Vol. 2 No. 62 May 25, 2007
The Bogus Economist
smart
Last year, a strange-looking creature began appearing on Oregon freeways and city streets – especially city streets. Resembling an egg with its back end chainsawed off, the thing drew stares, chuckles and even gasps from spectators as it went its seemingly carefree way.
This car - I'm sure you already guessed it was a car – is called the smart (NO CAPITALS) and is currently being manufactured by none other than Daimler-Chrysler and marketed by the well-known Penske organization, which has already shown it can compete in the truck rental business and now wants to demonstrate size isn't everything.
The smart (No Capitals) comes in several models overseas, where it has already passed the three-quarter of a million mark in sales. In the U.S., customers will start off with one, called the fortwo (no capitals). There's a good reason for this. If someone is looking for a vehicle that can take the kids out for a picnic, the fortwo is definitely not a good choice. Anything more than a couple of people, or one person and a large dog, along with some groceries, is overload. The people, or the dog, sit high enough to get a good view of the road and the overall effect is somewhat like a one-horse shay without the horse. A family car it's not.
The smart (no caps) began life in the fertile brain of Nicolas Hayek, the inventor of the Swatch (capitals O.K.), which many a boomer sported on their wrists in the heyday of watch fashions. Hayek took his idea to Mercedes-Benz, which became intrigued at the idea of getting into the innovative world of environmentally friendly, low-priced vehicles. Full development of the concept started in 1994 and the smart fortwo (N.C.) debuted at the Frankfurt Motor Show (IAA) in 1997. Germans were wowed. That same year, smart became a 100% owned subsidiary of Daimler-Benz AG. , which devoured Chrysler Corp the next year. This caused Daimler severe indigestion and Chrysler was subsequently spat up and then swallowed by Cerberus Capital Management last month. Note: the company is not to be confused with the three-headed dog of the same name entrusted in Greek mythology with guarding the entrance to Hell. Whatever, it's now got eighty percent of Chrysler Corporation.
Once the smart (nc) was announced, Mercedes first took on the question of safety. How, people asked, could a car looking more like a mobile bar of soap than a car survive in a collision with a determined bicyclist, let alone a Hummer? M-B had an answer: “The safety management system for all smart vehicles starts with the tridion safety cell,” says its website, “ This cell is designed to keep its occupants safe from harm. Made from three layers of reinforced steel at all strategic points, impact energy is distributed evenly through the safety cell.” (See smartcar.com).
Translated, this seems to mean that the Hummer will still probably come out on top, but you've got a better than even chance with the bicycle and probably with a lot of other less sturdily-constructed vehicles. A diagram shows the driver sitting in a kind of cage with what looks like roll bars on three sides. For an egg, it appeared impregnable.
Also, the smart (yes, I know) has a couple of extreme virtues that may make it the next vehicular iPod. First, a typical 20-foot parking space can comfortably accommodate two of them. In France, I saw three smarts parked cozily side by side in one parking space, facing the curb. In an age where a common sport is seeing how many spaces a normal car can occupy, this car might spell the difference between making your appointment and spending a month in jail for assault.
A second advantage of the new baby Mercedes is economy. A smart driver (no capitals needed) can get about 40 mpg, which can make a real difference in paying the rent or buying groceries, especially at current Mafia rates. Nor is the smart (i'm getting used to this) terribly expensive. The base model (the pure) starts at “under eleven thousand.” Going up, the passion (i'm not kidding) costs fourteen and the cabriolet sets you back seventeen or so. The Hummer costs lots more and is always capitalized.
So who's going to buy smarts (small letters)? Well, people who have to buck traffic jams in order to make a living and who are running out of choice adjectives on the way to work might want one. The Less-is-More crowd would take delight in rubbing the environmental ethic into the skins of Escalade owners, while an out of work basketball player, according to the smart ads, could drive happily with room to spare.
What seems sure is that Mercedes will start its program of familiarizing America with pures and passions starting this month. Three truckloads of them will be touring cities near you and you might even get a chance to drive one. Portland gets a look in September. Naturally, if you've put down a $100 refundable deposit, you'll have the first chance. A smart press release claims thousands have already done so. This includes at least one bogus economist. Whether or not we folks are playing it smart remains to be seen.
