Or so I can only assume reading this article on ESPN.com about our latest, greatest acquisition:  The over-rated chucker who shot 42.7% and scored 15.8 ppg during the just-completed playoffs.  Bravo, Bryan Colangelo.  We’re now ready to compete against powerhouses like Maccabi Tel Aviv and CSKA Moscow.  We need clawback provisions now for both Colangelo’s Executive of the Year and Sam Mitchell’s and Coach of the Year awards…

During the deepest recession since WWII, with something like half the teams in the NBA losing money (some like the Indiana Pacers losing in the neighborhood of $30m per year), the overpaid-at-$6.864 million Hedo Turkoglo decided to opt-out of the final year of his contract and ask for an offensive $10 million per year.  This, despite displaying clutch but overall middling offensive prowess during the season and his playoff run, disappearing during some of the biggest games, and playing defense with a level of effort that made Pau Gasol look like Kevin Garnett.

And which group of jackasses apparently actually pays his asking price? My hometown Toronto Craptors.

To top it off, Hedo Turkoglu is an unathletic 30-year old (claimed… but we all know enough to be suspicious of the ages of foreign-born players.  A safer bet may be 32) who now has a guaranteed paycheque for the next five years, despite his stats having declined across-the-board from the 2007-2008 season to the 2008-2009 season.

We not have a starting five of Jose Calderon (one of the worst defenders in the league whose main strength is high-percentage shooting), a yet-to-be-named shooting guard, Hedo Turkoglu (one of the worst defenders in the league whose main strengths are clutch shooting, pushing off to create a shot, and being from Turkey), The RuPaul of Big Men (a mediocre defender who doesn’t want to be in Toronto anymore, tends to be a mismatch for heavier PFs, and whose greatest skill is a very reliable 17ft jump shot), and Andrea Bargnani (who has poor defensive mobility, and whose only real strength is his 3-point shooting).  We might need to add another digit holder for the visitor’s scoreboard.

I can’t wait until 2013 when we’ll have his juicy expiring contract to deal to a team desperate to save money.  Maybe we can get a one-legged Amare Stoudamire in return?

… and the cow goes moo

I’ve been following this story since I heard about it a couple of days ago, waiting to see how it played out.  It seemed to outrageous to warrant an immediate action.  Now that it’s had time to simmer (and boil over), it seems like we’ve arrived at an appropriate time to comment.

Please see this good quick ‘n’ dirty summary post with relevant links at your favorite econoblog, Naked Capitalism.  Politico has all the juicy parts.

I feel Edward Harrison is being a smidge unfair.  If I can  go to cafepress.com and spend $30 to have a photoshopped image of me and Gandhi tandem-JetSkiing emblazoned on a tee shirt, why can’t I pay spend a few thousands dollars for the Washington Post to customize an news article or editorial to depict an event of comparable accuracy to me and my boy Gandhi enjoying summer at the lake?

Harrison and those blabbermouth, self-righteous health care lobbyists are such prudes.

… and the cow goes moo

Barry Ritholtz excerpts a list from his new book, Bailout Nation, listing those most directly responsible for the financial crisis.  It would be easy to quibble about the order of some (really, Reagan just below Clinton?  When you’re trying to make a list of those directly responsible, I would think Reagan would be far below the likes of Paulson, Rubin, and Summers) but there was one entry that I really disagree with:

27. Appraisers (the dishonest ones)

Adding his parenthetical comment makes the accusation appear safe enough, but Mr. Ritholtz knows as well as I do that appraisers make their money only when originators/lenders/brokers send business their way.  Appraisers don’t sell their services direct to the home buyer in any meaningful volume.

And Mr. Ritholtz has been among the most vociferous in pointing out that these companies that order the appraisals, and the individuals at those companies who are compensated based on their mortgage volume, had been incentivized to order appraisals that met a certain dollar value which turned out to be very optimistic during the housing bubble years.

And when the lenders desire overvaluations (Ritholtz points out that they are doing so right now, even to the point of saying the National Association of Realtors and Mortgage Brokers’ Association may be “pro-fraud”) and are the only customers for appraisers, the choice is between providing the highest number in your estimate range or trying to find another job… And I can’t imagine there are many openings within the real estate industry for those with an appraiser’s skill set.

