I haven’t been blogging much as I’ve had a lot going on and just haven’t had much time. It’s not that I don’t have much to say, it’s actually quite the opposite. I’ve discovered that when I have a lot going on in my head that I want to share I end up writing nothing because I feel so overwhelmed . Add in the fact that these past few months have been very challenging for me on the trading front, taking the time to do a post hasn’t exactly been one of my top priorities. It’s not like blogging offers much in the financial reward category, so sometimes it’s easier to add it to the bottom of the list and focus on more pressing matters.

But what blogging does offer is much more rewarding that money. It’s a chance to shares thoughts, engage in conversations, and raise awareness on different issues that I feel are important. I received an email today from a reader of Zentrader.ca and frequent commenter that is currently gathering signatures for the congressional ballot in 2010. I wanted to give my stamp of approval and wish him the best in this first step of attaining the required 5000 signatures. Nicholas is a stand up guy, brilliant, and if any of you are registered voters in Florida District 24, follow this link to give your support.

Now, onto a random thought I had the other day that I wanted to share and get some feedback as to whether it’s a crazy or potentially great idea. All I’m asking is to stop for a moment and consider the pros and cons and weight in. Politics can be just a hot topic to discuss but it doesn’t have to be. I’m neither a Republican or a Democrat as I feel that they are one and the same. They appear to have different agenda’s but they’re really just the same when it all comes down to it. I’m also not a fan of the current structure of Government and here is a quote that is highly relevant in these times of unprecedented spending and to big government getting bigger.

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with a result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by dictatorship. The average age of the world s greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through the following sequence:

  • From bondage to spiritual faith;
  • From spiritual faith to great courage;
  • From courage to liberty;
  • From liberty to abundance;
  • From abundance to selfishness;
  • From selfishness to complacency;
  • From complacency to apathy;
  • From apathy to dependency;
  • From dependency back into bondage. “

 
– The Decline and Fall of the Athenian Republic,
Alexander Fraser Tyler (1748 – 1813) 

So the other day I was thinking about the President’s 4 yr term, voter turnout, and campaign spending and how they’re all connected and wondered if it would be such a bad idea if the President’s term was two 6yr terms instead of two 4 yrs. This is of course strictly from an economic standpoint and here are some pros and cons that I’ve come up with and would welcome additional feedback.

Pros.

  1. It would cut down on unnecessary campaign spending. We all know Obama practically bought his ticketto the White House. While the US economy was going down the toilet and people were losing (and still are based on the job numbers yesterday) their jobs at an alarming rate, Obama managed to raise close to 700 million to spend on his campaign. What a huge waste of money that is. By have 2 elections every 12 years instead of 3 it would cut down on a lot of wasteful money spent on campaigns. There should also be a limit as to how much can be spent on campaigns in an attempt to make it fair. Electing politicians isn’t about how many national televised spots you can buy. It’s about how these politicians are going to serve their people.
  2. People may actually put more thought into who they elect because they know they’re going to be stuck with that candidate for the next 6 years. Now before anybody says that 6 years is a long time, consider that we just endured 8 years of Bush, who had one of the lowest approval ratings of any President. Like I said, it may cause people to take a little more interest in who they elect in office. Who knows, after 6 years in office people may have realized that Bush isn’t the answer and got him out of office sooner.
  3. 4 yrs in reality is too short of a time to accomplish much. By the time you appoint all your minions and get settled into you new plush pad, you starting to think about your upcoming reelection campaign and not focusing on the job at hand. Yes this can be a double edged sword as it could allow a really bad candidate to stay in office for 12 years. However, it they’re really that bad there are other ways to get him out of office (Nixon).

 

Cons.

  1. People remain apathetic towards Politics and inept leaders stay in office too long.

Our current Government is pushing our great country into bankruptcy and is no longer working properly in my opinion. Between the great ponzi scheme disguised as a Wall St. bailout and trying to fight wars we can’t afford, Obama was right about one thing. We need change. I’m just afraid that he’s not the kind of change we’re really in need of. I could probably think of more reasons, but I’d rather just hit save, spell check, and post and see how the discussion unfolds.