The New Front-Runner?

As was widely confirmed, Rick Perry declared his candidacy for President of the United States of America.


With his speech, Perry juxtaposes himself as the business and private enterprise friendly candidate who will restore American pride. As I said before, he is in many ways the anti-Obama.

While I am wary of Perry's social stances in regards to abortion and gay marriage, I was impressed and even moved by his speech. I think he did a great job of appealing to Americans' patriotic values as well as outlining his plans to help America grow in the future.

I believe Perry has a much stronger understanding of what it will take for America to get back on its feet than the current administration. Some of the things that he wants to do is simplify the tax system, repeal ObamaCare, get our credit rating back to AAA, and create jobs - create, innovate, and succeed.

Listen, we're going to need someone who is going to encourage private enterprise. Recovery isn't going to happen through fiscal spending. While infrastructure improvements and updates are necessary, the real long term growth is going to come from a reassurance of our private sector and through the encouragement of innovation. We need a President that understands these needs. Rick Perry understands.

While I will not confirm that he's my favorite candidate, I will say he has catapulted himself to the front of the GOP race for the moment.

The Introduction To The Family Business

The following is my final paper for my Epics, Ancients, and the Mafia class at the University of Michigan. Every once in a while, I like to read the papers that I write for school because I want to see what I think of it after the fact. Usually, when you write these papers, you're so in the zone, that you don't get to appreciate your own work. The Sopranos is one of my favorite television series of all time, and I really enjoyed writing this paper. I hope you enjoy it.

Both as a contemporary representation of the mafia genre and as a contemporary representation of mafia, The Sopranos faced the challenge of connecting with or referring back to previous representations of mafia genre while updating the mafia tradition. To address these challenges, the first two episodes of the series serve a similar role as the proems that begin epic poetry, particularly The Metamorphoses. A proem, in epic poetry, is an invocation that provides the introduction to the story within its context. Usually, it addresses overarching themes, like Achilles’s rage in The Iliad, Odysseus’s suffering in The Odyssey, and transformation in The Metamorphoses. It can, however, also cover underlying problems and consequences or take us to a specific point in time. For example, in The Iliad, Homer takes us to the feud between Achilles and Agamemnon. As a television series that continues the mafia tradition and takes place during a specific period of time, The Sopranos share a relationship of content with the proem of The Iliad. At the same time, it shares a connection with The Metamorphoses in that both stories come at the end of the genre. The major difference is that The Metamorphoses bring us from past to present, whereas The Sopranos makes reference to the past through developments in the present. The proem, the first two episodes, of The Sopranos not only reintroduces the familiar motifs of the mafia genre, but also introduces the relationships, themes, and subplots that will dictate the events of its contemporary story.

In the first scene in Dr. Melfi’s office, Tony gives us insight both into the problems that he is facing and the changes that have occurred since generations past. When he first opens up, Tony tells Dr. Melfi that within the context of the mafia he “came too late” and that he feels that the “best is over.” He goes onto reminisce about his father’s time and how “they had their standards, and they had pride.” The vicarious nature of the second comment reminds us of The Godfather and the first half of Goodfellas when times were better for the mafia and there were no FBI indictments, there was no fear of family members snitching, and there were closer business relationships. These are all the issues that we see introduced in the first couple episodes, which weigh heavily on Tony throughout the course of the show. This struggle between the idealistic past and the less opportune present and future in itself is one of overarching themes of the entire series, but there are many subplots that draw from this struggle.

The subplots within The Sopranos are introduced through Dr. Melfi’s questioning to get to know Tony and to diagnose the source of his panic attacks. As Tony narrates the events that led to his panic attack, we are shown the scenes from that day. We see, however, more than what he tells Dr. Melfi, for he is unable to tell her the details of his business. This invokes the code of silence, referencing past representations of the genre such as Frank Pentangeli’s testimony in The Godfather: Part II or Paul Cicero’s lectures to Henry Hill in Goodfellas. Tony himself admits, at first, that “it’s impossible for him to talk to a psychiatrist.” In the scenes depicting his daily life within the first two episodes, we are introduced to the themes, subplots, and relationships that are generated from the conflict between the past and the present.

