Author: Peter

by

Want to Know Where the Next War Will Break Out? Look to Where the Last One Happened!


The countries which count themselves among “the west” have a very poor track record when it comes to recognizing how their present-day actions will inevitably affect the future.  In the history of the United States this did not take long at all.  Once the American Revolution ended in 1783, it was just a matter of time before the next outbreak of hostilities would come to its shores.

From 1783 and well into the Washington and Adams administrations, there was much talk between these presidents and the congress as to what represented a good army and a good navy.  To be sure, money was short for funding more than a minimal army and navy at best, but they had a difficult time deciding among themselves what one should even look like.  When Thomas Jefferson took office in 1803, he was so vehemently against the United States having any sort of standing army that he set out to entirely disband what we did have.  So weakened were U.S. forces in 1812, that when the United States finally took action against British Naval ships that were impressing American sailors, it was inevitable that the U.S. would have difficulties defending itself against the vastly superior British forces yet again.

James Madison, the president during the War of 1812, had his work cut out for him but he rallied support and put together a force that finally in 1814 ended the hostilities with the Battle of New Orleans.  Never again were U.S. forces so weak as to be incapable of defending our shores.

That World War 1 would happen where and when it did was apparent to all but those in complete denial of the instability that existed in the Balkan Republics.  While Austria was rightfully outraged at the assassination of Franz Joseph, it could have avoided dragging western Europe into a conflict had it not taken the actions it did.  But once it did, fierce Austrian and German nationalists used it as a way to united Prussia, Germany, and Austria in a fight with Russia, and then with France.  Prior to World War 1 national borders were frequently in dispute, often fuzzy, and at times certain territories claimed by one country were under the government of another.  It was this that thrust Austria-Germany into the fray.  Prussia in particular made claim to Russian territory and that brought in the Russians.

By the time World War 1 had ended in 1918 Europe was as war-weary as it had ever been.  The French felt the most wronged by the German incursions.  And the British, not to be outdone, felt they had been forced to contribute an inordinate amount of financial backing to the allied forces.  Each wanted its pound of flesh extracted from the German people.  When the final treaty was signed in 1919, Germany was required to pay so much in financial reparations as to render it bankrupt for decades to come.  The demands of the French and British were extremely unreasonable.  This so embittered the German people who a very small very right-wing group of Germans known at the National Socialists used that, and other prejudices, to champion their cause.  Throughout the 1920s the German economy expanded but because of its heavy debt it was felt by most Germans that they were being held down.  German feared, and rightfully so, that their military had been so weakened that their natural enemy, the Russian Communists, could overrun them at will.

When a world-wide depression hit in the 1930s, it gave the German National Socialists, lead by Adolph Hitler, the perfect opportunity to take power.  He rightfully pointed to the treaty signed in 1919 as the basis of the economic woes, and promised to take back German pride.  Once elected chancellor, Hitler did that at least in part.

Historians today point out how World War II is but a continuation of World War I, there having been no reasonable treaty agreed to.  But the end of World War II necessarily gave seed to both the Korean War and the war in Vietnam.

Until 1945, China had been led by Emperors and a conflagration of local war lords who ruled heavy handedly over the people.  For as long as anyone could remember these feudal lords were waring with neighboring feudal lords over land and power.  But by the end of World War II, the Chinese people were tired of monarchies and all their trappings.  Enter Chang Kai-shek.  Chang Kai-shek had been the visible leader of the opposition to the Japanese occupation forces, and of course at the end of World War II he was the U.S. choice to led the country.  But Chang Kai-shek did little to change the culture of the government.  The popular general turned into a hated governmental administrator.  Mao Zedong, who had also lead opposition forces during World War II proffered the idea of a socialist state, a “people’s government.”  So popular was this idea among the Chinese people who four short years after World War II, Mao Zedong was the head of the new Chinese government.

Mao Zedong quickly made friends with two neighbors each of whom was ethnically related, the North Koreans and the Vietnamese.  Both countries had established a communist form of government and both had a desire for their countries to be united, north and south.

The U.S. greatly underestimated the power of the North Korean and Chinese forces that invaded in 1950 and were nearly driven off the peninsula.

Not long after the end of hostilities in North Korea things were getting unsettled in Vietnam with the withdrawal of the French in what had been Indochina.  Here again a general who had opposed the Japanese during World War II, Ho Chi Mihn, was leading his communist nation.  But unlike the North Koreans, Ho Chi Mihn made an offering to U.S. official to avoid hostilities.  But 1954 America had become wrapped up in McCarthyism and negotiations with communists was viewed by many as unpatriotic.  No talks were ever held.

When the French left Vietnam the U.S. stepped in.  But U.S. officials had little understanding of Vietnam’s problem.  All they saw were the hated communists who had evil in their hearts and had to be controlled if  not eliminated.  As early as 1954 war in Vietnam had become inevitable.

For the past 11 years we have been involved in the conflicts of the middle east.  While things have at least settled down in Iraq and Afghanistan, the region is far from stable.  Also in question, what are our long-range motivations with regard to that region?  Where are our allegiances?  What countries are most likely to drag the region back into hostilities?

