Monday, October 10, 2011
SILENCE IS GOLDEN; NO MORE ANDY ROONEY
watched 60 minutes last nite and for the first time there was no andy rooney. what a relief. as freud said, i think, in Beyond the Pleasure Principal, pleasure is the absence of pain.
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA
Once Upon a Time in America
A troubled nation needs a real leader, not a storyteller.
By PEGGY NOONAN
At a symposium in Colorado at which thoughtful people from many professions spoke, and later in conversation with people who care about books in California, two things we all know to be true became more vivid to me.
The first is that nobody is optimistic about the world economy. No one sees the Western nations righting themselves any time soon, no one sees lower unemployment coming down the pike, or fewer foreclosures. No one was burly: "Everything will be fine, snap out of it!" Everyone admitted tough times lie ahead.
Related Video
http://online.wsj.com/article/declarations.html#
The second is that everyone hungers for leadership. Really, everyone. And really, it is a hunger. They want so much to be able to respect and feel trust in their political leaders. Everyone hungers for someone strong, honest and capable—as big as the moment. But the presidential contest, the default topic when Americans gather, tended to become somewhat secondary. Underlying everything was a widespread sense among Democrats and Republicans, lefties and righties, that President Obama isn't big enough, and that we don't have to argue about this anymore. There was also a broad sense that there is no particular reason to believe any one of the Republicans is big enough, either.
Actually, I saw a third thing. There is, I think, a kind of new patriotism among our professional classes. They talk about America now and their eyes fill up. With business people and doctors and scientists, there used to be a kind of detachment, an ironic distance they held between themselves and Washington, themselves and national problems. "The future of our country" was the kind of earnest topic they wouldn't or couldn't survey without a wry smile. But now I believe I see a deep yearning to help, to do the right thing, to be part of a rebuilding, and it is a yearning based in true and absolute anxiety that we may lose this wonderful thing we were born into, this America, this brilliant golden gift.
At the end of Tennessee Williams's "The Glass Menagerie," Tom, the narrator, tells us he never stopped thinking of his sister and his mother and their sadness, for "I was more faithful than I intended to be." That, I think, is the mood taking hold among members of what used to be called the American leadership class—slightly taken aback by their love for America, by their protectiveness toward her.
The president reads 'Of Thee I Sing: A Letter to My Daughters' by Barack Obama.
The untapped patriotism out there—if it were electricity, it would remake the grid and light up the world. And it's among all professions, classes and groups, from the boardroom to the Tea Party meeting to the pediatric ICU.
We think patriotism reached its height after 9/11, but I think it is reaching some new height now, and we're only beginning to notice.
***
And here we turn to politics. Are those running for president aware of the fix we're in? I'm not sure they are. For one thing, if they knew, they wouldn't look so dementedly chipper. And they wouldn't all be talking about The Narrative. Which is all I heard once I came back East.
The Narrative has nothing to do with what is actually happening in the country. That would make too much sense. The Narrative is the story of a candidate or a candidacy, or the story of a presidency. Everyone in politics is supposed to have one. They're supposedly powerful. Voters believe them.
Everyone in politics should stop this. For one thing, a narrative is not something that can be imposed, it is something that bubbles up. It's something people perceive on their own and then talk about, and if it's true, the talk spreads.
Here I return to Ron Suskind's book, "Confidence Men." As noted last week, Mr. Suskind has been criticized for getting quotes and facts wrong. But the White House hasn't disputed his interview with Mr. Obama, who had some remarkable things to say.
It turns out he too is obsessed with The Narrative. Mr. Suskind asked him why his team had difficulty creating a policy to deal with unemployment. Mr. Obama said some of it was due to circumstances, some to the complexity of the problem. Then he added: "We didn't have a clean story that we wanted to tell against which we would measure various actions." Huh? It wasn't "clean," he explained, because "what was required to save the economy might not always match up with what would make for a good story."
Throughout the interview the president seems preoccupied with "shaping a story for the American people." He says: "The irony is, the reason I was in this office is because I told a story to the American people." But, he confesses, "that narrative thread we just lost" in his first years.
