Blacknell.net

Politics, open government, and safe streets. And the constant incursion of cycling.

Month: March 2009 Page 3 of 4

Must Read: Josh Marshall on Obama, Geithner & the Public Trust

By

On March 19, 2009

In Policy, Politics, Society

Marshall writes:

What is so damaging about this isn’t the money — which is almost trivially small compared to the many hundreds of billions we’ve already committed. The problem is what appears to be the president’s mortifying impotence in the face of bankers and financiers who created the problem. The president speaks and acts for the federal government, which is to say, the American people, who have mobilized more than a trillion dollars and all powers of the state to repair the damage emerging out of the financial sector. And with all that, he’s jacked up on a employment agreement between a company the government now owns and derivatives traders who sank the world economy and may quite likely be looking at criminal charges for their activities in the not too distant future?

Anyone can look at that and see that the equation of power and accountability is all screwed up.

Quite.   And really, I hope you’ll click over and read the whole thing.  It nails the current state of affairs.  Here’s the end:

Whether Geithner and Summers are too close to the people on Wall Street, either through interest or affinity, is an interesting and possibly important question. But fundamentally Obama needs to start showing that he’s in charge, that he’s operating as the American people’s advocate and that he has the power to do it — which these stories of getting jacked up by some Gordon Gecko wannabes in London just terribly undermines. But to do that, to show that, it has to be true. And that might require some real changes in policy and possibly in personnel too.

Virginia Political Ridiculousness, Afternoon Edition

By

On March 19, 2009

In Personal, Politics, Society

Vivian Paige, in the context of some shameful personal attacks on a candidate for Lieutenant Governor, says:

The people have been lulled – by their own inaction – into a sense that politics is dirty and that’s just the way it is. But it doesn’t have to be. There are a lot more of us than there are of them. If we wanted to, we could change the way politics is done. But far too many are “too busy” to get involved, the result being the kind of attacks that Pat Edmonson and others experience, attacks that divert the candidate’s attention away from the real issues of jobs, healthcare, education and others.

People like to blame the candidates for the state of politics, but the candidates do it for a reason – it works with voters.  And it takes the focus away from things that are hard: jobs, healthcare, education; and onto things that are easy: playground insults and identity politics.   Now, as a fan of the occasional playground insult, I’m hardly hoping for some idealized world of policy debates (although if it could keep me from ever having to endure another pearl-clutching kabuki dance about how shocked and offended a Virginian was by language, all the while gliding over the ugliness of their ideas, I might sign up).  Rather, I’d like us all to be a little more conscious of our own tolerance for the form-over-substance approach to politics.

Only Little People Pay Taxes

By

On March 19, 2009

In Policy, Politics

The hits keep on coming:

Just when you thought it was impossible to find more proof of the bungling of the bailout … Rep. John Lewis (D-GA), chairman of the House Ways and Means oversight subcommittee, announced this morning that his panel had found 13 of the top 23 recipients of TARP owing the government $220 million in back taxes.

Making matters worse was the fact that any company getting TARP aid had to certify to the Treasury Department that they didn’t owe back taxes before getting their share of the bailout, as Lewis explained. It appears that Treasury took the bailed-out businesses at their word rather than asking to actually see their tax records.

This was a foul-up under Bush/Paulson, but the Obama Administration needs to turn around and look at those posters that put them there.   They need to take that CHANGE a bit more seriously, or they’re going to take it on the chin.  To be clear, they’re not approaching the financial sector in any fundamentally different way than did the Bush and Clinton Administrations, so it would be unfair to say that they’re any worse than what came before.  But that’s not the measure they’ve set for themselves, nor is it one that anyone should be willing to let them skate on.

DC Cyclists & Helmets

By

On March 19, 2009

In Cycling, DC

The City Paper had an interesting look at the cyclists who don’t wear helmets in DC, and their reasons:

Unscientific observations of D.C.’s riding patterns suggest that about half of riders wear helmets. Riders commuting downtown during rush hour, wearing loafers and nice pants, usually wear helmets. Cyclists wearing gear like clip-on bike shoes or Lycra jerseys or padded shorts generally do so as well. In low-income areas, among messengers, and during noncommuting hours, helmet use goes down.