One thing is certain, we cannot use our beliefs in what is right and wrong and overlay those beliefs on the people of other countries.  That simply does not work and it categorically unfair to the people of those countries.  What we need is a greater understanding of the needs of the gross population of these countries, their desires, and their beliefs.

by

The 2nd Korean War That Almost Happened


In 1969 I was stationed in the US Army at Yongsan South Korea.  Yongsan was, and is, the headquarters of the 8th U.S. Army as well as assigned US Air Force detachments.  I worked in the 8th Army communications facility that provided communications for the Headquarters to locations around Korea, to Japan, and to the United States.  Upon arrival it had seemed an easy enough assignment considering it was not Vietnam and no one was trying to kill me on a daily basis.  That does not mean there was no conflict at all, there was, more than most people in the U.S. ever knew about.

In February of 1968 the crew of the USS Pueblo, a naval spy ship, had been captured by the North Koreans and were held in captivity for the next 11 months, being released on December 23 1968.  Although the Korean military commands had been on heightened status, is was not perceived as grave.  Still, the South Korean government, in control of the world’s 5th largest standing army at the time, was nervous as Kim Jong Il had promised to invade the south and reunite the countries by force.  All South Korean men between the ages of 18 and 60, at the time, were either on active duty with the military or in the reserves.  Each considered war likely, and some even looked forward to seeking to avenge the hostilities that had ended only a decade and a half before.

At the time, the United States had two complete infantry divisions in Korea, the 2nd Infantry Division and the 7th Infantry Division.  It was the job of the 2nd Division to patrol and keep safe the demilitarized zone (DMZ).  Men, both observers and infantrymen, could easily see the North Korean soldiers on a daily basis.  The North Koreans were known for being provocative and frequently probed at the U.S. lines.  In one instance while I was there, a 2nd lieutenant of the US was out on an inspection tour of the DMZ when he was attacked by machete wielding North Koreans who killed him in broad daylight.  This incident, and many more like it, never made it to either the newspapers or the nightly news broadcasts in the US as those facilities were tied up in the news coming out of Vietnam.  And yet, soldiers in Korea who served north of the Han River were all considered to be in a combat zone and given commensurate combat pay.

Then, on April 15, 1969, a Tuesday, a U.S. Navy spy plane known as an EC-121 was shot down over North Korea and its crew of 33 all died.

US Navy EC-121

The aircraft was on a mission about 100 miles east of the North Korean peninsula when it was shot down by a North Korean Mig-21 fighter.

I was working in the communications facility at the time this happened.  My battalion commander, a Lieutenant Colonel who seldom ventured into the facility, was suddenly sitting in my work area visibly shaken.  He informed us that the facility was on lock-down and no one would be allowed to enter or leave.  To that end, at the entrance way to my section the normal military policeman had been replaced by a South Korean soldier who was wielding a shotgun with orders to shoot to kill.  Additionally, those men who were in what was the cryptographic section, secure teletype communications, had their door, a bank vault door, secured with the combination lock spun.

Most men who served in areas like I did were aware of what was called survival time after the outbreak of hostilities and the launching of missiles.  Our survival time, as I remember it, was about 3o seconds, for obvious reasons.  What I was unaware of, since we there were no windows in this facility, was that a machine gun had been erected three-quarters of the way up our microwave tower.  Additionally, a heavily army truck was stationed just outside our facility.

Communications parlance of the day had various levels of importance assigned to every bit of communications either received or sent: routine, immediate, and flash.  Each level above routine required the sender to have certain increasing rank and responsibility.  There was one type of communication that was seldom seen and this was known as the “red rocket.”  This particular degree of urgency was reserved for the White House.  Starting on April 15 1969 we saw a lot of such traffic.  The situation was extremely grave as we soon found out that the rear infantry division, the 7th, had been moved to a forward position and many of its supporting artillery batteries were in the process of being moved.

At the time the U.S. had many naval and air forces stationed in Japan which were scrambled to Korean waters and air bases in South Korea.  But more importantly, at the time the Air Force had a group stationed at McDill AFB known as STRIKE Command.  This group had nuclear capability and had been scrambled as well.  I only found this out a couple of years later when, while stationed in Italy, my neighbor was a man who had been assigned to STRIKE Command at the time.  He said STRIKE Command aircraft were within a couple of hours of Korea when they were recalled.

For its part, the United States had absolutely no interest in having an armed conflict with the North Koreans.  The U.S. already had over 500,000 military on assignment in Vietnam and could ill-afford a new commitment of men and material.  The new Nixon White House, a mere 90 days into its tenure, used Henry Kissinger’s amazing diplomatic skills to avert a war.  That task was certainly difficult as both North and South Korea desired a fight.  Still, it took serveral days to resolve the issue, at least temporarily.

We who served in Korea at the time felt over-looked, almost forgotten.  Thought not nearly in the numbers of Vietnam, men were still giving their lives in Korea in those days.  To be sure, the formidable size of both the U.S. forces in Korea and the South Korean military itself was just enough of a deterrent, but only because cooler heads prevailed.

by

Five Must Try Ethnic Food Restaurants in the Boston Area


My wife is something of a gormet cook, though not trained as such, she has put a considerable amount of time towards making really good meals.  She has also made a habit of searching out fine eateries in the Boston area.  I really had no appreciation for ethnic foods before her but now, well, I have come to appreciate it greatly.

