2009-04-21

Hrmmmm.…

Travelling for work, my roller car­ryon died. Looking for places which have cheap lug­gage turned up this:

Google mapping for "Target near 20005"

I won­der how old this entry for “Target” is…

Be the second to comment on this...


2009-01-06

Cooler, Wiser

Clearly, any spe­cific assis­tance [to ail­ing finan­cial insti­tu­tions] will have to include penal­ties for those man­agers who have left their insti­tu­tions over­ex­posed. Central bank cred­i­bil­ity in enforc­ing these penal­ties will go a long way in lim­it­ing moral haz­ard. Raghuram Rajan in 2005, explain­ing how to pick up the pieces after the 2008 finan­cial col­lapse (via Paul Krugman)

The first half of the paper is about how invest­ment man­ager com­pen­sa­tion struc­tures work, and what sort of behav­iors they end up incen­tiviz­ing. After that it’s the con­se­quences (i.e. our present-day eco­nomic cri­sis) and what to do about it. Fortunately for us, the cooler and wiser heads pre­vailed, and we were able to sim­ply hand those same man­agers an addi­tional $500bn with no strings attached — which they promptly added to their cap­i­tal reserves rather than lend­ing out like it was tac­itly believed they would.

Cooler and wiser heads like present-day Obama economic-council direc­tor Larry Summers, who said (appar­ently between his pub­lic insult­ing of women in sci­ence and sup­port for glad­i­a­to­r­ial cap­i­tal­ism in Russia) that Rajan was “misguided.”

Be the first to comment on this...


2008-11-25

Completely Unaware

“I hope the best and the bright­est who will be join­ing the new pres­i­dent will at least enter­tain the pos­si­bil­ity that a lot of what they think they know is wrong,” [Serial Errorist William] Kristol added. Theresa Cook and Kate Barrett, An Economic Transition, A Political Dance, ABC News

My ques­tion: why is any­one pre­tend­ing Bill Kristol has some­thing to say worth lis­ten­ing to?

Be the second to comment on this...


2008-11-24

Just… Wow

By select­ing Tim Geithner as his Treasury sec­re­tary, Barack Obama has opted for a fig­ure who plau­si­bly rep­re­sents change while also offer­ing a high degree of con­ti­nu­ity with both the Paulson Treasury and its Clinton admin­is­tra­tion pre-decessors. Krishna Guha, Geithner ready for top job as Treasury chief, Financial Times, 2009-11-23

How can you read that and not have visions of Homer Simpson doo-doo-dooing the cir­cus theme.

Bonus Funny: The cir­cus theme is actu­ally called “Entrance of the Gladiators” and is mil­i­tary march with a nod to the Roman Empire.

Comment on this...


2008-11-09

Vision

Obama is ask­ing for ideas, and while I have no faith that they will go any­where, I sent one in anyways.

Namely, I’d like to see a sov­er­eign wealth fund ulti­mately respon­si­ble to the Treasury, under advise­ment of Commerce and Labor. The man­date for the orga­ni­za­tion would include:

  1. Ensuring restored mar­ket liq­uid­ity by sheer force of grav­ity (if pos­si­ble), or via the right of the stock­holder (as necessary).
  2. Providing ven­ture cap­i­tal to entre­pre­neurs, par­tic­u­larly in carbon-negative (e.g. clean energy, pub­lic tran­sit, etc.), eco­log­i­cally renew­ing (e.g. toxic waste cleanup/disposal, recy­cling, etc.), and high-tech (e.g. high-speed telecom­mu­ni­ca­tions) industries.
  3. A lender of last resort for sta­ble com­pa­nies dur­ing dire times (e.g. right now).

I also had points about cre­at­ing a fed­eral credit rat­ing agency, but I think the end goal would be bet­ter served by requir­ing out­side audits of credit rat­ings. I also had a point in there about invest­ing in exist­ing busi­nesses who add jobs in the U.S., but I think you’re guar­an­teed to have pretty severe cor­rup­tion in such an invest­ments pro­gram, to the point that it under­cuts the prof­itabil­ity of the program.

