Let's not be the next Numa Numa

A quorum of the blog contributors (Yasser, Chris, Melissa and Karsten) had a great time in Baltimore this weekend. Fun times were had at the Michael Bolton birthday. Yea, that's right, the Michael Bolton Birthday Party. We may have even come up with a name for our soon to be Super Blog. If we can get some people to vote that is - not that I'm naming names. It is after fun weekends like this that I realize that it is great to share fun times with friends, not so fun to share it with the world. In catching up with the NYTs today, there was a prescient example of this:

Here, then, is the cautionary tale of Gary Brolsma, 19, amateur videographer and guy from New Jersey, who made the grave mistake of placing on the Internet a brief clip of himself dancing along to a Romanian pop song. Even in the bathroom mirror, Mr. Brolsma's performance could only be described as earnest but painful.

His story suggests that the quaint days when cultural trinkets, like celebrity sex tapes, were passed around like novels in Soviet Russia are over. It says a little something of the lightning speed at which fame is made these days.

Notwithstanding the fact that, unless this guy was a complete moron, he uploaded a video of himself doing something many people would view as a bit nerdy, I doubt he planned for it to become quite the story it has.

A cautionary tale for everyone to think about before throwing up those hilarious, but embarrassing pics, on the blog intending to just share them among friends. Before you know it, people you never intended to share with are passing them around like Paris Hilton's sex tape and the time you decided to dress up like Michael Bolton at your 26th birthday party is making news in the New York Times.

Full story here

And poor Gary's video here

Alford's Blame Game

I've been hoping the Iowa Athletic Department would realize their mistake and get a new men's basketball coach since practically day one. Now, even the local Iowa City sports columnist, Pat Harty, who covers the Hawkeyes in the IC Press-Citizen seems to have jumped on the "Steve Alford is No Leader Bandwagon". This, combined with the anit-Alford op-ed the Press-Citizen ran a few weeks ago hopefully represents the tide turning. In other words - another failed season under Alford's disastrous reign and it's the unemployment line for him. Here is a long excerpt:

...you know what stinks more than losing? Not knowing how to lose.

Iowa coach Steve Alford just doesn't get it.

Just when you think he has said the wrong things at the wrong time for the last time, he does it again.

His explanation for Saturday's 75-65 loss to Illinois was simple, direct and deflective: the Iowa players didn't make enough plays.

"Good teams, good players, they find a way to make plays, and we've got to learn those things," Alford said.

...It always seems to be a group effort -- from the coaches on down to the players -- after a victory, but only the players' fault after a loss.

It always seems to be the learning that is brought into question after a loss instead of the teaching.

"This team has not been about effort; this team has been about execution," Alford said.

Sorry, coach, but this team has been about mediocrity and unfulfilled expectations, as was the case with four of your previous five teams at Iowa.

...It would be easier to hear Alford deflect blame if we didn't have to hear him do it so often and at the expense of his players.

...He showed signs of making progress after the Jan. 5 loss at home to Michigan when he blamed himself for not getting the team ready.

But now seven Big Ten losses later, it basically comes down to the players not making plays, the players not executing, the players not having toughness and the players not making the big shots.

Well, if it is that simple, then why for Bob Bowlsby's sake is Iowa paying Alford $800,000 to coach the Hawkeyes?

If it's only a matter of making plays, then Tom Arnold probably could coach the Hawkeyes.

Full text is here.

For too long Iowa has emanated mediocrity, but the source isn't the basketball court, it's the sidelines.

Iowa to Young Folks: Don't Leave!!!

I've followed with a combination of amusement, concern and thoughtfulness the recent coverage of on Iowa's "Brain Drain" - the migration of young people out of the state.

It all started when the Iowa Senate Republican Caucus proposed to exempt Iowan's under 30 from paying state income tax.

The idea was pretty much panned by the old as unfair and by the young as ineffective. If you're wondering, the average tax break for a young person would be $600. Not a huge difference when you consider the high-paying jobs young college graduates can find in metro areas throughout the country, even when considering the difference in the cost of living.

Nonetheless, the Legislative Fiscal Bureau did a study and concluded that the proposed tax policy would have pretty much no effect on the migration of young people out of Iowa. Well no kidding - let's hope they didn't spend too much time on that one.

But one good thing came out of the hoopla surround the offbeat suggestion: people are thinking and talking about the problem.

Even the New York Times ran a column about the issue. You know when Iowa's in the news it's either an election year or something bad happend, eh? The writer, a former Iowan, lamented the economy dominated by agriculture, polluted environment (pesticide and animal waste runoff from farms pollute most bodies of water) and oh yeah, that stench that is uniquely Iowa - you know the one emanating from your local hog lot. Like Iowa is the only state with a smell problem! (That old joke about it smelling like money flies right over the head of most people).

On Sunday the Des Moines Register published a series of letters from readers about what to do about this vexing issue. I was slightly depressed by the number of ideas from people who obviously have no business training who think there is some magic bullet government solution (if only they'd put some money into creating a downtown). And that's coming from a Democrat! There were good ideas, though, like this one from Nick Gerhart, a 29 year-old attorney for an insurance company:

"We need to realize that we will never offer many of the things that attract young people away from Iowa. What we need to focus on is economic development and job growth that will entice young people to return to Iowa when they decide to have a family. Many of these people return to Iowa with experience from some of the leading corporations and businesses around America."

Ironically, the contributors to this blog all have a link to Iowa - we all graduated from the Unversity of Iowa and many of us grew up in the state. Except for one of us, we also share this - we don't live there anymore. So I think we owe it to Iowa to come up with our thoughts. I live the DC area, one of the best areas in the country for young people, and I've gathered a number of ideas that are transferable to Iowa. The ideas start flowing tomorrow...

Unintentional Hiatus

I know the blog started out with daily posts from me (and at least regular posts from Chris) and has deteriorated into sporadic postings from all of us. I apologize for that, but work on the new Uber-Blog has been stealing much of my Internet time over the past few weeks. I must say, it's all looking wonderful - and much user-friendly and interactive than this blog.

I'll keep you all posted as to the new URL once we buy the domain name (speaking of which, who wants to pitch in? My car just got towed today so my expendable income is substantially lower than it was yesterday...)

