It is becoming ever more apparent that America cannot keep a presence in the Middle East under the current political situation. Sadly, the “loyal opposition” has made it a case to continually undermine the current administration's efforts, while the current administration has allowed a lot of tragic mistakes to compound themselves to make matters worse. At this point in time, America has met a lot of its goals in Iraq, the foremost being the near total evisceration of Al Qaeda as a meaningful political or military force in the region. However, Iraq remains unstable and the rising tide of Persian hegemony in the region remains unchecked. As the U.S. attempts to make a final effort to stabilize the region and get Iranian diplomats to make serious concessions, both houses of congress undermine such efforts by passing legislation for an Iraq pull-out. At this point, even though America might have the means, we widely broadcast that we simply have not the political will to stabilize Iraq and control the Persian path towards nuclear weaponry and regional supremacy.
With that being said, I think it is time for the President to call key leaders of congress (most importantly Madam Speak Pelosi, Senators Obama and Clinton) to the oval office along with Vice President Cheney. During the conference, he should give everyone present the best current picture based on U.S. Intelligence and state clearly our national concerns and invite candid talk from the assemblage. After the discussion, he should ask the leaders of both houses of congress to return to their chambers after which they shall introduce and pass new legislation that fully supports and funds the current effort in Iraq with no strings attached. In addition, both houses should pass non-binding resolutions declaring solidarity with the administration and willingness to pass an authorization of force against the Islamic Republic of Iran for the acts of war it has committed against the United States of America. If such legislation is not passed within a week, then the President and Vice President will resign, at which time Madam Speaker Pelosi will become the next president of the United States.
The top line concern I have is that we absolutely need solidarity at this time, because world events are turning, largely due to our internal politics. While I personally detest the political views of the current Madam Speaker, I’d rather see America speak with a unified, but flawed voice, than bicker while my brothers and sisters in arms are in harms way.
Not only that, but I think the move is a political gambit with balls, and one that the president might actually be able to use. I think the Democratic party would rather spend the next two years building strength from republican misfortune than suddenly inheriting the problem with perhaps one of it most shrill leaders in charge. Senator Clinton is one of the most ruthless ladies on the hill. What would she do to keep Nancy Pelosi from becoming the first female president? How many lobbyists have already poured funds into Democratic hopefuls casting eyes towards 2008? Even better, this gives the republicans the chance to essentially pick the DNC front runner for the 2008 election, one that has no present organization for a presidential run and a severely limited national appeal. Last, would a President Pelosi really be ready to leave the Middle East in defeat, with her credited as the engineer to the plan? I remember a very anti-military Clinton administration changing tunes just months after getting into power. Personal authority and attendant responsibility have a way of changing things up.
As a soldier, I know we can prevail if we find the will. America needs to start speaking in one voice NOW, or I fear that the world will end up in a much more tragic conflict than the current counter-insurgency in Iraq.
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Godspeed to a Good Man
My apologies go out to my family members who have been waiting for me to make this post, but better late than never. In this case, I am sad to announce that apparently, the political and military leadership of our country have made a grave mistake with respect to the firing of MG Weightman, the former commander of Walter Reed Army Medical Center. As alluded to above, members of my family have had the ability to work with MG Weightman quite closely in the past, and from everything I can tell, he was a truly dedicated warrior and medical professional. Having served less than a year in command, he was actively trying to change things and never got the chance to make an impact before getting thrown under the political bus. The issues at WRAMC are politically made to order, as Democratics have often sought to shore up their lack of popularity with the military by trying to advance social issues cast into a military vernacular as as part of their platform. This not only helps to shift focus away from the scandalous lack of support they have given our military in combat over the last five years, but also is very consistent with the "there's a problem, you're a victim, we're the solution" mentality that prevades most of the Democratic Party's positions. With that being said, the problems at WRAMC where a huge hot potato issue, and the complete eviceration of the upper echelon of the army medical corps along with the resignation of the Scretary of the Army was done as a political expedient to get the issue out of the news, with very little thought for the reasons why the problem happened or who would be best situated to make improvements. Perhaps though, I am not putting MG Weighman's credentials to the proper light, so I am posting an open letter written by Mr. Douglas Kidd about MG Weightman. While himself a relative of the general, Mr. Kidd's letter is filled with factual information that can be cross-checked and has great insight into MG Weightman's character and background:
Dear Sir or Madame,
As someone who is close to Major General George Weightman, it may not seem appropriate to make public statements on his behalf, especially since they were not solicited either by yourself or by General Weightman. I am General Weightman's brother-in-law and have known him for almost his entire adult life.
