ALLY FINANCIAL - ORIGINALLY POSTED 2/24/12

You think we would have learned our lesson.  Every time I turned around I saw this ad for Ally Bank promising consumers all kinds of wonderful benefits.  Upon a quick look it turned out that Ally was nothing more than part of the whole Obama thoughtless financing of questionable companies.  I now read that Ally Financial is hiring a turnaround specialist, probably at huge fees.

Did you ever notice all the ads on TV with disclaimers of one sort or another in letters that are so small they can hardly be seen and certainly can't be read?  So much for change and transparency under this Presidential Administration.  

ANTI-GROWTH POLICY...DESTRUCTIVE...SEQUESTER MEANINGLESS(ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED 7/11/11)

There is so much talk about the deficit. Most of it is just plain wrong.

The deficits the Federal government was having almost every year going back to 1975 were generally manageable. Unfortunately, between 2008 and 2009 the federal income tax receipts dropped $400 Billion dollars. As a response, spending increased almost $1 Trillion dollars in order to stop a slide into depression. The policy has succeeded. Unfortunately the total deficit then became $1.4 Trillion dollars. There really wasn’t a significant deficit problem until the housing and financial crisis of 2008. That’s the first matter.

The second matter is all the talk about Medicare and Medicaid is total nonsense. The facts are that about 50 percent of all medical care expenses go to people 65 and over. EITHER WE WANT TO TAKE CARE OF THESE PEOPLE OR WE DON’T. Furthermore, most of the payments to take care of these people 65 and over go to pay for labor. Do you really think that labor costs are not going to rise and do you also think we aren’t going to take care of the people 65 and over? Well we are going to take care of the people 65 and over and labor costs are not really going to decline.

On the Medicaid end with younger people we take care of the indigent and the disabled. Yes, there are some crooks and cheats. AGAIN THE QUESTION IS DO WE AS A NATION WANT TO TAKE CARE OF THE INDIGENT AND DISABLED THAT ARE NOT CROOKS AND CHEATS OR DON'T WE? Or do we just want to tighten the procedures for those that really need help.

I don’t know what the “Tea Party” stands for and I’m basically a Republican. Unless you want Disney running our national parks and want to rely on Boeing to run the NASA program we better face up to the fact that government is here to stay. Most of the expenses are fixed and no matter what your political viewpoint, probably necessary.

The problem is we are destructive of our own national wealth. We let corporate executives who cheat assume practically no liability for mismanagement. We let our unions destroy major industries by not finding a way to adjust wages when competitive forces require it.

There is only one way out of this. Increase corporate and personal tax receipts by growth and incentive not by creating a “rich against poor” environment.

SEQUESTER - FISCAL CLIFF...IT'S ALL THE SAME (ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED 11/30/12)

Economic policy is geared towards controlling inflation during strong periods and controlling unemployment during weak periods.

The current "mania" over the fiscal cliff is a equivalent to the "mania" that occurred during the housing crisis.

It became the common wisdom and popular delusion that the price of residential real estate would rise in a straight line forever.  Obviously this was a delusion.  The delusion became so strong that people were allowed to borrow from banks the delusional paper profits that existed on their homes.  There was no regard for whether the personal income of the borrowers was rising enough to ever pay back the exaggerated mortgages.

Somehow or other a delusion has been created that it's okay to cut back on government deficits even when there is significant slack in the economy, little or no inflation, and unemployment well above the reported figures.

Therefore the politicians risk accepting an obviously incorrect economic policy for the current environment.  They have convinced a significant percentage of the population that the deficit is bad, no matter what economic conditions call for.  This is the same as being convinced that the price of houses would rise rapidly forever.

The Republican line of focusing on the deficit is the wrong policy at the moment.  Borrowing against an inflated house, at the wrong time, is the same as focusing on the deficit control at the wrong time.

There is a second delusional element that has come into the mainstream at exactly the wrong time. This combines with delusion number one, deficit reduction 2013.  Attempting to raise taxes for anyone while the economy is in a marginal state, is incorrect economic policy, as bad or worse than the prior discussion on deficit control.

We now face a government, on both sides, that have dug themselves into policies that are similar to the loaning against hyper inflated houses with risks that are clearly unknown.  Federal taxes have to be  paid by everyone and the government has to lead the way dynamically to modernize this country.  

