Archive for October, 2008
If you live in Michigan you’ve probably seen the ads on TV urging you to vote no on proposal 2 because it’s both morally wrong and will raise taxes. I’ll get to those in a second.
If you don’t live in Michigan or if you only believe what’s on TV, Proposal 2 is an amendment to legalize embryonic stem cell research. Now, stem cell research is already legal in Michigan - but only adult stem cells.
So where do the embryonic stem cells come from? According to the proposal, only embryos created for IVF that would be discarded anyway can be used. When a couple chooses in vitro fertilization, multiple embryos are created in case the first one doesn’t take. It’s cheaper and faster that way, and that’s how it’s done. If the first one DOES take, the extras are simply thrown in the trash.
Proposal 2 would allow those embryos which would otherwise be thrown away to be used for research. That’s it. There’s no other type of embryo that could be used, there’s no selling of stem cells, and there’s no people getting pregnant to sell their aborted fetus for research. Proposal 2 specifically outlaws all of that.
Ok, but it’s going to raise my taxes right? WRONG! There’s nothing in proposal 2 about increasing taxes. The TV commercials are telling you about a system in place in other states to mislead you. Proposal 2 will not raise your Michigan taxes. It’s actually more likely that this will lower the costs of the Michigan businesses currently doing stem cell research.
If you don’t believe me, you can read the free press article that talks about it.
It’s also important not to get caught up in the pro life debate surrounding proposal 2 either. The embryos in question here already exist, and are already going to be thrown in a trash can. Proposal 2 isn’t supporting abortion, and it’s not creating more embryos. It’s simply asking to take them out of the trash can and use them for research - without raising your taxes.
It’s a PDF, but you can read the actual proposal here. I strongly encourage everybody to do so.
October 8th, 2008
With the economy going deeper into it’s death spiral, many people are saying that it’s a bad time for start ups. Last quarter was the first in a while without a venture backed startup IPO, and many are predicting the trend to continue all year.
But that doesn’t mean it’s a bad time for startups. It’s just a bad time for most startups.
There’s still venture capital money out there, but it’s only going to go to the best startups with the best ideas. In order to get funded you’re going to have to have a solid business model (that doesn’t include the word adsense) and a clear path to revenue. “What new problem does your company solve?” is going to be a big factor in determining whether or not your startup gets funded.
When financial times get tough, only the good ideas will get funded. That’s good for the startups with good ideas though.
What separates a good idea from a bad one? Here’s some helpful don’ts:
Don’t launch a website with no clear path to revenue hoping that one will fall into place.
Don’t build something that is simply a mashup of other people’s APIs.
Don’t list “adsense” as your primary source of revenue.
Don’t just have a good domain name with no business plan.
Don’t just create a copy of another site with a couple new features.
It’s clear to me why all of these ideas will fail, most of it has to do with putting all of your eggs in one basket or hoping that your competitors won’t add the same features.
So what will succeed in this market? Startups that help companies save money will have a tremendous advantage over the next year. Think software as a service, cloud computing, or anything that saves IT costs. There’s a huge market for this now as companies are struggling to offload costs.
It’s often the case that “a bad time for startups” is really a great time for sound business ideas. A bad economy can let investors focus only on the good ideas. You may not have a quick exit strategy in place, but that won’t stop you from making money if you’ve actually got a good idea.
October 7th, 2008
Well, it took the addition of tons of “sweetened pork” but the bailout bill finally passed. The economy should be turning around right? Not so fast. My stocks and IRAs are still going down faster than (man I’m too old for these high school jokes)
So why aren’t things being fixed? Perhaps it’s because the bailout won’t really fix the economy.
It seems to me that the only people willing to sell off all their assets to the government at a loss are those with shitty assets. Most people who have mortgages are still paying them, so it doesn’t make much sense to sell that revenue to the government for less than it’s worth.
The people that aren’t paying mortgages still have houses. Those houses still have value (albeit not as much value as they did 5 years ago) If the bank can repossess a house and sell it for $100,000 (down from it’s original $150,000 value) they’re going to do that before they sell it to the governement for say, $70,000.
It just makes sense. As long as their assets have value, a company is going to try to get value out of it before accepting bailout money. That means, nothing is really going to change.
So who will take the bailout funds? Companies whose assets aren’t really worth anything. In other words, all the government is going to end up buying is a bunch of useless crap that they will never be able to recoup any value on. The only people this is going to benefit are the banks and investment firms who want to unload a bunch of unprofitable investments. They’re going to unload them onto the government, who will buy them with our money.
Congratulations you now own part of the Brooklyn Bridge.
In a way, that’s good. Letting the government own a large proportion of property in the country only puts us one step closer to a system like the one in place in China. Do you really want to rent your house from the government?
Another reason banks may not take the bailout is because it puts limits on golden parachutes and CEO pay. Now, I for one think that if you run your company into the ground you shouldn’t be paid at all - but unfortunately I don’t sit on the boards of any companies.
Quite simply, the same people voting whether or not to take the buyout are the very same people who would see decreased salary if they took it. Which way do you think they’re going to vote?
I’m not alone on this either. It’s obvious that many other Americans noticed this - and tried to tell their congressmen. So many in fact, that the House disabled all email from constituents. They didn’t have time to care about what we thought.
But hey, at least we got rid of that $0.39 tax on wooden arrows for boy scouts.
October 6th, 2008
With election season now in full swing and tonight’s vice presidential debate looming, it’s time we take a look at what else to expect this month.
Historically, October surprises have shaped many past elections. In the past we’ve seen Saddam Hussein found guilty right before mid term congress elections, George Bush’s drunk driving arrest before presidential elections, and even Foley’s scandal was right before an election.
The most famous though, was when George HW Bush and Reagan’s campaign manager convinced Iran not to release American hostages prior to the 1980 election. If I remember correctly, we paid them with aircraft tires.
So what will happen this October? Historically all of the surprises happen in favor of the party that needs the biggest boost. According to current polls, that’s the McCain camp. So let’s speculate:
1.) Bristol Palin will get married and it will be a highly publicized event with almost every major republican player present. This will happen within 1 to 2 weeks of the election, in an attempt to make it all memorable to everybody as they head to the polls.
2.) We’ll see another appearance from Osama Bin Laden. Many politicians (including John Kerry) seem to think that Bin Laden’s last October speech was all it took to cost Kerry the white house.
3.) Bush will make a major announcement regarding the war in Iraq. Newspapers have already reported that he delayed bringing some troops home for a time that would be more beneficial to McCain, but look for him to do something else drastic to shape public opinion.
Those are my “most likely to happens” Not only do I expect all of this to happen, but I also expect at least 1 or 2 more surprises.
What do you think will happen?
October 2nd, 2008
Next Posts
