On my way in to work a few days ago I saw this billboard. (Apologies for the poor quality photo, it was taken with my cell phone through the car window as I stopped at a red light.)


Yes, you see that correctly - a price tag on the Statue of Liberty.

Does that make you as angry as it makes me?

The ad is for the New York State Powerball and Lotto, and the slogan is: "Life Changing Jackpots 4 Days a Week."

Now, I understand wanting to promote massive jackpots, but I cannot understand why this icon of freedom and America was chosen as the item up for sale. I find the add a bit offensive as it implies that America is for sale. At least they don't put an actual price on the tag...

Maybe it wouldn't be as bad if the billboard right next to it wasn't also offensive to me in its exploitative use of the landing on the Hudson River:

Does anyone else feel the same way?  Ryan is pretty luke warm on the ideas and doesn't seem to mind that much.... but for some reason I seem to be more critical of the exploitation of positive symbols for advertising gain than of negative ones.  It seems to cheapen things. 

Admittedly much has improved since the first census in 1790 when 650 federal marshals went house-to-house unannounced, writing down the name of the head of the household and counting the other residents. The census cost $45,000, took 18 months and counted 3.9 million people. (more on census chronology)

Yes the letter was intended to get us excited to receive our "fair share", but could we have done without the pre-mailer?  Moot point acknowledged but multiply an unnecessary action by every citizen in the country and you have some real cash.

The 2000 census told us there were 105,480,101 households in the United States. Each household received one letter with postage of $0.44. This comes to:

$46,411,244

Probable postage discounts and rounding errors aside, $46 million dollars was spent to send a letter that didn't say anything!  To put this into perspective, in 2010 we have budgeted $50 million to The United States Institute of Peace (USIP) whose mission it is to provide the analysis, training and tools that help to prevent, manage and end violent international conflicts, promote stability and professionalize the field of peacebuilding.  That's a pretty darn serious mission.  If we couldn't return the money, could we have at least doubled their budget instead?

I do suppose it was worth while if it props the post office up for a few more years and keeps Saturday delivery around?

This reminds me of a particular Futurama episode...

Futurama	Weeknights, 9p/8c
Bureaucrat's Joy
www.comedycentral.com
Joke of the Day Stand-Up Comedy Free Online Games

You may think that this is nonsense and that I am suffering from deficit hysteria or that I have some political agenda, and you could be partially right, however I challenge you to read the rest of this article come your own conclusion.

David Walker, former head of the Government Accountability Office was on NPR's Fresh Air from WHYY last night (mp3 audio link).  Here is some of what he said:

"The current deficits are very large: in 2009, 1.42 trillion; for the current year, 2010, an estimated 1.5 to 1.6 trillion. But those were caused largely due to significant declines in revenues because of the recession, because of additional expenditures for social safety-net programs, because of two undeclared and unfinanced wars, and a variety of other factors, including bailouts.

Those are troubling, and they are adding to our debt, you know, at record rates, but that's not what threatens our ship of state. What threatens our ship of state is the structural deficits that will exist after we are out of the recession, after unemployment is down, after the wars are over, and after we get past the current crises."

The bailouts, the stimulus, the new jobs bill, lower tax revenues, all these things result in a disastrous fiscal deficit but they don't hold a candle to the overall structural problems that exist. 

"At the same point in time, we need to recognize that what threatens this ship of state is the ice that's below the water in the iceberg. It's not today's $12.4 trillion in debt. It's the $50 trillion in unfunded obligations for Medicare, Social Security, other commitments and contingencies that we don't know how we're going to keep, and it's time to start recognizing that reality and taking steps to make sure that we can deliver on the promises that we intend to keep.

The government spends every dime of the Social Security surplus on other government operating expenses, every single dime. There's no savings for Social Security. We've issued additional debt that ultimately what happens is we'll have to exchange one form of debt for public debt."

Here is how I see it:
Current analysis by smart people and smart organizations paint the following picture:

• Within 12 years, at current interest rates (which are at unsustainable historic lows) the single largest line item in the federal budget will be interest on the federal debt. It will likely be sooner than this
• In 2035 (25 years from now), based on historic tax levels the only thing the federal government will be able to do is pay interest on the national debt.  No military, no education, no roads, no government

In order to avoid this reality there are only two options that exist, or a combination of the two:

• Raise taxes above historic rates
• Reduce or eliminate entitlement programs

I don't see cities turned to ashes or mass poverty and starvation but I do see my generation being required to pay more and accept less.  Something which is long overdue.

It will be hard.  You and I have an entitlement mentality.  Admit it, you know you do.  Even though Leslie and I fight every day, every single day (sometimes failing miserably) to actively design and build a better life, there still exists that small rotten seed inside that says we deserve it. 

