A good read from Christopher Mayer (2012), writer of the Capital & Crisis newsletter. It’s basically an investment travelogue, covering some 20-odd countries that Mayer visited – in many ways, an updated version of Adventure Capitalist, just with greater emphasis on identifying the investable ideas. The title itself is a reference to the fact that emerging and frontier markets are catching up with the West, which is a return to equilibrium if one looks historically. Anyway, a treasure trove of memorable lines about investing:
-“A good investor is a worldly investor who has an understanding and appreciation of how the world works and how it came to be.”
-“Capital flees from abusive relationships and seeks out environments where it can be fruitful and multiply.”
-“Whatever starts out as a good idea is almost a sure thing to be overdone eventually.”
-“…you will do well to invest in the commodities that the big emerging markets are short of.”
-“There are not problems, there are only opportunities.”
-“Look for the gaps in these emerging markets. Find what they don’t have but want or need. Invest in the companies that fill those gaps.”
-“That’s one of the benefits of doing trips like this. When people begin to repeat ideas, themes emerge.”
-“…what sounds great from a macro perspective can be tough to implement in a micro way.”
-“Young people are economic catalysts.”
-“The returns are highest where capital is scarce.”
-“He’ll manage the business as an owner because he is an owner himself. I can’t stress the importance of this kind of orientation enough.”
-“It has loads of coveted natural resources, and the trend is toward unlocking that wealth.” (He is talking about Canada, but clearly the idea is broader than one country.)
-“Maybe the only gift is a chance to inquire, to know nothing for certain.”
-“I’ll keep writing, thinking, traveling and asking questions.”
Friday, October 26, 2012
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
Hill Runner
I have happily returned to my running ways, spending a lot of time lately in the Central Park loop. Incorporating the forefoot/mid-foot strike into my stride, I am causing myself much less lower limb discomfort.
Anyway, I came across a pretty nifty conversion formula for figuring out how to simulate certain hills in the park onto a treadmill. To use it, you need to know the change in elevation that you’re experiencing and over what distance – a GPS watch allows me to keep track of both. As for the formula:
-In Central Park, what is known as “Heart Attack Hill” near 110th street and CPW is about .4 miles long. The first step is to convert that distance into feet, so multiply it by 5,280 (2,112 feet).
-Next, divide the change in elevation from bottom of the hill to the top (96 feet) by its length (2,112) and multiply that answer by 100. The result (4.55) offers a smoothed out approximation for the percentage incline of the hill.
-In order to capture the wind resistance that comes with running in the elements while on a treadmill, add 1 to your guesstimate above.
So, if I want to run “Heart Attack Hill” at the gym, set the treadmill to 5.5%, pick the appropriate pace, and get going.
Anyway, I came across a pretty nifty conversion formula for figuring out how to simulate certain hills in the park onto a treadmill. To use it, you need to know the change in elevation that you’re experiencing and over what distance – a GPS watch allows me to keep track of both. As for the formula:
-In Central Park, what is known as “Heart Attack Hill” near 110th street and CPW is about .4 miles long. The first step is to convert that distance into feet, so multiply it by 5,280 (2,112 feet).
-Next, divide the change in elevation from bottom of the hill to the top (96 feet) by its length (2,112) and multiply that answer by 100. The result (4.55) offers a smoothed out approximation for the percentage incline of the hill.
-In order to capture the wind resistance that comes with running in the elements while on a treadmill, add 1 to your guesstimate above.
So, if I want to run “Heart Attack Hill” at the gym, set the treadmill to 5.5%, pick the appropriate pace, and get going.
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
Yen Update - Part 101
A week ago I said that the Yen had broken above the 78 level and out of the descending triangle formation. That continues to be the case, as shown in the chart below. The next key hurdle is the 80 level.
Monday, October 22, 2012
Quote of the Day
"You can look at things and say this is the way they've always been done. I like to look at it and say, well, if everybody's been doing it this way, that's not where the future is. You have to look somewhere else. And, you know, if that pisses people off, that's their problem."
