Grateful

Walking with my dog,

Thoughts racing thru my mind,

How lucky to have friends,

Friends who are my children.

Not sure what others think,

Who may have even more friends.

But my friends are really my family,

I love my wife, children, and spouses.

Maybe I’m deprived,

Such a small set of friends.

But no group is like my friends,

Who never leave me wanting,

Filling me with ideas and laughter.

And to think that my friends

Extended themselves with more,

Grandchildren that light up our lives,

Making us more than we are.

Whatever the future brings,

Nothing robs the present,

Moments bringing tears of joy,

Grateful for my children.

Health Care Bill

The debate within my head regarding the benefit/loss of passing a weakened health care bill has been somewhat validated by the opinions today of Krugman and Brooks.

Krugman, somewhat amazingly given his many prior columns, thinks that even a poor bill is worth passing. He is convinced that the biggest hurdle is getting any bill passed that addresses discrimination of access to health care because of pre-existing conditions and the lack of access to health care for 45 million people. Based on history, he thinks that the defects/omissions in the bill will be rectified over time.

Brooks has been somewhat consistently wavering. Today, he summarizes the plusses and minuses of the Senate bill in its current form and comes down on the side that it should not be passed because actual reform of the health care system is not adequately addressed and he thinks that these omissions will not be addressed in the future.

I share both views! What a mess!

Health Care Costs

Atul Gawande is a Boston surgeon who has made a name for himself by his analysis and writing on the subject of health care reform. A prior major article in the New Yorker which captured the horrendous situation generated by the fee-for-service method of payment was a "must read" in the White House. Now, he is addressing the issue of the reform of health care COSTS!

Admittedly, I have been disappointed that the bills under discussion now have not adequately addressed the reforms that would bring costs under control. His current article allays my disappointment. He confronts the issue by articulating the impossibility of legislatively carving a solution to the problems associated with the high costs of health care. Based on the history of how the government's Department of Agriculture addressed the problems in farming during the early decades of the 20th century, he speculates that the current legislation enabling and supporting all sorts of pilot initiatives follows the successful experience of the revolution in farming. We can anticipate that these pilot initiatives will enable change, albeit less rapidly than many want, but at a rate that it reasonable and rational, i.e., there is no fast solution to the myriad of problems generating the high costs.

"The Death of a Pope" by Piers Paul Reed

Since I read so much, there is seldom a need for me to write about a particular book. However, "The Death of a Pope" is different.

My background as a priest and a person interested in religion/theology makes this book most intriguing. It is a thriller-type novel that involves current conflicts within the Roman Church, including a deep resentment that previous popes have so stacked the hierarchy with very conservative bishops that there is virtually no hope for a more liberal pope who would modify the many areas of conflict, e.g., birth control, use of condoms, acceptance of divorced people within the communion, women priests, etc.

The reference to these controversial issues within the context of international issues made this novel worth reading and is recommended for anyone with an interest in these issues.

Thanksgiving -- 2009

Days pass ever so quickly,
Memories fade with ease,
Knowing the days of the past
Far exceed those ahead.

Wishing at times to hold on,
But seeing the inevitable,
Focus only on holy moments
Filled with the joy of family.

Each day recalls the cells
Of joy and laughter
Flowing from the faces
Flowering into wonder.

Thanks to you,
I treasure each day,
Never deserving rewards,
You've become my Thanksgiving!

What We Don't Know re: Afghanistan

The decision by the President to send 30,000 more troops was ill-advised. There is no way that this will ultimately make a real difference. The problems are too huge. Even trying to dismantle Al Qaeda is unlikely since they are surviving quite well in many nations. Pakistan remains a problem in trying to address the problem. In addition, the Taliban knows that they will be there long after the United States leaves, whenever that is.

In addition, we read about the corruption in Afghanistan without addressing our own levels of corruption (cf. Zbigniew Brzesinski). Who are we to level such charges against Afghanistan as though we were pure?

And then, we complain about the level of incompetence in the Afghanistan government. Michael Shank returned from Afghanistan to report the disconnect between our government's reported assessment of the situation and what are the actual causes, particularly those caused by our government.

Loss of the Middle Class

I have been concerned for some years with the phenomenon of the loss of the middle class. I was struck by Kevin Phillips' concern that every major power lost its power when it lost the middle class. He cited Holland and England as class examples. The middle class is required to maintain the purchasing power of the nation that enables it to be strong. As in the case of Holland and England, the United States started to buy from other nations since they were "cheaper". But, in the process, the loss of manufacturing jobs resulted in the erosion of the middle class and the resulting decline in wealth and power.

Elizabeth Warren has been harking on the same subject for some time. She points often that the middle class has lost much in the last 30 years and the expenses of ordinary living (housing, health care, education) have increased dramatically while their incomes (including how a second income) is insufficient to keep up. The problem is huge and significant to the point that unless something is done, the United States will suffer major erosion in its claim to international power (worth something only because of the alternative!).

Elizabeth Warren's latest entry is worthy of consideration because of its detail of how the erosion has trended negatively over these last 30 years.s

"The Evolution of God" by Robert Wright

"The Evolution of God" is not a relaxing book to read. It is filled with archeology, biblical literature, history, and various types of scholarship. The intent of the author is to provide an understanding that the concept "God" has a history. It has evolved from animism through polytheism to monolatry and then, monotheism is a somewhat logical, albeit convoluted, history.

The transition from one level of understanding to another involves cross-fertilization, i.e., believing in more than one God until Gods merge into one, incorporating features of both. And, then, there is a back and forth movement, i.e., beliefs discarded on one hand are kept alive on another. This form of evolution is referred to as cultural evolution. It is not as neat as biological evolution, but the history indicates that constructs, e.g., God, do evolve through cultural changes.

The fact that the understanding of "God" evolves by virtue of social forces "on the ground" does not necessarily disprove that there is a transcendent being. Politics, international relations, and economics helped to determine which God to align with or, at least, accept in a spirit of tolerance. As long as there was "gain" by tolerating/accepting the foreign God, why not have some sort of acceptance?

It appears that the notion of God is more expansive when there is a non-zero sum situation at hand. If we feel that our lot is better through tolerance, then our God will be seen as universal. If not, we tend to see God as vengeful, resulting in the horrible events detailed throughout history. While we can hope that nations will see that there is a non-zero sum situation involved for us all, i.e., we survive and thrive when we allow others to do so also, when segments see it differently, they can use all sorts of "sacred books" to justify violence and destruction.

