Is America's political 'nobility' undemocratic?
Kennedys, Bushes, Rockefellers demonstrate genetic popularity and power
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28257519/
If you will read this article, you might get a sense of the frustration I hear from others about how our “democratic” government is growing increasingly “un-democratic”. Like Robin Leach’s show, “Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous”, our government is becoming a celebrity haven and a “good ole’ boys (and girl's) club”. Our politicians have long since stopped asking what they might do for their country, but what the country might do for them. They worry more about spotlights and footlights than they do about fixing stoplights and closing tax loopholes. They would rather be television stars and headline grabbers than work as soldiers in the trenches of everyday life and spend any energy combating the woes of poverty and inequality. Busting a union for ideological sensationalism is more important than busting a drug cartel. Getting face time on Meet the Press and receiving a celebrity endorsement is more important than face time on the street with Joe the Real Plumber or taking a stand against wanton government waste that takes funds away from entitlement programs for the poor and/or unemployed.
If you consider only the fact that the RNC spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on clothing, hair stylings and make-up for Sarah Palin, it tells us about how easily Americans are distracted by the glamorousness, flash and pizzazz of runway status. Politicos are learning what India’s Bollywood learned years ago: get something on the silver screen with name-brand recognition and nice clothes and it will sell…and turn a profit.
We have come to elect “leaders” for their spectacular smiles and familial ties rather than for talent, insight, and leadership abilities, or for any sense for philanthropy. Bush wants to manufacture a legacy for Jeb, Nancy Reagan wanted to be the Queen of the United States (until we just said no to both her and her drug slogans), we have an entire cadre of “Clintonistas” and now we have Caroline Kennedy, about to be named (crowned?) the Princess of New York, the belle of the Ball and perhaps next contender for Female Ruler of the Universe. We have gone from, “Here I am. I’m qualified to represent you, elect me, please”, to “Hi there! I am a famous son, daughter, nephew or cousin of a noble member of an aristocratic American clan that comes from old money (and I’d like to be a movie star), so vote for me and you will get goosebumps when I speak to Fox News”. Sick. Disturbing. Disheartening. Disgusting.
The humorist Andy Borowitz gave it this spin, this morning:
Caroline Kennedy Asks to be Time’s Person of the Year, Places Phone Call to Magazine’s Editor
Caroline Kennedy would like to be considered Time magazine's Person of the Year for 2009 and has let the magazine's editor know of her interest in the honor, aides to Ms. Kennedy confirmed today.While some observers considered Ms. Kennedy's bid to be premature, especially since 2009 has not officially begun, aides to the New York senatorial aspirant said that it reflected her view that 2009 will be a very big year for her."I think Caroline's calling Time magazine and asking to be put on the cover shows just what a tireless worker she is," said cousin Kerry Kennedy. "When she really wants something, she's not afraid to roll up her sleeves and make a phone call."Her cousin said that having witnessed Caroline's work ethic, she has no doubt that she is deserving of Time's highest honor: "I can't tell you how many times she's gotten the wrong number, been put on hold, or had calls dropped altogether."In addition to the Person of the Year honors, Kerry Kennedy said that Caroline had also expressed an interest in next year's Nobel Peace Prize."That's a call she hasn't made yet," Ms. Kennedy said. "She has to figure out the time difference in Oslo."
Silly of course, and nonsensical, but frighteningly too close to the reality of American politics.
I suggest that our next election cycle feature on the names of people we have never heard of before: No Bushes, no shrubs, No Clintons or “istas”, no Reagans or Rockefellers, no Goldmans and no Sachs. No Wall Streeters or Fleet Streeters, and no first cousins twice removed of Billy Bob whoever he is. Not even any Washingtons or Jeffersons, or any Hillary William Jeffersons. Enough.
We need to elect some people who speak FOR us and not in spite of us. We need to elect people who will be eager to serve instead of be served. We need to elect people that are in for the duration and not the adoration. Let’s skip the Edward’s haircuts and the Biden suits and the Charlton Heston bravado and elect John Jones Smith. Let’s elect Maggie Elizabeth Everyman or Elmer Foxworthy instead of Nigel Newsworthy. Let’s elect someone like me, with bad teeth and a crooked smile (no, not that Cheney smirk).
It is time to elect the guy next door, the guy nobody has ever heard of, but the guy (or gal) who is pissed off about potholes and poobahs, doesn’t have a secret stash of oil money in an account off-shore, only has one old car that needs new tires and does not own three houses on a synthetic beachfront in Arizona, funded by beer money.
Old money does not automatically impart new wisdom. Leadership is not genetic. Genealogies do not guarantee insight. Nomenclature does not ensure noble behavior. Those who governed once before does not mean that this one can govern now. Photogenic affability does not promise pervasive ingenuity. Being smartly dressed does not necessarily portend making smart decisions. The current normal business has become abnormal showbusiness and the forecasted new normal aristocracy is most likely old hat. We need some new hats.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Monday, December 15, 2008
The President Gets It Right
Somewhere, over the Atlantic Ocean, aboard Air Force One, sometime on December 14 or 15, President Bush was asked about the status of negotiations, relative to funding a bail out and/or bridge loans for the US auto industry. The President stated that he wouldn’t give a precise timetable, and that, “This will not be a long process
Because of the economic fragility of the autos”.
Precision, the King’s English and eloquence all struck like proverbial lightning, at the same place and time and all at once, together, simultaneously. You betcha.
