Another Bank On The Brink

The Masters of the Universe on Wall Street, and in financial capitals around the world, will be holding their breath today.  They’re waiting to see what happens to Germany’s mighty Deutsche Bank, the latest big bank to fall into crisis and roil the international markets.

If you are unfortunate enough to own Deutsche Bank shares, you know what I mean.  The value of its common stock has fallen more than 65 percent in the past year, and a credit rating agency has moved its outlook to negative.  The Department of Justice has demanded that Deutsche Bank pay $14 billion to settle an investigation into residential mortgage-backed securities, although the Bank hopes to negotiate down to a lower payment figure.  Deutsche Bank has been removed from  European blue chip stock index because its share price has fallen so far, so fast, and now there are reports that some hedge funds are moving holdings out of Deutsche Bank to other banks.

Why should we care?  Because earlier this year the International Monetary Fund issued a report that found that Deutsche Bank “appears to be the most important net contributor to systemic risks in the global banking system.”  “Systemic risks in the global banking system” — there’s a phrase that should send shivers down your spine.  The bank has substantial exposure in derivatives . . . and equally important, it has significant connections to the big banks in America, Great Britain, China, Japan, and other countries around the globe.  In our modern, globalist world, that’s just how the huge financial concerns work.  That means that any serious problem at Deutsche Bank will have a ripple effect in America — an effect that is already being felt in the markets here.

So once again we are faced with the prospect of a big bank that has engaged in risky behavior teetering on the brink, with calls for a national government — in this case, Germany — to come forward and say that it is ready to step in and rescue the bank from the consequences of its own actions.

Sound familiar?  Hey, I thought this was supposed to have been fixed in 2009.

 

To Mars, And Beyond

This week, Elon Musk of SpaceX announced his plans for getting humanity to Mars.  The plans involve massive rockets, trips by 100 passengers every 26 months, and deliveries of supplies and housing — all with an ultimate goal of establishing an independent, self-sustaining colony on the Red Planet.

There’s still a lot of details in Musk’s ambitious plans to be filled in — like figuring out how in the heck the massive rocket is going to paid for, and how they are going to get materials sufficient to keep 100 people alive for months on a planet that is basically a cold desert.  Critics think the Musk plans, in their current form, are implausible.  They almost certainly are, of course.  The key point, though, is that somebody is actually thinking about how to accomplish passenger space travel and is doing something about it.

Musk isn’t the only one who is thinking about space.  SpaceX has shown that there is commercial value in space, and Jeff Bezos, the multi-billionaire founder of Amazon, has his own space development company with plans to launch satellites . . . and ultimately, people who would colonize the solar system.  NASA, too, is proceeding with Mars mission planning.

We seem to be on the cusp of a tipping point, where talk about colonizing Mars is moving from the dreams and visions of science fiction writers to fundraising, timetables, and engineering reality.  In my view, it’s about time.  Whereas Musk thinks we need a colony on Mars to protect our species from extinction through a cataclysmic event on Earth, I think we need to get a toehold in space to change our Earthbound perspectives, broaden our horizons, and reintroduce an explorer’s mentality to our world.

It’s good to see internet billionaires using some of their cash to open new worlds and opportunities to humanity.   We may not know what’s out there, yet, but let’s find out!

The Growth That Consumed German Village

We’re reaching the end of the growing season in Ohio — at least, I think we are.  You wouldn’t know it by the bright green growth spilling out of one of our planters.  This spectacular botanical specimen has long since exceeded the natural boundaries set by its terra cotta home, and now is growing like crazy in every direction:  up and across the steps, along the side of the house, on the bannister, and around all of the other planters.  You wouldn’t know that the plant is in a pot that is perched on a bench, which is now completely covered by the rapidly growing green leaves.

I’m getting to the point where I wonder what the house will look like when I get home at night — or even whether any house will be visible at all.

Two-Cent Milk

Yesterday I had oatmeal for breakfast, and the waitress at the hotel restaurant brought me a small carton of milk along with some raisins, brown sugar, and blueberries.

Looking at the small milk carton immediately reminded me of my earliest days in the cafeteria in grade school.  Sometimes Mom would pack my lunch, and sometimes if she was too busy I would eat a hot lunch at the school cafeteria.  Either way, a staple of the lunch hour was paying two cents for a small carton of ice-cold whole milk.  It tasted good with either a peanut butter and jelly sandwich and Twinkie from a paper bag or a hot plate of Johnny Marzetti on a plastic school cafeteria tray.

