Steel and Transportation Equals New Age Energy Inefficiency, Lightweight Super Strength Solar Cell Plastics might be the Better Choice.

I read that UCLA is involved in lightweight plastic solar energy panel research that is supposed to be easier to make then current solar energy panels. UCLA Plastic Solar Energy Research. The implications of a plastic solar cell composite are dramatic. A Low cost, lightweight yet strong material for absorbing solar energy might mean a huge reduction in the overall weight of all transportation devices.

The lower the overall weight of our transportation system, the more effective alternative energy resources become. But even more importantly, if the plastic material can be lightweight, an energy absorber, and strong, the applications become monumental. Walls, either around a property or on the side of a building, could be made out of material that actually absorbs the suns rays and converts it to another form of energy that we can use to power lightweight vehicles and buildings.

If cars and trucks can be made out strong as steel plastics that are lighter weight and also act as solar energy panels, the world energy requirements would not only shrink, but suddenly everybody would be helping to create energy. Steel in no longer the answer when it comes to our trains, trucks, buses and automobiles, it is now the number one problem.

Steel of course, is still needed, lets just not waste a lot of energy moving steel around when it is more useful to use steel for reinforcement in buildings and bridges. Buildings and bridges are heavy, and once built do not move, ergo steel makes sense. Trains, trucks, buses and automobiles move people around, ergo lightweight, strong plastic that also absorbs and converts energy makes more sense.

Unfortunately, if the planet goes with lightweight plastics to move people, steel cars would have to disappear very quickly since the two probably cannot share the road at the same time when it comes to collisions.

Reverse Money Flow from the Consumer to the Banks is the way to solve the economic crisis.

If the Banks valued the reverse flow of money from the consumer back to the bank in the form of interest free debt paydowns, the economy would even out a lot sooner. Instead, the banks and the federal reserve only seem to acknowledge the outflow of credit that is putting the consumer farther and farther behind because of the interest rate charges that eat into what a consumer can actually spend.

Credit Card Interest free debt paydowns are needed to help consumers.

it's so obvious that what helps the consumer survive actually helps the economy survive. Interest free debt paydowns have yet to be mentioned as a consumer cure all, I've been warning about this economy for the last two years.

A Christmas Song sung to the tune of Silver and Gold, Taxes and Debt, Taxes and Debt...

As time has gone on, the consumer has been beseeched with more and more taxation, and more and more consumer debt. I'm reminded of Burl Ives singing Silver and Gold, only instead of silver and gold, the line is taxes and debt.

Industrial modernization should have meant that taxation rates and consumer debt BOTH were reduced. Instead, the rich elite have used taxation and debt to accelerate economic "growth" that unfortunately has been built on a deck of cards.

Basically, we are screwed.

Now lets sing!

Taxes,
Taxes and Debt
Taxes and Debt
Taxes and Debt
The Government Fishes
For more Taxes and Debt
Have you measured
your credit worthiness?
Every newborn treasure
every newborn birth,
Taxes and Debt
Taxes and Debt
Means so much more
When we see people struggle
Taxes,
and consumer debt
under every Christmas Tree
Taxes, Taxes and Debt
Taxes, Taxes and Debt
Taxes and Debt

Taxes and Debt
Taxes and Debt
Miserly men print more cash
for the tired and old
and Mary was humbled to her knees
as the banks declared null and void
their own customers Home Equity...
It's Taxes and Debt
Taxes and Debt
suffocating the world
with their credit that binds
Taxes and Debt
how they make the customer shiver
On every Christmas night
On every Christmas night


Here is the original version,

Silver
Silver and gold
Silver and gold
Silver and gold
Ev'ryone wishes
For silver and gold
How do you measure
It's worth?
Just by the pleasure it
Gives here on Earth
Silver and gold
Silver and gold
Mean so much more
When I see
Silver
And gold decorations
On ev'ry Christmas tree
Silver, silver and gold
Silver, silver and gold
Silver and gold

Silver and gold
Silver and gold
Wise men brought gifts
To the manger I'm told
Mary was humble to see
Shepherds and kings
There on bended knees
It's silver and gold
Silver and gold
Feeling the world
With their lives
Silver and gold
How they shimmer
On ev'ry Christmas night
On ev'ry Christmas night

Silver
Silver and gold

Too much of the U.S. Economy is Tied into Cars.

When the teelevision Media decided to get in bed with the automobile industry, they ignored small business owners in other industries. When a national television show cuts to a commercial, the commercials are not localized enough. The result is primarily national brand merchandisers, and automobiles, can afford to advertise, but the smaller businesses that just want to advertise in a small radius around where their business is located, cannot.

Cable Television was supposed to help the small business owner get their chance to advertise. Yet even there, it is the local car dealership that advertises and dominates the commercial time slots! With no real back up plan in place, as less cars get sold, it seems like other smaller advertisers are not able to fill the void because they have been marginalized over the year by the same media that could now use their advertising dollars.

Would the Entire Worlds Economy be in Better Shape if all those Balloon Payments hadn't Ballooned?

Wouldn't everybody have been better off if all of those balloon payment loans had simply stayed "as is" for several more years? Over a year ago, when the stock market was still shooting upwards, I suggested a similar concept regarding credit-card-debt on my Credit-Card-Cap.com website.

Banks chose to foreclose and destroy homeowners who could actually afford a lower than desired monthly payment. Compared to getting zero dollars for that investment, was this really a wise course of action?

I believe a big elitist virus has been exposed. Loans MUST ENSLAVE the borrower for a long period of time. If the Loan does not enslave the borrower, the borrower did not borrow enough, or is paying too low of an interest rate.

One way to heal the economy is to offer interest free paydowns on ALL CREDIT CARD DEBT, but that is not acceptable to the banking elitists who can't stand the idea of unburdening the minions below them of their debt.

At some point in time, the flow of money from consumers who are PAYING DOWN THEIR DEBTS to the banks, is a good thing. Unfortunately, financial elitists don't want you to enjoy the freedom of being debt free and have instead chosen devaluation as a sordid solution to the world's economic situation.

One tip to remember regarding credit-card debt, if you cannot afford to pay down FOUR TIMES the MONTHLY MINIMUM DUE, you may never get out of credit card debt.

What is Missing from the Bailout Proposals, and how MSNBC once again put their own agenda ahead of country.

Bailout Matching Funds. Has anybody in the media even mentioned the possibility of bailout matching funds?

Anyone needing a bailout from the government should have been required to submit cost saving measures that would be immediately implemented. The idea that big business put their hands out and asked for money without submitting any type of documentation that they too were getting leaner and meaner is something that the mainstream media, led by MSNBC, missed.

Instead of questioning the rapidness with which the bailout bill was moving forward, MSNBC chose to scapegoat John McCain and his desire to postpone the first debate and get back to Washington to discuss the bailout bill. MSNBC actually broadcast all day long with a position that the 700 billion dollar bailout bill MUST PASS!

Two months later and the big three automobile manufacturers want a 25 billion dollar loan, but can the big three offer some type of payroll and overhead costs reductions? The big three want a 25 billion dollar loan, can they put up 2.5 billion in cost cutting measures as collateral?

