tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-69174927852362011192024-02-21T05:48:47.291-08:00Carpe NoctemPlamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.comBlogger48125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-17853844110022202302011-07-07T08:34:00.000-07:002011-10-27T16:36:21.282-07:00Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-59994984753881158922010-09-28T16:28:00.000-07:002010-12-01T18:20:29.847-08:00Green Technology<span style="font-weight:bold;"><span style="font-weight:bold;"><a target="_blank" href="http://www.greenboxny.com/ecoincorporated.com/Alt_Video.html">This</a> is green "technology" I can get behind - practical, cost-effective, voluntary, and last but not least, plain cool.<br /><br />Hat tip to Radley Balko at <a target="_blank" href="http://www.theagitator.com/">The Agitator</a>.</span></span>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-89910992724056137812010-07-17T22:27:00.000-07:002010-07-18T21:47:04.622-07:00I Write Like...<span style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-size:100%;" ><span style="font-weight: bold;">There is an interesting <a target="_blank" href="http://iwl.me/">web site</a> that claims to analyze a writing sample that you paste in, and tell which famous writer you write like, in terms of word choice and writing style. What algorithms they use, and how legitimate the whole thing is is anybody's guess, but I pasted ten samples from this blog, and seven of those were evaluated as <a target="_blank" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Foster_Wallace">David Foster Wallace</a>. I admit without shame that I was not familiar with Wallace - something I am now determined to remedy - but from the Wikipedia page, here are some descriptions of him and his style that seem to match well:</span><br /><br /></span><ul style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li><span style="font-size:100%;">Wallace's fiction is often concerned with irony</span></li><li><span style="font-size:100%;">long multi-clause sentences</span></li><li><span style="font-size:100%;">(humility alert!) able to ingest complex mathematics, logic and philosophy</span></li><li><span style="font-size:100%;">incorporate jargon and vocabulary (sometimes invented) from a wide variety of fields</span></li></ul><span style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-size:100%;" ><span style="font-weight: bold;">I wonder if I should be concerned that he hanged himself after a lifelong struggle with depression.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">The other three samples I pasted in were likened to H.P. Lovecraft (cool!), James Joyce (blah!), and Dan Brown (heaven have mercy!).</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">On the other hand, as a control, I tested the following:</span><br /></span><ul style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li><span style="font-size:100%;"> the first four paragraphs of <a target="_blank" href="http://tabootenente.tblog.com/post/1969893252">this work</a> by Hemingway, and the result was Neil Gaiman</span></li><li><span style="font-size:100%;">the first four paragraphs of <a target="_blank" href="http://www.gutenberg.net.au/fsf/THE-SENSIBLE-THING.txt">The Sensible Thing</a> by F. Scott Fitzgerald, and the result was Ray Bradbury</span></li><li><span style="font-size:100%;">the first page or so of <a target="_blank" href="http://www.dibache.com/text.asp?cat=51&id=184">A Perfect Day for Bananafish</a> by Salinger, and the result was... David Foster Wallace (seems I am in fine company!)</span></li></ul><span style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-size:100%;" ><span style="font-weight: bold;">Thus, entertaining as this may be, I judge it a cheap play on pareidolia, not that much different from a horoscope or a psychic reading, although unlike the latter two, this could become something neat if it is fed more texts, and its parameters are refined. Have fun with it.</span></span>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-11241649428999252382010-05-30T08:15:00.000-07:002011-03-11T20:56:28.390-08:00Reality Bites<span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-size:100%;" >A fool and his money are soon parted, the wisdom goes. That does apply to said fool's future earnings, for all those fools out there who have not gotten the memo. Example: <a target="_blank" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/29/your-money/student-loans/29money.html">this fool</a>, or pair of fools - mother and daughter - who <del>thought</del> chose not to think, but rather believe that spending $200K that they did not have on a degree from a top-notch school (NYU) in... wait for it... religious and women's studies!... was a great investment, because the precious snowflake could not attend a cheaper school.<br /><br />Now the snowflake is on the hook for $100K, which is all but impossible to discharge even in a bankruptcy, and - shocker! - feels like someone should have stopped her from being a moron. "It feels wrong to me." Fair enough - for a reasonable fee, and a release form from prosecution for battery, I am willing to beat (including physically, when necessary) into any future young people like Ms. Munna some common sense. That will necessarily include some insight like:<br /><br />1) The fact that something sounds like a great idea does not make it such.<br />2) See 1) - When you pay for something, you <del>may</del> REALLY want to figure out what it is worth to you.<br />3) See 2) - When you commit to pay for something, there are no do-overs. Unless you are a government (like Greece). Or unless you can throw a big enough temper tantrum to get a bailout from... wait for it... the government!<br />4) See 3) - When you get relief, help, a bailout - that means someone else who was not as dumb as you conveniently claim to be right now has to pay for your mistakes. Where does that fit into the religious and women's empowerment concepts you learned, Ms. Munna? Somewhere in between Psalm 37:21 ("The wicked borrow and do not repay...") and Camille Paglia ("</span><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:100%;" >“Capitalism is an art form, an Apollonian fabrication to rival nature. It is hypocritical for feminists and intellectuals to enjoy the pleasures and conveniences of capitalism while sneering at it. Everyone born into capitalism has incurred a debt to it. Give Caesar his due.”)</span><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-size:100%;" >?<br /></span>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-1858247318851355252010-04-13T17:58:00.000-07:002010-04-13T18:22:12.323-07:00A New Germany<span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-size:100%;" >Maybe, just maybe, there is hope for Europe - and I mean this as a geographical, not as a political term. Of course, the plural of "anecdote" is not "data", but... there have been enough anecdotes lately like <a target="_blank" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/13/world/europe/13europe.html?ref=global-home">this one</a>. Money quote: "Germans feel they have paid both their reparations and their dues, “and many times over,” said Ms. Stelzenmüller, especially in an uncertain time of globalization and financial crisis. “People want to be normal, in the sense that other people don’t come to us first and say, ‘You have to pay.’ And it doesn’t have much to do with political orientation. All of us are huddling with our backs against the storm.”<br /><br />Germany is outgrowing its guilt complexes, and beginning to question how long, for bleep's sake, the reparations will last. Of course, the last time this kind of questions popped up the outcome was very ugly. It probably will be this time too. We are, of course, not talking German divisions marching left and right through Europe - this is kind of <strong style="font-weight: normal; font-style: italic;">passé</strong> in these days. But European cities may still be smoldering, most prominently Athens - set ablaze by its own unhappy citizenry. This can of worms was kicked about 7 months down the road by the latest bailout given to Greece - Merkel caved in, and probably will have to surrender the proverbial pound of flesh at the ballot box soon enough. But to hope Greek politicians have all </span><span style="font-style: italic; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-size:100%;" >en masse</span><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-size:100%;" > had road-to-Damascus moment recently is beyond naive. The only big question remaining, in my humblest opinion, is whether Greece (again), or someone else (Portugal?) will be the next to come to Brussels (read: Berlin) hat in hand.<br /><br />This is not a train wreck in slow motion. It's Titanic meets iceberg in slow motion, with Germany in the role of Kate Winslet's Rose, who survives with the bulk of her wealth (the precious jewel) intact, but the love of Jack Dawson (most of the rest of Europe) turned ice-cold by the plunge into ice-cold Atlantic (economic reality).</span>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-63313433140075061872010-02-08T19:18:00.000-08:002010-07-22T16:12:21.771-07:00Your Tax Money at Work<span style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-size:100%;" ><span style="font-weight: bold;font-family:arial;font-size:100%;" >Stop the presses, newsflash, <a target="_blank" href="http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN0823962020100208">groundbreaking research</a> unveiled: people are afraid of losing money, and it has something to do with their brains.<br /><br />The scientific feat has been achieved by studying 2 (yes, that is indeed two) subjects - both female, both with a serious genetic defect - and comparing their behavior in a lab test with that of 12 (yes, that's twelve) other people.<br /><br />You know, it does not matter that economists have suspected something like that since Harry Markowitz proposed the portfolio selection theory in 1952. It matters even less that statisticians have developed this weird concept of representative samples in order to deal with inference from anecdotal evidence. What does matter is that you can get a nice grant and career advancement opportunities by documenting quasi-research that shows support of a well-known fact on OPM (other people's money). Considerations such as, say, the subjects' incomes and wealth (actually, full financials - balance sheet, income statement, and cash flow ) - known to affect risk aversion - are just trifling, nitpicking details. Why should we correct for exogenous variables, if the "research" will create buzz anyway? Just read the damn paper, and clap, rubes. Oh, yeah, and write a check for a follow-up study - who knows, we may discover something even crazier - say, that people (probably because of their brains, but you never know) enjoy winning money...</span></span>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-64510896265857232642009-12-06T02:52:00.000-08:002009-12-06T02:53:46.156-08:00Wisdom in Cartoons<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/L_GgrNGkDNY&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/L_GgrNGkDNY&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-18022789759230799132009-12-06T01:20:00.000-08:002009-12-06T02:29:41.982-08:00Danish Taxes<span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-size:100%;" ><span style="font-family: arial;">According to Wikipedia, "Denmark, with a mixed market capitalist economy and a large welfare state, ranks according to one measure, as having the world's highest level of income equality. Denmark has the best business climate in the world, according to the US business magazine Forbes.<span style="text-decoration: underline;"></span></span><sup style="font-family: arial;" id="cite_ref-busclimate_4-0" class="reference"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denmark#cite_note-busclimate-4"><span></span></a></sup><span style="font-family: arial;"> From 2006 to 2008, surveys</span><sup style="font-family: arial;" id="cite_ref-5" class="reference"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denmark#cite_note-5"><span></span><span></span></a></sup><span style="font-family: arial;"> ranked Denmark as "the happiest place in the world," based on standards of health, welfare, and education." The country is also pretty high in the GDP per capita and employment rankings. It pays generous unemployment benefits, and has free universal health care.<br /><br />How is this utopia paid for? What a shocker - taxes. As of 2010, the top marginal rate of 42%, and the VAT is 25% (<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nordisketax.net/main.asp?url=files/dan/eng/i07.asp&c=dan&l=eng&s=1&m=02">source</a>). What's going on here? Something's gotta give, and sure enough, something does. Young Danes <a target="_blank" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/26/business/worldbusiness/26labor.html?_r=2">are leaving</a> in droves - leaving, that is, after getting free education, which also includes English proficiency. From the article:<br /><br />"</span><span style="font-family: arial;">The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which is based in Paris, projects that Denmark’s growth rate will fall to an annual rate of slightly more than 1 percent for the five years beginning in 2009, reflecting a dwindling supply of a vital input for any economy: labor... studies suggest that about 1,000 people leave the country each year, a figure that masks an outflow of qualified Danes and an inflow of less skilled foreign workers who help, at least partially, to offset the losses."</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Who would have thought that when you tax something, you get less of it? So when you tax productive people heavily, and pay others generously not to work... Gee, this is getting complicated. This is the point at which most politicians would stick their fingers up to their elbows in their ears, yell "La-la-la-la, I cannot hear you!", and hope you buy all the BS about the joys of equality and security - which are guaranteed if you only (re-)elect them, and doubly guaranteed if you only let them tax and spend more.