As Carroll County commissioners Richard Rothschild and Robin Frazier display their one-note ideology over and over again, colleague Haven Shoemaker has spoken up in opposition to the extreme tilt to the Right and may have redeemed himself as a reasonable and more centrist, pragmatic thinker.
Why, indeed, give $6,000 a month in taxpayer dollars away so Rothschild can lay claim to a "national presence," which, Rothschild laments, has brought him undue scrutiny and criticism similar to that suffered by Sarah Palin.
Rothschild, not satisfied with self-serving rhetoric, wanted to hire a like-thinking hack -- that's what real news people call a hired spin master -- to polish up the image for a larger audience.
Shoemaker knows a grandstand play when he sees one, because he made a few beauties in successfully campaigning against incumbent Julia Gouge in The Election The Republican Central Committee Engineered through savvy redistricting and reduction in the Gouge base.
But now, to his credit, Shoemaker has had enough, and has said so.
Doug Howard, who I once thought was a lot brighter than average, seems to prattle on about the Rightness of the new board's agenda, as if the five of them have somehow been anointed with mandates to completely reverse everything that could be called reasonable progress in recent years.
His defense of the inability to find a planner as reported in a recent issue of The Carroll County Times actually inspired horse laughs in those who know what's really the problem. Howard said it may be difficult to find a professional planner who can work with the policies of the current board of commissioners and take the plan where the commissioners want to go.
Ya think?
NO self-respecting professional planner would touch the Carroll County planning job unless they were ready to retire, and willing to toss their reputations and take the money and move to Florida.
That's why former economic development director Larry Twele left the county for a job Howard County. No dead-end streets for him.
Virtually every planner -- and economic development professional -- knows that Carroll County was on the right track with reduced emphasis on residential growth and development of zoned areas to attract modern, state of the art business. The election of this board was a huge U-turn to the pre-1960 era.
It is unsustainable. Rothschild does not even understand the definition of that word, but he does not like it, because it does not fit his iron-bound politispeak. Here is a guy who refuses to acknowledge that islands are disappearing because water is rising.
But we all saw all of that coming. Where we are and where we are headed, at least until the next election, is no surprise.
What is a surprise to me, and some other observers, is the absence of any semblance of leadership from Commissioner Dave Roush.
Roush had strong opinions when he served on the economic development commission, and later on the Board of Zoning Appeals. He heard all the testimony of the advisers and saw the results of professional surveys on what direction the county needed to go to keep the tax rate down and create local jobs of a status to pay for the county quality of life. He spoke up, contributed to the dialog.
So where is he now?
Of all the candidates for commissioner in the last election, Roush had the most solid position of understanding of the issues the county faces, and the consequences of turning back the clock. Frazier was and is hopelessly didactic about conservative values and clueless about realities; Rothschild was obviously an ideologue with a conspiracy mentality. Howard had potential, in a benign, deer-in-the-headlights sort of way, but has failed miserably to examine the facts because he's too busy justifying actions. Note to Howard: It's okay to think for yourself. Key word is "think."
Shoemaker has come to the party.
I expected a lot more than I have seen or heard from Roush. Perhaps he is not being served well by the press, which tends to ignore or under report reasonable comment.
But I never questioned his judgment, and thought that as a commissioner, in a position that requires openness and leadership, he would stand up for what he knows.
He is past due.
Monday, October 3, 2011
Friday, September 23, 2011
One absolutist's sin is another's virtue
The latest criticism of President Obama is that he has been too moderate, or not liberal enough, which is in stark contrast to the continuing criticism that he is too liberal, or wishy-washy.
He is, indeed, all of the above, depending on how big a fruitcake the critic.
We have lots of absolutist fruitcakes; I know, because I have had the distinct displeasure of dealing with them on a professional basis.
When he was candidate Obama, I didn't know anything about him, except that with a name like that, skin like that, and intellect like that, he didn't have a chance in American politics; he should live in a more enlightened country, like Kurdistan. I'm kidding, a little.
The more he talked, the more I liked what I heard, but I had liked the message before, only to be disappointed with the delivery of the goods, or lack thereof.
In the past, what got in the way of Doing The Right Thing was political expedience, known in some circles as compromise, and in others as selling out.
