Post Off!

There was a fascinating moment when I was first in Japan back in 1997, and I entered the post office.

A world of not just stamps, but bill pay, basic banking, insurance, and connection to other government resources all in one place. Denver has 311 for some of the latter, for instance.

By then I had a private bank account, but today's American could use proper passbook savings in USA, and basic simple fee checking accounts in lieu of non-banking 'card' services, also called non-traditional banking alternatives? Under this idea, anyone could walk in and open up an account.

Further, the insurance we could provide US citizens were we to take up this different vision, would be basic coverage to drive, rent, or even buy a simple government backed life insurance policy that wouldn't lapse, and could always be redeemed.

Not just collecting stamps, our post office could be a front line remedy for any bill collectors- allowing the payor ample time and space to drop by the local Post office, and maybe pay from the PO savings account they held.

Alloting this preferred treatment, the Post office will have the ability to operate at a nominal and marginal profit, not reliant upon stamp and shipping costs to sustain income.

Finally, Amazon, Fed Ex, and other services should be sent to the back of the pile with priority given to paychecks, pensions and paperwork that the current go-go e-forms of the dont read just click "ok" culture will eventually be slowed with discovery of the law.

Such to say we need to get rid of the current Postmaster General, and get the business of ordinary people done fairly and on time, expanding the very definition of the public postal offices.

Been meaning to write that for two dozen years.

Interim Report Card: Obama and Congress

I have been focusing my energy on more positive things since I last blogged (a philosophical countenance upon monetary issues, since then a devaluation of the dollar, and a credit downgrade for the USA).

Many of the negative things we citizens have been enduring are in part due to congressional incompetence!


D for CONGRESS

1. Disappointing. Anyone who thought a fresh crop of outspoken freshmen would shift the paradygm should now see that (a) freshmen need to make small committee level type mistakes before getting to run with the big dogs, because the weak Speaker unable to whip the Teaparty group specifically has been a joke; (b) sometimes our system allows legitimate "tails," or minority views, to wag the dog of the center; yet (c) our system is about compromise, and the center has won out in most of the debates. The absurdity of the House of Representatives has been amateur hour.

2. Disrespect. Yes, the Pubs are the "party of No," actively defending their point of view and loudly hoping for the CEO of the USA to fail... except We The People are represented by all branches of government-- that throughputs into hoping against the USA itself, and seems highly disrespectful no matter how rosy the economy. So these red herrings and ad hominems look to be much fiddling whilst Rome Burns! What ever happened to respect for the office of the President?

3. Delay, Distract, and Derail. Between both parties the lack of civil dialogue has led to endless tactical maneuvers that have ultimately kept the American people riding in the rumble seat, while we watch some falsetto reality show about idiots sent somewhere to compromise and lead, but instead doing everything except what has been needed-- and so much needs doing!

4. Democrat. The Dems have been playing chicken, too. What ever happened to civil discourse? Both sides show they dont know how to get things done with fact, consensus, and logic. Keynesian theory, like climate change, is scientifically verifiable, so why do Dems somehow have a big issue explaining that massive cuts at the heart of a recovery will ensure a new downturn in economic activity. What small and large businesses and investors REALLY await is ANY final say on tax codes, securities regulation, and others of the many chickens that came home to roost in 2006 ~ 2008 (under the Bush Administration) still clucking along with us. Not too many care who is to blame, but await the issues to be addressed, solved, and a long term track set up so calculations can be made. We want chicken salad and have been served a lot of chicken $#!+. The whipsaw markets and the inconstant congress have made planning as much of a hunch as a calculation, and this is not right to do to potential employers during the worst job crisis since Ronald Reagan!


C-flat for Obama.

We are really seeing a tin ear on many things, particularly juxtaposed against the congressional reality from the President.

He has fallen flat on many issues that his populist core group, of which I count myself as formerly one, would have imagined his administration could have tackled in his sleep.

1. Habeas Corpus. To me this is the only issue of the 2012 election if this doesnt get handled, very soon. Don't get me wrong, I am sure there are some very bad people out there trying to do very bad things to the USA,, but at what cost are we willing to proceed? Still unsettled is the rejection of the initial human rights of the landholder found in the Magna Carta, enshrined by our civilization, and repealed under the harsh justice of Bush the Lesser. Yet Obama three years in unwilling to re-establish ancient Rule of Law?? Straight up F on this one.

