June 28, 2010
Corporations are more equal than people
Imagine a radical idea of a Supreme Court acting as a check on markets to protect individual liberty as opposed to a check on government to protect markets. That is what Noah Feldman explores in this thought provoking article
Imagining a Liberal Court
Conservatives are usually upset when liberals discover rights where they see none. Nonetheless, conservatives have accomplished a judicial feat over the last half of the century to discover rights of corporations on par with the rights of individuals and make it into a commonly accepted axiom.
Long post under the cut:
June 27, 2010
Again About Soccer
Sorry, I’m obsessed with world cup for the last few days. Since US lost to Ghana, I rooted for England today. I think I should start rooting for the opposite teams from now on. Ze Germans played very solid game, and that goal that wasn’t counted for England wouldn’t have made much difference. But the ball was inside the net and the referee should have cleaned his glasses nevertheless.
This win for Germany can be considered a revenge for the 1966 World Cup match between them England, when England’s scored the goal that wasn’t.
June 23, 2010
Obama Condoms
Look what I found today near Times Square.
I thought it was kinda cool. They also have a website:Obama Condoms
I, unfortunately, have nothing to do with this good business.
A tagline on the “The Ultimate Stimulus Package” piece: “Our most obvious play of words yet, “The Ultimate Stimulus Package” is meant to call attention to the severity of our economic state. Many Americans think that the Stimulus Package is full of holes. However, ours is not. It is intended to get the general public laid, not laid off, and to use comedy to stimulate political awareness and conversation.”
Yes we can!
Well, I think I know what team I’m going to root for now in World Cup. I like underdogs, especially those whose legitimate goals are not being counted. That’s why this win feels so much better. Give’em hell, you crazy old Yanks!
Go USA!
June 18, 2010
Obama Derangement Syndrom
Well, I don’t know what to say about yesterday’s comments of Texas Rep. Joe Barton other than that we have witnessed a prime example of Obama Derangement Syndrom. Here’s what he said to BP CEO Tony Hayward, a person who assumed full responsibility for the spill and voluntarily agreed to the $20bn clean up fund, at the hearings yesterday:
I’m ashamed of what happened in the White House yesterday,” the Texan said of BP’s offer, under pressure from President Obama, to set aside $20 billion to pay damages to Gulf Coast residents ruined by the oil spill. “I think it is a tragedy of the first proportion that a private corporation can be subjected to what I would characterize as a shakedown.
Oh! I wish I could follow the mental contortions he had to go through to justify this apology! It reminded me of a similar episode, in Republican circles of course, a few years ago. Remember when Dick Cheney shot a guy during the hunt and had THAT guy apologize to HIM for standing in the way. “Sorry, Dear Leader, it was my fault your didn’t see me”.
I always wondered about the way a Republican mind works. And that is an enigma I want to understand, if only out of curiosity. Perhaps Joe Barton, being from Texas, thought he will come across as a lone speaker of the truth and will achieve a celebrity status, like that congressman that shouted “You lie!” at Obama during the State of the Union. However, he miscalculated with the occasion. It may be fashionable to be a contrarian, but not when a TV screen is split between a live picture of a still gushing well, a contrite BP CEO and you complaining about the Obama clean up tactics. What times!
June 14, 2010
Republicans for Regulation
It turns out Republicans don’t favor free markets at all. Only they could come up with a legislation like this one.
On Strategic Default
Basically, they are trying to punish borrowers who, while being deeply underwater, are defaulting strategically – that is stop paying mortgage while staying in the house and spend money on other things. Things like going out to the restaurants, shopping, investing money in their small businesses, etc. You know, the normal things that help the economy rebound and keep the Republicans happy. I must also add and this is important – that while doing it, home borrowers are not actually breaking any contractual obligations. Default is an option. It’s the ultimate free market at work, just like the founding fathers have prescribed. But Republicans are not happy.
Frankly, it’s hard for me to guess why they are upset, because here we have people making rational economic decisions, which leaves me with only one option – they are upset with immoral behavior. Which they in turn seek to legislate. I can not put it better that this University of Arizona law professor.
I wonder if Congress might consider a similar measure mandating that any corporation or bank that strategically defaults on a contractual obligation is not entitled to any tax breaks or other government assistance, including any future financial bailout. The point is, of course, that business and banks strategically default all the time when it is in their economic interest to do so.
Why no similar move by the House to punish strategic default by banks and corporations? It is interesting that House Republicans are generally opposed to most regulation of corporate activities—preferring to leave the market to self-regulate—but have acted with House Democrats to regulate the economic activities of average Americans. This is yet another example of the double standard in America—one set of rules for Wall Street and another for Main Street—but this time the House is actually codifying this double standard.
Unfortunately, this kind of moralistic grandstanding by the House does nothing to help the millions of struggling underwater homeowners who have seen their retirement security disappear. Instead, it worsens the impact of the best bad choice they have to save themselves from financial ruin, which is to strategically default and let the banks have their homes—which, by the way, is a perfectly legitimate option under the terms of the mortgage contract.
The Left customarily criticizes conservatives for being too beholden to raw capitalism to the detriment of society as a whole. They are approaching it from the wrong end. They should criticize the self-proclaimed “capitalists” for not being capitalist enough. Because, (and it’s becoming a tired adage) it’s socialism for corporations and capitalism for the little guy.
