In today's WSJ, Matthew Slaughter (a childhood chum of mine) asks just What Is An "American" Car These Days?:
What exactly makes a car "American?" Does it mean a car made by a U.S.-headquartered company? If so, then it is important to understand that any future success of the Big Three will depend a lot on their ability to make -- and sell -- cars outside the United States, not in it. A big reason Chrysler has fallen bankrupt is its narrow U.S. focus. It has not boosted revenues by penetrating fast-growing markets such as China, India and Eastern Europe. Nor has it lowered costs by restructuring to access talent and production beyond North America.
On many measures the Big Three today are far less global than the most successful U.S.-headquartered companies. Today about two-thirds of IBM's revenue is earned outside the U.S. And what does it say on the back of every Apple iPod? "Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China." Chrysler and GM will be stronger if they can become more global, not less so. This should benefit not just their bottom lines but their U.S. workers, too. Much research now shows that expansion abroad by U.S. companies tends to support jobs in America, not destroy them.
Or is an "American" car one made within U.S. borders? If so, then it is important to understand that America today has a robust automobile industry thanks to insourcing. In 2006, foreign-headquartered multinationals engaged in making and wholesaling motor vehicles and parts employed 402,800 Americans -- at an average annual compensation of $63,538 -- 20% above the national average. Amid the Big Three struggles of the past generation, insourcing companies like Toyota, Honda and Mercedes have greatly expanded automobile operations in the U.S. In fiscal year 2008, Toyota assembled 1.66 million motor vehicles in North America with production in seven U.S. states supported by research and development in three more.
We're running into a situation at work that raises some of the same type of questions. Some of the recent government stimulus programs have designated that goods supplied in projects be "Made In America."
While we're headquarted in the US and manufacture some of our products here, we also supply the North American market with other products made in Mexico. A Swiss competitor has a plant in Indiana that manufactures some of the same products we make in Mexico.
So even though we're a US based corporation that pays hundred of millions of dollars in taxes and employs thousands of people in the US (far more in both categories than or competitor), the "Made in America" requirement means that a Swiss company gets the government business. I find it hard to believe that those who included the "Buy American" mandate intended for a rich family in Switzerland (its a privately held company) to profit at the expense of an American company, but that's exactly what's happening. Unintended consequences and all that.
Thursday, May 07, 2009
Mail Bag
Tim from Colorado e-mails to comment on Gary Larson's piece on the rise of "baby class":
It's a shame, but I think that while the positive public opinion of veterans and law enforcement swelled after 9/11, that positive view is now shrinking; I don't believe that the public holds our veterans and law enforcement in as high a regard as they did shortly after 9/11. Why was there not a greater outcry from the public in speaking out for our veterans? I think the success the Bush administration had in preventing further attacks in the US is a major reason why the general public has developed such a myopic memory.
Sadly, it will probably take another attack here in the US for the public-at-large to re-understand why we need aggressive terrorist investigation, and why we need a strong, flexible military. Mr. Larson is exactly right about the decision to release the documents and photos regarding US interrogation practices. That information will be used against us in many ways.
Obama and Napolitano are sheep. You may think this is a partisan statement, but in my defense I say take a look at the choices this administration is making when it comes to our national security. Show me one thing they've done right.
God bless our sheep dogs.
Jonathan e-mails to share his own memories of last week's Beer Of The Week:
Seeing your review last week brought back some memories, let me tell you. I spent the years 1994-97 stationed in Baumholder, Germany and Bitburger was a staple. I rather bad staple, but a staple nonetheless. Your "0" for aftertaste truly doesn't do it justice. On draft, it's in the sub-zero category. The way I learned to tolerate Bitburger was in a drink the locals in Baumholder called a Rattler. It was a 50-50 mix of Bitburger and Sprite. It truly isn't as awful as it sounds as the sweetness of the Sprite offsets the bitterness a bunch. It was a bit of a pussy drink, but I'll take it over straight Bitburger any day of the week.
Gott in himmel! That sounds downright sickening.
It's a shame, but I think that while the positive public opinion of veterans and law enforcement swelled after 9/11, that positive view is now shrinking; I don't believe that the public holds our veterans and law enforcement in as high a regard as they did shortly after 9/11. Why was there not a greater outcry from the public in speaking out for our veterans? I think the success the Bush administration had in preventing further attacks in the US is a major reason why the general public has developed such a myopic memory.
Sadly, it will probably take another attack here in the US for the public-at-large to re-understand why we need aggressive terrorist investigation, and why we need a strong, flexible military. Mr. Larson is exactly right about the decision to release the documents and photos regarding US interrogation practices. That information will be used against us in many ways.
Obama and Napolitano are sheep. You may think this is a partisan statement, but in my defense I say take a look at the choices this administration is making when it comes to our national security. Show me one thing they've done right.
