For the most part, I'm intending for this blog to be witty, informative, and insightful on a variety of subjects, most political, all practical in some fashion. However. . .
Every once in a while, I need to stick my foot into pure, childlike silliness.
This is such a time:
Oh, the geek is strong with this one. I loved this drink as a kid, and I can't wait to try the recipe.
If you have, please comment! I'm curious.
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
The Media Finally Gets One Right
If you're raising your eyebrows at me, don't worry. I'm not a Dancing With The Stars fan, or a fan of Cher, or anything else. But did you notice the consistent use of "he" throughout the article? Yeah, if you're the average straight person, chances are you didn't.
If you're alternatively gendered/sexed, I'll bet you caught it.
Source: Yahoo!
News about Thomas Beatie, a man who became pregnant, first hit the shelves in 2008. I remember listening to my co-workers at the time; many of them were insulted that the media referred to Mr. Beatie as a man, stating that "so long as he has woman parts, he's a woman."
In feminist theory there is an acknowledgement that to be is to be perceived. I could climb to the top of the Empire State building, proclaim myself Spiderman, but that no more makes me Spiderman than calling an apple an orange makes the apple taste like an orange.
To identify as something requires a bit of a push-pull with others. How do you know you are a woman or a man? Because you have the attributes of what you AND other people consider to be "womanly" or "manly." For those who chose (and in some cases even when they don't choose) to take the label of man or woman but fail to meet social expectations, the consequences can be deadly.
Source: ChristopherBoe
But to identify as something is also a basic human right. To be able to claim that "I am" is fundamental to Western cultures. And yet, when confronted with a female-born man, culture consistently denies these humans that basic right of self-identification: I cannot be me, unless you also agree that I am me.
Here are my guidelines. I'm sure there are those who feel differently:
If you are referring to a crossdresser or drag queen - when referring to the person who is in character, use the pronoun of the character. If Ru Paul is in drag, then she is fabulous. When Ru Paul is out of drag, he's still a great actor.
When referring to a transgendered person - Once the person is confident enough to say "I am", then respect the gender the person is transitioning to. In Chaz Bono's case, once he decided to become a man, all future references should change to the male pronoun. To refuse to do so denies those people the right to exist.
How would you like it if suddenly a good portion of the country decided you didn't exist?
For the zhes, s/hes, and others - At the risk of getting overly complicated (really, people, there is a reason why LGBTQRXYZ is jokingly called "alphabet soup" in the gay community), we really should try to be respectful of people's self-labelling. But alternatively gendered folks should be patient too. We've barely just gotten far enough that news media is finally calling a transgendered man a he! Give it some time before you start throwing third genders and genderqueer issues at them.
My one critique of the Yahoo! article is that they never mention why Chaz's beard would be important to him or why he's particularly famous. To someone who isn't familiar with the backstory, the article would seem confusing. While they did well in using the male pronoun throughout, they slipped a bit in failing to address the issue in a clear, direct manner.
Sunday, August 28, 2011
Disability As A Game
*facepalm* Mom stops kids' play because it's "disabelist" [sic]
Source: Chairsstairlift.com
The woman has great intentions, don't get me wrong. She wants to ensure that her kids are raised with an awareness and appreciation of difference. This is a noble goal. My concern is with the execution.
Instead of telling kids that pretending to be paralyzed is bad, morph the game into a learning tool. Build, borrow, or work something into a wheelchair, and then have the kids attempt to maneuver themselves with it. How will they get up stairs, get to the bathroom, get into bed, swim, without using their legs? Can they play basketball, hide and seek, or baseball in the wheelchair? What is easier? What is more difficult? Go out in public. How do the children feel when they are approached by strangers? Do they get stared at, ignored, laughed at?
Similar situation with missing arms / legs / fingers / eyes. By encouraging the kids to dig a little deeper in their play, Mom can help her kids not just sympathize with disabled people, but actually empathize. Encourage the kids to have conversations with disabled people - you might even learn a thing or two yourself.
Disability opens a person up to being a "public" body, meaning that everyone thinks they have the right to comment on your situation, because "visible" to most folks equals "not private." I often have people come up to me, asking if they can talk about something "personal", and then reveal to me the latest and greatest medical treatment for my condition, as if I haven't already tried it. People, whether or differing ability, race or religion, simply want to be acknowledged as human. There is more to me than my forehead, there is more to a paralyzed person than their wheelchair, and there is more to a black person than the color of skin.
Unfortunately, by making her childrens' play appear to be a shameful thing, this mother may have handicapped her kids' ability to empathize with others by using their imagination to pretend what it would be like to be disabled. Our childrens' greatest asset is their imagination; shame on anyone who attempts to stick that in a wheelchair.
Source: Chairsstairlift.com
Instead of telling kids that pretending to be paralyzed is bad, morph the game into a learning tool. Build, borrow, or work something into a wheelchair, and then have the kids attempt to maneuver themselves with it. How will they get up stairs, get to the bathroom, get into bed, swim, without using their legs? Can they play basketball, hide and seek, or baseball in the wheelchair? What is easier? What is more difficult? Go out in public. How do the children feel when they are approached by strangers? Do they get stared at, ignored, laughed at?
Similar situation with missing arms / legs / fingers / eyes. By encouraging the kids to dig a little deeper in their play, Mom can help her kids not just sympathize with disabled people, but actually empathize. Encourage the kids to have conversations with disabled people - you might even learn a thing or two yourself.
Disability opens a person up to being a "public" body, meaning that everyone thinks they have the right to comment on your situation, because "visible" to most folks equals "not private." I often have people come up to me, asking if they can talk about something "personal", and then reveal to me the latest and greatest medical treatment for my condition, as if I haven't already tried it. People, whether or differing ability, race or religion, simply want to be acknowledged as human. There is more to me than my forehead, there is more to a paralyzed person than their wheelchair, and there is more to a black person than the color of skin.
Unfortunately, by making her childrens' play appear to be a shameful thing, this mother may have handicapped her kids' ability to empathize with others by using their imagination to pretend what it would be like to be disabled. Our childrens' greatest asset is their imagination; shame on anyone who attempts to stick that in a wheelchair.
Homeboy Industries - Nothing Stops A Bullet Like A Job
I started going to church five weeks ago. They brought in a guest speaker last week, Father Greg Boyle. Father Boyle founded Homeboy Bakery in 1992, a business committed "to creating an environment that provided training, work experience, and above all, the opportunity for rival gang members to work side by side." This developed into Homeboy Industries.
Source: Homeboy Industries
His stories were amazing. So amazing, in fact, that I invite you to listen. It's 25 minutes long. Emo Warning: The ones who have a tendency to get dust in their eyes should keep a box of tissue nearby.
Tattoos On The Heart - 21 Aug 2011
Please visit the site and support this worthy cause, or better yet, start something similar in your own community.
Friday, August 26, 2011
Massachusetts Sports Gay Marriage, Universal Healthcare, Plus $460M Budget Surplus
Oh man: Massachusetts has $460M surplus
See, I'm not as crazy as you all might have thought I was. Increase social services, increase taxes, and voila, you have a state that is in the top-third of the country in terms of employment, and a surplus that the governor has asked the legislature to stow away into the state's Rainy Day fund, which would stand at $1 billion.
California, are you listening?
Mass. Governor Deval Patrick. Source: Wikipedia
As of 2008, MA also had the third-highest per capita income of the country ($50,375), and unemployment as of June 2011 stood at just 7.9%.
As far as taxes go (2010 numbers):
- MA ranks 23rd highest (or a little above average) for the overall average tax burden
- Flat-rate personal income tax of 5.3% (exemptions if below a certain income level)
- Sales tax of 6.25%, except groceries, clothing (up to $175), and periodicals
- Corporate tax is 8.8%, and capital gains tax sits at 12%
There is a small source of worry in the article, though. The majority of the surplus was due to higher-than-expected revenues from capital gains taxes. This is not a good sign for Massachusett's economy. Here's why:
1) Capital gains taxes only apply when someone sells an investment
This means that people are pulling money out of the stock market, or selling their houses. This is not generally a good sign, because it means that businesses have less capital to invest in better equipment and better people.
Note: Upon further research, home sales dropped 17% over the year of the budget surplus, and prices remained flat. This does not suggest the revenue is from home sales
2) Capital gains taxes disproportionately affect the rich
Not that this broker-than-dirt liberal has a specific problem with that, but it means that any easing of tax rates here won't do crap for the average working folk unless they have a retirement account, or what remains of a retirement account. This is, however, a nice example of legitimate wealth re-distribution that seems to be doing the job.
3) Capital gains taxes are not steady revenue
As previously mentioned, they only occur when investments are sold. That means this is generally a one-time event. Unless the money from the sale was invested back into the stock market (not likely considering the economic conditions of the country and the latest stock dive), money gained from this revenue source should not be treated as anything more than a happy windfall, and Governor Patrick is right to ask the legislature to bank the money.
4) Capital gains taxes are not indicative of higher incomes
If anything, they indicate lower incomes, as people sell investments to try to pay bills. I'd be happy to see evidence that contradicts this, though.
While I'm sure that Governor Patrick is excited to have a budget surplus, the overall message here is mixed. People pulling money out of the stock market indicates one of two things; either they think the market is too unstable to hold their money, or they need the cash to pay bills. Neither can be considered good news, but at least Massachusetts is putting money away in case things really get tough.
See, I'm not as crazy as you all might have thought I was. Increase social services, increase taxes, and voila, you have a state that is in the top-third of the country in terms of employment, and a surplus that the governor has asked the legislature to stow away into the state's Rainy Day fund, which would stand at $1 billion.
California, are you listening?
Mass. Governor Deval Patrick. Source: Wikipedia
As of 2008, MA also had the third-highest per capita income of the country ($50,375), and unemployment as of June 2011 stood at just 7.9%.
As far as taxes go (2010 numbers):
- MA ranks 23rd highest (or a little above average) for the overall average tax burden
- Flat-rate personal income tax of 5.3% (exemptions if below a certain income level)
- Sales tax of 6.25%, except groceries, clothing (up to $175), and periodicals
- Corporate tax is 8.8%, and capital gains tax sits at 12%
There is a small source of worry in the article, though. The majority of the surplus was due to higher-than-expected revenues from capital gains taxes. This is not a good sign for Massachusett's economy. Here's why:
1) Capital gains taxes only apply when someone sells an investment
This means that people are pulling money out of the stock market, or selling their houses. This is not generally a good sign, because it means that businesses have less capital to invest in better equipment and better people.
Note: Upon further research, home sales dropped 17% over the year of the budget surplus, and prices remained flat. This does not suggest the revenue is from home sales
2) Capital gains taxes disproportionately affect the rich
Not that this broker-than-dirt liberal has a specific problem with that, but it means that any easing of tax rates here won't do crap for the average working folk unless they have a retirement account, or what remains of a retirement account. This is, however, a nice example of legitimate wealth re-distribution that seems to be doing the job.
3) Capital gains taxes are not steady revenue
As previously mentioned, they only occur when investments are sold. That means this is generally a one-time event. Unless the money from the sale was invested back into the stock market (not likely considering the economic conditions of the country and the latest stock dive), money gained from this revenue source should not be treated as anything more than a happy windfall, and Governor Patrick is right to ask the legislature to bank the money.
4) Capital gains taxes are not indicative of higher incomes
If anything, they indicate lower incomes, as people sell investments to try to pay bills. I'd be happy to see evidence that contradicts this, though.
While I'm sure that Governor Patrick is excited to have a budget surplus, the overall message here is mixed. People pulling money out of the stock market indicates one of two things; either they think the market is too unstable to hold their money, or they need the cash to pay bills. Neither can be considered good news, but at least Massachusetts is putting money away in case things really get tough.
Sunday, August 21, 2011
Stock Market Investing Part 2 -
Picking Growth Stocks For the Lazy Investor
Disclaimer: I am not a professional stock broker, nor do I hold any kind of licensing. I'm a mechanic with a B.A. in English. These are the strategies I use when I pick stocks. I am currently averaging 20% annual growth. I take no responsibility for your actions as a result of this guide. If you can't afford to lose it, don't invest it.
Yes, I will be posting that disclaimer on every one of these. I don't want anyone coming after me because you forgot that you have your own brain, followed my advice (completely or partially) and lost the farm because you were investing money you couldn't afford to lose. Be smart, make your own decisions, and do your own research.
