Comments

Thanks, TP. No Slides? What's up with that? :-)

Bravo to Westpac for standing while others have fallen!

Bob Foster recently left this great comment on my blog that was relevant to US banks and the financial crisis. In such times we forget that there are many banks who did not engage in predatory lending or participate in these credit default swaps.

"There are 9,459 banks in the U.S. with assets of $100 million or more, plus many smaller community banks. These banks have over 70,000 branches. The great majority of these banks never made a subprime loan in their long successful lives, and don't deserve to be lumped in with the handful of incompetent large banks and greedy financial institutions that are not banks."

Bob put a needed perspective on banks in the US. He's an incredibly thoughtful businessman who I appreciate.

Posted by Judith Ellis at February 20, 2009 5:02 PM

TP,

Thanks for not sharing slides...

This almost sounds too simple to be true. Speaking of too simple to be true, I recommend taking a peek at Seth Godin's interview on the Simplicity Blog. Amazing what he says about FEAR in our current leadership/economic crisis. He also gives out a shout to TP!

I enjoyed Seth's answer with regard to his Dad and where he truly "steals" his ideas. Just a recommendation...

Posted by Candy Man at February 20, 2009 5:49 PM

Congratulations to Westpac for now - and thanks to smaller community banks.

Australian banking is concerned though - link to today's Sydney Morning Herald article at C Love:

"Storm's financial maelstrom threatens banks
February 21, 2009 - Page 1 of 4 Single page view

Thousands have been hit by this financial disaster and Australia's banks may be next, reports Colin Kruger."

Posted by C Love at February 20, 2009 5:51 PM

C Love - Bravi indeed on "smaller community banks."

By the way, I love your name change. :-)

Although, I think you also appeared here recently as David.

Spreading the "love?"

Posted by Judith Ellis at February 20, 2009 6:54 PM

Love is an answer Judith.

A click on C Love below brings up Alexandra Fuller - a soul mate perhaps - she/you could tell your story or Richard's with his world travels & Prague wife ... "fight for what we love ...". I have a place in Ashland, Oregon & noticed Alexandra is there.

Posted by C Love at February 20, 2009 7:31 PM

Alexandra Fuller sounds cool! Thanks for the link, C Love. (I'm kinda digging your name, man!) I had not heard of Fuller before but she seems quite interesting indeed. But the article does speak of a really good friend of mine, the poet, Naomi Shihab Nye. It looks like she was once a poet in series. She's a beautiful poet.

I see that Fuller grew up in a number of countries in Africa. Yesterday, my Aunt Hilda invited me to go along with her on a tour of Africa over Christmas this year. This should be really wonderful. I'm psyched!

Oregon? I've been to many states but never there; it might be really nice :-)

By the way, love is THE answer.

Posted by Judith Ellis at February 20, 2009 8:32 PM

Is this the proof that success is a long-term thing? Or, in other words, do your best and wait for the competition to screw-up?

Posted by Stuart Jones at February 21, 2009 3:24 AM

Great question, Stuart. Success seems both long-term and short-term. What we do daily matters in order for there to be success down the road. It also seems that the judgement of success is based in the particular time, even though the outcome may be very different over time. While doing our best is important, it may not be good enough no matter who fails.

To wait for the competition to fail seems like a failed strategy in that so many opportunities to do great things will have been missed in our waiting. It seems like a matter of focus. Is our focus mainly on what others are doing or on innovation for us? Yes, we are in fierce competition and it is important to know what others are doing, but it is more important to focus on us?

I understood your question, Stuart, not to be one of merely waiting. My response has to do with focus.

Posted by Judith Ellis at February 21, 2009 8:25 AM

TP,

Some of our issues may deal specifically with the fact that the new administration believes that we are a "nation of cowards". All of those WWII vets that gave their lives for everyone...cowards. The civil rights movement with whites and blacks hand-in-hand to make the country better...cowards. Vietnam vets that gave their lives for others and our country...cowards. Those who are protecting and serving our country today in harms way in Iraq and Afganawhatever...cowards.