HOUSING BUBBLE VS. GOLD BUBBLE (ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED SEPTEMBER 2010)

Two sides to gold - bullish and bearish - for those of us that still own gold it's important to be aware of both. You then stake the claim and hope you are right...

A friend of mine bought a home for $300,000 ten years ago. By 2007, the price of similar homes in their neighborhood had tripled in value.

During the period when the price of housing was rising so rapidly, banks were criticized for collecting deposits in one impoverished area of the country and lending it out in other more prosperous regions. The quality of the loans was not a factor, the equitable distribution of loans seemed more important. People all over the country were ecstatic over their increase of wealth through home ownership.

The government, in spite of everything, had created Fannie Mae, Freddy Mac and everything possible to increase home ownership. Practically no one was telling homeowners to liquidate their homes. Construction of homes was booming, millions of people were employed in the sector and no one dared to stop this lucrative bubble.

When the house I mentioned above was purchased in 1999, it would have taken approximately 1000 ounces of gold to pay for the home. Today, it would take only 250 ounces of gold to buy the same $300,000 house. Housing prices have “crashed” and gold has soared. In effect, gold has gone from $350 per ounce in 1999 to $1300 per ounce today.

Gold is basically a useless commodity. The price is a “bubble” that may sustain itself forever and ever, but it is a bubble. You can’t eat gold, it’s hard to carry, it earns you no money and its industrial uses are limited. Again, no one dares to tell people to sell their gold even though you can now buy it in vending machines. No one would even think of telling the mining industry to stop the production of gold, for fear of destroying yet another industry that is the primary source of employment and revenues in many struggling countries. I think we are all aware of the macro reasons that are being suggested to support current gold prices.

Keynes said that in the end investing is nothing more than a game of musical chairs and that when the music stops; we don’t want to be the ones without a chair. We still own gold. The late removal of hedges should finally allow the gold mining companies to achieve significant earnings increases. When interest rates normalize, gold prices will fall substantially. In the meantime, the music continues to play...Stay tuned.

DELL...A CARD FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE DECK?

In my 55 years in the investment business I would be hard pressed find a bigger boondoggle than the Dell situation.  Dell should be capable of paying shareholders a $5 dividend from their excess cash and earning power.  That action would probably reduce the price of Dell's stock to about $8 a share.

The $8 a share stock would be earning somewhere around $1.30 to $1.60 a share. This would enable them to pay as much .70 or .80 cents a share annual dividend, yielding close to 10%.

Whatever savings Mr. Dell plans to make after the company is private would be welcomed by shareholders while it is public and should add further to earnings.

The idea that those actions can't be taken because Dell is a  public company borders on the absurd, and seems to be an attempt to confuse smaller shareholders.

Obviously there are risks in the fundamentals of the PC industry, but do not deceive yourself.  It is totally illogical to think that Mr. Dell would put his shares into the new company plus almost 1 billion dollars on top of the leverage created, if he didn't expect a hefty return.

Give us a break Mr. Dell...investors aren't that stupid.

US GOVERNMENT VS. STANDARD AND POORS...

The implications of the government lawsuit against Standard and Poors will have ramifications far beyond the simple claims which are being made.  Over time, this case will rock the Democratic party to its core and bring the entire process of government under a black dark cloud.  Stay tuned...

PAY BACK TIME FOR THE STANDARD AND POORS RATING AGENCY...(ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED JUNE 2012)

There can be no doubt that Franklin Roosevelt was an immensely impressive human being.  His ability to bring an extremely divided nation through the depression years and through a devastating World War II is beyond the conceptual powers of most of us mortals.  He was a great man whether you believed in some of his policies or not. 
Many of his economic views were concerned with what human beings were "entitled" to.  Entitlement had to be paid for.  An elaborate system of taxation on almost every level of society was put into place.  Medicare tax, Medicaid tax, Social Security Tax, Property Tax...TAX,TAX, TAX.

Along the way a lot of little things happened.  One of those little things was the government approving three bond rating services, Standard and Poors, Moodys and Fitch.

Here is the point.  Over the years, common sense would tell you that the agencies saw the eroding financial stability of many states, cities, etc.  It became absolutely impossible for the agencies to lower the ratings.  It was tacitly understood that the taxing power of municipalities would cover the revenue needs of these entities.  It didn't matter if the quality of the revenue streams were eroding and that the demands of labor, supported by liberal politicians, was raising costs as the ability to tax was diminishing. 