The news is this: The President of the United States has finally figured out what the crux ,central core, and hugely responsible issues are at the center of the country’s current economic crisis: freaking autos are economically fragile. Whew. Finally. What a goddam relief. I was afraid we would go another few weeks (five, to be exact) before someone figured out just exactly what the sam-hill was wrong with America. It must be Christmas. We have been given a gift.
But as with all “gifts” that come from the government, I suspected something else was in play, and I chose not to be entirely euphoric.
While I was reading the report of this presidential revelation/proclamation, I was also reading about and watching videos telling about and showing the shoes of an Iraqi reporter, being hurled through the air at Bush’s head, during a press conference in Baghdad. Suddenly I had an epiphany, and I am guessing that W had epiphanied, as well. I realized the great likelihood that, for perhaps the first time in his life, without alcohol or drugs, George W. Bush had been faced with real trauma.
We need to keep this incident in its’ proper perspective if we are to fully appreciate the devastating implications of what really happened here. W was on foreign soil, in a newly liberated country (Cheney says so, anyway), standing behind an unfamiliar lectern, next to a world leader (?), amid a sea of doubt and potential hostility (only because he has been lying about this country, liberation, democracy and war for years), and suddenly, unexpectedly, without warning, two pieces of footwear came flying through the conference room, aimed more or less directly at his head. The shock and awe must have been terrifying. Unfathomable fear and previously undreamt-of terror must have grasped the President by his very being and shaken him to his ephemeral core. This manner of precarious and fright-laden situation is what many would call trauma inducing ,and it is highly likely that it indeed descended on the mind (?) of George W. Bush, as he stood, there, chock full of hubris and assumed self-righteousness.
Such an assault, coming as it were, from out of a crowd of reporters, previously assumed to be filled with adoration, must have been the penultimate shock. I know it would have rattled my underpinnings, and I don’t even lie that much (and if I did, or you did, I, or we, would not get caught so often).
Sometime later, during an interview, the President attempted to brush off the severity of the event, saying that it was no different that when “people wave at you, using less than five fingers”, and claiming to fail to see what “his beef” was ,when it came to the Iraqi version of a shoe-bomber. However, I suspect that the incident had a lot more to do with the remarks about “auto fragility”, quoted above.
Trauma can be truly revelatory. It can be a real eye-opener, after the fact. Trauma, neurologically speaking, induces autonomic reactions of fight or flight. Since the president stood his ground, ducking the missiles very effectively, as he has ducked morality, vision, common decency , logic and good grammar for eight years, indicated that he did not choose flight: he stood his Texas cowboy ground and remained steadfast, clutching the lectern with both hands. To reinforce the impression that he was not shaken or unduly moved by what had happened during the attempted sole-ful attack, he conjectured that this little skirmish did not “reflect the broad attitude” of the Iraqi people (I though it would have been a broad “spectrum”, but that word is much too big for him). Clearly the depth of the traumatization caused him to lose sight of the symbolism involved when, many years earlier, as the statute of Saddam was pulled down in the Baghdad square, the Iraqi citizenry pounded it with their shoes. This public behavior is generally believed to be a display of contempt and hatred in the Arab world. . But when you have been traumatized to the extent that W obviously was, some of the details get a little blurry, in hindsight. Like, ya know, lookin’ over yer shoulder?
Nevertheless, I am led to believe that this very event is what caused the president to proclaim, just a short time later, that our economic woes could be laid squarely at the feet (tires) of fragile auto economics. I am grateful that, in his somewhat unstable state, he did not refer to either “auto erotics” or any form of frigidity rather than fragility ( either mispsokeness, while probably not being any big surprise, would have been a dead give-away about his condition). My guess is that Hank Paulson might have come to a similarly grand economic revelation if he had been hit on the head by a falling brick from the Lehman Bros. building on Wall Street. But we have not been so lucky as to have that “befall” us, so to speak. .
As it stands now, we are vey fortunate to know that our President has “got it right”, as Monty Python might perchance observe. Surely, now that we (and W) are armed with such valuable insight as to why we have no money to spend on Christmas gifts, while the financial and banking CEO’s of New York are in Dubais, on holiday, and why Detroit products cost so much, break down so often and consume so much gasoline, time and energy, that our national quality of life will improve, shortly. Or at least as soon as W forms a Presidential commission to investigate the auto economic fragility problem. Perhaps Mitt Romney can head that up, as the (sic) Car economic fragility czar.
The alleged assailant, by the way, is being held in jail, apparently for attempting to induce harm, or creating an environment of danger, or something like that, in the presence of a world leader. Of the two men behind the lectern, the authorities in Iraq have chosen to say that it was the Iranian President they were referring to. I think we all know how and why they made their distinction.
However, we should consider one other nasty eventuality that might have come about: had either one (or both ) of the shoes hit their intended target, there would have been the recorded sound of the non-resonating thud of the shoe(s) hitting an empty vessel. Had that occurred, the main stream media would have given us much more coverage to wade through, the pundits and analysts would be almost as busy as they were covering the gaffs of Sarah Palin, and Christmas would not have something like the “economic fragility of the autos” to blame for our aggregate misery. It could have been worse.
Because of the economic fragility of the autos”.
Precision, the King’s English and eloquence all struck like proverbial lightning, at the same place and time and all at once, together, simultaneously. You betcha.
