I once thought that Great Again!! should be title track but now I am thinking this should be with the album cover a riff on Big League Chew bubble gum packaging with the Donald superimposed. We are Big League in a big way now, baby. A YUGE way.
 Nov 29, 2016, 15:03 CST
Rex Yehudi (shoham) 
Thank you for listening and responding, YUGE contribution! I also want to show some complexities, because I think The Don is very much Machiavellian and that there is a tender side to him.

And that if you strip away the crazy talk (which is distraction and posturing and yes ego and irrational at times) there is a weird America First legitimate thesis that is being made by DJT, and that it is very populist socialistic too. But for it to work, I have to show a more cynical side, almost alt-left side to him, which is the song I'm working on now "This Means War". Actually, what are your true feelings about the Donald?
flag (Nov 29, 2016, 15:26 CST)
Rex Yehudi (shoham) 
I wanted to get more done before I posted it, but that's not really going to happen: https://www.feed-forward.net/w.6664_This_Means_War_Very_Rough_1st_14_of_song

At your suggestion I made new cover art for Big League Blues, too! Thank you, Shoham
flag (Nov 29, 2016, 15:53 CST)
Digging the artwork!

He's very much like Hitler in a way, he really loves his country, and sees a particular group of people as being responsible for its derailment. For Hitler it was Jewish folks, for Trump it seems to be Mexican immigrants. In fact, his recent tweets about flag burning and what not also have remnants of Nazi Germany in their tone and intention. Certain things he says frightens me, but then certain things I agree with (a more isolationist view of world affairs = less wars, blocking TPP, lowering corporate taxation to encourage businesses to bring their money back to the US economy instead of in off shore bank accounts, putting tariffs on imports to encourage foreign companies like Honda, Toyota, etc to increase in house US production of products to avoid said tariffs which would boost job growth, list goes on). Unfortunately, a lot of his social issues comments worry me. I consider myself an economic conservative but social liberal, so I don't really fit in either party. Trump seems to have employed a bit of basketball strategy and has "faked right, shoots left". He straddles the fence and I think that is a good thing in many ways, and will allow a lot of the bipartisan politics in Congress which have been going on since the 90s to be slightly curtailed. Whether it actually lasts, or if he keeps any of his campaign promises, remains to be seen. Having Pence a heart attack away from the Presidency does frighten me to my very core I must admit. Dude seems soulless...
flag (Nov 30, 2016, 10:15 CST)
Rex Yehudi (shoham) 
Interesting. I think Pence seems a lot better than Trump. But it's a very low bar for them right now. As long as they keep the military out of a Vietnam/Iraq War style debacle, sure it will seem like a great success, even if we sink into a depression like 10 years ago.

By economic conservative, do you mean you would like to see the federal government get out of (1) Healthcare for old and poor -- 30% of all federal spending (2) Guaranteed Minimum Income for old and Disabled -- 20% of federal expenses (3) Security including DOJ and DOD 20% of expenses (4) Abolish the Dept of Transportation or Education 5% (5) Redo the modern financial system so that we don't even in good times run 3% structural deficits (Principle and Interest of 20% of fed spending) (6) Get rid of EPA and other agencies, which directly only cost a percent or so of Fed spending -- or some combo? (7) Get rid of programs for children, disabled and working poor such as food stamps, which are a relatively small fraction of fed spending -- single digits. Or raise taxes to fund the actual costs of running the kind of programs Americans seem to want??

The thing is I imagine you and I are on a similar page of being 'conservative' in the sense that one should pay up front instead of on the back end with interest, but it means either cutting spending, raising taxes or both and economically "CONSERVATIVE" today just means that people want the same stuff, but at a cheaper cost and better than ever (maybe also made in America by workers with good paying jobs). To me it all adds up to Reagan/Bush era deficits.

I don't know if I mentioned to you, but I taught kids for ten years, and was a kid for longer, and one thing I've found is that kids like TV and Internet, etc more than they like teachers. They way I feel about workers and consumers is that they like cheap stuff more than they like working in factories, mines, and farms. Which is why I don't think they will be any movement on these issues, not in a macro sense at least -- because it's not just Mexico.