The agencies had to know that if they lowered ratings, in accordance with the financial flows of the municipal agencies, the interest cost of raising money would have been higher and higher.  So the concept was created that it didn't matter if the financial stability of municipalities was eroding because in the end, the federal government would bail out the municipalities.  Therefore, why lower the municipality ratings as they were as good as the federal government was conceptually.  Arguably, even though municipalities were separate from the federal government for financing, that was really a mirage.  The rating agencies understood it, the municipalities understood it, and the federal government understood it.  Above all else, labor unions understood it so why not just unionize the government workforce and in the end the federal government will be responsible.

Along comes the housing crises of 2008 and the federal government starts to look for scape goats and finds that the rating agencies seem to have overrated lots of municipal securities. 

Okay, so then some congressional committee starts to investigate the rating agencies for incompetence. This looks good to the public and guess what...the rating agencies say "Wait a minute...they are blaming us for helping them keep their interest costs down.  We just did what they wanted us to do." Okay what to do.  Guess what. The rating agencies decide to go honest. They reduce the credit rating of the federal government for the first time ever.  In effect they were saying as in a famous Jack Nicholson movie, "You don't want to hear the truth. You can't take it." 

The only saving grace is that as things stands today, the federal government can print money forever.  Consequently, it can pay its bills in dollars that are worth something, be they municipal or federal obligations. 

People in the government are always changing, no one has to take responsibility,  and they can take all their time blaming everyone else when something goes wrong.

There is no doubt Roosevelt was a great man.  But to this day the crash of colliding viewpoints hasn't figured out how to truly raise the standard of living.

More on this subject will follow...

OPPORTUNITY- YES EASY- NO (ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED IN DECEMBER 2010)

Most professional investors use pretty much the same approach to investing assets. They try to ignore the trend of the market, don’t waste their time on economic forecasts and overweight a sector, industry or company plus or minus a few percentage points.
It’s been well shown by the performance of index funds that outperforming the markets, year in and year out, is one heck of a difficult task.

Without going into detail, I’ll summarize the market in one quick sentence. There is ample opportunity to win if you are either smart or lucky. The key word is opportunity.

Over the years I have successfully invested my own money by buying securities, both for trading and investing. I’m happy to share with you, for whatever it’s worth, some of my more rudimentary thoughts about making money.

1. KNOW YOUR RISK LEVEL

2. KNOW IF IT’S JUST A GAMBLE

3. NOT BELIEVING THE TREND OF CURRENT EARNINGS PER SHARE IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN VALUE

4. NOT BEING ABLE TO COMPARE FEELINGS OF VALUE VS. FEELINGS OF THE CHART

5. POSITIONS CAN BE SMALL

6. BUILD ON SUCCESS

7. ONLY DO WHAT YOU THINK IS RIGHT

8. NOT ACTING ON A THOUGHT WHEN YOU HAVE IT

9. LACK OF PATIENCE

10. NOT WAITING FOR A THOUGHT TO COME

11. ACT ON FEELINGS WHEN YOU GET THEM

12. KNOW WHY YOU ARE DOING SOMETHING

13. GAMBLE A BIT MORE

14. LOOK AT ALL DIFFERENT CHARTS

15. CORRECT MISTAKES – RIGHT OR WRONG

16. WORK A LITTLE HARDER ON THE FACTS

17. YOU MUST ACT IN ORDER TO SUCCEED

18. IF YOU CAN, RATE YOUR FEELINGS – WEAK, MEDIUM, STRONG

19. IF THINGS DON’T GO WELL, WRITE DOWN WHY NOT

20. VALUE IS NOT THE STORY, TREND AND DIRECTION OF EARNINGS IS

21. WHEN THE CHARTS SEEM TO READ A DIFFERENT STORY FOLLOW THE ONE WHICH IS MOST LONG TERM
22. YOU DON’T HAVE TO SELL THE WHOLE POSITION

23. SMALL GAINS DON’T MAKE YOU RICH

24. WHEN YOU MAKE A LOT OF MONEY TOO FAST, TAKE PROFITS

25. WHEN A COMPANY MAKES THEIR NUMBERS AND ACHIEVES THEIR GOALS YOU REWARD THEM BY STAYING BY THEIR SIDE, WHEN THEY FAIL YOU LESSEN POSITION
26. TRIPLING YOUR MONEY MEANS NOTHING IF IT'S ONLY SMALL PERCENTAGE OF YOUR ASSETS
27. ONLY TOTAL RETURN COUNTS

AUTHORITY WITHOUT RESPONSIBILITY...

