Monday, February 14, 2011

Interested in this story yet?

Who the F#%*)& are these guys?

So asks CJR's Ryan Chittum - and if you're not interested in the HBGary story- check your pulse.

It goes like this:

An exec named Aaron Barr at a computer security firm named HBGary mouths off in the financial times that he has discovered the identities of key members of the hacking group Anonymous. Anonymous' most recent claim to fame was the denial of service attacks against credit card companies who blocked transactions to Wikileaks.

Days later the Anonymous group hacks HBGary's website, email accounts, and numerous other accounts using SQL-injection, social engineering, and other published exploits. Mind you, HBGary is a computer security firm.

Anonymous takes over the HBGary website, leaks tens of thousands of internal emails to the web (which you can now search and read), leaks their source code and internal files - then deletes their backup servers.

They they flame HBGary using Aaron Barr's own twitter account.

That's just the opener.

The emails for HBGary reveal that HBGary was offering its services to Bank of America's law firm, Hunton & Williams (along with two other security firms Palantir Technologies and Berico Technologies) to smear and discredit Wikileaks and its supporters, among them Salon blogger Glenn Greenwald

Wikileaks has suggested they are about to unload a trove of internal documents for a large bank - and has mentioned acquiring the hard drive of a Bank of America exec.

And it gets better.

Ryan Chittum throws in this little tidbit:
A look through Factiva shows only one media hit for HBGary Federal in the last two years before the flurry of the past week. And it’s a very interesting one. This from SC Magazine, which covers IT security (emphasis mine):
HBGary Federal, provider of classified security services to the U.S. Department of Defense and the intelligence community, has partnered with Palantir Technologies, maker of analytics platforms. HBGary’s team of researchers will leverage Palantir’s analysis tool suite to provide enhanced threat intelligence.
Interested in this story yet?
I'll say.
(H/t trainreq)

Friday, February 11, 2011

Ezra Nails It

(H/t E)

Ezra in the WaPo: (emphasis added)
...Americans tend to distinguish between benefits they feel they've earned -- Social Security, say -- and benefits they consider giveaways. It's not a very useful distinction, but it's a convenient, and thus a powerful, one. We have a vast welfare state for the middle and upper classes, but the politics of it are entirely different.

For instance: Among the more mind-blowing facts about the health-care system is that the tax break we give to employer-provided insurance dwarfs the cost of the entire Affordable Care Act -- and, if you want to take the concept a bit further, this means those of us who don't get insurance from our employers are being forced, even mandated, to pay for those of us who are. But this break is largely uncontroversial in American politics, while subsidies to help people who can't afford health insurance are extremely controversial.

Random Sip From the Firehose, VI

Thursday, February 10, 2011

Pull Me Out of the Wall

Easily the most mindrending bit of Radiolab I've heard yet. Finding Emilie. It starts with a 21 year old art student named Alan talking about he and his girlfriend Emilie waking up on the morning of October 8th, 2010.
Alan: She would take the bike and I would take the train.

Jad: What was the morning like?

Alan: It was a beautiful day it was...you know, the sun was low in the sky so there were...you know, long shadows. I strapped on her helmet and adjusted it. Took her bike out for her. We kissed each other goodbye, and said 'I love you' and I watched her ride down the street. In this early morning and then y'know, [whistles] on I went, down into the subway.

Jad: Six hours later, he's working in the studio, doing some sculpture and he gets a call - from a cop.

Alan: And he just said, 'Emily Liegossiaux' she had an accident. She's at Belleview, this is the address.' And I said 'Oh. I mean, do you have any more information?' He just told me that it was bad. I was, like, carrying a bunch of stuff and I just dropped everything and started running.
Bad is quite the understatement. At the hospital, the doctors had (to quote her mother) "opened her abdomen and they had taken her intestines out and put them on top of her body so that she could breathe."

That's not even the gripping part. It only gets more intense from there.

Give it a listen.

Monday, February 07, 2011

Where the Hell is Quincy When You Need Him?

NPR posts one of those please-tell-me-this-isn't-happening stories, about Donna and Joe Turner, an Oklahoma family trying to get the state to investigate their daughter Chandra's death. In 2000, her death by a gunshot wound to the chest was ruled a suicide.

It took nine years to even get an autopsy performed. While the autopsy report determined that the death was a homicide - personnel changes at the coroner's office short circuited a formal change to Chandra's cause of death.

NPR puts the original death certificate online in a fine example of journalistic WTF.

It'll be interesting to see how this case develops - because the first draft makes the coroner's office look pretty terrible.

The disparity between what people think happens at their county coroner's office - and what is actually going on nationwide is pretty astonishing. I don't think anyone believes that CSI is true to life, but to read accounts of coroners who are unlicensed - even blind for God's sake - is just mind boggling.

Frontline and ProPublica have given this topic both barrels in the last week.

Grim reading, but fascinating stuff.

Saturday, February 05, 2011

Well, That Pretty Much Explains College Athletics, Then...

I'll just quote this directly, because it's just too perfect:
Which reminds me of another tax issue, this one with college sports. The New York Times reported this in a story this weekend:
Federal law permits taxpayers to deduct annually 80 percent of a donation for premium seating or luxury suites. All other contributions, including those for scholarships and capital projects, are 100 percent deductible.
You’ve got to be kidding me.
Anybody who thinks the plutocrats haven't captured the tax code is living in fantasyland.

Friday, February 04, 2011

Pensions, Everybody's Gravy Train

Oh, look. Banks may have found a new way to screw with public pensions: by overcharging them for foreign exchange transactions.
[S]tates are looking into whether certain banks charged state pension funds the most expensive foreign-exchange price during the day when a trade took place, rather than the rate the bank paid--and when currencies were sold, paid them the lowest price for the day.
So, the GOP would like to renege on promises made to pensioners - and banks managing the money owed to pensioners have been siphoning the money when nobody's looking.

It's starting to look like the only people who have trouble getting money out of public pensions - are pensioners.

Nice.

“Perhaps best this never sees the light of day again!!”

Yes, perhaps that would be best... for JPMorgan, that is.

The money quote comes from a JPM employee referring to a meeting agenda where the bank was discussing its dealings with Bernie Madoff.

News accounts have long pointed out that Madoff could not have been doing what he was doing without leaving all kinds of traces. One of the traces he was leaving behind was a total lack of account activity. Madoff claimed that his accounts were small, that the bulk of his money was tied up in all the trades he was making for his customers.

Only with a Ponzi scheme, you aren't making trades - the money is just sitting around waiting for a withdrawal (by Madoff or one of his customers/dupes). Bernie didn't keep the money in a matress, he kept it in a bank. JPMorgan Chase, to be precise.

According the the (just) unsealed lawsuit
The bank “had only to glance at the bizarre activity” in the Madoff accounts “to realize that Madoff was not operating a legitimate business,” the trustee asserted in the suit. The money coming in was not from the sale of securities, and the money going out was not for the purchase of securities — at a time when Mr. Madoff was supposedly making billions of dollars in trades as part of his investment strategy, ...
What does JPMorgan do?

Nothing. No calls to the SEC, no black listing - JPM continues to do deals with Madoff, even as their own risk people are screaming for them to pull the plug.

