TwoPennies

Financial Advice?

I have this older friend who is in serious financial distress.  

Unfortunately, this friend has gotten himself deeply into debt, and continues to spend way more than he brings home every year.  Consider these details:

• For the last few years, my friend has been making around $24K-$25K in net take-home pay.  But he's been spending more than he brings home each year, borrowing anywhere from about $1,500 to $4,500 annually to make up the difference.
   
• In 2009, with a down economy, he had a modest $20,740 in net take-home pay.  However, he also increased spending significantly.  So he found that he needed to charge an additional $20,530 on credit cards, plus borrow from his own 401(k) savings in the amount of $1,730.  This brings his total credit card debt to $78,560 and his total 401(k) self-loan to $43,560 at the end of 2009, for a grand total debt of $122,120 (as I mentioned my friend is older, and has been borrowing thousands of dollars a year for many years).
   
• His expectation for 2010 is to have a slight improvement in net take-home pay, up to $22,640.  Of course, he also expects to continue his high-spending ways and to finance this he plans to charge an additional $17,190 on credit cards, while taking out an additional $1,570 in 401(k) self-loans.
   
• This means that at the end of 2010, he expects to have a total credit card debt of $95,750 and a total 401(k) loan to himself of $45,130, grand total debt of $140,880.
   

Given all of the above -- what advice would you give to my friend?

Obviously he's on an unsustainable financial path.

He could work on increasing his income, certainly, though when he borrows nearly as much as he makes every year just to pay the bills there's only so much that can be done in that regard.

He could, like most people in such situations, work on cutting expenses -- generally much easier to control than income -- however deleterious to one's standard of living that may be.  Anybody with half a brain can recognize that if you're in a deep hole, the first thing to do is STOP DIGGING!

I expect most financial advisors would seriously urge my friend to consider bankruptcy as the most viable option available, given his crushing debt-to-income ratio (at the end of 2010 he expects to owe more than 6 times his total annual take-home pay!)

There are no easy answers or painless solutions to my friend's financial woes, and I worry about his future.  The longer he puts off addressing his serious debt issues, the more painful the ultimate fix will be.

Oh, did I mention?

My "friend" is the U.S. Federal Government.

Of course, the Federal budget deals with billions and trillions, so for my story (which is admittedly a greatly-simplified analogy) I scaled down the numbers to a range most people could more easily relate to.  If you want to see the real-life numbers, just add eight (8) zeros to the end of everything.

EIGHT ZEROS.

Think about that for just a moment, please.  

Think about how the government borrows significant amounts from itself and has been for years.  What does the 401(k) self-loan represent in my little story?  Mostly, that's the Social Security Trust Fund.  In other words, for years as the government has needed to fill annual budget deficits, it has taken part of the money from Social Security and put an I.O.U. in its place.

Think about how, unlike with individuals such as you and me, bankruptcy is not actually a viable option for the U.S. government.

With bankruptcy off the table, think about what it's going to take to eventually pay off all that debt.

Think about what it would mean to your family, if you owed more than 6 times your own take-home income, and expected that debt to continue to grow significantly over the next several years even as your income (hopefully) increases over time.

Think about what those whom we've elected at the Federal level have been doing to our country's finances for many years.

And think about how an election decision you might make matters, not just in the short term but potentially for decades to come.

---

Note:  Budget numbers and historical data were taken from the following, as provided by the United States Government Printing Office web site:

Federal FY 2010 Budget, Mid-Session Review

Federal FY 2010 Budget, Historical Tables

My Own Private Stimulus

Yeah, get your mind out of the gutter... I'm talkin' about a nice little free spin bonus I had recently in one of my favorite slot machines, "Moon Festival".  The bonus is 10 free spins with "sticky wilds" -- any wild symbols (in this case, the moon) that show up during a free spin stick in that position for all subsequent spins.  So you can end up collecting quite a few wild symbols by the end of the run, where most every spin pays off huge.

In this particular case, my first free spin got me a couple of wilds in the 2nd and 3rd reels, and as you can see by the end of my run half of the symbols on the screen were wild.  It helped a lot that the last spin started with the stack of highest-paying symbols in the game.  So all told, I scored over $350 on a $2.50 bet.  Not half bad... and for those who have asked, THIS is why I like to play this game!

Nerd Humor

So if you're a fan of the original Star Trek TV show, AND a fan of Will Ferrell's Old School, AND a fan of The 40-Year-Old Virgin, AND a fan of Stephen Colbert, AND a fan of more cowbell (and hey, who ISN'T a fan of all those things?) you're gonna love this (some NSFW language in here...)

(Hat tip to SciFi Wire)

Some people just don't get it...

Saw this headline on my Google News this morning:

French Workers Strike to Protest Economy

Friggin' brilliant.  Struggling economy got you down?  Stop working, that'll fix things!

 

Reinventing the Wheel

After a solid 20+ years of being a staunch IBM PC-compatible kinda guy, I've been thinking recently about (gasp) maybe getting a Mac, too.  The problem I have with that is they're so darn expensive for what you get... just yesterday I was browsing the Mac store on-line and saw the "top of the line" MacBook Pro 17" model for just under $2900, while a comparable model from Dell (same processor, memory, display, hard drive, etc.) was just under $2200.  To be sure, I could find a 17" Windows-based laptop for significantly less than that even, but I wanted to try to compare... well... Apples to Apples, so to speak.

