelled "Globalization" as "Globalisation," with an "s," indicating that a British employee had worked extensively on the presentation. Mr. Chambers talked about a "six point gameplan," which focused on general ideas, like investing in emerging markets (note: I am sick of hearing about "emerging markets" at shareholder meetings--of course companies must invest in other countries) and Web 2.0. He said that Cisco had "3,000 telepresences a week," which meant that Cisco's sales force was connecting to thousands of potential buyers domestically and worldwide, without the need for any travel. If the telepresences, like the ones you see on Star Trek, become commonly used, it will be Cisco that takes us there. Mr. Chambers acknowledged that some companies wouldn't feel the need to upgrade their technology, which would limit the roll out of newer internet products; however, he was also hopeful, saying that the "next wave of productivity" would happen, and Cisco would be at its forefront. After some more generalities of "vision, strategy, and execution," Mr. Chambers showed a moving video presentation.
This video presentation showed the effects of the devastating 2008 earthquake in the Sichuan Province of China. In a brilliant move, John Chambers traveled there immediately after the earthquake and worked with the cities to rebuild their infrastructure. Cisco donated 45 million dollars to rebuilding efforts (See News Report). The cynic in me says that Mr. Chambers is a PR genius. He knows China represents his company's best chance for growth with its 1.2 billion people. By going to China and lending a hand and funds, he hopes Cisco will be remembered down the line by the Chinese government. But Mr. Chambers has a way of winning people over. He appeared completely sincere when he spoke about his experience in China. In fact, I almost teared up after watching the video. Various pictures were shown of Mr. Chambers interacting with earthquake survivors amidst the rubble, and he joked that a young Chinese boy who was bold enough to approach him would grow up to be a Cisco salesman. Mr. Chambers also mentioned a little girl who hadn't spoken since the earthquake but who spoke again after seeing new faces arrive. The girl, of course, represented the power of the human spirit, something we all implicitly understood. At this moment in the presentation, you could have heard a pin drop. It was hard not to be emotionally affected after seeing the pictures of the two children.
Most important, Mr. Chambers called upon us to act, saying that it was an "embarrassment to us" that 3 billion people in the world live on less than three dollars a day, because we had the power to change this situation. He said that Cisco's worldwide expansion would help "700 million people in China" because Cisco brought high paying jobs and the increased likelihood of a middle class, not only in China, but all over the Middle East. His implication was clear--Cisco would help usher in a new era of worldwide progress.
The Q&A session began, with questions presented to Cisco employees on index cards, which were then typed on a large screen behind Mr. Chambers. One question asked about Cisco's 27 billion dollars in cash. This elicited a funny remark from Mr. Chambers, who said that in the current unstable market environment, "cash is king, queen and the entire royal family." He also said that before he left the company, Cisco would pay a dividend to shareholders. Paying a dividend would help stabilize Cisco's stock price, because the dividend would attract long-term investors and would prevent Cisco from using their cash in unproductive ways. (Also, paying a dividend might allow more mutual funds to buy Cisco stock.) The best question was tongue-in-cheek: "In the spirit of GM, what could make GM obsolete?" Mr. Chambers sat down to show the audience he took this question seriously and said that Cisco hadn't lost its sense of urgency. He mentioned Lucent and other companies that used to be technology high fliers and talked about Cisco's growth and its desire to continue growing.
On their way out, shareholders were treated to a Cisco-branded luggage tag holder, an interesting choice, given that Cisco's technology will probably decrease business air travel.
Overall, Cisco's meeting was run very professionally. In the future, Cisco ought to allow live, spontaneous questions and comments prior to voting on shareholder proposals. Beyond that, Cisco looks like a company well-positioned to benefit from the worldwide expansion of Internet users.
Disclosure: as of November 19, 2008, I own 6100 shares of Cisco (CSCO). I will, however, reduce my positions before the end of the year if not sooner.
Cisco ran its meeting professionally, almost too much so--at times, the meeting felt like a stiff, over-starched white-collared shirt. No one was allowed to ask spontaneous questions, because all questions had to be written down and submitted to employees, who would pick and choose which ones they wanted to display to the CEO. The meeting was designed to run smoothly, and with no unexpected problems or risks. Well, you know what they say--"Man plans, God laughs."
During one of the shareholder proposals relating to China, an older Chinese shareholder stood up and demanded to be heard. He held his hand in the air continuously and would not sit down, even after a Cisco employee came up to him. He had an issue with shareholder proposals being voted on without soliciting public comments. He had a point, but his heavily-accented English made him hard to understand. To his credit, CEO John Chambers later addressed the gentleman's concerns. Mr. Chambers said, towards the end of the informal presentation, that Cisco did not modify its equipment for any customer--the equipment is the same, i.e. "no unique capabilities [are given] to any government in the world." He also made a point of walking towards the gentleman to garner his support. I've never seen a CEO make an effort to approach an audience member who appeared somewhat aggressive, and Mr. Chamber's pro-active behavior made him instantly likable. After the meeting, I saw someone from Cisco talking politely with the gentleman, who appeared to be hawking his book. This high level of corporate professionalism is much talked about, but rarely practiced.
The formal part of the meeting had two presentations, one by Harrington Investments, and another by Boston Common Asset Management. Both focused on human rights issues and transparency. Ms. Carol Malnick (of Boston Common) made very interesting points. She said that censorship would decrease Internet traffic in the long run by discouraging new Internet users and limiting the use of existing users. Cisco's growth, of course, depends on more Internet users. It basically sells products that gets computers to talk to each other over the Internet, and the more computers sold with Internet capability, the more Cisco grows. She asked Cisco not to exit certain international markets, but to be transparent. She listed several countries she felt were Internet censors, including Saudi Arabia, China, Algeria, and Syria. I thought Carol Malnick's presentation was much more effective and polished. Others agreed--only 68% voted against her proposal, while 98% voted against the Harrington proposal. After her presentation, CEO Chambers made a point to use the word, "transparent" several times while looking directly at Ms. Malnick, as if to say, "We hear you, and even though we defeated your proposal, we are working on it." This was a very gracious and conscious move by Mr. Chambers.