Wall Street money managers report their performance regularly.  Public companies report their performance regularly.  Airlines file endless reports on maintenance and safety.  The EPA monitors pollution standards.  The Nuclear regulatory board studies the performance of nuclear reactors.

Isn't it time to study the performance of welfare recipients.  Let the government go back five, ten, fifteen and twenty years.  Let it then compile who the recipients were and where they are in life now.  What is their income, what is their education level, etc.

Just as so many of us are monitored by form or another of performance standards, so should be the welfare system.

After the welfare statistics are compiled, a real case for the long term value of government welfare will begin to emerge.

So many studies have been done on the outcome of high level college educations.  It would be beneficial to the country to do the same type of studies on the other end of the spectrum.  Then if the current system isn't producing at least average results newer methods should be examined.

THE FISCAL CLIFF IS NOT THE CIVIL WAR....

During the Civil War there were less than 30 million people in the Country.  During the Civil War there were over one million dead and wounded.  Unbelievably this would be the equivalent of over 10 million on today's 300 million plus population.  Imagine the enormity and agony of that War.

If you saw the movie "Lincoln" there was a scene in which Lincoln was given the opportunity by the Confederacy to end the War.  The political and emotional pressure was on Lincoln to end the bloodshed without a resolution of the slavery issue and the maintenance of the United States as a union without slavery.

Lincoln believed the issue of the Union and slavery and the thirteenth amendment were more important than the immediate cessation of hostilities.  This was the hierarchy of Lincoln's convictions.  The death toll was put aside until the surrender of Lee at the Battle of Appomattox.

This is not a blog about the Civil War, Lincoln's credos, or the rightness or wrongness of Presidential convictions.  It is just about what issues Presidents are willing to draw the line on and stake their place in history upon.

"Today we are faced" with problems of much less severity than what would have been the equivalent of 10 million casualties today.

We are faced with something that has become known as the fiscal cliff, the fiscal war if you will.  I searched the Internet and had difficulty finding who invented the term fiscal cliff.  There is no cliff and both the tax increases proposed and spending allusions are not significant in any case.  The spending proposals are spread over so many years that absolutely no one knows if they will have any impact at all.  The idea that a tax increase on the top earners will help economic activity is one hundred percent false.  For every dollar that is taxed away from anyone, rich or whatever, they have one dollar less to spend on food, clothing and everything else.

During the Civil War Lincoln was fighting for the Union and the dignity of all human beings.  The position of the Republican party to not raise taxes is strictly a question of who gets to spend the increased taxes, the persons that made the money or the politicians.

Unfortunately the social desire by some for more and more so called safety nets will ultimately make it impossible for safety nets to be paid for at all.

President Obama knows all the above.  In the end will he make choices that actually lead us to an increased standard of living or will he sacrifice results for politics?  The exact opposite of Lincoln.  

INSIDE INFORMATION OR GOOD RESEARCH METHODS...

Grab the phone.  You grab the other phone.  You get that one.  Syntex collapsed 50% in a short period of time due to rumors of cancer being caused by their birth control pill.  On the phone was three doctors.  How many of your patients are getting cancer we asked.  All three doctors didn't seem to know what we were talking about since none of their patients were getting cancer.  They further stated they were just doing some preliminary tests and if there are crazy rumors circulating, they didn't know anything about it.

Our brokers had been recommending Syntex to clients.  We were in a state of shock as the stock collapsed and we put out the word "It seems that the Syntex rumors may be false - we are going to bet that they are but there are no guarantees.  We are going to buy more but that's all we can tell you".

Did we use inside information?  In today's world, some government officials would think we did.  But what in the world is research if you don't try to learn more about the companies you are interested in than other people have learned about the same company?  How do you draw the line between thorough aggressive research and guaranteed inside information?   I am absolutely certain that more so called "hot" stories both negative and positive, are right as often as they are wrong.

The SEC is busy indicting specific individuals for alleged use of inside information.  That might be a good idea or a bad idea, but to me it makes very little sense.  For every investor that wins with an inside tip one loses - the net effect on the market is really zero.

