I am for the industrious little man myself

I read this at On The Level….

It is the little industrious man in the brand new Toyota Sienna Minivan taking the aluminum from my and all of my neighbors’ recycling bins a block ahead of the city’s recycling truck. The way I see it, if I had put my cans in with my trash because I was lazy or didn’t care about the environment then he would have every right to take the cans from my garbage container. But since I sort the recyclables and put them in a bin specifically for the recycling truck, I believe he is stealing as well as harming the environment. Here is why: The aluminum(arguably the most expensive item in the recycling bins) is used to offset the cost of my refuse bill. Without the aluminum, it may cost more to pick up the recycling than the materials themselves. If the city loses money, my bills go up. Second, by having both his minivan and the city truck stopping at every recycle bin in my neighborhood, he is putting more carbon in the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels.

I don’t have any sympathy for this line of argument. Trash pickup should be for trash pickup. If you are not willing to throw it out don’t put it out. And if you are willing to throw it out, don’t worry about who is picking it up. This is like somebody complaining that they left a bag full of soda cans out for the garbage man and someone else came by and turned them in for a redemption. If it is not worth it to take care of it yourself, don’t worry about it.

If this person was that worried about rising refuse bills, he could save his own aluminum up for year and turn it in for cash himself. That would offset his rising bill. Back when aluminum was cheap, nobody was doing this. But when aluminum was cheap, how could the city use it to off set the garbage bills? I don’t see how he has any real right to complain.

I suspect that his concerns about having a minivan and a city truck stopping at every recycling bin in the neighborhood is also bogus. Extra weight increase fuel consumption so by having less weight the recycling truck will save some energy. This will partially offset the minivan. Moreover, the recycling center will have to additional material handling to get the aluminum to where it needs to go. Our industrious little man is probably taking it directly where it needs to go. So on the whole, I suspect that it is a wash. I don’t have any proof, but then neither does he.

The Rich World Is Not Facing A Food Crisis Yet

A lot of people are getting unreasonable freaked out by the fact that Sam’s Club and others are limiting the amount of rice you can buy. The reasoning tends to run like this, “Rationing in the breadbasket of the world? The end of the world must be neigh.”

But the fact of the matter is that there is no shortage of rice in the US. The reason that Sam’s Club and other discount stores are limiting rice sales has more to do with the rampant speculation that is going on than it has to do with the state of the rice supply. For a little background on the scale of speculation going on in the grain markets read this post from Naked Capitalism called “Commodity Volatility Creates Problems for Farmers (and May Explain an Inventory Mystery). This quote from the post pretty much says it all…..

Aside from the difficulties that the farmers are facing, the article does contain signs that speculation is overwhelming fundamental activity. One big warning sign mentioned in passing: trading has outgrown the delivery system. If I read this correctly, it means that the volume of futures contracts is so large relative to the actual deliverable commodity that arbitrage (via taking physical delivery) won’t force convergence of futures prices to cash prices at contract maturity.

People with money are so disparate to find safe havens for their money that they are pouring cash into any area that might possible do well even in an economic downturn. Grain is one of those areas because their are real shortages in the world grain market. As a result poor people in third world counties are going to starve.

But the fact that poor people are going to stave does not mean that America faces some kind of grave crisis that threatens are ability to eat. It is a fact that even with the recent run up in prices, rice and other grains are extremely cheap relative to even the poorest of American’s income. If we ate like the rest of the world ate (i.e little or no meat and nothing in the way of processed food), food costs would be fraction of the poorest third of American’s population even if prices doubled from the current high prices. Contrast that with many third world countries where food cost tend to equal 50 to 60 percent of average income even before the recent spike in prices. They can’t cut back on the meat because they never ate much of it to begin with.

A song to remember

Many factors combine to make this an eery video. Hopkins’ body language seems remote and forced, as of an animated wax figure. I think this is partly a change in mannerism over the years. But the poor synching, the black and white, and the beat also contribute.

And I think it will shortly seem more appropriate than it does even now.

“Oh, my friend, we’re older but no wiser.”

A joke and some serious reading

Saw this courtesy of Calculated Risk…..

Joan Shaffer is turning in the keys of the north Phoenix Tatum Ranch home she bought with her daughter in late 2005. They put nothing down on the home, took out a loan that let them pay less than they owed each month and now their loan is $200,000 more than the house is worth.

“We paid $585,000. It was the peak of the market, but no one told us,” said Shaffer, a real-estate agent from Colorado. “We would probably have to spend the next 20 years trying to get right on the mortgage. That’s crazy.”

As Calculated Risk said “It’s amusing that she is a real estate agent.” He has such a gift for understatement.

On a more serious note, I saw a link to this discussion thread in the comments of CR post. The discussion is about the morality of just walking away from ones mortgage and it takes place on a forum for mortgage brokers. I recommend that everyone take the time to least skim the thread. The perspective of the people who where involved in making these loans is very interesting.

