Archive for the ‘rants’ Category

Video officiating needs to be added to baseball

Wednesday, August 4th, 2010

I’m not bringing this up because of any call I saw tonight (though there is a recent call that now comes to mind), I’m just tired of American baseball being so awful about adding a video replay official to their game.

It is simple. Give the on-field officials one more, er, official hand gesture: ‘go to the video’ (Cricket, a game that has been played since the early 16th freakin’ century, has an easy one: The Ump draws a box in the air above his or her head with his or her fingers).

If the video official can tell what happened, the result is reported to the field. If not, some sort of signal is sent to the field and the field official uses whatever judgement he or she has and makes a call.

This gives the official on the field an out when they aren’t certain what just happened, but leaves the judgement calls on the field. And it could happen really fast.

Here is a little economics that I hope seems obvious (once considered)

Monday, July 19th, 2010

As I’m sure many of you are aware of, there are some immediate economic problems facing the United States right now. A big one is that our economy isn’t doing much lately; it’s in a bit of a stall.

The idea behind capitalism, as a system, is that people with money available to invest in things actually invest in things that will make these wealthy people more money. A side benefit of this system is that these relatively wealthy people have to hire less wealthy people to put their various schemes in motion. This ’side benefit’ really is a side benefit — if wealthy people could make money without paying any wages, they’d take that option every time. Or not, maybe, but they have done so every time they’ve gotten the chance.

If money itself was a real thing that had real value, this system wouldn’t work very well, but, happily, we have a kind of money that has a shifting value. Typically, when the system we have adopted works correctly, that value actually goes down a little every year. Yup, inflation. What this does for us is make wealthy people worry that if their money isn’t ‘working’ for them, it’ll eventually go down in value and be lost.

Side note: The inflation that helped European countries discover and develop capitalism wasn’t our modern, government-controlled-bank-controlled inflation system, they got their inflation from Mexico via Spain in the form of newly-mined Potosí silver. An historical accident, really. Anyway:

This means that people with cash laying around will try to invest it in things that return more than inflation will take away. Putting that money into a savings account (remember them?) made it available to that bank to loan to somebody who would pay back a little more than the bank would pay you in interest. The guy who borrowed your savings deposit would try and use the loan money to put himself in a position to pay back the loan and still make a little more. Another option was to skip the bank and invest directly in the dude (or gal) who had some money-making idea. That’s a simple way of describing the stock market.

Another side note: A lot of bank loans went to working folks who wanted (or needed) cars and/or homes for their own use. These borrowers were just betting that they were good for the money, and that having a car or a home was desirable; the effect is the same: someone got paid to make a car or part with a home, and the bank made a little more than they paid you for saving with them.

In any event, this whole system was kept going by the idea that money that sits around just goes down in real value, so people with money kept putting it back into the system hoping to stay ahead. So we had a situation where money sought out opportunity. Most of those opportunities involved people earning wages, which is money, so everything kept moving.

This turned out to be a pretty good system, all-in-all, and, arguably, a much better system than communism. (What as, to simplify, communism tried to take ambition out of the equation — with the results history has demonstrated.) Until…

Until

Inflation gets taken out.

Oopsie. Without inflation to worry about, money looks like a great thing to, er, invest in. When inflation goes away, cash is an awesome thing to have in your portfolio. Why invest your money (and risk losing some of it — always a risk even when the system is working correctly) when it’ll be worth just as much tomorrow as it was worth today? Or, maybe, even more?

That’s pretty much where we are today, sadly. A lot of banks have plenty of money (thanks, in many cases, to the fact that they were ‘rescued’), but they’d be stupid to put it into anything risky. There are also individuals who have money — lucky them — who are quite happy to hang on to it.

Where does that leave us?

Snide version: Depends on who ‘us’ is.

Thoughtful version: It leaves us wondering when inflation will come back and money will start flowing into the economy that we rely on.

OK, then, how might (a little) inflation get put back into the system? (A teensy, teensy bit of inflation, I promise.)

The banks can coast indefinitely on their (now healthy) reserves, so until something else comes along to change things, they’re gonna sit on whatever cash they can accumulate.

Yet another side note: Right now, the banks can get cash from the Federal Reserve for, well, pretty much for free. The banks love this cheap cash when cash is so awesome. The Fed is making this cash available in the hopes that the banks will put it into the economy. Good luck with that, Fed.

The government could print more money, right? That would cause inflation, wouldn’t it?

