The Land of Oz

I recently returned from a trip in which I spent more than a month in Australia.

A decade ago I visited Sydney, Australia for a few days with Mrs. BeeLine and we thoroughly enjoyed our time there. At that time we decided we wanted to go back for a longer period and see more of the country.

The opportunity arose this year for us to go on a 32 day cruise that circled the entire continent and also visit all of the major cities of Australia---Sydney, Brisbane, Darwin, Fremantle, Perth, Albany, Adelaide and Melbourne among others were on the itinerary.

Here is a map of Australia that also compares its size to that of the United States.

Source: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Australia_%E2%80%93_U.S._area_comparison.jpg

We missed Cairns due to an approaching tropical cyclone which we would refer to as a hurricane in the States.

A few photos of the major cities in Australia that I took on the trip.

Brisbane

Perth

Melbourne

Sydney

Australia is sometimes referred to as "Oz." 

That clearly came about from its close phonetic relationship to Aus or Aussie. However, Aussies are also famous for shortening words. A few examples---Service stations are "servos", barbeques are "barbies", the city of Fremantle is referred to as "Freo" by locals. 

However, I think Oz also fits because Australia is a magical place. It is distant from almost everywhere  else on earth. You see animals and creatures you don't see anywhere else and it is blessed with beautiful and diverse topography.

Australia is also blessed with friendly, intelligent people of good humour who are a pleasure to be with.

I have found that they also follow American culture and politics very closely.

A decade ago, when I first visited Australia, the 2016 Trump-Clinton presidential race was in full swing. Invariably, when an Aussie found out I was an American, they asked what I thought about the race.

I eventually asked someone why they were so interested in the outcome. The answer--- we rely on the United States for so much of what we have, including our defense. We worry about China. It is important to us that the United States is safe and in good hands and we have a counter-balance to China.

My sense was that a lot has changed in Australia in the last 10 years. Australia has moved further to the Left over the years.

As with many liberal governments around the world, the Labour Party under Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has embraced allowing many more immigrants into the country.

Credit: https://www.reddit.com/r/aussie/comments/1mcwi9i/australia_net_overseas_migration_by_prime/

The majority of this immigration is coming from India, China, the Philippines and other Asian countries.

Credit: https://auspropertyunpacked.com.au/the-main-source-countries-of-australian-migration-inflow/

Australia only had a population of approximately 26 million in 2020.

If you are bringing in 1 million immigrants within a couple years you can be sure that it is going to have an effect of the social fabric of the country.

I saw this first hand in going by a day care and seeing a school day trip in Melbourne where the majority of students were clearly not native Australians.

Of course, there was no other country in the world that seemed to go as overboard in its reaction to Covid as did Australia.

Melbourne has the dubious distinction of having been locked down during Covid with more cumulative days than any other city in the world.

Masking was required throughout Australia with a fine of $200AU for non-compliance.

Those who chose to not take the Covid vaccine were subjected to travel restrictions, loss of their job and other penalties.

It did result in Australia having one of the highest vaccine compliance rates in the world.

Source: https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations

However, it did not stop the Covid virus from infecting Aussies.

Source: https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations

I still find it amazing that almost all of the Covid cases in Australia did not occur until AFTER a large percentage of the population had been given the vaccine.

Before that, there were almost no cases of the virus.

Australia clearly comes down hard on prioritizing group responsibilities over individual rights.

In Perth, our guide shared that Australia is now using traffic light surveillance cameras to also check whether occupants of the vehicle are wearing their seat belts or the driver is in contact with their cell phone.

She shared that she was recently fined $400AU for not having the seat belt over her shoulder (she was otherwise hooked up) as she reached into her pocket to get something out.

Her son received a $1200AU fine for having his cell phone in his lap even though he was not using it.

Australia also has a significant case of the WOKE virus and political correctness.

For example, almost everywhere we went for talk it seemed important for the presenter to recognize the First Nations people of the country at the outset.

It was said that these indigenous people (Aboriginal and others)were native to Australia for 30,000, 45,000, 60,000 years (we heard various numbers) before any Europeans discovered the continent. 

There is even an Aboriginal flag that is flown that was designed in 1971.

Credit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Aboriginal_flag

It is always said that the Australian people owe a debt of gratitude to these First Nations people.

Yes, we all owe a debt of gratitude to those who came before us. We have stood on their shoulders as we have advanced.

However, it seemed to me the biggest debt of gratitude is owed to the convicts from the U.K. who built a good part of the foundation of the functioning society of Australia that followed.

Those First Nation people had not even invented or developed a wheel in those 30,000+ years before the Europeans arrived.

Australia was principally built and developed into the society it is today by people that were considered the dregs of society by the UK. That is why they were banished to the far side of the world to never return.

Who deserves more credit in what Australia has become?

Australia is also rich in natural resources today but in the interests of the environment and concerns about climate change this concern has resulted in them refusing to use these assets for the benefit of its people.

There are vast coal resources but they refuse to burn it for energy.

Instead, they mine it and sell it to China so they can burn it. Does that make any sense if you believe man-made global climate change is real?

They have oil reserves but refuse to drill for their own use.

Australia had 8 operating refineries 25 years ago. They now have 2. 

