Congratulations to President-Elect Obama. As everyone said, last night was truly historic. We've elected the first black president. Virginia, New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado, Ohio, Florida, Indiana, and North Carolina went blue together for the first time since 1964. America repudiated the party of Bush.
But before we all congratulate ourselves and talk about how racism and discrimination is dead in America, let's take a look at the downright shameful results of several ballot initiatives.
Arizona voted to ban gay marriage 56% to 44%
Arkansas voted to ban gay (and unwed straight) couples from adopting children 57% to 43%
With 92% reporting, it looks likely that California voted to ban gay marriage 52% to 48%
Florida voted to ban gay marriage 62% to 38%
Really? On the same night that old barriers were torn down, new ones were put up. Millions and millions of Americans went to the polls and voted to strip their fellow Americans of a basic, personal freedom. How is this even allowed? Could there be a ballot initiate to prevent Catholics from getting married? To prevent Asians from adopting children? It's disgusting.
There were some bright spots, however. The anti-abortion propositions were all defeated and Michigan voted to allow stem cell research and medical marijuana.
And in miscellaneous election news:
As of the time of this post, Al Franken lost his Senate race by 571 votes, but surely with that kind of margin I'd expect a recount. Hopefully he can find another 572 votes somewhere.
Somehow Ted Stevens won re-election. I'm shocked. Not only was he polling way behind Mark Begich, but Stevens is a convicted felon! I suppose to the state that elected Sarah Palin, felons are ok as long as they're felons that bring home the pork.
The races in Indiana, North Carolina, and Missouri were ridiculously close. I wonder how long it's going to take before we get final numbers there.
As of right now, CNN is showing that 118,183,508 people voted in this election. CNN also shows that in 2004, 121,480,019 people cast ballots. That seems bizarre. I know that the final tallies aren't in yet, but is it possible that less people voted in 2008 than 2004? I doubt it.
And lastly...
For some reason, CNN felt the need to use a hologram in their broadcast. (to beam in the emperor) Earlier in their coverage, they also used augmented reality to put the capitol building onto a table top. I'm not sure why...
update: I left one ballot initiative off my list accidentally. It looks like California Prop 1A to fund a high speed rail system passed. That's good news! This country needs high speed rail.
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
Tuesday, November 04, 2008
Election Day!
Wow, election day is finally here. I didn't think this day would ever come...
Have you voted yet? If not, go vote right now. I'll wait....
Ok, welcome back. I hope you didn't have to wait in line for too long. I've heard some crazy stories about long waiting times for early voting, so I'm guessing today will be no different. I just waited 45 minutes to vote in New York and New York isn't even a contested state. It was an interesting experience though.
I waited outside for about 20 minutes before getting to the front door of my polling place. As I walked in, a poll worker looked at my election card (They mailed out cards with your polling location, election district, congressional district, etc.) and told me to stand in a specific line. I walked over to the line and was confused. The sign hanging on the booth at the front of the line said "14th Election District" but my card said "49th Election District." My congressional district, however, was listed as 14. Hmm... I turned around and asked the elderly lady behind me which district she was in. She showed me her card and it said "40th Election District, 14th Congressional District." Ok, so we were both in the 14th Congressional District, but the sign clearly said Election District. So I turned to the woman in front of me and asked her. She was also assigned to the 14th Congressional, but a different Election District. I asked them to hold my place in line and I walked back to the entrance.
I asked the poll worker at the door, "Just to be clear, we're supposed to wait in lines based on Election District, right? Not Congressional District?"
"Yes, that's correct. Oh no, have I been sending people to the wrong lines again?"
No wonder people have been standing in such long lines, the poll workers are incompetent. I walked back over to my place in line and told the ladies that we were in the wrong line. The woman in front of me thanked me and switched lines. The old lady behind me said she was staying put. I tried to explain to her how the lines worked and pointed to the 40 on her card, but she wouldn't budge. I'm guessing that as an elderly black woman, she was an easy target for voter manipulation and/or suppression. Someone probably told her not to listen to anyone but trusted sources... so she ignored me. I did my best to announce to the whole room that they should be in line based on Election District and not any other number on their card. I saw one or two people switch lines, but more people acted like I wasn't there.
I went over to the line for the 49th Election District and waited there. I moved pretty quickly up to the table, signed the book, got my registered voter card, and moved over to the line for the voting booth. We were supposed to sign the book, get our cards, and go right into the booth, but only one of the two machines for my district was working. This created a bottleneck, so we had to form a second line to wait for the machine.
As I stood there, another poll worker was directing people to their district lines and kept sending the good people of the 49th Election District to the back of my line. Each time a new person would walk up, I would ask them if they've been up to the table to get their Registered Voter card yet. They would each look at me blankly until I held up the card. "Do you have one of these yet? No? Ok, then you need to wait in that line."
People were pretty skeptical of me then too, but my prop helped convince them. After struggling with a couple of people, the woman in front of me in line joined the good fight and helped me direct people to the correct place. After doing this four or five times, I went over to the poll worker and told her that she was directing people to the wrong line. She thanked me, but generally ignored me and kept doing what she was doing.
All this time, I kept an eye on the old lady from my first line and, as I was about to get to my voting booth, I saw them direct her to the correct line that I had tried to show her 20 minutes earlier. I felt kind of bad for her for having to wait twice, but her second line was far more efficient than mine, and she ended up voting before me.
I eventually got to the booth and cast my vote. From start to finish, it took only 45 minutes. It could have been a lot worse. But that being said, it could have been a lot better. I'm sorry that I didn't take the day off to volunteer as a poll worker. Apparently, unless you have a name tag on election day, no one listens to anything you tell them. Oh well, I tried...
Have you voted yet? If not, go vote right now. I'll wait....
Ok, welcome back. I hope you didn't have to wait in line for too long. I've heard some crazy stories about long waiting times for early voting, so I'm guessing today will be no different. I just waited 45 minutes to vote in New York and New York isn't even a contested state. It was an interesting experience though.
I waited outside for about 20 minutes before getting to the front door of my polling place. As I walked in, a poll worker looked at my election card (They mailed out cards with your polling location, election district, congressional district, etc.) and told me to stand in a specific line. I walked over to the line and was confused. The sign hanging on the booth at the front of the line said "14th Election District" but my card said "49th Election District." My congressional district, however, was listed as 14. Hmm... I turned around and asked the elderly lady behind me which district she was in. She showed me her card and it said "40th Election District, 14th Congressional District." Ok, so we were both in the 14th Congressional District, but the sign clearly said Election District. So I turned to the woman in front of me and asked her. She was also assigned to the 14th Congressional, but a different Election District. I asked them to hold my place in line and I walked back to the entrance.
I asked the poll worker at the door, "Just to be clear, we're supposed to wait in lines based on Election District, right? Not Congressional District?"
"Yes, that's correct. Oh no, have I been sending people to the wrong lines again?"
No wonder people have been standing in such long lines, the poll workers are incompetent. I walked back over to my place in line and told the ladies that we were in the wrong line. The woman in front of me thanked me and switched lines. The old lady behind me said she was staying put. I tried to explain to her how the lines worked and pointed to the 40 on her card, but she wouldn't budge. I'm guessing that as an elderly black woman, she was an easy target for voter manipulation and/or suppression. Someone probably told her not to listen to anyone but trusted sources... so she ignored me. I did my best to announce to the whole room that they should be in line based on Election District and not any other number on their card. I saw one or two people switch lines, but more people acted like I wasn't there.
I went over to the line for the 49th Election District and waited there. I moved pretty quickly up to the table, signed the book, got my registered voter card, and moved over to the line for the voting booth. We were supposed to sign the book, get our cards, and go right into the booth, but only one of the two machines for my district was working. This created a bottleneck, so we had to form a second line to wait for the machine.
As I stood there, another poll worker was directing people to their district lines and kept sending the good people of the 49th Election District to the back of my line. Each time a new person would walk up, I would ask them if they've been up to the table to get their Registered Voter card yet. They would each look at me blankly until I held up the card. "Do you have one of these yet? No? Ok, then you need to wait in that line."
People were pretty skeptical of me then too, but my prop helped convince them. After struggling with a couple of people, the woman in front of me in line joined the good fight and helped me direct people to the correct place. After doing this four or five times, I went over to the poll worker and told her that she was directing people to the wrong line. She thanked me, but generally ignored me and kept doing what she was doing.
All this time, I kept an eye on the old lady from my first line and, as I was about to get to my voting booth, I saw them direct her to the correct line that I had tried to show her 20 minutes earlier. I felt kind of bad for her for having to wait twice, but her second line was far more efficient than mine, and she ended up voting before me.
I eventually got to the booth and cast my vote. From start to finish, it took only 45 minutes. It could have been a lot worse. But that being said, it could have been a lot better. I'm sorry that I didn't take the day off to volunteer as a poll worker. Apparently, unless you have a name tag on election day, no one listens to anything you tell them. Oh well, I tried...
Monday, November 03, 2008
MLS news
Apparently this is old news, (almost a week) but somehow I missed it.Freddie Ljungberg is the latest aging European soccer star to come to the MLS. He was the Swedish captain until he retired after Euro 2008 and his last club team was West Ham United. Now he's coming to America to play for Seattle.
He may be past his prime, but I'm all for players retiring from Europe and coming to America. The MLS can use them.
