The view from here

A Few Get It -- Only a Few Dozen Generations to Go and Change will Arrive

2011-11-11T23:50:00.000-08:00

I saw another article over on the "ESOP News" gadget I set up to the right of this blog: "Hire smart people, get out of their hair." It's an encouraging article, give it a read.

I actually have seen two articles in the LA Times regarding this same TV business (The other article is, "The Power of Being Local and Employee-Owned." That, to me, is encouraging. A for-profit newspaper has allowed a reporter to highlight an alternative capitalistic model. It is encouraging that the business has been prospering; it is encouraging that the reporter, and her editor, felt the story was worthy of publication; and it is encouraging that their owners allowed the story to be published.

[Actually, I notice that it is "FROM HOWARD'S 65TH ANNIVERSARY, A SPECIAL ADVERTISING FEATURE" and is not a product of a reporter, or editor, or even a publisher's tolerance of alternative models of capitalism. I guess I should have stuck with my snakiness about humanity.]

That is what it is going to take to achieve change, intelligent people spreading the word about how to construct a sustainable capitalistic economy. Repeated stories over a lengthy period of time until others recognize the validity of the alternative capitalistic models and begin to follow suit. It is also encouraging that the writer didn't not grow snarky as I normally do.

The business highlighted in the article has been around for years, and has been employee-owned since 1976. Publix has been around a similar amount of time, and the Bank of North Dakota has been around for over a hundred years. Those are the dismaying points, to me. That the model of sustainable capitalism, which is a style of socialism, has been around for so long yet Americans have ignored it.

But, as I highlighted a few posts ago on November 7, Gars Alperovitz points out that the number of worker-owned corporations has increased. So, change is coming, it is just going to be very slow. Evolution is frustratingly slow, I guess. But at least there is some hope of a more just economy for our great-great-granchildren.

Change the Economy, Change Politics

2011-11-10T18:15:00.000-08:00

I somewhat criticized Gar Alperovitz in my last post when I wrote, "I would have hoped that Mr. Alperovitz would have explained the evolutionary aspects of this shift in ownership." Given my critique I think I should explicitly lay out my thoughts.

Basically, my thoughts are that everything is interconnected. That may seem like a, "Well, duh, tell me something I don't know," type of statement, but, apparently, it does need to be stated. But everything is connected, in more ways than I can even express. Without rambling on about everything, I will just stick to the big three that I would like to highlight today: culture, economics, and politics.

Given a type of culture, certain types of economies would logically, and realistically, follow. Given certain economies, certain types of politics would logically, and realistically, follow.

In the United States our society, as a whole, suffers from a style of cognitive dissonance. Americans will say they value independence, yet the vast majority are almost completely dependent on the government or a corporation. Think about it, Americans puff up their chests and say they are so independent, yet they go to work everyday when told to and then go home when allowed to.

Or, Americans worship of the military, or a football team -- a worship of a role where the individuals do as they are told … And even which football team they are loyal to, i.e. the team that is nearest and that everybody else around them cheers for, basically, Americans have no independent preferences, no independent wills, they are apparently the people most susceptible to peer pressure on earth, they are completely servile.

OK, enough on the American culture of servility. But given a certain culture, a certain style of economics would follow. In this case, we have a somewhat capitalistic system, meaning a small sliver of the nation owns the factories and the offices and the vast majority then file into those factories and offices everyday and create continuous profits for the sliver of the nation that are the owners of those factories and those offices.

This suits the servile Americans quite well; though they may occasionally grumble about that reality, there is little reason to think they actually want it otherwise.

So, a small sliver of the nation owns the factories and the offices and that small sliver thus reaps the profits from the workers who staff those factories and offices. Then, given the style of politics in America, where the politicians have been allowed to craft the laws which regulate themselves, they have crafted the laws to funnel money to themselves through 'political donations' from the wealthy. They then use those political donations to saturate the media with messages to the servile populace to then vote for them again.

And this system also seems to be working out fairly well. Again, there are small groups that grumble, but the entire system is plain for all to see and the vast majority seem to be satisfied with this system.

So, I should title this piece, "Change the Culture, Change the Economy, Change Politics," but that is lengthy and clumsy and isn't as catchy as the current title. ;-) So that is why I leave it as it is.

So that is my too long explanation of why I am so fixated on worker ownership. Independence! Freedom! Those are my goals, that is the path that I try to steer Americans towards.

While a co-operative, or a worker owned factory, may resemble dreaded socialism to many Americans, holding the reins to steer your own destiny appears much closer to freedom, to me, than filing in to an office everyday, when told to, to create a profit for an owner you don't even know, and who may not even live in this nation…

My final point being, money controls politics, and money accrues to the owners of the businesses, therefor, continuing to work for a business in which a person has no ownership interest abdicates political power.

Successful Activist Amplifies My Cause

2011-11-07T13:27:00.000-08:00

Though I have been jotting down my thoughts about worker ownership here in obscurity, another writer with a far greater reach has touched on some of my them. "Capitalism fading in the evolutionary revolution" is a very good article by Gar Alperovitz, a professor and published author. I sugest anybody who is now reading this to go check it out.

The short snippets that I support are:

Over the last three decades, for instance, more workers have become owners of their own companies than are members of unions in the private sector; indeed, 5 million more.

and

14 states are considering the creation of state banks following the long-established North Dakota model, a trend that is also likely to grow.

Given the title of the piece I would have hoped that Mr. Alperovitz would have explained the evolutionary aspects of this shift in ownership. That he doesn't leaves me with some hope that I may yet have a role to play.

"Crowdfunding" on the Horizon

2011-11-05T14:44:00.000-07:00

I saw another article that I wanted to comment on and I thought I should go ahead and write post before I lose the article. The article is "When 'Friending' Becomes a Source of Start-Up Funds". The article is about legislation [PDF] "To amend the securities laws to provide for registration exemptions for certain crowdfunded securities, and for other purposes."

The article summarizes: "Critics say the idea is dangerous for investors, and even dicey for the entrepreneurs. Yet, it is gaining traction with small-business owners from the Bay Area to New York, who say they eagerly await an opportunity to sell stakes in their businesses through social networking—a process known as crowd funding."

The House Financial Services committee last week backed legislation that would make it possible for small businesses to use crowd funding to raise money from investors in exchange for equity stakes.

Under the proposal, investors would be able to buy stakes of up to $10,000 a year, or 10% of their annual income, whichever is less. Companies would be able to sell up to $2 million in equity—but must provide audited financial statements if the total exceeds $1 million.

