William

2 hours ago
‹ chat status

Profile

Name:
William
Location:
Louisville, KY
Birthday:
07/28/1947
Status:
In A Relationship
Job / Career:
Education

Stats

Posts:
36
Post Reads:
1,007
Last Online:
2 hours ago
Technorati:
blog reactions

Users Chatting

View All »

My Friends

online now

Subscribe

Politics & Legal > Thomas Sowell - Right Again - as Always

  Thomas Sowell - Right Again - as Always

"Our three candidates for president are being discussed in terms of their demographics - race, gender, and age." it does not seem that anyone anywhere is concerned with the momentous weight of responsibility that the office of president carries with it; and if any one of these three candidates are substantially qualified. Important issues such as nominating and appointing federal judges; the choices of - applying the laws of congress and the constitution, or judges who make their own social policies from the bench. "Change" which is not really change, but only a return to the failed social policies of the 1960's and the 1990's; protecting criminals, attacking business, increasing government spending, promoting a sense of envy and grievance, raising taxes on those people who are successful and productive producers; and subsidizing those who are not! In the not so distant past, this is what led us to 1960's double-digit inflation and double-digit unemployment; and the 1990's near collapse of the stock market and the entire U.S. economy. "Change' is good in many ways - "Who Ate My Cheese?" - but only if it is real "change" for the better - not just another return to proven failures,over and over, again and again. We the American people deserve much better than the three choices we now have before us. "Everything seems new to those too young to remember the old (past), and too ignorant of history to have heard (learned) about it."


posted on May 1, 2008 6:05 PM ()

Comments:

I have always wished for a space on the ballot to vote for "None of the above," which, if it got the most votes, would throw out the entire election and start another campaign with none of "the above" being allowed to participate. I know it Sounds simplistic, but it would eliminate a lot of the really nasty mean people from the process. There might even be room for some smart people.
comment by thestephymore on May 21, 2008 2:41 AM ()
Now there's an idea. I like it.
reply by shesaidwhat on May 21, 2008 10:47 AM ()
I don't completely understand American politics, to be truthful - what I, know is more what I have watched in the film (movies). With that thought in mind, from what I can comprehend, is that it is more, the Presidents 'staff', who run the show and more or less 'instruct' (rather than 'advise'), unlike our Prime Minister who is advised and then gives the governments decision to the Queen - who does, I believe, have the power to at least - critisize his decision. I think I may be tying myself up in knots here . . . I'm not too good with our politics either
comment by augusta on May 7, 2008 12:02 PM ()
Thought provoking blog. Thanks!
comment by jerms on May 3, 2008 10:15 AM ()
So you figure, in the past during down turns, the popular "New Deal" idea was to create government jobs, and they were temporary which meant they went away and we ended up back with those lost jobs? So here we have the latest stimulus, why have people even do anything productive, just give em money, does this work, hell no, maybe a temporary bump in consumer spending but when it's over, we're back a square one. One has to wonder when will politicians learn that long term economic health is based on market forces reving up the small business sector to stimulate growth?
Are there any creative minds in Washington, I doubt it, we only have two choices, and when the money flows to either party in power, they seem to go "brain dead" and follow the money.
comment by strider333 on May 3, 2008 9:22 AM ()
One error in your above statement - politicians, once elected to office, can not learn any thing new - they know it all (everything) already - just ask them.!!!!! Yes, there are minds in Washington - just all wasted on the greedy path to power and prestige more of our money to them!!!!!
reply by oldfatguy on May 4, 2008 11:49 PM ()
In the end, there isn't a lick of difference in these two parties...who ever is in power the money just reverses direction...forget ideology...we're all screwed, why blame the right or left...we're the fools...
comment by strider333 on May 2, 2008 10:42 PM ()
There's a lot of truth to what you're saying, Strider.

I figure I'll vote for McCain, since, MAYBE, the Democratic Congress will force him to compromise in a way which actually benefits most of us. I was gonna vote for Obama, until I really began to sniff out his agenda, which is to tax our way out of the mess ALL of the politicians have made, AND, he says he'll tighten border security even more, while renegotiating NAFTA, all of which could spell economic disaster.

I've postured myself so as to be insulated from any economic downturns which may occur when interest rates start going back up, and I advise everyone else to do the same.

I think it's wise for investors to put money into foreign index funds in countries which are benefiting from the Asian growth phenomenon. I also have money in Australian Dollars, and, even the Mexican Peso, because they both pay fat interest rates, and, both appear to be poised to outperform the dollar over a relatively long period of time.

It's going to take decades to heal the damage done to our economy by Bush's self-serving policies.

