Sunday, March 29, 2009

Middle Class Part 46: AIG, Farting and Contractual Obligations

“What I must do is all that concerns me, not what the people think.”- Ralph Waldo Emerson
Not comparing myself to Emerson in any way, but the sentiment stands. He wrote essays about nature and transcendentalism, and I write . . . hm, what would you call this?



EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE

Best laid plans: I had planned on delving right into the topic of taxation as the final piece that comprises the middle class’ anxiety about their progeny’s economic place in this country. I realized during a conversation with advocates for the poor and the rich that I needed to add a few more paragraphs to the subtopic of the free market, bonuses, global economy, etc.

Advocate of the rich I: . . . stated many of the same predictable things that rich advocates always say when defending the free market and minimizing anyone’s call for regulations that inhibit the irresponsible nature of 21st century financial maneuvers, whether by banks or other financial institutions or stock market mavens. His point- that the market was performing exactly how it should have, in that it was failing and it would have filtered out those who cannot adequately perform their jobs. To him, no government bailout was needed if business is to be conducted as usual in the free market. I would note, and did add to the advocate for the poor, that the traditional conservative’s epitome of a free market overlord is former federal reserve chairman Alan Greenspan who was quoted by everyone, from vindictive liberal columnists to conservative apologists, to an ignorant Spanish Ibex when he was shocked by the events that were taking place in our economy- “Greenspan admitted that he had put too much faith in the self-correcting power of free markets and had failed to anticipate the self-destructive power of wanton mortgage lending.” The devotees of the rich, in hindsight, may disparage Greenspan’s reputation all they want. This- let’s call it testimony- does not help your case considering that- “For years, a Congressional hearing with Alan Greenspan was a marquee event. Lawmakers doted on him as an economic sage. Markets jumped up or down depending on what he said. Politicians in both parties wanted the maestro on their side.” The title of the article which contains both quotations- “Greenspan Concedes Error on Regulation” written by Edmund L. Andrews, New York Times, October 23, 2008. (See- http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/business/economy/24panel.html) Whether Greenspan sold out to the government and agreed to say such things as a way of convincing the public to support a bailout remains to be seen. (Note: His words may actually have caused me to think that bailing them out was a necessary evil, but that regulations and accountability should be built into subsequent financial industry agreements/contracts in the future- or the bailout need not happen- see part- ?? How the hell should I know. I've written so many pages on this topic so far that Austrailia's blue-tongued skink is tired of it.)

Advocate of the rich II: See footnote * below, but also keep in mind that Obama is not the only one blaming the talented financial industry workers for playing a major role in causing our economic mess (he mentioned this as a primary cause for our economic mess on both 60 Minutes and during his March 24, 2009 press conference)- that would be a kind of urban legend that someone believes and then disseminates to coworkers at a happy hour. Obama was probably briefed and then delivered that assessment after industry insiders had made it common knowledge. Consider this, from New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman (from March 17, 2009) “I live in Montgomery County, Md. The schoolteachers here, who make on average $67,000 a year, recently voted to voluntarily give up their 5 percent pay raise that was contractually agreed to for next year, saving our school system $89 million — so programs and teachers would not have to be terminated. If public schoolteachers can take one for schoolchildren and fellow teachers, A.I.G. brokers can take one for the country.

“Let’s not forget, A.I.G. was basically running an unregulated hedge fund inside a AAA-rated insurance company. And — like Madoff, who was selling phantom stocks — A.I.G. was selling, in effect, phantom insurance against the default of bundled subprime mortgages and other debt — insurance that A.I.G. had nowhere near enough capital to back up when bonds went bust. It was a hedge fund with no hedges. That’s why taxpayers have had to pay the insurance for A.I.G. — so its bank and government customers won’t tank and cause even more harm.”
(See- http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/18/opinion/18friedman.html?_r=1.) If this was not a leading component of our economic problems, a symptom, a cause, whatever, but our moral sense of right and wrong should become more healthy by consistently reminding us of the difference between right and wrong and compelling us to demand restitution for those obviously guilty of having done the latter, particularly when it harms an entire country of people and a number of people around the world that I was not aware America had become contractually obligated to assist.

Never trust a fart: A student was suspended for farting on a bus in Florida last week and in the article that relates that news is included a sentence about a 13-year-old student that “was arrested in November after authorities said he broke wind in class.” Really, kids are getting punished for farting, a sometimes involuntary (non pig odor type) of air quality infringement and we can’t punish those who deliberately did so much wrong that it registers in the mind of the mouse-like jerboa of the Gobi Desert that has been preoccupied with a fight against its insurance company trying to get them to consent to pay for the somewhat elective stilt-leg reduction surgery. (For the gas passing story- see “Student Suspended for Passing Gas on Bus” Associated Press, March 23, 2009.)

Advocate of the poor I: The advocate for the poor is an extremely intelligent contractor whose point was that in a global economy if the United States is to have so much capital it is going to have to float more boats, that the poor want a piece of the puzzle and will displace American workers in order to do it. Hard to argue with the desires of the poor, but it is easy to tell someone, even if their altruism quotient is as high as my co-worker’s, to ask for some reciprocity from the rich, to ask those getting the AIG-style bonuses to sacrifice rather than someone who is about to receive a 1.5% salary increase, or to forget that the poor’s raised standard of living is something our American grandchildren will have to pay for. It should be stated that my co-worker had the poor of the greater world in mind when he mentioned those thirsting for a better life and not the poor of this country. Until we can get our own house in order we will not be able to assist all comers, even should they do us the favor of taking our jobs. If the wasteful spending does not put more money back into the hands of everyone, including the rich, then the rich, some of whom are so rich they have mud rooms in their RVs, should be taxed more. I’ve written this many times, as far back as part 5. The poor of all nations expecting America to save them from this global economic hell, would do well to remember how tiresome it is be told that because of an allowed global competition for jobs (in America), the world’s eager poor are capable of stealing millions more middle class jobs than they already have. And I say stealing, because the greedy corporate executives, are complicit in their handing over our country to workers of other nations- “If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.” – Abraham Lincoln. Which way are we choosing? We couldn’t be any more conscious of our decision than if we were leaning over a pool of water to refresh ourselves knowing that it was filled with mature crocodiles.

Advocate of the poor II: It goes without saying that the executives should be stripped of their healthy bonuses, no matter how talented they think they are. I told the advocate of the poor to start there. He and I discussed the nature of risk v. reward financial markets. My point would be that for too long, sans regulations, those in the business of controlling everyone’s retirement accounts have gotten ten times the benefit from investor collateral; financial industry employees have enjoyed plenty of reward with little risk, relatively speaking. One thing I would add to the advocate of the poor, and to the rich for that matter, as the poor (however, not even those that reside in this country) have been benefiting by the decisions made by the rich, who are moving middle class jobs overseas- the migration of jobs overseas has got to stop, and the poor’s climb** into the middle class cannot be made at the expense of those who are already there and have worked hard enough to stay.*** It seems a paper in “Pasadena, Calif. Dismissed its writers and outsourced its reporting to Pakistan (amusing, yes; joke, no), it saved overhead and became irrelevant.” (See John Olson’s article in the Minneapolis Star Tribune’s Opinion Exchange section- OP1 and OP4, March 15, 2008.) When I get rich, I plan on outsourcing back-stabbed knife extraction to the Martians; they’ll be cheaper than Guatemalans and Pakistanis because I can probably pay them in bottled oxygen, to be had at a reduced rate if purchased in bulk, if the mixture is laced with pig odor stench.

AIG

AIG: I’ve read plenty and enough about the AIG $165 million bonus scandal. I’ve read columns about how Washington must act on the bonuses and be a wrongdoing arbitrator, why they can’t do anything about the bonuses, and heard that AIG is going to have to change its name in order to allow it to successfully do business in the future. I wonder why snakes haven’t thought of this. I’ve heard that trying to pass legislation that requires the bonuses be returned is unconstitutional. Make it Constitutional! Perhaps the most ridiculous reason given for the greedy to keep their bonuses is that it is contractual. One Ruth Marcus, writing for the Washington Post, whose article appeared in the March 20, 2009 Minneapolis Star Tribune’s Opinion Exchange section has chosen this logic. Oh, she makes the same arguments about not jeopardizing the incomes of those who would help us fix the mess we’re in, but goes a couple of steps further. In the article, I saw for the first time- how columnists and writers could make the word “populist” into a word with negative connotations. Yeah, lord forbid that the public demand accountability from those with financial control security clearance. Marcus writes that we are a country of laws and cannot legislate retroactively, that “federal legislation explicitly states that compensation limits for companies receiving bailout funds do not apply to preexisting contracts.” Why would that be? Have we bailed out the financial sector so often that a standard contract has been decided upon, with our input, who are one-half of the consenting parties? I love it- who invented sarcasm anyway?

