[Josh's note: This is Part 3 of a 3-part series. Part 1 is here and Part 2 is here.]

Slow and Steady Keeps Me Sane

Once I finished my mental list, I had to start thinking about what I would do with all my new free time.  Obviously, I would need to continue looking for work, and maybe trying to find ways to make money in the interim.  I was actually kind of excited about the prospect of having 40+ hours freed up every week and I resolved to use them wisely.

I decided that the first thing I needed to do was settle into a routine. For me, routines keep me sane, and I knew unemployment would be miserable if I just sort of meandered through it, wondering what would happen next. I get bored easily, and I had to try to prevent boredom from ruining my time off.  So, I started going to Starbucks every morning to read, write, study, listen to music or whatever I needed to get done.  At first, I would buy a drink every time I was in the store, but then I figured out that I could make it myself for about 15% of the cost, so I bought the ingredients and started making my Starbucks drink at home and taking it with me.  It turns out I like my version of the drink better anyway, so I have a better drink and I save a bunch of money every month (I’m embarrassed to even write the amount of money I was spending on Starbucks every month, so I’ll just keep it to myself; suffice it to say it makes me cringe when I realize that my drink used to cost about four bucks every time I got it).

I used my time at Starbucks to keep up with current events (like world news, technological trends, various blogs, etc.), read (I’ve been reading Infinite Jest for several months now – I’m a very slow reader), find new music, keep in touch with friends, look for good job prospects and do school work.  I tried to find ways to feel productive, even if those ways involved checking up on pop-culture or playing Words with Friends on my iPhone.

I also made sure to continue going to the gym regularly.  It’s difficult to explain, but being out of work actually made it more difficult for me to go to the gym consistently even though I had more free time. So I resolved to continue putting in at least four days a week (Monday and Thursday are cardio days, Tuesday and Friday are weights days).

I tried to spend time with friends as much as possible. I have several friends whose work schedules are unusual, so we spent a lot of late nights playing PS3 and goofing off. It was nice to be able to just spend time hanging out and not worrying about getting to sleep so I could get up early for work.  During my time away from work, I realized how important my friends are to me, and I realized that I need to focus on cultivating and building relationships – we only get so many meaningful friendships.

All Good Things Must Come to an End

About six weeks after I was let go, I was asked to interview with my old company… for my old job.  It was awkward.  Apparently my previous co-workers had a lot of nice things to say about me, so I was at the top of the list of candidates for this job. The interview went well and it helped me to keep in touch with some people at the old company.  I never heard back on that interview, but after another six weeks, I was interviewed for another position at the old company.  This time I was offered the job, which I accepted.  In my list of things I did after I was let go, I mentioned that I resolved to leave on good terms – four months later, this decision led directly to a job offer that allowed me to return to work for my old company.  If I had left on bad terms, I would probably still be looking for work with growing anxiety and a shrinking bank account.

While I was enjoying my time off, I was starting to get a little bored. The routine was starting to get old, and I was having a hard time keeping motivated and being productive. I was also running out of cash, so the time was perfect for me to go back to work.  I’m still working on my MBA, and I’ll have to start thinking about what to do with it once I have it pretty soon.  I’m also writing a book, which could open doors to future career opportunities.  But for now, I’m back in the office 8-5 every day, and it’s nice to have a steady routine and a paycheck again.

[Josh's note: This is Part 2 of a 3-part series. Part 1 is here and Part 3 is here.]

Work the Plan

Since I started paying down the 0% card, I had also started considering what I would need to do if I lost my job. By the time I was let go, I had a very clear plan for cutting expenses, taking advantage of my insurance before it lapsed, and living a leaner financial life.  I’m going to list the pieces of my plan in a bulleted list to make it easy to skim and identify individual items.  This is a long list and some things were trivial while others were crucial.  Here’s what I did the day I got let go:

