Quote of the Week

This week, as I often do, I'm going to cheat a bit on Quote of the Week, and use it as an excuse to post a pretty clever cover from the New Yorker, pertaining to Occupy Wall Street.

For Quote of the Week, we'll just go with the guy in the background with the "I'm good, thanks" poster. He's my favorite.

I think I'm gonna start to walk around carrying a sign that says "I'm good, thanks," just to see how people respond to me. Actually maybe I'll just print up some t-shirts. Who wants one?

Woo-hoo!

It might have gone unnoticed in some circles (and I neglected to mention it here), but a very long and illustrious era nearly came to a very unceremonious end last week.

After more than 20 years, the curtain could finally be coming down on "The Simpsons."

A standoff is reportedly underway between the studio and the show's actors over their multimillion dollar salaries. And if an agreement isn't reached, the show could be canceled for good, reports CBS News correspondent Bill Whitaker.

The show holds the record as the longest-running sitcom in the history of broadcasting. But after 23 seasons and nearly 500 episodes, the very future of "The Simpsons" may hang in the balance over a reported pay dispute between Twentieth Century Fox and the actors that provide the voices of the show's beloved characters.

"Basically, the studio would like to see the voice actors take a pretty huge pay cut in order to justify the increasingly skyrocketing expense of doing a show that's been on the air for 23 years," Andrew Wallenstein, TV editor for Variety magazine, tells CBS News.

Nooooooooooooo!!! Oh... thank God.

Fans of “The Simpsons” can breathe a “d’oh!” of relief: The animated series was renewed Friday for two more seasons.

A contract dispute with the show’s voice cast had threatened to end the series, but Fox announced it will air through seasons 24 and 25.

The animated series about the Simpson family, including dad Homer and his familiar “D’oh!” is TV’s longest-running scripted nighttime series.

Negotiations over the future of “The Simpsons,” which began its 23rd season last month, spilled out into the public. Twentieth Century Fox Television, which makes the show, said it couldn’t continue without cutting costs and targeted the salaries of voice actors Harry Shearer, Dan Castellaneta, Julie Kavner, Nancy Cartwright, Yeardley Smith and Hank Azaria.

So, I'll admit I'm not exactly an unbiased observer in this situation, because I love The Simpsons. I've clearly watched too much of the show in my life (like, the majority of my four years in college), so much so that I regularly quote it in my daily life ("I am so smart, S-M-R-T"... "the goggles, they do nothing"... "inflammable means flammable? What a country!), some of the songs from the show are deeply and irreparably ingrained in my head ("Can I Borrow A Feeling", "Dr. Zaius Dr. Zaius", "Yvan eht Nioj", and so forth), and that I've seriously considered naming my first-born son "Max", because yeah... Max Powers.

So while the Simpsons may have lost its fastball a few seasons ago, it's still worth a watch, and I'm just not ready for it to be out of my life just yet. And if nothing else, Hank Azaria just amuses the hell out of me. Glad they're still gonna be around.

[CBS News]
[Chicago Sun-Times]

Interesting related graphics (and how they relate to Occupy Wall Street)

I've already posted Jon Stewart's terrific take on Occupy Wall Street here, and if you're looking for an equally well-executed (albeit much less humorous) summary of the situation, I'd suggest you read this piece from Barry Ritholtz. He correctly points the finger not only at Wall Street execs, but also at Washington, the mainstream media, and even the Supreme Court.

Ritholtz also warns that if the Occupy Wall Street movement isn't careful, it could suffer the same fate as the Tea Party--that is, being co-opted by a partisan political message that over-simplifies and distorts the original themes of the movement for the benefit of an established political party. In the initial stages of a movement or protest, disorganization doesn't really matter, but eventually it does--people (especially those in the media) are always looking for a coherent narrative, and they'll find it wherever they can.

At any rate, in that vein, I was struck by a couple of charts (appropriately enough, all brought to my attention by the very same Barry Ritholtz) that I came across this weekend, and they seemed both related and relevant. I'll leave the conclusions to you.

