Links! Links! Links!

US Population Growth Slowing (Wonkblog)

A Baguette Vending  Machine (Matt Yglesias)

Where Unused Gift-Cards Go (Wonkblog)

America's Best & Worst Airports (Atlantic Cities)

I would read this book (The Economist)

More Apartments less Single Family Homes (Matt Yglesias)

on Investing for Retirement

As I continue to read The Big Short by Michael Lewis it is becoming more and more evident to me that a lot of what happens in the investment world is either fucking someone over or using them to take exorbitant fees. So one should not be surprised that I agree with Matt Yglesias that investing should not be for normal people. It's complicated, people who spend their whole life in finance still struggle to be good at it so why do we think the average Joe can manage it on top of everything else in life?

Putting money aside for retirement should be easy, not detrimental to your retirement itself.

Links! Links! Links!

Where have all the hitchhikers gone? (Freakonomics)
Again, screwing with the sex ratio is not going to help in the long run. (Freakonomics)
The World's Next 20 Tallest Skyscrapers. (Atlantic Cities)

Links! Links! Links!

Wired:
The rise and fall of Bitcoin.
Amazon is the future.

The Economist:
South Koreans are insane when it comes to standardized testing.

A great Radio Lab short, just listen to it.

From Matt Yglesias, online piracy is not exactly theft.

From Atlantic Cities can we save Suburbs?

Links! Links! Links!

Bloomberg:

Afghanistan really was a no good very bad place, from a logistics standpoint, for the US to have invaded.

Leaving a party when you are the largest military force on the planet is a lot more complicated than you think.

I think Lithuania is getting one of the worst deals when it comes to the debt crisis.

China continues to experience growing pains.

The Economist:

Language continues to be weird.

And so does America and Religion.

3D printing marches onward.

Including Taxes in the Posted Price

In Colin Grey's video Death to Pennies he mentions how it is absurd that we do not include tax in posted prices at stores. As a result of this oversight individuals are unable to efficiently use their change to pay for items. My problem is with inefficiency of the whole affair; calculating the tax one time when marking the price on the shelf as well as the price being constantly priced and repriced in the heads of the customers and then recalculated again at the register. While the register does that instantaneously we humans tend to struggle even with the most basic of math. The result must be lost time, more stress and I would assume lost sales.

I think the excuse that if we include the tax in the prices people will be dismayed by the higher prices. I is exaggerated. Individuals take tax into account when making a purchase so why would they not switch from expecting tax to expecting higher prices?

Some Thoughts on Dollar Coins

The US government is ending the dollar coin program because they have 1.4 billion of them all ready in storage. Matt Yglesias jokingly (at least I think it's a joke) says we should pick 1,400 random people and give each of them a million of them. I certainly would love to receive that many dollar coins as would many 5 year olds but I can't say the same for the rest of society. I would assume they would for the most part end up back at the Federal Reserve.


Instead I think we should do away with the dollar bill all together and force people to use the coins. If coins are indeed more cost effective to use then we should be pushing individuals to use them not simply giving them the option. 


While we're at it how about we do away with the penny and add a 50 cent piece and a $2 coin to reduce the amount of coinage out there. I can't find a GAO report on that but I would expect that reducing the amount of currency by increasing denominations would save money. 


And for those of you who will complain about having to carry around pockets full of coins I would like to point out that with implementing $1 $2 & 50¢ coins and the elimination of the penny (also if you use them efficiently) you should never have more than 6 coins in your pocket at any given time. Think about it.

China is Screwed Continued

From Businessweek:

"at some point it doesn't make sense to keep on building," says Chovanec. "China has built tomorrow's infrastructure and housing today so what is it going to build tomorrow?"

Something tells me this chart is going to level off at some point, and a lot of people are not going to be happy about it.....

Some Critical Thoughts on China

Whenever I see an article that references China's success I always feel the need to comment on how much they still have to work out. Now the article got me going this time was actually a great article and the author did nothing wrong but I still feel the need to put China in it's place.

The point of the article is that China is booming and as a result fewer Chinese people are seeking out their futures in America. That's great, go China! In my opinion the more awesomeness in the world the better. But fewer emigration does not a successful society make. China has many unresolved problems that will crop up.

1. They have far more young men than young girls as a result of their one child policy. From this one can assume that their will be many sexually frustrated men in the coming decades. Either China embraces polygamy and or prostitution (both of which have numerous detractors globally) or it must seriously address the problem.

2. Another casualty of China's one child policy is it's aging population. In order to cope with this problem China is going to have to allow for a lot of immigration. Which we all know is never a hot button issue. More on this later.

3. Endemic favoritism and corruption. Not only will this get in the way of liberalizing an economy but this will stoke social and ethnic tensions. One can an imagine a situation in which Han Chinese officials prefer to do business with fellow Hans and not the countries minorities.

Which leads me to...

4. China's lack of an open society will be its Achilles heal. Without a proper way to air grievances how will China ever be able to overcome the effects of a gender gap, inequality, a need for rising immigration, disgruntled minorities and corrupt officials? Without a credible system what citizenry will stand by as the government ignores problems in order to maintain power and enrich itself? We are currently seeing A Russian population is growing weary of the implicit bargain that a limited society equals better living standards. What happens when China inevitably slows down (India all ready is)? I for one don't see the Occupy movement going over well in China.

While China is prospering now I do not see a happy ending if it maintains its current path.

For further reading I recommend The Economist's special report on China.

Blame Hitler for Suburbs

Kind of....

Edward Glaeser's Triumph of the City:

Levitt's average earned home buyer earned about half that amount ($8000 in 1950) per year. Few of them would have had eight grand to put down for a new Levitt house, but the federal government was splurging on housing subsidies. The GI Bill offered no-down-payment housing loans for veterans, and the Federal Housing Administration guaranteed up to 95 percent of mortgages for middle income buyers. With a government-guarenteed loan, Levitt's buyers only needed to come up with $400 to buy a home packed with modern appliances and surrounded by leafy space

Aaaaand if you want to really stretch it you could blame him for the culture of home buying that led to the housing crisis......

William Levitt invented the low cost suburb the predecessor of what we know as the modern day suburb.

Update: It should also be noted that another well known anti Semite in Henry Ford is also to blame for Suburbs.

Some Thoughts on SPLOST (and the Green Line Extension)

A SPLOST or a special purpose local-option sales tax is what the State of Georgia is putting to a vote in order to improve their pitiful commute times. I think this is a great idea, primarily because it localizes a normally toxic statewide issue. The  situation that comes to mind is what happens in Massachusetts every time funding for an MBTA project is brought up. At those times residents in the Western part of the Commonwealth howl (justifiably I might add) that they have had it with funding transportation projects for Boston and it's suburbs. As a result projects tend to die or not get the proper funding they need. 

For years the Green Line Extension Project has been bandied about but has yet to be fully funded. For situations such as this in comes a mechanism like SPLOST, which if localized down to a municipality or a series of municipalities, could make community specific transportation projects easier to fund, and funded by those who would benefit the most.  It would properly puts the cost of living in a high density urban environment on the people who live near and benefit from it. Now as a resident of Somerville I would have no problem being assessed an extra 1% on my purchases made within Somerville in order to pay for the project. I'm sure many people in Somerville, Cambridge & Medford (not to mention other North Shore towns and I-93 Commuters) would feel the same way.