And there was just a massive fire at one of them.

80% of Australia's fuel needs must be imported and most comes from South Korea, Singapore and Malaysia.

Even worse, Australia is at the end of the oil and gas supply chain.

Any disruptions in supplies and Australia will be the last in line. Australia is facing thar reality right now.

In Tasmania they used to cut timber, make wood chips and convert it into paper at a manufacturing plant on the island.

They have shut down the plant but now ship the wood chips to Japan to make the paper---and then import the paper back.

By the way, I thought Tasmania was the biggest surprise of the trip. It is a beautiful island state blessed with miles of oceanfront property, abundant natural resources and fertile soil.

Tasmania

Australia also bought back the government license to the fisherman in Eden, Australia who harvested abalone in the surrounding ocean waters in order to protect the natural resource. The fisherman now lives in a house the size of a hotel overlooking the bay from the money he received. 

The abalone are safe and secure but it is not clear if Australia will be in the future.

I saw it time and time again in Australia.

It is important to be responsible for our environment and natural resources.

However, it is also important that your society can independently sustain and support itself. That is doubly important when you are an island nation far removed from much of the rest of the world.

When I first visited Australia a decade ago I believed it was the first country out of the 40 or so I have visited that I could see myself living in if I had to leave the United States.

I still believe the combination of the people, language, culture and climate make it an attractive option.

However, the political trends in Australia are troubling for someone who values freedom, individual rights and economic realism.

I love Australia and its people.

I hope they can find their way.

At the same time, I returned to the United States believing more than ever that we are the last great hope for freedom in the world.

And that in itself always hangs perilously depending on the results of the next election. 

Useful Until You Aren't

Eric Swalwell was elected to Congress in 2012 from a district southeast of Oakland at the age of 31 just six years after graduating from law school.

He was considered a protege of Nancy Pelosi who appointed Swalwell to the prestigious House Intelligence Committee in just his second term.

During Donald Trump's first term Swalwell became popular with the mainstream media who would have him on often to criticize the President.

His position on the Intelligence Committee gave him credibility to amplify suggestions that Trump was in collusion with the Russians.

Swalwell repeatedly "suggested that Trump acted in Russia's interests or as a "Russian asset," challenging Trump to disprove the claims by releasing tax returns, detailing meetings with Vladimir Putin, or explaining financial ties to Russia."

Swalwell's star within the Democrat party rose due to his "attack dog" role regarding Trump.

After January 6, 2021, Swalwell was named by Pelosi to be one of the managers of the impeachment proceedings against Trump.

Swalwell had deep, deep ties with the Democrat establishment.

He ran for the Democrat Presidential nomination in 2024.

Swalwell was also running for Governor of California this year and was placing first or second among Democrats in polling for the upcoming primary. 

All of this was true despite the fact that it came to light in 2020 that Swalwell had been very close to a woman, Christine Fang, in the 2011-2015 period who turned out to be a Chinese intelligence agent.

Some even suggested that there might have been some type of romantic relationship involved as there is evidence that Fang was involved in "honeypot" operations with at least two other politicians.

Whether of not Swalwell had a sexual relationship with Fang, it has become very apparent over the last week that he was involved in a a number of sordid affairs with women over the years.

This is despite the fact that he is married with three young children under the age of 10.

It all broke out into the open with this story by CNN.

Source: https://www.cnn.com/2026/04/10/us/eric-swalwell-sexual-misconduct-allegations-invs

Another woman went public earlier this week who said the Swalwell drugged and raped her in a hotel room and there are reports that more women are ready to come forward.

Source: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/woman-says-eric-swalwell-drugged-raped-choked-thought-died-rcna331693

It did not take long for Swalwell to drop out of the California Governor's race and his congressional seat was well.

Why did all of this come out now?

This is especially true as there have long been whispers about Swalwell's sordid relationships with women.

Politico reported that all of this had been talked about in D.C. for a long time.

Source: https://www.politico.com/news/2026/04/13/influencers-allegations-eric-swalwell-00869517

The broad contours of Swalwell’s alleged behavior, if not the specifics, did not come as a surprise to many working in and around politics, especially in Washington. The 45-year-old cable news darling and Trump antagonist had developed a reputation for unsavory and sometimes unwanted behavior toward women. Those warnings were shared in whisper networks but rarely traveled outside the circle of political insiders.

Apparently it was also well known in his hometown of Dublin, California going back to the time he was first elected to Congress.

However, this "journalist" was obviously not interested in investigating or reporting the real story.

 

That was the case even when Swalwell was pontificating on Capitol Hill about the importance of respecting and believing women.

Swalwell said "trust women, they will get it right".

Running for Governor he said he would not tolerate violence against women.

How about this one from Swalwell?  Yikes!

That tweet really did not age very well.

It is not hard to see why Swalwell decided to forget about his political career.

He apparently has much bigger concerns right now--among them how is he going to make a living and how is he going to stay our of prison?

However, the question remains why did this all came down now?

How could the fall of this rising star come so suddenly?

Swalwell was in Congress for 13 years. He ran for President. We are less than two months from the California gubernatorial primary.

Why was none of this voiced before?