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">As a parting note, consider that 67% is not the total tax burden you pay in Denmark. The tax rate on non-electric vehicles is 200%, as noted by Dr. Perry at <a target="_blank" href="http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/12/denmark-crazy-and-crazier.html">Carpe Diem</a>. There is tax on income from securities, corporate tax, and property tax.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">As some poet with economic literacy (or economist with poetic talent) wrote:</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Tax his land, tax his wage,</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> Tax his bed in which he lays.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> Tax his tractor, tax his mule,</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> Teach him taxes is the rule.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> Tax his cow, tax his goat,</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> Tax his pants, tax his coat.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> Tax his ties, tax his shirts,</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> Tax his work, tax his dirt.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> Tax his chew, tax his smoke,</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> Teach him taxes are no joke.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> Tax his car, tax his grass,</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> Tax the roads he must pass.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> Tax his food, tax his drink,</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> Tax him if he tries to think.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> Tax his sodas, tax his beers,</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> If he cries, tax his tears.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> Tax his bills, tax his gas,</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> Tax his notes, tax his cash.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> Tax him good and let him know</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> That after taxes, he has no dough.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> If he hollers, tax him more,</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> Tax him until he's good and sore.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> Tax his coffin, tax his grave,</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> Tax the sod in which he lays.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> Put these words upon his tomb,</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> "Taxes drove me to my doom!"</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> And when he's gone, we won't relax,</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> We'll still be after the inheritance tax.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">However, if something cannot go on forever, it will stop (Stein's Law), and socialists always run out of other people's money.</span><br /><br /><br /></span>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-64128109975980604232009-12-02T18:08:00.000-08:002009-12-02T18:20:50.844-08:00Quotes of the Day<span style="font-weight: bold; font-family: arial; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-size:100%;" >"No lesson seems to be so deeply inculcated by the experience of life as that you should never trust experts. If you believe doctors, nothing is wholesome: if you believe the theologians, nothing is innocent: if you believe the soldiers, nothing is safe. They all require their strong wine diluted by a very large admixture of insipid common sense."</span><span style="font-weight: bold; font-family: arial; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-size:100%;" ><br /><br /></span><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: arial;font-size:100%;" >"After all, the great characteristic of this country is that it is a free country, and by a free country I mean a country where people are allowed, so long as they do not hurt their neighbours, to do as they like. I do not mean a country where six men may make five men do exactly as they like. That is not my notion of freedom."<br /><br />"On general grounds I object to Parliament trying to regulate private morality in matters which only affects the person who commits the offence."<br /><br />"There is no danger which we have to contend with which is so serious as an exaggeration of the power, the useful power, of the interference of the State. It is not that the State may not or ought not to interfere when it can do so with advantage, but that the occasions on which it can so interfere are so lamentably few and the difficulties that lie in its way are so great. But I think that some of us are in danger of an opposite error. What we have to struggle against is the unnecessary interference of the State, and still more when that interference involves any injustice to any people, especially to any minority. All those who defend freedom are bound as their first duty to be the champions of minorities, and the danger of allowing the majority, which holds the power of the State, to interfere at its will is that the interests of the minority will be disregarded and crushed out under the omnipotent force of a popular vote."<br /><br />-</span><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: arial;font-size:100%;" > Robert Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury.</span>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-17030016221762054152009-11-22T23:39:00.000-08:002009-11-22T23:43:06.926-08:00Subliminal Messages<span style="font-weight: bold; font-family: arial;font-size:100%;" >This is pure genius, and funnier still when you speak Russian.<br /><br /><object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/FQMrdw9u9AI&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/FQMrdw9u9AI&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object><br /><br />H/T <a target="_blank" href="http://depletedcranium.com/">Depleted Cranium</a>.</span>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-38343387915328493022009-11-19T18:50:00.000-08:002009-11-19T18:56:37.598-08:00Hero of the Day<span style="font-size:100%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Dog present or not, when you are <a target="_blank" href="http://www.newsherald.com/articles/nude-79230-gunpoint-alleged.html">91, and naked</a>, and you not only scare the crap out of a 26-year-old burglar, but hold him at gunpoint until police get there to cuff him, you deserve a drink and a hat-tip. Well done, Mr. Thompson!</span></span>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-68741457266216993792009-10-09T17:50:00.000-07:002009-10-10T06:17:06.433-07:00What Are They Smoking At Burger King?<span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;font-size:100%;" >Burger King, a venerable burger joint (if a chain with 12,000 outlets can be called that) is <a target="_blank" href="http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/business-news/2009/10/08/burger-king-set-to-revamp-restuarants-with-upmarket-look-86908-21731738/">revamping</a> its restaurants to give them "an upmarket feel". Huh? The thinking must go something like this: "We hate to be competing with McD and Wendy's... Let's go upscale and incur a cost disadvantage that will price us out of this market and go compete with Ruby Tuesday and Applebee's (perception-wise), and with Pizza Hut and Domino's (value-wise)."<br /><br />Now, in my humble opinion, BK has the best french fries of all burger chains, and their burgers are pretty damn good. They had a lot going for them, not least brand equity - recall a famous <a target="_blank" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLtwFugudZE&feature=fvst">Pulp Fiction dialogue</a>? However, whoever is mapping their corporate strategy is smoking something really, really good. Many companies suffer an identity crisis at some point, and try to reposition themselves. There are good ways to do it. There are bad ways to do it. And then (to quote Al Gore) there is that little known third category that includes Burger King - the phrase "unmitigated disaster" comes to mind.<br /><br />Let's try to see some of their advertising efforts:<br /><br /><a target="_blank" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcTWwXyt_Rs&feature=related">This</a>? Really? They share a golden shower?<br /><a target="_blank" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4_5qoy4oaQ&feature=related">This</a>? Really?? The last time I wanted to wake up with a man in my bed was... I'll get back to you on this one, but do not hold your breath.<br /><a target="_blank" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ityfbzQ-b6Q&feature=related">This</a>? "So special, people may think you're special?" Are we positioning a friggin' BK burger as "what-I-do-not-eat-to-avoid-getting-assaulted-by-psychotic-bitches"?<br /><a target="_blank" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWYjktTdq3E&feature=related">This</a>? Wow, edgy! Simon & Garfunkel! Mostly Garfunkel, of course. Was Bob Dylan not available?<br /><a target="_blank" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nopKDuydRo">This</a>? Oh no, this is just too rich... "I like square butts and I cannot lie?" "Phone book implants?" "A butt with sharp right angles?" "He's so spongy?" "Shake that cubicle butt?" "Bob got it goin' on, been known to rock him a thong???!!!" I am.... bemused.<br /><a target="_blank" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOI_iS66zus&feature=related">This</a>? And my inner cowboy has what exactly in common with women with mustaches?<br /><a target="_blank" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gm_n76Dsl0c&feature=related">This</a>? Maybe I don't?<br /><a target="_blank" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EO-nQsoTK9c&feature=related">This</a>? Midgets and "jugs"? Classy!!!<br /><a target="_blank" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGLHlvb8skQ&feature=related">This</a>? There was something there, right up to the "EAT THIS MEAT" part... Yeah, and the 0:37 part where you need frame-by-frame replay to make sure that there was no hand-to-crotch action going on. And the "till my innie turns into an outie" part. And the "I need to stuff a big burger beef jalapeno good thing down" part.<br /><a target="_blank" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MX-wiNe0Qd4&feature=related">This</a>? The peep-show patron special. When you are so dumb you have not discovered the internet for your porn needs... you may just need a BK burger too. The combination of a sultry male voice and "a very generous king"... touche!<br /><a target="_blank" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNcWVg7aW64&feature=related">This</a>? Right!!! Piss off one half of your potential customers with a sexist ad...<br /><a target="_blank" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCG_q-GyI50&feature=related">This</a>? The nipple pinch? "They took my nipples?" I feel so... Well, I know there is a word out there for what I feel, and I'll find it one day. Suffice it to know, it's not a kind word.<br /><br />Really, Burger King, what is your target customer base again? Maybe, just maybe, even the imperfect financial markets <a target="_blank" href="http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=MCD#chart2:symbol=mcd;range=2y;compare=bkc;indicator=volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=on;source=undefined">smelled a real stinker (sinker?) here</a>.<br /></span>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-63886975193890958472009-10-05T04:14:00.000-07:002009-10-09T20:00:25.663-07:00In a Parallel Universe Called Washington, DC<span style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;font-size:100%;" ><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sen. Benjamin L. Cardin (D-Md.), has <a target="_blank" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/04/AR2009090403842_2.html?sid=ST2009090403854">this profound insight</a> about the health care bill: "The larger the bill is, the more it's going to save." Just so we do not decide he may be kidding, the genius senator adds emphasis: "and that, he said, is the key", according to the linked WaPo article.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">I am going to look for my jaw in the basement.</span><br /></span>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-81519281794310630022009-09-26T23:03:00.000-07:002009-09-26T23:30:46.244-07:00Quote of the Day<span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;font-size:100%;" >"It gets dug out of the ground in Africa, or someplace. Then we melt it down, dig another hole, bury it again and pay people to stand around guarding it. It has no utility. Anyone watching from Mars would be scratching their head." - <a target="_blank" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Buffett#Dollar_and_gold">Warren Buffett</a> on gold.<br /></span>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-84052782017656840112009-09-24T17:58:00.000-07:002009-10-09T20:02:11.112-07:00I May Be Crazy...<span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-size:100%;" >... but at least I am not the only one. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/33004753">Here</a> is what Julian Robertson thinks. According to his <a target="_blank" href="http://www.marketfolly.com/2009/06/profilebiography-on-hedge-fund-legend.html">profile</a>, this gentleman's hedge fund had gross compounded return of 31.5% between 1980 and 2000, and he closed his fund before the dotcom bubble burst. In 2008, Fortune reported that he had seen 400% return since he had closed the fund. It's hard to argue with such a record - you listen to a man like this, even if you do not agree with everything he has to say. Of course, politicians and bureaucrats who have hardly made an honest buck in their lives (Timmeh!) know better, and insist we have to spend more, begin to buy houses again, and while we are at it, allow them to "reform" health care as they see fit... because their track record is... oh, who cares, just let them do it finally, okay?!