Guaranteed High Mileage Car Sales Boosting Plan

Forget Tax Incentives...
It should be rather clear by now that the average United States consumer has little concern for vehicle mileage when purchasing a car; at least, that is, until the price of gasoline is absolutely oppressive. And, tax incentives for hybrid vehicles and the like make little difference too. Doing what is "right" for the environment just does not seem to matter either.

So, how do we encourage people to save gasoline and purchase high-MPG cars over larger, more powerful models? Simple...

Mileage Incentives that Consumers
can Understand and Appreciate
I was just thinking about this the other day, and the answer became quite clear to me. The average person needs something TANGIBLE and right "there and now" to remind them why they chose to save gasoline with a high-miles-per-gallon vehicle, and the answer is this:

THE GOVERNMENT CAN MASSIVELY INCREASE THE PACE OF ADOPTION OF EFFICIENT VEHICLES BY GRANTING THE OWNERS THE "PRIVILEGE" TO LEGALLY DRIVE 15-20MPH OVER THE POSTED SPEED LIMITS ON HIGHWAYS (only highways) IF THE CAR THEY ARE DRIVING IS RATED AT OVER 50MPG HIGHWAY. PERIOD. HIGH-MPG CARS WILL SPEED (literally) OUT OF DEALER PARKING LOTS!

Sure, going faster will burn a (bit) more gasoline, but not much. I do not believe the hogwash that every 5MPH increase in speed decreases mileage 10 percent, because I have tested this with every car I have owned and have seen negligible impact from even a 10MPH difference in average speed over the same driving course of enough length to test completely. Not to mention, that bit of false information implies that if you doubled your speed, you would essentially get zero gas mileage. Ridiculous! And, regardless, people would be STILL be saving gasoline in a large way on the highway (compared to their current cars), and also consider how the "free pass to speed" is only valid on larger highways... the cars would save a LOT of gasoline everywhere else they are driven too.

So, come on government, incentive smaller, more efficient cars, in a way that the average consumer can quickly understand and embrace. When that consumer walks into the showroom and looks at the tiny little car that can get 50 or 60MPG, and then, with great surprise, again asks the salesperson: "So, you are telling me that if I buy THIS car, I can drive 15MPH (or 20?) over the posted speed limit on all Interstates and 4-lane highways, without getting a ticket for it?...(yes)... you are sure?... (yes)... I WILL TAKE ONE NOW!". Can you imagine how many people with long commutes, or traveling salespersons, etc., would want to suddenly save on gasoline by getting a high-MPG car?

Food for thought people... just thinking out of the box a bit. Though, dreaming is more like it :)

SQL2008 SP1 (Service-Pack) Released

In case you happen to be an enthusiast of Microsoft's newest SQL-Server Database software - SQL Server 2008 - you may be interested in knowing the latest Service Pack 1 for SQL2008 is now available. What you may not care to know is how small the list of new features is with this SP1 package -- it is mainly a cumulative bug-fix release.

Microsoft sums up the new features with three bullet points, that are essentially the following (which, I see potential in at least two items):

• You can "slipstream" a SQL Server 2008 update and the original installation media so that original media and the update [presumably Service Pack 1 for example] are installed at the same time in future installs. Slipstreaming is an installation method that integrates the base installation files for a program with its service packs and enables them to be installed in a single step. The [SQL-Server 2008] update setup documentation available from the SQL Server Download Center has the most recent description of the slipstream process [including SP1 changes that make slipstreaming SQL2008 SP1 possible]. I plan to try this out soon using SQL-Server 2008 Developer Edition with SP1 as my slipstreamed update of choice. I really hate having to install Microsoft products and then apply all sorts of Service Packs and updates in addition (which of course means, more installation time, more reboots, and correspondingly more system down time), so this is quite welcome!
• SQL Server 2008 SP1 now introduces the ability to uninstall cumulative updates or service packs via Programs and Features in Control Panel. I have not tried this yet; I will take their word for it, though I can only imagine the horror stories that will appear on blogs in the near future when people attempt to do this :)
  
• SQL Server 2008 Service Pack 1 provides a ClickOnce version of Report Builder 2.0. [my only comments: I have no idea what this is or why I even should care... I build databases, not reports, using SQL-Server; when I need reports, I use a "real" report builder that has wide adoption and a longer track record... at least for now]
  

SQL-Server is my favorite Microsoft software application, as I find it to be an incredibly robust relational database platform that is not only powerful and fast, but one that is easy to fully exploit from a software-developer's standpoint. Although it can handle very large databases (10's and even 100's or more Gigabytes in size), it is still quite manageable without a full time dedicated DBA (presuming your database and procedural code and queries are designed properly).

