« January 2005 | Main | March 2005 »
February 28, 2005
Congratulations to this year’s winners!
Susan T. Buffett—$2.55 billion to the Buffett Foundation, Howard G. Buffett Foundation, Susan A. Buffett Foundation, and Spirit Foundation. Buffett, a director of Berkshire Hathaway, in Omaha, Neb., who died on July 29, 2004, at 72, left approximately $2.4 billion to the Buffett Foundation, in Omaha. Ms. Buffett was the wife of Warren E. Buffett, Berkshire Hathaway's chairman and chief executive officer, and was the president of the foundation, which supports education, medical research, and efforts to curb population growth. She also left $50 million to the Howard G. Buffett Foundation, in Decatur, Ill., which was founded by one of her two sons. The foundation supports wildlife and environmental causes and education and human services programs. Buffett gave $50 million to her daughter's fund, the Susan A. Buffett Foundation, in Omaha, which supports early childhood education for low-income families, the arts, reproductive health, and Christian organizations. She left an additional $50 million to the Spirit Foundation, in Omaha, which is run by her son Peter A. Buffett, and supports arts, education, and human service organizations. According to Susan Buffett's will, the money derives from 31,707 shares of Berkshire Hathaway stock that she owned at the time of her death. The exact amount of the gift to the Buffett Foundation will depend on changes in the value of the stock once Buffett's estate is settled later this year. Susan Buffett was the wife of Warren E. Buffett, Berkshire Hathaway's chairman and chief executive officer.
And:
William H. (Bill) III and Melinda F. Gates—$627 million to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Bill Gates, 49, chairman and chief software architect of the Microsoft Corp., in Redmond, Wash., and his wife, Melinda, 39, paid $627 million toward a pledge of approximately $3.35 billion to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, in Seattle. This most recent infusion of cash came from a Microsoft stock dividend that Bill Gates received in late 2004. (A profile of the Gates Foundation appeared in the Nov. 11, 2004, issue of the Chronicle of Philanthropy.)
The world is truly a better place for having them in it...
Posted by Andrew at 12:49 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 25, 2005
More Goodies from Google!
Google movies: now playing
Now, if they would only tell me what was playing when...
Posted by Andrew at 11:26 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 24, 2005
McSweeney's Lists!
"The Bop Was Put in the Bop-Shoo-Bop-Shoo-Bop by Bristol-Myers Squibb, an International Consortium Dedicated to Improving Public Health Through Access to Medicine and Bop"
5 punning points if you get them all. I certainly didn't...
Posted by Andrew at 12:48 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 22, 2005
Working...
I’ve been doing some work on the sidebar, what do you guys think?
Posted by Andrew at 01:17 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
February 21, 2005
Celebrity rags are as catty as celebrities?
New York Daily News - Business - Paul Colford's Hot Copy: Editor's new job is not OK
Or is it just that Celebrity rags are catty, and thus think the people they cover must be also...
Posted by Andrew at 06:27 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
February 20, 2005
One Small step for Spain...
ABC News: Spain Gives Big 'Yes' to EU Charter But Few Vote
...One Giant Leap for Europeankind!
Posted by Andrew at 12:46 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
New passport, same fears
Economist.com | Border controls
One approach is to imprison the chip in a Faraday cage. This is a contraption for blocking radio waves which is named after one of the 19th-century pioneers of electrical technology. It consists of a box made of closely spaced metal bars. In practice, an aluminium sheath would be woven into the cover of the passport. This would stop energy from the reader reaching the chip while the passport is closed.
Posted by Andrew at 10:16 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 19, 2005
Boom!
BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Huge 'star-quake' rocks Milky Way
The flash of radiation on 27 December was so powerful that it bounced off the Moon and lit up the Earth's atmosphere. [...]"Had this happened within 10 light-years of us, it would have severely damaged our atmosphere and would possibly have triggered a mass extinction," said Dr Bryan Gaensler, of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, who is the lead author on one of the forthcoming Nature papers.
Posted by Andrew at 02:31 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 18, 2005
Reviews: (Books) The Demolished Man
Alfred Bester’s work The Demolished Man won the first Hugo Award. For those of you who don’t follow Sci-Fi, The Hugo is the biggest award that can be won in that genre, with the possible exception of the Nebula. Whichever, Mr. Bester created a masterpiece, one that truly deserves the attention of thoughtful people everywhere...
It isn’t a spoiler to mention that the book is a tragedy, Hamlet is a tragedy, that doesn’t stop people from seeing it. Hell, the new Testament is a tragedy! And Mr. Bester’s title is certainly indicative that this story is not about happy people...
