Listen closely and you’ll hear it… the cries, cheers, rants, screams, signs and more.  “Stop the corporate greed that is killing us!” Yes, those ‘evil’ corporations that make huge profits off the backs of working middle class and poor people then send jobs overseas.  Did you hear it? …the cheers for the death of a hated and despised Steve Jobs. If you embrace the “message”, corporate greed and profits, then SURELY you must be cheering his death; one of the country’s biggest offenders.

Now we (OWS) will be marching to the homes of the EVIL , rich CEOs.  Surely we should do this by “rank” of wealth.  This filthy pig,  ranked 39^th richest man in the U.S.,  should be one of our top priorities.  Just behind people like Warren Buffet, Mark Zuckerberg, Bill gates, Michael Bloomberg, George Soros, and more.  Anything less would be hypocritical.

Let’s take a look at why this ‘capitalist pig’, as he is now known by the OWS crowd, has earned this title.  First, to gain his wealth, career and fame, he used tax payer back loans and grants to go to college, then to Harvard law school. Wait a minute, wrong person.  Jobs dropped out of college because he couldn’t afford it. Often he would sleep on the floor in friends’ rooms, returning Coke bottles for food money, and get weekly free meals at the local temple.  However, he never graduated.  Figures, this guy was too dumb to learn how to work the “system” for free money.

Maybe it was the fact he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth and lived the life of luxury from birth. Using “daddy’s money” to start his business and not having to get a “real job”.  Wait a minute… that’s wrong too. He was given up for adoption.  Hmmm…

Anyway, you still have to “hate” this guy with a true passion if you are an OWS protester and here’s why.

A few points…

• Apple has enormous sales, about $60 billion plus and growing.  It is one of the largest publicly traded companies in the world by market capitalization. (Capitalists pigs)
  
• Apple “manufactures” the majority of its products overseas using poor country “slave labor”. (OWS term) Sending U.S. jobs overseas.
  
• Apple has one of the highest “profit margins” for a company its size.  Roughly 20% these capitalist pigs make every year.
  
• Apple “takes” most of its profits from hard working Americans.  Even the “poorest” of OWS protesters were ‘tweeting’ on their I-Phones that put over $2 billion into this capitalist pig’s back pocket.  Requiring these people to carry I-Phones, I-Pads, and MACs should be illegal. (I think it’s the law.)
  
• Apple cut deals with other murderous corporations to distribute these products in ways that enslaved them to corporate profits. Yes, you could buy the I-Phone for $600, but why not sign this “little contract” for 24 months and it’s only $99.  Truly the actions of a crack dealer.

I’m sorry, I’m disgusted and angry, such an evil man and company.  I agree with the OWS crowd.  We need to take this man’s money, ALL OF IT, and divide it up and share it with EVERY American.  Surely we could all pay off our student loans and put a deposit on a decent home with that money.  Let’s see, $5.5 billion dollars estimated worth on a good day…. divided by 300 million Americans…. I’ll make out the deposit ticket for…   what? $18.33 ?  Eighteen lousy dollars???   Stupid I-Phone calculator, broken again.

Maybe you’re starting to get my point by now?  If you “take the pulpit” your message better be true and your soul must be transparent and pure.  If you condemn “corporate greed and profits”, then do it with blind justice, and across the board.  Look at the books and go after the worst offenders.   Not doing so is simply wrong and lacks integrity.  It’s kind of like showing up at a PETA rally with leather shoes, calf skin belt, and an alligator purse. Of course you drove there in your Volvo S-80 with the wonderful dead animal skin interior.

If you truly are going to “scream” at corporate greed, then LIVE your message.  It’s time to throw away that I-Phone, I-Pad, MAC and break out the “Made in USA” white paper notebooks.  Wait a minute, those paper notebooks are made from murdered trees….  Man, I’m really starting to get a headache.

Commentary editorial above submitted from one of readers.

New Mileage Tax to hit drivers?