Why doesn't the SEC randomly pick 25 investigators.  Then pick 25 brokerage offices around the country.  Then subpoena the records of 10 brokers in each brokerage firm they select.  Then call each of the selected brokers into a room and ask them what they know about the companies that they had been recommending to their clients.  Having done this in my own mysterious way in the past, I am certain they would discover that most brokers had little to any specific knowledge on the companies they were recommending.

Now we have cases where money managers, who are paid a lot of money, break their backs trying to ferret out information for their clients so that they have a chance of achieving a positive return on their investments.  If inside information was of any particular value, there would be all sorts of money managers achieving returns far in excess of the overall averages.  If the government wants to claim that the only thing money managers should do is read public reports, then there really won't be any need for research at all. Any investor could attempt to ferret out the same information as the money manager.

I guess we will get to the point where someone invents something and is required to expose their invention to the marketplace before they even make the product.  Some investigating agency could claim they had "inside invention" because the inventor spoke to a scientist, who was sitting in his rowboat in Fiji and mentioned a molecule he felt may have some promise, and the inventor used the molecule.

If Jim Cramer gets some information from somewhere and recommends it on his program, and I don't happen to watch his show because I don't subscribe to his station, did his viewers have inside information compared to me?  There is a reason why our standard of living doesn't increase anymore.  That's why sunshine turns into stormy days.

A PARTICULAR MONEY MANAGER TOOK A LARGE STAKE IN THIS COMPANY KNOWING THEY WERE GOING TO THE MANAGEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF INCREASING SHAREHOLDER VALUE.  THE  INVESTORS WHO SOLD THEIR SHARES TO THE MONEY MANAGER DID NOT HAVE THIS INFORMATION WHEN THEY SOLD THEIR SHARES.  THAT'S A CLEAR CUT EXAMPLE OF INSIDE INFORMATION THAT GOES TOTALLY UNNOTICED BY THE INEXPERIENCED PEOPLE, WITH LITTLE INVESTMENT BACKGROUND, WHO HAVE BEEN AND ARE NOW INVOLVED AT THE SEC.  

WILL WALMART BECOME THE NEXT TWINKIES?

You can talk all you want about the give and take among the various entities that comprise the economy.

But as we ponder today's headlines one that would seem worthwhile to me is "Will Walmart become the next Twinkies?"  We have written before about how the inflexibility of union attitudes has resulted in the decline of a number of major industries from airlines, to textiles, to steel, to aluminum, to the post office, to automobile makers, etc.

Here is an approximate set of facts that never appears in the mainstream media, probably because it's above the analytical capability of most media personnel.  Walmart did approximately $450 billion dollars of sales in it's latest reported year.  Since there are approximately 3.4 billion shares outstanding, each shareholder was entitled to approximately $132 a share of sales for each share that is outstanding.

There is a second part.  Walmart had to pay for the items that it sold in its stores and then pay it's almost 2 million employees for all the things they do to run the business.  Those cash costs amounted to $423 billion or 94% of the $450 billion dollars of sales, and on a per share basis $124 of the $132 per share of sales to each shareholder. Consequently each outstanding share of Walmart generated income of $8 a share which theoretically and indirectly were assigned to a shareholder.

Now the third part.  After paying taxes and capital expenditures, each dollar of sales that Walmart generates it EARNS 1.3 PENNIES.  If you added that back into all the expenses, Walmart would have no more money than it currently has to pay for running their business.

We live in a country where the media is allowed to present union leaders and left wing professors claiming that Walmart makes billions of dollars of profits and should give large pay increases to its personnel.  As you can see, from the very simplistic analysis above, their comments are destructive, misleading and incorrect.  One day the management and shareholders will just walk away and say enough is enough.  ONE PENNY, ONE PENNY, ONE PENNY.

If you don't think you are watching the next Twinkies...Wake Up!

THERE IS NO OTHER WAY OUT...

The only thing that has sustained the economy has been the Federal Reserve.  Up until this point, Fed Policy has been as close to 100% correct as it could have possibly been.

The Senate and the House of Representatives have been totally wrong. Until such time as their policies become appropriate, the status of our economic well being will stay diminished.

The only policies that will help us into a healthy and long term uptrend must consist of some of the following.

1. Confidence on the part of the business community.

2. Recognition by the President that you can't pay people in the middle class or any class steadily increasing wages, if corporate profits are not increasing at the same time.

