Friday, July 31, 2009

Cash For Clunkers

By all measurements, the U.S. government program called "Cash For Clunkers" has been a resounding success. Ever since Barack Obama became the 44th President of the United States, he has search for a way to get American consumers back into the showrooms of nationwide car dealers and finally one of his ideas has paid off big time. Now for the bad news. In less than a week the government allocated $1 billion has been spent, which proves that Congress and President Obama were both behind the eight ball when it comes to understanding how popular this program would be with the American people. Today, Members of Congress are trying to pass legislation which will increase the amount of money that is available for the "Cash For Clunkers" program. Even though it is possible that the $1 billion of government money allocated for this program has already been spent, President Obama said today that anyone who trades in a vehicle that qualifies for the program this weekend will still be eligible to receive a government rebate between $3500 - $4500.

To me, it was refreshing to see the American people respond to this government program because unlike many other government bailouts, which will not work to help improve the U.S. economy - this "Cash For Clunkers" idea is the real deal. For once, rather than sending billions of dollars to Wall Street or Detroit to save big businesses - President Obama and Congress found a way for the government to jump start the U.S. economy, even though they drastically underfunded the idea. In addition to helping the economy, the "Cash For Clunkers" program will help the environment as well by slowing the speed of Climate Change. Most of the effects of Global Warming come from automobiles that are old. These old cars not only pollute more, but their gas mileage ratings are far below current models.

Now that the U.S. government program called "Cash For Clunker" has been proven to be a success, Congress should greatly increase the amount of money available to consumers to keep this program alive. A few Members of Congress are already working on legislation that will increase the amount of government money available for this program by another $2 billion. In my opinion, that amount of money is not enough and it should be increased to $10 billion or more. I still remember back in the days after September 11, 2001 when President George W. Bush worked overtime to keep Americas automobile industry alive when the threat of recession was great. Now, the U.S. government has first hand proof that one of their programs is working and they need to pass additional funding for the "Cash For Clunkers" idea ASAP.

While I am happy that one government program seems to be a huge success, at the same time I am distressed that only $1 billion was approved for this program - while at the same time hundreds of billions of dollars were approved to bailout Wall Street and Detroit. The U.S. government is still filled with high dollar special interest groups that have the ability to get our tax dollars funneled to themselves, while average Americans are thrown spare change. The good news for average Americans is that lobbyist for new car dealers across the country along with other lobbyist for the automobile manufactures love this "Cash For Clunkers" idea as much as consumers do - so it is now more likely than not that much more government money will be set aside to keep this program alive and functioning into the near future.

Title: Cash For Clunkers
Forum | Twitter | Chat | Stats | Privacy Policy | Blogged | Catalog
RSS | Atom | Feedburner | Feedback | Subscribe | Hutch Report

Wednesday, July 29, 2009

Tax The Rich

It may have been true that the rich in America were pampered under the President George W. Bush administration, but now under President Obama his administration wants to pay for all kinds of new social programs, including health care reform, with the help of new taxes on rich Americans. While on some issues I do view President Obama as a moderate politician, when it comes to creating or expanding social programs and paying for them with increased taxes on the richest Americans he is 100% liberal in his thinking. There has always been a big problem when the U.S. government tax the rich too much and that problem is many times they will just move their money and income producing wealth to a more tax friendly nation. That said, I do not believe that as of yet the Obama administration has taxed the rich to the point where most wealthy Americans will be looking for other countries to move their money to, but they could be getting close.

A good real world mainstream example of how excessive taxation can drive away Americans from doing business in a legal and honorable way is how cigarette taxes have been going up over the past few years. Here in Texas and many other states, conservative politicians who have promised to not only not raise property taxes, but to lower them - have found themselves in a big bind financially now that the U.S. economy is in a deep recession. So, with raising property taxes off the table as a means to increase revenue - some state leaders have started funding almost everything at the state level with increased taxes on cigarettes and other tobacco products. Now that cigarettes are selling for about $5 per pack in Texas, some people have been looking for black market sellers of those products because government got out of control and started taxing one group of taxpayers in an unfair way.

If the President Obama administration is not careful their desire to increase social programs in the United States and fund them solely through additional taxes on the rich will have the effect of causing honest taxpaying rich folks to find places to stash their money to avoid paying taxes all together. There was a time in this country when the rich were taxes at a 70% or higher level of income, but during those times mysteriously the super rich did not pay any more real taxes than they do today. Why? It's because they found loopholes, offshore accounts and they created businesses outside the United States to earn their income. It's important to remember that while most of us think some of the practices of the super rich are unfair, in the end - it's those very super rich people that produce jobs and all of us need to keep them here producing those jobs in America.

So, the next time you hear President Obama talk about making the United States a more fair and equal society by creating or expanding social programs and paying for them with yet another tax on the rich, you should frown rather than smile. While it has become political popular to beat up on the super rich because of some of their extravagant spending habits, just like with the people that smoke cigarettes - at some point in time they (the rich) will decide that it's time to go outside the government to get what they need rather than be taxed to death as a hated group of citizens. The last thing any of us really need is for the wealthiest of Americans to give up on the American dream, because if they do they will take their money and intelligence somewhere else and that would be a disaster for us all. From a simple prospective, doesn't it make more sense for the government to just start living within it's means?

Title: Tax The Rich
Forum | Twitter | Chat | Stats | Privacy Policy | Blogged | Catalog
RSS | Atom | Feedburner | Feedback | Subscribe | Hutch Report

Tuesday, July 28, 2009

Gold Teeth Value

As the price of Gold continue to increase, so does the value of the Gold many people have in their mouth like Gold crowns and bridges. For a long time, dentists have used Gold for dental repair and now with the price of Gold at around $1000 per ounce - lets just say that millions of people around the world are walking around with tens of thousands of dollars worth of dental Gold covering their teeth. A long time ago, dentist discovered that Gold was a wonderful metal in the practice of their profession. It is easy to mold and once it is put into place it tends to stay strong and hold it's shape for a very long time. Like millions of other people around the world, I have a Gold bridge in the back of my mouth which became necessary about a decade ago as my back teeth began to wear out as I aged. I still remember being shocked when my dentist told me that Gold bridge would cost $1500 back in the early 1990's.

Thank goodness that I don't need that Gold bridge today because it would likely cost $3000 or more now that the price of Gold has increased so much. Almost everyday, I meet people that have a mouth full of Gold not only in rear bridge work - but more and more people are starting to pick Gold crowns for their front teeth as well. Some of the public's attraction to Gold crowns and bridges goes back to the days when Gold was considered the only real metal of value in the world. Unfortunately with the U.S. dollar and other major world currency's in the cellar when it comes to real world value - the price of Gold has once again soared and nowhere in real life has that increase effected consumers more than in the cost of their dental work. Without even realizing it, many people that have used Gold for crowns and bridge work over the years are now walking around with tens of thousands of dollars worth of that metal in their mouth.

