On Tuesday, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department announced plans to use deputies to track parolees released from state prisons. While we thank Sheriff Lee Baca, we agree with Supervisor Michael Antonovich who said that Los Angeles County will be "taking our law enforcement personnel, who should be out fighting gangs … to do the state’s mothering of these parolees."
| |||||||||||||||||||
United Chambers of Commerce | 5121 Van Nuys Blvd., Ste. 208 | Sherman Oaks | CA | 91403
|
If you step on a scale and the floor collapses under you, you’re probably on a Weight Watchers diet.
I know that sounds like a punchline — but 20 Swedes learned the cold, hard truth about gimmicky diets when the floor gave way during their Weight Watchers weigh-in.
There were no injuries…unless you count pride. But honestly, what’d these folks expect from this masochistic diet cult?
Weight watchers "works" by assigning points to food. You get so many points a day and you can eat whatever you want with them…half a cookie, a bite of pizza and maybe lick the powdered sugar off a jelly donut.
Run out of points and you’re supposed to stop eating for the day…or you can earn more by punishing yourself with exercise.
But the only thing you’ll really lose with this backwards plan is money…and maybe your sanity if you’re forced to sit through enough of their weekly confessional-style meetings.
If you really want to lose weight, you don’t need points, exercise, meetings or other gimmicks. Just skip the junk — give the carbs a one-way ticket to Sweden and eat a healthy diet of animal fats and protein.
And if you insist on trying Weight Watchers, just make sure you reinforce the floor first.
Watching the weight watchers,
An evening with Guest Speaker Ann Armstrong Dailey
Founding Director & CEO of Childrens Hospice International
"CHI’s ultimate goal is to so ingrain the hospice concept into pediat-rics that it isn’t considered a separate specialty, rather, an integral part of health care for children and adolescents."
–Ann Armstrong-Dailey
As we begin to understand the importance of hospice for children of all ages, we need to participate in this opportunity to hear the impor-tant information she has to share. – Loving Homes hospice LLC
Visit our website to purchase tick-ets: lovehomehospice.org or mail payments to P.O. Box 940531 Simi Valley, CA 93094
Hilton at Warner Center
6360 Canoga Avenue – Woodland Hills
DATE:
FEBRUARY 27, 2010
TIME:
6:00 PM – 11:00 PM
HOST: STEVEN J BREVIDORO
LIVE ENTERTAINMENT DINNER/CASH BAR/SILENT AUCTION
ADVANCE TICKET: $75.00
AT DOOR: $100.00 PLEASE RSVP TO RESERVE YOUR SEAT BY FEBRUARY 17, 2010
For more information: Phone: (805) 578-2450
Email: [email protected]
Visit our website to purchase tick-ets: lovehomehospice.org or mail payments to P.O. Box 940531 Simi Valley, CA 93094
A Path-Dependent World
Between Dire and Disastrous
A National Suicide Pact
It's More than Just Greece
R.I.P., Walt Ratterman
The NBA, Snow, and No Power
The news is somewhat “All Greece, All the Time,” but most of the pieces miss the more critical elements, and in today's letter we will look at what I think those are, as well as at the important point that Greece is a precursor of a new era of sovereign risk. Plus, we glance at a few rather silly recent comments from economists. It will make for a very interesting discussion.
A few weeks ago I mentioned my friend Sir Walt Ratterman, who was in Haiti at the time of the earthquake. Long-time readers know that every Christmas I ask you to make a donation to Knightsbridge and projects that Walt runs. You have been very generous over the years. Tragically, they have found Walt's body. For those interested, I will provide a few details about this true hero, toward the conclusion of the letter.
Before we get into the meat of the letter, I want to give you a chance to register for my 6th (where do the years go?!) annual Strategic Investment Conference, cosponsored with my friends at Altegris Investments. The conference will be held April 22-24 and, as always, in La Jolla, California. The speaker lineup is powerful. Already committed are Dr. Gary Shilling, David Rosenberg, Dr. Lacy Hunt, Dr. Niall Ferguson, and George Friedman, as well as your humble analyst. We are talking with several other equally exciting speakers and expect those to firm up shortly.
Look at that lineup. These are the guys who got the calls right over the past few years. They called the housing crisis, the credit bubble, and the recession. And, in my opinion, these are some of the best in the world at giving us ideas about where we are headed.
Comments from those who attend the annual affair generally run along the lines of “This is the best conference we have ever been to.” And each year it seems to get better. This year we are going to focus on “The End Game,” that is, on the paths the various nations are likely to take as they try to solve their various deficit problems, and how that will affect the world and local economies and our investments. We make sure you have access to our speakers and get your questions answered, and you'll come away with excellent, practical investment ideas.
This conference sells out every year, and you do not want to miss it. There is a physical limit to the space. Every year I have to tell people, including good friends, that there is no more room. Don't wait to sign up. There is an early-bird discount of $200. And while it pains me to say it, you must be an accredited investor to attend the conference, as there are regulations we must follow in order to offer specific advice and ideas. Click on the link and sign up now. https://hedge-fund-conference.com/20…px?ref=mauldin
A Path-Dependent World
Path dependence explains how the set of decisions one faces for any given circumstance is limited by the decisions one has made in the past, even though past circumstances may no longer be relevant. In essence, history matters.
With regard to the future, the choices we make determine the paths we will take. As I have been writing for a long time, we have made a series of bad choices, often the easy choices, all over the developed world. We are now entering an era in which our choices are being limited by the nature of the markets. Not only are we in a path-dependent world, but the number of paths from which we may choose are becoming fewer with each passing year.
Our economic future is more and more a product of the political choices we make, and those are increasingly difficult. We have no good choices. We are left with choosing the best of bad options. Some countries, like Greece, are now down to choices that are either dire or disastrous. There is no “easy” button.
Let's look at how Greece came to its current rather dismal predicament. And we will look at why it may be even worse than many pundits think.
First, we need to go back to the creation of the euro. Most of the Mediterranean countries that are now in trouble were allowed into the union with an exchange rate that overvalued their currencies relative to the northern countries, but especially to Germany. That meant that Greek consumers could buy products and services that previously may have been out of their reach. Plus, with government debt at low rates, the Greek government could borrow more to finance deficit spending, without the threat of higher interest rates. And Greece began to increase its debt with abandon.
Additionally, as it now turns out, Greece basically lied about its finances in order to gain admission to the union. It never complied with the fiscal discipline that was required for entrance.
With the high exchange rate, however, came the consequence of higher labor costs relative to, above all, Germany. While reviewing some economic facts about Greece, I came across the factoid that Greek workers had the second highest level of actual hours worked. But even with that, Greece was running a trade deficit that is currently 12.7% of its GDP.