Here we go again. They can’t stop spending, so what do they do? Find ways to raise more money. (New taxes)  This week the CBO looked at a proposal that would add a tax for every mile you drove.  So, regardless of your income level, you would pay for each mile.  I guess that’s one way not to raise the “gas tax”.  The government / liberals  have gone completely insane at this point.  They are desperately looking at ways to TAKE more of your money, so they can keep bringing in dollars and giving them away to people that vote for them.
Taxing miles driven, taxing the internet, taxing millionaires, taxing oil companies, it just won’t stop.  Our country has very little time left in the direction it is going and the “power brokers” in Washington know this. They NEED more money to buy votes, and this time it is coming from your Prius.
From the Hill…

“The report was requested by Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), who held a hearing on transportation funding in early March. In that hearing, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said the Obama administration is hoping to spend $556 billion over the next six years, much of which would go to federal transportation improvement projects.

Conrad said in response that federal funds are tight, and in asking for recommendations on how to raise that money, he noted the possibility of a VMT tax as a way to solve the problem of collecting less in taxes as people move to more fuel-efficient vehicles.”

What is stagflation?

Here are some interesting facts and information on stagflation.

Quick summary for “dummies”… Inflation goes up, overall economy goes down.

In economics, stagflation is a situation in which the inflation rate is high and the economic growth rate is low. It raises a dilemma for economic policy since actions designed to lower inflation may worsen economic stagnation and vice versa. The portmanteau stagflation is generally attributed to British politician Iain Macleod, who used the term in a speech to Parliament in 1965.

The concept is notable partly because, in postwar macroeconomic theory, inflation and recession were regarded as mutually exclusive, and also because stagflation has generally proven to be difficult and, in human terms as well as budget deficits, very costly to eradicate once it starts.

In the political arena one measure of Stagflation termed the Misery Index (derived by the simple addition of the inflation rate to the unemployment rate) was used to swing Presidential elections in the United States in 1976 and 1980.

Up to the 1960s many Keynesian economists ignored the possibility of stagflation, because historical experience suggested that high unemployment was typically associated with low inflation, and vice versa (this relationship is called the Phillips curve). The idea was that high demand for goods drives up prices, and also encourages firms to hire more; and likewise high employment raises demand. However, in the 1970s and 1980s, when stagflation occurred, it became obvious that the relationship between inflation and employment levels was not necessarily stable: that is, the Phillips relationship could shift. Macroeconomists became more skeptical of Keynesian theories, and the Keynesians themselves reconsidered their ideas in search of an explanation of stagflation.

The explanation for the shift of the Phillips curve was initially provided by the monetarist economist Milton Friedman, and also by Edmund Phelps. Both argued that when workers and firms begin to expect more inflation, the Phillips curve shifts up (meaning that more inflation occurs at any given level of unemployment). In particular, they suggested that if inflation lasted for several years, workers and firms would start to take it into account during wage negotiations, causing workers’ wages and firms’ costs to rise more quickly, thus further increasing inflation. While this idea was a severe criticism of early Keynesian theories, it was gradually accepted by most Keynesians, and has been incorporated into New Keynesian economic models.

Many people are outraged.
Many are losing their homes, because they don’t have a job and these guys are out partying.

Honestly, some hope they lose everything they have, but suspect unions will protect them.

Chrysler may have accepted millions in a federal bailout to stay in business, but now it has a scandal on its hands because of carloads of dope-smoking, beer-drinking workers on a shift break near a Detroit plant. WJBK Fox 2 News in Detroit caught dozens of Chrysler auto workers drinking alcohol and smoking what appear to be joints during their shifts at the automaker’s Jefferson North auto plant in Detroit.

The plant, which builds the new 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee, was visited by President Obama just two months ago.

The investigation started five days after the president’s visit. The cameras caught workers leaving on their half-hour lunch break to head to the liquor store, and take off to a nearby park. The cameras even followed them into the liquor store to confirm the bottles in the bags were actually alcohol.

We STRONGLY encourage you to share this page with EVERYONE you know.

If every American would watch this full interview with Home Depot co-founder Marcus much would change.
An amazing DOWN TO EARTH talk with a man that came from nothing and built a great company.
Don’t STOP watching until you have seen ALL 3.
His comments on “Could you do it now?” are VERY revealing.

AGAIN… After watching all 3, share this page with 5 people you know.

Part 1…

Part 2…

Part 3…

NEW YORK/BERLIN–Chrysler won interim approval from a U.S. bankruptcy court to access a $4.5 billion loan as it tried to move ahead in its planned alliance with Fiat SpA, while the Italian automaker advanced its bid for General Motors Corp’s European Opel brand.