AIG and athletics: Contracts are torn up, violated, and infringed upon all of the time. The main thing is to get such weighty concerns, such as $750 billion in bailouts, right. I am so confident of my thinking here that I am not even going to spend the 2-3 hours of research looking for supporting arguments. One occurred to me just naturally. While this scandal did not help produce a recession and does not involve federal legislation . . . George O’Leary accepted the position of head football coach at Notre Dame. “A few days after being hired” –there is no doubt that the hiring of a head football coach at Notre Dame involved a contract between the university and the coach, he was fired for things that rather remind me of the types of lies and antics that our AIG pariahs have become famous for. O’Leary claimed he “had earned a master’s degree” from a non-existent university and claimed he earned varsity letters for football from a school for which he had never played a game. O’Leary’s net impact on the wider world- 0, AIG’s- considerably more. Ultimately, if you don’t hold up your end of the bargain for reasons that are the epitome of delinquency and greed then the spirit of , and the law behind, contractual obligations is going to have to change. Sports contracts have plenty of clauses that address a player’s limitations away from the playing field. If he is injured riding a motorcycle, surfing, tests positive for a performance enhancing drug, or manages a fjord pony and dugong at an all nude burlesque show, the terms of their contract have been violated and the team that is paying him for participating, can withhold payment- legally. Those terms are written into the contract. And with that, I imagine that O’Leary’s contract included a clause whereby if he was found to have lied on his resume, he could be fired. Those who would mock an apparent lack of pertinent examples will always seem to miss one very valuable piece of oversight common to all sports and missing from Washington (politics) and New York (the Mecca of finance) . . . populism. Heh, just kidding- see what I did there- just one small step in the making of a word into a derogatory term. No, the word I am thinking of is- officiating.

Contractual: I am tired of the least common denominator citizens of this country hiding behind what is or is not written into contracts. Home improvement contractors hide behind an obligation to pay on the part of the homeowner for inferior craftsmanship; Michael Vick still got $20 million from his previous employer, the Atlanta Falcons, though he was operating a dog-fighting ring out of his home, is sitting in federal prison and hasn’t played a game in two years; Stephon Marbury, of the New York Knicks, refused to play in a game and sulked on the Knicks’ bench for the majority of the 2008-09 season and still raked in the vast majority of his $21 million salary after being fined at least twice, once for refusing to play in a game. Don’t offer that a contract’s major included stipulations must be adhered to as it is always what is not included that most derails this society's sense of decency and the insubordinate’s rationale for not conducting business in a professional manner. With a lack of oversight that egregious, what is unaccountably missing can be a bigger problem than what is included. Someone defending those for whom Dante must have reserved their own circle of hell (ok, well, then one they will be sharing with the bed-wetting capybara) ought to know better.

It’s Jurassic: A Jeff Goldblum line from Jurassic Park is the most morally pertinent way of ending this exacting portion of the overall topic. When the scientists visiting the dinosaur park had the chance to sit down to discuss the reality of what they had just seen with the man who had funded that level of creation and future carnage and whether moneybags should have done such a thing as genetically reintroduce dinosaurs into the world, Goldblum’s chaoticianous character (one that proclaims the plausibility of chaos theory) had this to say to the financier- “You were so preoccupied with whether or not you could, you didn't stop to think if you should.” Phrased another way by us- 'made to feel guilty about taking back bonuses that never should have been paid out' bastards, I might change the phrasing and deliver the message to those who think it is unconstitutional and in poor manners to circumvent an apparent business dealings commandment about contractual agreements- “You have been so preoccupied with whether or not you shouldn’t you haven’t stopped to think if you should.” I am no chrisitian, but there is a place for morality which will always supersede the terms, or lack of them, in a contract signed by the devil.

____________________________________
* See- “AIG Firestorm Raises Alarm for Other Firms” by David Cho and Binyamin Appelbaum, Washington Post, March 18, 2009. In the article this paragraph appears: “The attack by lawmakers on AIG pay has provoked renewed complaints from some financial company executives that federal involvement in business decisions is making it difficult for struggling firms to return to profitability. In particular, executives say they need to offer bonuses to keep and motivate their most valuable employees and are already seeing an exodus of talent.” Two things- 1) where will they go if they are not feeding like leeches off of the toil, measured in dollars, of others; 2) is the same talent, those who apparently will be going on hiatus from bilking the consumer . . . are those the investors and financial magnates who got us into this mess in the first place? I’m confused . . . how is talent defined in the financial world? If the answer to that first question is yes . . . oh the options for a response are endless- here is one: I would rather brush the teeth of an annoyed hippopotamus with my eyelashes than reward executives or the financially “talented” with a bonus or a job. Would the “talented” financial employees be the ones insuring worthless derivatives and sacrificing real, measurable long-term growth? If I screw up at work I am reminded by some complete bitch of a software developer; if a talented financial industry employee screws up he is paid a retention bonus. To paraphrase president Obama, from a March 22, 2009 60 Minutes interview, those “talented” employees may need to take a step out of New York every once in awhile in order to get a dose of reality for their undiagnosed case of ego-centrism. I added the medical verbiage. Also within that article is further proof of a sickness only morally bankrupted, co-dependent accounting division employees would understand- wanting to pay “retention bonuses to keep employees who are unwinding its Financial Products division” over at AIG. Also, “A senior executive at one of the nation’s largest banks said he had heard from several hedge funds that they would not partner with the government for fear that lawmakers would impose retroactive conditions on their participation, such as limits on compensation or disclosure requirements.” And I had heard from a hedgehog, the runt of its litter, with a severe brain malfunction, that has not yet been tied to the inhalation of pig odor (see part 45) that is bright enough to require retroactive conditions such as compensation caps and disclosure requirements be put in place. A hedgehog is appropriately named considering that the investment managers can, should they be allowed to by a lack of government interference, trade commodities and debt, etc. and can creatively account for a very wide range of activities- in essence hog the capital produced by the hedge fund.

Coincidentally, a hedgehog’s SOP would be to perform a set of maneuvers that are virtually indistinguishable from the talented financial markets investor, or CEO of a major corporation, who has received word that their president, and others, have requested they return a bonus they never earned, and which the taxpayer who has gathered a 1.5% raise has helped fund, from bailout money that never should have been paid to them- “Hedgehogs occasionally perform a ritual called anointing. When the animal comes across a new scent, [such as a potential regulating agency, government entity or a fed up public] it will lick and bite the source and then form a scented froth in its mouth and paste it on its spines with its tongue. It is not known what the specific purpose of this ritual is, [it has been speculated that they do not like the aforementioned emasculation] but some experts believe anointing camouflages the hedgehog with the new scent of the area and provides a possible poison or source of infection to any predator that gets poked by their spines.” (Source- Wikipedia- with some embellishment.) The "new scent" component of this activity is not unlike what a former industry giant, such as AIG, might do to hide the trail of tears it has caused- something like planning on changing its name, which new AIG head Edward Liddy has the intention to do, as he mentioned in front of the collected enablers at the House Financial Services hearing last week.

** An ascendancy, that to be clear, is enjoyed by the poor of other nations and not this one.

*** Which of course, as I have stated several times since I started this topic, only takes into consideration those in the middle class that do not overcharge their credit card, buying or financing homes, cars, boats, televisions, video gaming equipment, clothing and other belongings they cannot afford.