Then he asks, "What's the particular requirement of the president that no one else can do?" He answers: "What the president can do, that nobody else can do, is tell a story to the American people" about where we are as a nation and should be.
Tell a story to the American people? That's your job? Not adopting good policies? Not defending the nation? Storytelling?
The interview reflects the weird inability of so many in political leadership now to acknowledge the role in life of . . . reality.
Overthinking the obvious and focusing on the artifice and myth of politics is a problem for all political professionals, including Republicans. Sarah Palin was out there this week trying to impose her own narrative: that she's all roguey and mavericky and she'd win if she ran, but she's not sure the presidency—"the title"—wouldn't dull her special magic. It was like Norma Desmond in "Sunset Boulevard." She's still big, it's the presidency that got small.
But this is mostly a problem for the Democratic Party at the national level, and has been since the 1980s. It reflects a disdain for the American people—they need their little stories—and it springs from an inability to understand the Reagan era. Democrats looked at him and the speeches and the crowds and balloons and thought: "I get it, politics is now all show biz." Because they couldn't take Reagan's views and philosophy seriously, they couldn't believe anyone else could, either. So they explained him through a story. The story was that Reagan's success was due not to decisions and their outcomes but to a narrative. The narrative was "Morning in America": Everything's good, everyone's happy.
Democrats vowed to create their own narratives, their own stories.
Here's the problem: There is no story. At the end of the day, there is only reality. Things work or they don't. When they work, people notice, and say it.
Would the next president like a story? Here's one. America was anxious, and feared it was losing the air of opportunity that had allowed it to be what it was—expansive, generous, future-trusting. It was losing faith in its establishments and institutions. And someone came out of that need who led—who was wise and courageous and began to turn the ship around. And we saved our country, and that way saved the world.
There's a narrative for you, the only one that matters. Go be a hero of that story. It will get around. It will bubble up.
A troubled nation needs a real leader, not a storyteller.
By PEGGY NOONAN
At a symposium in Colorado at which thoughtful people from many professions spoke, and later in conversation with people who care about books in California, two things we all know to be true became more vivid to me.
The first is that nobody is optimistic about the world economy. No one sees the Western nations righting themselves any time soon, no one sees lower unemployment coming down the pike, or fewer foreclosures. No one was burly: "Everything will be fine, snap out of it!" Everyone admitted tough times lie ahead.
Related Video
http://online.wsj.com/article/declarations.html#
The second is that everyone hungers for leadership. Really, everyone. And really, it is a hunger. They want so much to be able to respect and feel trust in their political leaders. Everyone hungers for someone strong, honest and capable—as big as the moment. But the presidential contest, the default topic when Americans gather, tended to become somewhat secondary. Underlying everything was a widespread sense among Democrats and Republicans, lefties and righties, that President Obama isn't big enough, and that we don't have to argue about this anymore. There was also a broad sense that there is no particular reason to believe any one of the Republicans is big enough, either.
Actually, I saw a third thing. There is, I think, a kind of new patriotism among our professional classes. They talk about America now and their eyes fill up. With business people and doctors and scientists, there used to be a kind of detachment, an ironic distance they held between themselves and Washington, themselves and national problems. "The future of our country" was the kind of earnest topic they wouldn't or couldn't survey without a wry smile. But now I believe I see a deep yearning to help, to do the right thing, to be part of a rebuilding, and it is a yearning based in true and absolute anxiety that we may lose this wonderful thing we were born into, this America, this brilliant golden gift.
At the end of Tennessee Williams's "The Glass Menagerie," Tom, the narrator, tells us he never stopped thinking of his sister and his mother and their sadness, for "I was more faithful than I intended to be." That, I think, is the mood taking hold among members of what used to be called the American leadership class—slightly taken aback by their love for America, by their protectiveness toward her.
The president reads 'Of Thee I Sing: A Letter to My Daughters' by Barack Obama.
The untapped patriotism out there—if it were electricity, it would remake the grid and light up the world. And it's among all professions, classes and groups, from the boardroom to the Tea Party meeting to the pediatric ICU.
We think patriotism reached its height after 9/11, but I think it is reaching some new height now, and we're only beginning to notice.
