Wednesday, December 31, 2008

2009 Tax Tips


With your 2008 tax return due just around the corner, it's time to brush up on those tax skills.  Here are some helpful hints that may help you when filing your return:

  • If you are self employed, open and fund an SEP-IRA before filing your tax return. You can claim the deduction in 2008, even if you make a contribution to the plan in 2009.
  • If you don't normally itemize your deductions, consider "bunching" expenses every other year to exceed the standard deduction.
  • Estimate your federal and state tax liabilities. If you didn't withhold enough, increase your withholding for this year's last few paychecks.
  • To exempt yourself from any penalty for underestimating Federal or state taxes, it is critical is that your withholdings of federal or state taxes meet one of the following:
    • at least equal to 90% of your tax liability for 2008
    • at least the same as your 2007 tax liability.
  • If you estimate you will owe state taxes, you can chose to prepay those before January 1, and increase your itemized deduction for 2008.
  • Remember, taxes fund torture and war.  If you object to this, consider filing a Peace Tax Return.

Posted via email from Anthony Martin's Weblog

Saturday, December 27, 2008

Martin Studio Blog


Introducing: the Martin Studio Blog.  This is where Karen and I can contribute in joint and post on behalf of the whole family.  It'll have things like announcements and other fun stuff.

I still have my original blog, and it'll be the place I post on my own.  I also still plan on keeping my Home Front category on my own blog too.  But that's where I'll make my personal observations and such.

Posted via email from Martin Studio

Wednesday, December 24, 2008

"... you look a-like that guy from 'Dumb and Dumber' ... thanks ..."


Overheard on my bus-ride to work.

Posted via email from Anthony Martin's Weblog

Economist Humor


Well, it appears that I have sunken to a new low; I actually find this funny (on top of that, I use semicolons):


One of the more funny paragraphs from part one:

Hair samples from Ben Bernake, Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, were much more difficult to obtain for obvious reasons. However, the efforts paid off. In 10,102 samples studied by scientists globally, Bernanke's DNA sports the only known instance of multiple, repetitive, alternating K-Marker M-Marker pairs.

Hilarious.  There must be a virus associated with economist humor.  I caught it.  Oh well.  But as always, Mish really does convey the point extremely well.  Too bad it's largely just lost on most people.

See and download the full gallery on posterous

Posted via email from Anthony Martin's Weblog

Sunday, December 21, 2008

Benjamin Waved


Today, Benjamin waved.  I know it doesn't impress anyone to find out a five-year-old waved, but as you may recall, Benjamin has been diagnosed with autism, and it's the first time I can recall him ever doing it.  In addition, he was waving backwards, such that his palm was facing himself.  This is very typical of how kids start off waving.

As I mentioned before, he has been reaching a number of early childhood milestones, lately.  This is interesting because he largely skipped most of them.  Actually, the accurate way to describe it is he just never reached them in the first place, so now he's finally getting around to it.

The really great milestone lately is that he has been copying a lot.  This is completely new behavior.  Here's something Karen noticed him copying:

Source: YouTube 

He would bounce on the couch when he'd watch it.  I couldn't get him to demonstrate for the camera, though.

Posted via email from Anthony Martin's Weblog

Fred Thompson on the Economy


First, take 10 minutes and watch this joker:



That's Fred Thompson, former United States Senator from Tennessee and former presidential candidate.  No, it's not a Saturday Night Live skit, but it may as well be, for all the good it'll do.

Obviously, he's being coy.  He's trying to get you to think about what you've done, voting in Obama and all those other democrats into office.  And of course, he felt this way when he was Senator and while running for President.  Only he never explained any of this during those stints.  There were very few people who would explain this.

People who study economics were saying this all along.  But those people were ignored.  Now that he and his party have been ignored, Thompson now has a bad case of sour grapes.

So if Thompson couldn't articulate these trends beforehand, why should I be upset now that he can see the truth after the fact?  I could show you a timeline of people like Peter Schiff and Murray Rothbard who could predict the overall trends we're seeing.

But we never listened to the Schiffs and the Rothbards.  Now we're going to listen to the Thompsons who didn't know what was happening until after it all went sour?  Give me a break!

Maybe we should be listening to Madoff.  He might have had a better scheme than Social Security has to offer.

Posted via email from Anthony Martin's Weblog

Saturday, December 20, 2008

End Times Drivel


Spurgeon was cautious that prophecy, when misused, would be a detriment to the proclamation of the gospel; that it was foolish at best, and wicked at worst, to delve into such speculation.  Yet in Spurgeon's day, like today, silly arguments over things like the number of the feasts, beast, and the identity of the anti-christ were topics of deep discussion.

During his ministry there was a great deal of prophetic speculation that Jesus would return in the year 1866.  When Christ did not return in that year, the very thing Spurgeon feared began to happen.  Unbelievers began to ridicule all Christian preaching.  Regarding this Spurgeon stated, "I am afraid of that spirit —'where is the promise of His coming? etc. etc.' And to pronounce 'all prophets as liars' came to me exceedingly harsh; yea, more than that, it was calculated, I feared, to influence thousands of minds, and lead them in a wrong direction."

It's not that Spurgeon didn't value prophesy, quite the contrary.  He just saw it as a secondary matter to the Gospel; a valuable endeavor, but one which should never "overlay the commonplaces of practical godliness," or start before "first you see to it that your children are brought to the saviour's feet."

Salvation is a theme for which I would fain enlist every holy tongue. I am greedy after witnesses for the glorious gospel of the blessed God. O that Christ crucified were the universal burden of men of God. Your guess at the number of the beast, your Napoleonic speculations, your conjectures concerning a personal Antichrist —forgive me, I count them but mere bones for dogs; while men are dying, and hell is filling, it seems to me the veriest drivel to be muttering about an Armageddon at Sebastopol or Sadowa or Sedan, and peeping between the folded leaves of destiny to discover the fate of Germany. Blessed are they who read and hear the words of the prophecy of the Revelation, but the like blessing has evidently not fallen on those who pretend to expound it, for generation after generation of them have been proven to be in error by the mere lapse of time, and the present race will follow to the same inglorious sepulcher.
Source: Spurgeon, Lectures, 100

And it goes on like that to this very day.