My opinion...big government that can't balance a budget, take a pay cut, and hide behind ideology and calling me out with millions of Americans...COWARDS! Take my money, misappropriate it, and call me out! The source of our issues in America are pretty clear to me, and most of them have nothing to do with people who go to work, support each other regardless of race or religion, and are trying to make life better for their families.

No progress in the past 50 years for all of you American cowards reading this blog!

Posted by Candy Man at February 21, 2009 12:51 PM

It is utterly useless and counterproductive to make outlandish parallels that are not relevant; neither is it useful to blow things completely out of proportion, goading anger as opposed to thoughtful provocations that engender subsequent actions. What is written above is irresponsible or ignorance; either can be destructive. The rant seems akin to that on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange by one who had not read the mentioned legislation and would probably benefit as an "off beat" reporter as the governors who are already running for higher office by refusing the funds for extended unemployment and healthcare benefits for their residents. This is a large gamble for the presidency in 2012. Whom do they love more? Themselves or their residents?

This reporter sounds like another misinformed out of touch one reporting from Israel on the Gaza conflict. Amid utter devastation and destruction, Joe the Plumber, also made outlandish inflammatory parallels. Candy Man's parallels are just as reactionary and ridiculous. If one listened to the attorney general or read his words in the full context delivered, such parallels above could have never been rationally made. A snip here and there does not draw the proper context; shame on all of those who seek to exploit as opposed to addressing the real issue of the lack of intimacy with each other to which the attorney general was referring.

If we would actually be fair, we would understand that the attorney general was talking about the lack of intimacy we do not share with one another outside of the workplace where there has been a push for diversity. He makes this point very clear. He also praises our progress. But how often do we have intimate conversations with those of different races outside of work? How often do we break bread together inside or outside of major metropolises? Such discussions make a difference in moving forward. Yes, we all should and must support our individual families but there is a greater extension of family, which include community, that is also very important. Can we count on others to directly give of their personal finances instead of through taxation to secure unemployment benefits or social security? Government has a necessary role.

In a representative government, it is important to know your neighbors, those who are near you. (And as the world is becoming increasingly smaller, our neighbors are becoming increasingly nearer.) The attorney general addressed the more intimate questions of conversation and personal trust. We do not necessarily desire or need to have direct personal conversations with our elected officials. But in order to make better decisions regarding a whole host of things, including education and health care in our communities, we need to have more intimate discussions with our neighbors, persons who are near us to make informed decisions. These are the kind of intimacies that the attorney general was referring to and should have been clear to anyone listening unfettered by inane ideology.

The issues of race in a country with such a history, even with the election of Barack Obama, do not mean that we need not be better still. We can be. Race can be acknowledged and moved beyond. We are indeed one race, the human race. When we think of the diversity of the world the whole discussion of race, as we know it in the US and even in other places in the world -- including Africa and India in relation to Imperialism -- it seems pretty insignificant. But there remain intimacies to share and conversations to be had.

Americans are indeed often quite cowardice in discussing race, often because we just don't know how to do it. (The Golden Rule of doing unto others as we would have them do unto us is applicable here.) Some Americans are even cowards in discussing business. Why else would we write books and comments under a pseudonym?

Posted by Judith Ellis at February 21, 2009 6:17 PM

Polariztion - wanna see what it is?
There is a good example of it in the two previous posts.

Posted by dot at February 21, 2009 7:56 PM

Mindless - wanna see what it is?
There is a good example of it in the one previous post.

Posted by Judith Ellis at February 21, 2009 8:17 PM

I'm rubber and you're glue,
whatever you say to me bounces off and stucks to you.

Posted by dot at February 21, 2009 8:22 PM

Too cute! Too cute indeed! What memories! I think I said such in the third grade.