The news is this: The President of the United States has finally figured out what the crux ,central core, and hugely responsible issues are at the center of the country’s current economic crisis: freaking autos are economically fragile. Whew. Finally. What a goddam relief. I was afraid we would go another few weeks (five, to be exact) before someone figured out just exactly what the sam-hill was wrong with America. It must be Christmas. We have been given a gift.
But as with all “gifts” that come from the government, I suspected something else was in play, and I chose not to be entirely euphoric.
While I was reading the report of this presidential revelation/proclamation, I was also reading about and watching videos telling about and showing the shoes of an Iraqi reporter, being hurled through the air at Bush’s head, during a press conference in Baghdad. Suddenly I had an epiphany, and I am guessing that W had epiphanied, as well. I realized the great likelihood that, for perhaps the first time in his life, without alcohol or drugs, George W. Bush had been faced with real trauma.
We need to keep this incident in its’ proper perspective if we are to fully appreciate the devastating implications of what really happened here. W was on foreign soil, in a newly liberated country (Cheney says so, anyway), standing behind an unfamiliar lectern, next to a world leader (?), amid a sea of doubt and potential hostility (only because he has been lying about this country, liberation, democracy and war for years), and suddenly, unexpectedly, without warning, two pieces of footwear came flying through the conference room, aimed more or less directly at his head. The shock and awe must have been terrifying. Unfathomable fear and previously undreamt-of terror must have grasped the President by his very being and shaken him to his ephemeral core. This manner of precarious and fright-laden situation is what many would call trauma inducing ,and it is highly likely that it indeed descended on the mind (?) of George W. Bush, as he stood, there, chock full of hubris and assumed self-righteousness.
Such an assault, coming as it were, from out of a crowd of reporters, previously assumed to be filled with adoration, must have been the penultimate shock. I know it would have rattled my underpinnings, and I don’t even lie that much (and if I did, or you did, I, or we, would not get caught so often).
Sometime later, during an interview, the President attempted to brush off the severity of the event, saying that it was no different that when “people wave at you, using less than five fingers”, and claiming to fail to see what “his beef” was ,when it came to the Iraqi version of a shoe-bomber. However, I suspect that the incident had a lot more to do with the remarks about “auto fragility”, quoted above.
Trauma can be truly revelatory. It can be a real eye-opener, after the fact. Trauma, neurologically speaking, induces autonomic reactions of fight or flight. Since the president stood his ground, ducking the missiles very effectively, as he has ducked morality, vision, common decency , logic and good grammar for eight years, indicated that he did not choose flight: he stood his Texas cowboy ground and remained steadfast, clutching the lectern with both hands. To reinforce the impression that he was not shaken or unduly moved by what had happened during the attempted sole-ful attack, he conjectured that this little skirmish did not “reflect the broad attitude” of the Iraqi people (I though it would have been a broad “spectrum”, but that word is much too big for him). Clearly the depth of the traumatization caused him to lose sight of the symbolism involved when, many years earlier, as the statute of Saddam was pulled down in the Baghdad square, the Iraqi citizenry pounded it with their shoes. This public behavior is generally believed to be a display of contempt and hatred in the Arab world. . But when you have been traumatized to the extent that W obviously was, some of the details get a little blurry, in hindsight. Like, ya know, lookin’ over yer shoulder?
Nevertheless, I am led to believe that this very event is what caused the president to proclaim, just a short time later, that our economic woes could be laid squarely at the feet (tires) of fragile auto economics. I am grateful that, in his somewhat unstable state, he did not refer to either “auto erotics” or any form of frigidity rather than fragility ( either mispsokeness, while probably not being any big surprise, would have been a dead give-away about his condition). My guess is that Hank Paulson might have come to a similarly grand economic revelation if he had been hit on the head by a falling brick from the Lehman Bros. building on Wall Street. But we have not been so lucky as to have that “befall” us, so to speak. .
As it stands now, we are vey fortunate to know that our President has “got it right”, as Monty Python might perchance observe. Surely, now that we (and W) are armed with such valuable insight as to why we have no money to spend on Christmas gifts, while the financial and banking CEO’s of New York are in Dubais, on holiday, and why Detroit products cost so much, break down so often and consume so much gasoline, time and energy, that our national quality of life will improve, shortly. Or at least as soon as W forms a Presidential commission to investigate the auto economic fragility problem. Perhaps Mitt Romney can head that up, as the (sic) Car economic fragility czar.
The alleged assailant, by the way, is being held in jail, apparently for attempting to induce harm, or creating an environment of danger, or something like that, in the presence of a world leader. Of the two men behind the lectern, the authorities in Iraq have chosen to say that it was the Iranian President they were referring to. I think we all know how and why they made their distinction.
However, we should consider one other nasty eventuality that might have come about: had either one (or both ) of the shoes hit their intended target, there would have been the recorded sound of the non-resonating thud of the shoe(s) hitting an empty vessel. Had that occurred, the main stream media would have given us much more coverage to wade through, the pundits and analysts would be almost as busy as they were covering the gaffs of Sarah Palin, and Christmas would not have something like the “economic fragility of the autos” to blame for our aggregate misery. It could have been worse.
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Great Expectations
Whenever we place unrealistic expectations upon ourselves or someone else, disappointment and sorrow are soon to follow. Both the "Audacity of Hope" and the Obama administration have just been dragged into unfair territory.