Saturday, November 01, 2008
Palin prank call
"MONTREAL - In an over-the-top accent, one half of a notorious Quebec comedy duo claims to be the president of France as he describes sex with his famous wife, the joy of killing animals and Hustler magazine's latest Sarah Palin porno spoof.
At the other end of the line? An oblivious Sarah Palin.
The Masked Avengers, a radio pairing notorious for prank calls to celebrities and heads of state, notched its latest victory Saturday when it released a recording of a six-minute call with Palin, who thought she was talking with Nicolas Sarkozy.
Throughout the call, which was making the rounds in U.S. political circles by day's end Saturday, Palin and the pranksters discuss politics, pundits, and the perils of going hunting with Vice-President Dick Cheney.
"We have such great respect for you, John McCain and I, we love you," Palin gushes, evidently unaware she's speaking to an infamous Quebec comedian named Marc-Antoine Audette.
At one point, Palin even comes close to confirming her intention to one day run for president, when Audette slyly remarks he can see her taking over the big desk in the Oval office."
Youtube link
Transcript with context of the names and french
Congratulations University of Michigan
Well, it's official, Michigan is going to have its first losing season since 1967. At 2-7 this week, Michigan is looking pretty darn embarrassing. But congratulations Michigan, you've learned a little something from the Bush administration. When someone in charge screws up really badly, you reward them. Michigan did just that. Despite leading his team to utter failure, Rich Rodriguez, Michigan's head coach, has been given a 6-year, $15 million contract."Richie, you're doing a heck of a job"
Who knew Halloween in New York was so crazy
Last night we went down to the village to celebrate Halloween and discovered that we weren't the only ones with that plan. Apparently 2,000,000 other people did the same thing and 60,000 people marched in the Halloween parade. It was utter madness, but it was a lot of fun.
Here's a (somewhat crappy quality) video of the 25th annual Thriller dance:
Molly and I went as Bristol and Levi. We had a plastic Trig, but I'm not sure where he was when this picture was taken. At one point, we posed with a stranger dressed as Sarah Palin and we took a family picture. If I can figure out who's camera it's on, I'll put it up here.
Here's a (somewhat crappy quality) video of the 25th annual Thriller dance:
Molly and I went as Bristol and Levi. We had a plastic Trig, but I'm not sure where he was when this picture was taken. At one point, we posed with a stranger dressed as Sarah Palin and we took a family picture. If I can figure out who's camera it's on, I'll put it up here.
Shameless plug: The Funeralogues
Even though only about 25% of my blog's traffic comes from people in New York, I still want to take this opportunity to plug Molly's latest show and encourage people to go.The Funeralogues is one woman's comedic journey into the known and unknown.
Created in collaboration between Stacy Mayer and New York playwright Robert Charles Gompers, The Funeralogues examines the words and lives behind eulogies. The evening draws inspiration from real life eulogies by Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. to the more humorous eulogy a six year old imparts for her headless Barbie. The audience is drawn further into the parlor as Stacy shares her experiences of wandering through the services of total strangers. Find out the not so certain answers to the uneasy questions we all ask including, "What will they say at my funeral?" and "Does this dress make me look fat?"
The Funeralogues premiered at Emerging Artsists Theatre's One Woman Standing Festival in 2007 and later appeared in the Director's Company Katherine & Friends Festival. It is now enjoying a 6 week limited engagement at All Souls Chapel in New York City.
The Funeralogues
Friday, October 31, 2008
A Halloween Story
Happy Halloween. Here's a special Halloween story for you...About a month ago, I was on a crowded subway train traveling from the upper east side to grand central station. It was one of those rides where there wasn't an inch of space to spare. I was holding onto the rail and fighting to keep my personal space. Once the doors were closed and the train starting moving, I entertained myself like I usually do on the subway - people watching. This time there wasn't anyone particularly exciting, but there was a hipster, an old lady, and right in front of me, sitting on the seat, was a little boy of about 8 or 9 years of age. Bored with the people watching, I started reading the subway advertisements. Then I heard a noise. Rattle Rattle. pause. Rattle Rattle. pause. I looked around, but I couldn't see the source of the noise. Rattle Rattle. pause. I looked around again. Rattle Rattle. pause. Then I noticed that with each pause, the people on the other end of the train parted. Rattle Rattle. part. Rattle Rattle. part. The noise and the parting got a little closer each time until I heard Rattle Rattle. pause. The people parted and I saw the source. There was a torso holding a cup of change. Seriously. There was a guy who was just a torso, two arms, and a head, and he was shaking a cup of change and then dragging himself forward with his hands. He'd shake the cup twice and then pause to drag himself forward. And with each forward movement, people had to figure out a way to get out of his path. So closer and closer he came. Rattle Rattle. pause. Until he was right in front of me - and more importantly - the little boy. I watched the boy as his gaze fell upon the torso. He went from happy-go-lucky to terrified and scarred-for-life in a matter of seconds. When the little boy laid his eyes on the torso, he began to scream. No, he began to shriek - at the top of his lungs. He wasn't screaming anything in particular, but seemed rather to be trying to drown out the outside world with the sounds of his screams. The torso kept on shaking and scooting his way down the train, but the little boy refused to stop screaming even after he had passed. It was like the switch that turned the screams on and off inside of him had been broken and this little boy was physically unable to stop. The train continued for what was probably only 15 seconds before reaching the next stop, but it felt like this kid was screaming bloody murder for an eternity. When the train finally pulled into the station, his grandmother took him by the arm and led him off the train - with the boy screaming the entire time. I was half tempted to get off as well, just to see how long he was going to keep it up. I wouldn't be at all surprised if he were still screaming to this day.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Who loves Israel the most?
What's the deal with Obama and McCain battling to show who loves Israel the most? According to the CIA World Factbook, the US has around 5 million Jews. That's roughly the same as the number of Mormons. So why aren't they fighting about who loves Joseph Smith more? (I know, I know, that would only net Utah's 5 electoral votes. I'm just trying to make a point)In the debates, each candidate tried to one-up each other in their pro-Israel rhetoric. Palin said, "They are our closest ally in the Middle East and they need us we need them and we shouldn't second-guess them." What happened to the Republican stance of "we do whatever we want and the rest of the world be damned?" After the fake plumber said that electing Obama would mean the death of Israel, Fox News's Shep Smith of all people rushed to correct his comment. So what's going on?
I'm as much of a fan as Israel as the next guy, (I was hoping to land a birthright trip this winter) but I don't see its relevance in the current US election. The economy, health care, taxes, the environment, and energy I understand as electoral issues. But Israel? I don't know, I just don't get it. Any thoughts?
One more quick Joe the Plumber rant and then I'll do my best to never mention him again
Ok, so as much as it pains me to perpetuate this guy's 15 minutes of fame, I have to point out the absurdity of it all. "Joe" the "Plumber" (Actually Samuel the guy who doesn't have his plumbing license) was a nobody until John McCain mentioned him over and over and over again in the final debate.
So did this guy take his 15 minutes with grace and then go back to his quiet Toledo life? Certainly not. Despite the fact that this guy is in no way qualified, he's announced that he would like to run against Marcy Kaptur for Ohio's 9th district and he's hired a Nashville publicist. Why would a guy who's 15 minutes should have long run out hire a publicist? Apparently he's planning on starting a country music career. And lastly, for some reason, he's out on the campaign trail stumping for McCain-Palin. And what stupid things is he saying? Well, for one, he said that an Obama victory means death to Israel.
This guy seriously needs to go away.
So did this guy take his 15 minutes with grace and then go back to his quiet Toledo life? Certainly not. Despite the fact that this guy is in no way qualified, he's announced that he would like to run against Marcy Kaptur for Ohio's 9th district and he's hired a Nashville publicist. Why would a guy who's 15 minutes should have long run out hire a publicist? Apparently he's planning on starting a country music career. And lastly, for some reason, he's out on the campaign trail stumping for McCain-Palin. And what stupid things is he saying? Well, for one, he said that an Obama victory means death to Israel.
This guy seriously needs to go away.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Joe the Biden
I was watching Larry King's interview with John McCain tonight and I saw something that made me laugh. Apparently McCain has been talking about Joe the Plumber too much because he referred to Joe Biden as Joe the Biden. That's all, I just wanted to share.
Maradona set to coach Argentina
Argentina legend Diego Maradona is set for a sensational return to football as the coach of his national side.
He will be appointed the new Argentina coach on Tuesday, according to Luis Segura, secretary of the Argentine FA.
The 1986 World Cup-winning skipper has had only two brief spells as a coach in Argentina, but is understood to be the leading candidate for the post.
This should add a little extra excitement to the World Cup... let's just hope Argentina makes it out of the groups this time.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Caviar-gate?
I keep hearing about the Michelle Obama caviar story despite the fact that it was debunked a week ago. If you hear anyone perpetuating this lie, explain that it was published by the New York Post's Page Six and subsequently retracted. She was not even in New York when she was supposed to have spent $400+ at the Waldorf-Astoria hotel.
Snopes link
Official retraction
1 week until the election....crazy
Snopes link
Official retraction
1 week until the election....crazy
Monday, October 27, 2008
Ted Stevens: Guilty on all 7 counts
"Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens has been convicted of lying about free home renovations and other gifts he received from a wealthy oil contractor.
The Senate's longest-serving Republican, Stevens was found guilty on all seven counts of making false statements on Senate financial documents.
The verdict throws the upcoming election into disarray. Stevens is fighting off a challenge from Democrat Mark Begich and must now either drop out or continue campaigning as a convicted felon."