The term is Bailout Matching Funds, the matching funds don't have to match one to one, but at least put forth an effort. Once again, MSNBC compromised their role as a news reporting channel and instead steered the original bailout bill discussions into their own agenda of passage of the bailout bill without real discussion, while also attacking John McCain for wanting to focus on such an important measure by postponing the first debate.

And these MSNBC clowns want to run our country for the next four years?

How come Stock Market Shares fall in Value during a Recession when a Company Breaks Even?

Does this make any sense? Why does a share of stock fall in value when a company breaks even during a recession? It seems to me that breaking even in dire economic times would actually be a good thing, no?

Lets factor in that many stocks no longer give dividends out. If you own a stock that gives no dividends out, and that company breaks even during tough economic times, why should the stock go down in value?

Yes, breaking even is the new profit, and that sure makes more sense than devaluing a stock when the parent company can break even in a recession.

How many of you would have been happy if the stock market would just stay stabilized in the past 2 months? If a company isn't losing any money nor making any money during a depression, why should your stock value go down if the company is not even paying you a dividend?

When a company breaks even, that means they paid all of their obligations, paid its employees, overhead, and taxed, but didn't have enough to create additional wealth for his investors. If the company didn't lose money, why is Wall Street devaluing my stock shares?

A simple question from a simple mind. Can you answer it? The company didn't make any profits during a recession, so that must mean the stock is now worth 20% less??? Huh? Why?

It is likely that a company that can break even during dire economic times probably will do ok if and when the economy picks up.

Me thinks some people on top are kind of stupid, either by design or ineptitude. Who gets removes them from their position, and when?

Is Quality the Answer when it comes to fixing the global economy?

It seems like economic growth is fueled by the belief in something good. Once the good is created, waves of false excitement that lead to false growth get created as cheaper product imitations are made that leave the consumer with the initial belief that they are getting something valuable, for a lot cheaper.

Once the consumer realizes the new cheaper thing is not as good as what it replaced, nor as useful, consumer enthusiam disappears, the value plummets, and the economy crashes.

The initial desire to save the economy is to then try and just get things going again. But if we create things just to get things going again, and the creation isn't based on quality and longevity, there will be nothing to get excited about, hence no real growth, and the economy will just stagnate.

No matter how many times we are led to believe that quality is not the issue, there comes a moment in the economic spin cycle where quality and longevity does matter.

Just recently I read an article about how Detroit had already started retooling some engine plants to make more fuel efficient engines, and now that the price of gasoline was crashing, there was some regret being expressed that maybe Detroit had over reacted to the spike in fuel prices and retooled too quickly.

It will be interesting to see if quality and longevity can make a comeback. Right now it seems the speculators only know how to make a fast buck, which means quality won't make a comeback just yet, and neither will the economy.

There may be only one way to fix the global economy.

There may be only one way to fix the global economy, and it revolves around the governments of the world changing how they operate. Governments can no longer be energy drainers and huge tax assessors, it no longer works. The world's global economy will only heal when governments from all over the world actually begin to create wealth rather than drain it.

Global economy overlap, in which emerging industrialized nations now compete with existing ones, can only be reversed if each and every government creates it's own wealth and reduces taxes on it's citizens, and the banking institutions quit charging long term interest on short term purchases.

What kind of wealth can governments generate? Energy wealth appears to be the number one commodity. If the United States government could supply energy to it's citizens at very competitive prices, it would become it's own wealth generator and in the process would not need to tax so heavily.

If the United States government generated it's own energy, we would not need to have so many troops spread throughout the world. I don't recommend our government directly compete with energy companies, however there are certain kinds of energy the government should be able to handle, energy such as hydroelectric energy.

In the information age we could lead by example, not by military presence. It really is all about energy now.

Stock Markets Rise over 900 Points, biggest rise ever, um, did your stocks go up very much in value???

I didn't delve too deeply into who did well today, however, just for fun and research purposes I track a few dozen stocks. Hardly any of them had more than a one or two percent jump in "value" on a day when the stock market went up 11%. Somebody has some explaining to do.

What will fix the Stock Market? How about the government admitting that they and the banking community have gutted the consumer beyond recognition.

George Bush will speak AGAIN this morning and once again I will be reminded of the musical quartet playing on the deck of the Titantic as the Titantic sank. I feel as if George Bush is simply there to ease our minds while the economy tanks.

What would fix the stock market?

An acknowledgement by the government that between their level of taxes and fees, along with ultra high interest rates by the banks on unsecured credit, the consumer does not have enough spendable income left. If President Bush would just admit this, and agree something needs to be done about it, this would actually encourage wall street. New investments in products and goods by businesses would be spurred by the belief that the consumer will be able to afford new purchases at some point in the near future.

However, something else has to happen, and I'll devote my next article to that key issue.

George Bush Explains about Credit 101, never Mentioning that cash is a good thing to have.

President Bush explains the economy to everybody during ANOTHER hastily called press conference...."Lets say you have a chair for sale, but the customer doesn't have the credit to buy the chair...."

My question is, why doesn't the customer have the cash to buy the chair? Answer, because taxes, fees, and interest take as much as 60% of a customers income, that's why there is a "need" for credit.

I never realized that the Government and Wall Street was doing everybody a favor by keeping everybody in debt and requiring ever increasing debt loads to pay their monthly bills.

Crikey.

NBC Bailouts out on CSPAN Bailout Spoof starring George Soros, Pelosi, Frank, Bush & Sandler lookalikes, but others have preserved the clip.

The Saturday Night Live CSPAN Bailout spoof video clip has been removed by NBC. I consider this bait and switch. Garner great ratings from political material, then pretend it never happened. I stumbled upon a gracious entity who understands the importance of preserving political art and you can download it at Saturday Night Live Spoof starring George Soros lookalike.

This link automatically downloads a wav file to your computer so don't click on it if you don't want it on your computer. I downloaded it with no problems. If you download the video the George Soros piece is in the final 90 seconds, however I don't think you can fast forward the video to the final 90 seconds.

Allegedly the Sandlers complained about their spoof segment, presumably about the caption that appeared over their scene. I can see why they would be concerned. The Saturday Night Live CSPAN piece should have stayed available with the Sandler caption blurred out or rewritten. Yes that can be seen as a form of censorship but since it involves inflammatory language about offing someone, I think an exception could be made.

For NBC to pretend the piece never existed is just wrong and in a way they may be doing more wrong by not accommodating the Sandlers AND letting the viewing audicence see the piece for ALL THE OTHER BITS THAT ARE IN IT. One wrong should not mean an entire piece is deleted from the internet.

George Soros manipulated the democratic race and Barack Obama doesn't care that millions of hard working voices and the elderly were denied a realistic chance to be heard in the Great Plains caucus contests, not to mention Florida, Michigan and Texas.

Saturday Night Live Transcript of a CSPAN Spoof involving George Soros, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, and the Bailout.

Transcript of Saturday Night Live CSPAN spoof starring "George Bush, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, and George Soros" lookalikes. I transcribed this myself, my preference is anyone can put a link to here rather than just cutting and pasting it somewhere else, thanks.