To me, Revelation is predominantly a book of worship.  I would rather showcase the worship and basically ignore the prophesy.  Like Spurgeon, I would rather be guilty of too little emphasis on the timing of the prophesy than too much.

If we Christians are to be like Jesus, then shouldn't the emphasis on certain topics follow the examples Jesus gave?  For example, Jesus talked about taxes more than eschatology.  So it stands to reason, especially in this day of over-taxing, we have a perfect opportunity to be biblical and speak on this topic more often than the end-times.

Please understand, none of this means Jesus' return is unimportant.  I just means the timing is unimportant.

Only fools and madmen are positive in their interpretations of the Apocalypse.
Source: Spurgeon, The Sword and Trowel, review on B. C. Young's, Short Arguments about the Millennium

Posted via email from Anthony Martin's Weblog

Monday, December 15, 2008

Added Shopify


I signed up for a Shopify account that can now tie into my Posterous account.  Did I really want this?

Posted via email from Anthony Martin's Weblog

It's leaking inside the freaking metro.


Posted via SMS from Anthony Martin's Weblog

Thursday, December 11, 2008

Hoax Spurgeon


There's an article floating around the Internet attributed to Spurgeon that was not written by him.  It is written in a way to make one think "how prophetic" that such a man of God could predict with such clarity the exact outcome of where the church ended up.

If it could stand on its own, that's one thing.  But it just is evil to attribute it to a great preacher like Charles Haddon Spurgeon when it's not, umkay?  I've checked the various Spurgeon archives and found nothing like this.  So the burden of proof is on those who believe he wrote it to produce some evidence.  That's it.  It is not up to me or anyone else to prove a negative.

Anyway, here's the article.

An evil resides in the professed camp of the Lord so gross in its imprudence that the most shortsighted can hardly fail to notice it. During the past few years it has developed at an abnormal rate evil for evil. It has worked like leaven until the whole lump ferments. The devil has seldom done a more clever thing than hinting to the Church that part of their mission is to provide entertainment for the people, with a view to winning them. From speaking out as the Puritans did, the Church has gradually toned down her testimony, then winked at and excused the frivolities of the day. Then she tolerated them in her borders. Now she has adopted them under the plea of reaching the masses.

My first contention is that providing amusement for the people is nowhere spoken of in the Scriptures as a function of the Church. If it is a Christian work why did not Christ speak of it? 'Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.' That is clear enough. So it would have been if He has added, 'and provide amusement for those who do not relish the gospel' No such words, however, are to be found. It did not seem to occur to Him. Then again, 'He gave some apostles, some prophets, some pastors and teachers, for the work of the ministry.' Where do entertainers come in? The Holy Spirit is silent concerning them. Were the prophets persecuted because they amused the people or because they refused? The concert has no martyr roll.

Again, providing amusement is in direct antagonism to the teaching and life of Christ and all His apostles. What was the attitude of the Church to the world? 'Ye are the salt,' not sugar candy—something the world will spit out, not swallow. Short and sharp was the utterance, 'Let the dead bury their dead.' He was in awful earnestness!

Had Christ introduced more of the bright and pleasant elements into His mission, He would have been more popular when they went back, because of the searching nature of His teaching. I do not hear Him say, 'Run after these people, Peter, and tell them we will have a different style of service tomorrow, something short and attractive with little preaching. We will have a pleasant evening for the people. Tell them they will be sure to enjoy it. Be quick, Peter, we must get the people somehow!' Jesus pitied sinners, sighed and wept over them, but never sought to amuse them. In vain will the Epistles be searched to find any trace of the gospel amusement. Their message is, 'Come out, keep out, keep clean out!' Anything approaching fooling is conspicuous by its absence. They had boundless confidence in the gospel and employed no other weapon. After Peter and John were locked up for preaching, the Church had a prayer meeting, but they did not pray, 'Lord grant Thy servants that by a wise and discriminating use of innocent recreation we may show these people how happy we are.' If they ceased not for preaching Christ, they had not time for arranging entertainments. Scattered by persecution, they went everywhere preaching the gospel. They 'turned the world upside down.' That is the difference! Lord, clear the Church of all the rot and rubbish the devil has imposed on her and bring us back to apostolic methods. Lastly, the mission of amusement fails to affect the end desired. It works havoc among young converts. Let the careless and scoffers, who thank God because the Church met them halfway, speak and testify. Let the heavy-laden who found peace through the concert not keep silent! Let the drunkard to whom the dramatic entertainment has been God's link in the chain of their conversion, stand up! There are none to answer. The mission of amusement produces no converts. The need of the hour for today's ministry is believing scholarship joined with earnest spirituality, the one springing from the other as fruit from the root. The need is biblical doctrine, so understood and felt, that it sets men on fire.

By the way, even Karen's grandmother, who is not Internet active in any way, carries this article on her person (in tract format) and hands it out to anyone who seems to enjoy Rock and/or Roll music.  I wrote what could pass as a reply on my previous blog.

See and download the full gallery on posterous

Posted via email from Anthony Martin's Weblog

Americans' debt shrinks - 1st time EVAR!


According to a CNN article: Household debt fell by 0.8% as Americans' net worth fell by largest amount on record on declining home and stock prices.

Is it a coincidence that household debt fell while our nation's net worth fell at the same time?  No.  Keep reading.  Here's the article (indented) with my comments (non-indented):

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- In a sign that Americans' spending habits are shifting, their household debt fell for the first time ever, as their net worth declined by the largest amount on record based on data going back to 1951.

According to the Federal Reserve's flow of funds report released Thursday, consumer debt fell an annualized $30 billion, or 0.8% in the third quarter to $13.91 trillion.

Americans holding less debt may sound like a positive, but it also means consumers are spending less, as debt has become more expensive and harder to come by.

Are you starting to see it, kids?  Holding less debt is positive, but the establishment and status quo (like CNN) is having a hard time admitting it.  The people are starting to see it, though.  Finally.

Money is debt.  Debt is money.  See the video in a previous article for an explanation of this paradox.

As the credit crunch intensified in the third quarter - and exploded late in the period with the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers - Americans were increasingly unable to finance big purchases like homes, cars and big-ticket goods.