-30-
The Bogus Economist © 2007
Monday, May 28, 2007
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Vol. 2 No. 62 May 11, 2007
The Bogus Economist
Naughty, Naughty
Talk about not inhaling.
You all will recall the unforgettable statement from Bill Clinton about his experiences with marijuana in which he admitted its use, but claimed he just puffed on a joint, briefly held the smoke in his mouth and puffed it out. The press, along with a good portion of the public, snickered a bit and moved on to other things. Monica was to come later.
More recently, a choice news item concerning a Deputy Secretary of State popped up that was in the same category as Clinton's smoking, only, if possible, less likely. The person in question is Randall Tobias, whose name appeared in the records of alleged madam Deborah Jane Palfrey, currently under federal indictment on racketeering charges. It seems Ms Palfrey was in the business of providing very expensive, high-class ladies to people who desired feminine companionship. Tobias, while admitting he had some of these ladies up to his pad, claimed it was only "to have gals come over to the condo to give me a massage." There had been "no sex," Tobias was quoted as saying. He added he didn't recall the girls' names and that it been like “ordering pizza.” At any rate, he handed in his resignation to Condoleeza. But that was only the Start of the Story.
The news that Palfrey had turned over her list of 15,000 or so clients to a major network brought more than a few shivers to a Capitol already in a high state of jitters over public perception of the government as a blend of Dilbert, Frankenstein and Bugs Bunny. Palfrey's attorney, Montgomery Sibley, said Friday that he has been contacted by five lawyers, asking whether their clients' names are on Palfrey's list. Some, Sibley said, have inquired about whether accommodations could be made to keep their identities private.
More revelations are in the offing, according to a story in the Washington Post. “The List” includes the names of some "very prominent people," as well as a number of women with "important and serious jobs who had worked as escorts for the firm.” Waiting for the other shoe to drop is now an all-consuming pastime. By the time this column is published, we should know what size.
What makes this story particularly interesting was Tobias' former job as head of U. S. foreign aid, which included his promise no precious American taxpayer dollar would go for anything that could conceivably support prostitution. This included banning funding aimed at making additional education and instruction available for shady ladies who wanted to improve their lot in life as well as providing birth control information to prevent pregnancy and AIDS infection. Tobias was the multi billion-dollar Administration voice against the world's oldest profession and had, as recently as four weeks ago, been congratulated by President Bush for a job well done – sort of another “Heck of a job, Brownie.” Others disagreed. The Indianapolis Star reported a recent American Foreign Service Association poll of 368 staff members at the Agency for International Development found only 21 percent thought Tobias had been doing a good job in getting resources for the agency and its workers. A .210 average isn't even good for Little League.
Now maybe it's true Mr. Tobias just hired a few young things to rub his back. Palfrey herself described her employees as being willing to dress up in costumes, play Monopoly in the nude and do all kinds of things, including massage, which, while perhaps potentially sexual in nature, weren't illegal. Be that as it may, the tremors experienced by both potentially revealed customers and providers around Washington is strong enough to shake martini glasses.
Cynics are seeing a pattern emerge. After Rush Limbaugh's admission of dependency on prescription drugs and Bill (The Book of Virtues) Bennett's revelation that he was hooked on gambling came Newt Gingrich's confession that he had been doing what Bill Clinton was doing during the time he was going after Bill Clinton. There seems to be a law whereby the habits of a person's personal life vary directly with the vehemence of the rhetoric used against them. Look at the folks who demonstrated an allergy to wearing a military uniform shouting the loudest for victory at all costs. Incidentally, the author of the military strategy known as “Shock and Awe,” Harlan K. Ullman, had his name on “The List.” He denies any involvement.
It would be more than stupid to say hypocrisy is something brand new, or that the present Washington bunch has a monopoly on it. Many of us recall the Reverend Jim and Tammy Baker and their tearful admission of a less-than-Christian pursuit of hard cash. It's always easier to point fingers at the other guy than finding the culprit in the bathroom mirror, but the consequences can be pretty awful. Then why do people do it?
I believe it's a matter of ego. The hypocrite thinks he or she is too smart for the people who probably don't have the intelligence to figure out whose hand is in the cookie jar. The other reason may be the politically popular Eleventh Commandment: Thou shalt not get caught.
Another one just did.
-30-
The Bogus Economist © 2007
The Bogus Economist
Naughty, Naughty
Talk about not inhaling.
You all will recall the unforgettable statement from Bill Clinton about his experiences with marijuana in which he admitted its use, but claimed he just puffed on a joint, briefly held the smoke in his mouth and puffed it out. The press, along with a good portion of the public, snickered a bit and moved on to other things. Monica was to come later.
More recently, a choice news item concerning a Deputy Secretary of State popped up that was in the same category as Clinton's smoking, only, if possible, less likely. The person in question is Randall Tobias, whose name appeared in the records of alleged madam Deborah Jane Palfrey, currently under federal indictment on racketeering charges. It seems Ms Palfrey was in the business of providing very expensive, high-class ladies to people who desired feminine companionship. Tobias, while admitting he had some of these ladies up to his pad, claimed it was only "to have gals come over to the condo to give me a massage." There had been "no sex," Tobias was quoted as saying. He added he didn't recall the girls' names and that it been like “ordering pizza.” At any rate, he handed in his resignation to Condoleeza. But that was only the Start of the Story.
The news that Palfrey had turned over her list of 15,000 or so clients to a major network brought more than a few shivers to a Capitol already in a high state of jitters over public perception of the government as a blend of Dilbert, Frankenstein and Bugs Bunny. Palfrey's attorney, Montgomery Sibley, said Friday that he has been contacted by five lawyers, asking whether their clients' names are on Palfrey's list. Some, Sibley said, have inquired about whether accommodations could be made to keep their identities private.
More revelations are in the offing, according to a story in the Washington Post. “The List” includes the names of some "very prominent people," as well as a number of women with "important and serious jobs who had worked as escorts for the firm.” Waiting for the other shoe to drop is now an all-consuming pastime. By the time this column is published, we should know what size.
What makes this story particularly interesting was Tobias' former job as head of U. S. foreign aid, which included his promise no precious American taxpayer dollar would go for anything that could conceivably support prostitution. This included banning funding aimed at making additional education and instruction available for shady ladies who wanted to improve their lot in life as well as providing birth control information to prevent pregnancy and AIDS infection. Tobias was the multi billion-dollar Administration voice against the world's oldest profession and had, as recently as four weeks ago, been congratulated by President Bush for a job well done – sort of another “Heck of a job, Brownie.” Others disagreed. The Indianapolis Star reported a recent American Foreign Service Association poll of 368 staff members at the Agency for International Development found only 21 percent thought Tobias had been doing a good job in getting resources for the agency and its workers. A .210 average isn't even good for Little League.
Now maybe it's true Mr. Tobias just hired a few young things to rub his back. Palfrey herself described her employees as being willing to dress up in costumes, play Monopoly in the nude and do all kinds of things, including massage, which, while perhaps potentially sexual in nature, weren't illegal. Be that as it may, the tremors experienced by both potentially revealed customers and providers around Washington is strong enough to shake martini glasses.
Cynics are seeing a pattern emerge. After Rush Limbaugh's admission of dependency on prescription drugs and Bill (The Book of Virtues) Bennett's revelation that he was hooked on gambling came Newt Gingrich's confession that he had been doing what Bill Clinton was doing during the time he was going after Bill Clinton. There seems to be a law whereby the habits of a person's personal life vary directly with the vehemence of the rhetoric used against them. Look at the folks who demonstrated an allergy to wearing a military uniform shouting the loudest for victory at all costs. Incidentally, the author of the military strategy known as “Shock and Awe,” Harlan K. Ullman, had his name on “The List.” He denies any involvement.
It would be more than stupid to say hypocrisy is something brand new, or that the present Washington bunch has a monopoly on it. Many of us recall the Reverend Jim and Tammy Baker and their tearful admission of a less-than-Christian pursuit of hard cash. It's always easier to point fingers at the other guy than finding the culprit in the bathroom mirror, but the consequences can be pretty awful. Then why do people do it?
I believe it's a matter of ego. The hypocrite thinks he or she is too smart for the people who probably don't have the intelligence to figure out whose hand is in the cookie jar. The other reason may be the politically popular Eleventh Commandment: Thou shalt not get caught.
Another one just did.
-30-
The Bogus Economist © 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