I wonder sometimes if morticians remove the Gold dental work in our mouth when we die? While the thought of a person taking Gold dental work from our mouths when we die might make some people uncomfortable, in reality what would stop a mortician from removing thousands of dollars worth of Gold dental work from a dead body before that persons funeral? Of course, I believe it would be ethically wrong for a mortician to take (steal) Gold dental work from someone without the families permission - my gut feeling tells me that this type of injustice probably happens more often than most people realize. That is why if Gold prices remain high, new laws might be needed to make sure that our loved ones body's are not used as a morticians pawn shop after death.

A few days ago while looking at charts of recent Gold price increases, my mind wondered off into the amount of dental work Gold that many of us have had residing in our mouth for decades. I'm sure most people never think about the value of Gold crowns and bridges that are in their mouth right now, but if the recession of 2009 does not end soon - unfortunately some of that valuable Gold might be removed and sold by desperate people who are running low on money. There are cheaper ways to provide crowns and bridgework in the human body than with Gold and it is possible that some people will choose to remove their Gold dental work, sell it and then replace it with something that is less valuable. If that happens, it really will be a shame because for many people Gold crowns and bridges will last a lifetime - while some less expensive alternatives do not.

Title: Gold Teeth Value
Forum | Twitter | Chat | Stats | Privacy Policy | Blogged | Catalog
RSS | Atom | Feedburner | Feedback | Subscribe | Hutch Report

Monday, July 27, 2009

Class Action Lawsuits

I have never been a big fan of solving problems through lawsuits and the worst kind are class actions. I know many of you probably disagree with me because you have personally profited by a class action lawsuit in the past. In recent months, I have received numerous letters from law firms around the nation that have notified me that I am a members of a class action lawsuit. Many of these lawsuits are against companies that I once owned stock in and who are now in severe financial trouble, while a few of them are out of business. What bothers me the most about some of these class action lawsuits against public companies is that when I bought their stock I knew there was a risk that the stock could go down - but now attorney's are trying to portray hundreds of people like myself as stupid victims that did not know what we were doing. That really makes me mad because without the the possibility of failure, there can be no true capitalism in the United States.

There are companies in the world that have taken advantage of their customers and I believe those companies are fair game for individual lawsuits if those that were wronged want to fight to get some of their money back. However, ever since Wall Street collapsed last fall - there seems to be an ever growing number of class action lawsuits being filed against companies that saw their stock price drop because of the recession of 2009. Investing on Wall Street has always involved risk to the investor and that risk is what has allow most people to earn returns that are greater than what would be available at a bank through a CD or via government bonds. Unfortunately, some financial planners have convinced investors that over the long haul there is no way to lose money on Wall Street and in the process they have held meetings with investors that promote an investing strategy of buy and hold no matter what.

While most people get angry when Wall Street CEO's continue to be paid million dollar bonuses even when the stock price of their company drops, most people do not believe that the best way to solve that problem is through class action litigation. What I dislike the most about class action lawsuits is that high priced lawyers turn a group of people into victims - even if those people do not consider themselves wronged. While there are a few people that want to profit anyway they can even through a class action lawsuit, many more people find themselves at a loss as to why they are receiving letters from lawyers notifying them that they are a part of a class action lawsuit against a company that did them no harm.

From my limited study of the practice of class action lawsuits it has become clear to me that many times the people that have been allegedly wronged by the actions of companies are not being compensated in any real way anyway. Many times, at the end of the day - class action lawsuit judgments have the harmed party's receiving only a few hundred dollars or a retail coupon - while a group of lawyers that brought the class action walk away will millions of dollars worth of legal fees. On the other hand, when a person feels wronged by a company and files a lawsuit - that person will receive a set percentage of any future settlement. While there might be a good reason for class action lawsuits to be filed occasionally - right now there are far too many of them and something should be done through law to limit their use.

Title: Class Action Lawsuits
Forum | Twitter | Chat | Stats | Privacy Policy | Blogged | Catalog
RSS | Atom | Feedburner | Feedback | Subscribe | Hutch Report

Sunday, July 26, 2009

Palin Steps Down

Palin Steps DownGov. Sarah Palin of Alaska stepped down today as that states governor and that event was covered in all the major national U.S. news media as one of the top stories of the day. Liberals have been having a jolly old time putting down Sarah Palin ever since she joined Senator John McCain as his vice-presidential candidate late last year. However, I believe that liberals are making a huge mistake in making fun of Sarah Palin and they are also missing the big picture when they now say that she is a quitter because she resigned as Alaska's governor before her term in office was complete. When I look at Sarah Palin, I see a smart like a fox young woman that also knows well how to play the game of political chess.

Why liberals feel the need to make fun of popular GOP candidates is something I have never understood. I still remember decades ago when Ronald Reagan was first running for President how high and mighty liberals acted while they made a joke out of his conservative views and they also made fun of him because he once earned a living as an actor. Any person with a lick of common sense would have learned from that experience that the American people do not like elitist liberals making fun of the candidates they prefer for public office like the late Ronald Reagan and in more recent times Sarah Palin. While liberal members of the U.S. news media have already written Sarah Palin off as a joke and now a quitter as well, I believe we have not heard the last of Sarah Palin because right now she is the most exciting new voice in the Republican Party.

What Sarah Palin brings to the GOP is not just a fresh voice proclaiming age old conservative values, but she is doing so at a time when good leadership is in short supply in the Republican Party. My guess is that if the 2012 GOP nomination was up for grabs today, Sarah Palin would win that nomination process in a landslide election. Right now, most liberals are feeling big and bad after President Obama won the White House last year and they increased their seats in the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate as well. Republicans know all too well how quickly voters will turn on a political party once the American people lose faith in it's top leader. While most conservatives still love former President George W. Bush, with enough time they will finally realize that it was he alone that cause them to lose power in Washington D.C. in last falls elections.

Arrogant liberals do not as of yet realize that a potential political meltdown of their own is on the horizon if/when President Obama becomes as unpopular as former President Bush did during his tenure in the White House. It has always been an occupational hazard of political partisans to become over confident when the American people give them the power they crave. What the conservative faithful missed in their undying support of President George W. Bush could very well be the same mistake liberals will make if they support President Obama no matter what he does. That is why I would never rule out Sarah Palin as the GOP presidential candidate in 2012 nor would I rule out the fact that under the right political circumstances she very well could beat President Obama when he runs for reelection. Humility is seldom found among the party faithful when they control Washington, but a lack of it is most certainly the main reason why the American people have a tendency to change how they feel about Americas two political party's.

Title: Palin Steps Down
Forum | Twitter | Chat | Stats | Privacy Policy | Blogged | Catalog
RSS | Atom | Feedburner | Feedback | Subscribe | Hutch Report

White House Beer

White House BeerSoon, there will be an interesting meeting at the White House when Sgt. James Crowley, Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. and President Barack Obama all sit down to talk and drink a beer. In what has turned out to be an interesting exchange of ideas about the issue of race, all three of these men have found themselves in the national spotlight of an issue that none of them thought would become so widely discussed in a nation that has a dark history when it comes to racial treatment and tolerance. In what some people have labeled as a teaching moment for the nation on the need for understanding when it comes to racial concerns, I instead call this moment a time when three powerful and stubborn men each made a mistake which was brought to national attention when President Obama interjected himself into a local police matter just because a friend of his was arrested. There is no doubt in my mind that all three of these men acted badly in different ways and rather than considering this a teaching moment about racial problems in America we should call it what it is and that is a battle of egos rather than a real case of racism.