1. I went to the gym and did an hour of cardio. Normally, I do some combination of reading, watching TV and listening to music while I do cardio.  On this day, I just did cardio and started mentally sorting through my new situation.  I think it was important for me to calmly start analyzing my situation. Even just an hour of clear thinking can help me start thinking straight and avoid doing anything rash.
2. I had to make a decision about whether to keep my gym membership active. After I finished my cardio, I went to the front office and spoke with a sales rep about my situation. My options were to keep the membership going, pause it (meaning I couldn’t go to the gym, but they wouldn’t charge me either) or ask for a sort of temporary free pass to get me by. My membership is $30 a month, and I decided that $30 a month was a good price for unlimited entertainment, keeping in shape and occupying my time.  This is one of the few expenses I kept intact.
3. I went home and called up any charities or non-profits I supported and let them know that I would have to stop supporting them indefinitely.  These were difficult phone calls, but they were necessary – I had to cut monthly expenses immediately, and I had to cut them as much as possible.
4. I called my dentist and scheduled a cleaning and check-up. My insurance coverage would be lapsing at the end of the month (two weeks from when I was let go), and I didn’t know what I would do for coverage after that. I needed to take advantage of my coverage while I had it.  If I hadn’t recently been to the doctor, I would’ve set something up with him as well.  When I went to the dentist, I mentioned my situation and asked for advice on things I might do to prepare in case I was without insurance for an extended period.  They recommended I go ahead and get some fillings done (we’d been “watch”ing them for a while, and rather than risk that they become full-blown cavities while I was without insurance, we went ahead and took care of them).  They also gave me some free samples of stuff (fluoride toothpaste, floss, etc.) to try to help me out.
5. I logged onto my Netflix account and dropped my subscription to the cheapest version that would let me keep free streaming on my TiVo (this saved me $10 a month).
6. I talked to the people who run the place where I get my haircut.  I told them my situation and asked if there was anything we could do to save me some money. They moved me over to a new stylist whose rate was much cheaper than my normal stylist. They said I could stick with the new guy until his rates went up at the end of the year.
7. I made phone calls to my family to let them know what was up.  This might have been the most difficult step, and I procrastinated on it for a while. I was pretty confident I would be ok, but I knew my family would be worried.  Nevertheless, these calls were necessary and ultimately provided a lot of encouragement for me.
8. I contacted my MBA program and let them know I’d lost my job. I asked them if there was anything I should do, needed to know, or should consider going forward. They recommended that I contact Financial Services (to see if anything could be done to help me out financially), and that I consider signing up for a Fall elective. Financial Services was of little help (status quo), but I ended up taking my required week-long elective and got that out of the way early.
9. I joined LinkedIn. I probably should’ve done this a while ago, but now seemed as good a time as any.
10. I contacted a career assistance program we’re offered through my MBA program.  They helped me update and rewrite my resume, and they taught me how to look for jobs, target companies and make meaningful contacts that could potentially lead to future job opportunities.
11. I started contacting friends, family and fellow MBA-ers to see if they knew of any job openings that I might look into.
12. I started looking into unemployment benefits in Florida. It’s pretty easy to Google “unemployment benefits” for your state to find out where to go and what to do. In Florida, FLUIDnow.com is a one-stop shop for all things unemployment.  I waited a bit before doing this because I knew there was a waiting period before I would become eligible to receive benefits, so there was no rush on this one.
13. Now that I had made serious cuts to my spending, I needed to recalculate my monthly expenses. Once I knew how much it would cost me to live each month, I could figure out how many months I had before I went broke.  It turned out that I had a little over six months before my money would run out… barring an unexpected, large expense.
14. I had to decide what to do with my car. I still had eight monthly payments to make, and those payments would constitute a big part of my monthly expenses.  It turned out that it really didn’t matter what I did because I had enough money in the bank to last seven or eight months (including my monthly car payment).  I decided to go ahead and pay the car off because it wouldn’t really impact my ability to survive, I would save a little cash on the final interest payments, and so that if something catastrophic happened, my car couldn’t be repossessed (and I could sell it if necessary – but that would be my choice, not the bank’s).
15. I resolved to leave my company on good terms. When I left my previous job in Dallas, I read an article that said to always leave a job on good terms, and to resist the urge to unload frustrations on the way out the door. The article emphasized that burning bridges is almost always a bad idea, and that we never know where our next job lead might come from.  Often, job leads come from contacts at previous employers, and those leads can be valuable.  This decision – to leave on good terms – would prove to be critical later.

[Josh's note: This is Part 1 of a 3-part series. Part 2 is here and Part 3 is here.]

After being out of work for almost five months, I’ve finally gotten a job offer. I consider this to be both excellent news and sort of a bummer.  I’ve actually had a great time while I was out of work, and my financial situation is actually better than it was before I was let go.  I’m sure each jobless person’s situation is unique but, maybe in sharing mine, I can help calm the fear of the unknown and the anxiety that some experience when they first lose their jobs.

