I got an email from my dad this week, relating an interesting story. I'm pretty sure there aren't going to be any legal repercussions, since 1) any violated laws would be post facto, 2) there was no culpable intent, and 3) I would have been about 12 at the time of the at-issue events. Besides, the truth is the truth, I have no fear of it, and I think those of you who read this will find it amusing.
When I was between the ages of about 6 and 16, my family lived in Northern California, in a quiet little residential neighborhood. VERY quiet. Tree-lined streets. Four schools, two churches, a candy store, a pet store, and a public park all within easy walking distance. THAT kind of quiet. I haven't been back there more than a handful of times in the last 15 years, but of course I remember it well.
So I grew up there with my two brothers, SW and GL, in a house with a big yard. The time frame included our pre-teen and teenage years, and this was LONG before 9-11, way back when you could buy real-looking toy guns that didn't even have bright-orange muzzles. As a family with three boys, we had plenty of those, and all sorts of other things that modern soft sensitivities and political-correctness have long since eradicated from the face of the earth.
Of course me, my brothers, and our friends would get tired of soccer, tag, whiffle-ball, and other sports, and would chase each other around with toy knives/swords/guns, and re-enact scenes from GI Joe, Robotech, Thundercats, or whatever. We were active boys. We didn't even have cable, just pirate HBO on a wood-cabinet TV without a remote, and neither SW's Atari 2600 nor (later) my NES really captivated us that much.
But we did have all sorts of toys that got us outside and running around, and not just sports gear. Among the cool shit that we had, thanks to having the usual male fascination with Army/Navy surplus stores, was some stuff that could only questionably be called "toys." For example: dummy grenades. (Google it.) Which are, in fact, actual United States Military surplus hand grenades, lacking only fuses, primers, and explosives. They are just like the ones you see on TV, with a cast-iron "pineapple" fragmentation case, aluminum fuse-body and safety spoon, and a locking pin, complete with the steel pull-ring. They look, feel, and ARE exactly like the real thing, except that they don't explode. Me and my brothers had a few of them, and they were BAD ASS. I've taken a quick look online, and looks like they're still legal to buy and own in most places, and are selling for about the same price that me, GL, and SW paid for ours, circa 1989: less than $10. In any rate, as pre-teen/teen boys, we were somewhat less than diligent about storage and/or maintenance of our toys - including our dummy grenades - which would routinely be lost, found, lost again, found again, etc. over the course of months and years. Perhaps you can see where this tale is going.
Fast forward to the present. My dad is still in touch with one of our old neighbors in that area, who told him that a few days ago, there was a bit of a ruckus at our old house. Police cars blocking the streets, a fire truck, two command vehicles, and a bomb-squad truck. (Although not huge, the town is rich from computer money, and has SPECTACULAR police and fire infrastructure. And there's a firehouse about 300 yards down the street from the house, by the way.)
Apparently, the family that now owns the house was digging in the flower-beds doing some re-planting (honestly, I bet I could guess the spot to within 5 yards), and unearthed what looked exactly like an unexploded hand grenade. It was just like the ones you see on TV, with a cast-iron "pineapple" fragmentation case, aluminum fuse-body and safety spoon, and a locking pin, complete with the steel pull-ring. Unlike my parents, would would have just rolled their eyes, the current residents did not consider munition-handling to be a routine part of gardening. They were a bit concerned with what they had found, and responded appropriately. I have no doubt that it once belonged to me and my brothers, and had been lost in action in the course of one of the wars we fought in that yard. Yes: A toy grenade that me and my brothers lost 20 years ago was the cause of a scare in a quiet suburban town.
Yeah. Sorry about that.
I really do feel bad about this. While I have to say it is a bit funny, I'm sure it really scared the shit out of bunch of people, and wasted a few man-hours of police time to get it sorted out. That having been said, I really wish I could have the grenade back, as a keepsake from my childhood, and generally cool memento.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Diax's Rake
With the sole exception of experience, intelligence is by far the most valuable commodity on the planet. This is due in large part to it being rare. That rarity is a bit of a mystery from a physics and chemistry standpoint. Aside from various congenital defects and instances of injury, most human brains are really very similar. While there are demonstrable physical differences between a healthy brain and one suffering from some sort of aphasia, the brains of most cardiothoracic surgeons are physically indistinguishable from the brains of most convenience store clerks. And if the subjects are both male, odds are that both of them spend about equal amounts of time thinking with (or about) their dicks. So it seems a bit odd that we’ll trust one to cut open a chest and fiddle with our internal organs, while we don’t trust the other to give us correct change for a Slurpee.
There are certain instances where unusual brain chemistry and neurotransmitter functions rig the game (google “synaptic plasticity”), creating people with photographic or eidetic memories. There are also ways to cheat at the intelligence game. This notably includes studying, but that’s a lot of work, beyond the interest of most people. But if you’re willing to make an effort, there are all sorts of cool things you can do with information media, mnemonics, and mental constructs (google “memory palace”) to capitalize on the generally holographic functioning of human thoughts and memory. Properly used (or even used at all), they can make you a lot smarter. Pretty much everybody’s brain will have some form of input that it prefers, and if you can figure out how your brain best absorbs and organizes information, you can suddenly get drastically smarter than you might have thought possible. Or at least you’ll be able to make yourself look a lot smarter to people around you, which is almost the same thing.
But most of that applies to abstract knowledge and information, not day to day functionality. By and large, I think day-to-day intelligence boils down to simply paying attention. The sad fact is that the vast majority of people - including doctors and lawyers at least as much as gas station attendants - spend a sizable portion of their lives staring off into space, not paying attention to what’s going on around them, and/or unable to hear ANYTHING over the should of how awesome they are. In The Rules, this is referred to as “The Star Of The Show” phenomenon. People stop and have conversations in the entryways of major department stores, not only not caring that they’re blocking the sole entrance to a 40,000 square foot establishment, but not even noticing that there are people walking the earth other than their own all-important selves. People wait in line at Starbucks, thinking evil thoughts about how long the people in line ahead of them are taking, and then get to the front of the line, and need to take a few moments to decide just what they want. Oh, and then dig into their pockets or purses for another minute, since they are going to have to pay, aren’t they? Just a second please, while they fill out a check.
Today, while I was attempting to order a double-double during the lunch rush, the line of 8 people got held up for literally two minutes, because the guy at the head of the line didn’t have quite enough money to pay for his order. He was trying to summon his wife over to the counter, so she could make up the difference. They had a yelling conversation across the restaurant, while she refused to leave the table she had staked out, for fear that someone else would take it while they went through the hassle of actually PAYING for the food they were hoping to enjoy there. I’m not just making this shit up, and I’m sure that everyone who’s reading this has a few anecdotal gems to share. People who send text messages while driving. Customer service “specialists” who don’t know a goddamn thing about how their own business works, and are completely incapable of addressing the situation you’re presenting, except to assure you that “your business is very important to us.” Whatever.
And we all do it. We can’t help it. We all have those moments where we space out and do stupid shit that needlessly delays, halts, or complicates the lives of those around us. It’s genetic: we’re human. Really, the best we can hope for is to have fewer and shorter spells in that mindset than those around us.
