Archive for the ‘politicish’ Category

the case for CoCo

Friday, January 15th, 2010

Inferred in the title, I’m a staunch Conan “People of Earth” O’Brien supporter. This does not mean I regularly watch his show. In fact, I rarely see it since I slimmed my subscriptions in Hulu but I watched regularly at first and enjoy his humorist tendencies.

That and his competition is sub-stellar.

David “Ahead of the News” Letterman is a better interview. His bits and monologue are tired but he, especially with guests he sees as inferior, is a master behind the desk (though, James “Your Favorite Curse” Lipton has him  beat hands down in overall style).

Jay “Have You Heard This?/Am I Right?” Leno has a tired monologue, uninteresting interview skills but can make fun of stupid people and typos. Jerry “Show About Nothing” Seinfeld is a genius in observing the comedy in the mondane. Leno’s genius is in trying to be Seinfeld.

Craig “Who’s That Guy?” Ferguson has filled the shoes of Craig “Where’s My Mirror” Kilborn well. Still, he’s a complete goof who I have only watched once or twice. He seems to have a following.

Jimmy “Stick Around After Grey’s” Kimmel has a stronger following than Ferguson and seems to have the staying power. At least on his network, which has ratings, I think, from televisions being left on after “Modern Family” or “Grey’s Anatomy” or, in some cases, “General Hospital“.

Because I’m such an impressive blogger*, I’ll even mention Wanda “Rock-Splitting Voice” Sykes and George “I’m Hispanic” Lopez. Neither are original (or funny) but both have shows (Fox Saturday and TBS during the week, respectively) because networks need to advertise pharmaceuticals to insomniac, depressed, middle-aged viewers. (Pills!!)

NBC’s decision to scrap their Tonight Show (a legacy of fifty-five years) for some hybrid option was rightfully opposed by O’Brien (his statement). After only a few months, O’Brien’s show had a younger audience, something coveted by most studio execs (lower proportion on a fixed income = more money = lucrative advertising). In any case, even Leno defended O’Brien’s ratings issues.

What no one’s talking about is how much Leno’s show sucked. I mean, it’s terrible. His monologue is just as abismal as it was an hour and a half later but the laid back format is boring, the interviews still terrible and his choice in up-and-coming comedians doesn’t fit his demographic. He can still make fun of stupid people but is that better than O’Brien?

No.

Mr O’Brien’s intellectually goofy style is more modern and more in-tune with the not-yet-middle-aged audience. It’s fresh and unique in a landscape of desks and couches. Jimmy “Look at My Gadget” Fallon has taken to the role of goofball after-The-Tonight-Show host, Jon “Say WHAAAAT!?” Stewart covers political humor and Stephen “Even I Don’t Take This Seriously” Colbert has a lock on mockery, so O’Brien can work his niche accordingly.

Playing one off the other here, as NBC is doing, provides a ratings boost and then built-in buzz for O’Brien’s next step. This, I’m behind. As long as he moves to a Hulu-friendly network… (who can stay up that late nowadays?)

* You may have noticed I didn’t even make a case for Conan’s staying at The Tonight Show or moving to another network or just retiring. I’m that good.

global warming: solved

Monday, October 5th, 2009

You may think it odd I can make such a claim, solving the prevailing issue of our days. We haven’t met, call me Draynd.

Anyway… For all those with smog-filled dreams, fret not. I have good news. (Of sorts.) Global warming is likely unavoidable but the blow will be softened. By oil.

Well, technically the lack of it. Black gold has turned Econ majors into bumbling morons. Demand has garnered no supply and has failed to produce viable alternatives, as predicted.

Here are a few fun notes:

  • Four million barrels per day (BPD) less come out of the ground each year.
  • There are no new worthwhile reserves to make that up (much less add to it to meet demand).
  • Producing countries are fudging reserve estimates (probably because their production quotas are based on them).
  • ANWR won’t produce 800k BPD until 2028 (even if all environmentalists are shot tomorrow). The US currently consumes 19 million BPD.
  • More natural gas use means wells are losing pressure with maturity, proving we’re almost out of dino-puddles.
  • Off-shore drilling is a pipe dream (har har) with rigs that barely stand up to category three storms.
  • Gulf drills are still producing 250k less BPD than they were before Katrina.
  • Producing countries are using more and more oil themselves, reducing exports.

Wind and solar power are far too inefficient. Any talk of hydrogen as fuel should be muted by its exponential cost and that it takes more energy to produce it than it provides, rendering it useless.

(Ethanol is too big a joke to laugh at here. Food costs, scarcity, nutrient and resource depletion, etc. Every subsidized ounce ruins our future. Rapidly.)

Food will be more expensive, exported jobs may return and travel will be cost prohibitive (any variety). “Think global, buy local” will be reality (not a hipster, ironic t-shirt slogan).

Cheap energy looks more like the last bits of milk shake than the mile-high gushers. With it goes the wholesale polluting that started the climate change mess and it will probably slow before the worst comes.

Global warming averted. World saved. What’s next?

Photo courtesy GreenPeace.org

market health care != reality

Monday, September 14th, 2009

GovernatorBeing the only thing taught in public schools since the Red Scare, most of you probably know of and think highly of a “Free Market.” This blanket assumption has many, many flaws and worse, we’re trying to apply markets where they don’t fit.

Market assumptions are simple. Supply of a good is tracked against the demand for that good and where they intersect is the price. Ignoring for a moment this ignores cost, depletion or waste (as so many do) how does this apply to health care?

A market needs two things: something of value (sometimes tactile) and consumers with choice. Whenever a market is artificially added to a sector without these things, disaster (exploitation, Enron) ensues.

