Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics |
|
|
Possibly the last non-group blog in the wild
Archives
E-mail me
Wish List Der RSS Feed (I think) Links policy Donate to ePatriots Dan is a student at Georgetown University. He is currently trying to think of a new biography for this space. Blogs (more soon) (new) - blogrolling.com reports that the blog was updated in the last 2 hours American Journalism American Prospect Atlantic Monthly Boston Globe Christian Science Monitor Cleveland Plain Dealer CNN Financial Times (US) Foreign Policy Los Angeles Times MSNBC National Journal New Republic New York Times Newsweek The Nation Wall Street Journal Washington Post Global Journalism BBC News Economist Evening Standard Financial Times (UK) Guardian Independent (UK) Intl-News.com International Herald Tribune The Scotsman The Telegraph (UK) The Times (UK) The Western Mail (Wales) Toronto Globe and Mail Useful Information Aerfares.net AskJeeves Amazon.com Borders Union Center for Public Integrity CNNSI Deutsche Bahn (European Rail) Encyclopedia.com ESPN.com MoveOn QJump (British Rail) RailEurope Take Back the Media The Weather Channel Weather (UK) Wikipedia Yahoo! Useless Information Amish Tech Support Canadian World Domination FuckedCompany Georgetown Univ. Haypenny Neal Pollack ScrappleFace Slumbering Lungfish Dybbuk Hostel and All-Night Boulangerie The LSE The Onion The Smoking Gun The Political Graveyard User-agent: * Disallow: / This blog translated: Chinese French German Italian Japanese Korean Portuguese Spanish  Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do. "There are three types of lies - lies, damn lies, and statistics." - Variously attributed to Benjamin Disraeli, Alfred Marshall, Mark Twain and many other dead people. Currently reading: Songbook by Nick Hornby The Sex Lives of Cannibals by J. Maarten Troost White Teeth by Zadie Smith You should read: One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich by Alexander Solzhenitsyn Fever Pitch by Nick Hornby Bobos In Paradise by David Brooks Madam Secretary: A Memoir by Madeleine Albright Damned Lies and Statistics by Joel Best Books written or edited by my professors (well, only the good ones) Nick Barr The Economics of the Welfare State The Welfare State As Piggy Bank Chris Dougherty Introduction to Econometrics David Gewanter The Collected Poems of Robert Lowell (ed. with Frank Bidart) In the Belly The Sleep of Reason Meredith McKittrick To Dwell Secure John McNeill The Human Web (with William H. McNeill) Something New Under the Sun Max-Stephan Schulze Western Europe: Economic and Social Change Since 1945 Greater Blogtopia Abu Aardvark Across the Atlantic AngryBear Asparagus Pee Blah3.com Bohemian Mama BonoboLand Brazos de Dios Cantina Carl with a K Chip Taylor Clareified Conceptual Guerilla D-Squared Digest Dilettante's Guide to Life Egotistical Whining Enemy of the People Equilibrismi ridanciani Fester's Place Fleeting Impulse Funny Farm Grammar Police Gropinator Hamster Head Heeb Hegemoney Hjordiso I Know What I Know Interesting by Association Impolite Company Internet Activism Jacqueline Passey John Hoke John Lemon John Scalzi Kick the Leftist Kids Korner Kieran Healy Liquid List Loopy Librarian Mark Maynard Martin Stabe Metajournalism More White Teeth MyDD No More Mr. Nice Blog Notes on the Atrocities Open Source Politics Oxytocin Passenger Pachyderms Peevish...I'm Just Saying Pigsqueal Pol3d Politics and Policy Quantum Skyline Radical Review Random Points Risa Wechsler Sha Ka Ree Sick of Bush Signifying Nothing Something's Got to Break Stryder Talking Dog ThomPaul Tom Runnacles Truth is a Blog Undependent Vaguely Right Vast Left Wing Conspiracy Vulgar Boatman We Report... You Deride Wizblog 
2004 ESPN Information Please Sports Almanac "Everything to Everyone" by Barenaked Ladies "In Between Evolution" by The Tragically Hip "Phantom Planet" by Phantom Planet The Partly Cloudy Patriot by Sarah Vowell "One Plus One Is One" by Badly Drawn Boy "Sultans of Swing" by the Dire Straits "Best of the Talking Heads" by the Talking Heads How Shareholder Reforms Can Pay Foreign Policy Dividends, James Shinn, ed. Weaving the Net, James Shinn, ed. Fires Across the Water, James Shinn, ed. Panasonic ES8017SC Men's Triple Blade Pro Curve Rechargeable Linear Shaver 
|
Tuesday, December 30, 2003
A bunch of really minor changes have been made to the template in the last day or two. It still looks pretty much the same, though. I just thought you'd like to know. Kevin Drum is making complete sense in calling for the minimum wage to be indexed to congressional salaries. In fact, it sounds like such a good idea that I doubt it'll ever happen. Things that make this much sense never actually happen in real life. So John Ashcroft has recused himself from the Plame investigation. The question continually running through my mind, though, is ... why? It's not a question of whether he should or should not have done it. It's pretty clear that he should do so - given the large role that the Attorney General plays in generally dealing with the CIA and other security organizations (not to mention political relations with those who are likely being scrutinized within the White House and VP's office), the Attorney General clearly faces a broad conflict of interest in the Plame investigation. (truthfully, the Justice Department encompasses such a wide variety of agencies that conflicts of interests in dealing with legal violations by other agencies under the umbrella are all but inevitable). It's a question of why the Attorney General would actually see fit to recuse himself. It's hardly as if he's been the type to worry about such a thing until now. Mark Kleiman and Josh Marshall both have a couple of ideas, mostly centering on the probability that this indicates that the ongoing investigation has made rapid progress and is pointing at the White House. Still, it seems a little early and the evidence a little shaky to clearly say that this is true. So, basically, what the hell is going on here? Monday, December 29, 2003
OK, so I took a bit more than a week off from here. Exams took a bit longer than I expected (more precisely, I had a paper that took a while longer than expected to finish) along with a couple of unexpected and mindlessly boring albeit large tasks that had to be done when I arrived home (including organizing my multi-thousand large baseball card collection for the first time in about a decade) haven't left me with much time to write here. Probably just as well, really, given a feeling of discontent with the whole of the political sphere right now flooding through me. Anyhow, I came across this ... Richard Arum's argument in the WaPo is basically that the school system is increasingly failing and increasingly seeing student violence at the same time as students have been given increased legal rights. Therefore, to rebuild public schools and curtail violence, we must roll back the legal rights accorded to minors. Well, yes, there has been a correlation. But that by no means indicates that there has been any causative relationship. That the purchases of CDs have also increased astronomically over recent decades (from nothing, admittedly), does not mean that we ought to therefore ban CDs in order to deal with violence among young people. Moreover, many of the problems cited by the author have nothing to deal with the extension of civil liberties to minors. That "Students and their parents have also challenged even minor school discipline, such as after-school "double detention," in-class "time outs," lowered grades and exclusion from weekend basketball or football games" is far more indicative of problems within the general legal system in allowing idiotic lawsuits to proceed than a problem resulting from the fact that due process and free speech have been allowed to students in a limited manner. Moreover, there is little that would logically indicate that greater civil liberties inherently make it difficult for school administrators to govern. Rather, these issues would seem far more likely to result from social issues in surrounding neighborhoods as well as chronic underfunding of schools and their infrastructures. Allowing students to speak out hardly means that they'll do it with a gun. Sunday, December 14, 2003
Tuesday, December 09, 2003
Ah, yes, it's that time of year again ... exams. Barring something massive, I'll be back here in a week. Friday, December 05, 2003
Y'know, I think it might be time to revoke Dr. Krauthammer's medical license. He's diagnosing Howard Dean with "Bush Derangement Syndrome" for referring to the Bush administration's blockading of the 9/11 report ... while answering a question from Diane Rehm during an interview. Mind you, Dean said nothing remotely false in his response, simply offering up a couple hypothetical possibilities. What a putzhead. UPDATE: And even the quotes were taken out of context ... Tuesday, December 02, 2003
The last post inspired some responses that were far more thoughtful than what I initially put into it. As far as the commenters ... the problem I have with Dodd and Durbin - particularly with Durbin - is not that that they have a problem with showing up for votes but that they don't show up in the press nearly enough. Basically, they need to do a much better job prostituting themselves to the media. They need to work at being a little controversial and learning how to piss the right (or, more specifically, wrong) people off. As far as Leahy, his skeleton is - depending on who you ask - either resigning or being forced off of the Senate Intelligence Committee in the late 1980's over either accidentally allowing a reporter access to a draft of the Iran/Contra Investigation Report or leaking it. In a day and age where politicians need to come across as strong on national security as possible, Leahy would be a sitting target as Minority Leader. As far as Matt Singer's backing John Kerry ... I think having Kerry as Minority Leader would be a good idea, but he won't be available until February or March in all likelihood (then again, the Senate really won't be in session much between now and then, so Daschle's ability to do any damage is limited). As far as Ezra Klein's backing Hillary Clinton ... Hillary is an incredibly polarizing figure, as we all know by now. On one hand, she would certainly bring out the first in the right-wing wing-nuts, making them look like paranoid nutjobs. On the other hand, that also runs the risk of her getting tarred and feathered by a media that is all too pliant to perpetuating smears at times. The second problem is her lack of experience. I'm not trying to argue that we should limit the Minority Leader position to old men, but getting re-elected once should probably be something of a pre-requisite. Finally, as the health care fiasco showed - see Brad DeLong for a little history - Hillary's not really a great manager of people. While the Minority Leader position probably does require someone capable of being a jackass when needed - especially right now - that sort of a record worries me. That said, she is incredibly well-known, far more than all but one or two other Democratic senators (if any) and is a great fundraiser. Those elements, however, would be good reasons to suggest her as a possible Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chair.* *The position is currently held by Jon Corzine, no slouch at fundraising either. UPDATE: There's also this dKos post/thread on replacing Daschle. Sunday, November 30, 2003