***
And here we turn to politics. Are those running for president aware of the fix we're in? I'm not sure they are. For one thing, if they knew, they wouldn't look so dementedly chipper. And they wouldn't all be talking about The Narrative. Which is all I heard once I came back East.
The Narrative has nothing to do with what is actually happening in the country. That would make too much sense. The Narrative is the story of a candidate or a candidacy, or the story of a presidency. Everyone in politics is supposed to have one. They're supposedly powerful. Voters believe them.
Everyone in politics should stop this. For one thing, a narrative is not something that can be imposed, it is something that bubbles up. It's something people perceive on their own and then talk about, and if it's true, the talk spreads.
Here I return to Ron Suskind's book, "Confidence Men." As noted last week, Mr. Suskind has been criticized for getting quotes and facts wrong. But the White House hasn't disputed his interview with Mr. Obama, who had some remarkable things to say.
It turns out he too is obsessed with The Narrative. Mr. Suskind asked him why his team had difficulty creating a policy to deal with unemployment. Mr. Obama said some of it was due to circumstances, some to the complexity of the problem. Then he added: "We didn't have a clean story that we wanted to tell against which we would measure various actions." Huh? It wasn't "clean," he explained, because "what was required to save the economy might not always match up with what would make for a good story."
Throughout the interview the president seems preoccupied with "shaping a story for the American people." He says: "The irony is, the reason I was in this office is because I told a story to the American people." But, he confesses, "that narrative thread we just lost" in his first years.
Then he asks, "What's the particular requirement of the president that no one else can do?" He answers: "What the president can do, that nobody else can do, is tell a story to the American people" about where we are as a nation and should be.
Tell a story to the American people? That's your job? Not adopting good policies? Not defending the nation? Storytelling?
The interview reflects the weird inability of so many in political leadership now to acknowledge the role in life of . . . reality.
Overthinking the obvious and focusing on the artifice and myth of politics is a problem for all political professionals, including Republicans. Sarah Palin was out there this week trying to impose her own narrative: that she's all roguey and mavericky and she'd win if she ran, but she's not sure the presidency—"the title"—wouldn't dull her special magic. It was like Norma Desmond in "Sunset Boulevard." She's still big, it's the presidency that got small.
But this is mostly a problem for the Democratic Party at the national level, and has been since the 1980s. It reflects a disdain for the American people—they need their little stories—and it springs from an inability to understand the Reagan era. Democrats looked at him and the speeches and the crowds and balloons and thought: "I get it, politics is now all show biz." Because they couldn't take Reagan's views and philosophy seriously, they couldn't believe anyone else could, either. So they explained him through a story. The story was that Reagan's success was due not to decisions and their outcomes but to a narrative. The narrative was "Morning in America": Everything's good, everyone's happy.
Democrats vowed to create their own narratives, their own stories.
Here's the problem: There is no story. At the end of the day, there is only reality. Things work or they don't. When they work, people notice, and say it.
Would the next president like a story? Here's one. America was anxious, and feared it was losing the air of opportunity that had allowed it to be what it was—expansive, generous, future-trusting. It was losing faith in its establishments and institutions. And someone came out of that need who led—who was wise and courageous and began to turn the ship around. And we saved our country, and that way saved the world.
There's a narrative for you, the only one that matters. Go be a hero of that story. It will get around. It will bubble up.
SOMEBODY KILLED MEREDITH KERCHER!
amanda knox was just let go. i have no idea if she is guilty or innocent. but somebody killed meredith kercher and justice has not been done.
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
MARINELLO SCHOOLS OF BEAUTY > 9/11
i have now lived in LA for about 28 years. as such i read the LA times. in my defense, i also read the nytimes, the wsj, and the FT. my father used to be in the magazine business. he taught me the value of certain pages in a magazine for advertising. the most valuable are the inside front cover, the inside backcover and the back cover. the cover, however belongs to the brand, the image, the reader.
which brings me to the LA times. for awhile, in desparation for revenue, they have sold the front page in a variety of ways. they sell inserts that wrap the front page in part; causing those of us who buy the paper to actually read the news to strip it off and throw it away. the other thing they do is sell a 2 inch by two inch adhesive label that goes above the fold with advertsising on the label, causing one to have to remove the label to read the paper.
