Stock Market Post-Mortem

Now that the stock market has closed for the year, we can take a step back and survey the carnage. As is our custom here at IcebergCarwash, we will use the S&P 500 Index as our benchmark.

In 2008, as measured by the S&P 500, the U.S. stock market declined 38.5%.

While that number is ugly enough on its own, let's put some historical context around it. For background, consider that the S&P 500 Index reliably goes back to 1926. The full 500-stock index did not appear until around 1957, but the index existed in other forms for about 30 years prior to that point.

Looking at the annual (January 1st-December 31st) returns on the S&P 500 going back to 1926, giving us 83 years of annual performance statistics, we calculated the rolling, annualized 3, 5, 10, 25, and 50-year (when available) returns for each year, starting with 1926. For example, in examining the rolling 10-year returns, we looked at 1926 through 1935, 1927 through 1936, 1928 through 1937, and so on.

The research yielded some interesting information:

(1) This year's performance represented the second largest annual (January 1st - December 31st) decline in the Index's 83 year history, surpassed only by the 43.3% drop in 1931.

(2) The annualized three-year return (2006-08) on the S&P 500 is a negative 9.1%. Out of the 81 years in our database where trailing three year returns could be measured (1928-2008), only 13 three-year periods witnessed a negative annualized return.

(3) The annualized five-year return (2004-08) is a negative 2.7%. This has only happened 11 times out of the 79 rolling 5-year return calculations in our database.

(4) In order to get a really good feel for the historical stock market weakness we're witnessing, look at the annualized ten-year (1999-2008) on the S&P 500, which was a negative 1.6%. This represents the first time a ten-year investment period yielded a negative return since 1939, and only the third time overall (the 1929-1938 period also saw a negative return). The negative 1.6% annualized return for the period from the beginning of 1999 through the end of 2008 represents the worst ten-year return in the database. While our database only goes back to 1926, so this is speculating a bit, it is possible that 1999 through 2008 was the worst ten year period ever for U.S. stocks. The ten year period from 1869 through 1878 might have been worse; I'll have to check to see if anyone has data on a broad market index going back that far. It's really scary when you consider that the first year of that ten-year period, 1999, featured a 21% gain in the index. Absent a very strong rally next year, the period from 2000 through 2009 will look rather bleak as well.

(5) The annualized return on the S&P 500 over the past 25 and 50 years was 9.7% and 9.1%, respectively.

(6) Speaking of the long term, if you had invested $1 in the S&P 500 on January 1, 1926, you'd have $1,871.69 today. Or, more likely, your heirs would.

As a reminder, we're still taking entries for The First Annual IcebergCarwash Stock Market Prediction Contest.

To join, use the "comments" section of our earlier post to register your prediction of where the S&P 500 Index will be at the end of 2009. As a starting point, consider that the S&P 500 finished 2008 at 903.25.

Entries will be accepted until 9:30AM on Friday, January 2, 2009.

Good luck, everyone, and here's hoping for a better year in 2009.

Look at the Bright Side. Maybe Obama Won't Be Our President

As the calendar creeps toward 2009, I find myself, like most Americans I suppose, looking forward to next year with guarded optimism. Sure, things look bleak, and it will likely be quite a while before our economy returns to normal. However, downturns don't last forever, and if there's one thing that history has taught us, it's that you can't keep America down for long. Brighter days are ahead.

Or, maybe not.

According to this article , Igor Panarin, a Russian professor, is predicting that the United States will fall apart in 2010. Specifically, he believes:

...that mass immigration, economic decline, and moral degradation will trigger a civil war next fall and the collapse of the dollar. Around the end of June 2010, or early July, he says, the U.S. will break into six pieces -- with Alaska reverting to Russian control.

So there you have it. The Russians are predicting the end of the American Empire. You're familiar with Russia, aren't you? The country that's less stable than the weapons-grade plutonium that about one-quarter of its citizens seem to have in their storage sheds. The place where a civil war of some sort breaks out every time two people disagree over the proper way to spell "Alexei." (Or is it "Aleksei?" "Alexy?" Can I just call you "Alex?"). The nation that doesn't seem to have figured out the need for decent public restrooms.

My personal biases aside, I do have some questions for Professor Panarin, as I prepare for the coming American Apocalypse.

(1) How, exactly, will the 50 states be divided up into the six new countries? Specifically, will New York and Massachusetts be in the same new country? Personally, I'd really love to avoid that. Is there anyone I could speak to about this now?

(2) Which new country will Barack Obama run?

(3) Will travel between the six countries require a passport?

(4) Regarding the three factors you cite as causes of the breakup, mass immigration, economic decline and moral degradation, a couple of questions:

(a) Have these factors already occurred, or are they expected to intensify? In other words, can we expect even more moral degradation? If so, while I'd hate to see the end of America as much as the next guy, you've gotta admit, things could get really interesting over the next 18 months.

(b) Are these three factors inter-related? Should we expect millions of people to show up from other countries, not wearing any pants, thereby causing all of our stores to immediately close?

(5) When Alaska reverts to Russian control, will you drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR)? Oh, wait. Scratch that question. You people already possess around 40% of the world's proven natural gas reserves, but are too stupid/ stubborn/lazy to do anything about exploiting it. Never mind.

(6) Will each new country have its own Olympic team?

(7) Is your comrade, Vladimir (Ras)Putin busy? As the recent U.S. presidential election indicated, we seem to have a real dearth of viable leaders in this country. I can't imagine having to chose six leaders. Just in case, I'd like to send "Ras" a nice "welcome-aboard-now-please-don't-jail-me-for-daring-to-be-successful-while-not-pledging-you-my-undying-support" gift. To which of his residences should I send it? The one in Moscow? New York? London? Paris? St. Moritz? Tuscany?

So many questions. So many things to prepare for.

By the way, those of our readers who reside in my new country (exact name and borders to be determined) are invited to a Labor Day barbecue at my house on September 6, 2010. The rest of you infidels can get your own darn burgers.

Purple Playoff Participants

The Viking ship is setting sail for the postseason.

The Minnesota Vikings defeated the New York Giants on Sunday, 20-19, on a last-second, 50-yard field goal by Ryan Longwell. Although they would have won the NFC North Division title and made the playoffs anyway, owing to the Chicago Bears' defeat at the hands of the Houston Texans, the victory allowed the Vikings to reach the 10-win plateau for the first time since the 2000 season.

While I don't expect the Vikings to go very far, making the playoffs for the first time since 2004 represents another important step forward for the team. After going 6-10 in 2006, they improved to 8-8 in 2007, and now 10-6 in 2008. This team is not a Super Bowl contender in my opinion, but could possibly be a few short steps away from attaining that lofty status. I'll save the "what-they-need-to-do-next" discussion for a later post.

In looking back at the regular season, the Vikings turned things around nicely after starting 1-3. More recently, after going 5-5 through the first 10 weeks of the season, they finished with a 5-1 run, allowing them to win the division and make the playoffs.

An interesting note is that even in their losses, the Vikings were never blown out of any game. Five of their six losses were by 7 points or less, and in most of those games, they had the ball late in the game, with a chance to tie the score or take the lead. Even in their one double-digit loss (30-17 to the Tennessee Titans in Week 4), they were within a touchdown until about 4 minutes remained, and Gus Frerotte threw an interception that led to an "insurance" touchdown near the end of the game. On the other hand, the Vikings put together few complete games, looking sloppy or sluggish at some point in nearly every contest. For example, while they beat the Detroit Lions twice, they did so by a total of six points. This, against the first team in history to post an 0-16 record, who were blown out of most games, was a frustrating sign of weakness of the part of the Vikings. In short, even in retrospect, this is a tough team to figure out.

By winning the division title and taking the team to the playoffs, head coach Brad Childress has probably saved his job. I'm still not a big fan of Coach Childress, who seems utterly clueless at times, but I'd have to expect that he will be back in 2009. There is definitely a benefit to be derived from coaching continuity, but Childress has got to improve as a coach if this team is ever going to make the leap to becoming a Super Bowl contender. The Vikings still commit too many silly penalties, and their clock management leaves a lot to be desired.

The jury is still out on QB Tarvaris Jackson as well. While T-Jack has appeared to be vastly improved in his second stint as the team's starting QB, after being benched for most of the season, he hasn't yet developed into a reliable signal-caller. It will be very interesting to see how he performs this coming week, in the crucible of a playoff game, against the aggressive Philadelphia Eagles defense, which will probably attempt to blitz him into submission.

Still, flaws and all, the Vikings will be participating in the playoffs this coming Sunday. Should be fun. (Unless they lose).

Join The Party!!!

In keeping with the rest of the world, here is my Top Ten List of things that happened to ME this year. (keep in mind my life is, thankfully, VERY mundane)

DRUMROLL.................................

10. Got a server for my dining room

9. Won a Gift Certificate for laser hair removal

8. Went to six flags for the first time

7. Got a swingset

6. My oldest started High School

5. (I would love to write learned to drive a stick, but a certain someone never taught me...)

4. Was in a film

3. Went on vacation with MBB for the first time in two years

2. Had a healthy happy year with my family and friends

1. Started this blog


Feel free to compile your own list in the comments section of this post.

Welcome to the Soothsayer's Ball

We've entered the last week of the calendar year, which (to me) can only mean one thing:

We're about to be inundated by "Top 10 _____ of 2008" lists.

I've always found these lists to be quite amusing, if not pointless. On the financial markets side of things, does it really matter which story was #1, and which was #7? I wonder, if someone lost $100MM in Bernie Madoff's ponzi scheme, and then reads that the Madoff scandal was the #1 financial story of 2008, does that provide any comfort? Conversely, if the poor fellow sees that the Madoff scandal is the #6 story, behind the overall market drop, the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers, the fire sale of Bear Stearns, the AIG bailout and the collapse of the housing market, does that add insult to injury?

While these lists seem silly to me, thay do serve one important purpose. A person could space out for 51 weeks, and then catch up on everything over the last few days of the year. That's pretty neat.