Anyhow, news comes today that Apple has just unveiled the NEW version of the 17" MacBook Pro, with the same nifty sleek design as was previously only available on smaller models.  And it's got a supposedly wonderful long-lasting battery.  It's definitely the coolest-looking big laptop that I've seen.

And it's still $2900, which is just too damn much for a computer that I'd then need to buy a bunch more software for in order to make it useful (as opposed to simply transferring my existing Windows software).  So, no MacBook for me, at least for the foreseeable future.

But lo, what's this I see?  It appears that Apple recently introduced the Next Big Thing in user interfaces, so I might just need to Think Different about my anti-Apple bias (big tip o' the hat to my main man Voltaire):

Apple Introduces Revolutionary New Laptop With No Keyboard

Day of Reckoning

So election day is finally here.  At last, our long national nightmare is about to be over.

And a new long national nightmare is about to begin.  No matter who ends up being elected today.

Assuming, of course, that the election is actually over today.

For some time now I've been checking and re-checking the electoral college map for some way that McCain can pull this off.  His chances are grim, indeed, but not completely lost.

The most optimistic (yet still halfway reasonable) scenario that I've been able to come up with has McCain tied with Obama 269-269 at the end of the day.  That would, of course, throw the election to the House of Representatives, in the new Congress, wherein each state delegation would get one vote.  So everything there would depend upon how many states have majority-Republican delegations.  And we won't know that until after the election, as well.

As I said, that's the optimistic but reasonable assumption about everything breaking McCain's way, and it ends in a tie.  But, that scenario leaves out a few key states that are leaning Blue but just might break Red after all.

Including my own state of Nevada, where I'm about to go cast my vote.

I've struggled with this since the convention over the summer.  The imperative for me is that the Democrats not hold power throughout the government -- as I've said before, mixed government is best for the country.  Congress is hopelessly lost to the Democrats, so Obama can't be elected without, as I said above, a new long national nightmare to begin.

But, as much as I admired McCain 2000, can I really vote for McCain 2008?  He's a different candidate than he was 8 years ago.

In discussing this with my boss a few weeks back, when I told him I couldn't vote for Obama, he asked if I was then just not going to vote.  It's an interesting thought.  Nevada offers a choice of "None of the Above" in our elections, so I could actually vote against Obama without voting for anyone else.  It's an intriguing possibility.

But, fundamentally, it'd be a selfish choice.  Voting "None of the Above" might ease my conscience, but it's as bad (or worse) than Obama voting "Present" on all those tough decisions.  Yes, the choices this year suck, but "None of the Above" isn't a viable option.  "None of the Above" has less chance than Bob Barr or Ralph Nader of being elected President.

One way or another, either Barack Obama or John McCain is going to be the next President of the United States.  Voting for anyone (or anything) other than those two is voting to have someone else make the call, period.

I wasn't going to vote for Obama in any event, so voting "Nobody" doesn't hurt his chances in any way.  Withholding my vote for McCain in fact would help Obama's chances.

As I said, the choices this year suck, as they have for many years past.  The next few years are going to suck, no matter who is ultimately elected.  But who in the next four years has the greater potential to do more long-term damage to the country?  With a compliant Congress, there's no question that Obama is that man.  I may not be able to stop him, but I'll be damned if I'm going to help him into office.

So, I'll be holding my nose and voting for McCain regardless.  I don't think it'll make much difference in the big picture, but it might.  And at least I'll have done whatever I could to try to prevent that new nightmare from happening, however futile the attempt.

Who's your man?

A friend passed this link along to me this afternoon (thanks Kelley!), it's an interesting little quickie barometer for figuring out how closely aligned you are with the two major Presidential candidates' quotes on certain key issues.

No surprise for me, I came out favoring McCain on more than 60% of the statements.  But of course, that means that I favor Obama on the other 40% -- a decisive edge to McCain, but not a hyper-partisan one (though to be fair, a couple of questions were tough calls for picking only one statement to agree with, and those both came out as Obama points... so my "support" for Obama is weaker than the quiz would indicate).

There's lots more political stuff to talk about when I get a chance, but hopefully this will spark some discussion in the mean time.  Who did you come out most in favor of, and by how much? 

Were you surprised by the author of any particular statements?  The illegal immigration quotes were a bit unexpected for me.

Feel free to leave your observations/results in the comments below...

What's this? Enthusiasm!?!?

As discussed yesterday, and continued a bit elsewhere today, I didn't think that John McCain's selection of Sarah Palin was necessarily a great choice, but an understandable sop to the social conservatives of his party.  I resigned myself to grudgingly cast my vote for McCain despite his VP.

I caught a bit of the end of Mitt Romney's speech this evening from work, and thought this guy's positioning himself to be the next traditional Republican candidate in 2012, with a lame run-down of all the standard talking points and using the term "liberal" as an insult in and of itself (no need to justify why "liberal" is a bad thing, after all, any God-fearing, America-loving, French-hating patriot just knows in his bones that this is so!)

Then later I caught most of Rudy Giuliani's speech, which was delivered much more engagingly and with humor, but was just kind of mean.  Oh, and somebody please tell this man that while national security is important, and 9/11 was a tragedy, there are many other important issues as well and it's time to move forward.