Preparation: Don’t wait until it’s too late

I started preparing for the possibility of losing my job about a year before I actually lost it.  The economy was tumbling, my company was constantly in flux, and I could sense that my job security was becoming more and more dubious.  I started examining my financial situation and realized that, if I were to lose my job that day, I’d be in real trouble.

First of all, I was spending a lot of money very quickly. It had been several years since I had a real budget, and I was blissfully ignorant of where my money was going. Subsequently, I wasn’t saving money like I used to.  Since I bought my house, I didn’t have the same motivation to save because I didn’t need to come up with a down payment anymore. Instead, I just kind of spent money as I got it.

Because I wasn’t saving money, if I had a big expense “pop up” (tires for my car, a landscaping project at my house, etc.), I would just pay for it with my handy-dandy 0% APR credit card. “It’s free money!”  I had managed to rack up about $10,000 on that card.  Since I was in college, I frequently bounced balances around on 0% cards because it felt good to borrow money interest free.

When I stopped to actually think about how much I’d need to pay each month to pay off the card before the 0% APR period ended, I realized I needed to start spending less and saving more. Immediately.  I toned down my spending on music, food, entertainment, clothes (although if you know me, you know that spending too much money on clothes really isn’t a problem for me) and other non-necessities.

It took me about 11 months, but I finally got the card paid off, and several months before the 0% APR period ended.  And literally the next day, my house had plumbing problems and I put $5,000 right back on the stupid card. C’iest la vie, right?

As I paid down the card, I also started trying to save money. I managed to sock away a little cash so I would have something to work with as an emergency fund. I didn’t get a whole lot of money put away, but I did have some cash in the bank when I was let go, and that cash helped me bridge the gap until unemployment benefits kicked in.

One way I shielded myself from the disaster of losing my job was by paying down debt ahead of time. For a lot of people, it’s too late to do this step. But for most people – like the 90% of Americans who still have jobs, but are likely worried about losing them – it’s not too late to start buckling down, spending less and saving more. Pay down debt so joblessness doesn’t mean financial catastrophe.

I also realized that I had an empty room in my house, and that room could be helping me offset the cost of my mortgage if it had a person in it. During the summer, I started looking around for potential roommates and discussing things with my current roommate to see if he planned to stick around.  He decided to get his own place, and I ended up finding three roommates.  This would end up being a pretty big decision as it would reduce my monthly costs substantially.

I finally saw (500) Days of Summer, and I liked it. A lot. But I also found it to be exceptionally depressing, although I couldn’t initially figure out why. The narrator is up front about what we’re getting into – “You should know up front, this is not a love story.” – and we quickly see that it’s meant to be a story about love, and it’s probably not going to have a typical romantic comedy ending.

And yet we’re conditioned to watch movies a certain way, with certain expectations, and it’s difficult to shake that conditioning even when we’re warned ahead of time that that ain’t where this thing is headed.  But I digress. On balance, the movie ended with me feeling sad. And I’m not sure whether that was what was intended. After all, the point seems to be that, sure Tom has his heart obliterated, but there’s always another season waiting around the corner!

But what’s the point, Tom? Ok, you met someone new. But how many (days) do you get this time, and to what end? In a way, I feel that the central theme of the movie is dark: fatalism. No matter what we do, no matter what we think is going on, we’re steadily plodding along toward the end, even from the beginning. The best we can hope for is to make our journey as satisfying as possible. Some journeys will end happily, like Summer’s, and some may never end or will end badly, like Tom’s probably will.  Tom decided that architecture would be more satisfying than writing greeting cards, and he seems really into it. But he was also really into Summer, and we know how that turns out.

But there’s also something even a little darker, if only because it seems to be true. The crux of the movie is wrapped up in a Tom-crushing line from Summer. Tom says to Summer, “I need to know you won’t wake up tomorrow and feel a different way.” Summer’s honest reply: “I can’t promise you that. Nobody can.  Anyone who does is a liar.” And she clarifies this idea the next morning in response to Tom’s inquiry as to why Summer’s past relationships didn’t work out: “Nothing happened really. It’s what always happens. Life.”  And we’re suddenly dropped down the existentialist rabbit hole.

