Saturday, February 17, 2018

Our sick baby dog survives with help from my wife

Not much on Economics and death and destruction for the week. Hopefully our success in helping our small dog "Lucky" survive may entertain and possibly help save someone else’s pet.

We got a small sheltie dog in September and he was doing OK for a few weeks. We were feeding him canned dog food and he loved it. And then the pup stopped eating. When we got him, he was almost 2 pounds at 8 weeks. All of a sudden, he stopped eating and had diarrhea and started going downhill. We would feed him a bunch of ham and he would throw it up two hours later. We gave him back to the breeder for a week and he could do nothing with the mother in the cage. We took him back and he kept losing more weight. He got down to 1 lb 4 oz and we took him in to the vet for an IV and he perked up a bit. The next day he was staggering so we had the vet give him a subcutaneous injection under the skin and that kind of picked him up a bit. My wife and I were going nuts watching the dog die. I went down and bought some Gerber’s baby food and if I remember, it was puree chicken and a can of sweet potatoes. We mixed it together with goat’s milk and the dog wouldn’t touch it. My wife decided to force feed the dog with a small syringe forcing his mouth open. We gave the little devil about 9 mls every 4 hours round the clock. After 4 days, he started eating the gruel we were forcing him to eat.



Needless to say, he was a Gerber baby for the next three months, about the fourth month we got him to start eating kibbles. He is six pounds now. He can chew the shoe laces off a pair of sneakers in two hours.

I kind of just threw this out there, my root canal article from several years ago, still has people adding their comments to it and maybe this may help someone else in the same situation, with a pet that needs help. This may be the info they need.

Lucky says "ARF" "ARF"

Monday, January 15, 2018

The Hyperbolic Moral Indignation of the Democrats Towards President Trump

I cannot understand the fiery rage of Democrats over the Trump election. I had no rage over Obama being elected. I didn’t like what he did, but I didn’t stand on a street corner denouncing him with every Anglo-Saxon curse word in the books, for a whole year.

Trump’s rescinding of previous Presidential directives has given new life to areas of our economy that were over regulated by the EPA. Southern ranchers stood up to the EPA for new grazing charges for range land that they had used for over a 100 years. The judge just recently threw the charges out that the bureaucrats at the EPA tried to enforce. Most people don’t understand that most of our laws are created by some bureaucrat working in an agency. Whether it is just or unjust has to be determined by a court of law. As we all know, that can take a lot of time and money. This person in that office, has all of the resources at their command to enforce the laws it created.

Trump is not really a politician. But that is a good thing. BS is not something that you want to push with him. The country is starting to move in a positive direction. Most of the media will belittle that fact and magnify Trumps latest impropriety. Many of the TV channels devoted to the Democrats have been magnifying what they perceive as Trumps ineptitude.

I kind of get the feeling that the Democrats don’t believe the election is over yet. By hook or by crook, they want a Democrat in the White House. Trump has not violated any laws and is being called names that are so school-yard-ish, that they are laughable. The Republicans won the Presidency, and are being punished for winning. The Democrats in both houses oppose any legislation that was part of the Republican platform for election. The move by Democrats to impeach Trump for winning the election smacks of treason.

Many people in the US today have a very absurd interpretation of what Democracy is. “I can do what I want and other people be damned,” or “I can protest until I get my way.” It just doesn’t work that way. Democracy is like a woven cloth or a team of horses with a shared purpose.

The basics of compromise that kept the country running efficiently are gone. 20 trillion in debt, the Pied Piper could present his bill at any time and “we the people,” cannot pay it. I think this is why many Congressmen are quitting, they see the handwriting on the wall. The shear frustration of the stubbornness in Congress; “my way or the highway,” or the phone call threats on their families.

