Freakonomics real estate video

Jenny Toomey explains what net neutrality means to musicians

At least you can afford shoes

Alejandro González Iñárritu, the marketably avante-gardish Mexican film-maker who directed Amores perros, did the commercial above. I hate to admit I liked this when I saw it at Slate, in spite of many of the things it represents-- commercialism, mindlessly hyperkinetic editing, glitzy phoniness, celebrity worship, and probably a bunch of other things which if pointed out would just belabor the obvious and make this long sentence even longer. But it's still pretty gee-whiz, even if you're not a soccer fan. (Do you ever wonder if some American bloggers pretend to be to soccer fans just to burnish their geek cred? )

cross-posted at Dead Horse.

CNN:"Big city left with no bookstore"

The original url at CNN is here. I don't know if the story is literally true, because some cursory Googling suggests there are other book stores in Laredo, although it also shows the B. Dalton phone number as current.

CNN video Cal lawyer vs BofA

Rachel Maddow vs slavery

via Crooks and Liars. The original post is here. This is not directly relevant to the content of her topic, but I note that Maddow seems to have picked up some of Keith Olberman's mannerisms and inflections. (Via Avedon Carol)

who is Hindery? some guy...

Regarding Hillary's 2008 plan, and individual mandates

I posted this at Dead Horse, in response to Buzzcook, a commenter who encouraged me to read a blog post(referenced below):

OK Buzzcook, I read the lengthy(4,000+ wd) post you referred to in the comments,
"An analysis of Clinton's [2008]Health Plan Proposal"

Robert Laszewski talks about how H. Clinton's 2008 healthcare plan(hereafter I'll just call it HRC-08)says that there will be a public option allowing regular people to buy a plan that's the equivalent of the "Federal Employee Health Benefit Program", something a lot of pols talk about.

Yes, the healthcare plan for federal employees is pretty good, but SO WHAT? If you've ever actually looked at buying health insurance on your own, you'd see that the major companies don't offer a one-size-fits-all plan for everybody, but rather a pretty wide array of plans, with the economy plans offering negligible coverage with high deductibles, and the top of the line plans offering at least as much coverage at the "FEHBP" plan, sometimes more. If you're curious, go to www.ehealthinsurance.com and plug in your personal data and see what's available to you. Blue Cross and Humana, for example, offer an especially wide range of plans, but the prime ones are well out of my reach.

(incidentally, the reason I recommend you look at ehealthinsurance is because they don't ask you, as of this writing, for an email or home phone number, which many of the other online comparison services do, presumably so agents in your area can subsequently pester you. For the record I have not purchased anything from them, just window-shopped.)

Laszewski also discusses the HRC-08 approach to individual mandates,

"Limit Premium Payments to a Percentage of Income: The refundable tax credit will be designed to prevent premiums from exceeding a percentage of family income, while maintaining consumer price consciousness in choosing health plans."

OK, the devil in her plan finally shows itself. Tax credits are all well and good, but what if they're not enough to purchase decent coverage? Then you have to purchase sub-standard coverage(I guess that's where "consumer price consciousness in choosing health plans" comes in.)

I'm a male in my 40s, and from what I've looked at, it would cost me at least 250/month to purchase meaningful coverage, as opposed to plans with 3,000/yr or 5,000/yr deductibles* that don't cover dr's visits until the deductible is satisfied, which are often more "reasonable."

Except they're not. The canard that individual mandate proponents often trot out is that individual mandates will force healthy people to buy coverage when they're well, and quit gaming the system by waiting until they're sick, implicitly suggesting that is what the bulk of the nation's 45 million plus uninsured are doing.

I don't believe that for a moment. If I had a spare 250 dollars a month I would buy a policy, but I'm really poor. I'll wager that most people who don't have health insurance just can't afford it, and some have looked at the bargain-basement policies and figured out they're essentially worthless. And of course some had insurance and were bumped by their insurance companies, and can't find anybody who'll cover them, except at exorbitant rates.

Let's say you are a cashier or a short-order cook, earning 8.50 or 9 bucks an hour. (Let's also assume you have no dependents and no pre-existing conditions.)

Sure, maybe you could, with some difficulty, afford to enroll in a plan that only costs 80 or 90 bucks a month, assuming you can stay healthy and don't actually need that 80 or 90 bucks that month, should you actually need to see a doctor and buy some medication, something the economy plans generally wont help you with, or will only help you a spitting-in-your-poor-face, token amount.

Let's see. You're paying 80 bucks a month, 960 dollars a year, the doctor charges 80 bucks for a visit, and the 80 bucks a month plan reduces your out-of-pocket expense to 45 bucks? Wow! But you don't have 125 bucks to spare on healthcare for the month, not if you want food, and some electricity? You're a bum.

