In the NYT today:
The Dow Jones industrials gained 485.21 points or 4.68 percent, to 10,850.66, halving the 777-point decline on Monday.485.21/777 = 0.6245 or, just about as equally close to 3/4 (0.75) as it is to 1/2 (0.5). Why the fuck would you call that a "halving?"
Yes, Andrew, Sarah Palin is a disaster:
Andrew wants to know why I'm more freaked out by the bailout package than by Sarah Palin. There are several answers to this. The first is that I did freak out--just ask Peter Suderman, who obligingly listened to me rant about her for forty-five minutes after her convention speech. The second is that, for all this, with the McCain campaign flaming out so spectacularly, I don't find her that worrisome. The third is that even if she gets into office, there's a better than even chance she won't end up as president. And the fourth is that while the last thing I said about her was hardly complementary, I haven't had as much time as I might have liked to devote to Sarah Palin. Andrew may not have heard, but there have been a few interesting developments in the financial markets over the last few weeks. As an economics blogger, I was regretfully forced to forgo full time devotion to the vice presidential race and turn to more trivial matters.And finally, do you really expect me to criticize someone whose ambition has led her to accept a position she lacks the qualifications for and who refuses to admit she was wrong when she makes frequent cringe worthy gaffes?
Shorter Megan McArdle: Oh Yeah? So you think that I'm clueless and moronic? Well, don't let my super public rants & raves distract you from all the really reasonable and smart and funny things I tell my boyfriend in private. Yeah, thats right, my boyfriend. He lives in Canada, where he is modeling underwear for the winter. He'll be back in a year. Thats right. So go ask him if you think I'm dumb because he will tell you right here right now that I am not. Besides, my self-imposed job title doesn't let me talk about important issues like the presidency, unless I get distracted by narcissism, hypocritcal pedantry, embarassing attempts at humor, daydreaming, french lessons, murder, alzheimers, describing energy policy through metaphors, science, baseball, and, did I mention I have friends?
the stupid continues to flow fast and free as Megan scrambles to find ways to pretend she has the slightest clue what's going on in the financial markets she's supposed to be an expert on. The main thing to remember is don't blame any rich people for this. Only the poor and homeless act in bad faith. Also, Megan is not going to admit she was wrong to think deregulation solves all ills, because she doesn't understand her mistake, or even recognize it. Part of the point of her avalanche of words is to help herself maintain that sphere of dense duh centered around her head.
The devil made me do it!:
Sure, House Repubs are acting like babies, but how dare Pelosi mention that the policies they pushed and I agree with them on are to blame for this mess? I AM NOT TO BLAME, PELOSI IS A TERRIBLE PERSON.
Why not nationalize, like Sweden?:
Do you really want to try a policy that works? What sort of example would that set for the rest of our government?
Prisoner's dilemma:
If I reference the two classical names I remember from prep school maybe you won't notice I have no fucking clue what I'm talking about.
Diogenes, Megan? Really? You do understand he was a dirty fucking hippie who lived off the Athenian dole, right?
The politics of the bill:
Is anyone else sick of me using the word "arguendo"?
Anyhow, Pelosi is to blame for the failure of the opposite party to deliver their votes on a bill their leadership supposedly supported. How dare she talk about the failure of my deregulatory philosophy at a time when it's helped cause a republic shaking crisis? Now is the time to kiss my ass and those like me, not to try to shame us into silence for having fucked up in the first place. It's not like we know what shame is, anyway.
Open thread on alternate plans:
I, ummm, am too lazy to find the other plans being proposed as alternatves, so tell me about them. I'll try to find time to read your comments between moments of acting indignant.
Raising Arizona:
There is a rumor, which you may have heard, that John McCain's famous return to Washington actually scuttled a deal last week, plunging us into the weekend's negotiations which resulted in . . . no deal. The nastiest interpretation is that he wanted to position the Republicans as against the bailout so he could run on that "principle". But the thing is unprovable, and so I haven't blogged it.I have blogged conspiracy theory Republican talking points about how everyone but the people who voted against the bill are to blame, but I have too much respect for the candidacy of someone I claim to loathe to subject it to the same lack of standards or integrity I use to guide my work on every other topic. And yes, you could point out the inherent hypocrisy of saying "I haven't blogged" about something I'm blogging about as I write that very phrase, but only if you want to be banned.