Well. Ok. So. Why did I like this movie so much? First of all, while I don’t necessarily agree about life being fatalistic, I probably agree so far as romantic relationships go. We’re programmed to look for love, to find a soulmate. Shoot, even the creation story describes the first woman as a helpmate for the man. She was created to help him live life, to be a companion. And so we pursue relationships like our lives depend on it. And we continue to do this despite the overwhelming evidence that the ultimate romantic relationship – marriage – ends in disaster more often than not.  So why do we pursue relationships when we know all the good times will most often be trumped by the bad? I think Tom would like to know as well.

But there were some artistic touches that stood out beyond all the sadness. The copy-room kiss was one of the better-written and acted scenes I’ve seen in a while. Tension is built, resolved and replaced in a matter of seconds, and I think we know how Summer and Tom feel in that moment. The “Reality” and “Expectations” split-screen was fantastic. I think most people have experienced that and just about everyone knows that the two screens will rarely match (if ever). In fact, the entire movie could be said to describe the differences between Tom’s expectations and reality.

There was a nice bit of Sixth Sense-like directing. There are a few scenes where I wondered “Are they really there together, or is Tom imagining this?” At the end of their trip to Ikea, Tom and Summer hold hands, but there’s a distance between them that seems large. The hand-holding seems almost imaginary. On the train to the wedding, I wondered if Tom really saw Summer, or if he was just hoping he saw her, using her to cope with this uncomfortable situation so he wouldn’t have to go solo. On the bench at the end of the movie, if Tom were sitting there alone, and another person saw him there, the observer would have no idea he was interacting with Summer. Was this just Tom’s way of finally saying goodbye? Ultimately, all of these scenes efficiently accomplish their objective: to emphasize the ambiguity inherent in relationships. Tom was constantly wondering, “Will she ultimately reciprocate? Am I alone here?” And we, as viewers, were asking the same questions.

All the pundits are discussing this tonight, and most of their discussions are worthless. Football is a game of numbers, maybe more than any other game. Ten yards for a first down. Four chances to get ten yards. Penalties are assessed in yards, and are intended to directly influence the offending team’s chances of getting another first down or scoring points.

So, the right way to analyze the situation is actually the easiest: make some assumptions, run the numbers and see which option was best.  First, I’ll show the numbers and the result, then I’ll describe my assumptions.

The answer:

Belichick was correct to go for it on 4th and 2 (and it’s not even close).

The math:

On average, the Colts will end up scoring 2.45 points if the Pats punt to them. And, on average, the Colts will end up scoring 1.14 points if the Pats go for it on 4th down. Going for it on 4th down is clearly the best option since it yields the fewest points (on average) for the Colts.

UPDATE: I saw an article on CNNSI.com that compares the likelihood of the Pats winning using percentages, and I think that method is better than mine. So, for completeness, here are my numbers for this scenario: using the same assumptions I mention below, the Pats will win 84% of the time if they go for it on 4th and 2, and they’ll win 65% of the time if they punt.

My assumptions:

• If the Pats convert the 4th down, they will win the game.
• The Pats will convert the 4th down 75% of the time (based on the Pats’ previous 4th down conversion rate against the Colts).
• If the Colts receive the ball on downs, they will score a touchdown to win the game 65% of the time.
• If the Pats punt, the Colts will get the ball on their own 30-yard line (and need to drive 70 yards and score a touchdown to win).
• If the Pats punt, the Colts will score from their won 30-yard line 35% of the time.
• The Colts will get 7 points if they score a touchdown (e.g., they will never miss the PAT).

My methodology:

In general, I wanted to compare the Expectation of the Colts (in points scored) in two situations: 1) The Pats attempt to convert the 4th down; 2) The Pats punt to the Colts.

For 1), here’s how I broke it down: The Pats will convert the 4th down 75% of the time, and the game will end. Or the Pats will turn the ball over on downs, and the Colts will score a touchdown 65% of the time and win the game.

For 2), here’s how I broke it down: The Colts will receive the ball and begin their drive on their own 30-yard line. From their own 30-yard line, they will score a touchdown 35% of the time and win the game.

What would it take for Belichick to be wrong?

If the Pats would only convert the 4th down attempt 60% of the time, AND if the Colts scored a touchdown 90% of the time when they got the ball on downs, THEN Belichick would have been wrong to go for it. But only barely. (I did not modify the numbers for the punting scenario.)

The math that would make Bill wrong:

Given the above statistics, on average, the Colts will still end up scoring 2.45 points if the Pats punt to them. And, on average, the Colts will end up scoring 2.52 points if the Pats go for it on 4th down. So, given the above assumptions, Belichick would have been marginally wrong to attempt the 4th down. But those assumptions seem very optimistic for the Colts. Even Peyton Manning wouldn’t score a touchdown 90% of the time from his opponent’s 28-yard line, and even when he’s using all four downs to do it.