To be a truly great leader, you will have success if you can do three things simultaneously: Stick to your principles; sell out; and make it look like you did both and neither at the same time.
I said before he took office that President Obama would not be as liberal as his liberal supporters expect, nor would he be as conservative as he needed to be to satisfy the cave persons over there in the dark. I was right, of course, which really, really ticks off my wife and friend Dave, because I keep reminding them that I am always right, and they sputter in their attempts at refuting the obvious.
My point was based on my perception that here was a very bright and articulate man, essentially a decent and well-educated human being, who wanted to go down in history as the Great Peacemaker. He wanted to bring Americans together for common goals. Problem is, there are no common goals; it's mostly Us versus Them.
He wanted to restore respect for America on the world stage. Problem is, the jingoism (often mistaken for patriotism) in this nation leaves us blind to how we are seen even by our allies. I said allies, not friends. We have no friends.
Eavesdropping on an intelligent conversation about the state of politics today (I had to tune in a public radio station), one participant summed it up: Mitt Romney has tottered to the Right because he needs those votes in the Republican primary elections; Rick (Marlboro Man) Perry is already over there, but is finding out not all Republicans think like Texans; and Obama has become the strident, more assertive soldier for social issues because, as the lady on the radio said, There is no place in American politics right now for moderates.
Okay, I've been saying that for a couple of years, but still, combined with still another rainy day, that makes me want to check out the sunshine in a truly enlightened country, like, say, Canada.
I'm kidding, but only a little.
He is, indeed, all of the above, depending on how big a fruitcake the critic.
We have lots of absolutist fruitcakes; I know, because I have had the distinct displeasure of dealing with them on a professional basis.
When he was candidate Obama, I didn't know anything about him, except that with a name like that, skin like that, and intellect like that, he didn't have a chance in American politics; he should live in a more enlightened country, like Kurdistan. I'm kidding, a little.
The more he talked, the more I liked what I heard, but I had liked the message before, only to be disappointed with the delivery of the goods, or lack thereof.
In the past, what got in the way of Doing The Right Thing was political expedience, known in some circles as compromise, and in others as selling out.
To be a truly great leader, you will have success if you can do three things simultaneously: Stick to your principles; sell out; and make it look like you did both and neither at the same time.
I said before he took office that President Obama would not be as liberal as his liberal supporters expect, nor would he be as conservative as he needed to be to satisfy the cave persons over there in the dark. I was right, of course, which really, really ticks off my wife and friend Dave, because I keep reminding them that I am always right, and they sputter in their attempts at refuting the obvious.
My point was based on my perception that here was a very bright and articulate man, essentially a decent and well-educated human being, who wanted to go down in history as the Great Peacemaker. He wanted to bring Americans together for common goals. Problem is, there are no common goals; it's mostly Us versus Them.
He wanted to restore respect for America on the world stage. Problem is, the jingoism (often mistaken for patriotism) in this nation leaves us blind to how we are seen even by our allies. I said allies, not friends. We have no friends.
Eavesdropping on an intelligent conversation about the state of politics today (I had to tune in a public radio station), one participant summed it up: Mitt Romney has tottered to the Right because he needs those votes in the Republican primary elections; Rick (Marlboro Man) Perry is already over there, but is finding out not all Republicans think like Texans; and Obama has become the strident, more assertive soldier for social issues because, as the lady on the radio said, There is no place in American politics right now for moderates.
Okay, I've been saying that for a couple of years, but still, combined with still another rainy day, that makes me want to check out the sunshine in a truly enlightened country, like, say, Canada.
I'm kidding, but only a little.
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Fear and loathing as a healthy lifestyle
You can't go on line without being exposed to an epidemic -- of health risk hysteria.
No wonder we are scared to death of germs. And viruses. And contaminated food, and medical mistakes and deadly reactions to mixes of medications.
Just this week, we learn that cantaloupe has made some people sick and killed two. Two. If it's a loved one, that's really hard to take, but the truth is, you're probably getting sicker every day with stress over stories like these.
You can never know too much, but you can be exposed to too much bad news. The key is balance.
Keep it in perspective; don't worry about dying from cantaloupe; you're more likely to get wiped out by another driver on your way to work. As you sit there and read what's on the internet, your arteries are building up clogs that will, after 50 years, give you a heart attack or a stroke.
