May 20, 2008
06:43 pm
That’s what they call “ROI”
Oil is at an all time high right now — $129 a barrel today.
So, Mr. Losh made $387 dollars today. At this rate, it’ll only take him 775 days to pay off that well. I guess that’s not really the worst investment, but… 3 barrels?
Meanwhile, I’m trying an experiment this week.
I usually use the cheap gas — 87 octane. I’ve always been one of those people who believed that it didn’t really make any difference if you used the cheap stuff, and for the most part it doesn’t. Nevertheless, this week I filled up (well, half-filled — the tank was only half empty) with premium, 91 octane.
Surprise, surprise: my Audi TT liked it better. Now, I didn’t really see any difference in the car’s performance, but I immediately noticed an increase in my mileage. On 87 octane, I averaged 24 miles per gallon; on 91? 28mpg. Last weekend when I bought the gas, it was $4.06 for regular and $4.29 for premium. (Remember the days when gas prices went up so rarely that you didn’t have to say something like “last weekend the price was?” I mean, it has gone up twice since Saturday, significantly.)
My math tells me that on regular gas it costs me 17¢ per mile; but on premium it costs 15¢ per mile. Driving 350 miles, which is usually how far I go between fill-ups, I’d save $7 using premium, even after the higher price per gallon.
Interesting, eh?
SELMA, Ind. — An eastern Indiana man is capitalizing on high crude oil prices with a backyard oil well that produces three barrels of crude a day.
Greg Losh said the oil his well produces comes from the Trenton oil field that fueled the growth of east-central Indiana cities more than a century ago.
He said it costs about $100,000 to drill an oil well, but that at today’s oil prices, it’s worth it. [WLKY]
Oil is at an all time high right now — $129 a barrel today.
So, Mr. Losh made $387 dollars today. At this rate, it’ll only take him 775 days to pay off that well. I guess that’s not really the worst investment, but… 3 barrels?
Meanwhile, I’m trying an experiment this week.
I usually use the cheap gas — 87 octane. I’ve always been one of those people who believed that it didn’t really make any difference if you used the cheap stuff, and for the most part it doesn’t. Nevertheless, this week I filled up (well, half-filled — the tank was only half empty) with premium, 91 octane.
Surprise, surprise: my Audi TT liked it better. Now, I didn’t really see any difference in the car’s performance, but I immediately noticed an increase in my mileage. On 87 octane, I averaged 24 miles per gallon; on 91? 28mpg. Last weekend when I bought the gas, it was $4.06 for regular and $4.29 for premium. (Remember the days when gas prices went up so rarely that you didn’t have to say something like “last weekend the price was?” I mean, it has gone up twice since Saturday, significantly.)
My math tells me that on regular gas it costs me 17¢ per mile; but on premium it costs 15¢ per mile. Driving 350 miles, which is usually how far I go between fill-ups, I’d save $7 using premium, even after the higher price per gallon.
Interesting, eh?
May 19, 2008
06:49 am
The Cowan Way
Always the best way, and I see someone agrees with me.
Seen yesterday when following stupid GPS directions. And even the GPS misspelled it as “Cowen.” Even street maps can’t get my name right.
Always the best way, and I see someone agrees with me.
Seen yesterday when following stupid GPS directions. And even the GPS misspelled it as “Cowen.” Even street maps can’t get my name right.
May 16, 2008
07:10 am
Hot Dog
May 15, 2008
05:05 pm
It’s always safe to talk about the weather
This is where the big, quantifiable difference between San Jose weather and Washington weather rears its head: right now, it is 104° in San Jose — very unusual heat, it rarely goes over 90 here. (The record for this day was 96°, in 1970.)
Back in DC, it hits 100 a few times each summer, and the humidity is usually about 99% on those days leaving everyone sweaty and exhausted and uncomfortable and bringing on charts to describe how hot it feels due to the humidity; it always feels hotter than it is.
Here? The humidity right now is 17%. It feels COOLER than it actually is.
I walked into my house — where I closed all the blinds and opened some windows in anticipation of the heat — and was amazed at how cool it felt. But according to the thermostat, it’s 89° inside the house. I turned on a fan and I really don’t feel the need to turn on the air conditioning; something that I would have done at 78° back in DC.
This is where the big, quantifiable difference between San Jose weather and Washington weather rears its head: right now, it is 104° in San Jose — very unusual heat, it rarely goes over 90 here. (The record for this day was 96°, in 1970.)
Back in DC, it hits 100 a few times each summer, and the humidity is usually about 99% on those days leaving everyone sweaty and exhausted and uncomfortable and bringing on charts to describe how hot it feels due to the humidity; it always feels hotter than it is.
Here? The humidity right now is 17%. It feels COOLER than it actually is.
I walked into my house — where I closed all the blinds and opened some windows in anticipation of the heat — and was amazed at how cool it felt. But according to the thermostat, it’s 89° inside the house. I turned on a fan and I really don’t feel the need to turn on the air conditioning; something that I would have done at 78° back in DC.
01:11 pm
The bigots are mildly upset
Here are some of the more laughable comments I’ve seen on newspaper sites this afternoon after the California Supreme Court ruling on same-sex marriage. Remember that bit about how conservatives are able to rationalize conflicting ideas?
Oppressive? This ruling expands rights and freedoms. Oh, wait — I suppose it oppresses those who wish to oppress others.