The two-cent milk was an important rite of passage in two ways.  It was my first real use of money and — equally important — my first real experience with being entrusted with money.  Mom would give me two pennies and I would walk to school with that cold, hard cash burning a hole in my pocket, knowing that I couldn’t lose it or I wouldn’t be able to get my milk with lunch.  In those first-grade days I didn’t have much of a conception of how the world worked, or how much things cost, but I knew that my milk at lunch cost two cents.

And, of course, the carton itself was a key test of young kid small motor skills.  You had to manipulate the carton just right to achieve the optimal milk-drinking experience.  The first step, of gently separating the container opening, was easy.  It was the second step, which involved applying just the right amount of pressure so that the carton would pop open in one clean motion, that was the challenge.  If you did’t get it on the first try, with each new effort the container would lose structural integrity and stay frustratingly closed, and you might have to use your fingernails to claw it open, leaving the milk drinking hole looking embarrassingly mushy and torn.

When I was presented with the small container of milk with my oatmeal yesterday, I felt my inner first-grader deep inside, focused on the task of opening the milk as cleanly and proficiently as the big kids did.  Alas, I still don’t have the knack.

Hail To The Chiefs

Last night the Cleveland Indians beat the Detroit Tugers to clinch the American League Central Division and a spot in the playoffs.  Russell went to the game up in Comerica Field in Detroit and snapped these pictures after the last Tiger was retired and the Tribe’s celebration began.

We’ll have to see how the Indians fare in the playoffs — their most reliable starter, Corey Kluber, left last night’s game with an injury, making him the third key starter to fall prey to jury in recent weeks — but for now we can enjoy a win by a team that has been fun to watch.  The team’s success is attributable to young players who have really blossomed, vets who have come in and played well, good team chemistry, fine starting pitching, and a bullpen that just keeps putting zeros on the scoreboard.  Behind it all is manager Terry Francona, who has done a masterful job.

Go Tribe!  Bring on the playoffs!

100 Million Viewers

Network executives are predicting as many as 100 million people will watch tonight’s presidential debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.  That kind of audience is normally reserved for something really important, like a Super Bowl or the last episode of MASH.  The previous record for a presidential debate was 80 million viewers of the Reagan-Carter debate in 1980.

I wish I could believe that so many people will be tuning in tonight because they are interested in a sober, careful discussion of the many issues America is confronting and how to address them.  Unfortunately, we all suspect that’s not the case.  For many people, the debate is must-watch TV because of the spectacle factor — they’re watching to see whether Trump says or does something outrageous, or Clinton faints, or some particularly choice insults are hurled back and forth.  It’s like rubberneckers slowing down to check out the car wreck by the side of the highway.

I’m hoping that whatever portion of those 100 million viewers who are tuning in for a gladiator contest are disappointed.  I’m hoping that the candidates hold off on the obviously canned wisecracks, that the moderator lets the debaters actually debate the issues, and that an actual policy-oriented discussion breaks out.

But I’m not holding my breath for that result.

Voting With Your Stomach

At the Marriott Town Center in Boca Raton, guests can get stoked up for the Big Debate by choosing a Hillary Burger or a Trump Burger.

Interestingly, one is beef and one is bull.  I wonder which is which? 

In The Hill Country

Yesterday we went out to the Texas “hill country,” the home territory of President Lyndon Johnson.  We visited the LBJ Ranch and the western White House, where John twisted arms under live oak trees and has a phone in every room.

In Johnson’s childhood, the hill country was a place of great poverty, and one of his first legislative accomplishments was bringing electricity to the region.  Now the beautiful area is home to wineries, ranches, and bed and breakfasts.  A few traces of the region’s hardscrabble roots still remain, however.

Pinkies On The Firing Line

We toured the Alamo yesterday.  As we walked the grounds, we happened across three volunteers who demonstrated the multiple steps of loading, tamping down, and firing the arms used by the defenders of the Mission against the overwhelming forces of Santa Anna.  The process was cumbersome and posed a special risk for the humble pinky.  The leader of the trio explained that the men of that era were trained to use the pinky to tamp down the charge, so that if the firearm discharged prematurely only the pinky would be lost.