Trump’s has informed the Democrats that the Socialism orgy is over and I’m sure they are not happy. The Democrat's platform appears to be for big business, big money and Socialism for the masses. Trump on the other hand, is for the guy on the street and jobs. Somewhere, Somehow, the two parties switched political platforms. The press has called President Trump every name in the book except one; “A filthy rich Democrat with a knock out wife.” IMHO he is one—his only flaw, he lacks the corruption baggage. I believe he wants to go down in history as a pragmatist that solved quite a few problems. Let’s see if he will be given the chance.

Wednesday, December 27, 2017

Fewer Presidential Executive Directives For the New Year

Most people think that the laws of this country are passed by the Congress and State legislatures. That is not the case. In most cases, a Government department is created and funded by Congress. The head of that department is responsible for writing the code of laws. If the traffic department wants to write a law that has a fine of $300 for sneezing at a stop sign, you pay the fine or hire a lawyer for $1,000.

So, what is happening? We have a President that is starting to eliminate a lot of these directives that gave these agencies regulatory authority over us. The EPA has lost about 770 employees and they are not being replaced. It was those people claiming that the car companies were getting better gas mileage due to their regulations. The truth was, the increased mileage was due to the forced production of more fuel-efficient economy cars than high performance models. By averaging the overall mileage as a group, you got the desired result. You could still buy both, but you paid more for the gas guzzler (get rid of ethanol additive to your gas, and you might even see an extra 4 miles a gallon).

Basically, the President enforces the laws. As chief enforcer, he can write Executive Directives to define how a department functions and can issue directives on how to execute the law. Obama did this with the border guards by limiting their authority to arrest and detain people crossing into our country illegally.

Obama’s presidency was fraught with Executive Directives for everything. Bureaucrats were deciding what was right for you to do or not do. If you didn’t march to their drummer, you were fined or jailed. This ranged from whole wheat bread in school lunches to grazing charges for cattle on government lands.

We are slowly emerging from this Obama fiasco of government regulations for everything, to one of less government regulation. The Trump administration brings anticipation of less supervision and more economic freedom.

Let’s ring in the new year and forget that we are Democrats or Republicans. Of course, with Congress it is very hard to forget what Obama did with health care. He taught the Republicans that he didn’t need them for anything. Attitudes matter, and I think the Democratic party is going to get pay-back in the coming new year. Hopefully less government regulation will turn the economy loose.

Here is hoping the new year 2018, brings prosperity and happiness for all.

From our family to yours, Have a Happy New Year Everyone!

Tuesday, November 28, 2017

Misallocation of Resources in California

Figure it out, if you put your money in a savings account, you get a one percent return. Plunk a million dollars into an 8-unit condo, which rent for about $2,000 apiece (two bed, two bath), the mechanics suggest a return of about $16,000 per month or about $192,000 k per year. Plus, you have a depreciation tax deduction and management expenses to write off. With a return that great, why pay cash for the 8-unit condo? Instead, buy four 1 million-dollar condos and only put 20 percent down on each. This is actually happening in California right now. Only instead of 8 units, we are talking about 80 to 200 units in a complex.

Parents have their children living at home. This is a plus if the kids are paying off their student loans, but becomes a real problem when the kids get married. What can your kid rent on an income of 70k combined in LA or San Diego? Chasing your bride around the house nude, in mom and dads’s home has some drawbacks. So, 30K per year for housing, implies taxable earning of about 40k which is about $19 per hour. Put another way, you need a wife or roommate making the same amount to help pay the bills.

The problem that hasn’t been visible yet, is the fact that, building rentals is still in the creation stage. You don’t just go out a build a rental unit. It takes about 3 to 5 years from start to finish to process and complete the building of a structure. We are presently in about the 8th year of building rentals. Right now, there are a lot of rentals, but no renters at the prices asked.

If a land lord has 100 units and only has 50 percent occupied, he has a real problem. If the rented ones are returning, $2,000 a month, the effective rental rate for the whole structure is $1,000 per unit. Lesson one, the land lord doesn’t set rental rates, the market does. If the mortgage payment is higher than the rental returns, the investment is structured to fail.