Barney Frank
Many of you are probably wondering where did that 700 billion missing from our economy go. To help answer that, let me introduce our good friend, Billionaire Hedge Fund Manager George Soros.

George Soros
Zo vut became of zat 700 billion dollars. Well, Basically it belongs to me now. Actually, it's not even dollars anymore but Swiss Francs. Since I have taken a short on position against the U.S. Dollar.

George Bush
Oh Really - that's not good.

George Soros
You're not to speak, I don't like you.

George Bush
(nods incoherently)

George Soros
Yes uh, the U.S. Dollar will have to be devalued sometime next week, either Tuesday or Wednesday, I haven't decided which yet, it will depend on how I feel.

Barney Frank
Thank you very much Mr. Soros, You're a great man.

George Soros
Yes, could I just add that even though you know whats coming, you won't be able to do anything about it.

Nancy Pelosi
You're a wise man, Mr. Soros (in awe), and a powerful one.

Barney Frank
You are better than us.

George Soros
(to Anne Hathaway's penniless husband) Your wife is physically attractive, sell her to me please.

Husband
Sure

Hathaway
OK.

End of faux CSPAN conference courtesy of Saturday Night Live.

The video clip has since been removed by NBC. However, you can download it at Saturday Night Live Spoof starring George Soros lookalike. This link automatically downloads a wav file to your computer so don't click on it if you don't want it on your computer. I downloaded it with no problems. If you download the video the George Soros piece is in the final 90 seconds, however I don't think you can fast forward the video to the final 90 seconds.

Consumer Bill of Rights, Does one even Exist?

The Wall Street Bailout masked what is really wrong with economy. We need a consumer Bill of Rights, and we need one now. Additionally, the Federal and State Income Tax Codes MUST be simplified and made fairer to those who are renters.

#1 The right to "OPT OUT" of any financial agreement whenever the loaner changes terms.
#2 Interest free pay down on all credit card debt that is 3 years or older.
#3 40% minimum floor space for products that are actually made in america for businesses such as Target and Walmart.
#4. Government Bailout to Wall Street primarily for U.S. industries that produce products and jobs in America.
#5. The creation of a true Alternative Minimum PERCENTAGE TAX that covers ALL FEDERAL TAXES.
#6 Full Income Tax Deduction for renters, full Income Tax Deduction on the Primary Home Mortgage (with a cap), full income tax deduction on all necessary medical & hospital expenses and on all insurance Premiums.
#7 No change to the current Income Tax Tables.

If the above Consumer Bill of Rights were implemented, the U.S. Economy would rebound.

Are there any downsides? A possibly weakened international military presence and ironically, a rapid and large influx of immigrants who would want to live here.

If we continue on with a strong international military while our own country's insides rot out, one must ask just who does this benefit?

If we put the military to work inside of our own borders, doing things like dredging the Mississippi river and installing underwater hydroelectric turbines, or rebuilding our country's infrastructure of bridges and railways, our own economy will improve. I prefer a consumer bailout versus a Wall Street Bailout.

117 million Taxpayers received 170 billion dollars in stimulus relief this year, Wall Street wants 700 billion, want is Wrong with this Picture?

117 million Taxpayers received a total of 170 billion dollars in stimulus relief checks this year, now Wall Street wants FOUR TIMES MORE than that amount. I find it crazy that we would ignore the consumer and their exploding debt and instead manufacture money to give to Wall Street, whose primary job is to create more debt among these same group of american consumers that are already in debt.

Crazier still is to give this money to a group of Wall Street Investors WHO WON'T EVEN KEEP THE MONY IN THE UNITED STATES! CRAZIER STILL IS THAT SOME OF THIS MONEY WILL BE USED TO BUY INFLUENCE IN THE NEXT ELECTION!

Clearly, reducing INTEREST ON OLD CONSUMER DEBT for over a 100 million american consumers would re-ignite the economy. Instead, the consumer's interests are not being addressed, but the politicians are listening to the very people who will then rebate them money for their own political campaigns.

Credit Flowing on Wall Street to do what, invest in other countries while Taking away more jobs from American Workers?

Between the government overtaxing US citizens, to Wall Street investing american money in overseas enterprises, the American Consumer has been thrown to the curb. Where is Ralph Nader when you need him?

Stock Market loses 1.1 trillion in one day over 700 billion dollar bailout bill rejection.

At first thought, one would say it's a "no brainer" to pass a 700 dollar bailout plan if it prevents a one day 1.1 trillion dollar loss on Wall Street. It would also have been a no brainer to come up with a stimulus package for consumers that encourages consumers to pay down their debts, especially OLD, unsecured DEBTS.

Reducing OLD CONSUMER DEBT may possibly be the least discussed option by financial gurus, yet it makes the most sense. Old debt is money owed on unsecured purchases that a consumer has been paying interest on for more than four years yet the principle has remained the same or barely inched downward during that time span.

Wall Street bitterly clings to OLD consumer debt as a source of income in the same manner a dog chases it's own tail. Wall Street wants to be bailed out of current bad loans, but why? So they can make new loans to whom, people still trying to pay off old debt? Wall Street and the Government can only pack so much debt onto the backs of its citizens, then it's either relief, or imprisonment.

Relief is simple enough. Just allow consumers to pay off OLD DEBT interest free. The banks already have made a ton of money off of the interest that has already been paid on the old, unsecured debt, now the consumer gets to pay back the rest with no more interest charges. The plan is so simple, and worthwhile, that not even a peep has been heard in Congress, from the president, nor from Wall Street, because this plan actually helps the consumer first. The consumer in turn would help everyone else. The consumer helping the higher ups is a plan that just cannot be stomached by the egoists in power, shame on them.

Consumer Debt, Why are we not talking about Consumer Debt?

Over the years we have heard about stock market corrections. Stock Market corrections restabilize the market and allow for a new run of success to occur.

Then there is consumer debt. For some reason, the media, the government, nor Wall Street ever states that reducing consumer debt is actually a good thing.

Has consumer debt ever decreased in the past 20 years? Shouldn't consumer debt periodically decrease so the Financial Industry can again entice us to go more in debt? Shouldn't there be an up and down cycle to consumer debt totals?

Consumer Debt Reduction cannot occur with so many hands inside the consumers wallet. Government taxes, state taxes, questionable interest rate charges on credit card debt, not allowing full medical deductions off of our income taxes, and not allowing full rental deductions to those who don't own property are the primary reasons that consumer debt continues to rise every year.

Until consumer debt is reversed and lowered, nothing can be done to fix the economy that will actually work. The Bailout is evil and was rejected, but until the elite in our society acknowledge that the consumer is overleveraged in debt, nothing will change for the better.

Lets have REAL CHANGE, Instead of the Government Saving the Bankers, how about the Consumer Saving the Economy.

Because the consumer continues to be under represented in important, national issues, the government makes knee jerk decision based on input from the actual kneejerkers that caused the problem in the first place. Fixing the economy is easy. Empower the consumer by waiving all interest charges on old debt.