The answer may lie in the polling we were seeing recently for the gubernatorial primary in California.

California switched to a non-partisan "jungle primary" contest in 2010 in which all contestants compete in a single primary with the top two vote getters moving on to face off in the general election.

It was designed with the idea of having two Democrats receiving the most votes in the primary and boxing out Republicans entirely from the general election.

Ironically, it was this process that allowed Swalwell to defeat a 40+ year Democrat incumbent when he first won office.

However, recent polls showed that the two Republican candidates were leading in the polls for the June primary as a crowded list of Democrats were diluting the party's votes.

A Berkeley IGS poll in mid-March revealed a possible worst-case scenario for the Democrats in California.

The "jungle primary" might result in two Republicans advancing to the general election with the Democrats completely frozen out.

This would guarantee a Republican governor would be elected in November.

Source: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/2h95684f

There were simply too many Democrats in the race splitting the Democrat vote.

None of the candidates seemed to be willing to drop out on their own despite the five alarm fire that might engulf the Democrats in the nations's largest state.

However, who of the five leading Democrats do you try to force out?

It would be a bad look to try to force out the two Hispanics (Becerra and Villaraigosa) or the woman (Porter).

You also would not want to make billionaire Tom Steyer mad because Democrats need his money.

That leaves the young, white guy Swalwell. Not many Democrats care about this demographic.

I am sure Pelosi and others tried to convince Swalwell to step aside with future promises. 

However, this is a guy who already ran for President and is right at the top of the Democrats in the polls.

He has to have a pretty, big head by now.

Why would he step aside?

In the end, the Democrats do not abide anyone who does not play ball.

If there were whispers about Swalwell's antics the Democrat establishment KNEW FULL WELL the truth.

They had the goods on him. It gave them the power to do with him what they pleased.

Swalwell was taken out and a stern warning was also given to any other Democrats who might step out of line in the future.

This is how the Democrat party operates and how they can deliver 100% of the votes, 100% of the time.

No individual can be allowed to threaten the power of the party or the agenda they are pushing.

We saw the same thing with the coronation of Joe Biden in the 2020 Democrat primary to thwart Bernie Sanders from gaining the nomination.

It was repeated in 2024 when Biden was pushed out after his feebleness became so apparent in the debate with Trump.

Biden had to go to save the party and the agenda.

It is not dissimilar to the way the Mafia, a drug cartel or the Iranian regime operates.

Loyalty to the organization comes before everything else.

You are useful if you are attacking Trump and provide an example of a young, athletic looking guy that might appeal to young men and women voters.

Then all of a sudden it is clear to everyone you are nothing but a useful idiot.

There is only one thing that matters to the Democrat party.

It is about retaining their collective power for their own benefit.

Everything else is secondary to that. Most particularly, the people that are supposed to represent.

If Eric Swalwell did not know that before, he does now.

As for the rest of us, how can you trust anything that the Democrats tell us seeing this playbook used over and over again?

No Deal. What Now?

The negotiations between the United States and Iran concluded in Pakistan yesterday without any resolution for a permanent peace in the Middle East.

It is hard to see this as a surprise.

It is difficult to see Iran agreeing to hand over their nuclear material and agreeing to open the Strait of Hormuz.

Any leverage the Iranians have revolves around these two issues.

At the same time, it was impossible to believe that the United States would agree to any terms that did not include these two items.

What now?

Despite the lack of a permanent agreement the two week ceasefire between the two parties is still operative.

Will it hold?

Why did President Trump agree to the temporary ceasefire to begin with?

I believe there were several factors at play.

1. It provided Trump the opportunity to reset the engagement. It was intended to demonstrate that Trump could be reasonable and provide Iran the ability to do the same.

2. The fact that Iran would not budge on any of the major terms also provides the United States a higher moral ground if this goes to another stage.

3. At the same time, it gave U.S. forces the chance to take a breather and reload supplies and armaments for what comes next.

4. It also provided the U.S. the opportunity to see exactly who was left in the Iranian regime that could be considered to be in charge and able to make enforceable decisions.

5. It also gave time to other Middle Eastern countries such as Saudi Arabia to develop other routes around the Strait of Hormuz. One report I saw suggests that as much as 80% of the oil that normally ships through the Strait of Hormuz may now be available. 

6. Finally, it gave the United States time to gather support from other Middle Eastern countries, European and Asian countries affected by Iran's shutdown of the Hormuz Strait to rally to take control of the Strait and the flow of oil.

Trump stated yesterday that the United States will begin a naval blockade of all ships in and out of the Strait of Hormuz,

You can be sure that this is not being done without the consent of Saudi Arabia, Oman and other Middle Eastern oil producing nations who use the Strait.

They have clearly had enough of Iran's extremism and aggression.

This is being done to starve Iran of the revenues they desperately need to keep the regime alive.

It also will squeeze China which is a big buyer of Middle Eastern oil.

One report suggests that Saudi Arabia pushed Trump aggressively to finish the job with Iran.

It remains to be seen how this will end.

Iran is like a wounded and cornered animal.

The Islamists have little to live for if the regime totally collapses.

They have already shown they have little regard for human life, their Arab nations or anything else.

