I recently read an article in the March issue of Forbes Magazine entitled "The Nothing Cure." The author outlines a study undertaken by Harvard Doctor Ted J. Kaptchuk in which he established three different groups a patients suffering from irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). In his experiment, one group received fake acupuncture with encouraging talk, one group was placed on a wait-list for acupuncture, and the third group received the fake acupuncture without the warm encouraging talk. The results were remarkable. Of those who received fake acupuncture and encouraging talk, more than 62% reported vastly improved conditions.
The message: don't ignore the placebo effect. As Dr. Kaptchuk states "expectation of a cure- and the rituals associated with medical treatment- can improve real-world symptoms. Our own will, imagination and belief can modulate the course of illness." Humans have an incredible ability to will themselves to overcome any obstacle. In many cases they only need a motivator. Something they can believe in.
I found the results of this experiment fascinating. The only thing that limits us is the confines of our own mind. If we strip that away, we have the ability to do anything we desire. It requires work, focus, determination, and perseverance. That is where, I think, nearly everyone gets tripped up. People find excuses to not put in the work. They look for reasons to slack, to limit themselves. They take the easy road. And, in the case of this experiment, the easy road means suffering until someone else offers hope.
Wouldn't it be easier if you just decided for yourself?
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Taxing Banks
The news today is that the Obama Administration wants to hammer the "fat cat bankers" with a tax in an effort to recover the money lent out under the TARP program. Officials in Washington have engaged in finger-pointing following the announcement with Barney Frank stating "They got us into this mess, its their fault, they should be taxed. They acted irresponsibly, greedily, and recklessly."
My feelings regarding Mr. Frank aside, this is one of the most ridiculous pieces of proposed legislation ever conceived. The issues with this proposal are as follows: the President has stated that one of his main objectives for this year is to generate job growth through continued economic stimulation and increased lending activity from the financial sector. What bank is going to lend when it is being taxed by the Federal Government for a program that many were forced to participate in?
Additionally, the proposed tax will not be limited to banks who took money from the government; any bank with over $50 Billion in assets (which is quite a few) will be taxed 15 basis points (or fifteen hundredths of one percent) of total assets for a period of TEN YEARS simply because it is a bank and because it is their fault we are where we are. That may not sound like a lot, but go ahead and multiply .0015 by $50 Billion or $100 Billion or even $1 Trillion as some of these banks have. You will quickly see why Washington is interested in this tax.
But that isn't nearly as bad as the other clause in the proposal. See, TARP was originally only intended for financial institutions who had an overabundance of assets which had uncertain values. But it quickly morphed into a program that lent to AIG, GM, Chrysler, and individual homeowners (many of whom had purchased homes they never should have even looked at). The problem is that Washington is trying to strike a deal with labor unions for its healthcare overhaul and politicians do not have the backbone to tax labor unions for their expensive health plans and tax their companies for poor operation. GM, Chrysler, AIG, and homeowners will not be taxed for the money they took. Because all of this is the banks' fault, they will pay for GM and Chrysler and AIG and underwater homeowners, it is their fault that all of these groups are in trouble. It is their fault that GM and Chrysler and AIG made moronic strategic decisions. It is their fault that people took easy money and bought homes they could never afford. Its all their fault.
Just to be clear, this isn't Alan Greenspan or Ben Bernanke's fault for cheapening the dollar, artificially lowering interest rates and encouraging lending to people who were not credit worthy. This isn't Barney Frank and Chris Dodd's fault for defending Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's lending practices. This certainly isn't their fault for desiring to have every American in a home, regardless of income or credit-worthiness. This isn't their fault. It's not their fault that Fannie and Freddie could lend to terrible borrowers at obscenely low rates that no healthy, smart financial institution could ever dream of. It isn't their fault for lending obscene amounts to people that no healthy, smart financial institution would ever touch.
None of these parties are responsible for their decisions and actions. It is all the banks' fault. It's the banks' fault for everything.
Listen, I am not going to sit here and say that all banks acted with utmost discretion and intelligence, with an eye to the future. I know there were terrible things going on on wall street. I know there was predatory lending going on. I know that cheap money and greed are deadly combinations. I am not a wall street apologist. But I do know that wall street acted on what was going on the market and the market was being led by two institutions who had federal backing who made some of the worst financial decisions of all time. I do know that those institutions were encouraged by the government to engage in those practices. I do know that wall street saw these loans, knew that they had to be bad, and packaged them together and sold them to the highest bidder. But the only reason these instruments sold was because they were supposedly "government backed."
But just remember. It's all wall street's fault. They are to blame and it's time for them to pay up......
My feelings regarding Mr. Frank aside, this is one of the most ridiculous pieces of proposed legislation ever conceived. The issues with this proposal are as follows: the President has stated that one of his main objectives for this year is to generate job growth through continued economic stimulation and increased lending activity from the financial sector. What bank is going to lend when it is being taxed by the Federal Government for a program that many were forced to participate in?
