2010-07-05
Phase Two of the Van Buren Experiment recently got going, and I'm back to loading my pockets with dollar coins. I've written about the purpose of the Experiment before, so I won't rehash that. The base point is that dollar bills suck, and need to come out of circulation. While replacing our (self +2) personal paper dollars with dollar coins is fine, it isn't very large-scale. There must be some other way I can influence currency usage....Of course I have an idea.
In fact, this idea of mine will aid our nation on two fronts: first by pulling out paper dollars (Bad Ones) from circulation, while at the same time reducing inflation. The benefits of the former are well-known (in some circles). And inflation, as we are all aware, is a tool that the government uses to advantage when debtors (including itself). Inflation disadvantages those of us who currently hold dollars, as their value continues to be eroded over time. This invisible tax must be stopped.
Thus I present to you my plan to combat both evils. For each paper dollar mailed to me, I shall return to the sender one Inflation-Reduction Coupon. So I'll be taking out a spendable piece of paper and replacing it with a nonspendable piece of paper.
Questions?
Q: What can I get by holding an Inflation-Reduction Coupon?Trust me, this is for the good of the republic.
A: ... paper cuts?Q: Nothing else?
A: It's a token of your commitment to the cause.Q: What will you do with all the dollars you get?
A: They will be put in a box.Q: And then?
A: I will guard them, as Keeper of the Bad Ones.Q: That's it?
A: As long as they're kept in the box, they're out of circulation. Unfortunately, I can't burn them, as it's illegal to knowingly destroy or mutilate US currency. However, if a large enough quantity is acquired ($100k), I may personally export the whole stock to Timaru, where they can be destroyed outside of Uncle Sam's purview.Q: And after 100,000 people send you free cash, you're not just going to take the money and run?
A: Not at all. As stated before, the money shall stay in the box, until it reaches a certain amount. The money shall not be used for my personal gain. Once 100k is reached, I pledge to -- at my own personal peril -- escort the box to it's final demise. Naturally I'll need to spend a little to make the long journey, but I promise to hire the smallest possible luxury hovercraft available.
First seigniorage, then franking
2010-06-01
Sometime around May every year, I get hit confluence of expirations. Lease renewal. Renter's insurance renewal. Car insurance renewal.So it's hard not to reflect on things this time of year. It's also hard (for me) not to look forward, and realize that May-June would be a really good time to shake things up. It'd be pretty easy to cut and run. Since I don't have a mortgage tying me down, the closest things I have to an anchor are these annual contracts. So for a short period of time each year (right now), I could walk away from them all without penalty, and do something that's been on my list.
But that year is not this year.
Doesn't mean big life changes can't happen though. It's not necessary to move to another continent to do something big. For instance, I've decided to change my date of birth. Went right on down to the courthouse and got a judge to take care of it for me. My new date of birth is Novembuary 10.
Also, my driver's license now says that I'm an Organ Consumer.
...and it says "best if used by" instead of "expires"
2010-02-16
Over thirty billion dollars. That's how much money Apple has stated they have in current assets. Thirty billion. For reference, other tech companies such as HP, IBM, and Cisco also have tens of billions in cash. The difference is, Apple carries no debt; that $30B is free and clear.So I wonder, what are they going to do with all that money?
Things companies use "extra" money for:
- Make acquisitions
- Pay a dividend
- Buy back stock
But to be realistic, Steve's gonna need to find a much larger island if it's meant to be home to 35,000 Apple employees, plus hordes of pilgrims. Trouble is, big islands are hard to come by. Even if you're willing to pay big bucks, the most expensive options aren't that large. No Taiwans are up for sale. However, there is an alternative to scaling up, and that's scaling out: the Appletopia Archipelago. I direct your attention to Greece...
Greece is in a bind: lots of debt and a displeased public unwilling to cope with higher taxes, service cuts, and lower state wages. As a member of the Eurozone, it's possible that Greece will be bailed out by the other members. But that option isn't so popular with people in the other member states, particularly Germany, where the majority do not support financial assistance for Greece. If Greece gets stonewalled on this, there's a chance they'll get the boot from the Eurozone and go back to the drachma. With their monetary independence, they'll be able to devalue their currency to promote investment in the country. The cheap drachma will be beneficial to holders of stronger currencies, such as the US dollar. Who do we know with a lot of dollars... ah right, Apple. Apple: cash in-hand and in the island-buying market. Greece has about 1400 islands, and Apple could afford to pay over $20M for each. Compare that number to the going prices on the island real estate websites. And those prices don't take into affect the cheapness of the drachma. This is starting to look like a real possibility, innit? Just picture Steve Jobs as Poseidon, with a trident. The Apple2009-12-20
Current slogans of the major cell carriers:AT&T: We've got the biggest 3G network!