Posted by Judith Ellis at February 21, 2009 8:27 PM

Judith,

You make a bunch of assumptions out loud about what my knowledge is of the Attorney Genereral and what context he made his misguided statement. Since when are politicians given the lattitude to call me a coward because not enough black and white people are playing on playgrounds together in the United States? How we go home and don't associate with each other-----he was even using them and us referenes (polarity)? How in the F does that dummy know what I do on the weekends or after work; moreso, after I pay his unworthy salary? His words were inappropiate and terribly scripted in another ploy to divide the country (blacks and whites). How does anybody know, at that level, what's really going on anyway? What happened to the "Yes we did!" attitude coming from Washington. What are THEY going to do? Legislate that WE all like each other?

I understood the context completely and the guy is a fool. Even though Bush was a Rough Rider wannabe, at least his cabinet didn't call his country cowards.

The mindless reference? Is that how you respond to someone that questions the integrity of our government at a critical time. My comments are not outlandish or counterproductive to me. I'm tired of politicians telling me what I should or shouldn't be. Don't those dipshits work for the people?

I won't reduce myself to namecalling and acting like the very coward, you're one too, that our AG called out. What in the world are you defending?

Judith-----I didn't call you out. I was sharing a perspective that a whole host of Americans are feeling right now. Yet, you frame your own opinions and how I'm really supposed to interpret his politically foul statement. Why do you feel it necessary to rebute people that don't agree with your perspective. Aren't you a consultant? How about a little diversity on the blog? Or better yet, maybe corporations should start calling their employees cowards to motivate better performance. Take my money, misappropriate it, and call me a coward. Where am I missing the truth in that previous statement? Praises our progress...he said, in his own words, that not much had changed in 50 years. Where in the F has that guy been?

Coward...I'm merely quoting our AG

Posted by Candy Man at February 21, 2009 10:58 PM

Dot,

Polarization...what are you talking about? So the words of the AG were not polarizing? People of the US aren't going to get excited when a politician calls us a "Nation of Cowards".

Back where I'm from, you call someone a coward (regardless of color, religion, age, sex, disability, hair color, perfume, hillbilly factor, etc.), you are calling them out to kick some tail. So my comments are polarizing? Gee...maybe we're more a "Nation of Kitties (slang)".

We need to stop forgiving Washington. We need to hold them accountable for their stupidity. That was the purpose of the post.

Posted by Candy Man at February 21, 2009 11:15 PM

Judith,

By the way, please let me know when the government delivers on its necessary purpose. Big government = Big Bailouts = Deficit Spending = Total Failure. www.usathemovie.com.

By the way, let's reward people who fail to meet their commitments with a mortgage and not do anything for the 90% that pay on time. Socialism? Polarization? Candy Man being "mindless"? Why all of the above...

There is some terrible stuff coming out of Washington right now. Will cripple us, the banking industry, and businesses for decades to come. In Obama's words...catastrophic!

Posted by Candy Man at February 21, 2009 11:28 PM

Judith,

If Government was run like a business, they would have folded up decades ago, shortly after WWII. Pay for performance in my mantra for those mindless, starch shirt, politicians.

Your friend,

Mindless

Posted by Candy Man at February 21, 2009 11:47 PM

Thanks Candy Man - well voiced.

Posted by RobCH at February 22, 2009 1:17 AM

Thanks Candy Man. Judith writes like the mindless neoliberal one who in her spare time promotes the too often hate site of the Huffington Post.

Holder was the architect of the infamous fugitive felon Marc Rich pay for play pardon made by president Clinton - which Holder admitted under oath as a serious mistake.

Holder is the coward as are too many blacks for mindlessly supporting him & the president per some neoliberal tribal mandate. Reviews of Holder's cowardice at best have him acting amateur & not ready for prime time.

The president can be brilliant in stagecraft but that isn't enough as poll numbers show his support is down to the 50+ percentile. He & the liberal democrats are building our current & future USA - & perhaps worldwide - house on the SAND of debt & punishment of responsible free enterprise champions.