The really pointless exercise lies not in the sundry annual "wrap up" stories, but in the "prediction" pieces that also typically run at this time of year. In stock market terms, different media outlets will assemble a formidable collection of pundits who will polish their crystal balls and tell us where the market will be at the end of the next year. Invariably, you will get a very wide range of predictions. One guy will say that he expects the stock market to rise by 35% in the next year, while some other person will call for a 40% drop. One thing you can be certain of is that anyone who lobs a prediction at us will be sure to back it up with an impressive-sounding argument.

Over the years, I've struggled with the question of which prediction to follow. Several years ago, when I was working as a stock analyst, a colleague of mine gave me this sage advice: "When in doubt, go with the guy who is wearing a bow tie." This made a great deal of sense to me at the time, so I made a mental note to do so going forward. About a year later, my illusions were shattered when our firm's bow tie-wearing chief economist showed up 30 minutes late to a meeting, sheepishly saying, "I thought this meeting was called for Thursday, not Tuesday." I realized that this guy couldn't figure out his schedule for the week ahead, let alone predict the stock market's level 12 months out.

Flamboyant neckwear aside, I think that it's rather obvious by now that even the "pros" have a difficult time accurately predicting the future. So, I figured that we should just have at it ourselves.


I am therefore pleased to introduce The First Annual IcebergCarwash Stock Market Prediction Contest.


To join, use the "comments" section to register your prediction of where the S&P 500 Index will be at the end of 2009. For reference, consider that the Index is currently at 865.42. It ended 2007 at 1468.36 (ouch).

We will keep track of everyone's predictions, and at the end of 2009, we will award a prize to the person whose prediction came closest to the actual closing level of the S&P 500 Index at the end of 2009. (Please read the disclaimer below). You've got until the market opens on January 2, 2009 to join. Good luck, everyone.





Disclaimer
This contest does not represent an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any security. It is open to anyone in the world, provided that the jurisdiction in which the entrant primarily resides does not expressly or implicitly prohibit joining contests of this nature. There is no fee to join this contest. IcebergCarwash disavows any connection to any individuals, including, but not limited to, the Governor of the State of Illinois, who might attempt to solicit fees from those who join this contest. The contest is open to relatives, friends or enemies of the operators of IcebergCarwash. The contest is not open to anyone named Charles who chooses to be referred to by the nickname "Chaz." In such instance, either "Charlie" or "Chuck" is acceptable. IcebergCarwash reserves the right to award a truly stinky prize to the winner of this contest. Reference to the term "stinky" in relation to the proposed prize includes any prize which could be deemed to be inadequate for the winner of such a contest, generally unattractive, or possessing a particularly foul odor, whether such prize is the actual source of said foul odor, or if the foul odor was derived from something which came in contact with the prize, thereby imparting - temporarily or permanently - the odor upon the prize. Taxes will be the sole responsibility of the contest winner. IcebergCarwash makes no representations whatsoever regarding the tax liability arising from winning the contest's prize. Each participant is advised to consult with his/her tax adviser to determine any potential tax liability, prior to accepting any prize awarded by IcebergCarwash in connection with this, or any, contest or promotional event.

You Want Me To Do WHAT?!?!? II

In a recent post (there haven't been too many of those lately), we spoke of the need to help other people out even if it's not really something you're thrilled to do. I believe that, but I don't think that gives people the right to assume that others will do things for them, and put them on the spot.

Last night at 10:42 I went to pick up my daughter from a school party. I came a little late, because she told me the party was over at 10:30, but that I shouldn't come before 10:40 the EARLIEST. So trying to be a nice Mom, and overcome my need for punctuality I got there at 10:50. The party was now "officially" over for 20 minutes, and unofficially for 10 minutes. Through the window I could see my daughter still dancing and having a good time, she looked really happy. After about a minute she came outside, opened the door to the car, and said "Mom, there's some kids who need a ride home, can you take them?" So of course I said yes. I was really tired, and these kids live in my general neighborhood, but not "on my way" and not on my block. Granted, all told it was a seven minute difference, but I was annoyed.

Not at the kids. At their parents. How do you send your kid off to a party and just basically abdicate your responsibility to pick them up to some anonymous person, because you don't feel like coming out to get them? If I live two houses away from them, sure. We could have arranged it in advance, but no problem if we didn't. But this? This is just so....I can't even think of the word. Oh, wait I got it. Selfish. Both houses I went to were completely dark, so those parents didn't have to wait up to go pick up their kids, they just assumed someone else would do it. I could have said no, and the kids would have asked someone who lives even further away, or GASP! called their parents, but I felt bad. For the kids who were put in the situation. Because, really, how hard is it for the parents to make a phone call and ask someone to do something, as opposed to ambushing them at 11 at night.

What's the difference, you may ask, if you would do it either way? Good question. AND I HAVE THE ANSWER!!! Aside from it being the more courteous thing to do,I think the main reason people DO NOT call to set it up in advance (it was a three hour party there was ample time to call and ask)is that they don't want to feel like they asked a favor, or need to return one. So they have their kids ask, at the party, spur of the moment, and that way they are beholden to no one. Not that I feel there needs to be a quid pro quo,and I'm happy to help someone out, but I can't think of another possible reason not to set it up in advance. They may feel they're not "close" enough with me to ask the favor, so they let the kid do it instead? It's just weird. the whole thing is just weird.

THEY'RE YOUR KIDS TAKE CARE OF THEM!!!!

Leading off, and playing center field, Charles Ponzi

As more information emerges about the stunning fraud perpetrated by Bernard Madoff, we have begun to hear about some of his bigger victims.

It is important to note that while Madoff's "fund" had a relatively small number of investors, many of these investors were hedge funds, who in turn had many investors. It seems that thousands of people were caught up in this scam.

Looking at the list of prominent investors who lost money, one name in particular stands out: Fred Wilpon, the owner of the New York Mets. It has been reported that Wilpon's real estate company, Sterling Equities, might have lost hundreds of millions of dollars in Madoff's fraud.

What makes the Wilpon case interesting is that this hardly represents the first time that he has been duped. My preliminary analysis has revealed that over the past ten years alone, Wilpon has invested tens of millions of dollars with certain individuals, and has little to show for his expenditures. Some of the people who have taken millions from Wilpon, and left him "holding the bag" include:

* Mo Vaughn
* Mike Hampton
* Carlos Baerga
* Pedro Martinez
* Luis Castillo

Perhaps most sad is the fact that Mr. Wilpon continues to throw his money at investments with a less-than-certain future. Earlier this month, he committed to pay a certain Francisco Rodriguez, of Caracas, Venezuela, $37 million over the next three years. Mets fans are surely hoping that Wilpon doesn't get Madoffed again in regards to this investment.

Wilpon's losses in the Madoff scam prove yet again that the New York Mets are at the epicenter of the current financial earthquake. (An earlier post detailed how the Mets brought Citigroup down).

It's bad enough that this team has now choked away a division title in each of the past two Septembers. Must they also destroy everything in their wake?

At this point, it wouldn't surprise me to learn that Mr. Met was running the credit default swap (CDS) desk at AIG. I imagine that the hiring decision-making process went a little something like this:

Trading manager: "Thanks for coming in today, Mr. Met. It was nice meeting with you. We'll be in touch."

Mr. Met leaves, and walks two blocks to the parking garage where he left his extra-large golf cart with the Mets cap on top. Upon paying the cashier, he is dismayed to learn that he has been charged an extra $20 for an "oversized vehicle." He decides then and there that he will not tip the garage attendant who retrieves his car.

Trading manager (to the head of derivatives trading): "Well, what did you think of the guy?
Head of Derivatives Trading: "I'm not sure. He gave me a funny vibe. What do you think?"
Trading manager: "I thought he was great. He's a genius. We should hire him."
Head of Derivatives Trading: "A genius? Why do you say that? Is he a Phd.?"
Trading Manager: "No. But he must be a genius. Just look at the size of his head."
Head of Derivatives Trading: "You're right. He's our guy."

You Want Me To Do What?

Recently I've become aware of a problem that does not really effect me. As the mother of two teen aged girls, there are very few circumstances in which I need to look for and hire a babysitter. I am, and always have been, very lucky on that front having my young cousins live across the street from me. Again, luckily, as my cousins grew too old to babysit (and I mean getting married, they would ALWAYS babysit for me in a pinch even in their twenties)new neighbors moved in, with teen aged girls. So the issue of needing to get out and being unable to find a babysitter was not one I struggled with. But, when speaking to mothers of young children, I see that this is more likely NOT the case.

So as someone who never faced this problem myself, I feel that I can somewhat objectively give my opinion on this matter.

Mishpacha magazine recently ran an article on this topic, and I think they did not go far enough. Most Bais Yaakov high schools have a Chesed program where they send their students to disadvantaged homes, or homes with special needs children, to help the family in whatever way the family may need. Usually it's a dire or grim situation in these homes, the girls go for their one hour of "Chesed" per month or two weeks, depending on the school, and then they fill in their paperwork. What have they learned? Well, they've learned they need to help those less fortunate than themselves, and generally garner a new appreciation for all the things that are good in their lives. A worthy endeavor indeed. However, maybe there is something missing. What we need to be teaching these girls is their responsibility to help those who need it, even if it doesn't come under the classic banner of high school "chesed." I think what throws a lot of these kids, is the women who call requesting their babysitting services live in clean homes, with well children, and can afford to pay. But if their getting out to a wedding, a dinner, a sale, or even a date with their spouse is incumbent on the cooperation of their young neighbor, I believe those girls should indeed agree to help them out. They do not have to decline payment to achieve the act of chesed. If the woman has already called ten girls all of whom have said no, then a quick yes, and a night of watching someone's kids and eating whatever they find in the pantry and getting paid has now been elevated to lofty status.

