Greg Mankiw's blog has a post showing the families costs of getting health care, based on current House & Senate versions of the bill. The house bill takes a bigger chunk from households.
Let's go Senate!
I'll post more about this soon...
Monday, November 2, 2009
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
The whiff of Death around Facebook & Twitter
If I inhale deeply, I think I catch the smell of death gathering around Facebook & Twitter.
Don't get me wrong, they both will continue to be around (and big, and over-hyped in the media) for quite a while. I just think they are both pulling into the turning lane of the same exit ramp that MySpace followed 2 years ago.
Why?
1. "The cool kids aren't doing it". When I talk to my students, the general impression is that none of them use Facebook or Twitter. LimeWire & YouTube are where their interests lie. If they want to communicate with someone, they simply text. There just isn't the interest level - they are young, so they aren't rekindling long-lost high school friendships (they haven't lost them yet).
2. "Old People have taken over". People like my wife and I joined this summer. Statistics show the average age of users in Facebook is much higher than MySpace. The young generation doesn't want to hang out in the same place that their parents do, so they are drifting away even more. If parents are there, the kids lose the ability to express themselves the way they want to, so there is no need to bother. Adding to that...
3. "It is an advertising thing now". Both services have "Jumped the Shark" and gone mainstream - alienating the core user base. Big media, movie stars, singers, and athletes have taken over the most-followed. So? Now, what is the difference between the sandboxes that Twitter & Facebook have created & the rest of the web? CNN is big in all 3, and sharing the same info in all 3.
4. "What is the point?". That is my question. I joined Facebook this summer. I have deleted most of the "friends" that I had b/c they either weren't posting, or posting innane stuff, or trying to drag me into Mafia Wars. Plus, call me a jerk if you must, but if the people from high school & I didn't keep in touch/reconnect in the last 20 years, why start now?!? I keep up with a small handful of distant relatives - my friend list is less than a dozen now. Also, I type too slow for Twitter.
Both services have uses, filing niches like creating communities around TV shows & such, but I think the decline in large-scale usage is about to begin. Just look at the number of articles about each in the news lately - they are declining from what I can tell.
My advice to both: Enjoy it while it lasts, and sell to Yahoo! While you still have a chance.
Don't get me wrong, they both will continue to be around (and big, and over-hyped in the media) for quite a while. I just think they are both pulling into the turning lane of the same exit ramp that MySpace followed 2 years ago.
Why?
1. "The cool kids aren't doing it". When I talk to my students, the general impression is that none of them use Facebook or Twitter. LimeWire & YouTube are where their interests lie. If they want to communicate with someone, they simply text. There just isn't the interest level - they are young, so they aren't rekindling long-lost high school friendships (they haven't lost them yet).
2. "Old People have taken over". People like my wife and I joined this summer. Statistics show the average age of users in Facebook is much higher than MySpace. The young generation doesn't want to hang out in the same place that their parents do, so they are drifting away even more. If parents are there, the kids lose the ability to express themselves the way they want to, so there is no need to bother. Adding to that...
3. "It is an advertising thing now". Both services have "Jumped the Shark" and gone mainstream - alienating the core user base. Big media, movie stars, singers, and athletes have taken over the most-followed. So? Now, what is the difference between the sandboxes that Twitter & Facebook have created & the rest of the web? CNN is big in all 3, and sharing the same info in all 3.
4. "What is the point?". That is my question. I joined Facebook this summer. I have deleted most of the "friends" that I had b/c they either weren't posting, or posting innane stuff, or trying to drag me into Mafia Wars. Plus, call me a jerk if you must, but if the people from high school & I didn't keep in touch/reconnect in the last 20 years, why start now?!? I keep up with a small handful of distant relatives - my friend list is less than a dozen now. Also, I type too slow for Twitter.
Both services have uses, filing niches like creating communities around TV shows & such, but I think the decline in large-scale usage is about to begin. Just look at the number of articles about each in the news lately - they are declining from what I can tell.
My advice to both: Enjoy it while it lasts, and sell to Yahoo! While you still have a chance.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
No Social Security Increase for 2010
Social Security payments will not have a Cost Of Living Adjustment (COLA) this year. But this is no need to panic - it isn't a problem!!!
The COLA was set up to increase each year by the same percentage as the inflation rate. If prices went up by 5%, then your SS check would also go up by 5%. This gives the recipient the same purchasing power from year to year.
This year the inflation rate is a negative - overall prices declined over the last 12 months. This because in the face of recession, prices fall as companies try to reduce inventories & retain precious customers.