Wednesday, March 18, 2009

2009 NCAA Tournament Special

“We, who look on with critic eyes
Exempt from action’s crucial test,
Human ourselves, at least are wise
In honoring one who did his best.”
- James Russell Lowell

While Lowell certainly could not have imagined the annually incongruous judgments of coaches, analysts, sports talk show hosts and NCAA college basketball tournament selection committees, his words seemed appropriate for introducing the subject matter which follows. Not one committee has gotten everything right since I started following which teams were invited to the big dance, and which were forsaken, back in the mid 1980s, when I had far less hair growing from my ears. The last line in the quote above should be applied toward the committee’s decisions in this respect- they tend to include some undeserving teams (often from major conferences- that perhaps have not performed their best) and by that, they are not honoring those that have performed more capably, all things considered, (as is the case with some teams from mid-major conferences). Of the at-large teams invited to the tournament, 30 are from the former group and only 4 from the latter. While this is a problem some might have with this year’s selected teams, it does not concern me as much as some other noteworthy items which cause me to think that the committee and the experts rather enjoy being controversial, if only to provide the sports fan with things to talk about which rival their BCS-loving football counterparts, who refuse to institute a college football playoff system.

To be sure- the list of things the expert-cooperative (coaches, analysts, talk show hosts and selection committee) get wrong does anything but honor those who did their best. The committee, that hardly ever throws anything away, decided to keep Arizona in the field. I visited my mom the other day. She owns a pink throw pillow that is so old it has varicose veins. Arizona was handed its 25th consecutive invitation to the big dance, despite going 9-9 (tied for 5th in a PAC-10 conference so watered down, the pop dispenser at Taco Bell would be proud). That pillow, which is supposed to be an article of leisure, is so hideous it looks like a ravioli cooked so long the beef has escaped. Note to the selection committee- maybe it is time to put together a field of participants in order to honor them for having done their best (to paraphrase Lowell) and with that, you will have done your best as well. Imagine a person exhausted by the day's events, who lays down on the couch to find that the only "comfortable" place to lay their head is the pink pillow that meets the description above. Across the room is a far more suitable pillow-candidate, but this person has no energy left to get up to get the pillow. Do you know what the pink pillow is . . . yep, Arizona.*



TALK THE TALK

The only thing worse than nearly two months of speculation about which bubble teams most deserve to be selected to participate in the NCAA tournament, is the 24 hours after the tournament field has been finalized.

The potential criteria decided upon by a selection committee, and speculated upon by everyone from president Obama, who filled out a dry erase board bracket, to a cave full of bears that just woke up from hibernation, is exhaustive in its scope and frustrating in its fiatness- about as frustrating as when all of the hot women are voted off of American Idol. The committee, we have been told by our 1000 pundits of the roundtable, lock themselves in a conference room for the weekend to deliberate upon the worthiness of the 34 at-large selections, that for the most part, are battling for the right to be the last teams to be sacrificed to the 1 seed in each regional. Consider the criteria, enumerated below, which I may or may not have taken the liberty to embellish. Each piece of fact has an element of cognitive dissonance associated with it, and is beloved by certain members of the college hoops elite, with more attention to detail and identifiable reverence than Indiana Jones had for the stone fertility idol at the beginning of Raiders of the Lost Ark. The chairmen of each committee has normally been uncomfortably interviewed by Jim Nance and Billy Packer (of CBS), just minutes after all of the tournament seedings are revealed and always seem to have made drastic mistakes that could cost some teams their tournament lives by giving them one seed lower than the respective coaches might have desired. That was sarcasm. Thankfully, I missed the waterboard-like selection committee chairman interview this year.

The potential seedings are deliberated upon for hours upon hours and days upon days on ESPN’s or CBS’ pundit-based halftime shows. Each expert/pundit and each year’s version of the selection committee has their own set of standards (and sometimes an agenda) that equates to one team being considered more worthy than another with about the same resume. The qualifications for promotion in some businesses are almost this difficult to follow. The rationale each committee, from year to year, and each pundit, from day to day, uses to determine which teams are more worthy wears me out; not even MapQuest can give such pathetic directions. At base level- the discrepancies are not unlike any of those that men have had disagreements about since the invention of the rock, or at least since blue-tooth technology. My children, who have not yet reached the age of reason, have more meaningful discussions about whose highly valued miniature stuffed Goofy doll, that came from the Apple Jacks box, is theirs to keep forever. (Note: when I say discussions, I mean that my son takes the highly valued prize and runs away from his sister before I realize what he's done.)



WE ARE WORTHY

Without further ado- for those teams vying for the 34 at-large bids, the criteria some people might use to defend/justify one team’s inclusion, and another team’s exclusion from the tournament (in no particular order):

1) RPI- Ratings Percentage Index - 1/4 (Winning Percentage) + 1/2 (Opponents' Average Winning Percentage) + 1/4 (Opponents' Opponents' Winning Percentage);

2) SOS- Strength of Schedule- the ranking of the strength of a particular team’s schedule is determined by how many of their opponents have been worthy and how many have been unworthy opponents. Defeating a respected 24-7 team, from a power conference, says more about a particular team’s NCAA tourney preparedness than defeating a 19-14 team from a conference that is deemed not as strong;

3) Strength of a team’s non-Conference schedule;

4) The physical appeal of one team’s cheerleaders (particularly UCLA's), compared to another's that just has a male jumping around in a razorback (i.e. pig) costume;

5) Road victories;

6) Record the last 12 games; (in vogue for the 08-09 season);

7) Whether one coach was slighted for the Academy Award for best director a decade ago and the committee may choose this season to make amends. Wait, that is an existing problem with the American Academy of Motion Pictures Art and Sciences, (i.e. the Oscars);

8) A coach’s total number of ego-stretch marks which are not a by-product of Dick Vitale’s brown-nosing (see below);

9) Record the last 10 games; (in vogue for seasons prior to the current season);

10) Whether the team's total number of wins is 20 or more and if that number is divisible by muskrat;

11) Record vs. common opponents;

12) Conference record;

13) How badly one team beat up on Little Sisters of the Poor;

14) 6 degrees of separation logic; let’s say Louisville, a #1 seed, played Virgina Tech, a non-conference opponent, on a neutral sight, and lost by 5; that same Virginia Tech team lost to Michigan on the road, Michigan lost to Utah at home, Utah lost to McNeese State Technical College who beat Ray Charles School for the Sight Impaired by 2. Now RCSFTSI can insinuate that they are tournament worthy as they can trace that season’s result-lineage all the way up to some kind of putridly derivative Louisville underachievement which is uncharacteristic of their overall body of work. The Imperial Stormtroopers dispatched to Tatooine didn’t do as serviceable a job tracking two droids to Uncle Owen’s dwelling in Star Wars;

15) The coach of the 19-13 Arizona Wildcats justified their inclusion in the tournament because they beat 3 conference champions- Washington (4 seed), Gonzaga (4 seed) and Kansas (3 seed). All of these games were at Arizona. If you make a statement like that it is best to include that you defeated Louisville, North Carolina or Michigan State in your supporting argument. That piece of information should not be the sole criteria used to justify your selection. Arizona had a 9-9 conference record, lost in the first round of their conference tournament; went 1-5 to finish the season; they had non-conference wins against Florida Atlantic, Mississippi Valley State, Santa Clara, Northern Arizona, Loyola Marymount and San Diego State- teams that may, MAY, appear in the NCAA tournament a combined 7 times in 14 years;

16) The team has a coach with great tournament success; I heard a talk show host mention this was the only reason that Tubby Smith's Minnesota Gophers got in; (16A- beat Louisville on a neutral court and hope that they win the Big East conference and Big East tournament). For those who don't know- Minnesota did that this year. I'll cross reference this one to #s 1 and 14. Rooting for teams that you had previously beaten is commonly done if you want to ensure your place in the field;

17) A team has a major player with an injury that would impact his team’s performance, or the player just came back from injury and shot 6 of 20 in two games prior to selection Sunday (ala Patty Mills and St. Mary’s- who were not invited to dance);

18) A certain team had close losses to teams from major conferences, in road games that began after 5 p.m. where the PAID attendance was more than 11,500, and the court had fewer than 2 swastikas accidentally emblazoned on the parquet floor;

19) Two coaches from the Big Ten conference, a conference with 11 teams, justifying that 8 teams from the Big Ten should be selected. Shockingly, they responded in the affirmative when asked if 8 teams should be invited, because it always makes sense to reward 3-5 teams with nearly identical conference records, none of whom really distinguished themselves more than a mid-major team with some key road performances and a dominating record in their conference, despite the fact that its conference was more deficient than the Big Ten- if that is even possible. I could see a scenario where two hours later, one of the two coaches referenced above, finding no invitation to the tournament, attempts to justify why his team should be in and the team he just made a case for should be out. Only in politics and in the mating habits of jellyfish does hypocrisy run as rampant. Jellyfish have no brains. That species being able to show devotion is just not in the cards.