For there to be a real case of racism by a police officer, there must be a real power issue involved where the police officer can take out his racist hatred on a helpless victim. In this case, Professor Gates was no helpless African-American victim - but instead he is a powerful employee of Harvard University who more than likely had a bad day and decided to exchange words with a police officer (James Crowley) who did not want to be badgered by a citizen who he was trying to help by potentially protecting that citizens property from burglary. I believe that if either Gates or Crowley would have tried to defuse this situation with a little bit of common sense, there would have been no need for Gates to be arrested, which in turn would have meant that President Obama would not have put his foot in his mouth on national TV complaining about a racist police department that does not exist.

Now all three of these men that should have acted better are going to meet at the White House for a beer and at the same time hopefully clear the air from this sad and preventable situation. Issues surrounding racism in the United States are very real and I regret that this issue of three men acting badly has caused many people to lose focus on a real issue - because a police officer just happened to be white when he arrested a prominent African-American person. Of the three men that acted badly in this situation the one that made the biggest mistake was President Barack Obama. I believe that he (President Obama) knew the minute his words left his mouth during that new conference that he would soon be forced to backtrack on his comments about the Cambridge police department as a whole acting stupidly. Then within a few days, President Obama was in front of the news media all but apologizing for his poor choice of words.

As so often times happens, men that find themselves in disputes end up settling disagreements later over a cold beer. From all current reports all three of these men have now settled down and are looking for ways to get along rather than continuing a feud that should have never got out of control in the first place. If there is a teachable moment in this story it is that anytime a person has a bad day, it is critically important for them to watch their words carefully or they could take a normal situation and turn it into something they will regret in the future. While I understand that President Obama wants to turn this whole issue into some kind of lesson about racial tolerances in America, what really should be learned about this situation is that all parties involved acted "stupidly" and when this event took place there apparently were no mature adults around to keep this silly and unnecessary situation from getting so out-of-control.

Title: White House Beer
Forum | Twitter | Chat | Stats | Privacy Policy | Blogged | Catalog
RSS | Atom | Feedburner | Feedback | Subscribe | Hutch Report

H1N1 Flu Vaccine

All across the United States, Americans are accepting the call from major universities to test a new H1N1 (Swine Flu) vaccine. Right now, almost every nation on Earth has been effected by new cases of the H1N1 flu virus and the only real long term solution to putting this new and deadly form of Swing Flu virus to death is to find and test a vaccine that can be administered to people before they catch it. Along with people in every nation on Earth, American doctors and scientist have been working overtime to not only isolate what makes the H1N1 virus so deadly, but also to find a vaccine that will protect people in the future that are exposed to H1N1 from catching a full blown case of this deadly flu virus. Doctors, scientist and educators at the University of Maryland Medical Center, Baylor College of Medicine, Cincinnati Children's Hospital, Emory University, Group Health Cooperative, University of Iowa and Vanderbilt University are in charge of testing about one thousand adults and children with a new vaccine that will create an immunity in the body against this new form of Swine Flu.

Most of us in the United States should thank our lucky stars that the H1N1 virus has not become as deadly of a pandemic here as it was in Mexico and some third world counties. Put simply, the H1N1 virus is very deadly and once a person is exposed to this new form of Swine Flu and then becomes ill, there is a short time window available for a medical doctor to treat the severe systems of this virus before the patient expires. Just like in the past the H1N1 form of Swine Flu is best prevented than treated later once a person has been exposed to the virus. The human body is a marvelous thing that can learn how to defend itself against most viruses, including H1N1, if given enough time to build up an antibody army to battle this deadly disease. In the United States, new flu vaccines must be tested on volunteers before they are offered to the general public as a real medical solution to a problem.

Today, I am pleased to report that people from all over the United States have been showing up at major universities to volunteer to test a new H1N1 Swine Flu vaccine that will be available to all Americans this fall if these new vaccine trials prove that it is safe and effective at preventing H1N1 from going into a full blown status in the general public. We are so lucky here in the United States because only a handful of people who were exposed to and later came down with the symptoms of H1N1 Swine Flu died. To say that the American people dodged a bullet when it comes to the potential loss of life we could have experienced with this new form of Swine Flu would be a huge understatement. Most Americans live with their heads in the sand when it comes to bad news stories like a worldwide pandemic, so I am extremely happy that there are a few medical professionals that have been working on an H1N1 flu virus for the past several months.

If all goes well, the clinical trials for this new H1N1 Swine Flu vaccine will be finish within the next few months. At that time, if this new H1N1 flu vaccine is proven both safe and effective it will be rushed into mass production for the upcoming fall 2009 flu season in the United States. My only fear is that this new H1N1 flu vaccine will contain something that is yet unknown which will effect to future health of the people that receive it. I was young the last time a major Swine Flu vaccine was administered to the general public back in the 1970's and at that time there were contamination issues with the vaccine that was administrated - which caused life long health consequences to the unfortunate few that rushed to get vaccinated because the President of the United States told the American people that not getting vaccinated for that 1970's form of Swine Flu could be a matter of life or death.

Read more about H1N1 Swine Flu:

Title: H1N1 Flu Vaccine
Forum | Twitter | Chat | Stats | Privacy Policy | Blogged | Catalog
RSS | Atom | Feedburner | Feedback | Subscribe | Hutch Report

Saturday, July 25, 2009

Wall Street Bonuses

Almost everyone in the world believes that million dollar bonuses on Wall Street are unfair and unnecessary, but the practice of providing those large bonuses continues - even at huge companies that are currently owned by U.S. taxpayers like AIG. So what's really up with these big bonuses that are provided to the best educated Americans who are lucky enough to land a job on Wall Street? In some ways, large bonuses are a good thing not only for corporate America - but also for the nation as a whole. To me, when a bonus is paid to an employee of a company - that bonuses should be awarded based on a persons hard work in helping that company to either grow successfully or as a perk to employees that have helped the company profit because of their exceptional skills and dedication. However, in more recent times - Wall Street bonuses have changed from their origional purpose and instead now many of the most lucrative bonus packages are paid to CEO's that neither grew the companies they ran or provided the shareholders with a good return on invested dollars.

By it's very definition, compensation that is considered a bonus should be for work preformed that is above and beyond the salary at which a person is paid. Most of us have at one time or another been offered bonuses at work when we have preformed our jobs in an above average way and when our company pays us a bonus it is considered more as a reward for our hard work than something that is expected as the norm when making up our annual salary. However, Wall Street views the act of passing out bonuses in a completely different way than most regular companies doing business in the real world. On Wall Street, a bonus is considered just another source of revenue that when added to an employees annual salary adds up to that employees total compensation package.

