The next two weeks or so we will not be posting much because we're leaving tomorrow to go home for Christmas. And we will actually be seeing most of the people who read this blog, so if you are one of the lucky ones, you will get the real deal, instead of mere words on a screen--enjoy!!!
We forgot to mention that my sister came through London again on her way back from Greece. She was only here one full day, as a long layover, but we managed to see a museum (Wallace Collection), eat some Asian fusion (Wagamama--no Adrian Lukis aka Mr. Wickham this time), and my sister got to see a show by herself, while Matt and I were both at our respective office parties. She saw Avenue Q which Matt and I saw a long while back when we were living in Cambridge, and we liked it.
When Matt and I get home we have a long list of movies we want to see in the theatre, that we couldn't afford to see when they came through London. Hope they're still on in one of the multi-plex theatres in Iowa!
Hopefully we'll be seeing you soon!
We set this up to keep in touch with people we may not see for awhile. So keep in touch. We'll try to keep this thing interesting and updated frequently.
Friday, December 19, 2008
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Photo of the Week, plus Christmas Work Parties
| From Photo of the Week |
A Christmas tree in Trafalgar square. The tree is donated from Norway every year, in recognition of the assistance Britain gave the country during World War II.
Office Christmas Parties: Grace and I both had our office Christmas parties on Tuesday night, which is why our photo of the week - which has evolved into a Tuesday affair - is going up today, instead of last night. Office Christmas parties in the UK are not exactly like the ones you might have in the states, though it probably depends on the organization.
First off, our party was held off-site, at a lobby in the Science museum and no partners are permitted. I think the idea is to keep it limited to familiar faces, so everyone is in on the same work jokes and thinking more about having a good time than meeting new people. The theme was Spirit of Havana, so the place was decorated with palm tree type plants and some women dressed as Marilyn Monroe (?). We were to show up at 7:00 for drinks, with dinner starting at 8:00. We were to be kicked out at 12:30 (we were allowed to come into work an hour late the next day!).
We weren't the only company at this event though. I think lots of places around London host Christmas parties in December, taking care of all the planning so companies just have to choose a package and say how many people are coming. It must be a good way to raise money, if you're a museum or concert hall or church. Anyway, there were maybe five companies at this thing.
Also, there's a dress code, which is not that surprising (I mean, you have a dress code at work too). Jeans and sneakers were barred (you will be turned away at the door, we were warned). Most of us men wore suits, but some people in my office wore tuxedos, and not just as a joke. And all the women wore ball gowns!
In some ways, this all reminded me of Cambridge, where they had formal dinners in the cafeteria (buttery) that required you to wear a tie to get in. At Cambridge and Oxford too, they have enormous lavish balls after finals that you must wear a tuxedo to get into. And so, most kids who go to University in the UK own tuxedos. And so, they use them whenever they get the opportunity. (I missed the end of year ball at Cambridge, as Grace and I were in India. Plus, I don't own a tux!). One of my co-workers did his master's degree in the states, and he complained that (jokingly) 'the worst part about school in America was that people had no taste. You would go to an end-of-year dinner, expecting everyone to dress up nice, but it would just be delivered pizza in an empty classroom.'
At the actual event, we had an open bar and seated dinner with assigned places. The company mixed everyone up, so that you were forced to interact with people from different departments. And there was a live band, and after dinner everyone went dancing. And that's how they do it!
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Hamlet II
It turns out that we got incredibly lucky with seeing Hamlet! The lead actor is called David Tennant and he's hugely popular here, much MUCH more popular than even Patrick Stewart, though Americans won't know him for the most part. He played Barty Crouch Jr in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. We went and saw Hamlet on the second night, less than a week ago, and it's only here for a six week run. Yesterday, it was splashed all over the papers that David Tennant has hurt his back and won't be back in the roll until after Christmas! The tickets for the full run of this show sold out in under three hours here. People who want to see Tennant now have to settle for the UNDERSTUDY!