The fact that this is a sad commentary on both the kids and parents of today is an issue as well. When parenting teenagers it is important to pick your spots, and maybe some parents feel this is not an avenue of friction they wish to travel down. However, as many things in life, the more you work towards something the more it sticks with you. If a girls realizes that what she is doing is a huge help, chesed if you will, to the other person, she will have learned a valuable lesson in real life. Sometimes those who need help are right there, and it's relatively easy to do. It doesn't have to be the most exciting and most prestigious sounding project to be a help. And that's a lesson that parents can teach their kids. It's OK to help someone even if the whole world doesn't know about it, and it doesn't sound all that exciting when you repeat it or put it on a resume. But these days, it seems to be what is needed, and that's the truest form of chesed. Helping someone the way they need the help.

(That girls don't feel the need to babysit, from an economic standpoint, and whether that is sustainable in the current economic climate is an issue for another blog).

So it's really become something that needs to be reformed in people's mind. Parents need to press upon the kids the importance babysitting plays in the community at large. And what is a bigger chesed than that?


For now, it's up to you dear reader, whether you are a parent of a teen ager, a teen ager, or parent of young children who needs a babysitter you need to get the word out. Change people's attitudes. It can be done.

REALLY????

Caroline Kennedy has officially announced her desire to have Hilary Clinton's Senate seat. And why not? She's a Kennedy, she wants it, it should be hers, what could be more simple? That there are others in New York politics who have paid their dues through sweat and campaigns and actual work for the people of New York? Who cares. She wants it. She has no experience or track record of any kind. That could be a plus, but more than likely not. She's lived a very sheltered life away from the riff raff and dirtiness of politics and populace.

You may ask why experience matters when we have a soon -to- be President who also lacks credentials and experience. There is a difference though. The people of this country knew he had no qualifications and chose to elect him anyway. Ms. Kennedy would be appointed, having never shown to be the choice of any people, for anything, anywhere. Big difference. According to The New York Times, her commitments generally involve nonprofit boards: the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund Inc., the American Ballet Theater, the Commission on Presidential Debates and the John F. Kennedy Library Foundation. She also worked for the New York City Schools, taking just a $1 salary, to essentially work on private fund raising. She was on the board to choose the President Of Harvard, and part of the committee that helped vett Vice Presidential candidates for Obama. Oh, and she wrote a really good memo to him.

This stinks. Politics being what it is, I'd be shocked if this doesn't happen. She helped Obama. Clinton, Obama's chief rival in the primary, is now going to serve in Obama's cabinet, hmmm, who will get that seat? Could it be that pressure will be applied to Governor Patterson by Hillary, on orders from her new boss (the CHICAGO politician)to throw a thank you appointment at Caroline Kennedy?

Welcome to New York.

Return of the Prodigal Purple

When we last saw Mr. Tarvaris Jackson, he had lost his job as the starting quarterback of the Minnesota Vikings after an 0-2 start, replaced by Gus Frerotte. Worse still, this very Blog-ojevich was comparing him to a disappointing toy.

Since that point, T-Jack, as we've taken to calling him, sat on the bench, while Gus Frerotte did a decent job righting the Vikings' ship (pun semi-intended). The Vikings won 7 of their next 10 games.

Then, last week, playing in Detroit against the winless Lions, the Vikings were putting in an embarrassingly sluggish performance, and were trailing 6-3 at halftime. With Gus Frerotte banged up, Tarvaris Jackson entered the game early in the third quarter, and immediately drove the Vikings for the go-ahead touchdown. After the Lions regained the lead, T-Jack rallied the Vikings again, and they escaped with a 20-16 win.

Yesterday, with Frerotte still nursing an injured back, T-Jack got the start in Arizona against the Cardinals, and he responded with perhaps the best game of his career, throwing four touchdown passes in a 35-14 Vikings romp. The Vikings' running game was dominant, so Jackson didn't have to throw that often (17 times), but he looked very sharp. He made several perfect throws, and I can only think of one pass that was poorly thrown.

Although one game and a half of action is hardly enough evidence, it would appear that T-Jack has taken some positive strides. Perhaps it was just a function of playing against relatively weak defenses. Or, he might just have learned something by watching the action from the bench.

At this point, T-Jack has not yet officially regained his starting job. However, I'd expect him to start at quarterback next week, against the Atlanta Falcons, as Gus Frerotte is not yet fully healed. I, for one, would like to see T-Jack as the starter at this point, as the Vikings need to determine, for once and for all, whether or not he is their quarterback of the future. If he is not, they will have to address that position in the offseason. In my opinion, T-Jack gives the Vikings as much chance to win as does Gus Frerotte.

In general, the Vikings have done a nice job turning around a season that started poorly. With two games remaining in the regular season, the Vikings have a record of 9-5 (already surpassing my typically-pessimistic preseason prediction of an 8-win season), and lead the NFC North division by one game over the Chicago Bears. The Vikings can clinch the division title with either one more win or one more Chicago loss. While I still don't think that the Vikings are serious Super Bowl contenders, it would be nice to make the playoffs for the first time since 2004.

Welcome back, T-Jack. It's nice to see you again.

I Got It!!!

Last night, while driving home from parent teacher conferences (for some reason known around town as PTA, which I guess it is, since the parents and teachers DO associate), it hit me. I figured out a solution that will kill two birds with one stone. The only problem is, I doubt he'll go for it.

As I'm sure many of you have heard by now, the Governor of Illinois was arrested by the FBI for numerous things, including attempting to "sell" the senate seat of former Senator-now-President-Elect Obama.

This puts even more pressure on NY Governor David Patterson, who needs to pick a replacement for Senator Hillary Clinton, our soon to be Secretary of State. He needs to pick someone who is both qualified and avoids the stench of a quid pro quo so rampant in Albany, and all political machines.

I have the answer. Michaal Bloomberg. Here's where the two birds come in. If Bloomberg is appointed Senator, he won't run for Mayor, and democracy, though already subverted, may triumph yet. The problem is I doubt he'd agree. The Senate is much different from the executive suites, be it corporate or political. Aside from building his Bloomberg empire he has been the Mayor for almost 8 years, and is used to an executive position. Can he play well with others? From a politics stand point I have no doubt that he would be fine, though I don't know that he'd be happy playing junior to Chuck Schumer. Plus, I don't think could stand two Senators with such annoyingly grating voices.

I heard some one say last night, that since the Governor was not elected he should not appoint Clinton's successor, but call a special election. That is a ridiculous argument. Did Lyndon Johnson call special elections everytime he had to appoint judges, or make a tough decision? No. Why? Because he was elected to a position that every knew he would take over if anything happened to his boss. So too with Patterson. He was elected Lieutenant Governor to Eliot Spitzer's Governor. The fact that no one expected Spitzer to leave? Well, as Monty Python says "nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!"

So who should Patterson appoint? As much as it pains me to say this, the answer is Andrew Cuomo. If New York state wants a representative who will represent the interests of New York in a tough and uncompromising way, a man who's been to Washington and knows it's culture, I believe he's the man for the job. Certainly not Caroline Kennedy, despite her uncle's desire to keep a Kennedy in the Senate now that his clock is ticking. Though I don't know who's waiting in the wings as State Attorney General.

If Cuomo is appointed, the Legislature would appoint an Attorney General, thus leaving New York State without a Lieutenant Governor, an appointed Senator, an appointed Attorney General, and a Mayor who uses political promises to secure himself an unearned spot on the ballot.

Ship him off to Washington.

A Little Lite Housekeeping

Some of you maybe wondering why our blog production seems to have slipped lately. Here are some thoughts.

Many people who heard that MBB and I had started a blog had the same reactions: Either

a)You must be bored
b)you must have a lot of time on your hands

In fact, that opposite appears to be true. The less time you have, the more time there is to blog. That seems counterintuitive, but as the horrid expression goes: "It is what it is." When you have no time, you think of something and you write it. There's no time to get wishy washy and worry whether it's worth writing.

As far as being bored? The more bored you are the less there is to write about. My very exciting day of cleaning up cheerios and changing diapers and playing with my baby and talking on the phone and doing errands and making dinner may be fine for me, but it doesn't make for very scintillating blog reading.

There's another element to this venture that cannot be discounted. The Rule Of Supply and Demand. We seem to be in a surplus right now, since the polls were not voted on, and the comments are few and far between. So, as all good businesses know, hold on to your supply and demand will increase.

We'll see.

That Was Fun!

So it seems a woman's work is never done. As I sit here in my sister's house, she is complaining that there's nothing new on the blog. So it seems I am not as compelling as a conversationalist as I am as a blogger. Hmmm. That does wonders for the self esteem.

It's so nice to get a slice of someone else's life. When I come here with my kids, it's not normal life here either (extra people, everyone home from school, etc), so when I come alone I really get the feel for her life. Obviously, my being here changes things automatically. But , still, it's nice when you live far away from someone to become, even briefly, a part of their daily routine. As Verizon can attest, we try to stay connected, though you can't compare being here with being on the phone.

A number of people asked me what we would do when I got here, and I responded "nothing really." Honestly, that's what we like to do. Just be. Life shared with those we're closest to feels so full. So, though we did nothing, we also went bowling, to Dunkin Donuts, shopping, and to a great little store here that's fun to browse. The funny thing about bowling was I did OK the first game, she did ok the second, but our COMBINED score on the second game was less than the loser of the trio next to us. I'd love to learn how to get the ball to curve, it's so coool. If I were to go bowling and wanted to learn, this would be the place. Including 2 pairs of shoes and a total of four games we paid a whopping: $13. That's just crazy!

I'm going home soon, and will wait 'til we can get together again. I hope it's soon.

The Kitchen Sink

Hello all from cold Michigan. I took advantage of Spirit's give away fares and went to visit my sister for less money than it would cost to do just about anything. Though to be honest, that's before you factor in the doughnuts, which of course was our first stop. Even before we got to the house. The hard part will be spending less at Dunkin Donuts then it cost me to fly 600 miles each way.

Having recently flown Jet Blue to Florida, after checking Spirit first and seeing Jet Blue was cheaper, I can honestly say I don't kow that the adage "you get what you pay for" holds true for this airline. First of all, you don't always pay very cheap on Spirit, but your still stuck in those dinky seats that I, Miss Shorty Von Short Short felt comletly squooshed in. Jet Blue had so much leg and arm room AND direct TVs. Spirit cramps you into the seat, supposedly offers snacks and drinks for sale (though to be honest I had a headset on, and they may have come around and I just didn't hear them), and practically charges you to use the air conditioning.