<br /><br />A few weeks ago, Richard Russell of the <a target="_blank" href="http://ww2.dowtheoryletters.com/">Dow Theory Letters</a> (subscription required) had this to say:<br /><br />"Let me get this straight -- Obama's health care plan will be written by a committee whose head says he doesn't understand it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it, and whose members are exempt from it, signed by a president who smokes in secret, funded by a treasury chief who did not pay his taxes, overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and funded by a country that is broke.<br /><br />What could possibly go wrong?"<br /><br />Robertson says the U.S. has to "quit spending, cut back, start saving, and scale backward". But that does not re-elect politicians - quite <i>au contraire</i>. Thus, while the American consumer/taxpayer is doing just as Robertson suggests, the US government is doing it's darnedest to offset it by spending, expanding, borrowing, and "scaling forward". Much as I hate to bet against the Fed and the Treasury, I cannot help but tip my hat to Robertson's <a target="_blank" href="http://www.marketfolly.com/2009/06/julian-robertsons-steepener-swap-play.html">steepener bet</a>. In his own words: "I've made a big bet on it. I really think I am going to make 20 or 30 times... I'm amazed at the amount of money the government is throwing at this thing. You don't even react anymore unless somebody's talking about $1 trillion. I genuinely admire the administration's courage in doing what it's doing, but not the wisdom of it. I look at the TALF (Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility) program, for example, and it's almost a bribe to get people to put on more leverage ... I ask anyone to give me an example of an economy beefed up by huge amounts of quantitative easing that did not inflate tremendously when or if the economy improved. I think what we're doing now will either fail, or it will result in unbelievably high inflation - and tragically, maybe both. That would mean a depression and explosive inflation, which is frightening."<br /><br />Hear, hear!<br /></span>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-45127215612440879562009-09-11T20:29:00.000-07:002009-10-09T20:12:51.774-07:00About Obama and Health Care<span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;font-size:100%;" >President Obama's speech on health care (full text <a target="_blank" href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-by-the-President-to-a-Joint-Session-of-Congress-on-Health-Care/">here</a>) was not a big surprise - lots of smoke and mirrors on costs, a perfunctory attempt to bring a couple of Republicans on board with a vague promise on tort reform, some posturing, and (pardon the profanity, and expect more) a big hearty fuck-you to young people.<br /><br /></span><blockquote style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;"><span style="font-size:100%;">"Now, even if we provide these affordable options, there may be those -- especially the young and the healthy -- who still want to take the risk and go without coverage... The problem is, such irresponsible behavior costs all the rest of us money. If there are affordable options and people still don't sign up for health insurance, it means we pay for these people's expensive emergency room visits."</span></blockquote><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;font-size:100%;" ><br /><br />The young and the healthy cost us money? This is patent fucking bullshit of jaw-dropping proportions. Obama is demonstrably ignorant about basic economics ("profits and earnings ratios"?!), but even he does not believe such tripe. Here's a neat <a target="_blank" href="http://knowledge.allianz.com/nopi_downloads/images/demographic%20change_health%20care%20costs%20per%20country_96dpi_1.jpg">chart</a> of health care costs broken out by age in several countries - and in the US those 75 and older use well over half of the spending. On average, the young and healthy uninsured simply do not pay for the unhealthy old. The government needs the cash and good actuarials of the young to push guaranteed issue and community rating on the insurance companies without bankrupting them promptly. Obama, of course, cannot say that, so he has to resort to a blatant lie, hoping enough of hoi polloi are economically challenged enough not only to not catch it, but also to tune out when the experts call him on it. Puke break.<br /><br /></span><blockquote style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;"><span style="font-size:100%;">"Unfortunately, in 34 states, 75 percent of the insurance market is controlled by five or fewer companies. In Alabama, almost 90 percent is controlled by just one company. And without competition, the price of insurance goes up and quality goes down. And it makes it easier for insurance companies to treat their customers badly -- by cherry-picking the healthiest individuals and trying to drop the sickest, by overcharging small businesses who have no leverage, and by jacking up rates. </span><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"> </div><span style="font-size:100%;"> Insurance executives don't do this because they're bad people; they do it because it's profitable."</span></blockquote><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;font-size:100%;" ><br /><br />In Alabama, that would be Blue Cross Blue Shield Alabama, which is a non-profit. Thus, they do not do it because it's profitable. They probably control the market because they do a good job and offer the best rates, and because regulation at the state level prevents others from selling insurance there. Care to try again? Puke break.<br /><br /></span><blockquote style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;"><span style="font-size:100%;">"...we've estimated that most of this plan can be paid for by finding savings within the existing health care system, a system that is currently full of waste and abuse."</span></blockquote><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;font-size:100%;" ><br /><br />As Arnold Kling <a target="_blank" href="http://business.theatlantic.com/2009/09/comments_on_the_presidents_health_care_speech.php">noted</a>: "And if we don't pass this plan, does he intend to keep the waste and inefficiency, out of spite?" How about first eliminate the abuse and waste, show us the bundle of money saved, and then propose ways to spend it? To propose to pay for a new health care program by making a fucked-up older one run as it should does not exactly inspire high trust in your ability to run health care programs... or any other programs. Departments of Energy and Education... Social Security... Medicare... For Christ's sake, "cash-for-clunkers" has pushed some dealers to the brink of insolvency as they wait for reimbursements. And these people want to run health care. Puke break.