-Mark Cuban (2011)
-Mark Cuban (2011)
Thursday, October 18, 2012
Read the Subtitle of this Blog
-First up is some analysis from Mark Hanson on the housing data out of Sacramento. Not good. Of course, it stands in stark contrast to all the hyperventilating that goes on whenever people see new housing start numbers. Hanson writes it, but it bears repeating, creating new supply does not mean that there is actual demand for it. Moreover, he notes that stimulus around mortgage rates has simply pulled demand forward, which means you end up in a tricky spot where you always need to do more in order to sustain it. My guess: developers and homebuilders bought the land at a very low basis at the depths of the recession. Now, with interest rates at ultra-low levels, they feel compelled to act before they move up. So, in a sense, they have gone from warehousing land to warehousing supply.
In the past few months, Hanson has also written more specifically about how the shadow inventory is often understated and misunderstood. Demand for distressed properties has been shown to be about 1.5 million units per year (or about 25% of total demand). But, the supply is not just the 300k to 400k foreclosures per year that we see – you also need to factor in the 5 or 6 million units that are 60-days late or in foreclosure, the 600k short sales per year, and the 6 million modified loans which should still be viewed as high-risk. Then on top of all that, you have somewhere in the neighborhood of 25 million homeowners who are stuck in homes bought during the bubble years because of negative equity. Hanson notes that this last group is (historically) the key driver of demand, but they are a non-starter right now. And until they are back above water, don’t expect any true recovery.
-I have said before that I don’t think a return to the gold standard is baked into the cake. In fact, I would argue that even if the chance of a return is some non-zero percent, it’s probably not much higher than that. Nevertheless, it feels like I still read a lot of skepticism about gold as investment, separate and apart from whether it will ever return to a formalized currency role. And I am stuck wondering why. Perhaps because it represents a disavowment of the mainstream. Regardless, even if jokers like Krugman, Sumner, DeLong and Glasner are right about whether the Ponzi charade can go on endlessly, all that means to me is that the climb in gold will carry on as well. In other words, I am willing to concede many of the points that Keynesians make about how the economy works and why their particular version of economic theory is the right one, but will still feel it is vitally important to own the yellow dog. Of course, if a funding crisis does come, and it turns out that you can’t print your way to prosperity…well, they’ll be wrong and I’ll still be happy to own my gold.
-Speaking of gold, I enjoyed this piece over at Zero Hedge (confirmation bias?) which looks at the gold coverage ratio. The historical average is 40%, we are currently at 17%, and when you have periodic bursts of no-confidence in fiat currencies, it can go to 100% and beyond. All this as the monetary base continues to grow…
-After mentioning it the other day, I bought a small position in the water desalination company that trades in Singapore. I also dumped the GG October $45 calls on Monday. As it stands, they are even lower today. But, lesson learned.
In the past few months, Hanson has also written more specifically about how the shadow inventory is often understated and misunderstood. Demand for distressed properties has been shown to be about 1.5 million units per year (or about 25% of total demand). But, the supply is not just the 300k to 400k foreclosures per year that we see – you also need to factor in the 5 or 6 million units that are 60-days late or in foreclosure, the 600k short sales per year, and the 6 million modified loans which should still be viewed as high-risk. Then on top of all that, you have somewhere in the neighborhood of 25 million homeowners who are stuck in homes bought during the bubble years because of negative equity. Hanson notes that this last group is (historically) the key driver of demand, but they are a non-starter right now. And until they are back above water, don’t expect any true recovery.
-I have said before that I don’t think a return to the gold standard is baked into the cake. In fact, I would argue that even if the chance of a return is some non-zero percent, it’s probably not much higher than that. Nevertheless, it feels like I still read a lot of skepticism about gold as investment, separate and apart from whether it will ever return to a formalized currency role. And I am stuck wondering why. Perhaps because it represents a disavowment of the mainstream. Regardless, even if jokers like Krugman, Sumner, DeLong and Glasner are right about whether the Ponzi charade can go on endlessly, all that means to me is that the climb in gold will carry on as well. In other words, I am willing to concede many of the points that Keynesians make about how the economy works and why their particular version of economic theory is the right one, but will still feel it is vitally important to own the yellow dog. Of course, if a funding crisis does come, and it turns out that you can’t print your way to prosperity…well, they’ll be wrong and I’ll still be happy to own my gold.
-Speaking of gold, I enjoyed this piece over at Zero Hedge (confirmation bias?) which looks at the gold coverage ratio. The historical average is 40%, we are currently at 17%, and when you have periodic bursts of no-confidence in fiat currencies, it can go to 100% and beyond. All this as the monetary base continues to grow…
-After mentioning it the other day, I bought a small position in the water desalination company that trades in Singapore. I also dumped the GG October $45 calls on Monday. As it stands, they are even lower today. But, lesson learned.