Luckily, as the director said in a statement, this is the Royal Shakespeare Company and the understudy is apparently doing very well, getting standing ovations. You've got to be pretty gutsy to step into that roll on short notice.
As for Patrick Stewart, he may be less popular here, but he is definitely known as one of the best Shakespearean actors. Matt and I agreed that his Ghost (he played the Ghost and Claudius, for those that remember, how cool is that? they put a wig on him for the Ghost) was the best part of the whole production, notwithstanding Tennant.
By the way, this is was the photo on the programme cover. It's a pretty awesome picture, even if Tennant isn't actually playing the roll.

P.S. This is a new layout for a new, more austere time.
Luckily, as the director said in a statement, this is the Royal Shakespeare Company and the understudy is apparently doing very well, getting standing ovations. You've got to be pretty gutsy to step into that roll on short notice.
As for Patrick Stewart, he may be less popular here, but he is definitely known as one of the best Shakespearean actors. Matt and I agreed that his Ghost (he played the Ghost and Claudius, for those that remember, how cool is that? they put a wig on him for the Ghost) was the best part of the whole production, notwithstanding Tennant.
By the way, this is was the photo on the programme cover. It's a pretty awesome picture, even if Tennant isn't actually playing the roll.
P.S. This is a new layout for a new, more austere time.
Tuesday, December 09, 2008
Picture of the Week, Plus Hamlet
| From Photo of the Week |
A slightly blurry vision of Regent Street, decked out for Christmas and closed to cars for shopping. They do it once a year.
Hamlet: On Thursday night, Grace and I went to see the Royal Shakespeare Company production of Hamlet. We were very excited, primarily because the show featured these two:
David Tennant, a.k.a the Doctor in Doctor Who (a famous sci-fi show in Britain that Grace briefly watched) and...
Patrick Stewart, a.k.a Captain Jean Luc Picard from Star Trek: The Next Generation (a famous sci-fi show everywhere).
Apparently they had to ban all sci-fi memorabilia from the show, because people brought so much stuff for these two to sign.
Anyway, Tennant was Hamlet and Stewart was his evil step-father Claudius. Everybody was great, and it was a very good show. David Tennant played Hamlet as kind of manic, not depressed and gloomy. We were really lucky to get tickets, because it's been sold out for months. But they have a deal for under-25s to get in on the night of the show for cheap. Excellent.
Also, I have previously read Hamlet, which meant I enjoyed the show more than King Lear, where I had no idea what was going on for the majority of the show. Alas, it wasn't perfect for me. I decided to skip dinner and eat after the show, but it didn't finish till 11, by which time I was in a rough state. Also the seats were built for people with thighs six inches shorter than mine, so I was contorted into a ball the whole night to watch the show. This seems to be happening more often to me.
But, Grace was in no physical discomfort and she assures me the show was really good.
Tuesday, December 02, 2008
Photo of the Week
| From Photo of the Week |
Matt and Gareth hanging out at the new shopping centre in Cambridge.
Sorry this is another photo from our trip to Cambridge, but we haven't been up to a lot of exciting things. We went shopping last weekend, and the weather was cold (for Britain) and rainy. Not photogenic anyway. But, we found some amazing deals at a shop called Woolworth's, which has declared bankruptcy. I guess I have the Great Recession to thank.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Photo of the Week, plus a Thanksgiving post
| From Photo of the Week |
Photo Caption: This is a new clock in Cambridge. The grasshopper on top pulls the outer wheel around with his legs, blinking and pausing from time to time. You read the time by looking at the blue lights, which sit where the numbers would normally be on a clock. In the glass you can see the reflections of buildings on King's College.
The Thanksgiving Post: Grace and I went up to Cambridge this weekend to have Thanksgiving dinner (a bit early, but the only time our friends could make it), with some of our old friends from Cambridge. The last two years Grace and I have hosted a Thanksgiving dinner, but this year our friend, Gareth, who is British, wanted to have a crack at it. We weren't sure what to expect, but he and his girlfriend really got it right. They must have done research ahead of time, because all the American staples were there - turkey, stuffing, cornbread, cranberry sauce, mashed sweet potatoes, roasted potatoes, pumpkin pie (made from Butternut squash, as no pumpkins were to be found), apple pie and more. Grace and I took the train up around noon, and we started eating around 2 for a few hours. We didn't leave the house all day, and we just kept going back for more leftovers. Excellent thanksgiving.
The next day we headed into town for a walk. The weather was cold (there had been freezing rain overnight), so it wasn't particularly cold. Grace and I were reminded how pleasant it is to go Christmas shopping in Cambridge, with all the nice shops down in the old town centre.
It was a really relaxing weekend, bookended by some idyllic train rides. I had been looking forward to getting on the train, as we were travelling midday, when it's not very crowded and drunk people are nowhere to be seen. I bought a paper, and felt like a real European, reading on the train, with a four seater all to Grace and me.
Other than that, I've been very busy with work. But, I'm on my last freelance assignment for 2008, so soon, hopefully, I'll be able to relax in the evenings. We're thinking of taking a weekend trip up to Leeds in December, where some of our other Cambridge friends live...
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Photo of the Week
| From Photo of the Week |
Here we are visiting a new art installation at the Tate Modern Museum.
Update: I should add though, that Grace is not pictured. That's me and our friend Nicole.
Saturday, November 15, 2008
To what we have been up.
Busy few weeks past. Here's the blow-by-blow:
Wed 29th--the day I went to the House of Lords hearing.
Thurs 30th--tried for the third time to open a joint checking account, banks in Britain being notoriously finicky. Apparently they don't want our money. Failed for the third time, prompting me to desire to make a blog post entitled 'Things I HATE', but decided this would be too pessimistic.
Fri 31st--massive disgusting eczema explosion on my right hand ring finger, went to the doctor, got a cream and antibiotics. All is now well.
Sat 1st--old, old friend from Cambridge, we'll call him 'Philosopher Gareth' (as opposed to 'Geologist Gareth') came to visit London with his girlfriend Deb. Haven't seen him in literally a year and a half since he left Cambridge. Met for lunch and drinks, had a great time.
Sun 2nd--Natural History museum with Gaz and Deb. Good times.
Mon 3rd--my uncle who lives in Bournemouth (south coast of England) was in London for a conference, met him for dinner. Haven't seen him since India.
Tues 4th--jittery and nervous all day.
Wed 5th, around 5AM--can't sleep, check the news, crawl back into bed and tell Matt the news.
Wed 5th, evening--celebratory Thai curry and Wednesday free movie night--Ghost Town with Ricky Gervais. If you've ever seen him in anything else, it's hard to see him as the 'nice guy'.
Thur 6th--interview with Amnesty International International Secretariat for volunteer position--it didn't go that well. They have a backlog of email enquiries in their inbox. Turns out the job is to clear the backlog. No thanks.
Fri 7th--another doctor's appointment, stupid finger.
Sat 8th--Nicole Novak, friend from Iowa City, is in town. She and two of her friends stayed with us, in our new improved apartment that permits overnight guests! She is a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford for the next two years, so we hope she visits often. Spend the day walking around--doing 'the Westminster walk' on which we were taken by Micky and Julia when we were new to London. UPDATE: In the evening we went to a ballet at the Barbican cultural centre/50s utopian concrete jungle. It was Romeo and Juliet, by a modern ballet company--THEY CHANGED THE ENDING SO THAT ROMEO AND JULIET LIVE, AND RUN AWAY TOGETHER. WHAT?!?!?!?
Sun 9th--massive city-wide search for cream tea in the pouring rain. Once we finally found it, it was totally worth it. Goodbye to Nicole.
Mon 10-Tues 11--boring old work!
