Waxing Poetic »

By Michael

In regards to the reason why humans (particularly men) past, present, and future wax poetic regarding love (i.e. sex), I have surmised that characterizing these outlets as “forms of art” is putting it all rather nicely.  They are merely the letters of ordinary people that have come back return to sender.  And those musings when disseminated to the public abroad simply become the idea onto which someone else projects their own daydream.

They might be art now, but don’t be mistaken because they were never written for the sake of art.

Even more relevant today, a lover could never read any greater piece of literature than by an author whose professional title is, “Sugardaddy.”

• • •

Guest Post: Excuses for Excuses Sake »

By Michael

My friend Bryan writes:

Excuses for Excuses Sake

After reading an article by Scott Moritz earlier this morning, I came to the conclusion that people/reporters try to make a story out of anything.  I honestly have no idea how an article that doesn’t really make much sense makes it to the front page of Yahoo. In the article Mr. Moritz states 5 reasons NOT to buy the new iPhone 4. There very well may be 20 reasons not to buy the new smart phone, but these 5 reasons just don’t seem like a deal breaker.

Scott’s first point is regarding the camera. He states, “HTC, Motorola and Nokia embrace the megapixel race with 8-megapixel and 12-megapixel cameras, Apple’s new iPhone keeps it cheap with a 5-megapixel model.” Is he stating that the quality of the camera is only based on the megapixels? Being a photographer, this is probably the comment that irks me the most. So using his logic, the cameras that are included in the HTC, Motorola, and Nokia phones are better than an entry-level DSLR camera (ex. Nikon D40)? Just because they have more megapixels? This is so far from the truth it’s not even funny.

Mr. Moritz’s second point of not having the “Swype” feature does not hold water in my opinion either. First of all, is this really a reason not to buy a superior phone? I say no, but that is for the consumer to decide. Plus, in all honesty, there will probably be an app for that. Along with this he makes his third point, regarding the video-calling feature. Yes, the feature limits you to only other iPhone 4 users, but that is what it is meant to do. He comments “not exactly an application of global Skype-like proportions.” Yes, he is correct, but the Skype app, will be available for those who want it. So, I don’t understand what he is complaining about.

Scott’s final two points are that there will be phone shortages, and that the iPhone is not available for Verizon. If a customer is loyal to Verizon’s service, that is their choice, but I still don’t understand all the complaints with AT&T network. Finally he states that the phone being in short supply is a blemish for the phone. Last time I checked, Americans, or people in general love rare things. Why do people buy Ferraris, Rolex, and special editions of things? They do this because they are rare, and to most, rare is sexy, and it means you’r important if you have one. Also, a couple months down the road, there won’t be a wait anymore either. So there goes that argument.

All in all there are definitely reasons not to get the new iPhone 4, however I don’t think this article show any of them.

I’m not sure that Moritz was giving five reasons not to buy the iPhone, but I certainly know that he wrote an article of complaints because complaining about the new iPhone is a great to get your story put up on digg and reddit.  One thing I want to comment on that I found puzzling when I read the article was his bizarre logic on how 1 million iPhones per month is something to complain about.  If anything, the great demand that will shorten supply only signals that this phone is worth getting.

• • •

Huh? »

By Michael

Arnold  Kling writes:

Incidentally, Idiocracy is a really bad movie, but it has to be seen.

No, Arnold, no it doesn’t.

• • •

Penmanship »

By Michael

Someone, probably Megan McArdle (although I’m still hoping for George Will), will probably write something soon regarding how the lack of Americans writing in cursive, while not the downfall of the United States, is simply one of the signs of how far we have fallen, or how far we will fall.  Watch this space…

• • •

On Democracy »

By Michael

Many weeks ago on Facebook, a friend of mine wrote in regards to the iPhone staying proprietary to the AT&T network, “muuuuaahahahahaaha! Dont worry, verizon isn’t as good as everyone claims it to be.”

It’s funny how we, as Americans, claim our democracy is the best form of available government, yet we continuously find examples where democracy in its barest form, is purported to be wrong (e.g. look above). If we’re willing to acknowledge that society at large makes decisions in plurality (or majority) that are wrong, then likewise, on the other side of the political spectrum, the free market must fail on similar principles.

And while your mind tackles with the logic that once again, there cannot be two sets of “facts,” the reality is that while Verizon may not be “as good as everyone claims it to be” (whatever that means), there is a reason why users of AT&T say it sucks.

• • •

A Diversion Worth Diverting To »

By Michael

Considering my other interests in music, last night, I saw what will probably be the most popular show I will see, for quite some time.  Owl City put on a show at The Electric Factory, along with the person whom I was so eager to see, Lights (pictured with me on the left).

Owl City-Lights 010While I could go into a review , let me just say that she and Owl City were both excellent, and that everyone had a great time.  And Lights being the wonderful person that she is, was nice enough to take a picture with me.  Many thanks to Brett who got us there, and Heather, who took the picture.