That said, both Spirit and other airlines have instituted a fee for check luggage. Now before this happened, there were a few souls who did not want to wait for their luggage or chance it getting lost, so they brought it aboard. Now, everyone does, and there is no one checking size and weight. It's almost like that old college trick of how many people can we get in the phone booth. Now, it's "Let's see how big of a suitcase and how much of my stuff can I get away with as carry-on." This tends not to be a problem for me, since I either spring for the extra few bucks, fly an airline that gives you one free bag, or I pack small enough that I can stick under the seat in front of me (the whole short thing again). There needs to be a point at which people say "you know, we're headed to visit the kids for two weeks, maybe we shouldn't try to bring these two overstuffed medium sized suitcases on board." Though, on the other hand, no one will stop you (if they do at all)until you actually try to get on the plane or are on the plane trying to stick it on top of row three even though your seat is in row 26, so you can probably ge check it for free, avoid the baggage and overweight charges. Brilliant.

It does however make for frustrating travel when everyone is rushing to get on the plane so there's room for all their extra -large-no-way-in-heck-is this-hand-luggage to fit on top. Then you wait to get on as other passengers are trying to find an empty space for their bags, cramming up the aisles while you wait in the freezing cold jetway getting nauseous from the outside plane and truck fumes cuz you haven't taken your dramamine yet since you don't want to risk taking it to early, and even when you get to your seat you're taking a chance since you never know when you're actually going to take off.

Off to do shopping, and probably get more doughnuts!

Purple Progress

Lest anyone accuse me of only posting about my favorite football team when I've got something to complain about, I need to congratulate the Minnesota Vikings on their fine performance last night. The Vikings beat the Chicago Bears, 34-14, and they now lead the NFC North, sporting a 7-5 record with four games to go in the regular season.

The game turned on an incredible five-play sequence in the second quarter. After the Bears, then holding a 7-3 lead, reached the Vikings' 2 yard line, the Vikings' defense held for four straight plays, stuffing three consecutive running attempts. After the last one, the Vikings took over on downs, holding the Bears without any points, but were backed up at their one yard line.On their first offensive play, quarterback Gus Frerotte dropped back into his own end zone and heaved the ball deep down the left sideline, where he hit a wide-open Bernard Berrian in full stride. Berrian caught the ball at the Vikings' 45 yard line, then sprinted the rest of the way for a 99-yard, game-changing score. The Vikings had gone from potentially being on the short end of a 14-3 score to leading 10-7, in the span of about a minute. They never looked back from that point.

With the victory, the Vikings lead the NFC North division with a 7-5 record. The Bears are 6-6, while the Green Bay Packers are 5-7. However, there's still plenty of football left to be played, so anything could happen.

While the Vikings have played well since my last post, two weeks ago, there are still some trouble spots. For one thing, the play-calling remains suspect. The coaching staff seems determined to run the ball, even when the defense is clearly playing to stop the run. It seems as though the Vikings only pass the ball on 3rd down. I think that they need to pass more often on first down. For one thing, it will keep the defense honest, thereby opening things up for the running game. Secondly, with defenses attempting to stack things against the run on first and second down, that's when the Vikings will find it easier to find some receivers open down the field. In general, Gus Frerotte remains inconsistent; at this stage, he could just as easily lose a game for you as he can win it for you.

So, while the special teams coverage, the pass rush and the offensive line play have shown improvement, this is still a rather flawed team.

It should be an interesting December.

A Space Oddity

Yesterday, the space shuttle Endeavour (Why do we need to use the British spelling for our space shuttles? Does this give them more gravitas? Are they telling us that the $1.7 billion price tag is not sufficient to make it seem important?) completed its 22nd mission, returning to Earth after a 16-day trip. The mission went rather smoothly, with the exception of one minor glitch at the end. Due to stormy weather in Florida, the shuttle had to land in California, at Edwards Air Force Base.

I've never been a fan of the space program, and have always considered it to be a colossal waste of money. Whenever I point this out to anyone, the argument is always the same. Think of all the scientific and technological advances that have been derived from the space program. My counter-argument is that I still don't believe that these "advances" represent a good return on our investment (ROI). It's pretty interesting, when you think about it. NASA probably employs some of the greatest mathematical minds in this -- or any -- country. Yet, no one in the place seems to be able to put together an ROI calculation. Simply put, the space program is not worth it.

As far as I'm concerned, the only thing we've ever accomplished through the space program occurred almost 40 years ago, when we put a man on the moon. That was an accomplishment, but not for any scientific reason. Rather, it allows people like me to properly express their frustration over any kind of technological or mechanical failing by invoking the lunar landing. As in, "This is ridiculous. We can put a man on the moon, but I can't get decent water pressure in my shower?!"

To some, space exploration remains important, as it can help us learn about the potential existence of intelligent life on other planets. I think that we still need to find more intelligent life on this planet.

Speaking of life on other planets, there are some people who live in great fear of alien visitors. They worry that they will be abducted by aliens, and subjected to all sorts of unfortunate things, including the infamous, highly-invasive "probe." I, however, do not worry about being abducted by aliens, for two reasons:

(1) Based upon the stories I've heard of alleged alien abductions, I'm pretty certain that I don't meet the demographic criteria for potential victims. The aliens appear to have focused their abduction efforts south of the Mason-Dixon line. Specifically, they're interested in redneck guys named Earl, who hang around "back of the mini-mart," spitting tobacco juice and generally minding their own business. I'm not sure why, but this seems pretty consistent. Who knows, perhaps on some other planet, far, far, away, some frustrated being is saying "I don't get it. We can destroy all six moons of Zarkon 9 using only light-emitting weapons, and we can't make a probe that doesn't require a Budweiser catalyst?!"

(2) If aliens ever did abduct me, I'm certain that before long, they'd make me their leader. Hopefully before they got around to the probe. That's not a pleasant experience on any planet.

Rest assured, if this ever did occur, I would not let my new status get to my head. Depending upon the conditions of the planet in question, my reign would be characterized by a benevolent-yet-authoritative style. As to my title, I must say, I've never felt comfortable with names like "king" or "emperor." "His Excellency?" Way over the top. Rather, I think that I would go with a ruling-class nomenclature based upon the 7-11 beverage size hierarchy. For example, members of Congress would be known as "Gulps," members of my cabinet would be referred to as "Big Gulps," and I, as the highest-ranking official, would be known as "Super Gulp." (I am fully aware of the fact that there is an even higher level, that of Double Gulp. However, to give someone the title of "Double Gulp" is just plain silly).

Anyway, I was glad to hear that the latest shuttle mission went off without any problems. Then again, the change in landing spot was possibly quite an inconvenience. I imagine that the following conversation took place on the shuttle, as its crew prepared for re-entry.

Spaceman Bob (on the headset, speaking to Ground Control): What's that? Weather's rough in Florida? You want us to land in California? At Andrews? Okay.
Spaceman Bill: What's up?
Spaceman Bob: That was the Chinese space station. They said that the delivery pod was malfunctioning, so they can't deliver our take-out order. No, I'm just kidding. Actually, it was Ground Control. They said we're going to have to land in California. There's bad weather in Florida.
Spaceman Bill: Oh, okay.
Spaceman Joe (from the back of the shuttle): What? California? You have got to be kidding me!
Spaceman Bob: Yeah, they said the weather's bad in Florida.
Spaceman Joe: Great. Just great.
Spaceman Bill: Dude, what's the big deal? It's easy enough to land this thing at Andrews.
Spaceman Joe: I'll tell you what the big deal is. I parked my car at the long-term lot at the spaceport in Florida. Now, how am I going to get home? (muttering): Stupid NASA.

Yes, readers, our space program. Expensive, inefficient, and at times, incredibly inconvenient.

Field of Broken Dreams

With the government stepping in last week to bailout Citigroup, pledging tens of billions of dollars to prop up the teetering banking behemoth, the question on everyone's mind is, "Who is to blame for this mess?" Vikram Pandit? Chuck Prince? Sandy Weill?

Well, IcebergCarwash is here to provide answers, and we've got the answer to this vexing question as well.

Come to think of it, we have the answers to most any question, relating to topics ranging from the sublime to the ridiculous. With the exception of one question, that is.

"How many jelly beans are in this jar?"

I've got to admit, I've never come close to answering this question accurately. Whether it's jelly beans, coffee beans, rubber bands, you name it, I've probably never been within 20% of the correct answer. Heck, if you spread out ten chocolate chip cookies on a nine inch plate, and offered an Aston Martin V12 Vanquish to the first person to guess correctly how many cookies were on the plate, I'd blow that one too. I've just got a mental block when it comes to these things. I'm no Rain Man.

I guess you've just got to have a knack for it. Like that guy a few years ago who walked into my local 7-11 store, took one look at the jar of coffee beans, and said "35,271." The store manager said, "Close. It's 35,270. You win," and handed him a certificate for a free lifetime supply of Slurpees. He grinned, and then walked out of the store triumphantly, whereupon he spent the next 25 minutes trying to figure out where he parked his car.

So, if you come across one of those contests, don't call me. You're on your own.


Where was I? Ah, yes. We were attempting to assign blame for Citigroup's downfall. The answer is simple.

The Mets.

As in The New York Metropolitans Baseball Club.

In the spirit of full disclosure (which is a real staple here at IcebergCarwash), I am a New York Yankees fan. As a fan of the most successful sports franchise in the history of mankind (as measured by the number of championships won), I very rarely pay any attention to New York's other team. To a Yankees fan, the Mets resemble a mosquito bite on one's backside. Rarely considered, somewhat unsightly and every once in a while, annoying. Unlike Mets fans, who seem obsessed with the Yankees, rooting against them with almost the same fervor with which they pull for their own squad, Yankees fans don't pay much attention to the Mets. They don't really register on our radar screens.