Verizon: We've got the fastest 3G network!
Sprint: We've got the first 4G network!
T-Mobile: Wein ist gorknoggerflankkensptiengupershigne von der wigglat!
Just ask Cathrine Zeta Jones
2009-09-09
Turns out that Democrats don't want death panels. The Republicans were criticizing them for this, so apparently they don't want them either. I ask: where's the support for death panels, and why don't they speak up?Thought it was about time I weigh in on this health care debate.
But I'm not going to explicitly give an opinion, but instead, a numbered list of things to consider. Here goes:
- It's all FDR's Fault - Ever wonder where our messed-up system came from? From watching Dr. Quinn and Deadwood we all know that back in the day, someone in town -- who was always named "Doc" -- would make house calls in exchange for a fee or gold or pot roast or whatever. Nowadays we travel to a doctor's office where maybe we pay some of the fee and a form gets mailed out to some organization (company or government) where they will pay a fraction of what the doctor bills them for. And some people don't have a place to have their forms sent to, so when they get sick they go to the emergency room where they're treated at the expense of people who can pay. So complicated. What happened to Doc and the pot roast?
During World War II, unemployment had fallen below 1 million. To keep inflation at bay, FDR thought it would be wise to implement wage controls. This may have helped, but corporations needed to attract workers. They couldn't do it with higher paychecks, so they expanded the compensation package to include health insurance. After this, some of the population became uninsured, and was disadvantaged because of it. Before this, almost everyone was uninsured, and it was a more equal, free market.
- The over-65 population doesn't want national health care - It's a wrong to say that the US doesn't have a public health care system. It does.... and it's called Medicare. Old people (and some others) have it. If everyone gets to use the health care system, then the biggest users of the system -- the 65+ folks -- might have a harder time getting appointments. I kind of see their point. Not that they should be more entitled to healthier than anyone else, but I have yet to hear proponents of full health care coverage ask the question...
- Where are the extra doctors coming from? - One of the reasons health care costs are high is because the AMA (yes, the organization that violated the Sherman Antitrust Act) does its best to constrain the supply of doctors. In other words, there's a monopoly on health care professionals. They support limits on med school class size under the guise of producing the best doctors, but constricting the supply increases salaries. And high professionals are more eager to pay into the organization that keeps their salary high through constricted supply, just like any union. But the tight supply hurts patients.
In Cuba, they have an oversupply of doctors. In fact, the doctors can't make enough money doctoring, so they often take up another profession instead. But I'll save my post on lifting the embargo for another day.
- People under-appreciate the gift of a known deathdate - Let's say you have an untreatable ailment, soul cancer. There's no known cure. You have 6 months to live.
Isn't that great?
I think so. You could be so carefree.... quit your job, spend all your money, do lots of drugs, travel without the worry of returning, eat anything you wanted... whatever. Most of the time, death comes unexpectedly. Perhaps death won't come by lightning strike or sudden heart attack, but even if you're simply old, you could start feeling deathly at 79 but stick around until you're 82. I'd probably wake up every morning wondering, "Am I dead yet?". It's preferable to know your time is running short, so you can say your goodbyes and wrap things up instead of letting the years drag on in a decrepit state, longing for the comfort of the grave.
Back to the soul cancer thing. Let's say "not curable" means "really expensive". Maybe treatment takes more than all of the money you've got. Do you go into debt trying to pay for the cure, only to continue life under a pile of debt with soul cancer still lingering?
I'm not saying everyone should not seek a cure, but I think people don't appreciate the option of not being treated. Back in the old days, it seems like (now, this is based strictly on TV and movies) death was just more accepted. Modern America seems to be more "clingy" grasping for any medical procedure that might make a difference. And doctors have to give it to them, lest they get hit with...
- Medical Malpractice Lawsuits - Rooted in the new American tradition of suing yourself to a better life, medical malpractice costs physicians (an in turn, those who pay them) big bucks. If the doctor doesn't order every possible blood test and the patient really did have TOWM flu, and dies, that doc is getting suited by the family. If a surgery isn't successful, good chance of a suit. Physicians need to blanket themselves in malpractice insurance if they wish to practice. And when settlements are big and the number of people treated are many, that's some pricey insurance.
- Some of the 45M uninsured Americans are ok with it - Probably not most, but some. There is not a horde of 45M Americans sick and dying for lack of insurance. Some are just young people who like their chances. I, for one, would not pay for standard health insurance for myself. And because of this...
- Not requiring everyone to have health insurance increases rates - Think of what would happen if only bad drivers got car insurance.