Saving Should Start on Day One

I like to highlight good ideas worth consideration every once in awhile. David Brooks proposes one in this NYT Op-Ed: KidSavings Accounts. They'd work like this:

"The government would open tax-deferred savings accounts for each American child, making a $1,000 deposit at birth, and $500 deposits in each of the next five years. That money could be invested in a limited number of mutual funds, but it couldn't be withdrawn until retirement.

Over decades, it would grow and grow, thanks to the wonders of compound interest, so that by the time workers retired, they would each have a substantial nest egg, over $100,000, waiting for them."

Compound interest is magic. Well, I take that back - magic if it's used too compound your savings. Not so magic when your credit card company compounds your finance charge daily based on your average daily balance. Am I putting you to sleep yet?

In his State of the Union address President Bush said, "I will work with members of Congress to find the most effective combination of reforms [for Social Security). I will listen to anyone who has a good idea to offer."

Listening to good ideas for this president usually means accepting ideas he already likes. Maybe he already likes this one.

hello world, it is i.

yas had the brilliant idea of letting me post here (big mistake, dude) and while i'm not exactly sure what my rambling, if cogent, writing style can offer, you can probably assume that inequity in the american educational system will be a common topic. you see, i grope and strain through the mires of that system every day at a munificently morose middle school in the heart of southwest philadelphia (and by "heart" i mean "spleen"). oh yeah, and when i said "cogent" i probably should have said "incoherrent" - whoops!

there you go, my introduction, my manifesto, my brief and paltry excuse for a debut.
hello world, it is i!

-marty

End Rigged Elections

One of my great peeves about our system of elections is the self-dealing way in which election districts are drawn in most states. Being from Iowa, one of a handful of states with a (practically) nonpartisan redistriciting process, I find it odd that our redistricting process is primarily concerned with preventing incumbents from facing competitive elections. Too many voters are stuck with their representatives because the insiders have set up the system to negate performance in favor of powerful, pinpoint computer technology to churn out districts of like-minded constituents. If something similar happened in the private sector, politicans would probably denounce it as a conflict-of-interest. But the redistricting process continues with a wink and a nod. After all, what politician in their right mind is going to force an issue that might put them out of their job?

Iowa also appoints, instead of elects, judges, thereby preventing them from being forced to raise money and pander from the very interests in which they one day may be rendering verdicts. That's a discussion for another day, though.

The New York Times wrote an article a few weeks ago about the growing citizen led effort to change this convoluted process. Here are some sobering facts from the article courtesy of Common Cause (an advocacy group trying to address this issue).

-In the 2004 election cycle, just 13 House seats changed hands
-Only 4 of those 13 was an incumbent losing
-In 2002, 82% of Congressional elections were decided by 20% or more

Nonpartisan redistricting isn't a panacea, however. Two House incumbents in Iowa moved during the 2002 election-cycle so they could run to keep their seats (Iowa's maps can't even take into account where incumbents live). Both won re-election, as did the other two (there wasn't an incumbent in the fifth district). Our current system results in too many politicians that represent the fringes of their respective ideology, leading to a more-divisive and polarizing Washington. Nonpartisan redistricting may have only a small affect on re-election rates, but those who are elected are more reflective and responsive to their constituents (if not, you can bet they'll have the race of their lives in the next election). It isn't surprising to me that Iowa produces moderates like Chuck Grassley and Jim Leach.

Some believe that nonpartisan redistricting isn't enough, as reflected in this article. In this view, voting districts would have to be drawn in such a convoluted manner to obtain cocmpetitiveness they'd look absurd, not to mention artificially divide areas into disparate and unrelated communities. The solution? Proportional elections, where any candidate that surpasses a certain threshold wins. This would mean fewer districts electing multiple representatives - for example, instead of electing 10 House members from 10 districts, you'd elect 5 from 2 districts, with the top five vote getters in each district winning. At least an idea worth exploring.

The "Loan" Theme and What Young People Think

A lot of the opposition to the proposed "reform" of Social Security has thus far revolved around the theme that it, in essence, asks workers to gamble their retirement in the stock market. A new theme emerged in today's articles: the proposed scheme asks American workers to take a out a loan to invest (some would say gamble) their Social Security retirement funds in the stock market. The theme is sufficiently captured in today's New York Times by Paul Krugman.

Another good article in today's Times captures some of my biggest arguments, as made by young people like me. Why should people take on this risk to a previously guaranteed benefit? How are most people, who have low financial literacy, going to begin to comprehend this?

Lastly, the Times is keeping a page dedicated to the Social Security reform subject that lists all of the articles written on the subject by them. It even includes a link to the great article I've mentioned from the NYT Magazine "A Question of Numbers". Because that article is greater than 7 days old, it typically requires a small fee to view, but if you go through this page it is still available free.

Deciphering the Proposal

The New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal ($) all had solid articles today and/or yesterday describing how the private accounts would work. Or, you can get the highlights straight from the horses mouth from The White House. Here are the highlights:

The private accounts would be phased in beginning in 2009, based on your year of birth:

Born before 1950: Not eligible
Born 1950-1965: 2009
Born 1966-78: 2010
Born 1979 and after: 2011