In the last 10 years, there have been a reported 232 bicyclist deaths in D.C., Maryland, and Virginia. Correctly worn, bike helmets are about 70 percent effective in preventing damage on impact.

Now, I think you’re an idiot if you don’t wear a helmet, but I’m not a purist.  I not infrequently make the three block trip to the grocery store without a lid, which I have no real defense for beyond just not feeling like bothering with carrying it through the store.  It’s a pretty lame habit, and one that I’m working on changing.  I would oppose any helmet law for adults (but support one for children).  That said, the reasons some of the folks give for not wearing helmets?  Make me wonder how they get through the day:

Kelly Johnson, 43, says he can’t wear a helmet because he wears headphones when he rides. Which means that not only does Johnson leave himself vulnerable in the case of an accident, but he’s also boosting the chance that such an accident will occur. He also admits that he thinks helmets look “corny.”

Bob Twillger, 28, who has been known to hang out at Capitol Hill Bikes, blames good helmet technology for his failure to wear one. “The lighter the helmet,” he reasons, “the more you put it down, and the more you damage it. It gets kicked around and beat up.” This from a man who takes credit for totaling a Toyota Camry with his forehead. “Every time I get hit, I get wilder,” he says. “More bulletproof.”

Yeah, no relationship between hitting your head and brain damage at all.

Another Pint, Gordon?

By

On March 19, 2009

In EU, Policy, Politics, UK

I have so little good to say about the UK’s Labour Party these days that I might as well get in a compliment where I can.  Prime Minister Gordon Brown has, against all reasonable expectations, struck a blow for common sense and decency:

Gordon Brown today rejected controversial proposals from the chief medical officer to establish a minimum price for alcohol, which would double the price of many beers and spirits.

The prime minister said that he would protect the interests of the “sensible majority of moderate drinkers” when responding to proposals from Sir Liam Donaldson for a minimum charge of 50p per unit of alcohol to be imposed on beer and wine.

And Scotland, well, how do you like that devolution now?

The Scottish government is planning to introduce minimum prices for alcohol and these could come into force by the end of the year. It would make Scotland the first country in Europe to introduce minimum pricing, which would be accompanied by a ban on certain drinks promotions.

Cheers.

Virginia Primary Childishness (Current Edition)

By

On March 19, 2009

In Politics, Virginia

Mike over at Blueweeds says what ought to be said:

I have been trying to stay away from the increasingly odd temper tantrums promoted by the MacAuliffe “netroots” supporters over at Blue Commonwealth and  Blue Virginia.  There is a level of self importance which I do not understand, which is bad for the party, and which makes folks like myself, whom I would describe as true neutral grassroots Democrats who have zero interest in being employed by any campaign, want to do anything other than support the candidate jammed at me by the self-described progressive netroots bloggers.

This sort of childishness has happened every cycle since the Miller-Webb primary, and every time, it does a little more damage.  If you’re part of it, stop it.  If you’re in the audience, get up and leave.  And for fuck’s sake, Virginia Democrats, stop rewarding it.

The Financial Clusterfsck: Exploiting the Knowledge Gap

By

On March 17, 2009

In Policy, Society

I’ve been thinking a bit about the exchange that went down in the Time Bomb post over at TPM, where they reprinted a readers claim:

You’re missing the point on AIGFP’s bonuses. The reason the government has no bargaining power is that failure to pay the bonuses — which, like it or not, AIG is contractually obligated to pay — would constitute a “cross-default” under AIG’s derivative contracts. Cross-default is considered an “event of default” under the standard ISDA Master Agreement (see sec. (5)(a)(vi)), which means that failure to pay the bonuses would allow AIG’s counterparties to terminate the CDS contracts and demand a full payout from AIG. With a derivatives portfolio of over $1.5 trillion, this is no small deal. Venting over AIGFP’s bonuses is fine, but urging the government to take an action which would result in hundreds of billions in losses to AIG (and thus the taxpayer) just because it would make you feel better is bad policy. Don’t let cheap populism become expensive populism.