Doctors have been telling me for 50 years that smoking my pipe is bad for me.
Lawyers advertise to get me to come see them because I was exposed to asbestos while serving in the Navy. Let alone the asbestos shingles we used to throw on rocks when we were kids to see them turn to powder. That was when we ran out of thermometers to break open so we could shine nickels and dimes with the mercury.
I know at least as many people who died trying to lose weight as I do fat people who died because they didn't try.
Booze will kill you, too, if you drink too much, but then other stories say that alcohol in moderation is good for your arteries. Here's to healthy arteries.
For years, I took aspirin every day to keep those blood vessels clog-free, which meant that I could eat my bacon and cheese omelets with a clear conscience. Now they say something in aspirin works against the key ingredient in some blood pressure medications, canceling each other out.
Blood pressure meds have been suspected as a contributing cause of Type 2 diabetes, which requires diet modification and medications which can cause other side effects, like, say, a coma.
If you're lucky, the meds will only cause kidney damage, leading to dialysis or a transplant, which requires taking anti-rejection meds which cause cancer. If you're unlucky, you get a muscle disease first, grow sore all over, weaker and more crippled, and then you get the kidney failure and the dialysis, especially if you have been easing your arthritis with nsaids painkillers for 20 years.
The diet for people with high blood sugar is low fat, low glycemic carbohydrates, or, cardboard. Whole wheats and brown rice, beans, nothing white like potatoes or corn or French bread. No fats, like butter. Use those whipped spreads on your brown bread, which soak into it like you've run it under a faucet, and then drink some milk; soy milk, that is.
When they come out with a soy substitute for bourbon, I may stop drinking. On the other hand, there is that healthy artery thing that one should not give up on too easily....
No wonder we are scared to death of germs. And viruses. And contaminated food, and medical mistakes and deadly reactions to mixes of medications.
Just this week, we learn that cantaloupe has made some people sick and killed two. Two. If it's a loved one, that's really hard to take, but the truth is, you're probably getting sicker every day with stress over stories like these.
You can never know too much, but you can be exposed to too much bad news. The key is balance.
Keep it in perspective; don't worry about dying from cantaloupe; you're more likely to get wiped out by another driver on your way to work. As you sit there and read what's on the internet, your arteries are building up clogs that will, after 50 years, give you a heart attack or a stroke.
Doctors have been telling me for 50 years that smoking my pipe is bad for me.
Lawyers advertise to get me to come see them because I was exposed to asbestos while serving in the Navy. Let alone the asbestos shingles we used to throw on rocks when we were kids to see them turn to powder. That was when we ran out of thermometers to break open so we could shine nickels and dimes with the mercury.
I know at least as many people who died trying to lose weight as I do fat people who died because they didn't try.
Booze will kill you, too, if you drink too much, but then other stories say that alcohol in moderation is good for your arteries. Here's to healthy arteries.
For years, I took aspirin every day to keep those blood vessels clog-free, which meant that I could eat my bacon and cheese omelets with a clear conscience. Now they say something in aspirin works against the key ingredient in some blood pressure medications, canceling each other out.
Blood pressure meds have been suspected as a contributing cause of Type 2 diabetes, which requires diet modification and medications which can cause other side effects, like, say, a coma.
If you're lucky, the meds will only cause kidney damage, leading to dialysis or a transplant, which requires taking anti-rejection meds which cause cancer. If you're unlucky, you get a muscle disease first, grow sore all over, weaker and more crippled, and then you get the kidney failure and the dialysis, especially if you have been easing your arthritis with nsaids painkillers for 20 years.
The diet for people with high blood sugar is low fat, low glycemic carbohydrates, or, cardboard. Whole wheats and brown rice, beans, nothing white like potatoes or corn or French bread. No fats, like butter. Use those whipped spreads on your brown bread, which soak into it like you've run it under a faucet, and then drink some milk; soy milk, that is.
When they come out with a soy substitute for bourbon, I may stop drinking. On the other hand, there is that healthy artery thing that one should not give up on too easily....
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Jobs, the budget, and the TSA
Since even rookie Republican politicians have put forth ideas for fixing the economy, I figure, it can't be that complicated, so I'll give it a shot, too.