• Workers could divert up to 4% of wages into their account (limited to $1,000 initially, increasing annually)
• Private accounts would be voluntary. Workers could opt-in if they chose, but once opted-in workers could not switch back
• Workers could select from a limited number of stock and bond mutual funds
• Workers could not dip into their private account before retiring
• To prevent market downswings from negatively affecting people near retirement, at age 47 all private accont holders would be switched to a "lifecycle portfolio" that manages risks based on age. Workers could opt-out of this switch if they signed a waiver stating they understand the risks they are taking
• At retirement, workers would receive "traditional" Social Security benefits (paid by the ~8.4% portion of worker's Social Security tax not diverted to private accounts) and have access to their personal account dollars
• Importantly, the "traditional" benefit is reduced by the the lifetime contributions and investment gains in the worker's retirement account. This would be calculated by assuming that contributions gained 3% annually after inflation
• The reduction in the traditional benefit would have no effect IF the worker's private account actually earned 3% after-inflation annually because the dollars in their private account would equal their reduction in monthly benefits.
• If the private account earned more over it's lifetime than 3% after-inflation annually, the worker gains, BUT IF THEY EARN LESS THAN 3% THE WORKER LOSES
• Also importantly, most workers would be required to use the money in their personal account to buy an annuity that would provide a monthly benefit equal to the reduction in the traditional benefit. Again, if the worker's personal account doesn't return 3%, they end up with less than they would have under the current system.
• Workers could not remove a lump-sum from their private accounts if their total monthly benefit would be less than the poverty line (currently a generous $9,310 for individuals and $12,490 for couples). I is not clear what happens if the traditiona benefit + annuity is below the poverty line
• Since most workers would have to buy annuities, which cannot be left to heirs upon death, the idea that worker's "own" the account and could leave it to their loved ones probably wouldn't be realized for most people. The only portion that could be left to heirs is the portion not used to buy the annuity.
• Remember, these are private accounts, which while run by the government, would be managed by private Wall Street firms. The estimated annual expenses are 0.3% (which is not included in the 3% return necessary to break-even)
• The transition costs over the first decade of private accounts would require the government to borrow $1 TRILLION (this is to replace the money people are diverting to private accounts that would normally be used to pay the benefits of current retirees.

There are aspects of this plan that I like: the accounts are voluntary and financially illiterate workers are mostly prevented from making stupid mistakes like borrowing from their account, taking out huge lump sums, or taking on extraordinary risks in their investments. But it's important o remember that the private account proposal is revenue-neutral (meaning it doesn't save any money to avert the so-called "crisis"). In order for the government to avert the "crisis", there are going to have to be benefit cuts or tax increases (a future post will cover those proposals). And on top of that, the government is going to have to borrow an enormous sum to make the transition.

The real effect of the proposal is to shift the risks onto individuals. Currently, the government has an obligation to pay the benefits it promises, so if they overpromise or the economy goes bad, the government has to raise taxes, cut benefits, or borrow to meet the obligation. The last few times Social Security has been reformed, it has been a combination of the first two. With private accounts the risk falls to the individual - if your account doesn't perform it's your problem. Let's be clear - everyone likes to pretend they're above average, but there will be losers in this. And, naturally, it will be those at the bottom of the economic scales that count on Social Security to live in dignity during old-age who are disproportionately hurt. Social Security was created as a guaranteed method to reduce poverty among seniors and it has been enormously successful. Here's an a quote from the NYT's Magazine that drives this point:

About half of Americans also have private pension plans, but for two-thirds of the elderly, Social Security supplies the majority of day-to-day income. For the poorest 20 percent, about seven million, Social Security is all they have. Even those figures understate the program's importance. According to an agency publication, ''Income of the Population 55 or Older: 2000,'' 8 percent of elderly beneficiaries were poor, but a startling 48 percent would have been below the poverty line had they not been receiving Social Security.

Given all this, it is difficult for me to comprehend why this proposal has made it this far. Social Security is an extremely popular program that has succeeded beyond expectations in meeting it goals. Can we afford the huge borrowing costs of the transition, when private accounts don't save money to begin with? Are we going to destroy the program so we can gamble taht some people might gain more for their retirement? And the cost is those most at-risk get less? This exploitation of people to make a few more pennies for yourself has gone too far.

Let's make sure that this undermining of Social Security doesn't go forward.

The Tables Turned

And Chris is now posting more than me! I can't believe it! Admittedly, I've been busy and tired lately. Not a good combination. I've been burning the midnight oil on a new designfor our blog as well as figuring out the backend. It's no easy task, but it could be extremely sweet if I get it all finished.

Still need a name though. A blog written by a bunch of twenty-somethings about life in the city, politics, jobs, music, movies, and uncertainty. Any ideas?

It's a real Steal!

I know I'm rehasing old points on Social Security here, but I think it's important to remind everyone what we know:

• There is not an imminent "crisis"
• Private accounts do not actually save money, they simply shift the risks onto indviduals
• The real savings in the Republican plan a result of a huge benefit cut on younger generations

Let's discuss the details of the last point.

There are two foundations of the proposed benefit cuts:

• The program will not change for those 55 or older
• For the rest of us initial benefits will be calculated based on price increases instead of wage increases over a person's lifetime (after you begin receiving benefits, they will still be adjusted for price increases)

It may seem like a small adjustment and the president just touched on it in his State of the Union speech. But, trust me, it's a big deal. That's because wages increase a lot faster than prices - that's why our standard of living increases - we have more purchasing power relative to prices.

So what is the effect of this change? Well, if your initial benefits are based on price increases over your lifetime, that means you'll have the same purchasing power (i.e. quality of life) as you did when you started working.

Think of it this way - if the program always worked like this, those that retired in 1980 would have the same standard of living as they did in 1940.

Let's hope that our quality of life doesn't increase over the next 40 years because a lot of our future seniors are going to be left behind!

Unfortunately, it us younger Americans who would be most greatly affected by this change. Of course, the idea is that if we divert a portion of our payroll tax into private accounts, we'll make up this loss in benefits with the historically higher returns in the stock market. But anyone who has taken Introduction to Finance knows that increasing returns mean increased risk. The fundamental promise of Social Security is to guarantee a minimum standard of living for seniors so they can live a life through old-age in dignity. The Republicans want to take away that guarantee for younger generations and put all of the risk on us.

So, here's the deal proposed for younger Americans: we continue to pay our full Social Security taxes, our parents get to reap the benefits of the current program, we take on all of the risk, we agree to cut our benefits and we hope that we come out at least even. In summary:

The Republican Plan for Young American's Social Security:
It's a real STEAL!

**************
Lastly, I just have to comment on the Democrat's communication strategy: you can feel the Repblicans swarming.

First, they've focused a lot of energy on convicing people that there is no real crisis. They've created a web site thereisnocrisis.org or something like that. Okay, true there is no crisis. Just one problem - they're having the argument on the Republican's terms. Both sides could fight all day over the numbers and your average American's eyes would glaze over. What they should have done in the beginning is not even have an argument - the idea that there is a crisis was moronic to begin with. Instead they should have dismissed the so-called "crisis" by labeling it as: flawed, fictional, fairy-tale etc. etc.