It isn’t a par­tic­u­larly rad­i­cal idea, most resource-rich coun­tries already have SWFs, and Sarkosy was stump­ing for this in Beijing weeks ago. Further, it’s my under­stand­ing that much of this author­ity is already held by the U.S. gov­ern­ment today. The pri­mary change is reor­ga­niz­ing the dis­parate author­i­ties into some­thing resem­bling an invest­ment bank — with the tax­payer as share­holder and a man­date for profitability.

Oversight must be absolutely air­tight, per­haps a well-funded adver­sar­ial orga­ni­za­tion within the exec­u­tive branch (a joint oper­a­tion by Justice and the SEC which pro­vides their inves­ti­ga­tors with a petri dish of what non­sense to look for in the pri­vate sec­tor — per­haps they will then be able to keep up with changes in the mar­ket?) in addi­tion to the more tra­di­tional over­sight exer­cised by Congress.

I can­not stress enough that the suc­cess of such a pro­gram — rather than it’s devo­lu­tion into a cookie jar of far­ci­cal pro­por­tions—requires that there be as many peo­ple as pos­si­ble who’s feif­doms depend on root­ing out cor­rup­tion in such a program.

Comment on this...


2008-11-07

Different Answers

A rel­a­tive of mine once con­fided that he voted for Ronald Reagan barely more than a decade after he asked that copies of The Daily Worker be mailed to him in Vietnam. I asked him why he did so, and his answer was that he “was tired of feel­ing ashamed of being an American.”

28 years later, my gen­er­a­tion answered that same chal­lenge in a com­pletely dif­fer­ent way.

Be the first to comment on this...

Didn’t Take Long

48 hours later, and I’m already com­pos­ing an apolo­gia for Obama. Well, let’s get into it on Rahm Emanuel:

  1. I live in Chicago
  2. I con­tributed money to Obama’s campaign
  3. Emanuel is the rep­re­sen­ta­tive for my district

To be hon­est, the main rea­son I had for both­er­ing to vote in the elec­tion before the bailout was to vote against Rep. Emanuel. Primarily for his efforts to oust Dean in favor of Harold Ford — in spite of the obvi­ous “right time” for Dean’s 50-state strat­egy. However, after learn­ing that he and Frank were the only ones in Congress who appeared to have any clue about what was going on, why those hap­pen­ings were so dan­ger­ous, and why the national gov­ern­ment had to step in, that choice became an ambiva­lent one.

Whatever your com­plaints against some­one, you have to respect them when they know what they are doing, and what they are doing is directly related to the biggest cri­sis in two gen­er­a­tions — as opposed to the rest of the House, which refused to pass an emer­gency bill until after they added another $300bn worth of absolutely pure bullshit.

Comment on this...


2008-10-15

The Last Debate

Some ran­dom thoughts from the debate:

