Every where a hundred million...

President Obama is asking every department to cut $100 million from its budget. An article over at The Heritage Foundation has an excellent graphic of what $100 million looks like next to the porkulus bill and the even more enormous federal budget for 2010.

I just wanted to give some more comparisons to show how minute these cuts really are:

$100 Million is to $3.69 trillion as the population of Wyoming is to the population of China.



$100 million is to $3.69 trillion as Earth is to the sun...

...if the sun were 342 times as big as it is now.

$100 million is to $3.69 trillion as a sockeye salmon is to a blue whale.

Laid end to end, $3.69 trillion in thousand dollar bills would circle the earth 2.34 times.

Laid end to end, $100 million in thousand dollar bills would run for 9.46 miles roughly the distance from the White House to Falls Church, Virginia.

If the government found $100 million to cut every day, it would take them over thirty years to pay off the current national debt.

The current share of the national debt for every man, woman and child in the United States is $36,558.

The $3.69 trillion 2010 budget is equal to $12,056 for every man, woman, and child in the United States.

A $100 million dollar cut would equal 32 cents for every man, woman, and child in the United States.

To paraphrase Heritage, asking the government to cut $100 million from its budget is like asking a family bringing in $100,000 to cut out one cup of Starbuck's coffee. Not per day, per year.

The NY Times, in the middle of trying to not go bankrupt and swatting away the scandal of printing a phony letter from the mayor of Paris, has lately turned to launching attacks at Obama in order to regain some of its stature. It's not surprising. From 2000 to 2008, they found good business in bashing Bush. Now that he and any Republican control of Congress is gone, the Times once again is choosing to promote its own agenda rather than focusing on being any kind of fair and balanced.

Oh, the Op/Ed page included the usual schlock from Mo Dowd, but there was another op/ed piece taking potshots at conservatism even though it was disguised as a criticism of Obama:

In what his aides billed as a major economic speech on Thursday, President-elect Barack Obama said that 2009 would “mark a clean break from a troubled past and set a new course for our nation.”

The “clean break” part of the statement seems an apt description for the spending part of Mr. Obama’s emerging, roughly $800 billion recovery package. He has outlined some $500 billion for bolstered unemployment benefits, aid to states and investment in the nation’s crumbling and outdated infrastructure.
But the tax-cut components of the package are hardly a clean break with the Bush years, presuming that is what Mr. Obama meant by the troubled past. To win the support of Republican lawmakers, the package is shaping up to include roughly $150 billion in business tax breaks, even though such breaks are widely recognized as packing very little bang for the buck when it comes to economic stimulus.

The business tax cut talked about here is the $3000 tax credit that a business will receive for spending at least $50,000 to hire a new employee. The writer is correct here. That, coupled with the tax breaks that businesses will undoubtedly receive for green efforts, will have little bang, since businesses will not spend tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars to receive a few measly thousands of dollars in tax breaks.

The big thing that I took from that section, though? "Wow, they are comparing Obama to Bush! The Messiah being likened to the anti-christ in the Op/ed page of the NY Slime!"

The article has one more attack on tax cuts, though:

The proposed tax break — up to $500 for individuals and $1,000 for families — makes good sense for low- and middle-income Americans, because the money is likely to be spent quickly, thus boosting demand in a contracting economy. But higher up the income ladder — a couple making $200,000 a year is in the top 9 percent of households — tax cuts are likelier to be saved than spent, providing relatively little stimulus.

Tax breaks for 138 million taxpayers in the amount of $500 is $69 billion. Nine percent of that is $6.2 billion. That means that the plan will put over $63 billion back in the pockets of the american people who make less than $200,000 a year. So sinking $700 billion into banks, the auto industry, and credit card companies is okay. Five hundred billion spent on roads is okay. But try to give the people $69 billion of their own money and that is where the Times draws the line.

BusinessWeek, on December 8, named Paul Nawrocki, aka the Sandwich Board Sign Man, the "Face of the Unemployed". In case you are new here, I called that one on December 6. Here is what I said:

"This guy is the anti-Joe the Plumber. His name is Paul Nawrocki, the Sandwich Board Man, and he is the face of Unemployed America."

And here is BusinessWeek on December 8th:

"I couldn’t help feeling a proprietorial sense of pride when BusinessWeek selected Nawrocki to illustrate its latest cover story, “Is the Jobs Panic Justified?” You can see a stark black-and-white photo of Nawrocki here. He has become the face of the unemployed."

Okay, so with that and my Black Friday call, I'm 2-2. Not bad for an amateur.

The first story appeared in my google reader at about three o'clock Friday morning. The headline read Shoppers Seek Deals, Buy Less on Black Friday. This prompted me to post my first ever post because I had finally had it with the mainstream media and their distortions of truth to suit their liberal agenda. They want us to think that we are poor, that we need the government to solve our problems. Well, let me tell you - that story appeared at three o'clock in the morning, well before anyone had really started selling anything! Now, the same story did appear in my reader several times that day, which I took for updates even though I didn't see anything different. If you look it up now, I think the time on the story is something like 6:30 pm.

Anyway, here is what they had to say then:

SAN FRANCISCO/NEW YORK (Reuters) - Shoppers lured by money-saving deals filled U.S. stores on Friday, but the annual kick-off to holiday shopping appeared weaker this year as worries about a deep recession kept purchases down.