Megan has another plea for the internet, as shown in her the title of her article ... uh... titled "Please, enough with the metaphors." Quoth the Megan:
If you cannot explain in clear English exactly what all the salient questions and facts are about the bailout, then please do not attempt to convince others that it is best understood in terms of Dirty Harry movies or the time your Aunt Mavis lost her car keys in the garbage disposal.Which is funny enough in and off itself, Megan lecturing others on using plain English. Even funnier, though, is to take a look at a previous post of her in which she claims that "Aesop described the problem rather well." How did he describe the problem, you ask? Why, by using plain English of course! Here, let me show you:
Once upon a time all the Mice met together in Council, and discussed the best means of securing themselves against the attacks of the cat. After several suggestions had been debated, a Mouse of some standing and experience got up and said, "I think I have hit upon a plan which will ensure our safety in the future, provided you approve and carry it out. It is that we should fasten a bell round the neck of our enemy the cat, which will by its tinkling warn us of her approach." This proposal was warmly applauded, and it had been already decided to adopt it, when an old Mouse got upon his feet and said, "I agree with you all that the plan before us is an admirable one: but may I ask who is going to bell the cat?"See, he used plain English to write an analogy! That's what more writers should be doing! None of this metaphors and analogy crap. Let's stick to the metaphors and analogies only, please.
thank god we have experts like Megan to explain this stuff to the layperson.
House votes down the bailout:
Democrats voted for it pretty narrowly -- 140 to 95. The Republicans shot it down 65 to 133. I find it hard to believe that they're voting their conscience; they're voting their electoral interest in November. I hope their constituencies enjoy the bank panic.About to? Maybe now we'll finally have that recession you keep joking about, eh, Megan?
Actually, what I hope is that I'm wrong, we don't need a bailout, and after a period of liquidation, everything will settle down. If so, I will happily confess my error. But I'm very much afraid that I am not wrong, and things are about to get pretty grim.
We clearly need better regulations. But bank runs are complicated creatures. There is no single cause of this, and there will not be a single solution, either.And let's not blame the banks, or especially their executives, or the economic 'philosophies', as if naked greed deserves the word, they used to justify their obvious mistakes. This kind of thing just happens, like Hurricane Katrina.
and on Megan's case. I'll put up a new poll soonish, just have to finish fixing the idea. For now, old fashioned catch-up shorters.
Dollar obsessions:
I really don't understand how the value of the dollar figures into economic matters.
In defense of borrowing short and lending long:
Fractional reserve banking puts that money to work. It gives us periodic crises. But by putting all that extra money to work in productive investments, it also gives us the wherewithal to pay for the periodic crises.The people who know how to game the system will get rich, and those who don't will take the losses. What, exactly, is the problem here? People are getting rich, yay them!
For what, I have no idea.Megan McArdle, paid journalist.
Here's a question: a lot of Democrats seem to want the Wall Street executives to disgorge things like their retirement packages and bonuses before cutting any deal. Can Congress do this, legally? I mean, yes, they make the law. But my understanding is that while you can grandfather in benefits, you can't retroactively punish people for behavior that was legal when committed. Can Congress reach in and retroactively void a private contract? I'm not asking for commentary on the wisdom or morality of such a move, just whether it would withstand a court challenge.Megan McArdle, designated "expert".
If the Big Three can't make autos people want to buy, then they should liquidate and open up the market to those who can.If Megan can't help The Atlantic produce work people want to read, then she should be replaced with someone who can. You are part of a money-losing venture, Megan. You said so yourself.
Should we punish stupid bankers by plunging the entire country into recession? Most of the stupidest ones have already been punished; as I understand it, Dick Fuld lost about $100 million in the Lehman collapse, while the head of Bear lost $1 billion. The mortgage bankers have already been fired. We're sending a message to a largely empty room.That's because the horrible shit you were saying made everyone leave, Megan. You're a fucking idiot.
In some sense, the reason to do the bailout is that we don't know. I don't want to give money to GM because I have a pretty good notion of the scale of a GM collapse. Some people will lose their jobs and get new ones, the steel industry will take a hit, and a lot of managers will be looking for another line of work than pushing ugly, underperforming cars. On the other hand, I have no idea how far a bank collapse might spread. And I'm really not eager to find out.I can't really add to that, can I.
Megan talks about the homeless in this post. This is ordinarily a post in which I'd set a new world record in profanities per second, but the sheer, unadulterated cruelty, coldness, lack of perspective or empathy that she lays out for all to see has just stricken me of my ability to even think.
