9/23/78

You signal silent, shining, shining sun-dressed girl, the day by the lake, of still water and flowing earth, the wind swept brown, command me to say nothing at all, ever again. I did abide at will, too early though, and your wish now was mine then, though we gave no damn about commands, or dared to utter them at all. So, shining shining, sun-dressed girl, standing firm in plain plane, harrying charges, reflecting dappled light of a long-gone lake, await the ever after of endless bedtime fairy stories, that fathers tell daughters to hasten them to sleep. But, I must abide, without choice, obey. I cannot speak now in right as I did not speak when my command was your wish, your dare. Content, shining, sun-dressed girl live thy nine lives and never hear the end of the story better left unbegun.

Ryder Cup Redux and Prospection

After three days of spectacular play by both sides and a contest closer than the final score indicated, all 24 contestants have much to be proud of. Some surpassed expectations while others did not play so well, and that mixture resulted in triumph for the United States. Several observations about the tournament itself. Both captains proved their skill as strategists. Neither Faldo nor Azinger made any dubious coaching moves, and, consequently, the contestants were put in places to succeed.

 

Arguably, with the American side having four captain's picks to Europe's two, the US held an advantage. Though meritocratic and fair, the points systems each sides use for qualification are imperfect quantitative methods. The two-tiered European and World Points system for Europe allows its top players to play their way on to the team without compromising their own income or commercial interests. America's method of qualifying players based on money is certainly an improvement over the byzantine top-10 based approach. However, the drawback to each approach is that this method does not account for the dozens of ultra-talented international players on both the European and American PGA Tours who finish well and hence reduce the point pool available to players vying for Ryder Cup spots. Thus, determining points ought to have a deflator or inflator relative to the strength of the field in each event. On a theoretical basis, any evolutionary dynamic - biological, economic, social, or political - which is more fluid and adaptable than a comparable system has a greater probability of success. (Since the publication of this post, European Ryder Cup stalwart Colin Montgomerie averred that Europe ought to have 4 wild cards as well).

 

Luckily, golf enthusiasts will remember the 37th Matches for what they were rather than for what they were not or what they ought to have been. Even without the most successful player in the world, the tension of anticipation, quality of play, spirited support, and sportsmanship by both sides surpassed even optimistic expectations. With no shortage of skilled, colorful sportsmen, the future of the game in a sooner rather than later post-Tiger era is not in doubt. Moreover, these matches may be the first watershed moment golf has had since Tiger Woods emerged over eleven years ago. 

 

In the same way that new formats in cricket have broadened the appeal of a staid, conservative sport, these matches knocked some of the dust off of the Royal and Ancient Game. They can serve as a catalyst to examine how to capitalize on such popularity. Perhaps American junior golf programs may stress aspects of team play rather than individual achievement. If anything, Ryder Cup golf is the most fan-friendly, for it can optimize technological innovation cost effectively. It would be expensive to have a camera follow every pairing in a 156 man field, but it would be feasible for broadcasters to have a cameraman follow each match. Such coverage could be sold on a pay-per-view basis over digital and satellite networks. Players may balk at more people inside the ropes, but limits on audio transmission and ever-improving video technology could make such recording unobtrusive to the playing of the match. Also, with soft greens, firm fairways and more than enough greenlight pins, the course set-up encourages aggressive play. Major championship golf has lately been a test against par, but the match play format is perfect for a hit it close style of play. Moreover, with no paychecks on the line, players are more liberal in opening up their arsenals of shots. With millions on the line and a one shot lead down the stretch, a high cut to a draw pin might be an unnecessary shot. However, with a chance to close a guy out, hyper-competitive, skilled golfers will more often that not hit "a shot with balls." 

 

The euphoria of reclaiming the Cup will soon wear off, but three days where everything went right was a brief, welcome escape from a world where lots of things are going wrong. Three days of dignity, pride and professionalism did much to cleanse some of the grubbiness and concern from the collective psyche. 3:1 says Captian Azinger gets a book deal soon. Reserve a copy today. If you need some help writing it, Zinger, here's hope you're reading.