So, with prices not going up, SS checks will not go up. But, at least the checks will not drop. For the last year, SS recipients were better off, because of the lower prices. For a while going forward, they may continue to see these gains even though the size of their checks didn't go up.
As the economy gets into recovery mode, prices will start to climb. Hopefully, the increase in prices near the end of the year will be off-set by the lower prices at the beginning of the year (and last year as well), and everyone will be all right. This should be the case unless inflation jumps up to 7-8%. Then next year the next COLA will come along, and there is no pain.
The COLA was set up to increase each year by the same percentage as the inflation rate. If prices went up by 5%, then your SS check would also go up by 5%. This gives the recipient the same purchasing power from year to year.
This year the inflation rate is a negative - overall prices declined over the last 12 months. This because in the face of recession, prices fall as companies try to reduce inventories & retain precious customers.
So, with prices not going up, SS checks will not go up. But, at least the checks will not drop. For the last year, SS recipients were better off, because of the lower prices. For a while going forward, they may continue to see these gains even though the size of their checks didn't go up.
As the economy gets into recovery mode, prices will start to climb. Hopefully, the increase in prices near the end of the year will be off-set by the lower prices at the beginning of the year (and last year as well), and everyone will be all right. This should be the case unless inflation jumps up to 7-8%. Then next year the next COLA will come along, and there is no pain.
Sunday, October 11, 2009
How the Recession Can Be Over With Unemployment So High
It's simple and true. The recession can technically end with
unemployment still high.
unemployment still high.
Some things happen before a change in the economy, some happen
concurrently, and some things happen after a change - the "lagging
indicators". Employment is a "lagging indicator" of the economy.
Why does it lag? When sales start to slow down, employers don't
instantly fire workers. Other costs are reduced first (like reducing
trips, upgrading computers, and cutting bonuses). If sales continue to
decline over time, then they start the layoffs - weeks or months after
sales slowed.
Conversely, once sales pick up, businesses need to make sure the
growth is real before they invest in hiring & training new people.
Just as a footbal player's pain doesn't stop when the game ends,
addional pain does stop. Technically, there may be enough growth in
the economy now to declare an end to the recession, but there is still
more gains to be had. The pain gas stopped growing for the economy but
we still have sore muscles and headaches to deal with.
The global recession may be over, but many people's personal
recessions continue.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Credit Scores
The Wall Street Journal had a fun article breaking down Credit Scores: what is in them & how important each category is.
A quick snapshot:
image from wsj.com
The article talks about things like, don't over-use your credit cards, and not to assume that things will come off your credit report after 7 years.
There were a few things the article didn't really hit on:
Credit Cards: The more cards you have, the lower your score will be. Also, higher credit limits will also bring down your score. Why? Your credit limits determine how much borrowing you can already do, and lenders have to assume that you can/will take advantage of that. They consider what your payments would look like if you did max out those cards when they determine your ability to pay them back. So, if you have a bunch of seldom-used cards, you should get rid of them to limit the amount of pre-approved credit that you do not need. One other thing, don't increase the credit limit on your current cards if you do not have to.
The other common piece of advice to help maintain your credit - make sure you don't fall behind on your "major" payments. These include your house payment, rent, and car payment. Try not to even be late when making these payments. If you fall behind & have to skip paying some bills, it is better to skip out on cell phones or credit cards.
A quick snapshot:
image from wsj.comThe article talks about things like, don't over-use your credit cards, and not to assume that things will come off your credit report after 7 years.
There were a few things the article didn't really hit on:
Credit Cards: The more cards you have, the lower your score will be. Also, higher credit limits will also bring down your score. Why? Your credit limits determine how much borrowing you can already do, and lenders have to assume that you can/will take advantage of that. They consider what your payments would look like if you did max out those cards when they determine your ability to pay them back. So, if you have a bunch of seldom-used cards, you should get rid of them to limit the amount of pre-approved credit that you do not need. One other thing, don't increase the credit limit on your current cards if you do not have to.
The other common piece of advice to help maintain your credit - make sure you don't fall behind on your "major" payments. These include your house payment, rent, and car payment. Try not to even be late when making these payments. If you fall behind & have to skip paying some bills, it is better to skip out on cell phones or credit cards.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Understanding the Federal Budget
Check out the poster below - From the "Get Rich Slowly" Blog:
Although this says “2008 federal budget”, it’s actually for 2010.
The Death and Taxes page allows you to zoom around and look at sections of the poster from within your web browser. There’s even a “quick find” feature that allows users to look up the sections that interest them.
Although this says “2008 federal budget”, it’s actually for 2010.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Microsoft plus Yahoo equals what?
A year ago the rumor mill was abuzz about the possibility of Microsoft buying Yahoo! And for a pretty good amount of money - Yahoo's stock price went from $19 per share to over $30 in 1 day.
Ultimately, Microsoft didn't bite.
Turns out, they didn't have to.
They just reached a deal in which Microsoft will provide search results for Yahoo. So, when you go to Yahoo to search (instead of Google...) you will get the same results as if you went to Microsoft's own search page, the newly-minted "Bing".
Yahoo doesn't have to spend money working on search results. They will pretty-much be maintaining servers that will distribute info Microsoft gives them. This makes Yahoo's job easier. Much like you getting in a taxi to go somewhere, rather than driving yourself.
In return for the privilege to put their results on Yahoo's page, Microsoft will give 88% of the revenue made from the ads on the Yahoo search pages.
So, Yahoo is getting paid to do put up Microsoft's info. They are like an employee now. Perhaps the best way to think of Yahoo now is "call forwarding" to Microsoft.
Operationally, it shouldn't cost Microsoft much at all to hold up there end of the deal. They do the usual tweaking to improve results, and merely send them to Yahoo. They are going to pay some upfront money to Yahoo, and hire some of Yahoo's no-longer-needed search programmers.
So, there are many people who do their searching by going to Yahoo.com and now, they will be Microsoft users. And without Microsoft shelling out the mega-millions.
But does this really make sense for either side? It gives Microsoft a larger slice of the search market, but without their name on it, who would know/care. (granted, it might say "powered by Microsoft on the page somewhere, but again, who cares?) This is like a person thinking they are important because their brother scored a touchdown. Even if they did fully combine, they would only make up 1/4 of the total searches, compared to Google's 60+%.
For Yahoo, it has given up it's main reason for existence. It is letting someone else do it's work for them. The company (hopefully) will brig in a steady stream of revenue from Microsoft, and their day-to-day expenses will be lower. The shareholder's should get a steady, small, and boring dividend. But what about future growth?!? I'd say that is out the window. At least independently, Yahoo might've come up with something new, but now their search innovation is all in the hands of Microsoft.
So, Microsoft isn't gaining much, but it isn't costing much. Yahoo is retiring & collecting a steady pension check. Google probably is the real winner, by losing a potential innovation challenger, and not having to spend a dime.
Ultimately, Microsoft didn't bite.
Turns out, they didn't have to.
They just reached a deal in which Microsoft will provide search results for Yahoo. So, when you go to Yahoo to search (instead of Google...) you will get the same results as if you went to Microsoft's own search page, the newly-minted "Bing".
Yahoo doesn't have to spend money working on search results. They will pretty-much be maintaining servers that will distribute info Microsoft gives them. This makes Yahoo's job easier. Much like you getting in a taxi to go somewhere, rather than driving yourself.
In return for the privilege to put their results on Yahoo's page, Microsoft will give 88% of the revenue made from the ads on the Yahoo search pages.
So, Yahoo is getting paid to do put up Microsoft's info. They are like an employee now. Perhaps the best way to think of Yahoo now is "call forwarding" to Microsoft.
Operationally, it shouldn't cost Microsoft much at all to hold up there end of the deal. They do the usual tweaking to improve results, and merely send them to Yahoo. They are going to pay some upfront money to Yahoo, and hire some of Yahoo's no-longer-needed search programmers.
So, there are many people who do their searching by going to Yahoo.com and now, they will be Microsoft users. And without Microsoft shelling out the mega-millions.
But does this really make sense for either side? It gives Microsoft a larger slice of the search market, but without their name on it, who would know/care. (granted, it might say "powered by Microsoft on the page somewhere, but again, who cares?) This is like a person thinking they are important because their brother scored a touchdown. Even if they did fully combine, they would only make up 1/4 of the total searches, compared to Google's 60+%.
For Yahoo, it has given up it's main reason for existence. It is letting someone else do it's work for them. The company (hopefully) will brig in a steady stream of revenue from Microsoft, and their day-to-day expenses will be lower. The shareholder's should get a steady, small, and boring dividend. But what about future growth?!? I'd say that is out the window. At least independently, Yahoo might've come up with something new, but now their search innovation is all in the hands of Microsoft.
So, Microsoft isn't gaining much, but it isn't costing much. Yahoo is retiring & collecting a steady pension check. Google probably is the real winner, by losing a potential innovation challenger, and not having to spend a dime.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