At its most basic level, this story functions as a crime drama: How do you get away with murder when Telepaths are scanning everyone all the time? Hell! How do you get down the street with murder on your mind, without a telepath spotting the murder and reporting it to the police? Ben Reich has a way. His motives aren’t what we might call honorable, but his ability was undeniable...
In my last review, I mentioned that it is a rare author who can show a character being clever. The way Mr. Bester shows his protagonist giving himself the tools is simply astounding (being more specific would constitute a spoiler)...
What is most compelling about Mr. Bester’s work is how much he seems to just like people. He postulates telepaths, people able to peak into the thoughts of another, and also postulates that the vast majority would not use their power for ill purpose. Indeed, Mr. Bester’s Telepaths are not interested in a “normal” Vs. Telepath war (Babylon 5 fans might be amused by that). What they are interested in is improving the society they see around them. And the rest of Human society seems to accept them (and their scary powers) without fear or prejudice. All of this serves to make the sad, lonely existence of Ben Reich even more poignant...
Ultimately, the book is a deeply psychological tale of murder and hope. It stands at the very pinnacle of what Science Fiction is capable of. It ought to be mandatory reading for students everywhere...
Rating:
5 non-demolished men out of 5 Chronicles of Amber. Really, just go read the book already!
Hell!
I couldn’t do a review of this book without quoting this lick:
Eight, sir; Seven, Sir;
Six, Sir; Five, Sir;
Four, Sir; Three, sir;
Two, sir; one!
Tenser, said the Tensor
Tenser, said the Tensor
Tension, apprehension,
And Dissension have begun.
Posted by Andrew at 11:36 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
I’ve heard many bad things about Microsoft...
Customers, resellers bite Apple back | The Register
But if someone had to have a monopoly, I am glad it’s not Apple...
Resellers in the suit are accusing the company of breaching confidentiality. Apple is using resellers' customer lists to target new customers for its own retail network of Apple stores which it began rolling out in 2001, says David Franklin, a partner at Franklin and Franklin, one of the law firms: They're stealing customers that would otherwise be more than happy to go to the normal resellers.
Posted by Andrew at 10:26 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 16, 2005
I’ve stopped panicking.
Now Playing on Amazon.com: The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
This is much better!
(you probably need an Amazon account to view it.)
Posted by Andrew at 10:41 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Most disturbing
George W. Beats Nation's First President 62% to 28% Among Republicans in New National Poll
Posted by Andrew at 10:25 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
February 12, 2005
come here a minute
Ladies First - The utopian fantasy of Deep Throat. By Laura Kipnis
But a better comparison is science fiction, another genre that takes a "what if" approach to bodies and societies. Like sci-fi, porn replaces existing realities with wild alternative universes (against which to measure the lackluster, repressive world we've inherited). At its most inventive, pornography too has an allegorical distance from the real, as with the deeply absurdist Deep Throat—an utterly invented erotic world in which male and female bodies and desires correspond with one another far better than they do back here on terra firma.
Posted by Andrew at 11:45 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
February 10, 2005
Free money for Everyone
Here’s an idea: Give everyone a few hundred bucks a month and gut all other forms of welfare. By everyone, they mean everyone from the guy begging on the street to Your Favorite Example of a Rich Man.
The term “negative income tax” was coined by Milton Friedman, who called for it in Capitalism and Freedom as the best and most efficient way to help the poor; he has regularly reaffirmed his support. Robert Theobald, in Free Men and Free Markets, maintained that individuals, businesses, and society as a whole would function more freely and evolve more readily if we “break the strangle hold of the job-income link.”
The Approximately US$9,000 per year envisioned by the Green Party wouldn’t really be enough to encourage any more of the mythical “Malibu Surfers”, yet it certainly would provide 8 months of my rent, or a nice Disney vacation for my Father and Step-Mother...
It is this later part that worries me a bit-- wouldn’t giving money away unattached to any personal labor cause enormous inflationary pressure? Perhaps I am missing something...
Posted by Andrew at 09:33 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
February 09, 2005
Enough!
Here is an Interesting Study about wealth and happiness:
Research on how happiness relates to material wealth by psychologists Edward Diener, Ph.D., and David Myers, Ph.D., clearly documents that people are happier if they live in wealthy rather than poor nations. However, once individuals have enough money to pay for their basic needs of food, shelter, etc., money does relatively little to improve happiness. Further, increases in neither national economic growth nor personal income have much effect on changes in the personal happiness of citizens.
This makes sense, I doubt somehow that Bill Gates is several billion times happier than I am. On the other wrist, I can pretty much guarantee that I am happier than someone who has lived their entire life trying their utmost just to keep the roof over their head...