Um, again: this ruling expands our freedoms. But conservatives and fundamentalists are not about freedom, they’re about legislating morals, suppressing individuality, and eliminating diversity all in the name of forcing their beliefs on others.
The best way to start a compelling argument is to start with a personal attack. Well done. Meanwhile, as to “judicial dictatorship”: I don’t think the ruling requires that you marry someone. Not that they’d want you.
Oh, please.
Glad you don’t vote, ‘cause if you were in any way active in your community and civically aware, you’d know that 6 of the 7 judges on this decision were appointed by Republican governors.
Yes, judges do have the right to override the will of the people. That’s what they’re there for. If the will of the people always ruled, people of different races wouldn’t be allowed to marry and black people would be drinking from separate water fountains. The judicial system is designed to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. From people like you.
I think what you mean is judges have denied a few bigots the right to tell everyone else how to live their lives.
Amazing, every time there is some progress in human rights, someone wrings his hands and claims that it’s the beginning of the end.
And in other news, all opposite-sex married couples are required by law to procreate.
I’d buy that, although not because of same-sex marriage. The downfall of our civilization will come from people like you; from people like the president you likely voted for (twice); from denying rights and legislating your own morals — you know, like the Taliban.
Sigh. It wasn’t one judge. And what people like you want is — surprise — one person imposing his societal view. You’re just upset that is isn’t YOUR view.
I have no idea what this means.
This is just a sampling from a FEW comment pages on Washington Post.com and San Jose Mercury News. I haven’t scratched the surface of those two sites, and I haven’t even contemplated what kind of screeds are going to be on conservative nutcase blogs.
I’m not one of those people who thinks that we should just sit quietly and not call attention to injustices because it may inflame too many people; still, I can’t wait to se how the right wing makes hay of this in the coming months, spreading fear of a nation where sissy boys and butch girls may move into your neighborhood, hold hands, and recruit all our children.
Here are some of the more laughable comments I’ve seen on newspaper sites this afternoon after the California Supreme Court ruling on same-sex marriage. Remember that bit about how conservatives are able to rationalize conflicting ideas?
Act now to overturn this hideous and oppressive ruling.
Oppressive? This ruling expands rights and freedoms. Oh, wait — I suppose it oppresses those who wish to oppress others.
Fortunately, there will be a ballot initiative this November to amend the Constitution and set things back to their proper order.
This is all just a huge wast of time and taxpayer money.
There will be a lot of sore backsides tomorrow in San FranScissyCo. tho….
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION PREAMBLE
We, the People of the State of California, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, in order to secure and perpetuate its blessings, do establish this Constitution.
so much for that….
Um, again: this ruling expands our freedoms. But conservatives and fundamentalists are not about freedom, they’re about legislating morals, suppressing individuality, and eliminating diversity all in the name of forcing their beliefs on others.
You really are a vile and despicable creature.
Further, we do not live in a democracy, we live in a Republic.
Now, we live in a judicial dictatorship.
The best way to start a compelling argument is to start with a personal attack. Well done. Meanwhile, as to “judicial dictatorship”: I don’t think the ruling requires that you marry someone. Not that they’d want you.
It’s a non stopping trend. We’ll see marriage between a man and a monkey or a dog and a woman getting married and enjoy all the rights as a “normal” marriage. Wait! I forgot to claim my 5 chicken sons and 2 cat daughter as dependents in my tax return.
Oh, please.
I’m sure the fact that the court is riddled with leftist ideologues has nothing to do with this decision. Whatever, I gave up giving a crap. This is why I don’t vote. At the end of the day, I realize that I have no say in anything.
Glad you don’t vote, ‘cause if you were in any way active in your community and civically aware, you’d know that 6 of the 7 judges on this decision were appointed by Republican governors.
Once again the courts override the will of the people and legislate from the bench. The judges have no right to override the will of the people. Shame on them.
Yes, judges do have the right to override the will of the people. That’s what they’re there for. If the will of the people always ruled, people of different races wouldn’t be allowed to marry and black people would be drinking from separate water fountains. The judicial system is designed to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. From people like you.
Again judges have denied the people the right to govern themselves. This is what faces this country if and when liberal Democrats win the presidency and both houses of congress- they already have the courts in their back pockets.
I think what you mean is judges have denied a few bigots the right to tell everyone else how to live their lives.
The United States of America is a country far from united on this point. The USA is on the way down to destruction from within.
Today is another day to week for the way our country has turned in the wrong direction.
May we pray for God to have mercy on us.
Amazing, every time there is some progress in human rights, someone wrings his hands and claims that it’s the beginning of the end.
Gay people getting married aren’t married couples. They can think they are, but they aren’t. These people can’t have children with each other.
And in other news, all opposite-sex married couples are required by law to procreate.
Welcome to Rome.
I’d buy that, although not because of same-sex marriage. The downfall of our civilization will come from people like you; from people like the president you likely voted for (twice); from denying rights and legislating your own morals — you know, like the Taliban.
One judge in a black robe overrides the will of 61% of California and liberals call this progrsss, and California doing the just and right thing. This is not progress, this is not the just and right thing. This is liberal fascism—-one person imposing his societal view on an entire state.
Sigh. It wasn’t one judge. And what people like you want is — surprise — one person imposing his societal view. You’re just upset that is isn’t YOUR view.
It is now beyond of my apprehension whether the social animals on this earth are behaving under the rules of nature or the man-made constitution. Don’t forget that all the creatures whether on land or sea, trees or nests never defied the nature because such instincts are developed due to the chemical reactions in human minds for illnesses having aggravated by social pressures that the other animals do not face. We have seen many nations in human history doomed before reaching to the height of civilization.