Now, unfortunately, it's the Republican's who have adopted this labeling tactic. Sen. Orrin Hatch popped up on MSNBC tonight and said that the idea that there is no crisis is "crazy". The Democrats have fallen write into the trap - now they're the ones who are going to be on the defensive trying to prove there isn't a crisis.

The Schnizl in the Math-iznal

I love New York Time's columnist Paul Krugman. He's an economist by training and as a man of numbers myself, I tend to favor rational political choices. This is probably why I could never be a successful politician - little of politics is rational.

Anyway, earlier this week Mr. Krugman wrote a column about Social Security that exposed a hole you could drive a truck through in the Republican's plan for Social Security.

We already know that the real reason that Social Security has a projected shortfall is because the people who make the projections have gotten more pessimistic in their forecasts. A slight change in any one of the following and poof the problem disappears:

• Life expectancy
• Immigration
• Wage increases
• Economic Growth

It's that last one - economic growth - that is important for Mr. Krugman's point. The Social Security forecasters predict that the economy will grow, on average, 1.9% annually over the next 75 years (it has averaged 3.4% over the last 75). It's that pessimism that allows them to predict an imminent "crisis".

On the other hand, privatization proposals, like those the president proposes, assume that the stock market will grow 6.5 - 7% over the next 75 years.

But, wait a minute, if the economy is only growing at 1.9% as the Social Security forecasters project, how can stocks grow at 7%? This implies that stocks (American businesses) are growing three times faster than the American economy (of which business is a big part). To put it in context, if this were to actually occur, stocks would be way overvalued a la the late 1990's stock market bubble times ten.

So let's fix the problem by raising the project growth rate. Whoops - then there is no more projected "crisis". So lets fix the problem by decreasing the projected growth rate of stocks. Whoops - then private accounts perform no better than Social Security. Let Mr. Krugman finish:

It really is that stark: any growth projection that would permit the stock returns the privatizers need to make their schemes work would put Social Security solidly in the black.

And I suspect that at least some privatizers know that. Mr. Baker has devised a test he calls "no economist left behind": he challenges economists to make a projection of economic growth, dividends and capital gains that will yield a 6.5 percent rate of return over 75 years. Not one economist who supports privatization has been willing to take the test.

The privatization scheme is FUZZY MATH!

C. Fredrick's State of Social Security and Iraq

I watched President Bush's State of the Union address tonight while on the treadmill.

Social Security
Here's the first line that made me chuckle:

I know that none of these reforms [to Social Security] would be easy. But we have to move ahead with courage and honesty, because our children's retirement security is more important than partisan politics.

Here we go again - promoting this complete myth that Social Security will go bankrupt because there are fewer younger workers paying into the system to support current retirees.

Just one problem Mr. President - as we've covered previously in a post about the NYT's Magazine article "A Question of Numbers", when Social Security was reformed in 1983 the actuaries took into account our aging demographics in their forecast. The real reason Social Security has a projected deficit today is because the actuaries have gotten more pessimistic. If you simply make the assumptions more realistic (since their using unecessarily pessimistic numbers) there isn't a problem at all.

In the end, we do need to deal with Social Security with courage AND HONESTY. Let's hope President Bush can start living up to his own words.

Iraq
I am more hopeful for Iraq than at anytime. Seeing more than half of the country turnout to elect their leaders on Sunday was amazing. We don't have that level of turnout in America (and we aren't faced with insurgents trying to kill us while we vote). The road ahead won't be easy - a government must be seated, gain legitmacy and govern; the country must be fully secured - but progress is being made. I know that we invaded Iraq to find WMD, but let's not forget that practically everyone in DC thought they would find them (many Democrats included). While it's hard to comprehend the cost, loss of life and debilitating injuries that resulted from the invasion, Iraqis are more free than they've been in decades.

I Hate to Say it...

but I told you so: Hawkeye's Dismiss Pierce

When Pierce was allowed to remain on the team two years ago after pleading guilty to a lesser charge, I was disgusted. Yes, he had to sit on the bench for a year and perform community service. And, I believe strongly in second chances, but that doesn't mean someone who is pleads guilty to a crime of that nature should be given a second chance to wear the Hawkeye uniform. Those that made or approved that decision should be held accountable.

This is one more testament to the failure of leadership in the basketball program.

For those not up on the latest investigation, read more here.

Notable Notes on the Web Today

Drunk Dialing
For those of us who still get the urge to drunk dial, but kind of regret it the next day because after all we're supposed to me more mature than that now, there's a new web service: Slackertown : Drunken Dialing.

Dial the 321-600-1200, leave a message and anyone can go the website and listen to it after it's reviewed by a panel of expert judges.

Source: NYT

The NYT Succumbs to $$$
One of the most valuable services the New York Times offers online is the ability to e-mail articles, particularly for those of us who are time pressed when it comes to blogging. The service is especially useful because I frequently use it to e-mail the text of articles to myself that want to blog about, but didn't have time to write about that minute. Or, oftentimes, when I just found an article really interesting and wanted to save it so that someday I might be reminded about the interesting content. Think of it as modern-day article clipping.

So it was unfortunate today when I went to e-mail myself an article and discovered that e-mailing the full text was no longer an option - you can now only e-mail a link to the article. And why would they do that? Well - my capitalist mind tells me that the business folks at the NYT figured out that e-mailing the full text of articles might keep some people from returning to the NYT's website at a later date and paying $3 to purchase said article (articles more than 7 days old require a "small fee" to view).

From the point-of-view of someone who frequently uses the NYT as a reference and who isn't about to pay one cent to get something that at one point was free, this is a pretty stupid idea. They're already earning advertising revenue from the site when you read the article and then kindly stick an ad in the e-mail, as well. Now they want more money when you want an article 7 days after it was published? One would think an institution like the Times would support a more free dissemination of knowledge and information.

There is a workaround, however. Simply copy and paste the article text into your own e-mail and send it back to yourself.