The real issue here that people have failed to understand is that the Fed interests rate at .05% forces investing to be more creative. Rental housing in the present environment of low interest rates offers a return of about 15%. The real trap here is that building rental housing is forcing a reallocation of resources artificially, into a market that is already beyond full capacity.

So, what is happening in Kalifornia, high rental rates and a very high number of houses for sale. Its okay to put three families in one structure. What has not truly been comprehended is that housing costs for family units is pretty much constant. Raise the prices and you find two families occupying the space that one family utilized before (move in with mom and dad). It is literally absurd in places, 6 to 8 cars per house. The weird thing, is that a lot of these homes have three car garages and a car in front of every garage door. This suggests that the rental market doesn’t offer the rental deal Mom and Dad have in mind. Kids leaving the nest is a dreaded event.

Right now, there are too many high-priced homes for sale and an oversupply of rentals. Present rental rates suggest that things are just great. Units are renting for $2,500 a month with a $500 move in bonus with two months free with a year lease. This financial structure is the first step towards rent reductions.

These rental complexes are gigantic, 100 to 200 units and all wood frame. Welcome to the new ghettos of the future. The future cash flow projections from these investment vehicles will fail, and be refinanced and rented at lower and lower rates. Of course starting a fire in something this big, for insurance purposes, could send the owner to jail for a very long time.

What we are about to witness in Californai is a collapse in rental prices from oversupply. The forward projection of investing in rental real estate has hit a brick wall. The 10 to 15 percent return rate is no longer there with the surge of new rentals hitting the market. Plus, the tenants per unit is not the same anymore. Two people sign the lease and 8 people move in, with dogs and cats and stereo systems that make you want to scream. But I digress.

When you do the math, how many McDonalds employees does it take to pay the rent? More than one, maybe more than two.

Now you begin to follow the dots on retirement from my previous post. A tent and a post office box to receive your Social Security check each month of $1,400---$46 dollars a day. Retirement in the sun, what a life.

We are at a point to where the politicians have fixed all of our problems as tax payers by sheer incompetence and left an opening for the homeless people, who have adjusted the system to accommodate their lifestyle. The homeless will be oblivious to the future rental market collapse.

Monday, October 16, 2017

The Legislative Thinking Mentality

The other day, on the news, San Diego is contemplating the idea of affordable housing for the homeless. Two problems here, the climate is so mild and it never rains so you don’t need a home, just a tent for privacy and a shopping cart for your belongings. Second, homes cost about $400,000. All a tent cost is about $100 and shopping carts are free. Figure $10 dollars a day for food and booze, no cigarettes, (they’re $10 a pack) you can be a beach bum for less than $3,650 a year. The problem with the tents intensifies when the owner picks up discarded items to more properly furnish his or her domicile. And the issue of trash removal and sanitation is nonexistent. At this point it becomes a health issue.

Then after the tragic Las Vegas shootings, Congress is contemplating tougher gun control laws. Criminals don’t shop at gun stores to purchase a weapon; honest law-abiding people do. There is no law we can pass that will stop someone from repeating what just happened. Almost everyone is entitled to buy a gun, if they do it before they break any laws. People are not born killers, but a law will not stop someone from killing if he is willing to die in the act. All gun laws do is process people into the jail system after they have fired their weapon (if they do not take their own life). Laws do not prevent bad behavior, they only punish it.

With these two examples, you might arrive at the conclusion; Congress believes that there is an obvious legislative solution to all of our problems. Of course, some problems solve themselves. 20 trillion dollars of national debt kind of explains why cigarettes went from 25 cents a pack to $10 dollars.

“Give the rich a tax break,” sets the Democrats ballistic. The bleeding hearts think the rich are obligated to foot the bill. At the same time, I haven’t picked up a newspaper reporting that someone in this country starved to death for any reason. I would bet that more than half of the people in this country on food stamps are severely overweight. Food stamps offer people the cell phone and cable tv option. But I digress.