I have no idea what this means.
This is just a sampling from a FEW comment pages on Washington Post.com and San Jose Mercury News. I haven’t scratched the surface of those two sites, and I haven’t even contemplated what kind of screeds are going to be on conservative nutcase blogs.
I’m not one of those people who thinks that we should just sit quietly and not call attention to injustices because it may inflame too many people; still, I can’t wait to se how the right wing makes hay of this in the coming months, spreading fear of a nation where sissy boys and butch girls may move into your neighborhood, hold hands, and recruit all our children.
posted by Gene Cowan | category Right = Wrong
comment on this entry (1 comments) | permalink | digg it
comment on this entry (1 comments) | permalink | digg it
07:05 am
Lunchtime at the Silver Creek Corral
Yesterday at lunch I was out walking and a flock of sheep moseyed over to eye me curiously… right outside my office. Was there ever a more illustrative picture of the evolution of Silicon Valley? The high tech office park eating up the pastures and farms, acre by acre?
Yesterday at lunch I was out walking and a flock of sheep moseyed over to eye me curiously… right outside my office. Was there ever a more illustrative picture of the evolution of Silicon Valley? The high tech office park eating up the pastures and farms, acre by acre?
May 14, 2008
10:58 am
Disasters far away and close to home
As I watch disasters unfold halfway around the world with enormous, unimaginable loss of life, it is difficult to avoid comparing the situation there with the potential here.
And when I do, it is patently obvious that the biggest cause of death in disasters is the socioeconomic level of the victims.
The closest thing we’ve had recently to the Burmese cyclone would be Hurricane Katrina. Katrina devastated large swathes of a major American city, but unlike the villages in Burma there were few places completely wiped out and nothing close to the 38,000 fatalities seen so far in southeast Asia.
Nor have we ever seen hundreds of thousands of deaths from a single event like the Sumatran tsunami; nor even the 15,000 currently reported in China.
I find myself wondering what it will be like when the large earthquake hits here in the San Francisco Bay Area, the one that they predict with 99.7% certainty in the next 30 years. What will a 7.9 be like in the Bay Area? Will our casualties mount into the tens of thousands or more? Am I delusional for believing that we, in our affluent neighborhoods with higher building standards, will have fewer fatalities? That we’ll be able to get a text message out, that we’ll have broken dishes but not broken lives?
As I listened to Melissa Block’s audio recording of the earthquake in progress, I was struck by the realization that it sounded exactly like the comparatively innocuous 5.6 we had in October; the same sounds of household items moving around and the creaking of walls — except that our earthquake lasted 15 seconds, not 3 minutes.
Death tolls so high just make it difficult to imagine the victims, they become large numbers or abstract statistics.
As I watch disasters unfold halfway around the world with enormous, unimaginable loss of life, it is difficult to avoid comparing the situation there with the potential here.
And when I do, it is patently obvious that the biggest cause of death in disasters is the socioeconomic level of the victims.
The closest thing we’ve had recently to the Burmese cyclone would be Hurricane Katrina. Katrina devastated large swathes of a major American city, but unlike the villages in Burma there were few places completely wiped out and nothing close to the 38,000 fatalities seen so far in southeast Asia.
Nor have we ever seen hundreds of thousands of deaths from a single event like the Sumatran tsunami; nor even the 15,000 currently reported in China.
I find myself wondering what it will be like when the large earthquake hits here in the San Francisco Bay Area, the one that they predict with 99.7% certainty in the next 30 years. What will a 7.9 be like in the Bay Area? Will our casualties mount into the tens of thousands or more? Am I delusional for believing that we, in our affluent neighborhoods with higher building standards, will have fewer fatalities? That we’ll be able to get a text message out, that we’ll have broken dishes but not broken lives?
As I listened to Melissa Block’s audio recording of the earthquake in progress, I was struck by the realization that it sounded exactly like the comparatively innocuous 5.6 we had in October; the same sounds of household items moving around and the creaking of walls — except that our earthquake lasted 15 seconds, not 3 minutes.
Death tolls so high just make it difficult to imagine the victims, they become large numbers or abstract statistics.
posted by Gene Cowan | category Life… Don’t talk to me about life.
comment on this entry (3 comments) | permalink | digg it
comment on this entry (3 comments) | permalink | digg it
May 12, 2008
08:00 pm
Here’s why the phone company is so rich and powerful
It’s no secret that I am really pissed off about fees — from ATMs to telephone bills, we are charged enormous amounts of money just cents at a time; far more than is proper in most cases, just because they can. Why do we continue to pay without protest?
Here’s an interesting point from a UK scientist, who expounds on the high price of SMS messages:
In case you’re wondering, that 5p cost works out to 10¢ in US currency — and US phone operators are now charging between 15¢ and 20¢ per text message. That comes out to a whopping $1123.50 per megabyte of data. That’s $1,106 more expensive than Hubble data.
I’m convinced that most people pay these outrageous fees because, like ATMs, they think that it is expensive to have instant data communication. If they realized that it is cheaper for the company to send tiny snippets of data rather than voice; if they understood that ATMs are infinitely cheaper than branch offices and salaries of tellers; if they understood that half of the fees listed on various bills as “Federal” are not taxes nor mandated by the government… well, perhaps there would be a mass uprising. Until then, the sheep will continue to be fleeced and companies will continue to rape us of every last nickel.