Source: Thomas Nast's "Battle Of Bears And Bulls"
For this portion of the investment guide, I will focus entirely on my process of picking a stock. I am not saying this is the right way, only way, guaranteed way - none of those are true. My strategy has a major flaw: I do not do the phone-based research Peter Lynch advocates for in his books (or anything other than web-based research, really). More than likely that is why my growth isn't bigger. However, I am comfortable with the risks that I have taken, and what little I was able to invest in actual cash for a limited time I made money on. I also understand that the lower growth rate is the payment for being lazy. Keep that in mind.
Note: Anytime I mention stock specific information (price, P/E ratio, etc.) I will always add the date and time afterwards. The stock market changes constantly, so these numbers are only good as an example, not representative of what may be going on when you read this.
1) Pick an index.
The easiest way to start picking stocks is to pick an index. This will give you a list of stocks to look into and make the big wide worlds of stocks look a little smaller. There are a variety of indexes to choose from, the biggest U.S. three being the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA), the NASDAQ, and the S&P 500. Each index has its own requirements that a stock must meet to be listed. For my personal portfolio, I started with the S&P 500.
Oh, another admission: I picked the S&P 500 because the numbers are smaller, so I don't feel like I'm on a constant roller coaster ride when I'm watching the news ticker of the stock prices go by. Remember in the first chapter when I mentioned people invest with their stomachs? Choosing the S&P 500 makes my stomach feel a little less queasy. Follow your stomach so you pick stocks you're more likely to stick with, even in tough times.
2) Find a listing of the companies on the index.
Wikipedia.org is what I used for this. Here's the current (8/21/11 5:19am) Wikipedia listing for the DJIA looks like:
Source: Wikipedia: DJIA
3) Research the stocks on the listing.
Since we're already looking at it, let's go ahead and start by looking at stocks with the DJIA. The first stock is 3M. Yahoo! has some very cool, free tools to research companies with. I went to Yahoo! Finance to start my research. Feel free to use some other research tool (web, magazine, annual reports), but know that the guide may be less helpful to you from here on out. I may go through these later, if people ask for it, but understand that will take some time for me to try out strategies and see the results. If you want to follow along, go ahead and load the website. I'll wait.
Ready?
Near the upper left hand corner you'll notice a little box that says "Get Quotes." From the Wikipedia listing, you'll notice that 3M's stock symbol is MMM. The stock symbol is an easy, quick way to identify a stock as prices are scrolling by your screen. Enter MMM in the Get Quotes field on the Yahoo! Finance site.
What is all that crap?
Information. Most of it I feel pretty safe in ignoring. If you want to pour through the information and you have the time, go for it. I'm lazy by nature, so take this for what it's worth.
The best growth stocks are boring, undervalued, and have good looking balance sheets. "Boring" and "undervalued" are both relative terms, so looking at information on a company's competitors can be a good starting point for finding the gems.
For "boring", you can check the volume statistic. Volume is the number of times stocks are bought and sold. If a company's volume is 6 million, it means 6 million stocks were either bought or sold in that time period (usually reported daily). If more than 50% of the volume were stocks that were bought, then the stock price goes up. If more than 50% of of the volume were stocks that were sold, then the stock price goes down. The more a company is traded, the more well-known the stock tends to be, and the more volatile the price. The reverse is also true.
If you're still on the Yahoo! site, scroll down and click on the "Competitors" link, underneath COMPANY on the left-hand sidebar. 3M's Competitor screen looks like this (8/21/11 5:45am PDT):
Source: Yahoo! Finance: 3M - Competitors
3a) Analyzing the P/E ratio
In general, an undervalued stock has a low P/E ratio.
So how do you know if a stock has a low P/E ratio?
My way is to look at the industry average. For 3M's screen, the industry average P/E ratio listed here is 13.50. This means that for every $1 of earnings, the price of the stock is $13.50. Keep in mind that the P/E ratio also represents the number of years it will take for you to earn your money back. On average, it will take a company in 3M's industry 13 1/2 years to make an equal return on your money. See why a low P/E ratio is good? A company with a P/E ratio of 5 would earn back its investment in 5 years. 3M's P/E ratio is 13.05, a little below industry average. This suggests that 3M has pretty much saturated its market, so we might research this stock later if our portfolio needs dividends (to be covered in a separate chapter).
Now what?
Look for a P/E ratio on the screen that's below industry average. Notice that AVY (Avery Dennison Corporation) has a P/E ratio of 9.37, well below the industry average of 13.5. On the surface, this suggests that Avery might be a better growth investment than 3M. Click on the AVY stock symbol on the competitor's chart to go to that company's stock page. Sometimes it's a useful exercise to click to the competitor's chart again, to see who AVY competes with: sometimes there are different stocks listed than are listed on 3M's page. For now, scroll down and click on Balance Sheet, left-hand sidebar, underneath FINANCIALS.
3b) Analyzing the Balance Sheet
The balance sheet is a listing of a company's assets, debts, and stockholder's equity. Let's pull out the important information to analyze to determine if AVY's low P/E ratio is because it's undervalued, or a representation that the company is on shaky financial ground.
To determine if a company is solvent, I need to check the company against a "worst of the worst" case scenario. What would happen if the company lost all sales and all its debts were made due tomorrow? Would the company survive, or would it have to declare bankrupcty?
The first bit of data is the assets (8/21/11 6:14am):
Source: Yahoo! Finance: AVY - Balance Sheet
I've pulled out this part of the assets table because the other items are either long-term assets (difficult to liquidate when the business needs immediate cash) or because they don't represent physical items that can produce cash (like the intangible assets).
Add the "Total Current Assets" and "Property Plant and Equipment" line.
Total Current Assets - the number which represents the most liquid of a company's net worth, usually in the form of cash, inventory, and other on-hand assets.
Property Plant and Equipment - While not as liquid as current assets, this number represents the amount of the company's net worth tied up in property, machines, desk furniture, etc. However, keep in mind that this number is usually over-estimated, due to some funky ways of accounting for depreciation and property values.
For AVY, 1.951 billion (Current Assets) + 1.262 billion (Property) = 3.213 billion
If necessary, AVY could raise 3.213 billion in cash on a relatively immediate basis. But that doesn't mean anything just yet.
Source: Allfree Logo
What about debts?
I'm so glad you asked. In our doomsday scenario, AVY is sitting on a nice, plump pile of cash. But the big bad creditors are about to come calling. What happens once all the creditors are done taking their part of AVY's pile?
AVY's liabilities look like this:
Source: Yahoo! Finance: AVY - Balance Sheet
Now, I'm very mean and protective of my money. You should be too. So we want to make it as hard as possible for the company to survive our doomsday scenario. While long-term assets were ignored, long-term debts are counted. The only number we look at here is Total Liabilities - 3.453 billion.
3.213 billion (Current Assets) - 3.453 billion (Total Liabilities) = -$240,000,000
Source: Business Cartoons
AVY is 240 million dollars in the hole.
Under what conditions would this still be a good investment?
This is where my strategy is inadequate. Behind every company is a story, a reason for why they are where they are. My personal stock picking strategy ends here; I would move on (and for the purposes of this guide we will). But, an investor who pushes a little further here would probably get better returns than I. This is the place where you could do phone research. Peter Lynch mentions talking to CEOs; I haven't tried it (would you believe I'm nervous?). But it is possible that there is a story behind AVY that would make it a comeback kid and bring great returns. But there is also the risk that AVY won't be able to improve its position, and eventually the company will fold. Knowing the story mitigates that risk.
This is also where non-web-based research can come in handy. If there is a investment magazine out there that has featured an innovative AVY product that might turn the company around, I wouldn't know. I don't subscribe to investment magazines, for the simple fact of lack of money. I suspect the average investor who will be reading my blog doesn't have the money for it either, which is why this focuses so much on web research.
Ugh. I tried to go through the rest of the DJIA listing, but I wasn't finding what I liked. To continue this guide, let's look at one of the stocks I've been following, Cummins (CMI). CMI is the darling of my portfolio right now; even accounting for the latest rollercoaster ride, CMI is up 171% from when I purchased it, and the numbers still look very good.
Here is the same balance sheet information from CMI that we looked at with AVY, but notice the difference in the numbers (8/21/11 7:02a):
Source: Yahoo! Finance - CMI Balance Sheet
6.289B + 2.041B = 8.33 billion Current Assets
8.33B - 5.732B = +2.598 billion dollars
Cummins has a current networth of over $2.5 billion dollars U.S. This means in our doomsday scenario, the company would be able to weather the storm and still end up with money to start over. The property portion of current assets, which I know to be overstated, is only 1/4 of the total current assets, so you could even cut CMI's property values by half and it would still be in the black at the end of the day.
You'd never know about Cummins' great numbers if you only watched the standard TV channels though. To have known about this company before you started research, you likely would have known about diesel engines. But how many people in the industry (even Cummins' own employees) actually take the step to invest in a gem that's sitting right under their noses and fingertips?
I'm a mechanic now, but CMI attracted me long before I knew anything about engines. After talking to people who have more automotive history than I, all of them have stated something along the lines of "Cummins? They make great diesel engines!" Back in part 1 I mentioned that if you like the product, you'll love the company. Nothing like real-world practice to shore up idealized theory.
4) Buy the stock.
Yup, I'm saying it, because I know that there will be people who will work all the way through the guide, go up on their favorite stock trading website, get ready to click that buy button, and go make themselves a cup of coffee. . . and then read the newspaper. . .and then walk the dog. If you're not truly comfortable with investing, walk away and never put a dollar into stocks. But if you done the research, you have better chance at making money on the stock market than those who consider what they do "playing" the market. If six out of ten of your investments make money, you've done better than the majority of fund managers out there.
I bought the stock. Now what?
Watch the stock grow (but not so much you get nervous). Once a year, I go through the process all over again. If any companies in my portfolio fail the requirements, I dig deeper to see if there's a reason the situation has changed. Did they take a big loan to buy equipment to produce a new product? Big debt loads aren't a problem if used to further growth, but debt loads needed to pay the bills suggest a failing company. If the numbers and story suggest the company is going downhill, cut the stock now. You may be on an upswing, but the price will come crashing down once reality sets in.
Any single statistic you look at doesn't necessarily point to a good investment, but when taken together, these little bits of data point to a company that is set to grow steadily and make a solid winner in a portfolio, or warn you about a company that may be experiencing difficulties. However, I hope I have emphasized enough that my strategy has its failings and a slightly lower growth rate than its potential, but I am willing to exchange that for being lazy and slightly more conservative.
Coming soon - Stock Market Investing Part 3 - Picking Growth Stocks For The Slightly-Less Lazy Investor
Source: Thomas Nast's "Battle Of Bears And Bulls"
For this portion of the investment guide, I will focus entirely on my process of picking a stock. I am not saying this is the right way, only way, guaranteed way - none of those are true. My strategy has a major flaw: I do not do the phone-based research Peter Lynch advocates for in his books (or anything other than web-based research, really). More than likely that is why my growth isn't bigger. However, I am comfortable with the risks that I have taken, and what little I was able to invest in actual cash for a limited time I made money on. I also understand that the lower growth rate is the payment for being lazy. Keep that in mind.
Note: Anytime I mention stock specific information (price, P/E ratio, etc.) I will always add the date and time afterwards. The stock market changes constantly, so these numbers are only good as an example, not representative of what may be going on when you read this.
1) Pick an index.
The easiest way to start picking stocks is to pick an index. This will give you a list of stocks to look into and make the big wide worlds of stocks look a little smaller. There are a variety of indexes to choose from, the biggest U.S. three being the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA), the NASDAQ, and the S&P 500. Each index has its own requirements that a stock must meet to be listed. For my personal portfolio, I started with the S&P 500.
Oh, another admission: I picked the S&P 500 because the numbers are smaller, so I don't feel like I'm on a constant roller coaster ride when I'm watching the news ticker of the stock prices go by. Remember in the first chapter when I mentioned people invest with their stomachs? Choosing the S&P 500 makes my stomach feel a little less queasy. Follow your stomach so you pick stocks you're more likely to stick with, even in tough times.
2) Find a listing of the companies on the index.
Wikipedia.org is what I used for this. Here's the current (8/21/11 5:19am) Wikipedia listing for the DJIA looks like:
3) Research the stocks on the listing.
