[updated] Cardilly is NOT a legitimate business. Security Certificate REVOKED. DO NOT buy from Cadilly!

Posted on by
37

Cardilly.com is either a scam or has a very unusual social media strategy going, since much of the buzz about Cardilly is very negative right now with many people insisting it’s a scam.   I think it’s probably NOT a scam   [update – I’m leaning to “scam” based on all the unaddressed negative feedback and undelivered cards], but surprised they are not addressing critics, and fast.   Is this all part of a strange  “negative news is still news” strategy?    If so, it’ll be interesting to watch the Cardilly saga play out.

After responding to an online advertisement  from what appeared to be a Google ad at a major site I wound up at the new website “Cardilly.com” that was offering $100.00  Wal Mart Gift Cards for … $50.00  .     Some would say that’s “too good to be true”, but in the online world it seemed to me this might indeed be a legitimate deal, especially in light of Groupon’s spectacular success and company valuation.   Seemed to me that Cardilly might be offering a handful of “loss leader” card deals in an effort to generate buzz and traffic.

Given this and their GeoTrust Certificate  (which I later learned  ONLY guarantees that the transaction is “secure” and not that the company is legitimate) I did make the purchase.     The long wait time is also a bit suspicious, but understandable because extending this time will increase their profits quite a bit on a big operation.

There’s a very active conversation about Cardilly online, with most people citing the red flags and asserting “Cardilly is a scam” without much evidence to support that claim.   [update:  Few (nobody?) has reported getting cards so the red flag is getting bigger each day]

This is an area where Google could do a much better job in my opinion – basically guaranteeing that anybody using them to advertise will have a physical address and complaints person identified online.    I’m always surprised how few people want to demand that kind of accountability from ISPs and other key online players like Google and Microsoft.     The solution to online fraud is fairly simple – you CANNOT sell online unless you provide a verified support contact.

The Civil War costs and benefits suggest Lincoln was wrong.

Posted on by
20

I’ve just finished watching Ken Burns “The Civil War” and (as usual) I think I’d argue a very unusual position in terms of what the North and South “should” have done given the massive cost in lives and prosperity and pride.    It seems to me that:
The South was reckless to secede.   They should have realized they had little or no chance of winning a war, and even if they’d won they would have been a weak and poor new country even if the North had agreed to engage in much trade with them – a questionable proposition at best.    Slavery was a morally bankrupt institution and the moral hypocrisy was particularly glaring given the South’s emphasis on the principles of Christianity.
Lincoln was irresponsible to prosecute the war so early.   After Fort Sumpter Lincoln should have pressured Virginia (or at least the West Point Graduates) to stay neutral rather than immediately calling for a massive army, an act that clearly pushed many Virginians toward secession.   Without Virginia’s wealth, military, and brilliant commanders like Jackson, Lee, Forest, Stuart, and more the war would have been over very quickly with far fewer dead and far less destruction.   Reconstruction would have worked well rather than ushered in a long era of exploitation and corruption.
Lincoln should have considered a “no war / no recognition” policy.   He would have allowed the deep south to go about their secessionist ways, courted Virginia to stay in the Union or stay neutral, and then enacted laws and policies to thwart secession non-violently such as no trade, no return of escaped slaves and active support of the underground railroad.   This would have undermined the secession efforts without the massive death and destruction of  infrastructure via Sherman’s march, and probably led to an eventual return of those states to the union when the economic challenges of secession started to bring greater and greater hardships to the people.
There seems to be a prevailing view in history circles that the war was justified because it preserved the union and ended slavery. I agree that slavery was so diabolical you can make a case that no cost was too high to bear to end it, but I think it could have been ended at a much lower cost both then and in terms of future fights for civil rights.  Innovation and industrialization combined with the growing moral outrage and demands of poor immigrants (who didn’t want to compete with slaves) would likely have eventually ended slavery soon even in the deep south.
In terms of preserving the union, I think the case for the Civil War is extremely weak – largely irrational in fact.    You simply cannot make a reasonable case that the cost of the Civil War – 625,000 dead, millions disabled, South destroyed and demoralized – justified simply keeping the deep South states in the union.   “A House Divided Against Itself” did not stand – one side crushed the other with consequences that last even today in terms of the lower living standards in the deep south.    A cost benefit analysis of the Civil War would show it was not worth fighting.
Comments very welcome as always!

USA Debt Rating Downgrade to AA+ is from our failure to cut defense and entitlements

Posted on by
1

S&P’s decision to downgrade the US debt rating from AAA to AA+ is very unwelcome news but it should not surprise anybody, especially in Washington where neither party has been willing to tackle the deficit or the debt in a responsible manner.

