diet coke for breakfast


Friday, October 31, 2003

Posted by RFTR
From today's Political Journal (sorry, subscriber email only):
"Comedian Dennis Miller's high-profile involvement in the California recall election -- he performed political spin duties on TV on behalf of Arnold Schwarzenegger after the only debate involving all the candidates -- was apparently just a warm-up act for his own political talk show.

CNBC announced yesterday that the edgy comic will host his own five-nights-a week talk show starting in January. It will be taped in Burbank.

Mr. Miller was briefly touted as a possible GOP candidate against Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer next year, but he has apparently decided to bench those ambitions. It's just as well. He would have had to curb his over-the-edge humor on the campaign trail."


This is legitimately disappointing to me. I think he could have had a sincere shot, and at the very least, made the election interesting for non-Californians. Oh well.



Wednesday, October 29, 2003

Posted by RFTR
Ananova - Downing Street 'mystified' by Bill Clinton claim

How did we miss this?? There are two explanations: Clinton lies easier than he tells the truth, or, Blair forgot that this had happened to him before. Which do you think is more likely?




Posted by RFTR
Right-Of-Center Bloggers Select The Books That Have Had The Biggest Impact On Their Thinking - Right Wing News (Conservative News and Views)

I got this link through Jake's new favorite site which I think might also be my new favorite site. But this list is certainly interesting...



Tuesday, October 28, 2003

Posted by RFTR
True Believers, Please Rise: "The main critique is that it is ridiculously expensive to lease planes, rather than buy them. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the leasing option will cost taxpayers an extra $5.6 billion, though scandal connoisseurs will appreciate that the deal also involves the use of 'special purpose entities,' the accounting mechanisms used by Enron executives in their glory days."

Brooks gives a serious critique of this whole process. James, do you have any insight that might help me understand if this is true or not?

James --

I don't know the specifics of the deal, but I certainly can speak to leasing in general. By and large, Brooks is correct that leasing would be more expensive than buying the aircraft. So, why would anyone in their right mind lease an aircraft? There are several reasons. One, which is probably irrelevant in this case, is concern over residual value risk. Some companies might be worried that they'll be stuck with a worthless plane that they can't sell, so they lease it, and at the end, it's the leasing company's problem to deal with. The other reason is availability of funds. Remember, a 767 can cost upwards of $100 million. Chances are, an airline or cargo carrier doesn't have that kind of cash on its balance sheet and would need to borrow in order to fund a fleet of new 767s. A lease is essentially the loan of equipment instead of money. Because the lessor still owns the plane, and could always take it back if the lessee defaults, the lessor might not need to charge as much interest in order to make the risk of lending profitable. Therefore, it might be less costly for an airline to lease an aircraft instead of borrowing the money to purchase it. But, the government works a little differently. For all intents and purposes, no one borrows more cheaply than the US Government. The rates on US bonds are often used as a baseline interest rate or a "risk-free rate". Boeing had to borrow (probably in the form of corporate bonds) in order to pay to build the planes. You can safely bet that the rate used to calculate the Air Force's lease payments was higher than the Boeing bond rate (otherwise the leases wouldn't be profitable), which in turn is higher than US Treasury rates. Brooks, the GAO, the CBO, and the OMB are probably right, this looks like a bum deal for the tax payers.




Posted by RFTR
yaledailynews.com - Universal health care is not a viable option: "It is essential, however, not to let emotion cloud logic."

Written by a good friend of mine, and worth a close read.



Sunday, October 26, 2003

Posted by RFTR
Presidential Debate
John Kerry, in reference to Boykin's comments: "When Boykin talks about 'The Almighty' he gets the White House all confused: Bush thinks he's talking about Cheney, Cheney thinks he's talking about Halliburton, Ashcroft thinks he's talking about him."

HAS THE POLITICAL DEBATE IN THIS COUNTRY REALLY SUNK THIS LOW? I'm appalled that John Kerry could actually feel comfortable saying that in a policy debate. Oh, and by the way, this was in response to a question about American troop strength around the country.



This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?