Since we're already looking at it, let's go ahead and start by looking at stocks with the DJIA. The first stock is 3M. Yahoo! has some very cool, free tools to research companies with. I went to Yahoo! Finance to start my research. Feel free to use some other research tool (web, magazine, annual reports), but know that the guide may be less helpful to you from here on out. I may go through these later, if people ask for it, but understand that will take some time for me to try out strategies and see the results. If you want to follow along, go ahead and load the website. I'll wait.
Ready?
Near the upper left hand corner you'll notice a little box that says "Get Quotes." From the Wikipedia listing, you'll notice that 3M's stock symbol is MMM. The stock symbol is an easy, quick way to identify a stock as prices are scrolling by your screen. Enter MMM in the Get Quotes field on the Yahoo! Finance site.
What is all that crap?
Information. Most of it I feel pretty safe in ignoring. If you want to pour through the information and you have the time, go for it. I'm lazy by nature, so take this for what it's worth.
The best growth stocks are boring, undervalued, and have good looking balance sheets. "Boring" and "undervalued" are both relative terms, so looking at information on a company's competitors can be a good starting point for finding the gems.
For "boring", you can check the volume statistic. Volume is the number of times stocks are bought and sold. If a company's volume is 6 million, it means 6 million stocks were either bought or sold in that time period (usually reported daily). If more than 50% of the volume were stocks that were bought, then the stock price goes up. If more than 50% of of the volume were stocks that were sold, then the stock price goes down. The more a company is traded, the more well-known the stock tends to be, and the more volatile the price. The reverse is also true.
If you're still on the Yahoo! site, scroll down and click on the "Competitors" link, underneath COMPANY on the left-hand sidebar. 3M's Competitor screen looks like this (8/21/11 5:45am PDT):
3a) Analyzing the P/E ratio
In general, an undervalued stock has a low P/E ratio.
So how do you know if a stock has a low P/E ratio?
My way is to look at the industry average. For 3M's screen, the industry average P/E ratio listed here is 13.50. This means that for every $1 of earnings, the price of the stock is $13.50. Keep in mind that the P/E ratio also represents the number of years it will take for you to earn your money back. On average, it will take a company in 3M's industry 13 1/2 years to make an equal return on your money. See why a low P/E ratio is good? A company with a P/E ratio of 5 would earn back its investment in 5 years. 3M's P/E ratio is 13.05, a little below industry average. This suggests that 3M has pretty much saturated its market, so we might research this stock later if our portfolio needs dividends (to be covered in a separate chapter).
Now what?
Look for a P/E ratio on the screen that's below industry average. Notice that AVY (Avery Dennison Corporation) has a P/E ratio of 9.37, well below the industry average of 13.5. On the surface, this suggests that Avery might be a better growth investment than 3M. Click on the AVY stock symbol on the competitor's chart to go to that company's stock page. Sometimes it's a useful exercise to click to the competitor's chart again, to see who AVY competes with: sometimes there are different stocks listed than are listed on 3M's page. For now, scroll down and click on Balance Sheet, left-hand sidebar, underneath FINANCIALS.
3b) Analyzing the Balance Sheet
The balance sheet is a listing of a company's assets, debts, and stockholder's equity. Let's pull out the important information to analyze to determine if AVY's low P/E ratio is because it's undervalued, or a representation that the company is on shaky financial ground.
To determine if a company is solvent, I need to check the company against a "worst of the worst" case scenario. What would happen if the company lost all sales and all its debts were made due tomorrow? Would the company survive, or would it have to declare bankrupcty?
The first bit of data is the assets (8/21/11 6:14am):
I've pulled out this part of the assets table because the other items are either long-term assets (difficult to liquidate when the business needs immediate cash) or because they don't represent physical items that can produce cash (like the intangible assets).
Add the "Total Current Assets" and "Property Plant and Equipment" line.
Total Current Assets - the number which represents the most liquid of a company's net worth, usually in the form of cash, inventory, and other on-hand assets.
Property Plant and Equipment - While not as liquid as current assets, this number represents the amount of the company's net worth tied up in property, machines, desk furniture, etc. However, keep in mind that this number is usually over-estimated, due to some funky ways of accounting for depreciation and property values.
If necessary, AVY could raise 3.213 billion in cash on a relatively immediate basis. But that doesn't mean anything just yet.
Source: Allfree Logo
What about debts?
I'm so glad you asked. In our doomsday scenario, AVY is sitting on a nice, plump pile of cash. But the big bad creditors are about to come calling. What happens once all the creditors are done taking their part of AVY's pile?
AVY's liabilities look like this:
Now, I'm very mean and protective of my money. You should be too. So we want to make it as hard as possible for the company to survive our doomsday scenario. While long-term assets were ignored, long-term debts are counted. The only number we look at here is Total Liabilities - 3.453 billion.
3.213 billion (Current Assets) - 3.453 billion (Total Liabilities) = -$240,000,000
Source: Business Cartoons
Under what conditions would this still be a good investment?
This is where my strategy is inadequate. Behind every company is a story, a reason for why they are where they are. My personal stock picking strategy ends here; I would move on (and for the purposes of this guide we will). But, an investor who pushes a little further here would probably get better returns than I. This is the place where you could do phone research. Peter Lynch mentions talking to CEOs; I haven't tried it (would you believe I'm nervous?). But it is possible that there is a story behind AVY that would make it a comeback kid and bring great returns. But there is also the risk that AVY won't be able to improve its position, and eventually the company will fold. Knowing the story mitigates that risk.
This is also where non-web-based research can come in handy. If there is a investment magazine out there that has featured an innovative AVY product that might turn the company around, I wouldn't know. I don't subscribe to investment magazines, for the simple fact of lack of money. I suspect the average investor who will be reading my blog doesn't have the money for it either, which is why this focuses so much on web research.
Ugh. I tried to go through the rest of the DJIA listing, but I wasn't finding what I liked. To continue this guide, let's look at one of the stocks I've been following, Cummins (CMI). CMI is the darling of my portfolio right now; even accounting for the latest rollercoaster ride, CMI is up 171% from when I purchased it, and the numbers still look very good.
Here is the same balance sheet information from CMI that we looked at with AVY, but notice the difference in the numbers (8/21/11 7:02a):
6.289B + 2.041B = 8.33 billion Current Assets
8.33B - 5.732B = +2.598 billion dollars
Cummins has a current networth of over $2.5 billion dollars U.S. This means in our doomsday scenario, the company would be able to weather the storm and still end up with money to start over. The property portion of current assets, which I know to be overstated, is only 1/4 of the total current assets, so you could even cut CMI's property values by half and it would still be in the black at the end of the day.
You'd never know about Cummins' great numbers if you only watched the standard TV channels though. To have known about this company before you started research, you likely would have known about diesel engines. But how many people in the industry (even Cummins' own employees) actually take the step to invest in a gem that's sitting right under their noses and fingertips?
I'm a mechanic now, but CMI attracted me long before I knew anything about engines. After talking to people who have more automotive history than I, all of them have stated something along the lines of "Cummins? They make great diesel engines!" Back in part 1 I mentioned that if you like the product, you'll love the company. Nothing like real-world practice to shore up idealized theory.
4) Buy the stock.
Yup, I'm saying it, because I know that there will be people who will work all the way through the guide, go up on their favorite stock trading website, get ready to click that buy button, and go make themselves a cup of coffee. . . and then read the newspaper. . .and then walk the dog. If you're not truly comfortable with investing, walk away and never put a dollar into stocks. But if you done the research, you have better chance at making money on the stock market than those who consider what they do "playing" the market. If six out of ten of your investments make money, you've done better than the majority of fund managers out there.
I bought the stock. Now what?
Watch the stock grow (but not so much you get nervous). Once a year, I go through the process all over again. If any companies in my portfolio fail the requirements, I dig deeper to see if there's a reason the situation has changed. Did they take a big loan to buy equipment to produce a new product? Big debt loads aren't a problem if used to further growth, but debt loads needed to pay the bills suggest a failing company. If the numbers and story suggest the company is going downhill, cut the stock now. You may be on an upswing, but the price will come crashing down once reality sets in.
Any single statistic you look at doesn't necessarily point to a good investment, but when taken together, these little bits of data point to a company that is set to grow steadily and make a solid winner in a portfolio, or warn you about a company that may be experiencing difficulties. However, I hope I have emphasized enough that my strategy has its failings and a slightly lower growth rate than its potential, but I am willing to exchange that for being lazy and slightly more conservative.
Coming soon - Stock Market Investing Part 3 - Picking Growth Stocks For The Slightly-Less Lazy Investor
Saturday, August 20, 2011
Rick Perry: An Analysis of Intention
Source: Yahoo
Coming right out and saying you want to change the Constitution is about as bold a move you can make politically in the U.S. If "America" is a religion, then the Constitution is most certainly its Bible. It's not that people believe its unchangeable; it's just that historically the U.S. has taken great pains not to modify the document. Prohibition is perhaps the best example of why Constitutional changes should not be entered into lightly.
I also want to note that for the most part what Perry is suggesting is unattainable. To get 3/4 of the country to agree on anything would be a miracle, one that could possibly justify Perry's anti-abortion and anti-gay-marriage stances. Short of that, he is nothing more than a politician who wants more power located in places he can control.
With that said, I'm going to focus on the following three issues Perry wants to change in the Constitution, and I'll explain why I think it's a really BAD idea.
1. Abolish lifetime tenure for federal judges by amending Article III, Section I of the Constitution.
2. Congress should have the power to override Supreme Court decisions with a two-thirds vote.
4. End the direct election of senators by repealing the Seventeenth Amendment.
I put these three together because they work at the same root concept: the equal distribution of power between the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government, and their accountability to the general public.
It also highlights one of the biggest, clearest examples of cognitive dissonance I've seen out of the GOP in a while (even including the whole "90% of what Planned Parenthood does is abortions" shenanigans).
On the one hand, he believes that Article III should be altered so that federal judges' tenure is reduced from lifetime. The article states that judges "shall hold their Offices during good Behavior", and it is this line that Perry takes exception to. He suggests that this gives too much freedom to judges to do whatever they want without the possibility of consequences. By removing lifetime tenure, Perry states that judges can be made more accountable to the general publlic.
What's wrong with this: The judicial branch is meant to be a check against the vagaries of the people, a long-term viewpoint that is badly needed in these myopic times. At any given point, the opinion of the majority of the country can change at any time. One year, we may elect a Congress that would repeal Roe v. Wade; the next year, an entirely Democratic Congress works to restore those rights.
This is what the founding fathers were trying to avoid; instead of actively working towards progress, the government would be stuck trying to "undo" everything the last Congress did. If this weren't the case and Congress could be trusted to leave something alone once it's resolved, Roe v. Wade wouldn't still be on the table. Bottom line: Nothing would get done if the federal judges could change according to the will of the people or the will of Rick Perry, which is what I suspect the true motive is here. If Perry could guarantee that he could appoint the judges he wanted to, then he could accomplish all of his goals. By attacking the lifetime tenure of judges, he is redirecting focus from his issues and forcing judges to justify their tenure.
Source: Wikipedia
His second point involves a much subtler but revolutionary idea: Perry believes judges are not to be trusted. Judges ideally are impartial, looking at the law and the facts, and occasionally attempting to look at what the lawmakers might have "intended," though all involved know it's no better than any other form of speculation. By removing the ability of the Supreme Court as the final say of the land and allowing Congress to override judicial decisions, Perry is insinuating that the judges are no longer capable of being impartial. The wide-reaching implication is that no judge can be trusted to be impartial.
I fail to see how this accomplishes anything other than throwing the courts open to far more criticism than they already encounter, and taken to an extreme, this could be kindling for a heated battle between judges who are simply trying to do their jobs, and the people who no longer trust them to do it. If judges cannot stand as an (admittedly inadequately) impartial, trusted opinion, who will? Mr. Perry? Who does Perry suggest could fulfill the role of impartiality?
I believe igniting social anger and sowing distrust is more what Perry is intended, as Congress already has the power to override judges in every single instance exception Constitutionality; just change the law. Feel the judge is stepping to far? Amend the Constitution. There are methods for this, and when federal judges have proven insufficient in protecting the interests of the U.S., Congress has amended the Constitution as needed (see 14th and 19th amendments, for example). This isn't enough for Mr. Perry.
On the other hand, one of the core issues leading to the Revolutionary War was representation in government. The ability of the citizens to directly elect the officials who will make policy that affects them is a core belief in the United States religion. It is the role of Congress to make the law, the President to enforce it, and the Courts to interpret it. Two of those three branches are in some way elected by the people. But Rick Perry, while on the one hand advocating for more direct accountability in federal judges, actually argues for less direct accountability of Congressional Senators. Not only that, but he wants state governors to be able to appoint the Senators. Why is this important? Because Mr. Perry was a governor. About as clear a case of supporting policies for self-interest if I've ever seen it.
