Got this from cousin Mike…

Once upon a time a man appeared in a village and announced to the villagers that he would buy monkeys for $10 each. The villagers, seeing that there were many monkeys around, went out to the forest and began catching them. The man bought thousands at $10 but, as the supply began to diminish, the villagers stopped their effort.

So the man announced that he would now buy monkeys at $20 each. This renewed the efforts of the villagers and they started catching monkeys again. But again, as the supply diminished even further, the villagers returned to their farms.

When the offer was increased to $25 each, the supply of monkeys became so scarce that it was an effort to even find one, let alone catch it!

So the man announced that he would buy monkeys at $50 each, adding that, since he had to go to the city on business, his assistant would buy on his behalf.

In his absence, the assistant told the villagers, “Look at all these monkeys in the big cage that the man has already collected. I will sell them to you at $35 each and, when the man returns from the city, you can sell them to him for $50 each.” The villagers rounded up all their savings and bought all the monkeys for $700 Billion. They never saw the man or his assistant again, only lots and lots of monkeys!

Now you have a better understanding of the federal Wall Street bailout.

Michael sent me this Application For Federal Bailout Program from Vanity Fair (Lord knows I could sure use one!) in response to Thursday’s post and I thought I’d share it with readers.

Maybe if enough of us apply, Hank Paulson and the boys on the Hill will be moved to grant a bailout for us poor taxpayers.

Of course, the rub will be deciding who’ll pay for it. Maybe Wall Street, once they clean up their act with the $700 Billion we sent them.

That would be fair, don’t you think? We scratched their backs, now they can scratch ours?

Yeah, right. Fat chance.

Anyway, here’s the form (click to enlarge). Paulson has his pen and checkbook ready. Hurry while supplies last.

The fire sale on government bailouts continues, with the Big 3 U.S. automakers the latest hopeful recipients. Chris Isidore’s article for CNNMoney.com talks about how our “givmint”, trying to appear due diligent as though watching out for already beleaguered taxpayers, is seeking a few symbolic sacrifices and assurances from automakers that the requested bailouts will “git ‘er done”.

What I want to know is how I can get on the “A” list for a bailout. I’ll promise to get rid of any corporate jets we might have, I’ve already taken a pay cut, and I promise that, with the help of, say, a puny $10 Billion, I’ll be profitable in three years immediately. So where do I sign up? Anybody?

I’ve written about Black Friday before and still marvel at the spooked herd mentality of people responding, like Pavlov’s dogs, to the ring of the shameless loss leader. But this year may be a little different given the state of our economy. While I expect crowds will still be ridiculous by normal standards, it will be interesting to see, when the numbers are tallied, whether tight money dampened or ignited shoppers’ enthusiasm for bargains.

Me, I’m writing this Thursday night for auto-posting tomorrow at 5 A.M. because we plan on sleeping in. Happy Black Friday!

So, how’s that bailout working for us? Not so well, I’m afraid. Read John Hawkins’ assessment. Maybe it’s time we start taking things “a little more seriously”…

Senate Democrats apparently think all that’s needed to entice a dozen more Republicans to sign on to their $750 billion bailout plan is to ring Pavlov’s “tax credit” bell. Doubling FDIC insurance on bank deposits and seasoning the package with a few tax credits, they reason, will be like tossing fresh liver to a starving dog. Never mind that most Americans are adamantly against the bailout and that, above all else, politicians want to protect their comfortable seats on the hill. But Democrats are betting a few “treats” will make Republicans forget who they work for, roll over and beg for more.

Sad thing is, that well may be all it takes.

The Internet is ablaze with a grand idea. Instead of bailing out AIG to the tune of $85 billion, why not divide the money among all 200 million or so U.S. adults? That gives $425,000 to every man and woman — $297,500 after taxes — at least according to the dozen or so emails I’ve received from readers including, most recently, my goombah, Michael. Great! Where do I sign up?

There’s just one small problem with the proposed plan: It only works out to $425 per person, not $425,000. Someone needs a refresher course in decimals. Oops.

Here’s the email:

I’m against the $85,000,000,000 bailout of AIG. Instead, I’m in favor of giving $85,000,000,000 to America in a We Deserve It Dividend.

To make the math simple, let’s assume there are 200,000,000 bonafide U.S. Citizens 18 and older. Our population is about 301,000,000 counting every man, woman and child, so 200,000,000 might be a fair stab at adults 18 and older. So dividing 200 million into $85 billion equals $425,000. My plan is to give $425,000 to every person 18 and older as a We Deserve It Dividend.

Of course, it would not be tax free. So let’s assume a tax rate of 30%. Every eligible individual would pay $127,500 in taxes. That sends $25,500,000,000 right back to Uncle Sam. But it means that every adult 18+ has $297,500 in their pocket. A husband and wife have $595,000.

What would you do with $297,500 - $595,000 in your family?

Click to read more ...

Here’s something to ask ourselves: Are we being held hostage by foreign oil as we’re been told? Or is Congress the real culprit?

I remember when the Republican led Congress passed a bill to drill, only to have it vetoed by Bill Clinton. Well, here we still are. So in this video clip, Newt Gingrich suggests three things we should do now to dramatically lower the cost of oil.

Is anybody listening?

Oil prices are at record highs. The overwhelming dependence of our cars and trucks on oil strains family budgets, threatens our national security and contributes to global warming. Plug-in electric vehicles have the potential to significantly reduce the United States’ dependence on oil. Yet can this potential be realized? If so, how? Is there a national interest in putting millions of plug-in vehicles on the road soon? How should policymakers in Washington, D.C., respond?

On June 11 and 12, the Brookings Institution and Google.org hosted a conference titled “Plug-in Electric Vehicles 2008: What Role for Washington?” The conference placed a spotlight on plug-in electric vehicles, examining their potential, their viability, and the pros and cons of different federal policies to promote them.

Transcripts and videos will be posted on the site soon. Meanwhile, I’ve been checking into available electric cars as a possible replacement for my gas guzzling Range Rover. Honda’s Civic Hybrid delivers an estimated 45 mpg, but with a gallon of gasoline approaching $5, it’s not as attractive to me as it might have been when a gallon ran a mere $3.25. There are several concept electrics in the pipeline, but none seem quite ready for prime time. However, I think I’ve settled on this one…

Click to read more ...

Cousin Mike sent this a couple weeks ago, along with what I think is someone’s incorrect mathematical explanation, under the title, “How You Can Tell You’ve Ticked Off an Engineer”. It works as a pretty good joke on its own but, to bring it full circle, you need to know a little history.

Seems engineer George Vaccaro took issue with Verizon for quoting him “.002 cents per kilobyte” for air time prior to his visit to Canada but billing him “.002 dollars per kilobyte” upon his return. After several unsuccessful attempts to explain the hundred-fold difference to Verizon, he recorded a twenty-six minute conversation with a Verizon manager which became famous on YouTube with more than a million hits. YouTube has since taken it down, but you can still listen to the original recorded exchange on Putfile or read the transcript on Verizonmath.

Enter my favorite physicist/cartoonist, Randall Munroe, who wrote the above check to satirize the whole comical issue. It’s funny all right, especially in view of its genesis, but for how much was the check actually written? Well, based on my very rusty high school calculus, and meaning no disrespect to whomever produced the above explanation, I think it’s a check for essentially “nothing”:

Click to read more ...

No matter how high local gas prices climb, there will always be some place where they’re higher. For example, here’s a shot taken last week in San Francisco, and you can bet it’s higher this week…

There now. Feel better?

In his March 27 article for AP, Tom Raum notes that while there’s little enthusiasm for government bailouts in general, voters are increasingly demanding immediate government relief as the economy ebbs. And Democratic presidential candidates, quick to recognize potential votes, are fanning the flames with promises of government aid for homeowners facing foreclosure. Clinton wants a $30 billion fund to assist those at risk of foreclosure, while Obama’s “plan” includes $10 billion to help homeowners avoid foreclosure.

I’m afraid I have to agree with Senator McCain: “It’s not the duty of government to bail out and reward those who act irresponsibly, whether they are big banks or small borrowers.”

Sure, the Fed orchestrated a bailout, if that’s you want to call it, for Bear Stearns. It reasoned that allowing a major investment bank to fail could so adversely affect the nation’s economy that helping shore it up, even with some detrimental economic effects of its own, would be the lesser of two evils. But now homeowners facing foreclosure want a slice of bailout pie as well, and both Clinton and Obama want government (read “taxpayers”) to serve them one. But is that such a good idea?

Not as I see it. I’m a believer in the philosophy that if you make a mess, you’re responsible for cleaning it up. And in this case, we taxpayers didn’t make the mess. So who did?

Click to read more ...

Oil surged to a record near $112 a barrel last week. The net effect was a whopping $88 fill-up for my Range Rover! And I’m not alone; big SUVs are prevalent in our area and, although El Dorado Hills’ residents may have a little more pocket change than some in the region, pump prices are definitely affecting local dating habits. Dinner and a movie? I’ll pick you up at eight. But a day-trip to the Bay area? How ‘bout we take your Honda, honey…

I took an informal survey at the pump last week and found a mixed bag; about half the guys filling their SUVs admitted to driving their wives’ or girlfriends’ cars on longer trips. The rest either said they wouldn’t let the price of petrol dictate their driving habits, or that they would have to do “something” if prices didn’t drop soon.

I suspect the majority are in pain. Or denial.

In his January 31 post, Kevin Kelly writes:

(There) are eight things that are better than free. Eight uncopyable values. I call them “generatives.” A generative value is a quality or attribute that must be generated, grown, cultivated, nurtured. A generative thing can not be copied, cloned, faked, replicated, counterfeited, or reproduced. It is generated uniquely, in place, over time. In the digital arena, generative qualities add value to free copies, and therefore are something that can be sold.

He goes on to explain these eight generatives — immediacy, personalization, interpretation, authenticity, accessibility, embodiment, patronage, and findability — building blocks of new products and services that are required reading for anyone who creates products or offers services in today’s digital economy.

You can read more at Kevin’s site.