Generation X Life Support


October 26, 2008

$700 Billion Bail Out Bullshit!

Category: Finance,Politics – SA – 9:51 pm

This article written by John Dunbar at the Associated Press is troubling me.  You know that $700B bail out the Fed gave banks, insurance companies, etc?  Well, they’re going to use that money for executive bonuses, salary increases and other things not related to fixing the economy. Pretty fucked up, huh?

If the whole thing is going in the shitter anyway, why bail them out?  Sure, things would be really bad a lot quicker, but maybe that would speed up the recovery, too?  I don’t know.  It just seems like the bad shit is going to come no matter what, and all these bail outs are doing is prolonging the misery.

Anyway, here’s the article detailing the latest load of bullshit from Wall Street and Corporate America:

Uses for $700 billion bailout money ever shifting

10/25/2008 10:53 AM

WASHINGTON – First, the $700 billion rescue for the economy was about buying devalued mortgage-backed securities from tottering banks to unclog frozen credit markets.

Then it was about using $250 billion of it to buy stakes in banks. The idea was that banks would use the money to start making loans again.

But reports surfaced that bankers might instead use the money to buy other banks, pay dividends, give employees a raise and executives a bonus, or just sit on it. Insurance companies now want a piece; maybe automakers, too, even though Congress has approved $25 billion in low-interest loans for them.

Three weeks after becoming law, and with the first dollar of the $700 billion yet to go out, officials are just beginning to talk about helping a few strapped homeowners keep the foreclosure wolf from the door.

As the crisis worsens, the government’s reaction keeps changing. Lawmakers in both parties are starting to gripe that the bailout is turning out to be far different from what the Bush administration sold to Congress.

In buying equity stakes in banks, the Treasury has “deviated significantly from its original course,” says Alabama Sen. Richard Shelby, the top Republican on the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee. “We need to examine closely the reason for this change,” said Shelby, who opposed the bailout.

The centerpiece of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act is the “troubled asset relief program,” or TARP for short. Critics note that tarps are used to cover things up. The money was to be devoted to buying “toxic” mortgage-backed securities whose value has fallen in lockstep with home prices.

But once European governments said they were going into the banking business, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson followed suit and diverted $250 billion to buy stock in healthy banks to spur lending.

Bank executives hinted they might instead use it for acquisitions. Sen. Christopher Dodd, chairman of the Senate banking committee, said this development was “beyond troubling.”

Sure enough, a day after Dodd, D-Conn., made the comment, the government confirmed that PNC Financial Services Group Inc. was approved to receive $7.7 billion in return for company stock. At the same time, PNC said it was acquiring National City Corp. for $5.58 billion.

“Although there will be some consolidation, that’s not the driver behind this program,” Paulson recently told PBS talk show host Charlie Rose. “The driver is to have our healthy banks be well-capitalized so that they can play the role they need to play for our country right now.”

Other planned uses of the bailout money have lawmakers protesting, although it is only fair to note there is nothing in the law that they just wrote to prevent those uses.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. questioned allowing banks that accept bailout bucks to continue paying dividends on their common stock.

“There are far better uses of taxpayer dollars than continuing dividend payments to shareholders,” he said.

Schumer, whose constituents include Wall Street bankers, said he also fears that they might stuff the money “under the proverbial mattress” rather than make loans.

Neel Kashkari, head of the Treasury’s financial stability program, told Dodd’s committee this past week that there are few strings attached to the capital-infusion program because too many rules would discourage financial institutions from participating.

As the bank plan has become a priority, the effort to buy troubled assets has receded from the headlines. Potential conflicts of interest pose all kinds of problems in finding qualified companies to manage that program.

“Firms with the relevant financial expertise may also hold assets that become eligible for sale into the TARP or represent clients who hold troubled assets,” Kashkari said.

The challenge was made plain when the Treasury hired the Bank of New York Mellon Corp. as “custodian” of the troubled assets purchase program. The bank will conduct “reverse auctions” to buy the toxic securities on behalf of the Treasury. The lower the price they set, the better chance sellers have of getting rid of the devalued securities.