HOME COURT ADVANTAGE

North Carolina, a number 1 seed, and Duke a #2, will both play first and second round games in Greensboro, N.C. I do not agree with the way the selection committee places teams that are already head and shoulders above their opponents within the friendly confines of their own state.** All teams should be made to leave their own state, so as to eliminate the advantage of proximity to their campus. Villanova will be playing its first and second round games in Philadelphia and Ohio State in Dayton, Ohio. People will say that it is better to keep teams close to home for a fan following, because more tickets will be sold and that tells me that the NCAA cares about money; money and integrity are mutually exclusive. Perhaps, in this economy, a fan-base that might ordinarily drive 49 miles to Greensboro (in the case of UNC fans), or take a long weekend to drive from North Dakota to Minneapolis (which is where NDSU will be playing in the first round) wouldn’t do so for financial reasons if their team was shipped out west. If this was the first season the committee mandated a home court advantage, (considering the economy) that might make some sense. Getting shipped out West is exactly what happened to Connecticut, the most eastern of any of the teams that might remotely have been considered for a no. 1 seed. In defense of the selection committee, there was not a team worthy of consideration as a #1 seed west of the Mississippi, so someone (Louisville, Pittsburgh, North Carolina, or Connecticut) was going to need to travel. And it is not the committee's fault that only 6 of the top 20 teams (as judged by the committee) are west of the Mississippi. It just simply is not fair to make inferior teams from eight states away travel to the lion’s den of a team that apparently does everything better than they do except travel well. This makes less sense than providing a traffic report at 4 a.m. . . . to a balloon-loving earthworm in touch with its feminine side. This is easier than one might think- keep in mind that earthworms have both male and female reproductive parts.



HOME COURT ADVANTAGE II

Two years ago, the coach of the Syracuse Orangemen (Jim Boeheim) complained about being left out of the tournament. I am surprised I cannot remember exactly his rationale because I heard him whining on just about every sports talk radio show on the air. I believe he cited reasons like the toughness of conference opponents, the Orange’s record in conference (10-6), that no Big East conference team had ever been left out of the tournament when they had achieved 10 conference victories, their record against non-conference opponents, etc. The team may have left the state of New York twice during the non-conference schedule- I tried to find that on the net- to no avail. In hindsight Mr. Boeheim, maybe you would have wanted to step up the competition and not be such a travelophobe. I include this paragraph because at least one coach per year uses this complaint. This excuse is more unchanged than a cartoon character's shirt.



BELONGING

Every coach that is interviewed by CBS sports or ESPN thinks his team is worthy of being included in the tournament and feels they should be given a higher seed than they have received considering their “body of work” a common refrain among coaches with some of the most delusional qualities you will ever come to find. When asked if his team deserved a #1 seed, Memphis coach John Calipari said (to paraphrase) yes, but the committee has been good to us. If there were upsets the committee would have made some mistakes. John, your basketball coaching abilities are impressive, but have you not paid attention to this tournament in the last 30 years? Next you will tell me that Leprachaun venison is not worth the time it takes to prepare. There are upsets, the tournament is famous for them- N.C. State in '83, Villanova in '85, Kansas in '88, Arizona in '96 and those are just the teams that one the tournament. There may be a few factors involved in a college basketball game that more noticeably determine the outcome than a group of men deciding which seeds certain teams should be. After all, the games are not played on paper. These factors that happen to determine the outcomes of games- field goal percentage, rebounding, defense, turnovers, players fouling out or getting injured, foul shooting, luck, skill, referees***and a coach deciding not to call a timeout in the last moments of a game to prevent your opponent from hitting a game-tying 3-pointer (ala the Memphis v. Kansas title game that you, John, coached in last season).


DICKY V
One very memorable college basketball personality (Dick Vitale) apparently thinks the games are decided by the coaches. He brings up Jim Calhoun (UConn coach), Jim Boeheim (Syracuse coach), or Coach K (Duke coach) as factors in determining which teams will advance given a scenario where eight teams remain; perhaps Thad Motta’s (Ohio State coach) assist-to-turnover ratio is a relevantly kept statistic somewhere, or Bill Self's ability to shoot dimes from the mouths of weasels (while not harming the weasel) that sit atop the backboards at Allen Fieldhouse will inspire Kansas to the Elite Eight. Vitale mentioned virtually nothing about this team’s defense, that team’s height advantage, depth or free-throw shooting, or another team he sees advancing that might have a lot of backcourt experience. I love Dick Vitale’s energy, his spirit and his knowledge of the game. He just can’t stop talking about how talented the coaches are. Sorry, but the average college basketball fan cares about the players, rivalries, passion and sweat (and not the kind of sweat you can find dripping off of Bruce Pearl’s sport-coat) rather than how many consecutive conference tournament semifinals a coach has gotten their team to.



SURVIVE AND ADVANCE

The prediction component of each ESPN or CBS panelist is always very interesting. They know their sport, and while each panelist may come to a different conclusion about who is in and who is out of the tournament, they also have different ideas on who can survive and advance to the final four and which teams have a chance to win the whole thing. They know far more about the participants than I do, but it is their job and they get to spend their days researching which Big Sky conference tournament runner-up beat the SEC champion on a neutral floor and therefore justify the slight of a mid-major conference candidate that is left out of the field in favor of an also-ran from a major conference. According to Jay Bilas- Connecticut has a chance to go all the way because of a dominant inside force- Hasheem Thabeet. Bilas, to paraphrase, said that he’s a player that no other team in the tournament has. This is really very good information. I am pretty sure that a player cannot play for two teams at the same time- that might be an NCAA rules violation or something. Pundit, committee, fan, coach or talk show host- there are plenty of NCAA tournament violations. Having written all this, I am guilty as well.


* Arizona's (of the varicose vein Arizona’s) selection to the tournament is not justified simply because they defeated an overrated Illinois team that was never worthy of a 5 seed and a #13 seed that upset their first round opponent. Likewise, an NIT final four team has not proven that they should have been invited to the NCAA tournament.

** Usually, home court advantage comes into play in the NIT tournament, where a team is awarded a home game simply because one team's fan base is more likely to turn out for a game. Usually, I like my sports champions determined by heart, effort and talent, and not by expected net generated income. I didn't include this as an element of the 19 enumerated factors which qualify a team for selection, but I probably could have.

*** This is probably off topic, but aside from the lack of a college football playoff system, the subjectively enforced dichotomy between a charging and blocking foul is among the most annoying features of any sport- excepting the allowed use of undersized crickets in arthropod Tiddlywinks by cobras that are over four feet long. Whenever I see a ridiculous charging call made against a rightfully aggressive offensive player that jumps into a defensive player who just barely got his feet set directly under the basket- I call it a Battier. Or whenever I see a goofy defensive player trying to do nothing more than get in the way of an offensive player dribbling the ball 30 feet from the basket- the defensive player always seeming to look like one of the prostrate guys on the rod of a foosball table- I call it a Battier. Those familiar with the former Duke flopper will understand.

Thursday, March 12, 2009

Middle Class Part 45: Middle Class Happiness, Abbreviated Inclusions, Consumer Confidence Index, the Omnibus Bill and Smelly Pigs

RANDOM READINGS

The Reader: Aside from a movie that was nominated for the best picture Academy Award, this is what I may have been the best description of my activities in the past two weeks. When I heard there was a movie title that best encapsulated my life, I was disgusted that they did not consult me on any of the scenes to which I could lend my particular brand of nuance- animal malady humor, irreverence, diligence or the ability to beat a dead horse- identify this blog saga as you will.

In the past two weeks: I have been reading up on my middle class disaffection, the reasons for our continued, collective disgust, and even about those who could have predicted its origin.

Thesis I: I would not say that I predicted the current economic situation. I felt we had enough economic disparity between the rich and middle class two years ago to justify my anxiety about my children’s financial prospects in this world, given the cost of a college education, its connection to one’s economic prospects, the rather minuscule living wage increases as compared against inflation and the increasing prices of about two dozen necessary costs, relative to the aforementioned wage increases. When all of that is considered against the present economic backdrop, my point, which was already made, is underscored rather than proven. Fiscal disparities, because of the economy, are simply more obvious, just as frustrating, and more easily explained, but are not introduced into the equation because of a mortgage crisis and a weak stock market. We should have had reporters attack more than the men’s Connecticut basketball coach (Jim Calhoun), about his substantial salary*- perhaps the CEO of a large corporation hiding his profits overseas for instance.