2. Tax. Dear Mr. President, under similar constraints, your hero, Reagan, also raised taxes. What economist is telling you to not generate revenues by simplifying government, tax codes, and regulations-- a net tax increase? Maybe Geithner is the least of our worries, but there is not really a debate amongst scholars as to what is needed stimulatively by the Buyer and Seller of last resort. You are trying to run the largest economy without proper income. Would any millionaire or billionaire also seek to run an operation with expenses exceeding income? No, they would pass the cost on. D+ on economy.

3. Negotiating. Before I consider voting for you again, I need you to show me that you wouldn't be hustled by a car dealer. In the real world, you see, people close deals all day long. I guess its a lawyers in Washington DC thing to expect that you acceed to the oppositions positions before they show willingness to engage in earnest horse trading. Practice by playing poker with your staff or something, because this is getting embarrassing to watch. Then the endless tactical back and forth. Next time, print out your hard and fast deal points and let congress work around you -- not the other way around! Congress is only popular to the tune of their family and friends networks now, so why would you let them have the first or last word ever again? D- on negotiation.

4. Everything else. Obama has been remarkably productive in the first couple of years, but it seems has been caught flat footed. His administration has gotten many remarkable things accomplished while fighting two wars they didnt start. I remember watching Nixon flying away from the White House lawn on TV when I was three, so I have no short term memory issues to somehow imagine that much of our problems stem from the horrible administrative decisions by the prior CEO.

Yet, I tried to bite my tongue about Bush, because I knew (a) he was only a person, (b) tens of thousands of others worked around him to create the millions of bad choices, least of which was Cheney, and (c) barring the previous administrations refusal to leave office without a coup, we are Americans, and even the quasi-fascist neo-cons left when the People spoke. So, yes, comparatively Obama has been a fresh start, but now we are into the quagmired reality of hard choices--regardless of who started what (My argument is that it's Nixons fault for taking us off the Silver Standard, but who cares, right? How will that argument get anything accomplished today??).

I give Obama a B- drifting into a C+ were it not for the key issues above, to combine for a very flat C-.

I can only pray we are restored our rights, and that the people who will be going back to Washington DC in the fall decide to take seriously the multitude of issues that have befallen the American peoples-- for surely this wont do!

How Cataclysm is Reality Check

The Disaster in Japan, presently mounting towards becoming something we will only hope to determine in a couple of months could be at least worse than Three-Mile Island and probably not as bad as Chernobyl; that is the Nuclear (Environment [Energy {consumption/scarcity} Economy] Health) Situation.

The Disaster in Japan is an example of the force of the oceans, a vivid recreation of the Indonesian Tsunami, but with the million dollar yachts, middle class houses, and video cameras slushing about everywhere—all floating together equally: that the reality TV, media, yet very real Safety Preparedness issues brought front and center for the World to see.

The Disaster in Japan was also a Massive Series of Earthquakes. Three Disasters in one, and all of them begging questions. Fundamental questions that I am confident the Japanese Society, and the World with which they have built tremendous store of good will, interdependence, and fair trade can answer the questions being asked by this Natural Disaster.

To come back to simplicity, the tragedy shows beggar, rich man, and thief all equally were swept away. All died, and were spared only according to natural forces – not perceptions or falsehoods held by society. Chaos, and randomness. DONATE TODAY!

We can use this crisis soon to be molded into opportunity to better understand our Society, too.


The first question begged, Nuclear, asks us to truly have Utilities, states, and corporations acknowledge that we are currently (this includes everything from Climate Change to Household cleansers, and includes everything else we make) conducting a real-time open ended chemistry experiment with our environs and habitat for which we rely upon sustenance. I have complained very loudly in my book Metaeconomics on the subject of incorrect assessment of lifetime costs and benefit-cost analysis in resource valuation.

The second shows us that seven generations thinking (planning for 7 x 30 = 210 years in advance) is required to address the engineering challenges of Reality posed by the forces of nature, and made worsening of those disasters.

Home itself as physical object is impermanent. So, any disaster in, near, or by the home becomes a scientific and engineering issue. At the extreme end, we have to be conscious also of our massive garbage and waste streams, and thus reusability, recycle-ability, biodegrability, etc.

For example: Is it too much to ask to buy a washing machine that your grandkids could inherit (still operational)? Or imagine you could use parts from your washing machine to replace parts to fix by hand (using simple tools) your futuristic vacuum? That the broken part can be sold for scrap to the local hardware store for re-smelting?

On the other hand, living spaces are designed to ideally (looking at older cultures than ours in Modern USA) last a similar 210 years... or many, many more!

