Thursday, September 03, 2009

Bad UI in Star Wars

(H/t to thorn)

What if there usability reviews in the Star Wars universe? SciFi Scanner tells you:

Lightsabers
Yes, I know, I want one too. But I tell you what: I want one with a hand guard. Otherwise every lightsaber battle would consist of sabers clashing and then their owners sliding as quickly as possible down the shaft to lop off their opponent's fingers. You say: Lightsabers can slice through anything but another lightsaber, so what are you going to make a hand guard out of? I say: Dude, if you have the technology to make a lightsaber, you have the technology to make a light hand guard.

Wednesday, September 02, 2009

School drop off

It's the first day of the new school routine
Dropping the boy at before school care, dropping the girl at day care and going to work.

And I have an 8:30 meeting.

I pull out of the driveway at 7:30 am with both kids strapped in and munching a Gosselin breakfast. I have the boy’s backpack, the backpack has the boy’s lunch. We’re good.

School drop off is a total mystery, I made a mental note of the street to take – I’ll park near where I was when we dropped the boy off.

I’m expecting bedlam, and the street is deserted. No people walking around and ample parking.

Odd.

I know I’m supposed to take the boy to the cafeteria – those were my instructions. I start heading for the door closest to the familiar, box-like appendage sticking out of the west side of the school.

The boy tells me we are headed to the wrong door. I figure, he’s done this before – so I follow his lead. We go down the stairs towards the door on the east side of the school. We get to the door, and it’s locked.

On the other side of the door, I see a teacher walking by who stops and gives us inaudible directions. My confused expression makes it clear I’m not getting what she’s saying.

Exasperated, she points with her arm to the west end of the school and repeats her inaudible directions.

The visual message gets through. We turn and head west.

---Bit of a comment here.

The school starts after 8am. This conflicts with virtually all work schedules known to man. If the school started classes at 7:45 or 7:30 a lot of lives would be simplified. Plus, I would not have to pay someone to watch my child for a half an hour before school every day.

That’s a systemic issue – not really the point – I’m concerned with execution here. The before school care is not run by the school. This is made clear by every school staffer you speak to.

“We don’t have anything to do with that.”

Now, I get that the school staff is not affiliated with the before school care people. I get that they don’t want to assume the responsibilities or liabilities that go along with caring for children in the hours before and after school.

But here’s the thing: Don’t act as if being asked about this care is somehow a burden to you. Don’t pretend that there is anything unreasonable in a person asking a school staffer about this service.
And for crying out loud – stop acting as if this service has nothing to do with the school.

No, you don’t have anything to do with this service – you only
  • Receive my children from this service before school
  • Deliver my children to this service after school
  • Allow this service to take place at your facility
I mean, why the hell would anyone at the school know the slightest thing about it?

More to the point – this service benefits enormously from the school lending it an air of respectability. If this was child care in an offsite facility I’d have all kinds of other concerns:
  • Is the facility safe?
  • How will they handle transportation?
  • What kind of security exists?
The fact that this care takes place in a school means those concerns are at least minimized. I know a school will not have power tools, rabid dogs, or circus carnies on the grounds. I know that if the child care person was showing R rated movies or passing out needles, there would be a high probability that someone would notice.

This service is leaps and bounds more acceptable in my sight simply because it occurs on school grounds. The school helped sell this service to me.

So - enough with the “Not my job” attitude, eh?

--where was I?

Ah yes. The three of us (with little e still carrying her cup of cereal) once again traverse the length of the school and walk up to another unlabeled, closed door and take a guess.

The door opens. Hooray. I’m at least at the right end.
We walk in. The instructions I had were “it’s by the principal’s office.”

Now, I don’t know if the cafeteria and the gym are the same thing. What is near the principal’s office is clearly a gym. And it’s packed with kids who are easily 12 years old.

As a parent of a five year old, I view 12 year olds like wildlife. On their own – they are perfectly pleasant. But I’m not leaving my son in room full of them.

I find no signs and no staff, so I start looking elsewhere. A few steps down the hall later, the boy tells me this is the wrong direction. We turn back towards the zoo and I go looking for a keeper.