Then I watched Sarah Palin speak.

Wow.

Just... Wow.

Granted, expectations were set a bit low -- she benefits from some of that "misunderestimation" I mentioned in my last post.  From the few public remarks of hers that I'd seen, I was concerned that she would come off as being way out of her depth in the political arena.

I figured she'd either have the deer-in-the-headlights thing going on, or else fall into the creepy Stepford Wife category that so many Republican political spouses have perfected.

Hot damn, was I wrong.  To quote Michael Palin (whom I referenced earlier):  "The little wascal has spiwit... bwavado... a touch of dewwing-do!"

She has humor, and grace, and genuine down-home likeability.  And she's not afraid to go after the other team, but not in a mean-spirited way to pick on her opponents (like Romney and Giuliani did).  She comes off more as a mama bear -- you poke her with a stick, she'll fight back and tell you what's what.

I'm starting to actually love this choice.  And I think that McCain is now at least partially vindicated for his decision -- you could sense the relief in his voice at the end when he came on to the stage and said something to the effect of (I don't have the actual transcript available):  "Aren't you glad she was our choice for VP?"

I still don't think she was the best available choice. 

I still don't think I would have picked her if I was in McCain's position. 

But he clearly was not insane for selecting Sarah Palin as his running mate, as some across the country have suggested. 

He made a bold, risky move -- a maneuver befitting a fighter pilot (excuse me, "Naval Aviator") -- and I think it might just pay off after all. 

Granted, she hasn't yet had to withstand the direct media onslaught on the campaign trail, so she could still fold up under that pressure.  But she clearly is not just fundamentalist arm candy.  I'm genuinely excited (and significantly more optimistic) to see how she does over the next couple of weeks.

Hell, I might even throw a few bucks their way now.  Enthusiastically.  Which is something I would not have said a week ago.

John McCain, you sly son of a bitch...  you give me hope again.

Political Round-Up

So last week, as I often do, I happened to be skimming headlines on Google.  The link said:

McCain picks Palin for VP

And, I shit you not, my first thought was:  "Michael Palin?  That's kind of a ballsy move."  (Which should give you some idea of how my brain is wired.)

My second thought was:  "Well, of course it isn't Michael Palin.  So who the HELL is that?"  And, the intertubes being all clicky and everything, I followed the link to find out.

Now, I'm no longer the 24/7 political junkie that I was before I moved to Las Vegas and got, you know, (kind of) a life.  I simply have more pressing daily responsibilities than keeping up with every last detail of the political scene. 

But I'm pretty good with names, and I do at least try to pay attention to national figures.  So if I've never heard of someone before, you know they're waaaaaaay off the mainstream radar screen.

If you're reading this page, you're obviously on the internet already so there's no need to explain who Sarah Palin is.  So, here's a few of my quick thoughts on this pick:

• Seriously, WHO?

• Ready to be president on day one:  No.

• Ready to be vice-president on day one:  Maybe.  Depends on how she handles herself over the next couple of weeks.

• Washington outsider?  Good.  It doesn't get much more "outside" than Alaska.

• Governmental experience?  Not-so-good.  Not actually bad, mind you -- even at less than two years in the governor's mansion in Juneau (and six years as the mayor of a tiny town), she's got more executive experience than the other three people on both parties' tickets COMBINED.  So there's that, depressing though that point may be.  But presiding, even as chief executive, over a town of less than 10,000 people just doesn't count for much when faced with the prospect of potentially needing to step up and preside over a country of more than 300,000,000.

• Policy positions?  Who really cares?  With the notable (and highly aberrant) exception of Dick Cheney, no Vice President has had much of an impact on administration policies.  To the extent that they align with McCain's policies, they are redundant.  To the extent that they differ from McCain's policies, they are irrelevant.

• Unwed teenage daughter pregnant?  Irrelevant.  Sucks to be her (Bristol, that is), for sure, but that's properly a private family matter.  Of course the media won't let it be a private family matter, so it doubly sucks to be her.  And the bit about Palin's "abstinence-only sex education" policy being thoroughly discredited because of the example of her own daughter?  Puh-leeze.  As if no teen who ever had the benefit of accurate, explicit sex-ed in school has ever gotten pregnant.  (That's not, by the way, a defense of "abstinence-only", simply a rejection of the argument against it based on a single example, however prominent.)

• Brilliant ploy to snatch up support from Hillary's "Sisterhood of the Traveling Pantsuits"?  UTTERLY LAUGHABLE.  No self-respecting, Hillary-supporting, left-leaning, "feminazi" (as Rush so endearingly calls them) would seriously consider voting for McCain instead of Obama simply because he put a chick on the ticket.  Seriously, where can I get some of THAT crack?

• Former beauty queen and runner-up as Miss Alaska?  What does that have to do with anything?  Sure politics is supposed to be "Show business for ugly people", but that doesn't preclude attractive folks from being successful.  They're awfully easy to misunderestimate, which can certainly work to their advantage.  Simply being easy on the eyes doesn't have any bearing on your ability to do the job.  Seems kind of sexist for people to imply that a (female) beauty queen must only be getting by on her looks, but an attractive dude who is successful might actually have substance.