On the same day it hired Mellon, the Treasury also picked the company to receive a $3 billion investment as part of the capital-infusion program. The same bank hired to help manage part of the economic rescue plan became a beneficiary of it.

With the Nov. 4 election nearing, lawmakers decided it was important to remind the government officials running the bailout program about parts of the law aimed at helping distressed homeowners by offering federal guarantees to mortgages renegotiated down to lower monthly payments.

“The key to our nation’s economic recovery is the recovery of the housing market,” Dodd said. “And the key to recovery of the housing market is reducing foreclosures.”

Sheila Bair, who heads the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., responded that her agency is working “closely and creatively” with Treasury officials to “realize the potential benefits of this authority.”

___

On the Net:

Treasury: http://www.treasury.gov/

 
 

October 24, 2008

Why Americans can’t get great small cars? Well, who wants’em?

Category: Automobiles,General stuff,Politics – SA – 5:01 pm

I found this interesting article on Vehix.com which goes on about why great small cars aren’t available in the US.  The author blames the “Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Department of Transportation (DOT) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) among others for creating very stringent guidelines for these manufacturers to even consider bringing these vehicles to our country.”

I admit there are some pretty interesting vehicles mentioned in this article, such as a diesel Cooper Mini getting 60 miles to the gallon, or the Ford Ka, which gets 40 miles per gallon and is one of the most popular cars in both Europe and South America.

Ford Ka
Ford Ka

All this being said, I have to ask one thing – What about the demand for such vehicles?

I’m on the road a lot.  My daily commute to work is 75 miles each way (yep, that’s 150 miles a day).  I drive 2 four cylinder vehicles that get pretty decent mileage, but nothing close to 60 miles (or even 30 for that matter).  One thing I’ve observed in these daily commutes over the past 6 years is that no one seems to be in a hurry to get rid of their SUV’s, not even when gas prices were over $4 a gallon.

Honestly, I would LOVE to see less SUV’s on the road, as my commuting experience these past 6 years leads me to believe that very few people who own SUV’s actually know how to drive them.  I don’t think people who drive these things really comprehend the potential harm they can do in moderate-to-high speed collisions.  I see reckless driving of SUV’s EVERY DAY on the Garden State Parkway, and for the weekly 4 or 5 traffic jams I get stuck in, most of the accidents usually involve at least 1 SUV.

Also, performance is another thing.  As I stated in one of my previous posts, it’s all good and well to get 30, 40 or 60 miles a gallon, but if it takes me 17 seconds to get up to 55 or 65 miles an hour, well, that’s just not going to work!  While I’m a big muscle car and tuner fan, I’m totally willing to see the 454, 350 small block or even the 4 cylinder boxers with turbo go the way of the dinosaur, assuming I can still get a decent quarter mile and 0 – 60 out of an electric/hydrogen/hybrid powered vehicle.  Maybe something like this:

the ale
the ale

Anyway, here’s that article.  Enjoy!

Why Americans Can’t Get Their Hands on Great Small Cars
by Nathan Adlen
9/17/2008
BMW’s Mini builds the Mini Cooper D, one of the most fuel-efficient cars in the world. It has a 1.6-liter, 110-horsepower (with 240 lbs feet of torque) diesel engine that is capable of getting well over 60 miles per gallon (about 80 mpg has been recorded with the manual transmission). In any guise, the Mini Cooper is one of the best handling vehicles you can buy. The Mini Cooper Diesel still has amazing handling like other Minis and is available in several configurations (convertible and larger Clubman), but it is not available in the United States.

Ford has been building the Ka for over 12 years. It is an extremely efficient design and gets remarkable mileage while still being entertaining to drive. It is handsome with a considerable amount of comfort and utility for its size. Over 40 mpg (combined) and great driving dynamics are but a few of its attributes. Despite its age, the Ford Ka is considered one of the most popular cars in Europe and South America. The Ford Ka is not available for sale in the United States.

