Was just logged into my Amazon account and noticed it says I've been a customer since 1998. The company was founded in 1994, so I was a relatively early customer, but nothing notable.
I remember reading investment advice from some guru of the time. Essentially he said one way to choose stocks was to buy those you used. That would have been good advice. I could have had a fortune now had I invested in Amazon when my first purchase was satisfactory.
But I didn't, never have invested in it, just paid it a bunch of money over the years.
As you get older you know not to dwell on opportunities you missed. That's life.
Wednesday, January 23, 2019
Tuesday, January 22, 2019
FSA Employees Turn Out To Be Essential?
USDA has decided to recall 9500 FSA employees beginning Jan 24 to provide services. Chris Clayton reported this on twitter and here's an article.
Apparently all field offices will open (not clear on DC and KCMO) and will handle most, but not all, program activities, including MFP applications, the deadline for which has been extended.
Apparently all field offices will open (not clear on DC and KCMO) and will handle most, but not all, program activities, including MFP applications, the deadline for which has been extended.
Monday, January 21, 2019
The Interplay of Tech and Behavior
Peter Moskos has an interesting post at his blog. In New York City if a policeman answers a 911 call for a person who's waiting for an ambulance she has to enter the person's data into her phone which results in a check of the database for outstanding warrants. Moskos argues that's wrong and bad: people will associate EMTs with law enforcement and avoid calling for help.
Towards the end he notes a separate issue--in Baltimore every time the police stopped someone, they ran a check for outstanding warrants. In NYC, they don't. Moskos traces the difference to a difference in technology: apparently in NYC multiple precincts share a radio band; in Baltimore each precinct has its own band. So, as an economist would predict, there's rationing of a scarce resource in NYC but not in Baltimore.
Towards the end he notes a separate issue--in Baltimore every time the police stopped someone, they ran a check for outstanding warrants. In NYC, they don't. Moskos traces the difference to a difference in technology: apparently in NYC multiple precincts share a radio band; in Baltimore each precinct has its own band. So, as an economist would predict, there's rationing of a scarce resource in NYC but not in Baltimore.
Sunday, January 20, 2019
Interpreting Human Facial Expressions
I may have written about this before.
Humans are very good at reading other people. At least scientists say we are, and we're eager to believe it.
For years I was sure that when I grinned, it was rather like Hugh Grant's smile: bashful and attractive, expressing good feelings.
Then I went to therapy. Early on my therapist blew away my illusions: my smile came across as unpleasantly supercilious. I came to realize that underlying my smile was nervous tension about how the social interaction. At least some of the therapy group were unable identify the insecurity beneath the expression.
Bottom line: I don't know how common it is to have such a disjunction between what a person is feeling and what people perceive.
Humans are very good at reading other people. At least scientists say we are, and we're eager to believe it.
For years I was sure that when I grinned, it was rather like Hugh Grant's smile: bashful and attractive, expressing good feelings.
Then I went to therapy. Early on my therapist blew away my illusions: my smile came across as unpleasantly supercilious. I came to realize that underlying my smile was nervous tension about how the social interaction. At least some of the therapy group were unable identify the insecurity beneath the expression.
Bottom line: I don't know how common it is to have such a disjunction between what a person is feeling and what people perceive.
Saturday, January 19, 2019
Watergate Reporting and Now
Josh Marshall at TPM has, I believe, noted that reporting on Watergate had its problems. There were news reports which were correct, there were news reports which were wrong, reports which were incredible at the time and subsequently borne out, and all sorts of variations in between. Mostly the administration denied the reports, launching ad hominem attacks on both the reporters and the sources. Some of the denials turned out to be well-founded, but most of the denials and the deniers lost credibility as time went back.
History can teach many lessons; one of which is events move at their own pace and sometimes patience is required to know the outcome.
History can teach many lessons; one of which is events move at their own pace and sometimes patience is required to know the outcome.
Thursday, January 17, 2019
LBJ's Biggest Mistake: Vietnam or Fortas?
Was in a discussion this morning on Supreme Court confirmations, which caused me to remember one of LBJ's biggest mistakes. Briefly, without checking my facts, Earl Warren decided to retire in 1968 as Chief Justice.
LBJ decided on a cute doubleplay--promote his attorney and longtime friend, Abe Fortas, from Associate Justice to Chief, and put Texan Homer Thornberry in to replace Fortas. In my memory, LBJ could likely have gotten a different person confirmed as chief but Fortas was a bridge too far. Not only was he a liberal justice, but he had always been an adviser to LBJ, something he continued as a Justice. (Still not publicly known, he had a yearly retainer from Louis Wolfson, a wheeler-dealer of dubious reputation who had been convicted in 1967.)
In 1968 LBJ had lost most of the clout he used to have, and people (senators) were tired of him. So Fortas was not confirmed, meaning no vacancy for Thornberry to fill. The next year Fortas was forced to resign over the Wolfson retainer, meaning Nixon could nominate and get confirmed the Minnesota Twins: Burger (as Chief) and Blackmun.