I agree with the critics, somewhat, it could be dicey. But it could open up capitalism to the people, which you know, is one of my main interests, and it intersects with my other interests. I am going to be watching this Bill closely and acting upon it if it passes. I think it is a great opportunity, for myself and all Americans.

I'll add more thoughts later, I just wanted to get this "out there" for now. There's another article on the same topic, "A Split in the Crowd-Funding Crowd", and I will post more after I have read the Bill carefully and have done a little more research.

A Joke, But I'm Not Laughing: The SBA is Off Target

2011-11-02T04:12:00.000-07:00

I noticed a little article with a fairly partisan and incendiary headline, "How did Solyndra get $500 million when I can’t get $5,000?", and, to amuse myself and waste a little time, I gave it a read. Now, it is clear the article is meant to be a right-wing indictment of the president of the United States by another right-wing media outline that is more concerned with destroying an American President, and America, than it is with helping America progress, but I basically agree with the meat of the article (I just find the blatant partisanship distasteful.)

First, the actual meat of the article. The article is written by Lisa Qualls, "the CEO and managing partner of Fresh ID, an agency dedicated to improving and socializing the brand experience across all forms of media." (A BS description of a consulting firm trying to make money from actual companies by just telling them what they should be doing if I ever heard one.) She 'serves' on boards for the Salvation Army and the Christian Foundation for Children, and she lives in Kansas City, so it is obvious she is a hard-core "Christian soldier" that concentrates her time on bolstering the prison industrial complex by getting heathens thrown in jail.

So, I am sure that if I met her in person I would retch. Which is a shame, because she has an ounce or two of intelligence, and alludes to valid criticisms of the Small Business Administration (SBA), though she never really discusses them. She mentions her desire for the SBA to "make these loans fair and accessible to those who truly need [them]." That sentence was near the end of the article, and is presented like a great revelation. It should have been in the first paragraph and should have lead to a serious discussion of the history of the SBA. Ms. Qualis notes, briefly, that the SBA requires a business to prove a "minimum three years of top line revenue and profit growth of 20 to 30 percent." Well, those are pretty demanding requirements, and makes it clear that the SBA doesn't want to get involved with helping a small business grow, but only wants to ride along after a small business has already been growing at a healthy rate for many years.

The SBA doesn't want to help small business grow, but wants to tag along after the SBA perceives there is no stopping this business. The SBA doesn't really make loans to what you and I would think of as small businesses. I drive around town and see small businesses all over. The small, family owned auto shop that I visit, or the one the son opened up across town; local restaurants and bars; specialty grocery marts like fish or health food stores; small book stores and craft shops; and on and on. These are small businesses in my mind. None of these would qualify for a "small business" loan. (And if you go by the SBA website they constantly put "small" in quotation marks, signifying that the manner in which they are using the word is not the actual meaning of the word.)

Basically, the SBA is looking for semi-large corporations that are already growing at a healthy clip and they want to loan them hundreds of millions of dollars so they can make the leap to huge, multinational mega-corporations. Their basic criteria is that the are not the leader in their industry. Growing, but not yet the leader. So, a huge chain like "Panera Bread" might manage to qualify, or maybe something like "Target" department stores. These obviously aren't small businesses. They know this. The data says that most new jobs are created in companies with less than twenty employees. Those are small-businesses. But most of those won't qualify for an SBA loan.

My second point, besides what a joke the SBA is, would be what a joke these massive media outlets are. The Washington Post has carefully found an individual who will parrot their own partisan ideals. The SBAhas been a joke for many decades. Yet Ms. Qualis has managed to seize on a high-profile disaster and imply that it is a recent development that needs to be changed. Ms. Qualis is attempting to lay all of the blame at President Obama's feet. Now, I'm not fond of President Obama, and he probably deserves plenty of criticism. But the SBA catering to only large businesses is not a recent development, and probably has more to do with the long history of our right-wing influences than today's African-American President.

So instead of the Washington Post running lame little articles they should be taking a serious look at the history of the SBA and advocating that it actually help small businesses that are in danger of failing. Just betting on the New England Patriots doesn't really help anybody. Helping a great little family run auto shop to expand, like Aaron's Auto Center, here in Jacksonville, would help the economy.

But the SBA only bet's on big companies, and the Washington Post only takes partisan pot shots at the president. Niether are helpful to the United States of America or its economy.

WHERE You Work Matters

2011-10-30T17:30:00.000-07:00

I keep trying to tackle this issue about 'ownership' and the currently accepted structure of capitalism, but I am (apparently) much too abrasive. (I believe this because I find no allies and create enemies.)

I point out the specific hypocrisy and dependence that is currently the rage. I believe this leads people to believe I am attacking them personally, and they, of course, calm their fear by attacking me…

ESOP's are my obsession. Publx [www.publix.com] is one of my favorite examples and is the largest corporation based out of Florida. Every employee receives stock; the employees seem happier than at other grocery stores; they seem more involved, more concerned, with their tasks. I personally know an older guy who works at one nearby part-time and, after 5 years, he has $5000 in stock.

Yet, the average Joe on the street shows no preference in filling out applications. They show no preference in jobs. They will work at the grungy store next door for the same wage, minus the yearly stock benefits. People don't shop differently either. Shoppers don't seem to care if the profits go to their neighbor or to Dubai.

Also, I see "liberal" group after liberal group shouting the same thing as the conservatives; "Jobs, jobs, jobs." They do not seem to care that the sole purpose of a job is to create a profit for the owner. (Strike that, many [politicians] probably do realize that--but they are concerned about their ownership stake in GE, or Wal-Mart… and need more bodies to work for subsistence wages and create more profit for them, the owners …)

I often snap at posters online. I go through posts of right-wing talking points and rip at them … I create more enemies..

Anyway, I have a sick feeling that if Wal-Mart or GE or Raytheon or Credit Suisse offered to hire all the current 99% protesters, I see no evidence that they all wouldn't file off to to work to while away the rest of their lives creating a profit for their new owners. [And yes, I see it that drastically, that harshly. They would be 'owned,' they would be "human resources" no more valuable to the corporation than any other "resource," like a lump of coal or a piece of paper. And the owners would owe them nothing, other than the subsistence wage previously agreed to, and the 'human resources' can usually be fired at will, and if they get to uppity the owners will just close that factory, or office, and move it to India and buy some cheaper human resources …

The owners of an ESOP [like Publix] are also the employees, giving them an incentive to not close their own store. It also gives them an incentive to think long-term and not skip on maintenance or investments. It also keeps the profits in their community, benefiting the community. It also allows them to feel less alienated, more involved in determining their own future. And on, and on …

So, there's my thoughts for the day. I am currently in law school and have researched and thought about these concepts extensively, from start-up financing to products to marketing and promotion. But, alas, I have found few who are interested, and most run off to apply to Wal-mart or Koch Industries while simultaneously complaining about the influence the profits (those same human resources create for Wal-mart or Koch Industries) are applied by the owners in the political realm … as lobbying to change laws to benefit the owners and cripple the workers. That is how the profit the workers create is used, yet people are clamoring to work to create those profits for corporations. So that the corporate owners can then use it to harm the workers.