Mr. Ritholtz’s conditional in parentheses does absolve those who left the industry from his scorn, but I would argue it is hardly fair to those who chose an occupation that they would prefer to do in a forthright manner, but were no longer to do so if they wished to stay off the Bad Appraisers quarantine list (which probably has a striking amount of overlap with the unemployment rolls).

(For more on the blacklisting of appraisers that fail to perform in-line with the brokers and lenders’ wishes, please see Calculated Risk’s Tanta’s explanation of the principle behind it)

… and the cow goes moo

I have very little to say about each of these links except that it’s been a glorious week or so of online reading.  I could not bring myself to close these articles from my Firefox tabs without recording them for posterity (as self-centered as I am, it appears I believe widely-circulated articles available on the Internet cease to exist when they leave my screen).

First, from The Atlantic Monthly (yes, I still call it that):

What Makes Us Happy? – By Joshua Wolf Shenk

An excellent, beautiful in that New Yorker-sorta way interrupted (by experiment subject narratives) interview with the man that has been behind the decades-old longitudinal Grant study at Harvard.  It makes me think my Bachelors in Psychology isn’t such a scarlet letter after all.

George Vaillant, head of the study for the past 42 years tries to plumb from the disparate measurements and surveys conducted since 1937 – questions changing to reflect the interests and eras that the study has now outlived – and from the ups, downs, ups and downs again from the cohort of Harvard men the cues to living well and growing up.

The author of the article beautifully ties Vaillant’s near-theology – which often sounds little different than self-help pablum – to Vaillant’s own surprising neuroses and private scandals.  Perhaps in doing so revealing a little known property of Psychologists (and Psychology students) outside of the discipline:  Our interest in mental illness is entirely self-serving.  Physician heal thyself.

And despite the shames of the researcher and the researched, the article lifted my spirits.  The technical feat of the collection, the triumph-against-adversity of the project itself to remain fecund and funded, moreso than even the subjects, is story of a hero.  Even if the hero is a collection of bits and bytes, papers in aged folders, and punch cards stuffed away in some filing cabinet monument in Boston.

Now from Chinese finance and economics magazine, Cai Jing (don’t worry, it’s in English):

Tight Spot for Fed, Blind Spot for Investors – Andy Xie

Mr. Xie provides what seems to me a very thorough and intuitively consistent synopsis of the state of American and international investment, with a US-centricity to his analysis despite the source of the article.

He provides a good anaylsis of the various push and pull forces active in the currency, Treasury, and commodities markets, tying his observations to current action within the equity markets and providing some broad predictions that may give pause to those on the sidelines (like myself) that have been failing to decipher all the noise of the market into something that resembles language.

On Mr. Xie’s implicit recommendation, I think I’ll invest in something loud with two wheels wrapped in Pirelli Diablo Super Corsa SPs.  I think that’s what he’s saying, anyways.

And now for something completely different!

The Ninth Life of a Berkeley Boomer – John Dolan (single page view)

Mr. Dolan always writes wonderfully (though the low-rent site which I enjoy and frequent doesn’t seem to stress spellchecks) and has some especially fascinating insights into the life of the near-literati; the failed writers who became failed academics who became just plain poor.

Here he captures the story of a friend much like himself: talented, but lacking the good sense to slow his pace to stay within the proximal zone of his ‘betters’ that would ultimately judge him and decide his fate.

In its telling, he reveals the life of some of the members of the true American elite: The filthy rich and the chieftains of academia who rule their roosts.  And even to them, a smart person cannot escape subjugation by them.  And a crazy person doesn’t escape their useful purposes.

He describes a secret bit of life that I probably always lacked the talent to access, or at least the high school extracurriculars.  And my entrance essays truly sucked.

… and the cow goes moo

I thought I’d pull together a bit of a collection of points and points of view in regards to the debate on health care.  The debate over health care is probably the most significant political discussion Americans will have during the Obama presidency, so I couldn’t pass up mentioning it.  And it happens to be a subject where I, as a former pre-med student, have more than a passing curiousity.

There certainly is a lot of noise that can be left out of the discussion, but this is one of the most important and appropriately handled political discussions that I have witnessed.  There is a fair ratio of sound-minded opinion and factual presentation to character assassination (very little so far, outside of the usual Obama-is-Black-Lenin talk) and misrepresentation and I’ve been happy to read most of the analysis that has crossed my path.  It’s like I’m in a room full of adults, for the most part.

