Bob Barr for Spoiler '08

I am pretty sure I am voting for Bob Barr of the Libertarian Party this time around, and here's why.

I don't like any of Obama's positions. The only McCain position that I like is his National Defense stuff. As near as I can tell, economic realities will force a significant curtailing of defense spending, making that a moot point. (If defense ceases to be a dominant issue, I suspect Obama wins handily.)

In the debate the other day both candidates said so many stupid things I wanted to cry. Both candidates are pro-Wall Street bailout, without being able to articulate why it should be done, especially now in a big rush rather than letting things shake out. I am completely unconvinced that the bailout is necessary, and will remain so until things are allowed to play out at least somewhat without intervention. As near as I can tell, all the people most strongly in favor of the bailout (and who understand economics) are the same people who missed the iceberg to begin with. Why are they to be trusted now?

While there are Libertarian positions that I don't agree with at all (canceling all social programs comes to mind), I generally like the ideology. And Barr looks like a goof ball with the mustache and glasses, but that's OK. I normally wouldn't consider them just because it is truly a wasted vote when there is a meaningful difference between the two prime-time candidates.

I've got my Oregon mail-in ballot, but haven't marked off my choice yet. If by some miracle the bailout doesn't go through (and I'm correct and the economic world does not end) I'll consider McCain again. Otherwise, consider me a protest voter.

ARCO: America's Worst Gas Station?

Up till very recently I thought gas station chains were pretty interchangeable. But it turns out that some go out of their way to make you hate them.

Enter an ARCO near Tacoma, WA.

They don't take credit cards. They don't make change for cash. Their pre-pay machine rejects most bills. They have a surcharge for debit payments.

Zounds and gadzooks! Consider that lesson learned.

Doomed!

Aside from Pieter's very informative response to my question about the profit potential in a bailout, I was recommended an extremely depressing Weiss Research paper that includes the prediction that if the government does purchase assets at a good deal, the selling banks will probably fail anyway:

Many investors have unrealistic hopes and expectations regarding what Washington can accomplish. Even if Congress moves swiftly to enact legislation allowing the government to buy up bad assets, the government is expected to pay far less than face value for them. In that case, banks will continue to suffer losses and fail, uninsured depositors will continue to lose money, and investors will continue to see their shares lose all, or nearly all, their value.

The main claim of that paper is that $700 billion isn't nearly enough to support all the banks and other companies liable to collapse in the near future.

The Bailout Is Now A Profitable Investment?

There seems to be a concerted effort to get Republicans on board with the bailout by claiming that it will actually be a profitable investment for the government.

Think about this. The troubled assets purchased by the Treasury right now are likely to be very under-priced because of the chaotic and frozen market conditions. But over time, through monthly cash-flow payments or through loan sales, taxpayers will get all their money back and in great likelihood a handsome profit.

Now, I'm no economist, but this strikes me as borderline violating-the-rules-of-physics speculation.

Surely, if the "toxic assets" in question were a good deal at the price the banks are willing to sell them at to the government, the banks would just hold on to them instead. Right? Please tell me if there is some reason the banks would knowingly sell assets for less than their actual value.

It's not like the government is going to be more effective at collecting on bad debts than the banks... maybe the bailout should consist of giving debt collection agencies the money to buy the bad loans - at least they might do something productive with them.

Maybe I should just shut up and start working on my perpetual motion machine to submit for funding from Obama's "energy independence" initiative.

When the Intent and Effect of HR Laws Diverge

At a recent job, I was regularly taking part in the interview process for prospective new hires. I was instructed to keep no written records of my thoughts on candidates because there was a concern that inappropriate or misinterpreted notes would expose the company to discrimination lawsuits.

We would regularly have later discussions about a position we were having trouble filling, someone would bring up a specific interviewee, and we would all go "hmmm, I can't quite remember why I didn't like him".

Supposedly candidates in BC have the right to request all documentation created regarding a job application at any time, but I'm not sure how accurate that is.

Anyway, the point is that we still were free to make decisions based on "illegal" criteria (I don't think we did, but I'm not a labor expert) - but we made sure we covered our tracks, just in case.

I suppose that means it is only a matter of time before there are laws requiring standardized documentation to be kept for all interviews. And the companies will respond by having a lawyer prepare those documents based on informal input from the interviewers...

