There is a TV commercial where your day trading skills can be improved by plotting and watching trends on stock values. My belief is that this is wrong - a capitalistic sin. People are making trades not on the intrinsic value of a stock, but rather the lemming mentality of it going up or down. No wonder we end up with overvalued stocks and ready to burst bubbles. Why we keep ending up with the rich getting richer and the rest of us with nothing to show for it - not even products of worth.
ChrisZ
Monday, September 21, 2009
Monday, August 17, 2009
Cash for Clunkers - good or bad?
Do I like Cash for Clunkers? I would if I had a vehicle to trade in and I needed another car....
I have 2 vehicles I would like to get rid of. First, an old Ford Taurus that is rusting away but gets too much MPG to qualify. Second is a Dodge truck that I use to haul my race car around with. It qualifies, but I can't afford the $15,000 extra to get a new truck after the rebate. Besides, I ride a motorcycle or bicycle to offset the times I do use the truck.
So, I don't qualify, but are there some myths out there to debunk? Maybe.
1. This program takes valuable vehicles off the road. If you visited the local car dealer back lot and saw the trade ins for this program, you would not want to drive them. Most are old, rusty, trucks and SUVs. Very few good small cars are there. Either they get too good MPG or they are worth more as fuel efficient cars. There are some odd cars here in there, but you are not going to find a mint BMW there, because they are worth more than $4500!
2. If a guy trades in an old SUV that gets 12 mpg and gets another SUV that gets 18 mpg, he has still reduced his fuel usage by 1/3rd - not too shabby.
3. Does it take good cars out of the used car market? Maybe a few, but most of these cars were in too bad a shape anyway. Plus the used car market is already glutted. Plus this leaves better cars that get better mileage - The price may be a little higher, but will be more than made up for with better cars and mpg.
Could the program be done a little bit better? Yes, scrap the engines but leave the rest of the car for the auto recyclers. Make a sliding scale to is is better to purchase a high mileage car rather than a truck, and handle the pr and interface with the dealers better. Is it the best program, no, but as long as it goes away in November it will be fine.
15 min
I have 2 vehicles I would like to get rid of. First, an old Ford Taurus that is rusting away but gets too much MPG to qualify. Second is a Dodge truck that I use to haul my race car around with. It qualifies, but I can't afford the $15,000 extra to get a new truck after the rebate. Besides, I ride a motorcycle or bicycle to offset the times I do use the truck.
So, I don't qualify, but are there some myths out there to debunk? Maybe.
1. This program takes valuable vehicles off the road. If you visited the local car dealer back lot and saw the trade ins for this program, you would not want to drive them. Most are old, rusty, trucks and SUVs. Very few good small cars are there. Either they get too good MPG or they are worth more as fuel efficient cars. There are some odd cars here in there, but you are not going to find a mint BMW there, because they are worth more than $4500!
2. If a guy trades in an old SUV that gets 12 mpg and gets another SUV that gets 18 mpg, he has still reduced his fuel usage by 1/3rd - not too shabby.
3. Does it take good cars out of the used car market? Maybe a few, but most of these cars were in too bad a shape anyway. Plus the used car market is already glutted. Plus this leaves better cars that get better mileage - The price may be a little higher, but will be more than made up for with better cars and mpg.
Could the program be done a little bit better? Yes, scrap the engines but leave the rest of the car for the auto recyclers. Make a sliding scale to is is better to purchase a high mileage car rather than a truck, and handle the pr and interface with the dealers better. Is it the best program, no, but as long as it goes away in November it will be fine.
15 min
Thursday, June 04, 2009
Will the rich get richer?
I was reading an article in the new Wired magazine called "Socialism - redefined". It looked at how people were pooling their talents for free in what were traditionally paying jobs - like Wikipedia instead of Encyclopedia Britannica. So I got thinking. If people don't have to work harder to earn more money to but things - if day to day items get less expensive and more common - think of i-Tunes instead of a record collection, or digital photos instead of paying for film; what will the average wage earner look like in 10 years? In the past, rising wages came from people making things - manufacturing items that other people bought. Now we find ourselves in the information age and sharing, renting and combining resources. For example, the average car is idle for 80 % of its life. What if we shared cars instead of owning them. The cars would be used to 100% of its capability, but we would only need 20% of them. Who is is going to make money on that? The person who organizes it, the person who designs the tools that allow us to share. In that sense, there will be fewer and fewer people making more money. How is this going to affect our life? Our tax system? Some things to think about.
ChrisZ
15 min
ChrisZ
15 min
Sunday, March 22, 2009
They still don't get it
The outrage over the AIG bonuses (real or not) just points out how out of touch everyone is.
AIG (and Wall Street in General) - Okay they had contracts, and you have to remember that even on a losing baseball team, you could have a superstar that needs to get paid, but guys, did you ever take a course in marketing? You had a whole year to inform everyone, temper the reaction, explain the situation, cut back or renegotiate the bonuses - did you really think nobody would notice?
The Government - Same marketing question as above, if you give out money (and those blaming the Democrats, remember; this deal for TARP was under the previous administration, this was a modification in the stimulus plan to restrict compensation, with the infamous clause). Keep you mouth shut till you know the facts and then be honest - If AIG pulled one over on us, shame on them. If it happens again shame on you.
The Average Citizen - Give me a break - the last place Baltimore Orioles in 2008 had more that 10 players who made over 1 million dollars. The highest player made over 8 million. Do you think that they shouldn't be paid? What about all the financial companies that went out of business? Did those guys get bonuses? We don't even know what the people who got the bonuses did. Maybe they saved the company billions of dollars. Grow up and start being responsible yourself.
The real problem, and nobody has spoken about this, is the salary gap between the average person and the highest wage earners. Where was all this outrage when things were good? They were getting even more obscene bonuses then, but nobody cared, because times were good. If we are going to make any changes we have to be consistent and vigilant. Learn from our mistakes and not keep making the same ones over and over and over.....
ChrisZ
10 min
AIG (and Wall Street in General) - Okay they had contracts, and you have to remember that even on a losing baseball team, you could have a superstar that needs to get paid, but guys, did you ever take a course in marketing? You had a whole year to inform everyone, temper the reaction, explain the situation, cut back or renegotiate the bonuses - did you really think nobody would notice?
The Government - Same marketing question as above, if you give out money (and those blaming the Democrats, remember; this deal for TARP was under the previous administration, this was a modification in the stimulus plan to restrict compensation, with the infamous clause). Keep you mouth shut till you know the facts and then be honest - If AIG pulled one over on us, shame on them. If it happens again shame on you.
The Average Citizen - Give me a break - the last place Baltimore Orioles in 2008 had more that 10 players who made over 1 million dollars. The highest player made over 8 million. Do you think that they shouldn't be paid? What about all the financial companies that went out of business? Did those guys get bonuses? We don't even know what the people who got the bonuses did. Maybe they saved the company billions of dollars. Grow up and start being responsible yourself.
The real problem, and nobody has spoken about this, is the salary gap between the average person and the highest wage earners. Where was all this outrage when things were good? They were getting even more obscene bonuses then, but nobody cared, because times were good. If we are going to make any changes we have to be consistent and vigilant. Learn from our mistakes and not keep making the same ones over and over and over.....
ChrisZ
10 min
Saturday, March 14, 2009
The Future is the Past?
Where to we go from here? Is Suburbia dead? This article thinks so:
http://finance.yahoo.com/family-home/article/106732/Suburbia-R-I-P
And the recent concept of Suburbia may be dead. Of people living in bigger and bigger houses with more land, living farther and farther away from the center of cities. But is there a new model of suburbia that will work? Here is my idea:
1. Cities will build new communities within their center. Projects like Co-op city in NY (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-op_City,_Bronx) but on a much smaller scale. These communities will house many different people. There will be students, young singles, married couples with small families, professionals and some older residents. The buildings will have garages, playgrounds, pools and open space area.
There will be small, multi family housing, this may go back to the days of families living in separate houses but on common property. Zoning laws will need to be changed to accommodate this. In addition, some larger houses will need to be modified to multiple occupancy. The challenge to zoning laws is will this be restricted to relatives or opened up to anyone?
For standard single family housing, children will stay longer and contribute to the household costs. Houses will be retrofitted with energy saving devices. There will be more solar collectors for heating. Second floors will be converted to storage and sealed off with doors to keep the main floor either cool or warm depending on the location. People will live simpler, with less grandiose houses. Americans will start looking around the world for ideas and then in our own manner, adapt and expand on them to suit our desires.
As the infrastructure changes, transportation will also change. Highway design will freeze as extra lanes will no longer be necessary. Car will be come smaller with rentals becoming more popular with shorter rental times. You might carry an entertainment center and plug it into a generic rental car. These rental centers will be centrally located. So you may take your car to a train, take the train to destination nearby where you want to go, and then rent a car locally. Or maybe, we will see more auto trains that can carry smaller autos between common destinations, like New York to Boston, or New York to Chicago.
Industrial Parks will move back within city lines and production will move back closer to the final distribution point. There will be more car pooling and buses, but only where the volume of use will make economic sense. In other locations, people will still have multiple cars, but they will be more diverse in thier function. One might be a small truck and the other a high mileage hybrid.
More ideas on the city of the future to come.....
http://finance.yahoo.com/family-home/article/106732/Suburbia-R-I-P
And the recent concept of Suburbia may be dead. Of people living in bigger and bigger houses with more land, living farther and farther away from the center of cities. But is there a new model of suburbia that will work? Here is my idea:
1. Cities will build new communities within their center. Projects like Co-op city in NY (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-op_City,_Bronx) but on a much smaller scale. These communities will house many different people. There will be students, young singles, married couples with small families, professionals and some older residents. The buildings will have garages, playgrounds, pools and open space area.