"Interest rates have shot rapidly higher in the last few months, and people are borrowing less because they don't want expensive credit hanging over their heads," said Michael Englund, chief economist for Action Economics. "The other component is the credit crunch, where qualified borrowers are unable to get credit."

That's a worrisome sign for the economy, as consumer spending makes up 70% of overall U.S. gross domestic product. The economy entered a long and deep recession in December 2007, and the prospect of a turnaround will weigh heavily on consumers' confidence to spend money.

There is another way.  But if we got into this mess with easy credit, more easy credit can't be the solution.

"Everyone over the past three months decided to become thrifty at the same time, but our incomes depend on other people spending," said Englund. "If we all start saving and cut back on our spending at the same time, it means more people will ultimately get fired."

Many who have not yet embraced frugality are going to have frugality embrace them.
- Mish

Yet, if we look at this year-over-year, American taxpayers are now on the hook for an estimated $8 TRILLION in total spending and "commitments" by the government in its desperate attempt to prevent a total meltdown of the financial system — yet stocks continue to tumble, banks refuse to lend, and the economy keeps sinking!

And I bet you thought Congress only authorized $700 billion.  I guess that depends on what your definition of "thought" is.

So while Americans try to save, and there's a mountain of debt piled on top of them involuntarily by their servant government.  What's the point in saving then?

Well, it can't get any worse, right?  I mean, as long as the government spends, we can at least keep our jobs, right?

The U.S. economy has shed 1.9 million jobs so far in 2008, with precipitous declines since September. As more Americans keep their wallets closed, Englund said the economy has entered a vicious cycle, in which Americans spend less and have less to spend.

D'oh!

And fourth-quarter debt data is likely to be even lower, as the peak of the credit crisis came in mid-October.

"There has been a particularly steep rise in the savings rate recently," said Englund. "With a large part of thriftiness due to panic, this trend could continue for a long time."

See that?  There's another example where the author links the problem to lack of spending, so savings are bad, umkay?  This s diametrically opposed to what we know is right.  Saving is good.  Just don't save dollars.  That's partially why everyone is confused; they've monkeyed with our money supply.

It's all related.  Prices in one sector falls, spending holds back to wait and see when the falling stops, which causes prices to fall further and spread to other sectors.  The government steps in to keep the prices from falling further which causes the market to become uncertain which causes prices to continue to fall.  The government solution is to keep bailing out by printing more money.  And they have promised they will never stop printing money.

Net worth in 12-month tailspin

Consumers watched their net worth decline for the fourth quarter in a row as it dropped by $2.8 trillion, or 4.7%, to $56.5 trillion, dragged down by precipitous declines in home values and the stock market. It was the largest decline in the 57-year history of the report.

It's interesting that the author tries to pass this off as unrelated to the previous section, other than the fact that they happened at the same time.  Of course, how does one imply causation in financial journalism?  So maybe by putting them in the same article, the reader needs to make that leap.  Good enough.

But if we're spending less and saving more, how can this be?  Because money is debt and debt is money.  Lower one, you lower the other.

The first quarter's decline follows wealth declines of $393 billion in the second quarter, $2.4 trillion in the first quarter and $1.5 trillion in the fourth quarter of 2007. Until then, net worth had been rising steadily since 2003, climbing nearly 31% over those five years.

Further confusion.  Trying to equate wealth with money is a problem.  You cannot print wealth, but you can print money.  And merely printing the money doesn't cause it to get into the economy.  It must be lent, thus easy credit.

The four quarters of declines have resulted in a net 11.1% decline in Americans' wealth in the last 12 months. During the bear market of 2000 through 2002, household's net worth dropped just 6.2%.

The net value of financial assets for households fell by $2.1 trillion, or 4.4%, led mainly by declines in stock holdings and mutual funds.

Americans' share of corporate equities plummeted $943.5 billion - an 11.5% drop - in the quarter to $7.3 trillion. With major stock indexes like the S&P 500 falling 40% or more since January, shares of mutual funds, a primary investment of 401(k) retirement funds, declined $597.4 billion, or 12.4%, to $4.2 trillion.

Financial assets account for about two-thirds of households' net worth, but consumers have also been hit hard by sinking home prices. Home values declined by $347 billion in the quarter to $19.1 trillion.

"Consumers are going through a major change in their spending and savings habits," said Lyle Gramley, a former Fed Governor. "Throughout the housing bubble, consumers had a savings rate of zero, relying on the rising price of their homes. Now they're saving money for the future instead of spending it."

Too bad they're saving dollars that are backed by nothing (backed by debt, which is nothing physical).  The less debt, the less "value."  So we should trash this debt based economy.  It's such a waste of effort.

But the government will never see it that way.  At some point, Obama's New New Deal will kick in to replace the spending, then the real fun begins.  The government credit will replace the consumer credit.  Bailout after bailout, leading to more war, more overall destruction.  Can't we see where this is going?  Total nationalization of the US Economy?

Want change?  We all want change, don't we?  How about small change?  That's all we'll have when this is over.

See and download the full gallery on posterous

Posted via email from Anthony Martin's Weblog

Friday, December 5, 2008

Perpetual Bush


My previous prediction is still forthcoming.  While we're waiting, I think I'll add some more detail and make another prediction contingent on it.  It's all just speculation, but indulge me.

On the 18th of this month, or thereabout, I think we will see:

  1. The Dow fall by 3,000 points in one day.
  2. SEC will halt trading.
  3. Some hedge funds will start to default.
  4. The Federal Government will start to guarantee hedge funds.

All this will result in a postponement of the inauguration, which means Bush will not step down on schedule.  How do I know this?  It's based on a hunch, but there is one objective principle: speed.

The administration will point out that The Plan needs a person with "temporary" emergency powers to fix the mess we're in quickly and with agility.  The administration will correctly claim that legislative bodies cannot act fast enough (central government pretty much never moves fast enough).  The administration may make use of the legislative process to hand over emergency powers or they may not.  Obama will back off and endorse this decision to avoid further deterioration in the crisis.

I really don't think this is part of some evil master plan.  I really do think this is just how these things play out.  There are some eerie signs of this going much wider ... e.g.:



In anticipation, I'm making my signs already ... e.g.:

Posted via email from Anthony Martin's Weblog

Wednesday, December 3, 2008

$199k trades


You can't really see it anymore, but on the 26th, "Freddie Mac PRFD 'N'" (traded as NYSE:FRE-N) had a $200k trade (see discussion threads: WTF, Freedie preferred, impossible).