Then I see this in a post over at Conservatism Today:

Sales rose to $10.6 billion, the Chicago-based company said in a statement. The increase was the smallest since a decline of 0.9 percent in 2005 and compares with a jump of 8.3 percent last year. “So far, so good,” said Craig Johnson, president of Customer Growth Partners LLC, a retail consulting firm based in New Canaan, Connecticut. “But a decent Black Friday figure doesn’t predict the whole season. The question is, how much momentum we can keep” in this “challenging” economic environment, Johnson said.

U.S. retailers are making earlier and deeper price cuts to lure Christmas shoppers, who are coping with the shrinking values of homes and stock holdings along with increasing joblessness. The season can account for as much as a third of annual profit.

November and December sales at U.S. stores open at least a year may rise 1 percent, the smallest gain since 2002, according to the International Council of Shopping Centers, a New York- based trade group.

Well, a 3% increase may not be as big as when the economy is growing, but we'll take it. It is, after all better than we did last year. The weak overall weekend, though, should not be attributed to the tight economy. It seems that last year, the first of the month fell on the Saturday after Thanksgiving. This year it waited until Monday. Anyone in retail can tell you that they do more business at the first of the month than any other time during the month. What I am looking forward to is the end of this week, when we are already past the first of the month last year. I am willing to bet that there are small increases to go around.

See also:
More Black Friday News
MSM distorts Black Friday figures

LONDON (AP) -- The attack on India's financial capital bears all the trademarks of al-Qaida - simultaneous assaults meant to kill scores of Westerners in iconic buildings - but clues so far point to homegrown Indian terrorists, global intelligence officials said Thursday.

Meant to kill scores of Westerners? Well, as of today, there are six Americans dead and a few from England, and some from other countries, but as of this writing, the death toll in the Mumbai incident is 174.

One hundred seventy four and only six Americans? If they were trying to kill americans then six out of 174 is a piss poor ratio if you ask me.

Now when I arrived home and heard the news of the attacks, a quick Google search showed that the Deccan Mujahideen were claiming responsibility. One more search of "Deccan Mujahideen" revealed this article dated Sept 15, 2008:

Next Mumbai: Indian Mujahideen



The Indian Mujahideen, which has claimed responsibility for the Delhi, Ahmedabad, Bangalore and Jaipur blasts killing at least 130 people in a span of four months, has now threatened to carry out attacks in Mumbai, report Agencies.


Accusing Mumbai Police’s ATS of harassing Muslims, Indian Mujahideen said in its email that it was closely watching the ATS.

“You should know that your acts are not at all left unnoticed; rather we are closely keeping an eye on you and just waiting for the right time to execute your bloodshed. We are aware of your recent raids at Ansarnagar, Mograpada in Andheri and the harassment and trouble you created there for the Muslims,” the group said in the email they sent to various media houses on Saturday evening.

“You threatened to murder them and your mischief went to such an extent that you even dared to abuse and insult Maulana Mahmood-ul-Hasan Qasmi and even misbehaved with the Muslim women and children there,” the email said.

“If this is the degree your arrogance has reached, and if you think that by these stunts you can scare us, then let the Indian Mujahideen warn all the people of Mumbai that whatever deadly attacks Mumbaikars will face in future, their responsibility would lie with the Mumbai ATS and their guardians – Vilasrao Deshmukh and R R Patil,” the email said. “You are already on our hit-list and this time very very seriously.”


The terror outfit also threatened to target a senior Rajasthan police official. “All the Mujahideen who shook Jaipur are absolutely safe and secure, and are preparing for our next targets, one of which is A K Jain – the DIG of Rajasthan,” claimed Indian Mujahideen.

Jain has been instrumental in arresting several SIMI members in Rajasthan in connection with the May 13 serial blasts in Jaipur. The mail bears two signatures at the end – Guru Alhindi and al-Arbi.

It took about four or five minutes of reading and two very simple google searches to find this out. I would have hoped that a journalist would have had better sources, or at least the wherewithal to do at least what I did in five minutes. Of course, maybe I should give them a break. I did have to go to about the third page of search results to find something not related to the news that day.

SAN FRANCISCO/NEW YORK (Reuters) - Shoppers lured by money-saving deals filled U.S. stores on Friday, but the annual kick-off to holiday shopping appeared weaker this year as worries about a deep recession kept purchases down.


Just to rebuke the drive by media, which has been saying that Black Friday sales were down today, I thought that I would tell you my experience.

I work at Wal-Mart, and every year for Black Friday I go out and help in Electronics. I work in the office, but my background is in Electronics. We beat our last year sales by 11 am. We sold out of all the televisions that were in the ad for the first time ever. Usually we have a couple dozen left over. After the sale merchandise was gone, the public just kept buying. By the time I got off work at 1:00, most of the regular merchandise televisions had also been sold. One couple bought two 32" Sharp televisions at $498 each, a Philips 19" at $298, and would have bought a $798 37" Sharp television as well if it were in stock.

You would think that an order like that would have gone on the credit card, but to my surprise, when we rang them up they processed the transaction as a debit, so they were actually spending real money.

Why did we do so well? Number one, NO UNION!! Number two, LOW PRICES!! Number three, an executive board that is smart enough to maintain about $7 billion in liquid assets so that credit is not a problem. If you noticed, Wal-Mart also had the foresight to pretty much revamp their business model a few months before the financial crisis really hit. Their message of "Save Money, Live Better" was rolled out at the perfect time to actually capitalize on the situation. (Oh great!! Now we sound like Rahm Emanuel!) I can't believe the company has done as well as it has considering the Secretary of 3am Phone Calls used to sit on the board.

See also:

More Black Friday News
So, who was right about Black Friday?