- Health insurance isn't treated as insurance - People use it as a club membership. Health care can be abstractly described in units (HCUs). Maybe an HCU consists of 30 minutes of a doctor's time, plus examination room space for that half hour, some equipment, blood work processing, whatever. The point is there is a finite number of HCUs, and they're getting spent on runny noses when they could be better spent elsewhere. But the insured can use the doctor's office like the gym, just stop by whenever they feel like it. This is not to say preventative care isn't worthwhile. Seeking preventative care will usually save HCUs (since they won't need to be spent later down the road). Unfortunately....
- Insurers don't treat their members as investments - at least some of them. Getting regular teeth cleaning will likely reduce the need for fillings in the future. And insurers want to pay out the least amount possible, so they'll keep paying for regular cleanings. But for patients in their 50s, the incentive starts to disappear, as members migrate to Medicare. From the insurer's perspective, it's best to not pay for the cleanings any more, and let Medicare foot the bill in a few years.
- The current system isn't a good example of a free market system - If a town only had one doctor and lots of patients, it wouldn't be a very free market, would it? The doctor would command pricing power since the people only have access to one doctor. Many local markets across the US have a dominant health insurer. Having to go through a single middleman to gain access to health care isn't much different than the one doctor scenario. Further, most people get their insurance from their employer; this limits choice (as people would "need" to job hop) and choice is a core component of the free market.
Because of this, the current argument of what we have now vs. universal health care isn't defined correctly: 1) we haven't had a real free market for many, many years 2) the Obama plan isn't really universal care, which I consider to be a single-payer (Canada-style) system.
- I don't want to pay for smokers and fat people - Universal health care evokes images of going to the hospital to get fixed up, without having to worry about payment or filling out forms. Or maybe a scene with someone going to the nearest doctor's office without worrying if she's "in-network" or not. But what I think about when someone says "universal health care" is smokers and fat people.... time bombs just waiting to go off. Because of bad decisions or lack of will, Smoking Man is going to be chugging tons of HCUs that could instead be used to prevent future health problems for dozens of people. I haven't heard of a solution to address this.
- We're going to need death panels - Insurance won't cover all procedures. To be at all sane, the government, acting as an insurance agent, will also have to make choices. Say I have a rare ailment (soul cancer again?). There is one specialist in Istanbul who can perform an experimental surgery with a 20% success rate, at the cost of $1M. Should the government pay for this? I wouldn't expect it to. Similarly, if an 80 yr old person requires intensive treatment for the rest of his life -- perhaps 5 additional years -- I think the government may balk at paying for it. It goes back to point #11, the HCU chugging problem. Either the tough decision has to be made, or #3 needs to be solved. And I'm not optimistic about the latter.
2009-05-25
On my own tonight. Roaming the streets of the El Raval district of Barcelona. My first destination, a restaurant, was closed. Restaurants here have uneven hours: closed two days of the week, open only for lunch, short hours on Fridays, etc. My backup destination, next door, didn't really seem suitable for dinner.So I started to wander.
LP had another recommendation that was not too expensive, and was open for sure. But it was some distance from my starting point. El Raval is not touristy like Barri Gothic, where the sights are, nor for being vacant like La Zona Alta, where our hotel is. It's not a total slum, but if you're looking for low rent, this is the place.
The streets are stone, narrow, and are often too small to be marked on my map. It reminded me of Cuzco, minus the hills. Naturally, I missed a few lefts and skipped a few rights along the way to La Bibiloteca and my walk turned into a tour. I happened upon a street game to cricket, a Spaniard wearing a Phillies cap (!), a singing quintet of winos, a statue of a giant cat, and some homeless people. As I walked by the mobile phone store Cell Red, I became aware that my surroundings were changing, notably the hooker's shoe landing on my thigh. After returning it (I'm such a gentleman) I dodged the second lady of easy virtue, but there was no getting around the third. She latched on tight, and wouldn't take "no" for an answer. She also wouldn't accept any of my excuses and gestures. At "no español" she paused, then replied, "lessgofuck", which made me laugh. By the time we reached the end of the street, I threw down the hammer: "no dinero". And she waved goodbye.
Finally, I got to La Biblioteca. After two hours of walking, eschewing touristy eateries near parks and town squares I was prepared to eat some real Catalan food. Yet what do I find inside? A bunch of friggin' Americans. Arguing over the merits of Goldmember.
But hey, there's pigeon on the menu!
Serisously, the cat was like, 9ft. tall
2009-05-16
For the past few years -- particularly around here -- gay marriage has been a hot topic. I am against state-sanctioned gay marriage. In fact, I'm against all government-sanctioned marriage. Back in the day, marriage was an agreement between a man and a woman resulting in the transfer of the woman to the man's family. The couple could have their marriage recorded at the church, if they chose. Eventually, the Church hijacked the whole thing, and marriages were required to be performed before a priest. After all it was a sacrament, and at the time, everyone was Catholic (or would soon be "persuaded" to become one). The clergy were inserting themselves into the ceremony to keep tabs on the flock (and to get invited to the receptions). The Protestants, not being down with Catholic councils, conferences, conclaves, congresses, or convocations, pitched the marriage-granting powers over to the state to handle. Religion wasn't yet separate from the state at this time though (Church of England) but eventually would be. And that pretty much brings us to today, where a man and a woman can marry in the eyes of the state, and also, separately be married according to their religion.But.... why?