God bless our sheep dogs.
Jonathan e-mails to share his own memories of last week's Beer Of The Week:
Seeing your review last week brought back some memories, let me tell you. I spent the years 1994-97 stationed in Baumholder, Germany and Bitburger was a staple. I rather bad staple, but a staple nonetheless. Your "0" for aftertaste truly doesn't do it justice. On draft, it's in the sub-zero category. The way I learned to tolerate Bitburger was in a drink the locals in Baumholder called a Rattler. It was a 50-50 mix of Bitburger and Sprite. It truly isn't as awful as it sounds as the sweetness of the Sprite offsets the bitterness a bunch. It was a bit of a pussy drink, but I'll take it over straight Bitburger any day of the week.
Gott in himmel! That sounds downright sickening.
Wednesday, May 06, 2009
The Worst Of All Worlds
Almost everyone agrees that the current U.S. tax-deferral rules are a complicated mess that are difficult for American companies to follow, inefficient at collecting revenue, and create accounting distortions. But as an editorial in today's WSJ makes clear President Obama's proposed solutions are only going to make a bad situation even worse:
The President's argument is that U.S. tax-deferral rules make it more expensive for American companies to reinvest overseas profits at home than abroad. This, he claims, creates a perverse incentive for companies to "ship jobs overseas" and reduces investment and job creation in the U.S.
He's right, except that his proposals would only compound the problem. His plan would limit the tax deferral on income earned abroad by tightening the rules, limiting allowable deductions and restricting eligibility for foreign-tax credits. This "solution" is antigrowth, job-destroying, protectionist and unlikely to raise the tax revenue Mr. Obama predicts. Other than that...
But it sounds good. And since most Americans will only hear about a plan to stop companies from shipping jobs overseas without having an understanding of the economic fundamentals of the matter, I expect it will prove quite popular. The reality of tax-deferral is that rather than being a "loophole" or "tax break" for big business, it's more of a effort to ease tax burdens on U.S. companies that their global competitors don't carry:
The current tax-deferral system is a clumsy attempt to deal with the fact that most other countries don't tax their companies' overseas profits. A German firm doing business in Ireland, say, pays no German income tax on its Irish profits, but it does pay Ireland's corporate income tax at its 12.5% rate. The U.S. company competing with that German business in Ireland, by contrast, pays Ireland the same 12.5% on its profits -- and it then pays Uncle Sam up to 35%, minus a credit for what it paid the Irish. And because almost everyone else's corporate tax rates are lower than America's (see nearby table), U.S. companies end up paying higher taxes than their international competitors.
Congress long ago created the corporate tax deferral to compensate for this competitive disadvantage. Under deferral, a company doesn't have to pay the U.S. corporate rate until it repatriates its earnings. It can retain them overseas or reinvest them abroad with no penalty. But if it brings them home or pays them as dividends, the tax bill comes due.
The German company faces no such quandary. It pays the Irish tax, and it's free to invest that money in Ireland or Germany or anywhere else. This territorial tax system, embraced by most of the world, eliminates the perverse incentive to hold money abroad that America's deferral system creates. Adopting a territorial system would be the most obvious and simplest way to eliminate the distortion that tax deferral creates. Alternatively, Mr. Obama could lower the U.S. corporate tax rate to a level that is internationally competitive.
Yes, we know: Few major U.S. companies pay 35% of their profits in taxes because of the foreign tax-deferral and other deductions, credits and loopholes. But that's precisely why Mr. Obama should want to take the better path to corporate tax reform by reducing the rate and removing loopholes. America now has the worst of both worlds -- a high statutory rate and a tax code so riddled with complexity that it is both expensive to administer and inefficient at collecting revenue. And yet Mr. Obama's proposal to limit deferral only layers on the complexity.
And reduces the ability of U.S. companies to compete globally. But hey, at least they won't be shipping jobs overseas, right?
But even as a revenue raiser, this is likely to fail. Fewer companies will keep their headquarters in the U.S., especially small or mid-sized firms that can slip away without becoming a political target. Those companies that can't flee will sooner or later demand relief from Congress, which will be happy to create even more loopholes.
Think that can't happen? Think again.
UPDATE--Further ponderings: When it comes to issues such as crime or terrorism, the Left is always eager to talk about the need to address the "root causes." We can't just lock up criminals or kill terrorists. No, we must delve deep into the root cause of these problems (poverty) and come up with solutions (more government spending).
But when it comes to matters of economic nature, this embrace of solutions to the root cause is nowhere to be found. If the problem is U.S. companies using tax-deferral to avoid paying U.S. corporate taxes, the Left's answer is to limit their ability to do so.