Thesis II: Many of the rich have worked hard to become so and to reiterate, I would never take from one man what he has earned, even should he have an excess of capital, if there is another way. I have spent thousands of words revealing in what ways I would avoid that scenario, so much so, that I consider it more likely that at least one plastic slinky will successfully descend a staircase in the designed upon manner than that the rich, under my idea of a watchful eye of this country’s resources (governmental oversight), would need to provide for the poor or financially supplement the middle class. We, in the middle class, should be demanding more referendum voting, be authoring more initiatives, bypassing the form of gridlock which is the unsteady foundation of the American political process driven by our distracted and ineffectual representatives.

Working for a living: I read an article in the Star Tribune called “The Working Poor Saw It Coming . . .” by Iain Levison, February 22, 2009, Opinion Exchange Section (pgs. OP1 and OP3), which followed two laborers looking to make some money laying carpet, who saw their credit limit go up despite the fact that they received pink-slips from their previous employers. My mom had her bathroom redone recently by a man who spent many hours over the course of a week and made $600 from the job, but who had to pay $600 for repairs on the vehicle he used to get to the job. All of his earnings lost. That is life I guess and part of the game = acceptable. This should not be: “Circuit City, currently liquidating all its stores and laying off thousands, asked a bankruptcy judge to let it give bonuses to executives to convince them to stay for the ‘wind-down process.” Are you cracked? That is like the spirit of a desert fox asking the vulture that just consumed its carcass to stick around because another member of his pack will be along shortly to perish in the same locale. I had an ex-girlfriend that wasn’t that co-dependent. Seriously, abusive relationships, between arctic terns and moorish idols, where the abused member of the couple, (probably the latter), protects the offender, even in the midst of law enforcement protection, are not that dysfunctional. Despite my feigned surprise, somehow this is less surprising than finding out there is such a thing as chess-boxing and a declared national frozen food month (March). (Note: an Arctic tern is a bird and a moorish idol is a fish. I thought I would elaborate for those who might have thought that the Moorish Idol was a singing competition exclusive to the descendants of the "small Numidian Kingdom of Maure from the third century BC in what is now [the] northern central and western part of Algra and a part of northern Morocco.")

Things to leave out: I read something about the lack of consumer confidence Americans have in the food industry, given the peanut butter salmonella outbreak; something about how those who live in Minnesota fewer than 6 months and 1 day of the year, and who are currently exempt from paying taxes, should, in fact, be made to contribute their share of taxes; I read something about the glorification of Nelson Mandela; I read something about the pathetic political decision making that led to the bailout of two American car manufacturers- “GM and Chrysler: Uncle Sam’s Prodigal Sons” by Steve Chapman of the Chicago Tribune- “In a normal market economy, things would proceed differently. The weak firms would file for bankruptcy and be forced to take drastic measures to cut their costs.” Previous to that, Chapman had written- “If one automaker gets the fatted calf, another one will have to do without.” He had begun the story with a new testament reference to the fatted calf killed “to celebrate the prodigal son’s return.” This calf was not killed because a corrupt cattle magnate, the beneficiary of "local control" had been allowed, by an alderman, to move his cattle confinement next door to the prodigal son's father's home- that joke, such as it is, will make more sense once you've read this entire installment. No, Cliff's notes are not available.

I read I: . . . several articles about how certain lending institutions misused the money from the bailout, either by throwing lavish parties, purchasing corporate jets, paying for executives to attend corporate retreats, or sponsoring golf tournaments, such as Northern Trust did with some of the $1.6 billion in government funds they received. (See “Northern Trust Under Pressure Over Parties” Associated Press, February 24, 2009.

I read II: . . . about “Obama’s Budget Offer[ing] Big Agenda, A Few Gaps” Washington Post, February 26, 2009; I also read enough about fiscal responsibility, people speaking on the condition of anonymity, about the Defense Department spending about $2 billion a week in Iraq in a Time magazine columnist’s critique, from July 2008, (written by The Curious Capitalist Justin Fox) of how “Congress’s housing bill won’t stop the foreclosure mess.” This column also includes the words- Congressional Budget Office and the sentence- “9 million U.S. homeowners owe more than their houses are worth.” That particular issue of Time also included an article about “The (Not so) Lunatic Fringe” which concerned the viability of 2008 Libertarian/third party presidential candidates such as Ron Paul (potential) and Bob Barr (actual), whose poll numbers (at least in the southwestern part of the country) were advancing. The same issue featured a one page article on Obama’s apparent centrism and how it upset some of his biggest fans.

I read III: . . . about the $3.6 trillion budget for the 2010 fiscal year and how Obama wants to extend health coverage, improve industry because of their emissions, chase alternative energy sources and invest billions of dollars in education. While I’m reading it, I think of the plot of “The Count of Monte Cristo” and the vengeance choreographed by Edmond Dantes, who takes on four of his enemies at once. I think of Obama taking on several issues at once- immigration, taxation, education, health care, Rush Limbaugh, pork-barrel spending, entitlements and perhaps even battling big business and hopefully campaign finance reform, never minding how unlikely is the latter battle considering how much Obama spent on the election; he has too many people to monetarily thank for their support of his candidacy. Ah, the audacity of hope is so out of place in politics, especially when a president signs a bill with 9,000 earmarks that any other president would sign. This line is telling- “he wants to restructure the tax code to shift more of the burden from lower- and middle-income workers to the wealthy, effectively a redistribution of wealth intended to reverse the widening income gap of recent years.” A widening income gap? Naaaaah. Next I’ll be told that snowflakes cling rather successfully to wool coats.

Forgetting the byzantine: I’ve been writing about those things for months upon months. But I streamlined the delivery of the words above, which would normally take me four pages to flush out in order to save space for other things. I may still quote from MSNBC, Associated Press, Star Tribune, The New York Times, The Washington Post, Time Magazine, talk radio, etc., etc., etc. in the course of my wandering through the remainder of this topic which is nearing its final installments. I don’t even have the energy to quote from ridiculous articles from May of 2008 with the headline- “Economists See Recovery Still a Long Way Off” with a subtitle that reads- “56 percent in survey see recession now or later this year—but a short one.” Nostradamus would be proud. My wife is concerned that my son, the offspring of two parents with a history of shyness, clearly a genetic disorder, is in the early stages of a life of hermitage and loneliness because he is four and doesn’t have any close friends in kindergarten. Both predictions seem a little ridiculous at this point, like the prophesied world domination of a legion of muskrats with muscular dystrophy, so bored by their affliction that they contracted herpes from playing beer pong. (Note: I heard about the fake news story of beer pong being tied to herpes from the Colbert Report which aired on 3/3/09. I’ll only take credit for the first two thirds of that instance/attempt at animal malady humor.)

Issues: After this column on middle class happiness or contentment, or whatever feeling of self-actualization we can all reach independently, I will have just one more topic to get through- taxation. I could spend another few articles investigating other social or political issues or social issues that become political issues, and try to gauge the effect those issues have on the middle class monetarily, but I will simply list those issues and refer readers to the installment where I might have covered that topic. This is not to downplay the issue’s relevance, either in the mind of the average American or how it might affect them monetarily, but that I must move on with my life.
The issues that I probably will not spend much prospective time investigating with an eye on how they would affect the middle class are:
Street violence, judicial appointments, religion and church and state issues, consumer protection, the war on drugs and the legalization of medicinal marijuana, civil liberties and American society and culture, (see parts 22-27 on immigration), capital punishment, energy policy (incomplete, but included in part 37), and the regulation of contractors (see part 33 on prevailing wage)- many of which I have somewhat addressed during the course of this smorgasbord of a blog topic.
GDP in the global economy: “Some business leaders and politicians defend both outsourcing and illegal immigration by claiming that America has an insufficient number of workers—an inadequate labor force. But if that were the case, real wages would be rising, not declining, and benefits and pensions would at least be stable, if not growing.” (From Lou Dobbs’ “War on the Middle Class” pg. 110.) I have been "permitted" to move back to my old department at work and am being replaced on my current project by contractors. The business I am in is being infiltrated by groups of people who do not come close to sharing a common heritage. Five years from now, the average middle class American will have very little in common with their co-workers. The global workforce will, of course, be talented and paid an overall compensation that is beneficial to most employers, which will stymie the average American worker’s ability to earn a living wage for the same work they did ten years ago. If “Personal consumption accounts for 70 percent of gross domestic product” (see- http://www.hoover.org/research/factsonpolicy/facts/4931661.html)** and people do not have jobs to make the money that they would ordinarily spend on goods and services, well, politicians and global businesses clamoring for a more reasonably priced workforce, I hope you choke on your globalization and world economy. This paragraph may seem out of place, but it is something I read these past two weeks and serves as a set-up for material at the end of this installment, as well as immediately below for those whose impatience for gratification (even blog diatribe gratification) is more compelling than others.