We served in the same infantry unit in the 25th ID. George took over my platoon as I moved on to a new assignment. Since then, I left the military and George embraced it as a career. Our families are close and even though George's duties took him all over the world, we stayed as close as we could and took advantage of the times when he and his family were stationed close by to get together and share our experiences.
The theme of this letter is "the Army got the wrong guy". I am not in a position to say who the right guy is, because I am not qualified to make that assessment. I am a very practical person who knows that someone who has just recently been assigned to a position, must have some time and leeway to assess the situation, plan and execute a strategy to fix the problems identified and then to build an attitude of continuous improvement into an organization. Major General Weightman was not given this opportunity in my humble opinion.
Why do I say this? I can say this because I know him. I know him as a man, a soldier, a doctor, a father, a loving husband, and as a brother. What is it that I know? I know his career and his absolute devotion to the Army and to serving his country for over thirty four years since his graduation from West Point in 1973. No one was more qualified than he to be in the position he held for such a short time at Walter Reed AMC.
Anyone can look up his record -- something maybe the two reporters from the Washington Post should have done before making the judgments they made about his performance at WRAMC. So to should the Secretary of the Army looked closer before his knee jerk action last week. Both parties should have asked the question as to who would be better to make WRAMC better at serving our soldiers than MG Weightman. The political necessity was that the Army had to show it was doing something, so what better way than to cut off the WRAMC head as a way of playing to the baying wolves of the press.
Let me provide some highlights about MG Weightman's career. He served five years in the infantry before completing the Infantry Officer's Advanced Course. It was then that he decided that he had a higher calling to medicine. He applied to and was accepted to the University of Vermont. He and his wife and infant son moved to Burlington and lived a bare existence while he attended and later graduated as an MD. He re-entered the Army and after his residency at Ft. Gordon, he was re-assigned to West Point to run the family practice clinic there. After three years there, he was selected to become the Division Surgeon for the 82d Airborne Division. While in the 82d, he made a night-time combat jump into Panama and later was on the first plane to arrive in Saudi Arabia at the start of Operation Desert Shield.
Upon returning from Iraq in 1991 he moved to become the Chief Resident at the Army Medical Center at Ft. Bragg. One day when both the hospital commander and deputy commander were away from Ft. Bragg, a military plane crashed at nearby Pope AFB, inundating an entire Infantry Battalion of nearly 600 men with burning aviation fuel and wreckage. Then Major Weightman, took charge of the triage at the hospital and was credited with leading the heroic efforts there in saving the lives of many soldiers.
Later, he volunteered to lead a hospital deep in the jungles of Central America in support of Delta Force in clandestine operations. He returned with Delta Force respect and malaria, which he still suffers from today.
In 1997 he took command of the Army's largest tactical Medical unit, the 30th Medical Brigade supporting all of the troops in Europe. This assignment took him into Kosovo and the surrounding area many times during his two years there. He was home only a few years when he was promoted to Brigadier General and was selected to organize, train and command the Medical Support Brigade for Operation Iraqi Freedom. He spent almost a year prior to the invasion in Kuwait coordinating and later commanding the nearly 12,000 Army, Navy, Marine and Air Force medical support for the invasion effort.
