I immediately thought Raytheon directors and VP's when I saw the title of this book:
Free Lunch: How the Wealthiest Americans Enrich Themselves at Government Expense (and Stick You with the Bill)
by David Cay Johnston
I've got a half dozen books on the list, perhaps this one is worth piling on.
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Monday, January 7, 2008
Campaign ads
One good (or bad) thing about living in MA is you get to witness the media scrutiny on the New Hampshire primaries from nearby but without the congestion and well, scrutiny. I had not had the good fortune to see all major candidates' TV campaign ads this early until this year.
Democrat side
Hilary: 2 version of classic, positive and color-rich ads, second person voice. Lots of videos and photos of her being with large groups of supporters. I'll have to say it is a textbook campaign ad.
Obama: 2 versions of one black/white still photos in a series and another of color video footage, second person voice. B/W one is unusual but grabs my attention almost immediately. The color one nicely compliment it.
Edwards: first person talking directly to the camera about fighting big corporations, nice wholesome backdrop in one version. Another one with just colors as background, him talking about how he fights for "the underdogs."
My favorite is Obama's. I believe they really bring out his strengths, very inspiing. Hilary's are a close second, very convincing. Both Hilary and Obama's ads mention the local NE newspapers that endorsed them.
John Edwards is crazy. He says "he'll fight big corporations that take jobs away from middle class Americans." Doesn't he know most people work for big corporations?!
On the GOP side:
Romney: very positive (we are going to be better and better), saturated and polished colors like pn a day-time soap opera of Mitt talking directly into the camera. He is a very speaker I must say.
John McCain: first person as well, reminding folks he hasn't changed since 2000. A bit boring as it is just a headshot. It made me feel a bit sympathetic for him.
I haven't seen any ads from Guiliani or Ron Paul. My money has been going to Ron Paul, but I'm thinking about giving Obama some push as well. Something tells me to want to keep my pot of contribution for Paul though, although his anti-abortion stands bother me.
When I googled "campaign", I got this list below. Hilary number 2 hit, weird.
Democrat side
Hilary: 2 version of classic, positive and color-rich ads, second person voice. Lots of videos and photos of her being with large groups of supporters. I'll have to say it is a textbook campaign ad.
Obama: 2 versions of one black/white still photos in a series and another of color video footage, second person voice. B/W one is unusual but grabs my attention almost immediately. The color one nicely compliment it.
Edwards: first person talking directly to the camera about fighting big corporations, nice wholesome backdrop in one version. Another one with just colors as background, him talking about how he fights for "the underdogs."
My favorite is Obama's. I believe they really bring out his strengths, very inspiing. Hilary's are a close second, very convincing. Both Hilary and Obama's ads mention the local NE newspapers that endorsed them.
John Edwards is crazy. He says "he'll fight big corporations that take jobs away from middle class Americans." Doesn't he know most people work for big corporations?!
On the GOP side:
Romney: very positive (we are going to be better and better), saturated and polished colors like pn a day-time soap opera of Mitt talking directly into the camera. He is a very speaker I must say.
John McCain: first person as well, reminding folks he hasn't changed since 2000. A bit boring as it is just a headshot. It made me feel a bit sympathetic for him.
I haven't seen any ads from Guiliani or Ron Paul. My money has been going to Ron Paul, but I'm thinking about giving Obama some push as well. Something tells me to want to keep my pot of contribution for Paul though, although his anti-abortion stands bother me.
When I googled "campaign", I got this list below. Hilary number 2 hit, weird.
Friday, December 7, 2007
Bailing out of mortgage contracts
Reason can't seem to win in this country:
Unfortunately, legislation and government intervention will not stop stupid people from being stupid. The same type of raw deal is occurring every few minutes at your local car dealership lots.
All of us know someone who buys that expensive SUV that he/she shouldn't buy, only got talked into it because of an attractively low "monthly payment of $199." At the end of loan length, some 5+ years from now, the buyer ends up paying twice the sticker price for that car. Shouldn't government regulate how people buy their cars too?! In fact, the most effective way of educating people about financial risks is to cut them off from taking out loans all together.
For that matter, people these days finance anything and everything. From vacations, wedding, home renovation, to major appliances, LASIK and child adoption. It's only a matter of time until we hear those who failed at assessing associated loan risk on CNN: "oh, I didn't think financing that $50k Vera Wang wedding gown was going to come back and bite me in the ass later on!"
Of course, home ownership is inseparable from the "American Dream". Many are considered losers in our American society if they are not owning a home by the time they are 40.