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Turning Tides
Bill Fleckenstein mentioned that there is growing evidence of a move away from the deflation trade. Specifically, he focused on the 10-year treasury, where we are seeing higher highs and higher lows on the yield (if he is right in his intuition -- and I think he is -- then I should credit myself for pointing out recently that it might be time to start a small short position).
In any event, as further evidence that inflation will become the dominant force that drives markets, the Japanese Yen appears to have broken out of its range, moving above the 78 level (oft-discussed on this site). The daily chart below tells the story.
In any event, as further evidence that inflation will become the dominant force that drives markets, the Japanese Yen appears to have broken out of its range, moving above the 78 level (oft-discussed on this site). The daily chart below tells the story.
On Voting
Doug Casey responds to the idea that people who do not vote do not have a right to complain about the results of the political process, since they have chosen not to raise their hands…
“But I do raise a hand, constantly. I try to change things by influencing the way people think. I'd just rather not waste my time or degrade myself on unethical and futile efforts like voting. Anyway, that argument is more than fallacious, it's ridiculous and spurious. Actually, only the non-voter does have a right to complain – it's the opposite of what they say. Voters are assenting to whatever the government does; a non-voter can best be compared to someone who refuses to join a mob. Only he really has the right to complain about what they do.”
“But I do raise a hand, constantly. I try to change things by influencing the way people think. I'd just rather not waste my time or degrade myself on unethical and futile efforts like voting. Anyway, that argument is more than fallacious, it's ridiculous and spurious. Actually, only the non-voter does have a right to complain – it's the opposite of what they say. Voters are assenting to whatever the government does; a non-voter can best be compared to someone who refuses to join a mob. Only he really has the right to complain about what they do.”
Monday, October 15, 2012
What I'm Looking For
One of the guys who I read and respect a great deal is Marin Katusa over at Casey Research. He is their energy specialist and has spent much time in the past year making the case that the next decade for oil could closely resemble the past decade for gold. I tend to agree. It is the lifeblood of economies and the reason that war is waged (at least, pretty often). So, I am on the lookout for vehicles that capture the trend. One example that I currently own (in moderation) is an Australian-listed company that has large stakes in oil projects across the Middle East and Africa. They play where others are probably scared to go, and that’s kind of how I like it.
Anyway, I bring it up because, in parsing through the logic of why I’m doing the above, it got me thinking about general investing themes. And one area that gets a lot of attention every time a new round of QE is announced is commodities. While I think they are likely to do well as a group, I do not plan to get exposure to every single one. Nor is it necessarily easy to do so. I like gold (as stated many times) and so own a nice amount of physical and some miners. I like oil (“black gold”) and am seeking out ways to buy in. But, after that, it is less straightforward.
Take water. Everyone needs it, but not everybody has access to it – and I’m not trying to corner the market on Poland Spring. So, instead, I own a Canadian listed mining services company that hits on all three of my favorite food groups (gold, oil, water). I have also been looking at a Singapore-listed company that focuses on water desalination, with a heavy helping of exposure to China and its billion-plus population. The point being, for investable themes that should work, creativity is sometimes the name of the game in order to get into the game.
Agriculture is also an interesting idea, but I don’t want to buy a farm. Still, you can’t argue, food is kind of important. If you ask Kuppy, it’s about the manufacturing of machinery. Marc Faber has mentioned a fund that buys land in Brazil. Me? Well, I’m still looking at the options.
In any event, those are some of the things on my radar.
Anyway, I bring it up because, in parsing through the logic of why I’m doing the above, it got me thinking about general investing themes. And one area that gets a lot of attention every time a new round of QE is announced is commodities. While I think they are likely to do well as a group, I do not plan to get exposure to every single one. Nor is it necessarily easy to do so. I like gold (as stated many times) and so own a nice amount of physical and some miners. I like oil (“black gold”) and am seeking out ways to buy in. But, after that, it is less straightforward.
Take water. Everyone needs it, but not everybody has access to it – and I’m not trying to corner the market on Poland Spring. So, instead, I own a Canadian listed mining services company that hits on all three of my favorite food groups (gold, oil, water). I have also been looking at a Singapore-listed company that focuses on water desalination, with a heavy helping of exposure to China and its billion-plus population. The point being, for investable themes that should work, creativity is sometimes the name of the game in order to get into the game.
