open window, close window, open window, close window

[solarbird]

Today? Hot. Seriously. But I biked with spazzkat to Woodinville, where McLendon's had the right kind of window cranks at less than half the price that Home Despot wanted, and they were even in the right colour, so take THAT, box store! Now we can open all our windows! Yay!

(Half the casement windows couldn't really be opened, and haven't really been openable since we moved in, by anyone but me. Of the ones that could, only I could trick a couple of them into opening. So that's an annoyance I'm well glad to have fixed. The hardware people couldn't figure out how they'd managed to wreck that many window cranks in that short a time. I suspect that the previous owner's boyfriend couldn't be trained to check the lock settings before giving the crank a good wunge first. I have no real reason to think this other than the fact that he used to try to hide the fact that he would smoke indoors when there was a clear outdoor smoking area setup, something we could tell from various clues about the house.)

So anyway, that's why I spent money today, even though normally I wouldn't have.

I really wish I'd taken spazzkat's camera with me on the ride - I saw a couple of flowers I'd really liked to have taken pictures of, and the feral chickens in Bothell were out with their chicks taking dust baths and wandering around in the undergrowth looking for food, and it was all just too twee to stand, even with the oppressive heat.

In other biking news, my 2,4 and 2,5 gears are really getting worse, so since I'm spending almost all my time in 2,6 and 2,7 lately anyway (the last Murkworks South to Murkworks North trip was spent more than half time in 2,7) I've decided just to go ahead and move into the 3, set, which is the 'Racing' range. OooooOOOOOoooooo.

Tonight I have to finish off the new, longer, hopefully better-paying form of this POP3 article. The only problem with is that I'm at that point where my eyes just slide right off the page, since it's kind of the third time I've written it. annathepiper gave it a read for me, which helped.

Meanwhile, have a couple of articles to read, if you're bored:

Why not to get into credit cards - no, it's worse than you think.

Women's rights groups to support in Iraq - unverified 'cause I don't really know how to beyond Google searches. Clues, anyone? Please?

And a flower picture, taken along the north path again:


Formalism

Sunday's miles: 12.5. Traction tyres got a good workout today - very hilly, and an unexpected amount of gravel. Odd!
Miles out of Hobbiton: 373.9
Miles to Rivendell: 84.4

PS: I seem to have a lot of icons all centred around anger. I wonder if that means anything?

Comments

[king-chiron.livejournal.com]

The gist of the credit card article seems to be the people are too stupid to make their own decisions about debt and therefore it's the governments job to handle that for us. Amusing, given that the federal government has a worse record of piling up debts than just about anyone.

[solarbird]

Combined with the sheer brutality of the new industry-written bankruptcy laws, I think what we have is an industry that's figured out how to mislead people into going into permanent debt to them, with government aid and support. Mmmmmm, vassalage.

[king-chiron.livejournal.com]

I don't agree with the new banruptcy law, but I also think that article is calling for regulating credit based on the lowest common denominator, which means eliminating choice for those of us who can handle it. Again, what's the likelihood that Congress and the federal government, which has done such an outstanding job managing its own debt, is capable of doing a better job?

[solarbird]

Oh, I don't think they will step in, not for a second. Not for several years, at least. The industry buys off too many people too effectively. I certainly don't plan to spend any time on it any time soon. I posted that link as a warning to consumers about how this system actually works.

But to address that question anyway, Congress and the federal government are already in it up to their armpits, as are the states. They're merely regulating to the overwhelming benefit of the credit industry.

Given that the traditional intrastate regulation of credit has been effectively eliminated, it would seem reasonable to suggest that the Federal government, which has a formal Constitutional role the power to regulate interstate commerce, should (in theory) be inclined to step in and assume the roles that state protective agencies used to hold. They'd certainly be empowered to do so.

One could also make the argument that a simple set of interest-rate limitations should be much cleaner, smaller, and easier to enforce than an increasingly tangled mass of "predatory practices" laws which are all but purely subjective in actual practice. One might also make the argument that "predatory practices" laws are much more thoroughly open to abuse than usury limitations.

However, what will actually happen is nothing, pending enough of a lending system failure to prompt a significant popular movement against it. With the effective governmental insurance for credit card companies enshrined in the new bankruptcy law, combined with a 0% American savings rate in June and -0.6% in July, combined with a continued falling of American wages vs. inflation, the stage has now been set for this to happen over a period of some years. The rules of the game have been changed mid-game, and much to the worse for the customers of these companies.

None of that means that any of this will happen, of course. Just that the pieces are in place for it.

[cafiorello.livejournal.com]

Not to mention, the govt uses our money to bail out the industry when defaults should kill them. So we're not regulating them, and not allowing market forces to correct them either. Feh.
Cathy

[mathmuffin.livejournal.com]

Yes, thank you solarbird for pointing out the interesting article on debt by Elizabeth Warren and Amelia Warren Tyagi. I am only halfway through reading it and already have learned much.

kingchiron said,
The gist of the credit card article seems to be the people are too stupid to make their own decisions about debt.

No, the article points out that the major portion of this debt is created by families that legitimately need money, for something like medical expenses or temporary unemployment, not by bad decisions. I remember that back when I was a college professor bouncing from university to university in one-year positions, I used to live off of savings during the summer and usually had to dip into credit card debt by the end of the summer (I had to save cash for the rental deposit when I moved to my new job). It was a priority with me to pay off that debt as soon as I had a paycheck again. Fortunately, the one time I did not have a paycheck in the fall, I had found a summer job and was not in debt.

And there are gambles with debt too. I could have sent my daughters to a local college that I could afford without debt. Instead I am borrowing $14,000 a year to send them to a better college. The main factor limiting their learning in middle school and high school was the resistant attitude of their classmates, and I am willing to commit to ten years of debt to avoid that. I have calculated very carefully that I can handle the debt, but it is a risk. What if Amy becomes sicker or I lose my job?

cafiorello said,
Not to mention, the govt uses our money to bail out the industry when defaults should kill them. So we're not regulating them, and not allowing market forces to correct them either. Feh.

Market forces optimize the economy, but the question is exactly what economic value does it optimize? A free market leads to efficiency, innovation, and the creation of good products at good prices, but it also leads to ruthless exploitation of resources, resulting in deforestation, pollution, etc. I worry that consumer debt is one of those resources that would be ruthlessly exploited. So I fear that not even uncorrupted market forces could keep this wave of debt in check.

Erin Schram

[starfallz.livejournal.com]

Looks like speedwell, or a relative.

Very interesting article on credit and debt.