However, it feels like Republicans didn’t just do it on their own accord. It does feel like it has an imprint of an invisible hand of Wall Street. The whole situation has a flavor of a strong player at the poker table losing a big pot to some schmuck who doesn’t know how to play and instead of saying ‘nice hand’ and moving on, he’s calling for a floor manager. Think about it – the big wigs on Wall Street got beaten in their own game and by who! To put it simply the scammers were being scammed, and they didn’t like it. The other team played dirty for once and won. But I thought it was understood among the players that it’s part of the business, a so-called leakage. That’s why I am very surprised to find moralists on Wall Street – out of all places, for Christ sake! Now I’m truly expecting the next logical move by Republicans – putting equal penalties for default on corporations.
June 8, 2010
Almost by O.Henry (Off topic)
Nothing is new under the Sun. Seeing a headline like this: Homeless man smashes window to get arrested the first thing that immediately came to my mind was a short O. Henry story about a homeless man who was trying to do the same. Both of these men, the fictitious and the real one, even resorted to the same tactics at some point – smashing windows. The present day story, however, was more prosaic – the guy managed to get arrested as he planned, albeit not on the first try. However, he wasn’t as inventive as the Soapy, the character in O. Henry story, who first decided to get arrested by having a fancy dinner and not pay for it. He’s unlucky in his quest though, as the restaurant owners are uncooperative and the policemen that he meets are somewhat lenient or stubbornly refuse to arrest him. Eventually, he does get his “three months on the Island” for the upcoming winter but not without a twist. Our real guy, before resorting to smashing Dunkin Donuts windows was ““going to strangers’ doors” asking if he could stay at their homes”, to no success. No, he obviously has not heard of this American classic.
Anyway, it’s a pleasure to read this story once again, here’s the link to the story. The Cop and the Anthem. Some brilliant quote from the story:
In Soapy’s opinion the Law was more benign than Philanthropy. There was an endless round of institutions, municipal and eleemosynary, on which he might set out and receive lodging and food accordant with the simple life. But to one of Soapy’s proud spirit the gifts of charity are encumbered. If not in coin you must pay in humiliation of spirit for every benefit received at the hands of philanthropy. As Caesar had his Brutus, every bed of charity must have its toll of a bath, every loaf of bread its compensation of a private and personal inquisition. Wherefore it is better to be a guest of the law, which though conducted by rules, does not meddle unduly with a gentleman’s private affairs.
June 6, 2010
In Defense of Obama
I had lunch the other day with an old colleague of mine, and we talked politics among other things. At one point, many years ago as we were working for the same company, we had very similar, far left political views. Back then he introduced me to Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn. Now he occasionally reads my blog and he told me that I became too right-wing. Almost – he paused looking for appropriate analogy – like David Brooks! (David Brooks is considered a conservative by New York Times standards). We laughed at this description of me, but then I thought, perhaps, there’s some truth to that. My colleague is disappointed with Obama because the troops are still in Iraq and Afghanistan. Frankly, I am disappointed at the Left for being disappointed with Obama. Disappointed liberals, I said, do not realize that this is the best they are going to get, this is the best person in a generation to represent their interests but they allow themselves to be whimsical rather than supportive. Do they honestly believe that an idealist like, say, Ralph Nader could ever be elected to represent them? I proceeded to explain to him why I think left wing idealism and rigidity is killing the movement and why it is necessary to have a practical approach to complex issues.
I know Obama understands it. He displays an enviable coolness of character, this ability to maintain composure and focus under the most severe pressure. I like that he does not have the propensity to rush to judgment and he doesn’t give us the presidential theatrics that the public demands, like public displays of emotion. He concentrates on task at hand while both Left and Right, like spoiled children, foaming at the mouth, demand that he does the impossible. How much more demanding we are of Obama is unbelievable. The bar that was set so low for Bush is raised to inhuman levels for Obama. Bush could kill a puppy on national TV and be applauded for doing it, Obama can don a batman costume, dive into the Gulf of Mexico and put his thumb into the leak and we’ll complain that he’s using the wrong thumb! I’m happy to see, however, that it bothers me more than it bothers him. I guess that over the course of his life he got used to idea that he must study more, work harder, be smarter and not complain about a thing just to be considered on par with the rest. That’s what makes him a perfect leader in times like these. I’m not saying he’s perfect, I’m saying that he’s the best we’ve got to steer the country through the crisis. He has the qualities to do that. Obama, see my previous post, knows the ways of the force.
As many of you know, and as obvious from the above I criticize both the liberals and conservatives. Because both have fringes and fringes are emotional. The more you get to the political center the less emotional and more practical you become. The truth is in the center, the Golden Mean, the Zen or whatever you want to call it. You can tell whether you’re in the center when if faced with a problem you say “What can be done about it now?” as opposed to “The world is coming to an end!” or “It’s so-and-so’s fault”. The Republicans scream that we’re all going to die, the Democrats screams “It’s Bush’s fault” and in the meantime Obama is trying to do something about it. The way things are going right now, however, being a centrist would mean that in addition to piloting a ship during the storm, Obama would have to step into the passenger cabin from time to time and to tell everyone to “Calm the Fuck Down!” Somewhat like this:
Chosen but not Special
Probably the most levelheaded analysis of the Mavi Marmara situation in particular and Jewishness in general.
I can’t help but remember, and I might be mistaken, but I think it was Queen Elizabeth II, that when a journalist asked her why there’s no apparent anti-Semitism in England she replied: Because we don’t think that Jews are better than us.
By the way, I learned a great new word from the article – seichel, which in Yiddish means wisdom, although it is much more than just wisdom. It is this understanding on almost cosmic level of how things work. Incidentally, I had my own way of describing this as “knowing the ways of the force”, a concept which I borrowed from the Star Wars. For example: Warren Buffett knows the ways of the force. Now I have a much shorter word to use.