It’s no secret that I am really pissed off about fees — from ATMs to telephone bills, we are charged enormous amounts of money just cents at a time; far more than is proper in most cases, just because they can. Why do we continue to pay without protest?
Here’s an interesting point from a UK scientist, who expounds on the high price of SMS messages:
A University of Leicester space scientist has worked out that sending texts via mobile phones works out to be far more expensive than downloading data from the Hubble Space Telescope.
He worked out the cost of obtaining a megabyte of data from Hubble – and compared that with the 5p cost of sending a text.
He said: “The bottom line is texting is at least 4 times more expensive than transmitting data from Hubble, and is likely to be substantially more than that.
“The maximum size for a text message is 160 characters, which takes 140 bytes because there are only 7 bits per character in the text messaging system, and we assume the average price for a text message is 5p. There are 1,048,576 bytes in a megabyte, so that’s 1 million/140 = 7490 text messages to transmit one megabyte. At 5p each, that’s £374.49 per MB - or about 4.4 times more expensive than the ‘most pessimistic’ estimate for Hubble Space Telescope transmission costs.”
Dr Bannister said it had been difficult to work out exactly how much Hubble data transmission costs. So he contacted NASA who gave him a firm figure of £8.85 [$17.35] per megabyte (MB) for the transmission of data from HST to the Earth.
“This doesn’t include the cost of the ground stations and the time of the personnel along the way, but it is an unambiguous number for that part of the process. So that’s £8.85 to get each MB from Hubble, to the first point of contact on the ground, but no further. Hence we need to go a little bit further to estimate exactly how much it costs to transmit data from Hubble to the end user - i.e. to the data archive which scientists can access. This is difficult, so I had to make some conservative assumptions.”
Dr Bannister estimated the cost of the data from Hubble could vary between £8.85 and £85 per MB- much cheaper than the £374.49 per MB cost of transmitting one MB of text.
In case you’re wondering, that 5p cost works out to 10¢ in US currency — and US phone operators are now charging between 15¢ and 20¢ per text message. That comes out to a whopping $1123.50 per megabyte of data. That’s $1,106 more expensive than Hubble data.
I’m convinced that most people pay these outrageous fees because, like ATMs, they think that it is expensive to have instant data communication. If they realized that it is cheaper for the company to send tiny snippets of data rather than voice; if they understood that ATMs are infinitely cheaper than branch offices and salaries of tellers; if they understood that half of the fees listed on various bills as “Federal” are not taxes nor mandated by the government… well, perhaps there would be a mass uprising. Until then, the sheep will continue to be fleeced and companies will continue to rape us of every last nickel.
posted by Gene Cowan | category The War with the Customer
comment on this entry (1 comments) | permalink | digg it
comment on this entry (1 comments) | permalink | digg it
05:14 pm
This is why I don’t stay up past 10
It’s official: Jay Leno is on the outs, to be replaced by Conan O’Brien on “The Tonight Show.”
I hate Jay Leno.
Well, I suppose “hate” is too strong a word; I just can’t stand him or his version of “The Tonight Show.” I long for the gentle days of Johnny Carson, and when NBC, in its infinite wisdom, dissed Johnny’s legacy by bringing forth crass and lowest-common-denominator comedy to late night, I switched off the TV.
What will Conan bring to the desk?
Meanwhile, O’Brien’s replacement is now confirmed to be Jimmy Fallon, who I enjoy somewhat — but the executive producer will be Lorne Michaels, who I think is overdue for retirement along with his flagship, “Saturday Night Live.” It ranks way up there with shows that have lived far past their useful or entertaining lives, along with “The Simpsons.”
Speaking of good TV from the past: “The Electric Company” is back in production over at Children’s Television Workshop — now known, rather cynically as a way to extend the brand, as “Sesame Workshop.”
It’s official: Jay Leno is on the outs, to be replaced by Conan O’Brien on “The Tonight Show.”
I hate Jay Leno.
Well, I suppose “hate” is too strong a word; I just can’t stand him or his version of “The Tonight Show.” I long for the gentle days of Johnny Carson, and when NBC, in its infinite wisdom, dissed Johnny’s legacy by bringing forth crass and lowest-common-denominator comedy to late night, I switched off the TV.
What will Conan bring to the desk?
Meanwhile, O’Brien’s replacement is now confirmed to be Jimmy Fallon, who I enjoy somewhat — but the executive producer will be Lorne Michaels, who I think is overdue for retirement along with his flagship, “Saturday Night Live.” It ranks way up there with shows that have lived far past their useful or entertaining lives, along with “The Simpsons.”
Speaking of good TV from the past: “The Electric Company” is back in production over at Children’s Television Workshop — now known, rather cynically as a way to extend the brand, as “Sesame Workshop.”
“The Electric Company” is turning on the juice again.
An update of the classic kids TV series will begin production today with location shots in Gotham’s Washington Heights and the Lower East Side. Show will run weekly beginning in January on PBS stations around the country.
Produced by the Sesame Workshop, the series will target 6- to 9-year-olds, with specific goals to improve the reading habits of children. Like the original version, there will be plenty of music and dance numbers to help kids learn.
Original “Electric Company” episodes ran from 1971-77 and starred Morgan Freeman and Rita Moreno. It continued in reruns until 1985.
