October 21, 2008

Craigslist Decoys Help Bank Robber Escape by Inner Tube

"In an elaborate robbery scheme that's one part The Thomas Crowne Affair and one part Pineapple Express, a crook robbed an armored truck outside a Bank of America branch in Monroe, Wash., by hiring decoys through Craigslist to deter authorities.

"It gets better: He then escaped in a creek headed for the Skykomish River in an inner tube, and the cops are still looking for him. 'A great amount of money' was taken, Monroe police said, but did not provide a dollar value.

". . . . the robber, wearing a yellow vest, safety goggles, a blue shirt, and a respirator mask went over to a guard who was overseeing the unloading of cash to the bank from the truck. He sprayed the guard with pepper spray, grabbed his bag of money, and fled the scene.

". . . . The robber had previously put out a Craigslist ad for road maintenance workers, promising wages of $28.50 per hour. Recruits were asked to wait near the Bank of America right around the time of the robbery -- wearing yellow vests, safety goggles, a respirator mask, and preferably a blue shirt. At least a dozen of them showed up after responding to the Craigslist ad."

More at cnet news. (Thanks, Ben!)

October 20, 2008

Jail, Not Bail. If You Agree . . .

please contact your reps and favored media outlets.

Everyone knows bad mortgages are not the main problem -- they represent only a small percent of the total wealth that's being sucked out of our economy (see this gummint report; and several sources concur that the actual losses likely to result from bad mortgages alone won't be more than 5 - 10% of the total, if that).

The big losses are in the credit derivatives (if you're not sure what these are, see Financial Sense or MoneyMatters).

I don't mind bailing out poor people who got mortgages they shouldn't have gotten; I do mind bailing out their lenders, who should have known better (that would be McCain's plan, which might ultimately benefit some borrowers but would more directly benefit the lenders by taking the bad loans off their hands).

And I don't even mind bailing out any lenders who did not help create the mess and who bought derivatives in a reasonable effort to insure themselves against losses in mortgage-backed securities they actually owned.

But I DO mind very MUCH bailing out people who bought or sold derivatives NOT to hedge against losses for securities they actually owned but simply as a "bet." These people were engaging in naked speculation, and it is not only morally wrong to require the rest of us to bail them out, it is a huge mistake to shield them from their losses, as a matter of practical policy.

These are the people who lobbied for the deregulation that enabled them to create a mess so monstrous that their best defense now is to claim they don't understand their own creation.

(And note that there's been not just de-reg, but de-funding and de-staffing of oversight; see. e.g., here: "Mr. Lynn Turner, Chief Accountant of the [SEC] testified that the SEC Office of Risk Management, which had oversight responsibility for the Credit Default Swap market . . . was cut in [Bush] Administration ‘budget cuts’ from a staff of [over] one hundred down to one person.")

I've worked hard since I was 16, stayed out of debt, saved, invested conservatively, and I've just watched 25% of my life's savings be vaporized at a point in life when it's doubtful I'll ever be able to recover the loss -- and I'm supposed to bail out the guys that caused this?

I suspect a lot of these people deserve jail, not bail.

But what might make me just as happy would be if each of them were sentenced to work at a minimum-wage job and to have to actually live on it for a year or few. Or maybe even just at the mean average annual wages of U.S. workers.

So much for the rant.

The practical lesson I hope you're taking away from this experience is that we MUST re-regulate. It is not realistic to expect the foxes to guard the henhouse; nor is it realistic to expect consumers or even "sophisticated" investors to guard against sophisticated financial schemes. There is nothing patronizing about this; it's simply a fact: I and I suspect most other citizens simply do not have the expertise or even the time to investigate my depositary bank's claimed assets, let alone my other investments, the way a financial professional might -- any more than I have the expertise or time to evaluate scientific research on new drugs, or to capture and try criminals. This is the kind of stuff government is for.

The problem is not too much gummint; it's who owns it.

The problem is not that us Uhmericans are over-taxed; it's that we and our gummint's coffers are being looted (e.g., and this is just a trivial e.g., per ABC News, less than one week after the gummint committed $85 billion to bailing out AIG, the company spent $440,000 on a retreat for its execs, including $150,000 for meals and $23,000 in spa charges -- but hey, looting's stressful).

Moreover, forking over all the bail-out money we can print will do nothing to restore confidence in U.S. markets, either at home or abroad, so long as the same players are free to engage in the same schemes.