In 2004 he was promoted to Major General and given Command of Ft. Sam Houston, the home of the Army Medical Corps. He commanded over 50,000 soldiers at Ft. Sam Houston and was responsible for developing a high level of performance at Brooks Army Medical Center (BAMC) and the support system located there. Ironically, many of the conditions cited by the two Washington Post reporters at Ft. Sam Houston as being superior and exemplary ways to care for and treat our returning wounded were planned and implemented while MG Weightman was the Commander there, prior to moving back to the Washington DC area as Commander of WRAMC August 29, 2006.
The practical person in me has seen that everywhere George Weightman has served, he has made those around him better and the units to which he was assigned better at achieving their mission of medical support to the soldier and his family. Rational thought would indicate that his
> background and accomplishments at his other critical assignments would directly lead to making WRAMC better at accomplishing its mission when he was done there. In fact, he already was moving forward with improvements there. However, his plan and progress were largely discounted by both the Post reporters and it seems Secretary Harvey.
His sense of duty, honor and country has permeated his family and has had direct positive impact on me and family. His two sons, one a West Point graduate is serving a second tour of duty in Baghdad as an Infantry Officer in a combat unit. The other son, a recent graduate of University of Virginia is now a Lieutenant attending the US Military Medical School at Bethesda and will become an Army Doctor on completion of his studies.
I am just sorry to see that the current leadership of the US Army has robbed itself of one of its most capable leaders in the Medical field. In the end, the soldiers and families for whom George Weightman has cared for in combat and in peacetime for 30 years are the biggest losers.
I am biased, but I am also keenly aware of just how talented a person George is and how devoted to serving his country through providing the best care possible for our soldiers wherever he has been. He has turned down job offers to run hospitals and health organizations that would have made him rich. He has remained loyal to the Army and to his own sense of purpose. It is unseemly that the Army has rewarded him by designating him as their scapegoat in this tragic situation at WRAMC when he is probably the best person in the Army to actually fix it -- if he had been given the time.
In closing, I must say that George and his wife have both asked that we in the family not speak on his behalf publicly. I, nor any of us who really know him, will not obey that request. I ask that you reserve judgment until all the facts are known, listen to what he has to say and then you need to help George get his good name back. If that is possible in this media centric environment in which we live.
Respectfully, Douglas Kidd
Sadly, all this is likely irreversible for MG Weightman. Still, honor demands that I at least do my part to help the rest of the world understand the contributions of this man as he moves on to the next part of his life. Godspeed MG Weightman!!
Dear Sir or Madame,
As someone who is close to Major General George Weightman, it may not seem appropriate to make public statements on his behalf, especially since they were not solicited either by yourself or by General Weightman. I am General Weightman's brother-in-law and have known him for almost his entire adult life.
We served in the same infantry unit in the 25th ID. George took over my platoon as I moved on to a new assignment. Since then, I left the military and George embraced it as a career. Our families are close and even though George's duties took him all over the world, we stayed as close as we could and took advantage of the times when he and his family were stationed close by to get together and share our experiences.
The theme of this letter is "the Army got the wrong guy". I am not in a position to say who the right guy is, because I am not qualified to make that assessment. I am a very practical person who knows that someone who has just recently been assigned to a position, must have some time and leeway to assess the situation, plan and execute a strategy to fix the problems identified and then to build an attitude of continuous improvement into an organization. Major General Weightman was not given this opportunity in my humble opinion.
Why do I say this? I can say this because I know him. I know him as a man, a soldier, a doctor, a father, a loving husband, and as a brother. What is it that I know? I know his career and his absolute devotion to the Army and to serving his country for over thirty four years since his graduation from West Point in 1973. No one was more qualified than he to be in the position he held for such a short time at Walter Reed AMC.