Additionally, the proposed tax will not be limited to banks who took money from the government; any bank with over $50 Billion in assets (which is quite a few) will be taxed 15 basis points (or fifteen hundredths of one percent) of total assets for a period of TEN YEARS simply because it is a bank and because it is their fault we are where we are. That may not sound like a lot, but go ahead and multiply .0015 by $50 Billion or $100 Billion or even $1 Trillion as some of these banks have. You will quickly see why Washington is interested in this tax.
But that isn't nearly as bad as the other clause in the proposal. See, TARP was originally only intended for financial institutions who had an overabundance of assets which had uncertain values. But it quickly morphed into a program that lent to AIG, GM, Chrysler, and individual homeowners (many of whom had purchased homes they never should have even looked at). The problem is that Washington is trying to strike a deal with labor unions for its healthcare overhaul and politicians do not have the backbone to tax labor unions for their expensive health plans and tax their companies for poor operation. GM, Chrysler, AIG, and homeowners will not be taxed for the money they took. Because all of this is the banks' fault, they will pay for GM and Chrysler and AIG and underwater homeowners, it is their fault that all of these groups are in trouble. It is their fault that GM and Chrysler and AIG made moronic strategic decisions. It is their fault that people took easy money and bought homes they could never afford. Its all their fault.
Just to be clear, this isn't Alan Greenspan or Ben Bernanke's fault for cheapening the dollar, artificially lowering interest rates and encouraging lending to people who were not credit worthy. This isn't Barney Frank and Chris Dodd's fault for defending Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's lending practices. This certainly isn't their fault for desiring to have every American in a home, regardless of income or credit-worthiness. This isn't their fault. It's not their fault that Fannie and Freddie could lend to terrible borrowers at obscenely low rates that no healthy, smart financial institution could ever dream of. It isn't their fault for lending obscene amounts to people that no healthy, smart financial institution would ever touch.
None of these parties are responsible for their decisions and actions. It is all the banks' fault. It's the banks' fault for everything.
Listen, I am not going to sit here and say that all banks acted with utmost discretion and intelligence, with an eye to the future. I know there were terrible things going on on wall street. I know there was predatory lending going on. I know that cheap money and greed are deadly combinations. I am not a wall street apologist. But I do know that wall street acted on what was going on the market and the market was being led by two institutions who had federal backing who made some of the worst financial decisions of all time. I do know that those institutions were encouraged by the government to engage in those practices. I do know that wall street saw these loans, knew that they had to be bad, and packaged them together and sold them to the highest bidder. But the only reason these instruments sold was because they were supposedly "government backed."
But just remember. It's all wall street's fault. They are to blame and it's time for them to pay up......
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
the mighty fall
What do we do about Tiger Woods?
Many an apologist have jumped in his defense by pointing out either the shortcomings of others, the fact that this has nothing to do with golf, or some other asinine justification. The bottom line is, there is no way his actions can be justified.
I get that others have committed similar indescretions. I get that no one is perfect and we all make mistakes. I agree that he needs help and I hope, for the sake of his family, his children, and his person that he can get help. The problem I have with this is twofold.
First, just because we all are not perfect does not excuse what he did. He has trampled on his wife and family. He has betrayed Elin's trust. He has let his children down. Forget the fans that he alienated or the prize and endorsement money he stands to lose. None of that will measure up to the emptiness he will feel when he figures out how precious a thing his family was and how stupid he was to do this.
Second, he profited from the image that he cultivated. He profited from his "righteousness" and "wholesomeness." We have been sold a bag of empty goods and it is wrong.
I agree more and more with Charles Barkley when he proclaimed that athletes are not role models. Our role models should be our parents. But what does Mr. Barkely have to say to Tiger's children? How can Tiger be their role model? Heaven forbid that Sir Charles might have to step into that role.
I think many find themselves in an awkward position of "he deserves his privacy" and "he needs to publicly defend himself or acknowledge his guilt" and there is no easy answer to this. Ultimately, Tiger is what we the public have made him to be. Now he has failed that image and many want answers. The only people he has to answer to is his family, and I feel for them right now. We should be less concerned with his public announcement and more concerned about a) his poor family, and b) what we can learn from this.
I think the lesson is to cherish your family. It is precious. It is more valuable than anything. And it should be fiercely defended.
Many an apologist have jumped in his defense by pointing out either the shortcomings of others, the fact that this has nothing to do with golf, or some other asinine justification. The bottom line is, there is no way his actions can be justified.
I get that others have committed similar indescretions. I get that no one is perfect and we all make mistakes. I agree that he needs help and I hope, for the sake of his family, his children, and his person that he can get help. The problem I have with this is twofold.
First, just because we all are not perfect does not excuse what he did. He has trampled on his wife and family. He has betrayed Elin's trust. He has let his children down. Forget the fans that he alienated or the prize and endorsement money he stands to lose. None of that will measure up to the emptiness he will feel when he figures out how precious a thing his family was and how stupid he was to do this.
Second, he profited from the image that he cultivated. He profited from his "righteousness" and "wholesomeness." We have been sold a bag of empty goods and it is wrong.