Hmmmm...I wonder what the root cause of this problem really is. Could it possibly be the onerous U.S. corporate tax rates (some of the highest in the world) that drive companies' attempts at avoidance? If you really wanted to address the root cause, that's what you would change.
The President's argument is that U.S. tax-deferral rules make it more expensive for American companies to reinvest overseas profits at home than abroad. This, he claims, creates a perverse incentive for companies to "ship jobs overseas" and reduces investment and job creation in the U.S.
He's right, except that his proposals would only compound the problem. His plan would limit the tax deferral on income earned abroad by tightening the rules, limiting allowable deductions and restricting eligibility for foreign-tax credits. This "solution" is antigrowth, job-destroying, protectionist and unlikely to raise the tax revenue Mr. Obama predicts. Other than that...
But it sounds good. And since most Americans will only hear about a plan to stop companies from shipping jobs overseas without having an understanding of the economic fundamentals of the matter, I expect it will prove quite popular. The reality of tax-deferral is that rather than being a "loophole" or "tax break" for big business, it's more of a effort to ease tax burdens on U.S. companies that their global competitors don't carry:
The current tax-deferral system is a clumsy attempt to deal with the fact that most other countries don't tax their companies' overseas profits. A German firm doing business in Ireland, say, pays no German income tax on its Irish profits, but it does pay Ireland's corporate income tax at its 12.5% rate. The U.S. company competing with that German business in Ireland, by contrast, pays Ireland the same 12.5% on its profits -- and it then pays Uncle Sam up to 35%, minus a credit for what it paid the Irish. And because almost everyone else's corporate tax rates are lower than America's (see nearby table), U.S. companies end up paying higher taxes than their international competitors.
Congress long ago created the corporate tax deferral to compensate for this competitive disadvantage. Under deferral, a company doesn't have to pay the U.S. corporate rate until it repatriates its earnings. It can retain them overseas or reinvest them abroad with no penalty. But if it brings them home or pays them as dividends, the tax bill comes due.
The German company faces no such quandary. It pays the Irish tax, and it's free to invest that money in Ireland or Germany or anywhere else. This territorial tax system, embraced by most of the world, eliminates the perverse incentive to hold money abroad that America's deferral system creates. Adopting a territorial system would be the most obvious and simplest way to eliminate the distortion that tax deferral creates. Alternatively, Mr. Obama could lower the U.S. corporate tax rate to a level that is internationally competitive.
Yes, we know: Few major U.S. companies pay 35% of their profits in taxes because of the foreign tax-deferral and other deductions, credits and loopholes. But that's precisely why Mr. Obama should want to take the better path to corporate tax reform by reducing the rate and removing loopholes. America now has the worst of both worlds -- a high statutory rate and a tax code so riddled with complexity that it is both expensive to administer and inefficient at collecting revenue. And yet Mr. Obama's proposal to limit deferral only layers on the complexity.
And reduces the ability of U.S. companies to compete globally. But hey, at least they won't be shipping jobs overseas, right?
But even as a revenue raiser, this is likely to fail. Fewer companies will keep their headquarters in the U.S., especially small or mid-sized firms that can slip away without becoming a political target. Those companies that can't flee will sooner or later demand relief from Congress, which will be happy to create even more loopholes.
Think that can't happen? Think again.
UPDATE--Further ponderings: When it comes to issues such as crime or terrorism, the Left is always eager to talk about the need to address the "root causes." We can't just lock up criminals or kill terrorists. No, we must delve deep into the root cause of these problems (poverty) and come up with solutions (more government spending).
But when it comes to matters of economic nature, this embrace of solutions to the root cause is nowhere to be found. If the problem is U.S. companies using tax-deferral to avoid paying U.S. corporate taxes, the Left's answer is to limit their ability to do so.
Hmmmm...I wonder what the root cause of this problem really is. Could it possibly be the onerous U.S. corporate tax rates (some of the highest in the world) that drive companies' attempts at avoidance? If you really wanted to address the root cause, that's what you would change.
Stand Up For Your Rights
Article in yesterday's WSJ on Why Fans in the U.S. Prefer to Sit and European Fans Stand at Professional Sporting Events (sub req):
It goes back to "the middle ages, when the nobility sat and the common plebs stood," says Rod Sheard, senior principle of the leading sports architecture firm Populous and designer of the Emirates. "All of America is nobility. Everyone thinks they're king in America."
Populous? Whew. How'd you like to work for a place with a ridiculous name like that?
Although I have fond memories of being in the SRO (standing room only) section for North Star playoff games at Met Center, all in all I prefer the US custom of being seated for sporting events. However, I do get annoyed by the folks who think you should be seated for the entire game. If it's the bottom of the ninth and our closer is out there trying to save a one-run lead, you better believe I'm standing. Or if we're down one with our goalie pulled trying to tie it up with a minute left, I am most definitely not staying in my seat. If you don't like having your view blocked, then get up, stand up like the real fans are.