This is why I've moved abroad. I can't tell you how many phone calls I made to Bush volunteers when I was naive enough to think he actually cared about doing anything but line his own pockets. I got tired of his Stepford-like drones politely listening with abject ignorance, as I discussed the corrupt nature of this Administration.

If people want to prepare themselves financially for some of what we're going through now, and into the foreseeable future, I recommend getting rid of debt, and investing in a mix of stocks that pay nice, healthy dividends. Many of these stocks were beaten down during the 7-month market correction. ANYONE can learn how to invest. For those who prefer the mutual fund approach, they might want to consider the Dreman Value Income Edge Fund, which gets a high rating from the investment rating services.

About 65% percent of my investment portfolio sits in cash, in case the broad markets get hammered when rates start going up, and, because of the uncertainty of election year politics. The other 35% of my money is split this way:

2 out of every 1 dollar is invested in assets whose underlying
wealth comes from OUTSIDE the US markets.

For example, I have money in BOTH the Australian index fund (which pays a nice dividend), along with my shares in the Australian Dollar Trust. I also have shares of the Brazilian, Chinese, Malaysian, and Singapore stock indices.

It's also good to have exposure to metals, which I've done by getting shares of BHP Billeton, a HUGE mining conglomerate out of Australia. It's a diversified mining stock, as it mines Aluminum, Iron Ore, Gold, all the other precious metals, many of which are used for industrial as well as consumer purposes, and, Uranium.

I don't worry about volatility any more, because I've structured my portfolio so as to pay me nice, steady dividends, regardless of which direction the market moves in.

Sorry to be so long-winded, but people need to know there are sane ways to get through these hard times.

I should also say that, I've had all these market positions for longer than the last 72 hours (most I've had for months or weeks).

Everyone should consult an investment adviser before putting money into the markets. (I'm not a trained investment adviser, but, I did get my undergrad degree in Business Finance.)

Like you, Strider, I realize that Ron Paul got shafted by the bribed media elites, but, if I vote for him, Obama could get the job. Apparently, he hangs out with some goof-ball loser that allegedly was a member of the Weather Underground. I believe the guy's name is Jim Ayers. Apparently, the FBI botched their evidence up, and they couldn't get a conviction, even though the guy confessed to bombing buildings during the Vietnam era.

Obama is long on talk, and, he's done great things for whistle-blower protection, via the law he helped craft, but he needs more seasoning, in my view.

McCain says he'll cut spending AND taxes. I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt, WHILE I hedge my bets by living on the opposite side of the planet from our troubled Not-So-New Roman Empire.






reply by amerigobard on May 10, 2008 9:01 PM ()
As I look Leftward through the history that I have lived I am staggered by the bizarre and unreformed nature of its players. Some 40 years after the fact we have socialist bombers teaching in our universities and declaring that they regret not having set more bombs and killed more innocent people (Lord hear my prayer). Just yesterday that political genius "Rosie" encouraged the pod people to meet in L.A. to re-enact the 68 convention. The madness never ends and reason never grips these people. The young will do the burning and bombing that's coming but it will be because old farts like these, who can't let go of their own irrational ideologies, rouse them to rage.
comment by think141 on May 2, 2008 6:39 AM ()
Your concerns are valid, sir. I regret that I allowed myself to get sucked into Obama's rhetoric.

I'd like to see Ron Paul in the White House, but, I'll vote for McCain, and hope he does a decent job.

I like the fact that McCain wants to cut federal spending and taxes, and I hope he can gracefully exit the nightmare in Iraq in a large enough measure to drastically cut our military spending.

Meanwhile, while stupid naysayers on Blogster once poked fun of me for advocating hydrogen-powered cars, even the "mainstream" press have begun to talk about it ...
reply by amerigobard on May 10, 2008 9:15 PM ()
How true that is. I always enjoy Sowell.

When we started out this campaign with about 100 people running and debating, it was kind of exciting. I was hoping someone would bust out of that pack and become "great."

That didn't happen.

Every time I try and do a "John McCain ain't that bad" type editorial, the freaking guy says something that PROVES he is "that bad."

I'm not sure which of the three candidates will push further into socialism?

(When I figure that out, then I will know who NOT to vote for.)
comment by angryrepublic on May 1, 2008 7:37 PM ()
Read my comments above, which were made to Strider and to think141.
reply by amerigobard on May 10, 2008 9:24 PM ()
We know from history that no matter which on, Hillary or Obama, quite interchangeable, what the overriding party platform and agenda says is going to happen. John McCain - who can tell which party, which side of the aisle, that he is affilliated with - but it does seem that his one major similarity with the democrats, his agreements are not with the people in fly-over country!!!!
reply by oldfatguy on May 4, 2008 11:55 PM ()

Comment on this article   


36 articles found   [ Previous Article ]  [ Next Article ]  [ First ]  [ Last ]