“The literacy crisis today is as pervasive and alarming as it was in 1971 when we created the first version of ‘The Electric Company,’ ” said Scott Cameron, director of education and research for Sesame Workshop. “We know that if struggling readers don’t get the literacy help they need by the end of second grade, they are in danger of never catching up.”
Series will consist of 26 half-hour episodes and, following its initial TV run, will segue into books, games and digital media.
Child actors to co-star include Ricky Smith, Priscilla Diaz, Jenni Barber and Josh Segarra.
Karen Fowler will exec produce.
[Variety]
posted by Gene Cowan | category The War with the Customer
comment on this entry (0 comments) | permalink | digg it
comment on this entry (0 comments) | permalink | digg it
May 09, 2008
02:29 pm
Conservatives: it’s all about ignoring the very, very obvious
A headline on CNN.com says:
Why are conservatives happier than liberals?
My initial reaction was to answer the question thusly: because conservatives ignore facts and don’t engage in any of that pesky “thinking for themselves.”
Then I read the article and was astonished to discover that this is basically the conclusion of the study.
I’ve always found that ability to rationalize inequalities to be the cornerstone of conservatism. It explains how poor and downtrodden people continually vote Republican despite the fact that when Republicans are in power the poor get poorer.
Which brings us to another interesting article:
Anyone who can interpret a simple graph knows that the economy is strongest and our fiscal health better under Democratic presidents; one needs only look at a graph of the Federal budget deficit over the last few administrations to see that. I think I’ve posted that here before, you can search if you like. Such a graph shows a slow, steady march toward a budget surplus over the Clinton era, then a steep, harrowing plunge back into a hellishly large deficit almost immediately under Bush. And yet, people voted for Bush (twice) because… well, I don’t know why.
A headline on CNN.com says:
Why are conservatives happier than liberals?
My initial reaction was to answer the question thusly: because conservatives ignore facts and don’t engage in any of that pesky “thinking for themselves.”
Then I read the article and was astonished to discover that this is basically the conclusion of the study.
A study published in the journal “Psychological Science” says it’s because conservatives are better at rationalizing inequalities.
Regardless of someone’s income, marital status or church attendance, people with right-wing ideologies report greater satisfaction with their lives than those with left-wing beliefs. Researchers found that conservatives also score highest when it comes to the ability to justify inequalities.
For example, a conservative might support the idea of a meritocracy – that if you work hard and perform well, you’ll move up the economic ladder… and if you don’t, you probably won’t. But the study shows liberals tend to be troubled by this. Inequalities take a greater psychological toll on liberals, apparently because they can’t rationalize away the gaps in society and thus end up more frustrated by them.
The study goes on to say that this research can be applied to areas other than economic inequalities. One example is that feminists may not be as happy in their marriages as more traditional women because they’re frustrated with the division of domestic chores.
These latest results go along with a Pew poll from 2006. It found 47% of conservative Republicans described themselves as “very happy”, compared to only 28% of liberal Democrats who felt that way.
I’ve always found that ability to rationalize inequalities to be the cornerstone of conservatism. It explains how poor and downtrodden people continually vote Republican despite the fact that when Republicans are in power the poor get poorer.
Which brings us to another interesting article:
The past three decades have seen a momentous shift: The rich became vastly richer while working-class wages stagnated. Economists say 80 percent of net income gains since 1980 went to people in the top 1 percent of the income distribution, boosting their share of total income to levels unseen since before the Great Depression.
Despite the historic magnitude of this shift, inequality has thus far had little traction as a political issue. Many Americans seem to accept the conservative view that escalating inequality reflects “free market” forces immune to amelioration through public policy. As Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson put it, perhaps a bit defensively, the growing income gap “is simply an economic reality, and it is neither fair nor useful to blame any political party.” Paulson’s assertion, however, is strongly contradicted by the historical record. While technology, demographic trends and globalization are clearly important, purely economic accounts ignore what may be the most important influence on changing U.S. income distribution — the contrasting policy choices of Republican and Democratic presidents.
The Census Bureau has tracked the economic fortunes of affluent, middle-class and poor American families for six decades. According to my analysis, these tabulations reveal a wide partisan disparity in income growth. The real incomes of middle-class families grew more than twice as fast under Democratic presidents as they did under Republican presidents. Even more remarkable, the real incomes of working-poor families (at the 20th percentile of the income distribution) grew six times as fast when Democrats held the White House. Only the incomes of affluent families were relatively impervious to partisan politics, growing robustly under Democrats and Republicans alike.
The cumulative effect of these partisan differences is enormous. If the pattern of income growth under postwar Republican presidents had matched the pattern under Democrats, incomes would be more equal now than they were in 1950 — a far cry from the contemporary reality of what some observers are calling a New Gilded Age.
Anyone who can interpret a simple graph knows that the economy is strongest and our fiscal health better under Democratic presidents; one needs only look at a graph of the Federal budget deficit over the last few administrations to see that. I think I’ve posted that here before, you can search if you like. Such a graph shows a slow, steady march toward a budget surplus over the Clinton era, then a steep, harrowing plunge back into a hellishly large deficit almost immediately under Bush. And yet, people voted for Bush (twice) because… well, I don’t know why.
posted by Gene Cowan | category Right = Wrong
comment on this entry (0 comments) | permalink | digg it
comment on this entry (0 comments) | permalink | digg it
11:24 am
Year Three: A Report
Three years ago, I made the somewhat bizarre — yet adventurous — decision to move away from Washington, DC, where I’d lived my entire life. On May 10, 2005 I arrived in San Jose, California determined to start again, to try to avoid the terminal boredom that had set in over 39 years in DC. Here’s a report of how it’s all going so far.
