Do Talk To Strangers

In November 2014, two children belonging to Alexander and Danielle Meltiv were picked up by police officers while walking home from a park a third of a mile from their home at 5 p.m. The authorities did not contact the parents about the whereabouts of their kids until three hours later and would only release the children into their custody after they had signed a "temporary safety plan" promising not to leave their children unattended.[1]

There is a big problem with perception vs reality in the United States today. I'm talking now, specifically, about the misinformed and idiotic trend toward reporting, arresting, and charging parents with child endangerment for allowing their kids to play outside unsupervised. Given the reality of the risks involved, this embarrassing state of affairs constitutes a true tyranny of ignoramuses in the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.

In the US, a child aged 14 or younger is more likely to die of a sudden, unexpected heart attack than to be abducted by a stranger. We have 60 million kids in this age group[2] and, in the latest year of compiled statistics, 115 of them were abducted by strangers.[3] That works out to a 0.00019% chance that, in a given year, a child aged 14 or younger will be abducted by a stranger. In fact, you are more likely to find a child dead of accidental drowning in a bathtub than you are to have him or her abducted by a stranger in any given year.

The most laughable (and tragic) misunderstanding of these odds is that many people feel that exposure to society is more dangerous for kids today than it was 20, 30, or 40 years ago. But this is not the case. From 1990 to 2007, for instance, "substantiated cases of child sexual abuse have declined 53% and physical abuse substantiations have declined 52%."[4] Rape, attempted or completed, against children fell a further 43% from 2003 to 2011.[5]

I could launch here into an exposition about why more people today are more likely to imagine that American society is more dangerous than it was in previous decades. But I'm not going to do that. It would only give a false air of legitimacy to the perpetrators of this trend. In the end, it is an uninteresting mystery to solve -- in the face of the active curtailment of liberty that is going on due to the breathless intervention of uninformed busy-bodies.

It really just comes down to this for parents: are you going to be influenced more by the true facts of the world or by fear of looking bad to people who are going to judge you regardless of how well you take care of your children? And to law enforcement, the courts, and the various child protective services agencies out there we need to say, "Enough is enough." What happened to the Meltiv family in Maryland should never happen to any family.

[1] Slate.com story about the Maltivs
[2] 2013 US population numbers by age range, US Census Bureau
[3] May 2013 Washington Post opinion piece by the director of the Crimes Against Children Research Center at the University of New Hamshire
[4] Trends in Childhood Victimization, Crimes Against Children Research Center, University of New Hamshire
[5] Free Range Kids.com crime statistics page

On Obamacare and the Free Market

Many of my contemporaries are posting and blogging about the PPACA, also known as "Obamacare", which rolled out its public health insurance marketplace in October. The most consistent complaint I read about the program is that it sets a new precedent of governmental intrusion on private citizens by requiring us all to purchase a product, namely: a health insurance policy. The law is set up this way so that the economics of heath insurance underwriting will work -- healthy individuals' premiums today cover sick individuals' costs today and provided a reserve for the costs of tomorrow.

It is worth considering how we as a county find ourselves crossing this precedent of intrusion. You would think (wouldn't you?) that industries operating in a free market would police themselves from a standpoint of enlightened self-interest so as to not require regulatory intervention. But in case after case, industries have failed to do so.

Take the revelations about the US meat-packing industry in 1905 that led to the founding of the (precursor to) the FDA. Or the 1910 phosphorus match industry study that produced high taxes, forcing the industry to innovate a safer technology for their workers. When the harm done by an industry flying the free market banner outweighs the benefits of waiting for the unseen hand to remedy the situation, governments have acted and always will act.

You may not be of the opinion that there was a crisis in healthcare access (via premium inflation or underwriting restrictions). However, a sober survey of business articles from 2003 until the housing crisis shows that US health care costs were consistently cited as one of the top problems threatening the US economy.

When you consider the trend of US demographics going forward toward the next 30+ years, it becomes less surprising that the PPACA is the new FDA or SEC of our time.

Wrapping Your Head Around the National Debt, Deficits, Surpluses, and the Debt Ceiling

The following is not a perfect explanation of the concepts of our national debt, deficits, surpluses, and the debt ceiling. But hopefully my readers will find it helpful in understanding what these terms mean and how they differ from one another.

Lets say we start a country and we have zero debt. In the first year, we collect $10,000 in taxes and spend $10,000. So we had no deficit, because all the bills were covered. We had nothing left over, so no surplus either. And we did not borrow any money, so no debt.