CEO Chambers had a video and spoken presentation. The opening slide spelled "Globalization" as "Globalisation," with an "s," indicating that a British employee had worked extensively on the presentation. Mr. Chambers talked about a "six point gameplan," which focused on general ideas, like investing in emerging markets (note: I am sick of hearing about "emerging markets" at shareholder meetings--of course companies must invest in other countries) and Web 2.0. He said that Cisco had "3,000 telepresences a week," which meant that Cisco's sales force was connecting to thousands of potential buyers domestically and worldwide, without the need for any travel. If the telepresences, like the ones you see on Star Trek, become commonly used, it will be Cisco that takes us there. Mr. Chambers acknowledged that some companies wouldn't feel the need to upgrade their technology, which would limit the roll out of newer internet products; however, he was also hopeful, saying that the "next wave of productivity" would happen, and Cisco would be at its forefront. After some more generalities of "vision, strategy, and execution," Mr. Chambers showed a moving video presentation.
This video presentation showed the effects of the devastating 2008 earthquake in the Sichuan Province of China. In a brilliant move, John Chambers traveled there immediately after the earthquake and worked with the cities to rebuild their infrastructure. Cisco donated 45 million dollars to rebuilding efforts (See News Report). The cynic in me says that Mr. Chambers is a PR genius. He knows China represents his company's best chance for growth with its 1.2 billion people. By going to China and lending a hand and funds, he hopes Cisco will be remembered down the line by the Chinese government. But Mr. Chambers has a way of winning people over. He appeared completely sincere when he spoke about his experience in China. In fact, I almost teared up after watching the video. Various pictures were shown of Mr. Chambers interacting with earthquake survivors amidst the rubble, and he joked that a young Chinese boy who was bold enough to approach him would grow up to be a Cisco salesman. Mr. Chambers also mentioned a little girl who hadn't spoken since the earthquake but who spoke again after seeing new faces arrive. The girl, of course, represented the power of the human spirit, something we all implicitly understood. At this moment in the presentation, you could have heard a pin drop. It was hard not to be emotionally affected after seeing the pictures of the two children.
Most important, Mr. Chambers called upon us to act, saying that it was an "embarrassment to us" that 3 billion people in the world live on less than three dollars a day, because we had the power to change this situation. He said that Cisco's worldwide expansion would help "700 million people in China" because Cisco brought high paying jobs and the increased likelihood of a middle class, not only in China, but all over the Middle East. His implication was clear--Cisco would help usher in a new era of worldwide progress.
The Q&A session began, with questions presented to Cisco employees on index cards, which were then typed on a large screen behind Mr. Chambers. One question asked about Cisco's 27 billion dollars in cash. This elicited a funny remark from Mr. Chambers, who said that in the current unstable market environment, "cash is king, queen and the entire royal family." He also said that before he left the company, Cisco would pay a dividend to shareholders. Paying a dividend would help stabilize Cisco's stock price, because the dividend would attract long-term investors and would prevent Cisco from using their cash in unproductive ways. (Also, paying a dividend might allow more mutual funds to buy Cisco stock.) The best question was tongue-in-cheek: "In the spirit of GM, what could make GM obsolete?" Mr. Chambers sat down to show the audience he took this question seriously and said that Cisco hadn't lost its sense of urgency. He mentioned Lucent and other companies that used to be technology high fliers and talked about Cisco's growth and its desire to continue growing.
On their way out, shareholders were treated to a Cisco-branded luggage tag holder, an interesting choice, given that Cisco's technology will probably decrease business air travel.
Overall, Cisco's meeting was run very professionally. In the future, Cisco ought to allow live, spontaneous questions and comments prior to voting on shareholder proposals. Beyond that, Cisco looks like a company well-positioned to benefit from the worldwide expansion of Internet users.
Disclosure: as of November 19, 2008, I own 6100 shares of Cisco (CSCO). I will, however, reduce my positions before the end of the year if not sooner.
OCM Revisited
I keep talking about OCM--Other Countries' Money. Very few people seem to understand the consequences of being dependent on the kindness of strangers. Now, the U.S. is considering selling Japanese-backed bonds rather than its own:
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/11/japanese-float-idea-of-treasury-selling.html
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/11/japanese-float-idea-of-treasury-selling.html
Oh, the embarrassment.
Currencies
You can now buy almost all the major foreign currencies through a U.S. brokerage account:
FXE: Euro
FXC: Canadian dollar
FXF: Swiss franc
FXM: Mexican peso
FXY: Japanese yen
XRU: Russian ruble
BZF: Brazilian real
CYB, CNY: Chinese yuan
ICN, INR: Indian rupee
Although you can trade currencies, it doesn't mean you should. Personally, I own some FXC and FXF, but my positions may change at any time, and I am *not* qualified to give investment advice.
I view the Canadian dollar as a diversification tool because it is indirectly linked to commodity prices. The U.S. imports most of its oil through Canada, Mexico, and Venezuela.
I view the Canadian dollar as a diversification tool because it is indirectly linked to commodity prices. The U.S. imports most of its oil through Canada, Mexico, and Venezuela.
The Swiss franc should do relatively well, despite Swiss banking problems, because war is the #1 destroyer of economies, and the Swiss have historically avoided war. In contrast, the U.S. has Iraq; China has Taiwan; Russian has Georgia; India has Pakistan (over Kashmir); and Mexico has internal corruption so terrible, it may lead to civil war. Brazil's egregious income inequality makes it difficult for me to invest too much of my money in the country, despite its independence from OPEC and recent economic growth.
I have heard several Southeast Asians say that Malaysia is doing better than its neighbors Cambodia and Vietnam primarily because Malaysia avoided war and Cambodia and Vietnam did not. The general theory makes sense. Aggression and war destroy economies because they lead to a lack of stability, which drives away investment. Thus, peacenik Americans who crave stability are left with the Euro, which is going to be devalued because of future expected interest rate cuts; the Canadian dollar; the Japanese yen; and the Swiss franc.
If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -- James Madison
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
S.F. Judge Reprimanded
Interesting article on an S.F. judge:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/18/BAAV147BAP.DTL
I've never met the judge, but he sounds like a former District Attorney.