The decision is also interesting in light of a Sunday Times article describing new software that dynamically searches digital files on your computer and spits out content with similar meaning as a way to find supporting material and perhaps find interrelated ideas. It would be great, for example, to use that tool to search through all the NYTs articles I've been e-mailing myself. Go ahead, read the article. Just hurry - only 6 days left until it'll cost you $3.

Alford's Time is Up

The Press-Citizen's Hawk Central printed a commentary that nicely sums up what I and a lot of other Hawkeye fans have been saying for years.

Frankly, Alford may yet become one of the greatest coaches the sport has ever known. After all, he's only 40 and has two or three more decades left roaming the sidelines, if that's what he wants. But if he is going to have that success, I just don't think its going to be at Iowa. I think this ship has sailed. It isn't the right fit and it just keeps getting more and more painfully obvious every year.

Compare the style and personality of Steve Alford and Kirk Ferentz. Alford is self-centered, arrogant and just a bit to perfect for Iowa - not to mention his team's woefully inadequate results on (and off) the basketball court. His players have problems with the law and in the classroom - reflecting of a team that lacks discipline. Nor does he ever seem happy. Ferentz has consistently taken a team of good football players and turned them into a great team with his humble, scrappy, disciplined and down to earth style.

Perhaps there's some coaching ability in Alford, but it will never shine at Iowa. The fit was never quite right.

Ben's At It Again

• Ben Folds has a new album coming out on April 26, entitled "Songs for Silverman." They're also remixing "Whatever and Ever Amen" and adding 7 new tracks. Goodness!
• Lisa Rein has posted the rest of the Gonzales hearings. It's just scary that this man has the potential to become powerful.

God Bless Nebraska

Only in Nebraska could you have a 2,000 ton pile of manure spontaneously combust. And only in Nebraska will that pile burn for three months.

Byproducts from the massive operation resulted in a dung pile measuring 100 feet long, 30 feet high and 50 feet wide that began burning about two months ago and continues to smolder despite Herculean attempts to douse it.

From CNN.com.

Actually, this problem is not uncommon and not exclusive to Husker dung piles. See what you city folk are-a missin'? Man, I love Nebraska.

Another Awful Cellphone Idea

T-Mobile has a new service called CallerTunes, which is arguably one of the worst mobile-branded ideas I've heard of. Their service will replace the normal ring-ring people hear when they call you with a song, celebrity voice, or comedy clip of your choice. Don't most people expect a ring? I think that would just confuse the heck out of me. I suppose if you never want another voice mail message (or possibly even phone calls) you could sign up. People will probably stop calling you out of protest relatively quickly. (via stereogum)

Be Sure to Tip Your Waitstaff

You better hope so, otherwise he or she could be posting your name out for the world to see how cheap and inconsiderate you really are. Seriously, how can you be so cheap?

Some other rumblings along the web:

• If you're looking for a good list of some excellent blogs, check out the nominees for the 2005 Bloggies. It's like the Oscars only less rigged.
• Curious how you've spent the time you've already been given? How many hours sleeping, eating, or working? Just where did the time go?
• Anyone who is using OS X should be using Quicksilver. It's hands down the most powerful interface tool for that or any operating system.
• Every office needs someone with one of these.
• Wandering through the blogsphere today I found what has to be a real-life version of the movie Saved.

Value Versus Mediocrity

I never really sat down and thought about the link between specialization and health care cost until I read an article from the Harvard Business Review entitled Redefining Competition in Health Care. Expertise, efficiency, reduction of errors, and improved outcomes are all clearly linked to decreased health care costs, and they certainly sound like their linked to specialization too. The argument is that by specializing we become better at a specific skill (namely, treating a specific disease or set of conditions) and are then able to become of better value to the consumer (more positive outcome for a given cost). Makes perfect sense, right? Then why isn't it working? Apparently, reform went wrong. To paraphrase...

• Managed care focused on cost, and as such we simply shifted the cost to someone else. Solved nothing.
• We tried legal action, which gave patients a Bill of Rights and providers increased costs.
• We though patient choice was the problem, so we gave them choices, but forgot to give them the information they need to make those choices.
• Now we're all abuzz with reducing error and improving quality by tracking everything into a computer and requiring that everyone receive the same thing on a network level. It's a nice system, but it only promotes the status quo and doesn't stop zero-sum competition.

The key, according to Michael Porter and Elizabeth Teisberg is developing non-zero-sum competition on the level of the disease:

Missing in the discussion about health care reform is an understanding of the role competition plays in driving quality, safety, and efficiency improvements and the type of competition that will best do so. If the objective is to create value, then competition to improve outcomes and increase efficiency in specific medical conditions is essential.

Patients really should choose the best doctor they can afford to treat the disease that they have. That harbors competition, and that's good for business in the end.

This argument works fine and dandy for specialists and the like, but what about general practitioners? Are they doomed because they didn't specialize? I don't think so, I just think they'll just be subjected to competition on multiple playing fields. What I'm not so comfortable with, is ranking physicians -- there's no fair way to do it. So how do we confer disease-based outcomes to patients without defaming physicians? Figure that out, friends, and then we'll talk.

War on the Poor: Create a Crisis - Privatize Social Security

First, I'd like to refer you to an excellent article (The New York Times Magazine, Jan 16 2005) that does a great job of giving a broad overview of the history of Social Security and debunks many of the common misconceptions.

This article presents the Republicans strategy clearly:

The campaign to privatize has not only been about ideology; it has also focused on Social Security's supposed insolvency...Conservatives have bombarded the public, over years and decades, with prophecies of trillion-dollar liabilities and with metaphors intended to frighten -- ''train wreck,'' ''bankruptcy,'' ''cancer'' and so forth. Recently, a White House political deputy wrote a strategy note in which he said that Social Security is ''on an unsustainable course. That reality needs to be seared into the public consciousness.''

The campaign is potentially self-fulfilling: persuade enough people that Social Security is going bankrupt, and it will lose public support. Then Congress will be forced to act. And thanks to such unceasing alarms, many, and perhaps most, people today think the program is in serious financial trouble.

