This economy won't turn around fast

I already blogged about the debt trap that has captured so many Americans before and through this credit crisis, but Paul Krugman's column today highlights why the mound of debt already accumulated might make this economic downturn very, very long:

According to Thursday’s G.D.P. report, real consumer spending fell at an annual rate of 3.1 percent in the third quarter...To appreciate the significance of these numbers, you need to know that American consumers almost never cut spending. Consumer demand kept rising right through the 2001 recession; the last time it fell even for a single quarter was in 1991, and there hasn’t been a decline this steep since 1980, when the economy was suffering from a severe recession combined with double-digit inflation. [emphasis mine]

So it's bad.  And those numbers are coming in before the crash in the Dow, and the seizing up of credit.  So when the economy is two-thirds consumer spending, can a Christmas holiday make us right?  Probably not.

American consumers have long been living beyond their means.

Here's the chart from the NY Times debt trap feature:

We've been spending more than we had for years, and now we're in a real bind.  Krugman goes into the macroeconomics, that the Fed can't even loosen up the economy because lowering interest rates can't help people who've been outspending their income for years. 

In other words, this recession's going to be here for a while.  Maybe we'll all learn a little thrift in the meantime.

Your subconscious is still racist

It turns out it's harder than just voting for equal rights to remove all the lingering social prejudices from your mind.  Check out this fascinating column as well as two tests of your subconscious preferences:

• Test 1
• Test 2

I blogged about Kristof's last column on this subject, too.

Voter suppression samples

Across the swing states, a lot of shady efforts to suppress the vote are ongoing.

A Nation of Debtors

Want to understand how America lost its way on financial sense?  Check out The Debt Trap, an interactive feature from the New York Times.

Long term fiscal stimulus: a New Deal

Renewable energy and energy efficiency could be the foundation for long term economic sustainability.  And it could provide an outlet for government to provide substantial economic stimulus in the short term.

Voter suppression is the real problem

As much as ACORN and voter fraud have been mentioned in the conservative media lately, you'd think community organizers are out stealing this election for the poor (and Democratic).  Too bad there's little evidence of that.

The Department of Justice, which according to the attorney general has "made enforcement of election fraud and corruption offenses a top priority," convicted only 24 people between 2002 and 2005 for voting fraud, an average of eight people a year.

But voter suppression is another way to undermine democracy, and it is being propogated on a much larger scale.

Voter suppression by election officials and state governments -- is widespread and validated. "Tens of thousands of eligible voters in at least six swing states have been removed from the rolls or have been blocked from registering in ways that appear to violate federal law," the New York Times recently concluded after its own investigation.

And of the specific allegations against ACORN?  Well, the same allegations were made in 2004 and every lawsuit was dismissed.

WASHINGTON - December 14 - Today, ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) announced that the last of three politically-motivated lawsuits filed against the group in the wake of its successful 2004 voter outreach drive has been "dismissed with prejudice." Each of the three cases (two in Florida and one in Ohio) were brought by partisan law firms based on unfounded allegations of "voter fraud" against the organization -- and all three cases have been dismissed.

In other words, this "voter fraud" claim is bullshit, just like 2004.  It's a politically motivated tactic to suppress Democratic voters.  And it's a campaign tactic we have to fight. 

Neat car tech: hydraulic hybrid

You cost Obama the election

Whassup: 2008 edition

And in case you forgot the original...

Time to vote: is work in the way?

Thinking about long lines at the polls impacting your ability to exercise your voting rights?  Keep in mind that most states have laws guaranteeing you time away from work to vote, even if lines are long.

Sample:

Minnesota – An employee has a right to be absent from work for the purpose of voting “during the morning of” election day. This time off is paid. (Minn. Stat. Section 204C.04)

What's the Word? Tinklenberg.

Michele Bachmann is a nutter, and now her opponent is featured in a rap.  What a race.

Obama and America's standing

A great piece on the potential for a President Obama to significantly increase America's standing in the world and why it's important (as opposed to just being a military power).

Best line:

you can’t fire cruise missiles at the global financial crisis

Palin Hatchet Job

It's about as nice as slamming community organizing.  But I think it's damn funny.

Better answers for Democrats

Why is the Democratic economic plan better than the Republican one?

Because Democrats have two fundamental beliefs: that when government acts, it should be to benefit the middle class and not the wealthy; and that when we use government to invest in the crucial functions of our economy, from health care to energy, that we have to pay for what we spend.  That's why, in a time of economic crisis, we're asking the wealthy to go back to paying taxes as they did before 2001 - since they don't need another handout - in order to sustain the middle class.

Would a Democratic President consider a judicial nominee who opposes Roe v. Wade?

A Democratic President is looking for the most qualified jurists to serve on the Supreme Court and would not use a litmus test.  That being said, the chance of their being a candidate for the Court whose judicial philosophy matches a Democratic President and yet opposes Roe v. Wade is downright infinitesimal.  You might as well talk about a Republican balancing a budget.

A moment of silence

Ever had the TV on for three minutes with no ads, taglines, splash screens or network music segments?

I tuned into the presidential debate on C-SPAN, and for the last three minutes prior to the debate, it was just a camera on the auditorium. 

w00t!

woo hoo!

YES!

How Racism Works

Thanks to MJE for the email, and to Kelvin LaFond for writing this letter to the editor on Sept. 5, 2008 in the Fort Worth Star Telegram.

What if John McCain were a former president of the Harvard Law Review?
What if Barack Obama finished fifth from the bottom of his graduating class?

What if McCain were still married to the first woman he said 'I do' to?
What if Obama were the candidate who left his first wife after she no longer measured up to his standards?

What if Michelle Obama were a wife who not only became addicted to pain killers, but acquired them illegally through her charitable organization?
What if Cindy McCain graduated from Harvard? What if Obama were a member of the 'Keating 5'? What if McCain was a charismatic, eloquent speaker?

If these questions reflected reality, do you really believe the election numbers would be as close as they are?

This is what racism does. It covers up, rationalizes and minimizes positive qualities in one candidate and emphasizes negative qualities in another when there is a color difference.

-Kelvin LaFond, Fort Worth

If you're more of a "compare the stats" person, try this from the email I received (if you're part of the anti-intellectualist wing of the Republican party, don't bother.  I know you think education is worthless):

Educational Background of Candidates
  Obama:
  Columbia University - B.A. Political Science with a Specialization in International Relations.
  Harvard - Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude

  Biden:
  University of Delaware - B.A. in History and B.A. in Political Science.
  Syracuse University College of Law - Juris Doctor (J.D.)

   vs.

  McCain:
  United States Naval Academy - Class rank: 894 of 899

  Palin:
  Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester
  North Idaho College - 2 semesters - general study
  University of Idaho - 2 semesters - journalism
  Matanuska-Susitna College - 1 semester
  University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in Journalism

McCain understands the middle class

From the last debate: should we be buying mortgages?

In last night's debate, Sen. McCain suggested that the Treasury Secretary should be buying up individual mortgages to help out homeowners. Seems like a winner for the middle class, until you read up a bit more. Get the skinny from economist Brad DeLong:

The McCain plan is:

• Take $300 billion.
• Pay double current market value to banks that have troubled mortgages on their books, thus:
  • Give a present of $100 billion to the bankers who made the loans.
  • Acquire and regularize the mortgages of only two-thirds as many homeowners as could have been accomplished if the $300 billion were invested wisely.

There's a big difference here: Democrats want to prevent depression and support the financial markets by investing taxpayer money in banks with troubled assets. Republicans want to give taxpayers money away to the shareholders and managers of banks with troubled assets.