And since you're making, say,18,000 dollars/yr, that 960 bucks a year is still too little to deduct off your income tax, because even if it's more than 7.5% of your taxable income, you still don't make enough to be able to itemize.

My point, buzzcook, is that plans with individual mandates are eminently gameable-- they're designed so the politicians can take credit for dramatically reducing the number of uninsured folks while forcing a large segment of society to buy junk policies, by defunding vouchers so they only pay for worthless coverage, or by making eligibilty for tax credits that phases out below a certain point, in the same way that making something tax-deductible means only people who make enough money to itemize may benefit.

Do I know HRC created a plan with this aspect designed to be a deliberate gimmick? No, but I don't have to. It's not about her, any more than it's about Obama now that he's president. It isn't even about the democrats. It's a systemic vulnerability that's built into individual mandates and that's why it's foul public policy, period. I'm sure you've heard of unfunded mandates in other contexts.

They won't call it cutting the plan off at its knees;

they'll call it "reaching a bipartisan solution" or

"allowing the private sector breathing room to innovate"

and when a New York Times story about some Duke or University of Michigan study questioning the effectiveness of individual mandates comes out 3 or 4 years later, it will studiously avoid connecting the dots, to prove that the democrats deliberately created legislation to "allow" themselves to be played by the other guys, as they both wink at each other from across the aisle.

That's why I think my criticism of HRC-08(and BHO-09) is legitimate.

Later this week I'll post about my thought on how to fix healthcare. Maybe my ideas will be just as flawed, just differently flawed. We'll see.

(*I've even seen some companies offer 7,500/yr deductible plans, although they're still rare.)

not to be confused with-- oh, you know...

via Abdusalaam al-Hindi, who hasn't posted for a while.

Happy birthday Bibendum

according to our wiki friends, Michelin commissioned artist Marius Rossillon to create Bibendum in 1898, so he turns 110 this year. Here are some older iterations. I've been told by some I resemble the Michelin man, but the less said about that the better, at least for this Wednesday evening.

Beware the hooded old man at the rudder...

Now, I know that Chris De Burgh's "Don't Pay the Ferryman" may strike some as melodramatic and overwrought, but that's only because it is. Nevertheless it seems like the perfect song to play while Congress ruminates over retooling the Great Bank Bailout of 2008(with more bailouts to come, no doubt, until we're all broke millionaires, awash in worthless currency...) (With a nod to Bob in Pacifica's "Something for nothing".)

(12.2008: In case the above embed doesn't work, the direct video link is here. Since I don't approve of sighing on the internet, I'll just write "grumble."

History repeating itself

Helena Cobban: "China and Japan's stakes in the US financial crisis"
as well as,

"China's condition to bail out the US: Taiwan?"

Andrew Leonard in Salon, "Not so fast, Secretary Paulson!"

look past the florid ridiculousness of Leonard's opening paragraph("this kind of profound remaking of capitalism..." ), as well as some(OK, many) of his assumptions, to this worthy passage:

You don't often find a Democratic senator and a University of Chicago free-market true-believer economist on the same side, but Luigi Zingales' widely circulated "Why Paulson Is Wrong" essay provides strong support for the idea that the government should get a piece of the action, framed in terms of debt forgiveness in exchange for equity.

Zingales argues that a reduction in debt can benefit both equity holders and debt holders because "there are real costs from having too much debt and too little equity in the capital structure." But debt holders tend to resist government-ordered debt forgiveness for the very simple reason that a government bailout is a preferable solution, for them.

Daniel Gross in Slate, "The Political Cowardice and (Hypocrisy)of the Wall Street Bailout"

Congress and the president favor a $700 billion Wall Street bailout, but they're afraid to say how they'll pay for it...

Xymphora: "Then they came for the Lehman Brothers, and I did not speak out - because I was not a Lehman Brother"

(not his best piece, but the title is irresistible.)

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, to the UN: "American empire in the world is reaching the end of its road, and its next rulers must limit their interference to their own borders"

invest like a pirate day

Lucian Freud n' Sue Tilley

Yesterday I discussed Dorothea Lange and the subject of her iconic photo of a migrant mother-- and coincidentally, speaking of artists and models, there's this video from Reuters.

Alternate Focus:The rise and fall of Blackwater in Potrero

from Alternate Focus.(about 27 minutes)

sundry items for profit-inclined bloggers

Merchant Credit Advance has a video explaining their service here, and pingomatic will simultaneously ping you on blo.gs, technorati, My Yahoo, Feedburner and a bunch of other such sites, so if that sort of thing is a big deal to you, one or both services might interest you.

don't forget to vote, parte dos

And, from the "I try to learn something new every day" department: "Smurfing"

Courtesy Gov.(for now)Spitzer of New York.