We've already covered the fact that private accounts don't save money in and of themselves. Again, quoting from the same article:

The White House asked the Congressional Budget Office to analyze one advisory council plan. That plan would allow workers born after a certain date (perhaps 1950) to siphon about a third of the payroll tax into individual accounts, up to $1,000 a year. The money could be invested in any of
three choices (other plans provide for wider menus) and would be converted into an annuity upon retirement.

The C.B.O. assumes that the typical worker would invest half of his allocation in stocks and the rest in bonds. The C.B.O. projects the average return, after inflation and expenses, at 4.9 percent. This compares with the 6 percent
rate (about 3.5 percent after inflation) that the trust fund is earning now.

Proponents hail the plan for forcing savings on the government. But the diversion of money into individual accounts would save the government nothing, since it would have to borrow to offset the loss of the diverted dollars. The individual accounts represent a transfer, not a savings.

The second feature of the plan would link future benefit increases to inflation rather than to wages. Because wages typically grow faster, this would mean a rather substantial benefit cut. That cut would mean a savings for the government. This is a political choice; we can always save money by reducing benefits. But it's important to stress that the savings result from cuts, not from the decision to privatize.

So, one might ask - why? Why the need to convince people that Social Security is broken to propose a "fix" of private accounts? Well, perhaps a hint of the real agenda, courtesy of one of the President's inaugural parties:

Though there was no official poem for the occasion, impressionist Rich Little, emceeing the Constitution Ball at the Hilton Washington, did provide a bit of inaugural doggerel.

The gist of it was: "Let's get together, let bitterness pass, I'll hug your elephant, you kiss my ass!" And the crowd went crazy.

Little said he missed and adored the late President Ronald Reagan and "I wish he was here tonight, but as a matter of fact he is," and he proceeded to impersonate Reagan, saying, "You know, somebody asked me, 'Do you think the war on poverty is over?' I said, 'Yes, the poor lost.' " The crowd went wild.

Source: The Washington Post

Next up: Talking Points

The Social Security Crisis

Today is the day that we start the Social Security discussion. And what better day than the worst day of the year to begin this discussion (see Yasser's post if you're confused - oh wait I forgot, no one else is reading this).

Over the past few months I have diligently read many articles related to this topic and consider myself more educated than your average 25-year-old. And in keeping with the spirit of our blog as an honest broker of information disseminated by two (as of today three - welcome Andy) contributors, my sources include both ends of the political spectrum, namely The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal, both of which I read daily.

Fair disclosure: I was completely open to the idea of adding private accounts to Social Security and even told a few people so going into this. I am an individual investor, manage my own investments and believe in the power of the private sector, markets and economics to provide a superior return to that of Social Security over the long-term. I also believe that government is inherently inefficient and that if there is a private sector alternative that can equitably serve all Americans, then it ought to be explored.

Here are my developing conclusions about the Social Security "crisis":

• There is NO CRISIS, but a possible long-term shortfall as projected using many conservative assumptions that may or may not turn out to be true
• Adding a private account option does NOTHING to address the shortfall (that's right - zero, zilch, nada)
• Private accounts introduce unnecessary risks to American's retirement, ending the guarantee of a dignified retirement for our seniors

In the end, the solution is one that strengthens Social Security as a program that keeps our parents and grandparents out of poverty in old-age and complements our own private savings. It can likely be done with modest program changes and it ought to be done without raising taxes on young people.

In comments to this post, I'll discuss some of the articles I've read and point you to helpful information sources. In the end, you'll likely experience what the AARP reported in a survey today: as people learn more about private accounts, their support for them decreases.

Not Even Close to the Worst

How today was calculated to be the worst day ever is beyond me. I thought it was a particularly great day. An uncharacteristically quiet Monday at work, complete with early departure for home. And what about tomorrow? Clearly, today can't be the worst day ever if tomorrow is the best. That just doesn't happen...

Other reasons why today isn't that bad:

• Joshua Kinberg, the design student whose thesis project (an SMS-printing bike that landed him in jail during the RNC this year) seems to be off the hook now. And he got his bike back, unlike so many other unlucky bikers of Critical Mass
• Laser pointers have a new use: Robbing donut shops.
• For those documentary fans out there, Kevin Kelly's True Films 1.0 is now available as a PDF file.
• Apple has sold over 250,000,000 songs on iTunes.
• Powerbook supplies are dwindling. I smell a G5 coming...
• And Andy joined our blog team today, so how could today possibly be the worst day of the year?

Getting It Handed To You

Well, it had to happen sometime. Roethlisberger had to lose (and he did a damn fine job of that too). Or did he just choke? I suppose you have to give the kid credit, he is only 22. He is just a rookie, and it's a rookie move to completely underestimate the reach of your opponent. He'll only get better, I'm sure.

It's a good thing I'm a Hawkeyes fan:

The Patriots, coached by Bill Belichick, handed Ben Roethlisberger his first loss as a starting quarterback in the NFL. Roethlisberger's last loss as a starting quarterback occurred in Iowa City on Aug. 30, 2003 when Iowa defeated Miami (Ohio) 21-3 inside historic Kinnick Stadium. Of course, Iowa was coached that day by Kirk Ferentz, who worked for Bilichick in the early 1990s when Bilichick was head coach of the Cleveland Browns.

(From hawkeyesports.com).

Cabin and Mac mini Fever

I still haven't made it out of the house. Not that it's deadly or anything outside, I've just had no motivation to fight with other drivers. So, I never made it out last night. Big deal, neither did you.

More random links:

• This is hilarious. Apparently some random people in Germany have been protesting the Bush Administration by placing miniature US and Bush flags in dog "piles" throughout the city. For a picture check out BoingBoing.
• Mac mini madness is taking over the world. Not that I wouldn't want one, I just don't see how there are so many geeks like me out there (most of them waiting in line at the Apple Store). Some people even have their own blogs (here and here) dedicated to the little white box.
• Not that the little white box isn't desirable. I tend to agree with what Rebecca Freed at PC World had to say:
  My bottom line? If I were recommending a starter system to someone (who hadn’t already taken a side in the Mac versus Windows holy war), I wouldn’t hesitate to send them in the direction of the Mac Mini.
  I always recommend Apple though, so that's not saying much, is it? And yes, I already recommended that my parents buy one.
• And even if you're looking for a coaster, you still have no excuse not to get a mini.
• Lastly, it has to be said: Go Steelers!