Since the president was elected the DOW Jones 30 are down an incredible 2200 points. Berkshire Hathaway - with "key" Obama advisor Buffett - has lost $120B in the last 6 months.

PS - now no drama Obama is hyper drama crises Obama - his calm WAS his saving grace - even president Clinton is critical of his hyper drama "leadership". Even the girlee man governor of California has become a drama queen!

Posted by C Love at February 22, 2009 7:52 AM

During the month typically known as "Black History Month" to honor the past and persistence of a people of great struggle and to seek to build stronger intimate relations between us, the attorney general, the first African American to hold this office, did not discuss our dreaded past and often unjust present in the courts system. Instead, he made the following remarks which seemed to address the problem of inequity from a different angle, one of intimacy. For all concerned, it is more difficult to be unjust or harbor resentment when intimacy is involved.

"Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot in things racial, we have always been, and we, I believe, continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards.

"Though race-related issues continue to occupy a significant portion of our political discussion, and though there remain many unresolved racial issues in this nation, we, average Americans, simply do not talk enough with each other about things racial.

"This is truly sad. Given all that we as a nation went through during the civil rights struggle, it is hard for me to accept that the result of those efforts was to create an America that is more prosperous, more positively race-conscious, and yet is voluntarily socially segregated."

-- Attorney General Eric Holder

To these remarks, I asked two questions:

1) How often do we have intimate conversations with those of different races outside of work?

2) How often do we break bread together inside or outside of major metropolises?

Posted by Judith Ellis at February 22, 2009 8:19 AM

"He & the liberal democrats are building our current & future USA - & perhaps worldwide - house on the SAND of debt & punishment of responsible free enterprise champions."

Illusions and delusions prevail. Which president took us off of the Gold Standard and made us a nation of debt? Which president began the deregulation process that has in part brought us to this global financial catastrophe? None were liberal.

The building of the "house of SAND and debt" did not begin with this administration.

Nor have there been...

"Responsible free enterprise champions" lately on Wall Street.

It is really inane to consider the stock of one who supports President Obama as a reason as an indicator of the success of a president who has been in office for 32 days. It is also idiotic to consider the stock of one company in this climate while not considering those many others, including the highly leveraged GE ran by the self-described "lifelong republican" Jack Immelt, who, in fact, supports President Obama.

By the way, it's highly plausible that Warren Buffet has given away more BILLIONS than the one who has derided him here could ever make in a million lifetimes. Only a madcap man makes such foolish statements like the one above in a truly unpredictable market which Paul Volker and George Soros see as having no end in sight and being greater than the Great Depression.

(Now the fast typing mechanical one above will probably go and google Volker and Soros and write back that they too have lost in this market based on President Obama because they too are liberal. How foolish is the assumption of Buffet’s lost! It is also highly plausible that Soros too has given away more money than he who has written the above words could ever make.)

How is YOUR portfolio?

Posted by Judith Ellis at February 22, 2009 9:11 AM

Judith,

I like what Morgan Freeman said about Black History month. He thought the month was foolish and he didn't want one. Freeman stated that Black History is American History. Why don't we have White History Month, Asian History Month, Hispanic History Month, Jew History Month (I forgot, we do...Jewly).

Morgan Freeman said it best in my opinion. Black History is American History. Regardless of the arguments you continue to make, I'm not going to look to politicians to define my character and who I associate with. The beauty of America is this. African Americans have made some of the largest strides, alongside women, in our great nation. The other side of this beauty is that you can choose who you want to associate with. I don't mind hanging with anybody, and I'm not going to say that I've got perverbial black friends. There are Blacks and Whites that don't want to associate with each other for their own narrow-minded reasons. That's fine with me and they should be able to associate with whomever they want. As long as there is respect held between both parties, they shouldn't have to do anything together.