3 imperatives for the next administration

According to Aristotle, a younger generation will try to correct the mistakes of its forebearers by adopting an opposite position. If X is wrong, and Y is the opposite of X, then Y must be the correct tack. Such radicalism is often misplaced, but after eight years of the George W. Bush administration, it might not be a bad idea. There are three areas where either a return to the status quo ante or outright repudiation of policy mistakes are crucial regardless of which party wins the executive in November:

 

1. Close the prison at Guantanamo Bay - Without question, this short-sighted, wrong-headed policy in the War on Terror has provoked more anti-American backlash than some of the prize pigs for which the Defense Department, CIA, and US Armed Forces are responsible. As awful as shoddy preparation and armament, extraordinary rendition, and the shame of Abu Ghraib have been, the ongoing detention of terror suspects at Gitmo embodies everything that was wrong with this administration. Gitmo signifies both how little the administration regards human rights and an utter disrespect for the rule of domestic Constitutional law and the spirit of international conventions. In addition to being neither compassionate nor conservative, the military detention center has not produced any significant counter-terrorist intelligence. All it does is piss off allies, disaffected Muslims, and Americans who still give a dman about the laws of the land. The glimmering hope that one of the suspects would provide valuable information to stop a ticking bomb never materialized. Shut Gitmo down. Apologize to the aggrieved. Find a better way.

 

2. Simplify taxation - Americans are not opposed to taxation if the proceeds to the public purse keeps the roads paved, the levies sturdy, and the country safe from military threat. What makes taxes so galling is the way legislators allocate tax receipts in the budget. A shift away from income and investment taxation towards consumption based taxes eliminates the size and scope of a government bureaucracy (IRS), will reduce the influence of lobbyists who grub for breaks for their corporate clients, and compel firms towards more efficient, externality-limiting means of production. Markets and consumer demand have signaled more preference of sustainable development and green technology. Rather than further complicate the tax code with breaks and subsidies to spur such investment, simplification of the tax code will result in a natural gravitation towards such ends.

 

3. Respect the office - Every policy blunder and scandal amount to a fundamental lack of respect for the presidency because every policy blunder and scandal - tax cuts, gross farm subsidies, unilateral military intervention in Iraq, torture memos, opaque secrecy, capricious use of executive privilege, the Plame affair, federal attorney sackings, sweetheart nuclear deal for India - seemed to stem from an extreme desire to advance pet, political agendas. They certainly did not tangibly benefit the American people. Few Americans find little in politics redeeming, and engendering such cynicism will erode confidence in an ostensibly successful, admirable institutional framework. Attempts by the executive to act above the laws he is intended to uphold are callow and disingenuous, and even after eight years, W demonstrated he is both incompetent at winning battles on his own and incapable of being accountable for his mistakes. What is worse is that he has left not only the country, but the office of the presidency in far worse shape than he found it. It is hardly surprising he managed to run another business into the ground despite having a highly connected support system. Whoever occupies the Oval Office next year must strive earnestly to restore faith in the presidency by distancing himself from the notion of all politics, all the time.

 

In short, the next president must take care to act within the framework of laws and favor a best practice approach rather than see what he can get away with. The bar ought to be higher for someone with such great power and responsibility, but Americans, tired of eight disingenuous years of Republican greed (big shock) may just be ready for someone who will not act like he is better than anyone else or the job he is supposed to do. Whoever comes next, please have some respect for the job you are trying so hard to earn, and, pretty please, with fucking sugar on top, carry yourself with the dignity the position deserves.

Family friendly tickets

In response to John McCain's selection of Alaska governor (and granny to be) Sarah Palin as his running mate, public opinion varied. Some cynically sneered that the Republicans were pandering to the electorate, merely copying the Democratic party's youth movement. Few were even surprised and confused by the selection, but the whole country knows McCain likes younger women, so where's the shock value? Another seeming middle ground majority fancying itself as the voice of reason expressed a more neutral, open-minded view that her background made the Republican ticket more family friendly - more to come on whatever the heck that means. 

 

What stands out is the lack of consensus over the Palin selection, and that seems queer to Yardage. French doctor, author and crackpot Louis-Ferdinand Celine wrote, "Public opinion is always right, especially when it's really idiotic." Selecting a female running mate is a watershed moment in the history of the political party known as a rich, old, white, male preserve. To be fair, the Democrats have their share of that breed, but they are more ashamed to admit that any entrenched political party truly stands for the preservation of the status quo, and its members fear egalitarian upward mobility of lower classes. The public response should have had some more unity such as, "It's about time," or "Finally." Instead, a female figurehead, the governor with gorgeous gams and a killer smile, come off the pine to invigorate a campaign which trails in preliminary polling. 