His entire post is worth a read, because he explains the fundamental difference between the European actions and Secretary Paulson's plan, and why the former is a lot more likely to return taxpayer money.

Fiscal responsibility

If you want to see a balanced budget, here's a couple thoughts for you:

Palin, patriotism, and (payroll) taxes

Gov. Palin made a big stink in the VP debate about taxes and patriotism:

You said recently that higher taxes or asking for higher taxes or paying higher taxes is patriotic. In the middle class of America...that’s not patriotic. 

I couldn't disagree more, and Thomas Friedman has a great column today explaining why paying taxes is in fact far more patriotic than anything else Gov. Palin has suggested we do:

Palin defended the government’s $700 billion rescue plan. She defended the surge in Iraq, where her own son is now serving. She defended sending more troops to Afghanistan...

I only wish she had been asked: “Governor Palin, if paying taxes is not considered patriotic in your neighborhood, who is going to pay for the body armor that will protect your son in Iraq? Who is going to pay for the bailout you endorsed? If it isn’t from tax revenues, there are only two ways to pay for those big projects — printing more money or borrowing more money. Do you think borrowing money from China is more patriotic than raising it in taxes from Americans?” That is not putting America first. That is selling America first. (emphasis mine)

A lot of Republicans consider it a given that taxes must go down, and then spending.  But we've tried that for every Republican administration since Ronald Reagan, and each time it's simply led to deficits and massive increases in the national debt. 

This is the issue: we currently spend what Americans expect from their government, but we don't ask them to pay for it.  Cutting spending means cutting programs Americans want, from defense to health care. 

It's time to do like the American family does in a pinch - try to make more money - and raise taxes.  Because it is patriotic to earn your living.

Election 2008: a chance to conquer unconscious racism

The studies show that conscious prejudice has been on the decline for years, but that unconscious prejudice has been fairly steady.  The problem is that the prejudice rarely happens in a clear-cut fashion:

Whites are particularly likely to discriminate against blacks when choices are not clear-cut and competing arguments are flying about...

For example, when the black job candidate is highly qualified, there is no discrimination. Yet in a more muddled gray area where reasonable people could disagree, unconscious discrimination plays a major role.

White participants recommend hiring a white applicant with borderline qualifications 76 percent of the time, while recommending an identically qualified black applicant only 45 percent of the time.

The subconscious prejudice unfortunately plays out in the election campaign:

a careful survey completed last month by Stanford University, with The Associated Press and Yahoo, suggested that Mr. Obama’s support would be about six percentage points higher if he were white

It may seem that solving this problem is beyond us. 

But another lesson, a historical one, is that we can overcome unconscious bias. That’s what happened with the decline in prejudice against Catholics after the candidacy of John F. Kennedy in 1960.

Sarah Palin's Debate Flow Chart

Now you, too, can be a Vice Presidential candidate and successfully navigate your first debate.

Thanks to EJ for the email and to Huffington Post for the image. 

McCain: how many times can you flip-flop in one interview?

Skip to 1:45 for John McCain's opinion(s) on the bailout bill that just passed. Many opinions, my precious.

Debate: Palin better than before, still not qualified

CNN did the fastest post-debate polling:

• Palin: 84% of debate watchers thought she overcame expectations (she stood, she breathed, success), but less than half think she's qualified to be President.  
• Biden: Debate viewers also thought Biden performed better, overwhelmingly agreed that he's qualified to be president, and thought he sounded more intelligent.

Neither candidate told the truth the whole way - get the debate facts at FactCheck.org.

My reactions:

• Palin stuck with the strategy of "if I don't know the answer, I won't give an answer," falling back to talking points and slogans.  She's great at slogans.  Won't help much if she becomes president (see: Current Occupant), though I'm glad she wants to put "country first, government on the side of the people, be a maverick, blah blah blah."
• Biden clearly showed he knows what running the country involves, particularly with the nuances required for good foreign policy.  His best line was probably in describing the McCain health care plan that will tax $12,000 in benefits in exchange for a $5,000 tax credit - "that's a bridge to nowhere."

If the election were held today and the polls were accurate, Obama would win in a landslide.  I don't think Palin did enough to change the game.

Senate bailout passes (with lard)

The Senate took the failed House bill and sexed it up with a few juicy (and often unrelated) components to win some more votes.  It passed this evening.

Some of the additions:

• Increasing FDIC insurance to $250,000 from $100,000 (the maximum you get back if your bank goes under)
• Renewables and "renewables"
  
• Extending the renewable energy credits for wind and biofuel for 1 year, and for other technologies for 2 years
• Lots of coal related tax credits (for things like "refined coal," "advanced" coal and "coal gasification")
• Tax credits for plug-in hybrid cars
  
• Mental health parity for health insurance (yay!)

And then there are a few smaller items like this:

• SEC. 503. EXEMPTION FROM EXCISE TAX FOR CERTAIN WOODEN ARROWS DESIGNED FOR USE BY CHILDREN.
• SEC. 325. EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF DUTY SUSPENSION ON WOOL PRODUCTS

I think I agree with Paul Krugman that this stinks, but may be necessary.

VP Debate Preview from an expert

He debated Sarah Palin over 20 times in the 2006 Alaska governor's campaign.  What's it like debating Governor Palin?

She's a master, not of facts, figures, or insightful policy recommendations, but at the fine art of the nonanswer, the glittering generality.

She's not much for facts or figures (or knowledge). 

"I watch you at these debates with no notes, no papers, and yet when asked questions, you spout off facts, figures, and policies, and I'm amazed. But then I look out into the audience and I ask myself, 'Does any of this really matter?' " Palin said.

 So what's a policy wonk like Biden to do?

With shorter question-and-answer times and limited interaction between the two, he should simply ignore Palin in a respectful manner on the stage and answer the questions as though he were alone. Any attempt to flex his public-policy knowledge and show Palin is not ready for prime time will inevitably cast him in the role of the bully.

What Rep. Sherman wants for the bailout

Discussion Points on Bailout Plan (hat tip to TPM)

1) Supervision. The Secretary of the Treasury shall not enter into
any contracts or purchase agreements unless such contract or purchase
agreement is approved by a bipartisan three member Board. Before we
pass the bill, Bush must unequivocally agree to appoint one person
selected by the Speaker and one selected by the Senate Majority Leader
to the Board. Asset purchase agreements of less than $1 billion and
service contracts providing for fees of less than $10 million are exempt
from this requirement.

2) Fast track for Regulatory & Corporate Governance Reform.
Throughout the 111th Congress, the Speaker of the House of
Representatives and the Majority Leader of the United States Senate,
shall have the following extraordinary power: to call up any bill
dealing with corporate governance and/or financial services reform under
the following rules: the bill shall be subject to limited debate,
followed by an up or down vote.

3) Tough Standards on Executive Compensation. Upon the sale of any
mortgage related asset to the United States Treasury by any corporation,
the following shall be applicable: any executive compensation contract
calling for compensation in excess of the amounts which are deductible
under Internal Revenue Code Section 162(m), is hereby void as against
public policy. No executive compensation agreement or practice shall be
engaged in by the selling entity, providing for compensation that is not
deductible under Internal Revenue Code 162(m). This provision is
applicable to the entity selling a mortgage related assets to the
Treasury and all affiliates of such entity. Affiliates is as defined in
Internal Revenue Code Section 1504.