While I’m doing this another parent streaks into view – dragging a child about the size of my son. I’m hopeful. Perhaps she knows where she is going.

She doesn’t. She is, however, at a higher level of frustration than I am and marches into the zoo. I hear her ask in a loud voice “Is this where before school care is?”

Now I see the keepers. They were inside the room just out of sight. This New Parent is talking to one of them. A balding middle-aged guy. Baldy shrugs and says something unhelpful. Behind him, another keeper says “I think they’ve moved to the teacher’s lounge.”

A third keeper shows solidarity with Baldy: they roll their eyes and say “It’s always something…”

New Parent is off like a shot and the boy and I try to follow. Little e is not in the mood to go fast. Anyway, she dropped a Cheerio and needs to pick it up.

Eventually we get to about the mid-point of the school when I see New Parent coming towards me, sans child. “They’re in the art room,” she says. “The middle school principle is kind of a…” she flops her hand around to imply: Dork.

I thank her.

We then go to the art room and there are a few kids sitting around a table with games and stuff. There’s a Nice Young Man who explains that when the school needs the gym the before school kids get booted into the art room. He shows me the sign up/sign out sheet and tells me he’s going to take the kids outside in a little while.

I tell him “It’s a good thing that the middle school thought to bump afterschool care on the second day. No chance of confusion there.”

He grins.

The boy gives me a hug and one of the kids tells him where to put his backpack. I leave.

Little e and I go to the nearest exit – the locked door we’d tried first. It opens to let us out and we walk back to the car.

It’s 8:05.

I’m twenty minutes from day care and day care is ten minutes from work. Parking is seven minutes from my desk. I call my team leader and tell them I’m going to be late. “Around 8:45” I say hopefully.

Usually, when I am late I start envisioning the forces of Murphy’s law sizing up my situation and deciding on tactics. It’s a delicate balancing act. Too few delays, I might show up on time. Too many, and their intervention becomes obvious (“Oh come on… a herd of cattle?”).

Today – their balance starts out pretty good. A train crossing. An ambulance delay. Traffic jam outside a school zone.

Then they get a bit greedy. A moving truck that backs out of a driveway blocking two lanes. It goes back and forth repeatedly because the driver is OCD and insists on having equal pavement on both sides of his truck when he parks.

The car in front of me stops to let pedestrians cross in front of them. These people are a half block away but this person is patient. “I’m in no hurry and I’m sure no one behind me is either…”

And then we’re at day care. Little e has (of course) taken off her shoes and socks, because its fun. So I re-shoe her and get her inside (where I then remove her shoes and put her in slippers). My watch says 8:30 and the day care administrator strikes up a conversation about web design.

Web design discussions… like crack… must resist….

I’m out the door by 8:35.

And realize I’m parked in. My day care, there is one driveway. You pull up to the house, somebody could park you in. Hasn’t happened to me in months.

Today’s the day.

So, I sit in my care for ten minutes. Because the parent who parked me in hasn’t tracked that they parked someone in. They’re in no hurry. I’m not mad at them. This is systemic, everybody gets a turn. Only way to avoid this is to park on a busy street which I hate –

But did it have to be today?

The parent comes out, apologizes and I’m off to work. Murphy’s done his damage, so the rest of the trip is without a hitch.

I hit my meeting at 9:05.

Tuesday, September 01, 2009

The room at the top of the stair

The milestones of childhood sneak up on you while you're watching them.

You have all the warning in the world - and it does you no good.

For weeks now, mom's been sending packages to the boy with school supplies - pencils, glue sticks, new clothes, a backpack. You figure I'd get get a clue there. I've been to the boy's school, met the teacher, took him to his new locker.

I can tell the boy is fretting over it. He grinds his teeth at night. He's been coming into our bed at night with some regularity. For him it's a huge change. Losing all his buddies from day care - losing his awesome teacher and having to start over.

I've never understood the whole kindergarten angst for parents, though. My mother has told me stories from her elementary school that seemed positively surreal.

The one I remember the most was about a mother of twins.

First off, she was incredibly tall. Taller, even than my mother which takes some doing. She was easily 6'4" and dressed in full corporate battle gear: power suit and all the accessories. She was dropping off her two boys for their first day of kindergarten.