I do not know the specifics of how or if you could pass something of this nature in Massachusetts but I think localized tax vehicles are a serious option in attempting to rectify the growing infrastructure spending deficit in this country.

Some Thoughts on Squares & Transportation

I was idly thinking about how transportation (be it mass transit, roads or highways) corresponds to population centers (more specifically squares and neighborhood centers) and I came to the realization that it is your classic chicken or the egg quandary. In order for people to travel to and from a location they need a means of transport, but in order for their to be a means of transport their needs to be a location. Which leads to the question why do we build new or better transportation? Is it because the population demands it or is it in anticipation of the coming population? I would say it's probably a mixture of both with their being extremes on both ends. Governments build bridges to nowhere and subsidize rural airports but they also are forced to add lanes to highways and expand train/plane capacity. An interesting thought experiment either way. 

Some Thoughts on Sentimentality

Humanity as a whole is a pack rat. Our sentimentality often gets in the way of sound economics and progress. Before we go any further I would like to point out that I am not for wholesale destruction of history in the name of new developments, I am a large fan of historical sights and history centered vacations. I'm just thinking maybe we shouldn't classify everything that is old as historic, maybe some of it is just not worth saving. To prove my point I went to try and find a specific article I read months ago on the Domino Sugar Factory in Brooklyn only to find it crowded out by many other articles about inane New York landmark classifications. I think we may be going a little preservation heavy.

Edward Glaeser puts it this way in Triumph of the City:

There is great value in protecting the most beautiful parts of our urban past, but cities shouldn't be embalmed in amber. Too much preservation stops cities from providing newer, taller, better buildings for their inhabitants. Height restrictions, in Paris and New York and Mumbai, may seem like obscure arcana of interest only to planning professionals. Nothing could be more wrong. These rules are shaping the future of our cities and our world. If the cities' history becomes a straightjacket, then they lose one of their greatest assets: the ability to build up.

While in DC a couple months ago, Katy and I went looking at apartments in Arlington just to see what you could get for how much. Before even entering an apartment it was amazing to see how because of DC's arcane height restrictions all of the large apartment complexes were pushed out into Virginia. Then when actually looking at the apartments we were shocked at how expensive they were if you wanted any semblance of access to the DC metro. To reiterate we were shocked at prices in Arlington and we have lived in downtown Boston, one can only imagine the prices in DC.

Of course the high prices are justified, DC is booming which results in more people flocking to the city. At the same time the supply of real estate is kept artificially low by the restrictions placed on developers who through market forces would love to build higher. As a result of high demand and a low supply you have high prices. It is because of laws like DC's and thinking that we are all going to be swallowed up by the city that strangles innovation and slows an economy. If people can't afford to get to the city in the first place how are they going to innovate? If people are paying more and more on living costs how are they going to spend money in other sectors of the economy?


Or as Ryan Avent (I wish he had a wiki page for me to link to) puts in in his book The Gated City

Our thriving cities fall short of their potential because we constantly rein them in, and we rein them in because we worry that urban growth will be unpleasant. The residents of America’s productive cities fear change in their neighborhoods and fight growth. In doing so they make their cities more expensive and less accessible to people with middle incomes. Those middle-income workers move elsewhere, reducing their own earning power and the economy’s potential in the process.

Our sentimentality is what stops us from progress that could cure diseases and help lift the poor out of poverty among many many many other advancements. But personally I would like to see a change in mentality solely so we can have all of America as a giant national park sans NH.

Some Thoughts on Urban Rings, Gentrification and it's Antonym

I have finally gotten around to reading Triumph of the City by Edward Glaeser. I've been enjoying this book and as a result you will be subjected to quotes of the book at length and my thoughts about it. You should pick it up; especially if you, like me, think cities are tantamount to a living organism.

I've always known that there are wealthy areas and there are poor areas but I have never really thought anything more of it until Mr. Glaeser put it like this:

New York, Boston, and Philadelphia have four transit income zones: an inner zone (like central Manhattan or Beacon Hill) where the rich commute by foot or public transit, a second zone (the edges of New York's outer boroughs, or Roxbury in Boston) where the poor commute by public transit, a third zone (Westchester County or Wellesley) where the rich drive, and an outer zone comprising distant areas where less wealthy people live and drive. Paris likewise has excellent public transportation and consequently has an inner zone where the rich use the Métro or walk. The next zone has the poor living in more distant areas that are still connected to the city by train.

That innately makes sense when you think about it. Just take a commuter train from the end to the city and you'll notice there are two separate patterns (this of course can vary from line to line, my example is the Rockport line) the first is the people who get on at the end of the line (Gloucester) and get off in the later third (Salem, Swampscott, Lynn, Chelsea) and the second are those who get on in the middle (Manchester, Beverly Farms, and Beverly) and get off in the city. Those who live at the end of the line for the most part live too far away to commute into the city every day (though some do) the next third is just far enough away from the city to be quaint and cosy but close enough to work there. The final third is the not yet gentrified area or where the former urban poor are being pushed to as a result of gentrification (reverse gentrification).

All gentrification is is the ever expansion of the inner city (which is now for rich people, not the urban poor) through the reversal of white flight. For whatever reason, the wealthy (white is not all that accurate) love living in the city and because of their penchant for quaint town houses there is an inevitable limit in the supply of real estate. Those of you who know Boston think of the ever expanding South End. The dividing line between the South End and Roxbury is Massachusetts Avenue, or maybe it's Melnea Cass Blvd. Regardless most can agree that with every passing year the latter is becoming more and more true. As a result of the demand developers buy up Roxbury and resell it as the South End. The constant demand insures that the city will continue to grow up and out, pushing the less fortunate and businesses to the periphery

What does this mean? I don't know really. I like to think of it as the city growing, harvesting the raw materials that surround it and growing ever larger. As transportation links become better and more common we will see the city continue to grow as more real estate becomes available and more desirable to those who work and play in the city. Is this how it should be? Again I don't know. While I myself love my two family and the square I live in I feel guilty for not living in a large apartment complex which is better environmentally and far more efficient. Yet you can not just make people live in high rises and tell others they can not afford to live in the neighborhood they grew up in. We should be integrating not alienating those people. Is that possible? I would like to think that in the end society tends towards equilibrium in order to avoid conflict.

American Exceptionalism Must Die

A couple Saturdays ago I attended the annual Symposium put on by Mass Humanities at Boston College. I defer to my wife on how things of this nature should properly be managed and since I attended only one of the three talks I will reserve comment. Also before I continue, full disclosure, I am an Evgeny Morozov fan.

I thought the talk was good and as much on point it could be with the topic pertaining to the naive debate that the internet can be a good thing for democracy, the participants mostly saw everything in the negative. I for one agree that the internet while having great democratic qualities (wikipedia, chat, forums) it has far more bad ones (malware, misinformation, government crackdown, selective censorship, etc). But that's not the point I'm trying to make here. I'm here to add my two cents railing against this American exceptionalism bullshit that happens to spew out of a pundit's mouth from time to time.