I'm sure there is a good reason why Wall Street companies decide to compensate their top executives using bonus money, but in the end these huge financial contributions to annual income should be called something else besides a bonus. In my memory, the first time I heard the use of the term bonus used in a way that did not reflect performance was years ago when professional athletes started demanding and getting huge signing bonuses from the teams they went to work for. Even today, I wonder why professional sports teams call that huge first financial payment a signing bonus because the athlete that is receiving the money did not have to do anything to receive millions of dollars in bonus compensation from the team. Shortly thereafter, I started hearing about Wall Street companies using bonuses in the same way and now look what a problem these so called unearned bonuses are having on the national economy.

In the future I believe it would be wise for Wall Street companies to start paying all of their employees a fair and reasonable annual salary that is based on their experience and educational background for the position. Then if and when certain employees at the company go above and beyond what is expected from them, then a real bonus should be paid to that employee which is in addition to their normal annual salary. This new policy should be in effect from the lowest to the highest paid employee, which includes the CEO and Members of the Board of Directors. In reality, Wall Street bonuses are not real bonuses at all, but instead they are consider as part of many employees total compensation package. The time has come for Wall Street to learn something from main street on when an actual bonus should be paid to an employee.

Title: Wall Street Bonuses
Forum | Twitter | Chat | Stats | Privacy Policy | Blogged | Catalog
RSS | Atom | Feedburner | Feedback | Subscribe | Hutch Report

CNN Too Liberal?

CNN Too Liberal?Conservatives have tried to label the Cable News Network (CNN) as being a liberal news organization for as long as I can remember. While it is true that CNN does report the news of the day from a slightly liberal point of view, it is not as liberal as the Fox News Channel is conservative when reporting political stories. In recent months, CNN has seen it's daily ratings drop and I'm sure that network suits are scratching their heads in an attempt to find out why more and more people are switching to Fox News instead of sticking with CNN. I do not believe that CNN's sight liberal slant in political news coverage is to blame for their current ratings problem. Instead, I blame the ratings problems at CNN more on their never ending need to be politically correct in everything they report and also I blame the never ending self promotion that goes on at CNN as part of why people are currently switching from CNN to Fox News.

At least when you watch the Fox News Network you know what kind of political coverage to expect from the reporters and anchors that work there. However, over at CNN there are reporters and anchors that try extremely hard to convince the audience that their reporting is right down the middle. That never ending attempt to try and convince the viewing audience that they are fair in their news reporting ends up boring the viewer to death as an endless stream of talking heads show up on each and every story that might offend one of their viewers. Political correctness has ruined both broadcast and cable network news as some liberal based news organizations work overtime to make sure that all voices are heard on each and every news story. In fact, my guess is that most Americans would rather just hear the hard facts of the news of the day without so much political correctness.

Another thing that just drives me crazy about CNN is their never ending need to brag about themselves. I have enjoyed watching Wolf Blitzer on CNN for decades, but in recent months I have found myself staying away from his programs because he is constantly talking about having the "best political team on television". To me, it's one thing for the audience to believe that CNN has the best political team on television and it is something else entirely when the network itself constantly brags that they are the best. From my country upbringing, people or news organizations that find it necessary to constantly brag on how good they are or on the top caliber of commentators that they employ - I start to think that there must be something wrong at the network because they (the network) must believe that their audience is too stupid to know what quality really looks like.

So, is CNN too liberal? Probably not, but they certainly could make some changes that would take their daily programming from what I consider to be boring political correctness and at least start having a firm position on some issues. I think that CNN network executives should get out of the office for awhile and travel to the heartland of the United States to ask people what they really want to watch. I'm sure those top executives would be shocked that most Americans do not want politically correct news coverage on CNN, but instead they just want to see the news reported in a clear and fair way. Another thing that CNN suits might discover if they traveled to the heartland of America is that most middle class/hard working Americans do not like the endless on air self promotion that CNN has become infamous for. It's time for the people that run CNN to start listening to their audience, instead of talking down to them like they are stupid.

Title: CNN Too Liberal?
Forum | Twitter | Chat | Stats | Privacy Policy | Blogged | Catalog
RSS | Atom | Feedburner | Feedback | Subscribe | Hutch Report

Casey Anthony Guilty?

The first part of this year I devoted a great deal of my time to writing about the murder of two year old Caylee and the arrest of her mother Casey Anthony on charges that she caused her death. Then around April I decided to stop writing stories about Casey Anthony because between her narcissistic attitude and the crazy stunts that became daily fare from her attorney Jose Baez - this whole case of child murder began to take on a circus atmosphere which was something that I thought was wrong and completely tasteless. Somewhere around the end of March it dawned on me that it was not just Casey Anthony's selfish attitude that was driving the nationwide coverage of this murder case, but then as many as seven attorney's had signed up to help defend Casey Anthony and they started to seem just as narcissistic as Casey as they went about their job of trying to find a way to convince a jury that she was not guilty of killed her daughter Caylee.

The question of whether or not Casey Anthony is guilty of murdering her daughter Caylee was answered months ago in the minds of the public. I too have believed for months that Casey Anthony indeed killed her daughter Caylee, but then I became discouraged as her lawyers prepared to use every legal trick in the book to set her free from responsibility. In what should have taken only a few short months to go from crime to accountability will in the end take almost a year in the case of Casey Anthony. While it is understandable that the wheels of justice move extremely slow in a high profile murder case, it just seems to me that too much time has been wasted not only by Casey Anthony's attorney's - but also the Florida legal system. Put simply, when too much time is put into pre-trial motions and legal shenanigans - the public as a whole starts to lose faith in the U.S. legal system.

Most people that keep up with their own local news know when a person is arrested for murder it does not take up to a year for the person accused of murder to stand trial. In addition to that fact, once an alleged murderer in a non high profile case is put on trial - the entire court proceedings usually last less than a week. What makes a regular murder trial different from one that is considered high profile are the ambitious attorney's that flock to high profile murder cases not to assure that justice is served, but instead their primary motivation is to get their faces on television and hopefully build a long lasting and lucrative legal career for themselves. That selfish act by some lawyers is what gives their profession as a whole a bad name.

As the murder trial of Casey Anthony nears, I will start to write more blog posts about the case. While millions of people all over the world continue to follow the daily drips of information that continue to flow out of Florida surrounding Casey's upcoming murder trial - many more millions will start to pay closer attention to the case once the trial begins this fall. My hope is that the murder of Caylee Anthony will not be lost in all the legal showmanship that will manifest itself when this trial finally begins. The biggest problem with high profile murder cases is that too many times the victim of the crime is forgotten or even blamed by defense attorney's in an attempt to obtain a not guilty verdict for their client. I continue to believe that Casey Anthony is guilty of murdering her daughter Caylee and nothing that has been provided in the way of evidence by her high profile legal team has swayed my opinion as of yet.