I just checked--Judge McBride was a former assistant D.A. and a police officer. According to the S.F. Sentinel, "[Judge] McBride has previously been named Judge of the Year by both the San Francisco Trial Lawyers Association and the San Francisco Bar Association’s Barrister Club." Judge McBride was also elected the S.F. Court's presiding judge this year.
Nothing against Judge McBride, but in states where voters can elect judges, I recommend voting against former district attorneys if they lack private sector experience handling non-criminal cases. Some great judges were former D.A.s, but generally speaking, D.A.s tend to see the world in black and white. Also, while former district attorneys seem to have a better work ethic than non-criminal lawyers, this extra energy is usually caused by a Superman complex. What do I mean by a Superman complex?
Most D.A.s become D.A.s to protect society from criminals and bad elements. To place yourself in a role where you can single-handedly protect your fellow man by locking up citizens (some of whom may be innocent), you have to be comfortable playing God or Superman. But people who view power cautiously or who are mindful of their lack of omnipotence will be fearful of wielding any kind of substantial power. This means that the most confident lawyers, the ones who are comfortable playing Superman, will gravitate towards the D.A. role.
In fact, good D.A.s must have supreme confidence to function, especially after seeing horrors like rape, homicides, and infanticides up close. The average person who sees an 18 year old mother microwave her baby probably won't want anything to do with that situation; a D.A., however, must not only get involved, s/he must convince a jury to throw the young mother in jail. If the D.A. thinks about the mother's personal background, her poverty, or some other random factor, it makes his job more difficult. In short, the ability to see gray areas complicates throwing a fellow human being in jail, because a person may realize that in some alternate universe, given the same set of circumstances, it could be him or her across the aisle in the courthouse. Of course, someone has to prosecute unfortunate souls along with the hardened criminals, so you want D.A.s to be tough, supremely confident, and comfortable playing God with people's lives. At the same time, it's important to recognize that kind of attitude works best in criminal law, not civil law.
Many meritorious civil cases involve gray areas without hard evidence (i.e., a smoking gun, fingerprints, DNA). For example, employment cases sometimes involve nothing more than he-said/she-said scenarios, such as where a female employee alleges sexual harassment. Thus, much of the time, a civil judge has to decide whether a case has merit based solely on sworn statements from different people. Although the law requires judges to send cases to a jury if a reasonable person could see genuinely disputed material facts, after seeing so much hard evidence in criminal cases and so many criminal cases involving severe harm, former D.A.s tend to be less sympathetic to cases that lack obvious physical harm.
You will notice that Judge McBride was named Judge of the Year by the San Francisco Trial Lawyers Association. Those associations are usually run by personal injury lawyers, who bring cases involving physical injuries. Thus, it is not unusual for former D.A.s to be well-liked by trial lawyer associations, because personal injury cases usually involve obvious physical harm and more black-and-white facts than other cases--such as securities litigation or labor law--which don't appeal to a D.A.'s experience of associating meritorious cases with blood on the ground.
Again, I don't know Judge McBride, so I cannot comment on him specifically. The only reason I write this post is to encourage voters to consider voting for a non-D.A., a public defender, a solo practitioner, or a lawyer with private practice experience when it comes time to choose a judge.
Bonus: an Illinois judge jails a man for making a yawning noise in his courtroom. See here.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/18/BAAV147BAP.DTL
I've never met the judge, but he sounds like a former District Attorney.
I just checked--Judge McBride was a former assistant D.A. and a police officer. According to the S.F. Sentinel, "[Judge] McBride has previously been named Judge of the Year by both the San Francisco Trial Lawyers Association and the San Francisco Bar Association’s Barrister Club." Judge McBride was also elected the S.F. Court's presiding judge this year.
Nothing against Judge McBride, but in states where voters can elect judges, I recommend voting against former district attorneys if they lack private sector experience handling non-criminal cases. Some great judges were former D.A.s, but generally speaking, D.A.s tend to see the world in black and white. Also, while former district attorneys seem to have a better work ethic than non-criminal lawyers, this extra energy is usually caused by a Superman complex. What do I mean by a Superman complex?
Most D.A.s become D.A.s to protect society from criminals and bad elements. To place yourself in a role where you can single-handedly protect your fellow man by locking up citizens (some of whom may be innocent), you have to be comfortable playing God or Superman. But people who view power cautiously or who are mindful of their lack of omnipotence will be fearful of wielding any kind of substantial power. This means that the most confident lawyers, the ones who are comfortable playing Superman, will gravitate towards the D.A. role.
In fact, good D.A.s must have supreme confidence to function, especially after seeing horrors like rape, homicides, and infanticides up close. The average person who sees an 18 year old mother microwave her baby probably won't want anything to do with that situation; a D.A., however, must not only get involved, s/he must convince a jury to throw the young mother in jail. If the D.A. thinks about the mother's personal background, her poverty, or some other random factor, it makes his job more difficult. In short, the ability to see gray areas complicates throwing a fellow human being in jail, because a person may realize that in some alternate universe, given the same set of circumstances, it could be him or her across the aisle in the courthouse. Of course, someone has to prosecute unfortunate souls along with the hardened criminals, so you want D.A.s to be tough, supremely confident, and comfortable playing God with people's lives. At the same time, it's important to recognize that kind of attitude works best in criminal law, not civil law.
Many meritorious civil cases involve gray areas without hard evidence (i.e., a smoking gun, fingerprints, DNA). For example, employment cases sometimes involve nothing more than he-said/she-said scenarios, such as where a female employee alleges sexual harassment. Thus, much of the time, a civil judge has to decide whether a case has merit based solely on sworn statements from different people. Although the law requires judges to send cases to a jury if a reasonable person could see genuinely disputed material facts, after seeing so much hard evidence in criminal cases and so many criminal cases involving severe harm, former D.A.s tend to be less sympathetic to cases that lack obvious physical harm.
You will notice that Judge McBride was named Judge of the Year by the San Francisco Trial Lawyers Association. Those associations are usually run by personal injury lawyers, who bring cases involving physical injuries. Thus, it is not unusual for former D.A.s to be well-liked by trial lawyer associations, because personal injury cases usually involve obvious physical harm and more black-and-white facts than other cases--such as securities litigation or labor law--which don't appeal to a D.A.'s experience of associating meritorious cases with blood on the ground.