The particular pundit I wish to speak of is the Sunlight Foundation's Mike Klein (an amazing organization that I have great respect for, see this Planet Money story), whose pseudo rant about Americans being above allowing the government to co-opt them. Besides being incredibly rude in Mr. Morozov's arguement by saying that Morozov's accent (Belorussian btw) corrupts his thinking on the matter, Mr. Klein was flat our wrong in his interpretation of American history. His reference to the vote being given to former African American slaves and women as a sign of inclusion was pathetically naive. Both are evidence of our two party system co-opting a cause/people to further each individual parties own political gains. The American two party system (I don't think that exists for what it's worth) is adept at shifting with the national conversation and seizing on opportunities when they present themselves. African Americans and Women were each a large block of untapped voters who could help shift/maintain the balance of power. We like to tell ourselves it was the right thing to do, but hardly is that ever the case.

It might just have been ok if Mr. Klein's naive belief in the glory that is American people power was the only thing that bothered me, but of course it was not. What really got me was his insistance that America is not susceptible to Eastern European strongmen or Maoist party politics because we are America. Again with the incredible naivety but this time while having spent the whole time siting examples to the contrary. Jack Abramoff's 60 Minutes interview about buying participants in politics, our lack of campaign finance reform means incumbents rarely lose, the brutality towards OWS protestors. No it's not murdering journalists or rotating through presidents; but what is aides rotating through campaigns and administrations? What of campaigns speaking "unfiltered" to the American people or on slanted news programs?

Are we really that much better or are we just that much better at lying to ourselves?

Some Thoughts on America's Multi-Party System

From time to time political commentators and political novices (all mostly of the left variety) lament that if only America had a multi-party system like Europe does then we would all be ok. I think that's hogwash. America does have a multi-party system (I would argue at least 8), what is missing is the election day free for all and post election horse trading of European Politics. Which from political theater stand point is awesome and as a political junkie I would love to experience it. From a practical standpoint, not so much.

Instead of the chaos America gets that out of the way in the primary stage, narrowing the many factions down to two major choices with the malcontents of the two parties (usually the far ends and the center) occasionally posting third party candidates. Both styles result in the same thing the majority of the time, a right of center or left of center government (there are of course notable exceptions but you will be hard pressed to find many of them).

The key difference between the two forms is that one is good at hiding differences as well as co-opting them in the name of coalition stability (America), whereas the other (Europe) is good at highlighting these differences in order to promote individual factions and their respective hot button issues. Regardless each system has more or less the following 8 divisions:

Far-Left
Left
Center-Left
Center
Center-Right
Right
Far-Right
Politically Agnostic

In Europe they are given party names, in America they run in the Republican or the Democratic primaries. In America in a way it's like Communist party politics; all the factions fighting it out behind closed doors but in the end they all belong to the same party which has the power. The American system preserves stability for a set period of time while many European systems, because of their fractious parties, reflect more of the mood of the people and can be more volatile  (snap elections, government's falling after a crisis, etc).

Of course I am not advocating one or the other. I myself would prefer an open primary with a top two candidate runoff as my election model of choice. I think that would be fairer to states that tilt one way or the other of center (think Texas or Massachusetts). What I mean to say with this post is that most Americans don't choose to exercise their right to influence the coalitions that are the Democratic and Republican parties for whatever reason. Yet, in my opinion, even if they did the end result would more than likely be a centerish government such as American democracy, and democracy as a whole, has always put forth.

Some Thoughts on Townies and Rutherford Ave

The impetus for the post comes from this Boston.com article.

If you have ever driven down Rutherford Ave then you know it is nothing to look at. More than likely you haven't looked at anything because you are flying down the street at 55 MPH+. Is that safe? No. Is that a desirable place to open up a retail store? No. Is that a place to raise your children or walk your dog? Of course not. That is exactly why the city and state would like to change that. Their thinking is if you make the place more desirable it will attract development, with development comes people and with people comes economic activity, with economic activity comes sales tax receipts and increased property tax takes, which in turn leads to a better standard of living for all those around.

But Townies see it a different way. They wrongly foresee increased car use on their side streets (one would assume with an Interstate running parallel to a road with stop lights people would use the Interstate), they see it as a grab by developers (because their homes, retail and restaurants appeared by magic) and they see an influx of the dreaded yuppie. I understand people fear what they don't know, and I am all for people being critical of change simply to make sure the change is for the better. But development is not always a bad thing, shrinking and slowing the flow of traffic is good for the surrounding area. If you are concerned about traffic flowing to side streets then add stop signs and speed bumps. Not only will this limit outside traffic it will make the environment safer for pedestrians.

What townies do see correctly however is a rise in rents (though that is undoubtedly all ready happening) which is a real problem and should be mitigated for current residents so as to ease the change over process. With that said if those renters have a stake in the surrounding business community the rise in rent will most likely be offset by a rise in demand for services in the same community. If they have no such stake it may behoove them to find work nearer where they live or to move closer to where they work, though a negative in the short term it is very much a positive in the long term.

Some Thoughts on the Euro & the ECB

So apparently the world as we know it is in the process of ending. Euro Doom has finally arrived and we are all screwed. I don't believe that is happening. The ECB must intervene. World events have gone beyond politics to a point at which politicians are throwing themselves in the way of this just to fix it at the cost of their own careers.

This is not the end, it must not be the end.

More Thoughts on Banking

To clarify my post from yesterday a little I would like to say that my thinking does not stem from any feeling that free banking should be a human right. My mindset comes more from that if it were free it would make the world more efficient and remove impediments to doing business.

I think Republicans are misguided in their "over-regulation" crusade and should focus more on regulations that give the edge to specific actors in the market, government sponsored monopolies is what I'm thinking of. I for one would love to see more players in the bank seen, especially players that have a history of driving down costs for consumers.

Some Thoughts on Banking

I don't necessarily know where this post is coming from in terms of what spurred it but take it for what you will.

My thinking is starting to drift towards splitting the financial sector in two; one side being heavily driven by profit and investment, with the other being centered on basic banking services. I think the first needs profit in order to operate at peek efficiency, why else would you lend someone money who you dont know unless it was to make a return on your investment? The second however is should be more centered around defraying costs, not making money.

Think of the alternatives to bank accounts and the costs that it would incur if we did not have them (or people were priced out of having them). As a result people would have to carry and store more cash (possibly in a shoe box or under their mattress). One would assume that they would not carry their thousands of monies on their person for fear of losing it or it being stolen, and if that were the case they would probably be less likely to make large purchases as well as to make impulse decisions. If debit cards do anything they make it easier for someone to spend money (as well as for retailers to take money) so why would someone who is looking to turn a profit want to take that tool out of a consumers hand? By instituting fees and pricing out the "un-banked" you are inhibiting consumer spending.

I see two alternatives to our current system of banks leaching off of consumers.

1) Governments get into the game in order to lower the use of cash as well as spur spending, while I think this would be a great idea I don't foresee this being something that will ever happen, maybe in small wealthy nations but even then I assume currency is used very infrequently to begin with (rich people use rewards based Credit Cards).