  • I’ve twit­tered about this before, but I hon­estly am glad that Obama got a new pro­jec­tor for the Adler Planetarium. The plan­e­tar­ium is a mon­u­ment in it’s own right, along­side the Museum of Science and Industry, the Shedd Aquarium, and the Field Museum; the longer it oper­ates the bet­ter. Also, it appears to have increased in price by $1m since the last time McCain men­tioned it, mak­ing it per­haps the safest invest­ment in the United States.
  • Obama’s per­for­mance was pretty bad, but the fact that ACORN and Ayers are even being dis­cussed marks a return to the “flag lapel-pin” bull­shit of the Pennsylvania Democratic debate.
  • I missed the first 20 min­utes, but in what I saw nei­ther one of them men­tioned the fact that we’re on the cusp of a sec­ond global depres­sion or appeared to have any clue what to do about it.
  • Given how pre­car­i­ous our eco­nomic sit­u­a­tion is (and how bad the “real-world econ­omy” was before the credit cri­sis), a spend­ing freeze by the Federal Government would make the depres­sion longer, deeper, and more painful. The fact McCain is still push­ing that mad­ness after today’s events — and worse, fruit­cakes like that CBS News “unde­cided voter” are buy­ing it — makes him very dan­ger­ous in his own right.
  • Neither can­di­date has the right answer for edu­ca­tion. It’s very sim­ply this: teach the sci­en­tific method, log­i­cal rea­son­ing, and intel­lec­tual rigor as soon as pos­si­ble. That is the fun­da­men­tal par­ti­cle of edu­ca­tion, and the fact that we don’t drill it into stu­dents’ minds as soon as pos­si­ble is why we suck. Period. Every other edu­ca­tion pro­gram we have — vouch­ers, Head Start, char­ter schools, NCLB — is only even worth con­sid­er­ing in rela­tion to how it helps or hurts the trans­mis­sion of the basic ideas of the Enlightenment. Since we’re not trans­mit­ting those ideas any­ways, talk­ing about those other pro­grams is a waste of time.
  • McCain’s plan for more teach­ers (recruit vet­er­ans from the war and let them skip cer­ti­fi­ca­tion exams!) is 100% pure crazy.

Comment on this...


2008-10-14

Pick A Side

Compare:

In the years of its rise, the move­ment lit­tle by lit­tle brought the community’s atti­tude toward the teacher around from respect and envy to resent­ment, from trust to fear and sus­pi­cion. […] By 1933 at least five of my ten [Nazi] friends (and I think six or seven) looked upon “intel­lec­tu­als” as unre­li­able, and among these unre­li­ables, upon aca­d­e­mics as the most insid­i­ously sit­u­ated. They Thought They Were Free

Contrast:

It was only three words in his 20-minute speech announc­ing his can­di­dacy — “taught con­sti­tu­tional law.” But his stu­dents and col­leagues at the University of Chicago say those words would make Barack Obama a dif­fer­ent kind of president.

“It cer­tainly is an advan­tage that he really knows the Constitution of the United States,” said Professor Cass Sunstein. “I don’t know if we have had a pres­i­dent that knows as much about the found­ing doc­u­ment as he does.” Professor Obama was a lis­tener, stu­dents say, Sun-Times 2007-02-17

Be the first to comment on this...


2008-09-26

Notes on the Debate

[Disclosure: I live in Chicago, and have finan­cially sup­ported Obama already.]

The first note is about the orga­ni­za­tion that McCain cited at the begin­ning of his speech, Citizens Against Government Waste. The one he was using as his cita­tion for the 900-million-dollar fig­ure he was hang­ing around Obama’s neck. They’ve are a lob­by­ing orga­ni­za­tion, which has the fol­low­ing accu­sa­tions against it:

  • Astroturfing for Microsoft, against the anti-trust actions in the late 90s.
  • Astroturfing for Phillip-Morris, to label a pub­lic health cam­paign that was show­ing results in reduc­ing smok­ing “gov­ern­ment waste,” and for a tobacco-industry sup­ported anti-tobacco bill.
  • Labelling the YMCA “gov­ern­ment waste” after tak­ing con­tri­bu­tions from pri­vate health clubs.

And per­haps most damning:

  • Laundering money for Jack Abramoff

That’s who McCain was using as his source when he obliquely accused Obama of corruption.

Also worth not­ing was Obama’s descrip­tion of the prac­tice of sup­port­ing friendly dic­ta­tors the prod­uct of “a 20th cen­tury mind­set.” A bril­liant state­ment, in no small part because Obama knows how to get your mind going in the direc­tion he wants it to go. The rest of the debate I had the recur­ring sen­sa­tion that McCain sounded like a throw­back to the late 1980s — great for ironic, trashy, brit­pop. For a U.S. President? Not so much.

Comment on this...

Go backward in time