Congress-i-anal stupidly assumes that low income people will spend their food stamp allotment and other monies on their kids. Not quite. But when anyone wants to change a program, it is pointed out that it is the kids that will lose out. The kids are used to earn more government handouts and believe me, the kids are the last ones to receive any of the trickle down from this. A 12 pack and a pack of cigarettes is $28.00 and the kids don’t get to drink the beer or smoke the cigarettes. They grow up eating macaroni and cheese with an occasional hot dog and some Kool aid. As a kid, I knew some of these kids, they would marvel at our refrigerator when they came over, it had food in it!

Reality is out there, it just depends on how your mind colors the pictures. Government should not be there to fix our problems, but rather to pay the bills.

California is the land of half million-dollar homes, and a climate that lends itself to the homeless on a $3,600 a year budget. Food stamps, a cell phone and a surf board, what a life!

Governor Jerry “Moon Beam” Brown will probably even get them registered to vote to boot. And then there is marijuana legalization. That old biblical story of Sodom and Gomorrah comes to mind. The Democrats have started a party that even Harvey Weinstein might want to attend/fund.

Monday, October 02, 2017

Restaurant Menu Prices 1938

Here is a reprint from four years ago for some of you that might have missed it. This was during the Great Depression that was already into its 10th year.

I was searching through some picture albums of my parents from way back and ran into some restaurant menus  from the depression era of late 1930's.. The first 3 pictures are from the Manhattan  Restaurant



 

The Second menu (three pictures) is on the Union Pacific Railroad from 1937 somewhere in Wyoming.






This last menu is from the Hotel Windermere in Chicago 1937.


Double click on the images to see what the prices were back then.   Did you notice that the Manhattan offered a broiled (Whole) lobster for 65 cents?  In today's world, you'd be lucky to get half a lobster for $30.  Bear in mind, the people that read these menus in real time are probably dead by now.

The pay raise that everyone gets each year because of inflation is just an allusion. Look around, the new hires are starting out a few pennies less than what the seasoned workers are making.  The neat thing about inflation is that Congress doesn't have to raise the tax rates, you earn more, you pay more.  That's the real difference between the Democrats and Republicans; print as you go verses pay as you go.

The real odd thing is that the average person does not connect the dots. The relationship between government spending and inflation does not exist. Rumor has it, we've always had inflation-- I guess we're supposed to get used to it.  My wife bought a new battery and asked me to guess how much she paid for it, and I said $40.  Her answer; "That's the price you would have paid 20 years ago, the battery was $100."

Let's see,(from top menu third pic red part) I'll have the broiled lobster with coffee and a slice of cake--that's about 85 cents total, plus 15 cents for a tip.  The trouble is, 76 years of inflation have raised the prices a tad.

Saturday, September 30, 2017

Taxing the Rich

The Democrats always cry tax the rich. Think about it for a minute. Say you have 20 million in the bank. That qualifies you as rich. Assume you have already paid tax on the accumulated 20 million, you leave it in a shoebox, it cannot be taxed again. However, at the current interest rates, 1.5%, you will get about 300,000 in interest over a year. This is taxable. At 33% tax rate, the person owes 100K in taxes if he isn’t in a rest home.

From a realistic point of view, the rich are not stupid enough to sit idly by while their bank accounts are milked, they are the ones already paying about 80 percent of the taxes. Irritatingly enough is the fact that 50 percent of the population pays no income taxes at all--- because “they don’t make enough money.”

The misleading statement that gets me from politicians is: “We do not need to give the rich a tax cut.” Where is the logic in this? Non-productivity is rewarded with no taxes and excess productivity is rewarded with more taxes. Kind of smacks of socialism. The guy who holds two jobs and works 16 hours a day is taxed at a higher rate than the guy who works the same job eight hours a day.

Poor people are entitled to more benefit than the middle class because they are poor. And if you are a minority, these benefits are god given rights. And guess what, if you are here illegally, you and your kids are entitled to benefits that I as a taxpayer have to pay for.