 

As governor of a geographically vast state, as head of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, Palin has accomplished much at a young age. There is no question regarding her administrative competence or at least her ability to rise quickly from local to state office. So, why is so much import placed on a family friendly ticket? Moreover, what on earth might that be?

 

For society to function, good government fills in where people, cooperation, and markets cannot. Sound infrastructure, public safety, and predictable regulation provide a conducive environment for families to thrive. When commutes are efficient, the laws enforced equally and schools free of violence, families do well. Totalitarian governments in Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany were surprisingly family friendly. Had the domestic economy not imploded due to excessive central planning or limited trade, the models might have endured. Perhaps linking the concept to the fundamental duties of government is not the best proof, but carping about populist issues does not solve policy and market failures.

 

So, in modern America, a family friendly political party ticket must constitute rhetoric about schools, healthcare, tax breaks. Wrap it up with a pretty, prolific lady, and the party has a product. As long as wages stagnate, no long term incentive to save exists, and no commitment to the well-information of the citizenry predominates, the concept of the family faces assault practcially and ideologically. Governor Palin certainly brings with her a telegenic phenotype of the family concept, but what in her gubernatorial record qualifies her as a champion of working families? According to Andrew Romano's Stumper blog, the record is "still pretty thin." Other than her vehement anti-abortion position, little ink has been spilled over her policy notions on government and market involvement in healthcare, national educational curriculum standards, and the expansion of benefits for the poverty stricken.

 

For someone who will represent the deciding vote in the Senate, how reassuring is it to middle class Americans that she is a dyed in the wool conservative with no discernible agenda? Such factors are of greater consequence given that Senator McCain may succumb to the vicissitudes of average life expectancy, and Mrs. Palin may wind up in the top job. She cannot remain a political enigma, and her slight record on 'bread and butter' issues only confirm a madman's epigram.

Sabbatical ends. Macky's back in town.

Dynamite has returned from self-imposed exile. Many of the events and occurences of the past 60 days - Olympic games, PGA Tour playoffs, FOMC meeting, Democratic convention - would have made brilliant topics for this space, yet topicality in extrema is like too much of any good thing. Applying the principle of declining marginal utility to being well informed is not quite so simple.

 

The principle of declining marginal utility states that a consumer as he consumes more of one good, while keeping consumption of all other goods constant, he will receive less utility from each unit consumed of that good. 

 

If a person prefers being well-informed to uninformed, he will consume information to satisfy that preference. However, the pursuit of being well informed as well as what one must consume to do so is forever dynamic. Moreover, the individual units of "well-information" are highly variegated. When one particular news item ceases to be of interest such as ongoing election coverage, the consumer can tune it out in favor of another area of interest. Once enough time has lapsed where the information he possesses about the presidential election has exhausted its utility outright, the desire to accumulate a greater reserve of election knowledge will renew the cycle. Shifting amongst the subpreferences within the overarching goal of being well-informed does not change the level of one's well-information so long as consumption is constant. However, what happens when even a rational, sensible, well-informed person has had enough?

 

The presidential election in the United States is a perfect example of how an ongoing, major news story crowds out some lesser, though more significant events such as the transfer of security to Iraqi forces in Anbar province or the high-level discussion held by international military leaders regarding the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. 

 

When information can spread quickly and easily, separating wheat from chaff without missing small, important items becomes ever more difficult. Press freedom is invaluable to a democracy, but its overabundance, the shrillness of its tone, its sometimes amateurish democratization do turn off even those who value the benefits of knowing more about the world around them. Given editorial biases, well-information requires consumption of information from sources with opposing ideological perspectives. Often, the editorial articles in the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal have similar subjects, and it is interesting to see how each side, each point of view might apply the same factual evidence. 

 

As the quadrennial presidential thrill ride hurtles into the fourth turn, as the harvest moon approaches, and the hunter's moon inaugurates the apex of the political season, media outlets will vie ever harder for commercial and professional prominence. Scooping, topping, breaking a story first will fuel what the late HST called the 'feeding frenzy.' Greed from all corners, the burning money machines of campaign drives and the sound of countless Faustian bargains being sealed will make for one bloody fall. Remember to vote and help the needy.