JayB

[video:youtube]sdg-b08uWRc

Probably true for cash-flow investors with deep pockets and lots of patience in certain markets. At least prior to Congress rolling out the $8,000 credit. Worth noting that the actual cost per each additional sale realized under that program is something like $43,000.

Seems like Greenspan had a mighty heavy hand on the interest-rate lever, no? The fundamental problem was too much debt backed by too little income. If credit-default swaps had been traded in an exchange like wheat-futures that might have helped, but I'm not convinced that it would have affected the global boom-bust dynamics that much on its own.

BTW - making the right call vis-a-vis the market is much less important than making the right call vis-a-vis your own financial situation IMO. I don't want anything to do with a mortgage until I've got 20% of the purchase price set aside in savings, on top of cash equal to at least six-months worth of living expenses, and have a monthly payment that's no more than 30% of the monthly take-home - but I suspect that I'm more risk averse than most and will consequently wait quite a bit longer to purchase than most folks. Still years away from being in a position where I'd be comfortable buying.

For the forseeable future it looks like I'll be investing in auto repairs, a couple of season passes, and trying to rebuild the rainy day fund. Whatever's left-over after that I put into FFNOX in a Roth. Only investment I have other than a couple of money-market accounts. Only change I'll make as the years go by will be to increase the allocation into a diversified bond-index fund with a low expense ratio. I have no idea how any of the above will perform in the future, but I'm comfortable with the asset-allocation/risk, and the management fees. IMO in the near term home-price movements on the low end will depend on how much more money the government wants to put at risk in an effort to put a floor under housing. Once that's over, I don't see any significant relief from downside pressures in any market segment until the price/wage, rent/mortgage metrics return to a point that's at or below the historical range.

Given that it's straightforward to upgrade an old home with energy efficient windows, insulation, and appliance, and that old homes last 3 to 5 times longer than new ones due to vastly superior materials (as any builder will tell you), I'd say that would not be a very good idea. Then there's history, asthetics. destruction of topsoil, gardens, trees. Ah, the things that cannot be readily quantified, which is most things that really matter. What wouldn't be a very good idea?

If you're going to be there for a couple more years you should definitely take up 1-3 of the above. There's supposedly a fairly active WW kayaking club at the Uni there, and some good entry level water nearby at a WW park on one of the local rivers. Lots of paddlers in Wellington as well from what I hear, and tons of good instruction coupled with intro-water in Murchison. Might as well embrace the rain. I was in NZ from Oct-March last year and the only micro-ish beer I ran into with any consistency was Monteiths, which was pretty mediocre and was priced in the upper teens for a six-pack. There were a couple of botique brews that were over $20 for a six-pack, but I had to boycott those. Funny thing was folks in both NZ and Aus were still convinced that all American beer was weak and terrible.

I have to wonder what number you'd get if you took the total energy required to the tear down the old homes and build the new ones, and divided that by difference between the annual average energy consumption of the old and new homes. If those pads aren't your style, perhaps I can interest you in a nearby condo?

"Green Lake eco-friendly homes going for much less The ultra-green Ashworth Cottages homes near Green Lake are for sale again — with prices lopped by 25 to 45 percent from two years ago." Link

ECB - where are you at? Palmerston North? Wellington? Auckland? IMO kayaking, fly-fishing, or beach oriented activities > climbing by a long-shot in most of NZ. Also found the beer there pretty disappointing, but most of the white wines were good and relatively cheap. Having spent a bit of time there, I'd agree that heading to NZ for rock-climbing is like like heading to the North Shore for the skateboarding. Possible, but hardly the best thing the place has to offer.

Tasmania might be worth a look. Lots of cragging there, much of it right by Hobart. If you're into the alpine-suffering thing, plug "Federation Peak, Tasmania" into google and have at it. Sounds like there's lots of more moderate stuff there if you're into walking. If granite by the beach is more your style, check out the Freycinet Pinensuala on the Island's East Coast. Lots and lots of wineries, general beach activities and some decent food nearby as well. Tons of wildlife, hiking, etc to be had. Much more info here: http://www.thesarvo.com/confluence/display/thesarvo/Climbing If it all goes to hell you can cruise up north and vegetate on the white sand beaches at the Bay of Fires. Didn't have the time to do much more than look on a ten-day lap around the Island, but on balance it looked like a much more appealing destination for a longish, couples oriented climbing trip than NZ. If rock is an afterthought for you, then NZ may be the better option. Having said that, there's some reasonably good cragging around the Taupo area, and some chossy scrambling amongst beautiful scenery available in the Peaks on Tongariro National Park. We spent six months in Taupo and loved it, but I spent virtually all of my spare time kayaking and fly-fishing, despite having lugged a full rack down there, and we wound up spending the rest of our time chilling on the beach, soaking in the hot springs, hiking in the Beech forests, and general sightseeing. Lots of great info and photos here on the climbing in NZ: http://www.ericandlucie.com/New%20Zealand/New%20Zealand.htm