SQL2008 is yet another solid version of this database platform, and surely deserves a look if you have not upgraded from SQL2000 or SQL2008 (if you are using a version older than either of those, well, you are simply insane).

Now, I will look forward to SQL-Server 2008 SP2, or perhaps SQL-Server 2008 SP3 to introduces some nifty new features that may be more enticing to me as a database designer and database software developer. I expect the SQL-Server 2008 SP2 Release Date will be long ways off yet, and I suspect it will not even come until 2010. So, for now, off to play with SQL2008 SP1 I go...

Mortgage / Refinance Rates - Home Equity, Conventional, etc

With mortgage interest rates being at super-low, rock-bottom, and certainly historically low levels, I have recently been thinking about how these rates really filter down to the consumer. I see home equity loan interest rates advertised as low as under 4 percent, though I am having a hard time determining if those are fixed-rate home equity loans (since they are quoted as Prime plus 3.25% or so), or whether, after taking out the loan, those rates are variable rate loans or somehow "float" over time.

I have seen 30-year fixed rate mortgage interest rates advertised at under 5% recently, though most often only if points and the like are paid (no-point loan rates seem to be just above 5% still regardless of all this talk I hear on TV of sub-5-percent loans).

Well, fact of the matter is that anything down in this range is quite reasonable considering the history of mortgage rates in the United States over the past decades. I remember the rates being quite high in the late 1970's and even through the late 1980's and early 1990's (my first home loan rate was something like 10.5% back then!!!), and it really is just amazing how people complain about "high interest rates" being anything over 5% (yes, I have heard people complain about this) even as I had to pay on a loan at twice that rate.

I calculated the other day how, if I purchased the same house now as compared to 20 years ago, I could have a payment that is literally just over HALF the amount of payment I had to make back then, and this is not even inflation-adjusted. If you throw inflation adjustment into the mix, the current-day mortgage payment would be essentially 1/4 to 1/3 of the payment. As such, I am just amazed that the housing market is still completely terrible. Sure, jobs are a major consideration, but wow... how much lower can rates go?!

I can not help thinking that it only makes sense to perhaps "step up" to a larger home or bigger yard or whatever while these lowest mortgage rates, lowest refinance rates, and lowest home equity rates in *forever* are available. I like my current house and yard, but I sure am feeling the "itch" to make a step-up now if I can.

The job market is bound to remain shaky, unemployment is sure to stay elevated for a while, but there is also one HUGE amount of fiscal stimulus in play (think: the Federal Reserve printing tons of money - TRILLIONS), that should get things flowing eventually. The only question is how long it will take for the Fed's, and Treasury's, massive injection of stimulus to start causing inflation. IF one would know that inflation is inevitable (especially re-inflation of some intensely-depressed home prices), then it would only make financial sense to purchase a property now, while interest rates are low, and hope for perhaps just a modest rise in interest rates coupled with a more substantial rise in home prices... that way, in theory, you can pay off the mortgage with post-inflated dollars.

But, who knows. Theory just does not seem to be panning out, since if it was, all this dollar-printing would drive interest rates higher (instead of lower) and also cause the US Dollar to devalue (versus getting "stronger" as everyone does the whole "flight to safety" thing). Macroeconomics, per what we were taught in College, is simply out the window lately, and this makes it tough to know whether these lowest mortgage rates, refinance rates, home equity rates, etc are all worth pursuing. arhghghgh. I need a crystal ball!

10 Trillion and Counting - PBS Frontline

Did you see the 10 Trillion and Counting episode of PBS's Frontline last night (March 24, 2009 episode) that discusses the ENORMOUS NATIONAL DEBT and DEFICIT SPENDING AS AMASSED UNDER PRESIDENT BUSH (Jr.). OH MY GOD!