So you know my position--the workers need to "own the means of production." But the worker's revolution should be in their own minds and spirits. "You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink." Right now, Americans don't seem to care where they work--but they should.

One final note: I spoke of Publix … which is a multi-billion dollar corporation, entirely owned by its employees. Americans should aim high. You don't need to be sole owner of a little used clothes shop, you can be part owner of a huge corporation… a corporate and a community leader. I am advocating evolution, not revolution. Eventually the workers will realize they are better off working at Publix rather than at Wal-mart. Eventually, greedy bastards like the Walton family will die off, and people like George Jenkins will rightfully be held in high regard.

Thoughts on jobs, etc.

2011-10-13T05:08:00.000-07:00

[An email I sent recently.]

Friend,

You seem rational, educated, compassionate, etc. and thought you could give me some outside perspective. (Here's a rambling overview ….)

I am interested in starting a non-profit business that starts for-profit ESOPs.

Many things have contributed to my thoughts.

JaxLegalAid was involved in a program to help ex-cons start businesses. (I haven't seen any evidence of success…)

I spoke with a Libertarian at school who felt the lack of ownership rights was at the root of the BP spill;
"When people own something they take care of it… sell off the Gulf of Mexico…"

I agree about the ownership stake …

Publix is the largest corporation out of Florida, and is an ESOP. An acquaintance who works at Publix says after five years he now has $5000 in Publix stock. I don't understand why the workers don't show a preference about where they work… but the workers at Publix sure seem friendlier than those at Winn-Dixie ...

Jobs create wealth for the corporations. When I worked as a freelance lighting tech the company would pay me $12/hr and bill the client $36/hr. When I went to law school professors pointed out that you have to bill three times your wage; if you make $50,000/year you need to bill $150,00/year. That's how capitalism works. One third to pay you, one third to pay for the building, the equipment, the electricity, whatever, and one third for the money men, the capitalists, profit. So, getting a job is getting exploited, getting taken advantage of, basically, for chumps. But thats what we [working class chumps] teach our kids; "Get a job."

(The SBA is worthless… but that's another story…)

And everyone knows that a house is "the average Americans largest investment, their largest asset" Yeah, the average chump. From the business perspective it is just a very big widget to sell the average consumer. Reagan said, "Buy a house ['cause I have stock in Lennar Homes…"]

Obviously, instead of teaching our kids "to get a job" and "buy a house" we should be teaching "start a business."

I believe this could be done sustainably. Loan a group $50,000 to start a business, they pay back 10,000/yr and they "buy-out" the business and are the employee-owners, and the loan is repaid with interest!!

I've thought about this from many more levels….

I've thought about approaching Peter Rummell, a wealthy local business man who "switched sides" and contributed $100,000 to Alvin Browns mayoral race and now is with the Urban Land Institute (ULI).

I've thought about approaching Chef Gordan Ramsey: "Hey, we have ten folks that are starting a restaurant… you can do a TV show that would inspire people..."

I thought about creating support by writing blogs. But comments are very tepid. Again and again people are like, "Just give me a job…" I see no ambition to be part of the ownership…! Just more, "Give me a job… I'll work to create a profit for somebody else"

I wonder if I should continue down this path. Why should I help these fools. I should just buy a boat and sail off
to the Cayman's…

Even after I explain all this to people, they are like, "Just give me a job… I'll work to create a profit for somebody else… " Yet working for Wal-Mart, or Raytheon, or BP, just creates more profit for Wal-Mart, or Raytheon, or BP, who then hire more lobbyists…

People are in fear, and overcompensate by acting macho and independent. (I joke, "the bigger the pick-up truck, the smaller the penis." People over-compensate for their weaknesses.

They convince themselves that getting a job is independent -- but it is pure subservience to the corporation. At least the folks at Publix are working for their corporation, one they have part ownership in.

Politics and the economy and culture are all intertwined.
We need to build a culture of true independence, where kids want to start a restaurant or a software company. (Of course you can make a lot more money working as an engineer at Raytheon than running a flower shop. But, at Raytheon you are spending your time working to pay for your own wage and then both to pay the owner's electric bill and making the owner a profit, and, ultimately, the job isn't very secure…)

Writing blogs and trying to generate interest is frustrating, and I am starting to think it's the wrong way to go.

That's where my thoughts are at this point…

Again, you seem rational, educated, compassionate, etc. and I'd like to sit down over a beer and hear your thoughts…

Drop me a line whenever.

Crazy Thoughts

2011-10-11T19:14:00.000-07:00

So my thoughts are starting to coalesce into a semi-coherent plan. (If I said this to any of my friends they would, since they know my personality, undoubtably laugh, or at least chuckle… they would think, "Danger, danger Will Robinson!") I have this concept, this thought, and it dwells in the shadows of my mind and takes over my thoughts in quiet times of contemplation, and I polish the concept.

The thought that occupies my mind is, in the simplest words, starting a business that starts businesses. Obviously, the thought is greatly polished by this point. It is fancy by now and I call it a concept, and I have many layers of thought attached to that concept. At the start is the reason why I want to do this. The reason is itself a many-layered story.

I was going to point out that these days it has become much more common for people to notice the corporate bias built in to modern reality, but it occurs to me I should start back even further in time, back before I had the thought that became a concept.

The thought grew from other thoughts, thoughts on interconnectivity and arrogance. That everything is so greatly interconnected and overlapped that none of us can truly perceive the extent, and that we are also all so arrogant that we are, to some extent, willfully refusing to perceive.

I'd like to say one word on arrogance here. I pointed out the wisdom in a line from a Who song: Nobody knows what it's like to be the bad man…" Of course my friend just said, "Yeah, it rhymes with 'sad man'." I went on to explain that nobody ever feels that they are the bad man; nobody. Everybody has a perfectly reasonable explanation for their actions, reasonable explanations we can all somewhat agree with, or at least have heard before and understand. From the person who is late for an appointment who leaves their fast food bag of trash in an inappropriate place as they rush off to an interview, to the executive making a cost/benefit analysis on a piece of [safety] equipment for the factory, or oil rig.