Also, a group of investment funds sought on Monday to block Chrysler’s plans with Fiat while United Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger said a union-aligned healthcare trust would work quickly to sell shares it would receive in a new Chrysler as soon as it in a position to do so.

The UAW healthcare trust, which is likely to receive a 55% stake in a new Chrysler under a sale plan the automaker filed with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court, would be very stressed initially through its acceptance of Chrysler equity for part of the funding of the trust.

A bankruptcy judge approved Chrysler’s request to access the funds from U.S. and Canadian governments, known as debtor-in-possession financing, as well as requests for the company to pay essential suppliers, dealers and its taxes.

Chrysler also had asked the U.S. Bankruptcy Court on Monday for a swift hearing into its planned sale of its best assets into a new company owned by its union, Fiat and the government, eliciting immediate objections from some dissenting secured lenders.

The dissenting lenders led by Oppenheimer Funds and Stairway Capital argued in a New York bankruptcy court that the sale proposal was “orchestrated entirely by the U.S. Treasury and foisted upon the debtors.”

A lawyer for the group, Tom Lauria, said some identified publicly in the politically charged reorganization have received death threats “which they perceive as being bona fide.” Those lenders have notified police and the FBI, he said.

President Barack Obama called the dissenters “speculators” in public criticism last week for refusing to join Chrysler’s biggest banks in a government-brokered deal to wipe out Chrysler’s $6.9 billion debt and move forward with the Fiat alliance.

Chrysler asked U.S. Judge Arthur Gonzalez to schedule a hearing as soon as May 21 to approve a $2 billion sale of most of the automaker’s assets. The judge adjourned a hearing on the request until 2:30 p.m. EDT (1830 GMT) on Tuesday.

“Absent a prompt sale, approved in the coming weeks, the value of the debtors’ assets will rapidly decline and the ability to achieve a going concern sale will be lost,” Chrysler said in court documents supporting the sale to Fiat.

Chrysler’s bankruptcy, one of the biggest U.S. company bankruptcies ever, is widely seen as almost a dry run for a potential reorganization of GM.

The No.1 U.S.-based automaker, which like Chrysler is surviving on government bailout money, faces its own restructuring deadlines on June 1 and is trying to restructure its business in the U.S. and overseas.

This includes the potential sale of its German-based Opel unit, possibly to Fiat.

But Fiat’s interest in the brand has a rival. Canadian parts maker Magna International Inc confirmed it was in talks with GM and the German government about taking a minority stake in Opel.

OPEL TAKES CENTERSTAGE

Fiat Chief Executive Sergio Marchionne wants the Italian automaker to be merge with Opel, then spin off and list the merged entity.

Combining with Chrysler as well as Opel, which makes up 80% of GM Europe’s annual sales of $34.4 billion, fits Marchionne’s strategy of bulking up Fiat to survive the crisis engulfing the auto industry.

“Industrial logic-wise, Opel makes a lot more sense than Chrysler. The big hurdle we can see is social cost,” Nomura International analyst Michael Tyndall said.

“It’s all very well to say they compete broadly in the same markets with similar platforms and there may be economies of scale. But the broad translation of economies of scale is fewer jobs and I’m not sure if the Italian or German governments have the appetite for the job losses a merger would entail.”

The biggest opposition to a deal is likely to come from German and Italian unions.

Opel employs around 25,000 people at its factories in Germany.

Germany’s finance minister, Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg, said Fiat’s plan was “interesting,” but needed a closer look following talks with Marchionne. Guttenberg said Fiat was seeking Europe-wide state guarantees as part of the GM Europe deal.

In fresh reminders of the dire state of the global auto industry, French new passenger car sales fell 7% in April and Belgium reported a 22.8% drop.

Spanish automaker association Anfac said car sales in the country fell 45.6% in April, declining faster year-on- year than in March, which saw a 38.7% drop.

Citigroup may put more employees on commission or offer them larger base salaries as it tries to retain key staffers without running afoul of laws limiting executive pay at banks that receive government funds.

Three people familiar with the matter said the bank has examined a series of possible moves, including special stock-based bonuses, or offering employees a percentage of their group’s revenue.

