The Decline and Fall of the NYC Empire

Since the end of World War II, New York City has served as the global epicenter of civilization. The wealth, culture and innovation it has spawned is truly extraordinary. Nearly 170 languages are spoken in the city. Forty percent of the world's finances are controlled by NYC. There is a whole laundry list of facts that I could include that all go towards demonstrating the same thing: NYC is the apex of modern civilization. But I'm here to tell you a different story. That not only has the city peaked, it has already lost its crown.

The world runs on capital. And no place leveraged capital better than NYC, specifically Wall Street. Wall Street's mastery over global finance cemented NYC's grip as the center of civilization. Accordingly, if you lived anywhere else in the world and you dreamed of prosperity, NYC was where you went to make it happen. In fact, even though I went to college 700 miles away from NYC, I believe that I am the only one from my graduating class of 6000 that doesn't currently live in New York. Put simply, NYC owned a monopoly over the creation of wealth.

But on September 15th, 2008, New Yorkers awoke with a Trojan horse on their doorsteps. That Trojan horse was the collapse of Lehman Brothers. New York never saw what hit them and that day forward, everything changed. What had previously been seen as an impenetrable fortress of wealth all of a sudden appeared vulnerable and open to attack. Instead of New Yorkers kidding about how a half a million dollars gets you a studio the size of a shoebox, they began wondering how far down can prices go. Instead of commenting on how the tough winters build character, they began to wonder the impacts of cold weather on the psyche. Instead of blindly following marching orders to arrive at work at 7AM and leave at 7PM, they began to wonder if they were fighting their war, or somebody else's. Instead of bravely wandering through the rat race for the piece of cheese at the end of the tunnel, they began to worry about the mousetrap.

For all those reading this article and shaking their heads thinking I'm crazy, listen to what I'm saying. I am not implying that other cities are not suffering the same or even worse obstacles than New York is facing, because they are (especially the city I currently live in, Phoenix). What I'm saying is that a city that never had a doubt, never questioned its hegemonic position in the world order, all of a sudden is having doubts, is questioning its future. And this has opened the flood gates. NYC must now question whether Wall Street can continue to take advantage of monetizing the dollar like it has over the past 30 years, which has been the source of so much of its wealth. Unfortunately, they will not like the answer, and all of a sudden, all the doubts listed above become magnified. When history looks back at September 2008, it will see the beginning of the waning of the NYC Empire.

Now before any of my readers, who live in NYC jump off a skyscraper, please calm down. Just like previous epicenters of civilization, such as Rome, Paris and London, the decline will be slow. New York is, and will continue to be the most dynamic and powerful city in the world for some time. Ok, now your thinking I obviously suffer from short term memory loss (like in that movie Memento), as I mentioned earlier that New York has already lost its crown as the apex of modern civilization. It has, but not to another city, but to WWW, the World Wide Web.

The web has now been accessed by about 1.6 billion people and that number grows everyday. The opportunities on the web to find employment, gain wealth, gather information, appreciate art and observe a diverse range of culture has long ago surpassed that of any city. Whereas NYC has often been coined a melting pot of civilization, the web is more like a rain storm of civilization, where information is coming fast and hard in small drops at a time and ultimately aggregating into a larger sea of information. And as we continue to get pelted with culture from disparate sources (and the web's technology becomes more sophisticated), we will continue to redefine our understanding of civilization. No longer should it or will it be limited in context to just our physical interactions, but rather also in the context of our virtual interactions. And (pay attention politicians and world leaders) no longer will any wall, mountain or ocean prove strong enough to separate one civilization from another; because the reach of the Web is infinite.

Short of a complete reversal of society's technological advancement, New York City will undoubtedly be the last CITY to serve as the embodiment of civilization. But NYC now bows down to the World Wide Web, as it now owns the crown.

The Meaning of Life

According to Wikipedia, "the meaning of life constitutes a philosophical question concerning the purpose and significance of human existence." It's a loaded question. A question that has occupied the minds of our greatest thinkers for centuries. And at one time or another, I'm sure its something that you have entertained (knowing my audience, probably while being high). Answers run the gamut and include "to realize one's potential," "to evolve," "to be fruitful and multiply," "to follow one's destiny," "to seek wisdom and knowledge," "to leave the world a better place than you found it," "to attain spiritual enlightenment," and of course the dog-chasing-the-tail answer of "to find the meaning of life."

As the preeminent thinker of our generation, I'm going to let you in on a little secret. There is no meaning of life. Now, before you start crying and reading me a laundry list of moments in your life that prove there is a meaning of life, consider the following:

The age of the universe is around 14 billion years. The age of the earth is around 4.5 billion years. Homo sapiens have been around for about 250,000 years (that's you and I for the uneducated). Doing the math, humans have been around for 1/18,000 of the earth's existence and 1/56,000 of the universe's existence.

Furthermore, within about 900 million years, all animal life on earth will be extinct. In about 5.5 billion years, the sun will expand to 250 times its current radius and probably consume the earth. In about 10 to the power of 100 years (that's a one followed by a hundred zeros) the universe will enter a dark era, where it will be almost entirely empty. After that, it's all speculative, but lets just say that most of the scenarios are not very encouraging for the future of any form of life (if you have a problem with any of these numbers/concepts, your problem isn't with me, but with the general scientific consensus.)