4) US Investors Only: No mortgage related asset shall be purchased
under the bill unless it is established that such asset was owned on
September 20th, 2008, by an entity headquartered in the United States.

5) Obligation to invest in the United States. Any entity selling
assets under this bill to the United States must agree to invest the
proceeds of such sale in the United States for no less than 5 years.

6) Homeowner States Rights Not Preempted. The federal government
in its role as holder of any mortgage, shall have no greater rights via
the mortgagor than would a private entity owning said mortgage. The
federal government shall comply with all state and local laws which
protect such mortgagor, not withstanding any argument that the federal
government is exempt therefrom.

7) Reports to Congress. The reports to Congress required by
Section 4 of the Paulson Act shall be rendered every 2 weeks, for so
long as said act is effective.

8) Minority and small business contractors Buy American. At least
10% of the asset (in dollar volume) management contracts and advisor
contracts must be small enough that a firm of 100 or fewer staff could
perform the contract. Otherwise, minority and small business will be
effectively excluded. In contracting with private entities for services
regarding the acquisition and management of mortgage related assets, the
Secretary of the Treasury shall be bound by all applicable laws designed
to benefit minority-owned businesses, women-owned businesses, and small
businesses and shall be bound by all applicable "Buy American"
provisions.

9) Review. Section 8 of Secretary Paulson's proposal is deleted.
The actions by the Secretary shall be reviewable by administrative
agencies and courts of law as provided by existing law.

10) Homeowner protection/bankruptcy reform.

11) Economic Stimulus.

Why many Democrats opposed the bailout

Unvarnished, a memo by one of the rebellious Democratic House members on why he opposed the bailout plan as written.

TAXPAYERS HIGHLY UNLIKELY TO RECOUP ANY OF THE COSTS -- Brad Sherman 9/29/08

We know that the Bailout Bill allows million-dollar-a-month salaries to executives of bailed-out firms, and it allows hundreds of billions to be used to buy toxic assets currently held by foreign investors. But we are told: "don't worry, this $700 billion bill won't cost us anything. We will get it all back next decade through a revenue bill."

I. Section 134 of the Bailout Bill merely says that the President must submit a revenue bill to Congress in 2013 that recoups from the financial industry the taxpayers' net losses.

a. If the President has any revenue ideas he actually likes, he would submit them to us anyway.
b. If the President submits revenue ideas only because he is forced to by Section 134, he will send it to us with a note saying that he believes they are bad for the country, and reserves the right to veto.
c. The Bailout Bill does not automatically enact any revenue increases, nor protect a revenue bill from filibuster or veto.

II. Congress is unlikely to pass a tax increase bill of hundreds of billions of dollars in 2013.

a. Tax increase bills are anathema to many.
b. 41 Senators can block the plan. We're giving Wall Street enough money to hire 4100 lobbyists.
c. In recent years, Wall Street has easily defeated every attempt to close every loophole that they exploit, no matter how pernicious-even the abusive use of Cayman Island tax havens by hedge fund managers, who thereby pay zero tax.

III. Any tax on the financial industry would make the good banks pay a huge tax so we can recoup what we gave to the bad banks.

a. Section 134 says the tax will be on "the financial industry." It does not provide for a tax on just those firms that received bailout payments.
b. A bank that doesn't get a bailout payment still pays the tax.
c. Community banks and perhaps credit unions will also be subject to the tax, so we can recoup what we gave to Wall Street.

IV. It is impossible to draft a tax that hits only those firms that received bailout payments, and even more impossible to draft one that taxes each bank in proportion to how much money we lost on its toxic assets.

a. There are no provisions to even keep track of losses on each asset purchased as it is managed over the years. Assets purchased from several
banks will be pooled, managed, and sold together, and we can never know how much we lost on assets purchased from any one bank.
b. If three banks in the year 2013 have the same income and size and operations, they will all pay the same tax-even if one got no bailout payments, a second got a million dollars, and a third got a billion dollars.
c. Many bailed-out firms won't exist in 2013.

1. Some will go under.
2. Some bailed-out firms are only shell companies. Example: Assume the Bank of Shanghai has $30 billion in toxic assets. It will sell these to the tiny subsidiary it has incorporated in California. The subsidiary will then sell these to the Treasury in 2009, and will be dissolved long before 2013.
3. Many bailed-out firms will still be unprofitable in 2013.
4. Some bailed-out firms will move offshore before 2013.

d. The whole purpose of the bill is to improve the balance sheets of the bailed-out firms. If particular bailed-out firms owe us the money they receive, they would have to list this as a liability, and the bill would fail to improve their balance sheets.

In 2013 we will not pass a tax bill that imposes hundreds of billions of dollars of taxes on the financial services industry, including those banks that got no bailouts, community banks, and credit unions. A tax bill imposed only on those entities that got bailout payments is impossible to draft, and contrary to the purposes of the Bill.

If it were easy to pass a bill to recoup hundreds of billions of dollars through taxes to be imposed in 2013 and thereafter, then provisions imposing such taxes would be in today's bill.

Wall Street gets their money now, and we get it back never.

Take your pick: high gas prices or none at all

Hurricane Ike shut down a lot of refining capacity in the South, and the result is gasoline shortages and gas stations running out of gas.

One culprit: "gas gouging" legislation. Stations don't want to raise prices to reduce demand, so they run out of fuel instead.

Foreign policy: can experience temper belligerence?

Times columnists Nicholas Kristof frequently writes on international issues and rarely on politics, but he breaks from that tradition to warn how Sen. McCain may be a return to the foreign policy of the first Bush term.

Although he is frantically trying to distance himself from President Bush, Mr. McCain, by his own accounting, would be more Bushian in foreign policy than even Mr. Bush is now.

Let's start with Iran, with its theocratic regime, hatred of Israel, and interest in nuclear armaments. 

Iran seems determined to continue its uranium enrichment and will be vexing for any president. But Mr. Bush, under the influence of Bob Gates and Condoleezza Rice, has realized that the best hope is diplomacy and negotiation. In contrast, Mr. McCain denounces Barack Obama’s call for direct talks with Iranian leaders and speaks openly about the possibility of bombing Iranian nuclear sites. 

“There’s only one thing worse than military action against Iran, and that is a nuclear-armed Iran,” Mr. McCain has told me and others, repeating the line regularly. That’s a nice sound bite, but it suggests that if Iran continues to enrich uranium he would feel obliged to launch airstrikes...

So if Iran continues its policies as most expect, we might well find ourselves under a McCain presidency headed toward our third war with a Muslim country.

And then there's the newly belligerent Russia.

Russia underscores Mr. McCain’s penchant for risk-taking, theatrics and fulmination. Most striking, he wants to kick Russia out of the Group of 8.

Mr. McCain’s lead-with-the-chin approach to Russia reflects the same pugnacity that resulted in obscenity-laced dust-ups with fellow Republican senators, but it’s less endearing when the risk is nuclear war. Do we really want to risk an exchange of nuclear warheads over Abkhazia or South Ossetia? The Spanish prime minister, José Zapatero, told me a few days ago that what he fears most under a McCain administration is a revival of the cold war with Russia.

Anyone recall the ad, Daisy?

Palin: ready to lead

A great debate

If you missed it, you can still catch the first presidential campaign debate here.  The best?  Plenty of time for the candidates to go back and forth, to challenge inaccuracies and to provide point-counterpoint.  It was a DEBATE.

I hope the other two live up to this.

Oh, and if you haven't, always follow up your debate watch with a visit to Factcheck.org.  Get the truth.