There is little of "Christianity" in the life of Jesus. The Jesus we know through the Gospels is a construct built by believers (40-80 years after Jesus). What seems to be true is that Christianity with many of the features popular to the world is a creation of Paul. And, like in previous eras, it was in his interest to further interethnic relationships in order to promote his franchises of Jesus-followers. The more magnanimous features of Christianity,e.g., loving your enemy, was a development designed to promote tolerance to the powerful in order to lessen their antagonism to this new religion. Expansion into the Roman Empire required more acceptance of other ethnic groups if the early Christians were to survive.

The development of Koran follows similar trends. When Muhammad was in Mecca where he initially was "inspired", his message to a polytheistic society was not received well. He was in no position to promote revenge directly. The Koran written under these circumstances encouraged more tolerance of those who were the oppressors. But, when he went to Medina and is message was supported by the majority, then the message was far more revengeful. The political and economic realities of the moment help determine the messages of Jesus and Muhammad.

Since the Books of the various religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) were written by people over time in circumstances that were perceived as either zero sum (producing intolerant, belligerent verbiage) or non-zero sum (producing more tolerant, compassionate texts), anyone can find something to support their views. The problem today is that the need to become tolerant in a clearly interdependent, non-zero sum world is sometimes jeopardized by the few who exercise extreme violence based on their perception of a zero sum situation.

The problem often times is that the hatred and violence of some result in a reaction that gives support to the belief systems of our enemies. Terrorists today are recruited because of the alignment of terrorists beliefs with their perceived reality, e.g., if Muslims claim justification for the behavior because the West hates them, won't our bombing and violence against our enemies who are Muslim, reinforced the basic premises of their behavior?

In order for the planet to survive, there is a need for people to use their moral imagination to reach beyond their more narrow perceptions in order to see how others are, in fact, interdependent with us. We have to work to make their "world" more aligned with ours in the sense that they see their "salvation" dependent on our behavior and vice versa.

Based on the title of the book, "The Evolution of God", one has to hope that "God" will clearly evolve to promote a higher degree of morality to enable humanity, now an interdependent global reality, to survive!

While the above captures the general thrust of the author's book, I clearly view the notions that God has "revealed" himself through written sources traditionally believed by the major religions as false. I can understand how someone could conclude that there may be a "higher power", but I cannot understand how humans could possibly have any comprehension of what this means. If there is a God, God remains clearly beyond our capacity to understand.

Public Option for Everyone!

In the past, I have communicated that I prefer a universal health care reform with one payor, viz., the government. It is the only way to achieve care for all with some way to control costs, even if viewed exclusively as rationing (which it is).

The bills offered by the Senate and the House do extend coverage, but at a severe cost. There is no health care reform. It is more or less the same system with more people. It surely will be a mess while driving up costs without any mechanism to establish control (I know that there is a provision for a group of specialized individuals to establish controls that will achieve higher quality, but I am not convinced that it will be capable of achieving its goals).

The only way to achieve universal access while controlling costs is to provide for the public option that is open to all (cf. Robert Reich). It surely will attract tons of people who will find that the private insurance more costly without higher access to care. And then, we will be able to proceed to the goal of reforming our health care system.

Robert Reich,

Crazy Fed Bank Policies!

When you read what the Federal Reserve is doing to contribute to restoring our economy, you note that they are giving banks money at virtually no interest rate. It is intended to support banks so that they will provide more credit to our citizens, permitting our economy to grow. However, this money is being used by the banks and investment firms to "make money" that provides no social value. There is no increase in our productivity. There is only more money being made by these firms. We continue the same procedures that got us into the mess in the first place.

Pearlstein's column poignantly focuses on the problem to the point that it is ludicrous.

Pitfalls of Electronic Warfare!

For some time, I have been uneasy with the use of drone warfare. While there is something exotic about being able to be involved in the killing of enemies without the use of our manpower, it is a slippery slope to the time when other nations will develop the technology. And then, what? What will be the next advancement to maintain our superiority? They already are starting to discuss space weapons that will be coming from military satellites.

Roger Cohen is drawing attention to the need for a national debate on the use of drones. His concerns are not like mine, but they too are valid. Shouldn't we consider the implications of our military sitting in Nevada and sending weapons to destroy our enemies and, often, innocent civilians.

We tend to think that no one can be as innovative in developing weapons as the United States. We will maintain our superiority because we are so "creative". But, at what cost?

"It Could Happen Here" by Bruce Judson

I have talked with my family over the past several years about my fear of major social unrest resulting from great economic disparities. Often times, I have referenced such disparities between the developed and undeveloped nations. More recently, I have been concerned about the economic disparities within our nation. As Kevin Phillips discussed in his books, nations that lose their middle classes tend to eventually lose their power.

Bruce Judson, a Yale Professor, brings data and imagination to address the great economic disparity within our nation. We are becoming, if not already present, a nation between the top and the rest! “It Could Happen Here” details the implications of a nation without a strong middle class. It is not simply a matter of social justice. As he says, “In fact, economic inequality if not solely a matter of fairness. It is a transcendent danger that threatens our national security and the survival of our form of government”.

It is clear that history indicates that nations with wealth allocated disproportionately to the few end up in some sort of major change. This situation is more problematic when a nation’s economy is in crisis. Can one imagine what would happen if nations investing in our relatively worthless bonds decided that they could do better elsewhere? Granted, it is hard to believe that they would do such because the consequences would be catastrophic for so many! However, should such occur, it surely would overwhelm our nation! Even as I write, I find out that our dollar’s value continues to decline! This may contribute to some “growth” because our exports will be cheaper, but surely it cannot be a great way to grow our economy.

Economic inequality is not just an absolute difference between groups of people. There is a relative aspect to what people perceive to be fair. People have expectations and, if there is no way to satisfy them, they become angry. Government can address problems associated with this disparity, but government’s failure to successfully remedy problems may inflame those who appear to be short-changed. And government may be overwhelmed to the point of being inherently ineffective.

The causes of a collapse of a society are unpredictable when focusing on specifics However, even from the time of Aristotle, economic inequities generally associated with major events, e.g., fiscal meltdown, result in some sort of revolution. But, the actual trigger could be less momentous. In short, when enough people feel like there is no hope in satisfying their aspirations and government is ineffective in addressing the issues, a society becomes quite vulnerable.

It would be hard to find anyone who would dispute the statistics indicating that the top 10% and above have more income and wealth than the remainder of our nation. In addition, high income is not no longer associated with an increase in social value. Making money with high leverage does not make a nation more productive. It mostly serves to increase the wealth of the few.