You want to fix America's economy? Instead of funding the TSA, put the money into airline subsidies and require that the airlines provide security, both on the planes and at the airports.
Air travel was better 40 years ago, when airlines were subsidized; I know, I worked for the industry in the early and mid-sixties. United was the best airline in the world, but there were lots of other carriers who served the public well, even to little towns like Fargo, ND, and flights were affordable because it was universally recognized that a well-run transportation system served even those who were not flying at the moment.
While the occasional drunk or nut was escorted off -- or more likely denied boarding -- a plane, unruly, rude, upset passengers were unusual.
Customers were treated politely, cordially, as if the airline and the person wearing the airline's uniform were glad to have you aboard.
You could call a number and a real human would pick up the phone and help you book a reservation, including suggestions for making the trip more efficient and enjoyable.
When you arrived at the airport, you could park your car within walking distance of the ticket counter, even the gate, and check in quickly and with a sense of security.
Booze and firearms were not allowed in your carry-on. What you carried in your luggage was your business; overweight charges were generally not collected.
That was then.
Now, the TSA treats everyone who comes into the airport like a terrorist.
I have a great deal of respect for mall security cops, guards at self-storage sites, and school crossing guards.
But I suspect that the average TSA airport employee would not want those jobs, even if the pay was better, because they offer less opportunity to abuse such a broad spectrum of the population.
You never see mall security cops high-five each other when one requires a six-year-old to submit to a pat-down. You don't see them hoping the parent that watches such a miscarriage of trust will explode and give them a reason to take them to the little glass room to cool off until the plane leaves.
They get to take out their kinks on kids, old men with colostomy bags, people in wheelchairs, mothers with three tots to corral, and anyone who "looks funny."
So little skill, so little ability, and so much power. It's almost like being a congressman, but without the health care and retirement plan.
Reassign some TSA workers to walking the desert where drug lords smuggle human beings and all kinds of contraband into the country. But use most of the money we pay them to ensure that the airlines screen bags, run passengers through scanners, and leave the profiling of suspects to FBI or other federal agents who are intelligent enough to take the sophisticated training and apply skills without humiliating the traveling public.
Less stress in the airport means less stress at the check-in, at the boarding gate, and one the plane. Cash subsidies mean a cushion on profitability, which would allow them to stop charging middle class families $75 for a bag that's two pounds over.
They could abandon the overbooking of seats on flights, make sure everyone who has a ticket actually gets on the plane. Maybe allow a few empty seats or more carry-on storage.
Life would be better for half a million Americans or so every day, so tell me, who has offered a better idea so far?
You want to fix America's economy? Instead of funding the TSA, put the money into airline subsidies and require that the airlines provide security, both on the planes and at the airports.
Air travel was better 40 years ago, when airlines were subsidized; I know, I worked for the industry in the early and mid-sixties. United was the best airline in the world, but there were lots of other carriers who served the public well, even to little towns like Fargo, ND, and flights were affordable because it was universally recognized that a well-run transportation system served even those who were not flying at the moment.
While the occasional drunk or nut was escorted off -- or more likely denied boarding -- a plane, unruly, rude, upset passengers were unusual.
Customers were treated politely, cordially, as if the airline and the person wearing the airline's uniform were glad to have you aboard.
You could call a number and a real human would pick up the phone and help you book a reservation, including suggestions for making the trip more efficient and enjoyable.
When you arrived at the airport, you could park your car within walking distance of the ticket counter, even the gate, and check in quickly and with a sense of security.
Booze and firearms were not allowed in your carry-on. What you carried in your luggage was your business; overweight charges were generally not collected.
That was then.
Now, the TSA treats everyone who comes into the airport like a terrorist.
I have a great deal of respect for mall security cops, guards at self-storage sites, and school crossing guards.
But I suspect that the average TSA airport employee would not want those jobs, even if the pay was better, because they offer less opportunity to abuse such a broad spectrum of the population.
You never see mall security cops high-five each other when one requires a six-year-old to submit to a pat-down. You don't see them hoping the parent that watches such a miscarriage of trust will explode and give them a reason to take them to the little glass room to cool off until the plane leaves.
They get to take out their kinks on kids, old men with colostomy bags, people in wheelchairs, mothers with three tots to corral, and anyone who "looks funny."