Title: Casey Anthony Guilty?
Forum | Twitter | Chat | Stats | Privacy Policy | Blogged | Catalog
RSS | Atom | Feedburner | Feedback | Subscribe | Hutch Report

Michael Vick Future

Michael Vick FutureDallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones made it clear yesterday that his team was not interested in signing up Michael Vick to play for the Dallas Cowboys if the NFL commissioner makes the choice to allow Vick to play in the NFL again. To Jerry Jones decision I say, "way to go". While there is no doubt that Michael Vick is an outstanding football player, after he was convicted on dog fighting charges and the murder of animals in some of the most inhumane ways possible - he gave up his right to be a well paid athlete in the National Football League. There always comes a point in time when bad behavior by a professional football player must be met with the NFL's toughest penalty - which is a lifetime bad from the game. In my opinion, it would be a huge mistake for the NFL commissioner to allow Michael Vick to play in the NFL again now that he has been released from prison.

Just image the baggage that would accompany the signing of Michael Vick to play for any NFL team? While his on field play could help some beaten down NFL team possibly win a few more games, the outrage from fans that a team would actually pay him millions of dollars per year to once again wear an NFL football uniform would out weight any potential benefit by a mile. I personally believe that most NFL football fans are also animal lovers and at the top of the list of animals that they love are dogs. If Michael Vick is allowed to take to the football field again and be positively promoted on Sunday afternoon football games in the same way that other more respected football players are, then I believe there will be a nationwide outrage expressed by fans that the National Football League has never experienced in the past.

When anyone is allowed to enter the NFL, along with that privilege there should come a sense of obligation as well. In the same way people that have been convicted of financial crimes are never allowed to once again work on Wall Street or at federally insured banks, that same type of harsh punishment should also be placed on high paid athletes that do something stupid like hurting and/or murdering defenseless animals. To many NFL fans like myself, long ago Michael Vick gave up his right to receive the praise of millions of NFL fans and he also gave up the big paycheck that came along with his big break in the NFL. The National Football League will not miss a beat if they decide to tell Michael Vick no when it comes to playing football again. However, if they tell him yes - they will be making a huge mistake that will haunt the league for years to come.

On very few occasions do I find myself agreeing with Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones about anything, but when it comes to his statement that his team was not interested in signing Michael Vick if the NFL commissioner allows him to play again, I found myself in total agreement with Jerry Jones. Hopefully, the other teams that make up the National Football League will also decide to take a pass on Michael Vick and if that happens the right decision should be an easy one for the NFL commissioner to make. Just because Michael Vick has served his time does not mean that he should be allowed to wear a NFL uniform again as a player. Part of the job of any NFL player is to positively portray the game that they are involved with and one which pays them a salary that is well above what most Americans earn. Any positive value that Michael Vick offered to the NFL was completely destroyed when his off the field crimes of dog fighting and animal murder became public.

Title: Michael Vick Future
Forum | Twitter | Chat | Stats | Privacy Policy | Blogged | Catalog
RSS | Atom | Feedburner | Feedback | Subscribe | Hutch Report

Friday, July 24, 2009

Obama Race Mistake

Obama Race MistakeEarlier this week in a prime-time address to the nation about health care reform, President Barack Obama made his first HUGE mistake since becoming the 44th President of the United States. In what I consider to be a rookie misstep, Obama interjected his personal opinions in a police matter in Cambridge MA where a person he knew, Henry Gates, was arrest by police for disorderly conduct. I did not see and hear President Obama make those comments live, but I did watch and listen to him use the word "stupidly" later on while viewing a repeat of his speech on YouTube. In my memory, this is the first time that the well disciplined Barack Obama has made a huge mistake when talking about race relations in America. Without knowing all the facts, President Obama jumped to the conclusion that a Cambridge police officer acted "stupidly" and when he used that negative word, to me, President Obama sounded more like Al Sharpton or Jessie Jackson than the leader of the free world.

What most members of the national news media are missing while covering this story is that in a nut shell what is being played out in Cambridge is not a difference of opinion on what really happened to Professor Gates, but it is a huge difference of prospective when it comes to the job that police officers are trained to do and also the history of a nation that has been filled with police abuse of African-Americans over the years. For example, most white Americans would welcome the police showing up at their home to make sure that no one was breaking in while they were away. In fact, my guess is that most white Americans would thank the police officer for coming and gladly show ID to prove that they are the rightful resident of the home. Contrast that white view of the police with a more negative one that some African-American have and from the first minute a police officer enters the home, many African-Americans believe they are there not to help them, but to try to arrest them because some bad cops over the years were racist at the very core and abused black people.

Now back to President Obama's comments at a news conference this week about this issue. First let me say that in my gut I believe that on at least one occasion while Barack Obama was attending college at Harvard University he had a negative run in with the Cambridge MA police department. That negative event probably caused the now President Barack Obama to form opinions about the Cambridge Police Department as a whole and that is the real reason that he spoke out so harshly in his new conference about that police department the other night. While I believe that President Obama made a huge mistake by even agreeing to answer that loaded question which was asked of him earlier this week, instead emotion and internal personal baggage caused him to interject himself into a police matter without looking at the case in a fair and objective matter. - So far, President Obama is the only person in this story that ended up acting "stupidly" in the end. Now this huge racial mess of a story is spinning out of control as many issues of race have done in the past and there is no telling where it will finally end.

In many ways I feel bad for President Obama because he allowed his personal emotions to rule the day. Everyone of us have had that happen as well at one time or another in our own life - but fortunately for us we were not speaking on national television with it occurred. What white and black Americans need to understand equally is that there is a huge difference in prospective when it comes to police officers. While most white American have a positive prospective when it comes to police officers, the exact opposite is true for African-Americans. This problem of police officer prospect is not going to go away overnight because it has built up into a huge problem over the years which will only be solved when all police officers treat black and white suspect the same. In addition to personal first hand prospectives of police officer treatment, there are stories that have been passed down through the generations which also effect how Americans feel about police officers in general. Those types of feelings, if of a negative nature, could take centuries to change.

Title: Obama Race Mistake
Forum | Twitter | Chat | Stats | Privacy Policy | Blogged | Catalog
RSS | Atom | Feedburner | Feedback | Subscribe | Hutch Report

Greed Is Good?

Well, major U.S. banks are at it again and this time they are ripping off their best customers because they are mad that the U.S. Congress and President Obama passed a law that will soon force them to start using fair lending practices when it comes to issuing credit cards. Everyone that has ever carried a credit card already knows just the amount of trouble a customer is forced to go through just to get the bank to play by the rules. Now that the rules for credit cards are about to be tighten to at least give consumers a fighting chance, some major credit card issuers are taking out their anger at the U.S. federal government on their best customers by increasing their minimum monthly payments by hundreds of dollars per month. It is clear that this is a government v bank issue and something that is not necessary for these huge banks to continue to profit.