Articles just this morning include:
-A plea by many for Obama to legalize "Mary Jane";
-An expose' demanding that Obama stop sexual exploitation of children;
-A call for Obama to nationalize and oversee American automobile production;
-More calls for immediate universal health care;
This weeks' emails included:
- Various invitations from multiple groups, sponsoring Obama "house parties". At these gatherings, they will apparently produce lists of issues and problems, which they will presumably submit to the Obama administration for immediate action. This presupposes an immdiate response, but no one seems braced for disappointment. Proverbial caution has been thrown to the proverbial wind.
- I recieved no less than 8 (eight) petitions from assorted groups, asking Obama to save whales, save polar bears, end poverty, stop global warming, reduce nukes, reform banks, turn coal green and reform Congressional ethics laws. And they all "expect" them to be a fait accompli by early 2009.
In none of these do I see or hear the word "compromise", nor do I sense any reasonable approach concerning just how long it takes to accomplish any of these. Obama does, after all, have to work with and through the Congress to effect any of this. But perhaps I have erred on the side of realism.
The "Audacity of Hope" is mutating into unreasonable demands and expectations. The only way for the new administration to succeed, to any measureable degree, is for the American people NOT TO BURDEN it with lists of demands founded on the wildest of dreams and unrealistic expectations. Southern plantation owners did that to black slaves 250 years ago. Surely we can do better, today.
Put yet another way, why should we party so hearty that we give Obama a hangover before he even reaches office?
And does anyone we remember how we scoffed at the Bush administration, for proposing "Aspirational horizons"? I am also inclined to think that unbounded ecstasy and euphoria can lead to catastrophic misery.
Life goes on in Texas.
Articles just this morning include:
-A plea by many for Obama to legalize "Mary Jane";
-An expose' demanding that Obama stop sexual exploitation of children;
-A call for Obama to nationalize and oversee American automobile production;
-More calls for immediate universal health care;
This weeks' emails included:
- Various invitations from multiple groups, sponsoring Obama "house parties". At these gatherings, they will apparently produce lists of issues and problems, which they will presumably submit to the Obama administration for immediate action. This presupposes an immdiate response, but no one seems braced for disappointment. Proverbial caution has been thrown to the proverbial wind.
- I recieved no less than 8 (eight) petitions from assorted groups, asking Obama to save whales, save polar bears, end poverty, stop global warming, reduce nukes, reform banks, turn coal green and reform Congressional ethics laws. And they all "expect" them to be a fait accompli by early 2009.
In none of these do I see or hear the word "compromise", nor do I sense any reasonable approach concerning just how long it takes to accomplish any of these. Obama does, after all, have to work with and through the Congress to effect any of this. But perhaps I have erred on the side of realism.
The "Audacity of Hope" is mutating into unreasonable demands and expectations. The only way for the new administration to succeed, to any measureable degree, is for the American people NOT TO BURDEN it with lists of demands founded on the wildest of dreams and unrealistic expectations. Southern plantation owners did that to black slaves 250 years ago. Surely we can do better, today.
Put yet another way, why should we party so hearty that we give Obama a hangover before he even reaches office?
And does anyone we remember how we scoffed at the Bush administration, for proposing "Aspirational horizons"? I am also inclined to think that unbounded ecstasy and euphoria can lead to catastrophic misery.
Life goes on in Texas.
Friday, December 12, 2008
The Economy of Illinois Politics
A great many people who know me, and know that I am not only from Illinois, but also from Chicago, have been asking me what I think about the recent disclosure and exposure of the attempt by the Honorable (I use the term loosely) Illinois Governor Blagojevich to "sell" the Senate seat left open by President-Elect Barack Obama (please hold the Polish jokes). After reading blogs and articles and columns and op-eds, and looking through a mountain of political editorial cartoons, I think I am ready to make a statement. Any condemnation is premature.
Despite the rancor and cries for damnation that have come from other (I'm certain) innocent Democrats, along with numerous calls for his resignation and threats to impeach, I have to say that the Governor makes me proud. There. I said it. He's my boy.
America is a land of traditions and traditional values. And American Illinois is a state of commerce, ingenuity, world class corn and dairy products (screw Wisconsin; damn cheeseheads) , and the Land of Lincoln (Honest Abe, you know). Chicago has grown from being a lakeside native American Indian resort and fishing hole, to the home a great and memorable fire, a head-bashing spree by corrupt police in 1968, interminable terms by Daleybots and the only river in America (I think) that not only flows backwards, but turns bright green every March, in spite of the pollutant level.
And the Governor's office, the state drivers licensing bureau, the Chicago City Council and its' Aldermen, the Farm Bureau (probably) and IDOT (or whatever it is called now, which never really finished any highway or tollway it ever started), in conjunction with the remnants of Al Capone's mafia structures...all of these have traditions to be upheld. And the greatest of these is corruption ( Think, "And the greatest of these is love"). Blagojevich was simply holding up his end of a long-standing bargain and keeping tradition alive, by trying to actually sell a Senate seat. This man understands the true role of the Governor of Illinois and has strived mightily to uphold the values entrusted to him. He done good (now you can tell a Polish joke).
However, this all raises an economic question which I had never pondered until now. Since nobody in Illinois ever buys anything, invests in anything or seeks to acquire anything that they cannot make money on, what, exactly does one want with a Senate seat? It is obvious now, since there were apparently several bidders, that there is much profit to be made by this purchase, and those of us who did not bid, and did not pick up on this new trend in economics, have lost an investment opportunity. Sarah Palin might say that we had missed out real traditonal American values.
