Category Archives: Current Affairs

Couric-Palin Part IV

Saturday Night Live has been pretty bad for a few years now.  It’s gotten so bad that we’ve pretty much stopped watching it in our house over the last few years.  However, they’ve struck gold with Tina Fey doing Sarah Palin impressions.  Last night’s opening, which featured a parody of Palin’s interviews with Katie Couric last week were a great example.  As Ed Cone wrote, it’s almost not funny considering how close to reality the parody was.  See for yourself below:

Battle of the Green Eyeshades

Winston-Salem is home to one large bank, BB&T.  We used to be home to Wachovia but then they went and "merged" with First Union and moved HQ to Charlotte, so we here in Winston have just one major bank that we call our own.  Thus it was with a little bit of hometown pride that I read in today’s paper that the bank’s head honcho sent a letter to the Congress critters detailing why he thinks the bailout stinks.

For John Allison, the high-risk rollers on Wall Street are getting
too much of the ear of Congress and having too much say in resolving
the financial nightmare that they created.

That’s why Allison, the chairman and chief executive of BB&T
Corp., submitted a 14-point letter Tuesday to all 535 members of
Congress with a simple message regarding the proposed $700 billion
bailout.

"There is no panic on Main Street and in sound financial
institutions," he wrote. "The problems are in high-risk financial
institutions and on Wall Street."

He said that it is important that "Congress hear from the well-run
financial institutions, as most of the concerns have been focused on
the problem companies. It is extremely important that the bailout not
damage well-run companies." Allison’s opinion is seconded by local
community-bank officials and community-bank trade groups.

"Community bankers did not create this financial crisis, but our
banks and communities are clearly feeling the impact," the Independent
Community Bankers of America said in a statement. "As the fundamental
drivers of local economies — we could be in a strong position to help
resolve this crisis."

Go get ’em Mr. Allison.

Wolves Guarding the Hen House

One of the axioms from business that I adhere to most fervently is that when someone tells me I need to buy NOW or face ruinous price hikes I should actually do the reverse and take a deep breath and consider very carefully the deal I’m considering.  That’s exactly what we need our Congress to do now in the face of the Bush administration’s call to push through a massive bailout package for the financial sector NOW.

Here’s why I think we need to take a deep breath and think before we act:

  • Most of the press has focused on this being Treasury Secretary Paulson’s initiative, with nary a mention of President Bush.  There’s lots of speculation that it’s because the President is a lame duck at this point, but personally I think it’s because they don’t want this thing to be associated with the Bush administration, an administration that no one trusts.  Well, Paulson is a Bush appointee and he’s most definitely a part of the administration which means that his actions must be scrutinized very carefully.  Even if his actions are well intentioned (I personally think they are), he is a crony and product of the industry he is asking us, the American taxpayers, to trust him to rescue with our future tax dollars.  I say future tax dollars because this isn’t money we currently have to spend so another part of the rescue package is that we’ll raise our debt ceiling from over $10 trillion to over $11 trillion.  If we’ve learned nothing else I hope that we’ve learned that no one in this administration can be trusted not to let privateers get wealthy in the process of governing our country.  They’ve already done it with the war in Iraq and there’s no reason to think they wouldn’t do it here.
  • A big part of the bailout proposal is that it will empower Paulson, and/or his successor, to contract with private enterprises to manage the assets that the government is going to buy.  According to this article in the New York Times some of the companies lobbying for the job are the very same companies who will be benefiting directly from the proposed buyouts.  Is anyone really surprised?
  • Although I believe that cronyism has gone on in every president’s administration, the Bush bunch has taken it to a whole new level.  While many pundits are quick to point out the Clinton administration’s contributions to this mess, the reality is that we’ve been under the Bush administration for eight years and they’ve been at the helm plenty long enough to bear the brunt of the responsibility for this mess.  Heck, Bush even had a Republican Congress and an incredibly high approval rating the first couple of years.  Unfortunately the Bushies spent the last five years doing everything they can to undermine the public trust, so now when the economic stakes are greater than they’ve been in over two generations and they need the public trust more than ever, they don’t have a chance in hell of getting it.  And rightly so.  Of course Congress hasn’t done much better, so in general I think we need to do whatever is necessary to hold all of these a-holes accountable and make sure they do the right thing.
  • What is the right thing?  I have yet to read or hear anything that clearly outlines the worst case scenario if we don’t do the bailout, versus the worst case scenario if we do pass the bailout. One number I’ve heard is that the bailout will directly cost every man, woman and child in the U.S. over $3,000.  What would the cost be of letting these companies fail?  And why not let them fail and let the competitive, free market establish a replacement?  I don’t think this is a silly question, especially given the fact that AIG’s major shareholders are now looking for a way to not take the government’s proposed $85 billion loan since it will essentially wipe out their holdings. Is it realistic to assume that some other parts of the financial services market might suddenly be motivated to get their own house in order if the alternative is losing everything when the government swoops in to take over?