Bernanke: pass this bailout or a recession is coming

Top story:

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke bluntly warned reluctant lawmakers Tuesday they risk a recession with higher unemployment and increased home foreclosures if they fail to pass the Bush administration's $700 billion plan to bail out the financial industry.

Hmm.  The administration comes up with a plan that is getting a lot of skepticism, wants it passed in a hurry and with little guarantee that it can solve the crisis.   Sound familiar?  Let's flash back to 2002:

On NBC's "Meet the Press," Vice President Dick Cheney accused Saddam of moving aggressively to develop nuclear weapons over the past 14 months to add to his stockpile of chemical and biological arms.

...[Condoleezza] Rice acknowledged that "there will always be some uncertainty" in determining how close Iraq may be to obtaining a nuclear weapon but said, "We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud."

That kind of talk lying led to six years in Iraq with no clear strategy and a multi hundred billion dollar price tag.  Ready to bring our Iraq strategy home?

Grape Juice as Good as Wine

Need a non-alcoholic life-extender?  Grape juice has nearly all the same benefits as wine.

Comparing presidential tax plans

Which do you prefer, tax cuts with debt or tax cuts that are paid for?  That's your choice in the tax plans of the campaign.  McCain's plans skews to the rich (in percent of income and absolute dollars) and will increase the deficit.  Obama's plan offers tax cuts skewed toward the middle class and pays for it with an income tax surcharge on the very rich.

 

Obama: bailout Main Street not just Wall Street

Obama's response to the bailout proposal:

Why this bailout is not the right one

Taxpayers are about to ante up $700 billion to save the financial giants.  But what do we get in return?

Paul Krugman analyzes the bailout and his comments can be summarized as this:

• It's not clear that the bailout can actually accomplish its goal.
• Even if it does, it may do so by over-paying for bad mortgages and leaving taxpayers with nothing in return.
• We'd be a lot better off with a plan that involves injecting capital into failing firms in exchange for stock, rather than buying up their worthless assets.   In this plan, if the financial giants recover (the whole point), taxpayers get something in return.

Here's the full story:

What is this bailout supposed to do? Will it actually serve the purpose? What should we be doing instead? Let’s talk.

First, a capsule analysis of the crisis.

1. It all starts with the bursting of the housing bubble. This has led to sharply increased rates of default and foreclosure, which has led to large losses on mortgage-backed securities.

2. The losses in MBS, in turn, have left the financial system undercapitalized — doubly so, because levels of leverage that were previously considered acceptable are no longer OK.

3. The financial system, in its efforts to deleverage, is contracting credit, placing everyone who depends on credit under strain.

4. There’s also, to some extent, a vicious circle of deleveraging: as financial firms try to contract their balance sheets, they drive down the prices of assets, further reducing capital and forcing more deleveraging.

So where in this process does the Temporary Asset Relief Plan offer any, well, relief? The answer is that it possibly offers some respite in stage 4: the Treasury steps in to buy assets that the financial system is trying to sell, thereby hopefully mitigating the downward spiral of asset prices.

But the more I think about this, the more skeptical I get about the extent to which it’s a solution. Problems:

(a) Although the problem starts with mortgage-backed securities, the range of assets whose prices are being driven down by deleveraging is much broader than MBS. So this only cuts off, at most, part of the vicious circle.

(b) Anyway, the vicious circle aspect is only part of the larger problem, and arguably not the most important part. Even without panic asset selling, the financial system would be seriously undercapitalized, causing a credit crunch — and this plan does nothing to address that.

Or I should say, the plan does nothing to address the lack of capital unless the Treasury overpays for assets. And if that’s the real plan, Congress has every right to balk.

So what should be done? Well, let’s think about how, until Paulson hit the panic button, the private sector was supposed to work this out: financial firms were supposed to recapitalize, bringing in outside investors to bulk up their capital base. That is, the private sector was supposed to cut off the problem at stage 2.

It now appears that isn’t happening, and public intervention is needed. But in that case, shouldn’t the public intervention also be at stage 2 — that is, shouldn’t it take the form of public injections of capital, in return for a stake in the upside?

Let’s not be railroaded into accepting an enormously expensive plan that doesn’t seem to address the real problem.

But the red sauce was my ticket to the cockpit!

Bruce Schneier is, frankly, a genius when it comes to security issues.  Unlike the TSA and so many government agencies, he notes HOW rules and regulations make use more secure.  His latest treatise is the liquids ban from plane flights.

There are two classes of contraband at airport security checkpoints: the class that will get you in trouble if you try to bring it on an airplane, and the class that will cheerily be taken away from you if you try to bring it on an airplane. This difference is important: Making security screeners confiscate anything from that second class is a waste of time. All it does is harm innocents; it doesn't stop terrorists at all.  

Why doesn't it work?  Because for items that are caught and carry a consequence,  the potential consequence has a deterrent effect.  Bring a gun to a airport and you'll be meeting with police for a while.  If items are confiscated with no consequence (liquids), then it means that screeners must catch every single person, because there's never a deterrent to trying to bring a liquid explosive on board.

If some copycat terrorists try to bring their liquid bomb through airport security and the screeners catch them -- like they caught me with my bottle of pasta sauce -- the terrorists can simply try again. They can try again and again. They can keep trying until they succeed. Because there are no consequences to trying and failing, the screeners have to be 100 percent effective. Even if they slip up one in a hundred times, the plot can succeed.

In other words, skip the liquids ban or start giving folks a hard time for it.  Otherwise, it's just an empty gesture.

2008 Campaign: Some media are aware of the lies

A stunning piece in TIME Magazine looks at the persistence of lying the presidential campaign, singling out Senator McCain for:

a ceaseless assault on his opponent's character and policies, featuring a consistent—and witting—disdain for the truth.

It's not as though the Democratic campaign and Senator Obama are innocent of the typical political monkeying with truth, but McCain has taken the lying to a new level by unreproachfully repeating falsehoods even when confronted with truth. 

John McCain has raised serious questions about whether he has the character to lead the nation. He has defaced his beloved military code of honor. He has run a dirty campaign.

What do you call...

Seen on Slashdot:

What do you call a hockey mom who preaches abstinence only?

A grandma

McCain - sounding a lot like Herbert Hoover

Responding to the collapse of several major investment banks this week, John McCain reassured us, "I think still -- the fundamentals of our economy are strong." That move comes from an old playbook: On Oct. 25, 1929, Herbert Hoover declared, "The fundamental business of the country, that is the production and distribution of commodities, is on a sound and prosperous basis."

McCain's fault is not just a lack of perspective on the economy, but also a willful support of deregulation that caused much of today's financial crisis.

What [McCain] doesn't talk much about is how deregulation happened. It was the 1999 Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act that repealed the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act and thus eliminated the depression-era walls between between banking, investment, and insurance that made this crisis possible. Glass-Stegall erected walls between banking, investment management, and insurance, so problems in one sector could not spill over into the others, which is precisely what is happening now. The primary author of that legislation was none other than his economic advisor, former senator Phil Gramm (who thinks the country is in a "mental recession"). McCain fully supported the bill and has a decades-long track record of opposing government regulation of the financial industry. His new-found conversion to being a fan of regulation is going to be a tough sell as Obama is already pointing out that McCain got what he wanted (deregulation) and this is the consequence.

The sin of symmetry

An interesting piece from the Washington Post that notes the media's penchant for symmetry (instead of being objective, truth seekers) and how it's allowing the McCain campaign to run roughshod over the truth.