The mafia business has been undermined by the downfall of the code, values, and pride that characterized it at its peak. In the first episode, Tony laments to Dr. Melfi that things are “trending downward” and that mobsters today “have no room for the penal experience.” The second episode reinforces this demise when Tony’s crew watches a discussion of the RICO trials’ effect on the mafia, especially in terms of leadership and values. We immediately see examples of these waning values. In the same episode, Junior calls for a sit down with the acting boss, Jackie Aprile, rather than making an arrangement to talk to Tony face to face. After Jackie dies, Junior and Tony continuously spar over control of the family and the spoils of the family tributes. This dispute exemplifies both the downfall of leadership and values, since a solution could have easily been reached had they worked together rather than against each other. Furthermore, there are some in the business who break the code of silence like Big Pussy Bonpensiero when confronted with a lengthy jail sentence (2.1). Pussy is arrested for selling drugs, which mirrors the experiences of Henry Hill in Goodfellas and resonates Vito’s proclamation to Sollozzo in The Godfather Part I that “drugs are a dirty business.” While the business still provides a living for these men and their families, the admirable traits that characterized the “family business” in The Godfather has eroded.

The maternal authorities have a more significant role in the influence of family matters. Through Tony’s interactions with his mother, Livia, we see the overall toll and effort that Tony must put forth in his interactions with her. When Dr. Melfi presses Tony about Livia’s ability to burden him with so much guilt, Tony cites how his mother “wore [his father down] to a little nub” to indicate her power over him. We also see that same maternal control within Tony’s own household. Carmela does not want Tony’s mother living with them despite his wishes (1.2), and Carmela is the sole decider of Meadow’s punishment for breaking curfew (1.1). This theme recalls the The Godfather Part II, when Michael is powerless to Kay in regards to the abortion and their marriage. Additionally, when confronted with the prospect of losing his family, Michael goes to his mother as the authority figure on family. While the scale of maternal influence is magnified in The Sopranos, it is important to note that Vito tells Johnny Fontaine in the very first scene of The Godfather, “a man who doesn’t spend time with his family can never be a real man.” The influence of women continues in later episodes when Carmela tears up Meadow’s Berkeley letter (2.8) and when she accosts their neighbor, Jeannie Cusamano, to persuade her sister to write Meadow a letter of recommendation to Georgetown. The increased presence of feminine aggression within the household has broken the balance that is idolized in The Godfather.

The differences in generations and their values have created conflicts both in the business and family worlds of the mafia. All of these conflicts derive from the interpretation of what is respect. Junior and Livia believe that the younger generations must treat their elders with respect and dignity. To Tony, his crew, and even Carmela, respect is received on a merit basis. For the younger generation, respect is more about fame and recognition. A good example of this conflict is Tony’s attempt to put his mother in a “retirement community.” Livia refuses to move because, to her, it is a nursing home and not a dignified residence. We also see Christopher struggle with his lack of fame and reputation, when his diseased friend, Brendon, is named as a Soprano-family associate and he is not (1.8). He rashly shoots a baker in the foot after the baker disrespected him by skipping him in line, and later, he becomes depressed until he is told by his mother that he has been mentioned in the Star Ledger in a mafia related article. This provides a Little Caesar moment for Christopher, as he joyously rushes to a newspaper rack to claim all the papers. While Christopher is satisfied with his new recognition, Tony and his crew are unhappy with the immaturity of Christopher in his actions and his jeopardization of the family’s business. The cohesiveness and understanding that we saw in The Godfather has been replaced with unrest between the generations.

Italian identity and culture is constantly rearing its head as a point of contention within The Sopranos. First and foremost, it is important to recognize that the mafia genre is a product of Italian cultural values. The Sopranos features many representations of Italian culture and values through food, assimilation process, and the family. One of the reoccurring viewpoints in The Sopranos is the rape of Italian culture. In the coffee shop with Pussy, Paulie resents the fact that “all these other cocksuckers are getting rich off ” of the coffee business (1.2). Another example of this rape, ironically, is when the mafia has to fight with Native-American protesters at the Columbus Day parade, a holiday that is very important to Italians (4.3). Another example that is riddled with irony is when Tony, Paulie, and Christopher go to Naples on business, Paulie has trouble adjusting to the differences of real Italian food (2.9). On the same trip, Tony is enchanted by the female boss of the local mafia, Annalise, much in the same way Michael was struck by a thunderbolt when he first saw Apollonia in The Godfather. We also see the religious values of Roman Catholicism in Tony’s marriage with Carmela, juxtaposing Carmela as the faithful and Tony the unfaithful. Unlike Michael and Kay in The Godfather Part II, however, Carmela and Tony are binded together by their adherence to catholic stance against divorce, even if their relationship is not mutual. The presence of cultural values is integral to our understanding of the time and place where these characters come from and the world in which they live.

The proem of The Sopranos provides us with the lens and the scope through which we will see the rest of the series. Through this, The Sopranos develops aspects of the mafia world that have never been addressed before. Never have we seen the extent by which the depiction of mafia in such an expansive fashion. In the proem we learn that the story is not just about Tony and how changes in his business are stressing him out, but rather about the world he lives in within the context of a mafia tradition. As a story about America experience and assimilation, we are able to see contemporary depictions of events that are able to exist without sacrificing the necessary focus of the narrative to center on the mafia itself.

Enter The Fray - Rick Perry

So Rick Perry is expected to announce his candidacy for President of the United States of America tomorrow. His foray into the race should see him instantly catapult him to the top of the Republican race. He will probably run on a jobs candidacy, being the only candidate with a strong record of job creation from public office. This should give him a strong leg up over Mitt Romney and John Huntsman, both of whom were successful businessman.

So how does he stack up?

Well, the man can fundraise:

“He is the most successful fund-raiser in the history of Texas politics,” said Craig McDonald, director of Texans for Public Justice, a watchdog organization that tracks campaign spending. “He may be the best in the country. He will have no trouble raising the money he needs for his presidential campaign.”

Only Mitt Romney can compete with Perry in terms of money raised. In the last two weeks, he's raised twice as much as every other candidate. Financially, Rick Perry should be one of the toughest candidates to top.

As I said before, he will be the job's candidate:

Over the past year, Texas' job growth was twice the national average. In fact, of all the jobs created since June 2009, 30 percent – about 295,000 jobs – were created in Texas, according to a report from the Dallas Federal Reserve which analyzed data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

That should make him a favorite in this recession. People want someone who will be business friendly and help the economy grow. Not someone who will continuously mislead the economy and not give a certain outlook over their future actions.

So what's been the secret to his success? Taxes:

Yucel said much of this job growth can be attributed to Texas' low tax rate – the state has no income tax -- few regulations and a law limiting tort litigation. Texas, according to Perry, is the "epicenter of growth."

Low taxes and few regulations are business friendly. Limited tort litigation is doctor friendly. In many ways, Perry is the anti-Obama. From the two and a half years we've seen so far, an anti-Obama is just what we might need to grow as a country.

Or is he? According to Joseph Henchman, while Perry decreased franchise taxes, he increased margin taxes, resulting in increased revenue:

"I think Perry's margin tax in Texas is a destructive type of tax," said Joseph Henchman, the vice president of state projects for the Tax Foundation. "You have taxes being levied on taxes based on how many levels of production a product has. It basically encourages people to form conglomerates purely for tax reasons which is economically destructive. You have these taxes pyramiding on each other so the effective rate is higher."

But what did Perry's opponents do? Unemployment under Pawlenty as Minnesota governor:

Still, 25 states had a lower unemployment rate in June 2011 than Texas, including Pawlenty's state of Minnesota in which 6.7 percent of the population is unemployed.

And the budget:

Pawlenty took office in 2003 when the state's budget was facing a $2 billion shortfall. Within his first year as governor Moody's rating agency downgraded Minnesota from a perfect AAA credit rating to AA1, one step lower, citing short-term fixes to long-term budget woes as the reason for the downgrade.

Despite the unemployment rate, Pawlenty has let his state's debt get down graded. He didn't solve the state's problems, but rather slowed it down by slowing down spending. It sounds very similar to what Boehner's plan appears to be doing.

Romney helped raise Massachusetts's credit rating:

Conversely, during Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney's tenure from 2003 to 2007, he petitioned the S&P credit rating agency to increase his state's credit rating from AA- to AA, which they did in 2005, according to a report obtained by Politico.

But did he raise taxes:

But the credit upgrade did not come without a cost. In 2002 Massachusetts raised more than $1 billion in additional tax revenue and in 2004 the state increased fees such as those for drivers' licenses, raising an additional $271 million annually, according to the report.

Actually, no:

Henchman said former Romney is the only GOP candidate who saw income taxes decrease while he was in office, albeit slightly, from 5.6 percent when he took office in 2003 to 5.3 percent by the time he left in 2007.

The article seems a bit misleading about this fact.

Meanwhile, Huntsman went with a flat tax:

"Huntsman's flat tax achievement is an achievement," Henchman said. "It reduced complexity and it made it a much more growth-friendly tax system."

You may ask why I'm focusing on taxes, the credit rating, and job creation. Because it's going to be the most important talking point for debate for the 2012 election. It should have been for the 2008 election, but instead they focused on healthcare, immigration, and the war. As I said then, the economy is always the most important issue whether it's good or bad.

The 2012 election will be about creating jobs, solving the debt crisis, and restoring the credit rating of this country.

However, since people do like to focus on other, relatively minute details, let's look at Perry's social stances. He is staunchly anti-abortion and anti-gay rights:

Governor Perry and the supporters of "the Response" can say all they want that the prayer rally was a non-political event, but the fact is the event was sponsored by the American Family Association, an exclusively Christian group with a narrowly-focused political agenda that revolves mostly around outlawing abortion and curtailing gay rights.

I have a hard time taking these types of people seriously. You know, the ones that not only are intolerant in their private lives, but also feel it is their mission to force their views on your publicly. For me, it's hard to trust someone for this. One of the founding principles of our country is the separation of church and state and when someone's viewpoint is derived from religious beliefs, you are blurring that very sacred line.

Carl Medearis feels similarly about the political implications of Perry's religious rally:

But here's my suggestion for the next politician that feels the need to call the nation to prayer, and wants to do so in a way that honors Jesus. Why not make the event open to people of all faiths and political persuasions? And rather than focusing on a narrow set of political concerns, why not make the focus of prayer something that Jesus actually talked about, like removing the planks from our eyes before we judge others... and loving our neighbor as ourselves?

Regardless, the "Response" may have been a political move to consolidate support of the conservative Christian base:

By leaving politics out of The Response, Perry formed a bond with the evangelical community that no other 2012 Republican presidential candidate has, at least on such a large scale: He earned their respect.

"I think by him not saying anything [political], that shows he kept his word," Stringer said. "I think if he had said something, he would have totally lost any equity with anybody. By not doing anything, even those that don’t ever vote for him, those that don’t agree with his politics, they can say ‘you know what, we can pray for that guy, and he went up a notch in my book.'"
y

Yes, but the event was still sponsored by a anti-abortion and anti-gay rights group. So what about that homeboy? It's all politics, right?

Whether or not I'm a fan of Rick Perry, he might be the candidate to beat. Regardless of how annoyed I get with social issues entwined with religion and politics, this election might be about jobs. I think we have a lot to learn about all of these candidates in regards to what they intend to do to help grow our economy. However, on record, Rick Perry appears to be one of the stronger candidates. I can't really knock him for that, and it appears the Obama administration is already taking notice.

The 2012 election is about jobs. When you're voting in the caucuses and primaries as well as the general election, keep this in mind. The economy should outweigh everything else.

Jamie Dimon Believes in America

USPS - Does it have a future?

I walk my dog in the late afternoon. The past couple times I've walked him, there has been a USPS truck with the driver just chilling in the front seat. Now, I was going to take a picture of this today, but I decided not to because I don't want my mailman to lose this job if this actually becomes more publicized, but I wanted to use it as an opportunity to get into the USPS debate.

As for my postman, is he off the clock? Did he already finish his routes and is he just waiting for quitting time? What's the deal here?

If you are unaware, USPS posted a $3.1 billion loss in its third quarter:

Total mail volume for the quarter that ended June 30 fell to 39.8 billion pieces, a 2.6 percent drop from the same period a year earlier, as consumers turn to email and pay bills online.

And what might exacerbate the system is a series of prepayments that will create cash concerns for the struggling postal service:

"We are experiencing a severe cash crisis and are unable to continue to maintain the aggressive prepayment schedule," Joseph Corbett, the agency's chief financial officer, said in a statement.

"Without changes in the law, the Postal Service will be unable to make the $5.5 billion mandated prepayment due in September."

With the government's debt as it is, it is unlikely that the government will be able to assist the USPS as it could in a more stable financial situation.

Additionally, like many government run bureaucracies, the post office isn't run efficiently and isn't allowed to be run in that way without the permission of congress:

Postal officials have called for Congress to change the way USPS operates, saying it needs more flexibility to close failing post offices, cut Saturday delivery and raise rates.

The agency is studying about 3,700 of its 32,000 post offices, stations and branches for possible closure. Officials plan to replace post offices by contracting with private retailers to sell stamps, offer shipping and provide other postal services.

The losses have caused postal higher ups to take shady measures in order to limit costs and to maintain its public image:

Managers at the U.S. Postal Service have skirted the agency's performance evaluation rules, reducing or eliminating employee salary increases in some cases to avoid the negative publicity that bonuses could bring the financially ailing agency, according to a new audit.

Here's how it was done:

Forty-six percent of evaluators and 40 percent of second-level reviewers surveyed reported that employee ratings were lowered during the review process. Respondents said they were instructed by a superior to bring ratings into line with average scores or believed that ratings should be lowered to avoid raising suspicion. Others were concerned that employee performance targets were too easy to meet or that the public would react negatively to workers receiving bonuses given the agency's fiscal condition, the IG found.

I don't want to get into an argument about whether these measures were right or wrong. I understand why they did them, but it doesn't make it right. The problem is the system.

As far as solutions, there are many. These range from finding cost savings or getting rid of the postal monopoly all together. Here's a bit of a cost reduction argument, regarding those pre-payments:

The problem lies elsewhere: the 2006 congressional mandate that the USPS pre-fund future retiree health benefits for the next 75 years, and do so within a decade, an obligation no other public agency or private firm faces. The roughly $5.5 billion annual payments since 2007 — $21 billion total — are the difference between a positive and negative ledger.

Mail is not the problem. It's these pre-payments that are the problem:

Furthermore, USPS' financial problems have surprisingly little to do with delivering the mail. In the past four fiscal years, despite the worst recession in 80 years and despite Internet diversion, revenues from postal operations exceeded costs by $611 million.

Mack Julion of the National Association of Letter Carriers has this to say in defense of the postal services:

The fact remains that everyone does not pay their bills online or even have access to the internet. Those who live in rural communities, low-income areas, and the elderly would be impacted the most by the slower delivery time that would result from just one less day of mail service. The Postal Service is still very relevant and for only 44 cent a stamp we don't require a dime of your tax dollar! If it was not for the congressional mandate to pre-fund our retirement, the Postal Service would have seen profits of over a half a billion dollars over the past five years. Right now the United States Postal Service does not need to close post offices, reduce services or a bailout -- we just need Congress to fix the law that is breaking your Postal Service.

The cause of the trouble is something everyone agrees on. It's the pre-payments.

How to solve this issue is the disagreement. Some think this should be done directly. While the proposed solution is to close down branches.

Personally, I believe the solution is more institutional than anything. The constraints put on the USPS put them in this situation. They need more leeway in how they can manage these things. They cannot make decisions regarding it's financial viability without the approval of congress. This puts them on an uneasy plain. It is not efficient to have this bureaucratic liability. The post office needs more freedom.

As far as getting rid of the post office, I think it's a bad idea. While most services have become digital, the post office still serves a purpose. It would be unwise to disband it.

Welcome To London

Out of control?

Vigilance At A Premium

It seems like vigilance is at a premium. If you're a long term investor, you're probably raising an eye brow and wondering what you should do with your money. People have been selling frantically the last couple weeks and the market has taken a sharp drop. The money has come out of equities and been shoved into fiat currencies like gold and to a lesser extent silver. At the same time, oil and copper prices have fallen, while the US dollar has gained on the Euro as greater concerns arise in Europe.

So what do we make out of all of this? Do we follow the experts and take our money out as well?

I don't think you can panic sell. Cutting your losses seems like a mistake when you can hold and accumulate higher dividend yields and reinvest them into more stock, which will increase in value as the stock recovers. If you sell, you're letting your losses stand.

You're probably also worried about this credit downgrade. I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. Here's the bottom line:

Neither side can easily claim the high ground. The downgrade laid bare a distrust of both the Washington political system and the independent firms tasked with standing in judgment of it. Ultimately, investors are likely to be responsible for deciding who has more credibility.

The downgrade was down to one thing: democracy. Because of the quibbling between the two parties and the time it took for the deal to get done, S&P felt compelled to downgrade.

The Obama administration say it's down to an accounting error, and while that may be the case, I still don't think this is a bad thing. At the very least, it will make them work that much harder to address the debt situation, so we can get back the AAA rating. In the meantime, do you really believe that the US will default on their credit now? You think not having that rating means we're less likely to pay off our debts? We came close, but we got the deal done. Are we going to not do that next time? In the end, these people know the importance of paying off our debt. They're not complete idiots, though they may seem like ones at times. I'm not saying that the rating downgrade is meaningless, but it doesn't mean as much as it is made out to be.

You can remain calm about it.

Burton Malkiel had this to say in this morning's journal:

Investors who have sold out their stocks at times when there have been very large declines in the market have invariably been wrong. We have abundant evidence that the average investor tends to put money into the market at or near the top and tends to sell out during periods of extreme decline and volatility. Over long periods of time, the U.S. equity market has provided generous average annual returns. But the average investor has earned substantially less than the market return, in part from bad timing decisions.

My advice for investors is to stay the course. No one has ever become rich by being a long-term bear on the fortunes of the United States, and I doubt that anyone will do so in the future. This is still the most flexible and innovative economy in the world. Indeed, it is in times like this that investors should consider rebalancing their portfolios. If increases in bond prices and declines in equities have produced an asset allocation that is heavier in fixed income than is appropriate, given your time horizon and tolerance for risk, then sell some bonds and buy stocks. Years from now you will be glad you did.

The US market has grown over time. To not be in the market is to miss out. To cut your losses is to miss out.

I think we're getting into the time where it's time to buy. Listen, over the past couple weeks, some of the best stocks have declined with the markets, coming off highs as a result of solid earnings reports. I see this as more of an opportunity to get these stocks on the cheap than an opportunity to sit on your hands. Fundamentally, these companies are still doing well and there's a reason that they were as high as they were. Now the shares are more affordable. You've seen the upside they have when things are normal. The last couple weeks, everything has fallen save for gold mining companies. Find a company you like and think has a lot of upside and dig in.

I'm a soon to be buyer, not a too late seller in this current market. I'm vigilant. I don't think this is going to get much worse. To think that this decline is the end of the world is short term thinking. You can't let volatility and declines get to you in the short term. You need to let it ride in the long-term. I am still a bull on America, as hard as that might be to be right now.