1.  Cafe Polonia, South Boston — Cafe Polonia is a tiny hole in the wall restaurant on Broadway in South Boston serving Polish cuisine.  At most, this restaurant seats 25 people at one time however, the dining area is immaculate and bright.  Traditional Polish food is based on pork, cabbage, and potatoes.  The center piece of Polish cooking is the pierogi.  A pierogi is basically a pasta shell filled with potato, cheese, fruit, meat, cabbage, etc.  They are first boiled before being pan fried.  In addition to the pierogi is the pork entre’, kielbasa, cabbage soup, and kishka which is also known as blood sausage.  For dessert I highly recommend nalesnik which is the Polish version of the crepe.  Also popular is babka which is a traditional cake.  Prices are extremely reasonable but parking can be difficult as only street parking is available.  Once done with the meal I recommend you cross the street to the Baltic Deli, a favorite destination for Polish people looking to buy traditional foods.  Also offered is the tradition middle-eastern treat baklava.  This is an extremely reasonably priced restaurant, but, like most small restaurants all parking is limited to what can be found on the street.

2.  Kolbeh of Kabob — This is a Persian restaurant located at 1500 Cambridge Street in Cambridge (right across the street from the Cambridge Hospital).  Middle Eastern food is known for its basics, rice, chicken, and beef.  This small restaurant is both attractive and comfortable.  The owner is also one of the servers and is dilligent in conducting her menu.  They make their own pita bread and serve it with hummas, both delicious.  Also offered as appetizers is egg plant and yogurt, each delicious in its own rite.  The main plates are usually skewers of either chicken or beef on a bed of basmati rice.  The rice is adorned with saffron, a unique middle-eastern flavor, and bay berries, raisins, and dates.  The combination is always delicious and brings a flavor to the rice that is delightful.  For dessert you must try the Persian ice cream.  It is simply a saffron based ice cream that is light and delicious.

3.  Ixtapa, Lexington — Ixtapa is a very family friendly Mexican restaurant located at 177 Massachusetts Avenue in Lexington.  This is barely 1/4 mile from Arlington Heights.  While boasting of tradional, and expected, Mexican fare, Ixtapa succeeds where others fail in its constantly excellent taste that is backed up by extremely friendly and fast service.  Any one of their meat dishes is available in a choice of chicken, beef, and pork, and sometimes a combination of all.  I almost always order one of their burritos or chimichangas.  Either of these is offered in at least a half dozen varieties so one never feel confined.  For dessert I recommend the apple burrito.  In the years I have been going to this restaurant I have never had to wait to be seated.  Furthermore, the Ixtapa has a second level that is reserved for larger parties.  The restaurant is fronted by a good size parking lot where parking is seldom a problem.  It is extremely reasonably priced, comfortable, and pleasant in atmosphere.

4.  Tango of Arlington — Tango of Arlington is an Argentinian restaurant at 464 Massachusetts Avenue in Arlington center.  Traditional Argentine food is centered around a really good cut of beef.  Chorizo and churassco are two cuts of beef that Americans call steak.  But these cuts are seasoned in a traditional Argentine manner that has to be tasted to be truly understood.  It is without compare!  Either is absolutely one of the best tasting steaks I have ever had anywhere.  Also on the menu are chicken, pork and fish, each equally cooked to perfection.  Even though the restaurant welcomes very casual dress, upon entering you cannot help but wonder that you are not properly dressed.  The feeling that you are in a very classy place is obvious to all.  The owner is always present and constantly checking the quality of the food served and the satisfaction of the customers.  The restaurant is a bit pricey, base meals starting at about $25, but certainly not unreasonable.  Parking is entirely on the street and it being in Arlington center can be problematic.  This city does have, however, a good size parking lot at the rear of the Bank of America which is a very short walk from Tango.

5.  The Aegean Restaurant — The Aegean Restaurant is located at 640 Arsenal Stret in Watertown, across the street from the Arsenal Mall.  The Aegean serves traditional Greek fare.  Traditional Greek food is based in beef, pork, and lamb, and sometimes all three put together.  From the start, with its Greek salad and homemade salad dressing, the Aegean serves really delicious food.  While the kabob is always delicious you can also order cuts of beef, chicken and lamb that are perfectly seasoned.  For dessert Greek baklava is beyond compare and I highly recommend it.  The only downside to the restaurant is its extremely limited on-site parking which means when its full your only alternative is park across the street at the pay garage and recross the busy Arsenal Street to the restaurant.  The Aegean is reasonably priced and worth a visit.

by

Five Books That Are Must Reads


I probably read at least 25 books a year.  In this day and age, I would say that is a bit unusual.   The closing of so many book stores, most recently the national chain Borders, tells me that people just do not buy books as much as they used to.  There are those who claim the internet and electronic media are to blame.  I am sure that is true in part, but I think technology is getting in the way of people feeling like they need to read anything at all.

That said, I want to offer up five books, all classics, that I consider must reads.  These are books that I think have a timeless quality to them not to mention how well they are written compared with today’s pulp fiction.  I read a lot of that pulp fiction and truly enjoy it.  But the manner in which these old classics were written is beyond compare.

1.  Silas Marner by George Eliot —  The author George Eliot is the pen name of Mary Ann Evans.  At the time of its publication, 1861, female writers were not taken as seriously as their male counterparts.  Silas Marner is the story of an English peasant who one day finds a very young girl who has been abandoned by her mother.  It tells of how Silas brings up the girl and his reception by the townspeople and the local nobility.  At the time of its writing the novel was considered quite risqué because of its bluntness in dealing with human relationships of all sorts.  It is also a love story, a murder mystery, and an editorial of English society of the day.  Once started, I think this book is a real page turner by anyone who undertakes it.