Japan has the opportunity to unleash the resources to create an actual place where they find their best and brightest technological possibilities. Entire new, green, and safe communities can arise by direct result of the response by the question being begged.

Maybe there is hope for Nuclear Safety, but clearly like Deep Sea Oil Drilling, like Trickle Down Economics, and a parade of other less than flexible ideas we have recently witnessed self-destruct (or at the very least flies in ointment canisters -- if not fact based proofs against them) in our times.

Finally, to be specific and real in my example, the idea of a California Coastal Commission has been the obvious joke in my experience (and many others) in real estate, architecture, engineering, planning, design, and other professional experience. Saying CCC in many circles is short hand for bureaucratic nightmare and red tape.

However, by looking at the scope of the challenge now before our friends in Japan, we can see clearly why certain agencies do exist for betterment of common good issues like health, safety, environment and planning. We may however need to streamline, and make efficient this series of systems and conflicting agencies.

So, we should mirror our friends as they rebuild their infrastructure, help them in doing so, and use the massive economic requirements to upgrade and refurbish our crumbling infrastructure system.

• In these next years, the friendship between our nations and the connection and spirit of kinship can only become that much stronger by the real challenges and questions Mother Nature has now asked of all human societies around the world.

The Golden Fleece-down

Comcast won approval. Okay, but (and I haven't read the resrictions) should we not limit this transaction from a perspective of the possession or easement of telecommunicative ("two-way") devices in places of private residence or commerce in conjunction with the Potential of an implied warrant* the real issue: data mining, data collection, financial data sharing; etc.

*The former issue was similar to the subsidized railways of the 19th century, and now that much of the hard infrastructure is "owned," this implied or real monopoly on a market-by-market basis, in conjunction with certain content monopoly issues (channel restrictions, access limitations, and slower speeds for content not preferred) all imply that this will be bad for consumers.

This is a merger of Producer and Distributor to attempt to break this deal down into the simplest terms, and they have the customers "clicks" right in their hand.

I have Comcast Service, and it isn't as good as all that. Technical issues quite frequently, and local outages. That said, ATT U-Verse had major outages right over the holidays (as many are well aware) nation wide.

I would like to see better consumer protections... my bill has only gone up, and not just as a direct function of inflation.

How does this benefit consumers directly?

My Personal 3rd Memorial Project

As most of my friends already know, my stepbrother passed away three years ago from Prostate Cancer. He was 36, and first met him when he wasn't yet three years old as my Mom and his Dad (now my Father, for all intents and purposes) were dating.

As his barely older stepbrother, I watched and witnessed much of his life half-lived, if ever fully and with a special connexion to the Earth, and how that ended with the tragedy of profound illness.

A genuine humanitarian, he was more often than not something of a defiant optimist, or at least pleasant pessimist. He was always learning and growing as his comprehension and measure of the world expanded. And all, to whom I have talked to since his passing, who may have only merely even met him, remember the strong impression he left – most would say he was a purposeful and friendly person.

As tragic as the whole saga was, there is still a lot we can do for people here and now.

In a blog before the elections, I began training for a 10K and started to raise funds for a Memorial Race in honor of my stepbrother.

But that was postponed until somewhere into Spring of 2011, and last I heard they may turn it into some other type of event (like rock climbing)?

So, as part of my goal setting exercises for 2011, I found a solution that allows me to continue the physical training I need to work on for my short, mid, and long-term goals, and continues to raise funds and awareness for ZERO and all the good work they are doing to combat Prostate Cancer.

Here it is:

I have, as I write this, on the third anniversary of my stepbrother’s passing, the goal of raising another $240 by year's end, and that would make an even $500 for this year; then I would like to try and raise another $2000 through to April 2nd, 2011, when I plan on running (either a 10K or half-marathon) trail race; and finally my tentative goal is to be fit enough to run a trail marathon for mid-September – and complete this fund-raising project for ZERO by raising a final $2500 – a Total of $5000 in one year!

I know with your help I can do it, but for me the important thing was to find an activity (trail running) that I am enjoying and make goals that met those needs, too.

I then have the privilege to know my getting healthy has not only purpose, but that everyone who has already chipped (and who will chip) in is part of my Team!

Thank you very much for your support, and Happy Holidays!!


-DONATE NOW-

Learning from 19

Well, I am disappointed that Prop 19 didn't pass, but my eyes are opened up to where things stand.

I am also disappointed that the opposition created no effort at a cogent rhetorical argument against -- everything I heard, saw, or read was an appeal to emotion (mostly Fear) at the end of the day. No real debate of logic or reason.