UPDATE: I saw an article on CNNSI.com that compares the likelihood of the Pats winning using percentages, and I think that method is better than mine. So, for completeness, here are my numbers for this scenario: Using the assumptions mentioned above, the Pats will win 64% of the time if they go for it on 4th and 2, and they’ll win 65% of the time if they punt.

The great thing about my method is that it can be made more precise with more accurate data. For example, it should be possible to figure out how frequently Manning will score a touchdown from the Pats’ 28-yard line if he’s using all four downs.  It should be pretty easy to find out how often the Pats can expect to convert a 4th down in that situation. It should be pretty easy to determine where, on average, the Colts would begin their drive if the Pats punted to them. And it should be pretty easy to figure out, on average, how often the Colts would score from that spot.

I’m not going to do that research because it’s not my job. Ironically, the people whose job it is probably won’t bother with it either because then they couldn’t pontificate about Belichick’s call for the next week.

UPDATE: I was wrong that nobody in the media would seriously analyze Belichick’s decision! Someone actually did a similar analysis for CNNSI. So, in the interest of full disclosure and eating a little crow, here’s a link to the article: CNNSI.com – Why Belichick Made the Right Decision

Preface

I recently bought a new laptop and, as I transferred my old stuff to my new laptop, I found this unfinished blog post.  I’m pretty sure I initially wrote this some time in early 2006 (possibly late 2005).  I wish I had found this before the 2008 election as it would’ve been fun to revisit in light of the major issues that drove the election.  Anyway, I want to get this posted while I’m thinking about it.  I’ve copied it here unedited, but I’ve added an afterward at the end (it was unfinished and I wanted to wrap it up instead of leaving it so open-ended).

Me on Machiavelli on welfare and government redistribution of wealth

I’m just about to finish up Machiavelli’s The Prince. Last night, I went to dinner at my favorite local cafe and my server asked if I was reading it “for fun”, to which I replied, “I wouldn’t say it’s ‘fun’, but I’m between books right now and I had this laying around, so I figured I’d give it a shot.” Even in his introduction, the translator says that he’s not sure we can really “learn” much from Machiavelli, but that his writing is insightful, at least as far as the mysterious Machiavelli is concerned.

As I began reading, I couldn’t help but agree with the translator–I didn’t see myself learning a whole lot from this experience. That was true until about half way through the book when I stumbled upon his chapter on “Generosity and Parsimony”. There, I found what I thought was some interesting insight into today’s politics in America.

A brief summary of a tiny part of The Prince

Before I go any further, I should probably give a brief summary of The Prince. I almost wrote something like, “For those who haven’t read and have no desire to read The Prince…”, but that’s just fluff. Really, I’m summarizing for myself so I don’t have to ever read it again. Anyway, a “prince” is basically a “ruler” and Machiavelli talks about how princes come to power, how they maintain their power and some general rules to live by for princes as they try to maintain their principalities. So, his chapter on “Generosity and Parsimony” is another section designed to point out traits of an effective ruler.

Machiavelli essentially says that, although it may be immediately beneficial, giving lots of stuff to people to win their favor is ultimately a trap that will bury a leader. I think he’s talking about bribery, but he’s also talking generally about giving gifts and freebies to the populous at large. He contends that there are several problems with giving things to people to gain their favor. The first is that all the things given have to be taken from somewhere else: he’ll either have to give of his own possessions, which will eventually run out, or he’ll have to take from others and give of their possessions which will eventually make those “others” his enemies and will also eventually run out.

Once the giving stops, the populous, having been spoiled by his generosity thus far, would be discontented and he would lose favor with them. A couple clichés come to mind: “Give them an inch and they’ll take a mile” and “Ignorance is bliss”. If you give stuff to people, especially if they haven’t earned it, and you stop giving them that stuff, they’ll become very restless; if you never give them more than they need, they’ll never know what it’s like to have excess.

Back to my point

But I said this has to do with today’s politics, didn’t I? Here’s how: Socialism, welfare, unemployment and entitlement are all hot-button issues today. Right now, the two opposing schools of thought are: 1) We recognize that people have needs and we believe the best way to satisfy those needs is to give them opportunities to work, earn a paycheck and fend for themselves and 2) We recognize that people have needs and we think that those whose needs are fulfilled should help out those whose needs are not fulfilled. In a nutshell, it’s “bolster the economy and create jobs” versus “tax the ‘haves’ and give to the ‘have-nots’”.