The voter cannot distinguish between the rich and the high-income earner. They think they are one and the same. These high-income wage earners are sports players, owners, doctors, Singers, various stage artists. So, tax the rich? What does that mean? If you earn a million dollars or more and get a W-2 form, they are going to tax the hell out of you. Of course, if you are a small business, you write your own W-2. Neat huh?

A doctor might form an LLC (limited liability corporation) and have his earnings dropped into that, and pays him\herself 30k a year. Naturally, the LLC picks up the mortgage payment on their home. So, they pay taxes on 30K. Not bad.

What we really need to look at, is the fact that the government doesn’t get a true estimate of earnings when the employer is the owner of the business. Look to Greece where there was a pool tax and only 5% of the population reported owning a pool, when the correct percentage was 95%.

What’s really happening, Congress is printing billions of dollars to pay for programs that there are no funds to pay for. Taxes collected verse tax money spent has no real correlation to reality.

The real question to ask, if taxing the rich is so successful, how come the national debt is now 20 trillion dollars? At what point does the debt amount become absurd? The answer to consider is that this borrowed money came from real people like you and me. We spent 40-hour work weeks saving for that rainy day and future retirement. And the government borrowed the money. The return of the physical paper money is not in question. What it might buy in the future, is what you need to consider.

Just a reminder, The Great Depression is now in its 11th year.

Monday, August 21, 2017

The Silence before the Collapse

Federal Reserve debt 4.5 trillion, national debt 21 trillion. 2.7 trillion in government bonds to Social Security. Figure about 30 trillion the government has borrowed and issued paper for. Then spent it.

Imagine that you have 10 billion in the bank. What you need to realize is that you have no way of realistically spending it. So, in this case, we have a person well off, that doesn’t need the extra dollars in his account. From an economic perspective, the money does not exist, because there is no opportunity for the owner to spend it, the sum is so large.

This 10 billion cash savings from one person represents a small portion the future buying power of deferred consumption. Count the total amount of funds involved for all the rich, the amount could be quite substantial. Since the inclination to spend it is absent, inflation remains low and plenty of product remains on the market. The extremely rich are holding on to dead money that will never enter the financial system to generate inflation. So, the government is happy with the rich getting richer, no appreciable inflation for just that reason.

Naturally the drive to get richer involves the rich as a group to suck more money into their grasps. The government loves the idea. A real millionaire in 1960 could buy a house and a car every year on the interests of 30,000 generated a year. In today’s market, 10 million dollars in the bank might generate 30,000 a year and might buy half a luxury car. To be wealthy today, you need to be a billionaire. Cigarettes have gone from 22 cents a pack in 1964 to 100 dollars a carton today.

This pretty much explains why schools don’t offer much education that revolves around the concept of inflation. Even if they did, it would do no good. Everything an 18-year-old wants to buy has always been that price. They have no historic memory of price. The funny thing is, for the super-rich, it is the same concept. Even though one zero drops off of their buying power because of inflation, they don’t see it. But in reality, the 10 billion has lost 90 percent of its buying power over the last 20-year period.

The cumulative savings in this country for retirement have increased dramatically over the last 10 years. An awful lot of individuals realize that they didn’t save enough to retire comfortably and are saving a lot more. They are now working longer to make up the difference. This too, decreases consumption and keeps inflation lower that it should be.

Some people argue that this game can go on forever. And I do not think it can. From 1960 to 1990 we lost a zero on buying power vs money in the bank. Then we lost another zero from 1990 to 2010. The thing to notice is that the gaps are getting shorter in time. I think it foolish to say that the next zero drops off in 2020. The progression of 30 years to 20 years to 10 years makes too many assumptions.

Once the rich realize that they are losing a zero (90% of their purchasing power) on their net worth over a 10-year timeline, there will be a very significant switch in asset allocation.

The investment model has to change. Compound interest is no longer the 8th wonder of the world. The rule of 72 where you divide your interest rate at the bank into 72 gives you the time it takes to double your savings. That kind of sucks when one into 72, returns 72 years. Compound interest at that interest rate will not make you rich.

