November 2008 Archives

Because I am going to be attending and presenting at BarCamp Harrisburg I have been putting a lot of thought into what my discussion topic should be, and I have three things that have been rattling around in my head for a while now. I am going to decide on one of them within the next week so I can begin to compile my materials.

Here are the things I've been thinking about:

• Incorporating social tools into existing business applications. - I want to be able to examine how you could change existing applications into something more collaborative and connected. I'm not crazy about this topic, but since I am a developer I do think about these types of things.


• Social Project Management - I think Project Management is one area that could use more social interaction, collaboration, better searching, more integration with different types of media, and it's something that I've been aching for. I want to put some thoughts together on how to make this happen.


• Running a Social Media Consulting Business - The other thing that's been really consuming my thoughts is how to run a consulting business that helps connect companies with social tools like Twitter, Facebook, and the like to be more responsive to customers and grow. I believe a lot of companies are afraid of these types of tools and they shouldn't be. I think there is a great opportunity for the right company to come forward and help others understand and join the social web. I would do this as a practice run for presenting to my own company. I don't want to hide that. I want to sell this idea to my company.

So those are my topics. I'm going to probably pick two of them and prepare them both.

I just found out through a Twitter contact that Harrisburg is going to be having their own BarCamp. BarCamp is not an all-day booze fest (though that does have its place in life) but is an unconference of sorts. It is a tech gathering where everyone who goes has to participate.

This is a moment of synchronicity for me because earlier this evening I was wondering what I was going to be blogging about in this space. I've already peeled away my personal postings to another blog to be able to concentrate this area on something more substantial, and that was certainly easier before the election, but since, I've felt topically adrift. I was not sure what I was going to be blogging about next, because there are many things that interest me, but where do I focus? Does the world really need another food blog? Do I have the time to devote to putting together a good music blog? And would anybody really care.

What I really needed was something that was going to dovetail nicely with my day-to-day activities in work and technology, especially because it'll be good to be able to capture and expand on my thoughts when I'm in that context.

Attending BarCamp Harrisburg gives me an excuse to pick a topic to present on and expand on it here. So the next couple of days I'm going to spend time thinking about what I want to discuss in January and build my presentation in this space.

I think it's fitting that I'll be working on a presentation for an "unconference" in this space and evolving my ideas here. Kind of anti-climactic for those who will be attending the actual BarCamp but oh well.

I don't think that this means I'll be completely ignoring politics or civil liberties and freedom as I have blogged about in the past. I'll just be looking for a new venue to do that in. When I've found a new home for that content I'll be sure to let you know.

On the heels of a $770 billion bailout of the financial industry, and the more than $120 billion handed over to the immoral criminal pig fuckers at AIG so they can go to spas and treat themselves, Democrats are now seeking $25 billion to hand over to the auto industry. Obama's significant lead in voting in Michigan has no doubt played a part in his thinking about whether these companies should be rescued.

Where in the hell is this money coming from? My pocket. My children's college funds. Can I give you any idea how pissed off I am that I'm losing money every day in my 401k and having to give up on all sorts of things so we can get by day-to-day while we prop up failing businesses?

And this is not just a Democrat thing, though they're pushing hard for the auto industry bailout.

I guess I've got a metric shit ton of money I didn't know about?

So far these bailouts are costing $3050 per person in this country: $915bn / 300m people, or $12,200 for me because I'm the sole earner in this family. Give me the fucking $12,200. I can find a lot better uses for it.

Fuckers.

A few weeks back, after one of the debates, a pundit on CNN joked that he expected a circular firing squad to form up amongst Republicans when they lost. And it has happened.

And is it really a surprise? This race was closer than I think they expected it to be, but it was still a loss, and mostly at the hands of a messy and undisciplined campaign that seemed to be run by too many chiefs, and not by the man that sought the office of President. I think there's going to be a lot of blood letting as the Republicans figure out who they are who, really, is to blame for this November. Unfortunately, not all of the people who are responsible will be held so. Some who don't deserve to be blamed will be. And the first to get attacked in the press falls into that second group: Sarah Palin.

I am no fan of the woman. I thought her choice was a dangerous one for McCain. I realized that it would either be statistically brilliant or hugely unpopular, and I wasn't sure which it would be. I was certain it was going to be scary and entertaining and she exceeded my expectations on both accounts. I never trusted the woman. I found her proud willful ignorance disturbing. She came across as well-meaning but clueless and arrogant, and now McCain staffers are using that public image against her.

For her part, Palin has fired back saying that the statements quoted were taken out of context and has gone further to call those attacking her "cruel" and "cowardly".