So, Mr. Perry wants the public to distrust the judiciary AND give up its right to elect Senators directly while at the same time allowing said Senators (elected by State governors) to override the judiciary.
Interesting.
However, even the village idiot can give good advice. I do think the federal income tax should be scrapped, but I think it should be scrapped in favor of a tax system that more adequately furthers the interest of the country, such as instituting an Unlimited Savings Allowance tax. This tax system would be more about behavior modification and manipulation (yes, I'll say it outright) than about income and revenue. By encouraging good money policies, you can help protect the country against a third Depression. Considering Perry is running for President, I wonder where he thinks he's paycheck will come from, if all taxes are abolished. He must have some idea of an alternative.
I'd love to read it; unless of course his ideas would be politically damaging, circumstances under which I would understand his reluctance to go public.
Source: http://www.viennava.gov/Town_Departments/
budget/budgetbrief.htm
I also agree with the requirement of Congress to pass a budget every year, but my implementation would be a little different. If the government fails to pass a budget, a new election is called. After about the third election, the DNC and RNC would be so poor that they'd be forced to work with each other, or we would finally elect a mix that would get the job done right. Like people, politicians are motivated by their pocketbooks and a quest for power. Affect their bottom lines, and they'll do their jobs. I disagree that the budget always needs to be balanced; there are times (such as now) when going into debt makes sense in order to help the country get out of an economic slump. The trick is to then roll back spending in good times and bank the surplus.
I also differ from Perry in his exception in times of war; it's simply far too easy for a President to declare "war" (officially or not) and get spending restrictions waived. I wonder which country Perry was thinking of invading.
By taking a closer look at the language Perry has used, we can see how Perry's language relays where he thinks political power should be located, and the role of the U.S. public in electing the people who make and interpret policy.
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Girl Expelled, Forced to Apologize For Being Raped. . . Twice
WTF??? Girl expelled, forced to write note to apologize for accusing boy, who plead guilty, of raping her. . . twice.
Please send e-mails and letters and phone calls to display your disapproval:
Vern Minor - Superintendent of Republic School District:
E-mail: vern.minor@republicschools.org
Phone: 417-732-3605
Fax: 417-732-3609
518 N Hampton
Republic, MO 65738-1323
First off, let me request that if anyone knows of a fund to help with this girl's legal fees, I will gladly advertise for it. This little girl needs everyone's help.
Secondly, I cannot adequately express my rage, except to say that I know that the angrier I get, the more syllables the words I write tend to have. I. . . You know, there are a few things I would like to add the list of crimes that qualify for the death penalty. The boy who raped her, and the people who have subjected her to this, both deserve that punishment. This is inhuman beyond reason. I would like to see the death penalty for all involved, but unfortunately our country does not place a high enough value on human dignity and quality of life, only the quantity.
Third, we didn't seem to be satisfied when the GOP attempted to redefine "rape" as only "forcible" rape, so now we are attempting to redefine rape as a "public display of affection." It amazes me the level of cognitive dissonance this requires.
Fourth, and the worst possible offense, is that these are women who are putting the girl through this. How can we as women expect to regain complete equality with men when we are so focused on putting our sisters' through this level of pain? We are destroying ourselves with this. Why are we so lacking in compassion these days, and instead insist on kicking everyone who is already down?
I hope there is more to this story. I truly encourage the truth to come out, if there are any lies to this. I would like to be wrong. But if not, then I sincerely hope that we as a culture descend upon these administrators like a plague of locusts and pester them until it is clear that this behavior is unacceptable in the United States of America. Freedom from rape is a fundamental human right.
Please send e-mails and letters and phone calls to display your disapproval:
Vern Minor - Superintendent of Republic School District:
E-mail: vern.minor@republicschools.org
Phone: 417-732-3605
Fax: 417-732-3609
518 N Hampton
Republic, MO 65738-1323
First off, let me request that if anyone knows of a fund to help with this girl's legal fees, I will gladly advertise for it. This little girl needs everyone's help.
Secondly, I cannot adequately express my rage, except to say that I know that the angrier I get, the more syllables the words I write tend to have. I. . . You know, there are a few things I would like to add the list of crimes that qualify for the death penalty. The boy who raped her, and the people who have subjected her to this, both deserve that punishment. This is inhuman beyond reason. I would like to see the death penalty for all involved, but unfortunately our country does not place a high enough value on human dignity and quality of life, only the quantity.
Third, we didn't seem to be satisfied when the GOP attempted to redefine "rape" as only "forcible" rape, so now we are attempting to redefine rape as a "public display of affection." It amazes me the level of cognitive dissonance this requires.
Fourth, and the worst possible offense, is that these are women who are putting the girl through this. How can we as women expect to regain complete equality with men when we are so focused on putting our sisters' through this level of pain? We are destroying ourselves with this. Why are we so lacking in compassion these days, and instead insist on kicking everyone who is already down?
I hope there is more to this story. I truly encourage the truth to come out, if there are any lies to this. I would like to be wrong. But if not, then I sincerely hope that we as a culture descend upon these administrators like a plague of locusts and pester them until it is clear that this behavior is unacceptable in the United States of America. Freedom from rape is a fundamental human right.
#OpBART - Success and Failure
Source: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2011/08/16/18687809.php
I followed this live protest on August 15 as closely as I could via Twitter, ABC News, and a couple live video feeds from protesters on location. Ultimately, I'm not sure how "successful" the BART protest will be. Here are a few points where I think Anonymous went right, and where I think they (and protests in general) are going wrong.
Lack of Violence: SUCCESS
To the best of my knowledge, no one was hurt or killed during the protest. Police shoved protesters around, and vice versa, but no one ended up in the hospital (again, that I know of. Please feel free to correct me.) Overall, I count this aspect a success, as there was no copy-cat rioting.
Impact: SUCCESS
There is no doubt in my mind that thousands of people were made aware of and impacted by the protest, especially in light of BART shutting down four stations in response to the movement of the protestors. In this aspect, Anonymous successfully created a live Denial Of Service event. Denial of Service usually refers to the crash of a website; normally, this can be created when a website is flooded with visitors, but obviously hackers can do it as well with code. Also, BART made a major concession by shutting the train stations down as opposed to shutting off cell phone service, though this is mitigated by Anonymous's release of an Android app that allowed users to send messages without using the cell phone network. Even if BART had attempted to shutdown cell phones, it probably would not have hampered the protest much.
Media Coverage: NEUTRAL
Yes there was media coverage. No, not nearly enough.
Fighting For The Citizen: FAIL
This is one are where I think Anonymous failed its stated purpose. By causing the shutdowns of four stations, Anonymous inadvertently pissed off the very people they are purporting to fight for and essentially handed BART a perfect, anti-Anonymous PR campaign. How many thousands of commuters were stranded as the result of Anonymous's actions? Those people are probably bitter about the event, and leaving a bad taste in someone's mouth is never an effect way to campaign for your cause.
Possible solution: If you're going to cause a live D.O.S. event, come up with a plan to mitigate the effect on the locals. For example, why not ask every protester to bring extra cash with them, and offer to help pay cab fare for those stranded due to the station closures? Bring pamphlets with information on alternative transportation, especially the kind that BART can't profit from. Do not piss off the people you are trying to get on your side.
Making A Stand: FAIL
When police came in to start shoving people out of the station, I was excited because I thought "Here we go, we are going to see people take a stand for what they believe in." Boy was I disappointed. Instead of sitting down and making the police move them, the crowd meekly turned around and then wandered for hours on end. Anonymous made sure to provide information for legal counsel in the case of arrest, but they neglected to act in such a way as to force the legal system to deal with them. While I certainly don't want people hurt, tucking tail and walking away when confronted with what you consider to be oppressive is not going to effect the changes you are seeking - in fact, it rewards the very behavior Anonymous was trying to prevent. Have some ovaries, and next time force the system to deal with you. Do not let them think they can wave a piece of paper and you will obediently follow orders. Do we know whether or not that piece of paper the cops read from was legitimate? Or was it simply a flyer that someone scribbled a neat, official-sounding speech on as a scare tactic? Why should cops get warrants when simply saying they have one is enough to get people to do what they want them to do?
Possible solution: Set up a legal fund, and get people to sit down instead of leaving when a cop gets up in their face. "They can't shoot us all" was a rallying cry during the protest, yet nothing the protesters were doing forced the cops to do much more than stand there. If you believe in a cause, do not fear arrest. It will only serve to make you look better and them look worse. If you don't believe in a cause enough to get arrested for it, then you are as bad as the oppressors, because you allow them to draw a line in the sand that you won't cross.
In the interest of a balanced approach, there was also one major, glaring, epic mistake by BART:
BART trapped people inside a station after closure. This is a biggie, because no one is allow to restrict a person's movement without probable cause. I am very surprised Anonymous and others haven't picked up on this.
I hate to be nostalgic, but I miss the days of the hunger strike, the sit-in, the chain of people linked arm in arm that have decided that no, this power you cannot have. Like unions, protests have become toothless displays of mass exercise (I have no idea why protests seem to be stuck on this idea of marching; don't they realize you have to figure out how to get back to your car?). Would women have ever gotten the right to vote if protesters were not arrested and then maintained a hunger strike? Would segregation have ended if blacks had simply been too afraid to get hit with that fire hose? If you are going to draw a line, stand on it. Do not allow anyone to shove, coerce, or manipulate you off that line.
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Anti-Grav Yoga
I had to share this. It looks like a lot of fun, but I wonder how hard it is on your shoulders. Anyone care to share their experience? What do you think?
Monday, August 15, 2011
Stock Market Investing Part 1 - Philosophy Of Investing
Disclaimer: I am not a professional stock broker, with any kind of licensing. I'm a mechanic with a B.A. in English. These are the strategies I use when I pick stocks. I am currently averaging 25% annual growth.
This guide is meant to focus only on stocks, as that is my primary vehicle for investment at this time. I have tried this strategy out at Investopedia.com 's stock market simulation game. In the game, you begin with $100,000 hypothetically. You can then research the stock like normal, and make trades. The game then tracks the performance of each stock and adjusts accordingly; the only limitation is that your "purchase" does not affect the real world price, so the game may or may not reflect an accurate performance of your strategy. I highly recommend people who are interested in stocks to start there; it will show you whether or not your strategy needs some fine tuning, or perhaps that you need a strategy to begin with.
To that end, here are the four components of my philosophy when it comes to investing in stocks. I've also included Practice What You Preach (PWYP) tips for each point:
1) Pick what you know, and only pick as much as you can follow. Investing is pointless if you don't know what you're buying. If you "play" at the market, you might as well go spend that money at an arcade; at least you're guaranteed a prize for your tickets. You must spend time looking at companies before you buy them, which is why you should limit yourself to a handful of companies, especially in the beginning. While I agree that you should invest in several stocks, if you aren't comfortable putting all of your money into one company, you shouldn't put any money into it.
Your most powerful research tool is yourself. Do you work in healthcare? Perhaps you know about a new drug that has been successful. Research the company that makes it, and then invest if the balance sheet looks good. How about a car salesman? Have sales been lagging at your dealership? Is there another company that keeps you up at night? Those are prime examples of how information you already know can help you pick a winning portfolio. Also, when looking at retail stocks, ask yourself a very simple question: Do I like the product/service/store? If so, it's likely you'll love the stock.
PWYP: The next time you go to a mall or plaza, notice what businesses are crowded, which ones are empty, which ones are new, which ones are old and neglected. Chances are some of the best investment opportunities will be right in front of you.
2) A downturn in the market is simply an opportunity to buy your favorite stock at sale price. Most people invest with their stomachs, not their brains, and bail out of the market during or immediately after a big drop in prices. This is a good way to lose a lot of money, as you haven't "lost" money until you sell below your purchase price.
By looking at a sudden drop in stock prices as equivalent to a clearance sale at your favorite bookstore, you can mitigate some of the fear that naturally occurs when you see your investment shrink by a third. I have noticed that when there is a market correction, stock prices tend to resume almost exactly where they left off and then continue an upward trend from there. Yes, a four-day sell-off can destroy a year's worth of growth, but the two-day rebound is almost as likely to recover 3/4 of your losses.