Well, it happened again on September 30th, this time "CLAYMORE US CAP ETF" (traded as AMEX:UBD) (see discussion threads: Another Screw Up By Google..., in at 48.21!).

I had not seen it happen again after that.  Must have been a glitch in the Google (isn't that supposed to cause déjà vu?).

Posted by email from Anthony Martin's Weblog (posterous)

Tuesday, December 2, 2008

Strange NASDAQ Activity


At around 3:07 PM (EST), the NASDAQ flat-lined.  The chart below shows what Yahoo! saw at the end of the day with the NASDAQ in blue and the Dow Jones Industrial average in red.  Google shows the same thing and there's a message board with questions about it.

I'm sure it's a simple glitch in how the official data is being published because it affected all financial news outlets that I checked, including Yahoo!, Google, CNBC, MSNBC, et al.

Just one of those things, I guess.

Posted by email from Anthony Martin's Weblog (posterous)

Monday, December 1, 2008

Benjamin's Blocks

Benjamin is a bit of an enigma sometimes.  He has autistic symptoms but more than that.  Benjamin has always been delayed in things like gross and fine motor skills, and from what Karen and I have read, there's very little to link delayed motor skills with autism.  It has been brought to my attention that new studies have just recently linked lower gross motor skills with autism, but there is not a lot of data.  These studies look at children after they have been diagnosed with autism and found that some (20% or so) have lower muscle tone.  It's exciting to see studies like this because it does point to Benjamin, but not entirely.

For example, he has just now started playing with blocks by stacking them.  Neurotypical children (like his sister) tend to play with blocks like this at about two years.  It's not a rule, just a tendency.  Benjamin is five (six in March) and he has stacked blocks in school under direction from teachers, but this new behavior is different.  He gets out the blocks and spends hours stacking them, knocking them down, and stacking them again.  His approach to them seems almost like problem solving.  He seems like he's stacking them to see how high he can get.  On the carpet, he doesn't get more than five or six.  Knowing Benjamin, he'll be stacking blocks until he's seven, then he'll move on to the next stage.

So while a one-year-old can stack blocks, a two-year-old typically plays by stacking blocks.  Developmentally, in this particular area, Benjamin has been one, and now he is developmentally two (with blocks, anyway).

Benjamin has always shown progress like this.  He takes a long time to reach a developmental milestone, then he camps there for a very long time.  This is why I've always had hope.  It might take him longer than most children, but he will get there with time.  He has always progressed, just not at the speed people like.

It seems like he started getting interested in blocks after one of his favorite electronic toys broke from overuse.  There's a lesson there for us, I suppose.  Or maybe that was just a coincidence.

See and download the full gallery on posterous

Posted by email from Anthony Martin's Weblog (posterous)

Momentary Socialists


I know a lot of conservatives.  I am a conservative.  At least, that's how I identify myself.  And by conservative, I mean:

conservative |kənˈsərvətiv; -vəˌtiv|
adjective
holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in relation to politics or religion.
  • (of dress or taste) sober and conventional : a conservative suit.
  • (of an estimate) purposely low for the sake of caution : the film was not cheap—$30,000 is a conservative estimate.
  • (of surgery or medical treatment) intended to control rather than eliminate a condition, with existing tissue preserved as far as possible.
  • (Conservative) of or relating to the Conservative Party of Great Britain or a similar party in another country.
noun
a person who is averse to change and holds to traditional values and attitudes, typically in relation to politics.
  • (Conservative) a supporter or member of the Conservative Party of Great Britain or a similar party in another country.
DERIVATIVES
conservatism |kənˈsərvəˌtizəm| |kənˈsərvədɪzəm| noun
conservatively |kənˈsərvəd1vli| adverb
conservativeness |kənˈsərvədɪvn1s| noun
ORIGIN late Middle English (in the sense [aiming to preserve] ): from late Latin conservativus, from conservat- 'conserved,' from the verb conservare (see conserve). Current senses date from the mid 19th century onward.


The above definition is from the New Oxford American Dictionary.  I included the entire definition just to provide a bit more perspective.  Obviously, I don't identify as a member of the Conservative Party of Great Britain, but the word does carry such meaning.  The conservatives I know in the US are quite comfortable with this definition.

Yet a great many people who identify themselves as conservative completely throw out their conservative values under certain (momentary) circumstances.  To me, this demonstrates a compromised set of principles and it seems like a form of intellectual sloth.

For example, with the so-called War on Drugs, many conservatives become socialists, after all, the term was first used by President Richard Nixon in 1971, and his choice of words was probably based on the War on Poverty, announced by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964.  It is socialism because the War on Drugs uses tax dollars to regulate substances in one state while seeking funding from another.  It is the classic redistribution of wealth, the very definition of socialism.  The War on Drugs forces one state with less of a "drug problem" to pay for enforcement in another state with more of a "drug problem," for example.   So regardless of how you feel about the social problems drugs cause, the laws are enforced federally and therefore require funding on a national scale.

The War on Drugs is just one example of how many conservatives sometimes turn into what I call "momentary socialists."  No Child Left Behind is another example.  It is a conservative idea to abolish the Department of Education because a free public education amounts to welfare for the middle-class.  Like the War on Drugs, it forces one state to fund education in another state.

In both of my examples, with the War on Drugs and No Child Left Behind, funding originates by each according to ability while funding is allocated to each according to need.  If a conservative cannot recognize the previous sentence as pure unfettered socialism, I think those conservatives are very lost or have compromised principles at work.

I believe these are examples why the conservative base has lost confidence in the Republican Party.  The slow erosion into momentary socialism and compromised principles has eroded support and cost the conservative movement the election.

To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.
— Thomas Jefferson, letter to Joseph Milligan, April 6, 1816

When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.
— Benjamin Franklin

The above quotes and others make it clear that those who promote "redistribution of wealth" as a task for the government fly in the face against the very basic principles underlying the United States of America.  We couldn't trust the Republican Party this time around.  It's amazing they've lasted as long as they have.