It was a fantastic break from thinking of all things economics, which we’ll get back in a bit here at The Nappy Cat.

• • •

Points Made Without Knowledge »

By Michael

Robert Samuelson writes a good op-ed in today’s Washington Post.  He ends by writing:

A VAT might be the least bad tax, though my preference is for energy taxes. But what’s wrong with the simplistic VAT advocacy is that it deemphasizes spending cuts.

That’s fair enough.  However, earlier in the article, Samuelson makes a point without knowing it.  And I don’t know if that’s because he didn’t notice what he wrote, or he would rather not draw attention to it.

But the actual increase might be closer to 16 percent because there would be huge pressures to exempt groceries, rent and housing, health care, education and charitable groups. Together, they account for nearly half of $10 trillion of consumer spending.

Samuelson is stating that the VAT wouldn’t be enough to lower the deficit.  But, he ends up making a point that it’s just plainly expensive to make a living, period.

• • •

I Didn’t Say It »

By Michael

I caught this post from Greg Mankiw as soon as he posted it.  In it, he discusses that a Parade magazine article shows way too much distribution towards rich people.

The problem I found with it was that Greg cites:

By my count, about 14 percent of the people in Parade’s sample earn more than $1 million a year. In the real world, the actual percentage is about 0.2 percent.

There’s nothing with citing that.  My problem is that Greg opens himself up to everyone in the world asking, “Wait, why is there such a huge income gap between the top and the middle?”

Unfortunately, because I’m not a prominent economist I was frightened to actually publish any post regarding it.  Luckily, Justin Wolfers stepped out into the water for me and made my argument.

The lesson?  Families earning more than $1 million probably do represent close to 14 percent of total income, and maybe more.  By arguing that only 0.2 percent of families are this rich, Mankiw risks distracting his readers from the fact that increasing the taxes paid by the rich can be a big part of the solution to our fiscal woes.

• • •

Oh Please »

By Michael

From Grand Prix.com:

While driving on the street at 9:15pm, close to the Albert Park circuit, Hamilton was spotted by the police deliberately losing traction in his 2010 Mercedes C63. Melbourne police booked him under what are know as “anti-hoon” laws, in which – often young – motorists spin their wheels, fishtail or perform doughnuts on public roads.

The police impounded his car, and he was then driven back to his hotel.

I’m sorry, but if anyone in THE WORLD is qualified to have a bit of leeway on the road with their car control, it is Lewis Hamilton.  To the point, if anyone were to be pulled over for such an offense, the proper thing for an officer to say is, “I’m sorry, but are YOU Lewis Hamilton?  No, then you’ll have to come with me.”

• • •

Two Heads – Same Coin »

By Michael

I must admit, there is some sort of morbid enjoyment I receive in figuring out how terrible our current system of government and business operates in tandem.

In the example I’d like to show to you today, I will discuss Tim Geithner.

First, from Matt Taibbi, who has been chronicling the Wall Street bailout since its inception.

Geithner and Ben Bernanke continued a bailout policy that rewarded the very people who were most responsible for the crisis.

This is understandable and supported by many facts and first hand accounts.  People saw what Geithner was doing as a classic tactic of tackling a problem in a manner that would first -and probably only – help large financial institutions.  To wit, Geithner’s background follows along and maintains the same criticisms of Henry (Hank) Paulson’s background when Paulson served as the Treasury Secretary.  Both former executives from large financial firms only to go to work for government to be seen as helping only large financial firms.

Then, there’s this tidbit from Paul Krugman Friday:

Jimmy Cayne’s reaction to Tim Geithner’s reluctance to bail out Bear Stearns:

“The audacity of that [punk] in front of the American people announcing he was deciding whether or not a firm of this stature and this whatever was good enough to get a loan,” he said. “Like he was the determining factor, and it’s like a flea on his back, floating down underneath the Golden Gate Bridge …, saying, ‘Raise the bridge.’ This guy thinks he’s … He’s got nothing, except maybe a boyfriend. I’m not a good enemy. I’m a very bad enemy. But certain things really—that bothered me plenty. It’s just that for some clerk to make a decision based on what, your own personal feeling about whether or not they’re a good credit? Who … asked you? You’re not an elected officer. You’re a clerk. Believe me, you’re a clerk. I want to open up on this …, that’s all I can tell you.”

(Expurgated — even though this was reprinted in the WSJ, I’m trying to protect the dignity of the Times. And he didn’t actually say punk).

It all makes for a great soap opera really.  Jon Stewart made a joke on his show about this all becoming a great movie, and he’s right.  And this is by no means an effort to give Tim Geithner some sort of pass for any bad choices he’s made.  Rather, I’m simply trying to point out how so much is not enough in terms of “bailing out” such large firms.  It’s really quite amazing how indignant people like Jimmy Cayne can be.

• • •
12345Next Page >102030...47