What I do question is whether we have a “consumer culture”
Psychological research goes further than this, however, by showing that people who “buy into” the messages of consumer culture report lower personal well-being.(Emphasis original)
I have to wonder here how many people who have “enough” keep striving for more, and how much unhappiness is being reported by those who don’t have “enough” and are striving for it. Also, how much unhappiness is brought about by the debt incurred to actually pay for “enough”? After all, if I can’t meet my credit card payment every month, I’ll probably be fairly miserable...
Posted by Andrew at 09:27 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 07, 2005
It’s worse than you think.
Ok, here it is, my long over-due post on Social security:
Before Social Security we had a system where retirement was a rare event-- old people were forced to work until they died, or live off their children. But a lot of old people starved on the streets or “died with their boots on”...
Or have what today we would call “private accounts”. During the 1920s the stock market boomed and lots and lots of people bought lots of stock. Around November of 1929 this option didn’t look nearly as good anymore. Old people (along with everyone else) were suddenly starving in the streets...
So, New Deal: Works Progress Administration, Interstate highways, Social Security. For 70 years, Social Security kept old people from dieing at work or on the streets. Now, Bush wants to change it irrevocably...
The way the program currently works, I pay 20% of my income to FICA, who gives a lot of that money to my grandmother. Between everyone in my store, we manage to take care of about 10-15 grandparents. Not bad at all...
In exchange for this, when I retire I’ll get an income (from the government) with a base level based on what I paid into the system. We expect a couple of things to happen by 2043: 1) standards of living will be better than they are today 2) Productivity will be higher than it is today.
Assumption 1 tells the government that was is middleclass today will be poor in 2043. When the first people to get Social Security started getting Social Security, having a refrigerator was a luxury almost no one could afford-- air conditioners might not have existed. Today’s retirees get an income consistent with having both AC and ‘fridges. How much more than this they get is based upon how much they paid into the system. Whatever luxury items we have today that will be necessary for living by 2043, they’ll be covered under current social security...
Assumption 2 tells us that we’ll be able to pay for increased standards of living because our workers will simply be able to be more productive then ever before-- even if there are less of them. At 26, with a low level job, I create more wealth then my grandfather could have at 26 with his mid level job. Technology increases, and with it productivity. This has been the central fact of the last 300+ years, we don’t expect it to stop any time soon...
The problem
The problem is that my grandparents had too damned many kids-- and I don’t have enough siblings. Everything I just said about assumption 2 is true-- but there are a fuckton of Baby Boomers. And they’re going to live for gods-damned ever. How ever shall we solve this problem?
Actually, the problem is solved. Back around 1982, Ronald Reagan took a look at the problem and said that if we started saving right then, that very moment, things should be ok. So, Payroll taxes got raised to above the rate the system would need to pay out to current retirees. That extra money would be saved until 2010, when the first Baby Boomers would start to retire...
Since hauling several trillion dollars out of the US economy would be an enormous burden on the economy, the decision was made (I think Alan Greenspan suggested it) to buy US government bonds with the Social Security Surplus. The bonds would become due when the Boomers retired, and Mr. Greenspan would pat himself on the back for his own cleverness...
Ok, so the bonds aren’t quite enough to cover everything forever. The Social Security Administration estimates that those bonds will run out in 2053. The Congressional Budget office estimates 2047 (I retire in 2043, so I’m set). Once the bonds run out, Social Security will only be able to pay out 85% of promised benefits. Remember: that 85% is much higher than what my grandmother is getting now, and will be a lot higher than what my Father will get. And it won’t effect anyone who is currently over 17. Really, there is a long time to solve this issue...
In fact, the Economic forecasts used to estimate when the SS system will run out of extra money assume the US economy will grow at 1.9% per year. Since the Economy grows closer to 2.5-3% per year, there may not be a problem at all...
ok, so what is the problem?
In about 5 years, we’re going to have to start buying back a whole lotta bonds. Social security is not in a "crisis", but will certainly cause one!
See, a bond is basically a lone (actually, a lone is a bond. But never mind). When the SS administration bought all those bonds, the government essentially borrowed it and spent it (that’s how we kept it in circulation all those years). The US government is not in a position to pay back that much money all at once-- we’ve got a war and tax cuts to pay for...
This is what stodgy ol’ Al Gore tried to tell us when he insisted that Bush’s then-proposed tax cuts would be a bad idea. The only way we can pay those loans back is by raising taxes or slashing spending. Probably both. I’m not holding my breath waiting for Bush to get responsible...
Thus we see that the "Social Security Crisis" Bush is so keen to talk about is actually a Social-Security caused General budget crisis. Of course, since it was designed this way from the start, and we’ve had an entire generation to come up with the money, you’d figure that we would have been more responsible. Perhaps we will be soon. When you default on your House Loan, you loose the house. What happens when we default on America’s loans? How much do I have to pay for Amber waves of grain at the foreclosure auction?
Posted by Andrew at 10:59 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack