Friday, September 16, 2011

He Was Only Quoting A Nobel Prize Economist

Social Security is structured from the point of view of the recipients as if it were an ordinary retirement plan: what you get out depends on what you put in. So it does not look like a redistributionist scheme. In practice it has turned out to be strongly redistributionist, but only because of its Ponzi game aspect, in which each generation takes more out than it put in. Well, the Ponzi game will soon be over, thanks to changing demographics, so that the typical recipient henceforth will get only about as much as he or she put in (and today's young may well get less than they put in).

Rick Perry
Some Evil Republican
Paul Krugman

Friday, August 05, 2011

Philip Rivers vs. Dan Fouts

Here’s one for the casual or not-so-casual Chargers homer.

Nick Canepa of the San Diego Union Tribune offers up the opinion that Philip Rivers has already taken the mantle of greatest Chargers quarterback ever… over Dan Fouts. Although I’m not a Canepa fan this is an opinion I started to hold back in 2006. Not necessarily that Rivers was already the best Chargers QB ever but, when the dust had settled, we (that is, you the Chargers homer and myself) would look back on the respective careers of these two fine gentlemen and conclude the Rivers was the better QB, overall.

This doesn’t settle so well for those who look back misty-eyed at the Air Coryell era. When asking for commentary on the article from a fellow friend and Chargers homer I’d have to classify his reaction as a tiger who just had a stick poked in his cage. Now comparing two athletes playing in the same position in two different eras is always a challenge, but my friend said that I could compare Fouts’ golden years (1979 – 1981) with any three years from Philip Rivers and it wouldn’t be close.

Well, I somewhat agree with my friend except I think the scales are tilted solidly in Rivers’ favor.


(From Click for full size.)