What then would it take to be so reasonable as to shut out the opposition entirely:


Firstly, the measure failed in all the major growing areas! Also it failed in LA and SD, where I sense that had the Proposition somehow not stepped on fewer toes, then this may have passed without the support of the growers.

In his article, John Walker points out that exit polling found 30% of "NO" voters supported legalization-- just not 19!

That would suggest that a simple ballot proposal which only focused on the idea of making legal cannabis (in all its forms, including industrial) will pass.

Next, the simple folk wisdom that at the end of the day Prop 19 was a proposal to tax people, and I feel old when I think back to all the very good ideas I have seen, or helped put onto ballots, and even voted on, that dont pass for one basic fact-- the idea to raise taxes is a bad starting position.

Dont get me wrong, Prop 19 was well past deficit neutral, but it certainly appears that the 60-40 rule (when if you propose a tax it has the default position, regardless of issue, of being down 20%-- so to vote in a tax you need a virtual super-majority of enthusiasm, just to get to 51%!) was in full effect here.

So, then that suggests we need to legalize cannabis without creating taxes through referendum.

Finally, at the end of the day, it is certain that those people who operate directly or indirectly with the less than legal aspects of the current #1 Cash Crop, were overwhelmingly against the proposition for a wide range of hallucinations: market prices would drop (making this less profitable); medical marijuana laws would be hampered (which it wouldn't, but for certain operators the same issue of profitability would have potentially come into play); and claims of being poorly crafted (which would not have been as much of an issue because Ammiano would have reintroduced Bill to Legalize, Tax Marijuana, and thus harmonized and cleaned up any outstanding or unclear issues) seems to have been code for "let's not kill the goose laying golden eggs."

To summarize, the initiative that will pass sooner than later, must (a) be simple, clear, and complete; (b) should not prohibit, nor prescribe any taxes or fees; and (c) must be supported by the over ~60% of eligible voters who actually support an end of prohibition-- growers, suppliers, medical marijuana-ists, law enforcement, unions, churches, civic organizations, and maybe even another party (besides the Libertarians) that fully backs the initiative.


To whit the simplest proposal available for every state in every election year until prohibition is ended:

Shall Cannabis, its cultivation, harvest, products, by-products, use, sale, and distribution remain illegal?


Full text of the initiative;

A yes vote shall change nothing.

A no vote shall render all state and local laws against Cannabis void. If so voided, then the people will by force of this vote recommend the matter to state and local governments to establish regulation, tax, and control.


That simple, really.

I think the strategists, movers and shakers are well to get something as simple as this proposal onto a couple of 2011 ballots (maybe CA?).

If this issue can get onto the 2012 ballot in say a dozen or two of the major states where the movement is strong (WA, OR, CA, NV, CO, NM, MT, NE, MN, MS, OH, NC, NY, ME, HI, et. al.), then I imagine there will be an end of prohibition-- doesn't matter if it's 2 months, two years or two decades later-- we are very close to the beginning of the end of prohibition.

This strategy is a simple existentialist dilemma, which is designed only to jeopordize the continuation of Prohibition.


Finally, as I may not write another pro-Hemp article for fifteen days, months, or maybe another 15 years (hopefully not), I would like to re-iterate and respond to the question of why I support legalization:

Our founders had declared that the innate disposition of the character of the American Citizen is a free person who reserves and is granted by the Almighty an inherent right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness. Further, the right to privacy is implied within the bounds of social order and safety of the state.

To have something, a plant, literally something that can grow as a weed, a volunteer, that has been misrepresented as in the same category as Heroine, when in fact it is less harmful than Alcohol, and has outstanding benefit to the industry and health of humanity, then as stewards of this little blue marble, we earthlings, must make free that plant, animal, or being. This is the ethical implication.

To arrest people for an activity that human beings have engaged in since the dawn of history itself is madness. This the moral implication.

The definition of Liberty may be argued in massive volumes, but put simply: "the right of the individual to live and pursue happiness within lawful means without infringing upon an other's liberties, nor antagonism towards the state."

As such, so long as we perpetuate false myths, rumors, and stories about reality itself and facts as such, we create a society of suspicious minds (to quote Elvis) that is in genuine conflict with the ideals of Freedom and a right to Pursue happiness.

So long as another American's reasonable expectations of ordinary individual Liberties are being infringed upon, then this implicates us each and all as fellow citizens to understand that some element from our own choices in life may be also similarly put asunder arbitrarily and capriciously by the government. This is the philosophical argument.