And here's a nice tidbit: Madoff was apparently into money laundering for wealthy clients -
According to [Madoff trustee Irving Picard], the flow of money just between the Madoff accounts and [a single] customer’s accounts should have set off warning bells at the bank.

On a single day in 2002, Mr. Madoff initiated 318 separate payments of exactly $986,301 to the customer’s account for no apparent reason, the trustee reported. In December 2001, Mr. Madoff’s account received a $90 million check from the customer’s account “on a daily basis,” according to the lawsuit.

Mr. Picard’s complaint does not speculate about the purpose of the transactions.

The transfers should have caused the bank’s money-laundering software to start flashing, Mr. Picard’s complaint asserted.
Yet another revelatory and embarrassing lawsuit that names names.

What does it take to get indictments in this country, anyway?

(Via CJR)

Friday, January 28, 2011

Pity He's Not Dressed Like Queen Victoria

There's only a few people on earth who will get this, but I needed to post this.
  1. Go to this iMDB trailer
  2. Scan forward to exactly 0:52
  3. Press play (the relevant bit ends at 1:00)
For those in the know, I'm just hoping my subconscious mind doesn't get any weirder than that.

So...unbelievably F'ed up.

Wednesday, January 26, 2011

Worst Person in The World - Atty. Frederick J. Voss

With Olbermann out of action, I figure I'd put up a candidate for WPITW.

I'd mentioned before that I used to edit a legal newsletter. One of its recurring features was a list of attorneys who had broken the law, failed in their professional obligations to their client/profession - or disgraced themselves in a fashion that required discipline.

This issue's star was Atty. Frederick J. Voss of Rhinelander, WI.

Atty. Voss is apparently on a personal quest to become the gold standard of attorney misconduct.

He makes a pretty good case.

Exhibit A - Atty. Voss begins to represent
...a female client with a very extensive history of and treatment for various psychiatric disorders and alcohol dependency. The client's diagnoses include bipolar I disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, eating disorders, and severe personality disorder with histrionic, borderline, anti-social, and passive-aggressive features.
In the past, a worker at one of her treatment centers engaged in sexual relations with her - and was "fired, criminally prosecuted, and jailed."

This client has major issues. Lots of responsibility there.

Enter Atty. Voss.

Within a year and a half of formally becoming this woman's attorney - he's sleeping with her. This is directly at odds with the code of professional conduct for attorneys, but hey... maybe nobody will find out, right?

Naturally, somebody found out.

Voss was reported to the lawyers regulatory agency, but the client would not file a complaint.

Improper relationship with disturbed client. Check.

Exhibit B Voss is alleged to have forced his client to have sex with him. This incident was reported to the sheriff - who recommended filing charges to the DA. No charges were filed.

Voss goes on the attack:
In an...e-mail to the client's sister, Attorney Voss said that if he were charged criminally, as part of his defense he would introduce into evidence information regarding various incidents involving the client that would not make her look good and that she would not enjoy testifying about in open court.
Voss then contacts two circuit judges telling them the allegations have no merit - he includes details of his clients sexual history. This is before either judge has any case in front of them.

He contacts the client's mother - promising to bring up personal family issues if he is called to testify in court.
He files extraneous embarrassing information about his former client in memorandum.
He pays her money in exchange for signing a self-serving statement he's prepared.

Exhibit C When all this finally blows up into a disciplinary hearing, Voss is shameless in his defense:
The [Office of Lawyer Regulation] noted that Attorney Voss claimed he has sole authority and decision-making power to decide when he is the attorney and when he is not the attorney for a client, and that the client has no right to decide whether there is a continuing attorney-client relationship. Thus, Attorney Voss argued he may end the attorney-client relationship with the client immediately after a hearing on a chapter 51 commitment and that same day may elect to have sexual relations with the client. The OLR said this is a self-serving interpretation of the supreme court rules and in this fact situation, it is particularly egregious and predatory. The OLR noted that the client was the subject of approximately 82 different treatment matters, including mental commitments, out-of-home placements, substance abuse treatments, inpatient placements, and home placements...

¶27 Attorney Voss filed a 109-page post-trial brief which started out by announcing, "[The client] is a manipulative, alcoholic, violent, mentally ill, criminal." Attorney Voss's post-trial brief ended by saying, "No relationship is symmetrical. It is one she wanted to be in. . . . The relationship was as normal as it could be under the circumstances."
And, the court observed:
Throughout this entire disciplinary proceeding, Attorney Voss persisted in attaching to his pleadings hundreds of pages of medical records containing highly sensitive personal information about the client.
In short, ginormous asswad in all respects.

Sadly, for all this asswad-ery, the disciplinary hearing does not translate into criminal charges. The court brought down as much as the disciplinary hammer as they could - suspending Voss' license to practice law for four years and eight months - and fining him over $140,000.
Although this is a staggering amount, the reason the costs escalated to this level is largely because of Attorney Voss's aggressive litigation style. It appears he greatly over-litigated the case and thus it is appropriate to assess the full amount of costs against him.
His license is still good for the next month, so if you know anyone in northern Wisconsin looking for an attorney - you should tell them to stay the hell away from this guy. He's about to lose his primary income and he owes a lot of money. A financially desperate creep is twice as dangerous as the garden variety.

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

The Grabbing Paws of Bear Stearns

(Via The Big Picture)

You've just got to love this article in The Atlantic.
Former Bear Stearns mortgage executives who now run mortgage divisions of Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, and Ally Financial have been accused of cheating and defrauding investors through the mortgage securities they created and sold while at Bear. According to e-mails and internal audits, JPMorgan had known about this fraud since the spring of 2008, but hid it from the public eye through legal maneuvering. Last week a lawsuit filed in 2008 by mortgage insurer Ambac Assurance Corp against Bear Stearns and JPMorgan was unsealed. The lawsuit's supporting e-mails, going back as far as 2005, highlight Bear traders telling their superiors they were selling investors like Ambac a "sack of shit."

There's so much awful going on in this that it's fun to break it down.

1) The former firm of Bear Stearns was hip deep in selling bonds backed by lousy mortgages.
2) The mortgages were so lousy, Bear traders were forcing the originators of those loans to buy them back.

So far, not so terrible - if more investment firms forced their crap back on the originators we might have had less of a meltdown.

Enter 3) Bear's servicing division were "sometimes told to falsify loan-level performance data provided to the ratings agencies"

Then 4) The crap loans that are foisted back on their originators at a discount, and the Bear execs Mike Nierenberg (now at BofA) and Jeff Verschleiser (now at Goldman Sachs) pocketed the difference. Here's the Atlantic's Teri Buhl:
The traders were essentially double-dipping -- getting paid twice on the deal. How was this possible? Once the security was sold, they didn't have a legal claim to get cash back from the bad loans -- that claim belonged to bond investors -- but they did so anyway and kept the money.
and the capstone is
5) Bear Stearns went under in March of 2008. We're only just learning about this crap because Ambach sued Bear's new owners, JP Morgan in that same year and the lawsuit just became unsealed.

Why did it take this long to unseal?
JPMorgan did fight tooth and nail for the Ambac suit not to be made public, however, because the firm argued it could damage the reputations of senior bank executives currently working in the industry.
I'll just bet it will.