3. The only way to get out of our deficit is to increase individual income, increase corporate profits, increase dividends and increase capital gains. These increases will result in a growing tax base and will allow the deficit to eventually be wiped out.

4. Avoid anything that increases taxes, reduces consumption and weakens confidence, as this will only cause the deficit to grow.

5. Government spending has to be increased by putting into place infrastructure, such as new schools, on a massive basis.

6. Tax deductions have to remain in place as long as they induce economic growth.

7. Tax rates have to stay approximately where they are.

8. The leaders of Congress and the Executive branch must stop creating an environment where "success" is not respected and rewarded but is diminished and punished through taxation and regulations.

If you don't grow the economy steadily there is a smaller and smaller pie to take from, which is an absolute recipe for diminished returns to all segments of society.  

OBAMA'S CLAIM - ONLY FOR THE USA IS 100% POLITICAL

As Gandhi praised Hitler (Blog dated March 2, 2012), along with Joseph Kennedy Sr., Ambassador to Germany and as Chamberlain called for "peace in our time" praising Hitler, and as actors praise Chavez, our President seems to have joined this list of infamous overrated men.

In the newspaper in New York, one of their editorial writers, a master of words, and a confused soul, likens the Prime Minister of Israel to a party boss concerned with his political power.

Think of the absurdity of this writer's views on Israel's Prime Minister.  Almost beyond belief.  On Israel's one side are eighty million people with 40% illiterate and one the lowest per capita incomes in the world, who just elected a radical President concerned about a Palestinian state, when his own country's people suffer immensely.  On its borders to the north lives Hezbollah and Hamas,  terrorist organizations.  Syria, to its west, is filling up with Iranian arms and terror.  Jordan barely hangs on by its teeth.  Libya is hardly put together.  Iraq is trying but is a mess.  North Korea seems intent on making matters worse. Iran's President sounds like Hitler reincarnated.

This newspaper writer must know that security, which is almost impossible to achieve, is what drives Netanyahu, not some stupid coalition.  That means nothing to him or his party or to Israelis, as should be obvious when anyone weighs the risks of living in Israel.  This famous newspaper editorialist probably is so concerned with his sources of information in the Middle East that he obviously has lost his right to be taken seriously on Israel's security.

As hard as we try to show an even hand in the Middle East, we will unfortunately learn over time that the radicals have their eye on the oil.  Israel cannot sway to the appeasers and weaken its position any further.  If atomic weapons proliferate, how can anyone expect to live in peace.  

OIL IS THE ONLY ISSUE - NOTHING ELSE...(Originally Published 9/14/12)

Look at a desk.  Put a dot on it.  That's the land size of Israel in comparison to the land size of other Middle Eastern countries.  Can you really logically believe that this tiny little place is so repugnant to Muslims just because the inhabitants of Israel are significantly Jewish? Also the Jewish population is Israel is mainly secular, not religious.

The entire issue is over the control of oil.  As long as the United States continues to be so dependent on Middle Eastern oil, Israel will be the scapegoat.

Israel acts as a beacon of protection against the tyrants, terrorists and power seekers who would use oil as the ultimate power source.  It's not Jews that are the problem, it's the ultimate euphoria of being able to have world domination through the oil.  Until we get off the oil addiction, (the sooner the better), there is no hope for real stability, ever, in the Middle East. 

I am reposting a blog that we wrote in 2011 about how to break the oil addiction. 

HAPPY ANNIVERSARY - HAPPY TO BE ALIVE AND WELL! (ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED FEBRUARY 2011)