The way major U.S. banks are acting right now reminds me of a movie I watched decades ago with Michael Douglas called "Wall Street". One of the big lines from that movie was "greed is good" which Douglas used in that movie at a shareholders meeting of a company he was about to own in a hostile takeover. Even though most of us wish that the greedy days of the 1980's were long gone, there is no such thing as greed being a thing of the past at major U.S. banks. Even though it was through their own recklessness that Wall Street almost collapsed late last year, once again many of these same banks are playing games and using their own customers as ammunition in their current battle with Congress and President Obama. Soon, I hope that the government will prevent these super banks from operating in the first place - but it will be years in the future before that will even become a possibility.

At the heart of the current wrong doing by major U.S. banks is a change in the terms of credit card payments for their best customers. Back during the glory days of free credit for everyone, many large U.S. banks made the choice to offer low interest rate credit cards to their best customers with a rate that was good for the life of that credit card. According to the rules, the interest rate on those cards could never be increased as long as the cardholder was not late on a payment. However, now that major banks are in a high stakes feud with the U.S. federal government they have changed the only rule their guidelines permit and that is the percentage at which the minimum payment is calculated. Many of these low interest rate credit cards had minimum payments that were figured at only 2%, but now many of the banks are wanting 6% or more of the credit card balance as the new minimum payment on the card.

Mathematically, this increase in the amount of the minimum monthly payment on credit cards is huge because thousands of people used the low interest feature of these special cards to finance things like home improvements and other high ticket purchases in their life. For example, a person that borrowed $20,000 on one of these low interest credit cards would have at first had a monthly payment of around $300 per month. However, now that the bank has changed the payment terms, that same credit card minimum monthly payment could soar to $900 per month or more. To add insult to injury, the same banks that are changing the rules in mid stream for their best customers are giving them a high interest way out by agreeing to open a new credit card account for them at a considerably higher interest rate for low interest rate card balance transfers. Now how's that for bank customer service?

Title: Greed Is Good?
Forum | Twitter | Chat | Stats | Privacy Policy | Blogged | Catalog
RSS | Atom | Feedburner | Feedback | Subscribe | Hutch Report

Thursday, July 23, 2009

Increase Daily Potassium

For years I have studied the importance of potassium in the diet and finally some people in the medical community are starting to give proper credit to a mineral that is so important that the heart itself could not beat without it. Potassium is found in most foods, but surprisingly millions of people around the world do not get as much potassium as they need in their daily diets. Part of the reason that so many people lack enough potassium in their blood is because too few people eat a wide variety of fruits on a daily basis. Most vegetables are also high in the potassium which means that fast food junkies are not getting much potassium at all except from the french fries they order with their hamburger and large drink. I believe that some people who are tired all the time could be suffering from a blood supply that is depleted of potassium.

Another reason why potassium is in low supply in the blood of many people is because of the all out war the medical community has been fighting against potassium's mineral cousin, sodium. The fact is that everyone needs a certain amount of sodium and potassium in their daily diet to remain alive. Just like everything else in life, the secret to good health revolves around moderation when it comes to the amount of calories we consume and also the amount of sodium and potassium we put in our mouths each day. In reality, nothing will keep the damage that excess sodium causes to our bodies in check more than a ample supply of potassium in the diet. Actually, the body will push salt out of blood cells to allow in more potassium if we consume enough potassium in our daily meals. If we don't consume enough potassium, our blood cells become saturated with too much sodium which in turn leads to heart problems and high blood pressure.

Over the years, I have known people that have been forced to visit an emergency room because of tiredness even when they have been getting plenty of sleep and not exerting themselves to excess. On most occasions, these otherwise health people found out from a simple blood test at the hospital that they were drastically low on potassium, which was quickly and easily corrected by a potassium IV drip administered by a doctor at the hospital. What some people never bother to ask is why their blood level of potassium fell so low in the first place. I believe that a lack of fruit consumption is the main reason why otherwise healthy people find themselves with low levels of potassium in their blood. Unfortunately, many new tech diets are causing fruit to become the enemy because it's natural sweetness does not fit the profile of all those low carb diets that everyone seems to want to follow these days.

While most things in life are complicated, eating enough potassium is not hard at all. I too have found myself from time to time getting low on potassium. For me, correcting a low potassium problem is easily solved within 24 hours without a visit to the emergency room. Here's what I do when I feel the effects of low potassium in my blood start to wear me down. First, I eat as much fruit as possible for 24 hours. Most people know that banana's are high in potassium, but in reality most raw fruits are loaded with potassium. Even fruits you might not think would contain much potassium like raisins and figs are also very high in this important mineral. In addition to eating a large amount of fruit for 24 hours, I made sure to eat at least two large baked potatoes (including the skin) as well. By the time the next day rolls around, my body and attitude have improved because between all that fruit and those two large baked potatoes - my blood level of potassium has turned around for the better.

Title: Increase Daily Potassium
Forum | Twitter | Chat | Stats | Privacy Policy | Blogged | Catalog
RSS | Atom | Feedburner | Feedback | Subscribe | Hutch Report

Pancreatic Cancer Pain

A few nights ago, completely out of the blue, I had a terrible nightmare which woke me up in a cold sweat. My dream was about what my own father went through after he was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer back in 2001. Dad was always a strong man, who for most of his life worked from daylight until dark as a cotton farmer in the Texas panhandle. When dad was only 11 years old, he suffered third degree burns over most of his body and almost died in a Dallas hospital. However, due to the grace of God - dad survived his third degree burns as a child and grew into a man that almost everyone respected as a fair person. Then when dad turned 66 years old, he began having pains in his mid section that first were diagnosis by a doctor to be an ulcer. However, before too long that benign diagnosis of an ulcer turned into a life ending form of pancreatic cancer.

Over the next three months, I studied pancreatic cancer on the Internet and learned that it is one of the most painful forms and in many cases it is not treatable and ends up being a death sentence diagnosis for patients. What I did not know, until my father was diagnosis with terminal pancreatic cancer, was the extent of the pain that is suffer by the unfortunate few that catch the worst form of that cancer. Dad was one of the strongest men I have known in my lifetime and much of his strength came from being severely burned as a young boy only to go on and survive that near death experience to live a long and productive life. However, as dads death neared - he was in so much pain that the nurses who cared for him at a hospice hospital were forced to give him so much morphine that he remained asleep most of the time.

I remember asking myself during the last few days of dads life why the doctors that cared for him did not just knock him out using anesthesia instead of pumping his body so full of morphine that it basically had the same effect, but took hours longer? When my own father suffer from the tremendous pain that is associated with pancreatic cancer - I walked away from that terrible experience thinking to myself that modern medicine has a lot to learn about what is the right and decent way to treat terminally ill patients that are in severe pain. For almost a century, the same types of medications have been used to treat pain in pancreatic cancer patients. During that same period of time, the art of medical care has changed tremendously - but pain management seems to be stuck in the dark ages because some people continue to hold onto old stereotypes when it comes to narcotic medications.