PWYP: Only invest in a company if you plan to hold the stock for five or more years. When you hear that stocks have dropped by 100 points or more in a day, look at your best performing stocks and see if any of them are at sale prices. If you have difficulty holding stocks after a sudden drop, consider investing a particular dollar amount on a regular basis (like once a month) and only research companies once year. This will insulate you from the vagaries of the market and help you stay disciplined in looking long term.
3) Ignore the professionals. Stocks that are followed closely brokerage firms tend to have larger swings in prices. For example, if Edward Jones begins recommending Home Depot to buy, the herd mentality can artificially inflate prices that can come crashing down once profits fail to materialize. Likewise, an overtly negative outlook can create an artificially low price, handicapping a company's ability to purchase equipment and personnel necessary for growth.
Likewise, some of the best companies are boring. My best performer, Cummins (CMI), has tripled from 2008 to 2011. It makes diesel engines, and damn good ones at that. In July 2011, only 16 brokers made any recommendation. In contrast, Wal-Mart and Home Depot each had 29 brokers publish opinions.
PWYP: Go through index listings instead of looking at companies that are mentioned on the news or brokerage sites. This will open you up to companies that may be quietly growing into a two-, four-, or even ten-bagger (a tenbagger is a stock whose price has multiplied by 10). The more boring the name (and the industry), the better.
4) Ignore your ego. Similarly, don't fall in love with a stock. Look at each stock as you would an employee. Is it working for you? Has the performance been lacking? Are there good fundamentals, but something just isn't clicking? Do you need more out of your stock portfolio, like higher dividend returns? Develop a set schedule for taking another look at the companies you've invested in, to make sure that your investments match your financial situation. While I may have espoused ignoring professionals when it comes to picking stocks, it makes no sense to disregard good financial planning advice. Just be wary of the sales pitch.
Be prepared when you have to sell off your first stock at a loss because something went wrong. Even companies with the best balance sheets can't plan for every contingency. A natural disaster, an accident, political or economic environments can destroy even the best planning with little or no notice. Your best defense against the unknown is knowledge, so arm yourself with good information so you can feel confident in your stocks, even during a market correction, and be just as confident when you have to let a stock go.
PWYP: When it comes to checking stock prices, limit this according to your stomach. Feeling nervous? Only check once a month (or less). Also, decide how often you will re-research your stocks. Once a year, twice a year, quarterly, every two years? Ideally, your schedule balances being able to react quickly to favorable market conditions with not driving yourself bonkers trying to guess the market. Look at the numbers, and don't take a failing stock personally (unless you're the CEO!).
Hopefully these guidelines will help you weather the rocky seas that characterize stock market investing. By having a philosophy set before you ever pick your first stock keeps you focused on your goal: a portfolio that will ensure your financial security for the rest of your life. These points are loosely based on Peter Lynch's One Up On Wall Street and Beating The Street books. I highly recommend them.
Part 2 - How I Pick Stocks - Coming Soon!
UJC6JJB6TGG9
This guide is meant to focus only on stocks, as that is my primary vehicle for investment at this time. I have tried this strategy out at Investopedia.com 's stock market simulation game. In the game, you begin with $100,000 hypothetically. You can then research the stock like normal, and make trades. The game then tracks the performance of each stock and adjusts accordingly; the only limitation is that your "purchase" does not affect the real world price, so the game may or may not reflect an accurate performance of your strategy. I highly recommend people who are interested in stocks to start there; it will show you whether or not your strategy needs some fine tuning, or perhaps that you need a strategy to begin with.
To that end, here are the four components of my philosophy when it comes to investing in stocks. I've also included Practice What You Preach (PWYP) tips for each point:
1) Pick what you know, and only pick as much as you can follow. Investing is pointless if you don't know what you're buying. If you "play" at the market, you might as well go spend that money at an arcade; at least you're guaranteed a prize for your tickets. You must spend time looking at companies before you buy them, which is why you should limit yourself to a handful of companies, especially in the beginning. While I agree that you should invest in several stocks, if you aren't comfortable putting all of your money into one company, you shouldn't put any money into it.
Your most powerful research tool is yourself. Do you work in healthcare? Perhaps you know about a new drug that has been successful. Research the company that makes it, and then invest if the balance sheet looks good. How about a car salesman? Have sales been lagging at your dealership? Is there another company that keeps you up at night? Those are prime examples of how information you already know can help you pick a winning portfolio. Also, when looking at retail stocks, ask yourself a very simple question: Do I like the product/service/store? If so, it's likely you'll love the stock.
PWYP: The next time you go to a mall or plaza, notice what businesses are crowded, which ones are empty, which ones are new, which ones are old and neglected. Chances are some of the best investment opportunities will be right in front of you.
2) A downturn in the market is simply an opportunity to buy your favorite stock at sale price. Most people invest with their stomachs, not their brains, and bail out of the market during or immediately after a big drop in prices. This is a good way to lose a lot of money, as you haven't "lost" money until you sell below your purchase price.
By looking at a sudden drop in stock prices as equivalent to a clearance sale at your favorite bookstore, you can mitigate some of the fear that naturally occurs when you see your investment shrink by a third. I have noticed that when there is a market correction, stock prices tend to resume almost exactly where they left off and then continue an upward trend from there. Yes, a four-day sell-off can destroy a year's worth of growth, but the two-day rebound is almost as likely to recover 3/4 of your losses.
PWYP: Only invest in a company if you plan to hold the stock for five or more years. When you hear that stocks have dropped by 100 points or more in a day, look at your best performing stocks and see if any of them are at sale prices. If you have difficulty holding stocks after a sudden drop, consider investing a particular dollar amount on a regular basis (like once a month) and only research companies once year. This will insulate you from the vagaries of the market and help you stay disciplined in looking long term.
3) Ignore the professionals. Stocks that are followed closely brokerage firms tend to have larger swings in prices. For example, if Edward Jones begins recommending Home Depot to buy, the herd mentality can artificially inflate prices that can come crashing down once profits fail to materialize. Likewise, an overtly negative outlook can create an artificially low price, handicapping a company's ability to purchase equipment and personnel necessary for growth.
Likewise, some of the best companies are boring. My best performer, Cummins (CMI), has tripled from 2008 to 2011. It makes diesel engines, and damn good ones at that. In July 2011, only 16 brokers made any recommendation. In contrast, Wal-Mart and Home Depot each had 29 brokers publish opinions.
PWYP: Go through index listings instead of looking at companies that are mentioned on the news or brokerage sites. This will open you up to companies that may be quietly growing into a two-, four-, or even ten-bagger (a tenbagger is a stock whose price has multiplied by 10). The more boring the name (and the industry), the better.
4) Ignore your ego. Similarly, don't fall in love with a stock. Look at each stock as you would an employee. Is it working for you? Has the performance been lacking? Are there good fundamentals, but something just isn't clicking? Do you need more out of your stock portfolio, like higher dividend returns? Develop a set schedule for taking another look at the companies you've invested in, to make sure that your investments match your financial situation. While I may have espoused ignoring professionals when it comes to picking stocks, it makes no sense to disregard good financial planning advice. Just be wary of the sales pitch.
Be prepared when you have to sell off your first stock at a loss because something went wrong. Even companies with the best balance sheets can't plan for every contingency. A natural disaster, an accident, political or economic environments can destroy even the best planning with little or no notice. Your best defense against the unknown is knowledge, so arm yourself with good information so you can feel confident in your stocks, even during a market correction, and be just as confident when you have to let a stock go.
PWYP: When it comes to checking stock prices, limit this according to your stomach. Feeling nervous? Only check once a month (or less). Also, decide how often you will re-research your stocks. Once a year, twice a year, quarterly, every two years? Ideally, your schedule balances being able to react quickly to favorable market conditions with not driving yourself bonkers trying to guess the market. Look at the numbers, and don't take a failing stock personally (unless you're the CEO!).
Hopefully these guidelines will help you weather the rocky seas that characterize stock market investing. By having a philosophy set before you ever pick your first stock keeps you focused on your goal: a portfolio that will ensure your financial security for the rest of your life. These points are loosely based on Peter Lynch's One Up On Wall Street and Beating The Street books. I highly recommend them.
Part 2 - How I Pick Stocks - Coming Soon!
UJC6JJB6TGG9
Saturday, August 13, 2011
Online Education: The Answer To The Housing Crisis
Connections Academy - Free Online School
www.k-12.com
www.odysseyk12.org (Thanks to Farker Kimothy for these links; the list is not meant to be complete or all inclusive)
Source: Healthy Living
For me, this is something I've been dreaming about ever since I read The Rowan series by Anne McCaffrey and they talked about something similar. Something like this would have been a dream for me because I was always bored in school, often doing my homework in class and teaching myself what was going on. My teachers and I had an agreement; if they asked a question, and I caught their eye, they knew I knew the answer. That way I wasn't one of those annoying Hermione-types that seem like a know-it-all. If I happened to get it wrong, I would listen to the explanation until I figured out where my mistake was.
Allowing a kid to work at her own pace helps the child learn the information better, by tailoring the lessons to focus on those parts that the child is struggling with. Instead of ramming rote memorization down kids' throats so that they can pass a test, online education can focus more on helping children make the connections so they can properly comprehend the test, even if the answer they get is wrong. Critical thinking is a skill in short supply right now; English teachers I've spoken to struggle with their 101 classes because they are receiving kids who just want to be told what topic to write their term paper on, the answers to the tests, and who expect an A just for showing up everyday. After all, they are "paying" to be there, or so the logic goes.
The real value in online K-12, however, is in that it would eradicate the primary driver in the housing crisis: school districts.
The housing bubble was caused by three things:
1) Easing of lending standards
2) Dual income families with extra cash to spend
3) A desire by families to provide good, safe education for their children
If families couldn't outright purchase education in the form of private schools, they paid for their children's education in housing by moving to the best school districts. This created a shortage of housing in those areas, driving up prices to astronomical levels. No reason other than children would be strong enough to drive families to bankruptcy in the pursuit of the goal.
With online education, that primary drive would disappear. Families would be free to move closer to their work, reducing congestion and commute times, car expenses, perhaps even to the point where the family wouldn't need a car. Children could be guaranteed good, safe education in their own homes, where they would be free to work at their own pace and perhaps even study the things that most interested them. Instead of becoming medical majors in college, they could pursue a curriculum of study that could help them shorten their stay in college and move them into the workforce sooner and with less debt.
Elizabeth Warren and Amelia Warren Tyagi advocate the voucher system in their book "The Two-Income Trap." I have always had a problem with this, because you still have a supply and demand problem - the vouchers would all get spent on those schools that are perceived to be the best, while the failing schools. . . . what? disappear? How would the limited spots in a good school be distributed? By grade? Then you get schools with all A students, and schools with all F students (which is pretty much what you have now, when you look at the average grades of students in suburban versus urban schools). What about by lottery? I can't imagine the high-income parent of all-A student allowing them to go to school in Bronx, or Watts, or Compton, or Boyle Heights, or any other classically urban school. And of course, you have the distance problem again. Shipping a kid from the suburbs to an urban school would do nothing to alleviate congestion.
However, online K-12 addresses all of these concerns, and it's being provided free through the public school system.
There will be serious resistance to this at first. Two-income households will struggle to provide their children good online education because there will not be a parent there to supervise the child. But ultimately, this will be a good thing, because the parents will not have to struggle so much to buy education through massive debt loads, and instead can focus on purchasing housing, and the lifestyle, that they can afford. I suspect that as families recognize that being in the best school district is no longer necessary, housing will become less and less of an issue.
UJC6JJB6TGG9
Friday, August 12, 2011
A Mother's Birthday Prayer
Dear Lord,
I have a simple list of things I would like for my birthday. I haven't asked for much in a very long time. I don't think this is too much; I'm not asking for world peace or for millions of dollars.
But:
I would like my family to experience the peace of knowing the bills are paid for.
I would like my wife/husband/partner to know that if s/he dies or is in an accident the healthcare and life insurance will be there to help us cope.
I would like my children to go to a good school and learn job skills that will help them be whatever they want to go grow up to be, and that college isn't so expensive that we are caught between making too much for financial aid, but too little to afford it.
I would like not to be so stressed out, have less on my mind, and have more free time to do the things I enjoy, like gardening, or reading a book, or just watching my kids play.
I want to not have a full fridge at the beginning of the month, and little else but canned goods at the end of the month.
I don't want to have to worry about choosing between gas money, tire money, oil change money, diaper money, clothes money, rent money, and food money.