The first is a series of charts showing the changing distribution of income gains in the U.S. over the past century (culled from this interactive graphic).

Between 1917 and 1981, the bottom 90% received 69% of income gains.

Between 1982 and 2000, the bottom 90% received just 23% of income gains.

Since 2001, incomes for the bottom 90% have declined. The top 10% have still gained.

Related to that is a graphic showing which Presidents were responsible for the majority of our country's debt accumulation. (Note: I always take these "debt by President" charts with a massive grain of salt, because it's always difficult--if not impossible--to properly assess "blame" to one President or another for certain long-standing projects or proposals. If TARP was passed by Bush but enacted under Obama's watch, who bears the brunt of that debt hit? What about tax cuts, and then the extension of those tax cuts? And do we give Obama a free pass for certain of his policies that are certain to create debt in the future, even if they haven't officially done so yet? As a result, the findings of these types of charts have a tendency to be... a bit inconsistent. But they're generally consistent in a range--like, it's indisputable that George W. accumulated significantly more debt than Clinton--if not in specific numbers and percentages. They're far from statistically perfect, and therefore heavily prone to statistical manipulation to suit the artists' needs. But if you appreciate that fact, they can still be interesting.)

Alright, that's it for now. That should at least help explain why so many people are so angry, and why they're out in the streets (that and the fact that they're unemployed and really have nothing better to do). Good times.

More jokes in the mainstream media

It's getting a little crazy how the mainstream media keeps accidentally publishing articles that were supposed to run in The Onion, isn't it? First there was this article about the North Carolina governor's suggestion that we suspend Congressional elections so that our elected officials can keep doing the great job they've been doing. That was good for a laugh.

Now there's this article in Businessweek, discussing the Italian government's plan to begin drug testing the country's stock traders, because obviously their cocaine use--and not the government's excessive use of debt--is to blame for recent stock market volatility.

An undersecretary for Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi has proposed a drug-testing program for stock traders, citing studies that point to a “worrisome” link between substance abuse and market fluctuations.

Some Italians may have entrusted savings to people “not capable of making decisions” due to drug use, Carlo Giovanardi said in a phone interview today from Belluno, Italy.

Giovanardi, who’s responsible for the government’s family and drug-abuse prevention policy, said he plans to contact regulators and industry groups working with the stock exchange to discuss the drug-testing plan. The program could be developed without the passage of a new law, he said.

This is good stuff. It gets even better and more Onion-y, and I took the liberty of editing the next paragraph for Businessweek.

Giovanardi, who last year promoted a voluntary drug test for members of parliament, also cited “U.S. studies” suggesting recent market turmoil may have been amplified by “people politicians and central bankers who’ve lost touch with reality” due to drug use. The undersecretary said cocaine use has a “devastating” effect on individuals politicians, leading to “brain meltdown.”

There. That's better. Seriously, I'm getting really tired of the misdirection plays being employed by politicians around the world to distract from the core problem of too much government debt. It's not the debt that's the problem... it's CHINA! No, it's the IMMIGRANTS! No, it's those drug-popping stock traders, they're the real problem!!

When did our whole political process become an episode of The Simpsons? This is really rich stuff, guys. Keep up the good work, leaders of the free world.

[Businessweek]

Clip of the Week

Alright, I got my ranting out of my system yesterday (actually, there's more to come, but whatever...), so now it's time for Clip of the Week. Of course, Clip of the Week isn't always immune from ranting and complaining--just give this video a quick watch and you'll know that it was hard for me to contain myself after watching it.

But I'm looking for some happier stuff this week. Happy stuff like this really cool time-lapse video of some beautiful landscapes. Or this video of Steelers safety Troy Polamalu pretending to be a wax statue to scare small children (honestly, that would have been my Clip of the Week, but the Cowboy scooped me on it too soon--so be it, he's better at this stuff than I am).