MONEY
Naturally, the most important aspect. This is California, after all — where gas has been $4 for quite a while, sales tax is 8.75%, and housing costs are probably a little more expensive than on the moon.
Still, I’m quite proud of the fact that I’ve been able to keep my head above water despite some scary, panicky stretches — and managed to purchase my little dream bungalow, albeit at California prices.
When I arrived in California my estimates showed that I would be able to survive for two years with the proceeds from selling my Arlington townhouse. In the event, I was able to stretch those funds for three years (while still keeping 12% in reserve) by the good graces of friends who sent freelance and part-time work my way.
Although I enjoyed working for myself and the sabbatical it allowed me, as my savings began to dwindle I came to the realization that a full-time job was absolutely necessary in Silicon Valley. I had given myself two years to realize the goals of house-job-relationship; the house took only 6 months, the job took nearly 3 years, and the relationship? That’s still in the “to do” column.
Three months ago I met the “job” goal, landing a design job that covers my expenses — just — and gives me a sustainable platform to build my California future on. The uncertainty is finally over, for now.
HOUSE
One of my goals was to purchase a home in California with the assumption that California real estate always appreciates.
Oh, then there was this real estate implosion. Just my luck.
As of today, Zillow values my home at $10,000 less than what I paid for it in 2005 — bad news, of course, but still more than what I owe on it. I have a five-year plan for the house; my hope is that the value will creep back up over the next couple of years and I will at least break even if and when I sell.
Meanwhile, I am very happy in my neighborhood, where we all know each other and congregate around dogs in the front yards.
HEALTH
I’ve just had another checkup with the cardiologist, and there doesn’t seem to be any cause for worry — at the two year mark I’ll be taken off another prescription, so one less pill to take is cause for celebration. Especially since it is the most expensive one in the cocktail. My diet is mostly under control, notwithstanding a donut every six months or so; but my exercise habits are atrocious. For a while I was walking a mile or two a day, but then stress over running out of funds and losing my house took over and I began to slack off. By the time I went to DC in January to investigate moving back, I was no longer exercising at all. Today I am working an average of 11 hours a day, and in the time I have left I tend to vegetate and zone out or catch up on sleep — another thing that I’m not doing much of.
Still, my blood pressure is now normal as is my cholesterol, although I still need to work on raising my “good” cholesterol and lowering my triglycerides, both of which go hand in hand with exercise.
FAMILY
I feel increasingly cut off from my family. I didn’t see them every day when I lived there, and it almost seems as if they have visited me more out here — so far I’ve been visited by my brother, sister, aunt, father, and mother here in San Jose; in fact my mother has been here multiple times. Still, I feel like I am not in the loop. Things happen back home like engagements or moves or health issues and I don’t find out about them until much later.
FRIENDS
As time goes by, friends back in DC are drifting away from me. I made an effort, from keeping a local phone number to emailing and phoning them; but over time I began to realize that people from back home were never taking the initiative to contact me. I felt like I was putting so much energy into maintaining these relationships but ultimately it didn’t seem to matter. There are one or two people back home that still keep in touch; a few acquaintances have actually moved to the Bay Area; but for the most part my DC ties are fading.
I haven’t really replaced them in California. I have only a few friends here, and a handful of acquaintances. At first I spent all my time alone, working at home; now I am so busy that I never socialize. And of course, there’s that whole “horrible at meeting people” thing.
WEATHER
When it comes down to it, this is the biggest reason to move to California — the Santa Clara Valley in particular. If one looks at a single day in comparing DC and San Jose, they don’t seem that different. But the weather in San Jose is so consistent — sunny clear skies, warm temperatures — that the changing weather patterns in DC seem crazy. It is a rare thing to see a 40° day here, and I can’t imagine dealing with temps below that or higher than 90° anymore. On top of that, the humidity levels here are consistently in the 45-50% range, half that of DC. When I moved here, the chronic cough that I’d had for years disappeared, leading me to believe that it was related to the humidity.
I don’t miss the snow, I don’t miss the rain, and I don’t miss the heat. In fact, there are only two things I miss, nature-wise, about DC: thunderstorms and fireflies on a summer night.
In compensation, I have lush greenery and flowers year-round, fragrance of flowers everywhere, and hummingbirds that buzz around like mosquitoes.
PLACES
I’d planned to take advantage of California — within an hour of my house is San Francisco, Napa, the ocean, mountains… and I’ve failed to do so.
Oh, I’ve been up to San Francisco a few times, to Berkeley and Oakland; to Santa Cruz once or twice a year, Half Moon Bay, Monterey and Carmel. Every time I manage to get the time (and someone to go with me) to schedule a weekend visit somewhere I wonder why I don’t do it more often. The Paul Masson Winery, high in the Santa Cruz mountains, the Lick Observatory overlooking the valley — long windy drives with spectacular payoffs at the top. A weekend in Reno was disappointing, the inside of the casino was only marginally more interesting than the boring city streets. One thing I’ve not done despite my plans: Disneyland; although it looks like that will finally happen this summer.
This category goes hand in hand with the one above; I never go places alone as I find it too boring. And I just don’t have enough friends or someone special to go places with.
HAPPINESS
This is the crux of the matter, isn’t it? Am I happier in California than I was in DC?