See and download the full gallery on posterous

Posted by email from Anthony Martin's Weblog (posterous)

Friday, November 28, 2008

Happy Giving Thanks on Thanksgiving


Our family had a wonderful Thanksgiving dinner, so here are some pictures and videos.  I hope everyone had a great day.  Enjoy!

See and download the full gallery on posterous

Posted by email from Anthony Martin's Weblog (posterous)

Thursday, November 20, 2008

Recursiveism


I really like this comic for some reason, although I know the author is essentially reducing God down to infinite space and time and that is not what I believe.


Source: A Bunch of Rock

I do believe God is infinite but not solely manifest as infinite space and time.  God is more than that.

This comic helps illustrate how it can be hard for some people to believe in God.  The author is saying that if you have a person with above average intelligence, let's call him Randal, who is immortal and has access to infinite space and time, then Randal is indistinguishable from God.

And here, Randal is simulating the visible universe.  He only really needs to simulate what we can see, right?  So only the perceivable chunks.  He also only needs to simulate a chunk of time.  As far as we're concerned, time could have started 10 minutes ago, but we have planted memories from years ago in the simulation.

Randal can even make mistakes.  If he does, he could rewind and try it again, if he wants.  Things can happen in his simulation that he is not fully aware of.  All he's doing is maintaining a simulation that with rules for physics on particles.  He's not necessarily paying attention to everything nor does he have control over everything.  Furthermore, it's just a simulation to him, so he doesn't even have to care if a human or a kangaroo suffers.  It's just simulated deterministic suffering and he's above it all.

But does this idea disprove God?  Not at all.  All it does is push the question back a layer.  Someone created Randal, after all.  You could say the cosmic comic author decided to abstract his creation to a sub-creator, call it an inkling.

If you want to suggest that Randal was created by a super-Randal, ad infinitum, then you've really just decided to replace one unbelievable concept with another.

Which one is easier to believe?  Infinitely abstracted Randals or God?  I'm just saying.

Posted by email from Anthony Martin's Weblog (posterous)

Monday, November 17, 2008

God's Judgment on America?


If you think God is judging America by appointing Obama and plunging her into financial ruin, you don't understand a few things.

America has just as many resources as ever.  The natural resources and human resources are abundant, it's the man-made financial turmoil that is making everyone wig out right now.  I know it's a big deal when my pastor tells everyone they're going to see hyperinflation which will ultimately herald the anti-christ.

And, Obama is not the anti-christ.  Or, if he is, I don't care.  I am a Christian and my job is to point to Jesus, not some anti-jesus behind every bush.

Nowhere are believers told to watch for the appearance of the anti-christ. On the contrary, we are told to watch for Jesus Christ.  In Titus 2:13Paul says we are to live "looking for the blessed hope and theappearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus."Likewise, Peter urges us to "fix our hope completely on the grace to bebrought to us at the revelation of Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 1:13).  Johncompletes the apostolic chorus by similarly urging us to "fix our hopeon Him" at His appearing (1 John 3:2-3).

God has not abandoned us.  He is right here in the midst of this, along side us.  Our Paraclete to the end.

There is a huge transfer of wealth going on, that is true.  But if we pay attention during the reconstruction, we can do some major good.  If we don't give up and we avoid acting like this is some kind of prophesy, we Christians can do a great amount of good for the glory of God.

It reminds me of the Northridge (California) Earthquake in 1994.  Back then, a wise man told me how God could use this earthquake to move people around.  It had the net effect of placing non-believers in the same house as believers where a lot of good could happen.  Hurricane Katrina has a similar effect.

This economic turmoil has been compared to a natural disaster by a great many people.  It has a lot of similarities.  People are being uprooted, resources are needed.  People need to be loved.  The fact that this turmoil has a human cause doesn't change the fact that there are innocents involved.  Very few of us will encounter anyone who caused this, so we should focus on the innocent.

If you think sub-prime caused this mess, you are mistaken.  Sub-prime was the proverbial "canary in the coal mine."  The human heart was the cause of this mess.  We are experiencing the natural consequence of unbridled greed.  That greed lead to unlimited liquidity, which lead to this mess.

Another cause of this mess is lethargy.  In that way, We The People are to blame.  Although there were people who purposefully directed us into these problems, we sat back and expected Superman or Batman or Ron Paul to step in and fix it.  They are not going to do that.  They can't.

Then again, maybe I think I see lethargy because I don't have a $300kretirement account that went to $250k, then $175k.  That would bepretty stressful to watch if it was happening to me, and I most certainly wouldn't be lethargic.

Even Ron Paul knows the only way out is by active participation of the people in their government.  We have to take an active role and educate ourselves.  Instead, we have let the government go unchecked.  We have to fix that.  If we expect one person or a group of people to take care of us, we'll be right back here in no time.

The only exception to what I said about not expecting one man to fix everything is Jesus.  When Jesus comes back to judge the living and the dead, all bets are off.  I have put my faith in that one man and I have no doubt He'll come through.  But until then, we have a role to play in taking back our life, liberty, and private property.  Join me.

By the way, a lot of people are confused by this rapture event.  It's related to Jesus coming back to judge the living and the dead, but probably not what a lot of you've been taught.  Here's a quick explanation of the rapture in less than two minutes:

Posted by email from Anthony Martin's Weblog (posterous)

Sunday, November 16, 2008

Pumpkin Guts


 Karen is going to make pumpkin pie, so we have to gut the pumpkin.  A perfect project for the kids, right?

Posted by email from Anthony Martin's Weblog (posterous)

Saturday, November 15, 2008

Aquarium of the Pacific

Today, we packed up the family plus Uncle Gilbert and Grandma Sue and spent the day at the Aquarium of the Pacific.  Karen and I had been there once before during a diner party thrown by Borland for BorCon 2001.

This trip was specifically for Benjamin.  He loves fish.  Whenever he comes over to me, if I'm on my laptop, he asks to see the fish screen-saver.  So naturally, we would take him to the "Disneyland of aquariums" down in Long Beach.  In fact, he most certainly enjoyed this trip more than any other trip to any attraction you could think of, including Disneyland.

The minute we walked in, he saw the first aquarium.  So we unbuckled him from his stroller seat (yes, a five-year-old fits nicely into a stroller seat, where "nicely" is defined roughly as "extensively scrunched"):



To peal him away, I put him on my shoulders and stood there a bit.  Then I ran away with him to the next aquarium.  That worked nicely.