2) Major retailers (like WalMart) get into the game and offer money losing accounts simply to get you in their stores or lower their operational costs (I can see Amazon getting in to this or Apple). You all ready see this with specific banking institutions who offer free basic services on the chance that you may use their other services For instance Charles Schwab offers a great banking service for free on the condition that you open a free investor account with them, they don't force you to use it but if you want to it is there.

I haven't quite wrapped my head around my exact feelings on this matter but I'm getting there. To me it makes sense in the same way that Google does everything in it's power to get you to look at more pages on the internet. The more pages you look at the more ads they can put up, the easier it is for you to manage and spend your money the more you are going to spend it. Banks are in this scheme just middle men, they are a barrier between the consumer and the retailer, and I don't think they are going to be in the way much longer. 

Some Thoughts on the TPP FTA

First off why is this article in this weeks Economist the first time I have ever heard of the Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership? There is a chance that it might become a big deal this month with an APEC meeting taking place, and it would be an even bigger deal if Japan were to enter into negotiations. Without Japan it does not look like it would be all that interesting due to the fact that most of the countries involved have a standing free trade agreement with the US, the notable exception of course being Vietnam and New Zealand. Opening up to another English speaking country would obviously be worth more to New Zealand and the US than a non-English speaking country of the same standing. Vietnam I would assume would benefit greatly from becoming even cheaper than it is to US firms in regards to China (which may force the US and China to finally work out their problems).

The big fish though, is Japan. Tying the 1st and 3rd largest economies together would be nothing short of fantastic and may entice China to join the club or at least play a bit more fairly.

I don't claim to know anything about FTA or trade in general but I really want to learn more about trade deals.

Some Thoughts on Romney's Economic Thoughts

I would like Mr. Romney to explain how tax cuts that benefit business and the all ready wealthy will help our economy? The problem is that the driving force of the American Economy (ie the consumer) is heavily in debt. While lowering taxes in the long run is a good thing (as long as it is done in an efficient way) in the short term none of that will matter if Americans are still unable to spend on goods. By freeing them from that debt you open up their ability to spend again, which benefits business as well as shareholders. Where as his plan only benefits business and shareholders (but I would argue the other way would benefit them far greater).

From there one is better able to reform the tax code by lowering rates and broadening the base. Admittedly I would love to see Romney's end goal but I think how he gets there will never work.


Here is the Charlie Rose interview that spurred this.

Some Thoughts on the 10th Amendment

With the "introduction" of Rick Perry into the GOP race for the Presidency has come the debate pertaining to his "ideas". One of his so called "ideas" is that the 10th Amendment is supreme and lays most of the federal government unconstitutional. Now besides the fact that the 10th Amendment is at odds with this clause, this clause and this clause, or that the 10th has basically been dead since the Civil War, and forgetting the fact that Perry used to be a Democrat, rule by the 10th is a really really really bad way to govern.

Imagine if each state had their form of Social Security as Perry insinuates they should. Think of the redundant costs and overlapping pensions. Or think about how much this would restrict movement between states for employment. There are certain things that are better done on a large and national scale, such as currency, defense, entitlements, pensions, etc. Unfortunately the founding fathers did not have the foresight to write them all into the Constitution, hence why they wrote in escape clauses such as Necessary and Proper and the Commerce Clause. But it appears that Rick Perry sees something that he likes and just runs with it and he will be damned with the facts and contradicting arguments.

Some Thoughts on Social Security

In this weeks Businessweek there is a short interview that Tom Keene Had with former Reagan OMB Director David Stockman. There is really nothing knew in it; he advocates means testing and outright stripping of benefits for the rich. It's just that it hit me; how is treating Social Security like the large part of the budget it is (and not the so called trust fund it is perceived to be) and eliminating its payouts to high earners not a political win for both sides? It would preserve the benefits for those that need it while "taxing" the rich (both Dem talking points). While at the same time it "reigns in entitlement spending" for Conservatives. Throw in slightly lower taxes for the rich (not as much as this change would save) or an increase in the retirement age by a year and I don't see how this could not look good for both sides.

It's the creative ideas and true compromises that will win the day. This isn't a benefits cut that Democrats would hate (you could sell it as a revenue creator) and this isn't a tax increase (hell you could sell it as a spending cut paired with a tax cut if you were so inclined). I really hope this is something the super committee takes a look at.

Thoughts on Latin Alternatives to China

This weeks economist saw two articles in regards to good news for Latin American economies (Panama and China). And for those of you China haters and doom/gloom lovers this should be where you should be focusing your misguided worry. Free trade agreements and better relations with Latin American countries would likely help diversify our trade towards more Latin American goods not to mention help the environment, halt the influx of illegal immigrants and just be all around great for the world economy.

Though if you are looking for continued cheap all inclusive vacations to suspect countries in Central America then maybe you should ignore this.

Some Thoughts on Proportional Representation, by State Delegation, in the US House of Representatives

After listening to Ken Rudin & Ron Elving talk about redistricting for a brief couple of minutes on last weeks It's All Politics (I really wish they dedicated more time to it) I was struck with a brilliant idea (of which I have many): Why not determine House delegations via proportional representation? Now my initial reaction was that this must not be constitutional. Yet upon a reading of Article I of the US Constitution it became evidently clear that the election of a defined number of representatives is up to each individual state unless superseded by federal law. Which means states can do whatever they want as long as they come to the correct total of legislators unless Congress says no.

That is of course where I hit a snag. Federal law since 1967 does in fact say all Reps must come from districts of equal size.

I do however think the benefits of proportional representation are great enough to warrant the repeal of that law. I think it would promote the use of third parties in the US, in more populous states it would allow for greater representation among minorities, and would result in less "big wave elections". With that said I am a huge proponent of a system that has more than 2 parties and can't be trusted.

Now if the US were to repeal that law I am worried that Wesberry v. Sanders might get in the way of constitutionality. I would argue that because the ratio of population to the number of reps is more or less equal in each state then therefore you are achieving 1 person 1 vote. But I can entertain the argument that because, under a proportional system, I have access to 9 Reps in MA that I have more of a say on issues that come before the US House than one in ND does.

The Bottom Line: Is proportional representation in the US House by state delegations legal? No because of a 1967 law requiring districts. Upon repeal of that law would it be Constitutional? More likely than not.

Links

Even more on the phenomenon known as Bit Coins.

Adam Davidison's pro Airline fee rant at the beginning of this Planet Money podcast (which you really should listen to the whole thing) is exactly how I feel on the matter. If I don't have to pay as much for a ticket because airline's withhold free things such as a meal, reserved seat or checked luggage (just as long as if I really want it I can still pay for it) then I am all for it.

I largely agree with Bloomberg (editorial not the mayor) that though debit fees do seem rather high the answer is not to regulate. It is the business community that should band together to bring down the fees and if that proves not to be possible then Anti-Trust laws should be used not regulation. Personally I think this is the perfect opening for the US government to start offering a basic checking account to US citizens and provide free terminals to qualifying merchants. I would assume the savings from less currency in circulation and benefits to the IRS (I would assume the IRS would have some reporting tools built into the system not to mention the ability to withdraw and deposit tax directly from the accounts) would defray most of the cost. Of course that is never going to happen. In light of that I would encourage the Federal government to encourage things such as Square.