I think it would be fair to say that trying to explain the "significance of human existence" is akin to explaining the significance of an ant hill in the middle of Africa. And just like the ant hill, if (when) the human race disappears, our existence would (will) be but a brief footnote in history of the universe.

Yet, we continue to search for more complicated answers to our existence. Why does something always have to be bigger than it is? Why do we feel the need to give certainty to our lives by defining it through questions and answers that are ambiguous and only succeed in bringing more uncertainty (actually, I know the answer. Because it's easy to manipulate people that way.)?

No, there is no meaning OF life. There is only meaning to YOUR life. And the meaning you give to OTHER lives.

So stop making life so complicated and go out and define your own life. Discover what hobbies you enjoy doing. Spend more quality time with your loved ones. Become knowledgeable on subjects that you've always been intrigued about, but have never found the time to pursue. Stop sweating the small stuff. Call your sibling that you're in a fight with and apologize, whether its your fault or not. Go set some goals...and accomplish them. Have fun. Have a positive outlook. Help those in need of help. Stand up for what is right. And do it, not because I told you so, but because it personifies the best of who you are.

So, please keep in mind, that EVERYTHING will one day come to an end, including your life. And when that time comes, I promise you, we will be no closer to "solving" a meaning for human existence. But hopefully, you succeeding in giving meaning to your life and the lives of the ones you love.

My Big Ego Just Got Bigger

When Nobel Prize winner and Columbia economics professor Joseph Stiglitz, MIT economics professor Simon Johnson and Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City President Thomas Hoenig repeat almost verbatim to Congress what you said a few days prior, it confirms what you've always known: you're full of yourself and you're a genius.

Please conveniently ignore the fact that my opinions are heavily influenced by these people.

What's Going On

On November 4th, 2008, I, like the majority of the voting electorate, voted for "Change." Over five months later, I'm beginning to wonder if we will ever see that "Change." In the last few weeks, it has become apparent, that the current administration's answer to the financial crisis is to continue the plan developed by the previous administration; namely, propping up the zombie banks through taxpayer funded bailouts.

Geithner's recently unveiled plan for the toxic assets amounts to nothing more then the transfer of risk from the banks to the taxpayer. Thankfully for us, there is no chance of this plan working. Because even with the non-recourse 85% levered FDIC loans (didn't leverage get us into this mess?), and the generous 7.5% taxpayer subsidies, the bids still won't come in high enough for the banks to be able to accept without sinking their balance sheets. Or so I thought. As Jeffrey Sachs points out, the banks will figure out a way to bid on their own toxic assets (with no transparency, of course) and then quietly unload them onto the taxpayer in the not too distant future. Doh!

But all of this is a moot point. You all heard the good news. Banks reported big profits in the 1st quarter, far above analysts expectations. The financial sector and our economy is on its way to recovery. Sure, if your willing to ignore that much of the profits came from a change in the mark-to-market accounting rules (who needs transparency in accounting anyways) and from a one-time payoff on AIG's credit default swaps (aka CDS. basically insurance for the toxic assets). Oh, and yes, the AIG taxpayer financed bailout was just another non-transparent way to funnel money to insolvent banks. Conveniently for the banks, both of these fortuitous events happened prior to the conclusion of the government's stress test; designed by the administration to determine which banks are insolvent (I'm guessing all the major banks are going to pass).

Look, I'm not a pessimist, but rather a realist. I want the bank rescue plans to succeed and want to believe that the latest rally is a reflection of improving market conditions. But the more research I do, the more it becomes apparent to me that many of the major banks are insolvent and the governments solution is to slowly transfer losses and debt from the banks to the taxpayers and hope that asset prices trend upward. Whereas, the most efficient (and beneficial to the taxpayer) way to deal with the economic crisis is to put all the insolvent banks in a temporary receivership; liquidate the good assets off to well capitalized super-regional banks and institutions and throw all the bad assets into a RTC type entity.

So, what's going on? Why are the banks receiving special accommodations? From my perspective, the government and large financial institutions interests are so commingled that they have formed a symbiotic relationship. Seriously, of the people in the government who are really running the show, what percentage are former employees of the financial institutions? I'm sure the number is extraordinarily high. What percentage of former government officials are currently employees or "Advisors" of the financial institutions? How is is possible to not have conflicting interests in dealing with the current mess?

For a more in depth look, I highly recommend you read " The Quiet Coup" from MIT professor and Atlantic writer Simon Johnson and "The Big Takeover" from Rolling Stone writer Matt Taibbi. They both do a brilliant job of giving a detailed account of how 146 years after President Lincoln delivered us a "government of the people, by the people, for the people," President Obama is on slippery slope to delivering us a government of the banks, by the banks, for the banks.