Why is the Bailout Necessary?

Within minutes - possibly SECONDS - of not doing the bailout, the entire credit system would collapse, unemployment would jump to 25%, and lo, the end is near! Or so everyone seems to be claiming.

I haven't heard any explanation for why savvy investors wouldn't step in at the severely discounted prices and make a killing picking up the pieces...

On the bright side, if the US dollar does collapse, illegal immigration will slow and there will be plenty of factory jobs for all!

More Government?

The current financial crisis is undoubtedly complicated, and bad enough that even libertarian types are convinced the bailout is needed. I'm skeptical of the bailout myself, but what is known is that the problem was largely caused by decades of irresponsible government policy and the danger was understood for most of that time (via Coyote Blog).

Obama's solution? More government.

Obama outlined principles in his regulatory reforms including overseeing financial institutions that borrow from the government, improving transparency for financial disclosure, streamlining regulatory agencies, cracking down on trading activities that border market manipulation and establishing a market advisory group.

McCain's solution? More government.

First, to deal with the immediate crisis, I will lead in the creation of the Mortgage and Financial Institutions trust -- the MFI. The underlying principle of the MFI or any approach considered by Congress should be to keep people in their homes and safe guard the life savings of all Americans by protecting our financial system and capital markets. This trust will work with the private sector and regulators to identify institutions that are weak and fix them before they become insolvent. The MFI is an early intervention program to help financial institutions avoid bankruptcy, expensive bailouts and damage to their customers. This will get the Treasury and other financial regulatory authorities in a proactive position instead of reacting in a crisis mode to one situation after another.

I think I just became a single issue voter. Seriously considering throwing* my vote away on Bob Barr.

* Well, not really throwing away the vote, because it does leave a record of the fact there are votes that could be captured by better positions in the mainstream candidates.

Exiting Iraq Gracefully

As the US is sliding into bankruptcy, I hope that someone is thinking about the necessary pullout from Iraq. I have always been able to mount at least a half-hearted defense of the Iraq war, but financial realities are what they are, and Iraq is the easiest expense to cut.

If the goal in Iraq isn't chaos, then it's time to start providing incentives to get other forces of stability in there. I bet all of France, Germany, and Russia would be happy to get involved if they got their Saddam-era contracts back...

I presume that the coalition in Afghanistan is going to be shrinking too... hopefully something can be salvaged there with significantly less US support.

British Columbians' Chance to be Heard

If you are a BC resident you might want to take a few minutes to go fill out a survey from the government on the future budgets for the province.

I recommend demanding universal access to jetpacks. Max Pointy? Anyone?

Blogging the 2008 Canadian Federal Election

I will be contributing dispatches about the South Surrey-White Rock-Cloverdale riding to democraticSPACE over the next month or so. Check in there if you want my views on local politics.

BC Hydro's Monopoly

I'm reading Thomas Sowell's Basic Economics right now, and that got me thinking about the monopoly most relevant to me: BC Hydro.

It is certainly true that BC Hydro has a dam-electricity producing monopoly within BC (assuming you have no running water on your property). What had never occurred to me before reading this book was how artificially limiting a definition that is.

BC Hydro is still competing with

• fishermen for the use of the waterways
• high efficiency electronics producers
• out of Province electricity producers
• personal electricity producing devices, like wind turbines and solar panels and gas generators
  
• non-dam based production methods that could be developed
• all consumers of common building materials
  

In other words, even if their prices weren't regulated, increasing prices would only spur people to spend their money on these other things/activities instead. And no matter how secure a monopoly looks, they still have to compete for your money with every other business out there.

Movie Review: Burn After Reading

Burn After Reading is not exactly the goofy comedy the trailer advertised. Don't get me wrong, I laughed a lot, but I apparently enjoy the misery of others.

Basically it is about a bunch of people with borderline-yet-crippling personality disorders who proceed to screw up their lives even further. Dark, dark, stuff.

And there are some scenes that would probably be awkward to watch with your mom.

Why I Hate Political Conventions

Because it's only a matter of time before someone gets up on stage, say, hypothetically, Cindy McCain, and says something like "I know the hurricane spared us because of our prayers". If there's anything more offensive to my sensibilities than a God with human characteristics, it's a God that is influenced by prayer.