like many humans, like frogs in warm but ever gently increasingly hotter water, i get lulled into resignation over the constant degradation of the quality of life. but even i have my breaking point.
on 9/11 the la times put a advertising sticker from the marinello schools of beauty smack dab in the middle of the the picture and article about the 10th anniversary of 9/11. now thats just not right.
shame on the LA times.
which brings me to the LA times. for awhile, in desparation for revenue, they have sold the front page in a variety of ways. they sell inserts that wrap the front page in part; causing those of us who buy the paper to actually read the news to strip it off and throw it away. the other thing they do is sell a 2 inch by two inch adhesive label that goes above the fold with advertsising on the label, causing one to have to remove the label to read the paper.
like many humans, like frogs in warm but ever gently increasingly hotter water, i get lulled into resignation over the constant degradation of the quality of life. but even i have my breaking point.
on 9/11 the la times put a advertising sticker from the marinello schools of beauty smack dab in the middle of the the picture and article about the 10th anniversary of 9/11. now thats just not right.
shame on the LA times.
Sunday, August 28, 2011
ME MYSELF AND IRENE; THE WEATHER POLITICIZED
it is hard enough to predict the weather without politicizing it. but thats just what happened with Irene. mayor bloomberg got tagged for not being prepared for last winters snow and didnt want to get tagged again; so he was ultra conservative and he is an opinion leader. then chris christy needed to show who was the man; then last we had obama who didnt want Irene to become his Katrina which led him to say to the american people that Irene was going to be a historic hurricane!
this led to fine american cities, like boston to shut down their mass transit systems which in essence shut down the city with nothing but light rain and a little wind. much to do about nothing
aint politics grand?
this led to fine american cities, like boston to shut down their mass transit systems which in essence shut down the city with nothing but light rain and a little wind. much to do about nothing
aint politics grand?
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
HISTORY IS WRITTEN BY THE WINNERS
remarkable events in libya. it was interesting watching the west decide how to play different arab countries during the arab spring uprisings. france and italy had clear strategic interests in libys, oil. not clear why the US picked libya while passing on syria. it could have gone either way; win and youre a hero, lose you are a goat. obama deserves some credit. he placed a bet. putting nato out front was smart politics and resource sharing. but he was too slow which led to it being a 6 month campaign with euro support fading. it will be interesting to see what emerges in libya. a moderately democratic government building a new country for the libyan people? sectarian violence like iraq? the revolution is only the first step. revolutions can be hijacked. that is the risk in egypt. one of the reasons mubarak went was that a younger generation of milatary were disaffected, in part because they were not getting their share of the goodies. egypt could end up under the control of the milatary or in combination with the muslim brotherhood.
the middle east has been riddled and hobbled by a post colonial; cold war legacy of military, authoritarian, corrupt governments, supported by either the west or russia; usually with an agenda around oil, the wealth was not shared, the people suffered, often their misery turned into radicalized violence, often directed toward israel which really was not responsible for their misery.
it will be interesting how this all unfolds.
the middle east has been riddled and hobbled by a post colonial; cold war legacy of military, authoritarian, corrupt governments, supported by either the west or russia; usually with an agenda around oil, the wealth was not shared, the people suffered, often their misery turned into radicalized violence, often directed toward israel which really was not responsible for their misery.
it will be interesting how this all unfolds.
Sunday, August 7, 2011
THEY STOLE OUR CREDIT RATING!
as most of you know, the US's credit rating was downgraded to AA+ on friday. before addressing this event fully, lets get the irony out of the way
S&P, one of the two dominant rating agencies, along with MOODYS, rated trillions of dollars of mortgage backed bonds AAA which had no business be rated as such and led materially to the global financial crisis. they probably should have been shot for this. god knows why they werent. so the irony of one of them now downgrading the US is pretty high.
having said that. if i was a financial analyst at said rating agency and someone gave me an anonymous file on the US, without the name and maybe changed the absolute numbers but kept the proportions to further mask the identity of the issuer, i would probably downgrade it also. based on the numbers, the projections and the politics.
does it matter? shit yes! what are we going to do about it? we will see. We should fire the govenment and all govenments that dont do their jobs in an honest and competant manner. but we have the govenments we deserve. we deserve these assholes. what are we going to do about it?