Later, each decision might be called bad. Not just incorrect 'bad', but morally wrong 'bad'. That's human arrogance. Even though we have each done something bad at some point, something evil, none of us feels evil. That's human arrogance.

Human arrogance leads us to feel that we are individual, independent. Yet we live in a society, with roads, and buildings, and laws, all built and erected by many other people.

So since we are all so arrogant, and "independent," it is easy for us to gobble up the reasoning that we should get a job and take care of ourselves. And buy a house. That seems rational.

When I worked as a freelance lighting tech the company would pay me $12/hr and bill the client $36/hr. When I went to law school professors pointed out that you have to bill three times your wage; if you make $50,000/year you need to bill $150,00/year. That's how capitalism works. One third to pay you, one third to pay for the building, the equipment, the electricity, whatever, and one third for the money men, the capitalists, profit. So, getting a job is getting exploited, getting taken advantage of, basically, for chumps. But thats what we [working class chumps] teach our kids.

And everyone knows that a house is "the average Americans largest investment, their largest asset" Yeah, the average chump. From the business perspective it is just a very big widget to sell the average consumer. I saw somebody in finance joke, "Yeah, in the office we say 'it's a wasting asset.'"

Obviously, instead of teaching our kids "to get a job" and "buy a house" we should be teaching "start a business." And now I'm gonna' loop this around to American jobs getting shipped overseas: If you ran a restaurant/hardware store/flower shop/auto repair shop/beauty saloon/whatever, how quick would you ship that store overseas?

And, yes, I know that's overly simplistic. Of course you can make a lot more money working as an engineer at Raytheon than running a flower shop. But, at Raytheon you are spending your time working to pay for your wage and then both to pay the owner's electric bill and making the owner a profit, and, ultimately, the job isn't very secure. (I'll not talk about our ever-present fear right now, our fear that, hand-in-hand with our arrogance, drives us to always be "in control," to always be right.") (Nor do I have time or space to point out that by adding to Raytheon's coffers you build Raytheon's political clout, by working for a multi-national corporation you add to the lobbying efforts of a multi-national corporation.)

An acquaintance here in Florida works at a nearby Publix. Publix is an ESOP. After five years, he said, he's got $5,000 in Publix stock. He gets an ownership stake in the company. (Yes, the largest corporation out of Florida is an ESOP. Eeks, they let the workers own the means of production! Don't let the wage slaves over at Winn-Dixie know what those socialists are up to.) And I swear, and I realize this is just my anecdotal perception, but the employee-owners at Publix never seem as surly as the human resources at other supermarkets.

So that's the twisted maze that leads me to my thought at the top of the page: I want to start a business to start businesses. But not just any businesses: ESOPs! I got this crazy thought that if the workers owned the factory they wouldn't relocate to China. But, that's just me.

And oh, there's more, so much more …

2011-10-05T18:35:00.000-07:00

Apple - Remembering Steve Jobs

"Remembering that you are going to die is the best way I know to avoid the trap of thinking you have something to lose, there is no reason not to follow your heart."

— Steve Jobs, 1955 - 2011

New possibilities, new alternatives ...

2011-08-26T16:54:00.000-07:00

I left a a comment over at FDL on an article, and video, by Gar Alperovitz: "Movements, History, & Economic Transformation, Part 4: New possibilities, new alternatives"

My particular comment, praising the video, is here:

11,000 worker-owned companies!! Exactly, that is hopeful. Actual ownership of industry is directly linked to political power. Economics, politics and culture are all hand-in-hand and move together.

While some clamor for freedom from corporate ruled politics, they still advocate for “jobs”–not seeming concerned that they clamor for corporate jobs, which increase corporate profit, which increase corporate political strength.

While advocating for worker-owned businesses, advocating for community businesses, is actual advocating for worker political strength, for community political strength.

Excellent video.

The REAL Reason Why the U.S. and Europe Are Back at the Brink

2011-08-09T15:12:00.000-07:00

I just read:
Recovery Lost: Why the U.S. and Europe Are Back at the Brink
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/08/recovery-lost-why-the-us-and-europe-are-back-at-the-brink

Normally I would agree with the young author. But nowadays I see that he has been brainwashed by the neo-cons and the BS about "an ownership" society. Owning a house isn't the American dream. Running your own business, contributing to your community, is.

"...and a culture of risk and entrepreneurship."

That is not true. Americans have been trained to be good little zombies. The children file through metal detectors and into school. The populace are trained to "get a good job" where they work day and night to make a profit for the oligarchy, for their wealthy masters.

"This has wiped out the most important source of net worth to most middle income families." And that's part of the problem, part of the brainwashing. Buy another shiny bauble, you brain dead consumers, because Lennar and DH Horton and Toll Brothers need more profits. And you can pay with your wages from Raytheon, or Wal-Mart, or whichever corporation pays you subsistence wages.

Yes,shop at and work your days away at Wal-Mart and help the wealthy oligarchs, the Walton family, destroy your brave neighbors who attempted to run a clothing store, or a hardware store. Work to destroy any local business that reinvested in your own community. Make sure they know that individual entrepreneurship will be punished.

In other words, the demise of the American economy is because of the demise of American individualism, the demise of American entrepreneurship. The demise of the American economy is because of the demise of individualism and of community--now Americans are trained, and have accepted, that their sole purpose is to work to make a profit for the multinational corporation. Buy a car, a house, an iPod, and do not expect any equity in the actual business you spend all day building.

Are Americans Stupid or Self-destructive?

2011-08-02T10:26:00.000-07:00

This whole "debt-ceiling debate" is rather disgusting to me as very few actually talk about reality…

People seem extremely fond of analogizing the US economy with a household's budget, or running a business. That analogy is non-sensical for many reasons, as outlined in this nice little article: The Federal Budget is NOT like a Household Budget: Here’s Why.

But just for fun, let's look at the US economic situation through that analogy, let's look at the US as a business.

Suppose you, along with your brother, inherit a piece of land with a small building on it that has a stove, a sink and a refrigerator inside. And you and your brother agree to open a burger stand. You have very little money so you suggest getting a loan, and manage to convince your brother to go along. So the business takes out a 5 year loan for $1000 and you and your brother buy some meat and potatoes and start selling burgers and fries.

The burgers are good and people start buying them. Your place is very small so you can only seat one person at a time and therefor sell a lot less burgers than you could, as you see people walk on by when they see there is no room in your stand.