Who are those execs? The Atlantic helpfully names names:
Individuals named as defendants included: Jimmy Cayne, Alan "ACE" Greenberg, Warren Spector, Alan Schwartz, Thomas Marano, Jeffrey Mayer, Mary Haggerty, Baron Silverstein, Jeffrey Verschleiser, and Michael Nierenberg.
Oh, we could use more articles like this.

Monday, January 24, 2011

Detroit's Rebuttal

(Via Viceland with a H/t to Felix Salmon)


Climbing a hillock for a better view of the grassy wastes surrounding 
Jane Cooper Elementary School. If you move the camera just a few inches to the left you’ll get a bustling,
well-maintained food-packaging plant in frame, so be careful to crop that shit out.

It's dated, but worth a read

Something, Something, Something, Detroit: Lazy Journalists Love Pictures of Abandoned Stuff

Your Very Own Robot Minion

(Via Stack Overflow

I'll just quote this directly, because there's no way to improve on the delivery:
I’m a big fan of annoying my coworkers. Problem is, I don’t have any coworkers because I work remotely from home. An impossible conundrum. Or is it?


Oh yeah.....

Sunday, January 23, 2011

Motown/Ghost Town

(Via the Etsy Blog)

No, this isn't a set from a Terry Gilliam movie. It's Detroit.

Saturday, January 22, 2011

AOL Email is Free

Saw this courtesy of Felix Salmon

AOL encourages the belief that its email users need to pay for the service. They don't.

If an AOL email user has a different ISP, they can (naturally) change their AOL settings - but this is not obvious to many AOL users who (famously) are not the most technically savvy.

Business insider has posted a 1-2-3 guide to cutting the AOL financial cord.

The slides reveal UI that is desiged to obscure and confuse users who try this.

Anyways, I'm posting this so I can find it later, should I happen to run across one of these unfortunates.

And AOL? You are even lamer than your reputation suggests.

Friday, January 21, 2011

Shot Across the Bow

(Via Felix Salmon and The Big Picture)

Mary Williams Walsh (and by extension, the New York Times) would like you to think that states may try to declare bankruptcy in the foreseeable future.

That such things are illegal now does not seem to be an issue, nor does the absence of a Congressional bill making such a thing legal.

People are talking about it, Ms. Walsh warns us - and we should be afraid.

More accurately, public employees should be afraid (emphasis mine):
Bankruptcy could permit a state to alter its contractual promises to retirees, which are often protected by state constitutions, and it could provide an alternative to a no-strings bailout. Along with retirees, however, investors in a state’s bonds could suffer, possibly ending up at the back of the line as unsecured creditors.
And Ms. Walsh is using "alter" in the same way that Darth Vader uses it:
I wish to alter your pension. Pray I don't alter it any further.
It doesn't exactly sound likely, and it cannot be terribly popular - Welching on a pension promised to workers who have upheld their part of the deal?
You've paid us with years of your life - years that are now gone. I know we'd promised you money, but....well...
Who is leading the push for this?

Let's see:
Discussion of a new bankruptcy option for the states appears to have taken off in November, after [Newt] Gingrich gave a speech about the country’s big challenges, including government debt and an uncompetitive labor market.

“We just have to be honest and clear about this, and I also hope the House Republicans are going to move a bill in the first month or so of their tenure to create a venue for state bankruptcy,” he said.

I get that the GOP is dusting off the brass knuckles with labor, post election - but does the NYT really have to be their bullhorn for their threats?

What crap.

Crap For Sale, Dear

Bloomberg gets a hold of leaked bank documents and they reveal just what Barry was saying awhile ago: The banks are selling their crap to Freddie and Fannie.

Jonathan Weil does a better summation, though:
The gist of the article by Bob Ivry and Bradley Keoun: Citigroup, the too-big-to-fail bank that got a $45 billion government rescue, was still selling defective mortgages to Freddie Mac at an alarmingly high rate as recently as last year. And taxpayers, who now own Freddie, are on the hook as a result. The details are in an Oct. 25, 2010, internal Freddie Mac memo summarizing the findings of a yearlong quality-control review that ended last September.
...and he helpfully supplies some venom:
So who benefits from this leak? Some of the bosses at the two companies and their government minders must be embarrassed, which can only be good for the rest of us. To the extent that Freddie and Fannie have become a grabfest for the banking industry, that’s something Congress should know when it eventually gets around to rewriting the laws that govern them. Most importantly, though, the public needs to be told when it’s getting ripped off, especially when the government knows it and has no intention of telling us.

More leaks like this one, please.
Hear hear!

Thursday, January 20, 2011

I Wonder Where Goldman Got The Idea

Y'know I think emptywheel skewers Goldman's Facebook deal about as well as you can.

 A sample:
FROM: Mr. Lloyd Blankfein
200 West Street
New York, New York

202-555-MOTU

TO: CEO
Chump City, ForeignLand

Dear Sir:

I have been requested by the Facebook Company to contact you for assistance in resolving a matter. The Facebook Company has recently concluded new agreements to share its users’ identities. The contracts have immediately produced moneys equaling US$50,000,000,000. The Facebook Company is desirous of harvesting user identities in other parts of the world, however, because of certain regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission, it is unable to move these funds to another region.

You assistance is requested as a non-American citizen to assist the Facebook Company, and also the Goldman Sachs, in moving these funds out of America. If the funds can be transferred to your name, in your non-United States account, then you can forward the funds as directed by the Facebook Company. In exchange for your accommodating services, the Facebook Company would agree to allow you to retain 10%, or US$5 billion of this amount.

(H/t trainreq)

Wednesday, January 19, 2011

The Power To Kill

(Via CJR)
When Anthony Graves was arrested for capital murder, he thought it was a practical joke. A surveillance camera in the Brenham, Texas, police station captured Graves shaking his head and smiling. “This is a big mistake,” he said. “Somebody’s messing with me, right?”

It was a mistake, but it wasn’t a joke. Graves, then twenty-six, didn’t know he was about to begin an eighteen-year fight to clear his name of a gruesome crime he did not commit. He would spend most of those years in solitary confinement on death row.

Graves was charged with the brutal murder of six members of the Davis family in Somerville, a small city northwest of Houston. Robert Carter, the absent father of the youngest victim, four-year-old Jason Davis, became the first suspect when he showed up to the family’s funeral with burns on his face and a shaky alibi. But from the investigation’s outset, the police worked from the assumption that Carter couldn’t have committed the horrific murders alone, because multiple weapons had been employed: the victims were attacked with a knife, a hammer, and a gun before the house was set on fire.

When his interrogators pressured him to name an accomplice, Carter, to deflect attention from his wife, also a suspect at the time, offered the name of someone he barely knew: his wife’s cousin, Anthony Graves. Though there was no evidence connecting him to the crimes other than Carter’s accusation, Graves was convicted and sentenced to death.

Carter was executed in May 2000. His last statement from the gurney was a declaration that Graves was innocent. “It was me and me alone…. I lied on him in court,” Carter said, just minutes before being dosed with a lethal injection. Graves remained on death row, his case unexamined.

I read stories like this and wonder just how often the state kills somebody for no reason.

Full story on the Texas Monthly site.

Friday, January 14, 2011

Mumford and Sons

...kick crazy ass.