OMNIBUS BILL


Omnibus Bill I: It isn’t often that a footnote can introduce a main paragraph in my writing, but this is just such an occasion. Please read footnote number two, as indicated in the above paragraph (**), even should you have been clinically diagnosed with footnote aversion syndrome. Perhaps the intention of government is to increase its spending and remove the onus of the American consumer in contributing almost ¾ in support of the GDP. So, instead of the government relying on our spending, it seems to be planning on an increase to the 19% it comprises of the GDP. Instead of our spending our money, they seem to be interested in doing so- spending it for us. Course, they’ll have to tax us first. Why would I think this, that government could actually increase spending? Oh sure, there have been strange amendments in bills of all types before, particularly in the Omnibus Bill- a document that traditionally includes a wide variety of our fair politician’s pet projects. But consider the proposed outlays below- that will do nothing but appease the public, made happy by their elected officials, about as happy as my son made me by waking up at 6:06 this morning and promised to mitigate my dissatisfaction by sleeping on a rug, with his eyes open, in the kitchen until I finished my interrupted thought. He was quiet for about thirty seconds. The Omnibus Bill- “Once considered a relatively bipartisan measure, the measure has come under attack from Republicans _ and a handful of Democrats _ who say it is bloated and filled with wasteful, pork-barrel projects.” Quite true, considering the most offensive (literally if your nose is working) is the $1.7 million for pig odor research in Iowa. That is quite a pork-barrel. More attempts at pig comedy appear below. That is a threat, in the same way that the arctic tern, threatened its domestic partner by saying it planned to take up snoring.


Omnibus Bill II: This bill would also include, (before republicans are allowed to add 10-12 of their spending measures, to again waste our tax money in a more bi-partisan manner)- a “10 percent increase for the money-losing Amtrak passenger rail system,” “$238,000 to fund a deep-sea voyaging program for native Hawaiian youth,” (according to the Huffington Post- see Andrew Taylor’s March 5, 2009 contribution), $2.1 million for the Center of Grape Genetics in New York, $870k for a wolf breeding facility in North Carolina, and $2 million for the promotion of astronomy in Hawaii.” I was not aware that astronomy in Hawaii had so distinguished itself that a promotion was necessary. One of the republicans proposed amendments may be “an uncomfortable measure that would require the Senate to vote up-or-down each year on pay raises for Congress, even if they’re only cost-of-living increases. Right now, such raises are on auto-pilot. Democrats had hoped to avoid making that "tough choice" in public, considering the state of the economy and the dwindling possibilities of automatic pay raises for regular Americans.” Note to the republicans, and the democrats for that matter- I noticed the dwindling possibility of cost of living increases about a decade ago. (See- “Omnibus Bill Held Up By Bipartisan Objections, Obama Summit Fetish”- funny title, but the truth of the matter is that it makes sense for the supposed problem solvers to convene a meeting to discuss the issues and the solutions; without leading members of the middle class, I don’t believe that the best solutions to existing problems (health care, entitlements, fiscal responsibility, etc.) will be achieved. (See- http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/03/omnibus_bill_held_up_by_bipart.asp.) I’m not sure why democrats would be the only members of congress whose vote on this measure would be so scrutinized. Also, does it make much sense for congress to vote on its own pay raises? Only if you’re a congressmen. That is like leaving me in charge of rationing the household allotment of Tagalongs- the most popular of Girl Scout Cookies. You would dispute this? I have four words that are somewhat more convincing than the JFK assassination magic bullet theory- chocolate AND peanut butter. At any rate, the most comical present amendment in the Omnibus Bill, that I've been bored enough to investigate, is the pig odor research funding for Iowa. I am not even sure that this spending measure made it into the final bill; I just have a hunch.


PIG ODOR STUDY

Pig odor gloom and doom: When I Googled the pig odor research earmark, I read some of the comments that followed the main article riffing on the 8,570 earmarks in the $410 billion Omnibus Bill (that had not yet been fully debated or signed by the president). Everyone in the country believes the money spent in their locality fills an urgent need in their soul, something which will make them whole, something which will appease their dissatisfaction with life, something that will not incinerate their nose hairs or afflict their children with a variety of brain or respiratory malfunctions. One person chronicled the “local control” that a potentially stifling Iowa Agriculture Committee Chair has on the farming community in rural Iowa. An Iowa “Farm Bureau lobbied heavily against a bill in 2006 that would have tightened regulations on [4000-head hog] confinements.” The writer knows what the results of a pig odor study will be. A wombat, born DOA knows what the results would be. This just in- pigs stink. Why waste $1.7 million on that? The stench of pigs is just a symptom of a larger problem- that an all knowing god that is credited with creating the human race did not think to give them nose flaps to prevent the inhalation of harmful smells the same way that a snake has a transparent eyelids. Or the larger problem is that some state and local bureaucracies can rival many of the streamlined corruptions that take place on the national level. My point would be- it is 2009- we have scientists interested in exhuming our 16th president (Lincoln) so they can extract chopped up bits of his DNA, use that to possibly sequence Lincoln’s entire genome and mix it with acetic acid to prove that he was dying of as many as three rare genetic disorders before Booth shot him in Ford’s theatre, but we cannot find a way to minimize the smell of a bordering herd, or twelve, of swine without spending $1.7 million to legitimize the problem of homeowners who have lost about half of the money they’ve invested in a home in Iowa? Pigs smell, now let’s resolve the problem of corrupt business practices involving Factory Farms. Another commenter writes: studies on “hog manure effects” have already been conducted by the “University of Iowa, Duke University, the Pew*** Commission, the CDC, [and] the Union of Concerned Scientists” among others . . . No reputable research group states that large animal confinement buildings are safe for communities that live around them. Hydrogen sulfide and ammonia levels contribute to neurological disorders, malfunction, and even death . . . If $1.7 million will restore the people’s right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, it will have done its job. Unfortunately, it will serve as yet another costly example of the farm lobby and our legislators ignoring the truth and failing to protect the people they serve.” These are the types of citizens that should be/should have been included in one of Obama’s forthcoming, or already completed, summits about fetishes.

Plain old gloom and doom: At this point, it wouldn’t make much sense for me to quote from articles about how the weak economy was way back in early April of 2008, how the economy was souring the public on the future. (See “NYT Poll: Weak Economy Sours Public on Future, David Leonhardt and Marjorie Connelly, New York Times, April 3, 2008.) It wouldn’t make any more sense to quote from newspaper factoids about the average personal savings rate in the 1980s being 9.1 percent that has slipped to 1.7% this decade. I imagine that rate was far closer to 1.7%, than 9.1% even prior to the formally declared recession through which we are suffering- which would further prove the point I started making two years ago. And it wouldn’t do much good to question the NAR’s (National Association of Realtors) contention that “Patient buyers in most areas who do their homework will recognize that housing remains a good long-term investment.”**** I am not so sure. Owning a hamster that begins to suffer from wet tail the day you bring it home from the pet store may be a better long term investment than home ownership, even if your hovel isn't located next to a pig farm. And you don’t need to live close to a pig farm for a home’s value to have decreased 25% in the last five years. I used to think that owning a home one had the prospect of selling thirty years down the line to fund a free-wheeling retirement of travel and routine, and thankfully infrequent, colonoscopies, sans insurance, was going to be a high point in life.