So little skill, so little ability, and so much power. It's almost like being a congressman, but without the health care and retirement plan.
Reassign some TSA workers to walking the desert where drug lords smuggle human beings and all kinds of contraband into the country. But use most of the money we pay them to ensure that the airlines screen bags, run passengers through scanners, and leave the profiling of suspects to FBI or other federal agents who are intelligent enough to take the sophisticated training and apply skills without humiliating the traveling public.
Less stress in the airport means less stress at the check-in, at the boarding gate, and one the plane. Cash subsidies mean a cushion on profitability, which would allow them to stop charging middle class families $75 for a bag that's two pounds over.
They could abandon the overbooking of seats on flights, make sure everyone who has a ticket actually gets on the plane. Maybe allow a few empty seats or more carry-on storage.
Life would be better for half a million Americans or so every day, so tell me, who has offered a better idea so far?
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Didn't want to watch, had to, better for it
I don't trust American media to deal with something like the 10th anniversary of the terrorists' attack on America, and had planned to pass the day with my nose in a book.
But I had to watch. I was snagged by a random channel while looking for something mindless -- plenty to choose from -- and found myself compelled to stay with the visuals, and the memories, and the thoughts they brought about what might have been.
I sat there and wept.
So many might-have-beens; at least one such story for each victim, and another for each survivor of a victim.
I occurred to me that the people who died when the planes were flown into masses of humanity as an otherwise ordinary workday was just beginning were only the first names on a long list, one that grows daily.
Those who never got to finish a second cup of coffee that morning were caught unaware; many of the subsequent victims volunteered, signing up for military service to do something to take the fight back to the extremists with a rage from the Dark Ages.
Every American -- and every Iraqi or Afghan, or whatever nationality -- drawn to this infamous flame has danced with death in a thousand moments of violence. Soldiers, civilians, volunteers, career military and the random passers by have paid with their lives in the sequential events that follow what we call, "9 - 11".
Parents and wives and husbands sit at home and watch the news that is allowed to be broadcast, and wait for news that no one wants to hear. Pride, fear, frustration, depression, hope -- how many moments of anguish have followed the unspeakable and cowardly act on an incredibly beautiful September day ten years ago?
Another casualty was what we used to think was almost uniquely American virtue -- tolerance for people with different opinions and points of view.
Oh, we came together for a time after 9-11, and some would like to believe that we are solid in our resolve to ensure security now and justice over time.
But the truth has been held hostage by one faction or another, then dressed up in different versions and sent out through the land to represent differing definitions of what America is all about, what is the definition of a patriot, and whose opinions reflect the nation's constitution.
Four suicidal foreign zealots knocked down some buildings with airplanes; didn't live to see the results. Perhaps they were intelligent, educated men, but they were misinformed, or hopeless, and angry, and terminally misguided.
The rest of the damage has been done by the living, and not all of them live in some mud hut in the Middle East.
I am glad they have built a memorial and are replacing a building at Ground Zero. I know we will never forget, and that we all love our soldiers and support their families and the families of victims of 9-11.
But who among us will keep zealotry from destroying us from within?
But I had to watch. I was snagged by a random channel while looking for something mindless -- plenty to choose from -- and found myself compelled to stay with the visuals, and the memories, and the thoughts they brought about what might have been.
I sat there and wept.
So many might-have-beens; at least one such story for each victim, and another for each survivor of a victim.
I occurred to me that the people who died when the planes were flown into masses of humanity as an otherwise ordinary workday was just beginning were only the first names on a long list, one that grows daily.
Those who never got to finish a second cup of coffee that morning were caught unaware; many of the subsequent victims volunteered, signing up for military service to do something to take the fight back to the extremists with a rage from the Dark Ages.
Every American -- and every Iraqi or Afghan, or whatever nationality -- drawn to this infamous flame has danced with death in a thousand moments of violence. Soldiers, civilians, volunteers, career military and the random passers by have paid with their lives in the sequential events that follow what we call, "9 - 11".
Parents and wives and husbands sit at home and watch the news that is allowed to be broadcast, and wait for news that no one wants to hear. Pride, fear, frustration, depression, hope -- how many moments of anguish have followed the unspeakable and cowardly act on an incredibly beautiful September day ten years ago?