Saudi Arabia is currently trying to stop a global recession, pacify it's people and fund a cold war against Iran. Color me skeptical.

India loses a whopping 1/3rd of it's power production to thieves and inefficiency. Oh and that's equal to 1.2% of GDP.

People will always try to get high, and the US government is foolish for trying to stop them. That last part was my opinion.

Great profile on Turkey in last weeks Businessweek. Oh and if you want to buy me a subscription, please do so.

Some Thoughts on Happiness & Politics

My initial reaction to this Businessweek story was "Really?" Mostly because I would never blame the current state of the economy on the President, good or bad. Then I realized what the article really was saying; more than anything people vote with their happiness. If times are good, people are more obliged to keep it that way, and are less likely to vote in an unknown. But when times are bad, people are more likely to take a look at what the other guy is selling. I think the best example of this was Ronald Reagan's famous line, "Are you better off than you were four years ago?" That line directly linked the state of one's life to Jimmy Carter's election in 1976 (to be fair unemployment was practically the same when he came in as when he went out but it was the lower numbers in between that he was judged on) and back to the present, and guess what? A whole lot of people said no.

It doesn't matter how trustworthy Barack Obama is or how cool he seems, if he is tagged with making millions of people unhappy then he stands no chance at reelection and with the current economic numbers and the inability of Washington to do anything good for the economy, one never knows.

Some thoughts on Single Currency Unions

I always used to think that being able to tour Europe while never having to exchange my money was a good enough reason to have things such as the Euro. But now having traveled abroad a bit I have come to love that one of my CCs does not charge extra for foreign transactions and that with debit cards I can pull out exactly how much I want for a very marginal fee (both receive the prevailing exchange rate of the day).

In lieu of the European Debt crisis and with non-Euro EU countries apparently doing great, I'm starting to wonder do the pros outweigh the cons in regards to single currencies? Should we be going in the opposite direction? Would Arizona and Massachusetts benefit from different currencies? Probably, though I'm not actually advocating that. What I am saying is that in order for a single currency to work you need to collaborate on everything else; wages, business practices, tax rates, bank regulations, etc. If you can't do that then you should forgo the single currency and focus more on making currencies easier to exchange so as not to confuse the consumer.

Links for the Weekend

It appears that Italy is really an ass backwards country and Silvio Berlusconi only made that worse. I highly recommend that you read the entire report on Italy if you have the time and the Economist subscription (if you don't and still want to read it let me know).

I am a supporter of anything that tries to eliminate the need for cash and at the same time looks to reduce the amount siphoned off by the financial sector. Here is the practical way of doing it and here is the revolutionary way. The practical way is very enticing from a personal business stand point where as Bitcoin strike me as a pyramid scheme / penny stocks.

You know what scares me? That politics and not highly respected economists determine our fiscal and monetary policy.

Suddenly that investment in drones and not pissing off Saudi Arabia is starting to make a whole lot of sense.

This is why I don't put "cases" on my electronics and nor would i cover up the front of my vehicle

This (and the rest of the articles done in conjunction with NPR Planet Money) is why I will be reupping my Wired subscription.

I always wondered why we didn't put giant solar projects in the middle of the desert.

I want all states to get on this non-partisan election bandwagon California is currently leading.

You know you read an old man newspaper (or one with a good sense of humor) when they explain the definition of 'lulz" and "script kiddie".

Some Thoughts on, well, Thoughts

You may or may not have noticed that I have taken an interest as of late in the growing pains and the potential growing pains that China is, or is going to start, experiencing. People love to report on the rise of China in absolute economic terms (second largest economy, largest holder of reserves, etc) but hardly do we ever hear about what the repercussions of those staggering economic terms mean. Yes we heard about the air quality problems durring the Olympics and yes people love to talk about their large population but it is still a forgone conclusion that we will all be speaking Mandarin come the turn of the century.

Now I'm not going to sit here and tell you that China will not be the worlds largest economy, that is going to happen, the numbers dictate as much. When? I have no clue. But I can tell you it is not going to be smooth sailing. China has many problems going forward; an unsustainable aging population, far too many more males than females, restive minority popilations, ubiquitous corruption, no government accountability, horrendous environmental standards, and a growing gap between the rich and poor, just to name a few. China is going to hit bumps, HUGE bumps, in its run to being a fully functional world power and what that will bring for the rest of us we don't know.

And that's to say nothing of India, the Arab Spring, the industrialization of an entire continent (Africa), Latin Americas rise, the relegation of America to just normal, and Europe's own stagnation/population problems.

We think we know what our world is like but in actuality we have no clue, the status quo is now rapid and unpredictable change. Information about disasters and social upheaval are delivered to us all within minutes not hours and not days of when they happen.  Governments no longer can control like they used to. Power is shifting.

It is, in my opinion, an evening out (or as Thomas Friedman would say, flattening) of the teams. Weaker teams are gaining while the more powerful ones are dealing with their age, but in the end they are all going to end up on the same level more or less. Black and white together make gray. All the colors of the rainbow together make brown.

When? I have no clue.

-------

A programming note:

I am no longer going to do breakdowns of magazines I read. I'm going to try and write about the topics and articles as they come to me and if I don't get to talking about them specifically I'm just going to dump the links on you over each weekend. If that works, great, if not, then I'll just try something else.

Links! Links! Links!

I have neglected you all but I promise not to once the nightmare that is playoff hockey ends Wednesday night. I plan on getting some thoughts on The Economist up this week (maybe tomorrow) now that I'm not listening to so much George R.R. Martin. In the meantime here are a bunch of links:

Want my thoughts on Rep Weiner? Look no further. I just so happens I sometimes answer via Ezra Klein's finger tips.

We should not have phone numbers any more they hold no relevance to what they are for anymore, we should just have handles.

Shocking: The Post Office is antiquated and loses money.

The EU may be struggling at the top but it still works well as a carrot.

Dictators really don't fool anyone with their silly games.

I still love my trains because it uses less actual infrastructure but anything that brings us closer to a world like in Minority Report is AOK in my book.

Why don't we do this all ready?

Some Thoughts on Who the Voters Will Blame in 2012

Not really all that relevant to the story but Is Rick Scott's zeal/ineptitude going to effect the 2012 election in Florida even though he is not on the ballot? His approval rating as of the end of March was 29% and if memory serves me correctly even his party turned on him over his rejection of high speed rail money. A lot has been made of what swing states with high unemployment (Florida's is over 10%) will do when it comes to the Presidential elections but nothing seems to have been made of who is to blame in these swing states. May Barack Obama get a pass because Floridians blame Rick Scott for their woes? In WI I'm sure Mr. Obama could get a pass on a lot of things simply because Scott Walker, the most visible Republican in the state, is not well liked either, not to mention what a certain Representative from WI has done to single handedly diminish GOP 2012 chances. . Of course this is all subject to change and I could be completely wrong but I think this is something that is going under reported and would love to see some polling on it.