Judging by the comments in the post below, I'm not sure that my point was clear. Replacing Daschle is all well and good, but who are we going to replace him with? We don't want to go down the road of replacing someone bad with someone worse. Lieberman, Edwards and Kerry are running for president. Though handing one of them the Minority Leader position would be an interesting way to draw one of them out of an overly crowded presidential race, it's probably not something done easily. Hollings, Miller, Lautenberg and Graham are retiring - in the case of Miller, none too soon. Kennedy, Byrd, Kohl, Leahy, Inyuoue, Sarbanes and Feinstein are too old - and Kennedy, Leahy and Byrd both have enough skeletons in their closet to disqualify them anyhow. Akaka, Levin and Baucus are too bland. Chuck Schumer seems to be doing a great job of pissing off Republicans in his current incarnation. Whatever the hell that is. Ditto Chris Dodd and Dick Durbin, when they show up. Clinton would be way too divisive, and lacks experience anyhow. Mark Pryor is also too inexperienced, as are Debbie Stabenow and Mark Dayton. Blanche Lincoln and Mary Landrieu probably ought to worry first about getting re-elected. Putting women in control of both Minority Leader positions might well make the party look soft to men on security and military issues as well, regardless of how well it draws women. Boxer is too liberal. Ditto Harkin, Rockefeller, Cantwell, Mikulski and Murray. Biden is too enigmatic. Feingold is too idiosyncratic. Way too idiosyncratic. The Nelsons are both too conservative, and so is John Breaux (all are still well short of Zell Miller territory, though). Ron Wyden doesn't seem to know what's going on. Harry Reid seems better suited to his current position than being bumped upstairs (translation - he's a good backroom dealer, but not the face of leadership). Kent Conrad, Byron Dorgan and Tim Johnson are hardly different than Daschle. Last I knew of, Evan Bayh was uninterested in a leadership position. No one knows who Jeff Bingaman is. And after twenty years in the Senate, that's a pretty bad sign. Jeffords would be great, but isn't technically a Democrat. Which leaves us with, uh, Jack Reed. UPDATE: Upon further consideration, I forgot Jon Corzine. Who is also too inexperienced. UPDATE to the UPDATE: Fixed a very minor grammatical error. Wednesday, November 26, 2003
Buzzflash wants Daschle out. It's all well and good to be unhappy with the job that Daschle's doing. Getting rid of him, though, supposes that some Democratic senator would do a better job right now. Practically every possible leadership candidate - other than Daschle's current lieutenants, Harry Reid and Byron Dorgan (neither of whom is especially telegenic) - is running for President. Other possible choices are variously too young, too old, too far to either extreme or situated in states that are highly contested (this can be good - it probably will help Daschle's re-election chances in South Dakota - but it also runs the risk of the leadership losing an election a la Tom Foley). I'm all for getting rid of Daschle as Minority Leader, but only if we can replace him with someone who's going to do a better job. Tuesday, November 25, 2003
I've made a couple of updates to the template, adding a few links, subtracting a few inactive ones, and adding a couple of Babelfish translations, though I should point out that they only translate the sidebar and the first few posts. Monday, November 24, 2003
I got to think during my microeconomic theory class today about the post below, and econometrical ideas of applying ordinary least squares binary to political ideas, as some economist have begun to do, in dealing with the tendency of the U.S. economy go grow and contract during years ending in certain numbers. And as I went back in my head, I realized that there seems to be a fairly strong relationship there with the tendency of the White House to change residents by party in certain election years as well. It's generally fair to assume that the modern two-party system was first seen in 1856. Of course, one can make arguments about the Whigs being proto-Republicans, and the issue of third-parties, but I'm going to ignore those for simplicity's sake. 1856: Democratic hold 1860: Republican gain 1864: Republican hold 1868: Republican hold 1872: Republican hold 1876: Republican hold 1880: Republican hold 1884: Democratic gain 1888: Republican gain 1892: Democratic gain 1896: Republican gain 1900: Republican hold 1904: Republican hold 1908: Republican hold 1912: Democratic gain 1916: Democratic hold 1920: Republican gain 1924: Republican hold 1928: Republican hold 1932: Democratic gain 1936: Democratic hold 1940: Democratic hold 1944: Democratic hold 1948: Democratic hold 1952: Republican gain 1956: Republican hold 1960: Democratic gain 1964: Democratic hold 1968: Republican hold 1972: Republican hold 1976: Democratic gain 1980: Republican gain 1984: Republican hold 1988: Republican hold 1992: Democratic gain 1996: Democratic hold 2000: Republican gain Years ending in a 4: 6 holds (4 R, 2 D), 1 gain (D) Years ending in an 8: 6 holds (5 R, 1 D), 1 gain (R) Years ending in a 2: 2 holds (2 R), 5 gains (4 D, 1 R) Years ending in a 6: 6 holds (4 D, 2 R), 2 gains (1 D, 1 R) Years ending in a 0: 3 holds (2 R, 1 D), 5 gains (4 R, 1 D) So what does this show - ignoring the fact that the sample is far too small to take any conclusions at face value. Well, it shows that there tends to be far more turnover in years ending in a 2 or 0 than a year ending in 4, 8 or 6. This would make it more difficult for Democrats in 2004. On the other hand, years ending in a 4 are fairly even in terms of the outcome, while Democrats are strongest in years ending in a 6; Republicans are strongest in an 8 or a 0. Of course, there are far more complicating factors than the economy. There are numerous issues of public policy that end up factoring into any election. The Civil War and Reconstruction helped ensure that Republican presidents were elected between 1860 and 1884. The deteriorating global situation that led into World War II (as well as the Great Depression, for that matter) helped elect Democrats between 1932 and 1952. For that matter, there seems to have been far more of a general willingness among voters to accept that economic fluctations were natural before World War I, rather than the current state where political figures will be blamed for failing to ensure full employment (I may be overestimating the change in voter's priorities, though I suspect this to be a result of the transition away from a largely agriculturally dominated economy). For that matter, it can be easily debated to what extent the President actually has control over the economy, as the Fed controls monetary policy largely outside the hand of the President, and the Congress does much of the deciding on the actual final elements of the budget. To the extent that the President actually does control the economy, a large element of that control is the ability to sway public confidence. Finally, it's worth pointing out that there have been numerous instances in which the President did not win a majority of the popular vote: 1876, 1888, 1912, 1916, and 2000. The elections in 1876 and 2000 were particularly problematic and controversial, quite obviously. In other words, this whole thing seems pretty frivolous, though I still find it quite intriguing. Thursday, November 20, 2003
There's an interesting article in the New York Times today about the difference in stock market performance when Democrats and Republicans are in the White House. It seems that, far and away, since 1927, the stock market has performed far better with a Democrat in the White House than a Republican on Pennsylvania Avenue. Under a Democrat, the market has returned about 11% above the T-Bill rate (essentially, this is the return you get for being in the stock market rather than just holding a relatively risk-free security, not the return above holding cash), while Republican administrations have returned only about 2% above the T-Bill rate, generally in more volatile markets. In other words, Republican administrations are riskier to investors and earn lower returns. The findings seem to be broadly true, even if you break the long period into subsections (which is probably necessary given the huge impact of the Great Depression and World War II). I should point out a couple of caveats. First of all, the stock market is not the economy and vice versa. The outcomes of growth in the two are highly correlated, but are not directly related.* Second, if there is a causal relationship here and not just a coincidence, it is probably related more to market confidence than anything else. The President lacks direct power over monetary policy - the Fed gets that - and shares direct control over fiscal policy with the Congress, though realistically it is very difficult for a President to reject a budget passed by Congress because of the political repurcussions. In other words, it's not what the Presidents do, but what markets think of what the President, Congress and the Fed do that matters. *Though, as I'm fond of pointing out, "Excluding the 1970’s from consideration – the oil crises were caused externally and wreaked havoc with the economy – the last Democratic president to lead the U.S. into a recession was Harry Truman ... the last Republican president to serve a full term and not lead the U.S. into a recession was Rutherford Hayes ... So basically, Republicans claim to return money to the voters by lowering taxes, but end up costing them money by lowering income." Wednesday, November 19, 2003
I have, for the most part - until now - not bothered to comment about the candidates for the Democratic nomination. This was for a number of reasons, but primarily centered around the early date, and lack of a firm allegiance to any candidate. My political views are, by most measurements, closest to those of Howard Dean or John Kerry. I wanted someone with more experience than Edwards, better established positions than Clark, and, well, I just don't like Joe Lieberman - I don't think he's remotely Republican, I just don't think he'd make a good President. And Kerry's campaign never seemed to be going anywhere. I believe in a strong foreign policy, but worried that Iraq was a distraction from dealing with actual terrorist threats - though I suppose I was more supportive of the idea of overthrowing a bloody dictator than Dean. On domestic affairs, I was fairly closely aligned with Dean, though I worried about his position on gun control - but I had a hard time believing that he would actually seek to loosen current laws rather than probably just leaving things as they are. I found myself worried sometimes about some of the wingnuts who I saw drawn to Dean too - though, as Robert Kagan pointed out yesterday, many seem to be doing so because they misread Dean's views on Iraq. I would've been happier, I suppose, had more of them been drawn to Kucinich, but the big tent is, after all, a good thing. Of late, though, I've had a harder and harder time siding with Dean. His flip-flopping on Middle East issues didn't really bother me - frankly, I change positions on that issue about twice a day. His recent rallying to protectionism disturbed me, but, like the gun control issue, I had a hard time believing that he'd do anything stupid there. But then I read something like this - Dean is calling for greater regulation of business enterprise. I'm hardly a voice for endless deregulation. In fact, I think given our current economy, we've got things pretty close to right ... though things were probably a little better as of a couple of years ago, with a slightly stronger FCC, SEC and EPA, among others (including anti-trust enforcement). And I'll happily accept the case that recent deregulations have been fairly botched, though I think this speaks worse of the methods by which deregulation was carried out, rather than blaming deregulation itself. Properly carried out - as has been done in other countries - deregulation of certain industries can turn out quite well for almost all parties involved, particularly through the ending of rent-seeking behavior. Calling for wholesale, broad re-regulation of "utilities, large media companies and any business that offers stock options," however, is just stupid, both from a political standpoint - it will alienate numerous large companies that will give more money to George W. Bush - and economically - creating tremendous deadweight losses. Proper regulation is certainly necessary to ensure proper behavior and to make certain that there are no violations of anti-trust, environmental and other laws. Attempting to regulate entire markets, however, is costly and foolhardy. Tuesday, November 18, 2003
Random tech support I'm having some issues with my web browser (actually, my computer isn't adequately functioning either, but that's a separate matter). For some reason, when ever I click on the scrollbar on the side of my browser, it automatically scrolls down two pages. Yeah, I know I could just use the scroll button on my mouse or hit the page up/page down buttons, but does anyone have any idea how I can fix this? Thanks. Monday, November 17, 2003
You need a scorecard ... Ezra Klein, formerly of the Klein/Singer blog has moved from Not Geniuses to Pandagon, and has been replaced by Nico Pitney. No word on whether a player to be named later was involved in the trade. Meanwhile, I passed through unconditional waivers, as no one was willing to pick up my $20 million a year contract. There has been no word on whether I will be sent to the minors, given my unconditional release, traded, or kept here. Sunday, November 16, 2003
Cavs win! Cavs win! Oh my god, the Cavs actually win! Yeah, well it doesn't happen too often. And while I'm on the subject, I'd just like to restate the fact that I am in favor of mandatory steroid testing, both in-season and out of season, with severe penalties and significant suspensions and fines for any violations whatsoever, for baseball players ... and the team owners as well. Saturday, November 08, 2003
Most of my growing up was done in Cleveland, one of the colder and snowier major cities in the U.S. Being so damn cold and snowy, people would sometimes leave up their outside Christmas decorations for a while until it was sufficiently warm, and enough of the snow had melted to make getting the decorations down a safe possibility. Some of my neighbors would also keep turning the lights on at night. Usually this lasted for a couple of weeks after Christmas, but I can remember one particular household that had a habit of leaving their lights up and operating well into February or March. However, in Georgetown, I've noticed an annoying tendency this year to leave Jack-o'-Lanterns outside past Halloween. And it's really getting disgusting, since many of them are now rotting away, particularly after the rain of the last couple of days. Pointless football question - what would be the call were, on an onsides kick, the receiving player to touch the ball and knock it out of bounds before anyone from the kicking team lays a hand on it? Tuesday, November 04, 2003
Um, if you flip back and forth between CNBC and MSNBC right now, Jerry Nachman is on both channels simultaneously. Creepy. UPDATE: I should point out that this post will only be timely for the next minute or so, and will be pretty well useless after that point. Monday, November 03, 2003
John Snow said today that the U.S. is not seeking a weaker dollar. He also went on to add that the earth is flat and that the Easter Bunny is real ... OK, I'm not one to argue against a moderately weaker Dollar. But shouldn't the Treasury Secretary have learned a thing or two from his predecessor about how not to behave in public? Shouldn't he have learned not to speak out of his arse in such a manner that makes it clear to anyone who is listening? Does it not behoove the man to think before he speaks? There's a fair amount of hubbub going around about this Dave Lindorff article in Salon, which talks about the possibility of restarting the draft. I really, really don't see it happening any time soon. Really. First of all, the draft is only justifiable if the Bush administration are willing to acknowledge that Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere will require long-term committments, something that they have been highly unwilling to do until now. Few in the federal government are going to publicly admit what Donald Rumsfeld privately admitted in the now-somewhat-infamous memo. The draft was only restarted in the 1950's with the acknowledgement that the Soviets presented a clear long-term threat. Second, there just doesn't seem to be much of a groundswell for a return to the draft. Tryng to push for it would be a tremendous political risk that seems unlikely to be chanced in the year leading up to a Presidential election. Third, the military and much of the DoD oppose it, favoring an all-volunteer/career service rather than having to quickly train unhappy and ill-prepared conscripts. Moreover, accepting a return to the draft on their parts would be to admit that the all-volunteer/career service has essentially failed to win the peace in Iraq. Although the article notes that the Bush administration is pushing to fill vacant spots on draft boards, it also notes that Reagan acted similarly in 1981. Although I don't know whether Reagan made any push to restart the draft at that time, the outcome clearly ended with the maintenance of the status quo. Now, I should point out two personal things: I am not opposed to the reinstitution of a draft, so long as it is not gender-biased as the past draft was, and allows young people to serve their country through public service outside of the military should they choose to do so. This would both encourage greater public service on the part of young people - something that seems to be lacking nowadays - and also would maintain an all-volunteer/career military service. Such public service should include higher education, which does clearly provide positive externalities to the whole of society. As the article points out, the educational loopholes that allowed men to avoid the draft by staying in graduate school ad infinitum during the Vietnam War have been closed. While the loopholes were clearly extremely inequitable, they do the wrong thing by discouraging further education rather than encouraging it. The correct means of dealing with the inequities that the exemption would provide would be to create better means of access for poorer young men and women to attend university - which means lower tuition and better financial aid. Reintroducing the draft would create an additional source of uncertainty that would actually discourage those same individuals from attending school entirely. I should also point out that there is little chance of my actually being drafted, so my views on this subject may be a little skewed as a result. Even if the draft should be reinstated, I have a whole list of minor ailments that would preclude me from more or less any military service ... certainly nothing more dangerous than a desk job. (thankfully nothing of them are degenerative or life-shortening problems). (via Not Geniuses, who picked up on it from Tapped) Sunday, November 02, 2003
I really have no reason to link to this story, except for the sole reason of allowing me to excerpt this quote: "The government says more than 200 monkeys have been relocated to Gandhi's parliamentary district about 125 miles east of New Delhi. Gandhi denies it. 'It's all rubbish,' she said. 'Not one monkey has been relocated to my constituency.'" Friday, October 31, 2003
About the reported 7.2% GDP growth during the third quarter. First of all, it is certainly a blip. This is not to say that it isn't impressive (wow, a triple negative), but that 7.2% annual GDP growth simply isn't sustainable in a developed economy. Blips like these have certainly been seen in the past. As Krugman points out, the question is whether it can be sustained. If we see something along the lines of 3-4% GDP growth during the fourth quarter, then we'll be looking at a real recovery. If we drop back down to 1-2% growth, than we won't be. Moreover, as Brad DeLong points out, a recovery isn't going to be sustainable if it doesn't lead to job creation. Secondly, it ain't the tax cuts, people. For one thing, they took place months ago, and the checks were largely received months ago, and people will start to spend them as soon as they get an inkling of the cuts (basically, they'll borrow for what they want now - this is basic multitemporal utility theory). Although the money multiplier isn't immediate, it seems that the growth can largely be explained by a combination of military spending, borrowing facilitated by extremely low interest rates due to a highly accomodationist monetary policy and a the drop in the Dollar, which has finally begun to bring the trade balance back to some semblance of sanity. Wednesday, October 29, 2003
Just when you think that the political dialogue can't go any lower.../Temporary descent into blogosphere navel-gazing Donald Luskin is threatening to sue Atrios. Might I point out that the prospective defendant is, at least until now, anonymous and probably none too easy to track down? And that the prospective plaintiff is a moron? (and that's not libel, as it is quite true) Oh, and I'd follow suit, except I seem to have done so pre-emptively (and rather subconsciously too) Tuesday, October 28, 2003
For those wondering about why we're still hearing about whispers of deflation, both from the Fed today and from pundits recently, we are actually a fair degree closer to deflation now than where we should be at. Although CPI inflation has picked up in recent months, two things are worth keeping in mind: First, a good amount of that is probably the result of energy price fluctuations. I haven't bothered to actually look up what the core inflation is doing before I write this, but energy prices tend to introduce a whole mess into inflation calculations. Second, the CPI overstates inflation by about a percent or so, according to most studies. This is due to a combination of factors, largely measurement error and substitution bias (when a price rises, a consumer is likely to buy less of that product and more of a similar product that hasn't gone up in price - when this occurs, the CPI will note the price rise but will be slow to notice the change in preferences). For that matter, the CPI measures consumer price inflation, which isn't the only set of prices out there. Still, it's a much more reliable proxy for actual inflation than the PPI or any other index that I know of. We probably are in a better situation vis a vis the chances of inflation today than we were a few months ago, but we're not out of the woods entirely. UPDATE: I should also point out that this means that real interest rates aren't as low might otherwise seem, and may not actually be negative. Sunday, October 26, 2003
