143: Who Is Nancy Grace?

Who is Nancy Grace on something called the "HLN" network, and why is she obsessed with Jody Arias?  And who is Jody Arias?  And why would any rational person, other than the immediate families of both of the aforementioned women, know the answers to these questions?

While surfing TV, I happened upon this Nancy Grace person.  While she is obviously presenting herself as a serious "news" person, she seems to me to be a character more appropriate to Duck Dynasty. 

Of course there is some idiotic network executive who is paying Nancy Grace big money to act like a hillbilly with expensive makeup.  Maybe Nancy is just playing the part and taking the money.  If so, good for her.

142: The Fed Doesn't Know Anything

Today, after the Fed's meeting and accompanying mealy-mouthed remarks, the AP published the following headline:

Fed signals it could increase or decrease stimulus

So almost four years after the end of the Federal Reserve inspired and fueled recession, which was a reaction to ultra accomodative monetary policy, Uncle Ben is telling us he doesn't really have a clue what is going or how to fix or the economy.  Jeeeus Ben!  At least lie to us a little and try to make us think your are not really as dumb as all the other idiots in Washington.  Instead, you tell us you can go both ways.  Gee thanks.  

Whatever recovery there has been since 2009 has nothing to do with the Fed.  It is simply demographics playing out.  More people need more stuff.

141: Bernanke's War Against Savers

This morning on CNBC Wilbur Ross made a very prescient remark.  When asked how long and how much Bernanke would extend QE, WR said eventually the government would levy an outright tax or fine on savings.  As ludicrous as this sounds, I think it is possible.  There has already been a tacit penalty on savers for six years without a let up.  And there is no end in sight.  What will happen when the next recession occurs and the ZIR policy is already in effect?  The government will be desperate to induce the rabid consumption on which our economy and government are based.  One answer, clearly, is to fine people who refuse to participate in irresponsible consumption.

One Hundred Forty: President Chicken Little

BO has been criss-crossing the country for the past few weeks lying about the impact of slightly reducing the rate of growth of federal spending.  In addition to his blathering, he has ordered his cabinet chiefs and chiefettes to do the same.  It seems that the only segment of the American population who has paid any attention to all this lying is the national media, and even they seem unconvinced.  The securities markets, the real estate markets, and the economy in general are also seemingly unconvinced.  Is it possible that the national consciousness has finally gotten wise to BO's act?  Let's hope so.

One Hundred Thirty Nine: BO Can't Compromise

Last night I saw a news snippet of BO addressing a group of state governors.  BO was campaigning to prevent the $85B reduction in the rate of growth of government spending, also bizarrely called a "sequester."  BO was telling the govs that the situation just required "compromise," and that he, BO, had already demonstrated his willingness to compromise.  This willingness, BO said, was manifest in his previous offers and actions over the past 4 four years.  Even by Washington standard's, this is the mother of all whoppers.  But as George Costanza used to say, "It's not a lie if you believe it."  And BO really does seem to believe his own BS. 

If BO really had shown the tiniest bit willingness to compromise, our recovery from 2008-2009 would be off to the races.  But in fact BO does not want compromise.  He wants a relentless continuation of federal government growth to redistribute private wealth.

One Hundred Thirty Eight: Still Trying Facebook

A couple of years on, I am still trying to figure out the value of FB.  Now that it's a public company with a current market cap of some $70B, it's pretty hard to discount the reality of FB as a presence in the lives of individuals, especially those under 40 years old.  And of course the fact that corporate entities are also "persons" in the FB realm is another reason to take FB seriously.  But what redeeming social or economic benefit accrues from the bazillions of hours spent by people revealing every idiotic thought or image on their respective pages? 

In the past few days I have spent a couple of hours Facebooking.  After trying to make sense of what I encountered, I returned to read a few chapters of Moby Dick.  Comparing the two experiences, it strikes me that I have retained much more from Moby than FB.

One Hundred Thirty Seven: Lots of Data But No Communication

I have been an avid writer all of my life.  It started I suppose with my parents forcing me to write "thank you" notes when I received a dollar or two for a birthday or some other occasion.  Somehow, I learned how to write (and speak) succinctly, which is a talent and skill I wish was more widely practiced. 

The younger crowd in business today has grown up with instant and constant information resulting in tsunamis of data.  Email, Twitter, Facebook, You Tube - 24/7 connectivity, but it seems to me very little communication.  In a recent transaction for the sale of a house, I received an average of 20 emails per day, which could easily have been reduced to one single email or telephone call.  The clients and the realtor were creating blizzards of messages almost one letter at a time.  The point is that with the ability to spew out information at will, individuals feel compelled to take advantage of that ability, usually without much if any thought.  It's just too damn easy to empty one's brain into the airwaves without thinking.  Perhaps as computers get smarter they will develop the kind of protection a good secretary gives her boss.  She serves at a check valve to make sure what he tries to send is wise.