Bye Ted "the internet is a series of tubes" Stevens... you won't be missed.
"No, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night"
Have you seen those Holiday Inn Express commercials where the guy does something really impressive and someone asks him if he's a doctor/scientist/whatever and he says no, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night?
I always thought they were somewhat amusing, but I never understood how staying at a mostly crappy hotel could make someone smarter. Then I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express... Their secret is to use brain teasers. I now present you with the bathroom supplies:
They give you a bar of soap labeled "clean." That's pretty straightforward. But they also give you four bottles labeled scrub, soften, tame, and wash. It's up to you to figure out what they want you to do with these liquids.
I always thought they were somewhat amusing, but I never understood how staying at a mostly crappy hotel could make someone smarter. Then I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express... Their secret is to use brain teasers. I now present you with the bathroom supplies:
They give you a bar of soap labeled "clean." That's pretty straightforward. But they also give you four bottles labeled scrub, soften, tame, and wash. It's up to you to figure out what they want you to do with these liquids.
I'm back!
I'm back after a fun and relaxing vacation. The main part of my trip was a Mexican cruise, (thanks Amex reward points) and as you know, cruises are all about people watching. In the past, we've had the joy of meeting "Country Club Boy," "Stripper Step Mom," "Dog," and other lovable characters. These guys don't have a name yet, but I'm open to suggestions.
In their defense, Halloween was only two weeks away. That said, it's not much of a defense when they were in costume the entire cruise. You could turn on the cruise channel on TV at any given time and see a storm trooper dancing on deck at the late night dance party. It was bizarre.
In their defense, Halloween was only two weeks away. That said, it's not much of a defense when they were in costume the entire cruise. You could turn on the cruise channel on TV at any given time and see a storm trooper dancing on deck at the late night dance party. It was bizarre.
Friday, October 17, 2008
Out of the Country
I'm on a much needed vacation and will return on 10/27. In the meantime, check out the following websites if you need a fix:
XKCD
538
Electoral-vote
John McCain destroyed Joe the Plumber's life
John McCain couldn't just leave him well enough alone. No, he just had to pick on Joe Six-pack and ruin his life. That's right, before the debate Joe the Plumber was just your average Joe Scam Artist, but now that McCain has thrust him into the spotlight...he's screwed.
"However, a bit of media digging has uncovered that Mr Wurzelbacher's first name is actually Samuel and he does not have a plumber's licence, although the company he works for does.
According to Tony Herrera, of the Plumbers and Steamfitters Local 50 in Toledo, Ohio, Mr Wurzelbacher cannot practise in Toledo without a licence - although he can work for someone with a master's licence or in outlying areas that do not require a licence.
According to local court records, Mr Wurzelbacher also owes the state of Ohio $1,182.98 in personal income tax.
Mr Wurzelbacher acknowledged he did not have a plumber's licence and admitted in one interview he was "not even close" to earning $250,000."
John McCain is like a reverse King Midas. You know, Joe, Sarah Palin's life was pretty cushy before John McCain mentioned her too...
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Joe the Plumber?
Just a quick comment on the debate - MSNBC reported that the final count of Joe the Plumber references was 25. 25 times in a 90 minute debate. That's about one Joe the Plumber reference every 3 and a half minutes.
That's all.
Goodnight.
That's all.
Goodnight.
How many countries can you name in 15 minutes?
More accurately, how many countries can you name and spell correctly in 15 minutes?
You can find out here. When you're ready to go, click the start button and start typing. When you type a correct country name, the name will float down from your text box and land on the appropriate part of the map. It's like the game where you name all 50 states...only harder.
No cheating!
After you're done, you can click here to see my results. I got 86 out of 195, but there were 4 or 5 that I just couldn't spell properly despite my best efforts. Africa really stumped me. I bet I would have done a lot better had we been closer to a World Cup.
That site also has a ton of other similar games. Try naming all the US Presidents, Simpsons characters, or US State capitals
You can find out here. When you're ready to go, click the start button and start typing. When you type a correct country name, the name will float down from your text box and land on the appropriate part of the map. It's like the game where you name all 50 states...only harder.
No cheating!
After you're done, you can click here to see my results. I got 86 out of 195, but there were 4 or 5 that I just couldn't spell properly despite my best efforts. Africa really stumped me. I bet I would have done a lot better had we been closer to a World Cup.
That site also has a ton of other similar games. Try naming all the US Presidents, Simpsons characters, or US State capitals
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Well this is new
"WASHINGTON (AP) — Too busy playing video games to watch presidential ads on television? Barack Obama has found you, too, by becoming the first presidential candidate to buy ad space inside a game.
Eighteen video games, including the extremely popular "Guitar Hero" and "Madden 09," will feature in-game ads from the Obama campaign in the final weeks before the election. The ads — appearing on billboards and other signage — remind players that early voting has begun and plug a campaign Web site that encourages people to register for early voting.
Obama campaign officials said the video game ads target 10 states that allow early voting, including several battleground states: Ohio, Iowa, Indiana, Montana, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Nevada, New Mexico, Florida, and Colorado."
All this advertising combined with his media buy makes me really curious about just how much money Obama has raised. $100M this month? It seems possible. (edit: apparently the Washington Post had the exact same thought)
Bring on that free national wi-fi
"A proposal to create a free, national wireless Internet service got a boost as Federal Communications Commission engineers concluded that concerns are overblown about such service interfering with other carriers.
The report clears the way for the FCC to move forward with a plan to auction off airwaves to a bidder who agrees to offer free, national wireless Internet service. The FCC is expected to finalize rules this year and could begin auctioning off airwaves in early-to-mid 2009."
If you have an hour to kill
If you have an hour to kill and you want to work on your spacial awareness, check out this puzzle game from the Het Freudenthal Institute for Science and Mathematics Education.
You are presented with the view of a structure from three angles: top-down, front view (the arrow points at the front), and the view from the right-hand side. Your goal is to build the structure shown using the least number of blocks.
And just a hint - there's no gravity in this game, so feel free to make some flying boxes.
It's not particularly hard, but like I said, it's a good way to kill a little time. (edit: on second thought, level 2 is a bit tricky)
No, this is not the solution to the first puzzle...
You are presented with the view of a structure from three angles: top-down, front view (the arrow points at the front), and the view from the right-hand side. Your goal is to build the structure shown using the least number of blocks.
And just a hint - there's no gravity in this game, so feel free to make some flying boxes.
It's not particularly hard, but like I said, it's a good way to kill a little time. (edit: on second thought, level 2 is a bit tricky)
No, this is not the solution to the first puzzle...Monday, October 13, 2008
Making Toledo proud
Wow... I don't even know what to say. This guy is just so ridiculously ignorant and bigoted. And he's in Toledo no less.... awesome
This was going to be a trivia question
I wanted to put a trivia question out there, but I couldn't think of a way to word the question without giving the answer. My question would have been, out of the 50 states and Washington DC, which is the only one to have never voted Republican? The answer is Washington DC. The 23rd amendment gave DC electoral votes in 1961 and they've never once voted for the Republican candidate. Even in the lopsided election of 1984, Washington DC (along with Minnesota) cast the only votes for Mondale.
And no state has ever gone its entire electoral history without voting for a Democrat at least once.
And no state has ever gone its entire electoral history without voting for a Democrat at least once.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Another day, another soccer defection
The Cuban national soccer team played a World Cup qualifier in Washington DC and that can only mean one thing... at least one of the Cuban players is going to defect. They didn't disappoint. Reuters reports that midfielder Pedro Faife, 24, and forward Reynier Alcantara, 26, disappeared from their hotel outside Washington before a practice on Friday.
Just how often does something like this happen? That same Reuters article mentions 6 Cuban players defecting in March and Maykel Galindo, who defected after a Cuban national game, now plays in the MLS. Five Rwandan players defected to France in '96. Most of the Haitian national team tried as well. A Rumanian player tried to defect to Australia. Three Iraqi players did too. Six Eritrean soccer players defected to Angola. 300 Poles defected to Spain after traveling there to watch the World Cup. And in 1926, pretty much Hakoah Vienna's entire team defected and started New York Hakoah. And these are just the result of 5 minutes of googling. The list goes on and on
Just how often does something like this happen? That same Reuters article mentions 6 Cuban players defecting in March and Maykel Galindo, who defected after a Cuban national game, now plays in the MLS. Five Rwandan players defected to France in '96. Most of the Haitian national team tried as well. A Rumanian player tried to defect to Australia. Three Iraqi players did too. Six Eritrean soccer players defected to Angola. 300 Poles defected to Spain after traveling there to watch the World Cup. And in 1926, pretty much Hakoah Vienna's entire team defected and started New York Hakoah. And these are just the result of 5 minutes of googling. The list goes on and on
Saturday, October 11, 2008
She's such a maverick, she doesn't even follow the law
Well, in case anyone out there was still planning on voting for McCain-Palin, they have yet another reason not to. The "troopergate" report has been released and, surprise surprise, it found that Palin violated state ethics laws in trying to have her sister's ex-husband fired.
edit: I've read this story on a number of news sites and I'm seeing that some of them appear unwilling to go as far as saying she broke the law. Like this Reuters article, which will only say that she "violated the public trust by pressuring those who worked for her in a way that advanced her personal wishes."
And some sources, like the CNN story I linked to above, keep undergoing edits back and forth on this issue. But let's set the record straight - there's no debate here as to whether she broke the law.