Agriculture is also an interesting idea, but I don’t want to buy a farm. Still, you can’t argue, food is kind of important. If you ask Kuppy, it’s about the manufacturing of machinery. Marc Faber has mentioned a fund that buys land in Brazil. Me? Well, I’m still looking at the options.
In any event, those are some of the things on my radar.
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
When a Good Trade Goes Bad
Back during the summer doldrums, when the mining stocks were getting taken out to the woodshed, I bought some long-dated call options on GG, AUY and EGO. I also put on a smaller trade with $45 GG call options set to expire on October 20. My entry price was somewhere around $0.97.
Needless to say, when QE to infinity was announced and the whole gold sector took off, all my options positions shot up too. My October calls basically tripled. But, I didn't sell. Fueled by a bit of greed, I was in the process of moving accounts to a different broker, and so decided that I had the time to wait until everything was done to close out the position.
Fast forward to this week. The transfers are finally done (after a few hiccups which were unfortunate) and now I am underwater after the recent correction. With only 7 more trading days until expiration, I'm not going to cut my losses yet (the chart actually suggests that GG might be at a bottom), but, trust me, a lesson was learned. Namely, that when you are putting on a trade, and not an investment, you need to be satisfied with the quick hits. I think there's an expression about pigs getting slaughtered that would be entirely appropriate here.
Needless to say, when QE to infinity was announced and the whole gold sector took off, all my options positions shot up too. My October calls basically tripled. But, I didn't sell. Fueled by a bit of greed, I was in the process of moving accounts to a different broker, and so decided that I had the time to wait until everything was done to close out the position.
Fast forward to this week. The transfers are finally done (after a few hiccups which were unfortunate) and now I am underwater after the recent correction. With only 7 more trading days until expiration, I'm not going to cut my losses yet (the chart actually suggests that GG might be at a bottom), but, trust me, a lesson was learned. Namely, that when you are putting on a trade, and not an investment, you need to be satisfied with the quick hits. I think there's an expression about pigs getting slaughtered that would be entirely appropriate here.
Saturday, October 6, 2012
Priceless
With many subjects under the sun that might be deemed topical, my familiarity with the important minutiae is often minimal. Such is the case with health care policy and the plumbing that makes it such a complicated issue. Seeking to deal with that knowledge shortfall, I picked up Priceless by John Goodman (2012). Goodman is a health economist who espouses a libertarian / free market world view. And while I cannot tell you that his perspective on everything is necessarily accurate, here are some of the details and ideas that I think matter upon reading his book:
-In seeking to create a system with no out-of-pocket expenses for patients, incentives are skewed to overuse the system without much concern for shopping around to find the best service at the lowest cost.
-Having everyone pay the same premium incentivizes the healthy to go without insurance until they are actually in need (as flat premiums create a redistributive effect, where the sick are paying premiums lower than the expected cost of their health care needs, and vice versa for the healthy). And those that are uninsured, generally, are more likely to use emergency rooms, which increases overall costs.
-The world of medical care is largely a system of unpriced services. It is not a market process.
-To quote: “the field has been completely corrupted by the idea that (a) patients should never be in a position to choose between health benefits and monetary cost, (b) doctors shouldn’t have to think about such tradeoffs either, (c) to insulate the patient from having to choose between healthcare and other uses of money, third party payers should pay all the medical bills, and (d) since no one else is going to think about what anything costs, the third-party payer is the only entity left to decide which services are worthwhile and which ones aren’t.”
-There is a supply problem when it comes to care. Grand policy ideas may lead to more people with coverage, but it is not suddenly going to create more doctors to treat them.
-Higher fees often lead to greater access to care. Thus, public programs that don’t allow patients to supplement coverage with out-of-pocket payments (like Medicaid and CHIP) end up decreasing a patient’s ability to see the doctor that he or she needs.
-Where public programs have very specific protocols and guidelines for treatments, there is no incentive / financial benefit to doctors for going outside those boundaries and providing care which is more cost-effective.
-With community rating (same premium for all), insurance is geared to structure its products to encourage only the healthy (by not including certain doctors and specialists).
-Congress favors employer insurance (tax deductible) over individual insurance (deduction only on amount in excess of 7.5% of AGI), meaning it is less portable when people have to move and change jobs. This is where the problem of preexisting conditions often becomes very obvious.