I don’t know how to quantify happiness. I’m a relatively analytical person and don’t know how to graph my emotions.
My gut feeling is that I am marginally happier here. Despite this winter’s uncertainty about money, my house, and a job, I still feel somewhat less stressed here. However, now that I am working long hours, commuting, and dealing with the frustrations of my new job, it will be interesting to see if I am heading back into the same life I had before.
I guess that’s something I’ll assess for year four. Stay tuned.
Three years ago, I made the somewhat bizarre — yet adventurous — decision to move away from Washington, DC, where I’d lived my entire life. On May 10, 2005 I arrived in San Jose, California determined to start again, to try to avoid the terminal boredom that had set in over 39 years in DC. Here’s a report of how it’s all going so far.MONEY
Naturally, the most important aspect. This is California, after all — where gas has been $4 for quite a while, sales tax is 8.75%, and housing costs are probably a little more expensive than on the moon.
Still, I’m quite proud of the fact that I’ve been able to keep my head above water despite some scary, panicky stretches — and managed to purchase my little dream bungalow, albeit at California prices.
When I arrived in California my estimates showed that I would be able to survive for two years with the proceeds from selling my Arlington townhouse. In the event, I was able to stretch those funds for three years (while still keeping 12% in reserve) by the good graces of friends who sent freelance and part-time work my way.
Although I enjoyed working for myself and the sabbatical it allowed me, as my savings began to dwindle I came to the realization that a full-time job was absolutely necessary in Silicon Valley. I had given myself two years to realize the goals of house-job-relationship; the house took only 6 months, the job took nearly 3 years, and the relationship? That’s still in the “to do” column.Three months ago I met the “job” goal, landing a design job that covers my expenses — just — and gives me a sustainable platform to build my California future on. The uncertainty is finally over, for now.
HOUSEOne of my goals was to purchase a home in California with the assumption that California real estate always appreciates.
Oh, then there was this real estate implosion. Just my luck.
As of today, Zillow values my home at $10,000 less than what I paid for it in 2005 — bad news, of course, but still more than what I owe on it. I have a five-year plan for the house; my hope is that the value will creep back up over the next couple of years and I will at least break even if and when I sell.
Meanwhile, I am very happy in my neighborhood, where we all know each other and congregate around dogs in the front yards.
HEALTHI’ve just had another checkup with the cardiologist, and there doesn’t seem to be any cause for worry — at the two year mark I’ll be taken off another prescription, so one less pill to take is cause for celebration. Especially since it is the most expensive one in the cocktail. My diet is mostly under control, notwithstanding a donut every six months or so; but my exercise habits are atrocious. For a while I was walking a mile or two a day, but then stress over running out of funds and losing my house took over and I began to slack off. By the time I went to DC in January to investigate moving back, I was no longer exercising at all. Today I am working an average of 11 hours a day, and in the time I have left I tend to vegetate and zone out or catch up on sleep — another thing that I’m not doing much of.
Still, my blood pressure is now normal as is my cholesterol, although I still need to work on raising my “good” cholesterol and lowering my triglycerides, both of which go hand in hand with exercise.
FAMILY
I feel increasingly cut off from my family. I didn’t see them every day when I lived there, and it almost seems as if they have visited me more out here — so far I’ve been visited by my brother, sister, aunt, father, and mother here in San Jose; in fact my mother has been here multiple times. Still, I feel like I am not in the loop. Things happen back home like engagements or moves or health issues and I don’t find out about them until much later.
FRIENDS
As time goes by, friends back in DC are drifting away from me. I made an effort, from keeping a local phone number to emailing and phoning them; but over time I began to realize that people from back home were never taking the initiative to contact me. I felt like I was putting so much energy into maintaining these relationships but ultimately it didn’t seem to matter. There are one or two people back home that still keep in touch; a few acquaintances have actually moved to the Bay Area; but for the most part my DC ties are fading.
I haven’t really replaced them in California. I have only a few friends here, and a handful of acquaintances. At first I spent all my time alone, working at home; now I am so busy that I never socialize. And of course, there’s that whole “horrible at meeting people” thing.
WEATHER
When it comes down to it, this is the biggest reason to move to California — the Santa Clara Valley in particular. If one looks at a single day in comparing DC and San Jose, they don’t seem that different. But the weather in San Jose is so consistent — sunny clear skies, warm temperatures — that the changing weather patterns in DC seem crazy. It is a rare thing to see a 40° day here, and I can’t imagine dealing with temps below that or higher than 90° anymore. On top of that, the humidity levels here are consistently in the 45-50% range, half that of DC. When I moved here, the chronic cough that I’d had for years disappeared, leading me to believe that it was related to the humidity.I don’t miss the snow, I don’t miss the rain, and I don’t miss the heat. In fact, there are only two things I miss, nature-wise, about DC: thunderstorms and fireflies on a summer night.
In compensation, I have lush greenery and flowers year-round, fragrance of flowers everywhere, and hummingbirds that buzz around like mosquitoes.
PLACES
I’d planned to take advantage of California — within an hour of my house is San Francisco, Napa, the ocean, mountains… and I’ve failed to do so.