Technology and the global market were major factors in how economy has changed since the 70’s. So many people lost jobs due to technology, especially computers. Middle management tasks were outsourced as well as tasks generally done by unskilled labor. The end result is that corporations made increased profits with less employees. Moreover, regulations ceased to limit the markets, resulting in high leverage, increased debt, and less security for the ordinary middle class citizen. There was a time when adding women to the workforce contributed to maintaining the standard of living. Now, two earners in a household became insufficient, contributing to the need to add revenue by assuming debt in the form of credit and equity. We had produced a non-sustaining economy.

Obama’s administration recognizes the seriousness of the problems affecting our nation. At the same time, it is unclear whether they (and members of Congress) can adequately address the inherent problem of economic inequality. Those with wealth fight to maintain their gains. Redistribution of wealth is not achieved easily!

To rectify the situation, our nation has to focus on the common good. We are interdependent. Rather than an issue of just social justice, it is in our self-interest that our wealth is distributed more equitably.

We need to introduce policies that will tend to make society more fair. Health care, education, and retirement are issues that everyone wants. We have the means to have health care that is affordable to all that delivers high quality medicine. We need to address the problems associated with our school system that squanders so many youths with effects that last for life. We have to promote higher education, knowing that it is important that such education will promote opportunities for a full life. We need fiscal regulations to ensure that our markets can be trusted to serve the common good.

Health Bill is By No Means a Done Deal!

I would not place a bet that ANY health care bill will pass. There are too many problems with too many different groups of people. I, at the moment, will not be unhappy since there is nothing about the bills in Congress that satisfy my wish to see health care reform. To think that the House bill only passed by five votes! There were a number of Democrats that could not vote for the bill even after the abortion restrictions.

I am a fan of Marcia Angell who has been critical of our healthcare system. Her latest comments on the House bill reflect my feelings entirely. Her strategy of how we could achieve a single payor system strikes me as both realistic and hopeful. Her focus on strengthening primary care while placing more cost cutting restrictions on specialists is important. Placing on the emphasis on the need to insure everyone without other considerations of reforming health care itself will only provide more profits for insurance companies.

Implications of National Debt

Robert Samuelson may be considered a more conservative economist, but I do read his columns with interest and usually find them quite convincing. In his latest column, he discusses the implications of the debt of many major nations, e.g., Spain, Great Britain, Japan, and also, the United States. His observations are generally based on a IMF report that includes reasonably convincing data on what could be overwhelming national debt by 2014 (cf. below).

His scenario about the implications of such debt is scary and would make anyone pause to consider what should be done.

From my point of view, I would suggest:

1. The President and his administration (including Congress) should start voicing the need for a national response that would involve EVERYONE for a long time. Increased taxation and reduction of benefits are inevitable and only a sense of the common good will enable the politicians to do what will be required.

2. How can costs be reduced?

a. Health care: we have to get a universal card system as fast as possible and, with this national system, we will have to ration care comparable to what other nations do. In short, we cannot afford everything to all on demand. Whatever care will be provided within the provisions of a national system, I see no way to stop those who can afford more insurance to access more health care options. There are all sort of implications to this type of rationing, e.g., some medical research designed to bring advanced types of biotech treatment will have to be deferred/short-changed

b. Department of Defense: our nation has been expanding its military capacity to the point of the absurd. We have made our "allies" dependent on our use of OUR resources to address their needs. It is not fair. In addition, our empire building days have to end. We cannot save the world. We should be on the path to get the United Nations to expand its charter to include a military that would address issues of concern, e.g., genocide.

c. Benefits: Social Security should be adjusted regularly to the constant advancement of longevity. To extend benefits longer and longer without any adjustment may not be possible. Moreover, there has to be a change in the ceiling of pay roll tax for Social Security. The tax should be on total income AND the payouts should be adjusted to income, i.e., those at the bottom will get proportionally more in their benefits than those who have higher income and for those beyond a certain amount, e.g., $500 K, would receive NOTHING!

d. Tax Laws: Current incentives that reward those with more income should be modified, if not eliminated. One such tax law is the mortgage interest deductions. I would recommend the elimination of this deduction. It would add needed tax revenue and support initiatives designed to promote houses that are more reasonable in terms of their carbon print.

I believe that these changes would address our national debt.

General Government Debt to GDP

• COUNTRY
• BRAZIL
• CANADA
• CHINA
• FRANCE
• GERMANY
• INDIA
• ITALY
• JAPAN
• SOUTH KOREA
• MEXICO
• UNITED KINGDOM
• UNITED STATES

• 2007
• 67%
• 64%
• 20%
• 64%
• 63%
• 81%
• 104%
• 188%
• 30%
• 38%
• 44%
• 62%

• 2014
• 59%
• 69%
• 20%
• 96%
• 89%
• 79%
• 129%
• 246%
• 35%
• 44%
• 98%
• 108%

Letter to Speaker Pelosi & Majority Leader Reid

I write to you, as the Speaker of the House (Majority Leader of the Senate), because I am very concerned that the vision first articulated by President Obama is being lost because Congress cannot address the major issues of reform of financial institutions, health care reform, economic stimulus, and a global warming treaty in a way that makes sense to the American public. I realize that your job is most difficult. I admit that you are working to achieve some sort of consensus at least within the Democratic caucus. However, the way things are working out, it looks like politics is essentially ruining a vision of change.

I realize that no bill has actually passed either chamber at this point. However, it does look that the political interests of those in Congress to ensure their political survival seems to be the driving force that is shaping the legislation. I fear that the 2010 elections will result in the loss of many Democrats only because they failed to deliver on expectations. Maybe Congress has become unmanageable. Maybe the financing of congressional elections is so dependent on lobbyists that it is impossible to legislate to further the interests of the American public. Maybe we are in a downward spiral dating from the 1980's where congress is becoming virtually a series of vested interests with no common goals and vision. Whatever it is, the end result is negative.

I hope that this general vision of Sheila Blair and Elizabeth Warren are incorporated into a set of financial regulations.

I hope that health care reform will, in fact, reform health care!

I hope that there will be evidence that the economic stimulation package does actually produce jobs even if another stimulus bill is required. Surely, there are enough problems in our nation, e.g., our crumbling infrastructure, to warrant the investment.

I hope that a global warming treaty will indicate our nation's seriousness to reform our abuse of carbon.

I appreciate the opportunity to share my views.

Edward Toomey

"The Jesuit and the Skull" by Amir Aczel

My daughter and family gave me this book for Father's Day because they knew that I held Pierre Teilhard de Chardin in such high regard. I discovered him when I was in the seminary and became enthralled with his knowledge and vision. He clearly articulated a knowledge of evolution that was very convincing. And he was able to incorporate the scientific insights into a spiritual vision that was "breathtaking". I recall reading parts of his "Divine Milieux" to patients in the hospital because his vision was so beautiful.

Reading "The Jesuit and the Skull" added another dimension to my knowledge of this Jesuit priest. While I knew that he was exiled by the Jesuit community and Vatican officials, he did not realize the extent of his exile. It was incredible. I knew about the denials of the community and Rome to publish much of his writings (publications occurred after his death, thanks to an agreement between Teilhard and a friend).

The book captures the wonderful personality of this priest who seemed to be a friend virtually of everyone (except one). Some of his friends were women with whom he shared a deep friendship. In one case, the relationship was particularly strong, but eventually dissipated because he did not want to break his vow of celibacy.

I admit that my current vantage point, his life-long obedience to Rome and Jesuit order and his adherence to his vows are dumbfounding given that the institutional Church was so harsh with him personally and so antithetical to his beliefs. I know that the discrepancy between my beliefs and those of the institutional church were impossible for me to bridge with a sense of loyalty! He surely evidenced character traits that exceeded my capacity.

Another Letter to President Obama

President Obama, I continue to support you. I treasure you as a gifted leader. However, I do think that mistakes are being made in your administration. 1. Health Care It's a mess! There is no coherence in any of the bills under discussion. Moreover, none actually reform health care. It is essentially the same system extended to more people. The bills satisfy virtually no one. 2. War Afghanistan is a major test. I can only hope that your reflection will result in a decided reversal of prior statements. Going further down the road in any way will only extend misery. If anything, the promise to help the people can be guaranteed through foreign investments in schools, clinics, and other humane goals. 3. Economy I wrote to you earlier about the decisions made to address the economy. It remains evident to me that your economic leaders are not breaking away from the past with sufficient focus to make a difference to the financial sector. More importantly, the need to address the unemployment issue seems to assigned a lesser priority than other goals, e.g., health care. Somehow, the available stimulus money needs to make a difference quicker or we need more stimulus money. There surely is a national need to address our infrastructure problems, if nothing else. Such action would make a difference to our nation while creating jobs. 4. Transparency I hoped that your administration would be "different" because there would be total transparency, guided by ethics that transcended politics. I am afraid that your administration comes across as more of the same, albeit, in a less obvious fashion. In closing, I want you to succeed. It would be terrible if you did not! Edward Toomey

Afghanistan

The President is considering what to do with Afghanistan. There are reports that he will increase the military strength but less than what Gen. McCrystal wanted. Even that will be too much!

I see no end to McCrystal's strategy or for any other strategy that requires changes in governance or society.

I agree with all the people who emphasize that this will be the proverbial quagmire that Vietnam was for Johnson. No one better states the view than Robert Scheer.

Elections - November 2009

I do not think that the elections relate in any way to Obama. New Jersey has been a mess for years and everyone is hoping that someone different in the office of Governor will make a difference. I actually believe such a person may be coming in the person of Corey Booker. But that will be at least another four years and he still has much to do in Newark.

Virginia is traditionally a Republican state. That it returned to its traditional pattern is no surprise since the Democratic nominee was not that strong.

However, I do think that the Democrats will be in trouble in 2010 and beyond if they do not straighten out their priorities. This outcome is independent of what people think of Obama.

I do not agree with Obama's relative need to try to be inclusive when there is no indication that Republicans want to become part of Obama's vision. Obama was elected President and, as such, he has a right to implement his vision. They should negotiate change within his vision. What I feel bad about is that Obama is not strong enough in pushing for his programs.

Wall Street's Influence in White House

Often have I referred to differences in views held by me and some family members regarding the financial markets. It has been my view that the big banks and investment firms did us in by their high risk financial instruments and their low capital investments, i.e., high leverage with little of their own money. My support system includes Paul Krugman, Simon Johnson, Robert Reich as well as others.

No where were my positions better supported than last night's Bill Moyer's interview with Simon Johnson and Rep. Marcy Kaptur, a member of the House representing the Toledo area. Their views were strong and convincing (not that I needed much more convincing!).

The bottom line is that the big banks were wrong in their investment strategy and wrong in the amount of capital supporting those investments. There is no legislation passed or under consideration that will rectify the problems of the big banks and, in Simon Johnson's view, the problems with the big banks (now bigger than ever since there are only four left) will create problems again in decade or more that will be worse than those thus far experienced.

Simon Johnson added further comments regarding this interview on his blog.

Economic Stimulus

While I shared with others some ambiguity regarding the stimulus packages implemented by the United States, Europe, and China because it involves significant public debt, I have been a supporter because of those who claim that without it, we would be in a disaster.

Today, IMF convinced me that the supporters of a strong stimulus package were correct. The private sector is unable to place demands that require in increase in supply!

Thank you, the gurus who had the courage to push for a strong stimulus!

China: The Green Power House!

I was impressed that China indicated in the New York meeting regarding Global Warming that they were taking this issue very seriously and would use their economy to support the development of all sorts of technology to their need for a cleaner environment. It did not take long for Tom Friedman to sing their praises.

It will be more embarrassing if China becomes the power house in green technology, forcing us and other nations to import their products because we have not the gumption to do the right thing, i.e., develop a system whereby we pay for using carbon in order to fund initiatives that will lead to our not needing carbon!

Afghanistan: What to Do?

While there are proponents of adopting the additional manpower recommended by Gen. McCrystal, I then to support those who question the wisdom of such a plan. Our friend, Peter, sent an e-mail featuring Stephen Tanner's Afghanistan – A Military History from Alexander the Great to the War Against the Taliban, which traced the dismal history of prior attempts to intervene in this relatively primitive nation. Andrew Bacevich has repeatedly warned of the negative consequences of our even maintaining our current strategy, far less expanding it. Frank Rich is another person who depicts the dire consequences of our further involvement by referencing "Lessons in Disaster" by Gordon Goldstein.

I can understand that there will be a political price to be paid for backing away from what Obama initially said about the US commitments to Afghanistan, but really, there is little expectation of any success. We can resist attempts by terrorists to mobilize their forces without attempting to redo their society.

Difficulty in Overcoming Ignorance!

I make a valiant attempt to learn as much as I can about many things. One reason for my pursuit is my awareness of the degree of my ignorance. I just know little about much. For all I know, that which I don't know is impressive!

During this past few years and last year in particular, I have been trying to remedy my marked deficits in economics. There is much written about our economic disaster that it reminds me of what I think HBS' strategy is in teaching business through the case method. The current case is the financial meltdown and there are many attempting to explain it and some who are trying to establish methods to prevent its recurrence.

Given that the economic gurus are not dumb bells, we start with the hypothesis that there must be some validity in the perspective. Yet, realizing that many of these gurus differ, we also know that they cannot all be right. It does leave the likes of myself in a quandary.

pp

Today newspapers capture the problem.

Tyler Cowen, a professor at an acclaimed university advocating market economics (George Mason), depicts clearly the problems associated with government intervention driven by political issues. While attempting to address a set of problems, it engenders more! To the degree that we avoid the market's response to economic conditions, we become enablers of future disasters.

Then, Hyman Minsky is an economist that I never heard of. That he is now dead has not kept this writings to take on more pertinence in light of our current fiscal crisis. According to Stephen Mihm, Minsky thought that capitalism is inherently unstable and tends to collapse periodically. Conservative responses to crises yields over time to more risky lending practices when the economy is doing well, until it ends in some sort of disaster. But, compared with Cowen, Minsky gloomy prognosis of the inherent instability of capitalism, he felt that the answer was heavy investment by the government to address the concurrent of loss of jobs and depressed consumerism.

And the very next day (14 Sept 09), James Galibraith thinks that

the U.S. "could use a decade of public capital investment to rebuilt common infrastructure." Furthermore, we need to "mobilize and direct resources" to tackle the twin challenges of energy independence and global climate change.

These gurus have some validity, but how does it help someone like me?

In spite of all that has occurred and all that I have read, my initial economic philosophy remains generally in tact.

1. Capitalism is the best economic system known to mankind, but it is inherently prone to excess and inequities that lead to significant problems.

2. Government is necessary to provide regulations and oversight (albeit, never enough to prevent those wanting more than the system permits) and to intervene when fiscal disasters occur.

3. It would help if elements of the common good were weaved into the fabric of capitalism to ensure that economic inequities would be ameliorated.

"After You've Gone" by Jeffrey Lent

I've given up noting the books that I have read UNLESS there is something real special about the book. Such is the case.

Jeffery Lent displays such creative writing that I would recommend it to anyone interested in the art. He weaves a rather complex, yet simple, narrative through time and space effortlessly but artfully. His language is spectacular: simple but different, skillfully crafting images and scenes that capture the emotion at hand.

It is such a pleasure to read that I would recommend it to anyone.

Plight of Women

When I was a relatively young man, it was clear to me that I appreciated discussions with women more than men. Somehow or other, I found them more open, more nuanced, able to see complexity than I found in men. Men seemed to be more rigid in their thoughts. (I am aware that I then to be one with many "fixed" notions).

During later years, I became more conscious how unfairly women were treated. Not only were they paid less for the same work, but they tended to have more problems getting into higher office in this country, compared to other developed nations. And then, the horrors women face throughout the less developed nations.

There were two articles in today's NYT that capture the biases and horrors associated with just being a female in nations throughout Asia and Africa. Even though we appear to be light years more advanced, it does not mean that we do not more to do.

Health Care Reform

A prior blog entry admitted that health care "reform" was dead; at this point, I have no reason to reconsider the conclusion. We may well see a piece of legislation passed, but it will not reform the system of health care.

I have been a proponent of universal funding of health care because this appeared to the only way to address health care access as a common good and a means for controlling costs. Proponents of other systems, e.g., Health Savings Accounts, never appeared to be a realistic option.

David Godhill may not have converted me to a more consumer-driven system, but his article surely made me think. He admits that his ideas of reform would take a generation to fully implement, but the logic of his analysis is difficult to dispute. As long as our system distances the consumer from the costs of the system, we are in a situation where the normal role of a consumer-driven society works ineffectively. We have no system to say "no" to how our health care is being delivered.

Addendum: On 30 Sept, Stephen Pearlstein supported a similar view. Insurance should be geared more towards a system that insured against catastrophe rather than a prepayment system for health care.

Addendum: on 3 October, John Mackey was interviewed regarding his op-ed article on his approach to healthcare. I would be able to buy into much of his approach even though it would represent quite a change from my general approach which is a more common good (socialistic) model. If the votes were there for such a model, I would love to see if it could work. Clearly, I like the idea that people will need to provide more dollars to support their own health (higher deductibles) which will lower the costs of premiums. What always gets in the way is the method of addressing the needs of those without sufficient money to have access to quality health care.

Health Care Reform Appears Dead!

It has been sometime since I was optimistic that our nation would finally climb into the world inhabited by nations who finance health care for everyone, generally cheaper than us and often at better quality.

I hoped that Obama's method of letting Congress deal with the development of the plans would work, it appears that this would a fatal mistake. There are too many forces of special interests who protected private insurers and the general status quo.

My major drives were to see universal health care within a reformed system. Admittedly, it would mean less for many whose health care insurance is great, but I was a supporter of our need to endorse a system that was built on the common good. We needed to have a system that was good for everyone even if it meant that there were aspects that resulted in less for some. Rationing is inevitable. Rather than our current system that determines less care by virtue of whether you have health care insurance or what type you can afford, we would have a system that would tend to limit excesses even for those with great insurance.

What appears to be inevitable at the moment is legislation that will extend health care to more but will essentially leave the system in tack. Private insurance driven by fee-for-service will tend to rule and that will mean that we missed the opportunity to make serious reform.

Some think that Obama should have been more involved in the process. I am not sure whether that would have made a difference. It appears that the conservatives wield too much power and, for better or worse, we are a democracy. As such, we have to live with the results.

Someone Knew the Problems!

William White, the head of the Bank of International Settlements, is a person that I never knew. The organization is one I never knew. And yet, it is a powerful bank with a powerful director. And, he discussed his concerns with its members, the heads of Central Banks, e.g., Greenspan, without ever being able to convince people that the dangers needed to be addressed. If anyone adopted his views, we may have avoided the economic disaster that occurred. It is fascinating to know that the problems we now know so clearly, were so difficult to believe even when articulated by someone with his power and knowledge.

My Note to President Obama

I sent the following message to the White House:

While I remain a strong supporter of President Obama, I admit that there are signs that he may fail and failure will be terrible for everyone. Even if there is some good reason for allowing Congress to work details on health, energy and other critical legislation, it is not working. Even if a stimulus was needed for our nation's economy, it is not enough and surely has not been transferred to states quickly enough. You always said that you would admit mistakes and change courses. I recommend such now. A health care plan without a public option is relatively worthless. There is no way that health care costs can be controlled without government intervention in policy and funding. Trying to get buy-in of a plan that will not control and decrease costs is useless. An energy bill that does not tax people for use of carbon products may make some political sense, but it will not change behavior sufficiently to make a difference in terms of global warming. People need to change their behavior and economics will require such changes if products are priced to compensate for their carbon. Without jobs, consumption will not increase sufficiently to create a demand to sustain our economy. Increased unemployment shows no significant decline and there is data indicating that our unemployment rates may remain high until 2015. While national debt is a problem, we have a choice of either trying to stimulate the economy which will require more stimulus and quicker or, we have to inform the public that we are going to allow the forces that generated the depression to work themselves out over the next decade.

Public Option in Health Plan

I clearly support universal health care with single provider (funding mechanism) as in Medicare. I am convinced that this is not only a fair system but it is also a cost-effective system.  Dr. Steffie Woolhandler represents one of many physicians who are convinced that this is the only way to implement the required changes in the health care system.  However, it is clear that this level of reform is too much to expect from our Congress.

More palatable, but still toxic to some, is a public option that would be available to those who do not want to purchase their health insurance from a private company (where overhead is 31% versus 3% for Medicare). Reasons are not easily explained rationally. They seem to be simply against the public option because they want to support the insurance industry. Thankfully, there are many who advocate for the public option, e.g.,  NY Times and Paul Krugman.

A Film: August Evening

I am not an expert on films, but "August Evening" deserves a word because of its brilliant filming.

Somewhat akin to other cinematography that allows pictures to convey meaning, this rather simple if sad story of a illegal Mexican man and his family requires little action or words to convey the emotion involved in their tragic circumstances. Quiet but strong, the film focuses on the sounds of nature, the landscape, the evening skies, the sad faces to bring your own feelings to the forefront.

It was a beautiful film.

High Costs of Health Care

I just finished reading the well-publicized article in the New Yorker that focused on McClellan, Texas, where the average cost of health care per person ($15,000) which was $3,000 more than the average per capita income!  This study contrasted McClellan with a neighboring city (El Paso) as well as other organizations, e.g., Mayo Clinic, and states, e.g., California.

While other studies convinced me that the high costs of medical care were attributed to useless new drugs and  medical devices, this article brings to bear physicians in some areas see medicine as a source of increasing revenue. Quantity trumps quality, since the high costs of care do not correlate with better outcomes. 

Even though the evidence is clear, the author admits the difficulty in promoting models of collaboration and shared revenue to promote quality of care. Whether the government or private insurers fund health care, the evidence indicates that there is no difference in array of different costs. In short, unless physicians can see medicine as primarily a service to people without consideration of improving their levels of income, there will be a problem in the level of health care costs.

Rationing Health Care

Rationing health care is being discussed as inevitably related to new legislation that will raise the costs of health care. Sure, it will, but the important aspect of the debate is not that rationing will occur, it already is a reality. Rationing is inevitable; the issue is how rationing occurs and who "suffers" the consequences of the system. 

David Leonhardt has pointed out this reality.  I advocate a system where everyone is included in the basic system. There is a common good aspect of care that is critically important. Our brothers and sisters deserve access to care on a reasonable basis. However, I appreciate that at some point, there is a need to limit care in some form or other. Admittedly, this gets into difficult territory, but I do see ways to minimize the pain. Many medications are produced with no evidence that they generate better results than cheaper and older drugs. Same with medical devices. Technology  can invent various iterations of the same type of drug or device that will raise new revenues for stock holders but result in no better health for the consumers. 

Even with these changes, I do not see how we can have universal health care without additional taxes, something that seems appropriate. We need to share the pain involved in a plan that we give us all a chance to share in the this nation's health system.

Capitalism: It's Great If Actions Based on Ethics and Values

Fareed Zakaria has become special to me over the last year. His knowledge appears to be broad-based and his perspectives seem very balanced (more than mine!).

In a recent article on capitalism, he captured the many positive aspects of capitalism as well as pointing out the necessity that those who are in positions to succeed, base their actions on appropriate ethics and values.  In short, all the regulations in the world (albeit, I do support regulations being drafted by the Administration) will never ensure that financial disasters will not occur. People have to be behave ethically. None of financial instruments proven to be implicated in the current mess were used illegally. Few will be found guilty of crimes (some may have occurred secondary to fraudulent deals with unsuspecting customers), but many will fail the tests of common sense and values based on sober ethics.

"Confronting Power and Sex in the Catholic Church" by Bishop Geoffrey Robinson

Bishop Robinson is from Australia. He was a relatively conventional bishop until he was appointed by the Australian bishops to head a group that would deal with the sexual abuse scandal that erupted in Australia (as in many other nations). His involvement with victims helped him to see clerical sex abuse within a larger context. He eventually come to an understanding of the problem that forced him to resign his position as bishop while remaining active in the Church, i.e., he remains a bona fide bishop but has no responsibilities as a pastor in a diocese.

His book is written with good theology but also in a pastoral tone. He is not so much protesting as pleading for the bureaucracy of the church to recognize the need for major change if it is to be faithful to the spirit and teachings of Jesus.

His vision of the church would include the following:

1. People would be encouraged to adopt a healthy relationship with God rather than one based on guilt and fear.

2. People would have increased trust in his/her conscience as the primary tool for adopting beliefs and behavior. Those in power would be responsible for convincing people of the validity of their teaching rather than warn them of the consequences of failure to follow certain edicts.

3.  Recognition that the church is called to serve the "Kingdom of God" which is more than the church. The church is the servant of the Kingdom of God.

4. Authority in the Church is subservient to truth. There is a need for the church to admit mistakes and errors. Infallibility is a major hindrance in such a reformation.

5. Recognition that the body is as relevant to spirituality as is the spirit. Sex has to be promoted as good.

6. There is a need for some form of democracy. Without spelling out how such a form of government would be achieved, it is clear that the views of people have to be incorporated into teaching and governing mechanisms of the church. This view would not so much minimize the power associated with the pope and bishops as much as incorporate this power within the inherent power of the People of God, the entire church.

There is nothing in this book that has not been discussed by many theologians. He is not presenting the material as original. He is framing his presentation as a method of trying to reach out to everyone that there is a need for major changes with suggestions regarding what such changes should be adopted.

Personally, I totally agree with his points of view but I do think that the time may have gone by when change could make a difference. If and when such changes would occur, I have afraid that it would be considered too late for most.

A Contrast!