The most outrageous of McCain's distortions involve Obama on taxes. He asserts that Obama's new taxes could "break your family budget," and that an Obama presidency would inflict "painful tax increases on working American families." Hardly. Obama would lower taxes for most households, and lower them more than McCain would. The only "painful tax increases on working American families" would be on working families making more than $250,000.

Likewise, the McCain campaign has its story about Sarah Palin, and it's sticking with it -- facts be damned. She said "thanks but no thanks" to that "Bridge to Nowhere," except that she didn't: She backed the bridge until it was unpopular, then scooped up the money and used it for other projects. More than a year after McCain began railing against the bridge, Palin, then a gubernatorial candidate, said the state should build it "now -- while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist." 

 Obama's not innocent of stretching the truth, but he's also got enough of a conscience to stop lying when he's caught.  McCain, on the other hand, is "playing to win."

White privilege and this election

From Tim Wise, an excellent writer and thinker on racism in America:

For those who still can't grasp the concept of white privilege, or who are constantly looking for some easy-to-understand examples of it, perhaps this list will help.

• White privilege is when you can get pregnant at seventeen like Bristol Palin and everyone is quick to insist that your life and that of your family is a personal matter, and that no one has a right to judge you or your parents, because "every family has challenges," even as black and Latino families with similar "challenges" are regularly typified as irresponsible, pathological and arbiters of social decay.
• White privilege is when you can call yourself a "fuckin' redneck," like Bristol Palin's boyfriend does, and talk about how if anyone messes with you, you'll "kick their fuckin' ass," and talk about how you like to "shoot shit" for fun, and still be viewed as a responsible, all-American boy (and a great son-in-law to be) rather than a thug.
• White privilege is when you can attend four different colleges in six years like Sarah Palin did (one of which you basically failed out of, then returned to after making up some coursework at a community college), and no one questions your intelligence or commitment to achievement, whereas a person of color who did this would be viewed as unfit for college, and probably someone who only got in in the first place because of affirmative action.
• White privilege is when you can claim that being mayor of a town smaller than most medium-sized colleges, and then Governor of a state with about the same number of people as the lower fifth of the island of Manhattan, makes you ready to potentially be president, and people don't all piss on themselves with laughter, while being a black U.S. Senator, two-term state Senator, and constitutional law scholar, means you're "untested."
• White privilege is being able to say that you support the words "under God" in the pledge of allegiance because "if it was good enough for the founding fathers, it's good enough for me," and not be immediately disqualified from holding office--since, after all, the pledge was written in the late 1800s and the "under God" part wasn't added until the 1950s--while believing that reading accused criminals and terrorists their rights (because, ya know, the Constitution, which you used to teach at a prestigious law school requires it), is a dangerous and silly idea only supported by mushy liberals.
• White privilege is being able to be a gun enthusiast and not make people immediately scared of you. White privilege is being able to have a husband who was a member of an extremist political party that wants your state to secede from the Union, and whose motto was "Alaska first," and no one questions your patriotism or that of your family, while if you're black and your spouse merely fails to come to a 9/11 memorial so she can be home with her kids on the first day of school, people immediately think she's being disrespectful.
• White privilege is being able to make fun of community organizers and the work they do--like, among other things, fight for the right of women to vote, or for civil rights, or the 8-hour workday, or an end to child labor--and people think you're being pithy and tough, but if you merely question the experience of a small town mayor and 18-month governor with no foreign policy expertise beyond a class she took in college--you're somehow being mean, or even sexist.
• White privilege is being able to convince white women who don't even agree with you on any substantive issue to vote for you and your running mate anyway, because all of a sudden your presence on the ticket has inspired confidence in these same white women, and made them give your party a "second look."
• White privilege is being able to fire people who didn't support your political campaigns and not be accused of abusing your power or being a typical politician who engages in favoritism, while being black and merely knowing some folks from the old-line political machines in Chicago means you must be corrupt.
• White privilege is being able to attend churches over the years whose pastors say that people who voted for John Kerry or merely criticize George W. Bush are going to hell, and that the U.S. is an explicitly Christian nation and the job of Christians is to bring Christian theological principles into government, and who bring in speakers who say the conflict in the Middle East is God's punishment on Jews for rejecting Jesus, and everyone can still think you're just a good church-going Christian, but if you're black and friends with a black pastor who has noted (as have Colin Powell and the U.S. Department of Defense) that terrorist attacks are often the result of U.S. foreign policy and who talks about the history of racism and its effect on black people, you're an extremist who probably hates America.
• White privilege is not knowing what the Bush Doctrine is when asked by a reporter, and then people get angry at the reporter for asking you such a "trick question," while being black and merely refusing to give one-word answers to the queries of Bill O'Reilly means you're dodging the question, or trying to seem overly intellectual and nuanced.
• White privilege is being able to claim your experience as a POW has anything at all to do with your fitness for president, while being black and experiencing racism is, as Sarah Palin has referred to it a "light" burden.
• And finally, white privilege is the only thing that could possibly allow someone to become president when he has voted with George W. Bush 90 percent of the time, even as unemployment is skyrocketing, people are losing their homes, inflation is rising, and the U.S. is increasingly isolated from world opinion, just because white voters aren't sure about that whole "change" thing. Ya know, it's just too vague and ill-defined, unlike, say, four more years of the same, which is very concrete and certain.

White privilege is, in short, the problem. 

Tim Wise is the author of White Like Me (Soft Skull, 2005, revised 2008), and of Speaking Treason Fluently, publishing this month, also by Soft Skull. For review copies or interview requests, please reply to publicity@softskull.com

Your health news lacks good journalism

Tip of the hat to Minnpost for its story on health news journalism and a new website that helps rank health stories based on their willingness to engage some healthy skepticism of their sources.  Many of the doctors that provide quotes and opinions for medical stories are given a lot of money by pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers. 

Check your sources!

The presidential debate schedule

This is where a lot of Americans end up making their voting decision - the debates.  A chance to see candidates speaking unfiltered by the media and unvarnished by advertising polish.  Mark your calendars!

First presidential debate:
Friday, September 26
University of Mississippi, Oxford, MS

Vice presidential debate:
Thursday, October 2
Washington University in St. Louis, MO

Second presidential debate:
Tuesday, October 7
Belmont University, Nashville, TN

Third presidential debate:
Wednesday, October 15
Hofstra University, Hempstead, N

What is price gouging?

Gas is up to $5 a gallon in areas affected by Hurricane Ike, prompting a lot of people to complain of price gouging.  But what is price gouging?  Robert Rapier writes about the issue, and feels that it's a question of intent - are prices rising because...

• inventories are short?
• or, because folks get greedy?

We're better off having $10 a gallon gas if it means there's still some in the tanks, than $4 a gallon gas with empty tanks.

My idea would be that the state government should institute an emergency gas tax of at least $2 a gallon during these kinds of natural disasters.  The increased price would help reduce supply shortages and the revenue can be given back as a per capita tax rebate or used for disaster relief. 

Cleaning Blog House - #3

It's at times like these I think "I have a list of useful things I could be doing." Thus, I am blogging.

This evening, an essay on the reasons soldiers sign up for the military - the non-patriotic ones. Some interesting anecdotes, and not a comprehensive or scientific study. A sample:

Among the first I approached was Jason Thomas Adams, a slender young man dressed in a cook's white uniform. A twenty-five-year-old private from Brooklyn, Adams had joined the Army only nine months earlier. He had never really expected to, he told me—he'd wanted to be a police officer. After graduating from high school, he had enrolled in the John Jay School of Criminal Justice. To help pay the tuition, he worked at two jobs—Paragon Sports and a restaurant on Second Avenue—but quickly went into debt.