Again, I don't know Judge McBride, so I cannot comment on him specifically. The only reason I write this post is to encourage voters to consider voting for a non-D.A., a public defender, a solo practitioner, or a lawyer with private practice experience when it comes time to choose a judge.
Bonus: an Illinois judge jails a man for making a yawning noise in his courtroom. See here.
Steve Malanga on State Governments
Steve Malanga, senior editor of the Manhattan Institute's City Journal, is my new favorite writer. The WSJ included an opinion piece by him in today's paper:
http://s.wsj.net/article/SB122697315476635963.html
A study...by the Employee Benefit Research Institute estimated that the average public sector worker earns 46% more in total compensation than his counterpart in the private sector, largely because government employers spend 60% more per worker on benefits than counterparts in the private sector. States have collectively ranked up some $731 billion in unfunded liabilities for pensions and other retirement benefits, according to a study...by the Pew Charitable Trusts' Center on the States...
California state and local governments are paying some $12.8 billion a year to finance public employee pensions, up form $4.8 billion in 1999.
You know who's on the hook for all those benefits, don't you? We, the taxpayers, and our children. What is the reason government employees, on average, receive more benefits than private sector workers? It is becoming increasingly apparent that our elected representatives believe that we should work for them, instead of the other way around.
The next time you vote to give more money to government programs, just remember what we were told as kids: "Money doesn't grow on trees." Perhaps these days, it should read, "Money may not grow on trees, but what's wrong with getting money through bond sales?" Well, remember OCM--Other Countries' Money? Other countries are and have been the major buyers of our bonds, meaning they have become American Express, while we have become debt-holders, working each month to pay them off. I guess our own government is selling us out to other countries. Who can blame them? Other countries are the ones effectively paying for their benefits and for their inefficient programs (Bridge to Nowhere, etc.) through the purchase of municipal and Treasury bond sales. Although I am opposed to unnecessary regulation of private citizens, that doesn't mean an irresponsible government doesn't deserve to be regulated. Maybe we should require all public sector bond sales to have at least 51% American citizen ownership before being offered to other countries--once Americans realize we don't have the money to buy back our own debt, much less our future debt, we might become more frugal.
A study...by the Employee Benefit Research Institute estimated that the average public sector worker earns 46% more in total compensation than his counterpart in the private sector, largely because government employers spend 60% more per worker on benefits than counterparts in the private sector. States have collectively ranked up some $731 billion in unfunded liabilities for pensions and other retirement benefits, according to a study...by the Pew Charitable Trusts' Center on the States...
California state and local governments are paying some $12.8 billion a year to finance public employee pensions, up form $4.8 billion in 1999.
You know who's on the hook for all those benefits, don't you? We, the taxpayers, and our children. What is the reason government employees, on average, receive more benefits than private sector workers? It is becoming increasingly apparent that our elected representatives believe that we should work for them, instead of the other way around.
The next time you vote to give more money to government programs, just remember what we were told as kids: "Money doesn't grow on trees." Perhaps these days, it should read, "Money may not grow on trees, but what's wrong with getting money through bond sales?" Well, remember OCM--Other Countries' Money? Other countries are and have been the major buyers of our bonds, meaning they have become American Express, while we have become debt-holders, working each month to pay them off. I guess our own government is selling us out to other countries. Who can blame them? Other countries are the ones effectively paying for their benefits and for their inefficient programs (Bridge to Nowhere, etc.) through the purchase of municipal and Treasury bond sales. Although I am opposed to unnecessary regulation of private citizens, that doesn't mean an irresponsible government doesn't deserve to be regulated. Maybe we should require all public sector bond sales to have at least 51% American citizen ownership before being offered to other countries--once Americans realize we don't have the money to buy back our own debt, much less our future debt, we might become more frugal.
Update on Transmeta (TMTA)
On September 18, 2008, I wrote that Transmeta was a potential takeover target:
If you're looking for a growth story, this isn't it; however, as long as its patent portfolio remains viable, TMTA may be a potential takeover target or value play at the right price.
http://willworkforjustice.blogspot.com/2008/09/transmeta-tmta-shareholder-meeting.html
On November 18, 2008, Novafora acquired Transmeta:
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/081117/novafora_acquisition.html
This appears to be a good outcome for Transmeta. Kudos to the Board of Directors and to the officers for selling the company in a professional, transparent manner.
If you're looking for a growth story, this isn't it; however, as long as its patent portfolio remains viable, TMTA may be a potential takeover target or value play at the right price.
http://willworkforjustice.blogspot.com/2008/09/transmeta-tmta-shareholder-meeting.html
On November 18, 2008, Novafora acquired Transmeta:
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/081117/novafora_acquisition.html
This appears to be a good outcome for Transmeta. Kudos to the Board of Directors and to the officers for selling the company in a professional, transparent manner.
Now a Good Time to Invest?
A lot of you have been on the sidelines, waiting for a good time to buy stocks. I'm not making any recommendations, but I just bought between 55 to 250 shares of some tech stocks, including NVDA, ERTS, INTC, STM, SYMC, and CSCO. I realize my financial outlay isn't much, but perhaps these shares will be worth much more five years or more from now.
The information on this site is provided for discussion purposes only and does not constitute investing recommendations. Under no circumstances does this information represent a recommendation to buy or sell securities or make any kind of an investment. You are responsible for your own due diligence.
The information on this site is provided for discussion purposes only and does not constitute investing recommendations. Under no circumstances does this information represent a recommendation to buy or sell securities or make any kind of an investment. You are responsible for your own due diligence.
Homes v. Stocks as Investments
According to an article in Charles Schwab on Investing, Fall 2007 (p. 7), which looks like it was written by Matt Wood, stocks are a better investment than housing:[R]esidential real estate provided an annualized return of 8.6% during the period from 1978 to 2004, compared with 13.4% for the S&P 500 Index (citing Jack Clark Francis et al, Contrasting Real Estate with Comparable Investments, 1978-2004, April 2007)
In some cases, [owning a home costs] as much as three times the purchase price [due to insurance premiums, maintenance costs, and property taxes]...Robert Shiller says real estate's historic real returns are closer to zero after adjusting for inflation. [David Crook, "Your Home Isn't the Nest Egg That You Think It Is," WSJ Online, March 12, 2007]
I refused to buy any property during the last five years, believing that everything in California was overpriced. Now, however, I am not so sure. Housing and other hard assets might not be a great investment, but they no longer appear to be flagrantly overpriced.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Poem: Lola Haskins
I finally dumped my 8 years old wallet and replaced it with a new one I had in my drawer (it's been there for the last 5 years). In the process of emptying out the old wallet, I found a short poem, by Lola Haskins. It's titled, "Love":
LOVE
She tries it on, like a dress.