2.  Main Street by Sinclair Lewis — I remember hearing about this book way back when I was in high school and my attitude towards it was that it must be boring.  But recently I decided to expand my mind a bit by reading accepted classics and this was one of my first.  Main Street is the story of a doctor, Will Kennicott, who is one of three doctors who attended to the city of Gopher Prairie Minnesota.  Lewis, himself a trained physician, takes on the social mores of the day and drapes them over the people of the metropolis of Gopher Prairie.  The good doctor per chance meets Carol Milford, a librarian in St. Paul.  What you get is a view of small town America as seen through the eyes of these two people, Carol, who longs for city life and all it offers, and Dr. Kennicott, who assures Carol that Gopher Prairie offers so much more than any city.  What we get is an excellent view of early 20th century life in middle-America.  Lewis places many moral and ethical questions in Dr. Kennicott’s path as he moves through his life.  The style of writing is exemplary and makes you wonder if such well-written prose is taking shape today.

3.  The Financier by Theodore Dreiser — Dreiser is one of my favorite authors and as such it was difficult for me to pick one of three of his books which I love, Sister Carrie and An American Tragedy.  The Financier is the story of Frank Algernon Cowperwood and based on the real-life story of C.T. Yerkes, a magnate of the late 19th century.  This was to be the first of a trilogy Dreiser had planned but never completed.  His second book, The Titan, finishes the life of the inimitable Cowperwood.  The story starts with the teenaged Frank A. Cowperwood deciding he need to do something with his life that did not include any more formal schooling.  He quickly discovers he has a talent for making money in the buying and selling of commodities in Philadelphia, his hometown and the setting for this first novel.  Cowperwood’s genius for financial gain quickly lands him in the good favor of those trading on the local stock exchange.  Cowperwood’s life takes off from there as he decides early on that he is going to be rich.  Dreiser treats us to the shady inner workings of financial manuevers of the 1860s and 1870s and Cowperwood’s unscrupulous dealings.  Once done with this book you will most likely want to tackle The Titan to find out what happens.

4.  Ethan Frome by Edith Wharton — Wharton is reknown for her commentary on late 19th Century society.  Ethan Frome is the story of a man, Frome, in the New England town of Starkfield.  Frome’s wife, Zeena, is a cold and sickly character who Ethan attends to but moves through life as it were a heavy burden.  One day, however, the home is visited by Zeena’s cousin Mattie.  Mattie is everything Zeena is not.  It is the story of how these three live together and their relationships to one another develops.

5.  Space by James A. Michener — This is an historical fiction of the first magnitude.  To understand how well it is written, the reader should first look to the rear of the book.  Not to find out how it ends, but to take note of the many pages of footnotes Michener has made that shows a high degree of research that went into the writing of this book.  That alone makes it stand out.  Michener takes us from the Nazi German research facility at Peenemunde where the V-1, V-2, and V-3 rockets were developed and how, at war’s end, the Nazi scientists, Werner von Braun among them, came to arrive in the United States and champion the U.S. space effort.  He also starts us at the battle of the Coral Sea giving a riveting account of how a glorious ship’s captain emerged victorious facing overwhelming odds, and came to be an astronaut after the war.  What we get is an extremely inciteful account of the beginnings of NASA, the research scientists involved, the astronauts themselves, and all the politics that goes along with it.  He takes us through the Apollo 18 space mission.  Michener wrote the book after the actual final Apollo mission, number 17.  In reality NASA had planned out 21 missions so Michener’s playing out an 18th mission is by no means a stretch.

I hope these are five books you may never have contemplated reading either because more well-known classics have shadowed them, or because you just have not considered them.  Regardless, they are each worthy of reading and each is relevent to today.  None is too dated to be considered.

by

Ten of the Nicest Small Cities in America


I have not been to every small city in America nor am I any sort of a travel guru.  However, I have been to a lot of small cities having been in 44 of our 5o states.  The following is an entirely subject view of what I believe to  be 10 American cities that should be on anyone’s list of must see destinations.  I do not  believe that any of these cities exceeds a million people in population.  Some, however, do exist in extended areas of over one million.  Excepting the first entry, they are in no particular order.

1.  Savannah Georgia — I consider Savannah to be the nicest small city in all of America.  When you drive into Savannah you cannot help but notice the Spanish moss hanging from the trees.  Although this is not unique to Savannah, when coupled with the beautiful old homes and parks of the city, it may be singular in that respect.  The downtown portion of Savannah can be walked, entirely, in about 15 minutes.  It is only about two blocks wide by 8 or 9 long, and sits next to its large port facility.  Just outside of the commercial portion of Savannah sits most of its stately homes which have frequently shown up in Hollywood movies, “Forest Gump” and “Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil” were each shot there.  Renown for its friendliness, Savannah is a delight to all who visit there.  If there is not other small city in America that you make a must see, make this the one you do see.

2.  Portland Oregon — Portland sits on the Columbia River when it makes a sharp turn northward on its journey to the sea.  It is a very modern and very clean city that is steeped in the logging history of the northwest.  You drive 5 minutes from downtown Portland in any direction and find yourself in the gorgeous Oregon countryside.

3.  Oklahoma City Oklahoma — Oklahoma City is a sprawling small city.  If for no other reason you have to visit OKC for the food.  There are many many restaurants that serve either Mexican food or steaks that would put to shame similar restaurants in just about any other city in America.  It is also the home to the cowboy museum, a place where the old west is put on display and its history explained.  If you happen to go there during the summer, OKC has its own minor league baseball team which plays in a beautiful little stadium referred to as “the Brickyard.”