Funny old gloom and doom: Obama has recently commented on the negative tack of which plenty in the media are guilty. This necessary guilt- the media cannot pretend ignorance, can be overwhelming at times. Obama is going after successive problems- health care industry (see- “In Health Plan, Industry Sees Good Business” by Dan Eggen and Ceci Connolly, Washington Post, March 5, 2009) and the federal contracting faction among others. (See- “Obama Orders Federal Contracting Overhaul” Associated Press, March 4, 2009.) If the president of the United States wants a fiscal responsibility summit to tell wealthy seniors to sacrifice (by perhaps having them pay more than their poor counterparts for prescription drugs- in the former case) and “promising to curtail no-bid [government contract] awards that have led to waste, abuse and corruption investigations” (in the latter case) and it makes economic, and logical sense then the collective citizenry and congress should enable this predilection, providing objective good comes from it. Summit away mr. president. To hell with the rushed wrangling that still leaves the citizenry wanting for progress in an age of economic uncertainty. Those who think the vote on any bill, assuming more good can come from an extra week’s deliberation, must be handled the same way as the scramble for bargains five hours after Thanksgiving day is over should be treated, in turn, like a disposable camera after the film has been developed. If you enjoy being depressed, do so while laughing your butt off. Watch Jon Stewart whose cure for pundit-pomposity and political hypocrisy is a brand of irreverence without a rival. Watch some news, some cable news, read some news, just don’t believe everything that comes into your mind and don’t always value those things which never leave it (i.e. that a home is ALWAYS a good investment).


MIDDLE CLASS HAPPINESS

Don’t worry, be happy: Back in part 10, #8, I mentioned that money does not bring happiness. The unwitting proponent of schadenfreude is similarly not completely happy when others, who were formerly insanely prosperous, are bereft of their earthly belongings or their wealth, unless we’re talking about someone who murdered his wife and her companion and gets thrown in jail for stealing, at gunpoint, some athletic relics, awards, or junk- (think- O.J. Simpson). I’m still quite please with that result. The only other time I am more pleased with another person or group’s demise, even a proposed downfall, is when the prospect of the Duke basketball team losing is imminent or when there is talk of garnishing an executive’s obscene amount of compensation, something I desired long before I included it in part 10. It seems- “The president and members of Congress are weighing various proposals to restrict chief executives’ compensation as one of the conditions of receiving help under the $700 billion financial bailout fund.” (See- “Administration, Congress Work on Pay Restrictions” Associated Press, February 3, 2009.) Two things- one, this is excellent news and two, how soon can we vote detractors of this proposal out of office? I would want board members and stock investors to have, and employ, the same powers as a one time government stipulation to curtail executive pay and not just limit this provision to the CEOs who are bailout beneficiaries. After the economy turns around, CEOs will still make 25 times what a middle class worker does and that is one reason we are in this mess to begin with- it is called profit margins; wouldn't the $35 million lining one person's pockets who miserably failed do wonders for the business or corporation that employed them? We are enamored with the prospect of a 3.5% raise and two years later the executive expels us from the corporate world, making $23 million in buyout deals for managing corporations right into the tank. After all, “Wall Street firms paid more than $18 billion in bonuses in the midst of the economic downturn in 2008.” I don't know a blue whale that feels that entitled to consume a school of krill.

Depressed middle class: “More Americans Feel Downturn’s Pain, Poll Finds” Michael A. Fletcher and Jon Cohen, WashingtonPost.com, December 17, 2008- http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28273423/. A Washington Post-ABC News poll indicated that 66 percent of Americans “are worried about maintaining their standard of living.” People from all political parties were “highly critical of the federal action to address the crisis . . . the criticisms stem from skepticism that the government has put in place adequate controls to avoid waste and fraud in the use of federal money in the economic recovery effort.” I hate polls and will not say that I approve of them simply because the findings coincide with what I’ve been writing on this overall topic since May of 2007- for facts and speculation have begun to resemble each other. To me, these types of results are more obvious than when the she-male host of the reality show The Bachelor comes over to inform the women and the man, all of whom have the ability to see, that there is only one rose left on the tray. Yes, many polls taken in the last two years have supported my theory of the widening economic gap between the haves (the rich) and the have some (middle class).

Trust in government: Obama said, during his inauguration speech, that “those of us who manage the public’s dollars will be held to account—to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day—because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.” So, that equates to- let’s put $75 million in a stimulus bill to help people quit smoking? Imagine how happy the people would be if you could do that- actually restore trust in government. Mindful in what ways certain components of the economic stimulus bill are to the misallocation of funds I highlighted in part 9 (government waste), the people should be prepared to be disappointed, because I don’t see much bad habit reformation.

Voter’s mood: “Voters Show Darker Mood than in 2000” Kevin Sack, New York Times, January 24, 2008. “Americans feel a loss of autonomy, in their own lives and in the nation. Their politics are driven by the powerlessness they feel to control their financial well-being, their safety, their environment, their health and the country’s borders.” In line with what I’ve continually contended. “Public opinion polling is also detecting an erosion of the country’s self-image. A CBS/New York Times poll taken this month found that 75 percent of respondents thought the country had ‘pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track,’ up from 44 percent in May 2000 . . . Some of those interviewed . . . said they were confident their children would not enjoy the same standard of living they had, calling it a reversal of the American dream.” This kind of grown sentiment is certainly not unfounded unless you wish to be compared to an ostrich with a complexion problem that finds the largest pile of sand it can in which to bury its head. People, that article was from January of 2008. Imagine what percentage of people feel a loss of autonomy and believe the country has gotten off on the wrong track now. It probably looks more like that -6% export figure above.

The more things stay the same: The middle class has every right to be disgusted with the nature of politics. Last summer (2008) I heard an audio clip of Ronald Reagan, campaigning on behalf of Barry Goldwater during the 1964 election cycle. This is a portion of his 4,626 words:

“I have an uncomfortable feeling that this prosperity [countering what the democrats had said about America never having it so good] isn't something on which we can base our hopes for the future. No nation in history has ever survived a tax burden that reached a third of its national income. Today, 37 cents of every dollar earned in this country is the tax collector's share, and yet our government continues to spend $17 million a day more than the government takes in. We haven't balanced our budget 28 out of the last 34 years. We have raised our debt limit three times in the last twelve months, and now our national debt is one and a half times bigger than all the combined debts of all the nations in the world. [Keep in mind, that was in 1964.] We have $15 billion in gold in our treasury--we don't own an ounce. Foreign dollar claims are $27.3 billion, and we have just had announced that the dollar of 1939 will now purchase 45 cents in its total value.”

People (presidents, kings, magistrates, priests, fathers, employers) in positions of power throughout history have always taken what they felt they could get away with and ignored what it was in their power to discount. Politicians have been penitent to numbers and figures, playing meta-politics, for far too long, distracting the political consumer (the citizen-voter) with a continuous onslaught of alpha-numeric fear-mongering. Their subjective fact displays are insipid and simplistic and even the best of them in the game of balderdash (Reagan) who inherited a rather miniscule National Debt when he became president, are hard to trust. In China, 1.5 million people were evicted for Olympic construction (Section 2A USA Today, August 6, 2007). What is different about the hundreds of thousands of Americans being evicted from jobs across the country, even in sound economic times, in favor of cheaper labor overseas?

Middle class caucus: A member of the New York house of representatives- Anthony Weiner was going to create a caucus on the middle class in 2008. Weiner “listed elevating middle class incomes and making housing and college more affordable as principal issues that the caucus would examine initially.” That article was from Russell Berman, New York Sun, April 24, 2008. Any progress on that? I read elsewhere that its membership had swelled to 37 members from both parties in 19 states. And yet, $21 million was included in the stimulus bill for sod for the national mall- the grass was ruined during Obama’s investiture. Who told revelers to wear their spikes to the inauguration? For more information on this sub-sub-topic- see http://www.stargazette.com/article/20090212/UPDATE/302120010. Until something is done here to reasonably appease the middle class, it isn’t worth the space. The middle class tax reduction, which was included in the stimulus bill, is a step in the right direction as long as taxes elsewhere are kept at current levels. You cannot rejoice in an era when every time you turn around you are robbing Peter to pay Paul, unless you don’t inhale pig odor air.

More things not to include: I have articles on my desk about how Americans feel we’re worse off than 4 years ago from March 12, 2008- see http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23596304/ and how “Half of Americans Struggle to Stay Happy” from April 29, 2008- see http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24376037. I have had these types of articles in my possession since the spring of 2008, and while telling, are too old to be pertinent less than a year later considering all that has gotten even worse since then. Not to worry, stories about pet acupuncture and Time magazine articles about the best rapper alive being Lil Wayne are about as significant these days as sequined, pleated, corduroy sling-shot underwear sweat-shops designed for stinkbugs springing up all over the Carolinas and I won’t be quoting from those either. Political landscapes change, economic conditions worsen and our collective anxiety becomes even more well-founded than it was the previous year.