The problem with us being tagged as a nation of cowards is that those people who don't want to associate with each other are going to be even more polarized not to.

I don't measure my contributions by wealth, and if we looked at percentages, I may very well give more than Mr. Buffet. Economies of scale...not how much money. We don't need to look to experts to know that America is in serious trouble, just look at Hillary emphasizing that there are more serious crises than the Human Rights violations of China at work today. Work those Chinese employees a little harder and beat them a little more, we need to get America out of debt...because we owe them a ton of money. We're already beginning to roll over on the very essence of what makes Black History month so wonderful, overcoming mistreatment and discrimination. Money makes people funny.

787 billion dollars?

C Love does make some very good observations, maybe not in the context within you'd like to hear them.

Posted by Candy Man at February 22, 2009 10:22 AM

Seth Godin and his views on Simplicity and Fear; very short, to the point, and positive toward the future. Remarkably different than the neopolitical nonsense that gets tossed around daily in the blogosphere.

Good post Trevor!!!!!

Posted by Candy Man at February 22, 2009 10:26 AM

C Love,

Maybe the Governor and President could do their own Hans and Frans rendition of SNL.

"I'm Hans, and he's Frans, and together we can (clap)...bail you out!"

"I want to thank Hans, our master of bailitude, for giving California a bunch of money to keep our government pumped up (clap)"

"And I want to thank Frans for acting like a true Kennedy, even though he's been in disguise for the past 20 + years as a crossover politician. Maybe like the Census, I'll change the rules so non-nationals can hold the highest office in the US, that pumps me up (clap)"

And don't forget the visual of these guys acting like body builders as they're speaking from the lecturn.

Posted by Candy Man at February 22, 2009 10:36 AM

Regarding every practice:

"To everything there is a
season, a time for
every purpose under
the sun."

Posted by Judith Ellis at February 22, 2009 10:57 AM

Nothing can be more basic than intimacy and nothing more beautiful than diversity. Nature itself speaks to these.

Posted by Judith Ellis at February 22, 2009 11:02 AM

"Why don't we have...Jew History Month (I forgot, we do...Jewly)."

For those who seem to be interested in my particular racial ethnicity,
my maternal great grandfather was Jewish and he would also be
the grandfather of my mother's cousin, Richard Pryor.

As he would say, "I'm bad!"

Posted by Judith Ellis at February 22, 2009 11:17 AM

Nothing can be more basic than hunger and nothing more beautiful than a paycheck. Humanity itself speaks to these.

Posted by Candy Man at February 22, 2009 11:18 AM

The beauty of the net and blogging, it's the most non-discriminatory method of communicating. Nobody knows who you are, what you are, or why you are...unless you offer it up of course.

Posted by Candy Man at February 22, 2009 11:20 AM

"The beauty of the net and blogging, it's the most non-discriminatory method of communicating."

In a book that I am assisting a renowned public figure to write I outline in great detail this precise point.

I agree.

Regarding a prior comment, what about originality?

Posted by Judith Ellis at February 22, 2009 11:36 AM

Thanks Candy Man. Seth is brief and straight to the point. He is a generous man with his time for us 'ordinary folks.' I am very grateful to him ... and he speaks very well of the UK by the way.As we say here in England - a jolly decent chap :-)

http://www.simplicityitk.blogspot.com/

Posted by Trevor Gay at February 22, 2009 12:54 PM

May we have the title of the book...?

With regard to the originality...I prefer actuality.

Trevor------a jolly decent chap indeed. You've had two good interviews in the past two weeks.

Posted by Candy Man at February 22, 2009 4:17 PM

"With regards to the orginality...I prefer actuality."

What does this mean? Nice sounding phrases still require meaning.

Are they antithetical?

Posted by Judith Ellis at February 22, 2009 5:11 PM

Candy Man – thanks - appreciated. I enjoy the interviews and there are more to come over the next few weeks/months. I have 8-10 guests lined up at the moment. Seems a popular feature on the Blog. There are many folks with a great message that merits being heard by a wider audience – my hope is to promote them just a bit. Most of the interviewees are not as ‘high profile’ as Seth but they all have important things to say.