And you know what, I actually believe her, and I agree with her. Seriously, I do agree with her. Furthermore I find the way she is being attacked craven. Palin did not run the McCain campaign. She didn't make the choices on how to run, where to spend time and money, or what issues to run on. She was chosen by McCain (or some GOP cognoscenti if you believe the rumors) and he anointed her the savior of his White House bid. I don't think it is her fault that they lost, or not her active fault they lost. Certainly she inspired some people to vote against the ticket, but that's not important now.

What is important now is I think they're doing themselves a huge disservice by attacking her. As much as they may have lost the campaign now, Palin will be back. She will be smarter, more polished, more well-versed, better trained, and with a better staff (it's the Bionic Candidate!). She is the future of the evangelical Christian conservative movement and those who have attacked her will probably end up losing to her in the next Republican presidential primaries in 2012. Some Democrats say they want her to run again, but I don't think they realize what they're asking for. If she were to run, and to pick a young appealing centrist as her running mate, she may win.

It's always been interesting, and a bit foolish, to me that the news media like to use the stock market as a daily barometer of the health of our country. It should be clear to people who think that the stock market is large and often seemingly irrational ecosystem with so many moving parts that it is hard to figure out what causes what fluctuation and why.

Anything more than the broadest strokes about the activity on the stock market are invariably wrong, but that has not stopped any pundit from trying to use it's churn as an indicator for why their particular view of "something" was right all along.

So, thinking about this I did some research about the stock market and historical trends related to elections and found this site.

I've taken some effort to recreate a graph they have on their site, but I highly recommend that you go to their site and look at the entire article because it's chock full of information.

The graph above represents the general rate of return for the S&P500 for every presidential election between 1950 and 2004. As you can see the general trend of the growth is upward but there is some churn. What's most interesting to me is the 0.5% average drop in the days following an election. I am willing to bet that even though the average trend for all elections displays this dip, and is part of an overall uptick in value pundits on the losing side of the election will spin this an indicator of people's pessimism and anger from the election.

And I'm saying this no matter who loses on Nov 4th.

And it's almost true...wait, what?

Well, here's what I mean. As I see it, and grossly oversimplifying here, there are three groups at play in the stock market around election time: supporters of Candidate A, supporters of Candidate B, and investors who just don't care. In the days leading up to the election as it becomes clear that Candidate A is going to win the election his supporters are more exuberant and more willing to spend money on the stock market. They think the future's bright. Also, because there's let instability, since we pretty much know who the winner is, group three invest more. When Candidate A wins, the supporters of Candidate B are in a pessimistic mood and sell off some assets because clearly this is the end of days. Group three investors (those who don't care) also sell off some of their gains from the last month's worth of investing. These two groups selling, for different reasons mind you, causes that 0.5% dip.

And that dip's not terribly significant. These days that'd be between 50 - 60 points down.

The important thing here, and what I'm trying to drive at is that it's not an indicator of the implosion of our economy, or even that Americans as a whole are unhappy at the outcome of the election. It instead reaffirms what psychologists and honest financial analysts have told us all along: the market is ruled primarily by emotions and irrational behavior.

I want to add one huge caveat to my thinking. We have several new factors in play that could throw this historical trend out of whack:

1. This is an unprecedented election. If Barack Obama does win and America has elected its first black president there's no real way to predict the reaction on Wall Street. We'd be living in the middle of history but the business economy seems mixed on Obama, so it's possible for the American public to feel elated and excited while the market sinks.


2. Tying into number one, the world is watching this election with keen interest. Many people abroad see a McCain presidency as one of continued conflict and instability and I think that his election would spur sell-offs in the global markets as well as liquidation of American assets by overseas investors. If that does occur the markets would go down in value as well.


3. We are currently in economically unstable times. Investors and the markets in general might ignore the election completely and continue to thrash about wildly on every bit of news.

Like I said, the markets are a large and complicated ecosystem. Only time will tell what will happen in the days following Nov 4th.

Sorry that I've been negligent and not posting to my blog, but as you may know, I live in the "real America" and therefore I've been busy helping a hapless conservative run their campaign, spouting off pithy vapid comments about Israel, putting up yard signs for "Obama Ayers 1995" , and counseling old women to withhold Halloween candy from children of Obama supporters.

Clearly, I'm busy, and have to work. I'm not like the socialists who live in Philadelphia and spend their days blogging and eating cheese. I have to expose the evils of that dangerous socialist, wait, not that one, this one, dammit, this one.

But I am working on the next piece about socialized medicine. I want to expand the conversation further.