They have proven many times already over the last several months why one else was ever willing to confront the Iranian regime before Trump was willing to do so.

The only way that the United States will not prevail is if Trump and the United States people lack the political will to complete the mission,

It will not be easy seeing that most of our NATO allies have stood idly by and the Democrats and most of the mainstream media are rooting for Iran

Why would they root for a murderous regime that kills thousands of its own people, subjugates women and throws gays from rooftops?

Quite simply, they don't want Iran to lose if it means that Trump wins.

What now?

It likely is a test of wills.

The will of those with Trump Derangement Syndrome to put their hatred of Trump above the interests of world and national security.

The will of the Iranian regime to survive not matter the cost to their people and the world,

The political will of Trump and the American people.

Simply stated, there is a lot riding on the backbone and will of one man--Donald J. Trump--for this to turn out well for the United States and the world.

As I have observed before, you can't be great unless you are not afraid to be great.

That is what Donald Trump must decide on his own to answer the answer the question, What Now?

How Can I Become Rich?

"How can I become rich?"

That is a question I often hear from young people.

In my career I have had the good fortune to meet and know many wealthy and successful people. I have observed these people closely and I have also studied the available research on what separates the rich and successful from everyone else.

Despite the popular narrative, the wealthiest Americans are not living on trust funds that were handed to them along with a silver spoon when they were born. Most got rich by simply working hard for it. 

In fact, wealthy households contain on average more than four times as many full-time workers as do poor households---1.97 workers per rich household compared to .42  earners per poor household. The fact is that there are not many "idle rich" folks in this country.  There are, however, a lot of "idle poor".

If you don't believe it takes work to get to the top of the economic ladder just consider the differences in the traits between those that are wealthy and those that are poor in this research that compared the habits and traits of the two groups.  

Almost every one of these traits requires some work, effort or discipline on the part of the individual.  It does not necessarily occur naturally in the human condition.

Compare some of the personal traits of the wealthy (black bar) and the poor (white bar) in the charts below.

At the core of anyone that has achieved success is someone who sets goals for themselves.

Source: https://www.business-management-degree.net/popular-articles/wealthiest-people/

The rich also have good habits. They establish a routine in their life. They utilize their time wisely.  They are disciplined and work hard.

Source: https://www.business-management-degree.net/popular-articles/wealthiest-people/

They take care of their bodies and don't waste time.

Source: https://www.business-management-degree.net/popular-articles/wealthiest-people/

Source: https://www.business-management-degree.net/popular-articles/wealthiest-people/

If you work hard and use your time wisely it is difficult to not find success in life. As you can see above, the wealthy believe that good habits create opportunity. 84% of the wealthy hold that belief compared to just 4% of the poor. Is that just a coincidence?

You can be successful but that does not guarantee that you will be wealthy. There are many things in life that are rewarding that do not necessarily translate into increasing your financial net worth.

Becoming wealthy usually requires that you do at least two of these three things.

1. Get people working for you

2. Get your money working for you

3. Stay out of debt

Why is it difficult to become wealthy simply by your own labor and talents?

It is a question of time. We all only have so many hours in the day. We may be very productive but time is a finite resource. It is a limiting factor in utilizing our labor.

The amount that any one person is willing to pay another for their labor is also limited. For these reasons, it is hard to grow rich simply by your own individual labor.

Entertainers and professional athletes are exceptions to this rule. They are able to showcase their talents and labor to a broad audience and are able to get many, many people to pay them for it in the form of ticket prices or a media audience. However, each member of that audience is paying just a small price that gets leveraged with the size of the audience.

Inventors and authors are similarly advantaged. An invention that is used by millions of people or a best selling book creates large royalty payments that allow them to leverage their sole labor effort.

Most of us are not so fortunate. Therefore, if we are to become wealthy we have to leverage our time by getting other people to work for us whereby we gain a portion of their labor for our own benefit. Starting a business is the path that entrepreneurs follow to gain this advantage.

The other path is to simply work, save and invest and begin to get your money working for you through compound returns. As your money begins to work for you the need for you to labor to support yourself is reduced. If you can get enough money saved and invested you eventually do not have to labor at all. Your money does all the work to support your lifestyle.

It is hard to become wealthy carrying debt. Your lender may become wealthy. You will not. Borrowers are on the wrong side of compound returns. Getting compound returns to work for you is a path to riches. Paying interest on compounding debt leads to the poor house.

If you doubt any of this,  consider this chart that compares the percent of assets and liabilities held by the wealthiest 1%, next 9% and the remaining 90% compiled by Edward Wolff of New York University.

The top 1% has 63% of business equity (other people working for them), 55% of financial securities and 50% of stock & mutual funds (money working for them) but only have 5% of the debt (stay out of debt).

The bottom 90% has only 6% of business equity, 6% of financial securities, 9% of stocks & mutual funds but holds 74% of the debt. They also have 59% of the value of all personal residences. That may explain why the 2008-2010 period was so devastating for this group when housing prices collapsed in much of the country. It is also suggests that this risk could also form again---in particular if mortgage rates continue to go up.

This data conforms with a chart I put together a few years ago from IRS data (2013 tax data) comparing the sources of before-tax income based on the distribution by income groups (by quintiles plus the top 1%).