Sally and I were having dinner with a wealthy acquaintance of mine and was astounded when he proclaimed that "I don't support medical causes, they already get too much money." He knew I had leukemia. What he didn't know was that cancer would soon strike his immediate family. Does he still feel the same way?
I have now had cancer for ten years. It's called CLL, Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia. It is an incurable disease. Many people die from it and some people live a long time with it. Your prognosis is based to a great extent on the makeup of your DNA and the quality of medical care you can get.
If I would have listened to my original hematology oncologists, when first diagnosed, I would have been gone from this earth a long time ago. I was fortunate enough to seek out one of the very best physicians in this field, Dr. Michael J. Keating of M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. After about four years the cancer advanced to the point where I needed treatment. It was through Dr. Keating and his wonderful staff (especially Alice Lynn) that I received the state of the art chemotherapy treatment, long before it was recognized as the "gold standard treatment" for this disease. Simply put, there was all sorts of recommended treatments across the country, most of which have since been dropped and many of which were being recommended on the Internet.
My knowledge of this disease is extensive and modestly I have been able to point more than a few people in the right direction in order to help them with this disease, CLL.
During my extremely difficult chemotherapy treatments, I was thankful for the medicine created by the biotech industry, without which many cancer deaths would come much sooner.
If I have one piece of advice for dealing with this disease it would be to seek out the best possible medical advice, have a complete modern diagnosis of your blood and make sure you get the latest treatment protocol. Unfortunately there are only about ten world class leukemia treatment centers in our country. Many are really good but only a few are great. Another piece of advice, don't listen and believe too much of what you read on the Internet, much of which is confusing, misleading and written by the wrong people. You only have one chance to fight this, so make it your best chance.
I have been lucky, I'm still alive after ten years, still in great shape and look forward to a long life. It turns out I fought this disease correctly and reaped the benefits. You can live with cancer if you fight it correctly and if you're lucky. You can help others if you learn through the process of taking care of yourself. You can never let the word cancer prevent you from having a positive outlook.
"Money Cures."
http://www.cllglobal.org/

OBAMA'S PREPARED...BUT WILL THE REPUBLICANS BE IN 2012 (ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED 12/7/11)

On December 6, 2011 President Obama gave a brilliant speech in Kansas. He covers alot of territory, mostly economic. Between the lines you can read that the country has not increased the standard of living in a long time. He calls it the problem of the middle class and obviously those below the middle class. He seems to really understand that a combination of factors, from unions, geopolitical forces, greed, over emphasis on financial activities, entitlements and advanced technology have contributed to the lack of increasing living standards. He couches his speech in populist rhetoric but certainly comprehends the big picture better than any other politician I have heard speak on these issues. This makes him tough to beat in the upcoming election.

The magnificent Lincoln/Douglas debates of the 1850s centered on different views about the cohesiveness of the Union and issues pertaining to slavery.

Now we are faced with the Republican Presidential candidates arguing their view of how to get America's economic prosperity returning to preeminence.

Lincoln/Douglas versus Obama and the Republicans. Obama is prepared for the equivalent of the 1850s debate. Let's hope the Republicans can put forth a candidate with the clarity and vision expressed in Obama's Kansas speech.

Here is the link to President Obama's speech. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/12/06/remarks-president-economy-osawatomie-kansas

ROMNEY TOLD THE TRUTH...

Although truth is complicated, it is the essence of our legal system.  You raise your hand and take an oath to tell the truth. 

It takes absolutely no courage on the part of politicians to be pro-abortion.  There are millions of votes involved.  The same is true for a long list of other specialized interest groups.  Certain religious groups vote almost exclusively left or right.  Certain racial groups vote almost exclusively left or right.  The same is true of unions, gun owners and a whole long list of interest groups.  This interest group voting is the way it works in the real world and is very hard to overcome.

Without going into Candidate Romney's motives, it seems to take a certain moral conviction to stand up for what you believe in, rather than what will help you get elected.  The fact is that he spoke the truth when he indicated that a large percentage of the tax payer population do not pay federal income taxes. 

That happens to be true. The question then becomes is this a situation that will, in time, work towards the detriment or the improvement in this close to 50% of the population's standard of life?

In any case, Romney was probably right, a significant portion of those people vote democratic under all conditions.  Such was the stance of my Mother, who I loved dearly...Democrat - 100% of the time.

THE RIOTS HAD NOTHING TO WITH THE FILM...

This is the real story on the Middle East.  The riots from the Middle East are nothing more than a staged operetta. 

They have only one purpose.  The purpose is to take our eye off Iran and their march towards nuclear arms. 

The riots are meant to scare so that no one will dare deal with Iran, since the Middle East and other places will erupt into chaos. 

A RESPONSE TO A THINKER...(Originally Published May 2011)

Thank you for the extremely insightful comments on my recent blog pertaining to oil. Please bear with me as I attempt to frame my answer within the historical context of our nation's history. Bizarre as this may seem, I believe that it is within this story the answer to your questions lie.

After the Revolutionary War a disparate group of states with a very minimal and primitive central government existed. At the constitutional convention there were two primary government theories, that of the Federalists who wanted a strong central government and that of the Anti-Federalists who wanted most powers to lie in the states.

The Anti-Federalists, which enjoyed the oratory excellence of Patrick Henry and George Mason, believed in small changes and that "tweaking" the articles of confederation was all that was needed. It was pretty clear that the general populous of the time, about three million strong, as a majority, felt the same way.

Madison, Hamilton and Washington, a formidable group if there ever was one, believed in a very centralized sovereign government. Anti-Federalist argued that the sovereign central government sounded liked a re-creation of living under the aegis of King George the Third and the British Parliament.

In essence, Madisonian Hamiltonian position was that the articles had to be completely redone. The upcoming constitution could not create a strong nation with just a little fixing here and there of the articles. For whatever reasons, that 1870's period of time had attracted a set of delegates, probably never since duplicated in intellectual content.

When all was said and done, a convoluted constitutional government of Congressional, Senatorial, Judicial, Executive, Electoral and state's rights was embedded in our constitution. It seemed anything but kingly, and in fact was a vast sharing of overlapping powers.

Many, including Madison, came to believe that the great strength of our Republic was set in place by the seeming dilution of powers among many.

I tell you the story for two reasons, one; our response to the oil situation requires the same type of "do over" as our response to the articles of confederation, namely the courage for a new plan . Two; the answers will lie in a series of responses, rather than in one overall response.

A little more necessary review of history is needed before drawing conclusions. Since the birth of the nation, there has been almost two hundred fifty years of all kinds of things occurring. It's everything from the Industrial Revolution, Scientific Revolution, Agricultural Revolution to dealing with foreign powers and everything else. We have progressed, we have had ups and downs, we have brought more to the world than probably any country before us in the shortest possible period of time. For example, we dealt with WWII, in spite of a questionable response to our use of atomic bomb and a questionable response to the Holocaust problem. But even the Founders did not deal with all the issues. It put some aside such as slavery, women's rights, and Indians for another day but it dealt with things. It faced big recalcitrant issues and moved forward.

Along the way this nation has been built by oil. We are a large place, three thousand miles wide and we developed processes that involve the integration and use of this large space by the many. Cars and trucks use most of the oil.

Furthermore, deep in the bowels of the State Department, the CIA and our security apparatus lies a vast network of people and machines dedicated to a world view and hopefully peace.

Besides the potentially millions of people employed in this country at oil related jobs and infrastructure, there are hundreds of millions of Muslims, who one way or another, rely on their future well being from a steady stream of oil income. The shutting down or diminishment of the oil recovery domestically, or the oil power base around the world, would be potentially too catastrophic to face up to.

So what to do......
1. We have to let it be known that we consider the overall oil dilemma, not just the price, to be a crisis at least equal to any other crisis this country has faced.
2. We have to let it be known that all arguments and discussions to alleviate this problem on a permanent basis will be undertaken under all levels of government and society until a constitutional blueprint for the oil crisis has been submitted and accepted.
3. We have to let it be known that all points of view should be put forward during the development of the energy constitution, argued and decided upon and accepted by a majority of the people.
4. We have to let it be known that we will be willing to speak with anyone but will not allow ourselves to live under the constant threat of oil embargoes and constant price threats.
5. We have to let it be known that all hedge funds and speculators should be excluded from this market and no professorial economic or private property arguments will override the need from energy related threats.
6. We have to let it be known that oil producing countries shall not be able to provide gasoline in their nations at close to zero cost while selling oil at many multiples of actual production cost.
7. We have to let it be known that if this is to continue we will begin to demand exorbitant prices for necessary items from oil producing countries and at the same time selling those items in the normal domestic market at normal domestic prices.
8. We have to let it be known that every car in this country will be replaced by at least a one hundred mile per gallon car within at least a five year period whatever the resulting problems bring.
9. We have to let it be known that since cars and trucks are the primary users of oil that all this talk about alternative sources continues to be a deception from current scientific reality. Under existing circumstances oil producing countries will always reduce the price of oil below the cost of developing alternative energy sources whenever they reach a point of real competition.
10. We have to let it be known that we have the back bone to face the dislocations that these steps will cause because not facing them is not an alternative.
11. We have to let it be known that we do whatever it takes to stand up to special interest groups because the national problem requires solving this problem once and for all.
12. We have to let it be known any arguments about the undemocratic nature of the pursuit to solve our energy problems have to be put aside.