From the report: "I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39.52.110 (a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act."
She violated an Alaska Statute.... statute means law...she violated the law...
Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin abused her power as Alaska's governor and violated state ethics law by trying to get her ex-brother-in-law fired from the state police, a state investigator's report concluded Friday. (CNN)You can read the actual report here
edit: I've read this story on a number of news sites and I'm seeing that some of them appear unwilling to go as far as saying she broke the law. Like this Reuters article, which will only say that she "violated the public trust by pressuring those who worked for her in a way that advanced her personal wishes."
And some sources, like the CNN story I linked to above, keep undergoing edits back and forth on this issue. But let's set the record straight - there's no debate here as to whether she broke the law.
From the report: "I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39.52.110 (a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act."
She violated an Alaska Statute.... statute means law...she violated the law...
Friday, October 10, 2008
John McCain Humor
I thought this was a pretty creative home-made political ad
Youtube Link
And this one is kind of funny too, but it's more sketch comedy than anything else. Don't watch it if you're easily offended by language.
Youtube Link
And this one is kind of funny too, but it's more sketch comedy than anything else. Don't watch it if you're easily offended by language.
Circuit breaker levels for the NYSE
The Market opened this morning and was immediately way down. Yahoo finance briefly showed a drop of 1,000 points, but quickly updated their page (and I didn't get a screenshot). Google finance shows the swings so far today (in the first hour of trading) to be above 800 points. With movement like this, it's time to ask when they put the breaks on. A quick search led me to a blog post from the Financial Times:
Circuit-breaker points represent the thresholds at which trading is halted marketwide for single-day declines in the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA). Circuit-breaker levels are set quarterly as 10, 20 and 30-percent of the DJIA average closing values of the previous month, rounded to the nearest 50 points.Source
In fourth-quarter 2008, the 10, 20 and 30-percent decline levels, respectively, in the DJIA will be as follows:
Level 1 Halt
A 1,100-point drop in the DJIA before 2 p.m. will halt trading for one hour; for 30 minutes if between 2 p.m. and 2:30 p.m.; and have no effect if at 2:30 p.m. or later unless there is a level 2 halt.
Level 2 Halt
A 2,200-point drop in the DJIA before 1:00 p.m. will halt trading for two hours; for one hour if between 1:00 p.m. and 2:00 p.m.; and for the remainder of the day if at 2:00 p.m. or later.
Level 3 Halt
A 3,350-point drop will halt trading for the remainder of the day regardless of when the decline occurs.
Thursday, October 09, 2008
Tuesday, October 07, 2008
Google Goggles
Google has introduced a feature into gmail called "Mail Goggles." The idea is that if you're in the state of mind where you shouldn't be writing emails, you're probably not in the state of mind to do math problems either.
From the google blog:
If you really want to, you can enable Mail Goggles in the "Labs" section of settings. I had actually never noticed the Labs options before, but there's all sorts of stuff in there. Most of them don't look all that useful, but keyboard shortcuts, mouse gestures, vacation responder, and the forgotten attachment detector could be helpful.
From the google blog:
Sometimes I send messages I shouldn't send. Like the time I told that girl I had a crush on her over text message. Or the time I sent that late night email to my ex-girlfriend that we should get back together. Gmail can't always prevent you from sending messages you might later regret, but today we're launching a new Labs feature I wrote called Mail Goggles which may help.
When you enable Mail Goggles, it will check that you're really sure you want to send that late night Friday email. And what better way to check than by making you solve a few simple math problems after you click send to verify you're in the right state of mind?
If you really want to, you can enable Mail Goggles in the "Labs" section of settings. I had actually never noticed the Labs options before, but there's all sorts of stuff in there. Most of them don't look all that useful, but keyboard shortcuts, mouse gestures, vacation responder, and the forgotten attachment detector could be helpful.
Monday, October 06, 2008
Obamamentary
Remember back in the days when political campaigns used direct mailings, phone calls, and, heck, even emails to smear each other? Welcome to the future, baby. Today at noon, the Obama campaign released Keating Economics: John McCain and the Making of a Financial Crisis. KE:JMatMoaFC (as the kids call it) is a full fledged, 15 minute documentary about John McCain and the Keating 5.
You can view it on youtube or download the .mov or .mp4 at Keatingeconomics.com
You can view it on youtube or download the .mov or .mp4 at Keatingeconomics.com
Sunday, October 05, 2008
Only in New York
Knishery on the Lower East Side
Hot Nosh - the hot kosher food vending machine (in Westchester)Friday, October 03, 2008
It looks like the House passed the bailout
They just did the initial voice vote and it sounded like the Yeas far outnumbered the Nays...
update: voting just closed and the Yeas have it 263-171
Pelosi gave the final speech of the debate. She said this version of the bill was vastly improved from the version previously defeated. That's funny - the bailout language was exactly the same. She must be a big fan of pork.
update 2: Here's the voting roll.
update 3: And the bill is now a law
update 4: A look at some of the measures included in the
Sec. 101: Extension of alternative minimum tax relief for nonrefundable personal credits.
Sec. 102: Extension of increased alternative minimum tax exemption amount.
Sec. 201: Deduction for state and local sales taxes.
Sec. 202: Deduction of qualified tuition and related expenses.
Sec. 203: Deduction for certain expenses of elementary and secondary school teachers.
Sec. 204: Additional standard deduction for real property taxes for nonitemizers.
Sec. 205: Tax-free distributions from individual retirement plans for charitable purposes.
Sec. 304: Extension of look-thru rule for related controlled foreign corporations.
Sec. 305: Extension of 15-year straight-line cost recovery for qualified leasehold improvements and qualified restaurant improvements; 15-year straight-line cost recovery for certain improvements to retail space.
Sec. 307: Basis adjustment to stock of S corporations making charitable contributions of property.
Sec. 308: Increase in limit on cover over of rum excise tax to Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.
Sec. 309: Extension of economic development credit for American Samoa.
Sec. 310: Extension of mine rescue team training credit.
Sec. 311: Extension of election to expense advanced mine safety equipment.
Sec. 312: Deduction allowable with respect to income attributable to domestic production activities in Puerto Rico.
Sec. 314: Indian employment credit.
Sec. 315: Accelerated depreciation for business property on Indian reservations.
Sec. 316: Railroad track maintenance.
Sec. 317: Seven-year cost recovery period for motorsports racing track facility.
Sec. 318: Expensing of environmental remediation costs.
Sec. 319: Extension of work opportunity tax credit for Hurricane Katrina employees.
Sec. 320: Extension of increased rehabilitation credit for structures in the Gulf Opportunity Zone.
Sec. 321: Enhanced deduction for qualified computer contributions.
Sec. 322: Tax incentives for investment in the District of Columbia.
Sec. 323: Enhanced charitable deductions for contributions of food inventory.
Sec. 324: Extension of enhanced charitable deduction for contributions of book inventory.
Sec. 325: Extension and modification of duty suspension on wool products; wool research fund; wool duty refunds.
Sec. 401: Permanent authority for undercover operations [as related to tax provisions].
Sec. 402: Permanent authority for disclosure of information relating to terrorist activities [as related to tax provisions].
Sec. 501: $8,500 income threshold used to calculate refundable portion of child tax credit.
Sec. 502: Provisions related to film and television productions.
Sec. 503: Exemption from excise tax for certain wooden arrows designed for use by children.
Sec. 504: Income averaging for amounts received in connection with the Exxon Valdez litigation.
Sec. 505: Certain farming business machinery and equipment treated as five-year property.
Sec. 506: Modification of penalty on understatement of taxpayer’s liability by tax return preparer.
Sec. 601: Secure rural schools and community self-determination program.
Sec. 602: Transfer to abandoned mine reclamation fund.
Sec. 702: Temporary tax relief for areas damaged by 2008 Midwestern severe storms, tornados and flooding.
Sec. 704: Temporary tax-exempt bond financing and low-income housing tax relief for areas.
Sec. 709: Waiver of certain mortgage revenue bond requirements following federally declared disasters.
Sec. 710: Special depreciation allowance for qualified disaster property.
Sec. 711: Increased expensing for qualified disaster assistance property.
update 5: (Probably the last update to this post)
After the House failed to pass the bailout the first time, the Dow took a huge 700+ point dive. Here's a look at what happened this time around.
After the House passed the bailout, the Dow dropped 450+ points
Sarah Palin Debate Flow Chart
I found this flow chart amusing.... Thanks goes to Andrew for posting the link in his away message. (Source)
Thursday, October 02, 2008
A look at the Senate bailout bill
You can view a pdf of the Senate bill here. The Paulson plan was 3 pages long. The House bill was basically those 3 pages plus 106 more. The Senate bill is basically those 106 pages plus 345 more. So after lots of drama, the Senate has voted for the same, bad, 3 page plan, but with hundreds of pages of added junk.
First of all, this wasn't put forth as the The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 like it was by the House. The Senate version was an amendment to "section 712 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, section 2705 of the Public Health Service Act, section 9812 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to require equity in the provision of mental health and substance-related disorder benefits under group health plans, to prohibit discrimination on the basis of genetic information with respect to health insurance and employment, and for other purposes."
Uh..yeah. That's a mouthful. But what the heck is going on? That doesn't sound like a bailout bill to me.
First of all, this wasn't put forth as the The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 like it was by the House. The Senate version was an amendment to "section 712 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, section 2705 of the Public Health Service Act, section 9812 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to require equity in the provision of mental health and substance-related disorder benefits under group health plans, to prohibit discrimination on the basis of genetic information with respect to health insurance and employment, and for other purposes."
