1949, only Socialism can save China;
1979, only Capitalism can save China;
1989, only China can save Socialism;
2009, only China can save Capitalism.
Friday, February 27, 2009
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
No U-turn in Columbus OHIO
It's probably allowed elsewhere in Ohio. Drive carefully in Columbus!
2131.12 “U” turns prohibited.
(a)No vehicle shall be turned so as to proceed in the opposite direction upon any street or highway. Turns commonly known as “U” turns are hereby prohibited.
(b)Except as otherwise provided in this division, whoever violates this section is guilty of a minor misdemeanor. If, within one (1) year of the offense, the offender previously has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to one (1) predicate motor vehicle or traffic offense, whoever violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor of the fourth degree. If, within one (1) year of the offense, the offender previously has been convicted of two (2) or more predicate motor vehicle or traffic offenses, whoever violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor of the third degree. (Ord. 1579-72: Ord. 2120-03 § 1 (part).)
It is illegal to make a U-turn on a curve, near the top of a hill, if your vehicle cannot be seen within five hundred feet by the driver of another vehicle approaching from either direction or when a sign prohibiting U-turns is posted.
To make a proper U-turn, follow these instructions:
• Use your turn signal at least 100 feet prior to turning
• Check traffic ahead, behind and beside you before turning
• If there's traffic in the area, don't make the U-turn; instead make other turns to reverse your direction
• Check traffic again before completing final half of turn
• Turn into the lane closest to the center line or median
Note:
It is illegal to make a U-turn on a curve, near the top of a hill, if your vehicle cannot be seen within five hundred feet by the driver of another vehicle approaching from either direction or when a sign prohibiting U-turns is posted.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Money or life, which is more important?
***************Boston Globe
Tensions ran high in the hearing yesterday when SEC officials Andy Vollmer, the agency's acting general counsel, and enforcement director Linda Thomsen, refused to respond to questions about the Madoff investigation posed by Representative Gary Ackerman, a New York Democrat.
"You've told us nothing," Ackerman shouted. "You have totally and thoroughly failed in your mission, don't you get it?"
***************Washington Post
"If anyone could make the case better than Mr. Markopolos, and I didn't think they could, about you people being completely inept, you have made the case better than him," Ackerman said.
***************
"... men more quickly forget the death of their father than the loss of their patrimony."
------ The Prince, Niccolò Machiavelli
I still vividly remember that after 9/11, a lady from the CIA straightforwardly refused "the finger pointing" in a television interview and there was certainly no law maker threw any harsh words like the above to CIA, FBI and USSS etc. (Some efforts are on the way.)
So, losing 50 billion dollars can get words out of the law makers but nearly 3000 lives gone, forget it.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Fun Pictures (Copy &Pasted)
************************************************************************************
http://www.l99.com/202020/blog/view/40967
Received the following mail. i think it is cool
The 2008 crash is probably the most serious economic crisis we have faced after the Great Depression. Stock markets from around the world fell as much as 20% in a single week, dozens of banks either failed or were rescued by government and private instutitions, and companies started laying off employees as a consequence of the reduced demand.
We know how we entered into the crisis, but we don’t how, when, or how we will be getting out of it. Considering that issue, we decided to our little bit to help cheer everyone up by redoing the logos of some renowned companies …. after the crisis.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
On Obama's Inaugural Address
"The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works — whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified."
I am glad that finally both Bush and Obama agreed on this point. Although we still have to wait and see how the new administration makes sure the government achieve administrative efficiency.
I am glad that finally both Bush and Obama agreed on this point. Although we still have to wait and see how the new administration makes sure the government achieve administrative efficiency.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
The exit plan of Ben Bernanke
Here is the speech Ben gave at LSE today.
Ben first explained his approach in dealing with the financial crisis with the asset side of the Fed's balance sheet. Jim Hamilton does not like this approach but Ben clearly laid out his exit strategy focusing on how he will manage the inflation expectation as the economy recovers. He is building the expectation or say anchoring it by doing exactly what he is doing now: talking about it. It sounds like Ben knows what he is doing. But I am with Jim that the Fed probably should minimize the interest paid to excess reserve since paying interest on reserve itself is a contractionary policy and on the other hand, the Fed is trying to create liquidity in credit market, which is monetary expansion. I think maybe the Fed can sell something like the loan insurance to the banks, which may be helpful.
A little puzzle raised by Hamilton is that the Fed hope that by removing the toxic assets from the banks' balance sheet, the banks will start to lend out money again. However, the goal is not fully achieved for a while, at least. On the other hand, had the Fed not removed those toxic assets from the banks' balance sheet, there will be no credit easing for sure. Hamilton suggested that the Fed should off-load the colorful assets it has taken onto the asset side of its balance sheet, but my question is: How? Who will buy them and at what price? Won't that result in an immediate loss? It seems that the Fed need to do something effective in boost long-term lending for now and worry about everything else later since if the economy goes deeper into recession, the loss for taxpayers will be even higher.
Here is Q&A session.
Here is Hamilton's response.
Ben first explained his approach in dealing with the financial crisis with the asset side of the Fed's balance sheet. Jim Hamilton does not like this approach but Ben clearly laid out his exit strategy focusing on how he will manage the inflation expectation as the economy recovers. He is building the expectation or say anchoring it by doing exactly what he is doing now: talking about it. It sounds like Ben knows what he is doing. But I am with Jim that the Fed probably should minimize the interest paid to excess reserve since paying interest on reserve itself is a contractionary policy and on the other hand, the Fed is trying to create liquidity in credit market, which is monetary expansion. I think maybe the Fed can sell something like the loan insurance to the banks, which may be helpful.
A little puzzle raised by Hamilton is that the Fed hope that by removing the toxic assets from the banks' balance sheet, the banks will start to lend out money again. However, the goal is not fully achieved for a while, at least. On the other hand, had the Fed not removed those toxic assets from the banks' balance sheet, there will be no credit easing for sure. Hamilton suggested that the Fed should off-load the colorful assets it has taken onto the asset side of its balance sheet, but my question is: How? Who will buy them and at what price? Won't that result in an immediate loss? It seems that the Fed need to do something effective in boost long-term lending for now and worry about everything else later since if the economy goes deeper into recession, the loss for taxpayers will be even higher.
Here is Q&A session.
Here is Hamilton's response.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