And with the onset of the current recession, their fiscal deficit went from bad to worse. Their total debt is now €254 billion, and they need to finance another €64 billion this year, €30 billion of it in the next few months.
Bottom line, without some help or a bailout, they simply will not be able to borrow that money. And since a lot of that money is for “rollover” debt, that means a potential for default if they cannot borrow it.
European leaders said today that Greece will not be allowed to fail, hinting of a bailout. But there are a lot of “buts” and conditions.
Between Dire and Disastrous
While German Chancellor Merkel has indicated a willingness to help, the German finance minister and other politicians are suggesting German cooperation will either not be forthcoming or only be there at a very high price; and the price is a severe round of “austerity measures,” otherwise known as budget cuts. Greece is being told that it must cut its budget to an 8.7% deficit this year and down to 3% within three years.
For my American readers, let's put that into perspective. That is the equivalent of a $560-billion-dollar US budget cut this year and another such cut next year. That would mean huge cuts in entitlements, Social Security, defense, education, wages, subsidies, and on and on. And repealing the Bush tax cuts? That would just be for starters. No “let's freeze the budget” and try and grow our way out of it, as we effectively did in the '90s, or gradually cutting the budget a few hundred billion a year while raising taxes. That combination of tax increases and budget cuts would guarantee a US recession. Unemployment, already high, would climb higher.
And yet, that is what the Greek government is being asked to do as the price for a bailout.
A few facts about Greece. Some 30% of its economy is underground, meaning it is not taxed. In a country of 10 million people, only 6 (!!!!) people filed tax returns showing in excess of €1 million in income. Yet over 50% of GDP is government spending, and Greece has one of the highest public employee levels as a percentage of population in Europe. And its unions are very powerful. Nearly all of them have gone on strike over this proposal.
A National Suicide Pact
Now, here is where it actually gets worse. If Greece bites the bullet and makes the budget cuts, that means that nominal GDP will decline by (at least) 4-5% over the next 3 years. And tax revenues will also decline, even with tax increases, meaning that it will take even further cuts, over and above the ones contemplated to get to that magic 3% fiscal deficit to GDP that is required by the Maastricht Treaty. Anyone care to vote for depression?
And add into the equation that borrowing another €100 billion (at a minimum) over the next few years, while in the midst of that recession, will only add to the already huge debt and interest costs. It all amounts to what my friend Marshall Auerback calls a “national suicide pact.”
Normally, a country in such a situation would allow its currency to devalue, which would make its relative labor costs go down. But Greece is in a currency union, and can't devalue. Or it would restructure its debt (think Brady bonds) to try and resolve the problem.
The dire predicament is the one where Greece cuts its budgets and more or less willingly enters into a rather long and deep recession/depression. The disastrous predicament is where they do not make the cuts and are allowed to default. That means the government is plunged into a situation where it has to cut the entire deficit to what it can get in the form of taxes and fees, immediately. As in right now. And defaulting on the interest on the current bonds wouldn't be enough, although it would help.
Why not just let Greece go under? Part of the argument has to do with moral hazard. If Germany bails out Greece, Ireland, which is actually making such cuts to its budget, can legitimately ask, “Why not us?” And will Portugal be next? And Spain is too big for even Germany to bail out. At almost 20% unemployment, Spain has severe problems. Its banks are in bad shape, with large amounts of overvalued real estate on their books (sound familiar?) and a government fiscal deficit of almost 10%. While Spanish authorities say they can work this out, deficits will remain high.
The fear is one of contagion. Some argue that Greece is only 2.7% of European GDP. But Bear Stearns held less than 2% of US banking assets, and look what happened.
I have been trading emails with Lisa Hintz of Moody's, and she sent me the following note:
“It turns out from the BIS [Bank of International Settlements] numbers, that the largest holders of Greek debt are French, followed by the Swiss, although my guess is that a lot of that is hedged, and I don't know that the BIS picks that up, and then the Germans. The numbers as of last June were France €86 billion, Switzerland €60bn, and Germany €44 billion. I have seen more recent numbers of France €73b, Switzerland €59b, and Germany €39b. In terms of GDP, for Germany it is minimal – just over 1%. Of more concern, for France it is nearly 3%, and for Belgium 2.5%. For Germany, the debts of Ireland, Portugal and Spain are much bigger problems. They may, however, worry that if there is a contagion, they will have to take marks on that debt. That would be a real problem – nearly 15x the size of the Greek issue.”
The recent credit crisis was over a few trillion in bad, mostly US, mortgage debts, with most of that at US banks. Greek debt is $350 billion, with about $270 billion of that spread among just three European countries and their banks. Make no mistake, a Greek default is another potential credit crisis in the making. As noted above, it is not just the writedown of Greek debt; it is the mark-to-market of other sovereign debt.
That would bankrupt the bulk of the European banking system, which is why it is unlikely to be allowed to happen. Just as the Fed (under Volker!) allowed US banks to mark up Latin American debt that had defaulted to its original loan value (and only slowly did they write it down; it took many years), I think the same thing will happen in Europe. Or the ECB will provide liquidity. Or there may be any of several other measures to keep things moving along. But real mark-to-market? Unlikely.
The entire EU is faced with no good choices. It is coming down to that moment of crisis predicted by Milton Friedman so many years ago. And there is no agreement on what to do.
As Ambrose Evans-Pritchard wrote yesterday: (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/f…ek-rescue.html) :
“The 27 leaders never even discussed how they might shore up Greece or the rest of Club Med. German Chancellor Angela Merkel said she was not willing to broach the subject at all. The only relevant topic was whether Greece was complying with Treaty obligations, and how the country would slash its budget deficit from 12.7pc to 8.7pc this year – in a slump.
“'They offered nothing,' said Jochen Felsenheimer, a credit expert at Assenagon in Frankfurt. 'It was just words without any concrete measures, hoping to buy time.'
“Whether the EU has time is an open question. Credit Suisse says Greece must raise €30bn in debt by mid-year, mostly in April and May. Greek banks have been shut out of Europe's inter-dealer markets, forcing them to raise money at killer rates. They are suffering an erosion of deposits as rich Greeks shift money abroad. This could come to a head long before April.
“'Economically, we are in a very risky situation. Greece is close to default. We face systemic risk like the Lehman collapse and unless there is a bail-out for Greece, there will have to be a bail-out for the whole European banking system within two or three months,' he said.
“Yet they are damned if they don't, and damned if they do. 'A Greek bail-out increases the risk of EMU break-up, because monetary union can only work if everybody sticks to the rules,' Mr Felsenheimer said.”
There is talk among some in Europe of a more centralized control of some countries that do not stay within guidelines, which means that Greece might be asked to give up some of its sovereign freedoms in exchange for bailout funds. French President Sarkozy emphatically stated that no member of the EU would be allowed to default. But he did not bring a checkbook to the press conference. Selling this to a variety of national parliaments will not be easy, when they have their own problems.