The truth is that if you can consistently manage to be just a little smarter than those around you, pretty much everything in life gets much, MUCH easier. You get through airport security much more easily if you’ve already untied your shoes, and tucked your wallet, watch, belt, and cellphone into the luggage going through the scanner. You can do all that BEFORE you get in line, you know. Really. You don’t need to wait until you’re standing at the metal detector before realizing that the change in your pocket is a problem, and could just as easily be jingling inside the pocket of your carry-on.
Heavy traffic is a lot easier to negotiate when you put away your cell-phone, turn off the radio, and actually pay attention to what’s going on around you. Indeed, if you’re paying attention, pretty much any instance of moving among the masses from Point A to Point B becomes a matter of finding the best ways to side-step any given knot of people (read: idiots) who almost always have only general idea where they’re going, and not much thought or imagination at all about how they’re going to get there.
When I have kids, the first and foremost lesson that I will teach them is to try to be just a little bit smarter than the people around then. They don’t have to be brilliant or exceptional. They don’t need to be superstars. Hell, they’re even entitled to their allotted moments of pig-headed stupidity, same as everyone else. But being successful in any given field of endeavor, and in life in general, is as simple as just being, on average, a little tiny bit smarter and more on the ball than the competition. And it’s really not all that hard. Look around, for Christ’s sake. You telling me that it’s really that tough to rise above what you see?
Life is about problem-solving. So be better than average. You don’t need to be great, just better than the people around you. You just need to be smart enough to notice what’s actually happening, instead of just thinking about what you wish were happening. You need to be able to come up with some rational explanatory theory for problems and situations you must deal with (Occam’s Razor is usually a good place to start, with “user error” and/or “human stupidity” as the go-to explanations). Then you need to be able to come up with a plan to solve the analyzed problem (or at least a plan to remedy the at-issue symptom). And it needs to be a workable, simple plan, not whatever it is that James Bond or Walker, Texas Ranger, would do.
It helps if you can also come through with occasional flashes of brilliance, especially in clutch moments. You know: those bits of work-product that make eyebrows rise, and people say “wow, that’s good shit.” Turns out that if demonstrate the ability to come through with absolutely spectacular results in your field, you will only actually have to do so once or twice in any given work year. And in the meantime, you will be able to get away with vastly more bullshit and slacking than colleagues or co-workers who can’t or don’t come through with those sorts of gems.
But other than that, you only want to be a LITTLE smarter than people around you. Not a LOT smarter, since that leads to a whole other set of problems. You end up with Dr. Temperance Brennan and Sheldon Cooper, Ph.D., type characters. You know; those dumb fucks who think that people mean the actual words they say. (“You have a ‘Sarcasm’ sign?”) Not so good. So I’m not talking mutant-smart here. Just Yogi, smarter-than-the-average-bear type. The one who sees the world a little better, while not just seeing numbers. Donald Trump, not Alan Greenspan.
It’s also important not to be so smart that you can’t get away with playing dumb. Because in terms of practical utility, acting convincingly dumb ranks just behind being consistently smart. It’s a great card to be able to play, and it will almost always work, especially if you can also throw in an admission that it’s your fault, and that you’ll do whatever it takes to make things right. The best way that I’ve found to get out of a jam is to simply fall on my sword and admit to the boss/opposing counsel/the court that, hey, I kinda fucked this up, can I have a mulligan? It’s DEFINITELY not something that you can overplay without consequences, but shit happens both because of things we do, and in spite of things we do. Playing dumb and/or admitting dumbness will get you through a lot of shit, especially if you don’t have to do it very often. Never underestimate people’s willingness to occasionally forgive you when presented with an opportunity to do so magnanimously and from on-high. And don’t get me wrong if I’m presenting this as an easy or fun out. Because it’s not. It’s actually pretty humiliating acting dumb and/or admitting that you’ve been dumb. But it works. It’s nice when people think highly of you, and that you’re clever and on the ball. Really, it’s very flattering. But it’s a hell of a lot more useful when the other guy thinks you’re an idiot.
Those are lessons I will instill in my children: just pay a bit more attention than people around you, and you will get most things right. When you get something wrong, and have been caught at it, just admit you’re wrong, and make it right.
As an incidental point, these lessons to my prospective children will be followed by a closely related lesson: the best way to live a life free of serious strife, worry, or work is to go into a field based on and driven by human idiocy, insecurity, or greed. Law. Politics. Mass media. Insurance. Psychology. Medicine. Those fields will ALWAYS be growth industries, by simple operation of scalar economics: there is no conceivable limit on mankind’s ability to cause needless strife, blow things out of proportion, need bailing out, and/or need hearing that things are going to be okay, and it’s not their fault. If you can get into any of those fields, and still be just a little smarter than the people around you, you’re going to do okay. The philistines will rob each other blind to pay you your salary.
Lots of people like to spout philosophical drivel about the point where the angel meets the ape. For my part, I’m more interested getting and keeping me and my family fed and happy. And it’s really not that tough to live well and be happy.
There are certain instances where unusual brain chemistry and neurotransmitter functions rig the game (google “synaptic plasticity”), creating people with photographic or eidetic memories. There are also ways to cheat at the intelligence game. This notably includes studying, but that’s a lot of work, beyond the interest of most people. But if you’re willing to make an effort, there are all sorts of cool things you can do with information media, mnemonics, and mental constructs (google “memory palace”) to capitalize on the generally holographic functioning of human thoughts and memory. Properly used (or even used at all), they can make you a lot smarter. Pretty much everybody’s brain will have some form of input that it prefers, and if you can figure out how your brain best absorbs and organizes information, you can suddenly get drastically smarter than you might have thought possible. Or at least you’ll be able to make yourself look a lot smarter to people around you, which is almost the same thing.
But most of that applies to abstract knowledge and information, not day to day functionality. By and large, I think day-to-day intelligence boils down to simply paying attention. The sad fact is that the vast majority of people - including doctors and lawyers at least as much as gas station attendants - spend a sizable portion of their lives staring off into space, not paying attention to what’s going on around them, and/or unable to hear ANYTHING over the should of how awesome they are. In The Rules, this is referred to as “The Star Of The Show” phenomenon. People stop and have conversations in the entryways of major department stores, not only not caring that they’re blocking the sole entrance to a 40,000 square foot establishment, but not even noticing that there are people walking the earth other than their own all-important selves. People wait in line at Starbucks, thinking evil thoughts about how long the people in line ahead of them are taking, and then get to the front of the line, and need to take a few moments to decide just what they want. Oh, and then dig into their pockets or purses for another minute, since they are going to have to pay, aren’t they? Just a second please, while they fill out a check.
Today, while I was attempting to order a double-double during the lunch rush, the line of 8 people got held up for literally two minutes, because the guy at the head of the line didn’t have quite enough money to pay for his order. He was trying to summon his wife over to the counter, so she could make up the difference. They had a yelling conversation across the restaurant, while she refused to leave the table she had staked out, for fear that someone else would take it while they went through the hassle of actually PAYING for the food they were hoping to enjoy there. I’m not just making this shit up, and I’m sure that everyone who’s reading this has a few anecdotal gems to share. People who send text messages while driving. Customer service “specialists” who don’t know a goddamn thing about how their own business works, and are completely incapable of addressing the situation you’re presenting, except to assure you that “your business is very important to us.” Whatever.