Only re-regulation can restore such confidence. We MUST restore Glass-Steagall, transparency, and accountability.

Forgive me for adding, please see my closely-related post from April Fool's day earlier this year, if you haven't already, here. As I mentioned,

Others reviewing the details of the plan are even more concerned. Mike Whitney writes that, though the proposals are being billed "as a 'massive shakeup of US financial market regulation,' . . . [we should not] be deceived. [They] are neither 'timely' nor 'thoughtful' . . . . In fact, it's all just more of the same free market 'we can police ourselves' mumbo-jumbo that got us into this mess in the first place. The real objective of Paulson's so-called reforms is to decapitate the SEC and increase the powers of the Federal Reserve. . . . "

"If Paulson's plan is approved in its present form, Congress will have even less control over the financial system than it does now, and the same group of self-serving banking mandarins who created the biggest equity bubble in history will be able to administer the markets however they choose without the annoyance of government supervision. That's exactly what Treasury Secretary and his pals at the Fed want; unlimited power with no accountability." More here; see also The New York Times.
I'm hearing darn little from our congresscritters on re-regulation. It's time to start letting them know we'll settle for nothing less.

Here's a little video:

Economics 101

Please note certain parallels to the U.S. now.

October 17, 2008

Higher Technology:

The Emergency Party Button. I need one.

Watching the whole thing through is rec'd.



You might also enjoy the Blender Defender, designed to deter cats from hanging out on the kitchen counter.

(Thanks, Ben!)

October 16, 2008

Mantyhose

The vendor's site admits, "[b]rand of hose undisclosed as it was not originally made for men."

I don't foresee ever actually dating a guy who wore them, unless as a joke; but I actually think they're kinda hot.

More Re- Election Fraud



Here's a tip. Many states offer the option of "straight-party voting"; that is, instead of having to actually vote re- each office on the ballot, you can just check one box or whatever for a particular party to indicate that you want to vote for all the candidates of that party.

Please do NOT do that. Please go through and vote for an individual candidate for each office on the ballot. Investigation has shown that the electronic voting machines seem to be particularly error-prone when you vote straight-party. Blackboxvoting.org has stated, "[v]oting machine miscounts of straight party votes were proven by California researcher Judy Alter in the 2004 New Mexico presidential election; in Alabama Democrat straight party votes were caught going to a Republican; and [in] Wisconsin a whole slew of straight party votes disappeared altogether. Both DRE and optical scan machines are vulnerable." (Note, blackboxvoting.org is not my preferred source of info on this subject, but the general idea is consistent with other sources.)

Also, obviously, we NEED a landslide in order to overcome the cheating; but even if it becomes plain that we'll have a landslide in Obama's favor, cheating will still occur for TWO reasons:

1. Even if the presidential election can't plausibly be stolen, thousands of Congressional and other offices can be.

2. There is value in rigging elections to appear closer than they really were, because it sets precedents for interpreting the reliability of results in subsequent elections. E.g., if a Dem wins a certain office in a certain county by 2 points when the exit polls predicted 6, and in a subsequent election, the exit polls predict a Dem win by only 3 points, a Repub win by 1 point seems more plausible based on the previously-established historical discrepancy. Note that this since electronic cheating is believed to have been going on since the 2000 elections, we probably already have several cycles of distortion -- much of the country may be a lot blue-er than we realize.
Election reform must be a top priority of the next administration. We must have paper ballots, and the tabulation must be an entirely open process supervised by representatives from all parties and subject to complete audit.

UPDATE: Snopes has confirmed the risks of straight-party voting; see also VotersUnite ("Misprogramming has often caused voting equipment to tabulate straight-party votes incorrectly. . . . in prior elections, misprogramming caused straight-party votes to be dropped or counted for the opposite candidate, for example, in Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, and Wisconsin. . . . Straight-party vote-flipping has already occurred in this [2008] election on two different e-voting machines in Texas -- the ES&S iVotronic in Dallas and the Hart InterCivic eSlate in Houston.") Also see another, excellent new RFK article via Rolling Stone (Thanks, Craig!)

Roden Crater,

James Turrell's land/sky art installation and masterwork, begun in 1978 and currently scheduled to be completed in 2012. The project is supported by Dia; it's site on the project's under construction, too.

As of this writing, the video lacks sound, but the visuals are worth it, esp. starting ca. 1:44.

October 15, 2008

The Last Debate.



Ok, it's all getting pretty tedious. Just, pls, VOTE.