Although he wasn’t talking directly about welfare, I think Machiavelli’s point is valid: giving generously to the “have-nots” by taxing the “haves” seems wonderful until the “haves” get sick of it and demand that the “have-nots” work for their wages. Of course, I don’t believe that people should starve because they can’t find a job, and I believe America is a country that shouldn’t let that happen. People will fall on hard times and our country is wealthy enough to help those people out until they can get back on their feet. But they’ll never get back on their feet if they don’t have any incentive to stand up.

A sidebar on Giuliani’s Leadership

A few months ago, I read Rudy Giuliani’s Leadership and I was very impressed with some of his political philosophies and tactics. Most impressive, though, were his results. He only briefly discusses his take on welfare, but I think it was a great philosophy: When people are without jobs, other citizens should be helping them survive. But, part of helping them “survive” is helping them learn a trade, find a job and get off of welfare. Giuliani’s system provided seminars, vocation training, job hunting and other resources to those on welfare and, as a result, he dramatically reduced unemployment. I think the most substantial tenant of his welfare philosophy was this: If you’re on welfare, we’re going to provide you with all the resources we can to help you find a job, but you only have a certain amount of time to draw benefits and then we’re cutting you off. His philosophy was to “teach a man to fish”.

Back to my point again (and some butchery of my own interpretation of Giuliani’s philosophy)

I suppose my real problem with an open-ended welfare system (and the same goes for strict socialism) is that the system is not designed to actually help anyone get off of welfare. Instead, the system is designed to endear those who are on welfare to the providers, and ultimately to provide votes for the providers. I think it’s easiest to explain this by going back to the adage I mentioned earlier. The adage goes something like this: “Cook a man a fish and he’ll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he’ll eat for a lifetime.” To take this a step further, say there were two businesses, each related to the fishing industry, but in different ways. The first business sells fishing gear–poles, lures, line, etc.–while the second is a fish restaurant. The first business would be most interested in increasing the number of fishermen in its area. This business understands that more people fishing means better sales for poles, line, lures and such. The other business would be interested in keeping people hungry for fish and would prefer that people spend their time at the restaurant buying and eating fish because the more people that eat fish, the more revenue they’ll get. More importantly, the latter would realize that it’s bad for people to learn to fish. If people are catching their own fish, they don’t need a restaurant to cook and sell them fish for a significant mark-up.

In both examples, the analogy would extend into the political world as “revenue” equals “votes”. Giuliani’s philosophy was to teach people to fish, but also to give them a couple vouchers to the fish restaurant so they can eat in the mean time. The opposing philosophy would be to have the general population provide unlimited vouchers to those in need so the needy can eat and aren’t motivated to learn to fish on their own (I wouldn’t learn to fish if I knew I’d get three square meals a day at no charge to me).

Afterward (and a bait-n-switch from welfare to populism)

As I read back over this post, I feel that maybe I was talking more about populism than social programs.  I was a little off on some of my terminology (I guess I know what I meant by “open-ended welfare”, though it seems like I could’ve worded that more eloquently), but I think was mostly on point.  The 2008 election was largely driven by populism: Obama ran on a fundamentally populist platform, focusing on “change”, “hope” and other feel-good words for the masses while remaining fairly opaque about himself, his own ambitions and his specific plans; he also focused on taxing the rich and redistributing wealth, creating tons of social programs and spending many billions of dollars while offering little by way of explanation as to whom would fund these programs. It could be many years before we know how many of his promises he’s able to keep, or the cost of trying to keep those promises.

But politics and elections are based on promises (empty and otherwise), so what differentiates normal politics from populism?  To me, the differentiator is not so much the target demographic, class or audience, but the advisability and feasibility of the ideology being preached.  Are we making these promises because they’re best for the country, and ultimately for “the people”? Or are we making promises because they’re the key to maximizing votes for this particular election?  Are we bailing out the Big Three because that’s what’s best for the industry and the country? Or are we bailing them out because we need to save some jobs in the short-term, and a lot of those jobs are union leaders and lobbyists in DC?

Remember that time when I said I was going to try and make a substantive post every two weeks? Me neither.