And finally, like any good red-blooded capitalist from America, the most important issue is that of making dark markets bright, fair, and regulated places, and spreading the benefits of what is basically a TRILLION DOLLAR industry back unto the populace from whence its also is gainful of those basic services taxpayers provided for these outlaws (yes, as in "when freedom is Outlawed, then only Outlaws will be free!") to be benefitted from the roads, services, and infrastructure whereby the goose may so continue to lay golden eggs, and all of us are granted a right to have geese! Revenues gained by the States and Municipalities from all the new profits would have probably exceeded estimates over time.

***

California just missed a multi-billion dollar chance at a major fifteen to twenty year first-mover advantage!

The Shame of Big Oil

Here is the rhetorical question: Imagine if you will the Blob from the 1950's movie of the same title, and it was sweeping the streets removing only the gas stations, refineries, offices, and production facilities of every oil company that existed in five states.

How much money would the oil industry collectively spend to stop the Blob? How fast would that private action (without any help [or probably permission] from the Government-at-large) be done?

Now, if instead of "blob," we read massive uncontrolled oil gusher; we replace the streets with the Gulf of Mexico; and instead of oil companies we read: every fisherman, much of the tourism, a lot of recreational dollars, and the future health of millions of people-- not to mention the immense and incalculable devastation to our aquatic creatures and ecosystems-- we must wonder.

Is it not in every oil companies interest to assist in solving this problem ASAP so as to be able to have opportunity at future access to public waters?

As for BP: It was different to hear within the first days of this tragedy, that BP will honor all reasonable economic claims. That said, sending claimants out to help with the clean up and containment without proper safety (equipment, training, resources, etc.) is in some ways worse, because then they shall have several claims as a class action: (1) economic, and (2) health.

It seems there will probably be many levels of costs for BP, Halliburton, et. al.: (A) immediate, (B) long-term, (C) Criminal claims, (D) Civil penalties, and (E) future opportunity costs.

I also want to make the statement that this situation is not as advertised or spun, "Obama's Katrina." Bush got a four day notice, and if memory serves did nothing for an additional four or so days. When he did it was to reassure people, as opposed to acknowledge the tragedy. That tin ear populism was what created (along with catch phrases like, "heckuva job Brownie,") the sink hole of political legitimacy for Bush.

Pubs and haters praying for this to suddenly be Obama's Katrina are going with the old 'argumentum ad naseum,' again, but more startling is their admission that in this (and on several other issues like the economy) matter their last leader with a fully stacked Pub Congress flubbed on issue after issue. I think with the foot falling and the Tea Parties it is clear that the Pubs havent gotten out of circular firing squad formation quite yet....

This situation was precipitated by the Bushies, and the only problem I have with Obama (Administration) is that they did not catch the paper tiger collusion between MMS and Big Oil before it came to this.

So, now as far as I am concerned, we the people must ask the oil companies to verify and prove the statements they made in writing to our governmental bodies in order to acquire permits. If they claim this situation happens only once every 30 years, then they must show they have what it takes to either improve techniques and/or possess the technological wherewithal to mitigate even the slightest damage to our public lands and natural resources.

As far as I am concerned, even the fishermen are missing the bigger picture: they should not just ask for a years wages, or another job... What about charging wholesale prices for every pound of shrimp, dolphins, fish, crabs, clams, crawdads, mollusk, etc. that has been "eaten" by this blob; and what about all the future costs for the billions of creatures that have been aborted in this man made catastrophe facilitated by a chain of fools.

Finally, it is hard to write this knowing I am on track to have to fill up at the gas station in about a week. We are all conspirators at some level of this tragedy, but imagine how much this will cost the tax payers total. It is probably a very incalculable number like say $208,972,340,000.00, just to pick one out of the hat. We have dozens of these rigs out there. If we would just spend that $208,972,340,000.00 x 12 to facilitate electric cars, improved clean technology, solar, and wind, then would we not be in this mess when the next one is due in thirty years or less?

Strategy, Tactics, and Terrorism

I will make this brief.

The idea that we can stop terrorists who seem to be coming in via London, Amsterdam, or other foreign ports into America to set off havoc (and bombs) by essentially removing civil liberties here at home beggars belief.

A phrase that would have been heresy just several years ago, but is now on the TV-machine a lot is "security theater."

Now in my mind this would be the staging area for a secure zone, but in fact means staging an act which is designed to lend the appearance of greater safety.