Rant of the Week: 4/20/08-4/26/08

Monster Cables is one of those companies that relies on lawyers to make money because it is easier than relying on the quality of their goods and services. In other words, they like to sue other companies on dubious trademark grounds.

While we feel that the behavior of companies like Monster Cables is proof that are legal system needs reforming, we must admit that part of the problem is general cowardice on the part of victims. So often companies decided to settle over these dubious claims rather than fight because it cost less in the short term and is less “risky”. But of course, this only encourages the bullies continue with their misuse of the law.

Happily, Blue Jeans Cable is not one of those who are inclined to roll over. Here is Blue Jeans Cable’s response to Monster Cables. Make sure you read the last three paragraphs even the the rest of the rant is to much for you.

Essay of the Week: 4/20/08-4/26/08

There are a number of soldiers over in Iraq who have tried to document their experience over in Iraq. But amongst all of them, LT G stands out. We have already named one of his posts essay of the week some time ago. But he writes so many good posts that it would be an injustice to only highlight one.

In this essay he ruminates on dealing with the after affects of a Special Forces (our inference, he just calls them the other unit) raid.

What use is book learnining in the real world?

At a meeting on Friday afternoon, P.B. introduced to some of the supervisors a template for creating work instructions. I regret that I once again demonstrated my talent for being an obnoxious questioner. I questioned whether there was really the political will to accomplish the arduous work of creating and maintaining a comprehensive set of Click Here to continue reading.

Can Hillary Win?

A discussion was overheard In the Ethereal Land regarding Hillary’s chances of taking the democratic nomination. Some people were of the opinion that the delegate count was so close that Hillary had just as good of a chance of winning it as she ever did. Others argued that it is almost certain that she will lose because their are not enough states left for her to make up her short fall.

In the spirit of public service, I thought I would throw out some numbers for those who are not following this contest very closely so that people could make up their own mind. (All numbers taken from here.)

First let us compare what New York Times calls projected pledged delegates. These are the delegates that each candidate has already won in the various primaries and caucus. The only reason that the New York Times calls them projected pledged delegates because a lot of the caucus are non-binding. In other words, just because your supporters elected a slate of delegates does not mean they are legally bound to support you in some states. But this is a distinction without a difference. A slate voted in by Obama supporters will vote for Obama and vis a versa. The Associated Press does not even bother to break out the two types of delegates for this very reason.

So by looking at the data we can see that Hillary has 1,250.5 pledged delegates and Obama has 1,418.5. Again, these are all the delegates that have been won in the various primaries and caucus up this point. This does not seem like a very big lead for Obama does it?

But if you do the math you will see that this puts Obama 168 delegates ahead. To put that number in perspective, Pennsylvania only has 158 delegates to offer. So even if Hillary won every delegate that Pennsylvania has to offer, she still would not have caught up to Obama in the pledged delegate count.

We all know that Hillary will not win every delegate that Pennsylvania has to offer. So let us run some more figures. Not counting the super delegates, there are 566 delegates left. That sounds like a lot when you consider that Obama only has a 168 delegate lead. But remember that Obama is going to keep picking up delegates too. In order for Hillary to beat Obama in the pledged delegate race, she is going to have to win a little under 30% (29.68 if you want to get technical) more delegates than Obama. To put it another way, Hillary is going to have to win 65% of the 566 delegates that are remaining.

Since Pennsylvania has such a huge proportion of the delegates that are left, this means that Hillary has to win at least 65% of Pennsylvania delegates to have a hope of overtaking Obama. Especially when you factor in the fact that the next biggist state up for grabs is North Carolina with 115 delegates. Since that state is expected to go for Obama, Hillary has to do really well in Pennsylvania.

And what are the odds that Hillary will win 65% of Pennsylvania delegates? Well, none of the polls put here anywhere near the levels she needs to pull off that kind of feat. If she did mange something close to 65% she would have won Pennsylvania by a greater margin then she won New York. And if Obama wins North Carolina like he won South Carolina, he will more then make up for any gains she makes in Pennsylvania.

To be fair, there are some contests coming up where Hillary will probably win by 65% or more. Puerto Rico with its 55 delegates comes to mind. And it is conceivable that if everything went right that she could win all of the contests coming up except North Carolina. But winning 65% of all the delegates that are at stake? I can’t conceive of any way that can happen.

That brings us to super delegates. Right know Hillary is ahead on most “on the record” counts of super delegates. The New York Times put her at 259 and Obama at 226. But there is still 241 undecided super delegates out there so in theory the counts are still wide open. In practices, Obama has been gaining on the super delegate count quite rapidly. Many super delegates who came out for Hillary have switched to Obama and Hillary is clearly concerned that Obama will wind up winning the majority of super delegates.

Nobody can predict how the super delegates will go. But if you read the comments of the undecided super delegates over at the New York Times site, you would think that Obama would take more of the undecided super delegates then Hillary.