The reality is that the Mets are losers, as evidenced by their annual, epic September collapses, and the fact that they've only won two World Series in their 47 years of existence. Nor are the franchise's failings confined to the field of play. The Mets turn everything they associate with into losers as well. (Interestingly, I know many Mets fans who are not losers. Their ability to defy the odds and remain untainted by their association with the team is remarkable, and is truly one of the great inspirational stories of our time).

In the case of Citigroup, the connection here is too obvious to overlook. On November 13, 2006, the Mets announced that Citigroup had bought the naming rights to the Mets' new stadium, which would hereafter be referred to as "Citi Field," for a whopping $400 million over 20 years. I'm not going to discuss the pros and cons of the Mets building a new stadium, nor the fact that Citigroup has said that it remains committed to this sponsorship deal, even as it begs the government for funds. At issue here is the effect arising from an affiliation with the Mets. Citigroup's stock peaked within a few weeks of the announcement of the sponsorship. Since the day of the announcement, Citigroup's shares are down more than 85%, and its very viability as a going concern has been questioned.

Clearly, the Mets have brought down one of our banking giants, and perhaps the rest of the global financial system with it. It's just too bad that no one thought of harnessing this incredible power for a good use. For example, had John McCain spent every dollar he raised in his campaign on naming the new stadium "Barack Obama Field," he'd probably be the President-elect today. If the U.S. Government, which is already throwing around taxpayer dollars like confetti, would buy the naming rights to the place, and name it "Al Qaeda Park," we'd soon be able to breeze through airport security with as much as four ounces of liquid in our carry-on bags.

In retrospect, I find it amazing that Citigroup was not aware of this before it agreed to the sponsorship. I guess they've now learned the hard way. I wonder how much money the Mets would charge Citigroup to agree to remove the Citi name?

Mumbai

I'm so sad about the recent events a the Chabad House in Mumbai, India. Most of us don't think about Chabad unless we're out in the middle of nowhere and need a place to eat for shabbos. The thing is, Chabad has been in kiruv long before it became fashionable in the US, and they really sacrifice to do it. The shlichim leave their families, friends and most kosher/frum convieniences they are used to growing up in Crown Heights. They reach people who would otherwise never come in contact with religious Jews, and strive to bring them closer to whatthey themselves love. There are many who rightly decry the Messianic sect within Lubavitch, but not all Chabad is that way, and most are not. This particular Chabad house, according to CNN, also did drug counseling.

I don't really know what else to say so I just hope their families can find some peace, and their son will grow up to make them proud.

Obey the Yield Signs?

Hey everybody, here's an update:

In my previous post, I wrote that it would be prudent to continue avoiding the market. Of course, as if on cue, the stock market has now rallied 18% (as measured by the S&P 500) over the four trading days since that post was published.

I'd like to make two points about that prediction:
(1) I still expect that the market will pull back, and anticipate that the market will soon give back much, if not all, of the past few days' gains.
(2) My advice to avoid the market was simply a Jedi mind trick, designed to move the market higher. Apparently, it worked very well. Very impressive, indeed.

To me, today's most interesting event was the downward move in interest rates on U.S. Treasury securities. Prices and yields (rates) move in opposite directions, so a decline in rates means that the price of Treasuries continues to rise. What we have here is a classic "flight to quality." With investors increasingly nervous about the stock market, and especially skittish about investing in corporate debt, we've witnessed a tidal wave of money flowing into the relative safe haven of debt issued by the U.S. government (Treasuries). Today, the yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note closed a shade below 3.00%, marking the lowest yield on that security in fifty years.

The current yield on the 10-year Treasury looks even lower when compared to the average dividend yield on the S&P 500. About a week ago, Bloomberg news was reporting that the dividend yield on the S&P 500 had surpassed the yield on the 10-year Treasury for the first time since 1958. Actually, their analysis is somewhat flawed, as they were comparing the current yield on the Treasuries with the 12-month trailing dividend yield on the S&P. Considering how many companies have cut their dividend payouts in recent months, it's a pretty safe bet that the S&P 500 stocks, as a group, will pay out far less in dividends in the next 12 months than they did over the past 12 months. A more pertinent analysis would've used the current or anticipated yield on the S&P. Now, even by that measure, the S&P 500's dividend yield is higher than the current yield on the 10-year Treasury note.

On the surface, this is an extremely bullish signal for stocks. For those who are a bit more exotically inclined, it's probably a good time to short the 10-year Treasury (betting on higher yields), while buying stocks. This strategy assumes that the Treasury yield/S&P 500 dividend yield relationship will move back toward its more normal level via a decline in Treasury prices and a concurrent increase in stock prices. Over the long term, that's probably how it will play out. However, there are a couple of things to note:

(1) Any forward-looking analysis of the yield on the S&P 500 must take into account the high likelihood of significant cuts in dividend payouts. Simply applying a 20% haircut across the board results in a much more "normal" Treasury yield/dividend yield relationship.
(2) At the risk of sounding like one of these "we're-now-entering-a-new-era-in-the-markets" people, perhaps we've turned the clock back. Way back. According to noted stock market historian and author Peter Bernstein, prior to 1958, the dividend yields on common stocks were always higher than were the yields on government or highly-rated corporate bonds. The thinking was that investors demanded a higher regular cash payout on stocks vis a vis bonds, as they were the riskier security, based upon the greater historical variability (measured by standard deviations from the mean) of their returns. In other words, investors demanded their equity risk premium in cash, as opposed to higher expected capital returns. That relationship flipped in 1958, and has remained that way for 50 years, as investors measured stocks' greater potential for price appreciation as the primary component of their anticipated total return. While I doubt that the current, "inverted" relationship will persist for very long, perhaps we really have come full circle, and for the foreseeable future, stock prices will remain depressed enough that stocks will yield more in dividends than Treasury instruments pay out. Perhaps years from now, students of the financial markets will view the years from 1958-2008 as a curiosity.

Who knows, maybe it's time to dust off the old dividend discount model?

Again, I think that the current relationship is a mere blip on the radar screen. However, it might just represent one of the first major buy signals we've got on this market, so it bears watching.

Troubled Waters

On our way home from JFK airport we went over the Triboro (this is the way I like to spell it) Bridge. It reminded me that on our way to JFK airport we saw the signs for the rededication of the bridge as the Robert F. Kennedy Bridge. I believe the dedication was that day. My first thought was, wow, that's a lot of signs that need to be changed I wonder who's paying for that. MBB's first thought was "Man, I bet the Triboro Family is upset."

So now, in a terrible economic climate, one that in the city at least has been referred to as a "meltdown," and an excuse to subvert democracy, the state will spend $4 Million Dollars to change the signs to rename a bridge that was fine the way it was. Actually, unable to see the future, and embodying the definition of Hubris, Eliot Spitzer did not know what his ultimate legacy would be, thus he is the one who put the wheels in motion for this renaming of the bridge that connects the Bronx, Queens and Manhattan.

The legislature passed it in June and sometime after that Governor Patterson signed it into law. Here's the odd part. On Jul 30, Patterson went on TV and talked about the fiscal crisis that New York was entering, so much so that he even suggested privatizing some roads and bridges. Now, I'm not an economics expert, but I certainly don't think crisis spring up in a matter of weeks. So when he signed a bill into law, he knew there were 139 signs that needed to be changed, and granted when your deficit is in the 20 something BILLION dollar range, what's 4 million dollars. But, I would like to see a politician say, "No, this vanity project is not right for this time in NY." Peter Vallone who represents Queens in the city council did issue a statement:

Robert Kennedy was a great man, but this isn’t the time. While one agency that gets money from the state is raising fares and cutting service to the neighborhood at the foot of the bridge, another has somehow found a way to spend millions of dollars on changing the signage of it.

To be fair, the state is not even accepting bids for the signage change until 2011. It just doesn't smell right. Don't take away people's property rebate checks (city) and then turn around and do this. Yes, it's the state not the city that will be paying for most of it, but I think it's a morale issue.

There's been some talk about whether this name will stick (ever hear of the Joe Dimaggo highway?), but I think it will. It's short and easy to say fast on a traffic report.

Either way, it was a stupid thing to do at this time, and I hope there is some sort of uproar about it. Though most people are too worried about paying their bills to get up in arms about this.

Life is a Highway.....

So where'd we last leave off? Aaah, yes Thursday evening. Friday is kind of a short day, so we went to play mini golf up in Dania Beach, had a few minutes for...what else? SKEE BALLL! Then down to lower Miami Beach were we spent time with the inlaws. Saturday night we visited with a cousin in North Miami, went to get a quick bite and a mojito for me (that glass was HUUUUUGE!), and well, I don't remember much else about that night!

Sunday was great. It was very windy, but we went down to the beach with some books and diet cokes. MBB didn't last that long, but after three hours I met him near the empty pool area (it was windy and cool, but the water is heated), and he went swimming. After a little while we'd had enough sun, and sunday being sunday we watched some football, went to dinner and watched more football. It was a real vacation day. Lazy, and relaxed. I don't like to do too much on a sunday since places tend to be crowded, since everyone is off. So this was just a perfect day. For me anyway.

Monday, we (gasp!) got up early (relatively!), got some provisions and headed down to Key Largo. It's about 85 miles from where we were staying, and we took the highway down Florida City and US 1 into Key Largo. The plan was to go Snorkeling and one of the boats that have set tours, but a) we got down there a little too late (I guess we didn't get up early enough!) b) many of the snorkeling boats didn't go out because they didn't have enough people c) we realized that the only way for us to go snorkeling comfortably would be with a private boat, and we had done that once before, and didn't want to spend the money.

So we went back to John Pennekamp State Park, where we had (luckily, once we realized it wasn't really for us)missed a boat by minutes. It's not like we parked and saw we missed the boat, as soon as we pulled in you stop to pay to enter the park, and the ranger suggested we try one of the other places on US-1 that had later tours. That's when we found out that no one was really in Key Largo today who wanted to snorkel (or as MBB likes to say Shnorkel), so we made our way back to JPSP, paid our lovely state park price of 6 bucks, and went to rent kayaks.