i was talking to a friend yesterday and i said we elected our own hugo chavez. and he said yeah, but without the oil. you all may have different opinions.
the strength of a country rests on many things; its values and belief system. its education system, its economy. from their actions, it doesnt seem that most people in washington and in the white house have a clue how to nurture a stong economy. the US has an almost 15 trillion dollar gdp. so 20% is $3 trillion dollars. dont you think most of us could design a govenment on a 3 trillion dollar budget? you cant take in 20% and spend 25% and borrow 1.5 trillion year in and year out. your shouldnt raise taxes so the input goes to 25%, 3 trillion is enough. we need a flatter, simpler tax code. most people dont pay much in taxes. the ones that do are of a class who in fact create jobs. i remember when i got my first big bonus check many years ago and i said to myself, 25% of this is really mine. 50% will go to the government and and 25% will go to my future ex-wife. so i was operating on a psycological tax rate of 75%. a bit steep. how about the following
for individuals
0-20,000 0% tax but pay social security etc
20k-40k 10%
40k-100k 15%
above 100k 22% and get rid of most deductions.?
and all income is treated the same, salary, bonus, dividends, capital gains, carried interests?
getting rid of the mortgage deduction is tricky. if you just eliminated it, the price of real estate would just drop, making a weak economy a disaster. maybe do nothing. it is attacked as a fetishistic subsidy of a personal asset but if you buy a commercial building, interest is deductable. why isnt a home a capital asset? certainly most families look at their homes as a major store of their families capital. maybe just make sure that mortgages are credit worthy; full documents, underwritten etc.
this obviously is rambling but i am mad as hell. those assholes lost my credit rating and i am pissed.
S&P, one of the two dominant rating agencies, along with MOODYS, rated trillions of dollars of mortgage backed bonds AAA which had no business be rated as such and led materially to the global financial crisis. they probably should have been shot for this. god knows why they werent. so the irony of one of them now downgrading the US is pretty high.
having said that. if i was a financial analyst at said rating agency and someone gave me an anonymous file on the US, without the name and maybe changed the absolute numbers but kept the proportions to further mask the identity of the issuer, i would probably downgrade it also. based on the numbers, the projections and the politics.
does it matter? shit yes! what are we going to do about it? we will see. We should fire the govenment and all govenments that dont do their jobs in an honest and competant manner. but we have the govenments we deserve. we deserve these assholes. what are we going to do about it?
i was talking to a friend yesterday and i said we elected our own hugo chavez. and he said yeah, but without the oil. you all may have different opinions.
the strength of a country rests on many things; its values and belief system. its education system, its economy. from their actions, it doesnt seem that most people in washington and in the white house have a clue how to nurture a stong economy. the US has an almost 15 trillion dollar gdp. so 20% is $3 trillion dollars. dont you think most of us could design a govenment on a 3 trillion dollar budget? you cant take in 20% and spend 25% and borrow 1.5 trillion year in and year out. your shouldnt raise taxes so the input goes to 25%, 3 trillion is enough. we need a flatter, simpler tax code. most people dont pay much in taxes. the ones that do are of a class who in fact create jobs. i remember when i got my first big bonus check many years ago and i said to myself, 25% of this is really mine. 50% will go to the government and and 25% will go to my future ex-wife. so i was operating on a psycological tax rate of 75%. a bit steep. how about the following
for individuals
0-20,000 0% tax but pay social security etc
20k-40k 10%
40k-100k 15%
above 100k 22% and get rid of most deductions.?
and all income is treated the same, salary, bonus, dividends, capital gains, carried interests?
getting rid of the mortgage deduction is tricky. if you just eliminated it, the price of real estate would just drop, making a weak economy a disaster. maybe do nothing. it is attacked as a fetishistic subsidy of a personal asset but if you buy a commercial building, interest is deductable. why isnt a home a capital asset? certainly most families look at their homes as a major store of their families capital. maybe just make sure that mortgages are credit worthy; full documents, underwritten etc.
this obviously is rambling but i am mad as hell. those assholes lost my credit rating and i am pissed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)