As a Canadian who is very satisfied with our health care system, even if I am often upset with it’s practitioners and the more general prevailing approach to health care (I was born here and have never had to seek medical attention abroad, so I cannot compare directly), I enjoyed the NYT’s Nicholas Kristof’s (This Time, We Won’t Scare – June 10, 2009) anecdotal example of health care experiences from someone who had to experience both the Canadian and US approaches in succession.  Certainly as anecdotal evidence, it is meant for memorable impact more than analysis, it nonetheless manages to include a very important part of the debate that may be under-represented in statistics:  The experience.

The article points out two very poignant facts that are often overlooked as being perhaps more of emotional value then practical value, but in the field of medicine where impractical emotions can have drastic effects on physiological and behavioural responses to treatment, I would argue the lack of attention to matters such as these represent an ongoing failure of medical practice.

The two facts Kristof (and his subject, Diane Tucker) bring to the fore are: (1) the creature comforts that can be lost in a medical system like Canada’s, where there is less of a first-class and economy-class segregation of medicine (though you can certainly pay to get more even in Canada, the ‘more’ in question is irrelevant to the actual treatment); and (2) the apparent weighting of priorities in the US system, between treatment and payment.

Kristof’s subject, Diane Tucker, pays the paltry sum of $49/m for her health coverage as a Canadian resident (a deal even from my perspective, as a 20-something year old with heart like bull) and for it she receives prompt emergency service and initial response, albeit in less luxuriant quarters and with high school cafeteria-level food and perhaps (depending on what tier of American health care you wish to compare to) longer wait times for health visits required for non-emergency concerns.

The more acute and shocking revelation in the article to me, as a Canadian, is the clear message being sent by medical corporations in America when services are needed:  Before we decide to treat you, we have to be sure you can afford to pay us for it.  Apparently the first thing that Ms. Tucker needed to do when she visited a US hospital was to prove she was afford the treatment she required (or for the hospital to ascertain how much ‘treatment’ she could afford to obtain… I’ll get back to this in a second).  Perhaps I am misinterpreting this aspect of American health care, but to me the message is clear:  Prove to me you are worth helping before you prove to me you need helping.

Kristof spends much of the rest of the short article assassinating (justifiably) the character of some of those spearheading the movement against anything approaching universal health care, which interested me very little.  But the contrast between Canadian and American treatment approaches for Ms. Tucker are worth considering befor ean outcome is reached.  Weigh out the benefits of one system over the benefits of the other before you pick a favorite.  And please keep in mind what medicine should be.

[Note: I plan to continue commenting on this subject over the next bit, as I already have a few other articles and news sources saved.  Time permitting.]

… and the cow goes moo

Or so says this Chicago Tribune article (found originally at Exiled Online):

“In one case, a relative of Antoin “Tony” Rezko, the now-convicted influence peddler for former Gov. Rod Blagojevich, got admitted after U. of I. President B. Joseph White wrote an e-mail stating that the governor “has expressed his support, and would like to see admitted” Rezko’s relative and another applicant.

White’s message to the university chancellor was passed on to admissions officials on the same day they entered a rejection decision for the Rezko relative. “He’s actually pretty low,” replied an admissions officer, referring to the applicant’s ACT score and other credentials. “Let me know when the denial letter can go out.”

Instead, the relative was admitted.”

OMGWTFBBQ!?

Why is this news?  I would be absolutely shocked if some unstated factors weighed heavily on acceptance into a college, company, or even country club.  That Mr. White did so using methods that leave a very clear trail of evidence is the only news story here.

New headline:  University of Illinois President Too Dumb to Cheat Properly

And if you don’t know how to cheat, you really have no business attending a University let alone leading one.

… and the cow goes moo

I have no comment to add to this one (except that the last few frames are unintelligible to me), so this is a senseless post but check out Cracked.com’s Seanbaby and his comicbookization of the torture debate.  Really quite excellent and hilarious.

And I think Obama would make a great ’60s Batman.

Also:  There’s something hilarious about plastic-faced Nancy Pelosi in mid-clap.  That should be a wallpaper design so that anywhere you go in your house, you would feel like Barack Obama.