Uh..yeah. That's a mouthful. But what the heck is going on? That doesn't sound like a bailout bill to me.
DIVISION A—EMERGENCY ECONOMIC STABILIZATION
There it is! There's that pesky Paulson plan! So what did they add? Well, I certainly don't have time to read through all that right now, but according to Bloomberg, it contains:
provisions to repeal "a 39-cent excise tax on wooden arrows designed for children"
"tax breaks benefiting Hollywood producers, stock-car racetrack owners and Virgin Islands rum-makers"
"[T]he provisions include a research tax credit worth about $8.3 billion a year for companies such as Microsoft Corp. and Harley-Davidson Inc., and subsidies for the overseas financial services earnings of U.S.-based multinational corporations such as General Electric Co. and Citigroup Inc."
"[One provision] will save Nascar track builders $109 million this year"
"Several others are new provisions, including two tax breaks worth $478 million over the next decade for movie and television producers who shoot films in the United States."
"The Congressional Budget Office said today the tax provisions will add about $112 billion to budget deficits over the next five years because the legislation doesn't contain enough offsetting revenue increases to keep the budget balanced."
So the $700B bailout is now the $812B bailout. It still sounds like a stupid plan, but hey, at least now we don't have to pay an excise tax on kiddie arrows!
Hopefully I'll get the chance to read through the bill in the next couple of days and post more details.
provisions to repeal "a 39-cent excise tax on wooden arrows designed for children"
"tax breaks benefiting Hollywood producers, stock-car racetrack owners and Virgin Islands rum-makers"
"[T]he provisions include a research tax credit worth about $8.3 billion a year for companies such as Microsoft Corp. and Harley-Davidson Inc., and subsidies for the overseas financial services earnings of U.S.-based multinational corporations such as General Electric Co. and Citigroup Inc."
"[One provision] will save Nascar track builders $109 million this year"
"Several others are new provisions, including two tax breaks worth $478 million over the next decade for movie and television producers who shoot films in the United States."
"The Congressional Budget Office said today the tax provisions will add about $112 billion to budget deficits over the next five years because the legislation doesn't contain enough offsetting revenue increases to keep the budget balanced."
So the $700B bailout is now the $812B bailout. It still sounds like a stupid plan, but hey, at least now we don't have to pay an excise tax on kiddie arrows!
Hopefully I'll get the chance to read through the bill in the next couple of days and post more details.
Wednesday, October 01, 2008
The New York Times called this in 1999
From this article, published in the NYT 9 years ago yesterday:
Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending
"In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.
...
In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates -- anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional loans.
...
In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's."
Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending
"In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.
...
In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates -- anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional loans.
...
In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's."
Bailout Bill 3.0
The Paulson Plan? A no go. The Paulson Plan + an extra 30 or 40 pages of fluff? Also a no go. Now, in round 3, we have the Paulson Plan + a whole lot of fluff. Only this time everyone expects it to pass. According to many news sources, such as CNN, the Senate version of this bill is just the House bill with a bunch of vote-grabbing incentives added.
Unfortunately, after the House bill failed, I recycled my highlighted and post-it flagged copy, so I don't have all my notes to share, but I can remember a lot of what was wrong with the bill. First and foremost, it doesn't address the actual problem.
What's wrong with that picture? What was supporting that growth in house prices? It certainly wasn't a result of Americans suddenly getting richer and buying more expensive homes. It was easy money flowing from banks and the idea that homes were get-rich-quick schemes - flip that house! Add to this the fact that Wall St. and investment banks realized that they could securitize people's mortgages. This led to a situation where people were buying like crazy - well above their means - and banks were handing out mortgages left and right because they could turn around and sell them to someone else. Then people stopped paying their mortgages and the whole pyramid scheme came crashing down. If you haven't seen it already, this comic tells the story with a bit of humor.
So anyway, that's how we got to where we are now. We've seen the financial institutions who bought up these bad loans going broke and more and more people losing the homes they shouldn't have purchased in the first place. So what's the solution? Well, the Treasury Department decided to pick a really big number that sounded impressive and said that if they got that much money, they could fix the whole ordeal. What did they want to do with the $700,000,000,000 of taxpayer money? They wanted to buy up the bad loans from the banks. This would get the expensive mistakes off the banks' books and allow them to keep handing out easy money. In the meantime, the government would hold on to these garbage loans, and with a little help from magic, they would be able to sell them for a profit in the future. The problem with this is that it would take a whole lot of magic. How are people going to suddenly be able to afford these homes again? There's really only two ways - people start making a lot more money or house prices go back up. No one is saying anything about increasing people's incomes, so everyone is focused on propping up the housing market. This is just not sustainable though. They're only trying to prolong the bubble, which will inevitably cause a bigger burst.
So on to the bailout bill. The government plan is to give the Secretary of the Treasury a massive chunk of money, (most likely borrowed from China) to do whatever he wants, with little to no oversight. Now, I know what you're saying - but congress added an oversight board. Henry Paulson wasn't going to get away with those "unreviewable actions." Well that's true, but the oversight board was going to be made up of Ben Bernanke, Henry Paulson, the head of the SEC, and Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, and the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. I'm sure they'd do a good job regulating themselves...
There was another little gem buried in the bill that said the Secretary of the Treasury would be required to issue regulations or guidelines necessary to address conflicts of interest. That's helpful. More self-regulation.
And then there was the FAS 157 repeal. FAS 157 requires companies to "mark to market" their assets. If they bought one of these steaming piles of mortgages for, say $100M, but it's now worth $500k, they have to report it on their books at $500k. The plan would allow the companies to keep their $500k investment valued at $100M. Opponents of FAS 157 say that it's unfair to make them write down their assets due to temporary fluctuations. But again, how do they know they're temporary. Are the people who have had their homes foreclosed suddenly going to start paying their mortgages again? Somehow I don't think so.
There was so much more that was wrong with this thing, but I threw it in the recycling bin with pleasure when I saw the bill go down in defeat, so you'll have to trust me or read it yourself. But it doesn't end there, we now have to look at what the Senate has added.
They've added a provision to increase FDIC insurance from $100,000 to $250,000. This does not address the problem either. This just allows them to print even more money when banks fail.
They've added renewable energy tax incentives. I'm all for renewable energy, but if the bill stinks, the bill stinks. This has absolutely nothing to do with the current situation.
They've added Alternative Minimum Tax relief. Again, I think something needs to be done about AMT creep, but this is not the place to do it.
What else? "The revised bailout bill also includes a "Mental Health Parity" provision, which would require health insurance companies to cover mental illness at parity with physical illness." Oh yeah, that's a solution to the economic situation. I blame mental illness for this too, but I don't think we're talking about the same people.
Awesome. So we take a bad idea and bundle it with unrelated fluff. This plan doesn't address the actual problem, but instead hands over a massive amount of cash to the people who caused it in the first place. Oh, and it's probably going to kill the dollar. Where's my tiny American Flag? I just want to stand outside and wave it for a while...
Unfortunately, after the House bill failed, I recycled my highlighted and post-it flagged copy, so I don't have all my notes to share, but I can remember a lot of what was wrong with the bill. First and foremost, it doesn't address the actual problem.
What's wrong with that picture? What was supporting that growth in house prices? It certainly wasn't a result of Americans suddenly getting richer and buying more expensive homes. It was easy money flowing from banks and the idea that homes were get-rich-quick schemes - flip that house! Add to this the fact that Wall St. and investment banks realized that they could securitize people's mortgages. This led to a situation where people were buying like crazy - well above their means - and banks were handing out mortgages left and right because they could turn around and sell them to someone else. Then people stopped paying their mortgages and the whole pyramid scheme came crashing down. If you haven't seen it already, this comic tells the story with a bit of humor.
So anyway, that's how we got to where we are now. We've seen the financial institutions who bought up these bad loans going broke and more and more people losing the homes they shouldn't have purchased in the first place. So what's the solution? Well, the Treasury Department decided to pick a really big number that sounded impressive and said that if they got that much money, they could fix the whole ordeal. What did they want to do with the $700,000,000,000 of taxpayer money? They wanted to buy up the bad loans from the banks. This would get the expensive mistakes off the banks' books and allow them to keep handing out easy money. In the meantime, the government would hold on to these garbage loans, and with a little help from magic, they would be able to sell them for a profit in the future. The problem with this is that it would take a whole lot of magic. How are people going to suddenly be able to afford these homes again? There's really only two ways - people start making a lot more money or house prices go back up. No one is saying anything about increasing people's incomes, so everyone is focused on propping up the housing market. This is just not sustainable though. They're only trying to prolong the bubble, which will inevitably cause a bigger burst.
So on to the bailout bill. The government plan is to give the Secretary of the Treasury a massive chunk of money, (most likely borrowed from China) to do whatever he wants, with little to no oversight. Now, I know what you're saying - but congress added an oversight board. Henry Paulson wasn't going to get away with those "unreviewable actions." Well that's true, but the oversight board was going to be made up of Ben Bernanke, Henry Paulson, the head of the SEC, and Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, and the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. I'm sure they'd do a good job regulating themselves...
There was another little gem buried in the bill that said the Secretary of the Treasury would be required to issue regulations or guidelines necessary to address conflicts of interest. That's helpful. More self-regulation.