Last evening I joined some of the classmates of my seminary days. There were about 20 of us, with five of us who were married.  Some of the focus of the evening centered on physical maladies, but these meetings only reinforce my strong feelings that my decision could not have been better. It is impossible for me to speculate how my life would have progressed if I had try to remain a priest. All that I know is that it would have most likely ended in some sort of disaster. 

And now, as I come to the time when we celebrate 40 years of marriage and look back on such a wonderful life together, surrounded by tremendous adult children with their wonderful spouses, and their wonderful children, I can only be grateful to the good fortune bestowed on me.

What a Treat!

I admit that I am enamored by the emergence of Susan Boyle into the world scene.  It such a fantastic story that Susan would come from such a small village in Scotland, without the support of an immediate family, and show such confidence in her voice that the world is mesmerized. 

Last night she easily survived the semi-final round. I have watched her performance a couple of times and continue to hear her voice, strong and confident, reach the higher tones of "Memories".

Hate to Fear!

If it were not for the accumulated national debt (mostly to China) and the ongoing inability to control the need to borrow, I would feel so much better when viewing the future. While I fear future inflation, I worry more about the reasons why inflation became a problem. In short, we continue to spend so much more than our revenues dictate that the result is more indebtedness. Our dependency on other nations to finance our debt puts us into a precarious position. If our dollar further weakens and/or if China or other nations refuse to continue to finance our debt, we will be in a most serious predicament.

Reading a column from the perspective of 2089 only reinforced those feelings of fear. Let's hope that this fear is unnecessary and let us more quickly see the banks recover which will promote general health to the economy.

Health Care: One Payor

It has been clear to me for years that we need a universal healthcare system.  It would be clearly be the only way to reduce the profit motives involved in our current system using private insurers. The system promotes waste.  The Senate and House are struggling with a provision to include a public option that Senator Schumer wanted to make palatable by requiring the public option to meet the same standards as the private, i.e., reduce the ability to lower costs.

Nowhere has this perspective been made more eloquently than the article by Dr. Marcia Angell.

A Gift!

A GIFT!

Limited that we are,

There are so many problems,

We are so feeble,

And yet there are moments.

Moments are never planned,

They come in unexpected ways,

Are we up to it,

Surprisingly, we make it.

We loved them by family,

We loved them as friends,

We knew what was possible,

But they gave us such a gift.

Love knows no bounds,

We knew they were great,

But never was it shown

So gracefully as their gift.

They gave from their heart,

Making the wedding of their son,

Such a memorable time,

Not only for their son and new daughter,

But for all who shared the joy!

Mother's Day, 2009

My mother dead so long,

Asked for little, but missed so much,

It never seemed fair.

New to children, I loved a mother,

Through the woman of my life,

Giving me gifts of new life.

Years fly by, children grow,

Nourished by mother's love,

And then, they too give life.

Now, I see Mother,

Through eyes of age,

Mother of three, Life to more.

Awed by new mothers,

Grandchildren so loved,

My mother lives in them.

Quagmire Revisited!

My empathy for Obama is strong, but I do think that he will look back on his decisions regarding Iraq and Afghanistan as terrible mistakes. Surely, I can empathize with the dilemma. We created a mess in Iraq and we have some responsibility to restore the nation with some sense of security. Afghanistan has never be conquered in memory. It is a losing proposition due to the nature of the tribal loyalty and the terrible geography.

But, first, Iraq. We are supposed to be clearing out of the cities soon. There does not seem to be much sense that security is being stabilized. When you cannot trust Iraqi military (police are another problem), you are facing a real problem. To think that Iraqi military directly kill a US soldier is terrible! There are problems with corruption in the various ministries. The Sunnis have not been reconciled with the majority Shiites. Governance of Kirkuk remains unresolved. Clearly, the Kurds remain outside the national order, i.e., the control their own territory exclusively. It does not sound like Iraq is ready for self-government. What a mess!

The situation in Afghanistan has got worse because of the turmoil in Pakistan. i know of no solid positive outcome secondary to our involvement. The influence of the warlords and Taliban, coupled with the drug trade and rampant corruption, results in disaster. I feel for Obama. There is no intervention that makes sense and, yet, I can understand the problem with walking away. What a mess!

I think that Iraq and Afghanistan represent a quagmire!

Obama's Myopia!

I remain a major supporter of Obama in spite of my concurring with Krugman, Johnson, and Roubini that his approach to the banking industry will most likely not achieve the stated objectives. I now only hope that his approach will avoid the need to do the necessary restructuring urged by his critics because it would mean that tons of money would have been essentially wasted.

I have been supporting his declaring that the Bush policies regarding torture were wrong and are being withdrawn. I can understand why some want at least the people who authored the opinions to be prosecuted, but I can also understand why Obama does not want to proceed down this road.

What I missed is the fact that Obama continues to support the general position that the military has to be present virtually everywhere. I was taken back by Andrew Bacevich's column that expressed strong disagreement with this approach. Bacevich, a person with a distinguished military history, strongly critiqued Obama for continuing the past policies supporting a vision that military power will make our nation more secure.

As he states:

What the president is doing and saying matters less than what he has not done. The sins of omission are telling: There is no indication that Obama will pose basic questions about the purpose of the US military; on the contrary, he has implicitly endorsed the proposition that keeping America safe is best accomplished by maintaining in instant readiness forces geared up to punish distant adversaries or invade distant countries. Nor is there any indication that Obama intends to shrink the military's global footprint or curb the appetite for intervention that has become a signature of US policy. Despite lip service to the wonders of soft power, Pentagon spending, which exploded during the Bush era, continues to increase.

Dissent: Never an Easy Call!

I have personally experienced moments when I dissented from those in positions of authority. Yet, at the same time, I often questioned whether I would have the courage to have dissented from President Nixon if I were in the Administration. Being a part of something as significant as a Presidential Administration would be special. Could I dissent being so close to such power? I have similar questions when I expressed by anger and disapproval of Bush. It is so easy to criticize and "dissent" from a distance. What if I were in a position close to such power?

Richard Haas articulated the problems associated with dissenting when close to the source of power. Before the Iraq invasion, he disagreed with such a plan. When he was told to "save bis breath" since a decision had been made, he continued to express his views. Since he was not totally convinced that Iraq was not in a position to do damage on other nations (he stated that he was 60/40 against the invasion), he particularly wanted to ensure that the invasion achieved strategic goals. He negotiated with himself over the appropriate course of action. It was clearly a lesson in agony!

Emi, A gift on 3 May!

A daughter is special
For a Father or Mother,
But no more than when she becomes a mother.

