Many people in the United States today are dissatisfied with the results of the 2000 Presidential election between Al Gore and George W. Bush. One of the chief complaints is that Bush "stole" the election because Gore won the popular vote. [There are other reasons why people believe Bush "stole" the election, but we ignore them in this post.] Despite losing the popular vote however, Bush won the electoral college, and consequently, the Presidency. Those dissatisfied with the results and subscribe this complain often question the need for the electoral college, especially in the 21st century. We argue here that a republic is necessary now more than ever, that it provides stability to a volatile system, and present two writings which support our claim.
Many people today believe that a government exists to serve the populace, forgotten that first and foremost, that a government serves to protect individuals and their liberties. Federalist Paper 10, authored by James Madison, argues that a republic is necessary for the protection of individual liberties, and that as a society grows, a republic reduces the effects of populist movements.
Recently, a paper from HP Labs address the complex system, based upon 10 rounds of selecting electors, for the election of the Doge of Venice. The paper provides an in-depth technical analysis for the stability such a system provided to the Venetians. This system sustained a remarkable stable society for over 500 years.
Friday, December 7, 2007
Thursday, December 6, 2007
mortgage bailout (update)
It's happened.
see bloomberg for more details.
Because the current administration is Republican, the scope of the bailout is much more limited in scope. Democrats are already criticizing the proposal.
People who have sat on the sidelines for years, responsibly saving up their money, are getting the short end of the deal. Not only are they going to have to wait even longer, due to the ever shrinking availability of credit, their taxes are now going to pay for those who were irresponsible.
What I'd like to know is, why is no one asking the one fundamental question? That is, why should the government bail out those who committed fraud, instead of persecuting them? Yes, applying for loans by inflating information on financial assets (including salary) is fraud.
see bloomberg for more details.
Because the current administration is Republican, the scope of the bailout is much more limited in scope. Democrats are already criticizing the proposal.
People who have sat on the sidelines for years, responsibly saving up their money, are getting the short end of the deal. Not only are they going to have to wait even longer, due to the ever shrinking availability of credit, their taxes are now going to pay for those who were irresponsible.
What I'd like to know is, why is no one asking the one fundamental question? That is, why should the government bail out those who committed fraud, instead of persecuting them? Yes, applying for loans by inflating information on financial assets (including salary) is fraud.
Monday, July 9, 2007
mortgage bailout
we are now in the midst of a housing crisis in the united states. the bubble of the housing market has burst, and housing prices are dropping. which is not a problem in iteself, but in the past two years, the majority of loans have been given to people with sub-par credit taking out subprime/high risk loans who believed that housing prices would rise forever and that they'd be able to cash out. coupled with rising interest rates, too many people can no longer afford their payments, and are defaulting on their loans, bankrupting lenders such as new century financial and even hurting industry stalwarts such as bear stearns.
recently, politicians have proposed legislation to bail out such people. whether this is a good idea depends, among other things, on one's view of the role of government, as well as the scope of its powers.
first, is it the government's responsibility to bail people out of bad decisions (life, financial, etc) they have made? by no means should this question be entangled with whether the government should seek out and prosecute those who took unfair advantage of the ignorance of a populace.
second, should the entire population be responsible for poor decisions of a subpopulation? government bailout of such homeowners manifests as a tax on the rest of the population, in one form or another. as a non-homeowner (albeit an aspiring one), i have to ask why my taxes should go to pay for people to stay in houses that they cannot afford, while i myself am taking the responsible route and diligently saving.
third, one wonders about the motivations of the politicians who propose legislation. how do they stand to benefit if such bills are passed? the housing bust is a hot topic, and i can only imagine that they are taking the short sighted route- ruining the cyclic nature of any financial market for short termed gains (i.e. garnering of votes) without calculation of the repercussions that such actions may have long term.
legislative attempts have failed or been put on the back burner, but only time will tell.
recently, politicians have proposed legislation to bail out such people. whether this is a good idea depends, among other things, on one's view of the role of government, as well as the scope of its powers.
first, is it the government's responsibility to bail people out of bad decisions (life, financial, etc) they have made? by no means should this question be entangled with whether the government should seek out and prosecute those who took unfair advantage of the ignorance of a populace.
second, should the entire population be responsible for poor decisions of a subpopulation? government bailout of such homeowners manifests as a tax on the rest of the population, in one form or another. as a non-homeowner (albeit an aspiring one), i have to ask why my taxes should go to pay for people to stay in houses that they cannot afford, while i myself am taking the responsible route and diligently saving.
