Backing up is not hard to do...

I have an external harddrive that I use to back up the information on my computer, I try to do this every week or so, just in case something were to happen to my computer. I learned the hard way after losing everything several years ago. There are people that prefer to use an online backup system, which does has some advantages, especially if some sort of natural disaster or other disaster such as a fire happened, your information would be stored somewhere else. Whether you opt for the way I do it or using an online system, I recommend doing something. Most of us store quite a few important pictures and documents on our computers that would be very hard to replace...

Another economic crisis predicted within a decade...

I know this is a bit long, but it shares some interesting information I was sent via e-mail - from the Peterson Foundation:

HIGHEST RANKING ECONOMIC OFFICIALS FROM BOTH PARTIES FORESEE ANOTHER U.S. ECONOMIC CRISIS WITHIN 10 YEARS UNLESS U.S. TAKES IMMEDIATE ACTION ON STRUCTURAL DEFICIT

Peter G. Peterson Foundation Survey of Economic Leaders from Past Eight Administrations and Congress Shows Bipartisan Agreement that U.S. Needs to Cut Spending and Raise Taxes to Avoid an Economic Crisis

NEW YORK, NY – An unprecedented survey of the most senior economic officials from the last eight administrations and Congressional leaders from the past 30 years shows that there is broad consensus that failure to address the country’s long-term structural deficit challenges would lead to another economic crisis within the next ten years. There is also consensus around the solution to the deficit problem: it must include both cutting spending and increasing taxes, according to a group of more than fifty former top economic officials.

The survey topline can be found here:
http://www.pgpf.org/resources/PGPF_Fiscal_Survey_Topline.pdf

The survey respondents polled were former senior officials from the past eight administrations under Presidents George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George H.W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford, Richard Nixon, and Lyndon Johnson, as well as members of Congress, with significant experience on fiscal issues, including:

Secretaries of the Treasury
Federal Reserve Presidents and members of the Board of Governors
Directors of the Office of Management & Budget
Council of Economic Advisors Chairs
Directors of the Congressional Budget Office
Senate Budget Committee Chairmen/Ranking Members
House Budget Committee Chairmen/Ranking Members
House Ways and Means Committee Chairmen/Ranking Members

The survey was commissioned by the Peter G. Peterson Foundation (PGPF) as part of its mission to increase public awareness of the nature and urgency of the country’s key fiscal challenges and was released in the days leading up to the first meeting of President Obama’s National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform as well as the Foundation’s “2010 Fiscal Summit: America’s Crisis and A Way Forward.” The survey was conducted by Global Strategy Group, a public opinion research firm.

“It is significant to see such an overwhelming proportion of these former senior officials, Republicans and Democrats alike, agree that we must address our long-term structural deficits to avoid another economic crisis, and that we must do so now,” said Peter G. Peterson, founder and Chairman of PGPF. “Addressing our fiscal challenges will require being open-minded about solutions and taking a comprehensive approach in which all options are seriously considered. By acting now, we can meet these challenges in a way that secures the vital programs on which so many Americans rely, and ensures that resources will still be available for investments for future growth in areas like education, research and critical infrastructure.”

“The opinions of these federal government experts clearly demonstrate that there is a bipartisan consensus that spending cuts and tax increases are both necessary to address our unsustainable structural deficits,” said David Walker, President & CEO of PGPF. “Given increasing concerns among Americans, and with this bipartisan consensus of experts in mind, it is time to set aside partisan battles and bridge ideological divides to focus on sensible solutions.”


The survey found that top former economic officials believe:

· We need to change course. Democrats and Republicans unanimously feel that the federal government is currently on an unsustainable long term fiscal path. (100% Dems and Reps strongly agree)

· Systemic issues must be addressed. Democrats and Republicans unanimously consider long term structural deficits more threatening to the country’s economic future than short term deficits. (100% of Dems and 93% Reps say long term structural deficits are much more threatening; 7% of Reps say they are somewhat more threatening)

· Inaction will lead to crisis. More than 9 in 10 Republicans (98%) and Democrats (94%) believe if we do not act soon to address the nation’s long term fiscal situation we are heading for another major economic crisis.
– Most Republicans (88%) and Democrats (75%) expect an economic crisis within the next ten years if we do not act.
– And practically nine in ten Republicans (92%) and Democrats (82%) believe the government should begin to take action within the next 1-2 years to address the long term fiscal situation.