And Merkel has problems on the home front. There are reports she is putting the brakes on a bailout, as she is getting pushback from her constituency. The Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung warned the chancellor yesterday that offering Greece any kind of bailout would be a betrayal of the trust of the Germans who so reluctantly traded in their marks for the euro. “If the no-bailout clause of the Maastricht Treaty is going to be abandoned, then the last anchor of a stable euro will be destroyed,” warned the front-page editorial in the conservative newspaper. “Chancellor Merkel has to be hard now so that the euro doesn't become soft.”
Ultimately, this is a political decision for the Greek people. They have roughly four options. They can accept the austerity measures and sink into a depression for a few years. This would mean the total amount of debt would go up rather significantly, putting a very large crimp on future budgets. Debt is a constraint on growth. Debt-to-GDP is already over 100%. A recent paper by Reinhart and Rogoff (authors of the book This Time It's Different) shows that when government debt-to-GDP goes over 90%, it reduces future potential GDP by over 1%. That locks in a slow-growth, high-unemployment future in an economy already saddled with government spending at 50% of GDP, which is by definition a drag on GDP growth.
The second option is that they can simply default and go into a depression for more than a few years. This would have the advantage of reducing the debt burden, depending on what terms the government settled on. Would bond holders get 50 cents on the euro? 25 cents? Stay tuned. But it would also most assuredly mean they would not be able to get new debt for some time to come, forcing, as noted above, severe cuts in government spending. From one perspective, it has the potential advantage of reducing government's share of the economy, which is a long-term good but a short-term nightmare. But it also keeps Greece in the euro zone, which does have advantages. However, it does little to deal with the labor-cost differentials.
The third option is that they could vote to leave the European Union. While this is unthinkable to most Europeans, it is an option that may appeal to some Greeks. They could create their own currency and effectively devalue their debt. It would make their labor and exports cheaper. They would still be shut out of debt markets for some time. Any savings left in Greece would be devalued overnight. Those on pensions would find their buying power cut by a great deal. It is likely that inflation would become an issue. And it would be a full-employment act for legions of attorneys.
Most people scoff at this notion, but money is flying out of Greek banks into non-Greek ones, and to my way of thinking that is a suggestion that some Greeks think secession might be a possibility. It is also causing severe stress at Greek banks.
The final option is to promise to make the budget cuts, get some form of guarantee on their bonds, and borrow enough to make it another year – but not actually cut as much as promised; just make some cuts and then promise more next year if you will just bail us out some more. That just kicks the problem down the road for another year or two, until European voters (mostly German) get tired of taking on Greek debt.
The market is not going to let Greece continue to borrow without showing some serious efforts at cutting their deficit, and probably not even then without some external guarantees. The history of Greek debt is not a good one. They have been in default 105 years out of the last 200.
There are some optimists, however. Good friend and fishing buddy David Kotok thinks that this will all turn out OK. Writing this week, he said, “Lastly, it is important to understand the territory of this issue. The 27 members of the EU and the 16 of them that are in the euro zone, and most of the other 11 that want to be in the euro zone, will coalesce and deal with Greek debt in the fiscal policy arena. Budget deficits will decline, although they may not decline as fast as projections. Economic growth will occur, although it may not be as fast as projected. Taxes will rise. Public sector employment benefits and compensation will be pressured to compress, and the workers will resist but eventually compromise. By the way, that will also happen at the federal level in the United States and with the 50 sovereign state debtors that make up our country. Think of us as a US dollar zone, just as we think of them as a euro zone. They are new at it. We have had a century of practice and need only another few hundred years to get it right.”
My objection to that is, US states generally have a mandate to balance their budgets, so that the “debt-to-GDP” of a state is comparatively rather small. And a US citizen is ten times more likely to move from one state to another to find a job than a European will move to another country. As one person I read commented about unemployed Spanish workers in Madrid, “They won't even move to Barcelona!”
It's More than Just Greece
The lesson here? This is not just a Greek problem. Debt and out of control deficits are a problem all over the developed world. The Greeks are just the first. As Niall Ferguson wrote this week in the Financial Times, the contagion is headed to US shores unless we get our budget house in order. You cannot spend your way out of a fiscal crisis. The current path is simply unsustainable. At some point, we can become Greece. Yes, we have the advantage of having our debt denominated in dollars, but that is only an advantage up to a certain point.
The Nobel Prize economists (who will go nameless here) who say the US cannot default because our debt is in dollars miss the point. Being the world's reserve currency just means we can run up bigger bills, but if we go the route of printing money to pay those bills, that is devaluation and fraud, as the value of a dollar will diminish; and that is tantamount to default.
Whether it is Japan or Portugal or the US or (pick a country), the body of evidence clearly shows that there is a limit to the amount of debt a sovereign country can handle without a crisis developing. That limit is different for each country, but there is a limit that the bond market will impose. And there are many countries in the developed world that are approaching that limit.
We are in the fullness of time approaching the End Game. In country after country, the choices that have been made over the last decades will yield a Greek situation, where there are no good choices. And the longer the hard choices are put off, the more difficult they will become.
For some countries it could mean deflation. For others, it will look like inflation on steroids. Countries with sensible budgets and policies will thrive.
For most of the last two decades, investors have ignored country risk in the developed world. That is no longer a safe option. We will explore the consequences in later letters.
R.I.P., Walt Ratterman
A few weeks ago I wrote about my friend Walt Ratterman, who was at the Hotel Montana in Haiti when the earthquake hit. Walt's wife Jeanne received an email only 10 minutes before the quake, which placed him in the courtyard, where he would have been OK. After the quake there was an eerie silence. We all assumed that Walt was helping those injured in the quake and that he and his friends would surface when they got a break. Those who knew Walt understand the passion he brought to many relief operations. Walt was known for sneaking into Myanmar in the bottom of a boat where, if discovered, he would have been summarily executed. Walt was the subject of the documentary Beyond the Call, which showed him braving Afghanistan a month after 9/11, Myanmar, and the most dangerous region of the Philippines.
Walt's love of helping people who, for no fault of their own, couldn't help themselves caused him to relocate his family to the West Coast, to be better able to continue his work. Walt traveled the world to help the needy, visiting Asia, Africa, South America, and Central America. Each time he brought food, medical relief, and solar power, and had a sustaining impact on all the lives he touched. Walt was part of a team brought into Haiti by USAID (United States Agency for International Development) to bring solar power to Haiti. Walt was working there on several projects, including a few hospitals where electricity brought them out of the dark ages, allowing them to perform surgeries and other treatments that were unavailable in Haiti previously. Many of the projects were completed prior to the quake and provided much-needed support for the injured, saving countless lives.