So, here’s what’s been up since my last post:

Well, obviously, we’re more than SEC Champs these days. Since we whooped up on OSU, we’ve become the first school to hold both the basketball and football National Titles in the same calendar year. I don’t have much to say about that except that it’s great to be a Florida Gator. Oh, and I feel we’re a strong favorite to repeat in basketball… and look out for us in football next year.

Speaking of next year’s football team, it looks like Urban Meyer is a recruiting genius. But we don’t have a chance next year because we’re losing so much on defense, right? I don’t think so. I think our defense was great this year because we had a lot of talent, but also because we were so well coached. I think after spring practice and our first couple games this fall, we’ll be back on track. Also, our schedule is much more favorable this year and our offense is going to put up some serious numbers. I think our coaches will have the defense ready (though maybe not quite as good as last year), and our offense is going to put up better numbers this year. I think this year’s offense will make last year’s look pretty timid.

Moving on, um… I’ve been reading a lot. I recently finished reading Tipping Point. It was excellent, and it helped me have a new perspective on causality. It was interesting to get a better picture of what can make things “tip”. Here’s the analogy that comes to mind for describing what a “tipping point” is: Paper burns at 451 degrees Fahrenheit; it doesn’t burn at 450 degrees (in theory, or whatever). It’s not that 450 degrees isn’t hot, but that 450 degrees isn’t hot enough to cause the paper to burn – to tip. At 450 degrees, the paper is just hot; at 451 degrees, everything is on fire. But there’s not much difference between the two numbers. That one degree is just enough, in addition to the previous 450 degrees, to make a bunch of stuff happen and finally catch the paper on fire. And so it is with social epidemics – things will often be going on as they always have, and then some small thing suddenly causes those things to become something bigger and much more obvious. The book basically tries to break down the individual factors that contribute to something reaching its tipping point.

I am currently reading Fast Food Nation, which is pretty boring, but educational. I guess I’m learning a lot about what goes on behind the scenes in the “food industry”. The book goes through a brief history of “fast food”, then goes into the specifics of where most of that food is produced, who produces it and how very evil the whole process and industry is. Ironically, I keep finding myself craving a good hamburger while I read it. That ain’t right.

I’ve had a good run playing poker online recently. I spent some time working on my cash game, had a really, really good run, then took a break when the law of averages roundhoused me in the face (but still ran at about 5BB/100 hands for about 5K hands). I jumped back into MTTs and recently had a pretty big score in a $30 tournament. There were 113 people and I took 2nd for $678. Normally, I’d be very pleased with that finish except I battled back from a 2-to-1 chip deficit to a 10-to-1 chip lead (over about 25 minutes of solid heads-up play)… but then I lost a coinflip (AKs vs. TT), a 70-30 (King high vs. QQ), then lost another coinflip (all-in on a QTx flop with two hearts – I had KJo, he had 8h7h and flushed the turn). By the time all that was over, the blinds were so high we were just gambling. I lost one more flip and that was it.

Anyway, I’ve been to Jacksonville several times over the past couple months and I’ve enjoyed being able to get home so easily. I’ve seen my family several times and I’ve spent time with some friends too. It’s nice to be able to head up to Jax whenever I want, and it’s especially nice that I don’t have to burn vacation time or like $500 a trip. As I think back on my time in Dallas, it really seems like it was just an extended internship or something. I never really felt “at home” there, and I was always in a “wait and see” mode. I knew I’d either move west to pursue acting, or I’d move back east to be near my friends and family. Texas was never really a long-term option, and I’m really glad I ended up back in Florida. It’s hard to describe the overall increase in my quality of life since I moved, but it’s pretty drastic.

I bought a digital piano a few weeks ago. It’s a Kurzweil PC88 and it’s in pretty great shape, especially considering it’s probably 10 years old. I have been surprised how much dexterity I still have, and it’s been fun playing “by ear” instead of just reading sheet music. I can tell my musical ear has definitely matured since I’ve been playing the guitar. It’s nice to be able to just sit down and play something that’s in my head (at least a slimmed-down, easy version). Hopefully I’ll stick with it and become pretty decent.

I think that’s about all I have for now. I’ll try to make it back before April.

Road trip 1: Tonight, for the first time in about three years, I went running (outdoors and everything!). I’ve been doing various cardio exercises–ridin’ the bike, the crazy elliptical thing–for a few years, but I hadn’t gone for a run in a while. It was actually pretty relaxing and wasn’t as tough as I anticipated. I went about 3.3 miles in 30 minutes (nine-minute miles). That ain’t great and it ain’t awful. On the up-side, I did have to run a bit of a hill, so I’ll tell myself that slowed me down a bit.

