A Word of Advice for All Advertisers

I know. I have no degree in advertising. I have no degree in higher learning at all. However, I do have eyes in my head and I have likely a little better mind for reasoning than most. That is to say, I can observe and draw reasonably sound conclusions.

Now, let’s say I’m watching a TV show and one of those irritating, highly over repeated ads come on. You know the ones. The ones by the lawyers seeking their 40% for legal fees; the ones advertising for Medicare part C; etc, etc and so forth.

Instead of leaving the room to make a sandwich, I change the channel to avoid the obnoxious blather. Then, no matter the reason, I don’t change the channel back. Maybe I forget. Perhaps I decide I like what’s on the other channel. I don’t know. Maybe the remote breaks or gets lost.

Your ad, which is immediately after the repetitive gibberish is not watched…the one for which you paid good money. The money, goes down the tubes, never to even be seen again. I imagine the ad agency as well as those writing the check don’t like like my little story.

Based on the above, it would seem to me that advertisers would not want to pay prime prices for time following “such fantastic works of art.”

Odd. While watching TV just now, one of those irritants came on. I’m not sure I’ll change it back. I sort of like this program better.

I mean, there are irritating commercials. Then, there are just irritating blabbing, if you get my point. I mean, I do believe we are all now well educated on bad water at Lejeune and the benefits of part c Medicare.

Lemonade Sales & Other Money Making Ideas

By this time we’ve all heard the stories of kids being put out of business for selling lemonade or Cool Aid in their front yards. Believe me, it is not limited to kids and lemonade.

When someone came up with private citizens driving others around, the taxi industry about had had the proverbial, not so literal, heart attack. They were paying bundles to operate their businesses and a bunch of non-professionals came in and started talking their customers.

Actually, it was also the city governments that didn’t like it as well. They make a handsome sum from each and every cabbie and not one cent from the Uber drivers.

Nonetheless, Uber succeeded despite the objections of many city halls. I can’t say why, but it is one of very few. Even then, California challenged and succeeded at altering their operating model.

I know a few that had no success at all.

  1. In New England, there were dozens of older women knitting caps. They sold the caps to distributors who sold them to small stores. Most everyone benefited, that is, besides the unions. The unions sued in federal court and won. It seems that it is illegal to be paid by the piece. The only ones to benefit from that court decision were the unions and the lawyers.
  2. While teaching at MCAS El Toro Marine Station, two of my students visited Palm Springs. While visiting a motorcycle shop, they couldn’t help but notice the high prices. When they asked about them, they were told about the exorbitant fee to transport them there. The 2 did the calculations and determined thy could transport them in a pickup for half the price and still make a good profit. They made three trips, making quite a bundle before they were approached and threatened for commercially transportation of goods without a license or permit. When the men told me about, they said it was good while it lasted. At any rate, now you know why motorcycles are so much more expensive in Palm Springs than in Los Angeles.
  3. My oldest brother was generally pretty industrious. One day he bougt and restored an old tractor to do some personal work. Very soon, many people were asking for help. It wasn’t long before the tractor was making him a bundle. He even paid a guy to operate it and still made money. After 6 months, that came to an abrupt halt when he was told what he was doing was illegal. I never totally understood that one. Still my brother made a bunch. Besides the work he was paid for, he sold the tractor for 3 times what he invested in it.

My guess from the above is that lawyers don’t like people making money unless they get their cut.

I do know there are true logical reasons for such laws and rules but those lawmakers do like to carry things to an extreme. Hence, 7 to 11 year-olds cannot make lemonade for profit.

By the way, if you come up with a really good money making idea, I suggest you check with a good lawyer…just to make sure it’s legal.

The Epitome of Stupidity

I just heard a report on CBS that was so unbelievable that I just had to verify it before writing on it. Sure enough, it’s accurate according to NPR (Becky Sullivan)

Henceforth, VISA, Mastercard and American Express will (or have) created a code for gun sales. This is in hopes of decreasing gun violence.