Banks across Wall Street are struggling to reward top performers without violating an amendment to the 2009 stimulus package limiting executive pay. That amendment calls for the Treasury Secretary to review compensation of top employees at any major recipient of funds from the government’s Troubled Asset Relief Program.

Bonuses are expected to face particular scrutiny after Wall Street firms paid $18.4 billion of bonuses in 2008, a year in which the U.S. financial sector required more than $1 trillion of government support.

Some banks, most notably Goldman Sachs Group Inc, (GS) hope to repay their TARP funds as soon as possible, in part to avoid having to comply with pay limits.

Citigroup, which has received $45 billion of TARP capital and is not believed to have much hope of paying the government back anytime soon, is having discussions with the government about measures that might be appropriate for retaining revenue producing employees.

A number of possibilities are under discussion, and generally are geared toward ensuring that employees are motivated to perform well. The No. 3 U.S. bank will have a better sense of how to proceed once the Treasury Department crafts more specific guidelines on pay, one person said.

Of particular concern is the Phibro business, which has been extraordinarily profitable. If Citigroup cannot find ways to compensate people there, the energy trading business may be spun off, sold, or opened to outside investors, a person familiar with the matter said. News of this possibility was first reported in the Wall Street Journal.

The Wall Street Journal also reported that Citigroup had asked the Treasury Department for permission to pay special bonuses to key employees. One scenario discussed internally would be a one-time bonus paid to employees mainly in stock that would vest over at least three years.

Citigroup spokesman Stephen Cohen said in an emailed statement that the bank has not presented Treasury with any specific plan for staff retention or special cash payouts.

“Citi continues to examine ways to ensure its employee compensation practices are competitive in this very challenging market environment,” Cohen said in the statement.

The alternatives that Citigroup is considering to standard discretionary bonuses still have flaws with them, experts said.
Commissions, for example, only work well for professionals in sales positions, and even then can lead to conflicts over which sales person was responsible for a deal. Giving percentages of revenue could result in outsized paydays if a business outperforms, which could lead to public outcry.

“There’s no perfect answer to this issue,” said Michael Holland, founder of Holland & Co, which oversees more than $4 billion.

STEMMING THE EXODUS

But banks have every incentive to figure out how to retain their top staff. On Monday, a source said two equity traders and a salesman from Bank of America Corp (BAC) moved to hedge fund giant Citadel Investment Group. Foreign banks such as Deutsche Bank have also been able to hire employees from U.S. competitors.

In fact, banks that are not profitable will likely have trouble from a political standpoint paying employees anything but stock in bonuses, while banks that are profitable will likely look to repay TARP as quickly as possible to eliminate restrictions they face.

“I just don’t think all this planning for other ways to pay people will amount to anything,” said Paul Sorbera, a recruiter at Alliance Consulting in New York.

But for now, banks are concerned about retaining staff, and ensuring they are properly motivated.

“If we can’t pay people competitively, we can’t expect them to stay here,” said one bank executive.

WASHINGTON — Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke will provide Congress with a fresh assessment of the country’s fragile economic health that probably will note some recent improvements, but still warn that it will take time — perhaps years — for the economy to get back to normal.

At the same time, Bernanke is likely to face tough questions by lawmakers at a hearing Tuesday before Congress’ Joint Economic Committee about the Fed’s multitrillion-dollar efforts to bust through credit clogs and get banks lending more freely again to people and businesses.

Lawmakers worry that the Fed’s lending programs, as well as the government’s bailout of insurance giant American International Group and taxpayer aid to Citigroup, Bank of America and others, will encourage companies to take excessive risks because Uncle Sam will clean up their messes.

Moreover, the panel’s chair, Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., and other lawmakers, have pushed the Fed to be less secretive. Some have called for the Fed to disclose the identity of banks and investment firms that draw loans from its emergency lending program and what collateral they put up for them.

The Fed chief also is likely to be prodded for details about how 19 large banks fared on “stress tests.” Results, to be released Thursday, should shed light on which banks may need government support if the recession were to take a turn for the worse.

On the economic front, there have been some glimmers of hope that the recession is letting up.