Quick tangent. For an administration that ran on transparency, you would think this would present a golden opportunity for the Republicans to make some legitimate criticism of team Obama's opaque handling of the banking crisis. But no, they would rather throw a tea party (protest on government stimulus spending and taxes). I'm not going to get into the merits of the tea party, but rather comment that the ECONOMY is not going to recover until the banks are once again well capitalized and lending money. This IS the ISSUE of the day. And every other issue is secondary in nature until the economy is headed down the right path. Yet the Republicans are still spewing out the same ideological company line. But why am I surprised? The Republican couldn't lead their way out of a paper bag right now.

OK, now back to What's Going On. Looking beyond my superficial conspiracy theory that the banks are now running the government, recently, Brad DeLong, economics professor at U.C. Berkeley and Matthew Yglesias, associate editor of the The Atlantic Monthly, have proposed four different narratives on what the administration is up to. But seeing as how I'm obviously much wiser than any economics professor or any editor (yes, I realize my posts are riddled with grammatical errors), I'll propose my own narrative. And if this narrative is true, in many ways, it makes me feel better about the administration's true agenda and largely renders everything I wrote above almost completely meaningless (which, I guess, would not make me very wise after all):

The people who are running our government; namely, Larry Summers, Tim Geithner, Ben Bernanke and formerly Hank Paulson, stared into the abyss, as Zerohedge points out, on September 18th, three days after the failure of Lehman Brothers. U.S. Representative Paul Jankorski paraphrases disclosures from Bernanke and Paulson:

On Thursday (Sept 18), at 11am the Federal Reserve noticed a tremendous draw-down of money market accounts in the U.S., to the tune of $550 billion was being drawn out in the matter of an hour or two. The Treasury opened up its window to help and pumped a $105 billion in the system and quickly realized that they could not stem the tide. We were having an electronic run on the banks. They decided to close the operation, close down the money accounts and announce a guarantee of $250,000 per account so there wouldn't be further panic out there.

If they had not done that, their estimation is that by 2pm that afternoon, $5.5 trillion would have been drawn out of the money market system of the U.S., would have collapsed the entire economy of the U.S., and within 24 hours the world economy would have collapsed. It would have been the end of our economic system and our political system as we know it.

This event so traumatized them, that they are fearful that nationalizing the major banks may lead to another run on the banks; one in which they can not stop, resulting in the collapse of the world's financial and political system. And this fear has dictated every major economic policy since. Faced with the unthinkable,the administration has decided to do everything in their power to keep the insolvent banks afloat. Even if that means being disingenuous with the public and reckless with their money.

The Yin & Yang of Politics

The Yin and Yang of the current US political system can be found within the following two Questions and Answers:

Question 1: What are the definitions of a Democrat and a Republican?

Answer 1: A Democrat is one who criticizes and assigns blame to everything a Republican does. A Republican is one who criticizes and assigns blame to everything a Democrat does.

Question 2: What are the aspirations of elected Politicians and elite Businessmen?

Answer 2: Elected Politicians aspire to use their power to gain the wealth of elite Businessmen. Elite Businessmen aspire to use their wealth to gain the power of a Politician.

Let me enlighten you on how all this fits together.





Q&A 1: The Republican and Democratic parties, as institutions, own a monopoly over the political process. For this reason, they have no real desire to promote honest and intelligent discourse on the issues. You see, honest discourse and cooperation promotes innovation in political thought. Innovation in political thought gives rise to new political platforms. If a new political platform were to gain momentum, a new political party could possibly emerge; a threat to the two parties stronghold on political power.

The thought that the entire realm of political representation can be contained within two diametrically opposing concepts is ridiculous. But the Republicans and Democrats have succeeded in doing this very thing. They have done this by constantly assaulting the other party's laws and ideas, no matter their substance. By always being at odds, the Democrats and Republicans have created a dichotomy of ideology, a love/hate relationship, an us vs. them philosophy, that defines each as the opposite of the other and renders the need for any other competing parties as irrelevant.

To sum things up, through their monopoly of the political system, the two parties have reduced intelligent political debate into frantic yelling matches and simultaneously crowded out constructive competitors.

Which brings us to Q&A 2: The Democrats and Republicans, despite their polar ideologies, are, at their core, identical in nature. They exploit your ideologies to gain votes and get elected. Then, they transfer the power that comes with the office to an elite class of Businessmen in exchange for wealth. The entire political system is static. Wealth and Power stays in the hands of a few at the expense of the masses.

I'm not trying to downplay the fact that people have conflicting conservative and liberal ideals. But what does it matter when your elected politicians are willing to sell these ideals for wealth. In essence, if you are an ardent supporter of either party, you are being screwed. You may think that you're electing someone who shares your vision. And in some cases, maybe they do. But that support will not translate into policy that directly benefits you in a significant way. Rather, it will just ensure the preservation and consolidation of wealth amongst the handful of elite that really run this country.

But DLaz, don't give us the hows and whys of our political system. Tell us what we can do; what we can do to prevent the corruption of our elected officials, see the execution of the will of the people and provide a system that encourages the introduction of constructive thoughts. At the risk of sounding naïve and unaware of how the world works, here it is:

1. If you want to devote your life to public service and the common good of your constituents, prove it. All elected officials, throughout their lives, should only be able to maintain a certain predetermined level of wealth. You are free to earn as much as you can in your lifetime, but everything beyond this predetermined level will be liquidated and distributed, according to the will of the politician's constituency, to various charities and public projects. The level of wealth a politician can obtain should be based on a formula that takes into account spouses and children. The level of wealth should be in significant excess of the average family's wealth, but nothing too extravagant. If one's wealth is beyond this level upon entering politics, they will be able to maintain up to that higher level.
   
2. Politicians should have to run on their own ideas, not on the denunciation of others. They should be forbidden from negative campaigning and attacks on opposing parties. I can see a three-strike system here. First strike is a warning. Second strike is a fine. And third strike will result in losing your office. If you are worried about legitimate criticism of bad ideas, don't worry. There are plenty of talking heads out there to do that.


3. Only individual citizens should be able to donate towards a campaign or party (with a reasonable maximum contribution). If corporations want to buy legislation and power, so be it. But they shouldn't be able to do this through lining the pockets of politicians and parties. They should do it by gaining good will with the voters through donations to charities and public projects.


4. Term limits for Congress. No single individual should be in power more than a decade. We can go through the pros and cons of this, but my argument comes down to the saying/quote: power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.


5. The political parties should be subject to anti-trust laws.
   

I'm a realist, not an idealist. For the transformation discussed above to take place, you would need a revolution of our political system. But every revolution needs to start somewhere.

Save the [fill in the blank]

I feel like everyone/everything has a cause now a days. "Save the [fill in the blank]" has become the ultimate cure for boredom. Well, I'm bored too, so I decided to start my own cause.

Hi. I'm DLaz, founder of Blog and Drinks and I'm appearing before you today to talk about an issue that is very near and dear to my heart: VCRs.

Everyday, on average, 1,137 VCRs in the US meet their untimely demise. And if we don't act quickly, the thought of a world without VCRs will become a reality. Its easy to turn a blind eye to this pandemic, so long as we can avoid putting a face to its victims. That is why I would like everyone to meet Timmy.

It was not long ago, that Timmy was a young and ambitious player who selfishly devoted his time to showing you the day's cinematic masterpieces. Fast forward, rewind, play, pause, reject. These were the commands he faithfully executed on your every beck and call. Now, he sits, discarded and homeless, wondering if his life was just some sort of cosmic joke. Constantly replaying the great moments he shared with you: Gasping at Jaws, laughing at Blazing Saddles, crying at Field of Dreams. Yes, he was there for all of them.

Maybe Timmy is a little dated. Maybe he supports a technology that is nearly obsolete. Maybe he is impossible to program. But doesn't he deserve the same opportunities that vastly superior technologies like DVD players and Blu-Ray players currently enjoy? Well, now you can see to it, that Timmy does. For as little as $1.17 a day, less than the cost of your morning coffee, you can help VCRs like Timmy find loving and caring homes. Our operators are standing by to take your calls. So please grab your credit card and call 1-800-VCR-SAVE, and you can begin saving the VCRs today.

DLaz Thoughts

It has been almost a decade since The Simpsons was even half-decent and it’s still on TV. That’s really amazing when you think about it.

I don’t know anybody who likes Nancy Pelosi. Even her parents are disappointed.

I’ve been getting less spam recently. Which means, even the spammers have been hit by the recession (finally a bright spot in this mess).

Does anyone else get the feeling that A-Rod is going to go postal? Either that, or take Jeter hostage and refuse to release him until the world agrees to love him.

I would pay good money to see Rush Limbaugh and Michael Moore compete in American Gladiators.

Did President Obama make fun of the Special Olympics….and get away with it? I wonder if he can walk on water.

The number 1 rule of parenting: never let your kid became a child actor. Has a child actor’s life/career ever gone well in the aftermath?

Madonna is the first ever real triple threat. She could be my mother, my grandmother or my girlfriend and I think I would be OK with any of those options (I seeked permission from my girlfriend and was granted approval to write this thought. Still awaiting approval from my mom and grandma).

How is it that Europeans are so laid back and civilized in every facet of life, except when it comes to soccer?

I wish I was either smarter or dumber.

Geithner Looks Exactly Like.....

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Tim Geithner, the US Secretary of the Treasury, and one of the few men that hold the fate of the global financial system in their hands, is the spitting image of.....the bad guy from Billy Madison. This has to be a bad sign.

Greed is Gone

For over two decades, no speech has guided our business aspirations quite like the "Greed is Good" speech from the movie Wall Street. But, Greed, all of a sudden, is less popular than an AIG executive. We need a new rallying cry. Thankfully, I'm here to help:

Ladies and gentlemen, I appreciate the opportunity you are giving me here. There used to be an idea that was powerful. So powerful that it inspired the poorest people from around the world to risk their health and leave behind their families in pursuit of it. That idea was the American Dream. Today, that dream has been reduced to a joke. Ravaged by the very ones that we entrusted to its safekeeping. Goldman, Citi, Merrill, Lehman, AIG! They promised to watch over our dream with honesty and integrity. Instead, they sliced up our futures into a thousand pieces and sold them to the highest bidder. The truth is, they had only one true guiding principle: greed.

Now, here we are, with a financial system in ruin, wealth destroyed and dreams shattered. And what are We the People doing about it? Nothing! Everywhere I look, people are drowning in their own self pity. Waiting for things to go back to the way they were. Waiting for a white knight to come to the rescue. It makes me sick. It would make your ancestors sick. The very ones who built this great country. Yes, the investment bankers hijacked the American Dream. But it happened on our watch and we must take responsibility for it.

So, I ask you to open up your eyes and face two scary truths. First, the American financial system you grew up with is dead. The shallow existence of watching our wealth grow and indulging in our superficiality is over. Second, if we continue to sit idly, the Dream will be nothing more than a remnant of the fallen American empire. We need to act now. We need to take our Dream back! How? You the People, need to invest in the one institution that is innovative enough, that is capable enough and that is pure enough to be entrusted with the revitalization of the American Dream: yourself.

It is a scary thought to be burdened with the survival of our way of life and the revival of the American Dream. But for all your shortcomings, you are capable of extraordinary feats. You just need to invest in yourself! Invest in your knowledge! Invest in your evolution! Invest in your future! The internet has placed so much knowledge at your fingertips. And if you just scratch on the surface, you will open the floodgates of wisdom and power. If you're just willing to make the sacrifice and have the patience, you will find that not only can you navigate through this world, but manipulate it as well. America, everything you need to be successful in this world is within your grasp. Just reach for it. And I guarantee that you will save the American Dream. Thank you.

The Public Private Blur

We live in two distinct worlds.  One life exists primarily at work. Its professional, polished and politically correct. Its a life of routine and conformity. And its an act. The other life is more complex and exists primarily at home. Its where we let our guard down and let out the personality that makes us, us. It is the life you are afraid to let other know about. In this life we are crazy, paranoid, psychotic, insecure, you name it, we are all of it. But it is real. 

However, things are changing. Facebook, MySpace, GPS, Twitter, etc. Everyday, the technology of the 21st is further documenting our lives and persona to the point that our private and public spheres are becoming blurred. I was initially resistant to this movement. I was intensely private, willing to go to great lengths to guard my psychoses. But recently, I have begun to change my mind.

If you are familiar with the evolution of man, you would know that we as a species, used to live in a communal setting. But somewhere along the line, the human race separated into clans and families. We began to build borders (homes) around ourselves and shrouded our personal lives and thoughts in secrecy from others. "Never tell anybody outside the family what you're thinking again!" as uttered by Vito Corelone in The Godfather was the norm. This development though, came at a price. We lost touch with our race. 

Now, after centuries of putting up walls between our human brethren, we are tearing them down. Technology is giving us a closer look at what happens behind closed doors and what we are learning is that we are not that dissimilar.  That others have hidden private personas that are not so much different than our own.  That our psychoses are on par with everybody else (for the most part). We are discovering that human nature is not robotic, but rather significantly and exquisitely flawed. And this understanding is a positive development in our evolution.

I have always believed that we must put the advancement, enlightenment and common good of our race above our self-interest. It is for these reasons that I had to embrace the blurring of public and private life. Its why I write this blog. Yes, it is not easy to put yourself out there, exposing your insecurities to the world. What if they judge me harshly? What if this, what if that? I say, who gives a damn. If they want to continue being delusional hypocrites, so be it. The truth is, only through a better understanding of each other will we ever truly feel comfortable with ourselves. So embrace the blur, reach out to someone and let them know that you are just as crazy as them.

America & The Mechanic

Mechanic: Is America here?

America: Yea, right over here. How does it look.

Mechanic: Not good. Take a look at this.

America: What's that?

Mechanic: It's your AIG. Ya see, a normal AIG looks like this (points to a clean object). But this is your AIG, its dropping CDS's all over the place.

America: CDS's?

Mechanic: Yea. Credit Default Swaps, CDS's. They're everywhere. I recommend you take care of this immediately.

America: Ok, how much is that going to cost.

Mechanic: Normally, it would be $200 billion. But for you, we can do it for $180 billion.

America: Ok. I guess.

Mechanic: Now take a look at this. It's your Citi. You see this red color? It's normally supposed to be black. This is really bad. I don't even know if I can legally let you leave here without fixing it.

America: What's that going to run me?

Mechanic: I can get it done for you for $45 billion. Anywhere else, it would cost you at least $60.

America: Well, if I really need it.

Mechanic: We'd also like to put in a TARP?

America: A TARP! What's that.

Mechanic: It's complicated stuff. You would have to be a mechanic to understand.

America: Do I really need it

Mechanic: Yes, this is an emergency. If you don't put in one right now, your almost definitely going to crash on the way out of here. $700 billion should do the job.

America: But I only came in for a quick tune-up. Fine, but that's it, right?

Mechanic: Right, that's everything. But you should come back next month to make sure.

Don't Hate the Playa...

We like to see stars fall. It makes us feel better about ourselves. When someone climbs to a level of stardom we could only dream of, there's nothing more fun then to watch them fall off that cliff. We like to know that they're not untouchable. That despite the money, women (or men) and power, they are human just like us. That they still face trials and tribulations that keep them up at night. We just need a reason to hate on them, less one wants to risk appearing jealous of their good fortune. So we wait for them to screw up and then we bring the heat.

Hello A-Rod, Bonds, Clemens and McGwire (A,B,C &MG). You guys are through. Your names will be forever synonymous with steroids. You guys screwed up the game we loved. Enjoy the mansions, ferraris and yachts, because no matter how big your house is, or how fast your car is or how luxurious your boat is you will never be able to escape your sad legacy. And now we have the ultimate trump card in our hands; your Hall of Fame induction ballot. And we're going to dangle that in front of you but it will always be out of reach. We are going to put you on a public trial via your Hall of Fame ballot and ultimately, we will find you guilty and you will join the likes of Pete Rose and always be on the outside looking in.

If you subscribe to the thoughts above, you should know your a sucker. It's convenient to put A,B,C & MG on trial. But just like Harrison Ford in the Fugitive, we're putting the wrong people on trial. A,B,C & MG are the sacrificial lambs, the easy targets. There is something much more sinister going on. Someone is taking advantage of our predisposition to see stars fall, distracting us and future generations from discovering the truth. We've got to dig a little bit deeper and find the one-armed man.

Bud Selig and the owners were the ones entrusted with preserving the sanctity of the Game. Yet, they turned a blind eye to the usage of steroids. They knew exactly what was going on. And they could have put an end to it, but didn't, because they saw that steroids was good for the bottom line ($$$). And before you knew it, baseball and steroids became one. And that's it. Baseball from 1995-2005 = Steroids. Those who did Steroids (more than we'll ever know) were just playing Bud Selig's game.

Now, Bud Selig, the owners and the Game of Baseball have blood on their hands. They are going to offer you A,B,C & MG, prevent them from getting into the Hall of Fame and pretend like the Steroid era never happened. Bud Selig wants to wipe the slate clean. He wants historians to look back on this era and see that the players pulled a fast one over the Game of Baseball. But once the Game caught on, they punished the violators and condemned them from the game. You see, this is about the legacy of the Game and the legacy of Bud Selig. But we can't let them off that easy. I wont let them off that easy:

DLaz: I want the truth!!

Bud Selig: You cant handle the truth! Son, we live in a world that has Halls of Fame. And those Halls have to be guarded by writers with ballots. Who's gonna to do it? You? You, Bill Simmons? I have more responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for A-Rod and curse the Game of Baseball. You have the luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that A-Rod's public humiliation, while tragic, probably saved fans. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves fans. You don't want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that Hall. You need me on that Hall. We use words like Homeruns, RBI's, Batting Average...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent defending something. You use 'em as a fantasy stat. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very Baseball I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it! I'd rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a urine sample test and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to!

DLaz: Did you know about the Roids?

Selig: I did the job you sent me to do.

DLaz: Did you know about the Roids?

Selig: Your goddamn right I did!!!

We as the jury must condemn not the players, but the Game of Baseball and Bud Selig by disregarding any known or suspected involvement when considering one's Hall of Fame credentials. Doing anything else would be to hold the players to a higher standard than the Game was willing to hold itself to. So, let the Game and Selig take their rightful place in history and let the records reflect the reality of the Steroid era by voting A, B, C & MG into the Hall of Fame, no matter how much satisfaction it would give us to do otherwise.

Interview with Roubini & Krugman in 2017

DLaz: Hello everyone, I hope you have your favorite liquor in hand because we have a real treat tonight. My guests are Co-Presidents of the United States, Nouriel Roubini and Paul Krugman. Mr. Co-Presidents, it is a pleasure to have you on the show tonight.

Roubini: Call me Nouriel and the pleasure is all mine.

Krugman: And call me Paul. DLaz, we felt that it was our patriotic duty to come on the show. Your posts and shows have brought reason and tranquility in a time of so much uncertainty. The entire country owes you a debt of gratitude.

DLaz: Thank you. Gentlemen, lets get right to it. Looking back, it seems we could have easily avoided the decade of recession/depression experienced not just here, but throughout the world. Hindsight is 20/20, but you two were laying out the plan as far back as 2008-09 on how to deal with the economic crisis that is now, in 2017, finally subsiding. If any one's advice should have been heeded, surely it was yours, as your predictions of the forthcoming economic crisis seemed almost clairvoyant.

Nouriel, you were warning of the end of the real estate bubble as early as September 2006. Paul, a 2008 Nobel laureate, was critical of Alan Greenspan's reluctance to regulate the mortgage and financial markets as far back as 2005. Despite the great risk to your careers, you made these predictions, which, at the time, were met with ridicule and largely ignored.

However, by late 2008, early 2009, most of your predictions had come true. You two were hailed as prophets by some. Yet, in 2009, a crucial year in the management of the crisis, your advice was once again largely ignored. Looking back, how would you two describe the irrational behavior exhibited by the citizens and politicians of this country in ignoring your advice again?

Roubini: Well at the time, there was a lot of political pressure coming from both sides. The country was not yet ready to drown out the political noise and let the economists who best understood the crisis, handle it. It's just upsetting because so many jobs and trillions of dollars could have been saved.

Krugman: Morons! A bunch of idiots!

DLaz: We all know what happened next. The failure of the Obama administration to deal with the insolvent banks doomed any chance of the insufficient stimulus package from succeeding. As the economy continued to erode and with job losses mounting, Obama narrowly won re-election in 2012 by pledging to have you two run the Fed and the Treasury. From 2012-2016, you two tirelessly devoted your time to dragging the country and the world out of the Great Depression 2. In 2016, with your efforts gaining traction, popular sentiment pushed and passed an amendment to the constitution allowing for the one time election of Co-Presidents and foreign born citizens (Roubini). The 2016 election was more of a coronation, as you two ran unopposed, pledging to run for just one term, to safeguard the economy until it was on sound footing.

Once again, going back to 2009, Nouriel, can you please explain the first misstep our government took?

Roubini: Well the problems with the major banks of the US were not ones of illiquidity, but rather insolvency. Back then, I predicted total losses for the US banks and broker dealers would be about $1.8 trillion, whereas the total capital backing the bank's assets was only about $1.4 trillion, leaving the banks about $400 billion underwater. The right thing to do at the time would have been to nationalize the insolvent major banks, or if you will, put them temporarily in receivership.

DLaz: Of course, at the time, the word nationalization was a scary word, when actually; it was the most market friendly solution.

Roubini: Yes, you see, the government's decision to prop up the major banks only created zombie banks that couldn't effectively lend to the public because they were insolvent. Rather, the government needed to take temporary receivership of the big banks that were insolvent, which was most of the major banks, if not all of them by the end of 2009. At that point, we should have cleaned up their books and separated the good assets from the bad assets and quickly auctioned off the good assets to well-capitalized super regional banks and other private entities.

You could have done all this in months and quickly put the banks back in the hands of the private sector. Instead of 4 major zombie banks, we could have had about 30 major, well-capitalized banks that were healthy to lend and posed less systemic risk. In regards to the bad assets, you could have combined them all into one entity and liquidated the assets over many years, a la the RTC in the late 1980s.

DLaz: Wow, amazing. Now Paul, what other missteps did the government make in 2009?

Krugman: Well, as you alluded to before, the stimulus package was insufficient. In 2009, we were facing about a $2 trillion shortfall in GDP over the next two years. The 2009 plan was for $787 billion, of which $200 billion went towards tax cuts, which has little impact on demand, so only about $600 billion had an impact on the shortfall. Realistically, we needed a stimulus that would have added an additional $1.4 trillion in spending to the original plan.

DLaz: But Paul, as I remember, it was difficult enough passing the $787 billion stimulus due to the noise over the mushrooming budget deficit. How could you have convinced someone that we needed a $2 trillion stimulus when they were complaining about a $787 billion one?

Krugman: Do you know what got us out of the original Great Depression? World War II, which can basically be viewed as a large public works program. Spending for World War II led to full employment, and rising incomes with the private sector taking on very little of the debt. Over the course of the war, the government deficit had soared, but the ratio of private sector debt to GDP was cut in half. And this low level of private debt led to a quarter-century postwar boom, as the deficit was slowly paid down over the next few years.

Additionally, for a historical perspective on the public debt, after World War II, the public debt was about 120% of GDP. In 2008-09 it was only about 40% of GDP. In other words, we had more capacity to run up the public debt.

DLaz: And to think, if we just listened to those who had already proven that they had a supreme understanding of the economic crisis in 2009, we could have avoided years of misery. Well, we need to wrap this up, I have 3 time Oscar winner Megan Fox on next. But gentlemen, it would be my pleasure to buy you guys a drink. What can I get you?

Krugman: I'll take a Bass.

Roubini: Just a club soda for me.

DLaz: Nouriel....

Roubini: OK, I'll have Glenlivet on the rocks...make it a double.

Disclaimer: This is not a real interview with Krugman & Roubini. If you think it is, your an idiot and should immediately leave this blog.

I Majored in Wiki

As I think back over my many glorious years at college, I remember doing beer bongs, playing beerpong....basically put the word beer before any word and I was probably doing it. Good times.
When I wasn't studying to become an alcoholic, I actually participated in various educational activities. In fact, I wrote a thesis paper, maintained high grades and even attended a lecture or two. After four years, I graduated near the top of my class with a diploma from a top university. If the educational bureaucrats were to write a script for the ideal collegiate experience, I would be their star (minus all the drinking). The problem is, I didn't learn anything.

Sure, I learned "life lessons" and crap like that, but you can learn those from a fortune cookie. The truth is, universities aren't in the business of educating people. They are in the business of handing out a piece of paper so you can get a job. "Who cares if the kids don't learn anything. They'll get a job and learn from their employer. Besides, there is no other business in town. And at $100,000 a pop, why rock the boat" could be the slogan for the US university system.

Thankfully, two factors are going to contribute to the demise of the current university model. The first is financial. The math goes like this: Large budget commitments predicated on growth + shrinking endowments due to bad investments + increasing cost for student loans + shrinking alumni contributions + families who can no longer afford college = Screwed.

The second factor is that there's a new competitor in town that actually has the ability to educate people: Wikipedia. A few months ago, seeing the dark clouds of the economic crisis overhead, I wanted to become educated on the storm that was coming. I started my search on one wiki page and before I knew it, I read over 50 pages. And all it cost me was the price of an internet connection. Now DLaz (oh jeez, only three post and I'm already referring to myself in the third person, this can't be good) will school 99% of econ majors on the details of how we got into this mess and could maybe even hold his own for a few minutes with Roubini (look him up, idiots).

And the reason why Wikipedia is more effective than anything the universities can offer is because you can get answers to your questions in real time. No more waiting for your 70 year old professor to get back to you. No more arduous research in the libraries that fatigues the average person. No more 4 years of waiting for your degree so the universities can suck 4 years of tuition payments out of you just so you can announce to the world that your "qualified" in a specific field.

I can already hear people bitching, "but Wikipedia isn't a reliable source for an education." Well, you know what else isn't a reliable source? Fallible teachers with biases (all of them) and text books that change each year because the publisher learned something new, like that the theory of evolution is a better model than creationism (what! you mean some textbooks still teach creationism? oh, they don't teach creationism, they teach intelligent design. my bad).

Well, tonight, hopefully all of you will drink your wine a little more at ease, knowing that your kids may receive a BA or a BS from Wikipedia University and save you $100k.

Sure, the US is in Trouble, but Russia is Screwed

I was going to write a post today about doom and gloom and where I think the US economy is headed. However, I figured it best to wait until at least the fourth or fifth post to scare the bejesus out of my readers (3 strong now). Instead, we'll take this opportunity to laugh at the Russians.

If your not familiar with Igor Panarin, your in for a treat. He is the dean of Russia's Foreign Ministry diplomatic academy (FMDA). And he also likes to make predictions about the US. Amongst them: Obama will order Marshall law within the year, the US will split into 6 rump-states by 2011 and Russia and China will become the backbone of the new world order.

But the kicker, he thinks Russia and China should work together to make a new currency to replace the US dollar. I guess on PBS (Putin Broadcasting Service) they refrain from mentioning that the Russian ruble has fallen 30% against the US dollar in the last six months, or that their currency has recently been downgraded or that there is a world wide fear that the ruble is going to collapse.

Asked recently by one astute instructor at a lecture at the FMDA if his predictions more accurately described Russia, Igor quickly dismissed the thought. This blog had sought further comments from this instructor for the purpose of this story, but unfortunately, he is now permanently missing.

I am reminded of the Iraqi minister of disinformation ,aka Baghdad Bob, in the final days of the Iraqi invasion, telling the world on video that there were no troops in Baghdad and that the Americans were surrendering by the thousands. Meanwhile, in the background of the video, you could see Baghdad being bombed and in complete ruins. Within a few day, Baghdad had fallen.

Despite the struggles here in the US, we can take solace in the fact that an authoritarian government is disintegrating. Well, I for one, look forward to the end of Putinism, when Russians will once again be free to drink their Stoli and read my blog....but just in case there is some truth to those predictions, I am formerly announcing my candidacy for the President of the Southwest Rump-State of the UnUS.

"Mr. Watson - Come Here - I Want to See You"

If a post hits a blog and no one is around to read it, does it have any relevancy? I guess that's what I'm going to find out, as I'm pretty sure no one is reading my first post. Anyway, I figure I'll start out with the basic questions a curious observer of this blog may have.

What's with the name "Blog and Drinks?"

I figured that I would be doing most of my blogging at the end of my day, when I wind down and usually enjoy a glass (or two) of red wine. So there you go. I encourage my audience (of only myself right now) to also wind down at the end of their day, with the alcoholic beverage of their choice (unless your under 21, in which case, you either need to be in college or really cool in high school) and enjoy my blog. Cheers!

What is the subject of this Blog?

Much like how the US is wondering around aimlessly right now, lost with no decipherable plan to deal with the Great Depression 2.0, this blog will be a crapshoot. Basically, I'll blog about whatever's on my mind. Topics I see myself talking about include: the current economic crisis (i don't see that going away anytime soon), politicians (if you don't realize that they will say whatever they need to get your vote, you shouldn't have a vote), sports, other writers/bloggers I enjoy reading, crazy individuals who wield too much power (I'm speaking to you, Ann Coulter) and of course Angela Jolie.

How do I know if "Blog and Drinks" is right for me?

First off, if you don't get sarcasm, then please stay very far away from my blog. If you think that either the Democrats or Republicans are always right, stop reading. If you have never been wrong before (I have been once), continue being right somewhere else. However, if you wish to be enlightened, are looking for a little Jewish humor (think Jon Stewart, but funnier), hear some old Simpsons jokes rehashed or just wish to forge an imaginary, creepy bond with a person you have never meet before, you're in the right place.

What Separates this Blog from every other one?

Me.

What does "Mr. Watson - Come Here - I Want to See You" mean?

It means, that some things in life are better to be learned on your own (when you don't understand something, look it up on google search, you ignorant sluts). It also means that I think I'm pretty clever. Much more clever than I really am.


Well anyway, that's it. I hope you enjoyed your drink(s).



DISCLAIMER: I have no formal writing experience (other than going to school for over 15 years), so please ignore the gluttony of grammar and speeling mistakes (I still don't trust the spell checker).