• Irresponsible parent for taking up the burden of the campaign (and potentially the office) with a young family to raise, including an infant?  Also patently sexist.  Barack Obama has two young daughters, yet nobody even hints that for him to spend the past 20 months campaigning, or (should he be elected) the next 4-8 years of his daughters' lives in the most demanding office in the world, somehow makes him an irresponsible parent.  However, if a woman dares to exhibit ambition for herself, apparently with the full support of her family, she's a bad mother?

Bottom line on all of this, McCain made a risky move picking a relative neophyte as a sop to the conservative base of his own party.  Which is annoying to me if for no other reason (and there are others) than it reminds me of why I'm a former Republican myself.  It used to be that the party stood for entirely reasonable, solid philosophical positions regarding the proper role of government.  Then they went and threw religion into the mix (along with a dramatic misunderstanding and misapplication of the Laffer Curve), and it's all gone to hell in a handbasket.  Make no mistake, Governor Palin was selected precisely because she has the "right" religious views for the "values voters" bloc of the Republican party, period.  It certainly isn't because she is one of the top... oh, let's say ONE HUNDRED... most qualified Republicans (and one "Democrat" from Connecticut) that McCain could have chosen.

If, however (and this is a HUGE if), this pick allows McCain the maneuvering room to get back to his more moderate, independent roots, I think it'll be a good thing.  If she can placate the far-right base, while McCain can appeal to moderate independents, he just might pull it off.

But if Sarah Palin flames out (and if it happens, it'll happen fairly early -- within the next couple of weeks -- and not because of any scandal or media story, but because she'll implode on the campaign trail) then McCain will go down the tubes with her.  And it'll be four years of Obama before the Republicans can take back the White House and try to undo that damage.

So, am I happy with the Palin pick?  No.  Is it the worst possible pick McCain could have made?  No.  Does it make me change my opinion on the correct way to vote in this election?  Not in the least.

Look, this election isn't about Obama or McCain.  It's about far, far larger issues than that.  With the Democrats virtually guaranteed to build on their control of Congress, the choice is really pretty simple:

Do we give one party entire control of the government, with the inevitable Democratic overreaction/backlash after years of Republican abuse (leading inexorably to the next backlash the other way when the Republicans eventually return to power)?

Or do we safely divide government, protecting the country from the overzealous agenda of either party, by requiring the cooperation of both to get anything done?

McCain could have picked a ham sandwich (to paraphrase) as his running mate, and I still would have to vote for him for the good of the country.  That I happen to like him, and distrust Obama, makes that choice easier.  That he made a questionable pick for VP is a bit troublesome, but I understand entirely why he made that choice.  I'd have chosen differently, myself, but that's OK.

By the way, I find it fascinating that McCain made a poor VP choice for the country, but possibly an excellent choice for him -- while Obama in my opinion made an outstanding VP choice for the country (Joe Biden is possibly the most qualified person on either ticket for the #1 job) but a terrible choice for him. 

Seriously, Mr. "Hope-You-Can-Believe-In-Change" selects a 35-year Washington veteran and consummate insider as his running mate? 

Doesn't exactly fit the theme, does it?  But that's perhaps a topic for another post...

His wife ain't too shabby, either...

I haven't been watching the convention as it happens, so I've been getting bits and pieces out of order as I try to catch up.  I didn't see Hillary's big speech until after I saw Bill's, so here's the clip of her big moment:

As I mentioned over a year ago, I think the Democrats are missing an opportunity by passing over Hillary for Barack.  I don't necessarily agree with her policies, but she's a significantly more engaging personality.  I honestly think her speech was better than Bill's.

It's just as well, I've got to vote for the Republican ticket no matter what, and it's a lot easier for me to do with Obama on the other side.  More important than any one leader is maintaining divided government -- Congress is lost to the Dems so the White House has got to go to the Republicans, for the good of the country.  If Congress was in the hands of the Republicans, I'd hold my nose and vote for Obama, despite my many reservations about the man.

Dude gives a good speech...

Probably the most gifted orator of the past 50 years... never mind that some of his points are rather specious, the man is just awesome at working a crowd. Notice, however, how he speaks to "My fellow Democrats", not "My fellow Americans". Yes he's at the Democratic convention, but he's on national (if not world-wide) TV, his audience is much broader than that.

Anyhow, others may have a different read on this, but it seems to me like he's going through the motions, saying what he needs to say about his party's nominee more out of obligation than out of conviction.

It's been a while...

Been busy with work and other things... and haven't had much to say of late.  But last night I picked up my new (used) toy and thought I should share:

It's a 2005 BMW 330ci, and while I had never driven a BMW until less than a week ago, I have to say that I'm a big fan now.  Man, is this a sweet ride.

I've been wanting to get a new car ever since moving to Vegas, but of course I figured I needed to buy a house first.  And that took a couple of years longer than I expected... but now that I'm more or less settled into the house, I started looking around at cars again.  I've been wanting something sporty (as a contrast to the Explorer that I've been driving for -- *gasp* -- 12 years now!)  And I've always been partial to convertibles.  I've been looking at the BMW 3-series for a while, and the brand new models are gorgeous -- but freakin' expensive, too.

Enter CarMax.  They had a few models to choose from, mostly 2005 and 2006 (lease returns, as mine was) and the prices are about half what a new 3-series would cost.  I have to say, the CarMax experience was generally quite good -- although my sales guy flaked out on me a bit when it came time to meet him to actually pick up the vehicle, keeping me waiting for half an hour before he showed up -- and I really appreciate the no-haggle price policy (particularly with used cars, which can be a major pain to negotiate).  I wouldn't hesitate to recommend them to others, and I expect the next time I'm looking for a car, I'll probably start there.

So, as of this writing I've had the car for about 24 hours, and it's been topless for about 22 of them...

And I've already been caught in the rain (yes, in Las Vegas, it does occasionally rain) -- fortunately I was able to pull over right away and put up the top so no harm done.

Since this isn't exactly the very most practical car for hauling things, I kept the Exploder as well.  Oh, yeah, and SUVs have about a five dollar trade-in value now, so there was that.

My friend George at work, who previously owned a 3-series sedan, was very excited to learn of my purchase.  He warned me, however, to be careful -- as he described it, his car had been a lemon: the chick magnet on his BMW was broken!  Time will tell on this car, but hey, I've still got a year left on the factory warranty... so no worries...  :-D

Obama: More of the Same Old Crap

I caught a bit of Barack Obama's news conference from Florida while I was home for lunch today, the first I've remotely paid attention to the election season for quite some time, and I was immediately struck by a few points of inanity.  Other inanity took some time to sink in.

First, Obama complained that McCain's recently-announced support for opening up offshore drilling wouldn't do anything to help ease the high price of gas today, or tomorrow, or next year, or in the next five years.  He says that it'll be a generation before any significant oil production will come online from such drilling, and that increasing domestic production will simply "worsen our addition to oil" while putting off needed investments in alternate energy sources.

OK, setting aside for the moment that opening up future drilling has nothing whatsoever to do with whether we also pursue alternate energy sources, Mr. Obama is correct that opening new areas to future oil production won't have an immediate impact on gas prices.

But so what?  If it takes 10-15 years to get production of new oil fields up and running, that's an argument for starting to drill 10-15 years AGO, not an argument against starting the process now so that in 10-15 years we have that production available.

Anyhow, so he's right that McCain's suggestion won't ease gas prices tomorrow.  What's Mr. Obama's suggested alternative?  Massive investment in alternative energy sources.

It's a great idea.  We should absolutely invest heavily in alternate energy.  But that ain't gonna ease the price at the pump tomorrow, either.  Why on Earth could we not do BOTH these things at the same time?  Open up the drilling, and work on alternative sources of energy, and in a generation perhaps both projects will bear fruit.  Meanwhile, certain uses of petroleum products (and by-products) will stick with us for a very long time.  Gasoline isn't the only use for oil, not by a long shot, and not all of those other uses are energy-related either.  We're still going to need oil even with alternative energy sources.

But Mr. Obama didn't stop there.  Of course he has a "solution" to the pain at the pump.  He wants to send out a $1,000 stimulus check to 95% of American families.  Apparently, so that they can buy gas.

And how will he pay for this "stimulus" check?  Why, taxing those evil oil companies who are making "windfall" profits.  Which profits come from people paying high prices at the pump.  Which prices they'll be better able to pay, thanks to the "stimulus" check paid for out of -- oil company profits.

Anybody else see a problem with this?

But it did take some time for the full stupidity of this plan to sink in.  Obama says that 95% of American families will benefit from this $1,000 freebie.  I was a bit distracted by the certain knowledge that I'll doubtless be firmly in that 5% who can pound sand.  But then I started thinking... how much would that come to, anyway?  One thousand smackers for 95% of American families?  Wow, that seems like a lot.  But how much, really?

A little sleuthing on the Internet allows us to get a ballpark idea.  According to the IRS, in the last tax year with data available (2005) there were 134.4 million individual tax returns filed.  Now, granted, that doesn't match up exactly with the number of families in the country, but we're just looking for a ballpark figure (and with 300 million people in the US, we're at least within an order of magnitude here).  So, if we assume that 95% of those tax returns will get the $1,000 check, that means a cool grand going out to more than 127 million families.

What's the bill for that?  Not counting postage, of course, we're looking at $127 BILLION in "stimulus" checks (at least the $1K makes the math easy).  Paid for, Obama promises, out of the windfall profits tax on evil oil companies.

How much money could such a tax generate to pay for these checks?  A lot depends on the definition of "windfall" profits.  But for reference, the combined total profits of the oil industry in 2007 came to $155 billion.  Paying for Obama's giveaway would require confiscating about 82% of all industry profits in tax.  Never mind that while the $155 billion in profit is truly staggering, that's on total industry revenues of $1.9 TRILLION.  Making the industry profit margin a respectable (but moderate) 8% or so.  Hardly a windfall (search around a bit for other industry profit margins to see for yourself).

So what we have here is another vacuous attempt at pandering by Mr. Obama, a ploy to buy off the votes of the middle class with a fat government giveaway that can't possibly be paid for the way he claims it would.

Can we claim Hope and Change will save the day, while actually falling back into the same old patterns of politics as usual?

YES WE CAN.

[UPDATE]:  Apparently Obama claims a cost of only $50 billion for his "stimulus" plan.  I'm not sure how 50 million families make up 95% of America, but then I guess when you're full of crap in the first place, your numbers don't really need to add up.

Couldn't happen to a nicer guy...

Congratulations Terry Porter.  Nice to see a good guy get another shot at success.

Pyramid Scheme

A recent comment/question in my original FSX post sent me off in search of the Egyptian pyramids.  Granted, since I live in Las Vegas I can look outside my window and see a big freakin' pyramid any time... but it's not QUITE the same thing, now, is it?

In deference to "Lightning" who posted the original question, in case he wanted to first experience them within the game directly, screen shots are after the jump... but the quick answer to his question is, start at Cairo International Airport, then head more-or-less West and you just about can't miss them.

Another House Update

The tile and carpet installation in the new house is complete.  I've posted photos of the new look on this page for you to check out!

By the way, the repair of the ceiling turned out pretty well, much better than I expected.  Unless you know exactly where to look, you certainly wouldn't notice anything odd.

And, I just ordered my fridge from Home Depot today, it'll be delivered next Saturday.  I bought a kitchen table and an entertainment console from RC Willey yesterday, those will also be delivered next Saturday.  Once I get a bedroom set and have that delivered, I'll be ready to actually move in to the place.  Probably around 2 months after I actually bought the house.  Eh, what's the rush, right?  :-D

Logos can be funny little things...

From Andrew Sullivan, by way of Jack Bog...

When the British government wanted to rebrand the Office of Government Commerce, they came up with a new logo:

Do you see what's wrong with this (dirty) picture? A little help after the break...

A Little Oooopsie...

So the new house has been painted and otherwise worked on over the past month... and the latest upgrade has been tile (about twice as much as I originally intended) and new carpet (also much more than originally expected... but it's all for the best).

With my trip to San Diego getting in the way a bit, scheduling has been a bit tricky.  The tile guys came out Friday, and were expected to be done by Sunday -- I made it clear that I was going to be out of town so they needed to finish in time.  Then the carpet guys would arrive on Wednesday to finish the flooring.  No problem, right?

Well, Sunday came and went, with no word from the tile guys (different installers than the carpet) that they were done -- or that they were ready to return my key to the place.  So I dropped by the house Sunday afternoon to check in, since they told me Saturday that they'd be done Sunday morning.  Nobody was around, but the tile was all installed as expected.  I did notice that the hose from the wall valve to the toilet in the upstairs guest bathroom was broken off (sitting on the tub in that room, actually) and the valve was wrapped up.  So I naturally assumed that they were intending to fix that issue before they returned my key.  No problem, if they can wait for payment on the job, I can wait for them to finish.

I got a call from the tile install manager on Monday while I was in San Diego, asking if the tile was done to my satisfaction and could we arrange payment.  I explained, since he apparently didn't get the word somehow that I would be unavailable until Wednesday, that I was out of town.  But I pointed out what I'd seen on Sunday when I checked, and he didn't know anything about it.  He said he'd check up on it and get back to me, and we could then meet on Wednesday to finalize everything.

Tuesday night when I returned from San Diego, I stopped by the house to see if they'd fixed the toilet yet.  Imagine my delight to find that not only was the toilet not fixed, but the valve had been leaking the whole time (they tile guys apparently put a little clear plastic cup under the leak on Sunday, which I hadn't noticed before).  But after 3 days of inattention, that little cup had overflowed -- and there was about 1/4" of standing water on the new tile floor.  After unleashing a string of profanity, I grabbed the paper towels to begin sopping up the water... and when the first roll ran out, I had to head downstairs for another.  That's when I noticed the lovely hanging pouch of water bulging from the ceiling in the dining room, easily sagging a good 3 inches down.  Fortunately (I guess) that pouch hadn't leaked, but it was obviously trouble and certainly ruined the new paint job in that part of the house (never mind the potential for mold after sitting for 3 days...)

So I popped on the phone to the tile manager right away, and explained that not only was the toilet not fixed, but he had some significant water damage to take care of ASAP.  He was nice enough about it and assured me that he'd be over first thing in the morning, and they'd take care of whatever needed to be done to fix the problem.  Doesn't excuse the problem in the first place, but at least he had the right attitude about taking responsibility.

Anyhow, this morning I met up with the tile guys, while the carpet guys started their work -- they fixed the toilet right away, and told me that they wanted to wait until the family room ceiling dried out, then they'd just scrape away the paint pouch and "touch up" the ceiling.  I suggested in no uncertain terms that after an extended soak, perhaps a "touch up" would be insufficient.  So, they agreed to cut out the surrounding drywall and install a new piece, then repaint the resulting patch.  We'll see how that goes...

This evening (Wednesday night) I took a quick picture of the gaping hole in my family room ceiling, for your viewing pleasure...

On the bright side, the tile itself looks fantastic... and the carpet ain't half bad, either. I'll be sure to post pictures as soon as I get a chance to take some in the daylight.

The show's over, folks...

The National Indian Gaming Association trade show, that is... I spent Monday and Tuesday in beautiful San Diego (though, alas, I didn't get to see much of it... about 3 blocks from the convention center at most, and a little bit of the 3rd base at PETCO Park, visible from my hotel room) helping a bit with setup the first day, and helping a bit with manning the booth the second day.  Of course, I and all of the engineers in the company have been spending the last several weeks (if not months) working feverishly to get products ready for this show.  To friends and family who wonder where the hell I've been, that's why you've not heard from me for so long.

I even pulled an all-nighter last Thursday, trying to get my own game ready to be loaded on the truck Friday.  Haven't done one of those in a long time (not work-related, anyhow...) and I'm definitely getting too old for that kind of stunt...

But the results of all that work paid off nicely once the public got to see our exciting new products.  There were a few hiccups along the way, but mostly things went pretty smooth, and the response to the games (and the oversized cabinets) was very encouraging.

Here are a few pictures I took of the booth Monday afternoon, after the games had been set up.  At this point the place was still a bit of a mess with packing materials and other miscellaneous stuff cluttering the floor, but at least this will give you an idea of the layout and the dimensions of the games themselves.  The people in these photos are various coworkers of mine, who shall remain nameless to protect the innocent...   ;-)

This picture is a bit overexposed (I seem to have serious flash issues with my camera) but it certainly shows off the booth itself -- the truss system with banners covered almost all of the 20' x 40' booth space that we had.  Above the truss (not pictured here) was a rotunda with our company logos highlighted, visible from halfway across the convention floor.

This shows off 3 of the 4 game types we had on display.  In the foreground to the right, we have our 42" touch screen display games.  Center booth are the two 46" non-touch screen games in massive ("Colossal") cabinets.  And in the background to the left you can see a couple of our dual-screen 26" display games with LED light boxes around the top monitors, used in the bonus rounds of the game.

The picture below is the same basic shot, but taken without flash entirely.  The booth is a bit dark but the game monitors came out much better, and you can see the light boxes on those 26" games in the back (they're in the middle of animating, which is why not all of the boxes are lit at the moment).  Those lights are pretty impressive, each box can be backlit by an LED grid capable of displaying one of more than 65,000 unique colors, which really sets our machines apart from others you might see in a casino.

The picture below shows off the 4th type of game configuration that we displayed, a 5-reel mechanical machine (similar to the "old school" slot machines when physical reels spin around rather than a video display of reels).  Ours also happens to have a 26" video touchscreen mounted above the reels, which we use for bonus modes and other display purposes.  The cabinet configuration is flexible enough that if we wanted to, we could mount the same LED light box / vertical video display seen in the 26" video product above, on top of the mechanical reels.  The lighting in this photo makes it hard to see, but those are 3 white reel strips in the middle, with a red strip on the left and a blue strip on the right which contain bonus and multiplier symbols.

This is a shot of the title that I've been working on for the past month or so.  It's another 5-reel mechanical game with video top bonus.  Again, there are three white reels in the middle, and a couple of black reels on the sides for bonus and multiplier symbols.  This configuration also happens to have a small 6" display set just below the reels, for showing the player's credit balance and current wager information.

This photo shows another angle on the 26" video product in the background, with a pair of 42" video games on the right and just a bit of the 46" Colossal cabinet on the left.  Lighting is again problematic, but hopefully you can see the LED effects in the bonus boards of those 26" games (and also get a sense of the scale of these cabinets, with a real live person in the picture for comparison!)

Here's another shot of the same end of the booth as the picture directly above.  Unfortunately I didn't get a non-flash version of this angle, so the screens of the games are not clear at all.

Finally, again a shot of the center of the booth and those massive 46" cabinets.  The person in the foreground is standing about 10 feet away from that game, more or less -- I believe those cabinets are about 9 feet tall.  We've actually been unable to place them in some casinos because their ceilings were too low to handle the machine!  This is a "specialty" cabinet, so most casinos would only put one on the floor.  Some of the bigger places, with thousands of machines, might place 3 or 4.

Anyhow, now that we've gotten past the show, hopefully things will settle down just a bit.  Of course, there's always the next deadline... but at least I won't be personally trying to code a game for that one, so I might get home before midnight once in a while...

Paint Job Complete

The painters finished my house earlier in the week, and I've finally had a chance to get over there in the daylight to take pictures.  I've posted the before and after shots on this page.  Let me know what you think!

Painting the House

I'm getting ready to have the interior of the new house painted, and I've got pictures of my color choices posted here.  There's one decision yet to be made, so if you've got feedback let me know right quick -- the painters begin work on Friday, so I only have a few days to nail down my plans.

UPDATE:  Since posting this item, I noticed the automatic page name given to the permalink for this entry.  I wonder how many search hits THAT'S going to generate for me???  :-D

Video Link

So, there's a bit of a mess in the Democratic Party these days...

It's Official!

About 5:15pm this afternoon, I got the keys to the new house.

Hello, house payments through April, 2038...

...about 5 years before I'll actually be able to retire at age 73...

Buying a House

It's been a long time coming, but I'm finally almost a real live homeowner!  We had the house inspection this morning, which was the last major potential roadblock -- I was very concerned that there would be something seriously wrong with the house, since it's been on the market for a long time.  But fortunately, after a very thorough inspection, we got what my realtor described as one of the cleanest inspection reports he'd ever seen.  Nothing at all serious to speak of, just a few very minor cosmetic cracks, and a minor leak in the jacuzzi.

So now I'm just waiting for the loan docs to be processed, and I should be good to go.  There's a good chance that I'll close by Friday, otherwise it should be next week.

And then I too can participate in the expense -- er, JOY that is home ownership.  ;-)

For those who are interested, I've posted a page of photos that I took during the inspection.

This is what I'm talking about...

A while back I got into a discussion about the "cult of personality" surrounding Barack Obama.

By which I mean, a large number of the man's supporters are exceedingly enthusiastic for him, personally, without regard to his policies (in many cases, without actually understanding his policies).

This article from across the pond highlights perfectly what I'm talking about.  Especially with regard to the youth vote.

For example:

Sitting in the audience, Alex Dukeman, 17, says that she expects Mr Obama to introduce universal healthcare. But isn’t his plan voluntary while Mrs Clinton promises a compulsory mandate? “I just think he is a likable guy and he inspires people,” she replies.

...

Donny Murray, 21, says that Mr Obama “has definitely got a better plan” for tackling global warming. How so? “I’m not sure about the specifics, I just think he’ll get more people involved,” he says.

Notice that?  When challenged on their assertions about what Obama would actually do, they fall back on "I just think..."

Except that apparently, they don't.

But hey, why worry?  If GW Bush has shown us anything, it's that who we elect President doesn't really matter, right?

Happy Grammar Day!

Pedants Unite!!!

(Tip o' the hat to KimY)

Trying to make things interesting...

Ralph Nader is jumping into the fray again.

The Democrats have been dismissive of Nader, while at the same time claiming that his 2.7% of the vote cost them the 2000 election.

Nader, of course, doesn't have a prayer of actually winning, nor even breaking out of the single digits if he makes it all the way to November.

But nationally, this year is not going to be the "landslide" for Democrats that Nader claims it should be.  I think the Democrats have an edge, but it's still going to be close no matter what.  And in that environment, if Nader can pull even 2% of the vote away from the Democrats, it may in fact make the difference.  Of course, if he gets only the 0.3% that he achieved in 2004, he won't likely be a factor -- depending on which states give him better numbers.

Gotta love Side Show Ralph's tenacity, at least.  You'd think after two previous disastrously ineffective attempts, he'd maybe get the message.  But he's stuck on this belief that there's essentially no difference between Democrats and Republicans.  On some issues he's right about that, but there are plenty of differences on important issues that it really does matter which party is in control (or, ideally, that both parties must share control).

Here's my theory -- assuming that he actually does get on the ballot in a significant number of states, I think he does better than 2004's showing, but not quite as well as he did in 2000.  Reason being, he had novelty going for him in 2000, and we had yet to fully understand what direction GWB would take the country.  In 2004, there was a more concerted effort to oust Bush (resulting, interestingly, in a greater margin of victory for the President in the popular vote) and Nader had trouble getting on the ballot in all states.

But this time around, after 2 years of a Democrat-controlled Congress, that august body enjoys lower approval ratings than the President himself.  A certain segment of the population may have come to believe Nader's assertion that the Democrats and Republicans are essentially interchangeable.  Certainly there's significant dissatisfaction with Congressional Democrats after 2 years in the majority, and that may manifest itself in more protest votes from the far left wing for Nader.

If Clinton somehow pulls out the nomination, I guarantee that Nader takes enough votes to hand the election to McCain (though I don't think he needs the help in that case).  With Obama, Nader is not likely to be as much of a factor, but still could play a decisive role.

Next up... wait for Ron Paul to decide to run as an independent candidate, and watch 10% of the Republican base swing over to him.

From the Department of Redundancy Department

So, what do you suppose the folks at Old Spice think "and/or" means, exactly????

(Seen in an online ad at The Onion)

The Huckster's In Play

So the final tally isn't yet available, but it's looking like Mike Huckabee has trounced Mitt Romney as the #2 guy for the Republicans this Super-Duper-Tuesday.

Of course Arizona Senator John McCain was the big Republican winner this evening, surging into a commanding lead in the delegate count, though still only about halfway to the number of delegates needed to secure the nomination outright.  And the big loser was Romney, who had been trying to position himself as the "conservative" alternative to moderate McCain.  Voters in most states appeared to see Huckabee as the conservative alternative instead, although Huckabee's major wins occurred in the South among evangelical Christians, who may have had more of a problem with Romney's Mormonism than anything else.

At any rate, it seems to me that given the generally warm relations between McCain and Huckabee, and the strong regional showing by Huckabee in an area where McCain is relatively weak, this may be a setup for an eventual McCain-Huckabee ticket in November.

I can only hope...  McCain-Huckabee would have a very good chance of beating Obama-Anyone, and would virtually guarantee a victory over Clinton-Anyone.

But then, that would be the smart thing for the Republicans to do -- so I'm not holding my breath that it'll happen. 

It would also be good for the country, by the way, as McCain is more of a fiscal conservative while socially moderate, and Huckabee seems more of a genuinely compassionate conservative, than prior Republican occupants of the White House have been.  Such an outcome could signal a revival of the Republican party as a reasonable, moderate force in American politics.

Like I say, I'm not holding my breath.  But if that day comes when the Republicans nominate forces of (relative) moderation, I just might be able to register as a Republican again.

Don't ya hate when this happens?

Gross, yet compelling (hat tip to Jeffy D):