Year 2, we still collect $10,000 in taxes on $10,000 in expenses but we also decide to light a new national Christmas tree. This will cost $300 extra for tree, lights and electricity. We print 10 pieces of paper with the words "IOU $30.00" printed on them and tell people we will pay back $30 plus some interest on them in 5 years. 10 people buy our bonds, so we now have the $300 to cover the Christmas tree. Result: no deficit, no surplus, but now we have a $330 debt (including a flat 10% interest rate on the $300).

In year 3, we will need to set aside a little more than $10,000 (around $66 more) to make sure we will have the $330 ready to pay back the people who bought our bonds when they come due. However, if we still only bring in $10,000 in taxes, we will incur a $66 deficit for the year. The way we cover that is to print more IOUs and sell them so the money is set aside and our creditors believe we are taking our responsibilities seriously. So we see that the deficit incurred this year causes the debt to grow.

Skip ahead 230 years... We now have a military, a department of social services, tons of federal employees in each, etc, etc. All of these programs were approved over time by the people's representatives -- including the financing schemes to pay for them over time with future tax receipts. The amount of all the bonds we've permitted ourselves to print and sell (to cover our past and future spending commitments above the taxes that have come in) is our "debt ceiling".

Let's say the total amount we've agreed to pay above all of the combined tax income so far is now $17 Trillion. That's the debt. If, in this year, we incur more expenses (including payments on the debt) than we bring in from taxes, we have a deficit for the year. If we had a deficit last year and we have a deficit this year, but the amount we went "over" this year is half of what we went over last year, we have cut our deficit in half. If we bring in more tax revenues this year than this year's expenses, it is a surplus - but that doesn't help us pay down the debt unless we agree to apply some or all of this year's surplus toward paying off the total debt.

On American Exceptionalism

Once again, this time during a civil war in Syria, atrocities perpetrated by some group or other have roused sentiments that "America had ought to do something" about the situation. It has taken the surprise wisdom of an an internationally acknowledged tyrant and thug, published in a US newspaper, to give us all pause from our rush to near-unilateral military intervention. A major point of the published thesis is that America's exceptionalist self-image poses a threat to lasting world peace.

Oh for the days when we were not a so-called "Superpower". The decades -- well over a century if they were gathered up and packed together -- when we meddled with and aggressed only the unlucky other governments that happened to inhabit the land now known as the Continental United States. Even when our aggressiveness began spilling beyond those borders, our invasions involved only our nearest neighbors and our false flag operations were conducted within 90 miles of the Florida Keys. The Presidents in office during the years at the start of both world wars won their elections by promising to keep America out of them. We used to go to war for old-fashioned, unexceptional reasons: the gaining of territory and the weakening of other expansionist nations operating near our borders.

Supposing America were found to be exceptional, would that be a good thing? This is an important question, worth pondering and debating. Perhaps the Roman Empire did not fall because of greed or invasion by barbarians or due to the neurological effects of drinking from heavy metal goblets. Perhaps the Roman Empire fell the way every great society does in which an exceptional class of its citizens comes to control its policies. (always in the name of the "good" of the unexceptional) Under every such regime, only a generation or two passes before the old guard, consumed with defending its power and privileges grows increasingly blind and irrelevant to the concerns and aspirations of the very people it imagines it is serving. As an example, the architects of America's Cold War policies in the 1970s and 80s had about as relevant a contribution to make to the question of Iraq's danger to the world in 2002 as a horse might offer to an octopus regarding the question of sea-floor territory.

The same holds true for movements and institutions. Were Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and the Civil Rights Movement exceptional? Without a doubt, they were. Simply witness the situations in American society before and after the movement to judge the question correctly. Yet, only Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton remain muted voices in American politics today. And, this is as just as it should be. Today's societal struggles are not -- cannot -- be led by the heroes of yesterday's movements. Without a doubt, past heroes can inspire and advise new movements and help society understand the broader context in which the struggle continues. Yet, the fire that refines us in every generation is kindled with the tinder of today's hearts, not borrowed from the cooling embers of yesterday's. I assert this to be true also of heroic nations within epochs of international crisis.

So what is the conclusion? Are we Americans "exceptional"? To silently suspect one's own exceptionalism can be a source of great inner strength that motivates one to attempt acts of virtue or valor corresponding with a blossoming greatness sensed within. This is a mature, inner fountain of self-motivation, healthy to cultivate in children and in the unassertive. But to claim rights or privileges due to exceptionalism or -- worse still -- to defend one's claims to exceptionalism seems to me to be a sign of immaturity and weakness rather than of strength. It conjures up the image of a former ballerina Prima Donna, having lost her youthful beauty, grace, and flexibility, clumsily crashing the stage of a new production in a tattered, ill-fitting costume to demand fresh applause.