So, with today’s back of the envelope calculation, 100,000 in the bank for 10 years will lose one zero in buying power. 10 years from now, you’ll have the purchasing power of $10,000 to $20,000. You are looking at 9 percent inflation per year. In reality, the bank should be paying the inflation rate plus 2.5 percent on savings.

You might disagree with everything above, but there are two things we can agree on. If there was a shortage of funds to borrow, interest rates would have to rise. And you cannot force people to borrow money. What you can conclude from that is there is a hell of a lot of dollars looking for an investment and surprisingly they are satisfied with the interest rate offered. Economically that puzzles me.

The other factor that bothers me is the spread between junk bonds and Treasury’s. Its 4 percent. It portends that every loan transaction is a viable and fungible event with a very high bond rating. More than likely, an older person is looking for the highest rate of return to keep from exhausting his retirement fund. The poor guy probably thinks triple D is like a bra size, very desirable. The small spread implies that there is very little risk in the market.

We are at a point where we have tremendous wealth and tremendous debt and it is kind of a zero-sum game. People are looking for a stock market crash, but it could be different this time, it could be an electronic credit and debit card crash that the structured internet cannot handle.

This could play out in the coming months. October is the month to watch, that's where the action has been in the past.


Friday, July 07, 2017

More Taxes Create Problems

Tax cuts for the Rich and 20 million people will lose their health care coverage. The headline kind of makes you wonder. If they repeal Obamacare, this is the declared outcome.

For some reason, it doesn’t hold water. A tax cut for the rich means they’re going to be taxed at a lower rate. How can 20 million people lose a benefit if they paid for it? If they didn’t pay for it, now that’s a different story.

When you lose a free government benefit, a taxpayer had to be paying for it. So, giving the rich a tax break limits the amount of largess the government has to spend on those who are broke. I get upset when I realize that food stamps allow a family the ability to have a cell phone and cable TV. Of course, you don’t see it from the kid’s side, “milk toast for breakfast and hot dogs and macaroni and cheese for dinner” every day until you graduate high school or run away from home. Many states have renewed the work mandate for food stamps that Obama ignored, and it looks like there has been a 50 % drop in food stamp applicants.

Notice how there is contempt projected from our Congressmen for giving the rich a tax break and how there is the implied request for sympathy for people who stand to lose their coverage. Your Congressmen mentally weights the issue and comes to the conclusion, “By God I want to get reelected!” and this should do it.

A new mind set is in the mix. The one issue voter. Guns, gay rights, black lives matter, abortion, save the earth, health care, etc. are gone. The Christian religion appears to be the new touchstone of American politics.

In the last election, the tables were turned upside down. The rich were represented by the Democrats as were the poor. Kind of a confusing mix. Big business and socialism don’t mix. On the other hand, the Republicans lost the Rich and gained the middle-class voter who felt that they were being neglected because of all of the special interest groups. I don’t think that it will be politically incorrect to wish someone a “Merry Christmas” this year.

The big thing to notice that just happened is the passage of the Illinois State budget over the governor’s veto. The state will increase the state tax rate about 32%. Another way of stating it, is that the present rate for individuals rises from 3.75% to 4.95% and businesses rise from 5.25% to 7%. The problem here is that you will be paying more and receiving even less in benefits than before. This is what happened during the great depression. States and Municipalities raised taxes expecting to increase their tax revenues. The net result, tax receipts declined, it was the exact opposite of what the legislators had expected. People voted with their feet and moved.
If you go back to President Eisenhower, we had a tax rate on the very rich of about 80% and it generated very little tax revenue. Rich people then were not stupid, they bought stocks and paid 15 percent in capital gain taxes.

In today’s world, governments need to live on more realistic budgets and that is just not happening. Reality is starting to settle in. When your police force or fire department pull up for gas in Illinois, it is cash on the barrel head no state credit cards accepted.

So here is what we can conclude. 20 million people on free health insurance is not even feasible in any government budget. The assumption that raising taxes will increase the amount of tax collected is false. The opposite is more likely.