Anyone can look up his record -- something maybe the two reporters from the Washington Post should have done before making the judgments they made about his performance at WRAMC. So to should the Secretary of the Army looked closer before his knee jerk action last week. Both parties should have asked the question as to who would be better to make WRAMC better at serving our soldiers than MG Weightman. The political necessity was that the Army had to show it was doing something, so what better way than to cut off the WRAMC head as a way of playing to the baying wolves of the press.
Let me provide some highlights about MG Weightman's career. He served five years in the infantry before completing the Infantry Officer's Advanced Course. It was then that he decided that he had a higher calling to medicine. He applied to and was accepted to the University of Vermont. He and his wife and infant son moved to Burlington and lived a bare existence while he attended and later graduated as an MD. He re-entered the Army and after his residency at Ft. Gordon, he was re-assigned to West Point to run the family practice clinic there. After three years there, he was selected to become the Division Surgeon for the 82d Airborne Division. While in the 82d, he made a night-time combat jump into Panama and later was on the first plane to arrive in Saudi Arabia at the start of Operation Desert Shield.
Upon returning from Iraq in 1991 he moved to become the Chief Resident at the Army Medical Center at Ft. Bragg. One day when both the hospital commander and deputy commander were away from Ft. Bragg, a military plane crashed at nearby Pope AFB, inundating an entire Infantry Battalion of nearly 600 men with burning aviation fuel and wreckage. Then Major Weightman, took charge of the triage at the hospital and was credited with leading the heroic efforts there in saving the lives of many soldiers.
Later, he volunteered to lead a hospital deep in the jungles of Central America in support of Delta Force in clandestine operations. He returned with Delta Force respect and malaria, which he still suffers from today.
In 1997 he took command of the Army's largest tactical Medical unit, the 30th Medical Brigade supporting all of the troops in Europe. This assignment took him into Kosovo and the surrounding area many times during his two years there. He was home only a few years when he was promoted to Brigadier General and was selected to organize, train and command the Medical Support Brigade for Operation Iraqi Freedom. He spent almost a year prior to the invasion in Kuwait coordinating and later commanding the nearly 12,000 Army, Navy, Marine and Air Force medical support for the invasion effort.
In 2004 he was promoted to Major General and given Command of Ft. Sam Houston, the home of the Army Medical Corps. He commanded over 50,000 soldiers at Ft. Sam Houston and was responsible for developing a high level of performance at Brooks Army Medical Center (BAMC) and the support system located there. Ironically, many of the conditions cited by the two Washington Post reporters at Ft. Sam Houston as being superior and exemplary ways to care for and treat our returning wounded were planned and implemented while MG Weightman was the Commander there, prior to moving back to the Washington DC area as Commander of WRAMC August 29, 2006.
The practical person in me has seen that everywhere George Weightman has served, he has made those around him better and the units to which he was assigned better at achieving their mission of medical support to the soldier and his family. Rational thought would indicate that his
> background and accomplishments at his other critical assignments would directly lead to making WRAMC better at accomplishing its mission when he was done there. In fact, he already was moving forward with improvements there. However, his plan and progress were largely discounted by both the Post reporters and it seems Secretary Harvey.
His sense of duty, honor and country has permeated his family and has had direct positive impact on me and family. His two sons, one a West Point graduate is serving a second tour of duty in Baghdad as an Infantry Officer in a combat unit. The other son, a recent graduate of University of Virginia is now a Lieutenant attending the US Military Medical School at Bethesda and will become an Army Doctor on completion of his studies.
I am just sorry to see that the current leadership of the US Army has robbed itself of one of its most capable leaders in the Medical field. In the end, the soldiers and families for whom George Weightman has cared for in combat and in peacetime for 30 years are the biggest losers.
I am biased, but I am also keenly aware of just how talented a person George is and how devoted to serving his country through providing the best care possible for our soldiers wherever he has been. He has turned down job offers to run hospitals and health organizations that would have made him rich. He has remained loyal to the Army and to his own sense of purpose. It is unseemly that the Army has rewarded him by designating him as their scapegoat in this tragic situation at WRAMC when he is probably the best person in the Army to actually fix it -- if he had been given the time.