Another casualty was what we used to think was almost uniquely American virtue -- tolerance for people with different opinions and points of view.
Oh, we came together for a time after 9-11, and some would like to believe that we are solid in our resolve to ensure security now and justice over time.
But the truth has been held hostage by one faction or another, then dressed up in different versions and sent out through the land to represent differing definitions of what America is all about, what is the definition of a patriot, and whose opinions reflect the nation's constitution.
Four suicidal foreign zealots knocked down some buildings with airplanes; didn't live to see the results. Perhaps they were intelligent, educated men, but they were misinformed, or hopeless, and angry, and terminally misguided.
The rest of the damage has been done by the living, and not all of them live in some mud hut in the Middle East.
I am glad they have built a memorial and are replacing a building at Ground Zero. I know we will never forget, and that we all love our soldiers and support their families and the families of victims of 9-11.
But who among us will keep zealotry from destroying us from within?
Sunday, August 14, 2011
Still here; waiting for the din to subside
Judging from the hits on this site over the past week, it is apparent that regular readers are looking for the latest entry.
The world rotates on its axis. The sun rises and sets. Actually, it doesn't move at all, we do, but never mind.
I'm still here, but I am taking a break, waiting for the din to subside.
I came to the conclusion that I had become part of the din, and in danger of being dragged down into the swill of excessive rhetoric that in this era of polls and polarization adds nothing of any substance to the public discourse.
The debt crisis debacle did it. Why comment on insanity?
I fear that our culture is dying.
Our political system seems to be broken, perhaps a victim of instant transmission of whatever sensation presents itself, and the 'round the clock news cycles. Too much abuse of the freedom of speech, and assembly. When is an assembly of concerned citizens in danger of becoming a lynch mob? It may be simply a matter of publicity, and momentum.
I see too much apathy turning from the spectacle of too much ignorant ranting.
I will continue to write, but not in the arena on one-upmanship, where the latest cut, the cruelest dig, wins the day.
I choose not to engage in battles of wits with the witless. It will not be about volume, but about the elevation of ideas.
Reason, ultimately, triumphs over zealotry.
My personal decision changes nothing, I know. It flies in the face of the power of publicity, celebrity, and confrontation, and ratings. But if I believe that reason prevails over rants, I will not be one of those who rant.
Old-fashioned, perhaps, in this era of instant polls, and the abdication of responsibility by the traditional gatekeepers. But if you value substance over popularity, you can sleep better, walk a little taller, and retain hope for the culture.
The world rotates on its axis. The sun rises and sets. Actually, it doesn't move at all, we do, but never mind.
I'm still here, but I am taking a break, waiting for the din to subside.
I came to the conclusion that I had become part of the din, and in danger of being dragged down into the swill of excessive rhetoric that in this era of polls and polarization adds nothing of any substance to the public discourse.
The debt crisis debacle did it. Why comment on insanity?
I fear that our culture is dying.
Our political system seems to be broken, perhaps a victim of instant transmission of whatever sensation presents itself, and the 'round the clock news cycles. Too much abuse of the freedom of speech, and assembly. When is an assembly of concerned citizens in danger of becoming a lynch mob? It may be simply a matter of publicity, and momentum.
I see too much apathy turning from the spectacle of too much ignorant ranting.
I will continue to write, but not in the arena on one-upmanship, where the latest cut, the cruelest dig, wins the day.
I choose not to engage in battles of wits with the witless. It will not be about volume, but about the elevation of ideas.
Reason, ultimately, triumphs over zealotry.
My personal decision changes nothing, I know. It flies in the face of the power of publicity, celebrity, and confrontation, and ratings. But if I believe that reason prevails over rants, I will not be one of those who rant.
Old-fashioned, perhaps, in this era of instant polls, and the abdication of responsibility by the traditional gatekeepers. But if you value substance over popularity, you can sleep better, walk a little taller, and retain hope for the culture.
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Rookies in public office are a threat to your financial health
After the vote to raise the debt ceiling and avert tipping the first domino toward default, world markets show LESS faith in the US economy. In fact, the dollar was worth more when we were in crisis last week, so what do we have to do to calm things down?