We eventually made our way to the seal and sea lion tank.  That's one impressive tank.  They actually had both seals and sea lions, but I didn't know which one was which.  Hey, I'm just a software developer.



At first, Benjamin didn't notice the animals swimming around in the tank above.  He was very interested in the curved "glass" itself.

You really can spend a good chunk of your day at this aquarium.  I won't enumerate the kinds of fish there are.  To someone like me, fish are fish.  But Benjamin clearly liked the tropical fish the most.  He didn't know what to do with himself when we got to that part of the aquarium.  My previous trick, when it was time to leave, wasn't even working.  He was very upset when we had to finally leave.  But he was also tired from literally running back and forth and back and forth.  What's a kid to do?

Was it because they are brightly colored?  Probably.  They use a UV light to ensure proper exposure to what they normally get in nature.  In doing so, they show up very brilliantly.

Hannah really loved all the "Dory" fish and the "Nemo" fish.  She would point them out every chance she got.  She loved the big fake whales suspended from the sealing.  I believe they were intended to be scale, but I'm not sure.  She also had an incident with a tiny crab that came charging toward her.  Her mother assured her that it couldn't get her, but you never know if these things scar kids for life or not.

We got there a little after noon and stayed until four.  When we got into the van, Hannah immediately started snoring.  Benjamin still wanted to see the screen-saver when we got home.

See and download the full gallery on posterous

Posted by email from Anthony Martin's Weblog (posterous)

Thursday, November 13, 2008

Head Desk


Our so-called "representative," Senator and Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd:

We want to see more progress from our friends in the financial sector -- more progress in foreclosure mitigation, in affordable lending, and in curbing excessive compensation, and if that progress is not forthcoming, we are prepared to legislate.
Source: CNN

Got that?  What did the banks do to cause the sub-prime mess?  They "made progress" in easy credit.  Easy credit was the whole problem.  What is Dodd's solution?  Easy credit.  Head?  Meet desk.

Posted by email from Anthony Martin's Weblog (posterous)

The Good Old Days

Here's a video from Summer 2007 when we only had a budget deficit of approximately $9 trillion and we could still laugh about it. Those were the good-old-days.



Posted by email from Anthony Martin's Weblog (posterous)

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

"... I am not paying for my daughter's baby's circumcision."


Overheard near Aviation and Artesia on my bus-ride home.

Posted by email from Anthony Martin's Weblog (posterous)

"... well I'm sorry I offended you. But I have a right to choose."

Overheard near the missile-base on my bus-ride to work.

Posted by email from Anthony Martin's Weblog (posterous)

NEWSPAPER BLANKETS U.S. CITIES, PROCLAIMS END TO WAR

I got an interesting e-mail today. Rather elaborate. I've attached the PDF below because the web site is really slow at the moment.

November 12, 2008
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

SPECIAL TIMES EDITION BLANKETS U.S. CITIES, PROCLAIMS END TO WAR

* PDF: http://www.nytimes-se.com/pdf
* For video updates: http://www.nytimes-se.com/video
* Contact: mailto:writers@nytimes-se.com

Early this morning, commuters nationwide were delighted to find out
that while they were sleeping, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan had
come to an end.

If, that is, they happened to read a "special edition" of today's New
York Times.

In an elaborate operation six months in the planning, 1.2 million
papers were printed at six different presses and driven to prearranged
pickup locations, where thousands of volunteers stood ready to pass
them out on the street.

Articles in the paper announce dozens of new initiatives including the
establishment of national health care, the abolition of corporate
lobbying, a maximum wage for C.E.O.s, and, of course, the end of the
war.

The paper, an exact replica of The New York Times, includes
International, National, New York, and Business sections, as well as
editorials, corrections, and a number of advertisements, including a
recall notice for all cars that run on gasoline. There is also a
timeline describing the gains brought about by eight months of
progressive support and pressure, culminating in President Obama's "Yes
we REALLY can" speech. (The paper is post-dated July 4, 2009.)

"It's all about how at this point, we need to push harder than ever,"
said Bertha Suttner, one of the newspaper's writers. "We've got to make
sure Obama and all the other Democrats do what we elected them to do.
After eight, or maybe twenty-eight years of hell, we need to start
imagining heaven."

Not all readers reacted favorably. "The thing I disagree with is how
they did it," said Stuart Carlyle, who received a paper in Grand
Central Station while commuting to his Wall Street brokerage. "I'm all
for freedom of speech, but they should have started their own paper."

I think they are going to be very disappointed.

Download now or preview on posterous
NYTimes-SE.pdf (8414 KB)

Posted by email from Anthony Martin's Weblog (posterous)

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

UnFair Tax


If you have trouble with long articles, please at least read the bold parts.

For once, I'll just come right out and tell you what I think about something: I'm against the Fair Tax proposal.  Not that there's any danger of it coming up for a vote any time soon.

Usually I like to be obtuse and not come right out and say what I think, opting to embed my position in the article so you have to read it in full to try to figure out my position on the matter.  I don't like thinking for others, but I find that this angers some people to no end.

Instead, I'll tell you what to think.  I don't know why people like that approach better, but they do.

The Fair Tax

So what is the Fair Tax?  It's a proposed national sales tax that would replace the Income Tax and abolish the IRS.  The tax rate is 23% or 30% depending on how you figure.

Inclusively: $123 = $100.00 * 23% + $100.00
Exclusively: $123 =  $94.62 * 30% +  $94.62

I think it's rather silly to calculate the tax exclusively, but some people do in order to make the percentage look more scary.  Either way in my example, you pay $123.  If you'd like a more complete explanation, see the PDF below.

None of the above is why I'm against the Fair Tax.  In fact, I believe the biggest selling point of the Fair Tax, which is that the "embedded" price of good and services will go down, so this 23% or 30% percentage truly doesn't matter, as long as it doesn't change.

The Fair Tax relies heavily on Trickle Down Economics.  I'm a big supporter of the this theory.  In a nut-shell, trickle-down theory says that if you lower the price of doing business, by reducing or eliminating taxes for example, the lower price is passed along to the consumer.

If the price of labor goes down, the prices of goods and services that rely upon labor go down in lock step.  That's the theory, anyway.  I think there's plenty of evidence for this, but that's a topic for another article.