CONSUMER CONFIDENCE INDEX

CCI- from Wikipedia: The US Consumer Confidence Index is defined as “the degree of optimism on the state of the economy that consumers are expressing through their activities of savings and spending.” So, we are measured by our actions and our politicians by their earmarks, their spending of our money, the money we don’t spend on investments, or consumer goods. Interesting. “A month-on-month decreasing trend [of more than 5%] suggests consumers have a negative outlook on their ability to secure and retain good jobs. Thus, manufacturers may expect consumers to avoid retail purchases, particularly large-ticket items that require financing.”***** I’m pretty sure I’ve mentioned that financing thing before- part 2, part 3, part 4, etc. Wouldn’t a “large-ticket” item that requires financing be a college education? “Manufacturers may pare down inventories to reduce overhead and/or delay investing in new projects and facilities. Likewise, banks can anticipate a decrease in lending activity, mortgage applications and credit card use. Even faced with a down-trending index, the government has a variety of options, such as issuing a tax rebate or taking other fiscal or monetary action to stimulate the economy.” Perhaps the governmet has begun to consider that relying on consumer spending to comprise 70% of the GDP is not a wise approach, and that other means to make up this loss to the GDP- like ****** passing a stimulus bill which borrows money from ourselves in the future, is a better approach. This way the amount of money the government will spend, to fill the gap from the lack of consumer spending, is sure to go up, minimizing the loss of severly reduced consumer spending on the GDP. (Note: March, in addition to being, national frozen food month, per above, is also brain injury awareness month. I thought writing essentially the same thought in two different sentences would be the best way to showcase my present brain injury.)

CCI- from Investopedia I: “The Consumer Confidence Index (CCI) is a monthly release from the Conference Board, a non-profit business group that is highly regarded by investors and the Federal Reserve. CCI is a unique indicator, formed from survey results of more than 5,000 households and designed to gauge the relative health, spending power and confidence of the average consumer.” There are three separate measures that contribute to the CCI- the Index of Consumer Sentiment (the current feeling), the Current Economic Conditions (for how the general economy is going) and one for how the households see things in six months’ time- Index of Consumer Expectations. (For material from this and the next three paragraphs please see “Economic Indicators: Consumer Confidence Index (CCI), Ryan Barnes- http://www.investopedia.com/university/releases/consumerconfidence.asp.)

CCI- from Investopedia II: “A strong consumer confidence report, especially at a time when the economy is lagging behind estimates, can move the market by making investors more willing to purchase equities. The idea behind consumer confidence is that a happy consumer - one who feels that his or her standard of living is increasing - is more likely to spend more and make bigger purchases, like a new car or home.” Huh, maybe I should have taken credit for having predicted our present economic downfall, considering that the health of our economy is tied to the collective consumer’s happiness, how they feel about the trending economy as manipulated by the government, which is run by the politicians.

CCI- from Investopedia III: “In general, however, rising consumer confidence will trend in line with rising retail sales and, personal consumption and expenditures, consumer-driven indicators that relate to spending patterns.” No editorial comments needed.

CCI- from Investopedia IV: “Sentiment indicators can carry a lot of weight – there are so few that are standardized like Consumer Confidence and, in the final analysis, the happiness and spending ability of Joe Consumer is the most important determinant of an expanding economy.” So, our reluctance to part with our money, considering the prices of necessary costs, and all that Consumer Price Index stuff I decided not to include, can impact the economic health of the country? I wonder how much longer the government might wish this to be true, mindful of how American workers, who have lost jobs to overseas counterparts and due to the recession, do not have the money to spend. Is that horse dead yet?

Low down: Headline- “Consumer Confidence Index at All-Time Low” Julianne Pepitone, CNNMoney.com, December 30, 2008. “The Conference Board, a New York-based business research group, said Tuesday that its Consumer Confidence index fell to 38 in December from the downwardly revised 44.7 in November.” No word yet on whether the Conference Board would involve itself in a pig odor study. Considering job loss, hiring freezes, bailouts of American banking institutions, car manufacturers, the loss of half of one’s accumulated 401k retirement savings accounts, the housing market, the reduced cost of hiring a band of Chihuahuas for your civil war reenactment needs, I am surprised the CCI is not at 5%. As a consumer, who would be confident in what they are saving and spending these days? The “Economists were expecting the index to increase to 45.5, according to a Briefing.com consensus survey of economists.” Apparently, economists can pull the almighty speculation out of their ass, and attach meaning to it; facts aren’t the only things that stink. There are things that stink, that wallow around in the mud, that congregate in Washington or in capitals across the country, snorting and snuffing, from which an odor emanates that greatly offends an ever-increasing number of people who reside miles away. We keep electing these pigs who vote on their own pork-barrel spending, feigning disgust for their counterpart's proposed (and then manifest) spending measures. No wonder they are called pork-barrel spending measures, if it is pigs that approve them. Maybe brain injury awareness month is every November in which the citizens vote on their elected representatives.

_____________________________________________
* Calhoun is the highest paid state employee. See- http://ncaabasketball.fanhouse.com/2009/02/25/connecticut-governor-calls-jim-calhoun-salary-tirade-embarrassi/

** Also see this website if you are interested in learning that investment comprises 17% of GDP, government spending 19% and net exports -6% (that is negative six percent). These figures are from 2006. Maybe the government’s plan is to not have a GDP so heavily made up of people spending their money. This is good because unemployment in most states is over 7%. Investment also may not comprise 17% of GDP, at this time, as those who don’t have jobs won’t be playing in the stock market. The last time I checked- the stock market cost people at least half of their 401k retirement savings. The bountiful net export category is sure to continue to not look good (-6%). The number of toys, household belongings, automobiles, etc. that come in from overseas will cause this number to continue to increase in the negative direction, that is, unless we can count the number of jobs shipped overseas as exports. That leaves us with government spending, which is sure to increase, if exports, consumer spending, and investment all continue to fall. “The gross domestic product (GDP) is the generally accepted measure of the size of the national economy. It is the sum of investment, personal consumption, government spending, and net exports.” Definition courtesy of the Hoover institute link provided above.

*** What better name for a commission that’s purpose is to study the effects of the smell of hog manure.

**** From a 2007 or 2008 Minneapolis Star Tribune “By the Numbers” short factoid.

***** Keep in mind, that it is largely the middle class that would be financing large-ticket items. The poor probably should not be approved for a lot of financing- if they’re poor, how could a lending agency expect a return on the credit they have offered. The rich have no need to finance most things- they are rich. Why would they need to finance a $3,000 television? That leaves the middle class as, by far, the largest economic class through which lending institutions can expect to derive the most capital in the form of interest payments, which are heavily front-loaded with interest. If you are a credit card company or a lending institution, what money is to be made from the poor who, by and large, can’t get credit, or from the rich, who, by and large, don’t need it? Of course, I know that poor people all over the country are getting approved for loans and financing, but should not be and that is why we have a housing crisis- as I’ve already referenced a number of times; if people aren’t spending enough money, you give it to them to spend. What I haven’t pieced together yet is how approving loans for people who cannot afford to pay them back because they don’t have jobs with the requisite salary (cost-of-living) increases, or because they no longer have jobs, matches up with a speculated governmental alteration to the amount of consumer spending which makes up the GDP. What I’m contending is that the government does not want 70% of the GDP to be made up of consumer spending, nor should they want it to be, considering the situation I just described above.


****** Again, how does this not prove my point? We aren't being taxed more, necessarily, because an almost $800 billion stimulus bill was passed or because an over $400 billion spending bill was passed, so say the experts. However, at least as bad, our children will be. We are borrowing money in order to spend it. This too is a loan that should not be approved, largely, for reasons I mention above. We may be more poor in the future than we are now. When I say we- I am not referring to the richest 1-10%, but the economic class below them. This has been my point all along- things may not be even this good for the next generation of middle class kids who will have our debt to pay. And the overseas workers, who are already not being paid enough by the big corporations, will not take too kindly to being taxed under American tax laws in order to make up the difference. The difference being- what the government intends to spend now to even out the aspects that comprise the GDP, and what they plan on spending in the future.