While it may be that holding a federal Senate seat in Illinois is financially akin to managing a Wall Street hedge fund, this angle and aspect of political fund raising had never occurred to me. Where have I been, all my life? (gratefully, not in Illinois, for most of it).
So here is the question you must answer, if we are to truly understand the dynamics of this affair: (frankly I am dumbfounded that Krugman or Reich or Freidman or Paulson or Geithner haven't yet asked this or set forth an equation):
Part one: How much does one actually pay for an Illinois Senate seat? We really do need a dollar amount or the number of first-borns one must pledge.
Part two: In order to determine the fair market value (like hog belly futures... they do that in Chicago, as well) one must be able to calculate, well in advance, the ROI (that's "Return on Investment" for those of you who flunked Econ 101 at Wharton) of said Illinois Senate seat, as well as be able to know how long it will take to achieve that ROI.
While this mathematical challenge has me completely stumped, clearly good ole' Blago and at least five other bidders had it figured out, otherwise the potential transaction would not have made it this far. And I am amazed that the Chicago Tribune has not had a bevy of economists at U of I working on it.
As far as holding one of the Senate seats is concerned, the must be "gold in them thar hills" and most of us have been too stupid to look there. Blago is to be commended for keeping the faith and holding the tradition high, for all to see. Perhaps it will get his picture on the new license plates they stamp out at the prison he will attend. Who knows. All fame has a price.
But I want the equation for future use. If the ROI is that good, I could become a traditionalist, real quick.
Despite the rancor and cries for damnation that have come from other (I'm certain) innocent Democrats, along with numerous calls for his resignation and threats to impeach, I have to say that the Governor makes me proud. There. I said it. He's my boy.
America is a land of traditions and traditional values. And American Illinois is a state of commerce, ingenuity, world class corn and dairy products (screw Wisconsin; damn cheeseheads) , and the Land of Lincoln (Honest Abe, you know). Chicago has grown from being a lakeside native American Indian resort and fishing hole, to the home a great and memorable fire, a head-bashing spree by corrupt police in 1968, interminable terms by Daleybots and the only river in America (I think) that not only flows backwards, but turns bright green every March, in spite of the pollutant level.
And the Governor's office, the state drivers licensing bureau, the Chicago City Council and its' Aldermen, the Farm Bureau (probably) and IDOT (or whatever it is called now, which never really finished any highway or tollway it ever started), in conjunction with the remnants of Al Capone's mafia structures...all of these have traditions to be upheld. And the greatest of these is corruption ( Think, "And the greatest of these is love"). Blagojevich was simply holding up his end of a long-standing bargain and keeping tradition alive, by trying to actually sell a Senate seat. This man understands the true role of the Governor of Illinois and has strived mightily to uphold the values entrusted to him. He done good (now you can tell a Polish joke).
However, this all raises an economic question which I had never pondered until now. Since nobody in Illinois ever buys anything, invests in anything or seeks to acquire anything that they cannot make money on, what, exactly does one want with a Senate seat? It is obvious now, since there were apparently several bidders, that there is much profit to be made by this purchase, and those of us who did not bid, and did not pick up on this new trend in economics, have lost an investment opportunity. Sarah Palin might say that we had missed out real traditonal American values.
While it may be that holding a federal Senate seat in Illinois is financially akin to managing a Wall Street hedge fund, this angle and aspect of political fund raising had never occurred to me. Where have I been, all my life? (gratefully, not in Illinois, for most of it).
So here is the question you must answer, if we are to truly understand the dynamics of this affair: (frankly I am dumbfounded that Krugman or Reich or Freidman or Paulson or Geithner haven't yet asked this or set forth an equation):
Part one: How much does one actually pay for an Illinois Senate seat? We really do need a dollar amount or the number of first-borns one must pledge.
Part two: In order to determine the fair market value (like hog belly futures... they do that in Chicago, as well) one must be able to calculate, well in advance, the ROI (that's "Return on Investment" for those of you who flunked Econ 101 at Wharton) of said Illinois Senate seat, as well as be able to know how long it will take to achieve that ROI.
While this mathematical challenge has me completely stumped, clearly good ole' Blago and at least five other bidders had it figured out, otherwise the potential transaction would not have made it this far. And I am amazed that the Chicago Tribune has not had a bevy of economists at U of I working on it.
As far as holding one of the Senate seats is concerned, the must be "gold in them thar hills" and most of us have been too stupid to look there. Blago is to be commended for keeping the faith and holding the tradition high, for all to see. Perhaps it will get his picture on the new license plates they stamp out at the prison he will attend. Who knows. All fame has a price.
But I want the equation for future use. If the ROI is that good, I could become a traditionalist, real quick.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
I Always Write Too Soon
There will be a short pause
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28138287/
While we all get screwed.
Happy Holidays.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28138287/
While we all get screwed.
Happy Holidays.
Idiocy Prevails On the One Side, Cools Heads on the Other
And apparently ne’er the twain shall meet.
‘Twas the night before Christmas..and some kind gentleman just told me a few days ago that we have three ways of thinking in America (remember this?): Right brained, left brained and lame brained. Guess who (or what) is winning?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28108346/
And the beat goes on. " White House and democrats have limited intercourse and produce handicapped child". For $14M.