Podcast's of the Week

Planet Money: The Internet and Music
I was very disappointed in the lack of imagination shown on the part of the music experts in this story. They insisted that the internet was not going to work for music and would only help those lucky few. The only problem is that they were trying to tie it into the current label based industry, an industry that does not seem to be the preferred or sustainable method.

Why does it need to continue that way? Do retailers still use large swaths of middle men and warehouses or did they develop just in time delivery systems to cut cost? Do companies still need to be locate
Labels need to be consultants, which I think Alex touches on briefly at the end of the podcast.

Planet Money: Do We Need the IMF?
Why was the IMF created? What does it do? Do we need it? Look no further.

Short answer: We don't know
Long answer: If it didn't exist we would not create it but since it does we might as well use it.

Fresh Air does Area 51
Looking for a definitive history of Area 51? Then look no further. Want borderline crack-pot theories based on anonymous sources? Also look no further.

Programming Note

Due to a wonderful vacation over the weekend I found myself unable to read/listen to this weeks Economist. That of course doesn't mean you shouldn't give it a quick perusal and pick out a couple to read. At a glance I would go with the briefing on Nigeria and the Special Report on Australia. The new issue comes out today so I should be back on schedule next week.

This is not related at all but it appears Yemen is falling apart. If this doesn't resolve itself soon I don't see how Saudi Arabia does not get involved.

Some Thoughts on Digital Communications

It is a well believed and respected notion that the Internet makes work and life easier. I am not here to dispute that fact, I'm typing this out on my phone on an airplane. But the difference is some things can never be replicated perfectly by advancements in technology regardless of how long we try to develop it.

For example, video conferencing has made connecting with colleagues, contractors and loved ones much easier. Checking in on projects doesn't require a flight halfway around the world and long trips for business does not need to mean radio silence between a family.

Though technology does make it easier the problem is things aren't invented in boardrooms, brilliant ideas don't come about solely at ones desk and physical intimate contact can not be replicated over video chat.

Executives need the retreats to better work with each-other, innovators need that casual setting of a bar to spitball ideas and everyone needs to come home to their spouse and tussle the hair of their children. Technology can't replicate that now and probably never will.

Some Thoughts On Mother Jones May/June 2011

Mother Jones (as well as The American Prospect) are my Liberal side shining through. You have been warned.

• A little late on getting this to you, but if you want to take a peak behind why those Rapture people continued to insist we were all going to die last Saturday and how they may be coping with it, then look no further.
• I do find it a bit ironic that a men such as this one insist on using the courts to destroy the word of the people when they are the same who cry foul when Liberal judges strike down those same people's word. Anyway he just looks like someone who would do something like allow billions in undocumented financing into our political system doesn't he?
• Really someone is exploiting a populist movement for financial gain? Say it ain't so?
• Lies are far easier to tell than they are to disprove. Probably explains why we have libel laws.
• Have you ever asked yourself what Climategate is/was? Answer.

Some Thoughts on Mandatory Solar Panels

I do not presume to know the cost effectiveness of a policy such as this nor do I claim to know if it is good policy. But all the same it IS policy and I would like to know why we aren't having this discussion in the US (The Federal, Sate or Local level) ? Why isn't there laws that say that in order to build something you must have at some point during the building process a team come out (paid for by the government in question) to determine the feasibility of placing renewable energy production built into the building? They should then issue their report and recommendations to the owners, recommendations that they by now means have to follow but at least then they know the options.

Some Thoughts on The Economist May 21st

In case you have been living under a rock for the past two weeks here is a good rundown of why the arrest of DSK matters.

The housing market continues to fall, I blame Thomas Jefferson.

With 3D printing in it's ascendancy I don't see how there is any other option. That is in the long term, but in the short term I think current manufacturing methods aren't going anywhere anytime soon. Creating small specific pieces and prototypes will be what we use 3D printing for for the foreseeable future.

If you need a crash course on why Pakistan is the problem in Southern Asia then look no further. For my opinion read below.

Some good coverage on Libya this week. Qaddafi is done. This is one of the reasons for why he is done. The international community did the right thing, but it may cost them. Look for my thoughts on Libya a little later.

I'm liberal. I'm Pro-Union. And I still think this looks really bad.

Because this post is lacking opinion I'll leave you with this parting shot. Some people have it out for Ronald McDonald. Now I can't say that when I think of a "balance, active lifestyles ambassador" but I also don't think he is the Marlboro Man. People are not fat because of McDonald's, people are fat because they handed over their hard earned cash to eat food that McDonald's provides. If people can not see the correlation between their ever expanding waste lines and the food they eat then that is their problem. Now if by the grace of god they realize a hamburger is not made of leafy greens then McDonald's will adapt to it. Oh wait......

Some Thoughts on Pakistan

Pakistan, to me, is a country that thinks of itself as a world power when in actuality it is not. As an example I present the following

• A constant need to match India pound for pound militarily (men on the border, their nuclear arsenal and insurgents to make up for the rest) even though it has a smaller population, inferior economy, and weaker ties to the west (the US deals with Pakistan because it has to).
• Insistence that the US not operate within Pakistani borders, be it clandestine operatives or targeted hits against terrorists and insurgents. An insistence that is not coupled with taking care of the problems that these forbidden US actions insinuate.
• A desire to have a future in controlling part of Afghanistan's trajectory (which runs counter to its love of sovereignty when the US is concerned) even though it can not even govern its own fracturous society.

It is as if Pakistan had this grand plan for itself and has spent the past half decade failing to come to grips with the fact that it will never happen. That either directly explains the thought process of its leaders or it indirectly explains the need to demonize the West/India while showing clout in Afghanistan, in order to blind the public of reality. A reality in which Pakistan sponsors terror abroad, tacitly allows it within and has no plan to lift its people out of violence and poverty.

The only solution, in my mind, is for the US, India and Afghanistan to foster economic ties in the region. The stronger the ties the more likely that the Pakistani street will demand peace in lieu of retribution.

Links, Random Links

With the latest issues of Wired and The Atlantic arriving recently I realized I never gave my readers my links from the past issue of both. So here they are, slightly rushed.

Wired May 2011

• Only Bill James would have chronicling a history of dark crime as a hobby. Count his book as one I wish to read if I had the time.
• Yes commercials are indeed louder.
• Japan's quake ridden history.
• Sycophants might now be sooooo bad.
• Why do we still have Region Codes? Answer. Though the DVD is all but dead anyway.
• First rule about private trackers, you don't talk about private trackers.
• We are an angry 12 year old away from Armageddon.
• I for one tend to agree with Steven Levy. Though I would love to do away with physical programs for web based apps I still find myself using a Mac based Twitter client, email client as well as RSS reader. So to find myself doing away with physical files on my computer will be quite a stretch. I myself favor a Dropbox approach for now.

The Atlantic May 2011

• Did you want to know more about the Verizon Wireless Guy? Here you go.
• I am happy to say I do not follow into this category of yuppie.
• Being a pack rat is never a good thing, preserving useless old buildings is an even worse habit. We grow through innovation not through preserving old inferior buildings.