In closing, I must say that George and his wife have both asked that we in the family not speak on his behalf publicly. I, nor any of us who really know him, will not obey that request. I ask that you reserve judgment until all the facts are known, listen to what he has to say and then you need to help George get his good name back. If that is possible in this media centric environment in which we live.
Respectfully, Douglas Kidd
Sadly, all this is likely irreversible for MG Weightman. Still, honor demands that I at least do my part to help the rest of the world understand the contributions of this man as he moves on to the next part of his life. Godspeed MG Weightman!!
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Doing a Double-Tap
OK, I normally only post about once a week, but I saw this at lunch and just had to post, along with a huge shout out to all the EOD techs I have had the pleasure of working with in the past (Good job guys!!). In the link below, an EOD team deals with a VBIED (army speak for car bomb). The driver rams a tank, and the charge doesn't blow, likely because the impact with the tank damaged the primary firing circuit. The driver is pinned inside the car, still alive. It's a tough call, but the techs have to disable the device completely, which quite sadly, means paradise for jihadist. A warning, the video is somehwhat graphic.
http://www.ifilm.com/video/2691478
Three points I'd like to make:
1) The robot appears to be a Packbot or maybe a Talon. Either way, this is a good demonstration of just what kinds of risk military robots can circumvent. Hopefully, the DoD will continue deploying this type of techology to the field.
2) Some people more sympathetic to the noble Iraqi freedom fighters have said that this is simply some poor commuter being killed in cold blood. The "proof" is that if it where a car bomb, the whole thing would have exploded. What these types of experts fail to realize, is the concept of using a limited charge to disrupt the firing mechanism completely. There was likely a good chance that the impact with the tank detsroyed the circuit, but in this case, why take that chance or bet that there might not be a secondary firing circuit that Mr Jahadi is waiting to blow when the first troops come down range? It appears the team made every attempt to use the minimum charge necessary to make the scene safe. I am pretty confident that they even hoped the jihadi would be spared, because of the intelligence value of having him captured alive. C'est le guerre. See ya, dousch-bag.
3) I hope that all the wanna be jihadi's out there see this. Scenes like this play out every day. This is the truth that so many insurgents face. Not a glorious attack that shocks the world or defeats the "Great Satan", but a scared, doped up loser sitting pinned in a failed vehicle bomb knowing he is about to end his life a complete failure. Actually, this exact scenario doesn't play out every day, but ones like. The "brave mujahadeen" are for the most part thugs, drunkards, and rapists, especially the special breed of fighter that gets selected for a mission like this. It's not glory, just deluded killing, mostly targetting normal muslims just trying to live their lives.
http://www.ifilm.com/video/2691478
Three points I'd like to make:
1) The robot appears to be a Packbot or maybe a Talon. Either way, this is a good demonstration of just what kinds of risk military robots can circumvent. Hopefully, the DoD will continue deploying this type of techology to the field.
2) Some people more sympathetic to the noble Iraqi freedom fighters have said that this is simply some poor commuter being killed in cold blood. The "proof" is that if it where a car bomb, the whole thing would have exploded. What these types of experts fail to realize, is the concept of using a limited charge to disrupt the firing mechanism completely. There was likely a good chance that the impact with the tank detsroyed the circuit, but in this case, why take that chance or bet that there might not be a secondary firing circuit that Mr Jahadi is waiting to blow when the first troops come down range? It appears the team made every attempt to use the minimum charge necessary to make the scene safe. I am pretty confident that they even hoped the jihadi would be spared, because of the intelligence value of having him captured alive. C'est le guerre. See ya, dousch-bag.