third, one wonders about the motivations of the politicians who propose legislation. how do they stand to benefit if such bills are passed? the housing bust is a hot topic, and i can only imagine that they are taking the short sighted route- ruining the cyclic nature of any financial market for short termed gains (i.e. garnering of votes) without calculation of the repercussions that such actions may have long term.
legislative attempts have failed or been put on the back burner, but only time will tell.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
irrational absurdity
MoveOn.org is asking for people to sign the following petition.
why should it be a crime to be profitable by selling a product that everyone wants (by virtue of the choices they have made in their lifestyle) to buy?
why should it be a crime to be profitable by selling a product that everyone wants (by virtue of the choices they have made in their lifestyle) to buy?
Stop Price Gouging
Gasoline prices are predicted to be even higher than last summer, even though Big Oil just announced record profits.
Enough is enough! A bill in the House would make gasoline price gouging a federal crime, and it could pass this week! Can you help be sure it does?
A compiled petition with your individual comment will be presented to your Representative.
Sunday, May 20, 2007
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
the technical resume
i get a lot of resumes, and im always amazed how horribly people represent themselves. here are some of my suggestions for making sure your resume gets noticed.
order the information on your resume by relevance, beginning with the most recent. at this stage, you have only 15 seconds of the person's time. make it worthwhile. if you are fresh out of school, your education and the projects you developed should come first. if you have some experience under your belt, that experience comes first. dont be overly verbose in your descriptions of your prior job responsibilities, but dont be overly brief either. the person reviewing your resume is trying to figure out whether you have a good background, and whether you have made the most of your experiences. convince them that they should call you for an interview (or at the very least, look at your website- see below).
dont include technical fluff. that means dont waste space on your resume listing applications (e.g. Adobe Photoshop, Microsoft Word). dont waste time writing things that should be common knowledge (e.g. XML).
create a website. include the url on your resume. make the website professional. do not use myspace or any other social networking site. on your website, include sample code, screenshots, descriptions. if your resume convinced them to look at your website, then your website should convince the recruiter to call you. once on your website, they have already decided to give you 5 more minutes of their time. make it worthwhile.
at the bottom of the resume, including some interesting facts about yourself. provide a "spark" that shows you are a real person, and perhaps even a well rounded person. couple of trivia about yourself (no more than 3) also serves well as the ice breaker in the interview process.
submit your resume in pdf format. if you are using word, i would suggest find a mac or downloading openoffice. either will allow you to save as pdf. if you are using word and applying for a technical position, i suggest you rethink your career path. pdf ensures that they can read it regardless of which computer they are using. it also ensures that your resume will not come out completely garbled.
order the information on your resume by relevance, beginning with the most recent. at this stage, you have only 15 seconds of the person's time. make it worthwhile. if you are fresh out of school, your education and the projects you developed should come first. if you have some experience under your belt, that experience comes first. dont be overly verbose in your descriptions of your prior job responsibilities, but dont be overly brief either. the person reviewing your resume is trying to figure out whether you have a good background, and whether you have made the most of your experiences. convince them that they should call you for an interview (or at the very least, look at your website- see below).
dont include technical fluff. that means dont waste space on your resume listing applications (e.g. Adobe Photoshop, Microsoft Word). dont waste time writing things that should be common knowledge (e.g. XML).
create a website. include the url on your resume. make the website professional. do not use myspace or any other social networking site. on your website, include sample code, screenshots, descriptions. if your resume convinced them to look at your website, then your website should convince the recruiter to call you. once on your website, they have already decided to give you 5 more minutes of their time. make it worthwhile.
at the bottom of the resume, including some interesting facts about yourself. provide a "spark" that shows you are a real person, and perhaps even a well rounded person. couple of trivia about yourself (no more than 3) also serves well as the ice breaker in the interview process.
submit your resume in pdf format. if you are using word, i would suggest find a mac or downloading openoffice. either will allow you to save as pdf. if you are using word and applying for a technical position, i suggest you rethink your career path. pdf ensures that they can read it regardless of which computer they are using. it also ensures that your resume will not come out completely garbled.
Friday, April 27, 2007
Saturday, April 21, 2007
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
the hybrid myth?
how environmental is a hybrid vehicle? ie, given today's technology, is a hybrid vehicle truly a better choice?
here is an editorial about the environmental costs of building a prius. the author does not provide citations for the claims he makes, but it does highlight the possibility that we cannot automatically assume that a car which consumes less gas is more environmental.
on another note, besides the environmental factor, the other argument for purchasing hybrid vehicles is that the amount of gas one saves. this is easier to analyse.
the following is based upon information taken from carsdirect.com
2007 Nissan Altima 2.5 S 4dr Sedan
price: $19144
mpg: 26/35 city/highway
2007 Nissan Altima Hybrid Base 4dr Sedan
price: $24046
mpg: 42/36 city/highway
here we use the nissan altima as our example. why not the prius? first, nissan does not actually build their own hybrid engines. they license the technology from toyota [citation], so we are discussing essentially the same technology. second, toyota does not make a non-hybrid version of the prius, so its hard to make a comparison with another car. on the other hand, the nissan altima base version comes in both regular and hybrid versions.
so, given the quotes we retrieved, the hybrid is more expensive by $4902. there are many factors that will make this number go up or down. some states have emission control charges. some states impose a sales tax. some states give "rebates" to purchasers in order to further an environmental agenda. due to the high demand for such vehicles, some buyers may have to pay above dealer cost. most people cannot afford to shell out the entire amount of the price of a car, and take out loans. just for reference, a $20,000 loan at 5.75% for 5 years will garner about $3000 of interest. in any case, we will not delve into all the possibilities, and just take the $4902 as the basis of our argument.
given today's prices (and let's take the most expensive prices of $3.50/gallon, currently in california), 26 miles of city driving on a regular altima will cost $3.50. 26 miles of city driving on a hybrid altima will cost $2.17. the difference, $0.0513. thus, it will take 95,500 miles of city driving in order to make up for the difference in cost. the difference in cost of highway driving is negligible. even assuming that the driver only drives in the city, that's about 7-8 years to make up that difference.
here is an editorial about the environmental costs of building a prius. the author does not provide citations for the claims he makes, but it does highlight the possibility that we cannot automatically assume that a car which consumes less gas is more environmental.
on another note, besides the environmental factor, the other argument for purchasing hybrid vehicles is that the amount of gas one saves. this is easier to analyse.
the following is based upon information taken from carsdirect.com
2007 Nissan Altima 2.5 S 4dr Sedan
price: $19144
mpg: 26/35 city/highway
2007 Nissan Altima Hybrid Base 4dr Sedan
price: $24046
mpg: 42/36 city/highway
here we use the nissan altima as our example. why not the prius? first, nissan does not actually build their own hybrid engines. they license the technology from toyota [citation], so we are discussing essentially the same technology. second, toyota does not make a non-hybrid version of the prius, so its hard to make a comparison with another car. on the other hand, the nissan altima base version comes in both regular and hybrid versions.
so, given the quotes we retrieved, the hybrid is more expensive by $4902. there are many factors that will make this number go up or down. some states have emission control charges. some states impose a sales tax. some states give "rebates" to purchasers in order to further an environmental agenda. due to the high demand for such vehicles, some buyers may have to pay above dealer cost. most people cannot afford to shell out the entire amount of the price of a car, and take out loans. just for reference, a $20,000 loan at 5.75% for 5 years will garner about $3000 of interest. in any case, we will not delve into all the possibilities, and just take the $4902 as the basis of our argument.
given today's prices (and let's take the most expensive prices of $3.50/gallon, currently in california), 26 miles of city driving on a regular altima will cost $3.50. 26 miles of city driving on a hybrid altima will cost $2.17. the difference, $0.0513. thus, it will take 95,500 miles of city driving in order to make up for the difference in cost. the difference in cost of highway driving is negligible. even assuming that the driver only drives in the city, that's about 7-8 years to make up that difference.
Monday, April 16, 2007
truly green?
i recently received the following evite to a milonga, which i've copied verbatim (with the exception of personal identification info). the event is meant to be "green" as in environmental, as 22 april is earth day (or something like it). i find the invitation to be lacking with respect to the presumed intention of the hosts. here's why. my comments are in red.
| a big green milonga welcoming tango beginners! |
| ||||||||||
applying for technical jobs
the resume
the website
the initial contact (most likely with hr)
the phone interview
the on site interview
the negotiations
the website
the initial contact (most likely with hr)
the phone interview
the on site interview
the negotiations
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)