Notice that only 35% of the income of the Top 1% comes from labor income. 61% of their income is derived from business income (other people working for them) or investment income (their money working for them).

On the other hand, in the 3rd and 4th quintiles (the heart of the middle class), labor income makes up 66% of total income. Business and investment income are almost non-existent.

The rich become rich by building a business and/or saving and investing to get their money working for them. They also are careful in their use of debt.

Keep these lessons in mind if you want to become rich.

Use your time wisely.

Develop and maintain good habits.

Have a strong work ethic.

Get other people working for you or get your money working for you.

Be careful about debt.

That is how the rich become rich.

One More Shining Moment

Tonight is one of my favorite nights of the year as the Final Four concludes.

Sure, I will enjoy watching Connecticut and Michigan battle for the NCAA Div 1 basketball championship.

However, what I really enjoy is after the game when CBS (or TBS in even numbered years) puts together its annual rendition of "One Shining Moment". That is the montage of some of the great images of this year's NCAA tournament set to the music of the song, "One Shining Moment".

I just wish I did not have to stay up to nearly midnight to watch it.

It is hard to believe that One Shining Moment has been around for almost 40 years.

You can learn more in this video and story about how this great tradition came about. It is probably not surprising that the inspiration had its roots with a pretty girl and the song came to national prominence due to an old friendship and a little bit of luck.

The most interesting tidbit about the song is that CBS originally planned to use it after Super Bowl XXI in January, 1987. However, the game ran long and a new prime time show was debuting after the game so the video song montage was cancelled. CBS then decided to use the song after the national championship basketball game and the fan reaction was so positive it has been used ever since to conclude the broadcast.

That seems the way it was supposed to be as the song was written with basketball in mind to begin with. If it had been used with the Super Bowl perhaps it would have been "one and done."

The song's composer is David Barrett who wrote it in 1986 and who also sang the original rendition of the song that was used on CBS from 1987 to 1993 and again from 2000 to 2002. 

Luther Vandross, Teddy Pendergast and Jennifer Hudson have also done vocals of the song for the finale of the Final Four weekend over the years. They still use the original sound track of the song that was recorded in a small studio in Ann Arbor, Michigan.

The fact that the song was originally recorded in Ann Arbor, Michigan might be a sign that this will be Michigan's year to claim the national championship. 

The song is great but it really is special due to the great editing done on the video montage piece by the CBS/TBS Sports production staff. It always concludes with images of that night's game. It must be a sight to see the staff put the finishing touches on the video in the minutes after the game.

The Luther Vandross recording has been used with the video since 2003 with the exception of 2010 and 2020 (when there was no Final Four tournament).

It is believed that his recording of the song was the last done by Vandross before his stroke and subsequent death.

2025 One Shining Moment sung by Luther Vandross

1999 sung by Teddy Pendergast. My personal favorite because it was the year my beloved Miami RedHawks made it to the Sweet Sixteen. Miami and its star forward, Wally Szczerbiak, got a lot of coverage in that year's version of "One Shining Moment." Look for Wally's big smile, Miami celebrating its big win against #6 ranked Utah to get to the Sweet Sixteen and Wally's dazzling spin move and dunk. You will also see a spectacular Miami cheerleader soaring and flipping into the air near the beginning of the video.

I am looking to see if Miami will get any love in this year's video after its 33-2 season and appearance in the Big Dance.

My bet is that the Miami swimming team in their Speedos might be One Shining Moment worthy.

1987 sung by David Barrett. The very first time the song aired and the start of a wonderful tradition. This was the year that Indiana won with the great shot by Keith Smart at the end. Watch closely and you can see Providence coach hugging his star player, Billy Donovan. Who knew that both of them would make so much more Final Four history? It is hard to believe that a a lot of players and cheerleaders in that video are almost eligible for Social Security.

If you really want to go deep into the rabbit hole with this you can view every One Shining Moment video here.

Thank you, David Barrett, Armen Keteyian, Doug Towey and a pretty waitress in East Lansing, Michigan that inspired it all.

This is David Barrett's website, www.oneshiningmoment.com

Here are the lyrics to the popular anthem:

The ball is tipped
and there you are
you're running for your life
you're a shooting star
And all the years
no one knows
just how hard you worked
but now it shows...
(in) ONE SHINING MOMENT, IT'S ALL ON THE LINE
ONE SHINING MOMENT, THERE FROZEN IN TIME
  
But time is short
and the road is long
in the blinking of an eye
ah that moment's gone
And when it's done
win or lose
you always did your best
cuz inside you knew...
(that) ONE SHINING MOMENT, YOU REACHED DEEP INSIDE
ONE SHINING MOMENT, YOU KNEW YOU WERE ALIVE
  
Feel the beat of your heart
feel the wind in your face
it's more than a contest
it's more than a race...

And when it's done
win or lose
you always did your best
cuz inside you knew...
(that) ONE SHINING MOMENT, YOU REACHED FOR THE SKY
ONE SHINING MOMENT, YOU KNEW
ONE SHINING MOMENT, YOU WERE WILLING TO TRY
ONE SHINING MOMENT....