Empower the homeowner by waiving interest payments for a year or two. Even if the payments remain the same every month, apply the ENTIRE AMOUNT towards the principal. This will do a heck of lot to help the economy. Discourage buying things on credit or with 12 months no upfront payments.

If the economy gets back to being real, then the condition of the economy can be reassessed in six months to a year and adjustments made that that time. Nobody is willing to acknowledge that the banking and investment industry suffocated too many people by having them pay too much in interest. Nobody is willing to take the government to task for wanting to much in the way of taxes without providing anything to help the economy.

Letting the consumer pay off their OLD Debts INTEREST FREE is the only bailout that is needed right now.

What is needed BEFORE a bailout is interest free pay downs on all outstanding consumer debt. This would instantly infuse the banks with MORE of the consumers money as the consumer pays down their debt, interest free.

Money would be used to pay down existing debt, money would also be saved, and a third bonus would be the consumer would actually be able to afford to buy some goods with CASH, and NOT credit. How dare the government pay off Wall Street first while ignoring the consumer. How dare the government print up money it doesn't have and claim that newly printed money has more "value" than the consumer money that has been earned by the consumer performing a job.

No matter how much money is printed by the government, all that really matters is how much money is being generated by people working. What then matters most is, how efficiently is the consumer able to spend that money? Old interest debt on consumeable items that have been consumed and no longer exist is hurting the consumer, and the economy.

But we are led by elitists who think they must "save us" so they can continue their pampered lives of excess. The elite need to go on a diet, and leave more of the consumers money in the consumers pocket, that is how to get the economy going again.

The Media, Banks, and the U.S. government are either slow to figure out an economic solution, or they have a master plan to keep us Fearful.

Solution 101. If I could wave a magic wand and do one thing for the economy, it would be to allow for an immediate implementation of a full income tax deduction for both renters and property owners.

"Preposterous", the wall street muckety mucks would say, "that is double dipping"! Lol, and just what does the government do every second of every day when it comes to taxation, they double and triple and quadruple dip. The government taxes money coming and going, every which way they can.

Hospitalization costs (including insurance premiums), monthly apartment rental costs and monthly mortgage payments should ALL be completely deducted from a person's income prior to calculating income tax, and the income tax tables WOULD NOT be adjusted to anticipate this real deduction.

Is the government being honest, or is the government trying to trick us by blaming the economy on higher fuel prices and the sub prime mortgage fiasco?

The reason I ask is, if the average consumer is paying $2,500 dollars a year in all kinds of interest & finance charges, and considerably more than that in all kinds of state and federal taxes, why would paying an extra $600 dollars a year on gasoline be destroying the economy?

Wouldn't it make more sense to "re-evaluate" just what kind of interest and finance charges are being charged on the consumer, rather than blaming the economy on the price of oil?

Wouldn't it also make more sense to re-evaluate the fairness of state and federal taxation as well when it comes to assessing taxes on the place we call home, be it rental or otherwise?

If the government wants to blame the economy on the sub prime mortgage debacle, why not acknowledge that peoples' desire to own their own living space for just a few hundred more dollars a month than renting was too good to pass up! Once the home interest deduction was added in, it may actually have cost less to own a home then rent from someone else!

The government needs to make it economically sensible to pay rent or the economic instability that is taking over will continue. Some people may choose to own a home and have less money in the bank as a result, others may choose to pay rent and with the money they save per month, actually have a savings account. Both living methods should be equally honored by the government. As it stands, renters are being discriminated against.

If this idea were to be implemented, it is possible that those who rent properties may raise their rates because they know that their tenants will now be getting income tax deductions. However, that would just be ethically wrong.

Once the renters deduction is incorporated into the income tax code, the government could set up an escalating tax on a building owner to prevent the owner from overcharging.

These steps would allow all people to take a huge, deep breath, one that they deserve. People are entitled to reasonable deductions, whether they are home owners, renters or have serious medical issues.

Media Afraid to Tread where this Article Dared to go a year and a half ago.

This is my second reprint of this article. I warned about what was happening to the United States economy back in February of 2007. Pretty much everyone of my complaints has come home to roost.
----------------------------------------------------
Here is a link to the end of the United States as we know it. Home Depot to sell Supply Services Division to make Wall Street "Happy." Below is the article with my comments interspersed.

News Story posted below with responding commentary by Alessandro Machi.
----------------------------------------------------
Posted on Tue, Feb. 13, 2007

Home Depot to consider sale of division

HOME DEPOT SUPPLY SERVES CONTRACTORS, OTHERS; NEW CEO REVIEWING OPTIONS FOR CHAIN

By Harry R. Weber
Associated Press
ATLANTA - Home Depot, the world's largest home-improvement store chain, distanced itself further from the strategies advanced by former Chief Executive Bob Nardelli as it said Monday it will consider shedding its division serving contractors, home builders and other business customers.

The company's shares rose on the news.
-----------------------------------------------------
Home Depot's stock market "value" has risen because Wall Street has approved of a strategy that minimizes the value of American Citizens who do blue collar jobs such as carpentry, plumbing, landscaping and general home improvement for a living.
-A.M.
----------------------------------------------------
Some analysts said the decision to possibly sell Home Depot Supply could benefit the company by allowing it to focus on generating value for shareholders, while others suggested it could put the onus back on the company's retail side, where it faces tough competition from Lowe's.
----------------------------------------------------
How does one "generate value" for Wall Street stockholders? It appears that the Wall Street investment community sees the disenfranchising of Blue Collar American Workers who work in America for other American Citizens as having inferior "value" when compared to businesses such as WalMart that sell retail products imported from other countries.
-A.M.
---------------------------------------------------
The announcement followed a decision earlier this month by the Atlanta company to give a seat on its board to an investment group that wants Home Depot to consider, among other things, a leveraged buyout of the entire company as a way to generate shareholder value.