4.  Honolulu Hawai’i — This seems like a no-brainer right?  Waikiki is incomparable to its beauty and shops.  Waikiki boasts a large number of high-end stores that those of us of modest means can peer into.  But it is also rich in cultural history.  The Queen Iolani Palace, the cultural center, and even the pineapple field tours speak to its rich and long history.  Of course, there is also the Pearl Harbor memorial, an emotionally moving place to reflect on the tragedy of World War 2 as you stand a few feet above the sunken hulk of the USS Arizona.

5.  Sacramento California — Sacramento, like Oklahoma City, is a sprawling city that sits at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers.  While the city itself is slightly over 100 square miles in size, the downtown portion is just a little over one square mile.  The capitol building and surrounding grounds may be the most beautiful of any of the 50 states.  The is also a portion, just a short distance from downtown, know as “old town.”  Old Town sits on the bank of the Sacramento River and is the oldest portion of Sacramento.  The building of this area are maintained to reflect an old west flavor.  Also here is the California Railroad Museum.

6.  Nashville Tennessee —  This, like Honolulu, seems like a no-brainer.  How can anyone not like the home of the Grand Old Opry.  Though rich in country music history, the city also boasts a lively blues music venue which has to be enjoyed.  But Nashville is more than just that offering a good selection of restaurants that serve a variety of southern cuisine, ribs, catfish, and grits have got to be tried here.

7.  St. Augustine Florida — St. Augustine is the oldest city in the United States.  It Spanish heritage can still be found in its architecture and food.  It also has long stretches of beautiful beaches that are not congested with the crowds of Floridas more southern cities, and yet rival them in beauty.

8.  Santa Fe New Mexico — Santa Fe is a beautiful combination of Mexican adobe architecture and native American culture.  The city sits in the foothills of the Rocky Mountains amidst the scrub pine.  It is a quaint small city of just under 70,000 people where you can lose yourself in its tranquility and beauty.

9.  Salt Lake City Utah — Salt Lake City sits snugly between the towering Rocky Mountains to the east and the Great Salt Lake to the west.  Founded by the Mormons in the 19th Century, located in its northern portion is the huge Mormon Temple, a beautiful cathedral-like structure that is central to the religion.  During the late spring the city has a stunning vista of the still snow-capped Rockies.

10.  Burlington Vermont — The largest city in Vermont at about 43,000 people, Burlington sits on the shores of the gorgeous Lake Champlain.  The city is the center of commerce for what is called Vermont’s “Northern Kingdom.”  Its downtown area has a large collection of quaint shops and small comfortable restaurants.  The lakeside portion of the city boasts a nice combination of boat rentals and tour boats.

I also want to offer ten other cities, without comment, that I consider worthy of visiting.  1.  Portland Maine, 2. Louisville Kentucky, 3. Charleston South Carolina, 4. Bar Harbor Maine, 5. Gettysburg Pennsylvania, 6. Laramie Wyoming, 7. Richmond Virginia, 8. Napa California, 9. Lake Tahoe Nevada, 10. Provincetown Massachusetts.

by

Who Is to Blame For America’s Present Economonic Malaise?


If you listen to the Mitt Romney political ads it is entirely Barack Obama’s fault that we have not already seen a complete recovery.  And if you listen to Barack Obama political ads it is the failed policies of the Bush-era that are to blame.  Personally, I think there is more than enough blame to go around that neither party is any more guilty than the other.

But first, let’s look at the world economy.  To look only at the American economy is a mistake because we do not operate in a vacuum.  Independent of what has been happening in America, Europe has gone through its own economic travails chiefly on the shortcoming of the Euro and the countries who use it as their sole currency.  In particular, Greece, Italy, and Spain have had it the worst.  Right now, Spain is reporting an unemployment rate of 25% which is similar to the U.S. great depression of 1929 – 1934.  That the Greek government has not gone bankrupt is largely due to the banks of Germany insuring Greek debt.  But northern Europe is hardly exempt from this as the Bank of Scotland is on particularly shaky ground at this point.

What does all this have to do with the U.S. economy?  The Bank of Scotland owns Citizen’s Bank which is headquartered in Providence Rhode Island.  Similarly, U.S. corporations have investments in every country in Europe and are therefore affected by that economy.  If a large U.S. conglomerate, say Ford Motor, is experiencing the European downturn, as it is, then that necessary reflects upon its overall corporate earnings.  And, as we saw in the Wall Street melt-down of 2009, corporations like AIG have considerable overseas accounts where they are insuring debt and investments.  If Europeans companies are defaulting or failing to make payments on their debt, that too necessarily affects U.S. corporations.

President Obama’s $750 billion stimulus plan has been roundly criticised by the Republican party.  They are suggesting that it did not work.  If it had not worked unemployment would have continued to rise and that just did not happen.  It did not, unfortunately, have the hoped-for effect but that does not mean it was a failure.  Every single dollar of that money, at least initially, went into the U.S. economy.  There is no where else it could have gone.  Was it as effectively used at it could have been? No, and that is where Obama failed.

People love to look at two journalistic publications and quote them as being authoritative on economic, and other, topics, the conservative Wall St. Journal, and the liberal New York Times.  That fact is, neither is quite so authoritative as they would have to believe.  The WSJ has more weight in the field of finances because that is its entire focus.  Even so, the people who write such articles are journalists who have a vested interest in reporting in a manner pleasing to their readership.  Simply put, such articles are biased towards conservatives which means they will emphasise data that supports conservative ideals and give less weight to data that supports more liberal ideas.  The New York Times, of course, does exactly the same thing.