The great irony is that Walt almost never stayed in nice hotels. He stayed with those he helped.
The men and women who loved Walt mobilized to raise money and travel to Haiti. My own readers have been very generous. Six teams made their way at various times throughout the search and rescue phase of the operation. Each of those teams brought much-needed food, water, or medical relief. Dr. Sir James Laws hired a bus in the Dominican Republic and loaded it with bottled water that was given to many who were thirsty in Haiti. Sir Edward Artis loaded a 20-foot truck with food and braved the road from the Dominican Republic as well, in spite of reports of looting and hijacking of other vehicles on the road. The first team was given the emotional task of handling the morgue at the Hotel Montana. Without complaining, each member of that team stepped up and did what was asked of them. Each night this team cried themselves to sleep from the emotional toll of dealing with the dead that day. Each of the Knights and friends of Walt reached out to their entire networks and brought awareness to the search for Walt and the hundreds of others trapped in the rubble at the Hotel Montana.
As time wore on it became obvious that a miracle wasn't meant to be. Hope gave way to preparation for the inevitable. Walt's backpack and laptop were found a few days before his body was discovered. And then there was a wait for positive identification, before dental records confirmed that Walt was a casualty of the devastating earthquake. He was one of more than two hundred thousand souls separated from their bodies in that quake. No doubt Walt was busy in the spirit world, calming and organizing this mass of men, women, and children for their trek to meet their maker.
Each of us who has been involved in the life of Walt, and now with his untimely death, knows that he lived a life of honor and that he died doing the work that he loved. His death was certain to be a death of honor because of the way he chose to live his life. Each of us has the opportunity to rededicate ourselves to living our lives in a manner more aligned with the values that Walt applied every day he was here. Walt stared death in the face so many times and lived, that we all expected him to be immortal. Each of us has limited time on this planet, and we can use Walt's example to make that time count.
You, gentle reader, have given generously to make a great deal of difference in Haiti and over the years to Knightsbridge. Would you join me one more time to honor the life and work of our fallen hero Walt Ratterman? The world does not have enough Walts, and he will be sorely missed. Rest in Peace, my friend.
Please make your generous donations today, by sending a check made out to “Steps for Recovery” but clearly marked “FOR KNIGHTSBRIDGE / HAITI” to:
Steps For Recovery
P.O. Box 67522
Century City, CA 90067
(A California 501(c) 3 Tax Exempt Corporation
Federal ID # 95.4472343)
Or you can make an immediate ONLINE donation via PayPal, by going to the Knightsbridge website, located at: http://www.kbi.org/ and hitting the Donate icon found there.
There will be two memorials. Click here for details. https://app.e2ma.net/app/view:Campai…1abafdccace3fc
The NBA, Snow, and No Power
I note, for the (now almost 10,000) readers of the Chinese language version of this letter, that there is a very interesting conference in Shanghai this spring. I wish I could go, but I have a conflict, though next year I am planning on speaking. You (and others around the world who are interested) can learn more at http://www.halterconferences.com/hfs2010_ticket.asp. Use promo code “MAULDIN” for a discount on tickets.
This weekend I take most of my kids and their spouses and friends to the NBA All-Star Game, as well as my friend of longest standing, Randy Scroggins (I am not allowed to say oldest friend). We went to the first grade together and have remained close for all these years. It will be a fun evening. My last All-Star Game was some 25 years ago, here in Dallas. I remember Isaiah Thomas getting the tip-off and missing his first shot. Kareem pulled down the board, jumped up and baseball-passed the ball to Magic Johnson running down the left side, near half-court. Magic caught the pass, dribbled once, and then passed the ball behind his back all the way down court to James Worthy, who was streaking down the far side. Worthy dribbled once and then dunked. All in the first few seconds of the game. At least that's the way I remember it, from the very top row in the corner. My tickets are better this time, but I can only hope we see something like that.
I write this letter from a friend's house. Thursday we woke to snow, and it continued all day and into the evening. We had almost a foot of snow, which is not a lot for the north of the country but quite a lot for here. It has been decades since we had that much. Trees are down everywhere under weight they had not grown accustomed to, as are power lines. My power went out yesterday afternoon and will probably be out until Sunday sometime.
Just like a financial crisis, these things sneak up on you. It was only supposed to be a light dusting of snow. The problem would be “contained.” We had a system that was not prepared for the weight of this much snow. Oh well. We figure out how to Muddle Through. There are some facts and figures on my computer that did not make it into this week's letter, but it is long enough as is.
Have a great week, and remember to enjoy your friends and family while you have them.
Your meditating on how quickly life can pass analyst,
John Mauldin
Fox’s American Idol is one of the few family-friendly programs left on broadcast TV. A wholesome singing competition that celebrates the talent and life stories of average, hard-working Americans, the show has become a favorite, especially with children and teens. But now, Fox is considering filling the show with someone who is known primarily for crude profanity and explicit sex talk.
When Idol‘s co-creator and judge Simon Cowell announced he will leave the show at the end of this season, Fox immediately began searching for a replacement; and many news sources say that Fox is considering hiring Howard Stern.
HOWARD STERN!
The same Howard Stern who said of the gunmen at the school massacre in Columbine, "Did those kids try to have sex with any of the good-looking girls?…If you’re going to kill yourself and kill all the kids, why wouldn’t you have some sex?" The same Howard Stern whose TV program showed him personally shaving the genital area of a 19-year-old girl. The same Howard Stern whose broadcast conversations about "gang bangs," anal sex, and violence against women used language so vile that he was forced off the public airwaves and onto satellite radio.
Some people may think Stern would "tone it down" if chosen as a judge. But here’s a sample of what Stern himself said he would say as a judge on American Idol. WARNING: GRAPHIC LANGUAGE!
To sign the PTC’s petition to keep Stern off American Idol, click here.
With more and more people out of work, tenants are having a hard
time paying their rent on time or at all.
Do you know the right way to handle an eviction? Making one wrong
move could cost you time and money. Be sure to attend this seminar.
How to Get Through the Eviction Process
You Will Discover:
and much, much more .
Buena Park Wednesday, February 24th
Holiday Inn 7000 Beach Blvd., Buena Park
San Diego Thursday, February 25th
Scottish Rite Center 1895 Camino del Rio S. San Diego
Van Nuys Friday, February 26th
AOA Main Office 6445 Sepulveda Blvd., 2nd floor, Van Nuys
Seminars are from10:00 am to 12:00 pm Registration starts at 9:30 am.
FREE to AOA Members and their guests
Non-Members – $39 per person Reservations are required.
You can register online at
http://www.discoversuccess.com/index.php?page=seminar
or call (818-988-9200 ext. 114.
If you are not a member with AOA yet, you can join at
https://www.aoausa.com/Join_Today.htm
Update:
We have added a Spanish RRP class on Saturday, March 27th.