And we all do it. We can’t help it. We all have those moments where we space out and do stupid shit that needlessly delays, halts, or complicates the lives of those around us. It’s genetic: we’re human. Really, the best we can hope for is to have fewer and shorter spells in that mindset than those around us.
The truth is that if you can consistently manage to be just a little smarter than those around you, pretty much everything in life gets much, MUCH easier. You get through airport security much more easily if you’ve already untied your shoes, and tucked your wallet, watch, belt, and cellphone into the luggage going through the scanner. You can do all that BEFORE you get in line, you know. Really. You don’t need to wait until you’re standing at the metal detector before realizing that the change in your pocket is a problem, and could just as easily be jingling inside the pocket of your carry-on.
Heavy traffic is a lot easier to negotiate when you put away your cell-phone, turn off the radio, and actually pay attention to what’s going on around you. Indeed, if you’re paying attention, pretty much any instance of moving among the masses from Point A to Point B becomes a matter of finding the best ways to side-step any given knot of people (read: idiots) who almost always have only general idea where they’re going, and not much thought or imagination at all about how they’re going to get there.
When I have kids, the first and foremost lesson that I will teach them is to try to be just a little bit smarter than the people around then. They don’t have to be brilliant or exceptional. They don’t need to be superstars. Hell, they’re even entitled to their allotted moments of pig-headed stupidity, same as everyone else. But being successful in any given field of endeavor, and in life in general, is as simple as just being, on average, a little tiny bit smarter and more on the ball than the competition. And it’s really not all that hard. Look around, for Christ’s sake. You telling me that it’s really that tough to rise above what you see?
Life is about problem-solving. So be better than average. You don’t need to be great, just better than the people around you. You just need to be smart enough to notice what’s actually happening, instead of just thinking about what you wish were happening. You need to be able to come up with some rational explanatory theory for problems and situations you must deal with (Occam’s Razor is usually a good place to start, with “user error” and/or “human stupidity” as the go-to explanations). Then you need to be able to come up with a plan to solve the analyzed problem (or at least a plan to remedy the at-issue symptom). And it needs to be a workable, simple plan, not whatever it is that James Bond or Walker, Texas Ranger, would do.
It helps if you can also come through with occasional flashes of brilliance, especially in clutch moments. You know: those bits of work-product that make eyebrows rise, and people say “wow, that’s good shit.” Turns out that if demonstrate the ability to come through with absolutely spectacular results in your field, you will only actually have to do so once or twice in any given work year. And in the meantime, you will be able to get away with vastly more bullshit and slacking than colleagues or co-workers who can’t or don’t come through with those sorts of gems.
But other than that, you only want to be a LITTLE smarter than people around you. Not a LOT smarter, since that leads to a whole other set of problems. You end up with Dr. Temperance Brennan and Sheldon Cooper, Ph.D., type characters. You know; those dumb fucks who think that people mean the actual words they say. (“You have a ‘Sarcasm’ sign?”) Not so good. So I’m not talking mutant-smart here. Just Yogi, smarter-than-the-average-bear type. The one who sees the world a little better, while not just seeing numbers. Donald Trump, not Alan Greenspan.
It’s also important not to be so smart that you can’t get away with playing dumb. Because in terms of practical utility, acting convincingly dumb ranks just behind being consistently smart. It’s a great card to be able to play, and it will almost always work, especially if you can also throw in an admission that it’s your fault, and that you’ll do whatever it takes to make things right. The best way that I’ve found to get out of a jam is to simply fall on my sword and admit to the boss/opposing counsel/the court that, hey, I kinda fucked this up, can I have a mulligan? It’s DEFINITELY not something that you can overplay without consequences, but shit happens both because of things we do, and in spite of things we do. Playing dumb and/or admitting dumbness will get you through a lot of shit, especially if you don’t have to do it very often. Never underestimate people’s willingness to occasionally forgive you when presented with an opportunity to do so magnanimously and from on-high. And don’t get me wrong if I’m presenting this as an easy or fun out. Because it’s not. It’s actually pretty humiliating acting dumb and/or admitting that you’ve been dumb. But it works. It’s nice when people think highly of you, and that you’re clever and on the ball. Really, it’s very flattering. But it’s a hell of a lot more useful when the other guy thinks you’re an idiot.
Those are lessons I will instill in my children: just pay a bit more attention than people around you, and you will get most things right. When you get something wrong, and have been caught at it, just admit you’re wrong, and make it right.
As an incidental point, these lessons to my prospective children will be followed by a closely related lesson: the best way to live a life free of serious strife, worry, or work is to go into a field based on and driven by human idiocy, insecurity, or greed. Law. Politics. Mass media. Insurance. Psychology. Medicine. Those fields will ALWAYS be growth industries, by simple operation of scalar economics: there is no conceivable limit on mankind’s ability to cause needless strife, blow things out of proportion, need bailing out, and/or need hearing that things are going to be okay, and it’s not their fault. If you can get into any of those fields, and still be just a little smarter than the people around you, you’re going to do okay. The philistines will rob each other blind to pay you your salary.
Lots of people like to spout philosophical drivel about the point where the angel meets the ape. For my part, I’m more interested getting and keeping me and my family fed and happy. And it’s really not that tough to live well and be happy.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Ramblings. Mostly on Sports.
I've been told that I need to write about something other than politics. Which is a bit problematic for me these days, since a lot of the things that piss me off and get me thinking fall into the general categories of 'politics,' 'economic,' and 'human stupidity.' Which, as above, I'm supposed to try and avoid writing about.
Apparently, the end result of being barred from writing about anything is that I don't really write about ANYTHING. So time to get back on the horse, and failing a specific subject, I shall simply ramble. Mostly about sports.
FIRST: I remember way back when, in the early 90s, the Chicago Blackhawks had by far the best power-play in the known universe. They were scoring shitbags of goals, even in an era were GAAs hovered around 4.0. I remember some (non-Chicago) coach being asked about it, and the coach in question responded, "Yeah, if I had Gary Suter and Chris Chelios running the points on my powerplay, we'd be pretty good too."
I remembered this statement while watching Game 3 of the VAN/LAS playoff series on monday. The Kings powerplay went 3 for 3 that night. The LONGEST amount of penalty time that passed with a man in the box before they scored was about 43 seconds. In game 1, they were 2 for 3 on the powerplay. They only scored 2 powerplay goals (in 6 opportunities) in Game 2, making them 7 for 12 for the series. Yes, the worst game they had so far involved only 2 power play goals. Their conversation rate for the series: Over 50%. That is OBSCENE. Especially since Vancouver is not bad at all. Their goalie was the starter for Canada's Olympic Gold Medal team. (He got pulled in the second period in Game 3.) Henrik Sedin led the NHL in scoring during the regular season. He's got no goals and three assists IN THE SERIES.