Ran through the self-nomination/voting scenario in my head, but couldn't imagine anyone actually going through with it. Much easier just to head to the store and buy yourself some gear as a reward for all of your own efforts. If people wanted to make non-voting donations as acts of penance for their general alpine lameness or atrocious TR's, I think that'd be a funding source worth looking into, though. I'd probably be on the hook for more than I could afford to contribute, but would chip in at least $10 on principle.

Just thought I'd get a thread going in case anyone else out there has had to think about this stuff before heading overseas for a climbing trip, or a trip that involves climbing. If you've traveled over seas for a climbing trip and have gone to the trouble over getting insured in the case of a catastrophic injury - how have you done it? I don't carry comprehensive health insurance, so I'm not sure if those policies will cover you if you have Joe Simpson style epic somewhere. I've include the stuff below the dashes in the event that it'll potentially be useful to someone, but hopefully other folks will chime in with additional info. ------------------------------------------------------------------- My wife and I were overseas for an extended period of time last year, and while preparing for the trip I looked into a few health insurance options that'd cover us in the event of a serious accident or illness. Basically I wanted catastrophic coverage for any hospital charges that we might incur while overseas, and medical evacuation coverage to fly one or both of us back to a hospital of our choosing in Seattle in the event that either of us really got messed up. We maintained our existing health insurance policy to cover us in that case. Finding a policy that'll cover overseas medical expenses isn't terribly difficult, but finding a policy that'll cover relatively dangerous activities in the outdoors can be a bit more challenging. For example, most "riders" that you can add to your travel coverage specifically exclude mountaineering, accidents that occur over a given elevation, etc. I eventually purchased coverage from "The International Medical Group" (http://www.imglobal.com). I can't remember if I got a standard policy plus an "extreme sports" rider, or went with their "Patriot Extreme" plan, but I think it was the latter of the two. In any event, I had to choose between a policy that had a high policy maximum that wouldn't cover mountaineering, or a policy with a relatively low policy maximum that'd cover us no matter what we were doing. In the end I picked up a policy for $50,000, with a $1000 deductible, and the cost was about $350 for seven months. In the end, I think I got overruled on the medical evacuation coverage, but this outfit (http://www.medjetassist.com/) looked like they had the best coverage/reputation, and it looked like it'd run just over $700 for the both of us.

I'd also nominate Polish Bob for MC at the Golden Sheep awards.

More than happy to leave it to the folks who are actually writing the checks to determine who and what it is or isn't in their interests to sponsor, dispense as a pro-deal, give away as swag, spend on logo-chotcke's to give away at trade shows, spend on glossy catalogs, or whatever. In the end it's their money, ergo they ultimately get to make the call whether a given climber "deserves" their sponsorship or not. ----------------------------------------------------------------- As an aside, I've always thought that it'd be kind of fun to use the paypal function here to generate a mini-pool of money that could be used as a kind of retrospective sponsorship. Something like: -Only people that pay into the fund get to vote($10/vote). -One pool for the "best" effort in the alpine. Very low-end version of the Piolet D'or. Call it the "Golden Sheep." Worth discussing whether it'd best be for routes anywhere in the world or limited to efforts in the Cascades. -One pool for the best TR. -Each awarded once per yer with the prize announcements/distribtutions at one of the annual get-togethers. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Kind of fun to think about, especially in the context of this discussion about the politics and effects of sponsorship, but not something that I actually expect to happen.

i don't actually know jay's take on afghanistan but i'd like to hear it - he's obviously a very logical guy pat (speaking of "pat answers" ), but as you say, mcnamara was able to give voice to the problems of logic vs emotion near the end of his life - afghanistan certainly feels wrong to me - how does it feel to you jay? I supported the invasion and our efforts to kill all members of Al Queda present there, displace the Taliban, and establish a civil framework that the population could at the very least have a chance to use to construct a government upon that was substantially less primitive, backwards, and barbarous than the Taliban. I don't think that it will be possible to turn Afghanistan into anything remotely resembling a modern, prosperous, stable democracy so we'll probably have to settle for something far less than that, call it good, and disengage while retaining the capacity to attack and kill Al-Queda or whoever else shares their goals and tactics when the opportunity to do so arises. Something more ambitious might have been possible in other circumstances, and with less feckless and uncommitted allies and more partners like Canada and the UK, but that's clearly not in the cards at this point unless the Afghans themselves make it so.