Words & Music: David Barrett Hodges Song Supply/ASCAP

False Promises

Iran's President released a letter to the American people at the same time that President Trump was addressing the American people about the military action in Iran.

Iran President Masoud Pezeshkian stated that Iranians " harbor no enmity toward other nations, including the people of American." 

He must be ignoring the Iranian regime's constant demands about "Death To America" and for the elimination of Israel that have continually been made for the last 47 years.

Credit: https://eaworldview.com/2013/10/iran-analysis-death-america/

Iran's President is clearly ignoring the capture of the U.S. embassy in Tehran and the taking of 52 American hostages in 1979 that were then held captive for 444 days shortly after the Islamists took power.  

“Iran… has never, in its modern history, chosen the path of aggression, expansion, colonialism, or domination.” 

He is also ignoring a long list of aggressive acts against the United States through proxies funded by Iran over the last 47 years.

1983 Beirut Barracks Bombing that killed 241 U.S. service members. That still is the highest single-day death total for the U.S.military since World War II.

1980's Lebanon Hostage Crisis. Iranian-backed Hezbollah systematically abducted and held a dozen Americans over several years and used them as leverage against the United States.

1980's Tanker War in which Iran attacked neutral and U.S. flagged oil tankers in international waters and laid mines in oil shipping lanes.

1996 Khobar Towers Bombing military housing complex in Saudi Arabia killing 19 U.S Air Force personnel and wounding hundreds.

2003-2011 Attacks on U.S Forces in Iraq through Shia militias using Iranian-supplied EFP's, IED's and rockets. The Pentagon estimates these Iranian proxies killed more than 600 U.S. troops and wounded thousands more.

2016 IRGC capture of two U.S. Navy riverine boats and 10 sailors in the Persian Gulf.

This is just a partial list of direct acts and does not includes the general funding of terror organizations throughout the Mideast over those 47 years.

Iran has also been the primary funding and weapons source of Hamas for most of that time as well as  being behind the attack on Israel of October 7, 2023.

The Iranian regime also recently perpetrated one of the worst cases of barbarity in recent history with the killing of an estimated 45,000 of their own citizens in January who led protests opposed to the theocratic authoritarian regime.

No aggression or domination?

Iran has been killing and dominating its own citizens.

The fact is that Iran has been a bad actor for almost 50 years.

One American President after another witnessed the chaos that Iran inflicted on the Middle East and all declared that Iran could not be permitted to have a nuclear weapon.

Donald Trump was the only one willing to step up and do something beyond talking about removing the threat.

Seeing Iran heaving missiles all over the Mideast and attempting to shut down the Hormuz Strait tells you everything you need to know about whether Iran has no enmity toward other nations.

The Iranian statement is a false promise on its face.

Israel and the United States have been in Iran's crosshairs for 47 years.

Others are now seeing it up close and personal.

This includes many of our NATO allies who now find their economies at risk due to Iran's actions to stop the flow of oil coming out of the Mideast and the discovery that Iran was hiding ballistic missiles capable of reaching many European capitals.

Of course, many of those NATO allies refused to assist the United States and Israel confront the Iranian threat.

Ever worse, NATO members such as the Spain, the U.K., Germany, France and Germany have been critical of the U.S. actions or have even taken steps to deny use of U.S. bases in their country or using their air space in offensive operations against Iran.

At the same time, these NATO allies have spent the last several years imploring and pressuring the United States to fund and support the Ukraine War because of the threat Russia's aggression posed to Europe.

It is easy to see why Trump is a little perturbed with our NATO allies.

They were not only unwilling to join the effort to neutralize Iran but actually were not allowing the United States to use U.S. bases in their own countries that the U.S established and has paid for over decades to defend them against Russia.

Has NATO become a one way street?

Is it also a false promise?

NATO can be used to defend and assist the Europeans.

However, if the United States asks for assistance no one is willing to step up and help?

Have the Europeans set the stage for the collapse of NATO in all of this?

Melissa Chen does an excellent job on X of articulating America's frustration with the European NATO members right now.

Source: https://x.com/MsMelChen/status/2039322644042977761

Let’s be real here. Europe has spent decades freeloading on American security. Even now, with every NATO member finally hitting the 2% GDP target in 2025.

But beyond the financial contributions, the real rupture is philosophical and the Iran crisis has shown a spotlight on it.

Europe worships process. Endless committees, consultations, and “predictability.” Macron actually calls it a virtue. For Trump, this is paralysis as his style is to articulate a threat, fix a target, and act. The Americans are men of conviction and purpose. Europe on the other hand lives by bureaucratic liturgy and in high-minded abstractions. 

Sure, Americans might make mistakes when acting. But Europe never considers what the costs of not acting actually are. 

Just look at how their nations are doing on various fronts, especially on the border crisis, and you see the same cancerous rot that undergirds their foreign policy approach play out domestically. It's the same problem on a different scale.

Iran is currently holding the Strait of Hormuz hostage, choking 20% of global oil and spiking prices past $100 a barrel. Meanwhile, the regime is bleeding from strikes, its nuclear ambitions are still alive despite degraded capability, and its proxies are firing missiles at allies and oil tankers. If this isn’t a clear and present danger to the global economy - of which Europe is a part - then I don’t know what is.