Watching this episode about the explosion of the Debt under GW, and the constant tax-cuts, entitlement program expansion (to garner votes) like Medicare-partD, and ignoring all advice to the contrary (including firing Treasury Secretary Paul Oneil when he advised otherwise)... it was somewhat like watching the darkest comedy ever.

Watching the Repubs (Repugs!) argue (during GW's term) that tax cuts and spending were needed to grow the economy... but, as soon as Barack wins office, they turn around and say the opposite with regards to spending, but persist with tax-cuts rhetoric even though CLEAR PROOF of outcome exists. Massive transfer of wealth to the top couple percent of incomes, and a fall in real-wages for most Americans (for the first time ever during an "economic growth period"). Unreal. MORONS!

The bottom line is that, given our spending habits, and our inability to deal with the fact that we can not continue to grow purely on credit, we are SO COMPLETELY HOSED as a country. This country is in such a state of denial.... DOOMED!

The national debt is likely to surpass GDP by 2017 if not sooner. Entitlement programs will consume the ENTIRE tax-intake of the Federal Government in the not too distant future also, as Baby boomers get their "benefits" (which were handed out for votes en masse during the past few decades).

Sadly, those "benefits" and promises were a big pile of garbage,... much like a Madoff Ponzi-scheme, where promises of huge returns (in this case, huge benefits including prescription drug benefits without any minimum-cost-negotiation clauses), are not met with ANY way to fund the expense required to actually deliver on those promised "benefits".

We are a country in DEEP DENIAL. We want it all. We feel entitled to it all. We want low taxes. But yet we want government spending on all sorts of entitlements. President Bush (Jr.) is sure to go down as the President that essentially sealed the fate on the United States sliding downward thanks to complete disregard for fiscally sound financial policy. He NEVER vetoed a single spending bill or tax-decrease -- the result: a huge explosion and doubling of the National Debt.

And, now the same Republicans that backed that agenda take issue with spending in order to (attempt to) avert total economic disaster. Unreal. Well, at least their core constituency (i.e., upper income brackets) fared quite well during Bushonomics, and should be in a better position to weather the storm! Mark my words: the ones that will benefit the most in the next decade are those upper 1% of income persons that paid the lowest tax ever on their incomes (during Bush Jr.) that will now use their "haul" to purchase depressed assets for pennies on the dollar and make out like bandits when the economy starts moving again. What a lovely cycle. I can nearly guarantee that wealth in this country will be even further consolidated among the top few percent, since there will undoubtedly be huge resistance to ANY tax "increases" (even though it could simply be returning tax rates to where they were during Clinton's term perhaps).

You can watch the episode online at pbs.org if you care.

Software Bloat: Acrobat Reader Executable Size Growth over the years

Does this image say it all? Since I develop various software applications that, among other things, create reports in Adobe's Acrobat / PDF format, I tend to keep quite a few versions of Acrobat reader around for testing my program output with. And, I just could not help laughing when I looked at my file-server's Acrobat Reader executable programs directory, where, since 1997, I have accumulated versions of Acrobat Reader 3.2, 4.0, 5.0, 6.01, 7.05, 8.12, 9.0, and now the newest addition of Acrobat Reader 9.1

Check out the Software Bloat factor in Acrobat Reader over the years:


What started as a simple utility to display PDF files (Portable Document Format files from Adobe), has grown from an under 4Megabyte (MB) installation program to a whopping 42MB installation for Adobe Acrobat Reader 9.1 - which now includes things like Adobe Air and Acrobat.com and all sorts of other ridiculous crap.

I find this all crazy... how a PDF-Reader application can grown 10-TIMES in size (for the installer executable download) in a period of 12 years. Sure, it is no worse than Microsoft Windows or most other major applications that also seem to grow by orders of magnitude over the years, but why?

Is there really that much more functionality in the applications these days to justify this explosive file-size increase, or is it lazy software develoment, a lack of tuning, a lack of focus on clean and efficient code and re-use, or a combination of all the above? It is just hard to accept (for me) why a program designed to allow me to view PDF files on any computer must require a 40MB Download (I will not even get into how insanely large the post-installation size-requirements for this application are!).

I remember the days when I had an entire operating system (on a TRS-80) running in a mere 32K of RAM with simple word-processing programs, games, and the like. Sure, those programs were much simpler, and did not have modern GUI desktops and flash, but the entire OS AND PROGRAMS ran in 1/1000th the memory that this latest Acrobat Reader intallation program download is. Unreal.

This begs the question: what will Acrobat Reader 10 be like, or Acrobat Reader 11, or Acrobat Reader 12, or Acrobat Reader 13, or Acrobat Reader 14, etc... will we hit a ONE GIGABYTE download for their future PDF reader eventually? Given the history, file sizes have gone up to nearly 11-times their size in about the same number of years, and the version numbers at about 1 for every 2 years... so, in a decade, expect a 1/2-GB install of Acrobat Reader 14! It is coming! And, you will be using it (note: I use Acrobat Reader nearly daily; many people do)

Mark-to-Market Solution : Mark-to-Moving-Average

I am of the opinion that, although mark-to-market (M2M) valuation principles make sense in some accounting situations where asset and financial-instrument market prices are readily obtained (on open exchanges - like commodity exchanges, ForEx, etc), this M2M accounting methodology does not make much sense for assets like homes and property, where the prices of those assets at any given time is hard to accurately value. I'd go as far as to place that *value* reference I made (in prior sentence) in quotation marks; i.e., they are assets which are hard to determine a "value" for at any point in time, because there is not always a willing seller and/or buyer for the assets, or an agreement on the value-point at which a buyer and seller would "value" the asset at the same price.

Mark-to-Market accounting is in the news a lot these days due to the SEC, and other regulatory body, requirements for banks and other financial institututions and the like to "value" their assets on a mark-to-market (M2M) basis. Well, this is creating a LOT of problems for Banks, Insurance Companies, and many other firms, as it is not just difficult to ascertain the current "value" of all assets held in a portfolio (be it loans, property, or even bonds for which there is no *current* market).

How does one determine the value for assets (like Sub-Prime mortgages or such) that there is no current buyer for? Is a financial firm simply to be forced to "value" all their loans at what is essentially fire-sale (or lesser) values of barely pennies on the dollar because there is no *current* buyer for those instruments? Many of these loans have some physical property behind them (i.e., homes), and most of those homes are NOT worth just a few cents on the dollar. Sure, there has been a huge decline in the underlying home prices and value of other assets subject to M2M accounting, but there were also nearly equally inflated prices in these assets over the past few years (which helped encourage the "Bubble" and ensuing financial crisis).

FIXING MARK-TO-MARKET ACCOUNTING!
So, let's address the pitfalls of mark-to-market accounting now, with a solution that considers the fact that quickly-rising asset prices (that can lead to financial "bubbles") are as bad (or certainly precipitators) of bubbles that result in quickly-falling asset prices.

I see an EASY solution to all of this mess: simply value assets using a MOVING-AVERAGE, and perform a "mark to moving average" accounting strategy to "smooth" values over time. Why do assets need to always be valued as of "right now", when such a strategy encourages panic as rapid oscillations occur when there is an imbalance between the supply-side and demand-side (i.e., sellers and buyers) of assets that lead to excessively inflated or deflated "values" when looking at "value" as a point-in-time evaluation.

Recently, Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke has suggested that regulators need to examine mark-to-market accounting during financial crises like the one we are currently experience, but he also rejected calls for immediate suspension of mark-to-market practices. He discussed how, when markets for certain financial-vehicles/assets "dry up", that mark-to-market can be misleading (note to Ben: during upward bubbles, mark-to-market can contribute to over-enthusiasm too, as balance sheets start looking exceptionally great as "value" rises extraordinarily fast; see past 7 years for reference).

So, please, someone from the Federal Reserve, SEC, FDIC, GAAP, or other regulatory and accounting-policy-setting players: consider something like a "mark-to-market-moving-average" strategy. The moving-average TERM will certainly need to be debated (e.g., does a 5-year moving-average home sales-price in a region work well, or a 3-year, or a 10-year?), as does the data to be used in calculating such averages (various home-price surveys, sales data, etc.). The longer-term TRENDS and moving-average historical-values are what matters more than anything for determining fair "value" for many assets.

Fact is, right now, average-selling-price is nearly useless as an indicator, because it reflects the sale of a boatload of foreclosed properties at fire-sale prices, and it does not mean most other persons would consider (or need to) sell their homes for similar discounts. Again, this is where a "smoothing" effect of a moving-average-M2M approach would be VERY helpful for everyone involved.

I can not help thinking how, over the years, we have all become so used to ever-faster information and ever more "instant" information, that we have thrown out common-sense in favor of trying to always obtain a "right now" look at everything (be it asset pricing or many other things). Mark-to-market in its current form is a perfect example of where data can be TOO INSTANT or current, and such data is actually misleading (if not outright harmful) compared to longer-term trends.

RESTORING REASON TO ASSET VALUATION
The entire goal of my proposed mark-to-average accounting is to remove these wild oscillations that are so damaging to our economy and financial system (both during "boom" times upward, and "crash" times downward).

The idea should help prevent situations like people in San Diego bidding 30-percent over asking price (and other such ridiculous behavior as we all witnessed over the past "boom" years), and then having that newly-paid price be representative as the "value" of a home, as well prevent situations where a $100K house (or mortgage on one) is now only "valued" at $2K just because there are no current buyers interested in it. Each of these extremes needs to be avoided. And, mark-to-market has only encouraged each of these scenarios by allowing banks to watch their own balance-sheet "values" explode during boom-times (and, feed further insane lending based on that "value"), and go down the toiled during the bust cycles (and then bring lending to a standstill as well). This can all be fixed.

AIG - no fire-sale please! Hold the "assets" government!

Even a minimally-educated investor knows that, unless you expect an asset to only decline in value more, you do not sell it. As such, the government really needs to consider slowing down this push to sell of AIG "Assets". If they ARE truly assets, and not some sinking ship of a mess, then it is time this government does what Bernanke has said -- use the fact that the government CAN be in it for the very long haul, and hold assets until pricing improves.

I do not like this talk of "fire sale" prices on AIG Assets, as I highly suspect that the ONLY portions of AIG that anyone would bid on would be those that still have value. And, without those, what do we, the taxpayers, have left aside from a black-hole of cash-sucking doom?! So, please, if these "assets" that are still part of AIG are truly worth something, then hold them. I have heard talk that bids on some portion of the company may only be $20BB, and what is $20BB compared to the nearly $200BB the government has laid out there already.

Next, let's expose WHERE this $200 billion has gone!
It is NOT staying within AIG... it is going to, essentially, pay off gambling debts that their CDS (Credit Default Swap) business got into. WHO is receiving these payoffs? And, why are CDS's still legal?!!!! Last I heard, the same thing that got us into this financial meltdown (CDS instruments being a big part of the mess) are still not outlawed! These things are evil and must be stopped.

Oh, I am ranting big-time today... I apologize. I am just sick of this insanity. I think the government should declare all outstanding CDSs NULL AND VOID immediately - all 10's or 100's of TRILLIONS of them, before they take the entire world down with them. Fact is, world governments and economies can not compete with the magnitude of BETTING (by way of CDSs, options, and other derivative instruments) that is going on in this out-of-control deregulated market. Declare the CDS activity illegal, and nullify outstanding contracts NOW. I do not buy this argument that it will cause a collapse ... failure to derail and outlaw these instruments of doom WILL cause a collapse, or will force a MASSIVE devaluation of currency to "pay off the bets"!

Oh, and another rant: I asked the question a while back, and STILL have not heard anyone mention where all that money homeowners spent on PMI (Private Mortgage Insurance) went?! I am so completely fed up with watching the gross incompetence (otherwise known as incredibly smart manipulation) that exists EVERYWHERE in this financial system, our government, business in general, etc. etc.

I personally am having a hard time understanding why the price of GOLD (or other precious metals) does not reflect the fact we are printing currency like water flows over Niagra Falls. And, somehow the US currency is still "strong". Unreal.