A Snowy Day

Since the city tends to come to a complete standstill when more than one inch of snow falls on the ground, today was an excellent opportunity to make some big time template changes to the blog (sort of a Kubrick meets paper bag look). Not to mention the title change. Alhough the verdict is out on both, I think it's a step in the right direction. Maybe I can clean it up a bit as I go. After all, I have just been messing around on my Powerbook and watching Return of the King all day.

Of course, after a 28 hour shift at work I've been much more inclined to just lounge around in my pajamas. And since the snow shows no signs of stopping, I think I'll probably stay that way.

Some other things on the radar:

• Lisa Rein has posted Daily Show clips from the inauguration. MPEG and mp3. Fantastic.
• Suffering from Short Stature? This little page lets you compare yourself to those more famous than you.
• Apple and Pepsi are teaming up again for their iTunes promotion. This is how I got my Jason Mraz CD. Good thing I'm not a Coke person.
• There are more reports of viruses that control your webcam (here and here). For those of you who have one, you may want to keep it under a blanket until a fix is out there.
• Last, but not close to least is our musical moment of the day. Hank Handy's Beatle's Medley is nothing short of phenomenal, and has been a regular entry on my iPod playlist. What are you reading for, go get it now! (via BoingBoing)

Morning is Too Early

I'm having more and more difficulty motivating myself to get out of bed at 5:30AM. I think that's probably normal, right?

It's snowing for the first time this year. Too bad it's not the good kind of snow, just the messy kind - only good for tracking mud and car accidents. I can't wait to move to Denver.

• According to this guy, "Procrastination is the reward for not doing work." Sounds good to me.
• The headline says it all: Four More Years of Bush Makes the World Anxious. Thank you Reuters.
• California has lost it. Now they're trying to pass their own state-level version of the INDUCE act. (Link via BoingBoing.)
• After a rousing email from Chris, I think we are going to rename the blog. I'm sure our readership cares, that is, both of us.

Contents Under Pressure

I almost named the blog that after seeing the warning label on my shaving cream. I still kind of like it.

On the other side of the net:

• For anyone who saw The Polar Express and thought the kids looked a bit like zombies, you're not alone. The CG in that movie just wasn't quite right. Ward Jenkins has an amazing description and some solutions on his blog. But what do you expect, he's an animator.
• Grafitti meets multimedia: Grafedia. I saw this on BoingBoing, and it's intriguing. I can think of a few people who could do some wild things with this.
• Our wonderful president is being inaugurated. I don't know about you, but I don't need a $40,000,000 party to remind me how stupid the electorate is.
• The Rice QotD: "We must use American diplomacy to help create a balance of power in the world that favors freedom," Rice said. Did she mean freedom, or American economic self-interest?
• Coolest car commercial ever. And the story behind it.

Yikes, that's more politics that I'm used to at one time. Chris, I'm going to leave that to you in the future. I'll stick to dancing cars.

Paying the Future

Health care costs are rising across the board, and we're soon going to find ourselves with an enormous shortage of primary care physicians. Unfortunately, that's probably not going to change much, unless market forces can drive their salary up. Not that doctor's don't get paid enough, but when graduating with $200,000 in debt 32 percent of medical students take salary into consideration when choosing a field:

Although the consumer price index is less than twice what it was 20 years ago, medical-student debt was 4.5 times as high in 2003 as it was in 1984...

...32 percent of students who graduated in 2002 indicated that their level of debt influenced their choice of specialty. Indeed, the latest match conducted by the National Resident Matching Program shows a continuing decrease in the number of medical students pursuing careers in primary care (37 percent in 2003, as compared with 49 percent in 1997) and an increase in the number gravitating toward careers in radiology, orthopedics, ophthalmology, and dermatology, which offer higher discretionary income.

Link to Dr. Morrison's article at NEJM.

Personally, I think we need to rethink health care in this country. We can't continue to treat everyone at the standard of care that we are now without running the system into the ground. It's a really small start, but I'll gladly take a $15,000 a year paycut if that means my loans will be forgiven. Any takers?

Another Day...Another Weekend

Well winter finally arrived in DC on Friday. Unfortunately it coincided with the after work happy hour, which kinda dampened turnout. Nonetheless, fun was had by all. Started out at Stetsons, then hit Cafe Saint-Ex. Both bars are in the U-Street area as I'm trying to make every happy hour a new experience (for me anyway). Stetsons was pretty much a local dive bar and started out pretty empty, but I warmed the place up after consuming some cheese fries and $2.50 Millers (their daily special). By the time we left, the place was pretty packed with your standard DC yuppie and wanna-be urban hipster crowd with knowledge of current events that would be strange in any other city. St. Ex was pretty much the same, except not a dive bar. But it was conveniently located next to a pizza place that served us cold pizza and will never be as as good as a an Adam's Morgan Jumbo Slice. Disappointment :-(

Well, I swear the political commentary is on it's way. Our first topic will be Social Security reform, a topic that should be of importance to 25 year-olds who care about their retirement future. OK - so care about and care enough about to get involved in the political process are two very different concepts. Regardless, the time to get educated is now. Here's a teaser, just a taste of the fun we'll be dabbling in:

The campaign [to add private accounts to Social Security] will use Bush's campaign-honed techniques of mass repetition, never deviating from the script and using the politics of fear to build support -- contending that a Social Security financial crisis is imminent when even Republican figures show it is decades away.
Social Security Push to Tap the GOP Faithful, Washington Post 1/14/05

A Weekend Without Blog

It's been a nice relaxing three day weekend. I ventured out into the snow and saw In Good Company, and finished the book I was reading, Absolute Friends. I half expected Topher Grace's new movie to be a romantic comedy, but I was pleasantly suprised to see that it's more of a comedic tragedy. You'll have to see it for yourself to understand. As far as the book goes, the ending really pissed me off. I'm still all up-in-arms regarding our lying president and his media. But whatever.

