Archive

Monthly Archives: September 2011

As a young boy, growing up on mean suburban streets, I had always thought that Steve Forbes was calling for a “fat tax” rather than a “flat tax.”  I naturally assumed this idea meant taxing fat people and I found this to be completely unfair.  It was not until much later in life that I figured out what Forbes was actualy proposing was a flat tax, which seemed more fair but much less fun.  Denmark, apparently, agrees that a fat tax would be a lot of fun.

The Denmarkians or Danes as it is more proper to refer to them by, will  pay an extra 30p on each pack of butter, 8p on a pack of crisps, and an extra 13p on a pound of mince, as a result of the tax.  We have no clue what a crisp nor a mince is, but they sound delicious.

We all know that controlling individual behavior by means of taxing it always turns out well, right?   With black markets, importing from neighboring regions without such taxes, and other work-arounds, we’re confident this ends well.

But our hacker did!

We’d like to thank the kind people of Vietnam, specifically Yoon Lee and Kwang Min An who performed some serious jujutsu and sorcery by accessing our Paypal and Gmail account from somewhere in Saigon.

The grand conclusion of a mostly idle Paypal account from 7 years ago for the infrequent eBay transaction has resulted in a dimly lit computer cafe being used to funnel cash through our Paypal accounts.  America!  American Express expertly emailed us within minutes and already placed a hold on the transaction, bravo.

So, a round of applause and hacker roll call for:

– Yoon Lee
– Bart Barry III
– Kwang Min An
– Patrick Kettleborough

“See A Charge You Didn’t Make?” – why, yes I do!


Remember, change your passwords often!  Total time expenditure, including this post – 3.5 hours.

The Federal Trade Commision and National Bureau of EconoLOLs has released a statement that Reebok will have to pay $25 million in a settlement over its EasyTone and RunTone Sneaks.  You know, the ones with those annoying billboards with a really fit women wearing sneakers that resemble space boots.  The implication of these ads being that “if you walk in these magical sneakers with the spirally things on the bottom, you’ll get super fit!.”  The other implication being that there are very desperate, lazy, and gullible consumers everywhere who take a look at these and think, “yes, that is my gateway to fitness”…

See the article here at Women’s Health…a surprisingly great source for macro-economic news as well as recipes for low-fat delicious desserts…

Crazy Sneakers Don’t Actually Make Women More Fit

Businesses pass costs onto the consumer, always.  We adore the cute calls by pundits to “regulate the banks” and “tax corporations” without an understanding of where an increase in cost actually lands.

Today, the most bankrupt of all banks, Bank of America, is set to charge debit card users $5 a month for the privilege of accessing one’s own nominal currency units.

For reference, here’s some populist bru-ha-ha on how we need to regulate those evil banks. 

We were too lazy to look it up, but Business Insider already has since we started typing this.  The Durbin amendment specifically caps debit card interchange fees.  We remember from being unborn in the 1970’s when the price of gas was capped and there were shortages. Hmmmm.

The econoLOL here is the inability for Durbin or anyone else to separate price from cost in the financial industry.  They are not the same, ever, and we can’t wait for this to be applied to the healthcare debate.  We’re not holding our breath for anyone in Washingtonvillelandistan to understand this.

We hate polls.  They are easily manipulated, vulnerable to institutional bias (hello Rasmussen), trotted out by every interest group in existence to leverage an argument, and those administering them are usually kind of creepy.

Despite our disdain for the world of polling, it was hard not to take notice this week of attention given to the public support for the “Buffet Rule,” based on the Oracle’s debunked claim that his secretary pays higher tax rates than he does.  We came across a popular web forum trotting out the headline “70% of the US support the ‘Buffet Rule’!” followed by a link to the very objective and always rational (yes, that was sarcasm) Daily Kos website where we came across this poll question

The wording of this poll, indicative of many like it, encapsulates why polls are generally nonsense.  If you managed to read the above line of questioning while keeping a straight face, then you are either mentally unstable or Clint Eastwood.

Econolol Poll: Do you support or oppose the idea that people making over 1 million dollars per year should kick less puppies than those making less than 1 million dollars per year?

Results posted tomorrow.

Former Google Director of Consumer Marketing and Brand Management, Doug Edwards, who seemingly cashed out with a nice chunk of deserved cash, pleads with his hero to love him.  Well, he doesn’t quite use those words, but he may as well have when literally asking to have his taxes raised in the below video.  We’re not giving Mr. Edwards the benefit of the doubt here by assuming that he only would like his taxes to be raised and not millions of other people as well.

Apparently, Google-guy has given $300,000 to politicians since 2000, which is fine, but we’re wondering how much he’s voluntarily offered to help pay down all the wonderful operations of the government that he so enthusiastically supports.  In particular, he called out Pell Grants (or shell pants, that part of the video is a bit fuzzy), which is a program pointed at students in need of funds to pay for education.  Google-guy would like his earnings to be taxed at a higher rate so that more funds can be diverted into Pell Grants…as opposed to just giving some of his money to the program or better yet, subsidizing the education of some kids of his own choosing.