… and the cow goes moo

I  posted on the plight of Troy Davis once in the past (in response to a Bob Herbert NYT editorial).

Bob Herbert has been one of the champion’s of Mr. Davis’ case, providing the attention such a case requires to gain political traction, and showcasing the apparently bureaucratic abuses and rigidity that keep the spirit of the law from being enacted even in the face of the potential execution of an innocent man.  Or at the very least, a man of very uncertain guilt.

(Bob Herbert has an updated editorial from a bit over a week ago that can be found here)

On the same pages that Herbert brought the case to my attention, former two-term Congressman Bob Barr (R-GA) has penned his own editorial making the case for Mr. Davis with fewer evidentiary specifics as Mr. Herbert, making the uncertainty and the need for a hearing with new evidence the crux of his argument.

The murder took place 20 years ago and yet it seems the State of Georgia is unwilling to wait another few months to find out whether the man they intend to kill has done any wrong.

I am ignorant of the varying pressures involved in a legal case such as this.  Is this the manifestation of a fear of administrative abuse by death row inmates intent on stalling their ultimate demise by introducing endless appeals with circumstantial and not-so-circumspect evidence?

Can we not trust the Supreme Court (or other high courts in the land) to be able to promptly discern between what appears to be legitimate investigative and judicial shortfalls versus stalling tactics?  I ask that in all seriousness.

Troy Davis is where the rubber meets the road in the balancing act between judicial and bureaucratic expediency and the diligent pursuit of justice.  If only but for a few dollars (and a few potential abusers), innocent (as they are until they are proven guilty) men and women might not die for the lack of time and money.

… and the cow goes moo

I think I can respond on behalf of every non-delinquent cardholder in America:  I dare you.

The story is all over, but here’s my usual source’s article (The New York Times):

“Even as card companies imposed punitive fees and penalties on those late with their payments, the best customers racked up cash-back rewards, frequent-flier miles and other perks in recent years.

Now Congress is moving to limit the penalties on riskier borrowers, who have become a prime source of billions of dollars in fee revenue for the industry. And to make up for lost income, the card companies aregoing after those people with sterling credit.

Banks are expected to look at reviving annual fees, curtailing cash-back and other rewards programs and charging interest immediately on a purchase instead of allowing a grace period of weeks, according to bank officials and trade groups.”

I call bullshit.

Even considering the recent spate of poor decisions that have blown up in the faces of banks and credit card companies, even they aren’t stupid enough to pick on customers who have choices.  Granted banks and credit card companies probably do not make much money on clients who never pay any interest (I think I paid $7.49 in interest on my credit cards in my lifetime… I misplaced my statement once and paid it a week or two late) but they do make money off retailer fees and annual fees.

And who the hell with a good credit score and good income is going to stick with a company that eliminates the beloved grace period, increases annual fees above its competitors, or removes our favorite travel and cashback perks?  We are not the chronically-delinquent cardholders that the proposed legislation is meant to protect: We have options.  And we can take our business wherever we want.

Let’s see how many retailers are willing to pay American Express service fees when AmEx holders no longer benefit from grace periods or card rewards.  And let’s see how many new cardholders are gained from competing companies when the first credit card company eliminates their perks.  If my credit cards no longer offer me any real benefit, I’m more than happy to return to making my purchases with cash or debit and save the retailer some fees.

This is a bullshit bluff meant to stroke outrage among the influential moneyed classes and nothing more.  There is no substance behind this threat and that should be patently obvious.  Let’s see what equally bullshit news organizations pick up on this argument in service of ignorance or the companies that stand to lose should the legislation pass.

… and the cow goes moo

See the NYT’s short editorial from last week.

(and my previous post here)

There’s nothing shocking about Congressman John Murtha’s (D-PA) corruption: it seems to be an open secret among those who follow politics.  What is surprising is how brazen the conflicts of interest are.

How many dozens or hundreds of people must turn a blind eye or be cowed by the powerful office of Mr. Murtha to allow millions in no-bid contracts to go to his nephew?  No-bid meaning there was no competitive bidding process.  For whatever reason (is blood a reason?), legislators decided that Mr. Murtha’s nephew’s company was the only company worth considering for multiple projects.

Honestly, Democrats who pretended to be disgusted by Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK)’s better be equally loud about this, lest they appear more team-oriented than ethics-oriented.

… and the cow goes moo