Here's them doing The Cave

(H/t to NG & MG... good pick)

Wednesday, January 12, 2011

Some Contracts are More Unbreakable Than Others

Couldn't agree more:
It is fascinating to see how the public narrative in the media has gradually shifted over the past year from Wall Street’s sociopathic practices (which were directly responsible for the creation of the crisis) to the alleged greed of public employee unions and their pension benefits, many of which were the product of agreed wage negotiation packages in which unions were receiving these pension benefits in lieu of increased wage benefits.

During 2008, we were told that the government’s hands were tied and that sanctity of contracts had to be honored. This was when the Federal Reserve authorized 100% payouts to the likes of Goldman Sachs on AIG’s credit default swaps (in effect allowing the Fed to act as an extra budgetary vehicle of the Treasury, which is a violation of the Constitution and shows how patently false the Fed’s claims of independence are). But I don’t seem to recall many Wall Street types going on about the sanctity of contracts when agreements with the UAW were reworked to save GM or now when public employee union pension benefits are under attack. The argument seems to be that the states are suffering from a genuine solvency crisis in which everybody has to make sacrifices, including the “greedy” unions. So why should big financial firms, which would otherwise have been toast but for the munificence of the suffering American taxpayer, be any different?
That's Marshall Auerback, a portfolio strategist and hedge fund manager, posting on Naked capitalism

Tuesday, January 11, 2011

Somebody Ought to Beat His Ass

(Via TPM)

In an apparent bid to out-crazy the gunman, the infamous publicity-whore preacher intends to protest the funeral of nine-year old Tulsa shooting victim, Christina Green.

And other victims as well.

Un-be-effing-lievable.

Friday, January 07, 2011

Score One For Sanity

The good news: Massachusetts recognizes the rule of law in foreclosures.

The bad news: That this, truly, is news :
(Bloomberg) U.S. Bancorp and Wells Fargo & Co. lost a foreclosure case in Massachusetts’s highest court that will guide lower courts in that state and may influence others in the clash between bank practices and state real-estate law. The ruling drove down bank stocks.

The state Supreme Judicial Court today upheld a judge’s decision saying two foreclosures were invalid because the banks didn’t prove they owned the mortgages, which he said were transferred into two mortgage-backed trusts without the recipients’ being named.
I mean, really - a ruling that banks can't foreclose if they cannot prove they ownsa mortgage should not be news.

Yet it is.

At least the ruling was right. Let's see how the banks push back on this.

(H/t The Big Picture)

Tuesday, January 04, 2011

GSE = Everybody's Whipping Boy

While Freddy Mac and Fannie Mae have been erroneously blamed for starting the financial crisis - they certainly are due for their share of abuse.

The AP had a story yesterday about how Bank of America and Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae had come to an agreement over bad loans.

BofA had sold Freddie and Fannie total crap, and they had the right to order BofA to buy back loans that didn't meet its underwriting standards. The deal they just reached amounted to $1.28 billion for Freddie and $1.52 billion for Fannie.

That seemed low to me - I remember discussions of figures north of $100 billion.

According to Barry BofA's exposure to Freddie's putbacks amounts to about $127 billion.

So, BofA gets to keep over $120 billion dollars that it owes Freddie.

Which means that the GSE continue to be (as Barry puts it) the backdoor bailout vehicle of choice for Washington.
  • Ship the bank's crap to a GSE who will agree to terms that no thinking business would take.
  • Then pour tax dollars into the GSE to keep them afloat when the crap loans fail
  • Finally, everyone can launch a rousing chorus of how inefficient GSEs are and how the banks are better at lending and managing risk.

I expect the same Wall Street apologists who blame the crisis on GSE will be only too happy to join in.

Monday, January 03, 2011

Long Term Investors

(Via Naked Capitalism)

Michael Hudson tells us that investors are hanging onto stocks and foreign currency investments longer.

Now the bad news:
Take any stock in the United States. The average time in which you hold a stock is--it's gone up from 20 seconds to 22 seconds in the last year. Most trades are computerized. Most trades are short-term. The average foreign currency investment lasts--it's up now to 30 seconds, up from 28 seconds last month.
Think about that for a second. What kind of market efficiency is there when positions are held for less time than it takes to describe them?

Here's a more granular observation from The Daily Finance's Peter Cohan:
The market is now controlled by short-term traders, rather than the long-term investors for whom these arguments might have some relevance. Specifically, 70% of trading volume on the major exchanges is conducted by high-frequency traders who hold a stock for an average of 11 seconds. Only a handful of market players have the real-time data needed to make these short-term trades.

That's 70% of trading volume happening at a rate that outstrips humanity's ability to absorb, comprehend, analyze, and react.

Remember that figure the next time some idiot tries to tell you that the Dow's latest hiccup is due to X or Y in the news.

Saturday, December 25, 2010

Truly a Golden Age

Right now, I'm a few miles up in the sky with both kids passed out.

I've surfed the web, distracted the boy for over an hour with Fruit Ninja, then spent well over an hour catching up on my RSS feeds.

And now I blog this using free (airborne) Wifi.

That's not even the amazing bit.

I used Google Voice to send mom a text using my data plan.

I know! FU AT&T.

Yes, yes the data plan is 15 a month, but they would have jacked me for 20¢ a pop to send it using free bandwidth.

Loving it.

Monday, December 20, 2010

Quote of the Day - 12/20/2010

Today's winner courtesy of Mike Rowe, host of Dirty Jobs, in response to the question "what was the worst job you ever tried?"
Of the 300 I would say for pure, epic horror - there's a thing called a lift pump and it's at a wastewater treatment plant. And a lift pump weighs about four tons and it sits in the bottom of a five story silo. And when the lift pump ruptures, the silo fills with whatever you flush.

And to make a long story short: you swim through the muck to the pump, you crawl on top, a crane lowers a cable, you affix it, you hang on. And the sound that a broken lift pump will make when its hoisted out of the silo and breaks the seal of poo that was holding it to the floor will haunt your dreams.

Friday, December 17, 2010

Why Was There a Crisis? GOP: Well... "Bubbles Happen"

(Via CJR)

It's hard to know where to begin after you read the primer conservative defectors from the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission.

Krugman gives us the primer's origin story:
Last week, reports Shahien Nasiripour of The Huffington Post, all four Republicans on the commission voted to exclude the following terms from the report: “deregulation,” “shadow banking,” “interconnection,” and, yes, “Wall Street.”

When Democratic members refused to go along with this insistence that the story of Hamlet be told without the prince, the Republicans went ahead and issued their own report, which did, indeed, avoid using any of the banned terms.

Here's a sample from the primer:
Bubbles happen. In retrospect, they always seem easy to identify, but as they are building, experts debate whether they exist—and, if so, why. The recent housing bubble was no different. Despite national home price appreciation well above the historical trend for almost a decade, and local markets with even more pronounced price swings, most homeowners and mortgage investors believed there were sound fundamentals underpinning their investments.

We will likely never have a complete explanation for why there was a housing bubble, but we have some clues. First, even without a big change in the costs of building a home, a sharp increase in demand for homes can cause rapid price increases until new homes are built, bringing prices back down.

Got that? We will likely never have a complete explanation....

Geez guys, couldn't you have just said No one could have conceived...?

CJR's Ryan chittum does us all a solid and directs us to Bethany McLean's column over at Slate.

She calls the primer what it is - bullshit.
...get ready for a few of the primer's breathtaking conclusions. "Put simply, the risk of a housing collapse was simply not appreciated." Shit happens. ("Bubbles happen" is, in fact, the first sentence in the report.) How about some exploration of why consumer advocates—who in the 1990s began warning the Federal Reserve and members of Congress that people were getting loans they couldn't pay back—were ignored? Here's another genius insight: "The panic ended when confidence returned." That one inspired me to check the definition of panic (a "sudden overwhelming fear") to make sure I wasn't wrong to find this a bit redundant. Daylight appeared when the sun rose. War ended when the armies stopped fighting. Hurt went away when the pain subsided.

In a way, we should be greatful to Vice Chairman Bill Thomas and commissioners Peter J. Wallison, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, and Keith Hennessey for so clearly illustrating who they work for.

They wrote a report about the financial crisis and agreed to avoid using the words "Wall Street."

Ye gods.

Thursday, December 16, 2010

Due to Our Incompetence, Your Data is at Risk

So, the other day while I'm reading a happy little letter from E's alma mater telling us in politely minimized language that her name and social security number have been potentially compromised. They'd stored this information in cleartext and (whaddaya know) somebody found a way to get to it.

They take great pains to point out they are not sure that the entire database was transferred (although it could have been) and that they don't know that anyone has used the data (although they could have) - all they're saying is that they were storing her personal data on a server that somebody had obtained unauthorized access to.

Well, great. This keeps happening to Universities - there are books telling you how to mine SSNs from universities - yet over 5 years later E's data sits in cleartext because they needed to "archive" their poor security choices.

Helpfully, they suggest watching our credit reports and account activity to see if anything "unusual" occurs. Forever.

Thanks, guys.

I don't believe that her data is likely to be put to evil ends that would affect us - but isn't it nice to know that that possibility will always exist?

-----

On a related note - I received an email from Gawker telling me that my account had been compromised. I honestly didn't remember ever having an account with them, but it's possible that I posted a comment there years back.

I'm set to ignore it when I get a second email from LinkedIn - telling me I should reset my account because of the Gawker intrusion.

So I reset LinkedIn and start on Gawker for good measure. Gawker's website is just godawful UI and (bonus) their email server is having problems, so when you try you get a "Reset Failed" message that appears for 2 seconds.

Well, thanks guys. I'm so glad that I tried, now I will try again.

And again.

And then wait 5 minutes and try again.

And then go away for an hour and then try again.

And so on - until the damn thing finally sends me a reset link.

You figure you have a security breach that requires resets, you might try to see if your reset process is actually working before you push the send button on the "we're so owned" message.

Fail.

Coding Horror has the goods on Gawker's data faceplant, and wow have they screwed the pooch.

The hack came complete with release notes from the hackers which goes out of its way to shame them.

They post the usernames and passwords of Gawker staff. Then they use the password of Gawker's Nick Denton to see how many other accounts they can get to.

Subtext for users: Don't use one password for multiple sites.

They post this bit of fun:
You'd think by now after being compromised Nick would change all his passwords.
He doesn't, instead his fellow circle jerkers convince him that it was his own fault,
That the account wasn't hacked but instead Nicks own fault by clicking a "link" lol.
They then post ftp logins for several other companies to drive home the point.

Nice.

The release notes detail the depth of the attack - and is illustrative for lots of reasons.

Forbe's has more detail.
What Could Gawker Have Done Differently?

Everything. Their founder noticed strange activity a month ago, and reported it, yet the investigation into it came to the wrong conclusions. It seems clear they do not have a good information security person on staff or that they can call. When they closed out the Nick Denton account on campfire, they could have realized that someone logging in as him to an internal system might mean that someone outside the company has access to internal systems or that the extent of the breach may be larger..

Subtext to businesses: don't be like these guys.

Monday, December 13, 2010

Get It Out

This year, the anniversary of Dad's death passed without a lot of observance on my part. Jen makes a point of sending flowers to Mom from the kids. My role in this is to accept that she is doing this and thank her for including my kids names on the card as well.

As if they are from me, or that I had the slightest involvement in them arriving .

I think the first year, I may have actually sent flowers - or conferred with Jen prior to her sending them - but ever since I've regarded it as something that was being handled.

Blogs being wonderfully self indulgent things - my observance took the form of heartfelt, yet virtual text. This year, I simply could not locate the right frame of mind to post.

In a self justifying way, I viewed this as progress.

Having spent countless hours bending depressing music towards my situation – this might actually be progress.

But there’s a certain amount of baggage that refuses to go quietly – and this is an attempt to shove it out the door despite the screaming.

What I’ve come to realize is that this stuff never really comes up. While this is good in lots of ways, it lays down a pattern of avoidance that is unhealthy. Maybe not for everyone, but certainly for me.

Mom is in the other camp – which is perhaps the reason I’m not. When I was in Norway, Mom started talking about Dad and Katrina with our assigned dinner group and I remember being angry with her. Angry because Mom talks about “the storm” a lot. It always seems to come up – any tenuous connection is an excuse for Mom to recount some storm-related factoid. “We didn’t have that during Katrina…”

You were in Katrina?

“Oh yes,” she’ll say with a sort of Now that you mention it… air. And she’ll start in with one of the stories I’ve heard too many times.

This is bothersome for all sorts of reasons. Ones that are easy to conjure up, but hard to articulate.
Trolling for pity, trading on the death of a loved one – or just simply the overwrought segue that precedes the story.

Now I say all this having vividly felt this – but having never breathed a word of this to Mom. I would never do that. Yet the moment we’d finished dinner with the Norway crowd - Mom all but apologized for it. “I know you don’t approve of that, but…”

I clearly need to restrain my facial expressions better.

Having thought about how little I’ve spoken to others about Dad – it occurred to me that I’ve managed to guilt my own mother about discussing what is clearly the defining event of her life right now. I so clearly failed her up to that point – and I can’t recall what I said – but I was too surprised to say anything intelligent.

Really. Why the hell should she hold back on that stuff?

This was my realization today. Think of any time somebody lets loose with a painful story. What happens? Someone else does the same.

I’ve always viewed these exchanges as a race to victimhood (“Oh, you think that was sad? Try this…”) and while I’m sure there’s some of that – think about these stories a minute.

They aren’t the box score for the local team - these are stories that never come up. They have no segue. Events that forever alter the lives of a person, or a family. Stuff that really matters, not some crap you saw on TV.

And you can’t bring them up without looking unseemly, or pathetic, or ghoulish.

My dad died from a heart attack brought on by massive head injuries. Who do I talk to about that? When does that come up?

Fricking never, is when. You can wait a long time for that perfect segue. And while you’re waiting, you build up a collection of anecdotes that are harmless to everyone but you.

Mom’s got it worse – she was there for the whole thing. Saw him sputter, watched the neighbor do CPR – and I’m slighting her for edging anywhere near that story? WTF is wrong with me …?

I’m beginning to believe that when somebody starts to lets something like that out, it’s because they need to. Yeah, it might come out as one-upsmanship or a rehearsed anecdote, but there are damn few opportunities to say what you’re really thinking.

Outside of blogs, that is.

You spend a lot of time conjuring up discussions that never, ever happen – and then you sit on them until one day something sets them off.

….

The lighted match of the moment are the words “passed away.” Some months ago, E surprised me by saying my exact thoughts on them – at least as they applied to my Dad.

As in – they don’t.

E said she couldn’t bring herself to say that my father had passed away. Because those words are the sanitized, polite form of what happens when a person lives to a ripe old age before going on to their final reward.

Passive. Passed away.

Gradual.

Internal

Only my dad’s death was not passive. It was active, external.

He did not go, he was taken.

And for some reason I’m sure I’ll one day realize in a sudden eureka-moment – I’ve resisted this categorization with the fervor of a fundamentalist.

Not “died,” but “killed.”

I wince even writing that, because I know how it sounds – but I refuse to put a polite face on something I find so offensive. And I don’t indulge others who try.

For some reason, it is also important that the blame be properly assigned. “Accident” is so beneath my father.

For years, my mind has saved a justification I’d direct at anyone who would try to exonerate the guilty party. My hope is that by giving it substance it can finally just go away.

If my mother is to be widowed,
If my children must be denied their grandfather,
If my grandmother must bury her oldest son,

If all of this must happen
– let it be a hurricane.

A storm like no other.

One that empties cities and erases towns.
One whose name is forever associated with destruction and loss.

If my father is to be brought down,
let it be a hurricane.

Anything less would seem inadequate.

Thursday, December 09, 2010

(Via The Big Picture)

I'll just quote it - because there's no better way to introduce it:
Prepare yourself to be floored:

Google Maps keeps evolving, expanding the ability to drill down into granular detail. The latest updated trick? Mapping foreclosures for sale.

...

Google Maps Foreclosure Listings

1. Punch in any US address into Google Maps.

2. Your options are Earth, Satellite, Map, Traffic and . . . More. (Select “More”)

3. The drop down menu gives you a check box option for “Real Estate.”

4. The left column will give you several options (You may have to select “Show Options”)

5. Check the box marked “Foreclosure.”

Seriously. Do this, and see every foreclosed house plotted as a little red dot. I did my own address and was ready to zoom out to see any impact. Turns out, there are over 100 forclosures in the inital map results by my house (11 of which are within 3 miles of my house).

TBP posts a search on Detroit which just bends my head:

 Ye Gods.

Tuesday, December 07, 2010

AT&T? I Think I've Found Which Half of Your Marketing Budget is Being Wasted

Hot on the heels of AT&T being declared the worst cell carrier, I've decided to re-up for another two years with them (courtesy of my iPhone).

So, today I'm logging in to pay this month's bill and I experience something that can only happen at a fortune 500 company.

Let's set the scene...

I hit the AT&T log in screen:

The ice princess will see you now
and instead of the dashboard screen of my current balance, etc, I'm shown the following:

We interrupt your attempt to give us money,
to bring you the following...

I have to believe that the vast majority of users will simply click the (understated) link that will take them into their account, but I've heard some buzz that telcos are trying "mea culpa" marketing strategies and I'm wondering if AT&T is one of them.

After the crap they've put me through...I'd like to hear them grovel.

So, I click on the "Learn More" button - and I'm taken to this:
Thank you for logging in.
Now.... who are you and what do you want?

This is a seriously WTF page. I've logged in, asked for more information about upcoming changes to my account manager - and they're asking me if I'm an existing customer.

Worse, they want me to enter my phone number - manually.

I've fricking logged into your website, you know my damn number. Oh, and is this for a personal account? I don't know maybe you could remember how I got here:

But okay, this is AT&T - the land where the left hand doesn't know if the right hand even exists.

I check Personal account, enter my home phone number, and press 'Go.'

Then I see this:

Okay, three bullet points saying my account manager will do the same things it does now, only with a new look.


Whoopee. Oh, there's a video, too.

I click the video - expecting to see a sneek preview of what I can do online.

And here's the AT&T treatment in full flower: the video is 17 seconds long.

Here is the script in its entirety:
"Soon your internet and home phone account management will have new features and a new look.  Managing your account online will be more convenient than ever. Check back to see how we're making online account management easier for you."

Basically a video version of a bad powerpoint presentation - sans actual content.


Blah, blah, blah... but with pictures!

Eleven seconds into the video, you see a peephole glimpse of what a new page might look like

- for less than three seconds.

Roll credits. Fin.

This is what passes for marketing/customer outreach at AT&T apparently. Think of the dollars they wasted on this mess. Somebody proposed this, got it greenlighted and then paid developers to code, test, and deploy.

All to direct paying customers to a 17 second POS video whipped together by marketing's pet monkey.

And as a customer, I have learned what? That their website will change, in some unknown way, at some unknown time in the future.

Speaking as a person who helped pay for this - I'd like to offer my suggestions:
  1. If your content amounts to "check back later" - I don't need to have a video. I'd argue you don't need to bother me at all, actually.
  2. If you can't tell me anything concrete - maybe you souldn't interrupt me like this is breaking news. Just because CNN does it doesn't mean you should. A banner ad would have sufficed.
  3. If you are going to interrupt a logged in customer, perhaps you should not ask them to fill out a form to direct them to your "content"
Frankly, the AT&T website experience isn't all that terrible unless you leave whatever silo you happen to be in. AT&Ts account manager allows me to do the basics quite well. Log in, pay the bill (or copy the amount and pay from my bank's website). These are basics - I'm not sure what more the website would do for me (other than summarize my bill better - oh, and beat the living F&**# out of whoever wrote their biling software).

AT&T's website tanks horribly any time you want lateral movement in the site. AT&T has no end of fault lines and every link runs the risk that the new page has no idea who the hell you are.

They want to impress me - they could work on that problem.

I'd watch a video about them fixing that. Hell, I might even congratulate them. I know that kind of fix is brutal.

But I know AT&T as well - and I think the odds are good that we'll get a lot more 17 second videos before we'll see any progress on stuff that customers actually give a crap about.

Monday, December 06, 2010

Huge

(Via NPR)

For a state that prides itself on aloha, Hawaii hasn't had much in the way of broad appeal entertainers - (De Lima, Reiplinger, Bumatai, - ack - Medeiros). But the Aloha state really caught a break with the instant likeability of it's largest, favorite son - Israel Kamakawiwo'ole.

I think the first time I heard Israel Kamakawiwo'ole's rendition of Over The Rainbow - was on E.R. It's one of those songs that immediately resonates with you. If iTunes had existed back then, it would have been downloaded a million times by the time the show ended on the west coast.

Assuming people could spell the name right.

I've played my copy for the uninitiated a few times and the reaction was the same. People stop, listen and say somthing like "sweet voice."

Because it is. Israel Kamakawiwo'ole (all 500 pounds of him) had a voice like butter. NPR's story recounts his unlikely rise to fame and the equally improbable creation of his signature song.

Check this out.
It began at 3 in the morning. Milan Bertosa was at the end of a long day in his Honolulu recording studio.

"And the phone rings. It was a client of mine," Bertosa remembers. The client rattled off Israel's unpronounceable name and said he wanted to come in and record a demo. Bertosa said he was shutting down, call tomorrow. But the client insisted on putting Israel on the phone. "And he's this really sweet man, well-mannered, kind. 'Please, can I come in? I have an idea,' " Bertosa remembers Israel saying.

Bertosa relented and gave Israel 15 minutes to get there. Soon, there was a knock at the door.

"And in walks the largest human being I had seen in my life. Israel was probably like 500 pounds. And the first thing at hand is to find something for him to sit on." The building security found Israel a big steel chair. "Then I put up some microphones, do a quick sound check, roll tape, and the first thing he does is 'Somewhere Over the Rainbow.' He played and sang, one take, and it was over."
That's just great from any angle.

Much as I loved the song, I've always wondered why he released a version where he screwed up the lyrics.

Knowing that he sang that song at 3 in the morning on the first take is somehow better than an explanation - More like a badge of honor.

Unvarnished, unrehearsed, unfiltered - he laid down vocals that rose above any other shortcomings.

Wednesday, December 01, 2010

Front Runners

(Via CJR)

Looks like the Fed finally coughed up some information about whose crap it's been buying all this time:
  • Deutsche Bank (GER)- $290 billion
  • Credit Suisse (SUI) - $287 billion 
  • Morgan Stanley - $205 billion
  • Goldman Sachs - $159 billion
  • Citigroup - $185 billion
  • Merrill Lynch/Bank of America - $174 billion
  • JPMorgan Chase - $153 billion
  • Barclays (UK) - $123 billion
  • UBS (SUI) - $94 billion
  • BNP Paribas (FRA) - $67 billion
For those of you keeping score at home - that's $1.7 trillion dollars, $861 billion of which is going to foreign banks.

The best bit:
It's not clear how much these firms profited by engaging in the kind of activity that allowed Gross to profit so well, known as "front running." However, it's abundantly clear that they did turn a profit.
Nice.

Free market, my ass.

(Also - isn't this kind of news dump two days early?)

Monday, November 29, 2010

There is Only One Threat Level


Bruce Schneier records the obit of the DHS's laughable Terror Threat indicator:
The DHS is Getting Rid of the Color-Coded Terrorism Alert System
Good. It was always a dumb idea.

But the money quote is in his addendum. Something dubbed Blakley's Law:
"Every public alert system's status indicator rises until it reaches its disaster imminent setting and remains at that setting until it is retired from service."
It's easy to see why Blakley's law holds: if something terrible happens and the alert status didn't predict it, the keepers of the alert status will be blamed for not preparing us for the disaster. Setting the alert status to "Disaster imminent" when no disaster is likely costs the public some money and mental health, but it doesn't hurt them in other ways. On the other hand, setting the alert status to "Don't worry, be happy" just before a disaster does happen is the worst case for everyone - nobody prepares for the disaster, and the people in power lose their jobs for failing to prevent or prepare for the crisis.
That....is full blown awesome.

Thursday, November 25, 2010

"We're not aware of a single case so far of a substantive error"

ProPublica's Marian Wang puts together a tidy summary of reasons why people might be in foreclosure that undermine the infamous WSJ assertion that the foreclosure scandal is all a big misunderstanding.

I'm sure we've all heard about people with paid off homes getting foreclosed on, but Ms. Wang nicely summarizes a few other scenarios that grab less ink, but are just as ridiculous:

1) Homeowners were not in default but faced foreclosure.
2) Homeowners who were told that to be eligible for a loan modification, they needed to fall behind on their mortgage—and subsequently found themselves on the path to foreclosure.
3) Homeowners were behind on their mortgage but could have caught up if not for additional fees.
4) Mistaken foreclosures due to dual track of foreclosure and loan modification processing.
5) Foreclosures in which the bank can’t prove it has standing to foreclose.

Here's the full post.

Wednesday, November 24, 2010

If I Showed You My Unit Badge, I'd Have to Kill You

Danger Room keeps posting awesomely-bad military patches, and I have to say I'd admire this effort from an Air Force unit working for Space Command:
Confirmed: The Air Force Totally Hides Aliens From Us...A former officer at Air Force Space Command tells Paglen that he and his friends had the patches made at their own expense after getting endlessly ribbed for working in a secure vault "where they kept the alien bodies." They wore them on their flight suits for months before a one-star general asked where he could get one of his own.

Oh, and the barely-decipherable legend on the bottom? It's Klingon for "Don't Ask." Paglen got it in the mail from its creator after mentioning that he knew about its existence on the Colbert Report.

How unbelievably awesome is that?


A valiant runner-up patch was this one:Omnis Vestri Substructio Es Servus ad Nobis

Less and Less Representative


Other than pointing out that the chart on the left starts at $840K, and the one on the right tops out at $150K
- I have nothing to add.

(Via CJR and Jesse's Café Américain)

When Are We Going To Fish?

(Via TPM)

WaPo has a gripping story from the survivors of the Alaska plane crash that killed 5, including fmr. Sen. Ted Stevens.

Here's the passage where frm NASA chief Sean O'Keefe's son, Kevin regains consciousness:
"When are we going to get to the fishing?"

"We're not," his dad told him. "We crashed."

Wow, Kevin thought through a muddled haze. Why are we not fishing? His teeth felt wrong, and he thought he must have lost one. Actually, his jaw was broken.

The cockpit radio had been crushed, so the only hope of reaching help was to find another radio or satellite phone somewhere in the mass of stuff.

The pilot, Terry Smith, didn't respond when they called his name. One glance told Kevin he was dead. It all felt surreal.

Somebody asked from the back: "Could you go through his pockets? See if he has a cellphone so we can call out."

But even though the dead man was chillingly close, he was just too far to reach. "I couldn't move my leg, and my hip was all out of place," Kevin said.

Still strapped in his seat belt, Morhard had slipped head first into the rear of the plane, very badly hurt and unable to move. O'Keefe was still trapped by debris.

The job of searching the plane fell to 13-year-old Willy Phillips, who had a battered and broken ankle but was the only one able to move.

"Where's my dad?" he asked.

"He's right here with me," O'Keefe responded, leaving it at that.

I second Josh Marshall's "wow."

Saturday, November 20, 2010

Neko Brings It

It's no secret I'm a huge fan of Neko Case.

I can never decide if I like her vocals or her lyrics better - but it's clear that some of her lyrics demand a voice exactly like the one who first sang them.
It looks a lot like engine oil and tastes like being poor and small.
I mean, damn.

Anyway - So I'm looking up the lyrics to a song of hers on her website to make sure I can play it for little e's birthday crowd (Answer: no), and I run across this bit of intro text which just pulls me in further:
WELCOME TO MY WEBSITE

It has taken years and millions of tax dollars to develop, so I hope you will not be disappointed.
Cute, but the real payoff is the brief history of her life - where she introduces us to her parents.

This is done succinctly, and with her trademark ferocity:
I was born on an Air Force base in Virginia to some teenage children. After a short classified assignment for the president, my family returned home to Washington State. From about age four to age fifteen, I was raised by dogs and cats. I occasionally intersected with my parents by accident. “Oh it’s you?! I have to make you a lunch, don’t I?” As I grew into a young adult I was very confused and lacked direction. My parents very much wanted me to become a crack-whore, but I gravely disappointed them by graduating from college. Though they did not notice until years after the event, they still take my failings personally.
Holy crap, that's just awesome. Concise writing just bursting with imagery.

Like stepping into the Tardis. How the f#ck did all that get in here..?

She finds the right tune, Neko might just have another album in there.

I know I'd buy it.

Peek Into The Chamber

(Via CJR)

Ryan Chittum nabs an interesting find from Bloomberg.
Health insurers last year gave the U.S. Chamber of Commerce $86.2 million that was used to oppose the health-care overhaul law, according to tax records and people familiar with the donation.