Plus, another English class has been added on Friday, March 12th.
These classes are filling up as fast as we can book them, please
don’t wait, book your seat today!
The class is 8:00 am to 5:00 pm and the cost is $175.
To find out if the RRP Rule applies to you visit:
The EPA web site at http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/renovation.htm
or http://www.aoausa.com/downloads/sbcomplianceguide.pdf
http://www.discoversuccess.com/index.php?page=seminar
or call (818) 988-9200 ext. 114.
Governor Schwarzenegger’s Legal Secretary Andrea Lynn Hoch today issued the following statement on the Governor’s Lieutenant Governor nominee Senator Abel Maldonado and what the California Constitution requires for confirmation:
"The California Constitution is clear: if the legislature does not act to refuse to confirm the Governor’s nominee, his appointment moves forward. The Constitution only speaks to ‘refusal’ of confirmation. Furthermore, the Lungren decision does not apply to this situation. The Lungren case addresses an entirely different situation and is not instructive here. Based on the Assembly vote, Senator Maldonado will be sworn in as Lieutenant Governor."
Article V of the California Constitution states that the nominee takes office if he or she is "neither confirmed nor refused confirmation" by both chambers. Today’s Assembly vote is not a "refusal" to confirm, there is neither a confirmation nor a refusal to confirm by that chamber and, under the text of the Constitution, the nominee would take office.
The decision in the case of Lungren v. Deukmejian (1988) 45 Cal.3d 727 dealt with a situation in which the Assembly voted to confirm and the Senate voted to deny. The court held that in that scenario, the nominee would not take office. The Lungren decision has nothing to say about the question here – when a majority isn’t reached, does the vote count as a refusal. According to the California Constitution, today’s Assembly vote is not a "refusal" to confirm.
The health Nazis want you to believe there’s nothing worse than tobacco…but I can think of plenty of things — starting with the so-called "cures" for smoking.
Take the anti-smoking drug Chantix…or, rather, don’t take it — because this drug has been linked to suicide attempts. But you don’t need to kill yourself to quit smoking… because you don’t need to quit smoking at all.
I don’t buy into the myth that tobacco is dangerous, but I do know plenty of benefits — like good digestion and regularity. It’s also a great way to relieve stress, and I can’t think of anything more enjoyable at the end of a long, hard day than a good smoke and a cold drink.
Anti-smoking meds, on the other hand, come with endless risks and terrifying — even deadly — side effects.
When you smoke, the nicotine unleashes a chemical signal that causes the brain to release a little dopamine. That’s the feel-good brain chemical associated with pleasure. It’s what gives us smokers that contented look on our faces as we puff away.
Chantix blocks this action, theoretically sucking the joy out of smoking — but any time you let Big Pharma suck on your brain, you’re just asking for trouble.
And boy do you get it.
This med has been linked to dramatic behavior changes, depression and that suicide risk. It can also worsen or reawaken any mental disorders you already have. And like the Ghost of Drugs Past, Chantix side effects can haunt you even AFTER you’ve given up the med.
Chantix has also been known to cause nausea, vomiting, constipation and gas. If that’s not enough, it can even alter your dreams.
All for a med that doesn’t work. That’s right — it’s the most "successful" of the anti-smoking drugs, yet four of five patients who try it are back to smoking a year later.
That’s if they didn’t off themselves first.
Burning through the smoking myths,
No matter what your local shrink tells you, the answer to depression isn’t always in your head…and even when it is, he’s the last person you should ask for help.
Nope, the real culprit is the slop you stuff down your yaw. And now two new studies confirm what I’ve been telling you all along: Carbs and processed food lead to depression and other mood problems. (That’s if diabetes and heart disease don’t get you first.)
A new study published in The British Journal of Psychiatry found that people who ate the most processed foods had the highest risk of depression. It was a clear case of cause-and-effect: The worse the diet, the higher the risk.
Another study in the American Journal of Psychiatry found that women who ate diets heavy in processed foods over a 10-year period were 50 percent more likely to suffer from depressive disorders. The researchers took it a step further and found that women who ate primarily fresh meat and vegetables were 30 percent less likely to suffer from depression.
It’s basic nutrition, really. The real recipe for good physical AND mental health is the low-carb lifestyle I’ve been backing for years.
I won’t blame you for thinking this is stunning news — it certainly knocks the socks off pill-poppers when they realize they’ve been conned into taking expensive and dangerous zombie meds for no good reason.
But it’s not a state secret. If your doc managed to stay awake during medical school he should know all of this already — he just finds it much easier and far more profitable to send you out the door with a pocketful of happy pills.
William Campbell Douglass II, M.D.
Editorial
There is great frustration with the intransigence and obstructionism in Washington D.C.. The narrow view of partisan politics that would rather block than be constructive is an evil afflicting both the federal Congress and the State Legislature in Sacramento. The nomination of Abel Maldonado for the position of Lieutenant Governor should not fall victim to this bad behavior.
The nomination should be confirmed by the legislature.
We believe that Maldonado has repeatedly demonstrated independent judgment that has led him to vote for what he believes is best for California, rather than aligning his actions with the intransigent posturing of his fellow Republicans. The most recent example of this took place during the stalemate over the budget, where he broke partisan ranks to vote for a plan with a tax increase.
Maldonado has proven throughout his career that he is a moderate, pragmatic Republican when it comes to making decisions: a different kind of lawmaker in an increasingly polarized party.
this is the ideal nomination to show a conciliatory, bipartisan spirit. It is the occasion for California Democrats to distance themselves from the destructive obstructionism of the federal Congress.
(This article can be read at: www.impre.com/printpage/mainprintpage.html?publication=opinion)
It’s a simple fact of life: Even the best kids need a good spanking now and again, and a good parent shouldn’t be afraid to deliver it.
The best spot is where grandpa did it — right across the backside. WHACK! Trust me — it’s good for them, and a new study confirms that kids who get spanked do better than the little brats who don’t.
That’s right — better.
Researchers at Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan, found that teens who had been spanked up to the age of 6 did better in school, were more likely to volunteer, more optimistic and more eager to attend college than those who weren’t.
They did better in every single positive category measured by these researchers
— and no worse on the negative ones.
Score one for REAL parenting — and that means you can ignore the touchy-feely hippy parents who scream "child abuse" at the mere thought of good old-fashioned discipline.
Look around — it’s obvious their spare-the-rod approach has raised a generation of spoiled monsters and miscreants.
The bottom line on this: Parents have lost control of their homes and it’s time to take it back. You don’t have to get slap-happy…but don’t be afraid to deliver a good whack when it’s needed.
And don’t feel bad about it afterward.
With science as my discipline,
The FDA claims they’re finally concerned about a toxic chemical added to our plastics…they’re just not concerned enough to actually do anything about it.