Well, the Russian government seems to have gotten itself into something messy. Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the chairman of Yukos, one of the two giant oil companies, has been arrested. This comes a couple of months after one of his chief lieutentants was thrown in jail. There is little doubt that Khodorkovsky and his fellow oligarchs committed any number of crimes during the crazy years that followed the fall of the Soviet Union and the privatization of the creaking public firms. Some of these were simple technical violations of the privatization laws, while others probably committed far more serious crimes. The problem is not so much that Khodorkovsky and his fellow oligarchs are being punished for their past misdeeds. The problem is that Khodorkovsky and Yukos have been singled out, possibly because Khodorokovsky had been willing to support opposition parties financially and had publicly speculated that he would run for President in 2008 when Vladimir Putin retires. The question remains of just who is running the show here - it's not entirely clear whether it would be worse if Putin is calling the shots to use the government for his own backing or if he had lost control over part of the government apparatus and let other misuse the institutions. Undoubtedly, the arrest of Khodorkovsky will create an enormous amount of turmoil in most any market related to Russia. Starting tomorrow, the Ruble will drop (which won't be bad for Russia insofar as it encourages exports), and the Russian stock market will undoubtedly take a pretty severe tumble, much as it did when the government has previously moved to arrest Yukos elites. Saturday, October 25, 2003
Sorry about the prolonged absence, but I've been busy with a combination of midterms and job interviews (no offers yet, unfortunately), which have cost me pretty much any semblance of free time lately. The hard slog is pretty much over for a couple of weeks, thankfully, but I've been at a conference all day. Wednesday, October 22, 2003
Saturday, October 18, 2003
There's an interesting article on the British backlash against CCTV cameras. Which has been far too long in coming, really. The cameras are ubiquitous in any city of any size in Britain, both for security and to catch speeders. One of my professors stated that, on average, each individual is being watched by a half-dozen cameras while in London (I have no way of actually checking the number). It's pretty clear that the cameras aren't being used too efficiently. The speed trap cameras often seem to be placed in areas where they're more designed to catch speeders than minimize accidents. There were a couple of cameras on the Kingsway, I'm fairly certain, and it was a dead straightaway that was generally too congested to allow serious speeding except on nights and weekends. Moreover, the speed trap cameras are often not well marked, meaning that many don't slow down in their vicinity. The security cameras are even less efficiently used. Clearly there is some use for them - many of those in the city were erected in response to IRA bombings, as the article notes - but many of them are sitting around in areas where they're plainly not needed (like the neighborhood I lived in, for one). I can't imagine that these are ever put to any real use. Why a country feels it needs a CCTV camera for every 24 citizens is really beyond me. Tuesday, October 14, 2003
Why, yes, we do have a business school In a review session for an upcoming midterm in International Relations, one of my fellow students actually asked: "How do you spell NSC?" Monday, October 13, 2003
Today, we answer the age-old question: Is Bill Safire really that dumb? You betcha. Safire is criticizing Howard Dean for denying saying that, as far as the killing of Uday and Qusay Hussein by the American military, "the ends do not justify the means," as John McCain criticized him for saying. The problem is, Dean never said that. The entire quote is as follows: "It's a victory for the Iraqi people ... but it doesn't have any effect on whether we should or shouldn't have had a war ... I think in general the ends do not justify the means." It's pretty damn clear from that quote that Dean's comment about "the end not justifying the means" was directed at the war, not specifically at the actions of the military leading to the deaths of those two monsters. No one, to the best of my knowledge, tried to make the case for going to war for the purpose of taking out Uday and Qusay. To a certain extent, the problem here can be attributed not to Safire, but to McCain, who clearly took the quote out of context in his comment.* Safire, however, is clearly either smart enough to realize the mistake and has chosen to perpetuate it in a despicable and disrespectful manner - ignoring the fact that Americans are actually smart enough to read and understand what Dean actually meant in the first place, whether they agree with it or not - or is just really, really stupid. *The story in the Times writes of McCain's comment thusly: "For instance, Mr. McCain cited Dr. Dean's remark that 'the ends do not justify the means,' in reference to the death of Saddam Hussein's sons. 'I was astounded,' the senator said. 'The ends were to get rid of two murdering rapist thugs and the means was the use of American military intelligence.'" I am willing to accept that Sen. McCain may have mistakenly taken Gov. Dean's comments out of context, but Safire can make no such justification, having had days to look over it and write this idiotic column. Sunday, October 12, 2003
Very, very busy (mostly at procrastinating, but still ...) Posting will be even more intermittent than usual over the next two weeks or so. Sorry. Friday, October 10, 2003
Also from the "the professors think they're funny" file One of my professors asked us "you do know what a radio is, right?" I hate it when they get nervous and try to respond with humor before exams. Wednesday, October 08, 2003
Tuesday, October 07, 2003
Arnold has apparently been elected as governor in place of the recalled Gray Davis. And I would like to announce that I will no longer consider the state of California a legitimate member of the Union, being on leave until such time as it comes to its senses. Man, I'm going to have a hard time finding a flag with 49 stars. UPDATE: Edited for a really stupid vocabulary mistake, which I'll blame on my near total lack of sleep of late. Well, it's certainly going to be a rather interesting day, what with the recall and all. Although, as a steadfast Democrat - as well as being utterly horrified by Schwarzenegger's personality - I am naturally opposed to the recall, but am rooting for a tie, purely out of spite for the state of California and the idiots behind these shenanigans. Or maybe a rainout. Smartass One of my professors - someone fairly well known in the studies of international relations, actually - asked my class this morning "where the Bretton Woods conference was held." Monday, October 06, 2003
Ego strutting Oliver Willis makes some good points about the blog bubble, and how the role of blogs in America today is often overestimated by those who run and read them. Of course, y'know, I made more or less the same point four months ago. Sunday, October 05, 2003
I'm not going to make any point over the seriousness or validity of the Israeli airstrike in Syrian territory. Frankly, I lack the expertise to make any judgments there. I will say this, however, to anyone thinking about listening to the Syrian line that this strike is a serious escalation in the conflict that threatens to internationalize the situation: It ain't. With Israeli military might clearly predominant in the region, and the Syrian state rotting internally, serious conflict is extremely unlikely. This is rhetoric, plain and simple. Schwarzenegger's campaign manager, Rep. David Dreier, has blamed Gov. Gray Davis for the releasing of information that Arnold has groped 15 women, at last count. So, let's see: It's Gray's fault that Arnold decided to grope, fondle and feel up all those women. Yeah, that's the ticket. Seriously, Gray Davis does not control the LA Times and, more importantly, if the allegations are true - and Arnold has more or less admitted as much - how they were released is of no matter, unless some law was violated in the releasing. Thursday, October 02, 2003
And it keeps on coming... ABC News is reporting that Arnold Schwarzenegger voiced his admiration for Adolf Hitler in an unpublished book proposal in the 1970's. This really shouldn't come as much of a surprise. Spy reported 11 years ago that Schwarzenegger liked listening to records of Hitler's speeches and gave away copies. Damn, this stuff took far too long to surface. The temperature here has really dropped in the last couple of days, and it's only going up into the mid-50's now. Which brings me back to one of my favorite little inside jokes at Georgetown, the inability of the southerners here to deal with anything even slightly cold. Having been raised in Cleveland, I have no problem with it and am still wearing short sleeves and shorts. Plenty of people, though, are walking around wearing a parka over a hooded sweatshirt and the like. Wimps. The Plame investigation has been expanded. Meanwhile, the Republican party seems to be refusing to back off its attempts to tarnish the reputation of Joe Wilson. Which is completely irrelevant to the crime committed by someone in the White House, of course. Do they really think we're that stupid? On second thought, don't answer that. It's nice when the guy who wins the Nobel Prize for Literature is actually someone whose work I have read. Or for that matter, for a change, someone I've actually heard of. And the truth comes into the open about Arnold, here and here. Well, sort of. It's really just the tip of the iceberg. See here and here. The articles in Spy and Premiere that I have copies of list include nine separate allegations of sexual harassment and assault, and three confirmed extramarital affairs. Not to mention accusations of statutory rape, steroid use, steroid sales, auto theft and passport forgery. And why, exactly, is this man leading the polls? UPDATE: In fairness, I should note that one individual is cited in both the Times and Premiere stories - Anna Richardson, a British TV hostess whom Schwarzenegger reportedly groped. Tuesday, September 30, 2003
Some idiot high school band decided to send a member running across the field while the band played "the composition by Franz Joseph Haydn that eventually became known as 'Deutschland Uber Alles.'" Words fail me. Well, words that I can actually print here. (the band director has apologized and said that he was simply trying to be provocative) The Justice Department today requested that the White House to preserve all relevant records dealing with the outing of Valerie Wilson as an undercover CIA operative. Said White House Spokesman Scott McClellan: "I'd like to thank the Justice Department for their statement. We had completely forgotten to delete all those e-mails. That could've been a real mess." Monday, September 29, 2003
To the people who keep stumbling in here looking for a photo of Valerie Plame Wilson, I don't have one, and I won't post one or a link to one even if I had it. Unlike Robert Novak, I do believe in defending our national security (a low blow, but clearly deserved). I'm assuming that these people are coming here because I linked to a photo of Gigi Goyette, the girl whom Arnold Schwarzenegger apparently had an affair with while she was underage and he was married. So bugger off, if that's what you're here for. Otherwise, enjoy! UPDATE: Neither do I have nude photos of Mr. Wilson and his wife. And to whoever came here looking for nude pictures of Arianna Huffington: No. Dear god no. Sunday, September 28, 2003
There's a poll near the bottom of the CNN page worth filling about regarding Wesley Clark's comments about the President. For more on l'affaire Plame, see Kevin Drum - here, here, here, here, here, here and here - and Daniel Drezner - here - and Josh Marshall - here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here - and Brian Linse - here - and Atrios - here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here - and Matt Yglesias - here - and Kos - here and here - and the WaPo article, the MSNBC update and the CNN article and ... well, you should have plenty of reading by now. Oh, and the Instapundit can't quite get his head around this one. Meanwhile, I'm thinking that it's time to come up with a scandal for this treasonous little mess that some snitch in the White House created. And, this being DC, every damn scandal has to end in "-gate." Besides the obvious Plamegate, Wilsongate, Treasongate, Leakgate ... uh, any suggestions? Today kinda sucked from a sports standpoint. First, the Browns lost to the *(@&%*(#@ Bengals. And, of course, it's the end of the regular season for baseball - and the end of the year for me in that regard, since both of the teams that I root for - the Indians and Blue Jays - are done. At least the Jays finished above .500 - last year was the only year that both fell below .500 since I was a year old (and I can't claim to have been exactly cognizant of baseball or anything else then). Saturday, September 27, 2003
It is being reported by MSNBC that the CIA has asked the Justice Department for an investigation into who at the White House leaked Valerie Plame's name to Robert Novak. This, if true, was a federal crime, as Plame was a covert operative for the CIA. It is believed that the White House leaked her name in retaliation to actions by her husband, former Amb. Joseph Wilson, who led the investigation in Niger as to whether Iraq had attempted to buy Uranium there. Wilson found no evidence of any purchase, but the claim still went into the State of the Union Address. For more, see CalPundit, Kos (with one hell of a long comment thread), TPM and Mark Kleiman. Friday, September 26, 2003
Wednesday, September 24, 2003
Tuesday, September 23, 2003
Free D.C. Josh Chafetz, guest-blogging at Los Volokhs comes out against a filibuster against an experimental school voucher program in DC (in other words, he backs the voucher program). Even if you ignore the fact that vouchers aren't cost-effective (see the post just below this one - permalinks bloggered again) and ignore all the church-state issues,* there's a massive problem with the program: home rule. Congess cannot simply intervene willy-nilly in state education policies whenever it wants. Nor should it. Yet because the District of Columbia has a half-assed version of home rule that subjects it to Congressional whims in order to ensure that it has enough funds to pay for services - that benefit Congressmen and other federal employees who do not pay taxes for them - the federal government can intervene in DC whenever it damn well feels like it. Which is stupid, inefficient, and patently anti-democratic. No one is challenging the ability of the District to manage its own affairs.** Yet Congress still has the unchecked ability to intervene in local affairs as it wants to. For the record, the Mayor supports the voucher plan as a last-ditch alternative, the Council seems to be broadly opposed to it, and the population, in most polling, seems opposed but not overwhelmingly so. Not that any of it matters one bit. *Yeah, I know, the Supremes already ruled here. I decided to bring it up again here. So sue me.*** **Well, now that Marion Barry is done. ***No, not literally. (via Hawken, whose permalinks are also currently bloggered) More incoherent blogging There's an interesting interview with an advocate for smaller schools, who said the following about the cost: "researchers at NYU did an analysis of big schools versus small schools and found that the operating costs of small schools are about 5 percent higher. But if cost is evaluated on a per-graduate basis, if you divide what is spent per year by the number of students who graduate, the balance tips slightly in favor of small schools, because the graduation rate is higher." This compares with vouchers, which cost an enormous amount of money, and, as far as any decent study I've seen, make an insignificant impact on educational outcomes.* *My knowledge is a little outdated. As far as I know of, the only three existing voucher programs in the US are those in Milwaukee, Florida and Cleveland. The Milwaukee program has a complex admissions system that means that it isn't a true voucher system, the Florida system essentially only existed on paper as last I knew (difficulties in meeting the requirements meant that few students could qualify). The study that I know of is based off of the Cleveland program, and it should a statistically small improvement in math skills and a statistically small decrease in language skills by students taken out of the public schools relative to what similar students scored in the public schools. If anyone knows of anything that I'm not including, leave a message in the comments. UPDATE: Whoops, I forgot to actually link to the interview. There I go again. Go figure Last Thursday and Friday, a hurricane hit Georgetown, but somehow the cable continued to work. Now, it's 70 and sunny outside, and the damn thing has been out for at least an hour now. Monday, September 22, 2003
Frank Rich's update on the responses to his article about Mel Gibson's possibly anti-Semitic movie The Passion includes this timeless quote by the actor about the journalist: "I want to kill him," he said. "I want his intestines on a stick. . . . I want to kill his dog." — The New Yorker, Sept. 15 Sounds like someone who has his head screwed on straight, no? (as Rich notes, he does not own a dog ... and does this not sound suspiciously like Mike Tyson's pronouncement that he wanted 'to eat' the non-existent children of Lennox Lewis?) Sunday, September 21, 2003
Kos and Kevin Drum are linking to this Newsweek poll showing that Wesley Clark has jumped out to an early lead, with 14% of registered Democrats and democratic leaners. Unfortunately, it's hard to get much information from this. First of all, Clark, Howard Dean (12%), Joe Lieberman (12%), John Kerry (10%) and Dick Gephardt (8%) are all within a +/- 3% margin of error (in other words, those five have support that is statistically insignificantly different from 11%. Second, with everyone so close together, it's a matter of where candidates are going, not where they are now. Clark is starting from a good point, but so was John Edwards as of a few months ago. Third, it's a #@&%^& national poll. Primaries are done by state. New Hampshire, Iowa, South Carolina and a few other states will play a pre-eminent role in deciding who is the nominee. And this poll probably took the opinions of a handful of people in New Hampshire. For that matter, it's theoretically possible (but extremely unlikely) that every Democrat in, say, California supports Clark but no one else does. Saturday, September 20, 2003
Next Year at RFK I've said it before and I'll say it again: Get it over with and move the Expos to DC already. Montreal doesn't want the team, San Juan and Monterrey don't have the base to support a major league team, and Portland doesn't have a stadium for the interim. I'm sick and tired of spending all day dragging myself up to Camden Yards - and only do it once or twice a year as a result - to see a ballgame. Repeal the steel tariffs already. They've done far more damage than benefit, that's clear, both in theoretical and empirical terms. They haven't worked, and they ain't gonna work, dammit. Friday, September 19, 2003
I just took off the front panel of my air conditioning unit to get something that I dropped inside (don't ask). Inside was a sign saying to disconnect the unit before doing any maintenance in order to prevent electrocution. Uh, shouldn't the sign have been on the outside? Overall, the damage from Isabel is fairly light here. There are a ton of leaves on the ground, but a surprisingly large number of trees didn't seem to lose much foliage. The ground - where there is ground - is muddy, and there are plenty of twigs and branches to be stepped upon. I could only find one street that was fully blocked (which was the block of 35th Street just south of Prospect, which is so steep as to be all but impassable in good weather). The Potomac is clearly swollen, but doesn't seem to be in much danger of flooding here. Power is still out in surrounding neighborhoods, but the university itself still has electricity in abundance. It's still a little windy, but the sun is out, so no one seems to mind too much. For the truly curious, we've received 2.37 inches of rain in the last 24 hours, and the wind gusts have topped out at 54 miles an hour. So now you know. It's come to my attention that I'm going to have to stay up until the rain stops, because the leak isn't going away and is requiring constant attention. Sooner or later, I may actually get around to non-hurricane related blogging, at least once I get done with this damn paper that I've been working on all day long. UPDATE: But apparently it's dry and quiet over in Dupont. Thursday, September 18, 2003
Georgetown will be closed tomorrow too. Which makes not a whit of difference for me, since I have no classes and no obligations on Fridays anyway. Yeah, the rain's pretty well picked up in the last few minutes, and so has the leak. The streets are pretty deserted at this point, and it's fairly dark already. The cloud ceiling has also dropped pretty significantly in the last few hours. And I've got my first leak. Nothing serious, just a small amount of water coming in from somewhere around the edge of the window seal. The wind has picked up again in the last minute or two, and has pulled a fair amount of leaves off the trees. We're getting some pretty solid rain now, but nothing huge. The wind has definitely picked up in the last ten minutes or so and the rain has picked up as well. Still nothing of much interest, though. It just started raining. I'm guessing that the TV will go out within the next ten minutes or so (the university's cable system runs off of a couple of satellites that tend to lose the signal whenever there's any rain) Well, it's turned quite gray and the wind has started to pick up a little, but it's hardly anything out of the ordinary so far. The side streets of Georgetown are pretty deserted, though no one seems to have moved their car. There are a few pedestrians still out there. seemingly divided between the oblivious (those convinced that the storm will be barely noticeable), the fearful (those who are hoarding about a month's supply of water and dry food) and the joggers (who, I'm convinced, would still go out were pitched battle erupt in the streets). M Street still has a fair amount of traffic on the streets, but far less than during a normal morning rush hour, and most of the shops are closed. I'm fairly surprised how much litter and debris is lying around on the streets that hasn't been moved inside or cleaned up. Some of it is clearly stuff left around from last night - although I'm sure they wanted to notify the faculty and staff, it wasn't altogether bright of the university administration to call off classes early enough for everyone to start drinking. Wednesday, September 17, 2003