So after the Fair Tax removes the tax on labor, it places a tax on the final consumer goods and services at the point of sale.  From Apples to Zigzags, if it's new, you pay the tax.

The Fair Tax was explicitly designed not to cut spending.  The proposal was designed not to eliminate funding for entitlements like Social Security and Medicare.  This approach is meant to allow all parties to support the change without objection.  This is considered a feature, not a bug.

I believe the Fair Tax just hides the threat ofviolence entirely in the corporate layer of the monetary base because at least under the IRS, I have the "option" not to file.  It's notevery good option and not one I have personally taken yet.  But it'sthere.  We can opt out.  If the Fair Tax is implemented, there is noway to opt out.

You might say that buying used goods is a form of opting out, sorry, it's not.  I'll go into that below.

Constitutionality

Does the Fair Tax pass constitutionality tests?  I think in some ways it does and in some ways it does not.  I'm not going to analyze that aspect in this article.  There are plenty of reasons to be against the Fair Tax without getting into questions of the Constitution, especially since our so-called "representatives" mostly don't.  I'll go into it another time.

Unintended Consequences

All pro-government solutions have unintended consequences.  Anything that makes the government bigger (or stay the same size) will have unintended consequences.  Since the Fair Tax won't make the government smaller, it will also have unintended consequences.

The main way government causes unintended consequences is through price manipulation.  Any interference in supply and demand will result in unintended consequences.  This is true for rent control, cap and trade, as well as taxes.  Even a tax like Fair Tax, which removed the embedded tax of goods, will cause interference in supply and demand.

For the moment, let's assume the Fair Tax is simply 23% of the base price.  So if $100 is the base, the total comes to $123.

One of the big selling points of the Fair Tax is that the tax is only applied once.  Basically, if you buy used property (be they used shoes or used houses), you don't pay the Fair Tax.  So if you're interested in a new house, you pay an extra 23%, but if you buy a used house, you don't pay an extra 23% tax.

The Fair Tax supporters say that the house will cost less to build because the materials won't be taxed until the house is sold.  The "embedded" tax will be removed, making the 23% not as bad as it sounds.  I believe this part of the proposal, and it's important.  The embedded tax is a real, so removing it will make things cheaper.  The Fair Tax relies upon removing 23% from embedded taxes then adding 23% at the point of sale.

So far so good, right?  Does that mean if you manage to always buy used, you don't pay any tax?  Not so fast, Buba.

What does that do to supply and demand?  Wouldn't the possibility of buying property tax free increase the demand on such property?

The increased demand for used, tax-free goods will drive the price of these items up.  These tax-free, used goods will become more expensive and in short supply, mark my words.

In fact, I think the price increase will be pegged roughly to whatever the tax is.  If the Fair Tax ever changes up or down, tax-free, used goods will follow because their demand would be pegged indirectly to the Fair Tax.

The Prebate Is A Lie!  The Prebate Is A Lie!  The Prebate Is A Lie!

The prebate is probably the most popular part of the Fair Tax.  It is a refund of all taxes paid into the national program up to the poverty line, whether or not you pay the tax.  This part of the proposal is intended to answer the objection of the poor.  It is assumed that the poor cannot afford the tax, so this prebate pays them back all of the money they spend based on a highly reliable government formula (the formula itself is based on the highly reliable Consumer Price Index, which itself doesn't take into account food or energy prices).

The prebate is issued to every man, woman, and child in the US (I assume only citizens), regardless of their income.

So how is this a lie?  Well, let's imagine the Fair Tax is signed into law and everyone starts getting a prebate.  Lawmakers want to issue debit cards instead of cutting checks.  Back when the Fair Tax was being written, there was some question as to whether or not a check could be issued.  Now that we've had a stimulus check under our belts, they know this is a piece of cake (but we all know that cake is a lie).  In order to make it even easier, they'll want to use debit cards.

So everyone will have a debit card.  Likely, they'll allow "head of household" and "joint" cards to simplify things so children won't need cards issued until they are 18, unless they want them.  It's all about flexibility and choice, right?

So how is this a lie?  Well, let's further imagine the initial amount of the prebate is $250 for each person, each month.

$250 x 303,824,640 = $75,956,160,000
$75,284,986,750 x 12 = $911,473,920,000

The US population is 301,139,947 as of the July 2008 estimate.  So let's just imagine the prebate paid out on a yearly basis is a cool trillion.  And where do you think the prebate trillion comes from?  If you guessed the money comes from the proceeds of the national sales tax, I'd agree with you.  It's a solvent system, after all.

So how is this a lie?  Read your history books.  Was Social Security solvent when it was first proposed and implemented?  Was Medicare solvent?  Are they solvent now?

The prebate will start out solvent but then become an entitlement just like Social Security and Medicare.  That's why it's a lie.

How will this happen?  The same way it always happens, Pinky.  Congress will raid the fund.  They always have, they always will.  They're treacherous crooks!  They won't let a cool trillion just sit there.  They'll use it for something else, then pay the prebate out of credit which we'll have to pay interest on.  The prebate will become another entitlement, mark my words.

In fact, it'll be the worst entitlement ever.  If you think Social Security and Medicare are ponzie schemes, you ain't seen nothin' yet.

Tweaks and Trojans

I cite the 1913 version of the Federal Reserve Act as originally proposed.  It was proposed in such a way that the teeth of the bill had been removed.  Although it was a bad bill in the first place, there were many good amendments that made it easier for the critics to accept.

The banking industry even pretended to be opposed to the amended bill.  But after it was signed into law, the Federal Reserve Act has been amended to become what it was originally supposed to be: The Creature From Jekyll Island.

The Federal Reserve Act got through Congress as a trojan horse.  The Fair Tax is also a trojan horse that will be tweaked and tweaked until it's true purpose is implemented.

The IRS was created in much the same way.  Originally, it would only apply to the highest income earners.  Do you really think it would have passed as its being implemented now?  Hell no!

So the Fair Tax will go through the same tweaks.  Everything you like about the Fair Tax will be minimized and everything you hate about it will be maximized, mark my words.  For example, the percentage of the sales tax will probably go up, and those qualifying for the rebate will go down.

A quick flick of pen and pork will change it.