Yeah, but we have a grown-up economic system. The ‘let’s just print money’ thing does appear to add to inflation, but it really just multiplies inflation. Germany and Zimbabwe have both done it in living memory, but they did it to pay bills they couldn’t borrow to cover. They would have borrowed if they could have, but their economies were too messed up. This, in both cases, led to what is called hyper-inflation, which made their money worse than ‘variable’ in value, it made it worthless.

What the United States government is in a position to do is exactly what Zimbabwe and Weimar Germany couldn’t do: borrow.

Just like the potential home- or car-buyer mentioned previously, the U.S. government can tell potential lenders “I’m good for it, I’ll sign right now.”

Our government can get cash, right now, at less than 3%. Being the government (as opposed to a bank), it doesn’t need cash to sit on, it needs cash to invest. If it can get the economy growing again, it’ll have the income to pay back the loan. Just like some person who wants to buy, oh, a hot-dog cart, the U.S. government can say “when I have this cart, I’ll be able to pay you back.”

Here’s the cool bit: Once the government jumps in and starts borrowing (and spending) money, inflation will come back. It doesn’t even matter what the government spends money on. (WWII worked great for this, and WWII isn’t much remembered as terribly productive. Important, Noble, even, but WWII mostly blew shit up.) Once inflation comes back, private money (the money the banks and wealthy people have) will go back into the economy again.

It gets better. Timed right, the government can jump back out of the borrowing market before rates go up much and let the private money take over. That should leave the economy growing faster than the 3% the government can borrow at today.

Which means:

Our government could pay back all the loans with less money than it borrowed. And save the economy, which is to say “the capitalist system”.

So, you are advocating for increasing the deficit?

Yup. Deficit spending is the only tool we have to keep capitalism alive, and capitalism is the best system we have right now.

Ah, Rand Paul. Thanks, dude

Thursday, May 20th, 2010

So this Rand Paul character wins the Republican Senate primary in Kentucky. For a seat left in contention thanks to the resignation of the really good baseball player and, arguably, lousy Senator Bunning.

Rand Paul is a self-identified libertarian, and has, now, exposed some of the problems I have always had with libertarians. Chiefly, the libertarian idea that the occult hand of the market will correct errors — any kind of errors.

The spot where young Dr. Paul has gotten into trouble lately is on civil rights legislation; he has given the impression that he feels that having the government step in and tell business owners that they can’t refuse service to customers based on, oh, whatever, is wrong and that the market will punish said business owners perfectly adequately.

He seems to think that having the government telling business owners that black people have to be treated like, er, people is redundant, what as these businesses will go out of business if their business practices are, what? Unsound?

Seriously, WTF? Has this motherfucker ever been to Mississippi?

So I’m watching Jonathan Ross on the BBC

Friday, April 30th, 2010

And he had Jeremy Clarkson and Gwyneth Paltrow and Robert Downey Jr. on, and that’s not what I want to type about. Nope.

I’m annoyed that an eHarmony.com ad made a big deal about intellect being one of 29 things that they match people up by. Seriously? Intellect and 28 other things? Um. Fuck eHarmony.com.

How about Intellect and then twenty-eight other, less important things. That may or may not matter. Stupid eHarmony.com.

Nova’s Mind Over Money

Wednesday, April 28th, 2010

Nova, the PBS show for kids, did a takedown on the ‘Chicago’ school of Economics (A.K.A. ‘Freshwater’ school). It was delicious. There were even interviews with all the Chicago big-wigs; they smugly defended their theories (which was predictable) while every other part of the show — both the science bits and the straight history bits — proved them wrong.

Priceless.

The whole thing is available online from PBS here.

Thank you Dr. Krugman

Monday, November 30th, 2009

The Shrill One explains why I’ve been kinda’ bummed out lately in a new must-read blog post. Let’s hope that his hopes are not in vain.

Mark Best helps us all out again

Thursday, October 8th, 2009

So, the wingnut rump of the Republican party seems to want to expel all the old-school Republicans, and they like to call them RINOs (Republicans In Name Only).

What should people call the non-RINO Republicans? Well, according to my friend Mark Best, the answer is:

BLOND PIGs

Bullies, Liars, Obstructionists and Nuts Driving the Party Into the Grave.

Nicely done, says I.

Yeah, Obama’s equivocation bothers me

Wednesday, May 20th, 2009

It appears that he’s worried about ‘distractions’, and would like it if all the people like me who assumed that all the secret stuff that Bush & Co. did would eventually see the light of day would, like, chill.

Um, fuck that. Seriously, fuck that.