We still haven't completely implemented the work of the bipartisan 9-11 Commission, Republicans continue to play petty politics by not conferring a TSA Chief, and meanwhile New safety measures appear arbitrary... I mean here.

The simple Strategical guidance I would offer is simple: We must shift from a Reactionary Defense to a Proactive Defense; We must shift from a Nation-State Invasion Model to a Sectarian Counter-terror Model.

Easier said than done!

That said, Proactive Defense looks more like what the British accomplished in 2005 with the liquid bombers; or the French have been dealing with since Algerian Independence in 1962. A lot of very advanced police work!

Our current reactionary basis has us looking at areas where the opponents last struck. As they say in investing, "past performance does not guarantee future results." This is backwards hindsight mentality.

The balance is to get international cooperation on improved intelligence techniques that somehow maintains reasonable personal privacy and functional civil liberties.

As for our wholesale invasion of places where terrorists live, well that is as delusional as the idea that Terrorists will somehow destroy the Freedom we enjoy in the West.

Our freedoms, our wealth, and our model of social change is not something that people plan on giving up on, and like any good product or service-- it is in high demand!

Ours is not a natural state of governance, but a logical outcrop as a result from hard earned lessons and wars of the past. Ours is the best model, for now, and people basically like Freedom, Liberty and Justice. So the terrorists can't expect random acts of havoc to remove or somehow dethrone this truth.

On the other hand there are dissenters and at the harshest end bad actors, those who would commit terrorist acts, probably in any major nation-state in the world. It becomes a question of what is aspirational and what is operational as to what threats are indeed real to human safety and liberty.

So, to invade yet another country to ensure freedom and democracy is so 20th century, and a very proven failed idea from not just a budgetary, but a benefit-cost, point of view.

Like NASA, our defense and offense needs to get more focused, accurate, and scale appropriate to live within their means.

What Made The Greatest Generation Better?

Startling to imagine that the people starting families, going to college and buying homes earned about 59% less than we do for homes that cost 217% less!


So in other words, a male in 1950 (who made a median income of ~$20K) could buy a median home that would cost him three times his gross income (~$55K), and if the female of the nuclear family was also working she could add about $9K p.a. to the kitty-- meaning a joint income family bought homes in the fifties USA for about twice their gross earnings!


If we reverse that using 2008 numbers: Median Wage was ~$32K, so a single earner should be able to buy a home that costs ~$96K...

According to census.gov the wage gap in 2004 was at ~77%, so that means the median female made ~$25K. The joint earners then have a combined ~$57K, and again, reversing the idea, a home should cost ~$106K!

-OR-

Instead of homes costing between $96K and $106K, we could reverse the wage disparity against home costs:

According to realtor.org, the Median price for homes in Dec. 2008 was $175K nationally. Lets not worry that there have been some slight improvements in the market, or how complex the marketplace really is for our purposes here, and agree that indeed $175K is fair (even in NY and CA).

Going back to the 1950's, that would put (male) wage earners at one-third of home price, or ~$58K per year!

If we accommodate the idea that gender equality has somehow had a negative impact (that is to say, lets make pay equal in our assumption, but reduce by a factor of 77% this reverse affordability [$58k * 0.77]), then we still get two earners who each gross just under $45K each!

And this still lags the 1950's statistic (where not making distinctions of male or female) a dual income family would earn ~$97K (an extra $7K).

Thats median, which means the perfect middle of all people, or in the case of property, a middle of the road home-- an imaginary concept. That said if we have only one person at the median, and everyone else is skewered to the furthest reaches (say very rich and very poor) this does little to promote a middle class, which the Greatest Generation also had the benefit of.

"The wealthiest 10 percent of Americans — those making more than $138,000 each year — earned 11.4 times the roughly $12,000 made by those living near or below the poverty line in 2008." (Note: they quote "median income" as '$50,303,' but they mean MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME!!!)

So the way back to 1950's prosperity? Increase affordability not just for some, but many.

(References: Median Wages and Home Prices, Census.gov; Inflation Adjustment Westegg.com; Chart assumption for 2010 Estimate = [2008 Median Wage according to BLS.GOV = $32,290, but carried ADJUSTED 2000 Median Wage of $36,200 into 2008 value $38,841as parity for estimate of 2010 Median Wage] / [DEC 2008 Median Home Price without adjustment or improvement or decline.].)

Esoteric Critique for McCain reserved for after the Campaign (Part 2)

MESSAGE, Message, and message....