It's easy to rely on the "magic" future to fix our problems or to think some mighty government pen will make the pain go away.  I really don't believe that can happen this time.  What we have are choices.  What we choose determines our future. It is as simple as that.

One last quote:

"Let's recognize reality. They're three key points with regard to spending. Spending more money than you make on a recurring basis is irresponsible. Irresponsibly spending somebody else's money is unethical - and if youre a fiduciary, a fiduciary breech. And irresponsibly spending somebody else's money when they're too young to vote and not born yet is immoral. And all three of those things are going on right now and they threaten America's future.

The decisions that we make or that we fail to make within the next five years, will largely determine whether our future is better than our past. And in my view, I want it to be better - for the sake of my kids and my grandkids."

Still haven't had enough? Here are your next steps:

1. Read about the history of the National Debt
2. Better yet read about what you can do to fix it

How about these apples: Try reading articles and analysis from someone other than an amateur blogger from Rochester New York.

1. Peter G. Peterson Foundation
2. CATO Institute
3. Washington Post

You know what?  Let's just let future generations deal with it.  Let's just watch OK Go's new YouTube video instead.

Irrespective of their differences the Great Depression of the 1930's and the recent recession magnified the unfaltering human desire to attribute responsibility, to incriminate, and to blame.

Appropriately aimed this physiological behavior of devaluation can be used to fashion constructive change.  Misaligned these negative feelings can rot away the very will to believe.

The difference between the Great Depression and the recent recession is where we are targeting the blame.  I'll share my view and then leave it up to you to determine which is more constructive.

From Aurthur Miller's autobiography, Timebends:

"It has often been said that what kept the United States from revolution in the depths of the Great Depression was the readiness of Americans to blame themselves rather than the system for their downfall.  A fine dusting of guilt fell upon the shoulders of the failed fathers, and for some unknown number of them there would never be a recovery of dignity and self-assurance, only an endless death-in-life down to the end.

Already in their early thirties, within a year or two of the collapse, the papers were reporting that in New York City alone there were nearly a hundred thousand people who had been psychologically tramatized to the point where they would never be able to work again.  Nor was it only a question of insuficient food; it was hope that had gone out of them, the life illusion and the capacity to believe again."

Both events included large scale failures of what we thought were properly functioning economic systems.  Obviously both also included poor decisions made by independent individuals which wove their lives and fortunes into the system (simplifying the situations: stock market speculation then, unaffordable houses now).

Then: Self-blame
In the Great Depression men overwhelmingly blamed themselves for their financial ruin often to a point of psychological trauma.

Nor was it only a question of insuficient food; it was hope that had gone out of them, the life illusion and the capacity to believe again. 

Now: Victim-blame
Too many exclusive polls and "top 10" lists exist to mention but it is obvious that today we overwhelmingly blame the system and the leaders of the system for our financial ruin.

Which is better?
Forcing myself to choose only one and discussing these behaviors from the standpoint of an individual citizen, it is my feeling that self-blame is, to a degree, more constructive.

Either behavior taken to extreme is very harmful, however waiting around for others to fix the system or becoming so skeptical of the system as to never participate in it again are potentially more harmful behaviors than introspection into your own failures or misunderstandings that caused your misfortune.


Introspection was the key word in that last sentence because if you are so destroyed and sapped of belief in yourself as to kill any desire for engagement and success then any chance of recovery through new and improved ideas is lost.





Do you have a different opinion given the same constraints?

“We have over 600 staffers on Capitol Hill not paying their taxes. That’s just not acceptable,” Chaffetz said in an interview with POLITICO. “It’s disingenuous to take federal taxpayer dollars and not pay your full share of taxes. It’s wrong.”

Federal employees in the U.S. House of Representatives owed more than $5.8 million in unpaid taxes in 2008. The Senate employees owe more than $2.46 million, according to figures.

A recent Government Accountability Office study estimated that government contractors owe the government nearly $5 billion in back taxes.

3/3/2010 2:04 PM EST: News Breaks - Chaffetz to introduce tax cheat axe bill
3/4/2010 4:33 PM EST: News Breaks - Democrats pull tax cheat axe bill

As the law stands now, only IRS employees can lose their jobs....

In February 2010 we were fortunate enough to be able to increase our net worth by $3,600. We are finally at a point where you can clearly see the water line in our history. I know it's small potatoes but it sure does feel better being on the positive side of the world.

Quite the history.

$6,059 in income.  Several business opportunities look to be in the works for March.  Hopefully we can squeeze them in early because a nice chunk of the month will be spent on our honeymoon road-trip.

$4,342 in spending.  We were about 75% successful with our budget, unfortunately we continue to struggle with justifications (this month a super snow storm and large scale work on some new online projects, I know tell me about it...) to justify dining out and other little misc splurges.

"measurable progress in reasonable time" I know we can do better.