Now, for some reason your brother is very upset about the debt the business has incurred. He insists that you spend all the cash the business has, barely $1000, to pay off the debt. You urge that the business take another loan and expand one wall so that there can be more seats.

You explain to your brother that if you pay of the debt with your cash that would basically put you both out of business, since you could not then buy supplies. You explain that not using the loan would be foolish, would create wasted capacity. You insist that the way forward is to expand and sell more burgers and make more profit.

Your brother is a hard core conservative though and continues to argue that the business should stop expending money on expenses like buying supplies or electricity, and that the only way to save the business is to pay down the debt now.

So you offer a compromise that you buy less supplies and less electricity. Of course, you can only open for an hour a day and sell very few hamburgers, and the business now barely makes a profit and you worry that it may not even be possible to pay off the loan as the business continues to shrink ...

writing about writing

2011-07-29T18:11:00.000-07:00

I think I'm writing a book about writing a book. I say "I think" because I've been working on a book, on and off, for many years and recently I was adding and editing the work and I've sketched in my mind a slightly different path than it was on before. I like this new angle; it gives me a good frame to work from. The beginning and end of the book are also the beginning and end of the story.

I mature, my thoughts mature, the story matures, the book matures: the end. Not exactly like that, but having the book be about the making of the book gives it a definite 'wholeness'.

And, of course, I'm thinking I would need a website, and an agent, … And thinking about all that just brings me down...

Boehner's Response - wow!

2011-07-25T19:17:00.000-07:00

Sometimes I mistakenly assume that others are as cynical and as informed as myself. Speaker Boehner bases most of his argument on a business analogy, which is entirely incorrect. A sovereign country prints its own money: the money would not exist without the sovereign. By continuing the comparison to a small business Mr. Boehner sacrifices realism for folksiness; facts for fiction.

Perhaps Mr. Boehner does not grasp advanced monetary theory and babbles his words in true belief of their validity. But, on second thought, I begin to suspect that he knows that his little parables are nonsense. He is fairly busy dropping keywords, and accomplishing other feats, so I can appreciate that his act doesn't rely on realism to sell tickets.

But how can any reasonable person have a discussion with this man. Either he doesn't grasp the concepts involved, or he is being deceitful for political reasons. Either way, a rational discussion would be impossible.

Yes, I understand, "politics," and all that …

Nice link giving specifics on why the federal budget is not like a household budget:
http://www.newdeal20.org/2010/02/10/the-federal-budget-is-not-like-a-household-budget-heres-why-8230/

Staying abreast

2011-06-02T17:34:00.000-07:00

I stopped by Alexa.com, where I checked on "Hot Topics, What people are searching for on the web right now…" (Number 1. was Area 51 photos) and "Hot Products, Products that people are coveting right now…"

Evolution Robotics Mint Automatic Hard Floor Cleaner.

Yes. I had never heard of it before, either.

But, apparently, this is todays must-have product. The product has received good reviews all over, with the features being praised are; it does dry and wet, runs up to three hours, is effective, and is quiet.

I saw prices run from $149 to the list price of $199.

I probably would have bought one myself ten years ago when I lived in a decent place in Boston with hardwood floors. Now I more mull the data as mild humor that reminds me that we haven't progressed very much in 50 years, a vacuum cleaner is still a hot product.

Other items of interest I noticed, though, were the Cricut Create Machine and Clif Kid Zbar. Interesting. How do people hear about these things to even know to go search for them? I guess, predictably, I'm just not in the info loop about new products.

The Socialists Among Us!

2010-07-01T14:58:00.000-07:00

I ran across a comment recently that made me want to make a point, but I didn’t feel that it would make any impact in this “drive-by” comment culture, and my thoughts were lengthy and not suited to a comment. So I decided to gather my thoughts and write a little article, not so much to enlighten you, my dear reader, but to have my thoughts gathered for future reference for myself, and my endeavors.

So now, on to the comment:

"Socialism is a collective controlling goods and resources. I doubt any person could be elected by saying they planned socialism as a governing strategy. To state a plan to impose socialism would certainly ensure a change in the next election.

Who am I talking to? I am not sure. I think most people on this thread are violently opposed to the way I think and what I believe in, so I am just putting it out there as another POV"

This is a fairly normal “drive-by” comment that can be read (and ignored) everyday on any social news site on the Internet; but the word that stuck in my mind is the word “impose”.

In college I happened to take a class on Darwin the semester before I took a class on Marx. I immediately understood that one was connected to the other, that while Darwin was writing about past human evolution, Marx was talking about further evolution. Marx was quite aghast at the “communist” revolution, and my favorite quote of Marx is when he said, “I am not a Marxist,” meaning he didn’t support violence and that he was writing of slow evolutionary changes.

And that’s how I always thought of socialism, a slow evolutionary change, definitely not somehow imposed on people, which doesn’t really make any sense whatsoever…

Now, let’s move on to some things I have been researching lately.

First, North Dakota Mill “The mission of the North Dakota Mill is to promote and provide support to North Dakota agriculture, commerce and industry. Provide superior quality, consistency and service to our customers. Grow the business and provide a profit to our owners - the citizens of North Dakota. Conduct our business with the highest integrity so that our employees, customers, suppliers and owners are proud to be associated with the North Dakota Mill.”

From https://www.ndmill.com/history.cfm “The North Dakota Mill receives no funds or financial assistance from the State of North Dakota to subsidize the milling operations. Selling value- added milled wheat products to bakery and pasta customers, as well as retail and food service suppliers, generates all operating funds. Over 90% of sales revenues are derived from customers outside the State to create value-added income for the State of North Dakota. The North Dakota Mill supports the local economy with a payroll of $7 million annually.

The North Dakota Mill and Elevator Association has contributed in excess of 50% of its profits to the North Dakota State General Fund for more than 35 years and continues to be a valuable asset to the State of North Dakota.

The North Dakota Mill and Elevator Association is the only state-owned milling facility in the United States. The North Dakota Mill and Elevator Association has, over the years, worked cooperatively with state agencies in promoting North Dakota and its high quality products by participating with and hosting international trade teams and serving as a resource center for training, research and testing.”

I emailed them and asked about other state-owned corporations and the reply said they only knew about the Bank of North Dakota,

“BND’s longstanding mission nor its roots in Bismarck, North Dakota, as the only state-owned bank in the nation, has changed. Our mission, established by legislative action in 1919, is to promote agriculture, commerce and industry in North Dakota. In this role, the Bank acts as a funding resource in partnership with other financial institutions, economic development groups and guaranty agencies.”