Did the world, once upon a time, give America a "pass" for using atomic weapons in war or for participating in the choosing of other nations' borders or their forms of government? What of it? We must have, at the time, so earned those privileges and so conducted ourselves in the immediate redemption of them as to invite the awe and respect of the greater mass of humanity rather than their outrage and vows of vengeance. Exceptionalism, then, like any other accolade or privilege, is best observed in ourselves silently or conferred upon us by peers worthy of our respect. As with any other virtue, it has a shelf life and begins to spoil and stink when hoarded too long. Only the insecure claim it as a right or use it as a justification.

My '10 Commandments' To A New Humanity

A friend on Facebook, Jerry Schirmer, suggested the following parlor game.  Below the quote are my 10 Commandments to a new humanity.

There is going to be an atomic war. All of humanity is going to be wiped out. The only survivors will be a group of 1,000 babies that will be raised by robots and given only knowledge of the English language, basic survival skills, and a firm belief in a vague monotheism.

On their 13th birthday, they will be brought above ground, and their first sight will be a giant stone tablet on which will be inscribed ten statements of some reasonable number of words apiece (something like ten, lets say). These statements will be said to be the absolute word of God. You are entrusted with writing these statements.

What do you put on them in an effort to create/preserve/restore the best society possible?

    I. These laws never expire.
   II. Debts and all other laws expire within 7 years.
  III. Patents, copyrights, and leadership roles all expire within 7 years.
  IV. War may be waged only with weapons powered by hand.
   V. Adults may ingest, copulate, and cohabitate as they see fit.
  VI. The best paid teachers and scientists must have equal pay.
 VII. No salary may exceed that of the best paid teachers.
VIII. You may each worship God, or not, as you see fit.
  IX.Anyone attempting to overrule these laws must die painfully.
   X. The maximum penalty for other offenses: 7 years humane imprisonment.

Fall 2012: Prelude To Recession

In my opinion, the U.S. economy has begun a slide into probable recession. This prediction is based on a technical reading of the major stock market averages (Dow Industrial, Nasdaq, S&P 500) as well as analysis of several recent shocks to our economic system. I have "called" these economic movements in the past and occasionally been correct about them. I want to give you, the reader, an opportunity to understand what I'm seeing, so I will use this blog to explain the analysis that happens behind the predictions.

In stock charting, we don't just show the price points making up the chart. We usually also draw a line on the chart showing the average price of the last 50 trading days. Additionally, we draw a 200-day moving average. Taken together, these moving average lines depict the longer-term direction of the price that is being tracked.

In a healthy stock market, the prices of the major indexes stay above their 50-day moving average lines (and the 50-day moving average lines stay above the 200-day moving average lines). This indicates the price is increasing and its long term trend is upward.


Thanks to stockcharts.com

Here is a daily price chart of the S&P 500 Index from late May 2012 to the date of this blog post. We have healthy behavior in portion 1, within the green circle, where the daily price lines are moving upward above the blue line, which is the 50-day moving average line.

A few weeks ago, in portion 2, (yellow circle) we have a warning indicator. The daily values have dropped below their 50-day moving average, but they are still above their 200-day moving average. Stocks and indexes occasionally bread down below their 50-day moving averages but then recover above them. That is not what has happened here.

A few days ago, in portion 3, (red circle) we see a serious warning that the S&P 500 index may have begun a longer-term downward trend. The daily values have crossed below their 200-day moving average. Notice that the index has remained below the warning level for several trading days. The Nasdaq 100 and the Dow Jones Industrial average are both also below their 200-day moving averages and have been there several trading days longer than the S&P 500 index has.

so we start with the facts - reality - the three major indexes have all fallen into the danger zone, and have not recovered so far. To be sure, there have been occasions in the past when they all crossed below the danger thresholds then recovered back up into healthy territory. On the other hand, every recession in this country dating back at least to the Great Depression, has been signaled by the major indexes of the day slipping below their 200-day moving averages and not recovering.