The group, Relational Investors, had threatened a proxy fight over the home-improvement company's strategic direction, part of an undercurrent that led to Nardelli's resignation in early January after six years at the helm of the company.
----------------------------------------------------
According to Wall Street "experts" it was unnacceptable for Home Depot to have a "supply division" that enabled skilled American Citizens who work with their hands to have a place to go to buy the products they need to do work for other Americans. Because Home Depot Supply Division could not create the kind of immediate profit that importing from other countries can create, Wall Street thinks the division should be sold off.
-A.M.
---------------------------------------------------
Frank Blake, who replaced Nardelli as CEO, said Monday's announcement regarding Home Depot Supply was part of a strategic review the company conducted in November.
---------------------------------------------------
What Mr. Blake calls a "strategic review" I call a sucide bomb placed directly into the heart and soul of the American Blue Collar worker. Wall Street supports the premise that it is not preferrable to sell supplies to American skilled labor because that will generate a smaller profit margin than selling product that is imported from other countries.
-A.M.
--------------------------------------------------
Nardelli had said repeatedly that he believed the company's strategy under his watch did not need changing.
---------------------------------------------------
Mr. Nardelli appears to be a controversial figure. While I wholeheartedly agree with his position that Home Depot should not shed it's Supply Division, Mr. Nardelli just received a huge, really huge severance package for his tenure at Home Depot. It appears that Mr. Nardelli understands that without a strong local economy which the Supply Division of Home Depot helps nurture; local community economies would stagnate. It just seems a shame Mr. Nardelli was paid so much darn money for that basic understanding. Home Depot Supply is the seed that bears fruit for local communities throughout the United States yet Wall Street seems to focus solely on quarterly profit margin reports and is unwilling to acknowledge that long term stability matters just as much.
-A.M.
---------------------------------------------------
Blake said the company wants to concentrate more on its retail business.
---------------------------------------------------
Retail business means the importing of product from other countries at the loss of local blue collar jobs, that's what is Good for Wall Street, but is that what is good for your local community?
-A.M.
----------------------------------------------------
The company said it would ''evaluate strategic alternatives'' that also could include an initial public offering of the supply business. Home Depot did not say how much it could fetch for HD Supply, but some analysts valued it at $5 billion to $7.5 billion.
------------------------------------------------
Strategic alternatives is a code word for outsourcing, for buying as much product from other countries as possible at the expense of the local communities ability to create skilled labor jobs.
-A.M.
-------------------------------------------------
Analysts had mixed reactions.

''While we had long been advocates of the Home Depot Supply business, the market never seemed to warm up to the strategy, viewing it more as a lower-margin, lower-return distraction from retail,'' David Strasser, an analyst with Banc of America Securities, said in a research note.
-------------------------------------------------
Lower profit margin does not mean the Home Depot Supply division was losing money, it just means that it was making less money than Home Depot could allegedly make if it were to simply focus on importing products from other countries.

Do you see a dangerous pattern emerging here? No new United States business can be created that uses United States Labor and United States resources and still score as high a rating with Wall Street as a U.S. business that imports products and/or services from other countries.

At some point, do we dare ask if Wall Street's institutional practices and objectives are violating the constitution of the United States by aggressively advocating the outsourcing of all goods and services to other countries over the blue collar citizens of the United States?
-A.M.
------------------------------------------------
Strasser said Home Depot's stock should react positively to the news.

''This tells us new CEO Frank Blake is focused on value, and taking a fresh look at every aspect of the business,'' Strasser wrote.
-------------------------------------------------
Increased value for whom? Perhaps increased value for those who are already worth millions and salivate for millions more from their Wall Street Stock holdings. How is this "fresh look" achieved, by focusing on the import retail business while downgrading the importance of the local blue collar worker.
-A.M.
--------------------------------------------------
But Mark Rowen, an analyst with Prudential Equity Group, said in a research note of his own that without HD Supply as a growth vehicle, investors soon could start to focus more intensely on Home Depot's core retail segment, which he believes is close to reaching store saturation in the United States.
----------------------------------------------------
Mark Rowen is a smart person. What Mr. Rowen is saying is the diversity of products and services Home Depot provides all over the United States fuels a huge amount of local economies by serving both the consumer with goods they can immediately use, and the blue collar worker with core products they require to do skilled labor, to have a job!

Home Depot is a company that has become an essential economic cog and valued member of local communities throughout the United States, whereas the same cannot be said of Walmart, which actually assisted in the rise and fall of a small town rubbermaid plant located in Wooster, Ohio several years ago. The rubbermaid plant was disassembled and the assembly line manufacturing components were sold to China, over a thousand workers in Wooster Ohio lost their jobs.

What Wall Street is saying to Home Depot is, "Be like Walmart and offer retail only products made from other countries or we will downgrade your Wall Street Value". What Mr. Rowen has intelligently pointed out is that companies that help the local community create and maintain jobs have an intrinsic value that cannot be easily measured by Wall Street. Ironically, it's smaller profit divisions within a company like Home Depot Supply that actually help stabilize a local communities economy and as a result help other Wall Street Stocks meet their bottom line because the local economy sustains more jobs, which results in more overall spendable income.
-A.M.
----------------------------------------------------
''We believe that Home Depot will continue to struggle with the effects of a difficult housing market in the near term, as well as intense competition from archrival Lowe's longer term,'' Rowen wrote.
----------------------------------------------------
Another excellent point by Mr. Rowen. Home Depot has a competitive edge because it offers a diversity of goods and services. Once Home Depot "cuts and runs", they may gain an instant increase in stockholder value for the investors who want to make a quick buck by selling their Home Depot stock. Afterwards Home Depot will simply blend in with their competition and most likely no longer hold any advantage. Meanwhile the blue collar workers who lose their jobs because of less supply availability won't be able to buy any product from Home Depot at all.
-A.M.
----------------------------------------------------
Overall, Home Depot currently operates 2,159 stores in the United States, Canada, Mexico and China.
----------------------------------------------------
Let us not forget, Home Depot not only sells products to consumers, but Home Depot Supply currently sells product to creators, innovators and blue collar people who use Home Depot Supply product in their own line of work. These jobs fuel the local economy so people have money to spend in their own community. Wall Street is insidiously proposing that it's always better to import product and services from other countries rather than creating the product in the United States. Wall Street is advocating an outsourcing paradigm because it will always create a larger profit margin than can be created with United States skilled labor. Wall Street is advocating this outsourcing motiff at the loss of blue collar jobs in the United States.

In a related scenario, since Wall Street has decided to completely embrace the importation industry over blue collar American Made Jobs, the War in Iraq takes on added significance. Having access to the worlds oil supply is imperative for any country intent on creating an import economy because it takes petroleum to fuel the huge number of ships that bring product from all over the world to our own ports. Yes, Wall Street, whether they realize it or not, appears to be a war mongering institution as well.

-Alessandro Machi

Stock Market Inflexibility, It's Their way or No way, same for the Government.

It just seems odd to this corner of the world that the stock market, the banking industry, and the U.S. Government seem to care only about long term profitability rather than short term consumer stability. I find this odd because in general these three entities usually seem to care only about short term issues.


Suddenly, when it comes to helping the consumer, it's a "this is going to hurt me, more than it is you" premise.

Short term consumer stability revolves around the banks, government, and wall street being satisfied that people can pay their monthly bills. One way to achieve this is to recognize that the interest charges on OLD, credit card debt is the first thing that should go. This would instantly give people hope that they could reduce their debts and start saving.

Banks don't seem interested in consumer stability if it means letting go of OLD credit card interest payments. Banks continue to hold on to their OLD credit card debt and are using it to further bury the consumer with OLD interest debt that the consumer has already been paid back over and over. This ill gotten money is then handed over to everybody BUT the consumer. Rather than use the ill gotten OLD interest rate charges to reinvest in the local community, the money is dumped in other countries, this investment then creates products that put more and more americans out of work while destroying the local infrastructure. These acts are approaching treason.

Our military uses more fuel than most nations, which in turn is adding huge debt on a daily basis while reducing the overall value of publicly owned real estate. This allows the Middle East to buy up our land with our own money at an even faster rate than can be imagined, is that a plan? We have always bragged about a separation of church and state, when do we get to brag about a separation of military and the politicians who financially benefit whenever the military goes to war?