It goes back to "the middle ages, when the nobility sat and the common plebs stood," says Rod Sheard, senior principle of the leading sports architecture firm Populous and designer of the Emirates. "All of America is nobility. Everyone thinks they're king in America."
Populous? Whew. How'd you like to work for a place with a ridiculous name like that?
Although I have fond memories of being in the SRO (standing room only) section for North Star playoff games at Met Center, all in all I prefer the US custom of being seated for sporting events. However, I do get annoyed by the folks who think you should be seated for the entire game. If it's the bottom of the ninth and our closer is out there trying to save a one-run lead, you better believe I'm standing. Or if we're down one with our goalie pulled trying to tie it up with a minute left, I am most definitely not staying in my seat. If you don't like having your view blocked, then get up, stand up like the real fans are.
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
Skippito
Took the urchins to their first book signing/reading yesterday at Galleria. The author in the spotlight was Judy Schachner, who has penned and illustrated the very popular Skippyjon Jones series of children's books. They're entertaining books that our kids enjoy greatly (again & again & again) and they're also fun to read, which every parent knows is a critical aspect of good kidlit.
Her popularity--or maybe Skippyjon's--was evidenced by the impressive turnout of harried parents (mostly moms) and excited kids. The chairs and free handout kits ran out quickly.
The scene was--as you imagine--one of chaos. Kids of various ages wearing the cardboard Skippyjon Jones masks that came in the handouts. Parents trying to keep their kids in one place on the floor. Others trying to find a place to park their strollers. Parents lining up to buy more Skippyjon Jones books or get numbers for the post-reading book signing. In the background, the constant din of kids chattering in nervous anticipation and parents barking commands, occasionally punctured by a plaintive wail from an aggrieved party (mostly kids).
And then the Skippyjon Jones mascot arrived (this pic not from yesterday's event). What had been somewhat controlled chaos became bedlam. In theory, the idea of a lovable children's character come to life in a cute costume sounds like a dream come true. In reality, when children get a glimpse of a larger than life animal coming at them in a goofy suit, it can be a nightmare. My experience has been then that about 25% of kids love seeing their favorite characters in costume, 25% are absolutely terrified to the point of hysteria, and 50% are cautiously on guard as they keep a safe distance while carefully observing the mascot for any sudden movements (much the same way that adults behave in the presence of Anderson Cooper).
My offspring were content to look at Skippyjon Jones without getting close enough to touch. One youngster near us began shrieking in terror as soon as Skippyjon appeared and continued until his mom (grandma?) finally wheeled him away from the monster. She attempted to bring him back a couple of times although I'm not sure if he ever recovered his composure. Bet he slept well last night.
Before the reading and signing, Judy Schachner lead off with an introduction and brief Q & A session. It was apparent that she's proud of her work (and well she should be), but I got the impression that she was talking more to the parents--making sure we understood how clever she was--than the kids and that was a little off-putting. I also think she could have left out a few of the background details she mentioned--did we really need to know the real life cat who Skippyjon was based on has since passed away or that her daughter went to the University of Pennsylvania to be a paleontologist?
By that time, our middle un had decided that he had enough of the crowd and the sitting still and so my wife took him and the youngest for a stroll around the mall. I held down our position with the eldest boy as we hunkered down what we had come for, the reading. Which of course was of a book that we didn't own. Given how much children savor the familiar, this lessened his enjoyment of the experience somewhat.
After the reading, we elected not to wait to get a book signed. Holding position number twenty-six, we reckoned that it would mean waiting at least half an hour in line and at that point the idea of further waiting had little appeal. My wife bequeathed our number to a woman holding a forty-four, moving her up a little in the line.
It was good to attend such an event to get an idea of what they're all about. It may now be a good while before we decide to attend another.
Her popularity--or maybe Skippyjon's--was evidenced by the impressive turnout of harried parents (mostly moms) and excited kids. The chairs and free handout kits ran out quickly.
The scene was--as you imagine--one of chaos. Kids of various ages wearing the cardboard Skippyjon Jones masks that came in the handouts. Parents trying to keep their kids in one place on the floor. Others trying to find a place to park their strollers. Parents lining up to buy more Skippyjon Jones books or get numbers for the post-reading book signing. In the background, the constant din of kids chattering in nervous anticipation and parents barking commands, occasionally punctured by a plaintive wail from an aggrieved party (mostly kids).