Posted by Trevor Gay at February 22, 2009 5:50 PM

Why have the comments been co-opted by a few long-winded types who use this as a forum to argue with each other? Are there no standards? I know many are unemployed these days, but go watch some soaps or something instead of spending all day writing blog comments! Enough already! Go make something of yourselves. Make mama proud! You know when I was a girl we did without...

Posted by Vey Ist Mir at February 23, 2009 3:43 PM

What are you now? A boy?

Posted by Judith Ellis at February 23, 2009 5:45 PM

"What are you now? A boy?"

Oooohh dam! Fell tha burn! Nice :)

Posted by chico blaze at February 23, 2009 6:46 PM

We've deleted a comment due to poor taste. Please refer to the FAQ for comment ground rules.

Posted by Shelley Dolley at February 24, 2009 10:57 AM

Ah, C "Love," the multiplicity of personalities, through the effort of many, but in one voice alone. What a non-talented one.

Posted by Judith Ellis at February 25, 2009 8:25 PM

Judith - the Detroit syndrome - part of your legacy - men tend to avoid Detroit females in droves.

Posted by C Love at February 26, 2009 6:41 AM

Since you brought it up, "my legacy," is obviously profoundly richer, much broader than yours in a whole host of areas, as your mere googling "intelligence" and "creativity" show. My boy, by your mere responses, dear, you are no match to the men or women that I know here. But perhaps you will yet become the man that I know you can still one day be, but with perhaps more listening a little less of your particular brand of "creativity."

Your words above are those of an idiotic simpleton and perhaps a foolish man is best answered according to his folly. But you wouldn't want this. Believe me. Detroit is also known for another kind of particular brand of creativity that will leave you wishing you had not embarked down this path of thinking. But, of course, before any of this could ever be, I would need to know your proper name and contact in order to respond accordingly.

Posted by Judith Ellis at February 26, 2009 8:29 AM

Enough already. Please.

Posted by RobCH at February 26, 2009 8:47 AM

RobCH - You may chose not to read, eh? See a name and by pass reading is a suggestion to you. None of these responses are addressed to you.

Posted by Judith Ellis at February 26, 2009 9:17 AM

Judith, I'm sorry, but it's not your place to suggest that RobCH read or not read comments made here. Any comment made here is, in effect, addressed to everyone. If you have an ongoing issue with another commenter that doesn't relate to the topic of the blogpost, please take that offline. Please revisit our FAQ for comment groundrules. Thank you.

Posted by Shelley Dolley at February 26, 2009 8:23 PM

Shelley - I shall do exactly whatever you think is appropriate or inappropriate here.

Posted by Judith Ellis at February 26, 2009 11:18 PM

With all due respect, if in fact every comment here is addressed to everyone then I am curious as to why this admonishment was directed at a specific contributor? A generic post or better yet,an off-line discussion with all involved might be a more effective way of getting the point across.

Posted by Dave Wheeler at February 28, 2009 2:28 PM

Dave,
We appreciate your feedback. Our team discusses each issue as it arises. In this case, we wanted to be very clear that we have an open forum here, not one limited to commenter-to-commenter arguments headed more toward the personal rather than the topic at hand in the blog post. An off-line discussion was had as well. Your point is taken. Again, our intention is that all feel welcome to post here, including Judith, RobCH, and all others who would like to add to the discussion of the blog post.

Posted by Shelley Dolley at March 1, 2009 5:39 PM

Thank you Ma'am...I really do appreciate your response. It takes two to have a commenter to commenter argument and I just found it odd the post was directed at one specific commenter. Your efforts to maintain an open and topic "focused" site are definitely appreciated...thanks again!

Posted by dave wheeler at March 1, 2009 9:53 PM