3) I hope that all the wanna be jihadi's out there see this. Scenes like this play out every day. This is the truth that so many insurgents face. Not a glorious attack that shocks the world or defeats the "Great Satan", but a scared, doped up loser sitting pinned in a failed vehicle bomb knowing he is about to end his life a complete failure. Actually, this exact scenario doesn't play out every day, but ones like. The "brave mujahadeen" are for the most part thugs, drunkards, and rapists, especially the special breed of fighter that gets selected for a mission like this. It's not glory, just deluded killing, mostly targetting normal muslims just trying to live their lives.
Monday, March 19, 2007
Beware of Iranian Cock
Found this report om Drudge this morning, it seems Iran doesn't like us nabbing all their QODS operatives:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article1530527.ece
Here is my favorite quote: “We’ve got the ability to capture a nice bunch of blue-eyed blond-haired officers and feed them to our fighting cocks,” (from Reza Faker, a writer believed to have close links to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad).
Wow buddy, TMI!! Normally, I would hesitate to make sophomoric comments about somebody saying the word cock in a public forum, but the preceeding reference to a "nice bunch of blue-eyed blond-haired officers" is a little creepy, almost fetish like. I guess blondes are more fun, even in terms of Persian latent homosexual innuendo.
In more sobering terms, Iran has already demonstrated somewhat of an ability to execute tactical kidnapping operations against our forces in Iraq:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2007/01/mil-070126-afps04.htm
This operation was carried out shortly following this years State of Union address, which also followed a raid where an Iranian "diplomatic" enclave was raided. In all likelyhood, the amount of planning required to execute the raid mentioned above likely means that it was not in direct response to our captures a few days earlier, but more likely timed to roughly coincide with the State of the Union address.
While US Forces are suceptable, there are marked differences between our ability to interdict Iranian operatives and their kidnapping operations. In most cases where U.S. soldiers are abducted, they have almost all been excuted shortly after being taken, usually with no taping of the proceedings. The lack of intelligence and propaganda derived from these events, are likely not part of the plan, and thus indicate that these operations are not completely being executed as planned. Why abduct 4 U.S. soldiers, then drive them 50 klicks or so away, just to shoot them in the back of the head? What this tells me, is that while the Iranians have shown audacity and discipline in setting up these attacks, they still really don't have the infrastructure to get captives underground and sequestered once the pursuit starts. In addition, the Iranian efforts seem to focus on soft targets with little intelligence value, while we are taking prime operators.
More than anything else, this means that military personnel must redouble their efforts and realize they could be targetted for kidnapping operations at any time or place, even possibly at home. In addition, I'd like to congratulate however out there is bagging these Iranian dousch-bags. Most people will never know the scrifices being made to keep America safe, and that's fine. Good job and good hunting! PS - beware of Iranian Cock.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article1530527.ece
Here is my favorite quote: “We’ve got the ability to capture a nice bunch of blue-eyed blond-haired officers and feed them to our fighting cocks,” (from Reza Faker, a writer believed to have close links to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad).
Wow buddy, TMI!! Normally, I would hesitate to make sophomoric comments about somebody saying the word cock in a public forum, but the preceeding reference to a "nice bunch of blue-eyed blond-haired officers" is a little creepy, almost fetish like. I guess blondes are more fun, even in terms of Persian latent homosexual innuendo.
In more sobering terms, Iran has already demonstrated somewhat of an ability to execute tactical kidnapping operations against our forces in Iraq:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2007/01/mil-070126-afps04.htm
This operation was carried out shortly following this years State of Union address, which also followed a raid where an Iranian "diplomatic" enclave was raided. In all likelyhood, the amount of planning required to execute the raid mentioned above likely means that it was not in direct response to our captures a few days earlier, but more likely timed to roughly coincide with the State of the Union address.