Yet when Washington asked to use European bases to finish the job - bases the US has defended for generations, the response was hesitation and hand-wringing. The US did strike from RAF Fairford, but only after warnings that British soil could become a “legitimate target.” 

If you cannot agree that a theocratic regime with eschatological ambitions who have shown no restraint in hitting out at Gulf countries and threatening the world’s energy jugular is an enemy worth confronting, then what, exactly, are we allies about?

Europe loves to preen about being tough on Russia. They issue condemnations and speeches and slap sanctions that hardly work to cripple the Russian economy. 

Now here was a chance to do something concrete: let the Americans use the bases they already pay for, help clear the Strait, and actually degrade the Iranian war machine that arms Moscow’s proxies. Trump didn’t ask for boots on the ground or any kind of more offensive action. All he wanted was permission to operate from the infrastructure America has underwritten for decades.

They couldn’t even manage that.

So can you blame the Americans for seeing NATO for what it is? A paper-tiger alliance that expects Washington to bleed and pay while Brussels and London convenes and deliberates.

If Europe refuses to treat Iran as the threat it is while happily letting American power keep the Strait open and the lights on, then the alliance is already dead. Trump is simply stating the obvious and the Americans are becoming very reluctant to subsidize the European delusion any longer.

What is really behind the European reluctance?

You can be sure that many of these governments are concerned about the large Muslim populations that have swarmed into their countries.

Taking on Iran or being too friendly to Israel now risks substantial domestic unrest they cannot afford.

There is a reason that Trump and Rubio have lost confidence that our historic European allies share the same values and principles that we do.

Can they be trusted allies in the future with our value systems diverging so substantially?

One of the most insightful and ironic posts I have seen recently on X is this one that observes how the Islamic world is divided when it comes to Iran.

Truly sad but true.

Beware false promises wherever they come from.

That also applies to Donald J. Trump.

If he can't subdue Iran and we don't see the oil markets stabilize he will pay a heavy price politically as will his legacy.

As I wrote in these pages at the beginning of the campaign, taking on Iran was the biggest of bets.

There was a reason that everyone else was willing to talk big but do nothing.

Winning that bet will fundamentally change the world.

It would be hard to not put Trump down as one the greatest Presidents of all time.

However, success is not assured. Any time you undergo military action there are second, third and fourth order effects that can occur.

Keep in mind what I wrote about all of this a month ago.

Great Presidents usually come about by facing great challenges. In many respects, the times make the man. It was certainly true with Washington, Lincoln and Roosevelt.

Greatness does not follow when taking the easy road. It only graces those who are not afraid of the challenge on the hard road.

Success is never assured. Trump may fail bigly. However, he is not afraid to be great. 

That in itself is a rare commodity.

A lot will be determined about the legacy of Donald Trump in the next month.

The same can be said about Iran and NATO.

 

This and That---March 30, 2026 Edition

A few random observations, charts and factoids to provide some context on what is going on in the world.

Oh Canada!

In February I wrote about the significant economic problems facing Canada in a post titled "Our Northern Neighbor Headed South?" 

Following up on that post, a Bank of Canada analysis indicates that roughly 40% of those who would be in the top 1% of income earners in Canada, as well as 30%-50% of the next 9% of earners, have emigrated to the United States in recent years.

This brain drain may be a significant reason as to why Canada is lagging the United States so significantly in GDP growth the last five yesrs.

More analysis on Canada's lagging per capita GDP problem can be found in this recent article.

Link: https://thehub.ca/2026/03/20/why-canadas-gdp-per-capita-crisis-is-real-deepdive/

Moving On

The United States has seen a similar pattern of out migration over the last several years.

However, it is people and their incomes moving out of blue states and moving to red states according to recently released IRS data for the years between 2019 and 2023.

The 31 states that voted for Trump in the last election gained 3.2 million in population from people who moved from states that voted for Harris.

Those 3.2 million who moved into red states brought with them $254 billion in income. A like amount was taken from blue states.

Is this just a coincidence or do policies matter?

Hablas Espanol?

We have reached a point where the United States now ranks second I the  world for the population that speaks Spanish.

More speak Spanish in the United States today than in Spain.

El Salvador

El Salvador was one of the most dangerous countries in the world in 2015.

It had the highest murder rate in the world between 2015 and 2018.

The country was largely under gang control.

Nayid Bukele was elected President of El Salvador in 2019 and took on the gangs and started jailing the bad actors.

There were a lot of bad actors but it was still a small percentage of the totla population.

1% of the population was eventually incarcerated.

The skeptics said that you can't jail your way out of crime.

What has happened in El Salvador might suggest that may not be true when so much data indicates that only a small percent of the population commits most crime in a society.

El Salvador is now one of the safest countries in the world.

Bukele made a big bet that personal security and safety is the foundational layer of any successful society.

Without it, you have nothing---economic growth, tourism, investment---all is built on that foundation.

It is a lesson some big cities in the United States might want to consider.

New York City and Chicago

Speaking of big cities in the United States, this stat on homicides in New York City caught my eye.

In the first nine months of 2025 there were 358 shootings in New York City in which a Black or White person was involved.