I used to believe that, deep down, all people are good. Megan has permanently convinced me otherwise. Here's a few quotes that illustrate her views of the chronically homeless:
The chronically homeless are not, as fable would have it, people who have had some hard luck. They are people who have repeatedly made bad decisions--mentally ill people who stop taking their medicine, drug addicts and drunks.Yes, she just said the mentally ill make "bad decisions" which is kind of like saying a baby makes "bad decisions" by crapping its pants and putting every random object in its mouth.
For many people (including me) giving someone an apartment as a reward for refusing to deal with their drug addiction violates our inherent sense of fairness. And for many bleeding hearts (including me) simply giving someone an apartment without forcing them to get help for their underlying conditions violates our inherent sense of mercy. We don't want them to just have a roof over their heads; we want them to stop drinking themselves to death and/or hearing voices.It's so unfair!!!!! Why won't those schizophrenics just stop hearing voices already? Megan manages never to hear any voices at all (like the voice of reason or conscience) without even trying. Why should those lucky lunatics get all the fun?
But people on the street are people who have refused help, or can't, for whatever dark psychological reason, use it. And they are people who cost a phenomenal amount of money when they get one of the many diseases inherent in sleeping on the street. How much money are we willing to pay to maintain our sense of fairness?Yes, mental illness is a "dark" thing, and the mentally ill are a source of pure evil in the world. Also, most people think it's totally fair to just leave them out on the street cause, hey, they could just "stop hearing voices" if they really wanted to.
Yes, I know, the hardcore libertarians are protesting that we shouldn't pay for their medical care.This is how she describes people with whom she chooses to associate herself. She admits that her brethren want people rotting on the street.
... because a majority of Americans are horrified by the idea of letting someone die outside the hospital door.True, this is what's known as having a bare minimum of a soul. It's actually a good thing, despite Megan's attempts to portray it otherwise.
But the homeless are already people with extreme disregard of social norms and also, personal suffering. Unless we're actually willing to let them die, and I hope we aren't, we don't have any leverage.Don't you love how she tries to make herself sound compassionate here by hoping that we won't "let them die." She fails to realize that you can't make even the slightest pull for being a decent human being when you call the mentally ill "people with extreme disregard for social norms." THEY'RE FUCKING SICK. They're not disregarding anything. They lack the capacity TO REGARD AT ALL. What the fuck is wrong with her?
Allow me to point out the obvious about John McCain's grandstanding declaration that he is suspending campaigning to deal with the financial crisis, and asking Barack Obama to cancel Friday's debate:This is not the wrong. The wrong is next.
1. It is dumb. The world is not crying out for John McCain's exquisite financial acumen to help shepherd us through this.
2. It is politically brilliant. John McCain gets to polish his somewhat tarnished "above politics" image.This is part 1 of the wrong. A politically brilliant move would not have involved needing George Bush to rescue him. McCain is not on the Finance Committee. Had Bush not organized a large photo op in the middle of complex negotiations that shouldn't be interrupted, McCain would have been rushing to Washington to literally do nothing.
3. Democrats who are mad are mad because it is politically brilliant, not because it is dumb. There is, as far as I can see, no actual harm in postponing campaigning, or the debates; we can just as easily learn McCain's terrifying plans for the country next week.Do you actually read the news, Megan? The main point of postponing the debate seems to be an attempt to keep the VP debate from happening. And Democrats, like Barney Frank, are mad because someone with no understanding of the issue or actual relevance to the process already underway is slowing it down by literally wasting the time of the major players, forcing them to trek to the White House for a fucking photo op that exists only for the political gain of the supposedly suspended campaign.
It certainly doesn't make me like John McCain any better. But I don't really see how he's endangering the Republic either.Ahhh, a strawbaby to close on. It's poor form for a major public leader to encourage fears about the current crisis, you asshole. If you had even a layman's understanding of basic economics you'd see why. He's not endangering the Republic, he's just fucking with it for personal gain.
In an article that prolly deserves more attention (or less, really) Megan whips out this whopper:
You know who made most of the money on the subprime bubble? Anyone who bought a house in the last ten years. Yes, that's right, you, with your low fixed interest rate on a reasonably sized house. You're the profiteer who laughed all the way to the bank.Megan is so clueless here that it's astounding. She thinks the people who massively overpaid for their houses and are threatened with foreclosure and/or bankruptcy are the ones that made out like bandits?
Posts
All Comments