The real question that should be asked in this presidential elections is, how much effect can the government, and even more so, any single person, even the president, have in the nation’s economic affairs?  The government is, by definition, the guardian of the public trust.  In deriving its power from the people, it is supposed to act in the best interest of all people without favoring any single person or group of people.  In the late 19th Century and early 20th Century, people like Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, Carnegie, and a few others, were in virtual control of the U.S. economy.  Because of that, the Chicago fire of 1872 helped precipitate the economic crisis of 1873.  Wall Street and corporate America was entirely unregulated and did as it pleased.  Corporate trusts and monopolies were accepted practices.  The titans of business and finance had themselves so well insulated from all civil and criminal prosecution that they were able to act with impunity.  But then during the Populist era, McKinley, Roosevelt, Taft, and Wilson, laws like the Sherman Anti-trust Act were put in place to curb these excesses.  The public demanded that the government regulate and pass laws to reign in these men of great power and influence.  Corporate America was reigned in by 1920, and then after the collapse of Wall Street in 1929, the U.S. financial concerns were also reigned in.  In both cases the method of reigning in was the use of regulation and oversight.

Contrary to concerns raised by industrial giants and financial gurus of those early days, America boomed until 1974 when America was hit by an artificial oil shortage, the inception of the oil cartel, also known as OPEC.  Democrats, largely in power at the time, responded slowly and poorly.  But when Reagan took office in 1981 he decided, and sold a rather naive American public, on the idea that heavy government regulation was holding back the expansion of corporate America.  Had anyone at the time been versed in history they would have instantly known that nothing could have been further from the truth.  The truth was, corporate America, particularly in heavy industry, had not bothered to retool after World War II and were still using 1940 technology while rising industrial giants like Germany and Japan had entirely retooled and were on a firm footing to sell in a global economy.

The 1950s and 1960s American domination of the electronics market, for example, quickly gave way to the Japanese, and in time to Taiwan, Malaysia and other Asian countries.  America was importing cheaper steel from Germany, and then cheaper, and better made, Japanese cars.  It was not until the bailout of the American auto industry in 2009 that it became apparent to all that Detroit’s decision the all the status quo had been an abysmal failure, and only a government infusion of cash would save it.

When Reagan brought about the deregulation of corporate America he was effectively saying, “We trust that corporate America will behave itself and always work in the best interest of America.”  You would have to be a fool to believe such things.  Corporations, by their very nature, always and only serve in their own best interest.  And that is exactly as it should be!  They are not required hold sacred the public trust, that is the government’s role.  Good business practices dictate that you will always buy from the least expensive source.  If that source happens to be China then that is where you buy.  It is unreasonable to expect American businesses to act otherwise.

As to what the U.S. owes foreign governments the Romney’s campaign that Obama has borrow money from China is foolish!  Does the U.S. government owe China money?  Absolutely!  But that comes as a result of international commerce.  In an attempt to gain a foothold in mainland China, a number of large U.S. corporations have invested heavily in China.  In doing so they necessarily us U.S. dollars.  And what is a dollar but the federal government promising to pay.  It is a debt that says the federal government guarantees payment on each and every dollar proffered.  When China gets those dollars it can then put a demand for payment to our government.  One form of payment, of course, is gold.  But whatever form that payment takes it is always between governments and not individuals.

One thing every American needs to be aware of.  About every 25 years or so America goes through an economic downturn, some worse than others.  This is one of those.  Most such events happen as a result of what is called a “market correction.”  When stocks do not properly reflect their value of the company they represent, this overvaluation brings a downturn.  This time is was the real estate market that was way overvalued.  Part of it was over-investment, but another part, and more important, was a lacking in regulation and regulatory oversight that allowed speculators to reap huge profits where none should have existed.  This was the state of the “sub-prime” market.

American businesses resist regulation because they want as free a hand as possible in doing business.  But the truth is, regardless of the degree of regulation, they are going to continue to do business in a manner that reaps them the greatest profit possible.  And that is exactly as it should be.  But it is not, by any stretch of the imagination, the responsibility of the government to assure our economic success.  That is the responsibility of corporate American and there is one thing you can always be certain of, corporate America will bring about success regardless of anything and everything else.  That means that they were responsible for the malaise and they will be in line for the credit when things improve.

by

Got Your BA or BS Degree? Don’t Stop There!


Most people, by the time the finish their first college degree only consider getting into the job force as quickly as possible.  They feel their college loans have a stranglehold on them, and that it is only responsible to get a job and start paying them back.  While it may be the responsible thing to do, it may not be your best next move.

Now, more than ever, entering into fields that require a college degree only gets you in the door.  Once there you discover that to truly get ahead you are going need a graduate degree of some sort.  And certain professions, teaching chief among them, require a master’s degree within a certain time period.  But what if you are one of those people who get a pretty good BS degree and then find it is not what you really want to do?  Here are a few suggestions of master level degrees that do not require a comparable bachelor’s degree.

Master of Science in Mathematics — I spent a career in the field of engineering.  But one of the most sought after persons in that field was not an engineer at all but a mathematician.  Why?  Engineering, and many other fields, require a lot of mathematics to support it.  Mathematicians are frequently used for their analytical skills in resolving not just engineering problems, by problems in physics, business, medicine, and a large array of research fields.  The demand for a person with a master’s degree in mathematics has been and is likely to always be high.