<br /><br /></span><blockquote style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;"><span style="font-size:100%;">"Now, much of the rest would be paid for with revenues from the very same drug and insurance companies that stand to benefit from tens of millions of new customers."</span></blockquote><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;font-size:100%;" ><br /><br />Customers, eh? I suppose you can call us (I am one of those young, healthy uninsured - the irresponsible prick, you know, who has used $0.00 of health care in the last 10 years) that, much like someone arrested for public intoxication is a "customer" of the county jail. Puke break.<br /><br /></span><blockquote style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;"><span style="font-size:100%;">"Now, I don't believe malpractice reform is a silver bullet, but I've talked to enough doctors to know that defensive medicine may be contributing to unnecessary costs. (Applause.) So I'm proposing that we move forward on a range of ideas about how to put patient safety first and let doctors focus on practicing medicine. (Applause.) I know that the Bush administration considered authorizing demonstration projects in individual states to test these ideas. I think it's a good idea, and I'm directing my Secretary of Health and Human Services to move forward on this initiative today. (Applause.)"</span></blockquote><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;font-size:100%;" ><br /><br />Oh, my, what a staunch commitment! It's already a couple of days past, and I have not heard Sebelius' plans to test the blindingly obvious - that $200K/year malpractice insurance premiums increase the cost of care (through defensive medicine) and drive physicians out of business. Puke break.<br /><br /></span><blockquote style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;"><span style="font-size:100%;">"For some of Ted Kennedy's critics, his brand of liberalism represented an affront to American liberty. In their minds, his passion for universal health care was nothing more than a passion for big government. "</span></blockquote><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;font-size:100%;" ><br /><br />Damn right it was. Extended puke break.<br /><br /></span><blockquote style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;"><span style="font-size:100%;">"But those of us who knew Teddy and worked with him here -- people of both parties -- know that what drove him was something more. His friend Orrin Hatch -- he knows that. They worked together to provide children with health insurance. His friend John McCain knows that. They worked together on a Patient's Bill of Rights. His friend Chuck Grassley knows that. They worked together to provide health care to children with disabilities."<br /></span></blockquote><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;font-size:100%;" ><br /><br />Sheesh, those right there might be a good part of any thinking person's reason to despise the Republicans too. The cream of the douchebag cream. Major puke break.<br /><br /></span><blockquote style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;"><span style="font-size:100%;">"That large-heartedness -- that concern and regard for the plight of others -- is not a partisan feeling. It's not a Republican or a Democratic feeling. It, too, is part of the American character -- our ability to stand in other people's shoes; a recognition that we are all in this together, and when fortune turns against one of us, others are there to lend a helping hand; a belief that in this country, hard work and responsibility should be rewarded by some measure of security and fair play; and an acknowledgment that sometimes government has to step in to help deliver on that promise."</span></blockquote><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;font-size:100%;" ><br /><br />And, if the helping hand is not extended, we will have the government twist it, and, if necessary, rip it off? It's not easy to puke and curse at the same time.<br /><br /></span><blockquote style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;"><span style="font-size:100%;">"You see, our predecessors understood that government could not, and should not, solve every problem. They understood that there are instances when the gains in security from government action are not worth the added constraints on our freedom."</span></blockquote><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;font-size:100%;" ><br /><br />This almost makes sense, but is, of course, unadulterated bullshit. Our predecessors understood more than that. They understood that the government could not, and should not solve MOST problems. Puke break badly needed, but postponed in expectation of the <i>coup de grace</i>.<br /><br /></span><blockquote style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;"><span style="font-size:100%;">"But they also understood that the danger of too much government is matched by the perils of too little; that without the leavening hand of wise policy, markets can crash, monopolies can stifle competition, the vulnerable can be exploited. And they knew that when any government measure, no matter how carefully crafted or beneficial, is subject to scorn; when any efforts to help people in need are attacked as un-American; when facts and reason are thrown overboard and only timidity passes for wisdom, and we can no longer even engage in a civil conversation with each other over the things that truly matter -- that at that point we don't merely lose our capacity to solve big challenges. We lose something essential about ourselves."</span></blockquote><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;font-size:100%;" ><br /><br />Those same predecessors also crafted a Constitution, which enumerates what the government MAY do, not what it MAY NOT do. It has no exceptions for carefully crafted and beneficial measures or for people in need. The government has no monopoly on facts or reason; moreover, most of the time it has neither. Reagan put it best: "The best minds are not in government, if any were, business would hire them away." And civil conversation necessitates the right of all parties to turn around and walk away without being robbed. Nothing left to puke... just a mixture of disbelief, bitter anger, and sadness.</span>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-20704258168983121602009-09-03T15:54:00.000-07:002009-09-03T16:02:53.375-07:00Milton Friedman on Government Spending<span style="font-family: arial; font-weight: bold;font-size:100%;" ><object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Hrg1CArkuNc&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Hrg1CArkuNc&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object><br /><br />Think about that next time someone on government payroll tells you that the government adds value.<br /><br />HT: Dr. Mark J. Perry at <a target="_blank" href="http://mjperry.blogspot.com/">Carpe Diem</a>.