She decides it doesn't fit,
and starts to take it off.
Her skin comes, too.
This was one of two poems I had in my wallet. Not sure why I had that particular one in there, other than the fact that it's one of the most poignant poems I've ever read. Can't you just feel the unnamed woman's anguish? I am still in awe of how the last line creeps up on unsuspecting readers, only to bludgeon them so matter-of-factly in the end.
LOVE
She tries it on, like a dress.
She decides it doesn't fit,
and starts to take it off.
Her skin comes, too.
This was one of two poems I had in my wallet. Not sure why I had that particular one in there, other than the fact that it's one of the most poignant poems I've ever read. Can't you just feel the unnamed woman's anguish? I am still in awe of how the last line creeps up on unsuspecting readers, only to bludgeon them so matter-of-factly in the end.
Book Rec: Factory Girls
I am in the middle of Factory Girls, a fascinating book about migrants in China:
Factory Girls
The book is a fantastic read. The writer, Leslie Chang, traveled to China and got to know various factory workers, all of whom migrated from small towns into large cities. She wrote about their experiences, and even seamlessly includes her own family's migration to America. The women profiled are incredible human beings, and reading about their lives should be required for every American high school and college student. What struck me most about the migrants is their desire to do anything to move up in society, including enrolling in "white collar" manners classes. Even though the migrants' wages are absolutely meager--about 50 dollars a month--they forge forward, determined to leave their mark in the city. Think Grapes of Wrath, but Chinese-style. Thanks to Jeff E. for the recommendation.
Factory Girls
The book is a fantastic read. The writer, Leslie Chang, traveled to China and got to know various factory workers, all of whom migrated from small towns into large cities. She wrote about their experiences, and even seamlessly includes her own family's migration to America. The women profiled are incredible human beings, and reading about their lives should be required for every American high school and college student. What struck me most about the migrants is their desire to do anything to move up in society, including enrolling in "white collar" manners classes. Even though the migrants' wages are absolutely meager--about 50 dollars a month--they forge forward, determined to leave their mark in the city. Think Grapes of Wrath, but Chinese-style. Thanks to Jeff E. for the recommendation.
Yahoo (YHOO) Update
Here is the latest on Yahoo (YHOO):
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Yahoo-to-replace-Yang-as-CEO-apf-13601499.html
Mr. Yang is going to step down. Bostock has the easiest decision ever--Susan Decker is right there. She takes over Mr. Yang's spot, and using her position on Berkshire's board, talks to Warren Buffett about a partial sale to Microsoft. Mr. Buffett, of course, knows Bill Gates very well. Mr. Bostock can't possibly screw this up...or can he?
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Yahoo-to-replace-Yang-as-CEO-apf-13601499.html
Mr. Yang is going to step down. Bostock has the easiest decision ever--Susan Decker is right there. She takes over Mr. Yang's spot, and using her position on Berkshire's board, talks to Warren Buffett about a partial sale to Microsoft. Mr. Buffett, of course, knows Bill Gates very well. Mr. Bostock can't possibly screw this up...or can he?
Louis Brandeis
A friend picked up the Brandeis train (courtesy of The Green Bag) last month. Isn't it a beaut?
Brandeis has a special place in my heart for these words:
The makers of our Constitution undertook to secure conditions favorable to the pursuit of happiness. They recognized the significance of man's spiritual nature, of his feelings and of his intellect. They knew that only a part of the pain, pleasure and satisfactions of life are to be found in material things. They sought to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions and their sensations. They conferred, as against the government, the right to be let alone--the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men. To protect, that right, every unjustifiable intrusion by the government upon the privacy of the individual, whatever the means employed, must be deemed a violation of the Fourth Amendment. (OLMSTEAD v. U.S., 277 U.S. 438 (1928))
"The right to be let alone." Such beautiful words. Too bad it's just a dissent, and therefore not legally binding.
On Prostitution
Re: sex workers, the keys to legalization seem to be as follows:
You'll notice I included social services, too, but in non-traditional forms--free housing, vocational job training, healthcare, and financial independence.
You'll notice I want a time limit to get the women and men out of this business eventually.
Prostitution is not something most people want to do, but it happens, it will always happen, and we must choose where we want our resources to go and whether we want a society that favors above ground or underground systems. Re: imbalances in power, they exist in almost every single business transaction. Does anyone suggest all results of imbalanced power relationships are automatically immoral? Shouldn't the touchstone of the analysis be voluntary consent, safety for all parties, and fair pay rather than subjective criteria? In other words, shouldn't the analysis center on how to avoid using the worker as a means rather than imposing a legal structure based on subjective criteria, which will only drive the business underground?
1) criminalize excessive and unwanted solicitation, which allows the workers to avoid coercion;
2) legalize prostitution, which requires police protection and presence for both customers and workers, furthering increasing the safety of the transaction;
3) tax the transaction, thereby funding other services, like education as well as the police squads assigned to the "Hamsterdam" districts;
4) require STD testing and databases of all participants before any activity;
5) place all districts far, far away from "core" business activity, including K-12 schools;
6) provide housing dormitories and free health care (in exchange for waiving some privacy rights in order to study physical changes or some other constructive health care purpose, and only when the workers themselves choose to see a doctor for more than the required STD-testing) to ensure that they can save their money (think military-style housing);
6) require that at least 10% of all earnings be set aside into an irrevocable retirement fund until age 50 and put into a balanced fund;
7) require 5% of all earnings be put into a liquid account accessible upon exiting the business;
8) require maximum employment of 15 years (I'm not sure about this step, but the idea is that at some point, just like prison rehabilitation programs, the participants would re-enter "core" societies with marketable skills);
9) apportion some tax revenue to the workers to decide what to do for communal purposes, allowing an indirect education into economics and politics.