It’s time to cut the only two things in the budget that really matter – the bloated portions of Defense and Entitlements.    Even estimating (and then cutting back) the bloat at 10% – absurdly low given how recklessly this money is spent – we could solve all deficit and debt problems in less than a decade.   DO IT, DAMN IT!

The Tea Party’s was right that debt and deficit are major concerns, but their approach to solving the problem has been almost infantile, lacking in strategy as well as substance.    They won’t cut defense – clearly required to solve this problem unless you raise taxes which as they correctly note brings a host of other problems into the mix.   Defense spending is so high it’s become counterproductive, creating blowback and international tension which is mostly a function of our own reckless big spending in hostile territory.

One does not have to be an isolationist to see that it’s time for a much more strategic spending focus.   Troops can be paid well and protected – these portions need no cuts, but operations and maintenance budgets in each of the services are where the big money lies, and where the big cuts won’t create trouble for policy or troops.

The solution is pretty obvious to many of us out here in the real world, where two things are crystal clear:   1.  Entitlements are out of control.  The prosperity the USA has enjoyed for over a century as the kingpin of the  industrialized world is winding down in favor of spreading the wealth around the globe, especially to the developing countries of China and India.   This prosperity allowed us (and by “us” I mean everybody – from poor to rich) to enjoy health, welfare, education, and retirement benefits the rest of the world could only dream about.      Liberal middle class folks are whining too much about how they might lose benefits they never paid for – much of this in the form of “defined benefits” where their contributions won’t match their benefit so it’ll have to come from future taxpayers.   Social Security has this problem, but it’s easy to solve by lifting retirement age a few years for those who can afford the wait  OR doing a ” means test”  OR taxing higher income beneficiaries.   If we do nothing the Social Security trust fund will run out in under 20 years according to most estimates.      The fund is actually growing now but demographics in the form of fewer workers and more recipients will soon overwhelm the system.   Unlike a well managed system, Social Security has promised more benefits than incoming payments can support.

Summary:   Simple solution is to cut bloat in the two big ticket items of defense and entitlements.    Problem solved, AAA restored.  DO IT.

Are Wifi Hotspots Secure / Are Wifi Hotspots Safe?

Posted on by
Reply

TechRepublic.com  has an excellent article about security at internet hotspots.  As with most things technological, the answer to the common question “Are Wifi Hotspots Safe?” is not as easy as it should be.   I’d say the best simple summary I have to date is this:

1.Free Wifi networks at coffee shops, airports, etc are generally safe to use.

2. There’s always a chance that somebody will set up a “fake” network alongside a real one, but common sense will help prevent your accidental use of networks of dubious origin.

3. Although most of the time your online banking and passwords probably would not be hacked at a quality public wifi hotspot where you are confident of the provider, avoid banking and other high security activities in public when possible.

4.  Pay attention to the HTTPS appearing in the address bar, which generally means your actions are encrypted and therefore MUCH safer.  NEVER enter passwords when you don’t see the HTTPS as part of the web address.

The long answer is far more complex, because there are many variations on the hacking theme, and good hackers could steal all but very secure information in a variety of ways.

Redwoods June 2011

Posted on by
3



Redwoods June 2011

Originally uploaded by JoeDuck

This is off trail, along Redwood Creek just after Tall Trees Grove at the sharp bend in the creek. This tree was tipping miraculously at about 30 degrees, so I went in to examine how it could be standing. The (probably) dead trunk in foreground was holding up the big tree by holding up the much smaller trunk to left. That trunk is connected at bottom to the big tree. I’m thinking that as the dead trunk dies the simply enormous pressure from the weight of the big tree – millions of pounds – will snap it and the big tree will fall, re-routing Redwood creek or perhaps even damming it up for a short time. Can’t wait to check up on this in the coming years.

Robert Reich’s interesting 2 minute explanation of the economy. Dude, surely you jest!

Posted on by
8

In the interest of putting up good arguments *against* my general point of view (which I posted in “Shut up or Cut”, here’s the always-sharp-but- often-wrong Robert Reich. As with most tribal viewpoints, Reich makes several correct points and connects them in ways that are fairly rational. HOWEVER, what you miss with this type of analysis is the full and bigger picture that emerges when the many other factors in an economy are included. It’s a game super smart folks like Reich play super well, but for me it undermines their long term credibility since he’s more advocate and politico here than economist. Reich is a left wing economist and therefore focuses too narrowly on distribution issues as in this video. Compare with the CATO boys – the “right wing” economists who focus too narrowly on the *production* side of the equation. They largely ignore income distribution issues and mostly whine about how tax and government inhibit economic development (good points, but too narrow). On balance I line up more with the CATO views because I think they are far more representative of the forces and ideas that created our massive, vibrant, and mostly successfully economic powerhouse, but I’d like to see more from the right about the desirability of a more level income distribution. NOT so much because it would seem to be “fairer”, but simply because it is likely to create more stability both economically and culturally. So I’d agree with Reich about that part at least.