All of this is just a long way of saying that Drew Doughty and Jack Johnson are REALLY good. So long as they are standing at the points, the Kings powerplay is right up there with the best in ability to score. And so long as those guys are playing 25 minutes a night, a lot of big-money scorers are going to hate playing against the Kings.
I really don't think the Kings have what it takes to make a serious cup push this season. While Anze Kopitar is quickly becoming a elite-level center, they still lack the sort of scoring winger who will rifle in the clutch goals. (Expect GM Dean Lombardi to do something about that; he was the guy who brought Joe Thornton to SJ.) Right now, the Kings remind me of DET during the early years of the Yzerman era; the core is CLEARLY there, but they still need a few pieces.
SECOND: The NFL Draft is tomorrow. In prime time. Which I'm not a believer in, but what the hell. I admit to being way on the outside, but this looks like another Manning/Leaf dichotomy year, which will necessarily result in heads rolling in the front office of whoever ends up on the wrong side of that coin. While there will be 1 or 2 QBs touted QBs who shine, there will also be 1 or 2 touted QBs who bust, perhaps catestrophically.
My personal feeling, which I know is worthless, is that Sam Bradford is not going to be a star in the NFL. Nor is Tim Tebow. Both of them spent their entire collegiate careers playing substandard competition: running up the scores against Cupcake State and Whatsamatta U. Bradford spent his career calmly scanning the field for receivers while his All-American offensive line cracked heads in front of him. He has never had to deal with edge rushers beating the snap into the backfield. It will not be an easy transition. Tebow has never had success against pro-style defenses even in college, and has certainly never had to face tacklers as big, as fast, and as athletic as he is. Neither of them have had to deal with serious adversity at any point in their lives. All that is going to change, and I don't think it's going to be an easy transition.
If I had to take a QB this time around, it's be Clausen. Lots of starts playing in a pro-style offense, where the talent around him was good, but not leaps-and-bounds better than the guys on the other side of the ball. He might not have the numbers of the others, but the numbers that he does have seem a lot more likely to continue at the next level.
THIRD: I'm looking forward to beer and hotdogs in the sun at Minor League baseball games this summer. I'm not a fan of baseball. But I do like beer, hotdogs, and sunny days.
FOURTH: I frequently consider that, as a professional mercenary, my workload would drop by about 30% if there were even a slight increase in net human IQ. I spent pretty much all day today reviewing corporate records in a defamation and business tort case; over 1,200 pages, each requiring individual review for significance. Nearing the bottom of the stack, and none of the pages that I've seen have any immediately apparent relevance to any damages sustained by the Plaintiff. Yes, it is billable, but it would be nice if it were even a little bit PRODUCTIVE as well.
My other notable task today: dealing with a Plaintiff in a resolved case, who keeps calling my office. This is about the fourth time he's called, even though the message is always the same: "I'm sorry, [HT] cannot speak with you. Even though the formal lawsuit is resolved, you are represented by counsel for this affair. [HT] is required by law to limit communications to your counsel. If you have ongoing concerns, they need to be addressed through your own attorney."
I'm setting the over/under for about three days before he tries calling me again. While this is an even bigger waste of time than review of random documents, I do find it moderately amusing. I mean seriously, so far as he's concerned I'M THE BAD GUY! Neither he nor his attorney did their job in presenting his case. He was pretty much required to accept token settlement on the eve of trial, when it became apparent just how badly I going to beat him. At this point, months later, I know that he thinks his own attorney is trying to screw him. But he spent about $20,000 of other peoples' money trying to screw MY client (and doing a bad job in those attempts, to boot), so I can't figure out why he thinks that I would be even a little bit sympathetic to his plight. I mean really, WTF?
All for now. Gotta go walk my dog.
Apparently, the end result of being barred from writing about anything is that I don't really write about ANYTHING. So time to get back on the horse, and failing a specific subject, I shall simply ramble. Mostly about sports.
FIRST: I remember way back when, in the early 90s, the Chicago Blackhawks had by far the best power-play in the known universe. They were scoring shitbags of goals, even in an era were GAAs hovered around 4.0. I remember some (non-Chicago) coach being asked about it, and the coach in question responded, "Yeah, if I had Gary Suter and Chris Chelios running the points on my powerplay, we'd be pretty good too."
I remembered this statement while watching Game 3 of the VAN/LAS playoff series on monday. The Kings powerplay went 3 for 3 that night. The LONGEST amount of penalty time that passed with a man in the box before they scored was about 43 seconds. In game 1, they were 2 for 3 on the powerplay. They only scored 2 powerplay goals (in 6 opportunities) in Game 2, making them 7 for 12 for the series. Yes, the worst game they had so far involved only 2 power play goals. Their conversation rate for the series: Over 50%. That is OBSCENE. Especially since Vancouver is not bad at all. Their goalie was the starter for Canada's Olympic Gold Medal team. (He got pulled in the second period in Game 3.) Henrik Sedin led the NHL in scoring during the regular season. He's got no goals and three assists IN THE SERIES.
All of this is just a long way of saying that Drew Doughty and Jack Johnson are REALLY good. So long as they are standing at the points, the Kings powerplay is right up there with the best in ability to score. And so long as those guys are playing 25 minutes a night, a lot of big-money scorers are going to hate playing against the Kings.
I really don't think the Kings have what it takes to make a serious cup push this season. While Anze Kopitar is quickly becoming a elite-level center, they still lack the sort of scoring winger who will rifle in the clutch goals. (Expect GM Dean Lombardi to do something about that; he was the guy who brought Joe Thornton to SJ.) Right now, the Kings remind me of DET during the early years of the Yzerman era; the core is CLEARLY there, but they still need a few pieces.
SECOND: The NFL Draft is tomorrow. In prime time. Which I'm not a believer in, but what the hell. I admit to being way on the outside, but this looks like another Manning/Leaf dichotomy year, which will necessarily result in heads rolling in the front office of whoever ends up on the wrong side of that coin. While there will be 1 or 2 QBs touted QBs who shine, there will also be 1 or 2 touted QBs who bust, perhaps catestrophically.
My personal feeling, which I know is worthless, is that Sam Bradford is not going to be a star in the NFL. Nor is Tim Tebow. Both of them spent their entire collegiate careers playing substandard competition: running up the scores against Cupcake State and Whatsamatta U. Bradford spent his career calmly scanning the field for receivers while his All-American offensive line cracked heads in front of him. He has never had to deal with edge rushers beating the snap into the backfield. It will not be an easy transition. Tebow has never had success against pro-style defenses even in college, and has certainly never had to face tacklers as big, as fast, and as athletic as he is. Neither of them have had to deal with serious adversity at any point in their lives. All that is going to change, and I don't think it's going to be an easy transition.
If I had to take a QB this time around, it's be Clausen. Lots of starts playing in a pro-style offense, where the talent around him was good, but not leaps-and-bounds better than the guys on the other side of the ball. He might not have the numbers of the others, but the numbers that he does have seem a lot more likely to continue at the next level.
THIRD: I'm looking forward to beer and hotdogs in the sun at Minor League baseball games this summer. I'm not a fan of baseball. But I do like beer, hotdogs, and sunny days.