The bottom line: had LBJ paid more attention to ethics, he never would have appointed Fortas and continued using him as an adviser. And with better judgment he would have replaced Warren with a moderately liberal justice. Although Blackmun evolved into a liberal justice likely comparable to anyone LBJ would have nominated, a more liberal Chief Justice would have changed the composition of the Supreme Court for decades.
As I think about it, our defeat in Vietnam seems to have been less consequential than we thought it would be in the 60's and 70's, while the changes in SCOTUS seem to be more consequential. Hence my title.
LBJ decided on a cute doubleplay--promote his attorney and longtime friend, Abe Fortas, from Associate Justice to Chief, and put Texan Homer Thornberry in to replace Fortas. In my memory, LBJ could likely have gotten a different person confirmed as chief but Fortas was a bridge too far. Not only was he a liberal justice, but he had always been an adviser to LBJ, something he continued as a Justice. (Still not publicly known, he had a yearly retainer from Louis Wolfson, a wheeler-dealer of dubious reputation who had been convicted in 1967.)
In 1968 LBJ had lost most of the clout he used to have, and people (senators) were tired of him. So Fortas was not confirmed, meaning no vacancy for Thornberry to fill. The next year Fortas was forced to resign over the Wolfson retainer, meaning Nixon could nominate and get confirmed the Minnesota Twins: Burger (as Chief) and Blackmun.
The bottom line: had LBJ paid more attention to ethics, he never would have appointed Fortas and continued using him as an adviser. And with better judgment he would have replaced Warren with a moderately liberal justice. Although Blackmun evolved into a liberal justice likely comparable to anyone LBJ would have nominated, a more liberal Chief Justice would have changed the composition of the Supreme Court for decades.
As I think about it, our defeat in Vietnam seems to have been less consequential than we thought it would be in the 60's and 70's, while the changes in SCOTUS seem to be more consequential. Hence my title.
Wednesday, January 16, 2019
FSA Goes Back to Work?
Only in part. Here's the Politico piece on Perdue's telling 2,500 employees to return on Jan 17, 18, and 22.
And here's the USDA press release.
And here's the list of offices which will open. (My impression is that a smaller share of offices in the Northeast are being reopened than in the rest of the country. They may have given preference to locations with heavy MFP activity?)
I wonder how they determined the employees to call back? All CED's of offices they're reopening? Might not be the best employees to have.
I wonder what happens after Monday?
Will be interesting to see how this works out.
And here's a NASCOE explainer from yesterday. (Thumbs up to NASCOE for the post.)
And here's the USDA press release.
And here's the list of offices which will open. (My impression is that a smaller share of offices in the Northeast are being reopened than in the rest of the country. They may have given preference to locations with heavy MFP activity?)
I wonder how they determined the employees to call back? All CED's of offices they're reopening? Might not be the best employees to have.
I wonder what happens after Monday?
Will be interesting to see how this works out.
And here's a NASCOE explainer from yesterday. (Thumbs up to NASCOE for the post.)
Tuesday, January 15, 2019
It's All Downhill from Here
This month I got my first hearing aid. Today I was told I need my first dental crown.
My health has been generally good up to now--no hospital stays, no broken bones, etc. But it's all downhill from here.
My health has been generally good up to now--no hospital stays, no broken bones, etc. But it's all downhill from here.
Monday, January 14, 2019
Small Dairy? Test Farm
The Times today had an article on a supposed small farm; actually a billionaire's test farm (i.e. playtoy given my cynical mood today) trying out various systems intended for small farms.
It's call Rivendale (it doesn't tweet much).
The article is frustrating--apparently one person is mostly responsible for the 175 milking Jerseys, using an automated feeding system and $200,000 robotic milking systems. The cows determine when they are milked (4 times a day) and produce 15 percent more. But it's not clear whether it's their breeding or the milking system which is responsible for the gain.
What I'd like to know, among other things:
It's call Rivendale (it doesn't tweet much).
The article is frustrating--apparently one person is mostly responsible for the 175 milking Jerseys, using an automated feeding system and $200,000 robotic milking systems. The cows determine when they are milked (4 times a day) and produce 15 percent more. But it's not clear whether it's their breeding or the milking system which is responsible for the gain.
What I'd like to know, among other things:
- what's the expected life of these robotic systems? 3 year, 5 year, 8 years, 10 years?
- how much maintenance and downtime do they require? my guess is 4 systems means that 3 systems can handle the 175 with the fourth providing for some backup and fudge factor.
- what happens when Murphy's law strikes and the systems go down? With the systems I grew up with, as long as you had electricity you could milk cows. Without electricity, it was hand milking.
- can the farmhand handle the technology or does it require a tech?
- how does the feeding system handle the "non-processed feed" they claim to be using?
- what's the overall picture--are the cows on pasture or is it a CAFO?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)