Black and White Prints from Vitaly Geyman

Posted on by
1

My Table Tennis pal Vitaly is not just an interesting fellow with an amazing personal history, he’s a great photographer from Ashland Oregon who specializes in Black and White Prints, especially nature photos featuring trees, flowers, and plants.   
Check out Vitaly’s personal website here where he features a lot of his prints:  VitalyGeyman.com
Here’s are some sample’s of Vitaly’s photography:
Point Lobos National Park, California (Art Print) http://vitalygeyman.com/image/ocean_prints/print_105_sea_fan

Tax burden by income level and “Shut up or cut!”

Posted on by
23

The tax debates always intrigue me, mostly because few of the people who are discussing things have much of a clue about the facts.   You hear all kinds of specious talking points – the most conspicuous from the left is that wealthy don’t pay much tax (they pay most of the taxes as in “most” of the taxes!).   From the right the foolish rant is that we’ll cripple economic development if we tax the rich even more than we currently do.   That’s not at all a reasonable assumption.     Most rich folks have a lot of wiggle room in terms of how much they spend, and the idea that foresaking an extra Rolls Royce will inhibit the global economy is preposterous.    As Warren Buffett reasonably notes, much of the tax burden on the rich is from capital gains taxes which are capped at a fairly modest rate.   He, and other wealthy folks, can pay more.

So, the rich CAN afford to pay more, but _should_ the rich pay more given that they already pay (by far) most of the total tax burden?

The answer in my opinion is simple, and involves both cutting spending and adjusting the incomprehensible tax system.     We should CUT SPENDING to match the revenues we take in, and ADJUST PROGRESSIVE TAX rates slightly to  make sure those with the best ability to pay continue to bear most of the payment burden.

To avoid negative economic “shock waves” from this simple but dramatic solution, we can phase it in over the next decade.    Cutting spending is easy – most of the current spend is easy to adjust downward as we’ve discussed before.   Government is incredibly inefficient in delivering well-being via entitlements and security via defense spending, so we just need to make gradual cuts over the decade until the spend matches the revenue.   Tea Party hypocrites who don’t call for defense cuts need to shut up since it’s impossible to balance a budget without cuts to a massively bloated military budget, as do liberal whiners who think money grows on trees and medicare and social programs are serving taxpayers and beneficiaries effectively.    Millions of recipients – most of whom have contributed only a fraction of their benefits – don’t even need them!    Common sense must prevail, and for that to happen the fringe people who have no interest in compromising their sacred cows should be disavowed.   This is not a time to advocate FOR spending, rather it’s a time to be talking about WHAT are the spending things you LIKE that YOU are going to  CUT?    I’m calling this the  “SHUT UP or CUT! ” approach to balancing the budget.

Table 1. Summary of Federal Individual Income Tax Data, 2008(Updated October 2010)

Number of Returns with Positive AGI AGI ($ millions) Income Taxes Paid ($ millions) Group’s Share of Total AGI Group’s Share of Income Taxes Income Split Point Average Tax Rate
All Taxpayers 139,960,580 8,426,625 1,031,512 100% 100% – 12.24%
Top 1% 1,399,606 1,685,472 392,149 20.00% 38.02% $380,354 23.27%
1-5% 5,598,423 1,241,229 213,569 14.73% 20.70% 17.21%
Top 5% 6,998,029 2,926,701 605,718 34.73% 58.72% $159,619 20.70%
5-10% 6,998,029 929,761 115,703 11.03% 11.22% 12.44%
Top 10% 13,996,058 3,856,462 721,421 45.77% 69.94% $113,799 18.71%
10-25% 20,994,087 1,821,717 169,193 21.62% 16.40% 9.29%
Top 25% 34,990,145 5,678,179 890,614 67.38% 86.34% $67,280 15.68%
25-50% 34,990,145 1,673,932 113,025 19.86% 10.96% 6.75%
Top 50% 69,980,290 7,352,111 1,003,639 87.25% 97.30% >$33,048 13.65%
Bottom 50% 69,980,290 1,074,514 27,873 12.75% 2.70% <$33,048 2.59%
Source: Internal Revenue Service