What’d you expect, real action?
BPA, or bisphenol A, is an estrogen-like chemical used in plastics and cans, and it’s turning us into a nation of flabby, weepy, impotent pansies. It’s been linked to sexual problems, some forms of cancer, obesity, diabetes, early puberty and more…and most Americans are exposed to it on a daily basis.
But instead of banning this junk outright, the FDA has played blind, deaf, dumb and stupid — pointing to bogus safety studies provided by the chemical industry that makes BPA.
You can’t make this stuff up.
But now that they’re "concerned," they’re still far more interested in buying time for their industry friends than protecting you from a dangerous hormone boost. They say they’re waiting for the results of a big BPA study being conducted by the National Institutes of Health, due in two years.
Are these jokers for real? There have been more studies on this than I can count — and pretty much all of them point in the same direction: BPA is bad news.
So don’t wait for the feds, take it from me: Limit your exposure, starting now. Avoid anything that comes in a can or plastic bottle — you shouldn’t be eating or drinking the crap inside these things anyway.
Use quality glass cookware and real, fresh foods and you’ll minimize your exposure — and your risk.
And for goodness sake, keep this junk far from your kids. Most baby bottles are now BPA-free, but you can’t thank the feds for that. Parents threatened a boycott and state lawmakers threatened their own action. Meanwhile, Canada banned BPA in baby bottles outright.
That’s how you get things done — hit ’em in the wallet.
Introduction
Ever since the surprising election of Republican Scott Brown to the Senate seat held for over 40 years by the late Ted Kennedy, many political pundits have predicted that President Obama would have to move to the political “center” and scale back his liberal agenda. But unlike many politicians before him, I do not believe that Obama has any intention of moving to the center. In fact, he has said as much recently, even if he loses the House of Representatives in November.
As clear evidence that Obama is not moving to the political center, take his record-breaking federal budget proposal for fiscal 2011 that he unveiled last week. With absolutely no regard for the public's growing alarm over out-of-control government spending and trillion dollar budget deficits, the president proposed a record $3.83 trillion federal budget for fiscal year 2011 and increased its estimate of the 2010 budget deficit to a record $1.6 trillion.
Within the budget and its various 10-year fiscal projections, Obama plans to raise taxes by over $1 trillion over the next 10 years, largely on the backs of individuals making over $200,000 a year and American families that make over $250,000 a year. Here, too, this is hardly the sign of a man who is moving to the political center. And all of this is happening just as the economy is crawling back from a credit crisis and the worst recession in a half century.
It remains to be seen if the American electorate will respond with a sweeping change in Washington this coming November, or if the current groundswell against skyrocketing government spending and record deficits will have faded away, as Mr. Obama is hoping. The latest Rasmussen poll found that 75% of Americans are “angry” about federal spending.
This week, we will take a close look at the president's monster budget and record budget deficits as we go along. As should not surprise you, I am going to criticize President Obama in the pages that follow. Most importantly, you should know that I also beat up on both former presidents – Bush (43) and Bush (41) – for big spending and running large budget deficits.
Finally, we will take a look at the latest good unemployment news. Unfortunately, the latest unemployment report was not all good news. It's a lot to cover, so let's get started.
Obama's Record Large 2011 Federal Budget
When defending his massive spending and record budget deficits, President Obama frequently says that he inherited a “trillion dollar deficit” from former President Bush. That claim is not true. To put this in perspective, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office concluded that Bush's federal budget deficit for FY2008 was $454.8 billion.
The CBO deficit number did not include the $700 billion “Troubled Asset Relief Program” (TARP) that President Bush signed into law in late 2008 during the sub-prime crisis to shore-up major banks and insurance companies in the form of loans secured by troubled securities. If you add the $700 billion in TARP to the $454.8 billion, then you get a deficit of over $1 trillion.
The problem is, the Treasury only spent apprx. $400 billion of the $700 billion TARP in 2008, and over $300 billion was left over when Obama took office in early 2009. So how President Obama can claim that he inherited a trillion dollar budget deficit from Bush is beyond me. Yet that is Obama's story to justify his out-of-control spending in 2009, including the massive $787 billion “stimulus package.”
What we do know is that the federal budget deficit for FY2009 was a record $1.42 trillion, largely on Obama's watch. During 2009, Obama presented his budget proposal for FY 2010 which included another projected deficit of $1.4 trillion for this year.But as we learned early last week, the Obama administration now predicts that the 2010 budget deficit will be even higher.
President Obama presented his latest federal budget for FY2011 early last week, and it is yet another whopper. You may recall that Obama's first federal budget submitted last year for FY2010 was an enormous $3.6 trillion, as compared to Bush's last budget of $3.1 trillion. When Obama submitted the 2010 budget last year, the projection was for a budget deficit of $1.4 trillion this year, but his latest budget projections show the FY2010 deficit topping $1.6 trillion which is almost double Bush's last deficit (even if you include the $400 billion in TARP money).
President Obama's proposed federal budget for FY2011, which begins on October 1, would ratchet government spending up to a whopping $3.83 trillion with a deficit of at least $1.3 trillion. I say “at least” $1.3 trillion because some of the economic assumptions made in the budget and deficit projections are too rosy in my opinion (more details below).
So much for Obama moving to the center! He will continue to run $1+ trillion deficits, even though the latest Rasmussen poll found that 75% of Americans are “angry” about out-of-control federal spending, and the likelihood that the Democrats will take a drubbing in the November mid-term elections.
Here are the latest budget deficit estimates from the White House Office of Management & Budget (OMB), based on Obama's latest federal budget request for FY2011. If these projections prove accurate, the US national debt would almost double by 2020.
There are several important reasons why these deficit projections are too optimistic, in my opinion. First, the White House OMB assumes that economic growth or GDP will increase by 4% in 2010, which could be quite optimistic as I have suggested in the last few weeks.
Second, the OMB assumes that economic growth or GDP will increase by 5.2%-6.1% annually in the five years 2011-2015, with no recession. Most economists would agree that this scenario is way too optimistic. Even the Congressional Budget Office, which is also historically too optimistic, projects that annual real GDP growth will average only 3.8% a year in 2011-2015.
Annual GDP growth of 5.2%-6.1%, versus 3.8%, over five years is a huge difference and clearly suggests that the Obama deficit projections for at least 2012-2015 are far too optimistic. In fact, both sets of economic assumptions could be too optimistic.
Third, both the OMB and the CBO assume that inflation is going to remain subdued over the 10 years shown above, with the Consumer Price Index hovering just over 2% annually. Likewise, both the OMB and the CBO believe that interest rates will remain relatively low over the next 10 years, with the 3-month Treasury bill rate remaining well below 5%.