Master in Business Administration — It is not unusual for a person to get a BA degree in economics, advertising, marketing, and many other fields only to discover that they can greatly improve their situation within their company by getting an MBA.  Having an MBA is attractive in fields that may see far afield from business such as public policy, government, and even engineering.  No organization exists successfully in the world today that does not have someone within who does not have a keen understanding of business, and is therefore likely to have an MBA.

Nurse Practitioner / Physician’s Assistant — While both these degrees require a prior degree in nursing or allied field, they are in great demand today and that demand is growing fast.  Right now it is believed there is at least a 14,000 shortage of physicians.  And while a NP or PA cannot fully take on all the responsibilities and duties of a certified MD, he can help fill in the gaps where they do exist.  The needs for NPs and PAs is expected to grow for the foreseeable future.

If you are expecting to receive your bachelor’s degree in the near future or have recently received one, the time is now to plan for your next degree regardless of you field of choice.  Once you have left college behind it becomes increasingly difficult with each passing year to return.  And if you are in either of these situations and have come to realize that you have the wrong degree, by all means, return to college and get the right degree!  Master or bachelor!  Remember, as long as you are enrolled and attending college your student loans are not due.  And even though it means increased debt, in the long run you are putting yourself in a better position to pay off that debt sooner rather than later.

by

Understanding Socialism


The Republican Party likes to demonize certain Democrat ideas of being socialist, the idea being a direct correlation between socialism and communism.  While socialism is certainly a hallmark of communism, it existed in certain forms long before communism.

In 17th Century Massachusetts the town of Dedham was founded as a utopian community.  In those days Dedham extend from what is now South Boston all the way to Plymouth.  Today’s Dedham is a smallish town not far from Boston.  The next utopian idea happen at what was called Brook Farm near Boston.  It too was a utopian/socialist attempt that failed.  But these were not isolated attempts.  Other attempts in states like New York happened throughout the 18th and 19th Century.  All, of course, failed, but none was ever condemned as they were mostly economic endeavours.

Socialism got its greatest traction in 19th century Europe.  It came as a result of the old feudal systems still in place in much of Eastern Europe, and to a lesser extent because of Western European monarchies and their tendencies towards excesses of self-enrichment.  It is no coincidence that Word War I put an end not just to the Russian monarchy but also the Italian, German, Prussian, Polish, Austrian, and numerous others.  The cost of waging war is so great that the armed populace that monarchies sent to the battlefields turned on their own governments.  The Czar was replaced by the Soviet, the Kaiser by a Chancellor, and so forth.  The people, impoverished by these monarchies, demanded a redistribution of wealth and the leaders of the various revolutions were only too willing to oblige, and in doing so, gain wide-spread support for their particular cause.

In the first half of the 20th century, socialist groups were not necessarily liberal or left-wing.  The formal name of the ultra-right wing Nazi party of Germany was the National Socialists.

The United States in the first 20 years of the 20th century had a number of socialist mayors, congressmen, and other elected officials.  And if you lived in the United States in 1936, 1937, and 1938, and understood the evil that Hitler was visiting on his people, you supported the German Communist party as it was the only opposition to Hitler at the time within Germany.  They were throughout World War 2 the underground in Germany.  Similarly, it was French Communists who were a large part of that underground.  All that, of course, changed when the war was over.

Socialism has existed in some form in most countries since World War 2.  By definition, socialism is any government-owned or administered production and distribution of goods.  By that definition socialism does not exist in the United States in any form, and is constitutionally prohibited from existing.   But as soon as you expand that definition to include services the waters become muddy.  Health care is by definition a service.  But so too is airport administration.  That means most U.S. airports are run, in a socialist manner, at some level of government.  Does that mean we should turn of administration of O’Hare Airport in Chicago to private enterprise?  I would hope not, and I doubt any Republican will ever support such a measure even if it does mean they must compromise on their definition of socialism.

If Republicans are truly anti-socialist, as many claim, they are going to have to turn over to private corporations all seaports, AMTRAK, the Tennessee Valley Authority, all state-run liquor stores, all state lotteries, all draw-bridge operations, all transportation authorities, all port authorities, all air traffic control, all public hospitals, and many other operations.  If you think about it, any and all of these functions could be run by privately owned corporations.  The only question is, in the desire to eliminate any possible socialist type government operations, are you willing to give up these?

If, for example, our airports were turned over to corporate America, I for one would stop flying.  I simply do not trust private enterprise to act in my best interests.  And therein lies the central concept of why we entrust certain parts of our existence to the government.  We quite simply have more trust in the government looking after our best interests than we do corporate America.  And to this end, health care, which corporate America has so totally failed to include all Americans, needs to have government participation at a greater level than previously experienced.  Here, in Massachusetts, the Mitt Romney inspired required health care coverage has been a huge success in spite of its critics.  If anything, corporate America has benefitted from the Massachusetts experience in health care.

The bottom line is this; when corporate America has not given a service through lack of desire, has abdicated responsibility for whatever reason, or has refused to offer essential services to all Americans, we expect our government to step in and either provide the service, such as most forms of surface transportation, or make a provision whereby corporate America is compelled to make their service available at a reasonable rate to all Americans, and this is the case of health care.