While US Forces are suceptable, there are marked differences between our ability to interdict Iranian operatives and their kidnapping operations. In most cases where U.S. soldiers are abducted, they have almost all been excuted shortly after being taken, usually with no taping of the proceedings. The lack of intelligence and propaganda derived from these events, are likely not part of the plan, and thus indicate that these operations are not completely being executed as planned. Why abduct 4 U.S. soldiers, then drive them 50 klicks or so away, just to shoot them in the back of the head? What this tells me, is that while the Iranians have shown audacity and discipline in setting up these attacks, they still really don't have the infrastructure to get captives underground and sequestered once the pursuit starts. In addition, the Iranian efforts seem to focus on soft targets with little intelligence value, while we are taking prime operators.
More than anything else, this means that military personnel must redouble their efforts and realize they could be targetted for kidnapping operations at any time or place, even possibly at home. In addition, I'd like to congratulate however out there is bagging these Iranian dousch-bags. Most people will never know the scrifices being made to keep America safe, and that's fine. Good job and good hunting! PS - beware of Iranian Cock.
Friday, March 9, 2007
Say What?
OK, I like listening to and reading different news services, I have to admit. Since I was old enough to get pissed off because my dad insisted on watching Cross-Fire (old school Pat Buchannon vs. Micheal Kinsley) instead of Jeopardy, I have had at least some awareness of the issues. Over that 20 year period, one of the most consistent issues has been America's debt. It has always been a vogue issue, with editors and anchors lamenting about "the sad state of the American Houshold and our love for consumer debt." Watch the news over the next week and you will hear the same thing, especially now that everybody is worried about sub-prime debt issues causing the financial sector to tank.
However, I saw this today on Fox News:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,257999,00.html
Should you be too lazy to follow the link, let me paraphrase. The net worth of American households has climbed to record levels. This doesn't make sense. I mean we are swimming in debt right? For the more economically challenged, net worth is what you would be worth, basically your assets (stuff you own) vs. your debt (stuff you owe). People are getting richer, surprise!
I want to make a few points here:
1) When people make an issue about debt, they talk about it in absolute terms, which isn't always beneficial. Having more debt isn't necessarily bad if you still have net worth. Take my situation. In the last two years, my family debt has more than doubled. It sounds bad, but hardly surprising, because I had to move to a more expensive area and finance a house that cost more than double from the place I moved from. In this situation, my net worth has continued to increase, even though my debt is up, so I am in a financially healthy position. People talk the same way about the Federal Budget defecit. "The Federal Deficit is at record levels, which bodes ill for our future." Very scary. No one says that as a percentage of GDP it's actually well below both our national average and most of the current deficit levels of other major economies. The bottom line is that as our economy, and even ourselves personally, grow, debt levels will increase. It's the net worth and debt vs income (or equity) that really matters. Think in terms of historical percentages and the data is much more meaningful.
2) While I think this data paints a rosy picture, I'd like to get a feel for what the distribution of the net worth increase is. Most likely, the majority of gains where in upper middle and upper class households. Many see this as proof that the American system is unfair, and families are being left behind. I agree, if poor people could actually build wealth with the only income they can afford to put towards their retirement (Social Security), instead of having it consumed by the government, then thay could build weath too. Instead, we have a system where the working poor pay relatively high taxes on the promise of future social security benefits. Try getting a small business loan with your social security statement of benefits as collateral. The American system is unfair to the poor. We need to abolish social security so the working poor can start building wealth.
However, I saw this today on Fox News:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,257999,00.html
Should you be too lazy to follow the link, let me paraphrase. The net worth of American households has climbed to record levels. This doesn't make sense. I mean we are swimming in debt right? For the more economically challenged, net worth is what you would be worth, basically your assets (stuff you own) vs. your debt (stuff you owe). People are getting richer, surprise!