India's working poor makes Mexico's working poor look like America's working poor except that the workforce in India is larger than the workforce of the entire Western Hemisphere. And Africa is poorer, hungrier and bigger still. Which is the big problem for me with Trumpism -- America is actually winning and has been for 70+ years. So, what does 'Winning' look like in the new era? I think it's just GW Bush on Methamphetamines!
flag (Nov 30, 2016, 11:24 CST)
Healthcare definitely needs a revamp. Its a long con. Penalize people on their tax returns if they don't have it, then make the plans more expensive and worse each year. It's a Rockefeller type wet dream of fleecing the middle and lower classes. I think it should be more an emphasis on employer provided healthcare, and appropriate tax incentives for those companies. I would cut military budget significantly and shift this towards the provided tax cuts to small and larger businesses who provide healthcare for their employees, as there is really no reason for our military to be as huge as it is. When we spend more than the next 8 nations on the list combined, you have to ask yourself if its really necessary. We need to stop fighting other countries battles for them, and more importantly, stop invading countries and essentially stealing their resources in the name of "democracy" and "freedom". There is so much hatred for America in the world today bc of this pseudo-patriotism, which is just corporate greed wearing a mask. War has always been a corporate love affair though, I mean even Ford built engines for tanks for Hitler and the railroads that led to the death camps were made with Carnegie steel. I was moved by the recent droves of people who mourned Castro, a ruthless dictator, but looking back, the US tried the same in Cuba that we did in Iraq/other countries (stealing their natural resources) and he led the regime that stopped that, and I believe this is one of the reasons why there was such high respect for him.
I think also that drug testing should be made mandatory for folks receiving federal aid and food stamps. It baffles me that for me to work a job, I get tested, but someone using the resources I am taxed to provide for, could be high all day. I also think we should switch from cotton to hemp and legalize marijuana, as these crops are more efficient with dealing with high CO2 then trees, which would in turn solve our global warming crisis and Colorado has shown marijuana sales bring in more state tax revenue then alcohol sales. EPA and regulatory agencies should be untouched, as they are the only task force monitoring corporate d-bags from further polluting our world. I agree on the India and Africa points. Even where I work, I am one of only 10 Americans on our ENTIRE FLOOR, which employs approximately 120 people. Not great odds, but they have better work ethic so they should have the jobs, other than most lazy Americans I know who are brainwashed into always checking their smartphones for the latest Kardashian news...Wrote that quickly hopefully no spellos
flag (Nov 30, 2016, 13:48 CST)
Rex Yehudi (shoham) 
spellos, good one. I think you are "Left-Libertarian". Not to pidgeon hole you. Bloomberg Libertarian is the way I think of it -- the news outlet, not the mayor necessarily. I would want your insight into this since you have a huge background in health science and I don't know much about the issue, especially compared with you. What about single payer? Canad and UK have it. These are not totalitarian regimes, but the though is to socialize the risk and provide group rate. My understanding is that they spend about 1/2 what we do as a society and are no younger. Our federal and state governments alone spend on Health Care what UK and Canada do, per capita that is. By that logic, the gov would take in as much and disperse as much but get more people covered with, supposedly better care. I know the argument against 'socialism run amok', but I think that's hot air, since you could still get supplemental coverage privately. Your thoughts? Also, yeah look they have to be motivated or they will literally not have enough food to eat. I keep telling people here, we actually live in the best place in the best time, so why not enjoy it? Even WV which is a poor state, you can live a good life in a city, college town or country if you try right? In Zimbabwe, maybe not so much.
flag (Nov 30, 2016, 13:56 CST)
Haha thanks. I actually read bloomberg now and then. I am actively trying to learn more about investing as I got a raise recently. Come from very poor family so know zero about stocks, etc. Exactly. The US could easily adopt the Canadian system, but I feel there is some shady business and kickbacks going on between the insurance companies and congressmen, be it via lobbyists, campaign donations, what have you, that prevent this from occurring, at least in our lifetimes. Only problem is getting people active and off of sugars. Two main reasons (well besides smoking or whatver) we are all dying younger than we should given our medical advances since our grandparents time. Yes. It makes me super angry when people complain about things like that. Living in a poorer state has some advantages actually, if you make decent wages at your job. Like if you make 60k here, you could buy a house. In San Francisco? Yea not so much. It is true that you have to actively try to make a good life here, and fun things to do don't just magically fall in your lap, but at least there is ample food and water supplies and access to care when you need it.
flag (Nov 30, 2016, 14:17 CST)
Rex Yehudi (shoham) 
In terms of investing, I'll be honest with you, you don't need to make 60K/year to buy property and you can go for a duplex. I come from a similar background as you. The thing is that stock investing is slow but steady with 0 income until you retire, and you are better off in the indices. I am looking on zillow right now and Huntington seems to be very reasonable ($50/foot to buy). I am also looking on Craigslist and if you plan to rent out 1/2 of a duplex, you can get probably 70 cents per foot. So take this one:


Your Principle Interest Taxes and INsurance assuming you only have to come up with is closing costs will be 700/month:


Which is what you can get by renting out the half you don't live in. That would save you what you are paying for rent right now, since your tenant is effectively paying your mortgage.

Ironically I just got a check from a tenant via Huntington bank!

So if you are now paying 500/month you are bringing in $6,000 more a year using this strategy. You can then either pay of your mortgage faster, or use that extra $6,000 for other things -- even buying up more property in the neighborhood.
flag (Nov 30, 2016, 16:02 CST)
Nice. Hadnt thought of this route. Not sure how long I will be staying here though as I am applying to jobs all over the place, but its a good strategy to think over once I find a more permanent situation than what I have now.
flag (Dec 01, 2016, 11:17 CST)
Rex Yehudi (shoham) 
As long as you stay out of places with high property values, you'll be fine. Pittsburgh metro area is very reasonably priced, for instance and lots of research jobs.
flag (Dec 01, 2016, 13:33 CST)

You May Like