Some Thoughts on Mitch Daniels

I never thought he would run, mostly because it would have been very hard for him to talk candidly about the debt and spending problems when the opposition (GOP and Dem alike) tried to paint those problems as his to begin with (he was George W Bush's budget man). With that said, if he had run I do not think he would have garnered as much support as everyone was saying he was bound to get. I think Mitt Romney has all ready staked his claim as the moderate Republican, with Tim Pawlenty to the right and John Huntsman trying to be slightly to Romney's left. I saw no space for Daniels and my guess is Daniels saw that as well.

I had planned to write about how I thought Daniels mirrored the prospect of Wesley Clark in 2004, but I was overtaken by events.

Podcast's of the Week

This American Life reports that government's don't create jobs, at best they add minimal value to jobs being added by the private sector all ready and at worst they rob future investments in high end job growth to subsidize low wage jobs now (AKA you need to invest in education to really win the future).

Oh and they like to poach jobs from eachother.


Planet Money does a great, and short, history of US debt dating back to Hamilton. Well worth your 20 minutes.

It's All Politics for this week features Ron Elving giving probably the best explanation as to how voters choose between an incumbent President and a challenger. I will be co-opting it from now on.

Charles Barkley is on the BS Report and in only the way Charles can do he makes America (or that specific part of America) look really stupid for disliking gay people.

Some Thoughts On Abolishing the Senate

To start off it should be known that I am not delusional enough to think that this is even remotely possible, you aren't going to see 66 votes in the US Senate nor the 38 State legislature approval needed for the Constitutional Amendment but that doesn't stop me from speculating!

Ezra Klein had a short post recently illustrating how ridiculous a notion the makeup of the Senate is, best expressed by how a Senate vote in Wyoming is worth 68 times more than it is in California. Not exactly fair but it was a necessary compromise needed to bring the smaller states (such as Rhode Island & Delaware) into the Union with larger, more populous states (such as Virginia and Massachusetts) who favored the model used in the house (proportional representation). With that said the 3/5 Compromise was stripped out of the Constitution quite some time ago, though it should be noted however it took a costly Civil War to right that injustice.

In a world molded by my hands I would see the Senate abolished and 100 seats added to the US House of Representatives bringing our avg district population down to 484,000 which would move us from 2nd worst representative to only the 3rd worst. I would prefer to see the US add even more seats but an 1:1 consolidation of the two chambers sounds better. The consolidation would obviously have to revolve around the completion of a census year to bring into the fold the proper proportion of House seats per state.

As for the duties of the Senate (treaty approval, judicial & executive nominations, etc.) either the House would assume all of them or the House could nominate per 2-year session a committee, chaired by the Speaker, that's sole duty was to pass or fail these. I think I would prefer to still give the House the full up or down vote for this partially because the more representative of the US population the better. But mostly because I don't think adding these duties would be all that much of a burden to the House, especially if we were to limit the amount of executive positions that need confirmation which are at about 1,400 (and this would be a great excuse to do so).

Some great side effects of this "merger" would be the elimination of the Senate Pro Tempore from the line of succession as well as the annihilation of all Senate rules such as cloture and secret holds. And who knows maybe we would do away with that pesky Electoral College while we are at it?

The main goal here, as I stated above, would be to make elections fairer. But the obvious side effect from this would be the elevation of the Speaker of the House to near the level of the President, if not above the President. I think it would be a good thing, possibly stop, or at least be a great check on the Imperial Presidency and shift the power back in the direction that the founders assumed it would be.

But again, this will never happen.

Some Thoughts on Federalism and Europe

This hit me when I read the article about the Scottish Elections but it reflects news coming out of Europe over the past couple of months. Despite the opposing viewpoints of a push for more unity among Europe and the same time a push within countries for more local governance they reflect the same need and want for federalism among Europe. But they also expose problems with the way forward:

• As long as each a country's culture is so drastically different from the next (think Greece vs Germany) problems are always going to persist. You can not allow a difference of retirement age by 6 years and expect there not to be serious consequences. Going forward, in order to stop these problems, economic & fiscal policy as well as social welfare goals need to be further alligned. The goals must be identical across the Union and member state's must be held accountable by a central government with teeth. But like in the US each individual states should be allowed leeway in how to implement those goals due to the cultural differences that occur.
• On the other end of the spectrum you see the splintering of states (Scotland, Belgium and distantly the Basque region of Spain). While I applaud the dissolution of powers to local constituencies and governments (something Great Britain has long needed) the assumption of diplomatic and defense responsibilities by such localities would not be advisable. Though if a credible EU diplomatic corp and defense force where to emerge then I would support more drastic dissolution to localities (something on the line of county and big city autonomy in the US) .

Some Thoughts On The Economist May 14th - 20th 2011

Really good Afghan coverage this week, paired with this news, I think my thoughts from earlier in the week are looking better.

Did someone say bubble?
I do think some of these companies are overvalued considering in the end all they hold are pageviews which navigate to the coolest new trends but with that said the market and technology are not the same as a decade ago. Then again I know only what I read online and hear from Planet Money.

Microsoft did not buy Skype to make money, because this market will never make money, especially with Google and Apple all ready in the game and I'm sure Facebook will jump in at some point as well. They must have bought it to integrate it into a future OS and enhance current products. Personally I would like to see, and I think we will some day, an integration of video chatting into the phone system as a whole, regardless of what operator you use.

List the World Cup on Ebay?
Would eliminate board corruption, would reward teams who are looking to spend money on the sport and would set the drama to zero? I'm cool with it.

Security State? You must be white.
Caveat: I'm a middle class, white, male.
I find it interesting that the majority of this country found it ok that people could be stopped at random, searched, roughed up and jailed on a bogus charge but to be inconvenienced at the airport is an outrage.

Once Again......
I would like to stress that if China and India do not start importing females soon then they are in for a whole lot of social upheaval in the next few decades. If China doesn't end its one child policy soon it is going to need to really liberalize on immigration to deal with the huge increase in retirees going forward. In other words China's ascendancy is in for a rocky furture

Consolation Prize
It appears that although we have seen our retirement funds wither away, debt pile up and had to deal with job insecurity all of that was a rouse win back our jobs from the Chinese!

To limit or not to limit?
I think its moronic that we kid ourself into thinking that putting limits on our debt but not our spending will keep us from appropriating too many funds. With that said I like that it requires us to think about our debt obligations and reassess if it is the right thing to do, regardless of how stupid the debate becomes.

Some Thoughts On Newt's Announcement

You may or may not have heard, but former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich announced that he will in fact run for President of the United States.  This was an announcement that was widely expected for months now. It is also widely expected that Newt will not win the nomination. Why is that known you might ask? It has something to do with his love life and how it plays with this, his thoughts about the seating arrangements on Air Force One, and the fact that Bill Clinton stole his lunch. But of course the news networks will cover him and his run like he matters. Again, your 4th Estate at work!

Some More Thoughts On Bin Laden

Apparently the US and Afghan governments have been holding super secret talks (though if it is appearing on this blog I doubt it is all that secret) with various factions of the Taliban in order to bring them into the government fold. It also appears that the death of Osama bin Laden does not complicate those talks, if anything it makes them easier. According to Ahmed Rashid who spoke on NPR's Fresh Air the death of OBL may negate the personal debt that Taliban leader Mohammed Omar has to Al Qaeda (in particular OBL).