The biggest problem with morphine and other forms of narcotic medications that are used to treat cancer patients is that almost every dose of the medication must be followed by a stronger dose the next time because the human body starts to build a resistance to it so quickly. For pancreatic cancer patients, I believe that it only takes a few weeks for most powerful morphine medications to become ineffective at controlling the pain of the patient. In closing I would just like to ask an open question which I have as of yet not received a satisfactory answer to. When pancreatic or other types of cancer patients are within a few days of death when most forms of pain management don't work anymore - why won't doctors just administer anesthesia so the patient does not have to leave this Earth in so much pain? If we humans treated animals the same way we do our fellow citizens at the end of their life, we would be arrested for cruelty.

Read more about pancreatic cancer:

Pancreatic Cancer Memories - Patrick Swayze Cancer - Pancreatic Cancer Cure? - Why Is Pancreatic Cancer So Deadly

Title: Pancreatic Cancer Pain
Forum | Twitter | Chat | Stats | Privacy Policy | Blogged | Catalog
RSS | Atom | Feedburner | Feedback | Subscribe | Hutch Report

Wednesday, July 22, 2009

Susan Boyle Returns

It was so refreshing to see and hear Susan Boyle again tonight as NBC TV conducted an interview with her after America's Got Talent. Like millions of other people around the world, I had become very concerned that after "Britain's Got Talent" earlier this year - Susan Boyle pretty much dropped off the map after reports surfaced that she had been hospitalized in the UK suffering from exhaustion. Like hundreds of millions of people around the world, Susan Boyle's voice made me smile and for a period of a week or two I was hooked on watching her sing via the Internet service called YouTube every single day. Now Susan Boyle is coming back out into the spotlight where she belongs and judging by her improved appearance and more importantly her renewed outlook on life - I think that all of us will be hearing more from Susan Boyle in the days and weeks to come.

While the stress of going from a nobody to a person that was known worldwide in a period of a couple of weeks did put tremendous pressure on Susan Boyle, in my opinion what drove her over the mental edge were the crazy and mean paparazzi in the UK that hounded her ever step for almost one month. After watching how the tabloid media treated Susan Boyle I was reminded of why most people around the world do not like reporters. Whether those reporters are of a tabloid nature like Susan Boyle encounter in her quick rise to fame in the UK or some local television news reporters that still have the attitude of "if it bleeds it leads" hounding the families of victims at some hospital emergency room - both are the same kinds of low life that make their living off the misery of others.

To me, Susan Boyle is a special kind of person and the fact that she had a medical scare when she was young that effected her brain makes her even more special in my opinion. While I get very angry when tabloid news reporters first try to inflate the career of someone like Susan Boyle only to work overtime to destroy their own creation later on, in the end a person of strong character like Susan Boyle always seems to get the last laugh. A smart person told me once that it took much great effort and time to create something than it does to tear it down. While that is true, the builders in our society know that no matter how much the lazy shortcut folks that write for tabloids try to destroy someone, in the end the person will succeed if they just don't listen to their lies and abuse but instead move forward with their dreams.

Now that Susan Boyle's audition performance on YouTube is not being download tens of millions of time per day, maybe she will have the time necessary to get her sea legs and move forward with what should be a long and lucrative singing career. I know that there are millions of people around the world that share my love for Susan Boyle's amazing singing voice and we are all so excited that she is back around singing at selected concerts in the UK and we are even more excited that Susan will be releasing her debut album this fall just in time for Christmas. The story of Susan Boyle's life is something almost everyone in the world can relate to in one way or another and that is why we have not heard the last of an unlikely singing star by the name of Susan Boyle.

Read more about Susan Boyle:

Susan Boyle Hospital Condition - What's Next For Susan Boyle - Susan Boyle Finals - Win Or Lose, Susan Boyle A Star - Susan Boyle Performance With Judges Comments - "Memories" From Cats, Susan Boyle Wins - Will Susan Boyle Go All The Way? - Semi-Finals For Susan Boyle - Susan Boyle 15 Minutes About Up? - Simon Cowell/Susan Boyle Contract - Susan Boyle Burn Out? - Simon Cowell, Don't Change Susan Boyle - Judging A Book By It's Cover, Susan Boyle - Susan Boyle Will Win "Britain's Got Talent - Voice Of An Angel / Susan Boyle - Susan Boyle A Dream Come True - Susan Boyle / Britain's Got Talent

Title: Susan Boyle Returns
Forum | Twitter | Chat | Stats | Privacy Policy | Blogged | Catalog
RSS | Atom | Feedburner | Feedback | Subscribe | Hutch Report

Tuesday, July 21, 2009

California Offshore Drilling

New offshore oil drilling could be making a comeback soon in California because of an agreement made by state leaders to save the state from bankruptcy. The last time any new offshore oil drilling was allowed off the coast of California was back in 1969. To me it's strange to hear the words offshore oil drilling in California while at the same time there is a Democratic Congress and President in charge in Washington. However, while most parts of the United States are in a deep recession right now - in California financial matters are much worse. In fact, the State of California has been paying some of it's creditors with IOU's instead of cash and those IOU's will not have any tangible value until October at the earliest. While there are no bread lines in California that I know of, for a practical matter California state government could be described as being in a depression if that term was judged by the amount of money the state takes in compared to the amount it must spend.

People that call California home must get tired of the rest of the country making fun of them for some of their extravagant behavior and liberal attitudes. In no area, except maybe the conduct of some Hollywood stars is that extravagant behavior more noticed by Americans that live outside of the State of California than with offshore oil drilling. California has the largest population of any state in the United States and California burns more fossil fuels than anywhere else as well. However, when it comes to exploration for crude oil in offshore locations - most California residents have always said no which meant that the other 49 states were forced to drill for more oil so it could be shipped to energy starved customers there. While I believe that California is one of the most beautiful states in the union, when it comes to many California residents wanting other Americans to pollute their own back yards just to keep California away for the same pollution is wrong headed and narcissistic.

Now it appears that a deep recession is doing something that no politician or political party was able to accomplish as offshore oil drilling will start a new off the coast of California near Santa Barbara. However, just because state leaders have decided that California needs to allow some offshore oil drilling does not mean that oil companies are loading up their trucks and ships to begin the process. Instead, it will be years before any new offshore oil drilling will be allowed near California because within the next few days environmental groups will file a lawsuit and locate a friendly judge that will issue a restraining order to stop new offshore oil drilling near Santa Barbara. In some ways it's great when courts step in to right an injustice. However, when it comes to the public good - sometimes courts try to set themselves up as being above the law they are sworn to uphold. There will be no new offshore oil drilling near California any time soon because environmentalist will find a judge that will put their needs and concerns ahead of a state that badly needs additional revenue.