And then there was the FAS 157 repeal. FAS 157 requires companies to "mark to market" their assets. If they bought one of these steaming piles of mortgages for, say $100M, but it's now worth $500k, they have to report it on their books at $500k. The plan would allow the companies to keep their $500k investment valued at $100M. Opponents of FAS 157 say that it's unfair to make them write down their assets due to temporary fluctuations. But again, how do they know they're temporary. Are the people who have had their homes foreclosed suddenly going to start paying their mortgages again? Somehow I don't think so.
There was so much more that was wrong with this thing, but I threw it in the recycling bin with pleasure when I saw the bill go down in defeat, so you'll have to trust me or read it yourself. But it doesn't end there, we now have to look at what the Senate has added.
They've added a provision to increase FDIC insurance from $100,000 to $250,000. This does not address the problem either. This just allows them to print even more money when banks fail.
They've added renewable energy tax incentives. I'm all for renewable energy, but if the bill stinks, the bill stinks. This has absolutely nothing to do with the current situation.
They've added Alternative Minimum Tax relief. Again, I think something needs to be done about AMT creep, but this is not the place to do it.
What else? "The revised bailout bill also includes a "Mental Health Parity" provision, which would require health insurance companies to cover mental illness at parity with physical illness." Oh yeah, that's a solution to the economic situation. I blame mental illness for this too, but I don't think we're talking about the same people.
Awesome. So we take a bad idea and bundle it with unrelated fluff. This plan doesn't address the actual problem, but instead hands over a massive amount of cash to the people who caused it in the first place. Oh, and it's probably going to kill the dollar. Where's my tiny American Flag? I just want to stand outside and wave it for a while...
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Sarah Palin has apparently never read a newspaper
This just keeps getting worse and worse for Sarah Palin. Depending on how you interpret this, she's either read every newspaper in America... or none of them.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Fed throwing around almost $700B anyway?
Fed Pumps Further $630 Billion Into Financial System
By Scott Lanman and Craig Torres
Sept. 29 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve will pump an additional $630 billion into the global financial system, flooding banks with cash to alleviate the worst banking crisis since the Great Depression.
The Fed increased its existing currency swaps with foreign central banks by $330 billion to $620 billion to make more dollars available worldwide. The Term Auction Facility, the Fed's emergency loan program, will expand by $300 billion to $450 billion. The European Central Bank, the Bank of England and the Bank of Japan are among the participating authorities.
BloombergThe Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (aka The Bailout)
The bailout bill has ballooned from 3 pages to over 100. Here's a short summary from the House Committee on Financial Services:
I. Stabilizing the Economy
The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (EESA) provides up to $700 billion to the Secretary of the Treasury to buy mortgages and other assets that are clogging the balance sheets of financial institutions and making it difficult for working families, small businesses, and other companies to access credit, which is vital to a strong and stable economy. EESA also establishes a program that would allow companies to insure theirtroubled assets.
And here's the full bill (pdf)
I haven't had the chance to read it yet, so I won't pass judgment on it. I thought Bailout 1.0 was crap though, so we'll have to see...
update: The full bill is 109 pages. This is 109 pages of double spaced, large font, short sentences. I copied it over to word and took out the double spacing and made it a uniform 12 point font and it became 73 pages. The lines rarely go more than halfway across the page and each are preceded by a line number. There's also a lot of lines of blank space, dates, and filenames. If I took the time to edit this down to just the actual text, I would guess this thing fills no more than 30 or 40 pages.
update 2: There are a number of ugly provisions in this bill - including suspending FAS 157 - but it looks like the bill failed by a count of 228-205, so this might be moot.
I. Stabilizing the Economy
The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (EESA) provides up to $700 billion to the Secretary of the Treasury to buy mortgages and other assets that are clogging the balance sheets of financial institutions and making it difficult for working families, small businesses, and other companies to access credit, which is vital to a strong and stable economy. EESA also establishes a program that would allow companies to insure theirtroubled assets.
II. Homeownership Preservation
EESA requires the Treasury to modify troubled loans – many the result of predatory lending practices – wherever possible to help American families keep their homes. It also directs other federal agencies to modify loans that they own or control. Finally, it improves the HOPE for Homeowners program by expanding eligibility and increasing the tools available to the Department of Housing and Urban Development to help more families keep their homes.
III. Taxpayer Protection
Taxpayers should not be expected to pay for Wall Street’s mistakes. The legislation requires companies that sell some of their bad assets to the government to provide warrants so that taxpayers will benefit from any future growth these companies may experience as a result of participation in this program. The legislation also requires the President to submit legislation that would cover any losses to taxpayers resulting from this program from financial institutions.
IV. No Windfalls for Executives
Executives who made bad decisions should not be allowed to dump their bad assets on the government, and then walk away with millions of dollars in bonuses. In order to participate in this program, companies will lose certain tax benefits and, in some cases, must limit executive pay. In addition, the bill limits “golden parachutes” and requires that unearned bonuses be returned.
V. Strong Oversight
Rather than giving the Treasury all the funds at once, the legislation gives the Treasury $250 billion immediately, then requires the President to certify that additional funds are needed ($100 billion, then $350 billion subject to Congressional disapproval). The Treasury must report on the use of the funds and the progress in addressing the crisis. EESA also establishes an Oversight Board so that the Treasury cannot act in an arbitrary manner. It also establishes a special inspector general to protect against waste, fraud and abuse
Here's a 6 page summary (pdf)And here's the full bill (pdf)
I haven't had the chance to read it yet, so I won't pass judgment on it. I thought Bailout 1.0 was crap though, so we'll have to see...
update: The full bill is 109 pages. This is 109 pages of double spaced, large font, short sentences. I copied it over to word and took out the double spacing and made it a uniform 12 point font and it became 73 pages. The lines rarely go more than halfway across the page and each are preceded by a line number. There's also a lot of lines of blank space, dates, and filenames. If I took the time to edit this down to just the actual text, I would guess this thing fills no more than 30 or 40 pages.
update 2: There are a number of ugly provisions in this bill - including suspending FAS 157 - but it looks like the bill failed by a count of 228-205, so this might be moot.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
You can't make this stuff up
So you know that solution to the financial crisis that Henry Paulson came up with? You know, the $700 Billion bailout plan? You would think that the $700B number would be based on financial models, forecasts, and actuarial analysis. At the very least, you'd think it was based on SOMETHING. Well, you'd be wrong:
"It's not based on any particular data point," a Treasury spokeswoman told Forbes.com Tuesday. "We just wanted to choose a really large number."Oh holy crap.... You seriously can't make this stuff up
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Intrade Betting is Suspicious
FiveThirtyEight has an interesting look at some Intrade irregularities concerning the POTUS prediction market.
"It's pretty obvious that this is not some sort of random walk. Rather, every so often, some individual trader or some small group of traders are shorting all the Obama contacts in bulk and resetting the entire market. The markets then organically climb back upward until the rogue trader strikes again six or eight hours later. The volumes on these contracts have been very high for the past week as a result."It's hard to summarize the whole post, so take 5 minutes and check it out.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Inflationtastic
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) just put out the September Producer Price Index data. "The Producer Price Index (PPI) program measures the average change over time in the selling prices received by domestic producers for their output." The BLS also puts out the Consumer Price Index, which is the "monthly data on changes in the prices paid by urban consumers for a representative basket of goods and services." However since I only have PPI data available in excel format, that's the one I looked at. (It's easier to parse than a pdf)
The first thing I noticed is that wheat has become a lot more expensive across all the categories:
Hard red spring wheat - up 218% over last year
Soft white wheat - up 204% over last year
Hard amber durum wheat - up 181% over last year
The list goes on and on, but I have no idea what the different types of wheat actually are. Has anyone noticed bread getting a lot more expensive?
Potatoes have also been hit especially hard:
Round white potatoes - up 241%
Round red potatoes - up 218%
Russet potatoes - up 135%
Food items seem to be the hardest hit across the board:
Tomatoes - up 167%
Celery - up 165%
Green peppers - up 139%
Cauliflower - up 136%
Other random stuff has increased significantly as well:
Iron and steel scrap - up 111%
Crude petroleum (domestic production) - up 106%
Fertilizer materials - up 95%
Sulfuric acid - up 50%
There are also just some bizarre stuff on the list:
Small arms ammunition - up 34%
Prefab metal buildings - up 32%
Slaughter ducks - up 32%
Reproduction of audio disks and video media - up 3%
Candles - up 8%
Fire extinguishers - up 25%
Burial caskets - up 5%
Blood and blood derivatives for human use - up 6%
Some things have also plummeted in price:
Dry onions - down 80%
Celery - down 78%
Lettuce - down 54%
Crabs - down 50%
Make of this what you will. I have no commentary to share, I'm just throwing some numbers out there...
The first thing I noticed is that wheat has become a lot more expensive across all the categories:
Hard red spring wheat - up 218% over last year
Soft white wheat - up 204% over last year
Hard amber durum wheat - up 181% over last year
The list goes on and on, but I have no idea what the different types of wheat actually are. Has anyone noticed bread getting a lot more expensive?