To illuminate my next critique, I will first choose the thing that Obama did (amongst other things [but in this case from strictly a marketing point of view]) oh so very right: He picked a brand identity and stuck with it.



If memory (yes, I am not googling it or whatever) serves me, then I believe he had the trademark blue "O" with the red stripes of the American flag as hills (or waves) more or less at his announcement in Springfield. I also believe it was fairly early on (before Iowa) wherein he used the one word slogan "Change." He stuck by those now famous messages throughout his effort.

Hilary gave him as stiff a challenge as she could (and still hope for a personal political future aside from her husbands shadow), and barely lost in her efforts to peel away at the brand of a cool intellectual who stood firmly for change and chose most words carefully most of the time.

She did throw the kitchen sink at him. But she also tried (again from memory only) the better part of half a dozen slogans, and dozens of various straw man sticking points with varying degrees of truth buried within the message-- all designed to run against Obama.

Last mention of Obama here, and then onto McCain, Obama (and his exploratory committee) seemed to calibrate the message (brand identity+slogan+platform) squarely against ALL COMERS, not just his next nearest competition.

McCain's team in March clearly failed to assess that (A) Obama's message was fairly consistent throughout a grueling Democratic primary, and (B) his Brand and Identity were fairly unshakable. That would seem to imply that (1) In order to appear more unshakable, unflappable, AND experienced a granite bedrock and marble foundation of a message needed to be developed during that down time from March to June, and (2) It was going to be an all out effort which required coordination and harmonization at every level-- especially the ground.

So, lets focus just on McCain: identity = servant to the nation, war hero, and maverick; slogan and platform... well that never quite got straightened out by the "Straight Talk Express."

If he was going to continue riding around in the STE, then a heavy dose of Straight Talk would have really been helpful. I mean how high would his polling numbers have shot up if he had said, "I know President Bush has been unpopular, hey personally I think he's even a bit of a Jerk, but in order to win these wars you have to make some unpopular decisions."

What part of that statement could the Dems have disagreed with? You then refocus on the messy details of how to win wars.

My Proviso here is that I am assuming the Pubs had some sort of strategy (other than continuing to prolong the war and siphon tax dollars to no bid contracted cronies for shoddy work and non-accountability), but if I am wrong then moreover they deserved to lose!

On the Economy (and I already suggested that Romney should have been the VP... there would have been a much more contentious battle in the West, Rust Belt, and to a lesser degree New England), if he were to have said, "I know there are some people struggling, but its the job of the government to give a hand-up-- not a hand out!"

Again, thats an oldy but a moldy from the Reagan playbook Maverick 2000 McCain would agree with, but somewhere the message was coopted to please the Rovian Sith Hordes (a.k.a. NeoCons) and so any talk of assistance to anyone (used here to include the "personhood" of corporations) not worth billions was taboo.

On Immigration, "My friends, I could prattle on about my long record on immigration and human rights, but lets get one thing straight-- We need to fix this broken down Immigration and border system."

Vague enough to not completely freak out the borders only crowd, but tongue firmly in cheek enough to give the wink to his true base of Pro-Life Hispanics who have some concerns for workers rights, and deep fear for some of the more draconian suggestions posited by the NeoCons.

Finally, although this may not be entirely "message," but it fits into the category of "Non-verbal." When you go into your convention a landslide victor, your party needs to conform its platform to your overarching gameplan and strategy.

That most certainly didnt happen.

No, as became clear on September 15th, McCain surrounded himself with people who could tolerate his bullshit, and (probably) feared him enough to not be able to simply point out his errors or fallacies. Someone had approved a script saying "The fundamentals of the economy are strong," when most economists worth their salt were at least tipping their hand that the "R" word was around the corner if not nearer. What on Gawds green monster sign were they thinking?

Here are some great stats about how to measure Recession, and why I would never have ever approved of that message (if McSame was my boy), as we have technically been in Recession for years.

He then panicked, "suspended" his campaign (even though in fact there were commercials, surrogates, and Palin romping around), scuttled a deal brokered in Congress with the President, and then resumed his campaign only to vote FOR the bailout. Think "My Pet Goat," on Viagra, uppers, and Scotch....

I have to believe that the absolute shit sandwich (all of those many many served to him 'special order' over the years) that McCain was served as part of the 2000 campaign and its subsequent events (including the absolutely dishonorable attack against fellow Vietnam Hero Kerry) had (as they say in Poker) put on Tilt a personality and temperament which could really not afford to be on Tilt.