FOURTH: I frequently consider that, as a professional mercenary, my workload would drop by about 30% if there were even a slight increase in net human IQ. I spent pretty much all day today reviewing corporate records in a defamation and business tort case; over 1,200 pages, each requiring individual review for significance. Nearing the bottom of the stack, and none of the pages that I've seen have any immediately apparent relevance to any damages sustained by the Plaintiff. Yes, it is billable, but it would be nice if it were even a little bit PRODUCTIVE as well.
My other notable task today: dealing with a Plaintiff in a resolved case, who keeps calling my office. This is about the fourth time he's called, even though the message is always the same: "I'm sorry, [HT] cannot speak with you. Even though the formal lawsuit is resolved, you are represented by counsel for this affair. [HT] is required by law to limit communications to your counsel. If you have ongoing concerns, they need to be addressed through your own attorney."
I'm setting the over/under for about three days before he tries calling me again. While this is an even bigger waste of time than review of random documents, I do find it moderately amusing. I mean seriously, so far as he's concerned I'M THE BAD GUY! Neither he nor his attorney did their job in presenting his case. He was pretty much required to accept token settlement on the eve of trial, when it became apparent just how badly I going to beat him. At this point, months later, I know that he thinks his own attorney is trying to screw him. But he spent about $20,000 of other peoples' money trying to screw MY client (and doing a bad job in those attempts, to boot), so I can't figure out why he thinks that I would be even a little bit sympathetic to his plight. I mean really, WTF?
All for now. Gotta go walk my dog.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Did I really hear that?
I did promise somebody that I'd be blogging about non-political issues. And I shall. But I can't help myself on this one, and have to get it out. Non-political thoughts to follow later this week, time permitting, and I'll try to keep this one brief.
I took a little road-trip over the weekend, through largely uninhabited country, and to pass the time, I ended up hitting 'SCAN' an awful lot on the AM band. The end result was that I spent most of the drive alternately listening to conservative pundits bashing liberals without really addressing any issues, and - when that station faded over the horizon - then listening to liberal pundits bashing conservatives without really addressing any issues. It was moderately humorous, actually. But notwithstanding entirely too much time listening to that shit, there's really only three things that stuck.
First, every single one of those people think entirely too highly of themselves. And coming from me, I think that's a pretty bold statement. Especially Mike Savage. I gotta say that he seemed to have both the best spin and the most sweat-of-the-brow invested in his message; if you disagree, call in and prove him wrong, and regardless of whether you agree or not, THINK. I can get behind that. But he still sounds like the most arrogant, ego-centric guy on the face of the planet. Would love to have a beer with that guy sometime.
Second, both the conservatives and liberal pundits have sold their marketing souls to gold brokers. Although diametrically opposed on every other point, pretty much everyone at either extreme of the spectrum has been paid sufficient funds to personally endorse the idea that you and I should buy gold as an investment. Further, we'd be wasting our time buying from anyone except Their Guy. I can see how the conservatives can sell this idea with a straight-face, since an intrinsic part of the far-right platform is that Barack, smiling all the way, is leading us to financial disaster. But I wonder how the liberals can talk about how Barack, smiling all the way, is going to lead us to economic recovery, while still suggesting that gold (whose worth is relatively static in the face of economic prosperity or decline) is a wise investment. Whatever.
The third thing that really stuck was when uber-liberal Randi Rhodes indicated that, in event of global economic meltdown, her plan was to prostitute herself. Up to that point, she was scoring against the idiotic marketing of "survival seeds" or some other such idiocy during Glen Beck's conservative radio show. I'm sure you can imagine the ad spot: "In event of global disaster, non-hybrid viable plants seeds could be more valuable than gold! Buy today, only $150 for enough to plant an acre!" No, this is not an exaggeration of the propagation of paranoia presented in the advertisement. One really would think that Beck should've vetoed that sponsor, or at least required them to pay him enough that he could retire.
But in the course of her criticism, Ms. Rhodes openly stated that in event of global financial meltdown, she already had her own personal "survival garden" between her legs. The implication was that she would simply resort to the Oldest Profession to make ends meet. (Of course, this assumes that she's already exhausted the reserves of gold that she's bought from Her Guy, through some prior exchange of cash, goods, or services.) It struck me that if anyone else on the face of the planet affirmatively suggested that a woman resort to prostitution for survival, Randi would be at the head of the pack of people bearing torches and pitchforks. But - as with racism - sexism is apparently only a sin when somebody else is doing it. I found this to be amusing, in a tragic sort of way.
Having returned to civilization (relatively speaking), I couldn't help myself, and took a look at Randi, just out of curiosity. Having done so, I really hope that in the event of economic catastrophe, Randi has a Plan B, since I think she's probably going to need it.
I took a little road-trip over the weekend, through largely uninhabited country, and to pass the time, I ended up hitting 'SCAN' an awful lot on the AM band. The end result was that I spent most of the drive alternately listening to conservative pundits bashing liberals without really addressing any issues, and - when that station faded over the horizon - then listening to liberal pundits bashing conservatives without really addressing any issues. It was moderately humorous, actually. But notwithstanding entirely too much time listening to that shit, there's really only three things that stuck.
First, every single one of those people think entirely too highly of themselves. And coming from me, I think that's a pretty bold statement. Especially Mike Savage. I gotta say that he seemed to have both the best spin and the most sweat-of-the-brow invested in his message; if you disagree, call in and prove him wrong, and regardless of whether you agree or not, THINK. I can get behind that. But he still sounds like the most arrogant, ego-centric guy on the face of the planet. Would love to have a beer with that guy sometime.
Second, both the conservatives and liberal pundits have sold their marketing souls to gold brokers. Although diametrically opposed on every other point, pretty much everyone at either extreme of the spectrum has been paid sufficient funds to personally endorse the idea that you and I should buy gold as an investment. Further, we'd be wasting our time buying from anyone except Their Guy. I can see how the conservatives can sell this idea with a straight-face, since an intrinsic part of the far-right platform is that Barack, smiling all the way, is leading us to financial disaster. But I wonder how the liberals can talk about how Barack, smiling all the way, is going to lead us to economic recovery, while still suggesting that gold (whose worth is relatively static in the face of economic prosperity or decline) is a wise investment. Whatever.
The third thing that really stuck was when uber-liberal Randi Rhodes indicated that, in event of global economic meltdown, her plan was to prostitute herself. Up to that point, she was scoring against the idiotic marketing of "survival seeds" or some other such idiocy during Glen Beck's conservative radio show. I'm sure you can imagine the ad spot: "In event of global disaster, non-hybrid viable plants seeds could be more valuable than gold! Buy today, only $150 for enough to plant an acre!" No, this is not an exaggeration of the propagation of paranoia presented in the advertisement. One really would think that Beck should've vetoed that sponsor, or at least required them to pay him enough that he could retire.
But in the course of her criticism, Ms. Rhodes openly stated that in event of global financial meltdown, she already had her own personal "survival garden" between her legs. The implication was that she would simply resort to the Oldest Profession to make ends meet. (Of course, this assumes that she's already exhausted the reserves of gold that she's bought from Her Guy, through some prior exchange of cash, goods, or services.) It struck me that if anyone else on the face of the planet affirmatively suggested that a woman resort to prostitution for survival, Randi would be at the head of the pack of people bearing torches and pitchforks. But - as with racism - sexism is apparently only a sin when somebody else is doing it. I found this to be amusing, in a tragic sort of way.