Hmm, and I poked around some more, and found this:

More States May Create Public Banks “By 2011, only one state will have escaped the credit crunch that is pushing other states toward insolvency: North Dakota. North Dakota is also the only state that owns its own bank. The state has its own credit machine, making it independent of the Wall Street banking crisis that has infected the rest of the country.

Now, several states are either studying the prospects of a state-owned bank or are considering legislation to make one possible.

Five states have bills pending—Massachusetts, Washington, Illinois, Michigan, and Virginia. ... Candidates in eight states are running on a state-owned bank platform: three Democrats, two Greens, two Republicans, and one Independent.” (Contrary to the “drive-by” commenter’s POV.)

Furthermore, when a rural friend had complained that he had to drive quite a distance now for supplies, I encouraged him, with the help of the community, to re-open the local convenience store, and then I found this:

Build Alternatives to Big Boxes and How to open a community-owned store (PDF) “Citizens in a number of towns have formed community corporations, raised capital through local stock issues, and opened their own department stores”

Yes, apparently, quite a few communities have created their own stores.

They get people to buy shares at and then they have equity in the stores and control of their own future. If you poke around that site and find the map you will find that there are 19 community-owned stores listed there, but other websites cite many more.

Too many thoughts!!

2010-06-24T04:47:00.000-07:00

There is just too much that I have to say, too much that I want to say, that I am twiddling my thumbs and avoiding saying anything at all. Part of this problem is that I am very self aware, and somewhat lazy, and am really tired of humanity.

But I know I want to explain a few things to humanity and so I am going to do so, albeit in a very piecemeal manner, in my very disorganized manner -- which is why I'm creating these "pages" so that I can polish and consolidate my thoughts. Over and over I am confronted by the fact that I don't know where to start, that I don't want to deal with the ingrained hostility of humans, that I don't want to deal with the demands for instant gratification and the requirement that I must entertain the public to be heard.

But I am going to trudge onward, and within that toiling trudge onward I must acknowledge and deal with the reasons that I am going to trudge onward.

Perhaps something like the acerbic paragraphs above should be a permanent page, or an introductory text near the top of this blog. I will think about it.

Today I'd just like to point out a few things that I've already written, and will eventually expand and incorporate here.

Today I "seeded" a link to an article at www.1115.org at www.newsvine.com and made a lengthy comment.

And that sentence right there with five links in it is a great representation of our fractured realities.

And that sentence right there represents many further thoughts I have about our fractured realities. Each sentence

I type creates many further thoughts that I have, and if I stop to type those thoughts I get caught in a constant loop of typing many more sentences to elucidate and explain each previous sentence -- heck, I'm getting caught in such a spiral now.

I'd like to try to stick to one topic right now, but that is nearly impossible for me. But, let me start with fame and futility. It doesn't matter if I have any answers if nobody will listen; so to get anybody to listen I would have to pursue popularity, but I personally abhor popularity (and the pursuit thereof) and therefor it is a given that humanity won't listen to my ideas.

So there is my conundrum: I want to help humanity; but humanity only listens to popular ideas, humanity only listens to celebrities and big [media] corporations and doesn't want to hear new and innovative ideas; therefor humanity doesn't want to hear innovative ideas, even if they contain answers humanity really needs.

I'm blowing my own mind and am caught in a spiral and need more coffee...

(Notes to self: escapism; narcissism; intelligence; effort v. accomplishment)

Still out; just looking ...

2010-06-22T15:08:00.000-07:00

I'm taking care of personal bureaucratic BS, but keeping an eye on the market... Heard the "news" about the yuan, see that the market is finally rolling over, and just wanted to post a big weekly chart of the SPX and the XLE just to highlight that we are an energy economy, and the turmoil in the energy markets (mainly because of BP) is having a major impact on the overall market.

XLE 6-mo/weekly

Notice the Fast Stochastic is starting to roll over a little "soon" so to say, looking kinda' bearish. Anyway, check out the next chart, the XLE, the "energy" Index and you can't but notice the similarity. I guess I could look up the weighting in the S&P and all, but you get the idea.

SPX 6-mo/weekly

OK, enough with the charts ... I'm gonna' start babbling about law and law school shortly ... you've been warned. Actually, in the near future I'd like to keep an eye on a few blogs and websites and post a few snippets and commentary, some market related, some just financial, or legal, or whatever.

oh well part II

2010-06-11T19:24:00.000-07:00

well, I guess if I hadn't bailed my calls would have worked out,

now AKAM is breaking out, closing at the high of the day and all...

AKAM 2-mo/daily

Competition

2010-06-03T02:42:00.000-07:00

I see economists of every stripe talking about what must be done and I always think how one-sided their view is.

We must have growth, we must cut taxes, we must raise investments, we must increase savings, we must cut the deficit, ... (If you have read a bit of other things I have written on this you can probably see where I'm going.)

We must do all of those things, but we must not obsess on any one of those things. More importantly, we must do new things. Almost every one of those economists and commentators will mention "innovation" and the need to invent more crap to sell to the consumers. 'Creating jobs in the clean energy industry' is a favorite and is often mentioned.

But this all reminds me of the "blogosphere" and how it seems to me that life is like a play where the entire audience is on stage and everybody is shouting their lines but nobody is listening to the words, nobody is commenting on the content or meaning or the meaninglessness -- the fact that when people use the word "innovation" all they really mean is doing basically the exact same thing that has been done before except now they've attached a decoration ...

True innovation isn't just thinking of a new product to sell -- true innovation starts with examining fundamentals and contemplating alternative approaches.

Capitalism is too competitive and usually benefits the individual corporation and to an extent the individuals within that corporation but harms society. We already have all of the answers, they are all laid out before us like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle, but we don't put the pieces together into a picture because they are in competition.

All of the pieces are fighting for themselves but nobody is fighting for completing the puzzle.

We, the corporate slaves, ...

2010-06-02T04:51:00.000-07:00

FROM: http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/05/oil_reaches_louisiana_shores.html

I stated in an email that "America planned to have an uncontrolled oil blowout," but I'm not sure that anybody puts one-and-one together anymore, so I wanted to elucidate.

Canadian regulators require drillers in the Arctic to drill a relief well at the same time as the main well. The BP disaster could have been avoided if the US had the same regulations for deepwater drilling. But, through our crude democracy we had come to an agreement, a 'social contract,' to deregulate everything and enhance profits. Therefor, the risk of investment to BP was lessened and we, in our collective consciousness, decided that when a deepwater blowout occurred we, as a nation, would suffer most of the environmental and economic losses.