For starters, according to financial experts who get more time on the air than what TV wants as a "sound bite," it never was about the debt ceiling for those who know what they're talking about when working the numbers. It's about the dollar's reputation when compared to all the alternatives.
Paul Salmon, the economics reporter for Public Media, interviews people from Right to Left, including former financial advisers for both Republican and Democrat administrations. He also gets into the hectic world of financiers, who told him the other day that in essence, the news coverage of the financial crisis misses the point, because it covers it from a political consequences point of view, reporting opinions instead of the facts at hand.
Reporters talk to politicians on the Right and the Left, get quotes from a housewife in the grocery store, the retired guys getting cheap coffee at McDonald's, and others who really, forgive me, do not have a clue as to how to fill out a tax form, let alone a federal budget.
The folks in the back rooms know that those opinions matter, but not always in a good way.
World money markets traditionally trusted the political moderation of our decision-makers. Grownups with some experience in both business and governance, and only the occasional radical reformer. But now we have absolutists affecting the decision-makers; rookies in leading roles who do not understand the impact of cutting spending and not raising revenues.
Wiser heads -- those focused on economics, not ideology -- point out that these economic conditions are not as cut and dried as the normal standards weighed by rating agencies. They say you do not cut spending when what is needed is more cash in the marketplace.
What the market wants to see is not a reduction in the deficit; they want to see buyers coming in to spend money. When the buyers are spending, sellers will hire more people to serve the customers, and to make the products the customers want.
We love to nod sagely at grandpa's sage advice to put your money in a sock, don't borrow anything, and if you have a debt, pay it off immediately if not sooner.
Somewhere between carrying more debt than we can repay and not having any debt at all is that happy medium where we have confidence that we can pay off the credit that we use today.
I know the Pandora's box of instant polls and using electronic media has been opened, and will never be closed. But we'd all be better off if we turned off the talk shows, ignored the polls, listened less to the rants and read more about the solutions to complex issues.
Unlike so many of my colleagues in the media, I believe it is not freedom of speech that is paramount, it is the ability to find and seek the facts. It's getting harder to sift through the din to learn anything, except today's Talking Points of one side or another.
For starters, according to financial experts who get more time on the air than what TV wants as a "sound bite," it never was about the debt ceiling for those who know what they're talking about when working the numbers. It's about the dollar's reputation when compared to all the alternatives.
Paul Salmon, the economics reporter for Public Media, interviews people from Right to Left, including former financial advisers for both Republican and Democrat administrations. He also gets into the hectic world of financiers, who told him the other day that in essence, the news coverage of the financial crisis misses the point, because it covers it from a political consequences point of view, reporting opinions instead of the facts at hand.
Reporters talk to politicians on the Right and the Left, get quotes from a housewife in the grocery store, the retired guys getting cheap coffee at McDonald's, and others who really, forgive me, do not have a clue as to how to fill out a tax form, let alone a federal budget.
The folks in the back rooms know that those opinions matter, but not always in a good way.
World money markets traditionally trusted the political moderation of our decision-makers. Grownups with some experience in both business and governance, and only the occasional radical reformer. But now we have absolutists affecting the decision-makers; rookies in leading roles who do not understand the impact of cutting spending and not raising revenues.
Wiser heads -- those focused on economics, not ideology -- point out that these economic conditions are not as cut and dried as the normal standards weighed by rating agencies. They say you do not cut spending when what is needed is more cash in the marketplace.
What the market wants to see is not a reduction in the deficit; they want to see buyers coming in to spend money. When the buyers are spending, sellers will hire more people to serve the customers, and to make the products the customers want.
We love to nod sagely at grandpa's sage advice to put your money in a sock, don't borrow anything, and if you have a debt, pay it off immediately if not sooner.
Somewhere between carrying more debt than we can repay and not having any debt at all is that happy medium where we have confidence that we can pay off the credit that we use today.
I know the Pandora's box of instant polls and using electronic media has been opened, and will never be closed. But we'd all be better off if we turned off the talk shows, ignored the polls, listened less to the rants and read more about the solutions to complex issues.
Unlike so many of my colleagues in the media, I believe it is not freedom of speech that is paramount, it is the ability to find and seek the facts. It's getting harder to sift through the din to learn anything, except today's Talking Points of one side or another.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)