My 13-year-old son and I had a conversation in the backyard this morning that went something like this:
"Hey, Dad. What are you doing?"
"I'm digging a hole in the backyard," I replied as I stood knee-deep in the hole I had just dug.
"What's the hole for?" asked the puzzled young man (kids are so curious about such things.)
"Well, Son," I began as I mopped the sweat from my brow, "it's part of my new investment strategy."
"How does it work, Dad?"
"Well, you see this hole?"
"Uh, yeah...."
"I put all of our savings into that big, metal box over there and I'm going to bury it in this hole so that your Mom and I have something to live on in our retirement."
"I don't get it, Dad. You're always telling me that investing in stocks is the best way to save for the future."
Kids are great at pointing out all of your failures, weaknesses, and idiosyncrasies. I thanked him for his valuable input then finished digging as he stood by and watched.
I emerged from the large hole in the back yard, picked up the large metal box that was now home to our life's savings and deposited it in the hole, then began to fill in the hole with the remaining dirt.
After 15 minutes of toil, I finished and stood back to admire my work.
"You see, Son, with all of the chaos in the stock market now, I figure a diversified approach to investing is a wise strategy."
"Dad, how is burying your money diversified? Besides, what about the magic of compound interest you keep talking about?"
Ouch. He had me there. Fortunately, I'm pretty quick on my feet. You have to be when raising kids.
"Son, those are great questions, but I can't answer them right now." Hey, I figured that answer works for politicians, why not for me?
"Dad, I have one more question."
"What is it?" I responded with a twinge of exasperation showing in my voice.
"You said we were only renting this house, right?
"Yes, what does that have to do with anything?" I replied.
"Well, if we move next month won't we have to dig up this money?"
I hate it when kids are right.
"Your right, Son!" I said as I handed him the shovel, "Start digging!"
Parenthood does have its privileges
Friday, September 19, 2008
Thursday, September 4, 2008
Marlins Draw 600 Fans
Okay, I'm not a baseball fan to the extent that I check out every box score daily, but I couldn't help but notice that yesterday's game between the Florida Marlins and the Atlanta Braves only drew 600 fans. That's right- 600, not 6,000!
Granted, it was a day game played by two teams who are not going to make the playoffs, plus it was 90 degrees out, but are you kidding me? 600 fans? That's pathetic. I think I had more people at my wedding....well, close.
I guess Dolphin Stadium where the Marlins play was so empty that the few fans that were there could hear all the on-field chatter between the players. I can imagine the conversation on first base between Atlanta's Kelly Johnson, who singled in the 8th, and Marlin's first baseman Wes Helms.
Helms: Nice hit, man.
Johnson: Thanks. Uh, you guys got a pretty big crowd today.
Helms: It's 'cuz we're playing you.
Johnson: Yeah right. You guys never draw a crowd no matter who it is.
Helms: Not true. We average almost 15,ooo fans a game.
Johnson: Dude, I've seen minor league teams that average that many fans. In fact, I've been to birthday parties with more people than this.
Helms: Speaking of birthday parties, did you know Luis Gonzales' birthday is today? He's 41.
Johnson: Do you think all these people came out for his birthday party instead of the game? Where's the cake?
Helms: Bite me!
Hard to believe that a team that's won a World Series can only draw 600 fans. Maybe everyone was evacuating in advance of Hurricane Ike. Or maybe Florida needs a new stadium. Yeah, a nice, new, taxpayer-funded stadium, then the fans will roll in. Build it and they will come.
Granted, it was a day game played by two teams who are not going to make the playoffs, plus it was 90 degrees out, but are you kidding me? 600 fans? That's pathetic. I think I had more people at my wedding....well, close.
I guess Dolphin Stadium where the Marlins play was so empty that the few fans that were there could hear all the on-field chatter between the players. I can imagine the conversation on first base between Atlanta's Kelly Johnson, who singled in the 8th, and Marlin's first baseman Wes Helms.
Helms: Nice hit, man.
Johnson: Thanks. Uh, you guys got a pretty big crowd today.
Helms: It's 'cuz we're playing you.
Johnson: Yeah right. You guys never draw a crowd no matter who it is.
Helms: Not true. We average almost 15,ooo fans a game.
Johnson: Dude, I've seen minor league teams that average that many fans. In fact, I've been to birthday parties with more people than this.
Helms: Speaking of birthday parties, did you know Luis Gonzales' birthday is today? He's 41.
Johnson: Do you think all these people came out for his birthday party instead of the game? Where's the cake?
Helms: Bite me!
Hard to believe that a team that's won a World Series can only draw 600 fans. Maybe everyone was evacuating in advance of Hurricane Ike. Or maybe Florida needs a new stadium. Yeah, a nice, new, taxpayer-funded stadium, then the fans will roll in. Build it and they will come.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
The Litmus Test for Choosing a President
The litmus test for choosing a president can be summed up in one word- character. No presidential candidate can possibly be qualified for every aspect of the job. It's just too big and too complex. There are more variables than there is room on a candidate's resume for bullet pointed accomplishments.
I'm not really interested in whether a candidate has good business savvy. Jeff Skilling and Ken Lay were both accomplished businessmen, but their character flaws are what did them in and brought down the Enron empire. Harry Truman was a horrible business man, but history remembers him as being a pretty darn good president although he wasn't thought to be at the time.
What about foreign policy experience? Yes, it would be nice for the next president to be able to pick Bosnia Herzegovina or Bangladesh out on a map. It would be really nice too if he could correctly pronounce the names of the countries. But the presidency isn't a geography class and we shouldn't pick the next president based on foreign policy experience alone. This is one aspect of the job where on-the-job training is pretty common in our history. Look, John Kennedy had no real foreign policy experience when he became president, but he looked down the barrel of the Soviet gun and never blinked despite facing the threat of nuclear war. Ronald Reagan had no foreign policy experience either and I guess you know the rest of that Russian story- sorry, Mikhail. That kind of unflinching nerve is a test of character.
When you go to the polls in November, think about who has the best leadership qualities, who has the best judgment, and whom you would trust under the worst case scenario. We're not conducting a popularity contest or looking for a guy that looks the best on stage. If that were the case, I'd recommend voting for George Clooney. If you look at character as the defining criteria for choosing the next president, then pulling the lever in the polling booth, is pretty easy.
I'm not really interested in whether a candidate has good business savvy. Jeff Skilling and Ken Lay were both accomplished businessmen, but their character flaws are what did them in and brought down the Enron empire. Harry Truman was a horrible business man, but history remembers him as being a pretty darn good president although he wasn't thought to be at the time.
What about foreign policy experience? Yes, it would be nice for the next president to be able to pick Bosnia Herzegovina or Bangladesh out on a map. It would be really nice too if he could correctly pronounce the names of the countries. But the presidency isn't a geography class and we shouldn't pick the next president based on foreign policy experience alone. This is one aspect of the job where on-the-job training is pretty common in our history. Look, John Kennedy had no real foreign policy experience when he became president, but he looked down the barrel of the Soviet gun and never blinked despite facing the threat of nuclear war. Ronald Reagan had no foreign policy experience either and I guess you know the rest of that Russian story- sorry, Mikhail. That kind of unflinching nerve is a test of character.
When you go to the polls in November, think about who has the best leadership qualities, who has the best judgment, and whom you would trust under the worst case scenario. We're not conducting a popularity contest or looking for a guy that looks the best on stage. If that were the case, I'd recommend voting for George Clooney. If you look at character as the defining criteria for choosing the next president, then pulling the lever in the polling booth, is pretty easy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