Classes are cancelled. Thank god. We seemed to be about the last major educational institution in the area to cancel classes. Not that the hurricane will really hit until the end of the day, anyway, but I suppose it's better not to have people going home at the end of the day. Actually, we haven't been officially notified via e-mail yet, but the school's closure hotline says so, so I'm taking them at their word. Particularly since I have as much time in class on Thursdays as during the rest of the week put together. This hurricane is really annoying me. The last couple of days have been the first truly sunny and warm period we've had since I got back to Georgetown three and a half weeks ago. We've gotten an incredible amount of rain, and the ground is still soaked across most of campus. But, apparently we'll have to balance out the couple of sunny days with a damned hurricane. It's still warm and stuffy outside, but the first high clouds have arrived, where the sky was perfectly blue earlier this afternoon. We haven't quite reached the sense that all hell will soon break loose yet. Barring any other obligations, I do intend to blog through the hurricane, starting around 3 PM tomorrow or so, at least as long as the power lasts. So you'll be treated to lots of insights such as "it's raining really hard, but not quite as hard as before" and such. Btw, the 52nd weekly (yes, that adds up to a year, more or less) Carnival of the Vanities is back home at Silflay Hraka this week. Current verdict on the early TV coverage of the impending 'cane: lots of flashy graphics, not much in the way of, um, actual forecasting. Tuesday, September 16, 2003
The good news: I now have something of an internet connection. The bad news: My computer still isn't fixed. I've managed to dig up my ancient laptop, which, though it has an ethernet card, seems to run about as fast as a 28.8 line. A return to normal blogging is probably still a few days away. And that's assuming no impact from the hurricane. Monday, September 08, 2003
Open source tech help OK, here's the deal: my internet connection isn't working. It's not the ethernet card, which the diagnostics for show is fine. It's not my ethernet connection, which is also working fine (it works for a borrowed laptop). I seem to have a very small amount of connectivity (probably not the right description) with the internet, as I can still generally ping most sites through MS/DOS, but cannot load any websites, nor use AIM or anything else internet-related. Even when I dial into to AOL, I can still only check e-mail and use non-web functions as web sites still will not load. It's not a problem with Internet Explorer alone, because Netscape isn't working either. I have reinstalled the ethernet card driver, TCP/IP driver and physically taken the ethernet card out, cleaned it off and reinserted it. This occurred on Saturday afternoon. I had installed Lavasoft's Ad-Aware program to deal with some spyware issues. That worked fine, but seemed to increase the number of pop-ups I was getting, so I installed a pop-up control program (Popup Stopper Free). The latter program was blocking my e-mail client from working (because e-mails will open in new window), so I uninstalled it. When I uninstalled it, I had to restart the computer, and the internet connection has not worked since then. I'd really like not to have to do what University Information Systems wants me to do, which is to reformat my entire hard drive and reinstall Windows. Any ideas? UPDATE: 1. I'm not getting a Mac. Regardless of all the performance issues, I'm not in a position to get a new computer right now. 2. It's not any of the worms. My computer is actually running an old enough OS to not be a possible target for the current worms. 3. It is not, unfortunately, a problem with the ethernet cable. Sunday, September 07, 2003
My internet connection is down, and it looks like it may be a few days before I can get things completely fixed (something is very, very wrong with my computer). Saturday, September 06, 2003
I missed the Buckeyes game today (whoever the hell decided to schedule a meeting for me on a Saturday at 9 AM has earned my eternal enmity), but what the hell happened to Krenzel? 5-20-76-0-1?!? (Does SDSU have that good of a pass defense, or was Krenzel that bad?) Reading this and this, I get the feeling that the Draft Clark movement is not so much a campaign as a lifestyle. Friday, September 05, 2003
Saith Kos: "We're witnessing a profound cultural change within our military's officer ranks. There is a sudden realization that things were pretty good under the last Democratic president, and that Bush has made a profound mess of things. Under Clinton, all they had to worry about was gays in the military. Now, they have to worry about dead comrades, shattered lives, broken families, and an administration that gives lip service to our men and women in uniform while ignoring their real needs. It won't be their votes that will matter next year. It'll be their voices -- helping dispel the notion that only Republicans can protect our republic from our enemies." (Italics added) Uh, not so fast. Not to pick at an open sore or anything, but I think we'd probably have a President Gore right now if a few more soldiers voting in Florida hadn't voted for Bush. Pointless book review I finally got done with Richard Duncan's The Dollar Crisis. It's not exactly a page-turner. But then again, it's not that good, either. It's kind of funny, actually, that I just wrote that, given that I actually agree with Duncan's conclusions. He seemed a little too determined, however, to undermine his own case. Duncan's thesis was that the U.S. is heading towards an economic crisis, barring serious intervention now. Since the downfall of the Bretton Woods system, the U.S. has sustained increasingly large trade deficits. The deficits, financed through debt, have created an enormous disequilibrium in the global economy, creating a world-wide credit bubble. Countries have built up huge stockpiles of international reserves - first financing the stock market bubble, and now financing the enormous fiscal deficit. It has also led to a deflationary pressure on consumer prices. The result has been the current contraction of the economy due to over-investment and the creation of significant excess capacity. First of all, I have to believe that Duncan is suffering from a Cassandra complex. Having predicted the Asian crisis correctly - in 1993, mind you - he is now seeing impending crises. Duncan is probably not the first economist to over-react to being proven correct; he will surely not be the last. The Asian crisis, in any case, can be attributed both to fundamental flaws and to an evident panic in 1998. Second, Duncan repeatedly makes use of nominal numbers unadjusted for population. This is not a significant problem were he dealing with monthly numbers, but over the course of multiple decades, significant inflation and population growth - even in the U.S. - have to be accounted for. Failing to use real per capita numbers for yearly data over a century is simply inexcusable. Over the last century we have seen nearly 20-fold inflation, by my quick estimate, and the population 5-fold. Adjusting for those two factors makes the multi-thousand percent growth of currency in circulation or foreign reserves seem far less damaging. Third, I'm not sure that the end result need necessarily be the collapse that Duncan expects, nor do I think that it necessarily be an immediate threat. It is not entirely unconceivable that the shock that results from dealing with the twin deficits be a significant correction rather than a crisis. There are a number of factors that could alleviate the fall of the U.S., particularly a significant drop in the U.S. Dollar. And, hell, there's always the IMF. Fourth, Duncan rails against the use of fiat money from time to time, arguing that the trade deficit was only possible with the abolition of Bretton Woods and the severing of the link between the Dollar and gold. The problem is that, as much as fiat money presents problems, the use of a gold peg seemed even worse. Duncan takes a particularly rosy view of the Bretton Woods period (even he doesn't argue for a return to the Gold Standard, which required sacrificing internal stability for external stability). Though Bretton Woods theoretically came into force in 1947, it was not truly complete until Western Europe returned to full convertibility with the abolition of the EMU in 1958. Canada wouldn't bother with joining the standard for a couple of years, and some other countries waited longer. Bretton Woods was only truly in existence from 1958 to 1971, a period which was clearly racked by increasing numbers of currency crises as speculators pushed for repeggings. The U.S. was simultaneously blamed for it's 'guns and butter' spending, which caused inflation to spread elsewhere - though some of the blame may be attributable to the unwillingness of Europeans (other than West Germany) to revalue their currencies to reflect the recovery after World War II, since to do so would have had a contractionary effect. Fiat money can, in some respects, be called the worst option except for all the other choices. Fifth, Duncan offers the solution of some quasi-global minimum wage mechanism so as to boost the demand in developing countries. Essentially, the idea is the same behind Henry Ford's famed decision to pay a $5-a-day wage, above normal wages at the time - so that his workers could buy the same cars that they made. It's an interesting idea in theory but, as Duncan notes, it's not entirely certain how a workable system could be put into place. Clearly the trade deficits that we have experienced over the last couple decades are unsustainable, and have had deleterious effects both at home and abroad. The time will come when we have to take our medicine too. I just wish that Duncan had actually made a sufficient argument for why this is so. Flood the Zone Friday, #3 Let's face it. It's been a long time since we've had a president who has been particularly strong on civil liberties. After election, most presidents seem as much interested in gaining power for their administration as anything else. Still, George W. Bush seems determined to go down as easily the worst president on civil liberties since Richard Nixon. We seem to be regressing towards the days of Cointelpro and wire-tapping. The PATRIOT ACT has allowed the government to simply claim 'terrorism' and search without probable cause. It has allowed the government to proceed without warrants in certain cases, dispensing with centuries of common law. Worst of all, the Bush administration wants the power to permanently detain non-citizens without trial. This, quite simply, is damned wrong. Thursday, September 04, 2003