· Elements of a crisis. Majorities of Democrats and Republicans believe that without measures to address the longer term structural deficit challenges it is very likely we will encounter:
– Rapid growth in federal mandatory spending crowding out other important public investments (80% Reps very likely/71% Dems)
– Significant rise in interest rates (71% Reps very likely/65% Dems)
– An eventual decline in Americans’ standard of living (65% Reps very likely/53% Dems)

· Tax increases and spending cuts must be part of the solution. Two-thirds of Republicans (68%) and more than eight in ten (88%) Democrats believe that solving the country’s long terms structural deficits will include both spending cuts and tax increases.

· Democrats and Republicans share an open-minded approach.
– Practically all Democrats believe entitlement reform (100%), overall spending cuts (100%) and significant decreases in discretionary spending (94%) should be seriously considered.
– 72% of Republicans believe tax increases should be seriously considered in addition to 56% who believe significant decreases in defense spending should be seriously considered.

# # #

Methodological Note: Global Strategy Group conducted a survey among top economic leaders from the last eight administrations and Congress between April 5 and April 26, 2010. Individuals who are currently serving in public office were not solicited for participation in accordance with the research design. For the purposes of analysis, respondents are assigned a party identification based on their personal affiliation (if an elected official) or by the administration that appointed them.


About PGPF

Founded by Peter G. Peterson with a commitment of $1 billion, the Foundation is dedicated to increasing public awareness of the nature and urgency of key fiscal challenges threatening America's future and to accelerating action on them. To address these challenges successfully, we work to bring Americans together to find sensible, long-term solutions that transcend age, party lines and ideological divides in order to achieve real results. For more information, see www.PGPF.org

OMG I missed Boobquake..

How I missed participating in this one, bad on me. I could have helped topple the world as we know it...

Boobquake has begun

What's funny is NPR had a story titled, "An Internet Coup D'Ta-tas" which now comes up no story found. Thanks to the wonders of Google? Proof it once existed is out there...



This could make one ask, "no balls NPR?"

:-)

How I escaped yardwork...

I know many of you enjoy yardwork, and some of you enjoy gardening. While I do enjoy gardening, the actual yard work aspect of cutting the lawn, trimming it, pulling weeds, are not on my list of favorite things to do. When I came home from work Thursday, the front and back yard was cut and trimmed, the outdoor décor items we use in the backyard, including my awesome solar stump light, were taken from the garage and displayed in the right places.

It dawned on me that there were huge advantages to having a 18 year old be a resident of our household. He enjoys yardwork, even the persnickety lawnmower that likes to give me grief starting every time seems to so far, cooperate for him. Though when looking for a companion to my eflish type stump light, had I known there were gargoyles? I'd have at least two...maybe three...

Abuse of polling data has a long pedigree

I've shared my thoughts on polling and how polling data is used many times here and on Glass City Jungle. I said, "AMEN" more than once when reading this article, Climategate Claptrap, I by Mark Hertsgaard. I highly recommend reading all of it, but one part that I felt was important:

Advocates across the political spectrum habitually cite polls to "prove" that the public holds a certain view of a given issue, even when the truth is more complicated or even contradictory. This appears to be happening with the climate issue. As the Obama administration and Congressional leaders prepare to introduce new climate legislation, mainstream media have given fresh prominence to deniers' claims of fraud and rampant error on the part of climate scientists. Meanwhile, surveys by Gallup and other leading pollsters are being spun as evidence that the deniers are gaining ground among the public, which is supposedly divided over whether to take action against rising temperatures and the droughts, storms and sea-level rise they trigger. A closer look, however, suggests that public opinion has changed very little. What has changed is the message coming from the media, key parts of which have reverted to their longstanding posture of scientific illiteracy and de facto complicity with the deniers' disinformation campaign.

Did you know abestos comes from mines?

The picture is a mine in Canada, where chrysotile asbestos is mined and where 95 percent of the asbestos mined in Canada is shipped out of the country. It is believed that using the right chemical formulation makes asbestos not have the same risks earlier products using it had, yet it was known for well over a hundred years that there were health concerns related to the older forms of asbestos. While the illness and death of those exposed to asbestos was the source of lawsuits even back in the late 1920's, Mesothelioma was not recognized until the 1960's. While it is considered a rare form of cancer, there have been a number of well known people who have died from it. Including Steve McQueen, though was his exposure from his earlier years in the navy or from his race car days when asbestos was used as an insulation in protective wear worn by drivers has been debated.

E-commerce...did you know?

While there is usually a lot of chatter when it comes to Cyber Monday and online shopping, did you know that the Census Department actually estimates E-commerce?