How Far Would You Drive to Save a Few Cents per Gallon?

Just how far would you drive to find gasoline that was 8 cents cheaper per gallon? Eleven gallons of gasoline minus eight cents per gallon would save almost a dollar.

Or would it???



11 gallons would save approximately 88 cents at the gas station above. But when one factors in that the gas station was 1.5 miles out of the way, plus 1.5 miles for the return trip equals 3 extra miles traveled, or 1/8 of a gallon if your car gets 24 miles per gallon.

An 1/8 of a gallon costs approximately 60 cents nowadays.

So from the 88 cents in fuel savings we must now subtract the 60 cents in extra gasoline consumption, making for a grand total in savings of 28 cents!



The lesson is, if you buy gas from a gas station that is exactly enroute to where you are going anyways, you can offset slightly higher costs per gallon, versus going out of your way to find a slightly lower cost gasoline station.

Just what is the least amount of money you would be willing to save per tankful when the extra mileage to get the cheaper gas is taken into account? For my purposes, any savings less than 50 cents per tankful is probably not worth it. So I guess it was my bad when I went for the lower price but higher distance, as my net savings was approximately 28 cents.

Lou Dobbs Agrees, sort of, Impeach George Bush, just like WallStreetChange Reported a Week Ago.

Reported on this Blog one week ago, Impeach Bush over his inability to rally any government resources over REDUCING FUTURE FLOODING downstream that would be occurring over the next couple of weeks.

Lou Dobbs expresses impeachment concerns about tomato tainted salmonella. All I can say is if Lou Dobbs thinks George Bush should be impeached for salmonella tainted tomatoes, what about his non action in doing anything to REDUCE flood damage that is yet to happen.

Both of our stories came on the same day. I think the flood waters are an easier target to fight than salmonella, but either way, George Bush doesn't seem interested in making a real difference in his own country, just fighting wars elsewhere.

Lou Dobbs Impeachment Article
WallStreetChange Impeach George Bush Article

Why it Really is Later Than We Think When it Comes to Petroleum and the Worlds Addiction to Oil.

Imagine that ethanol had been invented before gasoline. The advantages of Ethanol would be pretty apparent, one can grow their own fuel while remaining independent of all other countries and entities. Seed, water, soil, and sun and one can grow corn to make ethanol, wow.

Now imagine the ethanol pioneers wanting to resell excess ethanol. To meet this goal, and to increase efficiency and profits, a huge ethanol plant is built. At first glance the ethanol plant is doing spectacularly well as all the local growers bring their corn in for processing. Sooner rather than later, the nearby seasonal supply of corn is depleted.

To keep the ethanol plant busy, and profitable, corn is pipelined in. Oh wait a minute, corn cannot be pipelined in, because it's corn. The lightweight, volume enhanced corn has to be trucked in. It soon becomes apparent that as the distance the corn has to travel before it is ethanolized increases, the potential profits are consumed simply supplying ethanol fuel to the truck that is carrying the load of corn in for processing.

The corn to ethanol ratio works best when the corn is nearby, and almost doesn't work at all as that distance grows. To make matters worse, not only does the truck have to go and get the corn from the farm and then bring it back, all the while burning ethanol, another truck has to then be used to transport the flammable fluid to it's final destinations. Ethanol also is used to harvest the corn, and sadly, the fertllizer used to help grow the corn uses petroleum products as well. The result is way too much ethanol being used, to produce ethanol.

Petroleum has always been able to mask the wrongness of using itself, to make more of itself, until now. The wrongness with petroleum comes into play when petroleum energy is used to make more products, that also are petroleum dependent. If petroleum was only used to create products that in turn run off of non-petroleum based fuel, the world and its future would look a lot better.

I happened to catch Tammy Bruce (June 22, 2008) on the radio last Sunday afternoon, and it was appalling to hear her try and claim that the United States' over consumption of petroleum is something the rest of the world should bow down to in gratitude because the United States fuels the world's economy. This is nonsense.

The worst thing the United States could be doing is encouraging every other country to follow our "petroleum addicted" lead. Sadly, we seem to be doing a great job of addicting the rest of the world to petroleum.

When we use petroleum to make products that rely on the burning of petroleum to function, we are no different than the farmer driving their load of corn a far enough distance to basically burn up all the product that was to be made from selling the corn for ethanol in the first place.

How does this relate to Wall Street?

Wall Street does not want to acknowledge the super simple rule that using petroleum to make other products that rely on petroleum will be the quickest road to a worldwide economic meltdown. If Wall Street continues down the path of rewarding petroleum based products that create more petroleum based addiction with higher stock value, the surface of the planet and the industrialized nations that enhabit part of it will just be wiped out at a faster than expected rate.

Those less addicted to petroleum will probably survive at a better rate than the industrialized nations.

Old School Thinking Types like Tammy Bruce helping to Destroy the Planet.

Coming Soon, a Response to comments Tammy Bruce made about the United States gasoline consumption. The rebuttal to Tammy Bruce can be found directly above. Or you can click on this link Tammy Bruce Rebuttal

Banks continue to Squeeze Consumers Credit Card Debt Dry.

Rather than make a bold move and encourage consumers to pay down their debt by eliminating interest rate charges on OLD DEBT, the Banks continue to cling to the only way they know how to make money, charging ridiculously high interest rates on old credit card debt. The banks may then use this never ending old debt indenturedness to invest in businesses in other countries.

When will this madness end? Will it take physical riots to uproot a system that is trying to pretend the status quo is acceptable? Wall Street continues to crumble yet clings to it's credit card interest rate fiasco as a prize of some kind. Long Term Credit Card Debt is no prize, it is an anchor that continues to sink the american economy, american citizens, and Wall Street.

What is bad for the american consumer SHOULD ALSO BE BAD FOR WALL STREET, but somehow that does not seem to be the case.

Should President George Bush be Impeached over the Rampant Flood Damage that is still Days and Weeks Away?

Nobody knows at this point how much damage the Flooding along Iowa and on down the Mississippi River and surrounding areas will cause. But the FACT that NOTHING by the government is being done to mitigate the floodwaters before they do new damage downstream, is very disconcerting to me.

Is the lesson learned from New Orleans to simply get FEMA in place as soon as possible and help flood victims, is that all has been learned? Of all the types of non-man made disasters, slow motion floods fall into a different category simply because their damage can go on for days and weeks as the mass of water moves downstream to new locations, causing more and more devastation.
If President Bush thinks his only responsibility is to monitor flood damage that has already occurred, acknowledge that more damage is to come, visit the flooded location, and dole out money that isn't his, he could be charged with reckless disregard for the american citizen, and I think this kind of reaction is worthy of impeachment charges being brought against him.

If you found out that 100 billion dollars in damage related to the floods was going to occur, and that damage could have been cut in half to 50 billion dollars with a 5 billion dollar influx of governmental resources, resources that would have both created jobs while reducing flood damages, wouldn't that mean that the government just squandered 45 billion dollars of taxpayers money?

Is George Bush's government about spending money to fight wars in other countries while disregarding the welfare of people in his own country?