I want my children to grow up knowing they can feel comfortable being whoever they are, gay, straight, bi, black, white, yellow, red, purple, green, a freak or the most boring person on earth, without having to worry about getting beaten up by bullies - including bullies in the form of teachers and administrators.
God, I don't care about candles or birthday cakes or presents, this year. All I want is a peaceful year ahead so my family can get on its feet.
Think you can send me a little help?
Signed,
Every Mother On Planet Earth
I have a simple list of things I would like for my birthday. I haven't asked for much in a very long time. I don't think this is too much; I'm not asking for world peace or for millions of dollars.
But:
I would like my family to experience the peace of knowing the bills are paid for.
I would like my wife/husband/partner to know that if s/he dies or is in an accident the healthcare and life insurance will be there to help us cope.
I would like my children to go to a good school and learn job skills that will help them be whatever they want to go grow up to be, and that college isn't so expensive that we are caught between making too much for financial aid, but too little to afford it.
I would like not to be so stressed out, have less on my mind, and have more free time to do the things I enjoy, like gardening, or reading a book, or just watching my kids play.
I want to not have a full fridge at the beginning of the month, and little else but canned goods at the end of the month.
I don't want to have to worry about choosing between gas money, tire money, oil change money, diaper money, clothes money, rent money, and food money.
I want my children to grow up knowing they can feel comfortable being whoever they are, gay, straight, bi, black, white, yellow, red, purple, green, a freak or the most boring person on earth, without having to worry about getting beaten up by bullies - including bullies in the form of teachers and administrators.
God, I don't care about candles or birthday cakes or presents, this year. All I want is a peaceful year ahead so my family can get on its feet.
Think you can send me a little help?
Signed,
Every Mother On Planet Earth
Thursday, August 11, 2011
UK Looks To Ban Twitter, Facebook, Blackberries
David Cameron Asks Parliament to Ban Blackberries, Twitter, Facebook
There is no blip, soundbite, sound of dismay, groan, wail, scream, or shout that could adequately display my shock, revulsion, and anger at this. Did the UK learn nothing from Egypt? England is not the Middle East, but our populations are not that much different. We have the same concerns, same needs, same anger at those in the position to take away our rights, all the in name of saving money, making a profit, keeping your families safe. How does this help keep us safe? Is the illusion of safety worth this restriction?
Egypt tried and failed at culling the firestorm that can be summoned by social networking sites. The "developed" countries called upon Egypt to end its restriction against Internet usage. Now, when it's the UK, will we make the same cry? Or will we turn a blind eye, because now it's our families whose businesses, lives, and schools are affected?
Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504943_162-20091384-10391715.html
How quickly we forget, especially when convenient to do so.
There is no blip, soundbite, sound of dismay, groan, wail, scream, or shout that could adequately display my shock, revulsion, and anger at this. Did the UK learn nothing from Egypt? England is not the Middle East, but our populations are not that much different. We have the same concerns, same needs, same anger at those in the position to take away our rights, all the in name of saving money, making a profit, keeping your families safe. How does this help keep us safe? Is the illusion of safety worth this restriction?
Egypt tried and failed at culling the firestorm that can be summoned by social networking sites. The "developed" countries called upon Egypt to end its restriction against Internet usage. Now, when it's the UK, will we make the same cry? Or will we turn a blind eye, because now it's our families whose businesses, lives, and schools are affected?
Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504943_162-20091384-10391715.html
How quickly we forget, especially when convenient to do so.
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Wisconsin GOP Loses 2 Seats, Keeps Majority
Damn: Recall elections remove 2 GOP seats
Wisconsin had a really good chance to prove to the rest of the country that they would not tolerate a political party whose sole guiding interest seems to be robbing people of their livelihoods and basic human rights and necessities. From the right to collectively bargain, to healthcare, to the right to control your own reproductive organs, the GOP has launched a campaign to limit your freedom, all while at the same time supposedly protecting those same freedoms in the interest of "small government." If Republicans are so interested in having government get out of their lives, why is the Wisconsin legislature described as "been approving Republican-backed bills in rapid succession would likely have ground to a halt if Democrats had won back the Senate"?
Because they really couldn't give a damn about your freedom. What they care about is money and power, and they will use any kind of rhetoric to get it.
And before you go thinking I'm a liberal Repub-basher, I'm not happy with the Dems on this one either. A comment from a citizen who voted GOP is particularly damning:
The implication here is that the Dems squandered the chance with a bad campaign. Shame on you, Wisconsin Democratic leaders, for blowing your chance to prove that you can be the better party. Gill doesn't say it outright, but a reader is definitely left with the feeling that if the Dems had been focused on collective bargaining rights and used other rhetoric as supporting arguments, at least this citizen may have voted Democrat instead.
I'm disappointed in Republicans, for taking away rights. I'm disappointed in Democrats, for not recognizing the proper campaign strategy and trying to demolish the Republican party instead of isolating this one issue and killing the Republicans on it. Wisconsin could never be referendum on the national GOP party, but the Dems could have gone a long way into removing this cancer on civil liberties.
And finally, I'm disappointed in the United States of America, for allowing this to happen. Wake up. It's time to not just see that the politicians aren't representing you, but it's time to do something about it. I'm going to place a book list up here soon that I want everyone to read. When you arm yourself with knowledge, you are more likely to see through the political BS that's being slung back and forth on the media. And turn off the TV. The information you hear there is nothing more than heavily processed sound bites meant to keep you well enough informed that you're confused about the whole thing and can't think properly, but not so processed you feel insulted. Let's wake up together and take back our country and take back our rights, from both the Republican party and the Democrats.
Wisconsin had a really good chance to prove to the rest of the country that they would not tolerate a political party whose sole guiding interest seems to be robbing people of their livelihoods and basic human rights and necessities. From the right to collectively bargain, to healthcare, to the right to control your own reproductive organs, the GOP has launched a campaign to limit your freedom, all while at the same time supposedly protecting those same freedoms in the interest of "small government." If Republicans are so interested in having government get out of their lives, why is the Wisconsin legislature described as "been approving Republican-backed bills in rapid succession would likely have ground to a halt if Democrats had won back the Senate"?
Because they really couldn't give a damn about your freedom. What they care about is money and power, and they will use any kind of rhetoric to get it.
And before you go thinking I'm a liberal Repub-basher, I'm not happy with the Dems on this one either. A comment from a citizen who voted GOP is particularly damning:
"This was all supposed to be about the workers' rights, so to speak. But that has not been brought up one time. It's all been misleading, the attack ads, things like that," [John] Gill said. "The one reason they started this recall, they didn't bring up once."
The implication here is that the Dems squandered the chance with a bad campaign. Shame on you, Wisconsin Democratic leaders, for blowing your chance to prove that you can be the better party. Gill doesn't say it outright, but a reader is definitely left with the feeling that if the Dems had been focused on collective bargaining rights and used other rhetoric as supporting arguments, at least this citizen may have voted Democrat instead.
I'm disappointed in Republicans, for taking away rights. I'm disappointed in Democrats, for not recognizing the proper campaign strategy and trying to demolish the Republican party instead of isolating this one issue and killing the Republicans on it. Wisconsin could never be referendum on the national GOP party, but the Dems could have gone a long way into removing this cancer on civil liberties.
And finally, I'm disappointed in the United States of America, for allowing this to happen. Wake up. It's time to not just see that the politicians aren't representing you, but it's time to do something about it. I'm going to place a book list up here soon that I want everyone to read. When you arm yourself with knowledge, you are more likely to see through the political BS that's being slung back and forth on the media. And turn off the TV. The information you hear there is nothing more than heavily processed sound bites meant to keep you well enough informed that you're confused about the whole thing and can't think properly, but not so processed you feel insulted. Let's wake up together and take back our country and take back our rights, from both the Republican party and the Democrats.
Subtle Censorship and Wikipedia . . . Maybe?
Source: http://fathergeek.com/parenthood/games-and-censorship/
For example, take this entry from Judy Garland's Wikipedia entry:
During this time Garland experienced her first serious adult romances. The first was with the band leader Artie Shaw. Garland was deeply devoted to Shaw and was devastated in early 1940 when Shaw eloped with Lana Turner.[33] She was noticeably thinner in her next film, For Me and My Gal, alongside Gene Kelly in his first screen appearance. Garland was top billed over the credits for the first time, and effectively made the transition from teenage star to adult actress.Now, one could easily conclude from this paragraph that Garland was "noticeably thinner" in her following work because of her failed romance with band leader Artie Shaw. This would be inaccurate.
In reality, in between Shaw and For Me And My Gal, Garland eloped with musician David Rose. Many of those surrounding Garland suggest that Garland was trying to escape her overbearing mother. The marriage failed, but not before Garland's mother and husband both convinced her to abort when she got pregnant.
The context suddenly looks a little different, doesn't it?
It seems a little strange to me that someone would neglect to include information like that, especially when you consider that at least two other websites I went to (NewWorldEncyclopedia, this IMDB page (which suggests even more conflict that just the abortion), and this site which mentions the abortion but doesn't mention the weightloss) all mention the abortion higher up on the site before they mention the film Garland worked on after the abortion.
I also looked up Lorna Luft and Liza Minnelli's pages.
Lorna Luft's wiki states:
She is the author of the 1998 book Me and My Shadows: A Family Memoir. Among its revelations is that she had a romantic crush on Barry Manilow.[4] In 2001, the book was adapted as an Emmy-winning[11] TV miniseries Life with Judy Garland: Me and My Shadows. It stars Judy Davis as the adult Judy Garland, with Tammy Blanchard as Judy in her teenage years. Hugh Laurie portrayed Vincente Minnelli, Victor Garber as Sid Luft, and Marsha Mason as Ethel Gumm.and
[edit]
Luft was born in Santa Monica, California to Judy Garland (who was of Irish and Scottish descent) and Garland's third husband, Sid Luft (who was of German and Russian descent). She made her showbusiness debut at age 11 singing "Santa Claus Is Coming to Town" on the 1963 Christmas episode of her mother's CBS television series, The Judy Garland Show[1]. Siblings Liza Minnelli and Joey Luft also appeared in this episode.No mention is made of Luft's difficult relationship with her mother, a far more central revelation to the book than her crush on Barry Manilow. Unless someone knew Judy Garland by name (and with today's generation, that's not likely), a casual reader might not realize how much of a superstar Garland was and consider how that might have affected Luft's upbringing. Liza Minnelli's webpage is similar in understating Garland's career and completely omitting any mention of a difficult upbringing.
Now, I call this censorship because I have a hard time believing this information was omitted accidentally or overlooked. I remember well the TV coverage on Judy Garland and her family when Luft's book came out, so I have to believe this is a very subtle form of censorship. Have you noticed any interesting ways censorship has been rearing its ugly head? If so, please share so we can all learn to recognize the crafty ways censorship weasels its way into our lives and smack it down before it becomes an invasive weed that sucks the truth out of everything.
Also, you'll have to review the revision history of the Judy Garland page to see the form of the site I saw. I edited it while I was writing this, but I left Luft and Minnelli's pages alone. If it is different from what I have posted here, please check the history tab.
Sunday, August 7, 2011
An Open-Book Policy
I get in trouble for telling the truth a lot. My most recent experience involved a job interview that I had completely aced otherwise. The final question was, "Are you available to work tomorrow?"
Now, I know in my head the answer the interviewer is "looking" for; an unqualified yes, no hesitation, no exceptions.
But I am human. That particular day, I happened to have an appointment a half hour's drive away to get food stamps. The appointment was at eleven. I told the woman that I would be happy to start work tomorrow, but that I would be available after 1pm.
"Well, I have other candidates to look at," she replied, her attitude going from warm and sociable to rude and unavailable. I felt like I got smacked in the face.
Where have we gone wrong as a society when we cannot tell the truth about simple obligations. Where have we gone wrong as a society when the simple act of having an appointment means someone can't get a job, let alone the fact that the appointment was so I could eat.
It would have taken a minimum of 2 weeks to get my first paycheck. My family is tapped, having given far more support than they had ever originally signed up for when I moved back home. My fiancé's family is tapped, already supporting for more adults than they should be. I went on food stamps to attempt to ease the burden a little and buy groceries for both households. I only get 200 a month, but it helps immeasurably in easing tension.