The canoe/Kayak trail in this park is a very placid mangrove creek. The water is salt water, obviously, since it is off the ocean, and we took a double- sit- on- top Kayak. We saw a cute little crab, and the mangroves themselves I found fascinating. They don't seem to be rooted in the bottom, the roots just float in the water. they're think in many places, and create their own islands in other. We saw some really nice birds in stunning colors, and hopefully didn't scare them too badly as I had difficulty with the whole right goes left and left goes right thing. MBB was none too pleased, but then we got into a groove it was a really nice time.

The whole way down we saw sign for a place called Sandal Outlet, and a little note, like a burst on the side that said "T-shirts 3 for $10." You all know about MBB and t-shirts, so needless to say we found the Sandal Outlet. What a scam! The place that advertises literally EVERY MILE once you get into Key Largo that they have 3 for $10 LIED!!!! It's a big store with lots of Sandals and t-shirts. So I asked if all the t-shirts were 3 for ten. Nope. Only the ones in the back corner. Ok, not bad. THERE WAS ONE! 1! UNO! Round clothing rack that had a bunch of ugly t-shirts on it, and the sign on top of it said "3 for $10.99." I was so annoyed we left. Even though we didn't look at everything there. I was so offended and annoyed! Boo Sandal Outlet! BOOOOO!

We decided to drive home via Card Sound Road instead of US-1 which gets you to the same point at Florida City, but you can drive faster and you see more water along the way. We opted to take US-1 the whole way back, which was nice, but it literally doubled the trip. But, we were in a convertible roadster with temperatures between 77 and 74 so how could we complain. I was heartened to see that not every store along the way was a national chain store, and there were some local private businesses still in existence.

Tomorrow it's back to frigid temperatures, so we're going roof down in the car tonight, even if it hits 60!

See you all soon in the wintry northeast. BRRRR!

Musings from Miami

Hello from sunny Florida. It's not that warm by vacation standards, but it's a lot warmer than NY, so we're happy. We need to wear sweatshirts/jackets in the evening, but we're able to keep the top down on the convertible so the vacation is great!

When we left NY, we parked at an off site parking place near JFK. I was quite amused when we pulled up to read the sign that advised us to "precede with caution." Well, now we had a problem, since the sign clearly said "DO NOT BACK UP," and yet, how were we to defer to the cars behind us if we couldn't back up? Being the daring types that we are, we threw caution to the wind, and went ahead anyway. We dodged that bullet, and all went off without a hitch. The flight was great and empty.

When we finished at the car rental counter, we went into the garage to pick up our car. We knew it was a red convertible sports car, and they gave us the berth number. You know how in all the movies the loser guy gets set up with some girl, and comes into the bar and the set up man points to the girl, and the loser guy sees a stunning tall blond, and says "the blond? Wow!' The friend then tells him no, the girl right beyond the blond and she tends to be a mousy glasses wearing brunette in a button up blouse and floral skirt. So it wasn't that bad, but as we approached we saw a gorgeous red sports car convertible, but it was in the wrong slot parked next to an SUV so we couldn't see the slot two over from it where our car was sitting. MBB noted that the car we were drooling over was a Saturn Skye. We walked two cars over to see our Nissan Z, which is very cool and fun to drive.

After a fun time in Dave and Busters we went out to dinner. There we were sitting at the window, having finished our soup ( it was chilly last night, sorry folks, but low 60's is chilly in these climes)and I looked up at the gas station across the street we had noted when we drove in. Between sitting down and eating soup the price had dropped 14 cents!!!! Maybe we should have had dessert!

We got a late a start today and went to get my watch fixed, pick up some breakfast/lunch, and then out to the Everglades for an airboat ride. We've done it before, but we find it both fun and fascinating, and this time we saw a lot more alligators. The drive down was great. We opted for the long route which was straight on route 41. It was actually (top down and all) a great ride, not boring, lots of cool buildings, and ethnic neighborhoods, and once we got closer to our destination the road felt more like US 1 down to the Keys. Everglades on both sides, and a few signs here and there directing drivers to the various airboat tour companies. Interestingly, a few miles in on that part of 41 is a whole development with miamesq apartments and palm trees, it's quite lovely, though somewhat in the middle of nowhere. I think my suburb has become so urban, that a few minute drive to amenities seems like a lifetime.

Our guide was a man who looked about 60 (though he could've been 35), his voice was choked with smoke from the last 40 years, he claimed to have one eye, he wore numerous rings, one was a skull, lots of tattoos, a pony tail, and originally from Kentucky, accent and all. He informed us on the tour that he's been living on water since he was 6 years old, and first flew a plane at age 11, and landed one at 13. I know he's real tough and all, but two years seems like an awfully long time to stay up in the air. The tour was very informative, and it started off with a five minute fast ride through the sawgrass in the everglades. The water is between 4 inches and 15 inches deep, thus necessitating the airboat. When he came to a stop after this first quick ride where the boat slid sideways many times he informed us of two things. Number 1, this is when he told us he had one eye. Hmmm. Number two, this is when he told us his name. He said "My name is Scooter.'

And all I could think was "Of course it is."

Apocalypse Now

A bit more than a month ago, in this very space, we put forth a very gloomy prediction, that the stock market would not hit bottom, and begin to build a base, until we at least tested the October 2002 lows on the S&P 500.

We advised against trying to buy stocks until we reached that point. Unfortunately, that prediction has come to pass. The S&P 500 closed today at about 750, falling below its closing low of the last bear market, (776.76), established on October 9, 2002. I say "unfortunately," because like most Americans in one form or another, I own stock. I never want to see the market go down, even if it means that my predictions will turn out to be accurate. Had I shorted the market, that would be a different story. Alas, as with my prediction that oil prices were headed lower, I did not put my money where my mouth was. It sort of reminds me of all of those people I knew growing up who would say things like, "I could've bought that building twenty years ago for next to nothing."

At least I resisted the temptation to add to my stock holdings. Hopefully, our readers have resisted doing so as well, and recognized the false rallies over the past few weeks for what they were. What I find particularly troubling is that the market didn't hold at the 775 level. The next few trading days will be very important, to see if the index continues to fall further below the last bear market bottom. If it does, who knows where the bottom of this thing is.

So, as always, we ask the age-old question: What do we do now?

My advice would be to continue avoiding stocks. Even when prices stop falling, we probably need to see a significant period of base-building, where the market trades sideways for a while, before really moving up. Of course, the market could put in a big bounceback rally, but the risk of losing more money in this market is greater than the risk of missing out on a rally. Besides, once it does recover, the market will still have plenty of upside left, even after its first upward surge.

Supposedly, Baron Rothschild, when asked to explain his success in the stock market, stated: "It's simple. I never attempt to buy at the bottom, nor do I attempt to sell at the top." (I say "supposedly," because the investment field is filled with quotes that are attributed to very famous people, when in all likelihood, someone else is really responsible for the quote. I guess a quote has more impact if it is attributed to an extremely succesful person).

There are also other ways to position one's self for a rally in the stock market, while limiting the risk involved. I hope to discuss a strategy or two in an upcoming post.

In the meantime, sit this one out. Granted, stocks appear to be extremely cheap now, looking at things like the dividend yield on the S&P 500 vs. short-term Treasury yields, or, more importantly, the earnings yield of the S&P 500 (the inverse of the P/E ratio) vs. Treasury yields. However, just like stocks - or other assets - can be expensive for years at a time, they can also remain cheap by historical valuation standards for long periods.

Sometimes, that new paradigm can be a real kick in the pants.

Keep Checking

We'll be away for a short time, but keep checking. You never know when we decide to send a scintillating post from the beach.

Stay warm!!!

FBB and MBB

Purple Mediocrity

Looking at our blog a few minutes ago, I was hit with the following thought:

IcebergCarwash could really use another football-related post right now.

I know, I know, you've all been thinking that same thing for weeks already.
I guess I'm a little slow on the uptake.
So sue me.

If you've got no interest in a football post, well, to paraphrase Ivan Drago, Rocky Balboa's opponent in Rocky IV, "I blog for me. For me. Not government. For me."

Speaking of Rocky the Fourth, I believe that with that movie, along with the Rambo epics, Sylvester Stallone played a pivotal role in ending the Cold War. The Russians knew that they could not compete with us.

I find it curious that Mr. Stallone has not received more recognition for his actions on our nation's behalf. Perhaps it's yet another shameful episode of a deserving immigrant not receiving his due simply because of the incredible difficulties he's had in mastering the English language after coming to our supposedly-welcoming shores.

(Pardon me, folks. My editors have informed me that Mr. Stallone, is not, in fact, an immigrant. He was born in New York City. Never mind. Still, he probably should get some recognition for his geopolitical impact).

Anyway, back to the football. Yesterday, in a generally uninspired performance, the Minnesota Vikings lost to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, 19-13. Actually, the Vikings put in a pretty good first half, and were leading 13-6 at halftime. Unfortunately, they didn't do anything of note in the second half and ended up losing the game. The loss leaves the Vikings' record at 5-5. Five wins, five losses. That's what you call mediocre.

Officially, with six games to go in the regular season, the Vikings are still solidly in the hunt for a playoff position, owing to the general mediocrity (there's that word again) of their division, the NFC North. There's currently a three-way tie atop the division, with the Vikings, Bears and Packers sporting identical 5-5 records.

It now looks possible that the winner of that division will end up with a 9-7 record, maybe even 8-8. As the division winner, whichever team ends up on top would then automatically qualify for the playoffs. Whereupon they will probably be beaten like a rented mule by whichever decent team they end up playing.

While I didn't buy into the preseason hype, the Vikings are definitely not playing as well as most observers expected.

The offense continues to struggle, particularly when it comes to throwing the ball.
The defense, while improved, has not been dominant, and is still susceptible to giving up big plays in the passing game.
The special teams have been dismal. Specifically, the punt coverage units are the worst I've seen in the 30+ years I've been following this sport.