I don't know whether prostitution is a victimless crime or not. It's especially unclear at the tonier levels-- but I fail to see how Spitzer's behavior warrants impeachment when that of You-Know-Who and Mister Growls-a-lot does not.

this n' that

stylin' in Montevideo. photo: cardomain.com

via groovy Avedon:

Piracy not raiding CD sales" The enforcement arm of the Australian music industry has dismissed damaging overseas research that found illegal music sharing actually increased CD sales. The study, conducted by two researchers at the University of London for the Canadian Government, found people downloaded songs illegally because they wanted to hear them before buying or because they were not available in stores."

and, 3/7ths of a Paul Goyette post:

2. Some interesting analysis of a couple of the presidential candidates' speech patterns by Mark Liberman.

4. A style guide for citing blogs, from the National Library of Medicine.

7. And I wanted to mention, before we get too far along into the month, that it's National Novel Writing Month again. If you have that great idea, you should get started now...

(you still have 21 days and 4 minutes;PG mentioned this on the 2nd, unlike slothful me. If you don't read locussolus regularly, how is that my fault? Anyway, get to work!)

all electric, no bills

photo(andreadoria.com) of the Ile de France leaving New York Harbor, circa 1936.


When I was a kid I loved animals, and big motorized machines of every type, whether it was an airplane or Jackie Stewart's Tyrrell Formula One car or the big ocean liners of yesteryear. It never occurred to me that my holding these parallel interests might somehow be ironic.

I wanted, for example, to someday fly on the Concorde, which last flew in 2003, so I guess I missed my chance. The big ocean liners are mostly gone too, but like the Concorde they're strictly a niche consumer good for the wealthy. I wonder sometimes if the ghosts of Concorde and the old gran luxe ocean liners are a sort of D.E.W. line for a society that still believes that technology will rescue us from today without requiring us to do anything about our multiple bad habits.

Speaking of French things (and motorized machines, etc.), the 24 hrs of Le Mans is taking place this weekend, and there's a pretty good chance that a diesel-powered racer will win it outright. The rules have been finessed for this year to allow a diesel powered car to be competitive, and Audi and Peugeot decided to field diesel-powered entries to meet said rules.(The scuttlebutt, incidentally, is that because of the massive investments these two companies undertook to make competitive diesel racers, they're concerned that the rules stay the same for a few years so as to not render their cars obsolete in 2008. After all, only one company team can win Le Mans at a time.) I still love motorsports like I did when I was a kid, even if I can see the politics I wouldn't have understood when I was seven or eight.



photo: greatoceanliners.net

addendum: oh yeah-- Audi won.

Κέρβερος

William Blake's Cerebrus, the mythological hound of hell.

from channel 8 in Grand Rapids:
"Chrysler workers skeptical of Cerberus' motives in Chrysler deal"

DETROIT -- Billy Boyd, a Chrysler worker for almost 34 years, is so skeptical about Monday's sale announcement that he might not stick around much longer.

Like many of Chrysler's roughly 80,000 employees, Boyd, 51, a machine operator at the automaker's Kenosha, Wis., engine plant, isn't sure what to make of the unusual deal. Parent company DaimlerChrysler AG is paying as much as $650 million to walk away from Chrysler by turning over the keys to his company to Cerberus Capital Management LP, a New York private equity firm.

"It sounds good," he said before work Monday afternoon. "Are they buying us to help us out or to suck the blood? It's kind of scary."

At many Chrysler plants, workers also worried about what it will cost them as word spread about the $7.4 billion sale. Many are fearful of private equity buyers, which in the past have sold off companies in pieces to make a fast buck.

As well they should be. I note that the UAW guy quoted in the Channel 8 story sounded upbeat, so we probably don't need to worry overmuch about his future. On the other hand-- while the democrats are carefully calibrating their response to GWB so that they seem to care about ending the war without seeming "vindictive" or "mean" or any of the other countless things they might be accused of by the millionaire anchormen whose approval they tremble before, couldn't they have thrown in an extra seven billion to protect a few thousand American jobs?


For much, much less than the cost of the damned Iraq war, the US gov't could have bought Chrysler outright, and federalized American healthcare, therebye making each of the big three more globally competitive. But, no, we can't do that, that's what crazy European leftists do. So much better to run our country into the ground proving we're macho.

also:Andrew Leonard, "Chrysler at the gates of hell"