Sir Gives-a-lot

I have no doubt the rebate will be used to reward voters.  If you vote a certain way, you'll get money.  As I explained above, the logistics for getting the money to the voter can be very simple.  A few strokes on the prebate computer and the prebate can go up instantly, it's the American way.

Also, as explained above, the government now has experience with stimulus packages.  It makes perfect sense that the two would be combined.  Instead of having two separate systems to distribute stimulus and prebates, just combine them.

I imagine a stimulus czar will be appointed.  I've named him Sir Gives-a-lot.  He'll probably have a white beard and a red hat and be featured prominently during the holidays.  When the population is burdened by the next business cycle, Sir Gives-a-lot will swoop in and adjust the prebate up for some and down for others.  Sir Gives-a-lot will be a very popular man, mark my words.

In fact, he will eventually be as powerful over consumer spending as the Federal Reserve Chairman is perceived to be over the financial sector.  "Will the Fed key interest rate go down while the prebate goes up?"  That's the question the talking heads and pundits will ask.

How To Sell It To Me

Having said all of the above, there's only one way to sell the Fair Tax to me.  Even if I'm right and the Fair Tax is even worse than I've explained in this article, one thing would sell me on the proposal.  If the Fair Tax proposal includes a constitutional amendment to repeal the 16th Amendment (the same mechanism where the 21st Amendment repealed the 18th Amendment), I would then shout support for the Fair Tax from the hilltops (for all the good that'll do).

But in order for me to support this amendment, the new amendment would have to be free of any and all strings.  The amendment to repeal the 16th Amendment cannot itself introduce a new tax or anything else.  There's no need.  Just repeal the 16th Amendment and I'll be happy, but not before.

By the way, my full position on the 16th Amendment can be found on my previous blog.  To summarize, regardless of the 16th Amendment's status as to its legitimacy, people think the 16th Amendment authorizes a tax on labor.  We should repeal it no matter what, but especially if we're moving on to a national sales tax.  I cannot and will not support a national sales tax while the 16th Amendment is in the US Constitution.  Letting both on the books means one day we'll have both, mark my words.  A sunset condition on the Fair Tax is not good enough.  You think I was born yesterday?  See Tweaks and Trojans (above).  How do we know the sunset condition won't just be removed if repealing the 16th Amendment fails?

And if you think our so-called "representatives" will listen to anything we have to say, remember theEmergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, commonly referred toas the 'bailout' or 'rescue' bill of the U.S. financial system?  The support for that unpopular bill was split 50/50: 50% said no, 50% said hell no.

If they won't listen to us regarding a matter of $700,000,000,000 (our money), what makes you think they'll listen to us for anything about keeping the Fair Tax from becoming yet another taxing and entitlement monstrosity?

My Solution

What's my solution to this mess?  Here it is: A five year emergency moratorium on all but constitutionally authorized federal activity.  Congress can meet to play backgammon during legislative sessions and that's it (to fulfill US Constitution Article 1, Section 4, Clause 2).  Then, after five years, we'll see how much better off we are and start officially removing the stinking rotting carcass we call the Federal Government.

Posted by email from Anthony Martin's Weblog (posterous)

Twitter Tweet Chart



Source: xefer

Posted by email from Anthony Martin's Weblog (posterous)

Added Facebook


My existing Facebook account can now tie into my Posterous account.  Impressive!

Posted by email from Anthony Martin's Weblog (posterous)

Fahrenheit Scale


Question Digested: 1425

Previously, on my old blog, I kept track of my The Internet Oracle questions/answers.  Mostly, I only posted the ones that got digested.  My earliest writings on The Internet Oracle go back to 1998 when it was still called The Usenet Oracle.  So I thought I'd restart the practice on my new blog.

The Internet Oracle has pondered your question deeply.  Your question was:

Oh great and powerful Oracle...

We here in America generally use the Fahrenheit scale to measure temperature.  Why is the normal human body temperature 98.6 degrees? Since we humans invented Fahrenheit, why didn't we originally calibrate the scale so that normal human body temperature was 100 degrees?  Might this have something to do with global warming?

And in response, thus spake the Oracle:

Fahrenheit actually is calibrated to the temperature of the human body.  The imperial system was just conceived in a fever dream.

You owe the Oracle two wet towels and a pint of cough syrup.

Posted by email from Anthony Martin's Weblog (posterous)

How To Nap



Source: Boston Globe

Posted by email from Anthony Martin's Weblog (posterous)

Friday, November 7, 2008

She Said That??

There's a lot coming out about Governor Palin that has been suppressed until after the election. I'm not sure how this is supposed to put me at ease, knowing the press is capable of keeping a lid on this stuff, but there you go.

When discussing the financial crisis, apparently, Governor Palin thought the discussion was about two arch rival comic book characters: General Motors and General Electric.

Posted by email from Anthony Martin's Weblog (posterous)

Thursday, November 6, 2008

Horse Wranglers In NH


Here's a little background.  The videos below are two parts, perhaps waiting for a third, about a family's encounter with a militant charity.  You may be familiar with the SPCA, an organization not normally associated with militantism.  Usually we think of PETA as the militant animal rights group.

But that's not the most bizarre part.

The reason the SPCA representative was being militant was because he wanted to see if the Travis family was taking good care of their own horses.  Apparently, in New Hampshire the law requires shelter for horses during November through April.

But that's not the most bizarre part.

Some of this may be hard to understand if you aren't aware of a few things: Life, Liberty, and Private Property.  In America, some people observe this tradition referred to as "Liberty."  This tradition may seem quaint to most of us, but if you understand this concept, the video begins to make a little more sense.

The Travis family interpret Liberty differently than the man from the SPCA.  The Travis family want to be left alone to enjoy their Life, Liberty, and Private Property.  The man from the SPCA does not observe Private Property the same way.  He and his police buddy believes the law gives them the right to enter Private Property in order to enforce their statues.

So rather than go through the proper and civilized channels, rather than make an appointment with the Travis family, rather than show them the courtesy that equal human beings should show one another, the man from the SPCA starts off making accusations then calls the police in an attempt to intimidate the family.

But that's not the most bizarre part.



Now for the bizarre part.  If you're into firearms, pay attention:

Posted by email from Anthony Martin's Weblog (posterous)