I want to make a few points here:
1) When people make an issue about debt, they talk about it in absolute terms, which isn't always beneficial. Having more debt isn't necessarily bad if you still have net worth. Take my situation. In the last two years, my family debt has more than doubled. It sounds bad, but hardly surprising, because I had to move to a more expensive area and finance a house that cost more than double from the place I moved from. In this situation, my net worth has continued to increase, even though my debt is up, so I am in a financially healthy position. People talk the same way about the Federal Budget defecit. "The Federal Deficit is at record levels, which bodes ill for our future." Very scary. No one says that as a percentage of GDP it's actually well below both our national average and most of the current deficit levels of other major economies. The bottom line is that as our economy, and even ourselves personally, grow, debt levels will increase. It's the net worth and debt vs income (or equity) that really matters. Think in terms of historical percentages and the data is much more meaningful.
2) While I think this data paints a rosy picture, I'd like to get a feel for what the distribution of the net worth increase is. Most likely, the majority of gains where in upper middle and upper class households. Many see this as proof that the American system is unfair, and families are being left behind. I agree, if poor people could actually build wealth with the only income they can afford to put towards their retirement (Social Security), instead of having it consumed by the government, then thay could build weath too. Instead, we have a system where the working poor pay relatively high taxes on the promise of future social security benefits. Try getting a small business loan with your social security statement of benefits as collateral. The American system is unfair to the poor. We need to abolish social security so the working poor can start building wealth.
Thursday, March 1, 2007
Word Brother
I read an article by Dr. Victor Davis Hanson:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/03/iraq_war_recalls_past_us_confl.html
As normal, I strongly agree with Dr. Hanson. American life has become so very fast paced, with everybody expecting instant results. Consider this:
1) Imagine we went to war and within the first few months, our forces where routed in a stunning defeat right outside our own border.
2) In response, we establish a beach head and land over 100,000 troops that march within artillery range of the enemy captital, only to have the commanding general lose his nerve and retreat. After being relieved of command, said general turns to politcs and becomes the Democratic party front runner. Over the three years that follow, we relieve our commanding generals about twice a year due to incompetence.
3) Our enemy assembles a force of respected and efficient leaders and manages to beat us in two out of three battles on average over the next three years, despite being outnumbered with poorer technology. Hundreds of thousands lay dead.
4) On two occasions, the enemy manages to invade us, causing crippling damage despite being replused.
5) When we do manage to win, the only way to pacify the enemy is to wantonly torch the country-side as we go.
Would we have the heart to win such a war if waged today?
We did in 1862, when the union forces went up against the Confederate high tide and won. Study the mistakes of President Lincoln and you can see just how bad things can get.
To quote from the other side (Stonewall Jackson in 'Gods and Generals')
"Hold on Mr. Pendleton, it's good to get your dander up, but it's discipline that wins the day!"
Speaking first hand, our soldiers have the discipline to win the day. It's the rest of the country that worries me.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/03/iraq_war_recalls_past_us_confl.html
As normal, I strongly agree with Dr. Hanson. American life has become so very fast paced, with everybody expecting instant results. Consider this:
1) Imagine we went to war and within the first few months, our forces where routed in a stunning defeat right outside our own border.
2) In response, we establish a beach head and land over 100,000 troops that march within artillery range of the enemy captital, only to have the commanding general lose his nerve and retreat. After being relieved of command, said general turns to politcs and becomes the Democratic party front runner. Over the three years that follow, we relieve our commanding generals about twice a year due to incompetence.
3) Our enemy assembles a force of respected and efficient leaders and manages to beat us in two out of three battles on average over the next three years, despite being outnumbered with poorer technology. Hundreds of thousands lay dead.
4) On two occasions, the enemy manages to invade us, causing crippling damage despite being replused.
5) When we do manage to win, the only way to pacify the enemy is to wantonly torch the country-side as we go.
Would we have the heart to win such a war if waged today?
We did in 1862, when the union forces went up against the Confederate high tide and won. Study the mistakes of President Lincoln and you can see just how bad things can get.
To quote from the other side (Stonewall Jackson in 'Gods and Generals')
"Hold on Mr. Pendleton, it's good to get your dander up, but it's discipline that wins the day!"
Speaking first hand, our soldiers have the discipline to win the day. It's the rest of the country that worries me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)