</span>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-88443957444517462832009-09-02T17:26:00.000-07:002009-09-02T17:58:40.051-07:00On The Nature of Liberty<span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-size:100%;" >A brilliant, if I may say so, <a target="_blank" href="http://www.countingcats.com/?p=4167">analysis of liberty and self-determination in a libertarian society.</a> Consent is the key, and withdrawn consent can be discouraged only by civil litigation for damages, not through aggression.<br /><br />Are there problems with a libertarian society? Sure. There is no perfect society. Libertarian ideas, however, overwhelmingly point the way to a better society these days - we just have too much government, and it is growing to overtake functions that belong with the private citizen.<br /><br /><br /></span>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-19185197011232051972009-08-23T14:44:00.000-07:002009-08-23T14:54:27.064-07:00Cash For Clunkers<span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-size:100%;" >Hard to add much to <a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/08/21/cash-for-clunkers-dumbest-program-ever/">this</a>. Next proposal: add to the federal first-home buyer subsidy a second-home buyer subsidy, which kicks in if you credibly destroy the plumbing and and electrical wiring of your old "inefficient" home, as long as the new home's electric and utility bills are 10% lower. Of course, you can still re-sell the wood and the roof shingles - that's okay.<br /></span>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-54329448949207198522009-08-15T00:19:00.000-07:002009-08-16T04:38:38.764-07:00Paging Ray Bradbury<span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;font-size:100%;" >I have been a non-rabid fan of good science fiction for a long time. It challenges, makes you think, puts things into perspective... and entertains. My taste in sci-fi is peculiar, and changing - for example, I was never blown away by Asimov and Bradbury, got disappointed eventually in Orson Scott Card, developed a liking for Heinlein late (although it keeps growing), and I adored Robert Sheckley. Lately, I find my appreciation for sci-fi tilting towards a different aspect of it: it appears elements of its more dystopic visions begin to materialize around me. Without further ado, I tip my hat ever-so-slightly to Ray Bradbury's foresight - coming to a bookstore or library near you, courtesy of the US government, </span><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;font-size:100%;" ><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);"><a href="http://city-journal.org/2009/eon0212wo.html">bookburning</a></span>. You could have almost missed that hat tip, and there is a reason for it - Bradbury stated that "451 Fahrenheit" was not about censorship, but about how television destroys interest in reading literature.<br /><br />Bradbury is, of course, entitled to his interpretation. Perhaps he picked up a meme without fully realizing it - a testament to his keen perception, if not his sharp intellect - and his creation took on a life of its own. I see it differently. I am not in the least bothered by people glued to their TV's, iPods, or gaming consoles. Such is human nature, and throughout history the vast majority of people have lacked the interest and capacity for elitist, intellectual, abstract knowledge, which was until recently almost exclusively stored and distributed in the form of paper artifacts. I am profoundly bothered, however, when the government restricts access to knowledge.<br /><br />So, back to our modern-day Guy Montags. I am not a conspiracy theorist, and thus I do not think what the article describes is, per se, outright censorship. These books are just victims of the crackdown on things that those who have been given the power to crack down on things think they ought to be cracking down on, and of the law of unintended consequences. What does</span><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;font-size:100%;" > get my panties in a bundle, however, is that it does have an element of censorship. It is this element that bothers me, as I expect the modern "firefighters" will soon sense it, and see it a feature, not a bug. What I mean is that by "protecting" little Johnnie and Jane from books printed before 1985, the Agent Smith's are also preventing them from learning about any number of realities from the world before political correctness, multiculturalism, environmentalism, gun control, etc., took hold. Bingo, we are on the proverbial slippery slope. How long do you think it'll be before protecting children from noxious lead-infused illustrations extends into protecting them from noxious thoughts and ideas? Something along the lines of "reading books has been found to contribute to sedentary lifestyle, and hence obesity, therefore thou shalt not read" is not as far out as it seems. That's the danger - the slow creep of the "you may not do it for your own safety" argument as acceptable. When the government gets a tool/weapon, it uses it, sooner or later.<br /><br />Before you think I am hyperventilating in the paranoid grips of a bad LSD trip, think about pubs in the UK (and increasingly elsewhere). A staple of the British lifestyle, if there is any, and yet a thorn in the side of health Nazis, who prefer a healthier tax base that costs less and pays more in taxes without discussing it too much over a pint. Banning pubs and bars immediately would lead to a revolution, and that's not an exaggeration. So... let's ban smoking there on the grounds that "it's for your own good". Not a ban, sure, but enough to shrink the customer base enough to make many of these fine establishments unprofitable, as enough smokers get tired of shivering in the rain outside to get a puff, evicted from a private property the owner of which would gladly admit them, were not his or her license on the line. Unsurprisingly, pubs are going out of business, and the government has achieved its goal through the back door, without torches and pitchforks being shaken outside Westminster.<br /><br />I have put Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World" and Orwell's "Nineteen Eighty-Four" and "Animal Farm" near the top of my (re)reading list. I am currently reading Vernor Vinge's "Ungoverned".<br /></span><pre style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:arial;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);"><br /></span></span></pre>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-17357762208336465852009-07-12T05:32:00.000-07:002009-07-12T05:33:38.355-07:00Quote of the Day<span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-size:100%;" >Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard. - H. L. Mencken<br /></span>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-49981041102078297892009-07-03T21:09:00.000-07:002009-10-09T20:23:41.905-07:00Cashless Japan<span style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-size:100%;" ><span style="font-weight: bold;">In Japan, they are not messing around - the Japanese government appears to be considering </span></span><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-size:100%;" ><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);"><a href="http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/economics/article6531299.ece">the abolition of cash</a></span></span><span style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-size:100%;" ><span style="font-weight: bold;">. This is evil that everyone remotely concerned about freedom should be willing to rise in arms against.