    Given all these questions it’s kind of hard for us Regular Joe’s to figure out what we think our
    leaders should do, and considering that we have their jobs in our hands
    in less than two months I’d think they’d want to clearly explain to us
    why they’re doing what they’re doing.

  • Oh wait, that last point is so naive of me. They don’t want us to know because either they don’t think we’re capable of understanding, or they don’t want us to figure out how inept they’ve been, or both.

I know this stuff can be kind of boring to most of us, but it’s hard to overstate how important this particular issue is.  It’s absurd that no one is effectively framing the issue for us, the people who ultimately are going to pay the bill.  Will someone please step up and tell us what the hell is going on?

Left Coast Perspective

I’ve been in San Francisco since Sunday and it has been interesting seeing how news breaks here versus back east.  For instance all the news about the Wall Street meltdown has had a kind of muted feel here, but I don’t think it’s because people here are any less worried or affected.  Rather, I think that because the financial market is already a couple of hours into its day when everyone here is starting to pay attention the east-based media has had time to calm down and get through its initial breathlessness.  Not that they seem any smarter or deeper from here, but that panic-tinged tone just isn’t as evident.

It’s also interesting to realize exactly how New York-centric our news still is, and from out here it’s really kind of annoying.  I have CNBC on right now (BTW, Dow is down 287 points at this point) and their "perspective" from the west coast came from a Hollywood reporter and focused on how advertisers will move to TV from print.  WTF?  I mean I’m sitting just down the road from Silicon Valley and I’m wondering why they wouldn’t look into the effect the market shake up is having on the tech sector.  Hollywood?

And the whole kerfluffle about McCain’s comment yesterday that the economic fundamentals are strong was kind of fun to watch from here.  While I was getting ready in my room yesterday morning I had the Today show on and they were playing McCain’s interview with Matt Lauer at just after 7:00 PDT.  Well, as I listened to his wan performance (it really was bad) and his incredibly lame explanation that what he meant was that America’s workers are the fundamental strength of the American economy, I realized that McCain had uttered those words three hours earlier during a live 7:00 a.m EDT interview and I started wondering what kind of spin his people had come up with in the ensuing three hours since he’d laid that stinker of an interview on his campaign.  It really hit home that out here news kind of hits with a time delay, and it’s much like us east coasters watching news out of Europe.  It just doesn’t seem so urgent or Chicken Little-ish, and I think that’s a good thing.

Maybe all this helps explain why everyone here seems so laid back.

Meet the Tortoise

Dana Blankenhorn calls Charles Schwab the new kings of Wall Street:

The value of Schwab stock is practically unchanged since the start of the year. (I don’t own any but I do keep my money there.) In the present environment this is an immense achievement.

Schwab himself finally retired recently at age 70, for the second time. Hopefully the new guy, Walter Bettinger, whose former retirement planning outfit was acquired by Schwab in 1995, has learned the lessons and will stick to his knitting.

The reason you won’t hear about this on CNBC is precisely why Schwab is so strong. As with Seinfeld, this is a story about nothing.

Schwab doesn’t play with its customers’ money. It offers a selection of mutual funds, mostly index funds, and invests customer cash conservatively. It offers advice, but that advice is simply to diversify. It doesn’t make extra money if you take its advice, and it doesn’t make more if you don’t.

I like to call Schwab my "bookie" and that’s a pretty good description of the business model. Schwab doesn’t have a horse in the race. Schwab gets its vig no matter who wins.

Lenders, Meet the Law of Unintended Consequences

Remember when the banks were so hot to trot on toughening the bankruptcy laws?  This BusinessWeek article looks at why they might now be regretting those tougher rules.