Bonus: Police protection is necessary to prevent trafficking and mafia involvement--the whole point of legalization is to eliminate the underground economy; again, the idea is to shift police resources away from undercover work and targeting the informal economy into protecting consensual behavior;
You'll notice I included social services, too, but in non-traditional forms--free housing, vocational job training, healthcare, and financial independence.
You'll notice I want a time limit to get the women and men out of this business eventually.
Prostitution is not something most people want to do, but it happens, it will always happen, and we must choose where we want our resources to go and whether we want a society that favors above ground or underground systems. Re: imbalances in power, they exist in almost every single business transaction. Does anyone suggest all results of imbalanced power relationships are automatically immoral? Shouldn't the touchstone of the analysis be voluntary consent, safety for all parties, and fair pay rather than subjective criteria? In other words, shouldn't the analysis center on how to avoid using the worker as a means rather than imposing a legal structure based on subjective criteria, which will only drive the business underground?
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Blue Dog Democrats
The WSJ's November 14 letters section (A16) introduced readers to a Blue Dog Democrat, Jim Cooper. I am a registered Democrat, but am fiscally conservative, which makes me a Blue Dog Democrat.
Rep. Cooper makes the point that the federal government "is still using unaudited cash accounting despite the availability audited, accrual numbers. The federal government is the only large enterprise in the U.S. that is exempted from normal accounting rules. If you want the truth, check out the 'Financial Report of the U.S. Government' (available at http://www.fms.treas.gov/fr/)."
That link leads to this one: http://www.fms.treas.gov/frsummary/index.html
A politician who isn't lying, and who's showing us where the truth is? Just doing the former would make him special in Washington, but the latter, too? Bless those Blue Dogs.
Rep. Cooper makes the point that the federal government "is still using unaudited cash accounting despite the availability audited, accrual numbers. The federal government is the only large enterprise in the U.S. that is exempted from normal accounting rules. If you want the truth, check out the 'Financial Report of the U.S. Government' (available at http://www.fms.treas.gov/fr/)."
That link leads to this one: http://www.fms.treas.gov/frsummary/index.html
A politician who isn't lying, and who's showing us where the truth is? Just doing the former would make him special in Washington, but the latter, too? Bless those Blue Dogs.
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Michael Lewis on Wall St Corruption
Michael Lewis always has great stuff:
http://www.portfolio.com/news-markets/national-news/portfolio/2008/11/11/The-End-of-Wall-Streets-Boom
My favorite parts? Here you go:
In Bakersfield, California, a Mexican strawberry picker with an income of $14,000 and no English was lent every penny he needed to buy a house for $720,000...
He called Standard & Poor’s and asked what would happen to default rates if real estate prices fell. The man at S&P couldn’t say; its model for home prices had no ability to accept a negative number. “They were just assuming home prices would keep going up,” Eisman says.
Oh, the hubris.
http://www.portfolio.com/news-markets/national-news/portfolio/2008/11/11/The-End-of-Wall-Streets-Boom
My favorite parts? Here you go:
In Bakersfield, California, a Mexican strawberry picker with an income of $14,000 and no English was lent every penny he needed to buy a house for $720,000...
He called Standard & Poor’s and asked what would happen to default rates if real estate prices fell. The man at S&P couldn’t say; its model for home prices had no ability to accept a negative number. “They were just assuming home prices would keep going up,” Eisman says.
Oh, the hubris.
Poem: How do you like them apples?
It's the weekend, so not much on the economic front to report. The government might take our tax dollars to give to GM and Ford, but that potential giveaway comes next week. For now, some poetry:
http://paulgoetz101.wordpress.com/2006/11/15/federico-garcia-lorca/ [Broken link]
Same poem, different link:
https://www.poets.org/poetsorg/poem/gacela-dark-death
Federico Lorca, who wrote the poem above ("Gacela of the Dark Death"), had a fascinating, but sad life:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federico_Garc%C3%ADa_Lorca
http://paulgoetz101.wordpress.com/2006/11/15/federico-garcia-lorca/ [Broken link]
Same poem, different link:
https://www.poets.org/poetsorg/poem/gacela-dark-death
Federico Lorca, who wrote the poem above ("Gacela of the Dark Death"), had a fascinating, but sad life:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federico_Garc%C3%ADa_Lorca
Friday, November 14, 2008
Bay Area Homeowners in Trouble
According to The SF Chronicle and Zillow.com, around 20% of California Bay Area homeowners have no equity in their homes:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2008/11/11/MNN0142MCG.DTL&
Zillow's estimated prices are not 100% accurate (that's the nature of an estimate), but it's very hard to price houses in this market; therefore, Zillow might be the closest thing we have to getting what I call the "misery numbers."
Hat tip to Barry Ritholtz for linking to the SF Chronicle article first.
Poem by Judith McCune
I keep this poem in my wallet. It's from The Atlantic magazine (March 2000, page 96), and I've kept it there for eight years. Like my eight-years-old wallet, it is fraying and may soon become unreadable. I wanted to post it here so that others may read this little-known poem. Click on the link below to read the entire poem:
http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/poetry/antholog/mccune/theguest.htm
I can't post the entire poem because of The Atlantic's copyright (a question for the IP and copyright lawyers out there: once the author is dead, does the copyright to her work diminish in any way, even though the owner of the copyright is the magazine, not the author?). In any case, I will quote the last stanza only to entice you to read the poem:
Now when Chiqui asks me how I've slept, I lie: Just fine, I say, though by this time I've learned the Spanish word for shame.
Copyright © 2000 by The Atlantic Monthly Company.
The poem neatly summarizes my old-fashioned world view. It has hard-working immigrants, caring family members, and a continuity of time (expressed through different generations of the same family). It also juxtaposes old-fashioned values against modern values in a way that makes the new values subservient to the old ones. Whenever I read McCune's poem, I fall in love with its style and content all over again.
http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/poetry/antholog/mccune/theguest.htm
I can't post the entire poem because of The Atlantic's copyright (a question for the IP and copyright lawyers out there: once the author is dead, does the copyright to her work diminish in any way, even though the owner of the copyright is the magazine, not the author?). In any case, I will quote the last stanza only to entice you to read the poem:
Now when Chiqui asks me how I've slept, I lie: Just fine, I say, though by this time I've learned the Spanish word for shame.