There will be small, multi family housing, this may go back to the days of families living in separate houses but on common property. Zoning laws will need to be changed to accommodate this. In addition, some larger houses will need to be modified to multiple occupancy. The challenge to zoning laws is will this be restricted to relatives or opened up to anyone?
For standard single family housing, children will stay longer and contribute to the household costs. Houses will be retrofitted with energy saving devices. There will be more solar collectors for heating. Second floors will be converted to storage and sealed off with doors to keep the main floor either cool or warm depending on the location. People will live simpler, with less grandiose houses. Americans will start looking around the world for ideas and then in our own manner, adapt and expand on them to suit our desires.
As the infrastructure changes, transportation will also change. Highway design will freeze as extra lanes will no longer be necessary. Car will be come smaller with rentals becoming more popular with shorter rental times. You might carry an entertainment center and plug it into a generic rental car. These rental centers will be centrally located. So you may take your car to a train, take the train to destination nearby where you want to go, and then rent a car locally. Or maybe, we will see more auto trains that can carry smaller autos between common destinations, like New York to Boston, or New York to Chicago.
Industrial Parks will move back within city lines and production will move back closer to the final distribution point. There will be more car pooling and buses, but only where the volume of use will make economic sense. In other locations, people will still have multiple cars, but they will be more diverse in thier function. One might be a small truck and the other a high mileage hybrid.
More ideas on the city of the future to come.....
Sunday, March 01, 2009
Working hard just to keep up
When we are young, we spend most of our time trying to improve ourselves. Like a new car we put on fancy hub caps, install new radios, maybe even a exciting new paint job. The problem is we are not interested in the basic maintenance or strengthening the chassis. I am now finding that this relates to our bodies also. Rather than eating well and working out, keeping our blood pressure low and watching how we act; we do crazy things and they rely on our young body to pull us through. Then, when we get old, we spend just as much time just trying to maintain what is falling apart, that we have no time for improvement. Oh the follies of youth......
3 min
3 min
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Chris's Words of Wisdom (WOW)
“This country will collapse economically, when the government cannot pay for the seemingly reasonable demands of the people .”
ChrisZ
1 min
ChrisZ
1 min
Sunday, January 04, 2009
Out in the 'Burbs
I have been reading about the move back to the cities from the suburbs. While I an not going to make a blanket statement, I want to throw out some observations about suburban living and how it has changed.
Disclaimer - I grew up in Mineola, Long Island. At one time it was farm country, then was developed, not so fast as Levittown to the east, but it was considered the suburbs. My friends in the city called it the "sticks" because you could not walk out your door and get on the subway, although we did have a bus stop at the corner and the train was within walking distance.
The suburbs have changed in the last 50 years. What was once 1/4 acre lots have become 2 - 3 acre lots. What was once grid style road layouts have become mazes of cul-de-sacs and dead ends. Town like Torrington, where I currently live, even have a fading suburbs, as growing out from a central town, the developments change as they finally fade into real rural areas.
The families have changed also. From the, father works while the mother stays home, modern suburbia is a virtual ghost town during the day, and actually, most all of the time. As families got smaller, kids no longer could find entertainment in their own house or neighborhood, but now have to be driven to group activities, whether band or soccer. Older people no longer retire to Florida or an apartment or move in with their kids, but hang on to their homes much longer.
Financially, taxes are going up as municipal services are stretched thin, citizens are less connected to their government (despite the advent of the Internet), and schools are dealing with kids needing extra services.
Now is any of this bad? If so, what needs to be done? That is for another time.
ChrisZ
10 min
Disclaimer - I grew up in Mineola, Long Island. At one time it was farm country, then was developed, not so fast as Levittown to the east, but it was considered the suburbs. My friends in the city called it the "sticks" because you could not walk out your door and get on the subway, although we did have a bus stop at the corner and the train was within walking distance.
The suburbs have changed in the last 50 years. What was once 1/4 acre lots have become 2 - 3 acre lots. What was once grid style road layouts have become mazes of cul-de-sacs and dead ends. Town like Torrington, where I currently live, even have a fading suburbs, as growing out from a central town, the developments change as they finally fade into real rural areas.
The families have changed also. From the, father works while the mother stays home, modern suburbia is a virtual ghost town during the day, and actually, most all of the time. As families got smaller, kids no longer could find entertainment in their own house or neighborhood, but now have to be driven to group activities, whether band or soccer. Older people no longer retire to Florida or an apartment or move in with their kids, but hang on to their homes much longer.
Financially, taxes are going up as municipal services are stretched thin, citizens are less connected to their government (despite the advent of the Internet), and schools are dealing with kids needing extra services.
Now is any of this bad? If so, what needs to be done? That is for another time.
ChrisZ
10 min
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)