Typically, when a team's performance is below expectations, it is either a matter of the coaching decisions (e.g. play-calling) or the personnel. In this case, I think it's both.

* The offensive line, which was supposed to be one of the league's best units, is overrated. Specifically, the right side of the line remains a weakness. The primary culprit is RT Ryan Cook. I'm sure he'll make a nice backup in the future, given his ability to play a few positions, but the Vikings will need to upgrade this position going into next year. He was terrible yesterday, doing his best "matador" impression, while the man he was blocking walked right past him several times.
* Not surprisingly, the QB position is a mess. Tarvaris Jackson was benched after two games, and it was the right call at that point. Gus Frerotte has been inconsistent. Yesterday, he made several poor throws. At this point, I believe that the Vikings might as well put Tarvaris Jackson back in there, to see if he's learned anything by watching the action from the sidelines. Let's be serious. The Vikings aren't going anywhere this year anyway. By playing Jackson over the remaining six games, at least they'd be able to make a final decision on T-Jack this coming offseason, and move on.
* The offensive play-calling has been atrocious. The Vikings need to throw more often on first down, when opposing defenses are keying on Adrian Peterson. In addition, they just have the wrong personnel in the game most of the time. Why do they insist on playing with a fullback? They'd be better off spreading things out more often, with three - or even four - wide receivers. This would eventually give Adrian Peterson more room to run. It's not like the fullbacks are doing a good job of opening holes for him anyway. Here's a general rule to coach by: Whether on offense or defense, you should have your best 11 players on the field as often as possible.
* Unlike the offense, the defense seems to employ a decent scheme. However, there are personnel issues, which have prevented this unit from playing at a higher level. First of all, the loss of MLB E.J. Henderson was a major blow. Despite the efforts of Chad Greenway, the defense has not been able to fully overcome the loss of a player of E.J.'s caliber. In addition, the secondary has not done a great job covering receivers. Specifically, Cedric Griffin is getting burned worse than FBB trying to make creme brulee'. A key task in the offseason will be finding a starting cornerback to replace Griffin in the spot opposite Antoine Winfield next year.
* As for the punt coverage units, surely the loss of ace coverage guy Heath Farwell hasn't helped. But, even I'm at a loss to explain how bad this unit has been.

Ten games are usually more than enough to get a good feel for a football team. At 5-5, the Vikings appear headed for a record of 7-9 or 8-8, and will probably miss the playoffs for the fourth consecutive year.

Not even John Rambo could pull them out of this one.

You Think I'm Bored????

Lately, while listening to the all news station on the radio, I have made a discovery. The writers are afraid to be repetitive. Possibly, they think that many of their listeners are listening on a constant loop for hours on end, the way you would to talk radio, music radio or sports radio. The differences is, on those stations the content changes constantly. Unless there's some breaking news, chances are it's the same stories repeated over and over at least an hour at a time.

Why then do the writers and reporters feel they need to shake things up to the point of the absurd? The other day there was a report of a rescue mission that would now be a recovery mission for one missing duck hunter. His three friends made it relative safety of a small sand bar (or island depending which story you read) after a storm hit and their boat capsized. The story ended with the reporter saying "the storm that victimized the men came up suddenly."

Now I understand that these people went through a terrible ordeal, and lost a friend in the process. But, "victimized?" in that context? It just seems more than a bit much to me. But wait. It gets better.

If you think the regular news writers/reporters feel the stories are tedious hour after hour, how about those traffic reporters? ( I once wrote an angry e-mail to management about the folksy style of one traffic "reporter," who basically gives you very little info, just inflates his own ego with what he thinks is witty reporting. I beg to differ). This one took the cake. So much so I had to draw a cartoon about it:




There were, and I quote: "DUELING ACCIDENTS."

Ummm, Waiter......

I've been sitting in front of a blank screen trying to come up with something to blog about. I haven't done it since Thursday, and our many adoring fans may be clamoring for our slice of sunshine on the 'net.

I gotta tell you people, as of right now I've got nothing, but I'll give it a shot.

I went out to dinner last night with a whole group of people, but too many of them read this blog for me to say anything about that. I'm kidding of course. It was really nice, we had a great time. Too bad there weren't any Mojitos there, but I plan to remedy that in a few days as I sit in the sun on a white sandy beach. I'm so happy that it's going to be cold in these parts when I leave. I hate going to sunnier climes when the temperature at home is mild. Blast me with cold, and I get really excited as soon as I see the palm trees in the airport.

Of course rule number one: Never go out to eat starving, you're likely to be disappointed and order way too much. I wasn't, thanks to some excellent Basmati rice I mooched off my Dad. Man, that rice took me back. I love sticky rice, and specifically the sticky rice they served in the school I went to through second grade. This was so close, I could almost smell the old hallways. Either way I wasn't starved. That brought me to rule number two: Go with your first choice. If your initial reaction is to pick a certain entree, I say go with it, you'll be the most happy. Restaurants are a great opportunity to be daring, but there's the financial element that holds you back. You want to order something different, and try new things, but if you're paying you don't want to be horribly disappointed. But don't be boring, either. Make sure you order something that's right for the place that you're in. It may be delicious, but if you're in a steakhouse, don't order chicken. Don't order steak at a Moroccan restaurant, go for the Tajine.

At least my Appetizer was right for the place I was in, but I should have ordered my first choice ( more right for the specialty cuisine there), and instead I went with what I thought was a safe choice, but ended up being just ok. I can't stand when I order something that I can make better myself. I can only blame myself. I need to not think so much, and just order.

Sorry folks, that's all I got today. Maybe MBB can pick up the slack.

Pandora's Box

I think I've been had.

I'm usually very cynical when it comes to e-mails, but this one came from someone very close to me, it wasn't a forward, and it was only addressed to me, not forty people. Aaaand, my baby was screaming because she saw a bottle of soda on the counter and brought me a toy cup from her kitchen set so that I could pour her some, but mean mother that I am, I refused. So I was letting he get this little temper tantrum out of her system, and reading my emails. This one started thusly:

Sorry,guys, it's quick and for a kid's school project! (And you are the onesI thought might follow through - either because you have kids, you like
science, or you're just plain nice.) This is for a science fair project. If
you could do this I would appreciate it! DON'T ASK, JUST PLAY!

Hmmm. Distracted and a plea for help from someone close, I was a goner. So I sat there and sent the email to 10 people ( I cheated I only did 9 including the one who sent it to me)and I had to think of ten people she wouldn't have sent to. At the end of the e-mail it says, "see what 'll happen."

NOTHING WILL HAPPEN!!!

That's not really true, here's what will happen:


1) I will get ten e-mails back (cuz that's what the e-mail says to do)

2)I will have 6 friends or family members who will be annoyed with me for sending them this drivel (four won't mind because they'll be into this kind of thing which leads us to the next thing...)

3)I will start to get a thousand forwards a day; jokes, urban legends parading as facts, word games, promises of untold wealth or coupons for forwarding e-mails, viruses and product warnings that are over 2 years old, and rehashed political stories with the names changed to stay topical.

So to those of you I sent it to, I'm sorry, it was a moment of weakness and hopefully will not happen again. As for myself, I just cannot believe that I fell for this. Maybe I'm just not smart enough to contribute to a science fair. Here's the rest of the e-mail:

Copy and paste this entire letter into a new e-mail (PLEASE do NOT hit
FORWARD), then read the list of names below. If your name is on the
list put a star* next to it. If not, then add your name (in
alphabetical order), and do not put in a star. Send it to ten people
and send it back to the person who sent it to you. Put your name in the
subject box! You'll see what happens...It's kind of cool! Please keep
this going. Don't mess it up, please:
Aaron, Adam, Aileen,Alastair, Alda, Alexis, Alicia, Alisa, Allison, Alyssa, Amber, Amee,Amy***, Andrea**, An dy*, Angie, Ani, Ann*, Anne***, Ardis, Arlan,
Asha, Asheley, Ashley, Astin, Austin, Becky*, Beth*, Betsy, Bill***,
Bob, Bonnie, Brittany*,Bruce, Brook, Brooke, Candace, Carey, Carl,
Carol*, Carolyn*, Carrie, Chona, Christine, Cindy*,Chris*, Christy,
Claudia, Corrie, Cortney, Crystal, Curt, Dan, Dana, Deanna,Denice,
Dennis, Diane, Domenic, Donna, Doreen, Edna, Elizabeth*, Ellen,
Emily*,Erin, Evelyn, Fevin, Frank, Gail, Gina, Gogi ,Grant,
Grayce, Hamilton, Hans, Hayley, Hazel, Heather***, Heidi, Jackie*,
Janel, Jeffery, Jen*, Jennifer****,Jessica*, Jill*, Jillian, Jodi,
John, Jonathan*, Joe, Joy, Judy**, Julie**, Julia*, Kajene, Kara,
Karen**, Kate, Kathleen*, Kathy*, Keli, Kelly*, Ken, Kevin, Kim***,
Kraig, Kristi, Kristie, Kristy, Landon*, L auren, LaMis, Laura**,
Leigh, Leigh Anne, Liliana, Linda*,Lisa***, Lori, Maricela, Mary, Matt,
Mike*, Monica, Nancy**, Naomi, Pamela, Stephen, Tammy, Tara,Theresa,
Tony, Tina*, Tzvi, Steven,Wanda

Maybe some of you are smarter than me, and can figure out what could be sciency about this, but after doing it I realized you just get it back with the name of the people you sent it to added or starred. Big Whoop. I'm sure some of you commentators can let me know. If nothing else, I will once again have more comments than a certain someone else. hehheh.

Stupid Creme Bruleee

You know that old Joke about the soldier writing a letter home to his girl, and his buddy asks why he's writing so slowly, and the reply is: "cuz my girl don't read too fast"?

Well, read this post very slowly, because that's how I'm writing it. Why? Because I'm stupid. Not stupid in the sense that I can't write or type quickly, no, stupid in the stupid sense.

I've been stupid before. Like when I was blending thawed frozen broccoli with a hand blender and cleaned out the blade while it was still plugged in, and I was pressing the button. I only needed skin glue for that stupidity.

Now, many of you dear readers know where this post is going. You knew it from the title. Because you were there. Those of you who were not there, let's get you up to speed.

I made a dinner party last night for a newly married couple and 28 of their friends and relatives. It was actually a very nice shindig with the first two courses served, the main as buffet, and then dessert served as well. Aaaaah, dessert. I'm not much of a bakestress and dessert tends to be a bit of a pressure for me since it is not, (to steal a favored phrase of MBB's) in my wheelhouse. So after much thought and a bit of deliberation I decided, based on my menu and decor, to take a stab at making creme brulee. I know a few people who own the little ramekins that are needed to make and serve them, so it wasn't like I needed to go out and get 28 of them. So, once the decision was made, I knew I had to get a kitchen torch (no, I didn't do something stupid with the torch just read the whole thing and stop trying to guess). I went to Bed Bath and Beyond ( I think I even had a coupon!), and I picked one up, I came home and it wouldn't light. I read the directions a few times, and finally in small print I saw it said the fuel was not included. The next morning I went to Home Depot to pick up some Butane. After only a few tries, the torch was full and ready to flame!

Alright. Creme Brulee it will be! I found a really easy recipe online, and in order not to be embarrassed by a failed culinary experiment I made some test creme brulees a week in advance. My friend and I had a very nice tasting lunch as we tweaked various aspects of the caramelized sugar (plus she offered to make me crescent cookies dipped in chocolate, which she did and were gorgeous). Apparently, it wasn't tweaked enough, because I tried it in one size ramekin, and made it for the party in a smaller size, and so the sugar was a little too thick and was not as delicious and crackly perfect as the samples.

When we reached a point in the party when everyone was at the peak of their socializing we stopped it all for a quick poem from the kids, and a small speech from MBB. I stayed in the kitchen and began to torch the sugar on top of the creme brulees.

I will tell you another lesson I learned from this party. Don't plan a menu that has foods that must be prepared AT THAT MOMENT, when you are having 28 people. The gnocchi was delicious, but I was busy in the kitchen when my guests arrived. The creme brulee would have been better without all the pressure to torch so many of them. A lot of them ended up with too many scorched spots, and I definitely needed to be in a more relaxed mood when I did it. I wasn't.

I was actually nearing the very end of the torching process, and had just finished one of the last five when I saw some of the sugar puddling a bit. My first thought was that I should spread it out a little. So I turned off the torch and stuck my finger on the just caramelized sugar, and then reflexively stuck the same finger, now adorned with a burning hot piece of melted sugar into my mouth. At that point the sugar hardened immediately, and I was left with a very burnt left index finger, which has now blistered to about 1/4 of an inch above the surface of my finger and the size of a dime if a dime was oval.

Another lesson. You learn a lot here at IcebergCarwash! Don't touch burning hot sugar.

Being married to Superman, I was able to keep my finger in ice water while he finished cleaning up all the dishes after all the guests had left.

So to nutshell this post, I burnt my finger last night so it's making me type slower.

Yo, Watchoo Lookin' At?

Last week, I traveled to Houston on business. On my way back home, as I am wont to do when I'm in a city I haven't previously visited, I purchased a snow globe, to add to the collection we have at home.

While searching through several stores, all featuring an eclectic mix of souvenir items, I realized that there seemed to be common thread running through all of these retail establishments. All of these places featured something with the phrase "Don't Mess With Texas" emblazoned on it. It was everywhere. On T-shirts, hats, key chains, ash trays, you name it. You couldn't go more than ten feet in that airport without seeing the phrase "Don't Mess With Texas" somewhere.

My initial reaction was something along the lines of "Boy, they must be really tough here. I'd better not mess with Texas." On second thought, maybe it's just the opposite. Why do these people have to spend so much time telling other people not to mess with them?

Take my home state, New York, for instance. Have you ever seen a "Don't Mess With New York" T-shirt anywhere? Of course not. In fact, most New Yorkers are secretly hoping that someone will mess with them, just so that they have an excuse to slap somebody around.

New Yorkers have a reputation for being tough. We don't need a T-shirt to prove it.

Okay, I'll admit it. I've really bought in to the "tough New Yorker" thing. Perhaps it's a matter of civic pride. As FBB knows all too well, I get a kick out of telling people that I grew up in Queens, in a tough neighborhood. So, you'd better not mess with me.

The truth is that the part of Queens in which I grew up, a town called Kew Gardens, was a rather idyllic place, actually. Nothing tough about it at all, really. I can hardly recall any incidents in my childhood where my toughness was tested.

Then again, there was that incident at the stickball game.

Here's the story:

I had a friend who lived on the other side of Kew Gardens, and we used to hang out a lot and play ball after school and on weekends. About a block away from his house, right off a major street, there was an area where the neighborhood kids used to play stickball. For those of you who are unfamiliar with stickball, it's very much a New York City game, and is basically baseball, designed to fit the unique dimensions and characteristics of the city streets. As the name implies, the game involves using a broomstick instead of a bat, with the bottom portion of the stick covered with tape, for a better grip. We typically used a rubber ball, although sometimes we played with a tennis ball. The interesting thing about stickball is that different parts of New York have different rules. In Queens, the ball was pitched on a bounce, with an umpire calling balls and strikes. A foul ball on a third strike resulted in an out. Otherwise, everything was based on distance. Anything that got through the infield was a single. If the ball landed on the crosswalk, it was a double. If it landed in the cross street, it was a triple. If you hit the ball clear over the cross street (quite a distance), it was a homerun.

One day, when I was 11 or 12 years old, I was playing football with my friend outside his house, and we noticed a stickball game in progress, so we went down the block to watch. It turned out that they were short on players that day, so they asked us to join. We did, although we felt a bit awkward, as we were the only Jewish kids playing in a game that was clearly skewed toward the Italian-American demographic. When it became obvious that my friend and I were both pretty good at the game, we were invited back to play whenever we wanted.

A couple of weeks later, I was playing stickball, and I was hanging around, awaiting my turn at bat. One of my teammates was a 16 year old kid named Anthony. (Actually, about half of the kids there were named Anthony). Anthony was one of those guys who made you wonder how the Roman Empire lasted longer than 20 minutes. Let's just say he was a few beans short of a pasta fazool.

(Blogger's note: In the next section, readers will be well-served to read Anthony's lines with a heavy, almost caricature-like Italian-American accent. Think of any mobster movie or TV show you've ever seen).

As I'm just standing off to the side, minding my own business, Anthony sidled over to me, and pointed to a spot about 100 feet away, where a bunch of girls named Angie, Gina and Tina and the rest of the local chapter of Future Hairdressers of America (FHA) were hanging out, listening to the radio.

The following conversation ensued:

Anthony: "See that girl over there? That's my girlfriend, Angie."
Me: "Oh."
Anthony: "I think she's nice."
Me: "Oh."
Anthony (gesturing towards the group of girls): "Hey Angie, come here."

At this point, the warning bells started ringing in my head.

Few things on this planet are as frightening as an Italian guy trying to show off for his girlfriend. This would probably not end well, for anyone involved.

Angie came over to where we were standing.

Anthony: "Hey, Angie, I think you're beautiful."
Angie (cracking her gum): "Aww, thanks Anthony."
Anthony (turning to me): "Isn't she beautiful?"
Me: "Uhhh."
Anthony: "Whatsa matter, you don't think she's beautiful?"
Me: "Uhhh."
Anthony: "Hey kid, tell Angie that you think she's beautiful."
Me: "Uhhh."
Angie: "Knock it off, Anthony, leave the kid alone."
Anthony: "No. I think you're beautiful, and he's gonna say it."

Now, just for the record, let me point out the following. Angie was not beautiful. She was not pretty. Not even remotely so. Angie was far from beautiful. Very far. It was a long distance call from Angie to pretty. And long distance calls cost a fortune back then. Of course, this was all besides the point. This was about intimidation. For some reason I can't quite explain, perhaps sheer stubbornness, I made up my mind right then and there that I wasn't going to be Anthony's puppet, no matter what the consequences. That's just how we rolled in the 11415. It was a way of life in "the Q."

Anthony then picked up a stickball bat, and waved it in my face. The veins in his neck started to bulge, and he was turning red. "If you don't tell Angie she's beautiful right now, I'm gonna hit you with this bat."

Angie: "Cut it out Anthony, what's wrong with you?"
Anthony: "Stay out of it, Angie, this ain't about you."
Angie: "You're a jerk, Anthony."
Anthony: "Oh yeah? Well you're a pig."

After that romantic exchange, Angie stormed off, leaving me alone with Anthony. Unfortunately, he wasn't done. "I'm tellin' you, kid, you say that Angie's beautiful, or I'll hit you with this thing."

I said nothing.

Anthony tensed, then swung the stick at me...and stopped short. He dropped the stick, and broke out in a wide grin. "Aww, I was just messing with you. It's alright."

He then put his arm around my shoulder, and said, "I like you. You're tough." Of course, he then felt compelled to boadcast his opinion to everyone. "See this kid here," he said, pointing to me. "He's tough. He's all right."

About a minute later, it was my turn at bat. I strode to the plate, and either because of the fear-induced adrenaline rush I had just experienced, or emboldened by Anthony's endorsement (or simply because I was lucky enough to get a pitch right where I wanted it), I crushed the first pitch I saw, sending the ball across the street. And over the sidewalk. And over a house. Off the roof of the second house.

For the second time in about two minutes, I earned some respect.

The interesting thing is, Anthony still wasn't happy. "Hey, that was my ball you just lost. You owe me a quarter."

The rest of the game, and my childhood, for that matter, passed by without a similar incident.

Looking back, I'm not sure if I really was tough, or just really, really stupid. Well, at least Anthony thought I was tough.

You know, the funny thing is, I don't remember ever paying Anthony for that ball. If I ever did run into him again, perhaps I'd just hand him a dollar bill, for the ball.

I'd tell him to keep the change.

...to buy something nice, for Angie.