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">As can be expected, the idea is sold as kind of cool, sci-fi, futuristic, avant-garde to hoi polloi. A noble justification is ready for the slightly more sophisticated - "we" need to fight the evil deflation. This is BS of epic, retch-inducing proportions. </span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">The Japanese government is drowning in enormous and growing debt, even though Japan has the highest corporate tax rate in the civilized world, and is no tax haven by any stretch of the imagination when it comes to personal taxes. It is becoming increasingly hard to squeeze more taxes out of the Japanese economy. The Yen has been strengthening, which is a millstone on the neck of the export-oriented Japanese industry. The population is shrinking, especially that of working (and tax-paying) age. Furthermore, the Japanese have been enjoying a Clinton-style peace dividend for the last six decades in terms of light spending on defense - "we are pacifists now, let the Americans defend us". Yeah, well, now they've got a very assertive, industrialized China next door, a nut job in North Korea, and a "new" America that does not seem to be as eager to defend them - even if it formally keeps them under a nuclear umbrella. What's a government to do?</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Borrow and spend? It tried the Keynesian prescription in the 90's, spending over 100 trillion yen in 10 fiscal stimulus packages. That did not help, since the spending was concentrated into politically favored industries, notably construction, which took a vicious hit in 1989-1992, with real estate prices falling by 80%. Only a government bureaucrat-genius can think you can cure a burst oversupply bubble by supplying more of the good that you have a glut in. A good chunk of the money also went into keeping zombie companies "alive", even though they could never realistically be expected to become profitable and viable again. Even Paul Krugman, back when he was a reasonably bright economist, wrote: "Japan's postal savings system which channels money into public works projects that have little if any social payoff, is monumentally inefficient; so is the practice of rolling over the debts of companies that will never regain profitability and hence keeping capital employed producing what nobody wants." (Krugman 2001) What those stimulus packages did accomplish was to predictably and spectacularly expand public debt to unheard-of proportions. So to borrow now is kinda difficult, and it would help as much as it did in the 90's, unless you believe that politicians can stop being politicians.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Inflate? The monetarist prescription was tried as well. The discount rate was lowered from 6% in 1990 to 0.5% in 1995, and held there for five years. M2 grew in this period at about 2.5% per annum. This did not translate into commensurate credit expansion - the banking system was clogged with bad loans. Even an abbreviation solution was tried - yes, TARP, TALP, PPIP, etc. have a venerable predecessor - the Fiscal Investment and Loan Programme (FILP), which tried to extend loans by bypassing the banks, and loaning directly to businesses. Extend them it did, but surely enough mostly to the businesses best connected to the LDP, not to the ones that generate growth. </span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Shrink, cut spending, and deregulate? Okay, comical relief break over. That would be a bit too Austrian, we cannot have such nonsense.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">So... the government needs to stimulate consumption, which is politically easier to tax than savings. What's the best way to do that? Stealthily tax savings. Two-birds-with-one-stone solution, if there ever was one. If you remove cash from the economy, and then make interest rates negative, those evil people do not have the notorious option of stuffing cash in mattresses, which is every Keynesian's nightmare. Being able to deny access to money with a phone call to their banker to anyone who you do not like is just an added feature which would never be abused, right? Right? RIGHT?</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">The scary part is that Japan is already deemed a "testing ground". Which means, if history is a guide, that this is coming soon to an economy near you. It's just too good for any government to pass up. </span><br /></span>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-28400890227308099452009-06-21T09:49:00.001-07:002009-08-15T02:51:39.357-07:00"Meat Free Monday" by Paul McCartney<span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-size:100%;" >Paul McCartney wants you to bow to the altar of health and environmentalism, and observe the </span><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-size:100%;" ><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jun/15/paul-mccartney-meat-free-monday">Meat Free Monday</a>. Homer Simpson notably exclaimed once upon a time: "Rock stars... is there anything they don't know?"<br /><br />Dude, you were cool and cutting-edge 45 years ago, and that was mostly by piggybacking on John Lennon. Now you wanna do the same with Bono - he may be an economic ignoramus too, but at least he was mostly original. Go spoon with Al Gore.<br /><br />I hereby announce and begin promoting Paul McCartney Free Decade.<br /></span>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-86696306027102786512009-06-21T09:39:00.000-07:002009-06-21T09:47:48.190-07:00These People Want to Run Healthcare Too<span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-size:100%;" >Another moment of sheer brilliance from the U.S. Congress - we can get more people to visit the USA by... </span><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);font-size:100%;" ><span style="font-family: monospace;"></span><a href="http://patterico.com/2009/06/16/senate-bill-to-promote-foreign-tourism/">charging them $10 each in order to tell them to do so</a>. Words fail me.<br /></span>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6917492785236201119.post-20710048156536590152009-06-14T09:43:00.000-07:002009-08-19T18:11:40.832-07:00Word of the Day<pre style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: bold; font-family: arial;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia">Pareidolia</a> - basically, the tendency of the human brain to search for meaningful patterns in<br />random, meaningless data.<br /></span></pre>Plamenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14209486398849262374noreply@blogger.com0