I have already sent out pieces by both Krugman (German/European cars) and Freidman (Electric cars and software upgrades) earlier this morning (check all the stuff you deleted). There have been comments.
Martha said:
Tracey said (along the way, after reading Krugman and me):
‘Twas the night before Christmas..and some kind gentleman just told me a few days ago that we have three ways of thinking in America (remember this?): Right brained, left brained and lame brained. Guess who (or what) is winning?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28108346/
And the beat goes on. " White House and democrats have limited intercourse and produce handicapped child". For $14M.
I have already sent out pieces by both Krugman (German/European cars) and Freidman (Electric cars and software upgrades) earlier this morning (check all the stuff you deleted). There have been comments.
Martha said:
I've seen Friedman interviewed before and he gives a lot to think about. Habits of mind are dangerous things, and hard to break. What we need is a merge of expertise in vehicle manufacturing and the new business platform. Then we could have the best of both worlds. It doesn't have to be a "either/or" proposition, if the two could co-exist, which, so far they haven't, in the automobile industry. Friedman makes it sound that some in the world have seen that it's in their best interest to do so. I don't think Detroit, or Washington has caught on to that yet. They better get out of the box, or they will be left behind. That goes for the consumer too.
Tracey said (along the way, after reading Krugman and me):
Uh - I am one of those "underclass" who are more plugged in, and wear my "pretentious Eco-Snob" badge with great pride. Please convey that to all you know. THEY are the underclass of insensitives whose karma will catch up with them. Intellect and awareness trumps conspicuous consumption any day.
(Tracey drives a Prius.)
Barbara said that the "idea of a Czarina" was much more attractive. Or words to that effect. When I later told her that "Czarina" had just called me, from down on 6th St. in Austin, and wanted me to come buy her a beer, Barbara said it did not much help the cause of female equality. Touche'.
It sounds like having a “car czar” appears inevitable, because everyone in Congress is thinking exactly the way in which Friedman (see the NYT article) urged that we should not. I think the decisions (in spite of what I think about republicans) probably are ass-backwards, but that is because we have so many asses making them.This is a really crappy thing to do to Santa Claus.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
A Czar, A Czarina, or A Dis-czar-ster?
Now that the jury has mostly come in on the fall-out that was has been called a bail-out of Wall Street, most opinions are that it did too little, too late, or did nothing at all to stave off economic mayhem. We saved the bankers’ salaries and paid for parties for brokers and hedge fund hedge hogs, and the banks that got the money used it to pay off stockholders and invest it to make money elsewhere. Seemingly none of it went out as loans to help anyone who needed it: Republic Door and Window in Chicago is an example of how not to manage money, save jobs and work in the interest of the public good. The employees are sitting in, the company is sitting out, the bank is sitting pat and everyone will not have a Merry Christmas. Obama has said the workers have his support: he should be grabbing B Of A by the throat and making them turn blue. I doubt anyone at that bank will go without a turkey or ham on Dec. 25.
I have lost track of the numbers involved: Faced with a huge public outcry, the congress said no to a $700B deal for Wall Street. The weekend passed and then so did a new bill, for $850B. To date, there has been about $152B (?) spent with no visible effect. There is another story (or group of them) that Paulson and his minions have doled out about $2T (yes, trillion) which is largely unaccounted for. All that seems certain I that the Paulsonites will certainly have jobs after Jan. 20. Somewhere on Wall Street. And today the CEO of Merrill cavalierly asked to receive his $10M bonus, anyway. How did we manage to raise and propagate these idiot totems of industry? This man has inadvertently stuck his head up his own posterior. No mean trick but he is clearly a mean man: why should we be surprised? Tar and feathers would be good, here.
But, while the current Governor of Illinois is whisked off by the feds for selling government congressional seats (hell, he was only fulfilling his traditional role in IL politics), there is the ongoing, low-level blip on the radar screen in Detroit, the Big used-to-be Three and the paltry matter of somewhere between $15 and 34B. This is another public display of bail-out or life-line or bridge loan or congressional pocket change change rattling. I have never seen a story grow up so fast over so little, change as rapidly, get twisted so violently or produce so few results as this one has. Whatever this amount of money eventually turns out to be (if it does at all), it will be, by any reasonable estimate, like pouring a bucket of warm water into an Olympic-sized swimming pool to heat it up. Most believe that whatever forms this measure takes, it will only stave off a manufacturing holocaust for a few months…if that. You might read www.alertnet.org/workplace/111029, if you want to hear more. The biggest and most startling line in that article is that the business of Detroit is “more transparent” than that of Wall Street: “With Wall street, lack of clarity, helped bag the money”.
Enter Uncle Sam and the regulatory watchdogs (just when I thought this could not get worse, it gets worse).
It has been suggested that any bail-out/bridgeloan/lifeline/credit extension bring along with it the appointment of a “Car Czar”. Oh joy.
Before I tell you why I think this idea stinks and what might be an alternative, just let me remind you of two or three other events in our history that have been much ballyhooed and accomplished little or nothing. Several years ago, our sense of societal guilt/philanthropy/elitism led to us to appoint a “Drug Czar”. We could have just said “NO”, but we bought off on the idea anyway. For all of the clamor and cheering, today we have more drugs on the street than ever, more law enforcement time and money engaged in drug traffic fighting than ever and more people incarcerated for petty drug crimes per 100 members of the population (more than any other country in the world) than ever. This has been a spectacular accomplishment, along with winning the war in Viet Nam, eradicating poverty and homelessness in the US, making all educational programs equal in quality and introducing “Intelligent Design” (with saddles on dinosaurs) as a way to interpret science. For all of our “fundamental” beliefs, we are fundamentally screwed up.