Meanwhile, he got married, his wife got pregnant, and he had no health care. From a brother in the military, he had learned of the Army's many benefits, and, visiting a recruiter, he heard about Tricare, the military's generous health plan. He also learned that the Army would repay his education loans. And so he signed up. When I asked about September 11 and service to the country, he said flatly that it had had nothing to do with his decision.

Cleaning Blog House - #2

I started this in July and clearly hold my career in too high a regard to prioritize a reduction in my "I should blog this" bookmark folder. Well, here's the second post. At this rate I'll be done in 2023.

So now the administration knows that it can make unsubstantiated claims, without paying a price when those claims prove false, and that saber rattling gains it votes and silences opposition. Maybe it will honorably refuse to act on this dangerous knowledge. But I can't help worrying that in domestic politics, as in foreign policy, this war will turn out to have been the shape of things to come.

Paul Krugman, writing in 2003 about the domestic impact of the Bush Administration's success with lying into Iraq.

Things you probably (don't) know

It's a new era in presidential campaigns: lie until you get caught...then lie some more. What might you believe if they stopped lying?

• Gov. Palin did support the bridge to nowhere, before the feds cut the funds.
• Barack Obama's economic plan will cut taxes for 95% of Americans. If you read are reading this blog, that's you.
• McCain's economic plan will not take money from public schools.
• McCain no longer says the economy is sound.

This takes me back to a FactCheck.org story I meant to blog about ages ago: when we hear lies about the candidates, they tend to stick, even after they've been debunked. Not only that, we may even attribute the falsehood to the debunker (e.g. I heard that on FactCheck.org!). Crazy.

Palin - unfiltered

Prepare yourself for a "blizzard of words."

Lipstick on a pig

I'll let Obama respond to this latest example of "phony outrage":

Online gamers use science to win

When kids want to win in online games, they do two things:
1) Create a hypothesis
2) Gather data to test it (in a spreadsheet, of course).

A fascinating look at the way kids unknowingly bring the scientific method to their online, free-time pursuits.  In her survey of chat rooms for these online role playing games, the author found:

A majority [of posts] -- 86 percent -- were aimed specifically at analyzing the hidden ruleset of games.  More than half the gamers used "systems-based reasoning" -- analyzing the game as a complex, dynamic system. And one-tenth actually constructed specific models to explain the behavior of a monster or situation; they would often use their model to generate predictions. Meanwhile, one-quarter of the commentors would build on someone else's previous argument, and another quarter would issue rebuttals of previous arguments and models.

These are all hallmarks of scientific thought. Indeed, the conversations often had the precise flow of a scientific salon, or even a journal series: Someone would pose a question -- like what sort of potions a high-class priest ought to carry around, or how to defeat a particular monster -- and another would post a reply, offering data and facts gathered from their own observations. Others would jump into the fray, disputing the theory, refining it, offering other facts. Eventually, once everyone was convinced the theory was supported by the data, the discussion would peter out.

Too bad your average science class isn't so interesting (sorry, SPH).

Replying to fan mail in the pre-computer era

A clever checklist of frequently desired answers.

Yes/no weather report

If it's accurate, it's a nice way to plan for your commute: Umbrella Today?

Government privatization undone - by Bush

Formerly government-owned, then government-back private mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have returned to the federal fold.

For a more detailed story, check out this coverage from non-profit news source, MinnPost.

Defeat is Victory - health care measure pulled

In Ohio, petitioners just gave in to pressure and withdrew their ballot measure mandating paid sick leave for all Ohio workers. The Ohio House speaker (a Republican) responded with this:

“This is a victory for all Ohioans. This proposal would have hurt Ohio businesses and driven jobs out of our state. It was poorly crafted, confused voters and would have placed Ohio at a significant disadvantage to compete with other states, much less in the global economy,”

No guarantee of staying home for a day without losing pay, whether you have a cold or cancer.  Some victory.

Hypocrisy 101: the "gender card"

Nine months ago, conservative commentators and candidates said Hillary shouldn't be a whiner when she talked about sexism in American politics.  Where are they now that they have a female vice presidential candidate?  Let's check with the Daily Show (hat tip to Shadoweyes for the idea that I should post this):

Marital discord has a genetic component in men

Men are more likely to be devoted and loyal husbands when they lack a particular variant of a gene that influences brain activity...which is present in two of every five men...[it] also appears to predict whether women involved with these men are likely to say their partners are emotionally close and available, or distant and disagreeable. The presence of the gene variant, or allele, also seems predictive of whether men get married or live with women without getting married. 

Obviously, it's not just genes that determine marital fidelity and harmony, but it's fascinating to see how science continues to discover the role of nature in complex relationships.

Is rebuilding New Orleans smart?

A very thoughtful piece on whether it's the smartest idea to try and rebuild a seaside town, below sea-level, with the water rising and the land sinking.

Other towns faced with recurring disaster threats have decided to move.

Social security - it IS security

Why it's important not to mess with a good thing...

66 percent — 66 percent — of Social Security beneficiaries 65 and older derive more than half their income from the program. A third of beneficiaries derive 90 percent or more of their income from the program.

Toss the Q-tip

The latest research says trying to remove excess ear wax only causes more problems.  The best move?  Leave it alone.

"The conclusion is that the mere presence of ear wax does not require anything," Roland said. If the ears are functioning, and there is no problem, most people should do nothing. And that includes resisting the urge to use a cotton-tipped swab to clean out the ear, he said.

Obama's economic message

It's not pithy or succinct, but it's insightful as only a longer essay can be:  Obamanomics.  Obama also shares that he really loves the following quote from Robert F. Kennedy, about the true measure of economic prosperity.

"Too much and too long, we seem to have surrendered community excellence and community values in the mere accumulation of material things. Our gross national product ... if we should judge America by that - counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage. It counts special locks for our doors and the jails for those who break them. It counts the destruction of our redwoods and the loss of our natural wonder in chaotic sprawl. It counts napalm and the cost of a nuclear warhead, and armored cars for police who fight riots in our streets. It counts Whitman's rifle and Speck's knife, and the television programs which glorify violence in order to sell toys to our children.

"Yet the gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education, or the joy of their play. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages; the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials. It measures neither our wit nor our courage; neither our wisdom nor our learning; neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country; it measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile. And it tells us everything about America except why we are proud that we are Americans."

Beijing Olympics: a resounding success for everything but democracy

Thank you, Jay, for being one of a few Olympic journalists to actually scrutinize the Games in the context of the real world.  This short story notes that the Games were a huge success for host country China, but a real failure in pressuring the Chinese to open their political system and allow basic political freedoms.

Around the sports, there were promises broken. The major Catch-22 was the so-called protest zones. Those alone are not unusual. At the U.S. political conventions in Denver and St. Paul, similar zones for demonstrations have been set aside. They were established in Athens and Sydney, too, for previous Games.

But here, it's been reported in the Western media, if a Chinese citizen applied for a protest permit, they instead were arrested. (emphasis mine)

...As for Darfur and Tibet, they were distant shouts amid the festive din. The only news was that visas were denied to Darfur advocates. It's too bad there was such a news blackout.

Hard to believe that before the Games began, there were a number of highly respected journalists and democracy advocates calling these the Genocide Olympics.  All I heard about was Michael Phelps.

P.S. Though he was awesome.

Overcoming butterfly ballots

Election officials are gearing up for a predicted massive turnout for the 2008 presidential election, trying to ensure an adequate supply of ballots, voting machines, and election judges (I'm one!).

One of the big hang-ups in obtaining a smooth and accurate tally is actually the ballot itself, which can be designed more carefully to make it easier for voters to register their true intent.  Check out this interactive feature on ballot design.

Second personalities in video games

One of the classic highbrow defenses of videogames is that they allow you to experience new personalities -- to, in the words of Sherry Turkle, create a "second self." This is considered supremely healthy, because self-exploration is generally a good thing.

But what happens if the second self you create inside videogames turns out to be a total dick?

Click through for an insightful look at how video games allow us to try on different personalities and sometimes unlease the inner douchebag.

Charting health care

Paul Krugman provides an illustration of the presidential candidates' health care plans versus "busienss as usual."  While no one covers everyone, Obama's plan is the only one that shrinks the number of uninsured.

Stop the phone books

Via Lifehacker -

Finally, a way to stop receiving phone books.  Are they good for anything anymore?  At my house, they've gone straight from doorstep to recycling bin for years.

Autographed copy of Plato's Republic

From the Best of Craigslist. 

Date: 2008-07-09, 11:00AM CDT

1st edition of The Republic signed by its author. There is of course a reasonable amount of wear and tear, (light highlighting and underlining, dog-eared pages, back cover missing, etc.), but it is in overall good condition considering its age.

First come first serve

Brilliant.

Sans email

C'mon, Google...

Stopping the stupid in energy policy

Two NY Times columnists have illustrated the stupidity of American energy proposals in the last week.  And sadly, they both recognize that we have a serious lack of political will to meet the energy challenge.

Last week, Paul Krugman noted that the GOP is making a name for itself as the "know nothing" party - proposing simplistic and naive "solutions" for energy problems and calling detractors terrorists or French. 

What I mean, instead, is that know-nothingism — the insistence that there are simple, brute-force, instant-gratification answers to every problem, and that there’s something effeminate and weak about anyone who suggests otherwise — has become the core of Republican policy and political strategy. The party’s de facto slogan has become: “Real men don’t think things through.”

But it's not just Republicans that are selling America short.  Friedman tours the Scandinavian countries and marvels at their commitment to energy efficiency and renewable energy.  Hotel hallways have lights on sensors in Greenland.  Half of Copenhagen commuters ride bikes and 20% of their electricity comes from wind turbines (in the U.S., it's 1%).   

The Danes responded to the 1973 Oil crisis with a commitment to being free from foreign oil addictions.  They made gasoline cost $10 a gallon and juiced their economy by lowering income and other personal taxes. 

In 1973, said [climate and energy minister] Hedegaard, “we got 99 percent of our energy from the Middle East. Today it is zero.”

Back home, both presidential candidates are proposing to add to offshore drilling and even tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to give addicted Americans another hit on the oil bong.  Where's the vision?  Even the previously-staid Al Gore has a better offer - getting 100 percent of our electricity from renewable, domestic resources in 10 years. 

Now that's worth voting for.

Obama's Energy Speech

From Time Magazine

The short term:

• Offshore drilling, requiring oil companies to use existing leases first
• Tapping the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (boo!)
• Grants and loans to help automakers retool for fuel efficient cars

The longer term:

• $150 billion over 10 years to get
• 1 million plug-in hybrids on the road by 2014
• $7000 tax credit per car
  
• 4% increase in mileage standards each year
• Better battery technology
• 10% of energy from renewables by 2012
• Extend renewable tax credits for 5 years
• 6 billion gallons from next generation biofuels by 2022 (actually less than the current goal, as far as I can tell)
  
• Reduce electricity demand by 15% by 2020
• New buildings 50% more efficient by 2012

The not-insignificant individual contribution: inflate your tires properly.  If everyone in the U.S. had properly inflated tires, we'd save 4% of our oil consumption, more than we'll ever get from offshore drilling.   Mocking this means you love giving terrorists our oil money.

Lane ends, 200 feet. Do you merge?

A fascinating essay on the ethics of merging from this weekend's NY Times Magazine.  Are you a rule-following "lineupper" or a "sidezoomer"?

Although the personal stories of anger and frustration are a treat themselves, the most interesting is the traffic theorists who note that a "zipper merge" at the point of lane closure is the most efficient outcome.  (And clever exits and re-entries are perfectly legitimate, as well). 

A year or two ago, I was traveling on I-35 and the traffic signage specifically asked motorists to use both lanes and to alternate entering the remaining lane.  Like the unified checkout at the retail store, it should only be a matter of time before we implement the zipper merge. 

Costly gasoline hurts exurban house prices

The big lot and spacious house doesn't seem so great when you have to drive your 12 mpg Denali 45 miles each way to work.  The Washington Post has some great graphics showing how housing prices in the core of DC have increased while the housing crisis is gutting exurban prices by 26% in the past year.

Smart: the Obama that was

Obama has come out in favor of releasing some oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to help reduce gas prices.  This is a bad idea because it's 1) short-term "fix"; 2) a political and not strategic use of the reserve; 3) counter to the principle of conservation and energy independence. 

There's an even better reason not to discuss it:

“We're arguing over a gimmick that would save you half a tank of gas over the course of the entire summer so that everyone in Washington can pat themselves on the back and say they did something,” said Obama. 

That was his comment about a federal gas tax holiday for the summer.  It's true here, too.

A victory for rule of law

A judge ruled today that White House aides cannot ignore Congressional subpoenas, but even more significantly, told the Bush Administration that courts, not the President, determine the extent of executive privilege. 

In essence, Judges Bates held that whatever immunity from Congressional subpoenas that executive branch officials might enjoy, it is not “absolute.” And in any event, he said, it is up to the courts, not the executive branch, to determine the scope of its immunity in particular cases.

Hooray for checks and balances!

Iraq tours shortened (back) to 12 months

National Public Radio is a great news source and they promise news with context.  So it was an extreme disappointment to hear them parrot the Bush Administration's horn toot that Iraq tours of duty will be reduced to (the original) 12 months.

See, in April 2007, the Bush Administration increased tours of duty from 12 to 15 months as part of the "surge."

Go ahead and let the President have a quote about "helping soldiers and their families," but for God's sake tell the truth, too.  This isn't some sort of special benefit or policy, it's restoring the tours of duty to the length that soldiers actually signed up for. 

Oh, and "it won't apply to troops now serving."

Liberal media, my ass.

Why end oil dependence - in 10 words or less

Triple Pundit asks its readers to weigh in - why should we become oil independent?

No need to
Nation build when
We don't need oil

Your laptop and mobile phone lie to you

Those signal meters and battery icons aren't really giving you the straight scoop.  People like electronics that indicate long battery life and good signal quality, so that's what those indicators are designed to display. 

The article notes a couple tricks:

• Battery life meters stay at full longer because it makes people think they're getting long phone life.  
• There's no standard for what "more bars" means for mobile phone reception.  And even if the signal meter is accurate, it doesn't show what matters: signal-to-noise ratio.

I've always felt like my cell phone goes two days at full and then drops like a rock.  Now I know why - thanks, Sprint!

Why this blog misses the point on energy prices

If you read this piece, you're left with the impression that Democrats may be clinging to policies that keep energy prices high and that they're endangering their environmental message as people pay more attention to their pocketbook.  (Note: who has a pocketbook, anyway?  Gotta love the media for the inane metaphors for America's tough problems). 

The implicit message is that energy prices could be lower, if only we did something else. 