...

The spending on the Chamber exceeded the insurer group’s entire budget from a year earlier and accounted for 40 percent of the Chamber’s $214.6 million in 2009 expenditures. ...The $86.2 million paid for advertisements, polling and grass roots events to drum up opposition to the bill, said Tom Collamore, a Chamber of Commerce spokesman.

Read Chittum's commentary. Nice to see the health care lobby doesn't have the guts to own up to its own viewpoint. So they hire the Chamber, willing surrogate for anyone who can pay.

Friday, November 19, 2010

Psst! 800,000 People Are About to Lose Their Unemployment Benefits

Not that anyone is bothering to tell you about it.
The Washington Post stuffs the unemployment news in the ninth paragraph of an inside story in which the first eight graphs discuss expiring tax cuts. Sample sentence on the tax cuts:
Unless Congress acts, virtually every taxpayer will be hit with higher taxes in January that could leave monthly paychecks hundreds of dollars lighter.
Sample sentence on unemployment (there are only three sentences to choose from, and emphasis is mine):
Unless it is extended, advocates say as many as 3 million people will see their checks cut off by the end of January.
The Post story gives the distinct impression that it’s more concerned about tax cuts than unemployment benefits.
Chittum's even better when he recounts that the unemployment benefits would cost $12 billion. Which begs the question what kind of money is at stake with those tax cuts anyway?
...there’s no real debate on extending most of those tax cuts, especially at a time when the economy is depressed. Where Democrats and Republicans disagree is on whether tax cuts for the top 2 percent of earners, ones who make more than $250,000 a year, should be extended. How much would that unfunded cut—86 percent of which would go to millionaires—cost? Thirty-six billion dollars in 2011, or three times what extending unemployment benefits would cost.

In other words, an average $100,000 each for 310,000 millionaires. You have to marvel at how the right isn’t holding that up until they’re paid for.

(H/t CJR)

Also, read how the press tanks on covering the risk of deflation. It's like they're on cruise control.

How Do You Really Feel, Barry?

(Via The Big Picture)

Love this:
I feel compelled to correct an embarrassing grammatical error in the Washington Post.

The paper, whose grammar is usually outstanding, wrote this morning that

“The [foreclosure] problems came to light this fall as firms such as Ally Financial, Bank of America and J.P. Morgan Chase halted foreclosures because of revelations about shoddy documentation and other questionable practices.”

It came to light because the banks were embarrassed by public disclosures of the half-arsed, slip shod operations they were running — and because courts started kicking out foreclosure proceedings because of this.

As to the grammatical error: Forgery, fraud, and criminal contempt of court are not mere “questionable practices” — the word you are having some difficulty recalling is Felony. If the editors at Washington Post do not know how to spell the word, perhaps we can help them out:

The word is Felony.

Spelling bee contestant: “Can you use that in a sentence?”

Yes: “Felony. The bank executive was convicted of a felony involving fraud, went to prison, and was sodomized daily. Felony”

We can dream.

Make the Budget Deficit Your Problem ('cause it kinda is...)

I'm addicted to good infographics. Love, love, love them. With the web, there's the added value of making them interactive - so you can get iterative feedback and learn a hell of a lot more.

One informative graphic + functionality = many, many informative graphics.

So here's the NYT's Budget graphic

and it's awesome. It presents you with the projected short term and long term budget shortfalls for the US budget - as well as a list of current proposals for reducing the deficit.

Here's the starting point:

A great illustration of the magnitude of the problem - and a wonderful tool for letting the air out of coffeehouse theories or tv talking points.

Let's cut foreign aid!

Okay, we'll slash them in half:




What now?

Uh...we'll eliminate earmarks, too!

Done.

What else?

Uh......

Sure, a lot of the proposals don't show what other consequences would occur (from, say raising the age for Medicare, or freezing Medicare payments) but I do wish they'd have this graphic at hand the next time some airhead like Mitch McConnell pitches an idea as if it is the silver bullet.

Thursday, November 18, 2010

Eat Your Own Puppy Chow

What follows is a true story... at a company that shall remain nameless.

It's an average day in the web department of a large financial company. A project manager gets an email from a high executive who happens to sit just down the hall.

They are asking for the Project Manager to explain something to them.

As Project Manager doesn't usually hear from High Executive, they quick pop down the hall.

In your mind's eye - picture the dutiful PM strolling over towards the corner office - eager to assist.

Bit of background:
Large financial company sells many financial products. Financial products typically come with legal contracts and scheduled payments. High Executive (like most of their ilk) buys many of these products from the company. Above a certain rank, it's considered bad form to buy from competitors.
Back to our PM, now bounding into the office of High Executive. While it is a lovely day, it is immediately apparent that High Executive is not pleased.

Their mood can be directly connected to two events:

1) Over a month ago, High Executive had used the company website to set up automatic payment (in full) for a financial product.
2) High Executive had just received a cancellation/dunning letter for the same product from their company.

HE says something to the effect of What the hell is going on? I set up automatic payment and I get cancelled? Who sent me this crap?

PM rushes to find out just what the hell happened. They start with the department in charge of sending that kind of crap. The department readily admits, yes - we sent that letter to an executive in our own company - because they hadn't paid us in over a month.

PM points out that the executive not only set up automatic payments, but set them up to pay the full annual bill - as opposed to just the monthly installments.

Ahhh... replies the department with a bureaucratic smile ...there's the problem. Automatic payment doesn't take effect for a month after you set it up. You still need to manually make the first payment.

You can imagine them holding that smile for a moment - as if their answer has solved everything. PM points out that this executive has supplied an account number & routing number to set up automatic payment - and that this information is identical to information that would be required to make a payment of any amount.

PM: "So, you couldn't take a monthly payment using that information...?"

Of course not (you big silly) They said they didn't want to pay by the month - they wanted to pay in full.

PM: "Couldn't you make a note that their payment is scheduled for 30 days from the date of setup?"

Our process doesn't support that. We'd be taking the risk their payment wouldn't go through.

Smile is weakening a bit - but still there.  

They should have made their first payment when they set up automatic payment

PM: "They thought they had."

We have warning text on the screen - it's very specific.

PM: "It looks like terms and conditions. They didn't read it."

Well, they really should have read it. Then this wouldn't have happened.

PM: "We should change the automatic payment to make the initial payment at the same time."

Our process doesn't support that.

PM: "Well, what are you going to do about this?"

--------

Now, I'll give you two scenarios that could result from this:

Scenario 1: A review of the payment web interface is undertaken. A gap is found where three tasks (View outstanding balance, Make a payment & Set up automatic payments) are kept entirely separate, despite being very closely related.

The underlying processes are integrated - so that a user who sets up automatic payment is presented with the amount of their initial payment, shown the scheduled date of payment, and asked to confirm it. Behind the scenes, an initial payment for 30 days is recorded - and a second payment for the remaining balance is scheduled with the automatic payment system in the following month.

Conversely - each time a user makes a single payment, they are presented with their outstanding balances and offered the opportunity to make a single payment or set up automatic payments.

Scenario 2: A script is written to scan all outgoing dunning letters for the names of all company executives. Those letters will be routed to an employee tasked with investigating the account balance and resolving any issues with a minimum of exec involvement.

 Now - Any bets on which of these two will actually happen?