Copyright © 2000 by The Atlantic Monthly Company.
The poem neatly summarizes my old-fashioned world view. It has hard-working immigrants, caring family members, and a continuity of time (expressed through different generations of the same family). It also juxtaposes old-fashioned values against modern values in a way that makes the new values subservient to the old ones. Whenever I read McCune's poem, I fall in love with its style and content all over again.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Ariel Investments
Ariel Investments CEO John Rogers, Jr. beat Michael Jordan in a 1-on-1 game back in 2003. The video is here:
Ball Don't Lie
WSJ Link
Just for this, I am going to buy some Ariel funds someday (http://www.arielinvestments.com/). I love the way Mr. Rogers Jr. calmly walks away after the game instead of getting excited or trash talking. That's the temperament--calm but determined--a good mutual fund manager should have.
Ball Don't Lie
WSJ Link
Just for this, I am going to buy some Ariel funds someday (http://www.arielinvestments.com/). I love the way Mr. Rogers Jr. calmly walks away after the game instead of getting excited or trash talking. That's the temperament--calm but determined--a good mutual fund manager should have.
CEO Lanni Leaves MGM Mirage
MGM's CEO Lanni is leaving MGM Mirage:
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idINN1338744220081113
Jim Murren will likely replace him. Here is an old transcript of a 1998 interview with Murren:
http://www.fool.com/foolaudio/transcripts/980813_mgg.htm
Mr. Murren seems much more candid than Mr. Lanni. Earlier this year, I posted a review of the 2008 MGM shareholder meeting--see 2008 MGM Shareholder Meeting--in which Mr. Lanni seemed far too sunny and upbeat about his casino's prospects. You can't blame the man for trying, though.
I hope next time I'm in Vegas, I won't get a horse's head in my hotel room after this blog entry. An experienced dealer in Reno once told me, "Back when the mob was running Nevada, things ran much more smoothly." I bet.
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idINN1338744220081113
Jim Murren will likely replace him. Here is an old transcript of a 1998 interview with Murren:
http://www.fool.com/foolaudio/transcripts/980813_mgg.htm
Mr. Murren seems much more candid than Mr. Lanni. Earlier this year, I posted a review of the 2008 MGM shareholder meeting--see 2008 MGM Shareholder Meeting--in which Mr. Lanni seemed far too sunny and upbeat about his casino's prospects. You can't blame the man for trying, though.
I hope next time I'm in Vegas, I won't get a horse's head in my hotel room after this blog entry. An experienced dealer in Reno once told me, "Back when the mob was running Nevada, things ran much more smoothly." I bet.
General Electric at 12 Year Low
General Electric (GE) stock hasn't been this low since July 1, 1996. GE stock went as low as 14.58 per share today.
Yesterday, the stock tanked because the federal government suddenly reversed course and said it would not be buying bad debts. GE issues debt and also owns various financial subsidiaries, including insurance companies. Absent a government guarantee, various pieces of GE's financial portfolio would be less attractive to buyers. However, GE immediately issued a press release noting that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation approved GE Capital Corp. to participate in the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program--meaning up to $139 billion in short and long-term debt is going to be guaranteed by the federal government. (See AP article.) I guess when one door closes, another opens.
Today, GE's stock tanked because of rumors that GE was cutting its dividend, which stands at a hefty 7%. GE denied the rumors, but its stock fell anyway.
I am a major buyer at these levels. I picked up three thousand shares yesterday and just bought another thousand shares this morning at around 15.24 per share. My average buy price is around 16.25 per share.
Update on November 13, 2008: I sold my 4000 shares of GE at 16.74 today. Had I waited just five more minutes, I could have sold my shares at 16.90, meaning I would have made another $600+. That's fine--I'm not greedy. GE stock closed today at 16.86. It will probably go up more tomorrow, but I had too much invested to sleep comfortably if I held my shares overnight.
If you go back and look at my "Stocks Update" posts, you can view my short-term trading record. I also sold the GOOG and AMAT shares I bought yesterday.
The information on this site is provided for discussion purposes only and does not constitute investing recommendations. Under no circumstances does this information represent a recommendation to buy or sell securities or make any kind of an investment. You are responsible for your own due diligence.
Yesterday, the stock tanked because the federal government suddenly reversed course and said it would not be buying bad debts. GE issues debt and also owns various financial subsidiaries, including insurance companies. Absent a government guarantee, various pieces of GE's financial portfolio would be less attractive to buyers. However, GE immediately issued a press release noting that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation approved GE Capital Corp. to participate in the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program--meaning up to $139 billion in short and long-term debt is going to be guaranteed by the federal government. (See AP article.) I guess when one door closes, another opens.
Today, GE's stock tanked because of rumors that GE was cutting its dividend, which stands at a hefty 7%. GE denied the rumors, but its stock fell anyway.
I am a major buyer at these levels. I picked up three thousand shares yesterday and just bought another thousand shares this morning at around 15.24 per share. My average buy price is around 16.25 per share.
Update on November 13, 2008: I sold my 4000 shares of GE at 16.74 today. Had I waited just five more minutes, I could have sold my shares at 16.90, meaning I would have made another $600+. That's fine--I'm not greedy. GE stock closed today at 16.86. It will probably go up more tomorrow, but I had too much invested to sleep comfortably if I held my shares overnight.
If you go back and look at my "Stocks Update" posts, you can view my short-term trading record. I also sold the GOOG and AMAT shares I bought yesterday.
The information on this site is provided for discussion purposes only and does not constitute investing recommendations. Under no circumstances does this information represent a recommendation to buy or sell securities or make any kind of an investment. You are responsible for your own due diligence.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Techcrunch on Yahoo
Yahoo's share price is almost in the single digits:
Techcrunch
It's like watching a train wreck. Susan Decker needs to call Warren Buffett and get some advice.
Techcrunch
It's like watching a train wreck. Susan Decker needs to call Warren Buffett and get some advice.