The risk to BP was lessened by deregulation, the cost of gas was lower, the profit incentives to pursue alternatives were reduced, and "we the people" were content that we were reaping short-term material gains and knew that in the future society as a whole would bear the brunt of any harm. America believes in privatized profits and socialized risks!

BP may pay for the clean-up and may pay fines, but the nation has lost things that BP can't buy. If a man is wrongfully imprisoned for 50 years, and then he is released, do you think any amount of money would make up for those lost years? The money that BP will pay for this disaster is insignificant to BP, barely a few months normal profit, but the costs to the Gulf economy and environment are huge, and the affect on the human lives are incalculable. There needs to be a coin of the realm that represents both material and moral goods. Money doesn't replace what has been lost, you can't buy time, you can't eradicate horrible experiences, you can't speed-up the healing.

America's lack of regulation is de facto planning. America planned on minimal investment by oil companies and no expensive relief wells drilled at the appropriate time. Therefor America planned to have an uncontrolled oil blowout -- despite that many now act as though this is an "accident." If a person is driving down I-95 at 180 mph with no functioning brakes one would perceive that individual as planning on crashing .... and wouldn't think of it as an accident when it does happen.

A corporation taking huge risks with our property is not what I call a "free market," but apparently the majority of Americans do feel that way.

I believe a highway with NO SPEED LIMITS is dangerous. I believe unregulated corporations (pursuing shareholder profits to the exclusion of all other concerns, including disregard for national security, the environment, human rights, etc.) are dangerous to the USA, capable of more damage to the nation than any terrorist.

Gathering my thoughts so far...

2010-05-31T05:55:00.000-07:00

I started this blog discussing that I am here to write, for various reasons, and that lately I have been feeling a great frustration with humanity and society about what I've called fragmented realities.

I've noted that we are all very self-involved and arrogant, believing what we are each doing or saying is important and that others should take notice and perhaps contemplate the meaning that is being conveyed and incorporate the new ideas into their own thought processes.

I've also vaguely tackled the concept that we all know is true, that the vast, vast majority is basically worthless information and is a distraction if you are trying to form clear and coherent thoughts, either for yourself or to communicate to others.

I just want to state that I comprehend that I appear arrogant and self-involved, and probably hypocritical. I believe that my value is in my own unique perspective, in that some things appear obvious to me while few others even mention the proverbial "elephant-in-the-room." So I am going to state the view from here even as I contemplate that both what I write and my perspective may be meaningless.

I believe this lack of perspective, the inability to even see other perspectives, causes great confusion and misunderstanding among society, and that even this 'inability to even see other perspectives' is one of the 'elephants-in-the-room' that are, intentionally or not, ignored or not allowed to be part of the debate.

So, to just get started down this line of reasoning I'm going to reference a current online article:

BP Gulf Oil Spill: 'This Is Literally a War We're In' - ABC News

That headline grabbed my attention, it highlights a 'fragmented reality'. We have a 'war on terror' which is as silly as a 'war on sadness' -- but actually using planning, and strategy and leadership are apparently not going to be tools to battle this disaster, we are going to let a foreign, for-profit corporation with their own private motivations and goals decide what should be done at each step. Americans will allow foreigners to destroy their lands as long as there motivations are greed and they use guile, but Americans will not stand for actions motivated by anger against this nation for its past actions.

Hmm, I guess I've devolved into sarcasm and should move along... Maybe what I'm driving at is America's and American's words and actions are disproportionate to what they say their actions are, and, as with individuals, actions speak louder than words. America spends great time, money and resources to wage this 'war on terror' but spend comparatively little to protect or enhance their own country or environment. I don't know, kinda' like a filthy guy sitting in a filthy pig-pen exerting all his efforts at shooting a bazooka at somebody a mile away who is dropping a candy wrapper on the ground... Put down the bazooka for a minute and take a shower, dude!

UPDATE, 2:40--just ran across this excellent article that expresses my views of the US governent's responsibility to the citizens.

Robert Reich: Why Obama Should Put BP Under Temporary Receivership
"The president should temporarily take over BP's Gulf operations. We have a national emergency on our hands. No president would sit by and watch a privately owned nuclear reactor melt down and the gulf spill is the environmental equivalent."

perhaps i should go read a novel...

2010-05-31T03:11:00.000-07:00

Since I've started this blog I have repeatedly contemplated what in the heck I'm doing here, why are all these blogs here?

First off, everybody believes that what is happening in their own mind, their own thoughts, is very important. Since everybody is arrogant and believes they must tell their thoughts to everybody else, everybody is now a publisher. There are blogs, and podcasts, and Twitter, and web pages, and...

You get the idea. But in the past an individual would have to write thousands of pages and then convince a publisher to actually publish whatever had been written. In the old system there were obviously fewer things published because more people were required to approve, or encourage, the content.

It seems to me that there was less crap to wade through before everyone became a publisher... I believe the thoughts of some individuals are more "important" than the thoughts of many others. Now, I didn't say anything about those individual's lives, or their wealth, or anything. I'm just saying that most of what is written is not useful to people other than the author.

So there are millions of irrelevant and basically useless blogs out there that primarily serve the purpose of bolstering the author's ego and alleviating that person's boredom. Hmm...

does this matter?

2010-05-27T22:19:00.000-07:00

I fall asleep with the television on and wake up to late night drivel. Ann Curry is on a late night show with Jimmy Fallon. She got stuck in an elevator for an hour and the entire little group in the elevator were twittering that the were stuck in an elevator. And she mentioned that she spoke at Wheaton College, only she had looked up the wrong Wheaton College and cited numerous non-graduates as graduates.

So I Google Ann Curry and find she is a reporter for some cotton-candy daytime show. Let me get tis straight--she is a reporter who makes millions to do a luxurious job and lives the life of wealth and extravagance and that is important, so she is paid more money to go on a night time show to tell stories about how she googles drunk, looks up the wrong college, and can't even address a college graduation coherently the next day...

Does any of this matter? In one way, no. In another way, it just highlights that individuals are no different than BP. Ann Curry is one lucky bitch--she gets awards and millions of dollars to DO A JOB and so that makes her famous, so she gets more money and can stay drunk as much as she wants and can piss all over an entire graduating college class. Aren't we so honored to have her earn more money on late night TV displaying her greed and avarice and callousness toward humanity in front of our eyes on late night television.