The United States is prohibited from having hundreds of great small cars. Why?

We can thank our Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Department of Transportation (DOT) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) among others for creating very stringent guidelines for these manufacturers to even consider bringing these vehicles to our country. European standards are a tad looser than ours, thus making it easier for cars like these to be deemed safe for public consumption.

The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) has excellent standards shared with several nations worldwide to regulate equipment on cars in order to facilitate trade of vehicles. The United States is not part of the UNECE and has very different standards – some experts say it is a deliberate ploy by our government to keep imports from dominating our market. Our current standards prohibit many of these small vehicles from being imported without costly revisions. Even our own automakers have to jump through hoops in order to get foreign built cars (even under their own company name) into the United States.

The question should be: How can we get the cars to be accepted into the United States sooner rather than later? And what are American-based vehicle manufacturers like Ford and General Motors doing about it?

General Motors has proved that with minor alterations popular sellers in Europe can be brought to the United States rapidly. The Saturn Astra is based on the European Opel/ Vauxhall model that has proven popular there. Sensing a hole in the American market, General Motors wisely “Americanized” the Astra and brought it to market quick enough to replace the void left by the rather unloved Saturn Ion.

Ford is on the fast track too. Several Ford cars are cutting through the red tape to a speedy production. The new Fiesta will be based on the (well received) new Mazda 2 (Ford is Mazda’s parent company). Hoping to make up for dreadful truck sales and keeping our market flush with new small cars and trucks, it is expected that Ford will bring several economical import vehicles to our shores soon.

There is a “business” reason that more platforms are not shared with other countries which consumers may not be fully aware of. Vehicles are often built for the consumer needs of that region. A Chevrolet Suburban would not be ideal for the narrow garages of Tokyo or the cobblestone roads of old Europe. The Renault Twingo and Mitsubishi ‘I’ would not fare well on our large highways and American style traffic.

Also, consider that a very high portion of Americans still drive two to three ton pickup trucks, SUVs and vans which would boot these wee little cars as easily as Beckham kicks a ball (despite good crash test results – physics works in greater mass’ favor). Having compact vehicles in America is nothing new and can be popular to some, but up until now, these owners were a minority.

The runaway success of the Mini and Smart brands in our country has proven that we are accepting of small cars and may even embrace them. The little Toyota Prius with Honda’s Fit and Civic (and many other’s) popularity should serve as a lightning rod to our newly aroused appetite for fuel sippers.

Within the next few years, several automakers will spring new models onto our shores – it is inevitable. The question now becomes: What do these future, smaller new models have that is so special? What vehicles will be worth the extra expense of licensing with our government’s agencies?

We will know very soon. There are some fantastic machines just waiting to win your hearts and they are closer than ever – stayed tuned for more!

October 14, 2008

Our Next President – Set the Bar Low..

Category: Politics – SA – 7:39 pm

I know, I know.  There he goes again, bitching about something political.  All you have to do is read the title of this post to deduce that.  Well, before I go on my rant here, let me just state that the reason for this post is not to bitch and complain.  I’m not going to be purposely negative here. The purpose of this post is to help you set appropriate expectations for the next four years.

Now, I’m not going to sit here and use this post as an opportunity to tell you that either Obama or McCain are lousy candidates, or tell you who to vote for.  Considering the state of politics in this country, they both are not the worst candidates we’ve ever seen.  Now, is it sad that McCain and Obama are the two best candidates each party offers?  Perhaps, but it could be worse.

Which brings me to my point – Whoever wins, don’t expect the next four years to be a radical departure from the pain and troubles you are now facing.  While only time will show how well the winner of this election will do, the damage done by the current administration is probably too much for anyone to handle in four years.

Now, it’s fairly obvious that Obama or McCain have “the potential” to be vast improvements over the current administration, but that’s setting the bar low, right? Yup.

But who knows? If you set the bar low, you just might be pleasantly surprised sometime after 2012, when we are all driving flying cars powered by air, and will be living in cities on the moon!