MInimal, insignificant action on the homefront by George Bush as it relates to PREVENTING additional flood damage is not acceptable. I consider that to be reason enough for impeachment. Who in congress is on the president's case to do more? To make sure resources besides money are in place to reduce future flood damages? Or is congress fearful that if they speak up now, their region will get less funds after the flood waters have receded?

Is this the best that we can do?

Waiting to Exhale, Cedar Rapids, Iowa is just the tip of the FloodBerg.

I am completely floored that our government is basically standing by waiting for the flood waters to recede in Iowa so they can go in and "mop up" and dole out vouchers, water, and perhaps temporary shelters. But what when the waters recede in Iowa, do those waters just recede and disappear, or do they ease on down the road?

I feel like the government is engaged in some sort of ambulance chasing involving the flood waters. Rather than get ahead of the flood waters and try and do something to alleviate the flooding, the idea seems to be to wait for the flood to go on its destructive way, and then clean up and rebuild.

While nobody may have ever said "Slow motion disasters fascinate me, I just sit and look at one for days", it sure seems to be the modus operandi currently at work.

Is this the best that we can do? Really?

How does this relate to Wall Street? The less resilent we are as a nation to fix our own problems, to repair our own damage, to anticipate and minimize future known problems, the less reason there is to invest in our own stock market.

500 Year Flood, Dredging up Mountains of Mud might have prevented billions of dollars in Damages.

Apparently, there may be a "wave effect" from all the Mississippi River related flooding. Places farther north that are suffering right now, such as Cedar Rapids, Iowa, may then translate into places further south having their flooding problems in the near future. Is it possible that some type of dredging or ground forces could make a difference farther south, except that perhaps we just are not prepared to fight wars against nature?

Is it possible that George Bush believes that the military is to be used only to fight in other parts of the world, but never to heal problems in the United States? In a twisted sort of way, is the government secretly pleased that the floods will cause a lot of damage, and that once the floods have receded the local economies will get a much needed boost from the insurance companies? Could that be the master plan?

I think we can do much, much better than that.

Tim Russert Passes.

Please leave a Tim Russert remembrance if you have one.

Cedar Rapids Iowa Flooding, How Long for the Media to Realize this is more important than the Presidential Race Daily Discussion?

I don't mean to imply that Cedar Rapids, Iowa is the only place that has had trouble this year. Tornados, Cyclones, Earthquakes and floods have been happening all over the world. 50,000 people and more have perished in earthquakes.

Cedar Rapids, Iowa is starting to look and feel like New Orleans and the news agencies are still too wrapped up in the presidential campaigns to switch gears and make this flood the real top story.
In coming days, Cedar Rapids, Iowa will be heard about more and more, but what about right now? This lack of complete focus on troubled american regions harms the american people and economy by not letting the proper attention be used to make a difference.

I heard that FEMA is out there, but why is MSNBC still going on and on about the presidential race that is still months away while floods waters rise to unheard of levels.

The United States Military uses a LOT of Petroleum, Are they Giving Away America Because of this?

These numbers may change as I do more research, but it appears that the United States Military uses 15,000 gallons of gasoline every second of every day! My calculator doesn't have enough digits but lets do some math. Assuming every gallon of gas nets the supplier one dollar, that would mean our suppliers, whom we are told don't like us, are being paid 15,000 dollars a second to do business with our military.

15,000 dollars a second equals 900,000 dollars a minute, 54 million dollars an hour, 1.296 billion dollars a day. Is our military really paying our supposed antagonists 1.3 billion dollars a day for petroleum to fight them, to protect us from them? Is this why the middle east now has so much money that they want to buy huge chunks of America?

At 1.3 billion dollars a day, that is a whole lot of real estate our oil suppliers can buy in the United States, especially as the high price of petroleum reduces real estate values! 1.3 billion dollars a day for Military fuel expenses may be controversial, and one could argue that 30% of all of that oil is from the United States, so that portion shouldn't be counted.

Yes and No. As our budget deficit grows because of our dependence on oil, we are paying interest charges on our national debt. But it's worse than that.

To show a positive bottom line. banks are hammering the american citizen to the tune of 30% credit card interest rates. So one could say that the 30% oil that we produce ourselves has been negated by the 30% interest rate that is being passed on to consumers on the ever increasing revolving debt and decreasing real estate value being caused in part by our becoming an import economy.

What the military consumes in one years time for petroleum could actually power the United States' entire public transit system for 14 years!

If the Military donated just 10% of their oil consumption to the United States public transit system, the public transit system could eliminate their entire fuel expenditures every year! We are reaching a point where less is more. The less foreign oil we purchase to power our military, the stronger we may actually be.

I think we have already crossed the point of less is more, but apparently nobody has bothered to notify the military.

How Wall Street could help Prevent Flooding from the Mississippi River, but Refuses to do so.

Over time, the Mississippi River bottom literally gets "muddied up". The result is the depth of the Mississippi gets shallower and shallower. Today we see the result of that shallow depth as the midwest experiences monstrous floods unseen in at least 15 years.

Some people like to rationalize that floods are good for the economy. Insurance money "floods" the area and people go forward with the task of rebuilding their lives, hiring contractors who in turn purchase supplies, and so on.

While one can agree that there is sort of a perverse economic insurance funded bounce after a tragedy, I doubt that the actual net affect is a good one. How about Wall Street actually supporting the revitalization of the Mississipi River by having it dredged several feet deeper. I would assume that the mud at the base of the Mississippi River is actually good potting and planting soil, no?

Why can't Wall Street just create an industry that actually maintains the Mississippi River and in the process prevents flooding, damage to billions of dollars worth of real estate, reduces Insurance Industry costs, and creates a made in america product? Or should I say Mud in America. Mississippi Mud would probably would be coveted in the United States, especially with so many people starting to grow their own fruits and vegetables.

If you are an expert in the field of flood management and want to refute my position, please do so in the comments section. I just want to understand why Wall Street can't create a win win win situation within the United States, but happily will bilk indebted american citizens to the tune of 30% credit card interest rate charges, and then use that money to invest in economies outside of the United States. How about Wall Street start helping the very people they are overcharging and underserving.

Solving the Home Owner Crisis Requires more than a Stimulus Check.

A better way to stimulate the economy is to eliminate interest rate charges for a while. An economic stimulus package in which the entire amount of the stimulus check goes towards higher gasoline prices is silly, no? If I were a bank and I was worried about millions of foreclosures, I would value keeping the homeowner making a monthly payment over simply foreclosing on them.

But for some inexplicable reason, the banks seem reluctant to waive interest payments. The obvious reason is that if they waive interest payments for some, they will have to do this for everybody. The reverse corollary to this reasoning is, if the banks don't waive interest payments, the debtors who lose their homes just become more of a drain on society, and it will be up to others to prop them up.

How about this idea. Waive all interest payments on home mortgages UNTIL a homeowner is no longer upside down on the house, plus 20% equity. So if a homeowner owes more on a house than the house is worth, they get to stay in the home as long a they make interest free payments. Once they have built up 20% equity in the home, they can either put the home up for sale, or agree to new terms that now involve interest.