This only matters in the fact that all we have to do is turn on our televisions, look around ourselves, to see self-obsession and greed being displayed by giant oil companies and self-involved reporters, both with no other goal than gain a few of your hard-earned dollars, to detract from your wealth, only to fill their own material needs.

Is there any other goal in life than to somehow, anyway possible, to take other people's dollars? I truly wonder. Do humans have any other goal than exploiting other humans? Oh, right, exploiting the planet...

I climb out of bed and turn the TV off.

Grey Wolf

Obama criticism...

2010-05-27T10:38:00.000-07:00

I just watched Pres. Obama's press conference and, while I have been an Obama supporter before, I am gonna' have to give him an "F" on the Federal response to the Gulf oil disaster.

FEMA or the Army Corp or whoever from the Federal Government should have been in charge from day one! Not 'supervising'. Obama said BP wants to stop this leak.

Yeah, now they do. On day one they were trying to capture a little more oil and they have wasted time and should not have been trusted to choose the response path to take.

With FEMA or the Coast Guard or the Army Corp of Engineers in charge, as well as advice from industry experts outside of BP, this "top kill" effort may have been used first.

Grey Wolf

the news, the news

2010-05-26T11:21:00.000-07:00

The information we are inundated with everyday, the news, the news, the oil spill, Greece, fin reg, politicians and celebrities, it is too much. It complicates my 'simplify, simplify' strategy.

what I am whittling...

2010-05-26T08:04:00.000-07:00

This is an odd format where one post is on top of the other; I understand it is so the newest post is on top for the reader, the visitor -- but for me as a writer it makes me 'feel' that I wrote the 'ending' first, which I guess is the novelty of the blog, it is a 'never-ending story', until it isn't.

So anyway, to continue with my thoughts from yesterday, which can be found just below this post ;-), I regret mentioning others in a possibly negative light, it shines a negative light back on me, however, I was actually talking about myself, framing my point of reference...

As I'm sending out emails and making phone calls for school and medical treatment and finances it occurs to me that I am fairly disorganized, my documents are scattered and I fail to construct realistic frameworks for dealing with the inevitable future information I will have to file or deal with.

And as I pondered on this, and my similarities with my cousin, and my dissimilarity to many much more control-type people, I didn't jump up and start managing documents, I contemplated if my relaxed attitude, whether my ability and inclination to ponder my own actions, whether these attributes are actually among my strengths ... one of the important things in life is deciding what we are going to do, without the deciding the do is out of your control, which amazes me about obsessive-compulsive control freaks---they actually have very little conscious control of their words or actions, it is almost pre-programed.

That is what I am whittling away at in my life at this moment. "Simplify, simplify," as Thureau would say. What is important, what is valuable, what is pleasant to do with my time and energy and money? Those are important questions, and it is important to take the time to do the asking of those questions.

I guess I am more concerned about organizing my thoughts and actions at the moment than I am in organizing documents and contact information.

Grey Wolf

You're crazy, I'm crazy

2010-05-25T03:14:00.000-07:00

The world is fragmented and everybody concentrates on their own areas of interest and disregards or dismisses tangental factors.

We live in fragmented realities. It is easier to see in others than ourselves. I can look at my ex with her current 2010 complaints of a possible rare and incurable ailment and see little difference with her complaints of a different 1990's possible rare and incurable ailment, and I'm sure ten or twenty years from now she will complain of another possible rare and incurable ailment.

(My ex has many other fine qualities and is an overall great person, and I have many flaws and faults of my own which I will discuss in depth in the near future. In real life we can't talk about reality, I couldn't say these things to her as she would grow defensive and react by attacking me--arguing with me, belittling me, etc, etc, resulting in negative progress on all fronts. I have asked others to point out the same type of flaws and logical inconsistencies about me, but they usually won't, obviously fearing that I will grow defensive and react aggressively. -- Think about that little phrase I just threw in there, it means a lot -- "In real life we can't talk about reality..." I am writing anonymously and honestly here, take heed!)

She needs people to express compassion, she is very needy, and she is my ex. But I grasp her as an example only to illustrate a larger point and only because of my familiarity with the subject.)

Cognitive dissonance. Where a belief trumps a fact. You know something, but a belief over-rides what is known as a fact. Two or three examples...

The classic example is of some primitive peoples believing that killing a certain species of animal would cause rainfall. "The Indians thought that killing a buffalo would bring rain" and that type of thing.

A more moden example is a cult believing that an alien goddess would visit on a certain date. After the date passed some members left the group but others created rationales and stayed. "The goddess is pleased with our devotion and she has postponed her appearance."

Basic logic and appreciation of reality make these situations unacceptable to most people. To an extent, not realizing our own absurd tendencies is a type of cognitive dissonance. My ex, if she did serious self-analysis, would clearly see that an individual with her tendencies is rather pathetic and, by spending so much time and energy generating pity, is not utilizing her abilities to their fullest.

Let's leave my ex out of this for a minute and cite a few of my relatives. My mother is extremely arrogant and passive-agressive and she also often plays the pity card. She will say, "Oh, I can't do anything right." But as soon as she is out of sight she will secretly try to "fix" a minor problem that you mentioned ... usually with disastrous consequences. She can cite the fact of her numerous blunders, but she firmly believes that she is more skillful and intelligent than any other person she has ever meet--and she acts on that belief despite the vast amount of data contradicting those beliefs.

A cousin, who is fairly intelligent and works in a mid-level labor job and makes a comfortable living, but he always mentions going back to school, or starting a business, or investing in something, or fixing something up ... But none of these things ever come to pass, there are cars to be worked on in the garage and the house needs serious work, and in his mind one day all of these things will be taken care of ... now some of this is laziness, true, but some is slightly delusional. But they are delusions he truly believes. He believes he is industrious, but he doesn't need to accomplish anything, he just needs to believe he will accomplish all of these things one day. Of course, when he finally has to admit to himself that 'one day' has come and gone, he will find a new rationale.

So my thoughts on the human mind and the causes of our actions have prompted me to start this blog. I should have called it "You're crazy, I'm crazy" after that old book 'You're OK, I'm OK' because it means the same thing to me. Obviously, I am applying these same thoughts to a little examination of myself and my tendencies, and I see the most similarity with my cousin, to a lesser degree. I always see myself as a writer. I am not working for a publication or taking a class or working on a project, so ... so I'm not currently actively writing, and I need to change that.

So I am here to be doing something. I am here to write something significant about myself or society. I am not only here to write though, I am here to learn something significant about myself or society, and I am here to change something significant about myself or society. The pen is mightier than the sword.

Take care, I'll be back,

Grey Wolf