Bonuses are given in February so a company will know how much profit was made in the previous year. A bonus reflects a distribution of portions of these profits. Get it, dim bulbs? No profit--no bonus. This is a handy rule of thumb. Especially when the bonus comes out of public bail out money, which I am withholding judgment on. For the time being.
If you go hugely into debt over the course of a year, and I, Uncle Sam, give you money to tide you over, under absolutely no circumstances whatsoever may you regard this as a profit. You have to earn the profit yourself. Why is this so hard to grasp?
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Monday, March 9, 2009
Understanding Capitalism
It is the duty of capitalists to spend all their waking moments thinking about how to make as much money as possible. To work properly this must be a completely unfettered activity. Worrying about bad effects isn't really part of the process.
It is the duty of government regulators to examine the activities of capitalists and make judgments about which are in the public interest and which are not. Nothing should be omitted from this examination process. Some activities should be forbidden and others strictly controlled, depending on how they are seen to affect the overall economy through up and down cycles. Particular attention must be paid to down cycles.
As a young person I read Theory of Countervailing Power by Galbraith. If you haven't read it, you should. Thinking you don't need both pieces is just plain dumb.
It is the duty of government regulators to examine the activities of capitalists and make judgments about which are in the public interest and which are not. Nothing should be omitted from this examination process. Some activities should be forbidden and others strictly controlled, depending on how they are seen to affect the overall economy through up and down cycles. Particular attention must be paid to down cycles.
As a young person I read Theory of Countervailing Power by Galbraith. If you haven't read it, you should. Thinking you don't need both pieces is just plain dumb.
Simple path to nuclear disarmament
Step one. I don't really intend to go past step one, but why not take step one and get it over with.
Calculate exactly how many megatons are required to completely destroy all life on earth, and then reduce our own stockpile to that level. Doesn't require negotiating or farting around with other countries. Doesn't require acting all superior and self righteous.
Just do it and get it over with. I understand this would save a ton of money.
Calculate exactly how many megatons are required to completely destroy all life on earth, and then reduce our own stockpile to that level. Doesn't require negotiating or farting around with other countries. Doesn't require acting all superior and self righteous.
Just do it and get it over with. I understand this would save a ton of money.
Monday, March 2, 2009
Why it has to be called marriage
I was listening to the radio today and it was reported that a gay marriage advocate and a leader of the opposition were reported to have reached a compromise. Everyone would be happy with a form of civil unions which they then described. Christians would be protected from having to recognize these "unions" as marriage.
The fundamental and in my opinion primary reason for promoting gay marriage GAY MARRIAGE is respect. Repeat respect. Yes the legal benefits are nice, but what one wants is that ones relationships are treated with respect. This is only achieved by calling it marriage.
The fundamental and in my opinion primary reason for promoting gay marriage GAY MARRIAGE is respect. Repeat respect. Yes the legal benefits are nice, but what one wants is that ones relationships are treated with respect. This is only achieved by calling it marriage.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Why American Cars Don't Sell
In my youth in the fifties American cars were the sexiest things on the planet, and each year the car companies fought to make them even sexier.
Nowadays the only sex appeal the car makers can think of is to make huge ugly trucks and SUVs. Macho is the only kind of sexy. If the car is intended to be small, efficient and economical, they hate this and go into a kind of furious suicide wish. They make them as boring and ugly as possible. Remember Emma Peel's cars? Small cars can still be sexy. All that's required is for you to believe.
Nowadays the only sex appeal the car makers can think of is to make huge ugly trucks and SUVs. Macho is the only kind of sexy. If the car is intended to be small, efficient and economical, they hate this and go into a kind of furious suicide wish. They make them as boring and ugly as possible. Remember Emma Peel's cars? Small cars can still be sexy. All that's required is for you to believe.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Bipartisanship
Bipartisanship isn't really to be expected. Politics is about getting elected, so the best thing to do when your side is out is to lay back and wait for the in party to fall on its ass. Inevitably. You snipe from the sidelines and try really hard to make it look like the other side is to blame for everything that goes on. This isn't rocket science.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Setting Goals
Logically life should proceed by
a. setting goals
b. trying to achieve them.
Do I have to mention that this is not the normal course of events?
The problem with modern day economic policy lies in step a. What is the goal of economic policy? Is it
a. maximizing global product or
b. maximizing domestic income?
I am definitely on the side of b. I could give a shit that China and India are thriving under free trade policy. The only thing I care about is
a. the maximum number of Americans are employed and
b. they are receiving the maximum possible salaries.
That's it. When those two things are achieved, I'm done. In order to evaluate the effects of free trade, I need to see that my two goals are in any way served by it.
As far as I am concerned, other countries are entirely on their own.
a. setting goals
b. trying to achieve them.
Do I have to mention that this is not the normal course of events?
The problem with modern day economic policy lies in step a. What is the goal of economic policy? Is it
a. maximizing global product or
b. maximizing domestic income?
I am definitely on the side of b. I could give a shit that China and India are thriving under free trade policy. The only thing I care about is
a. the maximum number of Americans are employed and
b. they are receiving the maximum possible salaries.
That's it. When those two things are achieved, I'm done. In order to evaluate the effects of free trade, I need to see that my two goals are in any way served by it.
As far as I am concerned, other countries are entirely on their own.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)