The numbers are of course not recent, since we are dealing with the government and statistics, they are from 2007, but when you look at the report link to pdf you can see the main areas. I was surprised that motor vehicles and parts dealers ranked so highly as to total sales online.

The wish list for the next Supreme begins...

With the news that Justice John Paul Stevens is retiring, there have been many articles out there suggesting what qualities the next Justice should have. One editorial from the LA Times suggests:

Whether Stevens moved left or the court on which he sat moved right, it's undeniable (and unsurprising) that a careful but intellectually curious justice would evolve over three and a half decades. That suggests to us that in choosing Stevens' replacement, Obama should focus on enduring intellectual traits rather than on whether a nominee possesses views that would augur well for the administration's priorities.

Some Obama supporters also hope that, specific issues aside, the president will choose a justice who will defend an expansive view of constitutional rights with the same combativeness displayed by Justice Antonin Scalia and other conservatives in pressing for constitutional "originalism." Even if the president finds such advice persuasive, he should insist that his nominee also possess the independence of mind that allowed Stevens to survive and grow over a long and remarkable career.

A New York Post editorial suggests:

In other words, it's not likely that Republicans and conservatives will be wild about the president's selection.

But we hope that Obama heeds New York's Sen. Chuck Schumer, who urged him to "choose a candidate who . . . merits consensus support."

In that respect, he should recall that Justice Stevens was chosen by a Republican president in an effort to win bipartisan support, though Gerald Ford could scarcely have been pleased with the ideological path his nominee followed.

I was curious as to what the New York Post removed from Schumer's quote, I found the full quote at TPM:

At a time when Americans are yearning for bipartisanship, we hope the President will choose a candidate who both merits consensus support and lives up to Justice Stevens' fine legacy. We hope both sides of the aisle in the Senate would quickly confirm such a nominee.

Hearing hopeful signs but not yet seeing them...

The part of Northwestern Ohio that I live in has been pretty hard hit with the downturn in the economy. Unemployment has been in the doubledigits for some time and some with jobs have either taken pay cuts or had their health insurance costs increase. Or in the case of my family, both.

I know more people know who are on unemployment and have been nearing their last extension more than once. That's never happened before that I can remember, typically most of my circle of acquaintances may end up temporarily between jobs, but one extension was all that was needed and at times not even that.

858 people speak for you...

Yes, I know there is this whole belief that polls are scientific but the reality is no matter who does the poll and how they try to sell it all it really means is however many people were polled feel that way. This CBS Poll is an example of bad polling - despite the fact that they proclaim:

This poll release conforms to the Standards of Disclosure of the National
Council on Public Polls.

Why? The political ideology of those polled is not included and that makes a huge difference. If the percentage of those called between March 29 and April first were not Democrats it's not surprising that Obama's approval numbers dropped or that health care is not supported. Nor can you really accurately gauge how the numbers have risen or dropped unless you ask the same people each time.

Which doesn't happen in these polls. I'm a Zogby panelist, which makes me wonder why the most recent poll I participated in on the question of health care and the never ending "are you proud or ashamed of President Obama" has not been released. While I am a panelist, even Zogby only shared what those who participate think, the only advantage to how they do some of their polling is you are at least seeing how some of the same people feel on a regular basis.

The problem with the way CBS did this poll is it makes it appear that a majority of Americans feel a way that is not being evidenced by those who I know who are Democrats.

Could we stop with the cherry picking?

One of the reasons I don't participate on Kos anymore is things like this tiny snippet of video that gives the impression that Sean Hannity called Tea Party members "Tim McVeigh wannabes here" is evidence that Hannity believes they are terrorists.

If it were a Democrat who had one or two sentences taken out of context, they would be pointing out how wrong it is. Hence, it's just as wrong to do the same thing to the other side, even Hannity...

The reality is the earlier context provides why he used that term, while I don't agree with his suggestion that the left is fabricating/exaggerating the behavior of some in the Tea party movement, since there is a basis of evidence that inappropriate behavior is being demonstrated. It's hard to be outraged about it though when both sides of the political spectrum have used the behavior of a few to label larger groups.

It'd be more than possible to point out concerns and poke fun at Tea party members if that was the goal without having to reach for cherry picking video moments. New York Daily News with their Teabonics photos is an example of how a picture can speak a thousand words and for those of you who want to see an example of some on the left being made fun of via photos, flash back to 2008.

The dislike of the left by the right and the right by the left has almost become legendary in some cases but for those of us who live in the real world? I don't want to have to defend Hannity, but in this case? It's disappointing that fellow Democrats would not stop and think that logic dictates questioning context...