Not at all. I am clearly defering to your superior expertise on these matters, and am hoping that you'll use it to expand on the claims and expand on the themes that you introduced in that post. Take your time.

Who was arguing? I thought that last post of yours was fascinating, and hope that you'll expand on it. Particularly possibilities that arise from incorporating the level of unwavering commitment, remorselessness, ruthlessness, and uncritical zeal that the average jihadi brings to bear on a typical suicide bombing mission into our personal and civic lives.* Just imagine the implications for the self-help industry. It'd blow most self-help programs right out of the water. One can easily imagine Robert Fulghum enviously eyeing the sales stats for "All I Really Know I Learned from Osama" in that sector of the publishing market. Do carry on. *Haven't your typical abortion clinic bombers, abortion doctor murderers, etc already done so?

Given that there's no religious motives or sanctions in play here whatsoever, and that tactical/secular imperatives are the only thing that matters, it stands to reason that the representation of Arab Christians, Jews, and secularists of all stripes amongst the folks detonating themselves in order to advance a particular goal or agenda must be commensurate with their representation in the various societies that generate suicide bombers. I'm sure that there are statistics out there that reflect that. It's also strange that they've so often chosen to detonate themselves amongst fellow Arabs and Muslims with such regularity, much less that the overwhelming military superiority enjoyed by civilians in markets, on passenger trains, in civilian aircraft, in Mosques, pre-schools, etc would compel them to employ this tactic in those locales. Unarmed civilians going about their business clearly present a threat of sufficient magnitude that all bets are off. I think that you are off the mark in condemning Americans for entirely lacking this level of commitment and "heart." Timothy McVeigh, for example, had at least 50% or more of the "sacrifice and heart that these people demonstrate," so if you're going to praise suicide bombers for the many virtues that they embody, you're remiss in sparing him an equal measure of praise. So, when you have a spare moment I hope that you'll employ the same logic, and fire up the keyboard on his behalf.

What's the official word on whether or not they get their 72 virgins? i truly feel sorry for you. Glad to hear it. That was a serious question, though. I'm genuinely curious as to what the official doctrine specifies concerning the nature and the extent of the cosmic rewards that one accrues when one kills oneself while attempting to wage jihad in some fashion or another, but doesn't actually manage to slay any infidels in the process. There's presumably a very well developed and precise jihad/martyrdom literature out there, so it's quite likely that there's a real answer to this question in the relevant texts.

What's the official word on whether or not they get their 72 virgins?

"There's an enormous amount of economic analysis out there right now that is quite clear as to why this recession is persisting. The difference with yours is that it is essentially political in nature, it has a clear scapegoat and a clear white knight." Who or what distinct, concrete entity is the scapegoat, and the knight, in my analysis?

The wrong signals being that we're not going to continue to let out of control deregulation, tax cuts for the rich, rampant militarism, etc. run the country off the cliff and that instead we're going to start seeing what we can do to provide some health care for folks, work together with allies, and use some of the wealth that people are generating to improve the country instead of sending frat-boy pricks off on a coke binge? Those signals? Thanks for trying to forge a "new" message here, Jay, but no thanks. On the bigger picture front, thanks too for confirming that our Republic is effectively held hostage by, and that your grand vision for politics consists entirely of political representatives being sock puppets for Capital. Well, it's up to everyone who has money to spend or invest to decide for themselves what to make of the legislation that's working it's way through Congress, so there may indeed be some business owners out there there that feel that way. I suspect that the net effect of the various legislative proposals working their way through congress is increasing "regime (rule) uncertainty" and decreasing private investment, but others may feel differently. If you alternately consider what would happen to net business investment, employment, and wage-growth in the US in response to and announcements that effective tomorrow: A)The tax on corporate profits earned in the US would be permanently reduced to zero, with no exceptions. B)The tax on corporate profits would be permanently increased to 100%, with no exceptions. I think that most people will concede that expectations about the future play an important role in shaping investment decisions in the present.

Send the wrong signals about the future and you can significantly depress hiring, equipment purchases, investment, etc in the present and thereby significantly worsen whatever contraction that's resulted from factors in the past.

Might be a good time to Google "Regime Uncertainty" and "Private Investment."