A birth is always unique,
Never the same, even if perfect.
A gift to the parents, grandparents, the world.

Never old, always new always a miracle,
A child born into a family with love,
What more could anyone want.

Love between parents,
A child breathing new life,
For them, for all.

It never gets old,
Never the same,
Always a gift.

Never demanding,
Always open to the new,
We welcome Emi, so special.

Grandparents can never expect,
Remained overwhelmed with joy,
Grateful for parents who hold her.

Today, Emi came to us,
Wanted and loved,
For a life yet to unfold.

Expect only life being loved,
Never taking it for granted,
A gift beyond words.

Great Technology

Apple continues to impress me. My new MacBook is just wonderful in terms of its efficiency, weight, and operations. One of the many wonderful features is their software. Their photo software has now been updated so that the user can identify all pictures by facial identity. So, I can now sit down with any of my grandchildren and we can look at pictures that only include him or her. Impressive!

Worried about the Economy

Paul Krugman, one of my gurus, remains very unhappy with the administration's initiatives regarding the banks. Likewise, Joseph Stiglitz, Simon Johnson, and other economic gurus. I am concerned that the inability to deal with the banks forthrightly will only dramatically complicate a need to do later what should have been done a long time ago.

However, Neural Roubini's perception that that the economic collapse has not reached anywhere near the bottom really scares me! If we (we represents the world and not exclusively the US) have to travel many more miles before reaching the bottom, I surely am concerned about the ramifications such a decline will have on the global community as well as the nation.

Surely, I foresee waiting for 5-10 years before retirement investments will ever approach their past value. I cannot imagine how our economy will support employment at the 5% unemployment rate. I just cannot imagine what that many people will do to be gainfully employed. The demand in all sectors, except health, education and energy, will never bounce back due to a change in consumer habits. Malls will decrease, auto dealers will decrease, and the demand for autos will decrease, relative to the population, since people will only own what they need, not want.

I don't have a problem will an economy based on need, including needs to address global warming, universal health care, and higher standards for education, but such an economy will not generate sufficient jobs to reach a 5% unemployment level.

Admittedly, people my age have to deal only with survival. The total impact of a changed economy will affect younger people, but nevertheless, I share their angst.

Hard to Blog when the Goovernment is Good!

The blog has served many functions. One of them has been a place to display my anger at what has happened by the Administration. Now that I am so impressed with the new
Administration (despite my concerns about their dealings with Wall Street and the banks), I sit back and read with delight what great things are happening.

It is great to hear a President speak intelligently, coherently, and grammatically correct.

It is great to have a President who sees nuance in issues, including foreign policy.

It is great to have a President to thinks.

It is great to have a President who shares a vision with others.

It is great to see a President who recognizes that other nations are intelligent and live with values that can benefit us.

It is great to know that the President does not think that he is omniscient.

Generating Tolerance: A Process even in Christianity

The Jewish and Christian Scriptures have transitioned from the times before the finding of the Dead Sea Scrolls to ever expanding understanding of how they were written. The Dead Sea Scrolls were clearly an eye-opener to those who thought that these Scriptures were unique. The Scrolls showed clearly that there were similar stories present in other groups. Since then, scholars like Raymond Brown, Dominic Crossan, and others have added insight into the process of how these Scriptures came to be. Clearly, the end product was designed and engineered by humans.

Robert Wright has written an engaging account of how he understands the Christian ethic of universal love developed. Since he notes that the early work of Mark lacked virtually all of the stories in Luke and Matthew that expressed the extent to which we should love all, he concluded that Jesus did not say all that was included in these latter Gospels. He attributes this ethic to Paul's missionary work to non-Jews in other places, e.g., Corinth. The expansion of the former Jewish religion to include (1) Gentiles and (2) peoples of other places, required an ethic of love and generosity if the extended communities were to become a whole rather than distinct settlements. In short, the process of extending Christianity afar was akin to the process of globalization as we know it now. And, in conclusion, Wright has hope that this process will work now for all religions, including Islam, as the world becomes more interconnected.

Warning about our Economic Future

Everyone reads what others think about what is happening to the economy or what is being done to address the economy or when the economy is going to improve. It is hard to avoid the elephant in the room! We are all impacted by the economy and are concerned about the future.

I have had my opinions about what should be done. I have agreed with some of the economic gurus and disagreed with others. Since no one can be sure about what to do, it is hard to dispute any view.

Simon Johnson is a very unusual economist. He has a long and distinguished history at the IMF and is now at MIT. He regularly shares his view on his blog. His new article in the Atlantic, however, is worth reading even if it is most disturbing.

In this lengthy article, he references his work at the IMF and how the IMF dealt with other nations facing economic circumstances similar to our own. Ultimately, his concerns are very serious because never has the global economy been impacted as now. Concerns that the Eastern European banks will bring down the rest of Europe and our failure to address the failures of our nation's banks result in questions whether this economic downturn will exceed the dimensions of the great depression.

There are two points in particular that are worrisome.

One, like Krugman and others, he stresses the need to "nationalize" the distressed banks and see the restructured banks preferably to many investors that create smaller banks from the original whole. Banks too big to fail are, in fact, too big to exist.

Second, he is concerned that the financial oligarchs have too much power and, until they are brought down, there will be problems in our recovery. The ties between Wall Street and Washington have been long-standing, i.e., people transition from one to the other seamlessly, e.g., Rubin and Paulson and our present Secretary of the Treasury. As in all other instances where nations are rescued by the IMF, there is a need to restore justice by getting rid of these oligarchs.

Expert Opinion

I was intrigued by Nicholas Kristof's column today reflecting that expert opinion on average was no better than chance and the more "expert" the source, the more apt that the opinion ultimately was wrong.

It made me think about myself who always has an opinion and is always reading the opinions of others. I admit quite frequently that i was wrong about this or that opinion I had. Sometimes, my opinion (opinion relates to any held view, including belief) is terribly wrong, e.g., I would say that my history of advocating religion in general and Catholicism in particular to be a great example. However, there are times when I appear to be right. For example, I can recall my views that our economy had a lot of problems and I was worried about the future. To show that I was sensitive to my history of erroneous opinions, I never had to confidence to say, "let's move the money!"

So, one needs to be cautious about expert opinions and yet, we have to adopt some view. If you cannot trust the expert and you know that you are in error more often than not, what can you do?

It all gets back to existentialism! The angst of life is that there is anxiety associated with every decision because there is no way to avoid the inherent dilemma that we don't know the real answer to anything dealing with future!!