Most Republicans want to bring an end to AMTRAK and turn its operations over to corporate America.  I am guessing they have not bothered to read much history, because it was corporate America that begged out of the passenger rail industry in 1971, with but four exceptions, the Southern Railroad, the Boston & Maine Railroad, the Rock Island Railroad, and the Rio Grande Railroad.  All except the B&M gave in to government take over within a few years.  It is difficult to imagine that so much has changed, even in the densely populated northeast, that any private corporation on its own can turn a profit in the passenger rail business.  But do you want to imagine a US that does not have it?

Republicans are not being the least bit truthful about any government enterprise that they call “socialist.”  It is not socialism they fear, it is their loss of leverage at the corporate level they fear.  What will happen to corporate America if the government requires fairness, openness, and equal access?  The Reagan deregulation made certain that corporate America not be responsible to anyone but its board of directors as witness the blatant abuse of power and privilege during the Wall Street meltdown.  They will never admit to this being true but rest assured, it is!  But rest assured, socialism, even as it exists in democracies such as Canada and England, is not being suggested by anyone in the Democrat Party, or anyone else for that matter.  It is simply a Republican ploy to make undesireable something that will actually serve the good of all.

by

Who Is the Real Mitt Romney?


Romney’s election committee was quick to distance their candidate from remarks made by Indiana US Senate candidate Richard Mourdock vis-a-vis rape and abortion.  Mourdock said such thing reflect “God’s will” and he opposes abortion even in such circumstances.  The Romney campaign quickly said that Mourdock’s views do not necessarily reflect his own.  There is just one problem with that statement, in this case they do.

You rightfully ask how I can possibly know that.   It is really quite simple.  Mitt Romney is a devout and practicing Mormon.  Mormons are a very conservative sect as religions go, and are known for that.  Mormons are known, and take pride in, their extremely conservative views, particularly those regarding abortion.  There is nothing wrong with such beliefs, and I am not trying to suggest there is, but for Romney to say he does not share Mourdock’s views is very disingenuous.

Mitt Romney is probably the most conservative candidate since Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover, and even more so than either of them.  There is nothing wrong with being so conservative, of course, but I am more than a little surprised that the Obama campaign has failed to even suggest it.  Maybe they are afraid as coming across wrong in pointing out how conservative the average Mormon is.  But it is true, and what is wrong with telling the truth?

by

Let’s Kill a Few Democrat Sacred Cows


If you were to check my status at the city hall where I live you will find that I am a registered Democrat.  I bring that up simply to point out that this is not some conservative’s rant against liberals.

The Minimum Wage — This is like the holy grail of Democrat policies.  The minimum wage was first enacted in 1938 under the Roosevelt administration.  At that time it was intended to help raise people out of the abject poverty so many were in.  According to an Oregon State University study, that 1938 minimum wage raised the purchasing power of the employee to well above the poverty level.  Since 2006, however, that same study shows the minimum wage and the poverty level are almost identical.  This begs the utility of the minimum wage at all.

The federal government for decades now has had in place a wage scale for its employees that is adjusted for the area in which they live.  That is, a GS-5 level employee in Mobile Alabama gets a lower base pay than does his counterpart in New York City.  It is well-established that the cost of living can vary greatly from one locale to another.  That suggests that, at the very least, the minimum wage needs to be adjusted according to the locale.  Some states, Washington, Oregon, Connecticut and others, have already adjusted that rate upwards but the question is, is that really necessary?

I suggest that the minimum wage is entirely unnecessary any more for a variety of factors.  First, and foremost, the economics of 2012 have so drastically changed from those that existed in 1938 that the logic of any minimum wage is not defensible.  For example, the minimum wage here is Massachusetts is $8 an hour as opposed to the federally mandated $7.25.  Still, I can assure you, that a person working the front at any local McDonald’s is getting well above that $8 an hour which bring into focus who is getting the bare minimum?  Another clarifying point, exempt from minimum wage laws nation-wide are farm employees and certain other tip-based employees.  That is the federal government recognizing that certain exceptions need to be made.  But it also leaves you with the question, if market demands for labor keep minimum wages above mandated levels, why do we need a minimum wage?  I suggest we do not.

Federally Supported Welfare  —  I am not against welfare at all.  But I do believe in needs to be reigned in and the best way to do that is to switch that responsibility to each of the individual states.  The theory behind such programs is everyone feeds into the top as it serves the greater good.  That is, the good people of Grasse River Nebraska reap the benefits of helping Detroit poor.  It is absolute redistribution of wealth.  But it unfairly takes from wealthier better run states and given to poorer less well-run states.  The source of all welfare funds is the individual tax payer.  The closer you put the distribution of those dollars to their source, the control of those dollars improves.

Federal Funding of Public Schools  — To be clear, I think the funding of public schools needs to increase.  However, I do not want my Massachusetts-based income tax going north to support New Hampshire schools.  I think the Federal government needs to continue to mandate educational minimums and standards, but it needs to get out of the business of funding those schools.  Again, this is another place where redistribution of wealth is just not fair.

The bottom line is, by removing these, and other Democrat and Republican sacred cows, we will necessarily remove from the federal budget many items which are viewed as “pork.”  A thing like Sarah Palin’s “bridge to nowhere” would not have received a dime of federal funding and probably would not have been built by the good people of Alaska.  It is a simple recognition of personal responsibility within any given state.  When a state is fully responsible for funding its projects, its citizens are much likely to sit up and take notice of how much it costs and why they might even need it.