Remember the Alamo, but remember the pinky, too!  Its sacrifice helped secure the American West.

Psychedelic Church

Last night after dinner we walked over to the plaza in front of the Cathedral of San Fernando, one of the oldest churches in the United States.  A few times every night they project a light show against the facade of the cathedral that tells, in very broad strokes, the history of San Antonio.

It’s an interesting, memorable show, as new images slide up and down, faces appear and then vanish, and wavy lines move back and forth on the church and its two towers — but it’s disorienting, too.  After a while you wonder if you’re dreaming, or if someone might have slipped a Mickey into your drink.

The Tiled Stairways Of The River Walk

To get down to the San Antonio River Walk, you take stairways and ramps from bridges and overpasses.  Many of the stairways and ramps are of the bland, concrete variety, but some are special — gracefully curved, with wide steps and overhead greenery and delicate tiled facings that reflect a southwestern flair.

It’s amazing how a few colorful squares of tile can turn a generic stairway into an eye-catching addition to an already festive area.  If I had my say, every concrete municipal staircase would have bright tile facings with bold colors and geometric designs.  It’s a way to inject some much-needed art into our everyday surroundings.

Art At Sunrise

Near the Pearl Brewery, looking back at the San Antonio Museum of Art, reflected by the river and framed by the fish sculptures hanging from the underside of an overpass.

Pre-Dawn On The River Walk

It’s still dark in San Antonio, out on the western edge of the Central time zone, as I prowl the River Walk — but the joggers and outright runners are already out in force.

Little Church Of La Villita

I’m not a huge proponent of organized religion, but I’m a sucker for churches.

The Little Church at La Villita, in San Antonio, is a gem.  Built in 1879, its clean lines, stone walls, and modestly proportioned stained glass window create a setting of simple beauty.  It’s well suited for quiet contemplation after a stroll on the River Walk — and it’s cool inside, too.

Poll-Axed

So much of political reporting these days is poll-driven.  A new poll about “likely voters” comes out, and news broadcasts first report on the poll, then report on reaction to the poll, and finally feature a panel of talking heads to blather about “momentum” and “the dynamics of the race” based on the poll results.

But how accurate are those polls, anyway?  Should Hillary Clinton supporters be suicidal because a poll shows Donald Trump ahead in Ohio?  It seems like a new poll or two comes out every day, and the results are all over the map.

The New York Times blog The Upshot decided to conduct a clever experiment to test the role of pollster judgment in analyzing and reporting the results of polling.  The goal was to eliminate the effect of the “margin of error” that we always hear about, and instead focus on the behind-the-curtain decisions pollsters make.  So, The Upshot took the raw data from an actual poll of 867 Florida voters it conducted with pollsters at Siena College, gave that same raw data to four different respected pollsters. and asked them to report the results they drew from the data.

The results of the experiment showed a five percentage point swing in the results reached by the different pollsters, ranging from a four-point advantage for Hillary Clinton to a one-point advantage for Donald Trump, even though the pollsters were reviewing identical data.  Why?  Because the pollsters reached different conclusions about the demographics and characteristics of “likely voters,” and those decisions had dramatic effects on their announced results.  How do you determine who is a “likely voter,” anyway?  Rely on their oath that they’ll be casting their ballot this time?  Make your decision based on their voting history?  Tinker a bit with the breakdown of Democrats, Republicans, and independents, and change the mix of Hispanics, African-Americans, and whites in the “likely voter” population, and you’ve got substantially different results.

My own sense is that this may be the toughest election ever from a polling standpoint.  You’ve got a group of Clinton supporters who are loud and proud in their support for HRC, an apparent mass of ardent Trump advocates lurking below the radar, and then a huge group of disaffected people who really don’t like either candidate and are deciding what to do.  You’ve got lifelong Republicans who are saying, right now, that they won’t vote for Trump, and young people who just aren’t energized by Hillary.  Who among the mass of disillusioned people frustrated by an awful choice is going to vote come November — and for whom?  Based on my interaction with friends and colleagues, most of whom really don’t want to talk about the election, I just don’t see how pollsters can decide that key question with any degree of certainty.

Poll results are interesting, I suppose, but I wouldn’t take them as gospel — particularly in this historically anomalous election.