Potatoes have also been hit especially hard:
Round white potatoes - up 241%
Round red potatoes - up 218%
Russet potatoes - up 135%
Food items seem to be the hardest hit across the board:
Tomatoes - up 167%
Celery - up 165%
Green peppers - up 139%
Cauliflower - up 136%
Other random stuff has increased significantly as well:
Iron and steel scrap - up 111%
Crude petroleum (domestic production) - up 106%
Fertilizer materials - up 95%
Sulfuric acid - up 50%
There are also just some bizarre stuff on the list:
Small arms ammunition - up 34%
Prefab metal buildings - up 32%
Slaughter ducks - up 32%
Reproduction of audio disks and video media - up 3%
Candles - up 8%
Fire extinguishers - up 25%
Burial caskets - up 5%
Blood and blood derivatives for human use - up 6%
Some things have also plummeted in price:
Dry onions - down 80%
Celery - down 78%
Lettuce - down 54%
Crabs - down 50%
Make of this what you will. I have no commentary to share, I'm just throwing some numbers out there...
New Wario Game For Wii
The game doesn't look like anything special, but this is a pretty nice piece of viral marketing:
http://www.youtube.com/experiencewii
http://www.youtube.com/experiencewii
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
The Persistence of Political Misperceptions
This is an interesting study, but since I'm lazy, I'll let the Washington Post summarize it for you:
A similar "backfire effect" also influenced conservatives told about Bush administration assertions that tax cuts increase federal revenue. One group was offered a refutation by prominent economists that included current and former Bush administration officials. About 35 percent of conservatives told about the Bush claim believed it; 67 percent of those provided with both assertion and refutation believed that tax cuts increase revenue.
In a paper approaching publication, Nyhan, a PhD student at Duke University, and Reifler, at Georgia State University, suggest that Republicans might be especially prone to the backfire effect because conservatives may have more rigid views than liberals: Upon hearing a refutation, conservatives might "argue back" against the refutation in their minds, thereby strengthening their belief in the misinformation. Nyhan and Reifler did not see the same "backfire effect" when liberals were given misinformation and a refutation about the Bush administration's stance on stem cell research."
You can read a PDF of the full report here. So the conclusion is that political lying works...and refuting the lies makes the lies worse? Well isn't that just reassuring... I guess I can stop sending out all those links to Snopes.com then.
Deja Vu
Last week, the Bi-partisan Alaska Senate Judiciary Committee subpoenaed 13 people in the Sarah Palin troopergate investigation. This week, the Republican Attorney General of Alaska said, "state employees would refuse to honor subpoenas in the case." 10 of the 13 people subpoenaed are state employees. Alberto Gonzalez has taught this guy well...
This is just ridiculous.
Yesterday the McCain campaign said that Palin wouldn't cooperate with this investigation because it was "tainted" by Obama operatives and it was a partisan witch hunt.
Really partisan witch hunt? I thought it was "bipartisan consensus, formed by a unanimous panel before Palin became McCain's running mate, that her firing of the state's public safety commissioner justified the ethical investigation."
If she has nothing to hide, she needs to let this investigation run its course. If she does have something to hide, she shouldn't be running for the second highest office in the land. We can't have, yet again, an administration who thinks that they're above the law.
edit: I do believe that Palin is meant to be a distraction from the real issues. I think the economic turmoil we're going through right now is a far bigger deal. It's just that, to write a post about the economy, AIG, Lehman, Phil Gramm, etc., I would need to write a really long post. Maybe I'll get around to doing that this weekend.
This is just ridiculous.
Yesterday the McCain campaign said that Palin wouldn't cooperate with this investigation because it was "tainted" by Obama operatives and it was a partisan witch hunt.
Really partisan witch hunt? I thought it was "bipartisan consensus, formed by a unanimous panel before Palin became McCain's running mate, that her firing of the state's public safety commissioner justified the ethical investigation."
If she has nothing to hide, she needs to let this investigation run its course. If she does have something to hide, she shouldn't be running for the second highest office in the land. We can't have, yet again, an administration who thinks that they're above the law.
edit: I do believe that Palin is meant to be a distraction from the real issues. I think the economic turmoil we're going through right now is a far bigger deal. It's just that, to write a post about the economy, AIG, Lehman, Phil Gramm, etc., I would need to write a really long post. Maybe I'll get around to doing that this weekend.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
McCain's healthcare plan is a disaster
Health Affairs, the health policy journal, has published their analysis of John McCain's health insurance plan. In short, it's a terrible idea. You should really read the whole thing, but here's some tidbits:
Their one sentence summary:
Their one sentence summary:
Achieving John McCain's vision would radically transform the U.S. health insurance landscape, with negligible gains in numbers of covered Americans, and an expected decline within five years.Their abstract:
Senator John McCain's (R-AZ) health plan would eliminate the current tax exclusion of employer payments for health coverage, replace the exclusion with a refundable tax credit for those who purchase coverage, and encourage Americans to move to a national market for nongroup insurance. Middle-range estimates suggest that initially this change will have little impact on the number of uninsured people, although within five years this number will likely grow as the value of the tax credit falls relative to rising health care costs. Moving toward a relatively unregulated nongroup market will tend to raise costs, reduce the generosity of benefits, and leave people with fewer consumer protections.A couple of key quotes:
The main effect of establishing a national market would be to undo state laws designed to establish minimum levels of coverage and protect consumers. In a national market where state licenses are not required, insurers will charter in places where regulations are scarce--much like credit card companies do today. As a result, people guaranteed basic benefits today would find those benefits eliminated under the McCain plan. People in most states would lose access to procedural protections, such as requirements that disputed decisions by managed care plans be subject to external review. People also would lose access to many benefit protections. For example, forty-seven states now require mental health parity, forty-nine states require coverage of breast cancer reconstructive surgery, and twenty-nine require coverage of cervical cancer screening. All of these requirements--as well as regulations in several states that limit the rates that can be charged to higher-cost consumers and that limit who can be excluded from a health plan--would be eliminated under the McCain plan. Without legal requirements in place, plans would no longer offer these benefits at all in many markets, even if many consumers want them.
[I]nitially there would be no real change in the number of people covered as a result of the McCain plan. However, people are likely to have far less generous policies than those they have today.His plan would see deregulation of health care and make it harder for people with pre-existing conditions to get coverage. His plan would make employer-provided health care a taxable expense. His plan would mean less people with health insurance. His plan would mean that people who do have coverage would receive worse coverage. I'm struggling to find anything good with his idea...
Saturday, September 13, 2008
Great Garrison Keillor Article
Garrison Keillor, of A Prairie Home Companion, wrote a great, snarky article about McCain-Palin.
Read the rest here.
So the Republicans have decided to run against themselves. The bums have tiptoed out the back door and circled around to the front and started yelling, “Throw the bums out!” They’ve been running Washington like a well-oiled machine to the point of inviting lobbyists into the back rooms to write the legislation, and now they are anti-establishment reformers dedicated to delivering us from themselves. And Mayor Giuliani is an advocate for small-town America. Bravo.
Friday, September 12, 2008
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
A look at voting systems
Ron Paul held a press conference today extolling the virtues of third party candidates, but the American two-party system doesn't give them much of a chance. Our system of voting isn't the only option though. Here's a quick rundown of the various options (brought to you completely by wikipedia) :
Plurality Voting: This is what we have now. It's a winner-take-all system. The only real advantage to this system of voting is that it preserves the one person, one vote principle. I'm not entirely convinced that's an advantage, but who am I to argue with wikipedia? The disadvantages are far stronger. The most obvious one is, Duverger's Law, which we can also call Nader's Law. The winner-take-all system inevitably leads to our two-party problem and no one can vote for a third candidate for fear of electing the person they like the least.
Approval Voting: In this system, "each voter may vote for (approve of) as many of the candidates as they wish. The winner is the candidate receiving the most votes. Each voter may vote for any combination of candidates and may give each candidate at most one vote." With this system, Floridians could have voted for Nader without taking votes away from Gore.
Range Voting: Range Voting is similar to approval voting, but rather than a straight yes or no, voters can give a score to the respective candidates. The candidate receiving the most points wins. To use our 2000 example, if a voter really liked Gore, they could give him the maximum score. (Let's say 99) If they also liked Nader, but not as much as Gore, they could give him a 75. If they didn't like Bush at all, they would give him a 0. This system allows people to vote with a much higher degree of detail. It also complicates the system, though, as voters have to figure out how many points to assign to each candidate. There's also the issue of the hanging chads - if people couldn't even handle punching a piece of paper, how are they going to handle an intricate scoring system?
Borda Voting: In this system, "voters rank candidates in order of preference. The Borda count determines the winner of an election by giving each candidate a certain number of points corresponding to the position in which he or she is ranked by each voter. Once all votes have been counted the candidate with the most points is the winner. Because it sometimes elects broadly acceptable candidates, rather than those preferred by the majority, the Borda count is often described as a consensus-based electoral system, rather than a majoritarian one." This is just like range voting, but you get less expression in how much you like or dislike a candidate. This system would also get confusing if there were too many candidates.
Condorcet Voting: This system is a little confusing just to understand, so I'm not sure how well it would catch on in the real world. Voters rank the candidates like in a Borda system and "the count is conducted by pitting every candidate against every other candidate in a series of imaginary one-on-one contests. The winner of each pairing is the candidate preferred by a majority of voters. The candidate preferred by each voter is taken to be the one in the pair that the voter ranks highest on their ballot paper. For example, if Alice is paired against Bob it is necessary to count both the number of voters who have ranked Alice higher than Bob, and the number who have ranked Bob higher than Alice. If Alice is preferred by more voters then she is the winner of that pairing. When all possible pairings of candidates have been considered, if one candidate beats every other candidate in these contests then they are declared the Condorcet winner."