October 3, 2008

Best Financial advice in these troubled times

Category: Finance – Farly – 2:20 pm

I have been asked no less then 3 times in the last 2 days what I thought of the economic situation.

Now 3 may seem pretty low, but consider that I am not a savvy investor. I am not a wall street power house. I have a savings account, a house, and a minimal amount of credit card debt.

I suppose that qualifies me as “Joe Six Pack” as much as anyone else.

So when asked for financial advice I find that the same advice I have given to people in the last 20 years still applies today. I suggest you consultant an account and ensure that my advice is right for your situation.

STOP FUCKING BUYING SHIT YOU DON’T NEED!

October 1, 2008

The Greatest Things You’ve Never Heard – The Darling Buds, “Erotica”

Category: Music – SA – 11:22 am

From a music perspective, I never was one to settle on the main stream.  Right now, for the life of me, I can’t tell you who is in the top 40, and I can’t even tell you if I’ve recently heard anything from any artist in the top 40.  And that pretty much goes back as far as I can remember.  I never was a “top 40″ kind of guy.  Maybe in grade school, I’d pretty much settle for anything on the radio or anything that popped up on that crazy channel, MTV (I’ll spare you the “when they used to play music” joke here). 

This being said, it didn’t take MP3′s or the “Internets” to make me realize that maybe, just maybe, the best or most creative bands out there did not always end up on the radio or in the main stream of pop culture. 

So, with that being said, we’re starting a new featured series of posts you can only get here, exclusively on GenXLS.com called ”The Greatest Things You’ve Never Heard“, where we will spotlight little known Albums or Bands that we thought were great, but never quite made the mainstream.  So enough of the hype, let’s get to our first Album you never heard…

Band: The Darling Buds

Album: Erotica (1992, Epic Records)

Genre: Alternative, Indy

The Darling Buds were an alternative band out of the U.K., specifically Newport, Wales.  There’s no hiding this band’s place of origin thanks to the lead vocal performance of Andrea Lewis, and the melodic yet simple guitar and bass driven sound we’ve so come to love from U.K. bands like the Beatles, Happy Mondays, Oasis, the Psychedelic Furs, etc. 

Released in 1992, Erotica was the final album for the Darling Buds.  The album was the perfect balance of music for the time – trippy bass grooves and rock steady beats filled with angst, passion and hope.  Add to that passive aggressive vocals and lyrics of indifference, and Erotica pretty much sums up the early 90′s.  

In my view, the whole album is worth a listen, assuming you like this genre of music.  Even when listening to the simple and repetitive beats in songs like ”Off My Mind” and “Gently Fall“, perfectly timed tempo changes and masses of distortion kick in to pay homage to sounds first heard in the 1960′s garage rock scene.  ”Please Yourself“, a fast paced yet melodic track laced with heavy bass grooves was one of the songs released as a single, and the video was played prominently on the early 1990′s MTV Alternative Music Show 120 Minutes.  The album’s other single, “Long Day in the Universe” was featured in the movie/soundtrack for “So I Married an Axe Murder” starring Mike Meyers.  Other must here songs: Angels Fallen, One Thing Leads to Another, Sure Thing, Wave, If

Erotica was the last album from the Darling Buds.  Although they toured the U.S. in support of Erotica for a year, the Darling Buds packed it in, frustrated by the lack of commercial success.  Back in 1992, this sound was still pretty much “underground”, and just couldn’t get mainstream airplay.  To further throw salt in the wounds, Madonna released an album with the same name 2 weeks after The Buds’ version of Erotica was released.  

Their influences: The Beatles, Iggy and the Stooges, Siouxsie & the Banshees, Modern English, The Psychedelic Furs, Joy Division, the Cure

Similar Artists on their scene: Happy Mondays, Smashing Pumpkins, Jellyfish, Medicine, Sundial, Jesus and Mary Chain, Oasis, Juliana Hatfield, SpaceHog, the Sneaker Pimps

Artists Influenced: The Duke Spirit, Paramore, Black Rebel Motorcycle Club, Sparklehorse, Republica, Elastica