Wrong.

Energy prices are going up.  Period.  Oil is becoming more scarce relative to demand.  Same for coal, natural gas, etc.  Demand keeps rising (it's a world market, and the Chinese and Indians want to drive, too).  So even if we drilled our brains out, we're not going to be able to put enough oil on the market to drive prices down.

Renewable energy will prove cheaper in the long run, because fossil fuel price inflation will soon pass the cost of renewables (and has, in several markets).  And because many renewables are fuel-free (solar, wind), they won't become more expensive over time (though new wind turbines and solar panels can become more expensive, since they're made of metals and other materials that are also on the world market). 

So, America, listen up: THE ERA OF CHEAP ENERGY IS OVER.  Anyone who says differently is selling something.

Why David Brooks is a tool

I've never liked the guy, because he pretends to be a moderate but likes to pound on individual responsibility to the complete exclusion of cultural forces from corporations to consumerism.  This guy agrees, and he completely and thoroughly lays out the case why David Brooks is a tool.

A sample:

Brooks lies about how the [mortgage crisis and credit crisis] devastation occurred. An "unspoken code has been silently eroded, he reveals. Silently, David? Marketers of all kinds have spent billions for 40 years telling Americans they deserve a break today and that marketers from McDonald's and credit-card companies to mortgage lenders will give it to them instantly. This has been the most monumental, unrelenting campaign to destroy a culture the world has seen, barring perhaps the fascist and communist propaganda juggernauts of the 1930s. Our own governments are in on it, not just via de-regulation but with lotteries.

Why Americans are sunk in debt

The average household’s credit card debt: $8,565 (up almost 15 percent from 2000)
Typical interest rate: 19.1 percent (up 1.5 percent since 2005)
Becoming a nation of debtors: priceless

How did this happen?  In three ways, the banking industry has created a debtor nation.  First, by undermining the American value of thrift:

Eliminating negative feelings about indebtedness was the idea behind MasterCard’s “Priceless” campaign, the work of McCann-Erickson Worldwide Advertising, which came out in 1997. “One of the tricks in the credit card business is that people have an inherent guilt with spending,” Jonathan B. Cranin, executive vice president and deputy creative director at the agency, said when the commercials began. “What you want is to have people feel good about their purchases.” 

Thrift is less important, because banks now make the lion's share of their profit on fees and interest, not on repaid debt.  In other words, banks make money when people fail to repay their loans.

 “Today the focus for lenders is not so much on consumer loans being repaid, but on the loan as a perpetual earning asset,”

The lenders set up this system, first by lobbying for weaker lending regulations in 2003 and then by loosening SEC regulations of their investments in 2004.  The lax regulation allowed banks to gamble and lose.  And who pays?  We do, in a government bailout of the failed banks.

While we're paying them for making bad loans, the financial industry keeps the screws on us by pouring their profits into lobbying.  The 2005 bankruptcy law made it harder for Americans to escape from bad debt, such as loans made to people without any hope of repaying.  

Since 2005, when the bankruptcy law was changed, the credit card industry has increased its earnings 25 percent...even though sponsors of the bankruptcy bill promised that consumers would benefit from lower borrowing costs as delinquent borrowers were held more accountable, the cost of borrowing from credit card companies has actually increased anywhere from 5 percent to 17 percent.

Here's a nice year-after look at the impact of the bankruptcy law.  Summary: we got screwed.

Barack Obama plans to reform the 2005 bankruptcy bill to make it easier for consumers to escape bad debt.  You have a chance to make a difference in November.

Cleaning blog house - #1

I came to the realization that America is in the grips of a nefarious chicken-finger pandemic, in which a blandly tasty foodstuff has somehow become the de facto official nibble of our young.

This essay bemoans the children's menu at restaurants, noting that instead of downsizing adult portions, the kids menu often simply offers a few marginally nutritious comfort meals to quite the children while the adults eat. At a Chinese place, how about chicken fingers for the kids? Italian, chicken fingers! Thai, chicken fingers!

She notes that some restaurants are trying to adapt, reverting to the tradition of simply shrinking big people portions (and prices) for kids. But I found it interesting that restaurants have been catering to the parents' desire to have a good dining experience by catering to kids' comfort food (and waistlines).

Cleaning blog house - Preface

I have about twenty articles I bookmarked in the last year, as it became clear that working and blogging were not as compatible now that I had a job I actually liked. So this week I'm trying to clean house, providing at least a brief write up on each of the items I've let dangle for so long.

To the libertarian on health care: you're assumptions are wrong

Paul Krugman has a nice post about the challenge that libertarians have in accepting the evidence on health care - that their fundamental assumptions about the efficiency of markets just don't hold up.

The basic facts on health care are clear: government-run insurance is more efficient than private insurance; more generally, the United States, with the most privatized health care in the advanced world, has a wildly inefficient system that costs far more than anyone else’s, yet delivers no better and arguably worse medical care than European systems.

 See more of Krugman's post here. 

It is time for some campaignin'

Courtesy of JibJab

If you heard about the New Yorker cartoon

Then you must watch this video (hat tip to Shadoweyes):

Mortgage crisis: Fannie, Freddie, and the rest

If you're familiar with "when banks compete, you win," then you probably listen to a news source that discusses the mortgage crisis.  Paul Krugman's been keeping me informed, and he does a nice job of explaining what's going on:

• Fannie and Freddie are more closely regulated than private companies, so they're shenanigans were limited.  They couldn't do subprime loans - loans given with no income verification - by rule.
• However, they weren't completely innocent, as they tried to stretch their ability to participate within the rules as much as possible.
• The housing market is so bad, that even these more regulated companies are sinking as people with conventional mortgages end up with negative equity.
  

Consumer secret: it's all about the habits

An anthropologist with a passion for public health was stymied by the challenge of changing hygiene habits in Africa.  But with a little help from the consumer products industry, she's getting folks to soap up their hands and prevent the spread of disease.

The most fascinating?  The tangent into consumer psychology.  Because nearly 45 percent of our daily activity is habitual.

Over the past decade, many companies had perfected the art of creating automatic behaviors — habits — among consumers. These habits have helped companies earn billions of dollars when customers eat snacks, apply lotions and wipe counters almost without thinking, often in response to a carefully designed set of daily cues.

Proctor and Gamble faced a problem with Febreeze.  When marketed as a killer of bad odors, it flopped - people didn't have bad smells around enough to remember to use it.  But they changed their tactics:

The perfect cue, they eventually realized, was the act of cleaning a room, something studies showed their target audience did almost daily. P.& G. produced commercials showing women spraying Febreze on a perfectly made bed and spritzing freshly laundered clothing. The product’s imagery was revamped to incorporate open windows and gusts of fresh wind — an airing that is part of the physical and emotional cleaning ritual.

Thanks to marketing, Americans now spend $650 million a year spraying clean things with Febreze.  And Ghanians have increased their use of soap after a bathroom break by 13 percent. 

For more on how they marketed clean hands, check out the piece.

Peak fossil fuels = peak convenience

A thoughtful, short essay on the challenge to the American lifestyle as energy gets prohibitively expensive, from R-Squared:

However, many I know would never consider public transport. I know people who would circle the Walmart parking lot 10 times before they would walk from a parking spot that isn't within 50 feet of the front door. The only food they have ever known comes from the supermarket. These people scream the loudest for the government to do something about gas prices. These are also the people who I think will have the most difficult time adjusting to the new reality imposed by high oil prices. Some will sink ever further into debt as they wait in vain for the government to fix the problem.