• So I'm afraid to turn my iPod on. I think it's dead, frozen to death this weekend. Let that be a lesson to you, don't leave it in the car, even if you live in a good neighborhood.
• If you have a Monday headache, read this. I think you'll instantly feel better. (via BoingBoing.)

Now I Need a Job

As incredibly awesome as this is, I really wish Apple would wait to release the G5 Powerbook until after I graduate and finally make some money. But it looks like it'll just have to be an early graduation present. Now I just have to find $2500 by Quarter 2.

Besides that, here's some other stuff floating around the net today:

• The Human Clock is an awesome website that's actually a clock. The times are all in picture format, from users all over the world. Hard to explain, just go see it.
• That cheeky fellow Specialist Garner I blogged about earlier was found guilty on all five counts. It only took the jury 5 hours to decide he was a freak. NYTimes here.
• Chris, I hope you're reading this. Apparently, you're famous.

For Those with Guilty Consciences

Yes it's true Virginia - ours is the luckiest generation because we have such talented comics hosting our Late Night shows. When you're in the mood for political satire you can turn to Jon Stewart and the Daily Show. When you're in the mood for some outrageous tomfoolery, turn to Conan. I literally can't wait until NBC dumps Leno and his lame-o nursing home humor so Conan can put some funny back into the Tonight Show. In the meantime I settle for the encores on CNBC every night at 7 PM. Anyways, one of Conan's latest bits of comedic genius is the "I'm Gonna Go to Hell When I Die" song he sings after a particularly disparaging joke (think comparing Star Jones to a hippo). And now The Booty Boys have added their own lyrics and a little tune to it. Enjoy!

TheBootyBoys.com

Are We Awake Yet

It's been quite a busy day today, and unfortunately I don't have time to hit my usual web sources. But news of this week's New England Journal made it my way before 10AM. As my Resident said this morning, you'd think this would have been published in the Journal of Common Sense years ago. From the NEJM article by Barger et. al.:

We found that the odds that interns will have a documented motor vehicle crash on the commute after an extended work shift were more than double the odds after a nonextended shift. Near-miss incidents were more than five times as likely to occur after an extended work shift as they were after a nonextended shift...

These findings reveal that the schedule of present-day resident physicians in the United States is far different from that of resident physicians 60 years ago who lived, worked, and slept in the hospital in order to follow the evolution of the illnesses of patients who were hospitalized for extended periods. Currently, interns work extended shifts with minimal sleep in the hospital while caring for patients who are hospitalized during the most acute phase of their illness. Yet interns are still anachronistically described as being "on call" during these extended shifts, even though they are working 96 percent of the time. In today's climate of pressure to reduce the length of patients' hospital stays, 85.6 percent of monthly surveys indicated that interns slept four hours or less while working on extended shifts...

The increased rate of actual motor vehicle crashes and near-miss incidents during interns' commutes after extended work shifts that we have documented has legal implications, since drivers in both the United States and Great Britain have already been convicted of vehicular homicide for driving when impaired by sleepiness...

Moreover, appeals courts in two states have ruled that an employer's responsibility for fatigue-related crashes can continue even after an employee has left work, similar in concept to the liability incurred by people who serve alcohol to drivers who are subsequently involved in alcohol-related motor vehicle crashes.

Interns and Residents dying in MVCs on the way home from a 30 hour shift is nothing new. But this is a heated argument among residents and attending physicians, with people on both sides arguing for and against the 80 hour work week. Unfortunately we're still years away from a system that really works. Hopefully someday in the not so distant future we'll be able to work more regular hours (you know, like normal people). Full text is here for those with access. I'm going to bed.

Film and Medicine

Today has been one of those days that feels so much longer than it really is. No real reason why. I only had two cases today, and no excitement (the bad kind) with either of them. I think it's just leaving work after it gets dark that's getting to me. I need to go home and watch a movie.

• Don Cheadle's new Film Hotel Rwanda looks phenomenal. It's definitely at the top of my movie to-do list. Hopefully Cheadle can pull an Oscar out of it too.
• Everyone should go see In Good Company. No exceptions.
• I am a bit worried about Robin Williams' new film, Final Cut. It'd be nice to see a good Williams' film again. That's not going to happen with this one.

The wheels in my own film world have been spinning as fast as is possible when you're in medicine:

• I've been trying to get going on another film. I'd like to actually get past the talking and writing phase and start shooting, but that's because I like to jump the gun. Maybe I should find some actors first.
• I just got an offer to shoot a documentary/interview with some of the big-whig docs here. That probably means I'll have to produce and edit too...
• I'm slowly teaching myself DVD Studio Pro, so I suppose either of the two projects will be good for authoring practice.

But all that's all neither here no there. Still not much to talk about today. St. Germain is our album of the moment.

Another MWSF, Another Shopping List

This years' MWSF has come and gone, leaving the usual trail of expensive wish lists and I-told-you-soes. For those not in the know, read on.

The major announcements:

• A new Mac, and for less than $500. The Mac mini supplies pretty much everything my Powerbook can, minus the DVD burner (and Bluetooth, Airport, expandable RAM, monitor, and keyboard, of course). So maybe not like my Powerbook. It's basically Apple's sexy take on the headless machine, directed towards the PC using iPod community. It's just screaming to be on my desk. If only I had a desk.
• The iPod shuffle, definitely a potential purchase for you runners. It's Flash-based memory will never skip, and it's smaller than a pack of Trident. Rui is right, everyone will complain about no screen. They'll have to get over it. Available in 512M and 1G sizes.
• iLife has been updated, and how! The best part, iMovie and iDVD now support HD and widescreen 16:9 video. Final Cut Express HD also adds HD possibilities for us amateur producers. Thank you Quicktime 7! So sweet.
• Finally, Apple has a new competitor for MS Office, iWork. It looks very promising, and if it's anything like the rest of Apple's software, should be about 100x less bloated than Office.

Give Me a P! (for Pyramid)

Specialist Charles A. Graner went on trial yesterday for his Abu Ghraib transgretions. It seems that the New York Times missed one of his lawyers best quotes:

"Don't cheerleaders all over America form pyramids six to eight times a year. Is that torture?"

Guy Womack everybody, lawyer for hire. Thank you Reuters, for knowing what real news is.