Sorry, that will have little or no affect. The reason can be determined by a smart 6th grader (One who does not attend public school). Those who plan to use guns illegally are not likely to use a credit card to buy a gun. Hidden near the end of the article is a stat that pretty much confirms this. About 7% of those using guns during crimes buy them legally. There is no record of the purchase of over 90% of guns used in crime.

If I decide to buy a gun without my M.C., all I need do is go to the ATM and withdraw 6 or 7 hundred dollars and go find someone interested in selling their 9 mm.

I have no such plans nor do I currently have any guns, although if the FOCs continue to run things as they do, I just might go out and buy a few automatic pitching machines with which to defend my home. I’m not sure, but I’d think it would be a good legal way of defense. Any smart burglars burglaring my home would be wise to bring their baseball glove.

As I have said before, the way to stop gun violence, or any kind of of violence is three-fold. Teach respect of human life in the home, in the schools and from the government. Pray and encourage prayer before the violence. It doesn’t help much after. Make sure everyone knows basic gun safety.

One more thing thing that would help is to lock up those who commit crimes, especially the violent kind. Many violent crimes are committed by known criminals, most which don’t use guns.

Why So Easy?

I keep hearing these ads on TV about how easy it is to steal homes. It seems most anyone can do it. My question is why?

All these hundreds of representatives at state and federal level. You’d think a few of them have seen these ads. You’d think one would say, “Aha! I have this really neat idea for a law.”

Maybe, just maybe, they don’t want to stop the legal theft. After all, some of their friends make a bundle off such things. Who knows? Maybe they were even involved in such thievery.

Whatever. It seems an easy problem to solve. Unlike the weather, there are things that can be done about it.

If they can’t think of anything maybe they can start by locking up the culprits they catch…maybe 20 years. Maybe they can invalidate any such actions as well as any subsequent transactions on the property.

I’m sure there are many things that need to be worked out but these representatives are smart and they have a bunch of smart people working for them. I bet they all have college degrees. I suspect most have prestigious law degrees from such as Yale and the like.

Then again, they can treat like like the weather and do nothing but hold long impressive conversations about it.

Then too. I might even be wrong about that. I wonder if any of them ever brought the subject up.

Making Money the Legal Way

Every day lawyers make money the legal way. In the process, they cost well meaning honest people a ton and a half of money. Considering the weight of paper money, that’s a lot of cash.

They don’t have to win their cases in court. They sue for a million, settle for 200 thousand and the lawyers walk away with 80 thousand of it. This, of course all occurs within months, maybe weeks.

The sad thing is that many of the defendants have done nothing wrong. I wonder suspect no one is keeping any statistics. I suspect that those statistics would prove that most of the time the loser is our justice system.

Then, there are those situations where the defedants are guilty. In the recent case concerning Camp Lejeune, the lawyers seem to really be cleaning up.

I can’t help but wonder how much of our tax money is going into the hands of lawyers rather than victims. The attorneys advertise day and night. There must be a lot at stake. Otherwise, why advertise so much.

It is legal, completely. However, as veteran myself, it leaves a very bitter taste in my mouth that the lawyers would buy their executive jets off veterans like me. It is likely why lawyers are known as a necessary evil.

As an aside, think about it. The Congressmen are largely lawyers making laws to benefit lawyers. Unlike the Constitution, laws aren’t written in plain English. In order to understand laws, we need lawyers. By the way, sometimes the lawyers don’t understand them.

It’s no wonder lawyers live so well, unless they are honest and ethical.

I Knew it Had to Happen!

When they came out with battery powered push mowers, I knew the battery powered rider mower would be next. I even predicted it in one of my posts.

When I visited Lowes this afternoon, I noticed two zero turn machines that had electric mower trademarks on them.

I made a point to check them out on the way in. They had a sign on it that bragged 2 acres on a charge. I actually do have a decent sized yard, but it doesn’t get close to a 1/4 of an acre. Sadly, my yard just doesn’t justify the price tag.

Even so, considering my age, I was still tempted. Maybe I could use it to make money. I could advertise a green friendly way to keep your lawn well manicured. I wonder just how many lawns it would take to justify spending $5500.

Maybe one or two of my readers can figure a way to pretend I need a zero turn rider mower.

Maybe they will come out with a little lawn tractor mower soon. Maybe they will come out with one I can afford. In the meantime, I guess I will trudge behind the one I have. At least it’s electric. That will make those “going green” nuts happy.

Oh. And by the way. I won’t have to pay road tax to cut my grass.

Just Curious

Is there anyone on this planet that is unaware of the water problem that existed on and around Camp Lejeune?

if there is one, I’d like to know just what rock he’s hiding under.

I suppose I ought not complain. They are allowing me to watch old Hunter reruns free. Then again, their ads are wasted on me. Though I was in the Marines, i was never stationed east of Memphis.

Regardless, my guess is that there are a bunch of money hungry lawyers ready to get their share of the tort fortunes.

It does cause me to wonder just who they will villainize next. Those lawyers do need their jet planes and luxury yachts.

A Curiosity

There is a question of small significance based on the Bible and prophecy. Just why is it that the US is not mentioned in the Bible. It does seem to many that the Bible has left out half the world. Some might even suggest it is one of the more important parts.

Many have asked the question. Some have suggested answers. Personally, I don’t know. I do consider it something of a curiosity, though I would never let such a thing cause any doubts in the accuracy of God’s word.

As near as I can figure, what happens in terms of prophecy in the western hemisphere, is of little significance. Currently, that seems highly unlikely.

However, it would not take but a few days for that to change.

  1. A natural disaster. California, the Mid-south and many other places in Mexico and South America have serious fault lines. Just lately I found out there are faults under New York too, though not currently active. From time to time, I have been reminded that Yellowstone sets a top a huge volcano capable of destroying most of this country and send ashes worldwide. Such a thing just might help fulfill prophecies. I don’t know. As I say. I just observe.
  2. It might be war or a few terrorists. China, Iran and a few other countries would like American history to end. The Dems, on the other hand, seem to be inviting terrorists over an open border. A few well placed nuclear weapons would destroy our nation. Just look what 3 well placed planes did. Many take our national security for granted. They like the advantages of living here but they are not willing to help pay for it.
  3. Finally, there is the possibility of destruction from within. Those who say the Republicans are destroying democracy are tearing our Constitution asunder. Without the 10 amendments to protect us, the US will crumble.

Maybe none of this will happen. I don’t know. If any of it does, I hope I don’t live to see it. On the other hand, the more I observe, the more I believe it will be the third. With the dems such as they are, the Lord will not need to send natural disasters or even an enemy to destroy the nation he sees going very much astray. We will do a really great job of destroying ourselves.

Good News

For those interested. I just found out that one of the thorns in Trump’s side has just been shot down. Come January, Liz from Wyoming will be looking for a new job. Invariable, she will find one in among the news establishment. She will be well rewarded for becoming a never Trumper. She might want to remember, though, all liars do get their just wages in the end.

Tis a shame we cannot arrange an immediate result. Unfortunately, we do need to wait for November to make it final. Then we have to wait till January to make it legal.

Either way, she got the message, though she is not likely to take the hint from her constituents.

Surprise, Not All Stove Are Hot

It is something, likely, as old as stoves. Most folks quickly learn not to touch hot stoves.

Actually, it is not so important today as it was a couple of centuries ago when ole Ben first started building stoves. Generally speaking, when someone would touch a hot stove, they were not apt to repeat it.

Actually, I suspect it went back even farther than that. Before there were stoves, there were fireplaces. Before fireplaces campfires, or their equivalent.

I even heard a tale of one of the big wigs at Levi learning not to kneel next to campfires…first time. It was then that they decided to remove one or two of the rivets from the area just below the fly of their famous canvas trousers.

The one thing brought away from the first experience was the probability of pain, sometimes a little embarrassment too. However, here’s the news. Not all stoves are hot. Not all rivets are hot. It just is that once exposed to these experiences we mostly come away thinking they are, or at least can be. It is referred to as inductive reasoning. Because the first stove we touch is hot, we assume all stoves are hot.

What if the reverse is true. What if the first stove you touch is ambient temperature? Do we then assume that all stoves are cool to the touch. If we do this, we expose ourselves to many painful experiences. This is called inductive reasoning.

While it is useful, it can easily lead to errors. For instance, if we see a brown Labrador retriever, it would be wrong to assume that all dogs are brown and weigh eighty pounds. Indeed, it would be wrong to assume that all Labs are brown. Oddly there are some that are black.

On the other hand, suppose we touch a hundred cool stoves. Can we then assume are stoves are cool? If we see a hundred brown Labs, are we to assume that all labs are brown.

You see, even though we see a large number of examples, we cannot truly assume anything.

Until we see a large enough number of examples, we cannot positively say that we know all labs are brown and that all stoves are cool. Even when working with large numbers, inductive reasoning can lead us astray.

I wish that kids in the eighth grade were required to spend a few hours learning about inductive and deductive reasoning. I am convinced the concept is extremely important in so many parts of life.

Let’s take for instance, the woman that is robbed by an African American. Is it right for her to be afraid of all African Americans? Of course, not. Yet, it may take her years to get over the experience. Our fears are not always founded on good logic. Indeed, her fear might keep her from many good friendships.

The somewhat opposite of inductive reasoning is deductive reasoning. In deductive reasoning, we draw conclusions from many, perhaps exhaustive numbers of examples. It is best that these examples are at random. It is the way that medical research is done. I suppose we can say that statistics and deductive reasoning are interrelated. The more the examples and the more random, the more accurate will be the stats deductive reasoning that depends on the stats.

If we have a random selection of a million dogs, it is likely that only a few will be Labs and we will likely see a few black dogs, white dogs and even a few multi-color dogs. Therefore, we can have a more accurate idea of the coloring of dogs. If we take a random measurement of a million stoves, we might actually find that only 30% are hot enough to cause pain, or even discomfort. (only a wild guess, not am actual statistic)

I’m not going to try to create an equivalent example with the thievery. It’s far too complex and there are too many ways it can go wrong with my imaginary statistics. Moreover, I am not going to suggest that a woman should get robbed a million times. Two or three maybe, but no more. Still, the principles remain firm. With a larger number of examples, we would be able to draw more accurate deductions.

However, we need to be careful about drawing snap conclusions. When we go from the millions of examples and try to derive a single situation from millions of examples, we can still be wrong. For instance, if I may. It would not indicate that a thief is of any ethnicity, and it would be wrong to make any such suggestion.

Yet, every day, I see some people blame Black men because of individual as well as vast statistical data. Those methods just don’t work. And, by the way, the methods don’t work on Caucasian policemen, again, regardless of past inductive or deductive reasoning. You cannot convict a policeman based on past experience just as the woman cannot convict based on past thieves.

Perhaps the most horrible example of inductive reasoning is when the person says, “Single parent families are just as good as two-parent families.” Then they go about calling out two, three or four examples of good kids brough up by single parents. That logic has two holes. First, it is based on a very small count of examples. Second, there is the probability that, if there is a second parent, the child would likely have turned out better. The statistics back it up. We are talking millions of examples not just two or three.

On the other side of the coin, I see people say that a particular person turned out good or bad because of his parent(s). The stats prove that some good kids come from bad or broken homes and bad kids come from homes with good parents.

In this case, the inductive logic gets us nowhere and the deductive logic only shows trends. The trend shows overwhelmingly that two parent homes are better. But logic tells us that it is only true if they are good parents. Abusive and or alcoholic parents rarely qualify as good parents. Yet, again, some good kids come from homes with abusive parents. Sorry. I have no explanation for that. I’m not sure there is one.

For those who are not truly familiar with the terms inductive and deductive reasoning, may I suggest you take an hour or two and look into it on the net. Most will find it far more complex than most of us realize. For instance, one thing that must accurately be determined in inductive reasoning is an accurate correlation. For instance, that dance by that Voo-do doctor likely has nothing to do with that solar eclipse. On the other hand, all that rain I dumped on my lawn the other day likely had nothing to do with the thunderstorm we got the next day, though it did seem a little coincidental. If we collected enough data, it is likely to be proved that the one thing had nothing to do with the other.