-Data does seem to suggest that every additional dollar put towards public insurance crowds out the private variety.
Goodman spends a bit of time analyzing the provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”) as well:
-The main way that the ACA plans to lower costs (specifically with respect to Medicare) is by implementing price controls on providers. But, as Goodman notes, the shifting of costs back to doctors is not the same as actually controlling them. If anything, it probably leads to fewer doctors accepting Medicare as a form of payment and making accessibility more difficult. This reality is also why the pro-ACA faction says costs will go down, but perhaps chooses not to recognize that it will take quality and access with it. So, public insurance will provide less, while private insurance will become more expensive.
-Theoretically, everyone will be required to have insurance. But fines associated with going without will be small enough to make it worthwhile to hold off until there is an actual need. Employers will also have to provide plans that meet certain minimum thresholds. But, again, the fines will likely be smaller than the cost of meeting the requirements. So, it seems plausible than many folks will lose their coverage through work.
-There will be a whole host of new taxes to pay for the program (on medical devices, drugs, Cadillac plans, investment income, and raising the AGI threshold for individual insurance), which will add to the costs for individuals.
After reading the book, I don’t have any grand conclusions, except to say that implementation of the best of intentions does not always translate to ideal outcomes. And I suspect that that might be the case with the new law. By coincidence, a blog written by health economists with some left-leaning tendencies also recently reviewed the book chapter-by-chapter, finding much to take issue with. If you’re interested, follow the link.
-In seeking to create a system with no out-of-pocket expenses for patients, incentives are skewed to overuse the system without much concern for shopping around to find the best service at the lowest cost.
-Having everyone pay the same premium incentivizes the healthy to go without insurance until they are actually in need (as flat premiums create a redistributive effect, where the sick are paying premiums lower than the expected cost of their health care needs, and vice versa for the healthy). And those that are uninsured, generally, are more likely to use emergency rooms, which increases overall costs.
-The world of medical care is largely a system of unpriced services. It is not a market process.
-To quote: “the field has been completely corrupted by the idea that (a) patients should never be in a position to choose between health benefits and monetary cost, (b) doctors shouldn’t have to think about such tradeoffs either, (c) to insulate the patient from having to choose between healthcare and other uses of money, third party payers should pay all the medical bills, and (d) since no one else is going to think about what anything costs, the third-party payer is the only entity left to decide which services are worthwhile and which ones aren’t.”
-There is a supply problem when it comes to care. Grand policy ideas may lead to more people with coverage, but it is not suddenly going to create more doctors to treat them.
-Higher fees often lead to greater access to care. Thus, public programs that don’t allow patients to supplement coverage with out-of-pocket payments (like Medicaid and CHIP) end up decreasing a patient’s ability to see the doctor that he or she needs.
-Where public programs have very specific protocols and guidelines for treatments, there is no incentive / financial benefit to doctors for going outside those boundaries and providing care which is more cost-effective.
-With community rating (same premium for all), insurance is geared to structure its products to encourage only the healthy (by not including certain doctors and specialists).
-Congress favors employer insurance (tax deductible) over individual insurance (deduction only on amount in excess of 7.5% of AGI), meaning it is less portable when people have to move and change jobs. This is where the problem of preexisting conditions often becomes very obvious.
-Data does seem to suggest that every additional dollar put towards public insurance crowds out the private variety.
Goodman spends a bit of time analyzing the provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”) as well:
-The main way that the ACA plans to lower costs (specifically with respect to Medicare) is by implementing price controls on providers. But, as Goodman notes, the shifting of costs back to doctors is not the same as actually controlling them. If anything, it probably leads to fewer doctors accepting Medicare as a form of payment and making accessibility more difficult. This reality is also why the pro-ACA faction says costs will go down, but perhaps chooses not to recognize that it will take quality and access with it. So, public insurance will provide less, while private insurance will become more expensive.
-Theoretically, everyone will be required to have insurance. But fines associated with going without will be small enough to make it worthwhile to hold off until there is an actual need. Employers will also have to provide plans that meet certain minimum thresholds. But, again, the fines will likely be smaller than the cost of meeting the requirements. So, it seems plausible than many folks will lose their coverage through work.
-There will be a whole host of new taxes to pay for the program (on medical devices, drugs, Cadillac plans, investment income, and raising the AGI threshold for individual insurance), which will add to the costs for individuals.