Instant-Runoff Voting: Again, voters rank their candidate choices like in Borda. " If no candidate receives a majority of first preference rankings, the candidate with the fewest number of votes is eliminated and that candidate's votes [are] redistributed to the voters' next preferences among the remaining candidates. This process is repeated until one candidate has a majority of votes among candidates not eliminated. The term "instant runoff" is used because IRV is said to simulate a series of run-off elections tallied in rounds, as in an exhaustive ballot election." The IRV system is used in Australia, Ireland, San Francisco, Minneapolis, and other places around the world. IRV can produce some wonky results though. "Like all runoff processes with forced elimination, Instant runoff voting fails the Monotonicity criterion. In certain scenarios, raising the rank of a winning candidate on some ballots, which originally had ranked that candidate last, could counter-intuitively result in the winning candidate becoming a loser."
For colorful charts and simulations, check out http://zesty.ca/voting/sim/
Plurality Voting: This is what we have now. It's a winner-take-all system. The only real advantage to this system of voting is that it preserves the one person, one vote principle. I'm not entirely convinced that's an advantage, but who am I to argue with wikipedia? The disadvantages are far stronger. The most obvious one is, Duverger's Law, which we can also call Nader's Law. The winner-take-all system inevitably leads to our two-party problem and no one can vote for a third candidate for fear of electing the person they like the least.
Approval Voting: In this system, "each voter may vote for (approve of) as many of the candidates as they wish. The winner is the candidate receiving the most votes. Each voter may vote for any combination of candidates and may give each candidate at most one vote." With this system, Floridians could have voted for Nader without taking votes away from Gore.
Range Voting: Range Voting is similar to approval voting, but rather than a straight yes or no, voters can give a score to the respective candidates. The candidate receiving the most points wins. To use our 2000 example, if a voter really liked Gore, they could give him the maximum score. (Let's say 99) If they also liked Nader, but not as much as Gore, they could give him a 75. If they didn't like Bush at all, they would give him a 0. This system allows people to vote with a much higher degree of detail. It also complicates the system, though, as voters have to figure out how many points to assign to each candidate. There's also the issue of the hanging chads - if people couldn't even handle punching a piece of paper, how are they going to handle an intricate scoring system?
Borda Voting: In this system, "voters rank candidates in order of preference. The Borda count determines the winner of an election by giving each candidate a certain number of points corresponding to the position in which he or she is ranked by each voter. Once all votes have been counted the candidate with the most points is the winner. Because it sometimes elects broadly acceptable candidates, rather than those preferred by the majority, the Borda count is often described as a consensus-based electoral system, rather than a majoritarian one." This is just like range voting, but you get less expression in how much you like or dislike a candidate. This system would also get confusing if there were too many candidates.
Condorcet Voting: This system is a little confusing just to understand, so I'm not sure how well it would catch on in the real world. Voters rank the candidates like in a Borda system and "the count is conducted by pitting every candidate against every other candidate in a series of imaginary one-on-one contests. The winner of each pairing is the candidate preferred by a majority of voters. The candidate preferred by each voter is taken to be the one in the pair that the voter ranks highest on their ballot paper. For example, if Alice is paired against Bob it is necessary to count both the number of voters who have ranked Alice higher than Bob, and the number who have ranked Bob higher than Alice. If Alice is preferred by more voters then she is the winner of that pairing. When all possible pairings of candidates have been considered, if one candidate beats every other candidate in these contests then they are declared the Condorcet winner."
Instant-Runoff Voting: Again, voters rank their candidate choices like in Borda. " If no candidate receives a majority of first preference rankings, the candidate with the fewest number of votes is eliminated and that candidate's votes [are] redistributed to the voters' next preferences among the remaining candidates. This process is repeated until one candidate has a majority of votes among candidates not eliminated. The term "instant runoff" is used because IRV is said to simulate a series of run-off elections tallied in rounds, as in an exhaustive ballot election." The IRV system is used in Australia, Ireland, San Francisco, Minneapolis, and other places around the world. IRV can produce some wonky results though. "Like all runoff processes with forced elimination, Instant runoff voting fails the Monotonicity criterion. In certain scenarios, raising the rank of a winning candidate on some ballots, which originally had ranked that candidate last, could counter-intuitively result in the winning candidate becoming a loser."
For colorful charts and simulations, check out http://zesty.ca/voting/sim/
Fun With Flags
The Union Jack, the flag of the United Kingdom, is a pretty well known symbol, but do you know where it comes from? This might be common knowledge, but I had no idea and I found it interesting...
From wikipedia
From wikipedia
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
Stop, Hammertime!
What's the deal with crazies attacking sleeping people with Ipods? A couple months ago, there was the kid who was decapitated on the greyhound bus in Canada. Now it's a guy on the subway in Philly? It's amazing that this guy survived though, and even more amazing that he was able to get himself to the hospital. He's going to have one heck of a story to tell at parties...
Monday, September 08, 2008
Electoral Fun
I just came across 270 to win, which is a great website for playing around with possible electoral votes. You can view the country from all sorts of different starting points and then flip the states back and forth to see the outcome. It automatically counts electoral votes, possible routes to victory, probabilities, and historical facts.
You can also view the electoral maps and election facts going all the way back to the beginning - the election of 1789. Did you know that in the election of 1792, George Washington received 132 electoral votes, but George Clinton received 50? This country could have ended up a completely different place with P-Funk as a founding father...
Thursday, September 04, 2008
Next Up: Taxes
In this campaign, there's been a lot of talk about taxes, but it's really hard to get to the bottom of the candidates' actual intentions. I watched both conventions and heard Obama and McCain talk about their tax plans, but then when I went to their respective websites, I was unable to find details of what they had mentioned. So far, the best source of information that I've been able to find is the Tax Policy Center. "The Tax Policy Center is a joint venture of the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution. The Center is made up of nationally recognized experts in tax, budget, and social policy who have served at the highest levels of government."
Tax is a subject that I hold near and dear, but I understand that most people's eyes tend to glaze over before they finish the first paragraph on tax policy. I'll try to keep it simple and concise, but if you want more detailed analysis, check out the Tax Policy Center's report here. (It's 58 pages, but worth reading) Unless I say otherwise, the TPC's report is my source for all facts and figures in my discussion.
First off, I keep hearing the Republicans say that Obama wants to spend and spend without having any way of paying for it. McCain wants to cut taxes pretty radically too, but I haven't heard many people make the same complaint about him. So what's the truth? Well, to put it simply, both candidates want to cut taxes and spend, but neither one has a real plan to pay for it. How much each plan is going to cost depends on how you want to measure it, but using the Congressional Budget Office's measurement comes out with Obama's plan adding $3.5 trillion in debt, while McCain's plan adds $5 trillion.
Another hot button issue I keep hearing mentioned is the estate tax. (You may also know it as the "death tax" since this term gets thrown around for dramatic effect.) Under the current Bush law, the estate tax is being phased out each year until it is completely repealed in 2010. Then, in 2011, it comes back as it was before Bush's changes. The first $1M is tax free, everything thereafter is taxed at 55%* So even if neither candidate made any changes to the estate tax, your first $1M of inheritance would be tax free. That's probably enough to reassure most people, but just in case you're in line to receive a hefty sum, I'll continue. Obama's plan calls for the first $3.5M to be tax free, with a rate of 45% thereafter. McCain's plan would make the first $5M tax free with a rate of 15% thereafter. These hefty exemption amounts mean that pretty much everyone in America will be free from the estate tax. McCain's estate tax will only hit about 4,000 estates (or the top 0.2%) and Obama's will only hit about 8,000 (or the top 0.3%).
Now that we've established that both candidate's plans lead to an increase in debt and that neither one is going to rob you of your inheritance, let's get down to what you really care about - how is your yearly tax bill going to change? McCain and Obama have very different strategies, but for simplicity's sake, I'll cut to the bottom line. In a nutshell, Obama wants to tax the top 1% and to give tax breaks to everyone else (with the biggest benefits going to the poorest Americans). McCain wants to give tax breaks to everyone (with the biggest benefits going to the richest Americans).
Here's a couple of charts I put together using the information from the TPC report. They both show the average net change in after-tax income by percentile. In other words, positive numbers are good for your bottom line and negative numbers are bad. The first chart shows the situation in 2009 and the second shows 2012. The reason for the difference is that some of each candidate's changes phase in or phase out over time.
| Percentile | Income |
| 20% | 18,981 |
| 40% | 37,595 |
| 60% | 66,354 |
| 80% | 111,645 |
| 90% | 160,972 |
| 95% | 226,918 |
| 99% | 603,402 |
| 99.9% | 2,871,682 |
As you can see, on average, unless you're making some serious money, neither candidate is planning to raise your taxes.
There's a lot more to these two tax plans, but I just wanted to cover a few key issues to clear up the confusion and "mis-truths" that have been floating around. If you want more information, I suggest that you read the TPC report that I linked to above.
I tried to keep my opinions out of this analysis and simply present the facts (as determined by the TPC). I'm actually pretty critical of both candidate's plans, but I'll save that criticism for another day.
* This phase out, repeal, restore policy leads to a potential problem. Imagine for a moment that an elderly patriarch is worth, say $100M. If he dies in 2010, his beneficiaries get this $100M estate tax free. If he dies in 2011, his beneficiaries get around $45M after taxes. I'm not saying that anyone would kill their parent/grandparent for $55M, but that patriarch may want to watch his back in 2010.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Posts