Road trip 2: Tomorrow night, I’m heading to Atlanta to watch the Gators in the SEC Championship game. When I was a student, we pretty much expected to play for the SEC Title and we were always hoping to get into the National Championship game. Nowadays, playing for the SEC Title is a big deal and I want to be there if we win it. Also, it’s a pretty good excuse to go hang with my friends in Atlanta (I haven’t been since last Christmas). So, I’m leaving right after work tomorrow and I should get there around 10:00 tomorrow night. I’ll be heading back on Sunday afternoon.

Road trip 3: In honor of all the road-tripping, I picked up Jack Kerouac’s On the Road (audio book). I figure it’s just a bonus that Beatniks likely weren’t opposed to partaking of the acid from time to time (of course, that’s speculation based entirely on some stereotype I have for reasons I can’t recall).

I’ve been posting on my blog for almost five years, and I’m probably the only person who consistently reads what I write. While it’s always been true that my primary audience is myself (more specifically, it’s my future self; Marty?), I know that there are a few others who sometimes read it. Over the past few months, a few of those readers have mentioned that they liked what I wrote before the poker posts infested the place, but that they’ve been pretty bored since then.

My friends’ subtle reminders have reminded me that I should take more time to get my thoughts down, so I can refer to them later. Of course, I enjoy all things poker, so I don’t anticipate I’ll be abandoning the poker posts, but I hope to begin supplementing the blog with some more substantive posts more reflective of my life and thoughts. So, I’m going to start trying to post something meaningful at least bi-weekly (I almost wrote “weekly”, but that seemed a little too ambitious since I’m extremely lazy). I have no idea what I’ll write about, but I’m hoping inspiration will strike at least a couple times a month.

I’ll start working up my first post this week. I think I’m going to write about two financial philosophies I discussed with some friends last night. I’ve also got an almost-finished post I wrote a while back after I finished reading The Prince.

We’ll see how long this lasts.

About a month ago, I moved out here to work for a small software company. I no longer work for that software company… because we were acquired by a larger, public company. At first, I was a little nervous since I’m the new guy and the new guy is typically the first to go if there’s any kind of reduction in force. But, as I thought it over and spoke with my boss, I realized that I don’t have anything to worry about. First of all, the acquisition has been in the works for a few months, so they would’ve had to incur the cost of hiring me, moving me, etc., all while knowing they could let me go. Obviously, that wouldn’t make very much business sense and since I know the people I work for have a lot of business sense (they did just sell their company for a nice chunk of change, after all), I had to figure they wouldn’t make such a costly mistake. Also, a good friend of mine approached me about working there–I didn’t pursue the company so much as the company pursued me–and I couldn’t see my friend leading me to move out here, only to be canned a month later.

So, after a lot of thought and several excellent meals on my new company’s dime, I’m pretty sure I’m good to go. Really, the best thing is that I know have more career options since I now work for an 800-person company rather than a 40-person company. Before, the only vertical potential was basically my boss’ job, and I don’t think he’s going anywhere for a while. Now, there are several places I can go within the company, and I can probably get there relatively quickly since the company is growing very rapidly.

Florida Football winning, but battling silliness

It’s true that we’ve had some close wins against mediocre teams, and we’ve had some close wins against great teams. Our only loss was a close one to a good Auburn team on the road. I haven’t seen the strength of schedule numbers recently, but I’m guessing our schedule is one of the most difficult. So what I really don’t get is why USC is already being anointed as the one-loss team bound for the National Title game. They lost to an unranked Oregon State and they’ve only beaten two teams who were ranked at the time they played. True, if they win out, they will have played a pretty tough schedule, but they still don’t have to play a conference championship game, and they certainly won’t be playing any Top 5 teams in the next few weeks.

We’ve beaten two ranked teams (one Top 10) and our only loss is to a ranked team. We’ll also likely meet a Top 5 Arkansas in the SEC Championship Game. Another thing to consider is that the quality of opponent in the SEC is just better than that of the PAC-10. We’re a stronger conference, but because our teams play defense, we’re being called weak.

I just needed to get that off my chest. If we win out and don’t play for the title, I think we should offer to switch conferences with USC, Texas or some other “big” team for a season. That would be interesting.