The latest lesson for lenders from the housing crisis: Be careful what
you wish for. Banks and other financial outfits spent eight years and
$40 million lobbying for sweeping new bankruptcy rules that would limit
their losses from deadbeat debtors. But it turns out those changes,
enacted in 2005, are forcing more troubled borrowers to walk away from
their homes—even those who didn’t take on risky mortgages in the first
place. And that’s bad news for lenders, which suffer financially every
time they have to take a troubled property on their books.

Before the new rules kicked in, many consumers could find debt
relief—and keep their homes—by filing for bankruptcy protection. Now
the process is much more onerous and expensive and the benefits more
limited, making foreclosure seem appealing by comparison. A July paper
by David Bernstein, a researcher at the U.S. Treasury, found that
800,000 fewer homeowners have filed for bankruptcy since the rules
kicked in. A quarter of those people, says the report, have likely had
to give up their homes as a result—boosting foreclosures nationwide at
least 4%. "[The rules] are directly responsible for the rising
foreclosure rate," notes another report by investment bank Credit
Suisse (CSR). Counters Philip Corwin, counsel at the trade group American Bankers Assn.: "These studies don’t stand up to scrutiny."

The article doesn’t make clear how the studies might not stand up to scrutiny, so I don’t know if the ABA shill offered any details of their scrutiny, but I tend to believe that the tougher qualifications for bankruptcy had to increase the rate of foreclosures over what they would have been had the laws remained the same.  I don’t believe for a second that the tougher standards are solely responsible for the increase in foreclosures, but they certainly contributed.

More Proof That Size Doesn’t Always Matter

You sly little devil, you thought my headline was about, uh, you know.  Sorry to disappoint.  Size, in this case, refers to paychecks.  According to this story over 20% of people that make more than $100,000 a year report living paycheck to paycheck.  For those of you who are math challenged that’s more than one out of every five.

Of course the story features the predictable advice from personal finance "gurus" and you can skip that.  I mean who doesn’t know that you should track all your expenses, eliminate unnecessary expenses, stop trying to keep up with the neighbors, forego that daily double mint mocha latte frappacino swirl and have your 401-K contributions automatically taken from your paycheck?  Apparently a bunch of people who make enough money that they should know better.

For my kids I offer this advice: your mother is a genius at managing money, your dad’s the idiot who spends it.  Listen to your mother, always.

Oh, and if you run a small biz or are a big earner and need a money managing guru to put your finances in order then give me a shout.  I know just the person to help you out. 

Gustav on Ning

If you’re looking for a good place to find Hurricane Gustav related information online there’s a good repository here: http://gustav08.ning.com. A guy named Andy Carvin used the site Ning to create a social network for all things related to the hurricane.

This is the second example I’ve seen of someone making effective use of Ning.  A few months ago I witnessed a social network being born on Ning that is related to the practice of competitive intelligence (CI).  I used to work with the Society of Competitive Intelligence Professionals and while they had ample opportunity to build an online network they never got one off the ground, so in the absence of an "official" CI social network a grass roots network was created on Ning and it is by far the most successful online collaboration that the CI sector has seen to date.

When I first heard about Ning I dipped my toe in the water by joining a small business network that quickly devolved into a kind of lame online version of lead sharing networks endemic to coffee shops in every city in America, so I just kind of wrote it off.  Now that I’ve seen Ning used effectively by a few folks I’m beginning to realize the power it places in ordinary folks’ hands.  Honestly any group can use it effectively and it literally takes zero technical knowledge to use, so I have a feeling I’ll see more and more groups using it in the future.

City Bus Driver Shoots Man in the Head in Buena Vista Over Double Parking

If you’re from Winston-Salem you’re probably thinking, "What?!" based on the headline of this post.  Well, I’ve engaged in an age old media trick of getting you to read this based on a deceptive headline.  The Buena Vista I’m referring to is Buena Vista Terrace in SE, Washington DC, a decidedly different Buena Vista than our bucolic enclave here in the Twin Cities.  You might have figured out my trickery based on the fact that it involved double parking, something other than crime also not commonly found in W-S’s Buena Vista.  If this was a radio or TV news broadcast you’d have been able to figure it out because in DC the location would have been pronounced "bwayna vista" rather than our local pronunciation of "byoona vista".

Anecdotal Real Estate

From local blogs and newspapers comes anecdotal evidence of real estate misery:

I was reading the Wall Street Journal article about all the ghost-developments around the country and I thought of the higher-end subdivision across the street from our humble abode.  Lots of the houses were finished early last year and people moved in, but suddenly construction halted on a bunch and cleared lots stayed that way.  Kind of depressing to see.