After her boys had gone off down the hall, this imposing, seasoned professional lay prostrate in the middle of the hallway and sobbed her eyes out. Aware of the spectacle she was making, she crawled into my mom's office to recover.

It took awhile, my mom said. A long while.

I've never understood that. Her children were coming back to her in a few hours. All these books that purport to prepare your kids for going to kindergarten make some reference to crying parents. It makes no sense to me.

The kids are safe - they're coming back. I mean, sure - it's a change, but it's not like boarding school.

So, this morning we take the boy over to his new school. The whole family, because it's a big deal. We take pictures - and the boy is nonplussed by the whole thing. He wants us to carry his backpack. He's wondering when the bell will ring so he can line up to go inside. Total anti-climax.

I've been wondering if he'll freak out a bit when we start to go, but E's staying with him a bit. I'm leaving early because little e has to get to day care. I've got a meeting I need to get to. He gives me a bit of a wave and disappears into the throng of other kids and parents.

And then I literally go to pieces. Little e's tugging at my hand and we're headed to the car. I'm wishing I had a hat with a brim - I have to walk past a line of late arrivals and their parents. One of the neighborhood kids is here - Jesus, what if they see me? I'm a grown up for cryin' out loud.

The masochist centers in my brain dredge up the verses to a McCutcheon song that ruins any hope of regaining composure.
I always say since dad died, I'm all out of stoicism. I'm not sure if that's the excuse here - but I'm unable to stop or make sense of what is going on.

I'll see him this afternoon.

I get little e to the car and she's too delightful to notice that her dad's a wreck.

This makes no sense.

So I drive her to day care, searing myself with thoughts of work and my meeting. I'm good until I get to day care and drop off little e without her brother. The boy's teacher is there and I'm edging towards becoming spectacle. Little e runs off and behind me I hear some of the new parents coming.

I am not one of those people. You have no right to see me like this.

So I opt for the half door next to the classroom. It's never open and we're not supposed to use it, but its the quickest way out. I get through here, I can be gone before the new parents come down this way.

And the door's sticks - and I can't get it to close behind me. And there they are, the new parents - right in front of me.

And I'm a spectacle. Little e's teacher is great - she knows the score and gives me a hug. This only encourages my problem and I dash up the stairs, willfully ignoring the other parents.

Alone in the car, I still can't make it all make sense. The boy is fine. I should be fine. I'm not sure what the root of my problem is.

I can't stop it - which is infuriating. I'm ten minutes from work. I'll be in a meeting five minutes after I get there.

But that part that needs to keep suffering just won't give up.
Now I sit on the bed
As the memories rain down
There’s a hole in my heart
Where you’ll always be there
I still don't understand.

Make it stop.

Monday, August 31, 2009

How they do it over there

A good amount of ink has gone into rebutting domestic myths about our own health care system - leaving American myths about foreign health care unchallenged.

At last, WaPo's T.R. Reed steps up to slap down some of the sillier ones.

He wind's out with this:
In many ways, foreign health-care models are not really "foreign" to America, because our crazy-quilt health-care system uses elements of all of them. For Native Americans or veterans, we're Britain: The government provides health care, funding it through general taxes, and patients get no bills. For people who get insurance through their jobs, we're Germany: Premiums are split between workers and employers, and private insurance plans pay private doctors and hospitals. For people over 65, we're Canada: Everyone pays premiums for an insurance plan run by the government, and the public plan pays private doctors and hospitals according to a set fee schedule. And for the tens of millions without insurance coverage, we're Burundi or Burma: In the world's poor nations, sick people pay out of pocket for medical care; those who can't pay stay sick or die.
(H/t CJR)

America's Minotaur debate

Once again, the foolishness of American political debate is best encapsulated by satire.

Witness - the torture debate, as rendered by The Onion:



(H/t to CJR)

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

Still takin' what they're givin'

Critics have been all over the Congressional plans for their expense, their lack of cost controls and a host of imaginary horrors.