Economic reports out Monday showed that construction spending and pending home sales both fared better than expected in March, and that gave stocks a big lift. The S&P 500, considered Wall Street’s most important indicator, bounded up 3.4 percent Monday and erased the last of its losses for 2009. And the Dow Jones industrials shot up more than 200 points and had their first finish above 8,400 since Jan. 13.

Last week, Bernanke and his colleagues said they detected signs the recession is loosening its firm grip, an observation likely to be repeated at Tuesday’s hearing.

Although the economy is still contracting, “the pace of contraction appears to be somewhat slower,” Fed policymakers said last week in deciding not to take any new steps at that time to shore up the economy.

The economy’s rate of decline topped 6 percent in both the final three months of last year and in the first three months of this year. It marked the worst six-month performance since the late 1950s.

However, in the current quarter, analysts are predicting the economy won’t shrink nearly as much — anywhere from a pace of 1 percent to 3 percent. As President Barack Obama’s economic stimulus package of tax cuts and increased government spending takes hold, some think there’s a chance the economy will start growing again in the third quarter. Others, though, think that’s more likely to happen in the final quarter of this year.

Economists believe the worst of the recession is past in terms of lost economic growth — barring any new shocks. Still, the Fed warned last week that “economic activity is likely to remain weak for a time.”

And, even though spending by American consumers has shown signs of “stabilizing, ” the Fed said that ongoing job losses, tanking home values and hard-to-get credit will weigh on consumers.

More Americans also will be pushed into the ranks of the unemployed in the months ahead.

The jobless rate is expected to jump from 8.5 percent in March to 8.9 percent in April as employers continue to slash hundreds of thousands of jobs. The government releases that report on Friday.

Unemployment is expected to hit 10 percent by the end of this year and will probably rise a bit more into early next year before it starts to slowly drift down. Companies won’t feel inclined to ramp up hiring until they are confident that any economic recovery has staying power.

Economists said the the unemployment rate isn’t likely to return to normal — meaning around 5 percent — until 2013.

WASHINGTON — The U.S. is expected to direct about 10 of the 19 banks undergoing government stress tests to boost their capital, according to several people familiar with the matter, a move that officials hope will quell fears about the solvency of the financial sector.

The exact number of banks affected remains under discussion. It could include Wells Fargo & Co., Bank of America, Citigroup Inc. and several regional banks. At one point, officials believed as many as 14 banks would need to raise more funds to create a stronger buffer against future losses, these people said, but that number has fallen in recent days.

Representatives from Wells, Bank of America and Citi declined to comment.

The Obama administration announced the stress tests — a process of examining banks’ ability to withstand future losses — back in February. At the time, the news sparked concern among investors and depositors that the results would be used to shut down or nationalize some of the country’s weaker institutions. But Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner assured investors that none of the banks undergoing stress tests would be allowed to fail and that all would have access to government funds if needed.

In fact, the stress-test regimen appears so far to have eased some of the fears that swept through financial markets in February, just as President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s bank holiday did in 1933. He shut down the nation’s banks for several days during a banking panic and only reopened those the government deemed safe. One possible explanation for the recent, calmer state of affairs: The problems the tests appear to be uncovering aren’t as bad as some analysts’ worst expectations.

Also, if multiple banks are being directed to boost their capital, that could make the process seem less daunting than if it were singling out a few companies as weak.

In a sign of how much the doomsday scenario has faded, bank stocks surged Monday despite reports that Wells Fargo was identified in an initial review as one of the financial institutions needing a stronger buffer.

General Motors Corp. may be more likely to end up in bankruptcy based on the Obama administration’s willingness to place Chrysler LLC into court protection to safeguard union health-care benefits.

With GM and its biggest bondholders at odds over resolving $27 billion in unsecured claims by a June 1 deadline, the Chrysler model indicates that President Barack Obama may resort to bankruptcy to end any impasse over that debt, said Martin Fridson, chief executive officer of New York-based credit investment firm Fridson Investment Advisors.

Chrysler filed for protection April 30 after the U.S. was unable to persuade secured lenders to swap $6.9 billion in claims for $2.25 billion in cash. A union retiree health-care trust was offered a 55 percent stake in Chrysler.