I agree more and more with Charles Barkley when he proclaimed that athletes are not role models. Our role models should be our parents. But what does Mr. Barkely have to say to Tiger's children? How can Tiger be their role model? Heaven forbid that Sir Charles might have to step into that role.
I think many find themselves in an awkward position of "he deserves his privacy" and "he needs to publicly defend himself or acknowledge his guilt" and there is no easy answer to this. Ultimately, Tiger is what we the public have made him to be. Now he has failed that image and many want answers. The only people he has to answer to is his family, and I feel for them right now. We should be less concerned with his public announcement and more concerned about a) his poor family, and b) what we can learn from this.
I think the lesson is to cherish your family. It is precious. It is more valuable than anything. And it should be fiercely defended.
Friday, December 4, 2009
The Dollar: Where Has It Gone?
For those of you who have never read Steve Forbes' editorial that he puts out in his monthly "FORBES" publication, I highly recommend it. His views on U.S. Monetary Policy are, in my opinion, dead on, and I would be all for making him the next Chairman of the Federal Reserve.
Mr. Forbes accurately points out that of all the organizations and/or individuals responsible for the current recession, a large chunk falls squarely on the shoulders of the Federal Government and the Federal Reserve. As the country stared at a recession at the turn of the millennium, the government determined that loosening credit was a quick way to get the economy rolling again. The decision at the time was a sound one. The only problem was that no one turned off the spigot once things got rolling. Everyone became addicted to cheap money, homes were selling, people were making large purchases, the Fed continued to print money, the stock market rose dramatically, everything seemed great.
But cheap money meant a cheap dollar and the potential for rapidly rising inflation. Again, not a big deal because everyone was making more, spending more, and living high. But too many spent more than they should have. Lenders made loans no sound bank should ever make. We have all heard the rest.
The problem is that the Fed continues to print money at record paces hoping that it will keep the economy moving. But oil prices continue to climb and the value of the dollar continues to sink. By continuing their cheap dollar policy the fed and the government are simply delaying a day of reckoning which recent history has shown will come whether we want it to or not.
I will grant you that Steve Forbes has his personal slant: he is embedded with wall street and close to many of the individuals who perpetuated the situation we are now it. But he does not excuse them, nor does he pretend that he is an objective journalist. Rather he is exactly what he maintains to be: a smart, educated, driven, wealthy, entrepreneur who understands far more about our economy than members of congress who are attempting to make policy.
Mr. Forbes accurately points out that of all the organizations and/or individuals responsible for the current recession, a large chunk falls squarely on the shoulders of the Federal Government and the Federal Reserve. As the country stared at a recession at the turn of the millennium, the government determined that loosening credit was a quick way to get the economy rolling again. The decision at the time was a sound one. The only problem was that no one turned off the spigot once things got rolling. Everyone became addicted to cheap money, homes were selling, people were making large purchases, the Fed continued to print money, the stock market rose dramatically, everything seemed great.
But cheap money meant a cheap dollar and the potential for rapidly rising inflation. Again, not a big deal because everyone was making more, spending more, and living high. But too many spent more than they should have. Lenders made loans no sound bank should ever make. We have all heard the rest.
The problem is that the Fed continues to print money at record paces hoping that it will keep the economy moving. But oil prices continue to climb and the value of the dollar continues to sink. By continuing their cheap dollar policy the fed and the government are simply delaying a day of reckoning which recent history has shown will come whether we want it to or not.
I will grant you that Steve Forbes has his personal slant: he is embedded with wall street and close to many of the individuals who perpetuated the situation we are now it. But he does not excuse them, nor does he pretend that he is an objective journalist. Rather he is exactly what he maintains to be: a smart, educated, driven, wealthy, entrepreneur who understands far more about our economy than members of congress who are attempting to make policy.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Sportsmanship Rant
Many are accusing the coaches of USC and UCLA of poor sportsmanship. I would argue that there are greater problems that extend way beyond the field of play. We are part of a culture that celebrates dominance and demands more than a victory. Winning is not enough, we want our teams to pound their opponents into submission. The BCS system has created "style points" for teams seeking higher rankings and fans, acknowledging this system, encourage their teams to continuing acting in this manner. Additionally, teams are vilified if they accept defeat at any point. So a sign of mercy (taking a knee in a decided contest) is flagrantly rejected and the presumed victor decides that pounding the opposition into submission is the only way to end the game.
Worse still, players on both sides were not content with the results on the field, they were looking for a real fight. My greatest problem with that is players having enough left in the tank to engage in a brawl. What ever happened to "leaving it all out on the field?" There is no way the men in the trenches should have energy like that with 40 seconds left in the game. If I were the UCLA coach and I saw my star linebacker run over the umpire with such ease, I would want to know why he didn't play the entire game with the same gusto.
I am an admitted USC fan and I have no problem with how things worked out on the field. In the end, fans have no one to blame but themselves. The radio annoucers on both sides decried the actions of the coaches. They should look in the mirror.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)