The following appears in all-caps for emphasis:

THE TRUTH IS NEVER A DISTRACTION. IT IS WHAT YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO BE PAYING ATTENTION TO.

Realism might return when, what should we call it? False-ism? is exposed.

People like me will be happy to put the Bush administration policies behind us only when they are exposed, punished if that is required, and explicitly disavowed by the current administration if they are found to be illegal, immoral, dishonest, or stupid. Or all four. Until then, they need to be paid attention to.

Swine Flu? H1N1?

Friday, May 1st, 2009

pig_diagram.jpg

Let’s just call it Bacon Flu and be done with it.

Everyone loves bacon, right?

Sorry, all

Tuesday, October 14th, 2008

But I had’ta:

KrugmanLOLCAT.jpg

Read Bilmon

Tuesday, September 23rd, 2008

If you want a clearer picture of what’s at stake as we careen towards potential economic oblivion, click here. It’s long-ish, but not too wonk-ish. If you aren’t ready for some really bad news, skip that and go to Cute Overload instead.

So MSNBC is yanking Olbermann and Matthews.

Tuesday, September 9th, 2008

What are they going to learn from this?

That Olbermann’s approach was great for ratings, not just annoying cranky old conservatives. Their coverage will probably tank. That’ll learn ‘em.

KO and Maddow will still have an hour each to let MSNBC know that there are viewers to be had.

Joe?

Tuesday, September 2nd, 2008

Joe Lieberman just claimed that he is a Democrat. And he just did it again, actually. I was watching his Senate campaign, and he lost the Democratic primary. Then he wasn’t a Democrat anymore. Now he is again? Nah.

Joe Lieberman, Aaron Headly (me) doesn’t think you’re a Democrat, he thinks you are a sad little colossal jerk.

Lipton v Mitchell

Sunday, August 31st, 2008

Elvis Mitchell is all the man James Lipton would be if he (James Lipton) spent more time in the sun. (Or, to quote a friend, ‘out-doors’.)

-A

Oh, my.

Friday, January 25th, 2008

Me (and Paul Krugman, based on my reading of Krugman’s position) agree with Mike freakin’ Huckabee on economic stimulus. The Huckster complained about the Bush stimulus package at the debate last night, saying (I’m paraphrasing here) “OK, so we borrow $150 Billion from the Chinese so that a bunch of Americans can buy stuff made in China; how does that help?”

He then said something to the effect of “let’s build some highways. Let’s spend that money here.”

That’s been my point almost exactly (I referenced bridges and New Orleans, but we’re on the same wavelength.)

I ain’t switching, but that’s some ballsy shit from a Republican.

calling all filmmakers

Thursday, January 3rd, 2008

Again, stop with the music cues. One violin stab,TOPS. Just turn off the sound for one TV ad, and then watch said ad. You will learn about the damage music cues can do to narrative.

Before I go on

Sunday, September 16th, 2007

…I just want to point out that Mr. Woods calmly left the field well behind him today in the “Fed-Ex” cup and, oh yeah, also won the tournament.

He seemed — perhaps for the first time in his professional career — relaxed. I wish him more such tournaments. Maybe, when he’s my age, he’ll have to struggle to win, but he’s got at least a dozen years until then. In the mean time, I hope to watch him smile more often.

My worthless AG prognostication

Wednesday, August 29th, 2007

Bush will nominate one yahoo after another, then stand back and claim that the Democrats aren’t playing fair when they shoot down one after another.

There will be plenty of Washington “insider” pundits that will echo Bush’s claims.

Bush won’t care that his Justice Department has no leader ’cause he doesn’t want the J.D. to do a thing right now.

Just sayin’.

Talking Points Memo | Reax to Gonzo Resignation

Monday, August 27th, 2007

From Talking Points Memo | Reax to Gonzo Resignation
My favorite as well:

And my favorite, from Rep. Rahm Emmanuel (D-IL): “Alberto Gonzales is the first Attorney General who thought the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth were three different things.”

Indeed.

Moviemakers, please quit it with the easy ‘tragedy’

Wednesday, August 1st, 2007

I watched “Dead Man’s Shoes” last night, and (this is only a spoiler if you aren’t familiar with how everyone seems to end their ‘tragic’ movies) was annoyed by the death of the protagonist at the end.

I don’t need a ‘happy’ ending, I just hate endings that seem cheap. I wish people who make films would get over the whole Shakespeare thing and come up with something more original, or at least more honest. Why go to all the trouble of getting your ‘tragic’ character all the way to the end of the movie and then leave the viewer saying “I didn’t see that one coming — NOT!”