“This confirms the fear, which right along has been that the Obama administration is more sensitive or beholden to the unions than the bondholders,” Fridson said. “It makes it clear that GM bondholders aren’t likely to be able to work out anything outside of bankruptcy.”

GM bondholders proposed April 30 they get a 58 percent ownership stake in the Detroit-based automaker in exchange for their $27 billion in unsecured claims. Bondholders are objecting to GM’s proposal they get a 10 percent share of GM equity while a union health fund would get $10 billion in cash and as much as a 39 percent stake for $20 billion in unsecured claims.

Renee Rashid-Merem, a GM spokeswoman, Roger Kerson, a UAW spokesman, and Jenni Engebretsen, a Treasury spokeswoman, declined to comment on the matter.

Nevin Reilly, spokesman for the ad hoc committee of GM bondholders, also declined to comment. The group said last week its counteroffer would allow GM to “avoid a lengthy and difficult bankruptcy process.”

Dry Run for GM

GM said last week it must cut $44 billion in obligations from its books, including $10 billion of loans from the U.S. government, to return to an operating profit next year. It wants to win permission from the Obama administration to keep $15.4 billion in loans and receive $11.6 billion more.

“There’s no question Chrysler” acts as a dry run for GM, said Sean Egan, president of Egan-Jones Ratings Co. in Haverford, Pennsylvania. “It was designed that way because Chrysler is a much more manageable entity. The impact on the economy, on employment, is a microcosm of what is likely to happen with GM.”

GM’s $3 billion of 8.375 percent bonds maturing in July 2033 fell 0.25 cent to 8.5 cents on the dollar, yielding about 96 percent, according to Trace, the bond-price reporting system of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.

The shares were unchanged at $1.81 in New York Stock Exchange composite trading.

Competing Concepts

GM proposed that bondholders exchange 225 shares of stock for each $1,000 of principal. At least 90 percent must accept the offer for the automaker’s debt-reduction plan to work.

In their counterproposal, the bondholders said that in addition to their receipt of a majority stake in a reorganized GM, 41 percent of the stock would go to a union health-care trust and the last 1 percent to existing shareholders.

The bondholders committee had been in contact with about 100 institutions representing $12 billion in GM debt including San Mateo, California-based Franklin Resources Inc. and Loomis Sayles & Co. of Boston, a person familiar with the negotiations has said.

Time Running Out

Even if there is appetite for an agreement, it’s unlikely the thousands of GM bondholders can be pulled together in time, said John Casesa, managing partner at New York-based consulting firm Casesa Shapiro Group.

“The Chrysler bankruptcy can either scare them into settling or maybe make them more likely to take GM into bankruptcy,” Casesa said. “I don’t get the sense that the bondholders are ready to give in.”

Obama’s auto task force ousted Chief Executive Officer Rick Wagoner at the end of March, saying GM’s plan to return to profit wasn’t aggressive enough, and ordered new CEO Fritz Henderson to cut the automaker’s debt by more than initially demanded.

The U.S., which would hold at least half the equity in a reorganized GM in the automaker’s proposal, also ordered acting Chairman Kent Kresa to replace the majority of the GM directors as soon as possible.

“Obama has said the government doesn’t want to run a car company, so why not take the bondholders’ deal, which gets them out of ownership?” said Pete Hastings, a fixed-income analyst at Morgan Keegan & Co. in Memphis, Tennessee. “The 10 percent ownership offer is ridiculous, so their best shot is to try and win in court.”

‘Labor’s Interest’

The bondholders shouldn’t be surprised that the unions are getting preference over investors in an Obama administration, Egan said.

“If the government is providing money to these entities, they’re going to be looking out for labor’s interest first and foremost,” he said.

“ You may claim it’s unfair, but that’s the political reality and the time and cost of suing the federal government is prohibitive in most cases.”

The government was more likely to get its way in Chrysler because a majority of lenders were already supportive of the U.S. offer for their debt, said Mirko Mikelic, who helps manage $19 billion at Fifth Third Asset Management in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Mikelic dumped GM debt last year and still manages some debt in GMAC LLC, the automaker’s former finance unit. There seems to be little likelihood of a similar majority agreement at GM, he said.

The longer the GM bondholders have held out, the worse the offers have gotten, according to Egan.

“You’re better off acting early,” he said.