Having returned to civilization (relatively speaking), I couldn't help myself, and took a look at Randi, just out of curiosity. Having done so, I really hope that in the event of economic catastrophe, Randi has a Plan B, since I think she's probably going to need it.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Currencies and Centralization
Any financier will tell you that diversification of portfolios is important. You don't want to put all your capitol in any one asset (or even in any one market), because you don't want to risk being wiped out by any one plunge. The classic "Wealth without risk" business plans were all similar, and all simple: put away a little money each month, into a portfolio balanced between stocks, bonds, and other assets. Generally speaking, problems in any one market trigger a boom in other markets, so with a diversified conservative portfolio, your total assets would ride out most transitory market volatilities, and generally grow at a modest but appreciable rate.
Economic diversity is HEALTHY. This includes competition not just between businessmen and business entities, but also competition between nations, and competition between currencies. While looking through rose-colored glasses shows us a unified peaceful world with efficient energy and food markets - everyone cooperating and laughing, with enough to eat, running water, and good healthcare - the general reality is that those ideals don't work. In order for markets (including energy and food and healthcare) to be healthy, there needs to be competition. There needs to be strife. There needs to be incentive (read: objectively verifiable profit margins and dividends) for companies, markets and industries to be lean and efficient. Otherwise, they look a lot like governments: lots of talk, publicly funded, without substantial impact.
Historically speaking, Europe has been an ongoing hotbed of political and economic intrigue. Nations not necessarily at war with each other (they've long since reached consensus about where borders should be) but absolutely in competition with each other. England vs. France vs. Germany. Lean, efficient competition across the boards. And since each country had its own currency, they managed to avoid any systemic meltdown, even in the face of any number of shortages, regional crop failures, or even extended military conflict. Rough times in France? Some dry seasons in the agricultural areas? Maybe some poorly run banks, and the Franc running weak? Good news in London and Berlin! English and German firms - that are lean(er) and strong(er) - open branch offices in Paris, and governments buy up Francs on the cheap, to stockpile economic capitol for when the shoe, inevitably, shall be on the other foot. And because of that competition, the Franc regains value, French businesses have to get better or get replaced by English and German companies, and either way, the economy French economy rebounds.
The European continent, because of the intrinsic diversity of having a dozen countries with different currencies, was chaos. A paperwork and exchange rate nightmare, with rampant speculation and opportunism that made the World Cup tournament look like a game of patty-cake. But the continental economy nonetheless ran well, efficiently, and effectively. The strong were strong, because they had to be, and with weakness and slack being seized or seized upon, shit got done. The competition and strife made it ugly and distasteful, but guaranteed that a problem in any one (or any five) nations wouldn't pull the whole system down. It just meant that nations that handled their economics badly would end up with their economies being run by foreign interests.
But in the interest of working towards that rose-colored world, a lot of the strife and diversification has been intentionally done away with. Enter the Euro, the unified currency of a dozen nations, who have agreed to band together in economic unity. In effect, it was in many ways unionization of the European economy. During periods where that joint economy was strong, it was REALLY strong, since it allowed a unified push by not just individual national economies, but by most of a continent. That's a lot of industry, and when it's all running well and in the same direction, it can match any economic bloc on the planet.
The problem, of course, is that times are not always good, and when times are bad, problems in even one nation become the problem of the Union as a whole. The co-mingling has made partners where there used to exist competitors.
In the past, if things in, say, Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain (PIIGS) ran into the red, and if those governments started deficit spending like there was no tomorrow, it was not really that big a deal in the grand scheme of things. It just meant that the lire, peseta, etc., lost value and got bought by investors, and that either the local economies got lean and healthy, or else got bought out and replaced by foreign interests. Companies that were competitive in competitive places (England, Germany, etc.) stepped into the game in less competitive (lazier) markets, and immediately became the best player in the local game. And, as a result, the economy improved. Individual countries would periodically stumble, but in the face of the wolves already at their national door, they got lean and pulled through, or they got bought out, and pulled through.
But no more. These days, when Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain run into double-digit national deficits (which they have, even through the EU RULES say that no country shall run higher than 3% in the red), the solution is different. In the past, the wolves would drool. They would look to take over. Far from worrying, Germany and England got EXCITED when the lire or peseta ran weak, since that was an opportunity for Germans or Englishmen to make money by doing a job leaner, better, and more efficiently than the locals seemed able. They certainly didn't feel compelled to prop up and support nations that had their heads up their asses. Let those fuckers over-extend their credit and spend their own currency into worthlessness. It's THEIR currency, after all, and their ongoing inflation and other financial bullshit will just make it easier for us to buy them out and turn them around.
Except now, of course, it's not just THEIR currency. These days, when PIIGS and other nations run massively into debt, and have to conjure up a billion or so euros through drawing on credit, there is no differences between the euros being devalued and suffering from inflation in Greece, and the euros that - but for happenings in Greece - should be strong and robust in Germany or England. In order to protect the underpinning of their own economy (the euro as a currency), economically healthy places, rather than preying on stupidity and weakness - as has clearly arisen in places like Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain - instead need to prop up, assist, and bail out those places from their own errors.
The practical upshot, as evidenced by recent headlines: Germany and England, to avoid threat to their OWN economies, must subsidize social welfare, bureaucrat salaries, and foolish economics in Greece. Rather than a net improvement in efficiency and effectiveness, we see a net decline in efficiency and effectiveness. The strong, rather than compelling the weak to get with the program or get replaced in a preditory stance, instead are compelled to prop up the weak, and subsidize the foolishness rather than driving it out.
Socialized economics in action! Please, lets keep all semblance of this sort of shit on the other side of the pond.
Economic diversity is HEALTHY. This includes competition not just between businessmen and business entities, but also competition between nations, and competition between currencies. While looking through rose-colored glasses shows us a unified peaceful world with efficient energy and food markets - everyone cooperating and laughing, with enough to eat, running water, and good healthcare - the general reality is that those ideals don't work. In order for markets (including energy and food and healthcare) to be healthy, there needs to be competition. There needs to be strife. There needs to be incentive (read: objectively verifiable profit margins and dividends) for companies, markets and industries to be lean and efficient. Otherwise, they look a lot like governments: lots of talk, publicly funded, without substantial impact.
Historically speaking, Europe has been an ongoing hotbed of political and economic intrigue. Nations not necessarily at war with each other (they've long since reached consensus about where borders should be) but absolutely in competition with each other. England vs. France vs. Germany. Lean, efficient competition across the boards. And since each country had its own currency, they managed to avoid any systemic meltdown, even in the face of any number of shortages, regional crop failures, or even extended military conflict. Rough times in France? Some dry seasons in the agricultural areas? Maybe some poorly run banks, and the Franc running weak? Good news in London and Berlin! English and German firms - that are lean(er) and strong(er) - open branch offices in Paris, and governments buy up Francs on the cheap, to stockpile economic capitol for when the shoe, inevitably, shall be on the other foot. And because of that competition, the Franc regains value, French businesses have to get better or get replaced by English and German companies, and either way, the economy French economy rebounds.