Yu might remember that more recently, the Bush administration promoted the position of a “war czar” (how did we get so tied up in Russian history, anyway?). We had so many wars (like the old woman who lived in a shoe), that we didn’t know what to do. The notion was that we should consolidate, oversee and coordinate our comprehensive plans to implant democracy all over the world (in order to lower oil prices and eradicate terrorism). Well, we all know how well that has worked out, as well. My heart is warmed by both little nuggets of American ingenuity in action.
The notion of a “car Czar” is preposterous and laughable from almost any angle. Already today a TV pundit has recommended brain-dead, non-managerial “mental recession” Phil Gramm for the Job. Hell, we might as well appoint “Heckuva Job Brownie”: the next fuel efficient car off of the Detroit assembly line could be called a “Katrina”. It could run on crawfish ettoufee’ and warm beer.
I have no doubt whatsoever than anyone appointed by our government to oversee the American car industry, for a week or a month or a year, would have a snowball’s chance in hell of having any positive impact on this floundering manufacturing beast. They can barely manage themselves and the insertion of government interference will simply exacerbate the nightmare of needed reform and re-structure. Despite his pedigree, Mitt Romney would be a joke; any past auto insider would have no ability to see beyond the way things have always been done; a neophyte or Wharton school guy would have no clue about where to start. The Board would give a new car, an allowance and the keys to the executive dining room, and that would be that.
This is all comes , of course, before you realize that the money will be used to shore up failing pieces of Detroit, scattered and battered around the world and will not save any American jobs? Probably? Anyone who cannot se that boondoggle coming deserves dog food for breakfast.
If we are going to do this (I am on my hands and knees praying as I have seldom ever done that we don’t) maybe we should appoint a “Czarina”, and I don’t mean Fiorina. A woman would understand better how to manage a day-to-day budget. Women probably write more checks to Chrysler Finance, FoMoCo and GMAC than anyone else (they know how much money those clowns get now, much better than anyone else) and they do not believe that monster pick-up trucks with nudie profiles on the rear mudflaps will help the country’s transportation woes. They drive more mini-vans and cross-overs and hate the smell that gasoline leaves on their clothing, and are mostly correct in believing that all big truck drivers are red-necked a**holes who cause accidents, drive drunk and clog the highways. Give the job to a bright, economically minded, stiff—necked woman, throw away the keys to the “privileged” men’s room and clubhouse and the company limo and let ‘er rip. Testicles in the auto industry will shrink up and recede, nation-wide, but some good decisions might be made. (The boards of directors of all three “giants” would have to be replaced with women, too, if this is going to work).
Waggoner should be given a wagon to ride upon, Mulalay should go back to building model airplanes (Bill Ford can be a stay-at-home dad) and that Chrysler guy should go back to moving 2X4’s at Home Depot or be shipped back to Italy (Iacocca is waiting).
Someone just recently said (oh, that was me I the last blog or so) that Chrysler is already on life support and someone should just pull the plug. It was a bad product buy by the investors, like when I by a cheap lawnmower at Wal-Mart, and GM should just do what very red-oil-blooded American entrepreneur does and file for re-organization in bankruptcy court. Somebody in Tokyo will pickup the pieces, and American ingenuity will find something else to do with our tooling and resources. Ford seems to be holding up. Henry may be only rolling half-way over in his grave.
This situation has become ludicrous, in its’ scope and disproportionate media coverage. The pickets have been circling the fences in Detroit for years, holding signs that say, “The end is near”, and until gas went to $4.00 and Dishes on Wall Street ran away with the spoons, nobody noticed that more members of Congress drive Hondas than Chevys.
A car czar is a pending dis-czar-ster. As surely as the polar ice caps are melting and there is no such things as clean coal, Detroit is on the skids. The world is changing. And you can’t freaking drive your big pick-up to the hardware store anymore anyway: there aren’t any left.
I have lost track of the numbers involved: Faced with a huge public outcry, the congress said no to a $700B deal for Wall Street. The weekend passed and then so did a new bill, for $850B. To date, there has been about $152B (?) spent with no visible effect. There is another story (or group of them) that Paulson and his minions have doled out about $2T (yes, trillion) which is largely unaccounted for. All that seems certain I that the Paulsonites will certainly have jobs after Jan. 20. Somewhere on Wall Street. And today the CEO of Merrill cavalierly asked to receive his $10M bonus, anyway. How did we manage to raise and propagate these idiot totems of industry? This man has inadvertently stuck his head up his own posterior. No mean trick but he is clearly a mean man: why should we be surprised? Tar and feathers would be good, here.
But, while the current Governor of Illinois is whisked off by the feds for selling government congressional seats (hell, he was only fulfilling his traditional role in IL politics), there is the ongoing, low-level blip on the radar screen in Detroit, the Big used-to-be Three and the paltry matter of somewhere between $15 and 34B. This is another public display of bail-out or life-line or bridge loan or congressional pocket change change rattling. I have never seen a story grow up so fast over so little, change as rapidly, get twisted so violently or produce so few results as this one has. Whatever this amount of money eventually turns out to be (if it does at all), it will be, by any reasonable estimate, like pouring a bucket of warm water into an Olympic-sized swimming pool to heat it up. Most believe that whatever forms this measure takes, it will only stave off a manufacturing holocaust for a few months…if that. You might read www.alertnet.org/workplace/111029, if you want to hear more. The biggest and most startling line in that article is that the business of Detroit is “more transparent” than that of Wall Street: “With Wall street, lack of clarity, helped bag the money”.