Assuming banks have behaved ethically in how they have managed their homeowners loans, the above solution is a no brainer that helps everybody get through the current crunch. If it isn't done sooner rather than later, than we can assume the fix is in to imprison the american citizen for some ulterior motive.

Made in America, a Label that is Harder and Harder to Find.

If an american company can increase it's stock value by outsourcing its labor to other countries, how does that help America citizens? If a company actually disassembles assembly lines and sends them overseas where cheaper labor will reassemble and run the assembly line, how does that help America?

One argument that is used is if American companies don't stay competitive in the overall cost of their products, they will simply lose market share anyways. I don't have an exact answer to that conundrum, but I do know that if local economies don't spread wealth threw enough hands, that local economy will suffer either a quick, or slow death. An import economy does not replenish
a local economy anywhere near as effectively as products that are actually made in america.

Can't American stores guarantee to stock a certain percentage of completely made in america products on their shelves? 25%, 30%, 33%? Shouldn't every American store guarantee a certain amount of American made products are sold within their stores?

The Price of Gasoline Doesn't Matter.

The Price of Gasoline Doesn't Matter. Well, actually, the price of gasoline shouldn't matter. If you drive a car that gets 20 miles per gallon, and pay 2.00 dollars per gallon, your cost per gallon of gasoline is no different than if you drive a car that gets 50 miles per gallon and you are paying 5 dollars per gallon.

The problem has been in the lethargy with which our own economy, marketing, and personal preferences cause the increase in miles per gallon technology to barely increase over the past 20-30 years. New potential gas saving advancements are instead put into faster acceleration or more internal comfort for the passengers such as more 12 volt outputs to power television screens, improve air conditioning, add a better speaker system, keep the car more plush, or just larger and heavier than is necessary.

Just what is happening to the gasoline profits? Think about that for a moment. In a free market universe it's none of our business what the petroleum profiteer does. But what if the oil profiteer decided to make millions of hummers, sell them at a discount, and even offer 3 dollars off on a gallon of gas to every buyer of a hummer? While the odds are that won't happen, there are signs of it with these gas for only 2.99 guarantee offers if you basically buy a new gas guzzling car.

Could the argument be made that we no longer have a "free market society" if the amount of petroleum required for the planet's economy to run is more than can be supplied? Under those conditions, aren't urgent maneuvers the order of the day?

Not if you believe in let the market decide. At some point, the price of gas will become so high that other technologies will be developed. so just let the market decide. But there is a problem with that line of thinking.

If the oil profiteers choose to ignore the development of alternative energy technologies, they actually obstruct it's development. The obstruction comes in the form of purchasing existing, inefficient products that actually increase oil consumption! Anything short of investing ALL of the excess petroleum profits in alternative renewable energy products generated in one form or another by the sun, may be too little too late.

I believe we are in an "either you support alternative energy technologies, or you are against alternative energy technologies" mode, there is no in between. Fighting in Iraq to ensure stability so oil flows becomes a moot point if we don't accelerate our own fight for alternative energy development at a fater rate, especially when the amount of oil the military is using just to stay in Iraq is factored in.

Those Low Priced Import Trinkets, Part II, How they Hurt the U.S. Economy.

I believe the current economic woes in the United States are imbedded in our import economy. As more and more money is squeezed from the american consumer via credit card interest rate charges, gas guzzling cars, and HELOC's, the american consumer becomes addicted to low cost import products.

I could start a business right now. put a catalog of import products together, put up a website, and try and sell those products. Odds are that I won't succeed, but some have. However, whether I succeed or not, if our economy becomes more and more dependent on reselling only, with no emphasis on product creation and the servicing of existing product lines, the ability for local economies to refuel themselves is destroyed.

If our economy becomes all about the price of a import product with virtually no emphasis on quality, durability, repairability or usefulness of the product, we are doomed. We have actually reached that point in the United States. But what is probably sinking us is that our power elite either knows they have destroyed the local infrastructure all local economies need to survive, or they are too busy making the next big overseas import deal to care.

Those Low Priced Import Trinkets, How they Hurt the U.S. Economy.

I believe that import trinkets have had as much to do with the destruction of the US economy as our love with wasting gasoline and the wars we fight to keep that right.

What are Trinkets?

Trinkets are a small step up above junk, a very small step. On second thought they may be worse than junk simply because we believe they are not junk. Certainly todays plastic import trinket will be tomorrows landfill junk, no? The older junk you sell or try and give away today is no doubt worth more than the current trinket you buy today and try to sell or give away in the future.

I recently observed a "Reduced to Sell" sign on several boxes of import trinkets outside of an indoor mini mall store. It made me think of what a silly waste this was. This business had other, newer, lower priced inventory to put out for sale and needed to fast sell it's previous line of import trinket junk.

The goal for this business was to now try and find a buyer for these low priced trinkets. In turn this trinket seller would then have to find a place for what in many cases were probably "new and cheaper" trinkets, or basically worthless products ready to replace the trinkets that had yet to sell.

Suddenly this whole process seemed stupid to me. Products are cranked out in China in what probably are slave like situations. These products are then shipped across the Pacific Ocean, imported at various U.S. docks, then trucked in to stores. The store then makes room for this out of the country product at the expense of more expensive, better quality products that used to be made in the United States.

Do you prefer to fill your living space with very low cost items, or do you prefer to wait and slowly buy more expensive items? Do you prefer to buy several low costs products cranked out in an environmentally squalid situation at less than slave wages, or can you wait, and buy higher quality, hand crafted products instead?

Or, is your goal to quickly fill your living space with low cost junk, then slowly over time replace that junk with nicer stuff? Or is the low cost junk for youngsters, yours and your friends, to help you stay within budget? Or, would you be better off buying ONE more expensive but decent product, then several lower cost products that are not made very well?

Is the plastic crap being dumped on the US market something that also goes on in Europe, where space is more of a premium. or is it more of US phenomenon?

Are low cost plastic imports the equivalent of the Star Trek episode, "The Trouble with Tribbles"? Maybe it's time for a remake called "The Trouble with Trinkets" in which the original Star Trek script is kept intact, except trinkets replace the tribbles. Is it possible that we are building false wealth on the backs of products that really don't offer either quality or usefulness, but do require additional dependence on oil needed to ship products from overseas. Lets also factor in all the oil being used to ship raw resources to China so they can be turned into a trinket.

Over time, Chinese products have gotten better and better, the question I have is, did the Chinese economic revolution have to happen so fast? I wonder how many hard earned U.S. Dollars were simply shipped off to China to create businesses that literally sucked the life out of American manufacturing and the very people who did business with the banks.

In the next article I would like to further explore how trinkets are destroying the US economy, your comments are welcome.

Welcome to Wall Street Change

lol, it's all about change this year. In that spirit I thought a blog that discusses Wall Street Philosophy and how it affects citizens of the United States might be an interesting adventure.

I am not an economist, however I know I am an ideas person so I would like to share ideas that relate to the U.S. economy. Your responses in the comments section will spur this blog on.