Andrew,
As a follow up to your post on Car Culture, it is probably worth noting (from http://www.eia.gov/emeu/steo/pub/contents.html):
"Liquid fuel net imports (including both crude oil and refined products) fell from 57 percent of total U.S. consumption in 2008 to 49 percent in 2010 because of rising domestic production and the decline in consumption during the economic downturn. EIA forecasts that liquid fuel net imports' share of total consumption will decline further to 47 percent in 2011 before rising slightly to 48 percent in 2012."
In other words, our share of imported oil is going down as a result of less consumption (driving) as well as a slight increase in domestic production.
[I don't suppose you'll hear any Republicans mentioning that the share of liquid fuels made up of imports has dropped below 50% under Obama's watch? Didn't think so. :) ]
If there is one thing this recession is good for, it is wiping away, then keeping us from re-acquiring, our over-consumption in many areas.
Your pal,
Fred
Friday, August 19, 2011
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Social Security as Ponzi scheme
Andrew,
I agree with virtually all your readers in the batch of letters you published as pushback against the idea of Social Security as a Ponzi scheme (in fact, I made a similar point as the first writer in a comment on the Indiviglio site).
But your last reader, who tried to make the point about the safety of T-bills as investment vehicles, probably would not have tried to make that point if he (or she) had realized that the Trust Fund is *required* to be invested in T-bills. Yeah, it is safe, but there was no casting about for safe places to stash the cash and then deciding upon Treasuries.
The reader should instead have made the point that the reason the law says to invest the surplus in T-bills is that they are, indeed, safe there.
Your pal,
Fred
I agree with virtually all your readers in the batch of letters you published as pushback against the idea of Social Security as a Ponzi scheme (in fact, I made a similar point as the first writer in a comment on the Indiviglio site).
But your last reader, who tried to make the point about the safety of T-bills as investment vehicles, probably would not have tried to make that point if he (or she) had realized that the Trust Fund is *required* to be invested in T-bills. Yeah, it is safe, but there was no casting about for safe places to stash the cash and then deciding upon Treasuries.
The reader should instead have made the point that the reason the law says to invest the surplus in T-bills is that they are, indeed, safe there.
Your pal,
Fred
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Palin 2012
I complete agree with Larison on the question of Palin for 2012. But really, what is the GOP goal here? As much as there is some kind of overall goal they are shooting for, the presidency is *not* it. They know they have no chance to upset Obama in 2012 when he is in full campaign mode.
So their overall goal remains consistent: To soil the water of politics in order to present themselves as the only real alternative to those currently in power, starting with Congress. And toward that, Palin is a logical choice. If you have no chance of actually winning, why not run Palin up there to "speak truth to power" and tell America that "real Americans" are unhappy with the way things are being done? It is a win-win for the GOP--the media will happily (and freely) report everything Palin says and does with high definition coverage of "real Americans" trying to "take back" their country.
The GOP isn't about policy, governance, or leadership. It is about publicity.
Your pal,
Fred
So their overall goal remains consistent: To soil the water of politics in order to present themselves as the only real alternative to those currently in power, starting with Congress. And toward that, Palin is a logical choice. If you have no chance of actually winning, why not run Palin up there to "speak truth to power" and tell America that "real Americans" are unhappy with the way things are being done? It is a win-win for the GOP--the media will happily (and freely) report everything Palin says and does with high definition coverage of "real Americans" trying to "take back" their country.
The GOP isn't about policy, governance, or leadership. It is about publicity.
Your pal,
Fred
Thursday, May 27, 2010
DADT vote
Andrew:
I just wanted to point out one sentence from that NYT article on the committee vote for DADT:
"[Republicans] also questioned if the military leaders who would have to make the final decision would be able to resist pressure from the White House to lift the repeal. "
Sounds like someone keeps forgetting that Obama is the Commander in Chief.
Your pal,
Fred
I just wanted to point out one sentence from that NYT article on the committee vote for DADT:
"[Republicans] also questioned if the military leaders who would have to make the final decision would be able to resist pressure from the White House to lift the repeal. "
Sounds like someone keeps forgetting that Obama is the Commander in Chief.
Your pal,
Fred
Monday, March 15, 2010
On Glenn Beck
Andrew,
While I understand the point you are trying to make with regard to Beck (essentially, making a distinction between religious mandates and a welfare state), you are making a distinction Beck himself is not making.