And then the Skippyjon Jones mascot arrived (this pic not from yesterday's event). What had been somewhat controlled chaos became bedlam. In theory, the idea of a lovable children's character come to life in a cute costume sounds like a dream come true. In reality, when children get a glimpse of a larger than life animal coming at them in a goofy suit, it can be a nightmare. My experience has been then that about 25% of kids love seeing their favorite characters in costume, 25% are absolutely terrified to the point of hysteria, and 50% are cautiously on guard as they keep a safe distance while carefully observing the mascot for any sudden movements (much the same way that adults behave in the presence of Anderson Cooper). My offspring were content to look at Skippyjon Jones without getting close enough to touch. One youngster near us began shrieking in terror as soon as Skippyjon appeared and continued until his mom (grandma?) finally wheeled him away from the monster. She attempted to bring him back a couple of times although I'm not sure if he ever recovered his composure. Bet he slept well last night.
Before the reading and signing, Judy Schachner lead off with an introduction and brief Q & A session. It was apparent that she's proud of her work (and well she should be), but I got the impression that she was talking more to the parents--making sure we understood how clever she was--than the kids and that was a little off-putting. I also think she could have left out a few of the background details she mentioned--did we really need to know the real life cat who Skippyjon was based on has since passed away or that her daughter went to the University of Pennsylvania to be a paleontologist?
By that time, our middle un had decided that he had enough of the crowd and the sitting still and so my wife took him and the youngest for a stroll around the mall. I held down our position with the eldest boy as we hunkered down what we had come for, the reading. Which of course was of a book that we didn't own. Given how much children savor the familiar, this lessened his enjoyment of the experience somewhat.
After the reading, we elected not to wait to get a book signed. Holding position number twenty-six, we reckoned that it would mean waiting at least half an hour in line and at that point the idea of further waiting had little appeal. My wife bequeathed our number to a woman holding a forty-four, moving her up a little in the line.
It was good to attend such an event to get an idea of what they're all about. It may now be a good while before we decide to attend another.
Monday, May 04, 2009
Cradle To Crib
I've commented before on my fears about the growth of Adolescent America and worried about what will become of the country when too many people decide that they'd rather abdicate "grownup" responsibility to the government than have to deal with it themselves.
Now, in a piece at Intellectual Conservative, Gary Larson worries that we're witnessing the rise of the "baby class" as explempfied by their Infant-In-Chief:
Meanwhile, we veterans (me, of Vietnam) are now set up by a left-leaning bureaucracy (Dept. of Homeland Security, of ALL people) as a suspect group of domestic terrorists. Nope, it doesn't get more grossly insulting than that, the ingratitude of the Far Left, toward those who protected their asses physically. Rough men with guns we were.
Babies likely did not serve in the military. They did not put their lives on the line for their country, or on hold to rejoin civilians. DHS dunce Janet Napolitano, one of the kids who doesn't "get it," should hang her head in shame for targeting us GIs.
Babies' newly chosen leader, Kid Obama, is their water-walker, their Messiah. Even while releasing classified secrets to our enemies, now joined by file photos to be used as hate-propaganda and recruitment tools, the rest of the babies support him, say the polls. Lord knows why; it is a phenomenon that transcends logic. But then, he is the whirling dervish. Such activity suggests accomplishment. It is the opposite.
Now, in a piece at Intellectual Conservative, Gary Larson worries that we're witnessing the rise of the "baby class" as explempfied by their Infant-In-Chief:
Meanwhile, we veterans (me, of Vietnam) are now set up by a left-leaning bureaucracy (Dept. of Homeland Security, of ALL people) as a suspect group of domestic terrorists. Nope, it doesn't get more grossly insulting than that, the ingratitude of the Far Left, toward those who protected their asses physically. Rough men with guns we were.
Babies likely did not serve in the military. They did not put their lives on the line for their country, or on hold to rejoin civilians. DHS dunce Janet Napolitano, one of the kids who doesn't "get it," should hang her head in shame for targeting us GIs.
Babies' newly chosen leader, Kid Obama, is their water-walker, their Messiah. Even while releasing classified secrets to our enemies, now joined by file photos to be used as hate-propaganda and recruitment tools, the rest of the babies support him, say the polls. Lord knows why; it is a phenomenon that transcends logic. But then, he is the whirling dervish. Such activity suggests accomplishment. It is the opposite.
Lime Flu
In Saturday's WSJ, Eric Felten wrote on a A Curious Treat From Down Mexico Way:
With Cinco de Mayo approaching there will be plenty of Margaritas and Mexican beer served in the next week. But it may be a good time to try out a quirky quaff popular in Mexico that has struggled to find an audience in the United States: The Michelada, a combination of beer, lime juice, Worcestershire sauce and hot sauce served over ice in a salt-rimmed glass.