Health care is one of these sectors. Consumers (used generally to label the 98% not able to buy specialist care out of boredom) don’t have choice. They’re sitting across from their doctor and being told their options. If they need an MRI they don’t check the going rate in China or on NewEgg, for instance.

Insurance, medical practitioners, pharmaceuticals and many others are all under the blanket label of Health Care and it’s also something everyone needs. This not only depletes consumers’ choices further but confuses any market assumptions.

Applying a market to a natural monopoly (built, in this case, on high cost, low access and government assistance) never works. When the idea hit the electricity sector manipulation, artificial scarcity, high profits, unreliable supply and scandal were the natural results.

Health care in this country boils down to two things. On one side, you’re for single payer reform and believe health care is a right. On the other, you want to paint a market over a monopoly and see health care as a privilege (though few will admit that).

On whichever side you fall, take a look at Frontline’s look at six democratic countries with state-backed health care. Ask yourself, why can’t we have a system like Taiwan? Or Switzerland? Or the best parts of both?

In both cases they’re trying to force a market into a sector it doesn’t belong but it’s working for the people, not the companies.

Photo courtesy: SFGate.com

i’ll take that award now, Nobel Foundation

Tuesday, August 11th, 2009

Nobel Prize - EconomicsSome of you may think (rightly) that I don’t deserve a Nobel Prize. Your reasons may include, but are by no means limited to, my only completing an Undergrad, not having any expertise (in much of anything) or my unique ability to offend with a passing comment.

Not exactly a prime candidate for such a “prestigious” award, I’m aware. Still, their standards can’t be that high. I wouldn’t aim for anything worthwhile, like Physics or (for the good of all mankind) Literature. Instead, I set my sights on Economics.

Whoa, you’re thinking. Money? Financial theory? He’s kidding right? He can barely count. I am not. (Kidding, that is. You’re spot on with the counting.) In defense, I give an example of one recipient proving I’m just as qualified.

Milton Friedman, you say? Sure, an obvious target because his thoughts on perpetual consumption drove Reaganism, multiple nation-state failures and ignored any glaring issues (rampant unemployment, catastrophic inequality, unsustainable models, etc.).

Too easy.

My exhibit A (though, it’s the only exhibit, so I don’t know why I named it) is Mr. Robert M. Solow. For those unfamiliar, he was awarded a Nobel Prize in 1987 for magic and is (or was; not sure) a professor of wizardry at MIT.

How did he get a Nobel Prize and the subsequent funds in economics then, if he’s a less-fake Dumbledore? Your guess is as good as mine.

In theory, it’s because he helped solidify Economic Growth Theory (notice the redundant “theory” usage; told you I’m not aiming for the Literature prize). Here’s where I’m just as qualified, if not more so.

The theory only uses capital and labor as inputs for dozens of “calculations” that prove our economic growth is sustainable. This, to a Fox News devotee, is common knowledge. Which is the main problem.

Let’s take something as simple as a car. Dumbl— err, Solow claims to make that car you’ll only need tools, cars and a little know-how. That’s it. See where I’m going with this?

Yeah… so by sheer force of will (magic), he manifests recyclable resources like steel and glass and other barely reusables (like tires, plastics, fiberglass, etc.). Then, he forgets those in his “equations.”

What does that mean and why do I deserve a medal and related financial windfall? Not only is resource depletion ignored completely, but waste and pollution creation are non-factors. I can create a theory in 10 minutes that factors out entire mountains of common-sense and I want recognition for that.

Photo courtesy Google Images

hitch in the plan

Monday, April 20th, 2009

My job hunt has now expanded to Chicago or… well… anywhere, I guess, because my desperation has suddenly blossomed. Why you ask? Even after the fame of my burgeoning photography wealth is only just settling (and non-existent)?

I’ve been kicked out of the capitalist system and am awash in socialist frustration. My UI may be denied. This, obviously, was an unexpected blow to the spleen.

The next course of action is appeal. According to the notice, I can do this online. Golden, I’m there watching terrible television on Hulu anyway. But no. The log-in is disabled so now I have to call.

This is why universal health care will be ignored by 85% of everyone. There’s just not enough incentive in a free service to take on the tedium of government-sponsored services.

No one would want to waste their time on such things if rates for useful health care were reasonable. There would be incentive to have a job that pays for most of it too. Which brings me back to jobs…

I would love one. ::sigh::

Yes, that’s Mussolini, who was technically a Fascist leader. Still, the vast majority of the US doesn’t know the difference.

greenland has no green…

Wednesday, March 25th, 2009
Iceland America New Zealand and Russia

gregwake > Flickr

… and Iceland has no ice. Or money.

Iceland, in all its “we’re so hot we can run day-to-day on geothermal pipes” ways, is bankrupt. This, like the extinction of the panda, is long overdue. If any country deserves financial ruin, it’s Iceland.

Why, you ask, do I so loathe the Icelan-dicks (zing!)?  Read this and this and come back. (The staff is off enjoying the fact we don’t live on a continental rift so you have time; no rush.)

All set?

So (for those lazy tools that didn’t read) basically…

  • They adopted the American model of greed and imaginary money.
  • They don’t realize we can’t even keep ourselves afloat with vast resources.
  • They still believe in elves.

Neoconservatives have been forcing pure capitalism on people for decades (Chile, Russia, Iraq, etc) so I can forgive them the attempt at vacuous wealth. Believing there are tiny people disrupting construction projects, though, is a new level of idiot.

Iceland could have used their energy savings, invested in technology or education and lead the world in the new enviro-conscious age. Instead they’re one of the most noteworthy of the recession-related failures.

For a country where more than half the residents can’t deny small, pointy-eared people live in rocks, it’s no surprise they’d think they could manifest financial security by shear will. What’s our excuse?