The European continent, because of the intrinsic diversity of having a dozen countries with different currencies, was chaos. A paperwork and exchange rate nightmare, with rampant speculation and opportunism that made the World Cup tournament look like a game of patty-cake. But the continental economy nonetheless ran well, efficiently, and effectively. The strong were strong, because they had to be, and with weakness and slack being seized or seized upon, shit got done. The competition and strife made it ugly and distasteful, but guaranteed that a problem in any one (or any five) nations wouldn't pull the whole system down. It just meant that nations that handled their economics badly would end up with their economies being run by foreign interests.
But in the interest of working towards that rose-colored world, a lot of the strife and diversification has been intentionally done away with. Enter the Euro, the unified currency of a dozen nations, who have agreed to band together in economic unity. In effect, it was in many ways unionization of the European economy. During periods where that joint economy was strong, it was REALLY strong, since it allowed a unified push by not just individual national economies, but by most of a continent. That's a lot of industry, and when it's all running well and in the same direction, it can match any economic bloc on the planet.
The problem, of course, is that times are not always good, and when times are bad, problems in even one nation become the problem of the Union as a whole. The co-mingling has made partners where there used to exist competitors.
In the past, if things in, say, Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain (PIIGS) ran into the red, and if those governments started deficit spending like there was no tomorrow, it was not really that big a deal in the grand scheme of things. It just meant that the lire, peseta, etc., lost value and got bought by investors, and that either the local economies got lean and healthy, or else got bought out and replaced by foreign interests. Companies that were competitive in competitive places (England, Germany, etc.) stepped into the game in less competitive (lazier) markets, and immediately became the best player in the local game. And, as a result, the economy improved. Individual countries would periodically stumble, but in the face of the wolves already at their national door, they got lean and pulled through, or they got bought out, and pulled through.
But no more. These days, when Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain run into double-digit national deficits (which they have, even through the EU RULES say that no country shall run higher than 3% in the red), the solution is different. In the past, the wolves would drool. They would look to take over. Far from worrying, Germany and England got EXCITED when the lire or peseta ran weak, since that was an opportunity for Germans or Englishmen to make money by doing a job leaner, better, and more efficiently than the locals seemed able. They certainly didn't feel compelled to prop up and support nations that had their heads up their asses. Let those fuckers over-extend their credit and spend their own currency into worthlessness. It's THEIR currency, after all, and their ongoing inflation and other financial bullshit will just make it easier for us to buy them out and turn them around.
Except now, of course, it's not just THEIR currency. These days, when PIIGS and other nations run massively into debt, and have to conjure up a billion or so euros through drawing on credit, there is no differences between the euros being devalued and suffering from inflation in Greece, and the euros that - but for happenings in Greece - should be strong and robust in Germany or England. In order to protect the underpinning of their own economy (the euro as a currency), economically healthy places, rather than preying on stupidity and weakness - as has clearly arisen in places like Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain - instead need to prop up, assist, and bail out those places from their own errors.
The practical upshot, as evidenced by recent headlines: Germany and England, to avoid threat to their OWN economies, must subsidize social welfare, bureaucrat salaries, and foolish economics in Greece. Rather than a net improvement in efficiency and effectiveness, we see a net decline in efficiency and effectiveness. The strong, rather than compelling the weak to get with the program or get replaced in a preditory stance, instead are compelled to prop up the weak, and subsidize the foolishness rather than driving it out.
Socialized economics in action! Please, lets keep all semblance of this sort of shit on the other side of the pond.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Gonna need an extra thousand to make quota this month.
Our President is here in Nevada today, touting his health-care agenda at a "town-hall" meeting at Green Valley High School. Which means that traffic sucks on the entire east side of town. But otherwise nobody seems to give much of a damn. Besides healthcare, Barack is also pulling for his local boy, Harry Reid (D - Nev.), to get re-elected, but I personally think that's running neck-and-neck with the passage of national healthcare for the top spot on Barack's wish-list of miracles.
Don't think it's going to work. Anyone who knows Nevada politics knows Harry Reid is about as big a douchebag as walks the face of the earth. Which was fine when he was a token douchebag lost among a hundred milling senatorial faces. But he's been embarrassing himself enough on the news this last year that people are about as sick of him as they are of Obama. Nobody likes to back a losing horse. Even in a working class place like NV (or perhaps ESPECIALLY in a working class place like NV), lots of people are getting bored with Barack (and his pundits) telling them what a brilliant success the economic stimulus package has been. Apparently the people haven't heard that his experts are projecting 95,000 new jobs each month this year.
As for that last part, about more jobs and reduction in unemployment, the memo apparently didn't get through to places like Boeing. But don't worry. Just a bump in the road. As soon as Harry is locked in place at the top of the Senate for a few more years, and as soon as we get this healthcare thing done, economic reconstruction will be the next item on the agenda. He and Harry and Nancy are going to turn it all around. And they need your vote to make it happen.
Don't think it's going to work. Anyone who knows Nevada politics knows Harry Reid is about as big a douchebag as walks the face of the earth. Which was fine when he was a token douchebag lost among a hundred milling senatorial faces. But he's been embarrassing himself enough on the news this last year that people are about as sick of him as they are of Obama. Nobody likes to back a losing horse. Even in a working class place like NV (or perhaps ESPECIALLY in a working class place like NV), lots of people are getting bored with Barack (and his pundits) telling them what a brilliant success the economic stimulus package has been. Apparently the people haven't heard that his experts are projecting 95,000 new jobs each month this year.
As for that last part, about more jobs and reduction in unemployment, the memo apparently didn't get through to places like Boeing. But don't worry. Just a bump in the road. As soon as Harry is locked in place at the top of the Senate for a few more years, and as soon as we get this healthcare thing done, economic reconstruction will be the next item on the agenda. He and Harry and Nancy are going to turn it all around. And they need your vote to make it happen.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Opportunities. Or Not.
The heart of American industry has always been small businesses. Until recently, most Americans took their diplomas and/or degrees, settled down somewhere, and spent most of their lives working at some small establishment or storefront, doing some form of skilled or semi-skilled activity. These days, of course, most Americans are or will be working for the Federal government. Our politicians naturally want to be the boss. Of everything. It's just a defect of that personality type, and always has been. In its original incarnation, our government was structured specifically to keep government from taking over our lives and economy, but what can you do? Socialistic creep, and all that. We'll build stricter controls into our next government. Which is probably not going to come until a century or so after effective space travel is discovered, but again, what can you do?
In the meantime, it is fun to keep track of ongoing jokes, and to have the occasional pipe dream. In terms of comic relief, the Obama administration has declared today that the economy is going to grow by 95,000 jobs per monthfor at least the balance of this year. This is good news, in light of double-digit unemployment from the 8.4 million jobs that have been lost since late 2007. I think this is funny since a lot of these projected jobs are not economically created, but government created. Our beloved president, beset by difficult times, he has unveiled his proposed budget, in which Barack seeks to spend $3.8 trillion. That's $3,800,000,000,000. Thirty-eight, followed by ELEVEN zeros. I sincerely hope that a lot of this money is somehow going to find its way back into the pockets of taxpayers, through some form of employment. The only other way it will get back to grass-roots taxpayers is through hand-outs, so hopefully we can do this right. Not gonna hold my breath, but here's to hoping.