The neat thing about states that run out of money is that there are no bankruptcy laws to expunge the debt. States can’t file for bankruptcy so you could have a long wait, to get paid. I believe that Missouri just recently paid off a delinquent state bond issued 120 years ago.

Where to from here? It is kind of one of those questions without an answer. We borrowed too much and have no way to pay it back. The 1964 dollar has gone to a dime, inflation wise. I guess the 2017 dollar will also go to a dime and if my math is right, that’s a 1964 penny.

“A penny for your thoughts.”

Saturday, June 17, 2017

Press Politics

I’ve been watching the news since the Trump election and marvel over all the leaks. It looks like anyone in Washington that says something, is taped. Every cell phone is monitored. Every foreign diplomat meeting is recorded. That doesn’t bother me much, but the leaking of what was said, violates all sorts of trusts we build up with other nations.

The only thing I can conclude, is that you say nothing, and use no electronic devices, while in Washington D.C. Under no circumstances, discuss anything in the White House, unless you want it in the paper the next day. That is a pretty sorry state of affairs.

Lately, a lot of the newspapers have been writing news citing anonymous sources. Their sources are rather suspect and or non-existent. Today I was reading the morning paper about the Muller Inquiry. The paper quoted said “Five people briefed on the requests, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to discuss the matter publicly,”—bla bla bla. Five anonymous people makes the newspaper’s story line creditable? Let me guess 6 people in the room and Trump is one of them.

On this investigation of the Russians and Trump by a privately appointed prosecutor, where are the supporting leaked documents? We know when the conversations occurred and with whom. It’s got to be either the CIA, NSA or the FBI that has the document. It has already been released to the press, why can’t it be subpoenaed? Irritatingly, no documents have been produced. I would figure that even if there was nothing indicating a crime, the document should have a physical presence as the newspapers claim.

It’s kind of tragic when the news is reduced to fictional anonymous sources. It kind of remind me of the Orson Wells broadcast of years back. Here is a quote from WWW.smithsonianmag.com

On Halloween morning, 1938, Orson Welles awoke to find himself the most talked about man in America. The night before, Welles and his Mercury Theatre on the Air had performed a radio adaptation of H.G. Wells’s The War of the Worlds, converting the 40-year-old novel into fake news bulletins describing a Martian invasion of New Jersey. Some listeners mistook those bulletins for the real thing, and their anxious phone calls to police, newspaper offices, and radio stations convinced many journalists that the show had caused nationwide hysteria. By the next morning, the 23-year-old Welles’s face and name were on the front pages of newspapers coast-to-coast, along with headlines about the mass panic his CBS broadcast had allegedly inspired.
What bothers me, is that an awful lot of people believe whatever they see in print or on TV. I was a long-time subscriber of “The Economist.” During the election, the magazine was a political pulpit for Hillary Clinton. I didn’t agree with their political message, but it was only then, I realized this was not a magazine dealing with economics. They lost a subscriber.

It appears that the news organizations are trying to bend the news with a definite political slant. It makes no sense; the election is over. I can only guess that their subscriber base is mostly Democrats and/or the papers are owned by Democrats. In the past, newspapers were not dumb enough to enter into the political arena for one reason, it would alienate half of their subscriber base. Your subscriber base determines how much you can charge advertisers.

I am not sure where the level-headed people go from here. Can you selectively read or view what you deem non-political in nature, without developing a bias? I was watching FOX news the other night and a 27 story building was on fire. What do they do? They split the screen, the fire on the left, the program on the right and went on with their political discussion.

I guess that no one told the Democrats that they lost the election. When you lose an election, you hand the reigns over to the other party, and it doesn’t look like they are doing that. It kind of looks like the Democrats are searching for that [White/Black/Asian/Hispanic/GLBT] (pic one) knight in shining armor to come and rescue their country from the Evil Republicans. The grim reality, no more free stuff, go out and get a job.

The good thing is, with all of this "political news," no one has to lie about how great the economy is doing.