Oh, I’ve been up to San Francisco a few times, to Berkeley and Oakland; to Santa Cruz once or twice a year, Half Moon Bay, Monterey and Carmel. Every time I manage to get the time (and someone to go with me) to schedule a weekend visit somewhere I wonder why I don’t do it more often. The Paul Masson Winery, high in the Santa Cruz mountains, the Lick Observatory overlooking the valley — long windy drives with spectacular payoffs at the top. A weekend in Reno was disappointing, the inside of the casino was only marginally more interesting than the boring city streets. One thing I’ve not done despite my plans: Disneyland; although it looks like that will finally happen this summer.
This category goes hand in hand with the one above; I never go places alone as I find it too boring. And I just don’t have enough friends or someone special to go places with.
HAPPINESS
This is the crux of the matter, isn’t it? Am I happier in California than I was in DC?
I don’t know how to quantify happiness. I’m a relatively analytical person and don’t know how to graph my emotions.
My gut feeling is that I am marginally happier here. Despite this winter’s uncertainty about money, my house, and a job, I still feel somewhat less stressed here. However, now that I am working long hours, commuting, and dealing with the frustrations of my new job, it will be interesting to see if I am heading back into the same life I had before.
I guess that’s something I’ll assess for year four. Stay tuned.
posted by Gene Cowan | category Life… Don’t talk to me about life.
comment on this entry (0 comments) | permalink | digg it
comment on this entry (0 comments) | permalink | digg it
May 01, 2008
12:53 pm
A Prairie Airport Companion
Love me some Garrison Keillor.
The line inched along, four supervisors stood watching blankly, the fat lady barked, the gentleman operating the scanner was very jittery about shaving kits and computer batteries and needed to have every other bag checked, and in the lifetime it took to go through, you started to sympathize with all the Republicans who’ve complained about government inefficiency over the years, except it is a Republican administration that runs this operation, but never mind. Details, details.
Love me some Garrison Keillor.
posted by Gene Cowan | category Right = Wrong
comment on this entry (0 comments) | permalink | digg it
comment on this entry (0 comments) | permalink | digg it
April 30, 2008
07:08 pm
I don’t think “better late than never” applies
The headline on this article makes it sound like the White House admitted that they had put the banner up to refer to the Iraq war; in fact, the White House simply lied again, putting forth the ridiculous story that the banner was meant to refer to the carrier crew. Total, unmitigated bull. And the dig at the end — blaming it all on the media — is designed to ridicule anyone who points out the administration’s hubris.
White House admits fault on ‘Mission Accomplished’ banner
By TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent
(04-30) 18:14 PDT WASHINGTON, (AP) —
The White House said Wednesday that President Bush has paid a price for the “Mission Accomplished” banner that was flown in triumph five years ago but later became a symbol of U.S. misjudgments and mistakes in the long and costly war in Iraq.
Thursday is the fifth anniversary of Bush’s dramatic landing in a Navy jet on an aircraft carrier homebound from the war. The USS Abraham Lincoln had launched thousands of airstrikes on Iraq.
“Major combat operations in Iraq have ended,” Bush said at the time. “The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on Sept. 11, 2001, and still goes on.” The “Mission Accomplished” banner was prominently displayed above him — a move the White House came to regret as the display was mocked and became a source of controversy.
After shifting explanations, the White House eventually said the “Mission Accomplished” phrase referred to the carrier’s crew completing its 10-month mission, not the military completing its mission in Iraq. Bush, in October 2003, disavowed any connection with the “Mission Accomplished” message. He said the White House had nothing to do with the banner; a spokesman later said the ship’s crew asked for the sign and the White House staff had it made by a private vendor.
“President Bush is well aware that the banner should have been much more specific and said `mission accomplished’ for these sailors who are on this ship on their mission,” White House press secretary Dana Perino said Wednesday. “And we have certainly paid a price for not being more specific on that banner. And I recognize that the media is going to play this up again tomorrow, as they do every single year.”
The headline on this article makes it sound like the White House admitted that they had put the banner up to refer to the Iraq war; in fact, the White House simply lied again, putting forth the ridiculous story that the banner was meant to refer to the carrier crew. Total, unmitigated bull. And the dig at the end — blaming it all on the media — is designed to ridicule anyone who points out the administration’s hubris.
posted by Gene Cowan | category Right = Wrong
comment on this entry (0 comments) | permalink | digg it
comment on this entry (0 comments) | permalink | digg it
April 26, 2008
06:27 am
Lord, won’t you buy me a Mercedes Benz?
Why are gas prices so high? Must be because of god. Maybe if we sacrifice a few goats he will make more of it.
Why are gas prices so high? Must be because of god. Maybe if we sacrifice a few goats he will make more of it.
posted by Gene Cowan | category Right = Wrong
comment on this entry (3 comments) | permalink | digg it
comment on this entry (3 comments) | permalink | digg it
April 21, 2008
02:24 pm
The end came so quickly we didn’t even notice
I’m in the mood for bulleted lists today.
My prediction? Soylent Green makes its real-life debut within a few years.
I’m in the mood for bulleted lists today.
- The bees are all disappearing.
- Costco is rationing rice, oil and flour because of dwindling supplies; shortages and skyrocketing prices.
- The dollar is rapidly becoming worthless. It is no longer cost-effective to farm out our manufacturing to China, nor our customer service to India.
- Our mad idea that we should use food for fuel means that corn is in short supply and prices are way up; this means that farmers wanting to cash in are planting corn like crazy and not other staples.
My prediction? Soylent Green makes its real-life debut within a few years.
posted by Gene Cowan | category Right = Wrong
comment on this entry (2 comments) | permalink | digg it
comment on this entry (2 comments) | permalink | digg it