In concert with the stock market danger zone, we have: 1) the "fiscal cliff" of tax hikes and federal spending cuts looming, 2) continuing uncertainty regarding solvency in Europe, 3) a recent swell of unemployment due to the destruction from Hurricane Sandy, 4) thousands of troops returning from foreign wars also joining the pool of the unemployed, and 5) Atlas Shrugged - in the form of pissed off Republican business owners retaliating for four more years of Barack Obama by cutting hours and positions to protest what they see as a slide into Socialism.

A deal on the fiscal cliff would certainly give a positive jolt to the economy but it remains to be seen whether that, alone, would provide enough impetus to restore it to the path of slow, gradual growth it had been on prior to November.

Back to My Center, Politically

I'm not really sure which post or image I first responded to on Facebook that made me start sounding like a perpetual Barack Obama supporter the last couple of months. The truth is that I am not. I just felt it was important to take a stand against obviously slanderous information. I guess there's just something in my DNA that rages against intentional misrepresentation. No one may say I have not done the same for Romney when I saw similar distortions.

But I identify most closely with the Libertarian point of view: "Lord, save me from those who try to help me, I can handle my enemies by myself." If the Republican party had had the balls to nominate Ron Paul, I'd be all over that. In the end we need less centralized power, not more. Just think of it - instead of one convenient place for corrupting, pandering lobbyists to go (Washington, DC), just think if they'd have to spread out across all 50 states Capitols. Or, even better, thousands and thousands of county seats. Alas, I may not see that come to pass in my lifetime.

But I know that a Republican party yes man is also not what this country needs in the White House. The Neo-cons still control the Republican party and it is thanks to them we had the runaway spending of the Iraq war and the erosion of our civil liberties in the form of the so-called Patriot Act, warantless wire-tapping, the TSA, etc. If I must choose between a tax-and-spend Democrat or a borrow-and-spend Republican, I will go for the guy who's gonna at least bankrupt us peacefully.

Which brings me to our role in global affairs. I've said it before, I'll say it again: We cannot preserve our Republic while we try to maintain an Empire. The problem with maintaining a Superpower-class military long after the Cold War has ended is that you end up looking for excuses to get a return on your investment. I'm all for strength, but "larger than the next 10 militaries combined" is at least seven or eight times too large. Continually bleeding debt money for this - as well as the Federal entitlement programs in their current forms - will certainly force the hard choices, in a more painful way (like in Greece today), than if we made them today, intentionally.

The Cure Is Worse Than The Disease

Velcome to Soviet United States of America!

In order for protekting our citizens and their interests, we have establish strong centralized institutions with broad authority over various aspects of their lives. Our latest plan is one of best ever. You vill like.

Effidently, bad, evil, greedy corporations tricked millions of Americans into signink legal contract documents known in the venacular as "mortgages". Ve know this must have been bad idea since etymology of vord "mortgage" transliterates into "death note". No von would ever sign death note, yes? Vell, anyway, by usink of flashy, hypnotizing marketing campaigns, these nasty corporations lured our dear dependents, I mean, citizens, into takink on of financial obligations linked to value of their homes. It is fundamental right for all Americans that home value should go up, up, up, and never hit snag. Somehow, however, snag did occur. We're not too sure who caused snag, perhaps CIA can look into this. It gets compicated and I von't bore you now vith details about how Wall Street firms ended up owning bundles and bundles of these death notes. But anyway, Wall Street firms have been sufferink also from snag.

Normally, businesses are allowed to make bets with their capital, flourishing when bets vin and dissapearink when bets lose. Ve dislike this chaotic arrangement yet citizens showed up in town squares with firebrands and pitchforks when we tried to interfere previously. This time, however, talkink heads on televised finance programs have convinced the people that certain of our Wall Street companies must not to be allowed for dissapearink. So here is plan. We, the caretakers of the American citizens, shall create federal entity. Led by vice diktator Paulson, it vill have authority for absorbink these bundles of mortgages from Wall Street firms. No pesky courts or lawsuits vill be allowed to interfere with vice diktator's dispensing of the death notes. So now, instead of the company dissapearink, only debt from company's bad bets will dissapear. It is thing of beauty, no?

Some organizers of previous pitchfork protests are voicink concern about plan. These are same guys who got upset when we started listenink in on phone calls without warrants, created authority to arrest citizens and not let them tell their spouses or lawyers what the charges were, and used army for toppling of foreign government. Yet it seems that crises mute the voices of dissent. I vonder what crisis will open the door for next big plan. Who knows? But for sure we will be ready for respondink to it with smart ideas for new centralized caretakink.

Do svidaniya comrades, and God bless the USA!