Of course, citizens of California are not alone when they oppose necessary but unsightly projects like offshore oil drilling. Honestly, all Americans have become very good at claiming that the country needs certain things - but they are very forceful in declaring that they don't what it produced in their own backyard. I guess it's just natural for citizens of any community or state to want all the great things in life which usually require energy to run, while at the same time demanding that the production of that energy be done as far away from their own home as possible. It will take years for all the court challenges to run their course when it comes to new offshore oil drilling in California, but eventually the State of California will get it's way and new offshore oil drill will once again start to expand there. Like California residents, I would not want unsightly oil rigs blocking my view of the ocean either - but during hard financial times, even harder choices have to be made and one of those hard choices is expanded offshore oil drilling in the State of California.

Read more about offshore drilling:

Offshore Oil Drilling Dead - Alaska Offshore Oil Drilling - Florida Offshore Oil Drilling - Pros/Cons Of Offshore Oil Drilling

Title: California Offshore Drilling
Forum | Twitter | Chat | Stats | Privacy Policy | Blogged | Catalog
RSS | Atom | Feedburner | Feedback | Subscribe | Hutch Report

Health Care Blunder

The more Americans learn about President Obama's health care plan, the less they like it. To make matters worse, the people who are starting to show displeasure at Obama's prescription for health care reform in the United States the most are rank and file Democrats and the elected leaders that represent them in the U.S. Congress. Even friends and coworkers of mine that originally thought that President Obama's health care solution for the United States made sense are now questioning the lack of time and debate that has gone into such an important matter in Congress. In my own mind, I do not believe that President Obama has set out to destroy or even nationalize health care in the United States, but at the end of the day - his ideas about health care reform in American might do just that. So, millions of Americans that were not worried about Obama's health care changes to begin with are now very concerned about what these changes might mean for our future.

While talking to a friend today about the state of health care in the United States, we both reflected on the ups and downs that have been the norm when it comes to health care for U.S. veterans at VA hospitals around the country. At the present time, the U.S. VA hospital system is being run well, but it was not that long ago when the U.S. government was doing a terrible job at running the VA and millions of former members of the U.S. armed services were not be care for well at all at some VA hospitals. To me, when I look at the idea of government run health care in the United States - the first place I look to is a place where the government is already providing health care in the U.S. VA system. My guess is that if a public opinion poll was conducted today where Americans were asked if they wanted to keep the current health care system in the United States or if they would prefer to give up their health insurance and receive free care at a VA hospital, I'll bet that 90% plus of Americans would make the choice to keep what they have now.

While some counties have found a way to provide good health care with a government run system, the vast majority of citizens in nations where universal health care is now the law of the land do not like it. In fact, every time the United States starts to discuss the possibility of offering a government run health care system in the United States - citizens of Canada and the UK are the first ones to tell us what a big mistake we are making. Even Democrats that are moderate in their political views do not want to see a government run health care system in the United States and in speeches made almost on a daily basis - President Obama is proclaiming to anyone that will listen that his health care reform for America will not turn into a government run health care system. So then, why are so many people convinced that Obama health care will eventually turn into a government run health care system? The answer to that question is simple to answer because most Americans have seen first hand that any time the U.S. government becomes involved in something - eventually they take over and when it comes to health care reform that too will be the case either sooner or later.

It just makes more sense for the government to provide free health insurance to the poor that cannot afford to buy it on their own than to change the current health care system in the U.S. and put it on a path toward total government control at some future date. No one should ever believe that the U.S. government could run an efficient operation when it comes to offering health care to all Americans. In fact, the past evidence proves that government can't do much of anything better than the private sector and when it comes to health care cost containment a government run health care system would eventually cost us all more than the current system that has a bunch of problems already. Unlike many conservatives, I do believe that just like food and housing there are certain things that are a right and not a privilege in this great country. One of the things that should always be available to all Americans is quality health care and the only reasonable way to provide that health care without ruining the system for everyone else is for the government to provide free heath insurance coverage for those that cannot afford to pay the premium and leave the rest of us alone with the health care system we have today.

Title: Health Care Blunder
Forum | Twitter | Chat | Stats | Privacy Policy | Blogged | Catalog
RSS | Atom | Feedburner | Feedback | Subscribe | Hutch Report

Monday, July 20, 2009

Home Mortgage Recession

I spoke with my sister who is in the real estate business a few days ago and she told me that while more homes are selling today than in months past, most major leaders are still worried about the future and they are also very reluctant to approve homes loans for some people even when their credit score is perfect. It comes as no surprise to me that major banks and mortgage leaders are reluctant to step up and offer loans today that might have a duration of 30 years or more because almost everyone in the United States is concerned that the recession of 2009 might not be coming to an end anytime soon. While President Obama is talking a good game when it comes to a U.S. economy recovery, most Americans are listening more to what their friends and neighbors are saying around them than to the President of the United States. The simple fact is that U.S. unemployment is continuing to grow and when that happens both consumers and major mortgage banks are hesitant to make huge financial decisions.

I work with a few people that have bought homes in the past two years. Back when the U.S. economy was humming along and almost everyone with a pulse was pre-qualified for a 30 year or more home mortgage it seemed like the sky was the limit when it came to the American dream of home ownership. However, now after only six month of home deflation - many people that bought homes within the past year or two are now looking for a way out of their present home because of job security fears and dropping real estate values. The sad news for these new homeowners is that while it was easy to get approved for that home loan six to twelve months ago, there is nothing easy at all about finding a buyer that is willing to pay their current asking price. When the real estate bubble burst, millions of young Americans did not know what to do since during their short lifespan they had never witnesses financial hard times when the value of a home goes down instead of up.

While there is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to why the U.S. real estate market was allowed to bubble up and eventually explode, most certainly no real estate bubble would have been possible if better leading practice were required for home ownership. I also have a big problem with how home mortgage loans are approved these days, as well. When I was young and in college, I learned that getting a home mortgage loan was a long and drawn out process because before a bank or mortgage lender would finance a house for 30 years or more they first wanted to investigate the buyer to not only make sure they could make monthly mortgage payments for the length of the term, but also they wanted to be sure that new home buyers understood that there will be many ups and downs in the U.S. real estate market. Back in the 1970's there were rules that had to be followed before anyone could be approved for a home mortgage loan. Those rules had the effect of making sure that no American bought more home than they could really afford.

In more modern times, old real estate leading rules were toss out the window when major banks and mortgage leaders started depending on credit score alone for approvals. It was easy for old timers like myself to see the future meltdown of the U.S. real estate market when getting a 30 year mortgage loan became as simple as walking into a retail store to get a credit card. In my opinion, the streamlining of credit in the United States has not been the positive occurrence that many in the banking industry believe it to be. American consumers have always been impatient when it comes to buying the things they want to maintain a lifestyle they feel comfortable living in. Over time, U.S. banks became just as impatient as consumers when it came to the approval process of financing a mortgage loan and in the end those same banks made huge mistakes because they focused solely on a persons credit score when approving a home mortgage loan. My hope is that in the future banks will move back to more bedrock lending principle and away from credit score lending for something has high dollar as a home mortgage loan.

Title: Home Mortgage Recession
Forum | Twitter | Chat | Stats | Privacy Policy | Blogged | Catalog
RSS | Atom | Feedburner | Feedback | Subscribe | Hutch Report