356 of the shootings involved Blacks.

2 of the shootings involved Whites.

Meanwhile in Chicago, Mayor Brandon Johnson says that putting criminals in prison is racism and is immoral.

Link: https://x.com/ruswar/status/2037394216498905089

Since when did putting a CRIMINAL in prison become racist?

Criminals can be any race.

Did Bukele worry about the race of the gang members in El Salvador?

Could there be a much different way of approaching things as between Chicago and El Salvador?

Who might have the better approach based on 2025 data?

El Salvador    1.19 homicides per 100,000

Chicago         14.6 homicides per 100,000

Who would have thought a decade ago that it would be safer to walk the streets of El Salvador than America's two largest cities?

No Hope For Homelessness?

Over the last several years it seems that there has been more and more attention paid in our major cities to the homeless problem.

There were an estimated 770,000 homeless people in the United States in 2024.

The number of homeless people rose significantly since the 2021-2022 period.

Source: https://www.consumershield.com/

Is it just a coincidence that the number of homeless increased at the same time that Joe Biden and the Democrats opened the borders and allowed millions of immigrants to enter the country?

Take a look at how net international migration into the United States surged in the Biden years.

Source: https://cis.org/Report/ForeignBorn-Number-and-Share-US-Population-AllTime-Highs-January-2025

A principal factor in homelessness is related to housing affordability.

The massive increase in housing costs and apartment rents that followed the mass influx of millions of people in such a short period of time undoubtedly fueled the homelessness situation.

It is also not a coincidence that California and New York are the two states that have the largest homelessness problem.

Source: Source: https://www.consumershield.com/

Both California and New York have adopted statewide sanctuary policies for illegal immigrants as well as having some of the highest housing costs in the nation.

What is most shocking is the amount of money that is being spent on homelessness by some major sanctuary cities.

San Francisco is spending $102,000 annually on each homeless person in the city.

Portland $95,000.

New York City $82,000.

Los Angeles $62,000.

For context, the average American makes $67,000 per year.

However, that person has to pay for their housing and also the taxes that are supporting these homeless programs.

How is it that cities like New York City, San Francisco and Portland are paying much more for their typical homeless person than their average tax paying workers are earning each year?

It makes absolutely no sense.

Just as shocking is the increase in per capita spending on homelessness since 2019.

How is it possible to spend this much money and the problem has gotten worse?

Consider what has gone on in New York City.

Total spending has increased from $102 million in 2019 to $368 million in 2025.

Per capita spending increased from $28,000 to $82,000.

However, the unsheltered homeless population in the city increased by 26%,

 

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani wants to spend more in 2026 to "solve" the problem. 

City Hall is projecting that nearly $97,000 per homeless person will be spent this year.

What is going on?

The New York Post had the same question and recently published an editorial on the subject.

It’s certain that almost none of the $81,000 actually benefits these street people: Outreach workers get paid to count the “unsheltered” and to try coaxing them into shelter or arranging some kind of housing they’ll accept. 

This is just one particularly damning example of how New York’s nonprofit-industrial complex has morphed the city’s multibillion-dollar outlays in the name of fighting homelessness into a jobs program that simply pretends to manage it.

It sounds almost identical to what Elon Musk's DOGE team found regarding a lot of federal spending on programs with sympathetic objectives.

Most of the money is spent enriching the people managing the programs.

Very little actually gets to those who need it.

You get a sense of that by seeing how much the executives of some of the nonprofits who are "managing" the homeless programs in New York City are making.

Of course, what incentive is there to actually solve the problem and get people off the streets if the flow of money stops?

California Governor Newsom built his political career on the promise he was going to end chronic homelessness.

When he was Mayor-elect of San Francisco in 2003 he announced a 10-year plan to end chronic homelessness. He stated that it was his No.1 priority as Mayor.

Source: https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Newsom-details-plan-for-homeless-Mayor-elect-2509363.php

Little was different seven years later when Newsom left San Francisco's mayor's office to become Lt. Governor of California.

When Newsom became Governor he similarly pledged to solve chronic homelessness at the state level.

Newsom allocated $24 billion in local and non-profit (sound familiar?) grants to address the problem right after he took office.

All of that money hasn't done anything.

In fact, the homeless problem in California is worse than ever.

 

Source: https://www.independent.org/article/2025/05/27/newsom-legacy-homelessness/

Governor Newsom also believes he has all the answers to run for President in 2028.

In fact, recent polls in California show that Newsom is far ahead of the Democrat field for the nomination in that state.

Source: https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/president/democratic-primary/2028/california

It seems that Democrat voters do not care much about a candidate's record and results as long as say they tell you they are going to do something about a problem.

Just as baffling is to see Democrats like Newsom and Mamdani fail to make the connection between open borders, sanctuary states and cities and the problem of homelessness.  They also continue to throw millions to enrich their friends and allies at nonprofits with no accountability for results.

In the meantime, the homelessness problem persists despite the fact that it is staining their cities and destroying their budgets .

I can only conclude that there is no hope for homelessness until there is a change in the mindset of Democrats about the causes of the problem and reforming the incentive structure that perpetuates it with the "nonprofits" who profit from the homeless.