As previously noted here, I've enjoyed my share of Micheladas in Mexico over the years. While they are wonderful way to whet your whistle after a scorching day in the Mexican sun, I can understand why they haven't really caught on with American beer drinkers. My experience has been that after downing one Michelada, you're ready to go back to good old fashioned regular beer. While the combo of beer, lime, salt, and spice is good, it's not a well that you can go back to often after the initial draw. But perhaps I just wasn't using the right beer:
So, we have beer on ice flavored with lime juice, Worcestershire sauce and a Mexican hot sauce such as Cholula -- but what beer? The most traditional approach to the Michelada is to make it with a blond Mexican beer such as Tecate, Sol, Corona or Modelo Especial. But many prefer using a darker Mexican beer such as Negra Modelo, and I'm in that camp. To my taste, that sort of flavorful and slightly sweet beer stands up better to the savory and spicy sauces, let alone the ice, which are all likely to bully a lighter lager. Negra Modelo works well, but after trying a variety of similar beers, I settled on the Texas brew Shiner Bock as my Michelada beer of choice.
Interesting. I believe that all the Micheladas I've consumed were made with Sol. Using Negra Modelo, Indio, or maybe even a bock could improve its drinking repeatability. Will have to keep that in mind next time around. By the way, Shiner Bock is possibly the most overrated beer in America (although Fat Tire gives it a run in that category).
With Cinco de Mayo approaching there will be plenty of Margaritas and Mexican beer served in the next week. But it may be a good time to try out a quirky quaff popular in Mexico that has struggled to find an audience in the United States: The Michelada, a combination of beer, lime juice, Worcestershire sauce and hot sauce served over ice in a salt-rimmed glass.
As previously noted here, I've enjoyed my share of Micheladas in Mexico over the years. While they are wonderful way to whet your whistle after a scorching day in the Mexican sun, I can understand why they haven't really caught on with American beer drinkers. My experience has been that after downing one Michelada, you're ready to go back to good old fashioned regular beer. While the combo of beer, lime, salt, and spice is good, it's not a well that you can go back to often after the initial draw. But perhaps I just wasn't using the right beer:
So, we have beer on ice flavored with lime juice, Worcestershire sauce and a Mexican hot sauce such as Cholula -- but what beer? The most traditional approach to the Michelada is to make it with a blond Mexican beer such as Tecate, Sol, Corona or Modelo Especial. But many prefer using a darker Mexican beer such as Negra Modelo, and I'm in that camp. To my taste, that sort of flavorful and slightly sweet beer stands up better to the savory and spicy sauces, let alone the ice, which are all likely to bully a lighter lager. Negra Modelo works well, but after trying a variety of similar beers, I settled on the Texas brew Shiner Bock as my Michelada beer of choice.
Interesting. I believe that all the Micheladas I've consumed were made with Sol. Using Negra Modelo, Indio, or maybe even a bock could improve its drinking repeatability. Will have to keep that in mind next time around. By the way, Shiner Bock is possibly the most overrated beer in America (although Fat Tire gives it a run in that category).
Saturday, May 02, 2009
Hits & Misc
* Larry e-mails to note the Egyptian reaction to swine flu and sees an opportunity:
Occurred to me that if we had just called this "Al-Qaeda Flu" or "Bin Laden Flu," we might have gotten the Egyptians to take care of a couple problems for us. It's all about the moniker.
Good thing to keep in mind for the next pandemic.
* Nathan e-mails with a health care concern:
I haven't followed this too closely, but this seems downright frightening. The stimulus bill has a hidden provision creating a panel to study health care rationing. Can we be far from a world where the federal government decides who lives and who dies?
The reality that government run health care proponents don't like to talk about it is that at the end of the day, the only way such a system can control costs and remain viable is through some sort of rationing of care. People should understand that this is the inevitable result of turning their health care over to the government.
* Evan e-mails with a video on the real intent of President Obama's health care plan.
* Econ4U.org has a video in which they try to discover if people know how big a trillion dollars really is:
In order to do so, we took a poll of 1,001 Americans asking “How many times larger is a trillion than a million?” We also took our Econ4U team out in front of the White House to capture some live responses.
The video is amusing yet also depressing in that most people (79%!) can't grasp how much money we're actually going to be spending here.
* Shea e-mails with the latest on how fast food is becoming the new tobacco in the eyes of the Nanny Statists:
I don't know if you've seen former FDA Chief David Kessler making the rounds with his new book, trying to equate fattening food to tobacco and claiming that we're all being brainwashed into addictive overeating. Of course, if the Liberals can convince people of this insanity, then they get to impose new taxes on food they deem "bad." But I appreciated that Jacob Sullum at Reason has his number.
It's not my fault I'm fat, it's those devious food companies. The Age of Obama dawns as the age of personal responsibility fades ever further from view.
* Finally, my wife relates a flu-related conversation she overheard today at Target:
About two checkouts down, I heard a cashier talking to a woman and the subject somehow got to the Swine flu (the woman had a baby). She said basically that she wasn't too concerned about it yet. The cashier said that there was a woman in this week that stocked up on food/supplies in case we were told not to leave the house because of the flu.