One can argue whether a "socialist state" is the best way to deliver on the promise and mandate of social justice for the religious (of whatever persuasion). But one cannot argue that such a mandate is just cause for leaving a particular church.
Beck's ham-fistedness wasn't that he was talking about politics and wanted to ensure the religious were a part of his Rand-like vision. It was that he tried to separate the religious from their own beliefs.
Your pal,
Fred
While I understand the point you are trying to make with regard to Beck (essentially, making a distinction between religious mandates and a welfare state), you are making a distinction Beck himself is not making.
One can argue whether a "socialist state" is the best way to deliver on the promise and mandate of social justice for the religious (of whatever persuasion). But one cannot argue that such a mandate is just cause for leaving a particular church.
Beck's ham-fistedness wasn't that he was talking about politics and wanted to ensure the religious were a part of his Rand-like vision. It was that he tried to separate the religious from their own beliefs.
Your pal,
Fred
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
On leaving the GOP to fix it
Andrew,
Your eloquence about staying out of the GOP (most recently, in your reaction to Frum) is solid stuff. I only wish you would apply the same reasoning to your membership in the Catholic Church. The Church commits the same sins as the GOP but yet adds to it an ethical and moral authority just as damning to you.
Frum merely applies your "stay in the Church" reasoning to the GOP.
BTW, I'm a hetero white male, a moderate liberal, and a Catholic churchgoer as well. And I pray for you, Andrew, for all the misplaced hell you have to go through as you seek to follow your faith. And I pray that the Church will, within our lifetimes, live up to the faith you place in it.
Your pal,
Fred
Your eloquence about staying out of the GOP (most recently, in your reaction to Frum) is solid stuff. I only wish you would apply the same reasoning to your membership in the Catholic Church. The Church commits the same sins as the GOP but yet adds to it an ethical and moral authority just as damning to you.
Frum merely applies your "stay in the Church" reasoning to the GOP.
BTW, I'm a hetero white male, a moderate liberal, and a Catholic churchgoer as well. And I pray for you, Andrew, for all the misplaced hell you have to go through as you seek to follow your faith. And I pray that the Church will, within our lifetimes, live up to the faith you place in it.
Your pal,
Fred
Friday, November 20, 2009
Sarah Palin's book sales
Andrew,
As a published (and HarperCollins) author yourself, I'm surprised you would think that anyone has a clue right now about whether Palin's book will earn out her advance. Of course Harper is touting the sales and printing figures right now, but nearly all those books are going to bookstores. Are they being purchased by people--you bet. But *none* of those numbers include returns, which is why political books normally have sales drop offs like a rock off a cliff.
Whether the advance earns out of not (i.e., whether Harper turns a profit) depends upon whether sales continue to be positive before the end of the next royalty accounting period. In six months, in other words, will Harper be ordering more books from the printer, or will they be telling Borders to remainder those books in-place and offer credits of $20/book so they don't have to take back thousands of unsold copies of the book back in their Scranton warehouse? If Coulter and other recent political books are any indication, you betcha it'll be the latter.
The only two things we can be certain of at this point, is that Palin has made a boatload of money (she keeps that advance even if the book doesn't earn it out) and that Harper will be able to leverage the frontloaded sales of this book to roll the dice on future politi-celebrity books because their efforts make Harper more attractive to those authors.
Your pal,
Fred
As a published (and HarperCollins) author yourself, I'm surprised you would think that anyone has a clue right now about whether Palin's book will earn out her advance. Of course Harper is touting the sales and printing figures right now, but nearly all those books are going to bookstores. Are they being purchased by people--you bet. But *none* of those numbers include returns, which is why political books normally have sales drop offs like a rock off a cliff.
Whether the advance earns out of not (i.e., whether Harper turns a profit) depends upon whether sales continue to be positive before the end of the next royalty accounting period. In six months, in other words, will Harper be ordering more books from the printer, or will they be telling Borders to remainder those books in-place and offer credits of $20/book so they don't have to take back thousands of unsold copies of the book back in their Scranton warehouse? If Coulter and other recent political books are any indication, you betcha it'll be the latter.
The only two things we can be certain of at this point, is that Palin has made a boatload of money (she keeps that advance even if the book doesn't earn it out) and that Harper will be able to leverage the frontloaded sales of this book to roll the dice on future politi-celebrity books because their efforts make Harper more attractive to those authors.
Your pal,
Fred
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)