I think the NYT's David Leonhardt highlights another weakness - choice.
Real choice is not part of the bills moving through the Democratic-led Congress; even if the much-debated government-run insurance plan was created, it would not be available to most people who already have coverage. Republicans, meanwhile, have shown no interest in making insurance choice part of a compromise they could accept. Both parties are protecting the insurers.
He points out that what is happening may be a step forward, but its a baby step.

Lest anyone confuse the current situation in health insurance with choice, the NYT offers a graph of the current regional monopolies in health coverage.
(H/t E)

Tuesday, August 25, 2009

Bloomberg beats the fed?

(Via CJR)

Bloomberg has won their FOIA case against the Board of the Federal Reserve System.

All that money the Fed has been pumping into the system and hasn't been telling us where it was going?

We might find out.

Monday, August 24, 2009

McCaughey v. Stewart: A knife to a gunfight

I like you, but I don’t understand how your brain works.
-Jon Stewart to Betsy McCaughey
There could be no better illustration of the difference between a political discussion and what occurs on a so-called news show than Jon Stewart's interview of Betsy McCaughey.

McCaughey is a health care advocate who launched the meme that has since become the “Death Panels” talking point. She is an experienced PR messenger who appears before national audiences on radio and TV and never goes off script.  That she’s even talking to Stewart (who opposes her viewpoint and has an audience that will support him on virtually anything) illustrates her confidence in her ability to get her message across.

And she gets bludgeoned.

Stewart mops the floor with her, in part because he is so well prepared, but largely because McCaughey is so good at her job.

Stewart is having a conversation – and McCaughey is reciting her talking points. In any Sunday talk show, McCaughey ‘s approach would have carried the day.

How many times have you seen this exchange before?
Interviewer: [Your boss has stayed silent on this issue, but you haven’t] And — and that, to your critics, is a sign of his statesmanship and your lack of it.

What do you make of that?
PR Messenger: Well, I — I don't pay a lot of attention to what the critics say, obviously.
From my standpoint, the notion that I should remain silent, while they go public, that I shouldn't say anything, while they threaten to disbar the lawyers who gave us the advice that was crucial in terms of this program, that I shouldn't say anything when they go out and release information that they believe is critical of the program and critical of our policies, but refuse to put out information that shows the results that we were able to achieve.

The bottom line is…
Most times, that’s the response. No follow up. A shorter version would be-
Interviewer: Give me your talking point.

PR Messenger: Here it is.
McCaughey is clearly prepared for that kind of interview.  She enters with a prop (a large binder containing part of a health care bill), and refers to it as she sits down. “I’ll put this down here.”

Tactic 1: She tries the charm.
McCaughey: Hello everybody…It is so nice to be here.  This is such a great show. It’s such a big show…”
Which is her attempt to assert control of the conversation. Sit back and let me praise you.

This goes nowhere, anyone trying to disarm Stewart on his show should know better.

Tactic 2: Distract the audience. She discusses her prop, the copy of the bill. She rolls her eyes at the size of the document, suggesting that its size means it is both bad and hard to understand (for us).

Stewart doesn’t take the bait. He immediately goes right at her assertion that health care reform will compel seniors to make end of life choices they don’t want. “The infamous page 425,” Stewart calls it.
McCaughey, in classic PR fashion shows no fear.
McCaughey: Let’s get right to it, this is my major concern...
 Tactic 3: But before we get to your question…
McCaughey: I really want to help cover the uninsured. Nobody should lose their home or their savings because they bet sick.
 I come in peace. Classic PR – answer a question you weren’t asked. Say something no one can have a problem with.  Then switch to-

Tactic 4: Hit your talking point:
McCaughey: …But this bill is dangerous..
Science of attention, classic pivot: I’m for good things, and this bill is bad.
The talking point continues:
McCaughey: Page 425 to page 430 outline advanced consultations, living wills, other end of life consultation issues. The government proscribes what must be covered in detail including foregoing nutrition and even antibiotics.
Twofold tactic here: Hit the talking point, get out the scary words “government proscribes” and “foregoing nutrition” – she’s also establishing her mastery of the subject: she cites page numbers.

Stewart counters-
Stewart: Although the language is ‘life sustaining procedures’, the language of the bill is..
 Tactic 5: Stay on message.
McCaughey: No, it includes hydration, nutrition...
 McCaughey is trying to get all her scary words out there. Stewart cuts her off-
Stewart: No no no, I understand that, but they also say – it’s so you can make that decision.

McCaughey: That’s right. But it does proscribe, the uh medical professional shall, not may, shall must include-

Stewart: Have the conversation. If they have the conversation with you.

McCaughey: That’s right.
 McCaughey’s faltering here – she’s agreed to something Stewart has said. Twice.

Stewart presses on and starts to do some damage-
Stewart: Now you have said that the conversation is mandatory.

McCaughey: It is.

Stewart: Now the bill, at least the way I read it, and again…
Tactic 6: Stall.
McCaughey: Did you only read section 1233?

Stewart: I may…

McCaughey: That’s the problem. Factcheck.org. Everybody reads factcheck.org. They’re really spot-check.org.
All this yammering does nothing to back up her assertion that the conversation is mandatory. It does put Stewart on the defensive (Did I read 1233? Well, I…) and give her time to fill airtime with yet another talking point: Don’t trust factcheck.org.
Stewart: Give me the part that says it is mandatory that you must.

McCaughey: 1233. It’s on page 432.

Stewart: Read it to me. I’d be happy to hear about...
Stewart asks her to back up her mandatory assertion. The whole point of the discussion is being insisted on. Read it out. If you have it, show it to me.

Can anyone picture this exchange happening on any Sunday “News” show? That a talking point would have to provide a citation which is then read aloud to the audience?

When push comes to shove – she cannot produce a citation that backs up what she has said here and in other places.

She does try a host of distractions:
  • “Look! I wrote ‘disgusting’ on this page of the bill!” Why does that matter?
  • “Listen to this story about…”  Your story is irrelevant.
  • “This provision is so dangerous, the Senate has ripped it out of its draft” Only because you are freaking people out with misinformation.

No. Stewart smacks her down and then spells out what he’s asking for 
Stewart: But there is absolutely nothing in that reading that says this is a mandatory consultation-

McCaughey:  Well, you’re wrong.

Stewart: I’ve read it. Honestly.

McCaughey:  You’re wrong.

Stewart: Alright then show me where it says it.
And they go to commercial while she tries to find it.

They come back with Stewart reading a citation that is filled with bureaucrat-ese that sounds nothing like what McCaughey has described. He pronounces the last words with particular relish: “…adherence to orders for life-sustaining treatment.”

You can just feel the collective smirk from the audience.

Undaunted, McCaughey claims our health care is the best in the word. Which leads to:
Stewart: We’re 46th in life expectancy

McCaughey: Life expectancy. When you remove violent crime and car accidents, we are number 1.
The audience laughs.
Stewart: (smiling) Point taken.

McCaughey: So instead of fixing the health care system we could fix the highways.
Incredibly, she’s still trying to push her talking point – and so Stewart cuts her off at the knees.
Stewart: Maybe what we could do is this. After a car crash, ship people to countries that are really good at treating people who have been in car crashes.
Ow. That’s going to leave a mark.

Clearly rattled, McCaughey then tries to paint him as an elitist: Well Jon, you’re so rich, he’s got a big penthouse…


And Stewart judos her all over again.
  • She discusses her plan – which Stewart has read and then crucifies.
  • She brings up a testimonial letter – which Stewart exposes as the distraction it is.
  • I’d give her credit for hanging in there, but that’s the very thing that ensures she looks like a total fool.

Watch all three segments. They are fricking beautiful from any angle. Ask yourself what journalist would be this prepared, or pin down a guest to this degree?

Part 1 (Via TPM)

Part 2 (Via Comedy Central)

Part 3 (Via Comedy Central)


Late update: PalMD has a great observation on Mccaughey's tortured logic as it applies to PQRI:
HR 3200 does add a PQRI clause to advanced directive counseling, which, it may be argued, incents physicians to have these conversations and document them.
[Mccaughey is suggesting that] if this is included in quality measures, then it will be included in incentive, therefore doctors will coerce patients from changing their minds about advanced directives, which might lose them credit for "adherence".

...

This can only be an intentional misreading of the bill and of reality itself. The PQRI system, for example, provides different codes for a measure. There is usually a code for "did it", and "didn't do it because it's not appropriate" and "didn't do it because patient doesn't want to". The doctor is not in any way pressured to "require" patients to do a damned thing. And if the family changes their mind and "chooses to live", as McC puts it, there is no reason any sane, non-religious-zealot doctor would stand in the way. While the specific PQRI coding isn't proposed in the bill, there is not reason "adherence" would stand in the way of "mind-changing", since then you've created a new advanced directive with which to adhere.

Wednesday, August 19, 2009

Chris Whalen to Jim Cramer: I’m calling you out

Chris Whalen has had his fill of Jim Cramer's mindless mouthing of whatever Goldmann Sachs and Tim Geithner say.

But he puts in far more entertaining terms:
Jim, next time the boys at GS or Tim Geithner call and ask you to take a shot a Sheila Bair and our colleagues at the FDIC on TheStreet or CNBC, just know that I will put you into the boards every time. And I am looking forward to it with the greatest anticipation.

Here’s a challenge to Jim Cramer. If you want to talk banks some evening on your show, I know the way to CNBC HQ and will be happy to talk to the flock anytime you say.

Cramer went willingly to Jon Stewart's woodshed once, you wonder if he'll be so eager to invite Whalen over...

Here's hoping.

(H/t trainreq)

He'd better die quick is all I have to say

Seriously.

Fire with Fire

Love, love, love this - Barney Frank beating the stuffing out of a town hall whackjob:



(H/t TPM)

Put it on my card: How black ops get it done

(Via Danger Room and the New York Post)
More than seven years ago a group of Americans traveled to Siberia to buy a pair of Russian Mi-17 helicopters for the CIA’s post-9/11 clandestine operations in Afghanistan. As with many “black” programs, the contract had elements of craziness: Contracting officials paid the multimillion-dollar contract on a credit card at a local El Paso bar and then used the credit card rebate to redecorate their office; the team traveled under the guise of being private contractors; and the charter crew transporting the group abandoned the team in Russia in the middle of the night.

Saw this on Docuticker...

 
  
  
Well, most of that was found on docuticker...

(H/t E)

Why are we confused about food?

In 2007, Kellog spent $32.8 Million just to advertise Cheez-Its.
-Marion Nestle
Marion Nestle giving a great speech on the food industry, food policy, our limited understanding of both - and how we got here.

Her theme isn't exactly a revelation - but then, when so much money is spent to distract us - it's almost thrilling to watch an informed and entertaining re-introduction to what would otherwise be obvious to all.

Great stuff.

She references a report by the IOM on the marketing of food to children. Also worth a look.

(H/t Good Experience)

Tuesday, August 18, 2009

Glancing contact with a current event

A while back I was contacted by my credit card company telling me they'd canceleld the card and were sending me a replacement.

Apparently, my card information was part of the Heartland heist, whose conspirators were just indicted.

As my credit card is issued by a classy company - they handled the problem so I didn't need to do anything. No muss no fuss...

...but I'm sure interested to see what happens to the guys who brought this about.

A gust of wind and a chance encounter

(Via Starts With A Bang, H/t to Phil)

Take a look at this rock:


There's all kinds of cool going into this photo:

For starters, it was taken by a robot on another planet.

Also, this robot
-was launched over six years ago, traveled over 34 million miles through space before landing on Mars.
-has spent the last five years driving around taking pictures until...

... it took this picture.

In part because of a gust of wind.

What they learned from that picture picture is cooler yet.

Farve, buddy... give it a rest

Farve reportedly to sign with Vikings.

The hypocrisy of the anti-government reflex

I remember reading the transcripts of Terry Nichols making an @ss out of himself telling a judge why he shouldn't have to pay income taxes.

It was that whole Freemen thing - where individuals are free to advocate for the destruction of the very government whose social programs are subsidizing their existence.

Fast forward to today when Medicare beneficiaries are vocally denouncing government involvement in health care.

And you just grope for the right words...

Fortunately, somebody has come up with some:
This morning I was awoken by my alarm clock powered by electricity generated by the public power monopoly regulated by the U.S. Department of Energy.

I then took a shower in the clean water provided by a municipal water utility.

After that, I turned on the TV to one of the FCC-regulated channels to see what the National Weather Service of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration determined the weather was going to be like, using satellites designed, built, and launched by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

I watched this while eating my breakfast of U.S. Department of Agriculture-inspected food and taking the drugs which have been determined as safe by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

At the appropriate time, as regulated by the U.S. Congress and kept accurate by the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the U.S. Naval Observatory, I get into my National Highway Traffic Safety Administration-approved automobile and set out to work on the roads built by the local, state, and federal Departments of transportation, possibly stopping to purchase additional fuel of a quality level determined by the Environmental Protection Agency, using legal tender issued by the Federal Reserve Bank.

On the way out the door I deposit any mail I have to be sent out via the U.S. Postal Service and drop the kids off at the public school.

After spending another day not being maimed or killed at work thanks to the workplace regulations imposed by the Department of Labor and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, enjoying another two meals which again do not kill me because of the USDA, I drive my NHTSA car back home on the DOT roads, to my house which has not burned down in my absence because of the state and local building codes and Fire Marshal's inspection, and which has not been plundered of all its valuables, thanks to the local police department.

And then I log on to the internet -- which was developed by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Administration -- and post on Freerepublic.com and Fox News forums about how SOCIALISM in medicine is BAD because the government can't do anything right.
(H/t to Mike)

Monday, August 17, 2009

The ice cold water of the bank failure rate

I realize I'm a reflexive counterpuncher, so stories that speak ill of the current "recovery" mindset are appealing to me.

But here's a rather bit of commentary, courtesy of The Big Picture:
What kind of recovery, we wonder, permits the sixth largest bank failure in U.S. history? Colonial BancGroup, the flailing Montgomery lender that had 346 branches spread across Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Nevada, and Texas, joined 77 other banks so far in 2009 to find their way into the big bank home in the sky.

...

Says Sheila Bair, chairman of the FDIC, “The past 18 months have been a very trying period in the financial services arena.”

Consider that a sizable understatement. Last year, during what was considered the height of bank failures, the agency set aside $25 billion to cover what they saw as potential future losses. Now, less than 12 months later, the number of banks on the FDIC’s “troubled” watch list has jumped from 90 to no less than 305. The combined asset value of those “problem” banks? $220 billion.

Yarg.

I know the FDIC isn't running out of money any time soon, but a climate where banks keep imploding cannot be a good thing.

Peter Schiff is fond of saying that the FDIC is bad because it shields investors from risk. Logic being, if banks tanked, we'd be more careful where we put our money.

Problem with that is people don't want to have to suss out which banks are healthy and which aren't. And if people have trouble divining which banks are and aren't healthy now, wait until they have to worry about deposits under $200K fleeing to safer harbors.

I'm sure Uncle Sam will keep kicking out the cash to cover these kinds of takeovers - but you wonder if the rate continues to increase like this... what kind of course corrections will have to follow?

Our crazy tree is blooming

(Via TPM)

Rick Perlstein writes a monster article about the current health care debate:
So the birthers, the anti-tax tea-partiers, the town hall hecklers -- these are "either" the genuine grass roots or evil conspirators staging scenes for YouTube? The quiver on the lips of the man pushing the wheelchair, the crazed risk of carrying a pistol around a president -- too heartfelt to be an act. The lockstep strangeness of the mad lies on the protesters' signs -- too uniform to be spontaneous. They are both. If you don't understand that any moment of genuine political change always produces both, you can't understand America, where the crazy tree blooms in every moment of liberal ascendancy, and where elites exploit the crazy for their own narrow interests.

...

Before the "black helicopters" of the 1990s, there were right-wingers claiming access to secret documents from the 1920s proving that the entire concept of a "civil rights movement" had been hatched in the Soviet Union; when the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act was introduced, one frequently read in the South that it would "enslave" whites. And back before there were Bolsheviks to blame, paranoids didn't lack for subversives -- anti-Catholic conspiracy theorists even had their own powerful political party in the 1840s and '50s.