I was thinking "freak," but that doesn't surprise me because there are always the handful that overreact. But what did strike me as odd was what the cashier said next. "Obama even said that it should be business as usual." Maybe that's not the exact quote but basically that's what he said Obama said. And that struck me as odd for some reason and then it clicked. I don't think I would have heard the same thing if Bush or McCain was president...."McCain even said that it should be business as usual." McCain didn't/doesn't have the mystique of God-like qualities and the ability to save us all if he became president...
No, McCain was definitely not the all-knowing, all-seeing One. As chilling as it is to see how readily people seem take their daily marching cues from President Obama, I suppose it could be even worse. They could be listening to Vice President Biden for advice.
Occurred to me that if we had just called this "Al-Qaeda Flu" or "Bin Laden Flu," we might have gotten the Egyptians to take care of a couple problems for us. It's all about the moniker.
Good thing to keep in mind for the next pandemic.
* Nathan e-mails with a health care concern:
I haven't followed this too closely, but this seems downright frightening. The stimulus bill has a hidden provision creating a panel to study health care rationing. Can we be far from a world where the federal government decides who lives and who dies?
The reality that government run health care proponents don't like to talk about it is that at the end of the day, the only way such a system can control costs and remain viable is through some sort of rationing of care. People should understand that this is the inevitable result of turning their health care over to the government.
* Evan e-mails with a video on the real intent of President Obama's health care plan.
* Econ4U.org has a video in which they try to discover if people know how big a trillion dollars really is:
In order to do so, we took a poll of 1,001 Americans asking “How many times larger is a trillion than a million?” We also took our Econ4U team out in front of the White House to capture some live responses.
The video is amusing yet also depressing in that most people (79%!) can't grasp how much money we're actually going to be spending here.
* Shea e-mails with the latest on how fast food is becoming the new tobacco in the eyes of the Nanny Statists:
I don't know if you've seen former FDA Chief David Kessler making the rounds with his new book, trying to equate fattening food to tobacco and claiming that we're all being brainwashed into addictive overeating. Of course, if the Liberals can convince people of this insanity, then they get to impose new taxes on food they deem "bad." But I appreciated that Jacob Sullum at Reason has his number.
It's not my fault I'm fat, it's those devious food companies. The Age of Obama dawns as the age of personal responsibility fades ever further from view.
* Finally, my wife relates a flu-related conversation she overheard today at Target:
About two checkouts down, I heard a cashier talking to a woman and the subject somehow got to the Swine flu (the woman had a baby). She said basically that she wasn't too concerned about it yet. The cashier said that there was a woman in this week that stocked up on food/supplies in case we were told not to leave the house because of the flu.
I was thinking "freak," but that doesn't surprise me because there are always the handful that overreact. But what did strike me as odd was what the cashier said next. "Obama even said that it should be business as usual." Maybe that's not the exact quote but basically that's what he said Obama said. And that struck me as odd for some reason and then it clicked. I don't think I would have heard the same thing if Bush or McCain was president...."McCain even said that it should be business as usual." McCain didn't/doesn't have the mystique of God-like qualities and the ability to save us all if he became president...
No, McCain was definitely not the all-knowing, all-seeing One. As chilling as it is to see how readily people seem take their daily marching cues from President Obama, I suppose it could be even worse. They could be listening to Vice President Biden for advice.
Friday, May 01, 2009
Beer Of The Week (Vol VI)
[ Volume Six in the recently expanded beer tasting series. Once again, today's post is made possible by the fine folks at Glen Lake Wine and Spirits. That establishment has generously agreed to provide beer for weekly reviews and every brew featured here is available at Glen Lake Wine and Spirits. These reviews will be an expansion of the beer rating that I've been doing for years and will be more in-depth look at particular beers using the same rating criteria. And in addition to the just the beer itself, I'll be examining the whole aesthetic package; the bottle, the label, the name. ]
We once again head back across the pond with this week's beer review. This time for a little flavor of Deutschland with Bitburger Premium Beer:
Bitburger guarantees premium quality and enjoyment. Drawing on almost 200 years of expertise, the full-bodied, light, Bitburger Premium Beer is of course brewed according to the German Purity Law. Its popular, dry-finished, hoppy taste has secured Bitburger Premium Beer position as Germany's no. 1 draught beer.
My wife and I spent nearly a month traipsing around Germany back in the fall of 2002 and I don't recall ever seeing Bitburger offered on tap anywhere. Perhaps we just weren't looking in the right places.
Anyway, on to the review. While Bitburger is available in bottles, the beer that I sampled this week came in a unique eight-pack of half-liter (16.9oz) cans. Pretty standard fare on the can design with white background and traditional looking font. No widgets inside to replicate the draft experience like Guinness has.
Beer Style: Pilsner
Alcohol by Volume: 4.8%
COLOR (0-2): Light golden, but weak. 1
AROMA (0-2): A bit soft. 1
HEAD (0-2): White with strong bubbles. 2
TASTE (0-5): Comes on strong with some sharp edges. 3
AFTERTASTE (0-2): Poor finish. Bitter in a bad way. 0
OVERALL (0-6): Not among the top European pilsners, but for those less adventurous beer drinkers looking for something different but not too different from the big dog American lagers this could be a good option. It's also an intriguing package and you do worse than showing up for a party this weekend with a eight-pack of Bitburger on your arm. Just remember that those eight half-liter cans equal 11.3 of the standard variety. What? I only had eight beers last night. 3
TOTAL SCORE (0-19): 10
We once again head back across the pond with this week's beer review. This time for a little flavor of Deutschland with Bitburger Premium Beer:
Bitburger guarantees premium quality and enjoyment. Drawing on almost 200 years of expertise, the full-bodied, light, Bitburger Premium Beer is of course brewed according to the German Purity Law. Its popular, dry-finished, hoppy taste has secured Bitburger Premium Beer position as Germany's no. 1 draught beer.
My wife and I spent nearly a month traipsing around Germany back in the fall of 2002 and I don't recall ever seeing Bitburger offered on tap anywhere. Perhaps we just weren't looking in the right places.
Anyway, on to the review. While Bitburger is available in bottles, the beer that I sampled this week came in a unique eight-pack of half-liter (16.9oz) cans. Pretty standard fare on the can design with white background and traditional looking font. No widgets inside to replicate the draft experience like Guinness has. Beer Style: Pilsner
Alcohol by Volume: 4.8%
COLOR (0-2): Light golden, but weak. 1
AROMA (0-2): A bit soft. 1
HEAD (0-2): White with strong bubbles. 2
TASTE (0-5): Comes on strong with some sharp edges. 3
AFTERTASTE (0-2): Poor finish. Bitter in a bad way. 0
OVERALL (0-6): Not among the top European pilsners, but for those less adventurous beer drinkers looking for something different but not too different from the big dog American lagers this could be a good option. It's also an intriguing package and you do worse than showing up for a party this weekend with a eight-pack of Bitburger on your arm. Just remember that those eight half-liter cans equal 11.3 of the standard variety. What? I only had eight beers last night. 3
TOTAL SCORE (0-19): 10
Chinese For Shovel Ready
Story in yesterday's WSJ that, unlike the US, China's government spending on infrastructure has already stimulated construction projects. And these projects are also helping US companies:
China's efforts to quickly pump up its economy are providing a much-needed boost for U.S. businesses as well.
A growing number of companies, from tire and excavator makers to fast-food chains, are benefiting from China's $585 billion stimulus program, which has quickly funneled money into everything from bridges to consumers' pockets.
Just 11 days after the Chinese government approved a $930 million bridge and expressway project called Xiangshan Island Bridge, which will extend over the East China Sea and through mountain tunnels, massive orange drilling equipment was already on site.
Such speed is critical to U.S. industrial-equipment makers, which sell into that market and aren't benefiting nearly as quickly from U.S. stimulus spending.
Caterpillar Inc. Chief Executive James W. Owens says the company's excavator sales in China have returned to record levels in recent months, bouncing back from plummeting sales over the winter.
He says China continues to have a great need for infrastructure and that projects there could start much more quickly than could similar projects in the U.S. "It's something like nine months [in the U.S.] versus nine weeks" in China, he says.
Good thing the Chinese didn't have any requirements that these projects only use materials and equipment made in China.
China's efforts to quickly pump up its economy are providing a much-needed boost for U.S. businesses as well.
A growing number of companies, from tire and excavator makers to fast-food chains, are benefiting from China's $585 billion stimulus program, which has quickly funneled money into everything from bridges to consumers' pockets.
Just 11 days after the Chinese government approved a $930 million bridge and expressway project called Xiangshan Island Bridge, which will extend over the East China Sea and through mountain tunnels, massive orange drilling equipment was already on site.
Such speed is critical to U.S. industrial-equipment makers, which sell into that market and aren't benefiting nearly as quickly from U.S. stimulus spending.
Caterpillar Inc. Chief Executive James W. Owens says the company's excavator sales in China have returned to record levels in recent months, bouncing back from plummeting sales over the winter.
He says China continues to have a great need for infrastructure and that projects there could start much more quickly than could similar projects in the U.S. "It's something like nine months [in the U.S.] versus nine weeks" in China, he says.
Good thing the Chinese didn't have any requirements that these projects only use materials and equipment made in China.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)