Enter Uncle Sam and the regulatory watchdogs (just when I thought this could not get worse, it gets worse).
It has been suggested that any bail-out/bridgeloan/lifeline/credit extension bring along with it the appointment of a “Car Czar”. Oh joy.
Before I tell you why I think this idea stinks and what might be an alternative, just let me remind you of two or three other events in our history that have been much ballyhooed and accomplished little or nothing. Several years ago, our sense of societal guilt/philanthropy/elitism led to us to appoint a “Drug Czar”. We could have just said “NO”, but we bought off on the idea anyway. For all of the clamor and cheering, today we have more drugs on the street than ever, more law enforcement time and money engaged in drug traffic fighting than ever and more people incarcerated for petty drug crimes per 100 members of the population (more than any other country in the world) than ever. This has been a spectacular accomplishment, along with winning the war in Viet Nam, eradicating poverty and homelessness in the US, making all educational programs equal in quality and introducing “Intelligent Design” (with saddles on dinosaurs) as a way to interpret science. For all of our “fundamental” beliefs, we are fundamentally screwed up.
Yu might remember that more recently, the Bush administration promoted the position of a “war czar” (how did we get so tied up in Russian history, anyway?). We had so many wars (like the old woman who lived in a shoe), that we didn’t know what to do. The notion was that we should consolidate, oversee and coordinate our comprehensive plans to implant democracy all over the world (in order to lower oil prices and eradicate terrorism). Well, we all know how well that has worked out, as well. My heart is warmed by both little nuggets of American ingenuity in action.
The notion of a “car Czar” is preposterous and laughable from almost any angle. Already today a TV pundit has recommended brain-dead, non-managerial “mental recession” Phil Gramm for the Job. Hell, we might as well appoint “Heckuva Job Brownie”: the next fuel efficient car off of the Detroit assembly line could be called a “Katrina”. It could run on crawfish ettoufee’ and warm beer.
I have no doubt whatsoever than anyone appointed by our government to oversee the American car industry, for a week or a month or a year, would have a snowball’s chance in hell of having any positive impact on this floundering manufacturing beast. They can barely manage themselves and the insertion of government interference will simply exacerbate the nightmare of needed reform and re-structure. Despite his pedigree, Mitt Romney would be a joke; any past auto insider would have no ability to see beyond the way things have always been done; a neophyte or Wharton school guy would have no clue about where to start. The Board would give a new car, an allowance and the keys to the executive dining room, and that would be that.
This is all comes , of course, before you realize that the money will be used to shore up failing pieces of Detroit, scattered and battered around the world and will not save any American jobs? Probably? Anyone who cannot se that boondoggle coming deserves dog food for breakfast.
If we are going to do this (I am on my hands and knees praying as I have seldom ever done that we don’t) maybe we should appoint a “Czarina”, and I don’t mean Fiorina. A woman would understand better how to manage a day-to-day budget. Women probably write more checks to Chrysler Finance, FoMoCo and GMAC than anyone else (they know how much money those clowns get now, much better than anyone else) and they do not believe that monster pick-up trucks with nudie profiles on the rear mudflaps will help the country’s transportation woes. They drive more mini-vans and cross-overs and hate the smell that gasoline leaves on their clothing, and are mostly correct in believing that all big truck drivers are red-necked a**holes who cause accidents, drive drunk and clog the highways. Give the job to a bright, economically minded, stiff—necked woman, throw away the keys to the “privileged” men’s room and clubhouse and the company limo and let ‘er rip. Testicles in the auto industry will shrink up and recede, nation-wide, but some good decisions might be made. (The boards of directors of all three “giants” would have to be replaced with women, too, if this is going to work).
Waggoner should be given a wagon to ride upon, Mulalay should go back to building model airplanes (Bill Ford can be a stay-at-home dad) and that Chrysler guy should go back to moving 2X4’s at Home Depot or be shipped back to Italy (Iacocca is waiting).
Someone just recently said (oh, that was me I the last blog or so) that Chrysler is already on life support and someone should just pull the plug. It was a bad product buy by the investors, like when I by a cheap lawnmower at Wal-Mart, and GM should just do what very red-oil-blooded American entrepreneur does and file for re-organization in bankruptcy court. Somebody in Tokyo will pickup the pieces, and American ingenuity will find something else to do with our tooling and resources. Ford seems to be holding up. Henry may be only rolling half-way over in his grave.
This situation has become ludicrous, in its’ scope and disproportionate media coverage. The pickets have been circling the fences in Detroit for years, holding signs that say, “The end is near”, and until gas went to $4.00 and Dishes on Wall Street ran away with the spoons, nobody noticed that more members of Congress drive Hondas than Chevys.
A car czar is a pending dis-czar-ster. As surely as the polar ice caps are melting and there is no such things as clean coal, Detroit is on the skids. The world is changing. And you can’t freaking drive your big pick-up to the hardware store anymore anyway: there aren’t any left.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