I'm very much an open book. I don't hide the good and the bad things I've gone through and done. While some people may be uncomfortable around my willingness to discuss damn near anything, I believe that honesty is key in having successful relationships. You cannot fix what you don't acknowledge. Instead of killing each other with the thousands of small cuts caused by little white lies, approach the issue honestly. Acknowledge that what you say may sound wrong; this will help blunt any hurt the other person may feel. But if you keep it hidden, it will destroy you.
Secrets isolate us. When someone keeps a secret, they are attempting to control a large issue all by themselves. It's exhausting, and unnecessary. We need to stop telling these lies, not only to others, but to ourselves as well. Things are not "fine." Things suck. But things won't get easier if you don't ask for help, and you can't ask for help if you don't acknowledge there is a problem.
Culturally we seem to be dealing with an addiction to lies. There are the social lies we tell ourselves, where we drive the best cars, live in the best houses, and fill those houses with the best toys in an attempt to tell the lie of social status, pretending to be better off than we are. The result: The inevitable fall from social standing when the lie becomes too much to maintain.
There are financial lies we tell ourselves, and worse, to our partners. Our husband does not need to know about the 20 songs we downloaded for a dollar each on Amazon. Our wife doesn't need to know about the new power tool. My business partner doesn't need to know about the money lost on a bad investment. And most of all, no one needs to know we can't pay our bills.
But we can't. Instead of holding that secret against your chest, open up a little and see what happens. Sure, you're going to get criticism. Sure, people will call you every name in the book and a few that aren't. But do you want to fix things? Or are you content to maintain the status quo, watching your family slowly drown instead of waving your arms for that life preserver?
There are health lies we tell ourselves. We don't really weigh that much; that scale has always been faulty. My joints don't hurt that much. My blood pressure isn't that high. This food is good for me. Nationally we are experiencing rising rates in gout, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, obesity and its associated risks. Why? Because we are too cowardly to tell ourselves the truth: We did it, we're responsible for it, and we need to fix it.
We cannot rely on Congress (the biggest batch of liars) to fix these problems for us; they are behind just as big a wall of lies as we are. Their lies include misrepresentation of data to support their agenda, use of inflammatory and hateful language in order to shine the worst light on their opponent, use of religion to justify the mistreatment and discrimination of others. How can we expect a social institution to come up with fixes when they can't even tell the truth about facts? There is a well-known quote regarding Planned Parenthood, that 90% of their funding went to abortions. When this was revealed as a gross error, the speaker backwheeled by saying, "The statistic was never meant to be accurate." In plain terms: I lied about the statistic to convince people that my view is the right one, and I knew I was doing it at the time.
And we as a nation are okay with this?
The worst part about lies is that they are insulting. When you lie, you are insulting both yourself and the person you are telling the lie to.
When you lie to yourself, you are causing insult because of your refusal to deal with the truth as is. Psychology has a term for that: cognitive dissonance. This causes discomfort in the form of stress, which affects us on physical, mental, and emotional levels. Mentally, we can drive ourselves to the point of nervous breakdown in an attempt to keep all the lies straight, while at the same time trying to fix the truth. Emotionally, we become impatient and intolerant, because we assume that others will lie to us as easily as we lie to ourselves. We refuse to see others as the complex human beings with needs that we all are. Physically, the stress caused by maintaining cognitive dissonance manifests as headaches and migraines, fatigue, sleep disturbances, and the release of hormones which support the body's defense system - when released long term, these hormones sabotage the body's ability to heal by making the body operate at 110% all the time. The body needs rest, but we cannot rest and sleep peacefully when we are juggling lies.
When you lie to someone else, you are causing a social insult. People lie to protect themselves from what they think the other person's reaction will be if they tell the truth. That word in bold is key. Lying is completely based upon the perception of other people's reactions.
Therefore, the main insult here is in the form of a lack of trust. By lying to someone, you are telling them that you don't trust them with the truth. You don't trust them to not use it against you; you don't trust them to handle your feelings or situation with care.
Much of this is for good reason. There are countless stories of people being taken advantage of because they allowed themselves to be vulnerable. But the failing there isn't on the person who is vulnerable; the failure is in the inability of the people around them to act like respectable human beings, and recognize that someone is fearful and in need. People rarely tell lies when everything is fine and they feel secure.
But this here is why I have chosen to live my life as an open book. I do not care who criticizes me, I do not care who attempts to hurt me. My honesty has never come back to haunt me; I do not stay awake at night because I've told the truth. More often than not, I'm approached by someone with a similar situation, and I find a very human connection there. These connections would not occur if I didn't have the ovaries to tell the truth, if I didn't have the ovaries to share my struggles.
Please don't think I'm trying to put myself on a pedestal. I lie as much as everyone does, I'm sure. I am confronting lies I've told myself in the past years about many of the things I've discussed here, including health issues (I have yet to confront my high blood pressure; I may have ADD; and of course, my weight). But I am still honest that I have these issues, and that allows me a place to start when I am ready to start making changes.
If you have relationships in your life that are floundering, if you are looking for more connection, more community, start with telling the truth. Be true to yourself. Are you really gay? There's an example of how harmful secrets and lies can truly be. How many people have suffered for how many hundreds of years because they could not tell that truth. Are you really homeless? Use it as a platform to show people that the homeless aren't much different from they are. Connect with other homeless folks and pool resources to find shelter, get information for services, share stories and advice. Are you struggling from cancer, diabetes, other health issues? Be honest about it, so you can receive the support you need to get better, regardless of what the prognosis.
You cannot fix what you don't acknowledge. You cannot expect other people to change their behavior if they don't know what's wrong. And you cannot expect people to support their community, if you don't trust people with the truth in the first place. "Be the change you want to see in the world," says Gandhi. I want to see a more honest culture, where a person's vulnerability is not looked at as a character judgment, but instead seen by their community as an opportunity to prove trustworthiness and social responsibility. It has to start somewhere; why not here?
Now, I know in my head the answer the interviewer is "looking" for; an unqualified yes, no hesitation, no exceptions.
But I am human. That particular day, I happened to have an appointment a half hour's drive away to get food stamps. The appointment was at eleven. I told the woman that I would be happy to start work tomorrow, but that I would be available after 1pm.
"Well, I have other candidates to look at," she replied, her attitude going from warm and sociable to rude and unavailable. I felt like I got smacked in the face.
Where have we gone wrong as a society when we cannot tell the truth about simple obligations. Where have we gone wrong as a society when the simple act of having an appointment means someone can't get a job, let alone the fact that the appointment was so I could eat.
It would have taken a minimum of 2 weeks to get my first paycheck. My family is tapped, having given far more support than they had ever originally signed up for when I moved back home. My fiancé's family is tapped, already supporting for more adults than they should be. I went on food stamps to attempt to ease the burden a little and buy groceries for both households. I only get 200 a month, but it helps immeasurably in easing tension.
I'm very much an open book. I don't hide the good and the bad things I've gone through and done. While some people may be uncomfortable around my willingness to discuss damn near anything, I believe that honesty is key in having successful relationships. You cannot fix what you don't acknowledge. Instead of killing each other with the thousands of small cuts caused by little white lies, approach the issue honestly. Acknowledge that what you say may sound wrong; this will help blunt any hurt the other person may feel. But if you keep it hidden, it will destroy you.
Secrets isolate us. When someone keeps a secret, they are attempting to control a large issue all by themselves. It's exhausting, and unnecessary. We need to stop telling these lies, not only to others, but to ourselves as well. Things are not "fine." Things suck. But things won't get easier if you don't ask for help, and you can't ask for help if you don't acknowledge there is a problem.
Culturally we seem to be dealing with an addiction to lies. There are the social lies we tell ourselves, where we drive the best cars, live in the best houses, and fill those houses with the best toys in an attempt to tell the lie of social status, pretending to be better off than we are. The result: The inevitable fall from social standing when the lie becomes too much to maintain.
There are financial lies we tell ourselves, and worse, to our partners. Our husband does not need to know about the 20 songs we downloaded for a dollar each on Amazon. Our wife doesn't need to know about the new power tool. My business partner doesn't need to know about the money lost on a bad investment. And most of all, no one needs to know we can't pay our bills.
But we can't. Instead of holding that secret against your chest, open up a little and see what happens. Sure, you're going to get criticism. Sure, people will call you every name in the book and a few that aren't. But do you want to fix things? Or are you content to maintain the status quo, watching your family slowly drown instead of waving your arms for that life preserver?
There are health lies we tell ourselves. We don't really weigh that much; that scale has always been faulty. My joints don't hurt that much. My blood pressure isn't that high. This food is good for me. Nationally we are experiencing rising rates in gout, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, obesity and its associated risks. Why? Because we are too cowardly to tell ourselves the truth: We did it, we're responsible for it, and we need to fix it.
We cannot rely on Congress (the biggest batch of liars) to fix these problems for us; they are behind just as big a wall of lies as we are. Their lies include misrepresentation of data to support their agenda, use of inflammatory and hateful language in order to shine the worst light on their opponent, use of religion to justify the mistreatment and discrimination of others. How can we expect a social institution to come up with fixes when they can't even tell the truth about facts? There is a well-known quote regarding Planned Parenthood, that 90% of their funding went to abortions. When this was revealed as a gross error, the speaker backwheeled by saying, "The statistic was never meant to be accurate." In plain terms: I lied about the statistic to convince people that my view is the right one, and I knew I was doing it at the time.
And we as a nation are okay with this?
The worst part about lies is that they are insulting. When you lie, you are insulting both yourself and the person you are telling the lie to.
When you lie to yourself, you are causing insult because of your refusal to deal with the truth as is. Psychology has a term for that: cognitive dissonance. This causes discomfort in the form of stress, which affects us on physical, mental, and emotional levels. Mentally, we can drive ourselves to the point of nervous breakdown in an attempt to keep all the lies straight, while at the same time trying to fix the truth. Emotionally, we become impatient and intolerant, because we assume that others will lie to us as easily as we lie to ourselves. We refuse to see others as the complex human beings with needs that we all are. Physically, the stress caused by maintaining cognitive dissonance manifests as headaches and migraines, fatigue, sleep disturbances, and the release of hormones which support the body's defense system - when released long term, these hormones sabotage the body's ability to heal by making the body operate at 110% all the time. The body needs rest, but we cannot rest and sleep peacefully when we are juggling lies.
When you lie to someone else, you are causing a social insult. People lie to protect themselves from what they think the other person's reaction will be if they tell the truth. That word in bold is key. Lying is completely based upon the perception of other people's reactions.
Therefore, the main insult here is in the form of a lack of trust. By lying to someone, you are telling them that you don't trust them with the truth. You don't trust them to not use it against you; you don't trust them to handle your feelings or situation with care.
Much of this is for good reason. There are countless stories of people being taken advantage of because they allowed themselves to be vulnerable. But the failing there isn't on the person who is vulnerable; the failure is in the inability of the people around them to act like respectable human beings, and recognize that someone is fearful and in need. People rarely tell lies when everything is fine and they feel secure.
But this here is why I have chosen to live my life as an open book. I do not care who criticizes me, I do not care who attempts to hurt me. My honesty has never come back to haunt me; I do not stay awake at night because I've told the truth. More often than not, I'm approached by someone with a similar situation, and I find a very human connection there. These connections would not occur if I didn't have the ovaries to tell the truth, if I didn't have the ovaries to share my struggles.
Please don't think I'm trying to put myself on a pedestal. I lie as much as everyone does, I'm sure. I am confronting lies I've told myself in the past years about many of the things I've discussed here, including health issues (I have yet to confront my high blood pressure; I may have ADD; and of course, my weight). But I am still honest that I have these issues, and that allows me a place to start when I am ready to start making changes.
If you have relationships in your life that are floundering, if you are looking for more connection, more community, start with telling the truth. Be true to yourself. Are you really gay? There's an example of how harmful secrets and lies can truly be. How many people have suffered for how many hundreds of years because they could not tell that truth. Are you really homeless? Use it as a platform to show people that the homeless aren't much different from they are. Connect with other homeless folks and pool resources to find shelter, get information for services, share stories and advice. Are you struggling from cancer, diabetes, other health issues? Be honest about it, so you can receive the support you need to get better, regardless of what the prognosis.
You cannot fix what you don't acknowledge. You cannot expect other people to change their behavior if they don't know what's wrong. And you cannot expect people to support their community, if you don't trust people with the truth in the first place. "Be the change you want to see in the world," says Gandhi. I want to see a more honest culture, where a person's vulnerability is not looked at as a character judgment, but instead seen by their community as an opportunity to prove trustworthiness and social responsibility. It has to start somewhere; why not here?