Setting aside the fact that the Taliban peacefully integrating back into Afghan society would be nothing short of amazing, let us contemplate what this would do to US domestic politics. I'm no expert (though I do have a degree in Political Science) but would the Afghan and Iraq* wars ending on Mr. Obama's watch not castrate the national security issue in respect to GOP politics? Not to mention it might give Mr. Obama enough political capital to cut the defense budget significantly.

The point of this brief post really is that if you are thinking of donating to Barack Obama's reelection campaign you may be better off investing in a high end disputes lawyer and buying him a ticket to Kabul.

*George W Bush deserves credit for implementing "The Surge" as well as overseeing "The Awakening" movement among Sunni's in Iraq. Without those policies we may well have seen a much less stable Iraq at this time.

My Thoughts on The Economist May 7th - 13th 2011

Redistricting rows: Not so easy
It warms my heart to see that even in a place like Texas redistricting can still be difficult. Some day this nonsense will stop and all districts will be redrawn by an algorithm. That of course will happen in 2076.

Chicago's new police superintendent: The new blue
Is it not counterintuitive that a chief of police comes from a city other than the one he is from? Does he not need an innate knowledge of the city and the citizenry he is protecting? Wasn't Compstat proved to be a load of bullshit and what really works is boots on the ground and a relationship with your local police department? Am I going crazy?

China's population: The most surprising demographic crisis
I assume that is sarcasm in the title but one never does know. But a country that isn't hitting the replacement rate, has very large "boomer" generation, has about eighteen more boys per hundred girls and has yet to hit democracy/labor movements is definitely going to have some social issues in the future.

Robots and Japan's nuclear disaster: Nukebots
Reason 3294850298 I love Massachusetts, we made the robots that Japan can't make.

Pakistan is on no one's side:
And we better start realizing that sooner rather than later.

Real time advertising is the wave of the wave of the future........
......that is until it isn't.

And what are they going to do when the all those IE users eventually die off and the dominant browsers all support a version of Ad Block? What then Don Draper? What then?!?!

The Beer Market
First of all, that's a lot of Stella in that cart. Second: Stella is actually a shit beer to the rest of the world. Third: it is pronounced Who-Gar-Den. Fourth Craft Brews will be brought in to the fold by the big players just like every other "revolution" in every other market. Fifth: OMG THEY FINALLY FIGURED OUT THAT BEER IS CHEAPER AT THE STORE THAN AT THE BAR?!?! THE APOCALYPSE IS UPON US!!!!

Some Thoughts on Bin Laden

Thought #1

If the US government and the world ran the way I would like then he would have been taken alive and tried for his crimes, a practice offered to US citizens on a daily basis and something we should extend to the world, it would only improve our image. Now if I could have my way in the fullest I would like to see it all go down in the way that Lawrence Wright lays out in his recent appearance on Fresh Air, an Osama bin Laden that sees himself tried for each crime in each of the respective countries that his followers carried out his attacks, which culminates in his being tried under Sharia law in his home country of Saudi Arabia (with the possibility of being beheaded in a public setting). But alas the world is not my oyster.

With all that said and knowing the world in which we live in the actual outcome was probably the best that could have happened. If he were taken alive he would have been taken to Guantanamo Bay and the whole thing would have been mishandled from there for years with him being executed with the Muslim street thinking he was murdered by Americans and not brought to justice. His being shot in the head was the best option and kudos to the Navy Seal team for knowing that that's what their bosses really wanted even though they probably didn't voice it.

Thought #2

This will change very little in the scheme of things. Yes its great that we removed an iconic figure of radical Islam and yes this will set back Al Qaeda quite a bit but the positives end there. The problem is is that this "War on Terror" is a lot like the "War on Drugs", there is only one concrete and state oriented side in this fight where as the opposing faction in this "War" is loosely connected via ideology. And even that bond isn't that strong.

As long as there are people buying the crazy that the Islamists are selling then there will always be Islamists. Offer the Muslim street a better alternative (true democracy perhaps?) and then and only then will you see the Islamists fall by the wayside.

Thought #3

Hey America! How about next time we kill someone we don't like we don't act like we collectively won every major sporting event all at once? K? Thanx!

Yes I know he was a horrible human being and yes I think the world is better off without him but celebrating death never helped any situation in the long term. My point is, as outlined by the previous thought, we don't actually "win" until the rest of the world thinks we are decent people and that we are not out to destroy their way of life. How does dancing on the grave of a man some of them may be sympathetic too achieve that?

And as a fellow "Millennial" I don't buy this closure thing being propagated by my peers yes Osama bin Laden may be dead but that does not mean everything will go back to normal (not in the sense that you knew someone who died on September 11th in that respect I completely understand that this may mean closure and that is not what I am speaking to, I'm speaking to what was discussed in this weeks This American Life).

September 11th altered the fabric of America for good (Lexington speaks well to this) and the worst thing that could happen is if we go back to thinking terrorism is only something that happens "over there" and not to us. The party atmosphere was naive, if not just perfectly American in the sense that we are always looking for an excuse to throw a party.

Further Reading:

Steve Coll on OBL's death

The Economist briefing on OBL's death

NYT Obituary on OBL

The Economist April 30th - May 6th 2011

Cloud Computing's Growing Pains: Break-ins and breakdowns
What I find hilarious about the outrage with the compromising of data online is that people seem to think that this is innately due to the relative newness of the technology and the corresponding market. The thought that overtime this won't happen is ludicrous. People still rob banks, piracy continues to plague the seas and muggings still happen. All this even though we now have security cameras, spend billions on anti piracy measures and personal use of mace and tasers. Online capers will never go away, the stakes will only get higher.

America's transport infrastructure: Life in the slow lane
I love infrastructure projects, and I loathe the lack of train infrastructure in the US. So it should not come as a surprise that I agree that the US is woefully underspending on infrastructure. We are not just talking about potholes either, we area talking about losing economic prowess and jobs to other countries because we make the cost of doing business harder due to our lack of a modern transport network.

America's jobless me: Decline of the working man
And while we are at it why don't we employee the millions of men in the construction trade to improve that said transport infrastructure?

Europe's political parties: The shrinking big tents
While reading this I couldn't help relate it to the fragmentation of TV since the introduction of cable channels. The overwhelming majority of viewers of television in the US used to be held by the big three broadcasting companies ABC, NBC and CBS but now because of the spread of satellite and cable technologies as well as the internet their ratings are shrinking. Like TV ratings votes in political systems that allow for choice (parliamentary systems) are spreading out across the spectrum. This must be because of the internet and the downward cost of advertising that allows people to easily identify and engage with smaller parties instead of having to choose between the political behemoths that used to dominate the market.

Nuptial Economics: Unbridled
A $19,000 signing bonus to marry a woman from the UAE?

Economic Focus: Botox and beancounting
Why do country's report official economic numbers in such varying ways? Do they not realize that they only confuse those who vote? Oh wait....