So what possible message could you construct with all of those facts?

Suggestion for the trial balloon meeting that should have been on or around March 25th, 2008;

It takes a nation of millions to hold us back.

Esoteric Critique for McCain reserved for after the Campaign (Part 1)

Standing next to Palin (on her way up the popularity Elevator, that also went down with unfortuitous timing for the campaigns purposes), especially at the beginning, he reminded me of Pappy O'Daniel in O Brother Where Art Thou in the finale;



I mean, that scene doesnt show it, but after this excerpt when Pappy gets on stage he literally is warming his hands by the warmth of the Soggy Bottom Boy's popularity and fanfare... and that is exactly what McCain did wrong from an image point of view-- he looked desperate (and it seemed that he believed the plain and handsome Governor of Alaska was his saving grace).

Recall the scene towards the very beginning when O'Daniel's team discusses the opposition, and the conclusion was, "you cant get Reform if you are the incumbent candidate." (if I recalled the quote correctly.)

Whoever was in control of the imagery of the Straight Talk Express should have been fired after The Green Monster, and I think may even have been-- that said the young and to some attractive Governor only served to further demonstrate the age and wounds of the veteran Senator.

Monday Morning Quarterbacking for the Losing Team(s)

If I am Lombardi, in the halftime lockerroom (where I left off on August 1st), and speaking with my losing team that just had enough time on the clock to throw two Hail Mary's, and the first one was intercepted (where upon the opposite side {Dems}) then took a knee to run out the clock (twice because we did have one time out remaining when we hurled the ball to the two yardline) sending us into that lockerroom where we still had a real chance, then my speech would have gone something like this:

Ladies and Gentlemen, and the Rovian Sith Hordes, we are down, but not out by any means.

First, we have to decide are we a running game offense (ergo true Mavericks with a smash mouth offense), or a finesse team (ergo traditional divide and conquer partisan and identity politics), because at this point I am unsure if we can afford to do both.

The conventions are around the corner, and we have to make a smart pick for Veep... If we go smashmouth, true grit, honesty, leadership and the ability to speak our centrist truth to power I say lets get someone like Lieberman (how's his knee?) in there to lend true across the aisle credibility, an appeal to moderates and many conservatives, yet an ability to bark at the opposition on their terms. That would show 'em.

However, as confusing as that would be to the opponents, run play football is a hard way to have to catch up... lets get a guy who raised our game, kept us on our feet, and still has enough credibility on things we are weak in (like Economics) to make plays that pick apart defense... Romney.

Okay so heres the plan;

After the nomination, Romney you work the North West starting in every town in Utah in an ever expanding circular motion until you meet McCain at the end of his Viva la South tour (which starts in Florida, covers all of Dixie and then some, and meet up in Arizona). After Arizona for about a week we will reassess on where you are weakest, and let you do some joint appearances to rally huge crowds... after all we dont want you guys appearing at the same place all the time {oops}.

That said, a Veep Pick victory does not make...

Our key problem here has been message. We are trying to beat them at their game, trying to coopt that "Change" mantle. That doesnt work when weve been in Washington for over two decades and in power for a majority of that time.

Mmmm... lets see, oh yeah, our opponent is weak in experience. Rather than challenge (or appear to challenge) his patriotism, heritage, beliefs, or even to a lesser extent his philosophy (because lets get real our parties are still more or less two different sides of the same coin), lets instead hammer out a simple bumper sticker slogan (or two) that gets to the core....

Okay coach what do we have? (-offensive coordinator speaks-)

Great. Yeah, they have one word, so let us choose one word: Stability.

That will be all we need to do to reassure our conservative base who is a little squirrley that Romney didnt win, play neutral enough with moderates and independents, and if anything weird happens in the world, like God forbid a political crisis or economic crisis {puke}, we can be seen as above the fray in our stable bunker and hold tight to our consistent brand identity of "Stability." Also this wont offend the remaining two-hundred thousand people who believe in the current administration, yet allow us to make critiques freely of that administration should it handle such challenges poorly (but that hasnt happened, nor could it happen again {couldn't it?}).

Finally, defense (money and organization).

Team we need to really step it up. They have us on money, but organizationally, once we get our coalition with a bee in its bonnet-- we cant be beat!

It also strikes me that instead of rallying a get out the vote drive in only the last 72 hours may not be enough, so lets just start all our ground game stuff right on the heels of our convention.

All right, go out there and win one for the Gipper... no not George Gipp!

...of course I surely did not want this to become a competitive contest.