After reading the book, I don’t have any grand conclusions, except to say that implementation of the best of intentions does not always translate to ideal outcomes. And I suspect that that might be the case with the new law. By coincidence, a blog written by health economists with some left-leaning tendencies also recently reviewed the book chapter-by-chapter, finding much to take issue with. If you’re interested, follow the link.
Friday, October 5, 2012
Interesting Theory
Over at Casey:
"Have you ever noticed how practically all food in the US is pretty mediocre compared to its origins? Whether it's Italian dried meats, European bakeries, or German sausages, we just never seem to get it quite right in the States. Doesn't that seem a bit strange? After all, we've received so many immigrants over the years, yet the flavors from the home countries have never transferred completely. Here's my theory. The problem is that most people who came over to the States back in the day were like my friend. They had a good idea to start a restaurant and were hard-working, but knew how to pull off the recipes only halfway. We never got the most skilled from other countries. Why is that? Well, think about it. Why would the best ćevapi maker in Sarajevo move to the US? He's probably doing just fine for himself over there. In fact, his opportunities in Bosnia are actually a lot better than in the US – same with any other place. I'm sure that the best sushi chef in the world is still in Japan making a fortune. When tough economic times arrive, it's never the best who must turn their lives upside down by relocating to other continents. It's the rest of us."
"Have you ever noticed how practically all food in the US is pretty mediocre compared to its origins? Whether it's Italian dried meats, European bakeries, or German sausages, we just never seem to get it quite right in the States. Doesn't that seem a bit strange? After all, we've received so many immigrants over the years, yet the flavors from the home countries have never transferred completely. Here's my theory. The problem is that most people who came over to the States back in the day were like my friend. They had a good idea to start a restaurant and were hard-working, but knew how to pull off the recipes only halfway. We never got the most skilled from other countries. Why is that? Well, think about it. Why would the best ćevapi maker in Sarajevo move to the US? He's probably doing just fine for himself over there. In fact, his opportunities in Bosnia are actually a lot better than in the US – same with any other place. I'm sure that the best sushi chef in the world is still in Japan making a fortune. When tough economic times arrive, it's never the best who must turn their lives upside down by relocating to other continents. It's the rest of us."
Mish Mosh
A few things to cover:
-Today's jobs report was probably a big boost to the Obama campaign, as the unemployment rate dropped to 7.8% -- the lowest it's been during his presidency. The meaningful decline from 8.1% was triggered by a household survey that suggested 873,000 jobs were added in September. Sounds great, right? Well, a full two-thirds of that number (582,000) were part-time. So, that's the society we're becoming. We create jobs, they just aren't terribly good.
-This guy doesn't typically view the world as I do, but he captures well my complaint about the "great" thinkers of the dismal science: "Economists generally focus purely on the efficiency/growth effects of inflation..."
-I have been running again with some regularity (after suffering through foot tendinitis in my initial foray two months ago). My shins are barking a little bit, so I have started doing an interesting exercise designed to counter shin splints. You stand on a step, heels in, with most of your foot hanging off. Do 60 seconds non-stop of flexing your feet all the way up and all the way down (30 seconds with legs straight and 30 seconds with knees bent at a 45 degree angle). 3 sets, one-minute rest in between each. By the end of the five minutes, it feels like your legs are going to fall off.
-And, finally, it gave me a good laugh...
-Today's jobs report was probably a big boost to the Obama campaign, as the unemployment rate dropped to 7.8% -- the lowest it's been during his presidency. The meaningful decline from 8.1% was triggered by a household survey that suggested 873,000 jobs were added in September. Sounds great, right? Well, a full two-thirds of that number (582,000) were part-time. So, that's the society we're becoming. We create jobs, they just aren't terribly good.
-This guy doesn't typically view the world as I do, but he captures well my complaint about the "great" thinkers of the dismal science: "Economists generally focus purely on the efficiency/growth effects of inflation..."
-I have been running again with some regularity (after suffering through foot tendinitis in my initial foray two months ago). My shins are barking a little bit, so I have started doing an interesting exercise designed to counter shin splints. You stand on a step, heels in, with most of your foot hanging off. Do 60 seconds non-stop of flexing your feet all the way up and all the way down (30 seconds with legs straight and 30 seconds with knees bent at a 45 degree angle). 3 sets, one-minute rest in between each. By the end of the five minutes, it feels like your legs are going to fall off.
-And, finally, it gave me a good laugh...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)