As noted above, many economists agree that these economic assumptions are too optimistic. Here's the latest from the economists at banking giant Wells Fargo: “The federal budget proposed this week includes a set of economic forecasts for growth that is significantly above the general expectation for long-term growth for the U.S. economy. Yet, large federal deficits persist and these deficits assume significant foreign capital inflows at very low rates. We suspect this is a very low probability outcome.”
We are on course to double the national debt over the next decade, and there is no way that inflation and interest rates are going to remain at these low levels… unless we have another recession. As I have also suggested in recent weeks, this is entirely possible if not likely.
Winners & Losers in Obama's Budget
If you consider it a “win” to get more money from the federal government, then the following groups are winners in President Obama's $3.83 trillion 2011 budget proposal.
Education: Asa huge perk to the teachers unions,theDepartment of Education outlays would more than double from $32.4 billion in 2009 to $71.5 billion in 2011. Obama puts money into a laundry list of other education initiatives, from a $1.6 billion increase in child care funding to making permanent the expansion of Pell Grant payouts. He also proposes $3 billion more into K-12 education generally, with up to an extra $1 billion if Congress reworks the education system in the way he wants this year.
Civilian Research & Development: Saying it's a key to the nation's long-term economic recovery, Obama would significantly increase spending for basic, non-defense science research in a range of departments for a total of $61.6 billion in civilian research. Obama pledged to double R&D funding for the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy's Office of Science and the National Institute of Standards and Technology. More money is going to develop clean energy alternatives, expand biomedical research, cure cancer and develop a more reliable electric grid.
Small Business: The president touted the importance of small businesses to the economy at length during his State of the Union, and his budget gives small companies some new advantages. Obama's budget would eliminate capital gains taxes for investments in the smallest tier of business and provides for a total of $28 billion in loan guarantees aimed at businesses with few employees or little revenue.
Harry Reid & Nevada: In a veiled effort to help Senator Harry Reid, who may be defeated in November, Obama pledged that the government would guarantee $36 billion more in loans for companies seeking to build new nuclear plants in Nevada. But at the same time, his budget would close YuccaMountain in Nevada, which is our primary repository for nuclear waste. How do you build more plants with nowhere to store the spent fuel rods?
These are just some of the big winners in the president's new budget. If you consider it a “loss” to get less money from the federal government, then the following groups are losers in President Obama's $3.83 trillion 2011 budget proposal.
NASA & the Moon: Obama's budget calls for NASA to cancel its Constellation Program that has been designed to return people to the surface of the moon. Instead, the budget actually adds $6 billion to NASA's budget over the next five years for projects such as robotic rocket systems.
Some Defense Contractors: The president's budget would increase the 2011 Defense Department budget by only 3.4%, well below the request. As a result, several DOD programs are on the chopping block. One of these would be the halting production of the Boeing C-17 aircraft, saying additional planes are “not needed.”
Oil & Gas Producers: Obama's budget would increase the Department of Energy's 2011 budget by 7%, with most of the added spending going to research on alternative and green energy. At the same time, the new budget would terminate eight different arrangements, mainly tax benefits/incentives that boost oil and gas production and exploration. Removing subsidies for domestic oil and gas producers essentially amounts to a $36.5 billion cost increase for the companies over 10 years, which of course will be passed on to consumers.
Other Losers: Department of the Interior (-1.6%); Department of Labor (-2.1%); HUD (-4.6%); Agriculture (-5.9%); Justice (-12.7%); and Commerce (-36.0%). [Source White House OMB]
Obama to Halve the Deficit by 2013 (Not!)
President Obama frequently promises that he will cut the federal budget deficits in half by 2013. Obviously, I don't believe that will happen because, as discussed just above, the economic assumptions are too optimistic, and government revenues will fall short of these projections. Yet it is these flawed projections that Obama uses to make his claim.
Even if the projections were to prove accurate, I still find it more than a little disingenuous to boast that you will halve the deficit by 2013 when you more than doubled it in your first full year in office!
For Obama to deliver on his promise, either taxes have to go up or government spending has to go down, or some combination of the two. You know what that means!
Here's a graphic look at how the Obama administration is counting on bringing in revenue and spending it in fiscal 2011, when they predict a budget deficit of $1.3 trillion. Keep in mind that income taxes in 2011 include large tax increases on “the rich” as discussed below.
Obama Proposes Over $1 Trillion in Tax Increases
As many were expecting, President Obama announced along with his 2011 budget request a host of tax increases, especially for high income earners, as I warned in my January 12 E-Letter. Taxes on high-income earners alone would rise by at least $1 trillion over the next 10 years, under the budget plan put forward by Obama last week.
The bulk of that increase comes as certain tax cuts enacted under President George W. Bush will expire at the end of 2010. At that point, the top two income-tax rates, which affect individuals earning more than $200,000 a year, or $250,000 for married couples, will return to 36% and 39.6%, from 33% and 35% now. Mr. Obama would extend the Bush tax cuts, including the 15% rate on capital gains and dividends, for single taxpayers making less than $200,000 and couples earning less than $250,000.
Under the budget plan, capital gains and dividends would be taxed at 20%, up from 15% now, for people at those upper income levels. Limits on upper-income earners' ability to claim personal exemptions and itemized deductions will also snap back next year, without any action needed from Congress or the president. The only action Congress will have to take is to extend the Bush tax cuts for individuals and families making less than $200,000 and $250,000 respectively.
As in last year's budget, Obama proposed last week to go further by limiting the value of those benefits, which include deductions for mortgage interest and some charitable contributions. The highest income earners under current law can lower their taxes significantly via those deductions, but that will be reduced considerably under Obama's new proposal.
The bid to lower the limit on itemized deductions stalled in Congress last year amid strong resistance from Republicans and even some Democrats. It is also opposed by a battery of interests including realtors and charities. So it remains to be seen if it will pass this time around.
Hedge fund managers would see their partnership profits taxed at ordinary income rates, rather than the much lower capital-gains rate, under Mr. Obama's proposals. That plan, which was also proposed in last year's budget, passed in the House but did not in the Senate, where members of both parties worry that a tax increase on so-called “carried interest” could harm entrepreneurship and investment. It will!
Obama also proposes to permanently reinstate the estate tax, which was repealed for one year on January 1 for 2010, back to the 45% level, with an exemption for estate wealth under $3.5 million.
Obama also proposes putting limits on the use of family trusts that have helped wealthy families lower their estate tax liabilities, which the White House estimates would increase government revenue by $23.7 billion over 10 years.
All in all, it will be one of the largest tax increases in history and, unfortunately, most of it doesn't require a vote in Congress or signature by the president. Liberals refuse to realize that if you raise taxes on “the rich,” tax revenues from this group can actually go down, not up.