Buying Opportunity?
If you are a high risk trader, today's volatility might create a good entry point for short and long term trades.
Today, I bought GE, AMAT, and GOOG. My largest purchases were in GE--I now own over 3000 shares of GE at around 16.55 a share.
Traders still have twenty five minutes to buy (or sell) before the market close.
The information on this site is provided for discussion purposes only and does not constitute investing recommendations. Under no circumstances does this information represent a recommendation to buy or sell securities or make any kind of an investment. You are responsible for your own due diligence.
Today, I bought GE, AMAT, and GOOG. My largest purchases were in GE--I now own over 3000 shares of GE at around 16.55 a share.
Traders still have twenty five minutes to buy (or sell) before the market close.
The information on this site is provided for discussion purposes only and does not constitute investing recommendations. Under no circumstances does this information represent a recommendation to buy or sell securities or make any kind of an investment. You are responsible for your own due diligence.
California's Ailing Government
The AP's Judy Lin reports that California faces a $28 billion deficit:
SJ Mercury
And the hits just keep on coming...
SJ Mercury
And the hits just keep on coming...
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Famous Speeches
Here is a website with transcripts and some audio/video of famous speeches:
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speechbank.htm
Here is a speech by Barbara Jordan--before Obama, Barbara Jordan spoke of change:
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/barbarajordan1992dnc.html
And here is the text of one of my favorite speeches, by Barry Goldwater:
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/barrygoldwater1964rnc.htm
We see in private property and in economy based upon and fostering private property, the one way to make government a durable ally of the whole man, rather than his determined enemy. We see in the sanctity of private property the only durable foundation for constitutional government in a free society. And -- And beyond that, we see, in cherished diversity of ways, diversity of thoughts, of motives and accomplishments. We don't seek to lead anyone's life for him. We only seek -- only seek to secure his rights, guarantee him opportunity -- guarantee him opportunity to strive, with government performing only those needed and constitutionally sanctioned tasks which cannot otherwise be performed...
Balance, diversity, creative difference: These are the elements of the Republican equation. Republicans agree -- Republicans agree heartily to disagree on many, many of their applications, but we have never disagreed on the basic fundamental issues of why you and I are Republicans.
This is a Party. This Republican Party is a Party for free men, not for blind followers, and not for conformists.
That's from 1964, back when Republicans knew what they stood for. How will the GOP recover from its 2008 defeat? All they have to do is look at the not-too-distant past for answers.
________________
Here's a link for the lawyers--speeches by U.S. Supreme Court Justices:
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/publicinfo/speeches/speeches.html
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speechbank.htm
Here is a speech by Barbara Jordan--before Obama, Barbara Jordan spoke of change:
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/barbarajordan1992dnc.html
And here is the text of one of my favorite speeches, by Barry Goldwater:
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/barrygoldwater1964rnc.htm
We see in private property and in economy based upon and fostering private property, the one way to make government a durable ally of the whole man, rather than his determined enemy. We see in the sanctity of private property the only durable foundation for constitutional government in a free society. And -- And beyond that, we see, in cherished diversity of ways, diversity of thoughts, of motives and accomplishments. We don't seek to lead anyone's life for him. We only seek -- only seek to secure his rights, guarantee him opportunity -- guarantee him opportunity to strive, with government performing only those needed and constitutionally sanctioned tasks which cannot otherwise be performed...
Balance, diversity, creative difference: These are the elements of the Republican equation. Republicans agree -- Republicans agree heartily to disagree on many, many of their applications, but we have never disagreed on the basic fundamental issues of why you and I are Republicans.
This is a Party. This Republican Party is a Party for free men, not for blind followers, and not for conformists.
That's from 1964, back when Republicans knew what they stood for. How will the GOP recover from its 2008 defeat? All they have to do is look at the not-too-distant past for answers.
________________
Here's a link for the lawyers--speeches by U.S. Supreme Court Justices:
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/publicinfo/speeches/speeches.html
How Did You Vote?
This is the Ron Clark Academy presidential debate. Gotta love the token white guy.
Lyrics to “You Can Vote However You Like”
Obama on the left
McCain on the right
We can talk politics all night
And you can vote however you like
I said, you can vote however you like, yeah
Democratic left
Republican right
November 4th we decide
And you can vote however you like
I said, you can vote however you like, yeah
(McCain supporters)
McCain is the man
Fought for us in Vietnam
You know if anyone can
Help our country he can
Taxes droppin' low
Don't you know oil's gonna flow
Drill it low
I’ll show our economy will grow
McCain’s the best candidate
With Palin as his running mate
They’ll fight for gun rights, pro life,
The conservative right
Our future is bright
Better economy in sight
And all the world will feel our military might
(Obama supporters)
But McCain and Bush are real close right
They vote alike and keep it tight
Obama’s new, he’s younger too
The Middle Class he will help you
He’ll bring a change, he’s got the brains
McCain and Bush are just the same
You are to blame, Iraq’s a shame
Four more years would be insane
Lower your Taxes - you know Obama won’t
PROTECT THE LOWER CLASS - You know McCain won’t!
Have enough experience - you know that they don’t
STOP GLOBAL WARMING - you know that you won’t
I want Obama
FORGET OBAMA
Stick with McCain and you’re going to have some drama
We need it
HE’LL BRING IT
He’ll be it
YOU’LL SEE IT
We’ll do it
GET TO IT
Let’s move it
DO IT!
Obama on the left
McCain on the right
We can talk politics all night
And you can vote however you like
You can vote however you like, yeah
Democratic left
Republican right
November 4th we decide
And you can vote however you like, I said
You can vote however you like, yeah
I’m talking big pipelines, and low gas prices
Below $2.00 that would be nice
But to do it right we gotta start today
Finding renewable ways that are here to stay
I want Obama
FORGET OBAMA,
Stick with McCain you gonna have some drama
MORE WAR IN IRAQ
Iran he will attack
CAN’T BRING OUR TROOPS BACK
We gotta vote Barack!
Obama on the left
McCain on the right
We can talk politics all night
And you can vote however you like, I said
You can vote however you like, yeah
Democratic left
Republican right
November 4th we decide
And you can vote however you like, I said
You can vote however you like, yeah
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)