Now, aside from the fact that government jobs don't really qualify as economic growth, there is a problem with this plan and this budget. Most notable is that Barack doesn't actually have that much money to spend. In fact, what he's spent exceeds what he's got by $1,560,000,000,000. For those of you following along at home, this means that for ever dollar he spends, he also has to borrow 42 cents. I understand that accounting and cash flow problems can be difficult to manage, and he certainly did inherit a lot of the problems he's facing. Still. I don't think the solution to inadequate revenues and hugely overinflated spending is a year where you PLAN to spend almost 50% more than you actually have. The per capita burden comes to about $5,000. Doesn't seem like much, but what it means is that - in addition to all of the taxes we are already paying - Barack needs us all to kick in an extra $5,000. Per person. In the entire country. To get to even. For the year. (We can deal with the outstanding national debt another time. Besides, that's nice to keep around as a reminder to the people of the wasteful spending and bad fiscal practices of prior Republican administrations.)
For comparison purposes, news stories were written in early 2008 about how the Federal deficit was projected to run to $410 billion that year. That was a big number, since the 2007 deficit had been only $162 billion. The projected 2008 numbers would threaten the then-standing all-time deficit record, set in 2004. Of $413 billion. Our politician's spending habits have resulted in deficit spending increasing by over 300%. In two years.
But the 2009 proposed budget contains good news. If we approve the President's budget, and assume another billion and a half in debt, things will get better. If we do it this way, Barack's experts say, next year's deficit will only be $1.3 trillion. See! Things are getting better! And we'll have 95,000 fewer unemployed every month, safely tucked into government jobs, where they have guaranteed healthcare, cannot be fired, and get a month's paid vacation every year! How about that, we can have national health-care after all, we just need to get everyone working for the government!
But this does not bode well for small business. Again, small business has historically been the engine that drives the economy. These days, it is pretty much impossible to set up and run a small business. Beside the uncertainty of things like the availability of credit, the tax burdens of each employee, and the looming unknown of how much more Barack is going to require such businesses to pay for health care - not only for people who work for them, but also for most of the nation's unemployed - the administrative hurdles are overwhelming.
In terms of pipe-dreams, I have thought about opening a small business. And not just a tax write-off, but an actual business that makes things. Specifically, double-stack .45-caliber 1911 pistol frames. As I might have mentioned, the notable problem with the classically American 1911 pistol is that it only holds 8 rounds. If you could preserve the history and platform while bumping the capacity even a little, people will buy it. Ideally, come up with a design that uses most or all of the same 1911 parts (trigger assembly, slide, springs, etc.), but on a frame (the part with the handgrip) that will accept the cheap, reliable, common-place 13-round magazines already being mass-produced for the Glock 21.
In today's market, even in recession, a double-stack 1911 costs, on a good day, about $1,500. That's over three times the cost of a bare-bones GI model 1911. And almost all of the double-stack models require their manufacturer's proprietary magazines, meaning that each mag costs about $80. (A standard Glock 21 mag will run you about $25, for comparison.)
Taurus firearms has already demonstrated that it's possible to make a good 1911 pistol, complete with extra (usually very expensive) features and details, for sale in the $500-600 range. (Their PT1911 line. I own one. I like it better than I like the Kimber 1911 I paid three times as much for.) I wonder, why is nobody selling a bare-bones "entry-level" double-stack in the $600 range?
There will be some engineering and drafting problems involved in making that product, to keep the handgrip small enough to be usable, even with the fatter mags, but that seems manageable; the Glock 21 does it, after all. It could be a difficult mechanical transition from the wide Glock mag-well to a narrower rail to accept the standard 1911 action, but there are enough double-stacks out there to show that that's doable as well. Once the design is complete, we've got plenty of machine and milling equipment for sale in places like Detroit, complete with highly trained, newly-unemployed machinists to operate them. The substantial manufacturing is milling a billet of steel into the needed shape (with tight-but-not-that-tight tolerances), and then a final hand-fitting with mostly off-the-shelf 1911 parts. With CAD-driven milling machines, does it make a difference if the operator is supervising the milling of a pistol frame, instead of the turbo-charger turbines they used to makefor GM? Take a while to get business up and running, but I think it's doable, and that people will buy the product. Could be a classic American enterprise! Have an idea for a product, make it, sell it, pay your people, and maybe turn a little profit. Holy shit, almost like a real, live, free market!
The problem, of course, is the extrinsic bullshit, nearly all of it government or pseudo-government in nature. Gotta have the right tax forms and business licenses. The paperwork shouldn't take more than 6 months. Go through the permit process. An OSHA probationary period while they audit your premises. Making pistol frames, you also gotta pay the equivalent of a full-time salary so an ATF guy can be there looking over your shoulder. No, of course they can't just presume that you're following the laws you've agreed to follow. Without the inspector there regularly checking up on you, you could make even one unregistered illegal pistol, and thereby forfeit all the work you've done to get licensed, lose your business, and go to a Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison! How are you supposed to resist that temptation without someone policing you? That of course, comes AFTER a detailed testing of your design, to be undertaken at cost to you. Please send in a prototype for approval, a blank check, and don't forget the self-addressed stamped envelope for our reply. Make it a postage-prepaid box if you want the prototype back as well. Don't call us, we'll call you.
You're going to have to provide benefits and healthcare for all your employees, and we're not quite sure how much that is going to cost, but we're working on it, and will get back to you. But be ready for a BOHICA moment when Barack unveils his plan, because he's DEFINITELY not working for your benefit, buddy. You're an evil business owner, making profit off the sweat and industry of the proletariat. He's got his eye on you. But you can fly under the radar - to a degree - if you self-police you business to affirmatively limit any success you have. You'll actually make more profit if you make less than $250,000 profit. You're not allowed to make more than that without falling into a specially-created tax-bracket that is overtly intended to bleed you dry. So if you want to stay successful and profitable, you'll need to self-limit your success and profitability.
Since you're dealing with the machine industry, you'll have to have the right operating permits and approval stamps for your machinery. And while the law does not actually require you to hire union workers, Barack is certainly working on fixing that as well. God forbid you hire your labor as cheaply as you can manage it. Again, Barack has his eye on you, and won't let your sleazy "sense of business" arguments result in giving anyone a job that Barack doesn't approve the terms of.
Et cetera, ad nauseum.
Alas, alack. Add it all up, and you really have only two alternatives these days. Either (1) You open your business in Brazil, China, Mexico, or some other place where you can avoid all that bullshit, or (2) throw up your hands in frustration, and wait from somebody else to go through all that bullshit to get the product on the market. Neither of those options results in America gaining a new small business to fill a niche that's already there.
But Barack has taken the matter under advisement, and is working on a solution that will get the economy moving again. Regulations are going to be passed. Don't worry, things will get better. Again, there's going to be 95,000 new jobs every month this year!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)