Uh, yeah.  A subsequent reader (and really, TPM has some very smart readers, who contribute much to the discussion*)

This is simply not true. The bonuses are owed to AIG’s employees, not its counterparties. AIG’s employees are not parties to its ISDA agreements.

Furthermore conditions such as the payment of bonuses are not anywhere near what a “cross default” is. A “cross-default” would be if AIG failed to satisfy its obligations to Counterparty A, then Counterparty B could claim it was in default even if technically it wasn’t.

The contractual obligations that AIG are under are employee contracts…not ISDAs.
There’s no doomsday scenario here. The worst that can happen to AIG is that its
employees could sue it to obtain their promised bonuses.

Now, I don’t work in finance, but the first commenter’s claim that non-payment of bonuses would, on its own, trigger some cross-default provision struck me as absurd on its face.  And so I went to the cited model agreement section itself and saw that yes, there was no such provision and that the original commenter was full of shit.  But how many people would do that? His/her email to TPM is just another example of someone willingly exploiting the gap in knowledge (between the larger public and his/her specialized industry) for that industry’s benefit.  And it was intentional, to be sure – anyone who can cite a provision of the model agreement understands that it’s not relevant, here.  It’s disgusting, yet I see this sort of shameless exploitation replayed over and over again, in mass media discussion of the issue.  It’s a not faint echo of the approach that got us here in the first place – a belief that you can ignore the facts if you show enough confidence in your pronouncements.  Appalling.

*Like here!

This Explains Much

By

On March 17, 2009

In Personal, Society

Because I need to spread this around:

The BBC is reporting that a new study suggests that our mental abilities start to dwindle at 27 after peaking at 22, and 27 could be seen as the ‘start of old age.’ The seven-year study, by Professor Timothy Salthouse of the University of Virginia, looked at 2,000 healthy people aged 18-60, and used a number of mental agility tests already used to spot signs of dementia. ‘The first age at which there was any marked decline was at 27 in tests of brain speed, reasoning and visual puzzle-solving ability. Things like memory stayed intact until the age of 37, on average, while abilities based on accumulated knowledge, such as performance on tests of vocabulary or general information, increased until the age of 60.’

Some of you may appreciate the tags on the linked Slashdot story.

Is It Wrong, That I Laughed?

By

On March 17, 2009

In Society

Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA), in a radio interview regarding the AIG execs, yesterday:

“I suggest, you know, obviously, maybe they ought to be removed,” Grassley said. “But I would suggest the first thing that would make me feel a little bit better toward them if they’d follow the Japanese example and come before the American people and take that deep bow and say, I’m sorry, and then either do one of two things: resign or go commit suicide.”

“And in the case of the Japanese, they usually commit suicide before they make any apology.”

Probably a bit over the line, and wrong to laugh. But I did anyway.

Thank You, Sir, May I Have Another?

By

On March 16, 2009

In Law, Policy, Politics

Josh Marshall’s analysis here gets at why the situation with AIG bonuses is appalling:

We’re collectively taking our country’s future in our hands, spending vast sums of money to keep these companies from suffering the consequences of their own folly and (in many cases) criminality. And in return we’re receiving cavalier dictates about pay-outs and bonuses from executives who by any reasonable measure work for us — dictates we promptly accede to. There’s a beggars can’t be choosers problem there. And the disconnect is so mighty that it fuels the impression that the whole enterprise is not what it seems, not what we’ve been told, that in addition to picking up the tab we’re being played for fools.

Obviously, AIG and its ilk can’t be shamed, and aren’t at all worried about public perception or pressure.  You know who should be more worried than they seem to be?  The Obama Administration.   Their willingness to eat the shit sandwiches AIG keeps feeding them is nauseating.

Page 3 of 4

Previous

Next

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén