Economics

Fighting the Last Credit Card War

It occurred to me as a programmed payments in one month in advance into Quicken software that the credit card issuers are fighting the last war. The reason I am programming my payments one month in advance is that I have about 15 minutes from the time I receive my bill to write a check, plop it in an express mail envelope, then race after the mail carrier to send it back the same day to avoid a late fee.

The late fees were rolling in bulking up bottom lines at Chase and others. The reason they implemented these fees was that interest rates were low so they jerked customers on late fees to raise revenues. The interest rate far exceeds the paycheck loan rates. $40 on a one-day late $400 payment is 128 quadrillion percent annual interest.

But now they are faced with an anxious set of commercial paper buyers and collateralized debt obligation buyers demanding to know the credit quality of the borrowers. Well, it sucks. Because it has become impossible to pay a credit card bill on time without a flow of quantum entangled photons becoming disentangled selectively at the instant you get your bill so you can pay it faster than the speed of light. Credit card issuers, do you feel that petard? It’s going to get hoisted a lot higher.

Political Commentary

Cutting And Running

From cutting and running:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has backed down from demands for a withdrawal of our troops in Iraq by next spring.

Selling voters on cut and run was always tough, but now a new UPI/Zogby Poll finds that 54% of Americans believe the Iraq war is not lost.

Beyond the achievements of our forces, the public is obviously impressed that Iraq’s five top political leaders have agreed on a series of compromises, including oil wealth distribution and provincial elections.

Well, that’s what happens when you govern by poll instead of principle.

Technology and Society

Infinite Loop

I hate automated phone payment systems that insist on voice input. I particularly hate them when they’re stupidly worded.

After providing information, the voice says “Can I repeat that for you?”

Well, the two options are yes, or no. Obviously, the system is capable of repeating it for me. So the correct answer is “yes.” But an answer of “yes” will result in it repeating it for me. To which my response should again be “yes.” The only to get it to stop is to lie, and say, “no.” That is, the system cannot repeat it for me, even though we both know it can. And of course, being the sensitive kind of guy I am, I feel guilty about lying to it, even though it’s just a mindless machine.

I’d like to think that there’s some counter built into the system to keep scrupulously literal and honest people from dying of starvation or sleep deprivation while continuing their futile attempts to placate it, but it seems like it would just be simpler to word it, “Should I repeat that for you?” Or “Would you like me to repeat that for you?”

It’s even more irritating than asking me whether or not I had a perfect stay.

[Update a while later]

For those curious, I see no reason to protect the guilty. Maybe they’ll hear about this and do something about it. It’s US Bank.

War Commentary

A Petraeus Preview

From Captain Ed:

It’s an interesting advance look at the Petraeus testimony due on September 11th. Combined with the announcement of an agreement among Iraq’s political factions on political reform, it will make a formidable case for continuing on the mission. Democrats will have a difficult time asking for retreat just when obvious progress can be seen.

Yes, they put all their chips on America’s defeat. But they’ve been playing a losing hand.

[Update in the afternoon]

Anyone who claims that “the surge” was a mistake should read this piece from the Times of London. My only complaint about it this sentence:

Captain Patriquin played a little-known but crucial role in one of the few American success stories of the Iraq war.

No, it’s not one of the “few” American success stories of the Iraq war. It’s just one of the few that you’ve actually reported.

Political Commentary

An Interesting Parallel

When I was reading this blog post about the Marines at Haditha being cleared (sort of–you’ll see what I mean when you read the post), this phrase jumped off the screen at me:

“We can’t say those guys didn’t commit a crime,” said Michael F. Noone Jr., a retired Air Force lawyer and law professor at Catholic University of America. “We can only say that after an investigation, there was not sufficient evidence to prosecute.”

That statement could have been about Bill and Hillary Clinton, without changing a word. Bob Ray’s report didn’t clear them, contrary to popular media (and Democrat) myth.

And no, it’s not old news. She’s running for president, and seems likely to be the Democrat nominee. And “innocent until proven guilty” is a principle for the courtroom, not for public opinion.

Biting Commentary about Infinity…and Beyond!