However, the efficiency increase resulting from poor people moving from apartments into homes does not counter the added cost of intervening with the free market. This cost has a snowball effect and is an externality imposed on others who can assess the financial risks.
From my personal experience shopping for a home, I do admit looking at the mortgage numbers can get confusing. However, as consumers in a free market, we all need to be thinking about those numbers long and hard before jumping onto the homeowners' bandwagon. Markets afford convenience, efficiency and possibility, but there is a cost.
Bad stuff is down the road if the government gets its tentacles wrapped around the mortgage loans now. And to be honest, it'll hardly alleviate the sub-prime burden from the ordinary consumers' shoulders. Sorry, no support of government intervention in the mortgage industry from me.
"A recent Federal Trade Commission study revealed a third of mortgage borrowers didn't know what interest rate they were paying, while half didn't know how much they borrowed. Tougher disclosure standards may well make sense. But, in the end, it simply isn't the government's job to convince people that some financial risks aren't worth taking, or that housing prices can go down as well as up."
Unfortunately, legislation and government intervention will not stop stupid people from being stupid. The same type of raw deal is occurring every few minutes at your local car dealership lots.
All of us know someone who buys that expensive SUV that he/she shouldn't buy, only got talked into it because of an attractively low "monthly payment of $199." At the end of loan length, some 5+ years from now, the buyer ends up paying twice the sticker price for that car. Shouldn't government regulate how people buy their cars too?! In fact, the most effective way of educating people about financial risks is to cut them off from taking out loans all together.
For that matter, people these days finance anything and everything. From vacations, wedding, home renovation, to major appliances, LASIK and child adoption. It's only a matter of time until we hear those who failed at assessing associated loan risk on CNN: "oh, I didn't think financing that $50k Vera Wang wedding gown was going to come back and bite me in the ass later on!"
Of course, home ownership is inseparable from the "American Dream". Many are considered losers in our American society if they are not owning a home by the time they are 40.
However, the efficiency increase resulting from poor people moving from apartments into homes does not counter the added cost of intervening with the free market. This cost has a snowball effect and is an externality imposed on others who can assess the financial risks.
From my personal experience shopping for a home, I do admit looking at the mortgage numbers can get confusing. However, as consumers in a free market, we all need to be thinking about those numbers long and hard before jumping onto the homeowners' bandwagon. Markets afford convenience, efficiency and possibility, but there is a cost.
Bad stuff is down the road if the government gets its tentacles wrapped around the mortgage loans now. And to be honest, it'll hardly alleviate the sub-prime burden from the ordinary consumers' shoulders. Sorry, no support of government intervention in the mortgage industry from me.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Consumerism is so sad
The real toy story. Michael Wolf documents his journey is collecting second-hand used toys in the US (easily and cheaply acquired), creating an art piece from those toys and then heading back to their source, China, to document the toy factories.
LINK here
The fact those girls wear masks makes me think the media wouldn't have a single article if a dozen of them got sick or died from toxic fumes or lead poisoning working in the factory. One infant dying from those toys in the US makes headlines in major media outlets.
LINK here
The fact those girls wear masks makes me think the media wouldn't have a single article if a dozen of them got sick or died from toxic fumes or lead poisoning working in the factory. One infant dying from those toys in the US makes headlines in major media outlets.
Life has a price, doesn't matter what the amnesty international says. What is the price of your life? I'm still thinking about mine. ;)
Thursday, September 13, 2007
I love the Economist
A page full of rankings from the Economist website. Free to non-subscribers and full of rankings only one click away.
Denmark achieves #1 in Business Environment Ranking. Hooray!
Denmark achieves #1 in Business Environment Ranking. Hooray!
China fact of the day - milk
I still eat meat, albeit I'm trying to stop eating beef all together. Pork on the other hand will be hard for me to give up, so tasty. Plus pigs can feed up leftover human foods, less damaging to the land, no grazing needed. I could care less for chicken, but I usually get chicken or vegetarian burritos at Chipotle.
"In China, for instance, people are eating double the amount of meat they used to a decade ago."
Link to article here.
Another thought, dairy cows also pollute a lot. I don't see environmental groups targeting the Milk ads? Fact, humans are the only mammals that consume milk on a regular basis in adulthood. In the US, Americans are milk faithfuls, drinking several gallons a month.
Other than calcium, what other benefits of drinking milk are there? Calcium pills are abundant and affordable these days. It seems obvious that the dairy farmers and milk industry boards sponsoring the Got Milk? ad series benefit the most from us consuming more dairy.
I'm not saying drinking milk is bad, but a glass a day is probably over-rated and driven by commercial interest, not health. It leaves a huge carbon footprint when a cow is generating methane and eating up perfectly nice grasslands.