Soaring Debt Now a National Security Threat
The national debt is now $12.35 trillion and it increases by almost $4 billion every day. Of that total, $7.85 trillion is held by the public, and $4.50 trillion is held by intra-governmental agencies and trust funds – all of it in government debt securities.
Of the $7.85 trillion held by the public, apprx. half of that is owned by foreign entities, some of which do not have America's best interest at heart. The US government now borrows one of every three dollars it spends, with many of those funds coming from foreign countries. With the national debt on track to double in the next decade, our vulnerability to foreign powers will increase significantly.
Our skyrocketing debt weakens America's standing around the world and our ability to act. It strengthens China and other world powers including cash-rich oil producers and others. It puts long-term defense spending at risk and undermines the power of the American system as a model for developing countries.
Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations and a senior national-security adviser in both the first and second Bush presidencies, recently said: “We've reached a point now where there's an intimate link between our solvency and our national security. What's so discouraging is that our domestic politics don't seem to be up to the challenge. And the whole world is watching.” When the CFR makes statements like this, you know things are dire.
Aside from the fact that each American next year will chip in more than $800 just to pay interest on our national debt, that situation means America's government is largely dependent on continued large loans from foreign creditors and subject to the whims of international financial markets. A foreign government, through the actions of its central bank, could put pressure on the US in ways its military never could.
Think China, should it decide to halt purchases of US Treasury debt, or worse, should it decide at some point to unload part or all of its near trillion dollar holdings of US debt paper. Even under a more benign scenario, a debt-ridden US is vulnerable to a run on the American dollar that begins abroad. Some would argue it is already underway given the dollar's decline last year.
January Unemployment – Good News & Bad
Employers shed jobs at a slower pace in January, but the nation's unemployment rate edged lower, according to the latest unemployment report last Friday. Nonfarm payrolls dropped by 20,000 in January, even though the pre-report consensus called for payrolls to increase by 15,000.
But in a surprise, the nation's unemployment rate, which is culled from a separate survey, edged down from 10% in December to 9.7% in January, the lowest level since August. In a further hint of recovery, the “underemployment” rate, which includes part time and discouraged workers not looking for work, fell to 16.5% in January from 17.3% in the prior month.
Some positive trends were evident in a cross-section of industries. The manufacturing sector added jobs for the first time in three years – 11,000 jobs. The retail sector added 42,000. Temporary help services also hired 52,000. The federal government also added another 33,000 jobs, about 9,000 of which were due to hiring in preparation for the 2010 Census.
The average hourly workweek also increased to 33.3 hours in January after hitting 33.2 in the prior month. Average hourly earnings also tracked higher by 0.3%, past expectations calling for a 0.2% rise. That's the good news.
Now for the bad news. The construction industry lost 75,000 jobs in January, which was more than expected. There were also job losses in transportation and warehousing. The Labor Department revised December's job losses from 85,000 to 150,000.
Making matters worse, apprx. 2.5 million Americans were unemployed in January but were not counted as unemployed because they had not looked for work in the four weeks preceding the survey. If we include all of the unemployed and the underemployed, the real unemployment rate is approaching 20%.
Perhaps the worst news was the revelation by the Labor Department that it discovered in making its year-end revisions for 2009 that they failed to count over 1 million people as unemployed last year. After these revisions, the US economy lost apprx. 8.4 million jobs in the recession, not the 7.2 million previously estimated. That leaves little doubt that this has been the worst recession since the Great Depression.
That's all for now. For those of you who are thinking of firing off a nasty e-mail to me for criticizing President Obama this week, just be reminded that I similarly criticized presidents George W. Bush and his father before him for spending too much and running up the deficits and the national debt.
Very best regards,
Gary D. Halbert
SPECIAL ARTICLES
Greatest spend-while-you-can budget in history
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000…922399114.html
Obama Budget: Wealthy Face Tax Increases
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000…NewsCollection
Tax increases can't address the coming entitlements crisis
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000…168889076.html
The Federal regulation called the Renovation, Repair, and Painting Rule
(RRP) will go into effect on
property owners/managers and others who do the work on pre-1978
housing who might disturb painted surfaces to become Lead Certified
Renovators by taking a one-day certified course about using
“Lead Safe Work Practices” on the job.
To find out if this recently passed RRP rule applies to you visit: http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/renovation.htm
or http://www.aoausa.com/downloads/sbcomplianceguide.pdf
This one day (8-hr) class explains how to comply with EPA’s Renovation, Repair,
and Painting (RRP) Rule. Subjects covered include: health effects, regulations, lead
safe work practices, containment, cleaning & record keeping. After passing an
end-of-class exam, students receive RRP Certification.
Van Nuys Wednesday, March 3rd
AOA Main Office, 6445 Sepulveda Blvd., 2nd floor, Van Nuys
Anaheim Thursday, March 4th
National Econ Corporation, 1899 S. Santa Cruz St. ,
Van Nuys Thursday, March 17th
AOA Main Office, 6445 Sepulveda Blvd., 2nd floor, Van Nuys
Anaheim – Thursday March 18th
National Econ Corporation, 1899 S. Santa Cruz St. ,
The class is from and the cost is $175 per person.
Please register online at
http://www.discoversuccess.com/index.php?page=seminar
or call
(818)
988-9200 ext. 114
The New York nanny-staters are at it again — and this time, your taste buds are coming under assault.
Mayor Michael Bloomberg has declared war on sodium…but he may as well declare war on skyscrapers, money and the New York Yankees, because none of those things are as essential to his citizens as plain old salt.
And yet he wants the government to dictate how much of it you should eat.
Luckily, Mayor Nanny Warbucks is already getting some resistance — especially from his city’s chefs (the ones who really cook, not the minimum-wage workers who flip frozen slime patties).
Their message is clear: Keep your hands out of my spice rack. But salt isn’t just a tasty addition to your meal — it’s a scientific fact that a low-sodium diet can actually RAISE blood pressure in some people.
The so-called experts can’t even tell you WHY blood pressure rises in the first place…so you shouldn’t trust them to tell you how to lower it, either.
If you’re generally healthy and stick to a low-carb, high- protein diet, you have no reason to lose the saltshaker. Shake it ’til your wrist gets sore and you’ll be just fine.
Just stick with pure sea salt — untreated and unadulterated, it’s actually gray. I don’t care what fancy- schmancy name is on the label — if it’s snowy white, it’s been treated. Toss it out and get the right stuff.
And if you eat a steady diet of processed foods and other crapola, you’ve got much bigger problems than sodium…and nothing the nanny state does will save you.
By the way, I hear Mayor Bloomberg is known for always keeping his own saltshaker nearby — he’s been seen adding salt to just about everything he eats, including pizza. He even adds salt to his saltine crackers.
Typical nanny-stater: Do as I say…
Always worth my salt,