There's also this amusing parody movie trailer, "Too Much Moneyball"--the inspiring story of the Yankees' amazing ability to overcome absolutely no obstacles and win championships. That's a winner.

But this time, I'm just going to go ahead and give a nod to nature. Yeah, humans may rule the world now... but they still can't hold a candle to an antelope in a street fight. BOOM!

Yup... this is fair

I don't have enough words to describe my anger right now. This is ridiculous. And if you think this is unique to the U.K. and that stuff like this couldn't (or doesn't) happen here, wake up. This is the world you live in, and this has everything to do with the way that politics are done in our country.

Britain's tax authorities have given Goldman Sachs an unusual and generous Christmas present, leaked documents reveal. In a secret London meeting last December with the head of Revenue, the wealthy Wall Street banking firm was forgiven £10m interest on a failed tax avoidance scheme.

HM Revenue and Customs sources admit privately that the interest-free deal is "a cock-up" by officials, but refuse to say who was responsible.

Documents leaked to Private Eye magazine and published in full by the Guardian record that Britain's top tax official, HMRC's permanent secretary Dave Hartnett, personally shook hands on a secret settlement last December.

Hartnett is due to be questioned on Wednesday by the Commons public accounts committee. The leaked documents suggest that a previous PAC chairman, Edward Leigh, was misled when he was told it was illegal to reveal details of such cases to parliament...

The £10m Christmas gift for Goldman was the culmination of a prolonged attempt by the US firm to avoid paying national insurance on huge bonuses for its bankers working in London.

The sum was pocket change to Goldman, whose employees received $15.3bn (£9.5bn) in pay and bonuses last year. Its Wall Street head, Lloyd Blankfein, received $68m in 2008 and at the height of Britain's banking crisis 100 London partners set their bonuses at £1m each. This level was considered a mark of restraint.

In the 1990s, Goldman set up a company offshore in the British Virgin Islands. This entity, called Goldman Sachs Services Ltd, supposedly employed all of Goldman's London bankers, who were then "seconded" to work there.

The device appears to have been designed to conceal the size of the bonuses. Judge David Williams said in 2009 that it was "a way of keeping information about the GS accounts and payroll out of the public domain and confidential".

There is literally no lengths these guys won't go to in order to line their bank accounts. They don't care who suffers as a result, they care only about their own egos. I absolutely despise Goldman, but I'm also not naive enough to think that they're alone in this kind of behavior.

These guys play by different rules than the rest of us, plain and simple. There is no equality under the law, and the more stuff that comes out like this, the more clear that becomes. I'm furious. But don't worry... they're doing God's work. Wall Street is our Main Street. I say, fuck that. There's a reason people are "occupying Wall Street" right now--this is that reason.

[Guardian]  
(h/t Michael)

Quote of the Week

Whoops. I didn't post anything for Quote of the Week yesterday. As often seems to be the case, it's actually a good thing, because I didn't hear the Quote of the Week until last night.

I'm pretty much constantly watching sports on TV, and I'm just about as constantly complaining about the (low) quality of the color commentators, especially those who used to be athletes. It generally doesn't seem like they do even a little bit of research before covering the games they cover (if they did, they might actually be able to properly pronounce the names of the guys on the field--seems basic, but it's often not), and their insight in general is typically... weak.

There are of course plenty of exceptions to this rule, but it's much easier for me to bring up a list of commentators I dislike than one of commentators that I actually like. Keep in mind that I'm not talking about play-by-play guys, where there's actually still a lot of talent, but color guys, which have gotten worse by the year. But throughout the years, there's always been one guy who's stood out above all the rest... and been unquestionably the worst color commentator in the world for over a decade.

Tim McCarver, how do you still have a job?

This week's QUOTE OF THE WEEK

"That swing is like syrup."
                - Tim McCarver, on Texas Rangers outfielder Josh Hamilton

What the hell? What does that mean? It goes great on pancakes and waffles? It's... kinda slow-moving and sticky? It's part of a balanced breakfast? I... meh. Whatever. Go Tigers... I think.