Running through that brief history above, you can see that marriage started almost informally, with recognition of neighbors, but is now a state-controlled union with all sorts of legal streamers attached to it. It's the state's job to take care of legal issues, sure. But why must of host of legal consequences be packaged up into marriage? For instance, I have designated that upon my death, my group life insurance benefit will go to a specific nonprofit organization. However, if I marry, this benefit then goes to my wife. I would need to resubmit a form -- with my wife's consent -- to get things back into the state they are today. Why is such a thing change simply because I marry? I though it was about fidelity and love.... and now death benefits?
My view is this: I think we have enough lawyers and government offices in existence that anyone should be able grant whatever rights are ordinarily associated with a marriage, to any other person/people they desire. Today, "marriage" means a lifelong commitment to someone else, with the someone else getting a whole bunch of legal claims in the process. The commitment should be between the two people on a personal level, and all that legal entitlement stuff should be up to the person who is directly affected to grant in any way to any amount of people. Maybe your kids get your life insurance benefits and you give your brother guardianship rights over medical issues.
I guess you could call it marriage debundling.
Quit hasslin' me!
2009-01-04
There are some words that just sound different than what they are. Phonetically, one meaning triggers in my brain that's different than the actual definition. For instance, "tardy". Nice and short; quick to say. Does it mean "early"? Nope, just the opposite. It's supposed to be a negative word. Switch it up a little and it becomes "tawdry", which is easily recognizable as a negative word.Here's another one: "druthers". Am I the only person who thinks that "druthers" should be synonymous with "pants"? Picture: some trailer park, around 4pm on a Sunday:
Wife: Horace! Git yer druthers on, we got comp'ny!If not directly synonymous with pants, at least a type of pants.
And synapses are suspenders that you can use with druthers.
Give me enough time and I'll redo the whole dictionary
2008-12-02
The UK Post Office has a new campaign this holiday season: it's urging people to donate foreign currency that's sitting around at home. According to this article, there is an estimated £510M of the stuff in the UK alone. Foreign coins don't do much good to their holders -- can't spend them locally -- but would do a lot of good for a charity. A half-billion pound windfall; that would be something big.Something similar happens in the NYC area, the Common Cents/Penny Harvest people use school urchins to collect millions of pennies for charity every year. Same idea as above: non-circulating currency doesn't help anyone.
So out of curiosity, I decided to add up how much foreign currency I have around. It's inevitable that I'll bring some of it back after traveling. Also, when selling t-shirts, sometimes people would mail me currency from abroad as payment (I have an accept-all policy, since I plan to eventually travel everywhere). I have each currency in an individual envelope, held together with a binder clip. Let's add it up:
| Currency | Amt. | = USD |
|---|---|---|
| Euro | 32.58 | 45.36 |
| Czech Koruna | 8.5 | 0.45 |
| Canadian Dollar | 15.56 | 12.76 |
| Nuevo Sol | 263.20 | 84.73 |
| Total | 143.30 |
I'll note that the amount of CZK is so low because Dave and I decided to gamble away most of what we had left on our last day in Prague. Dan refused, so we knew there was enough currency between the three of us if we needed it.
Anyway, I at least have a lot more foreign currency than I was aware. How about you?
How many hellers will you give me for 3 centimos?
2008-11-03
Chicken or beef?It's election week, but it feels more like sitting in coach than anything else. There is the illusion of a choice, but in the end, we're still getting airline food.
Yeah, I'm glad to know that Dubya will be out soon. Obama will be president. But consider: which former presidency will Obama's presidency most closely resemble? Yeah, Dubya's. He'll start things off with a stimulus package, tax cut, and increase in military budget. Over the couse of his term, we'll see more nuke and coal power plants, US-fueled killing of Palestinians, and the continuation of corporate welfare. And of course, it's unlikely that he'll go back on his stance on FISA and telecom immunity.
Now go back and sub "McCain" for "Obama" in the previous paragraph. Same story.
Turning from current issues, there are several election process problems that will doubless go unfixed: closed debates, the electoral college, and rediculous ballot access hurdles. Not fixing these will impede us from electing someone who will deal with the above issues. It seems like every other developed country (and some not-so-developed!) is running a new version of democracy, and we're still at 1.0.
So pick: chicken or beef? There may be some additional choices if you have special dietary needs (5 in NY, 2 in PA), but between the two majors, I'm unsatisfied.
The only way to waste your vote, is to vote.