Saturday, August 6, 2011
Patriotic Millionaires For Higher Taxes
A good sign:
More and more I am convinced that people know what needs to be done to turn this country around. I would love to pay taxes, if I were only earning an income.
I do not think it is excessive to ask millionaires to pay a 70% consumption tax on items like a $100,000 Ferrari and a $28,000 toy SUV, especially when the taxes can fund social programs like universal healthcare, aid to end poverty in Africa, and infrastructure and research investments.
Millionaires like these know that those programs are necessary to ensure growth. How can a company expect to make a profit when it does not have the roads, rails, and skies to ship their product? How can a company expect to have workers when there is no healthcare to support them? How can they hire good workers when the education systems consistently puts out graduates who cannot accomplish basic tasks?
On the other hand, the IRS takes donations. So here is my call to all the patriotic millionaires out there: Start by bettering your community. Make a note of the items you buy that are far beyond the reach of the average consumer, and send a check equaling a 70% tax on those items to either the IRS or to the local social program of your choice. Make a note of the items that aren't quite so far out of reach of the average consumer. Stop using loopholes and tax shelters to avoid all but the most persistent of taxes. Quit waiting for the politicians to get their act together (they won't), and be the leadership you wish to see in your country.
More and more I am convinced that people know what needs to be done to turn this country around. I would love to pay taxes, if I were only earning an income.
I do not think it is excessive to ask millionaires to pay a 70% consumption tax on items like a $100,000 Ferrari and a $28,000 toy SUV, especially when the taxes can fund social programs like universal healthcare, aid to end poverty in Africa, and infrastructure and research investments.
Millionaires like these know that those programs are necessary to ensure growth. How can a company expect to make a profit when it does not have the roads, rails, and skies to ship their product? How can a company expect to have workers when there is no healthcare to support them? How can they hire good workers when the education systems consistently puts out graduates who cannot accomplish basic tasks?
On the other hand, the IRS takes donations. So here is my call to all the patriotic millionaires out there: Start by bettering your community. Make a note of the items you buy that are far beyond the reach of the average consumer, and send a check equaling a 70% tax on those items to either the IRS or to the local social program of your choice. Make a note of the items that aren't quite so far out of reach of the average consumer. Stop using loopholes and tax shelters to avoid all but the most persistent of taxes. Quit waiting for the politicians to get their act together (they won't), and be the leadership you wish to see in your country.
Domestic Terrorism On The Rise
Scary, isn't it: Children's medical helicopter shot
Photo source: 10tv article here
To set the scene a little: you're in a major car wreck. While you're being worked on, your kids are screaming in the back seat, and you have no idea how injured they are. You hear a call for a medical helicopter, and your kids are transported. . . only to have the helicopter shot at as they fly overhead.
What kind of lily-livered, yellow-bellied, ovary-lacking, ugly carbon bag of mostly water could want to do this?
This right here? This is domestic terrorism. Rapists, serial killers, people who shoot at helicopters, all belong in that special hell with child molestors and people who talk in movie theaters, and they all deserve to be tried for treason (except for the talkers, they just need to be ejected with massive amounts of humiliation).
To harm a child is to take an active role in ensuring that the future is a little worse off. That child could have been the President of the United States, the scientist who cures cancers, the mother who raises her children to be good people, the author who writes a book that changes the course of human history.
To fire up on a helicopter with a humanitarian mission to serve sick children should be counted among the lowest of human actions, but unfortunately, this sort of violence is exactly the kind of thing the U.S. should expect, and it will only get worse from here.
People are desperate. The debacle with the debt crisis now has its first truly visible and immediate consequence: the downgrade of the U.S. credit rating. Like a patient with obesity, the U.S. is collapsing under the weight of its own gluttonous consumption and appetite for debt. Most people heed the warning signs, and get their weight under control once symptoms like shortness of breath and high blood pressure appear.
Increasing violence is a hallmark of a collapsing society, just as cholesterol levels are the hallmark of heart attacks. We cannot afford to ignore the connection between economic security and physical safety. The answer to being safer is not more guns or more violence, but more help for those who need it. The U.S. has the choice to hand its poor a sandwich or a gun; unfortunately, it seems like Congress is more comfortable with handing out guns than food.
People from States are a special sort, able to turn a blind eye to all but the most immediate of problems. The U.S. continues to hemorrhage money, with no real debate on how to match the spending with revenue. A home-owner might take a second job to cover the bills, but the U.S. has fewer options. Ultimately, taxes must be raised, and the sooner Congress sucks it up and deals with that, the sooner the rest of the country (and the world) can move on with recovery.
In the meantime, keep an eye out for things like this. Work on getting your family in a position where you can move quickly, if necessary. Even if you never need to actually evacuate, having the resources available may still serve you in other ways. Get out of debt.
And most of all, help your neighbor. Your neighbor will be more likely to call the cops if your property is being robbed if they know who you are, if you have helped them with the yardwork, the kids, the pets. Good fences make good neighbors, that's true, but it also helps to build an isolation that causes all to be at risk.
Hopefully these monsters will soon have better things to do than shoot at children's medical helicopters.
To set the scene a little: you're in a major car wreck. While you're being worked on, your kids are screaming in the back seat, and you have no idea how injured they are. You hear a call for a medical helicopter, and your kids are transported. . . only to have the helicopter shot at as they fly overhead.
What kind of lily-livered, yellow-bellied, ovary-lacking, ugly carbon bag of mostly water could want to do this?
This right here? This is domestic terrorism. Rapists, serial killers, people who shoot at helicopters, all belong in that special hell with child molestors and people who talk in movie theaters, and they all deserve to be tried for treason (except for the talkers, they just need to be ejected with massive amounts of humiliation).
To harm a child is to take an active role in ensuring that the future is a little worse off. That child could have been the President of the United States, the scientist who cures cancers, the mother who raises her children to be good people, the author who writes a book that changes the course of human history.
To fire up on a helicopter with a humanitarian mission to serve sick children should be counted among the lowest of human actions, but unfortunately, this sort of violence is exactly the kind of thing the U.S. should expect, and it will only get worse from here.
People are desperate. The debacle with the debt crisis now has its first truly visible and immediate consequence: the downgrade of the U.S. credit rating. Like a patient with obesity, the U.S. is collapsing under the weight of its own gluttonous consumption and appetite for debt. Most people heed the warning signs, and get their weight under control once symptoms like shortness of breath and high blood pressure appear.
Increasing violence is a hallmark of a collapsing society, just as cholesterol levels are the hallmark of heart attacks. We cannot afford to ignore the connection between economic security and physical safety. The answer to being safer is not more guns or more violence, but more help for those who need it. The U.S. has the choice to hand its poor a sandwich or a gun; unfortunately, it seems like Congress is more comfortable with handing out guns than food.
People from States are a special sort, able to turn a blind eye to all but the most immediate of problems. The U.S. continues to hemorrhage money, with no real debate on how to match the spending with revenue. A home-owner might take a second job to cover the bills, but the U.S. has fewer options. Ultimately, taxes must be raised, and the sooner Congress sucks it up and deals with that, the sooner the rest of the country (and the world) can move on with recovery.
In the meantime, keep an eye out for things like this. Work on getting your family in a position where you can move quickly, if necessary. Even if you never need to actually evacuate, having the resources available may still serve you in other ways. Get out of debt.
And most of all, help your neighbor. Your neighbor will be more likely to call the cops if your property is being robbed if they know who you are, if you have helped them with the yardwork, the kids, the pets. Good fences make good neighbors, that's true, but it also helps to build an isolation that causes all to be at risk.
Hopefully these monsters will soon have better things to do than shoot at children's medical helicopters.
Friday, August 5, 2011
S&P Downgrades U.S. Credit Rating
No surprise here: S&P Downgrades U.S. Credit Rating
We knew this was going to happen: no one can legitimately be surprised that it happened. S&P had essentially told us this would be the result even if we did come up with a reasonable debt plan (which we haven't).
Considering the nauseating display of incompetence by Congress over the FAA crisis, this is a very reasonable action on the part of S&P; they have every reason to be "pessimistic" about the ability of the U.S. to take reasonable action in curbing its debt and its deficits.
Source: http://www.realtor.com/blogs/2011/03/10/did-you-get-denied-for-home-loan/
There is a ray of sunshine: S&P expects to downgrade the U.S. debt rating further in the next two years. Two years to turn our country around. We have the tools, we have the solutions; all we need are the politicians willing to implement them and the citizens who are knowledgeable enough about the issues to vote politicians to office who will actually make meaningful progress to turn this economy around.
But this doesn't matter to me! people will whine.
It does matter, as it affects the ability of the government to borrow money to pay its bills, including its employees. Remember the 74,000 people at the FAA that were furloughed? That's a small example of what would happen if the government couldn't afford to pay its people - all 2.7 million of them (and that's as of Jan 2009, I'm sure the number is larger now). Our economy cannot afford to swallow another 2.7 million unemployed workers, and our local governments are already stretched beyond reason trying to support unemployment benefits and other social services for those who have been out of work. And the 2.7 million employees are just the start; I'm not even talking about all the Social Security benefits for the elderly and disabled. All of those people would suddenly be on their own.
And Congress expects us to sit by and watch as they run our country's good name and good credit through the mud. How many of children, parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles, cousins, neighborhoods, how many are government employees? Do their jobs matter to you? If so, then this downgrade affects you. Do you or anyone you know collect Social Security benefits, or have benefited from mortgage assistance, or have ever drawn from any federal government agency's services? If so, then this should matter to you.
I predict many people in Congress and Wall Street will throw a tantrum over this. Ignore them, the same as you would ignore a 3-year-old who is upset because he couldn't play with his favorite toy. Now is not the time for playing around, not when the lives of current and future citizens are at stake. They are throwing a tantrum to distract you from realizing the truth: they have no interest in actually fixing the problems you care about. The only thing they care about is deepening their pockets and their power in Washington.
Let's stop the descent now. Get the message to your representatives that you want meaningful debate on a progressive consumption tax that would make the tax burden more equal across income levels. Encourage meaningful discussions on value-added taxes that would more accurately tax corporations. Vote for politicians who back universal savings allowance taxes that encourage savings and investment both from families and from business.
We knew this was going to happen: no one can legitimately be surprised that it happened. S&P had essentially told us this would be the result even if we did come up with a reasonable debt plan (which we haven't).
Source: http://www.realtor.com/blogs/2011/03/10/did-you-get-denied-for-home-loan/
There is a ray of sunshine: S&P expects to downgrade the U.S. debt rating further in the next two years. Two years to turn our country around. We have the tools, we have the solutions; all we need are the politicians willing to implement them and the citizens who are knowledgeable enough about the issues to vote politicians to office who will actually make meaningful progress to turn this economy around.
But this doesn't matter to me! people will whine.
It does matter, as it affects the ability of the government to borrow money to pay its bills, including its employees. Remember the 74,000 people at the FAA that were furloughed? That's a small example of what would happen if the government couldn't afford to pay its people - all 2.7 million of them (and that's as of Jan 2009, I'm sure the number is larger now). Our economy cannot afford to swallow another 2.7 million unemployed workers, and our local governments are already stretched beyond reason trying to support unemployment benefits and other social services for those who have been out of work. And the 2.7 million employees are just the start; I'm not even talking about all the Social Security benefits for the elderly and disabled. All of those people would suddenly be on their own.
And Congress expects us to sit by and watch as they run our country's good name and good credit through the mud. How many of children, parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles, cousins, neighborhoods, how many are government employees? Do their jobs matter to you? If so, then this downgrade affects you. Do you or anyone you know collect Social Security benefits, or have benefited from mortgage assistance, or have ever drawn from any federal government agency's services? If so, then this should matter to you.
I predict many people in Congress and Wall Street will throw a tantrum over this. Ignore them, the same as you would ignore a 3-year-old who is upset because he couldn't play with his favorite toy. Now is not the time for playing around, not when the lives of current and future citizens are at stake. They are throwing a tantrum to distract you from realizing the truth: they have no interest in actually fixing the problems you care about. The only thing they care about is deepening their pockets and their power in Washington.
Let's stop the descent now. Get the message to your representatives that you want meaningful debate on a progressive consumption tax that would make the tax burden more equal across income levels. Encourage meaningful discussions on value-added taxes that would more accurately tax corporations. Vote for politicians who back universal savings allowance taxes that encourage savings and investment both from families and from business.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)