I just got back from class and turned on the debate. So far, I've figured out this: somebody needs to punch Kerry in the gut or do whatever it takes to get him angry. And he needs to enounciate better. He could probably take a cue from Gephardt, who seems to be doing his best to channel Clinton - add a raspy southern accent and white hair (or, for that matter, Bob Graham's vocal chords and hair) and he'd be a dead ringer. My, that's completely inconsequential. Oh, and somebody needs to tell Kucinich to get real and learn how to pronounce his Spanish better. Kucinich was actually a better Mayor of Cleveland than people give him credit for - not that that's really saying much - but he seems completely out of his element in a debate (or reality nowadays). For that matter, Dean needs to learn how to think a little quicker and start forming his sentences in his head before he speaks them. Instead, he's stuttering and reverting to sound bites. And while I'm adding updates without noting them as such, somebody needs to tell John Edwards that no one knows who he is, but everyone knows his father grew up in a small town. It's past time he shut up about where he's from and starts talking about where he wants to be going. Tuesday, September 02, 2003
Arnold Schwarzenegger has attempted to respond to criticism of his unwillingness to participate in this week's gubernatorial debate by saying that he will participate in a debate the week the before the recall election. Every single other major gubernatorial candidate will participate in this week's debate. So why is he willing to participate then rather than now? Because he (and the other candidates) will get the questions for that debate a week in advance. A lot of people have been showing up here today looking for photos of Gigi Goyette, the woman who Arnold Schwarzenegger apparently had an affair with - while she was underage and he was married. For the record, I don't have any photos of her. If someone knows of where I can find one, I'll put it up or link to it, but I don't have anything now. (UPDATE: The best I can find is this. Satisfied?) And getting traffic via those searches is still better than people coming here via a search for free male nude proms. (on the plus side, the search ranks me one ahead of Fred Phelps' website, www.godhatesfags.com - no chance in hell I'm linking to that bigotry) I don't know, and I don't want to know. (see this post and this post, as well as Wendy Leigh's book for more background on Arnold) Too good to be true, maybe I'm not going to argue with the economics of the matter (indeed, basic Ricardian trade theory argues that it's beneficial) - but it bespeaks the hypocrisy of the Republican party that they tout nationalist-sounding slogans all the time - and then turn around and outsource their telephone fundraising to a company in India. (via Oliver Willis) Monday, September 01, 2003
Georgetown. No, wait, sorry ... Georgetown doesn't really do the technical side of communications too well. The phone system requires us to enter a PIN number to make outgoing calls. These weren't necessary until my sophomore year. Until then, as a result, students had been able to use 10-10 numbers to bill long distance to the school. I can't find my PIN number, which I apparently lost somewhere between leaving for England and coming back (the numbers are random - we can't choose them). So, using my cell phone, I called the number given to me for replacing my PIN number. The first menu on the automated system I got required me to enter my PIN. So much for that. The entire university's internet connection goes out through a single cable. Which passes under M Street. Which has been for the last couple years (and will be for a couple more) under significant rebuilding (because of the exploding manholes). So every time some construction worker cuts the cord, we lose the whole internet connection. And the university's cable system goes through a single cluster of satellites behind Harbin. Which, apparently seem to lose the connection every time it starts raining. And this being a humid summer even by DC standards, that has happened quite often lately. Including just now. (on the plus side, because the satellites are on the western end of campus and I'm on the far eastern edge, I can generally tell when it's going to rain a couple of minutes ahead of time) Bugger. Economics, if you can stand it There's an interesting article by Peter Goodman in today's Washington Post discussing American pressure on China to revalue or float the Yuan. The author's conclusion is that, basically, there's little imminent chance of a revuation. To explain, China keeps it currency - variously known as the Yuan, Renminbi, CNY or RMB - pegged to the Dollar at 8.28, with a fairly meaningless trading band of 0.1%. Because the fundamentals of the Chinese economy have improved so much in recent years, the Yuan has become drastically undervalued - that is, the free market value of it would be something significantly higher, variously estimated by most to be anywhere between 4 and 7.4 Yuan to the Dollar (this is considered to be higher or stronger because it would take fewer Yuan to purchase a Dollar). The low value of the Yuan makes Chinese exports cheaper to foreign buyers and imports more expensive for Chinese consumers than they would be at the free market rate. This creates a pressure to expand the Chinese economy - and thus makes the Chinese government reluctant to let the Yuan strengthen. In recent years, many have suggested that the U.S. is suffering because of the flood of cheap exports from China. U.S. consumers are buying more imports from China and less able to export to China than they otherwise might. In some respects, the current predicament of the American economy is due to the pegging of the Chinese economy* (though clearly there are many, many more factors at work behind the current situation). In particular, the decline of the manufacturing sector can be attributed to the export of jobs to China.** A revaluation would not be simply beneficial for the U.S. The pegging at the current rate has led to drastic expansion of the Chinese economy, which in turn has fueled Chinese demand for imports, no matter the pegged rate. At the same time, it has kept inflation in check during the expansion, and kept a real estate bubble from popping. Moreover, the flow of U.S. currency into China has led to enormous Chinese demand for U.S. securities, particularly T-bills, which has made the fiscal deficit tolerable until now and helped bid long-term interest rates down (until recently). In any case, the Chinese government is clearly quite reticent to do anything to the peg in the near future. It will probably widen the trading band in the next 12 months, but is unlikely to go beyond an expansion to 1% or so. Such a widening will be insufficient to deal with the pressure to revalue. Other options, such as floating, re-pegging, or a shift to a basket peg (rather than a single currency peg), are unlikely to occur soon. Two things are worth considering. The first is that this will be as much a political decision as an economic one. The government of Hu Jintao is not likely to want to cede to international pressure too quickly, particularly given that Jiang Zemin only recently retired (and still apparently controls much of the military). Jintao and others will not want to lose face. Moreover, the Chinese government does not want to do anything that might cause (more) domestic jobs to be lost and raise the specter of instability. More important, I think, is that, broadly speaking, the Chinese government doesn't really seem to like George W. Bush much. They never really like any American government, but were clearly irked by the war in Iraq and American behavior at the UN (not to mention the whole North Korea fiasco). They aren't going to want to do anything to smooth Bush's path to re-election. Second, the WTO may well come into play at a certain point. Global trade laws incorporate anti-dumping provisions, and someone may well eventually start trying to raise tariffs on Chinese goods as a way to make up for the cheap currency. It's not an immediate link, but someone may well try to make a case on the merits here in the coming months and years. *Some other countries are actually now hurt more than the U.S. by the pegging of the Yuan. The recent fall of the Dollar against the Canadian Dollar and the Euro means that Canada and the Euro-zone are actually now more exposed to the weakness of the Yuan than the U.S. than in the past. **The American manufacturing sector is clearly in something of a long-term decline independent of China. In part this is due to various changes in the domestic and international economy, but it is also due to the increasing specialization and use of outsourcing among American firms, which leads to the reclassification of much manufacturing as service provision (English translation - part of the decline is real but part is attributable to accounting, not economics) This just sucks. Major League Baseball is apparently planning to keep the Expos in Montreal next year, though they may play some of their games again in San Juan, or possibly even in Portland, Oregon, or Monterrey, Mexico. More and more, it seems that Selig and his buddies learned nothing from the contraction fiasco. Rather, they seem insistent on keeping the Expos on life support until they can kill them off once and for all - rather than actually trying to treat the patient (I apologize for the run-on metaphor). A lot of ink has already been spilled on the issue of the economic and political questions of bringing baseball back to the District. And I'm going to say this: Washington is ready for it already. Yeah, it's still a football city, but the city never latched on to either version of the old Senators or the Caps or Wizards, but the Senators always stunk, the Wizards have been mediocre for a number of years, and the Caps have been fairly average. The Caps and Wizards/Bullets were also hurt for a number of years by playing in Landover. Yeah, bringing the Expos to DC would probably hurt the Orioles, but only marginally. With the distance and horrific traffic, going to a game at Camden Yards is about a six hour ordeal for a DC resident - and longer if they lack a car, meaning that few go more than once or twice a year. The local media pays little more attention to the Orioles than they do to any other pro baseball team. The question is really where to put the stadium, and who will pay for it. I'm not a proponent of public financing by any means - particularly with DC as broke as it is - but I don't think that any of the alternatives are politically viable. RFK could be an adequate baseball stadium, but it's not going to produce the sort of revenue from club seats and loges that owners want. The District isn't in much of a position to pay for a new stadium, and is hampered by its unitary system of government, where most other localities can spread the expenditures across city, county and state governments. Another alternative would be to renovate RFK and build something smaller for concerts and DC United elsewhere. This would probably be cheaper, but might not satisfy anyone. Somebody needs to figure it out already, and get RFK ready for opening day. I finally caught the Al Franken-Bill O'Reilly brouhaha last night being re-run on C-Span2 (I was still in London sans TV when it occurred), and my thought is this: if Gary Hart isn't willing to challenge Ben Nighthorse Campbell for Colorado's Senate seat next year, what will it take to recycle Pat Schroeder? Sunday, August 31, 2003