Don't even get me started on the stupidity and short-sightedness of celebrity endorsements in environmental causes, diseases, Toyota Prius and world-poverty issues. The talking heads sure haven't been hesitant to promote milk drinking either!
Some interesting facts about milk via MR blog. One particular comment:
"2. In some parts of the United States, milk is more expensive than gasoline."
This is true where I live. However, I don't think it should be a cause for concern. If anything, we are drinking way too much milk. More importantly, gasoline prices have a lot of catching up to do. The market price of gasoline, without US meddling in the middle east, government subsidies and interferences from OPEC, etc, world-wide gas price should be a lot higher. And it will only get higher as fossil fuels are finite resources. Quit whining you polluters! (me included)
"In China, for instance, people are eating double the amount of meat they used to a decade ago."
Link to article here.
Another thought, dairy cows also pollute a lot. I don't see environmental groups targeting the Milk ads? Fact, humans are the only mammals that consume milk on a regular basis in adulthood. In the US, Americans are milk faithfuls, drinking several gallons a month.
Other than calcium, what other benefits of drinking milk are there? Calcium pills are abundant and affordable these days. It seems obvious that the dairy farmers and milk industry boards sponsoring the Got Milk? ad series benefit the most from us consuming more dairy.
I'm not saying drinking milk is bad, but a glass a day is probably over-rated and driven by commercial interest, not health. It leaves a huge carbon footprint when a cow is generating methane and eating up perfectly nice grasslands.
Don't even get me started on the stupidity and short-sightedness of celebrity endorsements in environmental causes, diseases, Toyota Prius and world-poverty issues. The talking heads sure haven't been hesitant to promote milk drinking either!
Some interesting facts about milk via MR blog. One particular comment:
"2. In some parts of the United States, milk is more expensive than gasoline."
This is true where I live. However, I don't think it should be a cause for concern. If anything, we are drinking way too much milk. More importantly, gasoline prices have a lot of catching up to do. The market price of gasoline, without US meddling in the middle east, government subsidies and interferences from OPEC, etc, world-wide gas price should be a lot higher. And it will only get higher as fossil fuels are finite resources. Quit whining you polluters! (me included)
Saturday, September 8, 2007
Globalization and New England apple season
As September rolls around, apple picking is fast approaching. Some early harvest varieties such as Ginger Gold are ready to be picked right now. Later ones, including my favorite variety, Fuji, won't be ready until late October.
Last October, Kristian and I took a fall foliage trip through NH and VT. We stopped by Green Mountain Orchard in Putney, VT on the way back to Boston. After loading up on MacIntosh apples in our tummies and bags, we took a hayride with the kids around the 128 acre orchard.
Chul messaged me this morning about apple picking up here. I was surprised to find out there are actually apple farms within 40 min radius of Boston as well. According to this Globe article, Nashoba Valley area used to the apple growing center of New England.
Interesting stats:
"In 1947, Massachusetts had 23,000 acres of apple orchards, according to Robin Helrich, an agricultural statistician with New England Agricultural Statistics, which is part of the US Department of Agriculture. Last year, there were 4,100 acres of fruit-bearing apple trees in the state, she said."
I also didn't know Chile exports apples to the States since grapes were a lot more commonly labeled Product of Chile. I reckon if carbon footprint labeling was to become standard on foods and durable goods, local grown fruits and veggies would regain popularity quite fast.
Way to go for the local orchards to adopt, and apply algorithms of hayriding, cider and donut shops to keep their businesses running though.
Last October, Kristian and I took a fall foliage trip through NH and VT. We stopped by Green Mountain Orchard in Putney, VT on the way back to Boston. After loading up on MacIntosh apples in our tummies and bags, we took a hayride with the kids around the 128 acre orchard.
Chul messaged me this morning about apple picking up here. I was surprised to find out there are actually apple farms within 40 min radius of Boston as well. According to this Globe article, Nashoba Valley area used to the apple growing center of New England.
Interesting stats:
"In 1947, Massachusetts had 23,000 acres of apple orchards, according to Robin Helrich, an agricultural statistician with New England Agricultural Statistics, which is part of the US Department of Agriculture. Last year, there were 4,100 acres of fruit-bearing apple trees in the state, she said."
I also didn't know Chile exports apples to the States since grapes were a lot more commonly labeled Product of Chile. I reckon if carbon footprint labeling was to become standard on foods and durable goods, local grown fruits and veggies would regain popularity quite fast.
Way to go for the local orchards to adopt, and apply algorithms of hayriding, cider and donut shops to keep their businesses running though.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