Now, I really try to be tolerant of religion. After all, I do find myself sharing positions with the faithful a surprising amount. And frankly, good luck finding an atheist that doesn't believe in at least one of magnet healing, traditional Chinese medicine, 9/11 consipiracies, command and control economies... do I have any friends left? How about global warming apocalypse and peak oil? That should do it!

Bottom line, do you really want someone that believes prayer can influence the universe to be anywhere near the President of the USA? That creeps me out.

When Pork is Good and Right

Is Sarah Palin a real porkbuster?

The charge is that she was only against the Bridge to Nowhere when it became politically expedient. The fact is, this is irrelevant to the question.

A State representative's job is to get as much as possible for their constituents. And if that means you can sucker the Feds (ie other States) into paying for something, you do it. I would not begrudge Barack Obama for voting for bills that disproportionately benefited... whatever State it is he represents.

When things go wrong is when you support bills that benefit other States disproportionately, as just part of "doing business". Something Obama and McCain (to a lesser extent, but for more years?) are most certainly guilty of.

So unless someone can dig up info on Palin's attitude toward Alaska's funding of County level projects, I would say she is completely untested on pork spending. Which still puts her ahead of Obama, but this is really about the Right's enthusiasm for Palin.

Tide is Turning on Ethanol?

Best news of the 2008 election cycle: The Republicans are withdrawing support for ethanol.

This week, the Republican Party in its national platform called for an end to ethanol mandates in just the latest shot at a fuel alternative that, in some circles, has grown more target than treasure.

High ranking politicians, including presidential candidate John McCain, have publicly opposed ethanol subsidies before, but the platform approved during the Republican convention in St. Paul, a corn-belt capital, marks the first time a major U.S. party has taken an official stance against publicly funded ethanol incentives.

It was just four years earlier that the Republican platform called for "efforts to expand the use of biodiesel and ethanol, which can reduce America's dependence on foreign oil while increasing revenues to farmers."

Better late than never, I suppose.

Via Coyote Blog.

Totten on South Ossetian Independence

Michael Totten has a dispatch out describing the differences between the South Ossetia independence movement and the Kosovo equivalent.

South Ossetia is more ambiguous. Unlike Abkhazia, that district did begin in the post-Soviet era with an ethnic Ossetian majority, but ethnic Georgians made up nearly a third of its population until most were driven out by Russia’s invasion last month.

Kosovo was not created by ethnic cleansing. Ethnic Albanians did not need to drive out Serbs in order to create a space where they were a majority with the plausible ability to secede. They made up the overwhelming majority before a single shot was fired in the 1999 war, just as they make up the overwhelming majority now.

Movie Review: We Own the Night

Featuring Joaquin Phoenix with a perpetual slur (which made sense when he was drunk, not so much the rest of the time), We Own the Night is a pretty dark story of loyalty, family and revenge.

It's funny; for all that I mistrust police as a whole, that sure doesn't impair my enjoyment of a good cop story.

I'm not sure if there is some great message to be taken away from it, but I enjoyed it. The whole "conflict between good and evil" thing gets me every time I guess.

More Dodgy MP Communication

The Conservatives are inappropriately using their parliamentary funding for campaigning, but much more subtly than the Liberals did last year.

I received a little "how are Russ Hiebert and the Conservatives doing" poll in the mail today. Standing out from a bunch of more-or-less neutral questions was this beauty:

[Check one:]

• I support the Conservative Government's action to raise the Age of Protection from 14 to 16.
• I support the Liberal/NDP position to keep the Age of Protection at 14.

On the bright side, there was also a question about the abominable Canadian Human Rights Commission. But it seemed tailored to not inform the public about why they might not approve of that body, so I'm not sure what is being aimed for.

Movie Review: Stardust

Part Princess Bride, part Willow, and lots of Neil Gaiman, Stardust is a great true love adventure story.

I remembered liking the book considerably, but no details beyond that. As near as I can tell, the movie was fairly faithful but added some extra funny stuff. My only complaints are the extended "Robert De Niro dancing in drag" scene, and the witches' inconsistent powers in the final battle.

Totally worth renting though.