Arnold Schwarzenegger is refusing to participate in a debate this week. Cruz Bustamante, Tom McClintock, Peter Ueberroth, Arianna Huffington and Peter Miguel Camejo will all participate in the debate. So what's Arnold afraid of? Well, that he has no ideas for how to deal with the problems that California is facing. That he has no political experience whatsoever. That he's a habitual philanderer. The rumors about whether he committed statutory rape. The recently unearthed 'Schwarzengangbanger' that he spoke about in Oui Magazine. That he's apparently sexually harassed half of the women in Hollywood. That he's been friendly with Kurt Waldheim. That he apparently used to enjoy listening to and giving away records of Hitler's speeches. That he used steroids. And may have sold them on occasion too. The questions that have been raised about whether he was involved in auto theft and passport forgery. That he has attempted to cover up nearly all of the above at one time or another. That all of the above question his judgment, and seem to indicate that he belongs more in San Quentin than Sacramento. A little pointless prognosticating The sports pundits are pointing to last night's game as evidence that Ohio State is still rolling along, even without Maurice Clarett. I'm still a little worried. The game seemed more to be evidence of Washington's weaknesses - Cody Pickett seemed unready, their running game stunk to hell, and their secondary was mediocre. For Ohio State, the defense certainly did its job well enough - it seemed a little too vulnerable to the short passes, but given that Washington had little choice but to run those dump plays, it's still good enough. Craig Krenzel, for that matter, was, as always, better than advertised. It's the running game that frightens me. Hall and Ross were adequate, but neither showed the game-breaking quality that Clarett had (or, for that matter, that Hall and Ross occasionally appeared to show last year). Ohio State's best big play runner last night seemed to be, of all people, Craig Krenzel (nothing against Krenzel's running, but it's just not a good sign). That left them using the pass to set up the run, rather than trying to use the run to set up the pass, and left them too reliant on going long. This worked just fine against the Huskies, whose secondary was less than stellar. Against a team with a stronger secondary, though, Ohio State could be vulnerable, though. Clarett will be out, in all likelihood, for at least six games, which knocks him out of the games against N.C. State in Columbus in two weeks, and the (night) game against Wisconsin at Camp Randall, three weeks later. Both games, I think, will present a far tougher challenge for the Buckeyes than anyone realizes right now. I'm not going to go flat out and say they'll lose - I certainly hope they won't - but they're going to need to get a better running game - and soon - if they expect to dominate as they did against Washington. Incoherent blogging Interesting Ian Buruma article today in the New York Times Magazine on anti-Semitism and perceptions of Israel's role in American foreign policy. Saturday, August 30, 2003
Rep. Bill Janklow (R-SD), charged with second-degree manslaughter as well as traffic violations for speeding through a stop sign and killing a biker in the process, is refusing to resign. On one hand, the precept of 'innocent until proven guilty' should be remembered. On the other hand, any Congressman who is sufficiently suspected of such a serious crime - or, for that matter - any serious crime, to be charged, ought to be giving serious thought to an immediate resignation. Then again, if you scroll down to the bottom of this New York Times article, it may be that Janklow was injured worse than originally thought, and may not be operating with a sufficiently clear mind to be making a decision. Which, paradoxically, means that he may also be in no shape to hold office either. Catch-22, I suppose. There is, of course, no Congressional equivalent of the 25th Amendment. So you're going to lie to Congress ... Well, it seems that Dick Cheney personally lied to Congress (well, to be clear, not directly to Congress, but to the Comptroller General of the GAO, which is, in effect, an arm of Congress). It seems that Cheney claimed that his office had provided the GAO with "documents responsive to the Comptroller General's inquiry concerning the costs associated with the [Energy task force's] work" - which the GAO had attempted to get released - when no such thing had been done (nor has the information been released in full to date). I don't think that this can reasonably be claimed to be grounds for impeachment. The constitution allows for impeachment in cases of "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." This certainly does not fall into the first two categories and the third and fourth are a stretch given that Cheney's lie cannot be considered any form of perjury or violation of the oath of office. It still should be, I think, reason for a public apology on Cheney's part and a probable censure. The executive has a duty to tell the truth at all times, whether under oath or not, and failure to do so cannot be tolerated. (via Eschaton) Friday, August 29, 2003
Flood the Zone Friday, #2 (see here for background, here for the original idea and here for this week's primer). President Bush's leadership - or lackthereof - on the environment is clearly out of step with the vast majority of America. The administration is simply in lockstep with the worst elements of big business, rolling back basic regulations - even attempting to raise the allowable level of arsenic in drinking water, and now wants to allow nuclear waste to be allowed to leak into groundwater. Sounds like a great idea, no? Meanwhile, Christie Todd Whitman - barely qualifiable as a moderate on environmental issues - has been pushed aside out of the EPA in favor of Mike Leavitt, whose environmental record and troubling history of corruption bespeaks the intent of a return to the days of James Watt. Tuesday, August 26, 2003
I've managed to get a hold of copies of both the Spy article from 1992 by Charles Fleming and the Premiere article from 2001 by John Connolly that detail the schenanigans and misbehavior of Arnold Schwarzenegger. Neither of them paints a pretty picture. Unfortunately, for reasons of copyright law, it is my understanding that I cannot, say, reproduce either article in full here. The Premiere article is, however, available here at an archive site (incidentally, the article was pulled from Premiere's web site shortly after Arnold announced that he was running for governor). I can provide copies to anyone who wants one, however. The Premiere article includes the following accusations: - Inappropriately touching Denise Van Outen, Melanie Sykes and Anna Richardson (all British TV hostesses at the time) during a 2000 press junket for The 6th Day. - Pulled a woman's breasts out of her shirt during the production of Terminator 2 and fondled Linda Hamilton during a limo ride with his costar, as well as director James Cameron (who was then having an affair with Hamilton), and others (Hamilton has reportedly denied that the latter incident took place). - A highly inappropriate comment to the female producer of one of his movies, while both were standing before her husband. - Engaging in oral sex with another woman while on the set of Eraser in 1996 (this is the famous 'eating is not cheating' episode) - Berating wife Maria Shriver shortly after she became pregnant during the production of Total Recall and a claim that Schwarzenegger was having an affair with costar Rachel Ticotin at the same time. - Inappropriate behavior in a Beverly Hills restaraunt by Arnold and his entourage. - Attempts by Charlotte Parker, Schwarzenegger's then-publicist, to deny press coverage of Wendy Leigh's book Arnold: An Unauthorized Biography - by offering her publisher either a large amount of money or an authorized biography. Parker was apparently subsequently fired when she could not prevent the spread of news of his infidelities. The Premiere article also includes rumors of his reported use of steroids. The rumors seem fairly speculative, mostly based around news of Schwarzenegger's heart surgery in 1997, in which he had aortic valves replaced by pig valves, and the general commonness of steroid use among bodybuilders in the 1970's. The author of the article, John Connolly, did note that the accusations are dealt with elsewhere in some detail, principally in Leigh's book and True Myths a book by Nigel Andrews. The Spy article includes (besides a nude photo of Schwarzenegger ... ewwwwwwwwwww! - ed.) the following accusations: - The well-known Nazi party membership of Arnold's father (sins of the father, etc.) and his public support for Kurt Waldheim (or, as the article calls him, "renowned Nazi Kurt Waldheim"), as well as the less well-known claim that "in the 1970's he enjoyed playing and giving away records of Hitler's speeches." - Another claim that Arnold was caught 'in flagrante delicto' on a movie backlot. - Inappropriate comments to a store owner (though not directed at the store owner). - The story behind a photo taken by "Spanish millionaire and notorious gay playboy" Paco Arce that shows Schwarzenegger eating breakfast off fine china while wearing a tanktop and tight underpants and standing in front of numerous copies of Playgirl. (that's seriously weird, no doubt, but doesn't directly point to anything illegal or, for that matter, inappropriate). - More stories of attempts by Arnold's entourage to prevent the publication of Wendy Leigh's book, including four reported break-ins to the book's publisher while the book was being prepared (no connection to Schwarzenegger or his minions could be established). Schwarzenegger's side reportedly also offered Leigh a settlement for a libel lawsuit related to an article she had written about Arnold for the British tabloid News of the World that included demands for a large sum of money, a full public apology, and a promise from Leigh not to include in the book any allegations of homosexual experiences, steroid use, steroid sales, auto theft or passport forgery - despite the fact that no one had previously laid any such accusations (well, publicly) against Schwarzenegger. - The insistence of Charlotte Parker that an interview Schwarzenegger granted to Time would be ended immediately if the interviewer brought up Wendy Leigh's book, the Nazi party affiliation of Arnold's father or steroids, and more odd behavior by Parker towards various journalists. Some of the allegations are clearly more damaging than others. It seems certain that Schwarzenegger has an endless history of inappropriate and misogynistic behavior towards women that is simply intolerable - and, quite frankly, seems to make Bill Clinton look like a damn choirboy. Between the two articles, I count nine women, and three definite affairs (if, unlike Arnold, you count oral sex as cheating). The accusations of steroid use (and, for that matter, apparently sales) are quite damaging, but not immediately confirmable. Similarly, Schwarzenegger cannot be held responsible for the behavior of his father or his staff, though he should be considered partially responsible for the behavior of the latter - after all, he hired them and paid them to behave as they did. And I haven't even delved into his apparent admiration for Hitler or the questions about auto theft and passport forgery ... Given a man with such an perpetually abhorrent personality, and, for that matter, a lack of apparent direction as to how he would behave in the future - policy-wise or personality-wise - can anyone tell me why it is that this man is in first or second place in the polls in the California recall election? UPDATE: And then there's his reported affair with Gigi Goyette which apparently began while she was underage - and he was already married. (via Mark Kleiman) |