Wed 12th--lecture at LSE by Navanethem Pillay, formerly one of the few women judges in the International Criminal Court, hugely influential in her work at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, particularly to its treatment of crimes of sexual violence against women. She is a huge hero of mine. Sadly she has left the ICC to be the new United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. She was speaking in that capacity. She's a South African of Indian decent, was the first woman and minority in apartheid South Africa to open her own practice.
Thur 13--ETHIOPIAN dinner with our friends from Matt's work Martin and his wife Naheed! We used to eat a lot of Ethiopian in D.C. which has the largest concentration of Ethiopians and Eritreans outside of Ethiopia and Eritrea. You might have heard there is some really bad stuff going down in nearby Somolia right now and the UN has decided it cannot intervene, I think for justifiable reasons. Matt and I had a long discussion about it--look, the UN are not miracle workers, okay?
Fri 14th--WORK, BORING!
Sat 15th (today)--lazy Saturday. We're getting excited about Thanksgiving and Christmas. This year, our friends Gar and Kirst, ie 'Geology Gareth' and his girlfriend Kirsten, are having Xgiving at their place in Cambridge! We're really looking forward to it, and are happy to have passed the love for an American holiday on to the Brits.
Wed 29th--the day I went to the House of Lords hearing.
Thurs 30th--tried for the third time to open a joint checking account, banks in Britain being notoriously finicky. Apparently they don't want our money. Failed for the third time, prompting me to desire to make a blog post entitled 'Things I HATE', but decided this would be too pessimistic.
Fri 31st--massive disgusting eczema explosion on my right hand ring finger, went to the doctor, got a cream and antibiotics. All is now well.
Sat 1st--old, old friend from Cambridge, we'll call him 'Philosopher Gareth' (as opposed to 'Geologist Gareth') came to visit London with his girlfriend Deb. Haven't seen him in literally a year and a half since he left Cambridge. Met for lunch and drinks, had a great time.
Sun 2nd--Natural History museum with Gaz and Deb. Good times.
Mon 3rd--my uncle who lives in Bournemouth (south coast of England) was in London for a conference, met him for dinner. Haven't seen him since India.
Tues 4th--jittery and nervous all day.
Wed 5th, around 5AM--can't sleep, check the news, crawl back into bed and tell Matt the news.
Wed 5th, evening--celebratory Thai curry and Wednesday free movie night--Ghost Town with Ricky Gervais. If you've ever seen him in anything else, it's hard to see him as the 'nice guy'.
Thur 6th--interview with Amnesty International International Secretariat for volunteer position--it didn't go that well. They have a backlog of email enquiries in their inbox. Turns out the job is to clear the backlog. No thanks.
Fri 7th--another doctor's appointment, stupid finger.
Sat 8th--Nicole Novak, friend from Iowa City, is in town. She and two of her friends stayed with us, in our new improved apartment that permits overnight guests! She is a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford for the next two years, so we hope she visits often. Spend the day walking around--doing 'the Westminster walk' on which we were taken by Micky and Julia when we were new to London. UPDATE: In the evening we went to a ballet at the Barbican cultural centre/50s utopian concrete jungle. It was Romeo and Juliet, by a modern ballet company--THEY CHANGED THE ENDING SO THAT ROMEO AND JULIET LIVE, AND RUN AWAY TOGETHER. WHAT?!?!?!?
Sun 9th--massive city-wide search for cream tea in the pouring rain. Once we finally found it, it was totally worth it. Goodbye to Nicole.
Mon 10-Tues 11--boring old work!
Wed 12th--lecture at LSE by Navanethem Pillay, formerly one of the few women judges in the International Criminal Court, hugely influential in her work at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, particularly to its treatment of crimes of sexual violence against women. She is a huge hero of mine. Sadly she has left the ICC to be the new United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. She was speaking in that capacity. She's a South African of Indian decent, was the first woman and minority in apartheid South Africa to open her own practice.
Thur 13--ETHIOPIAN dinner with our friends from Matt's work Martin and his wife Naheed! We used to eat a lot of Ethiopian in D.C. which has the largest concentration of Ethiopians and Eritreans outside of Ethiopia and Eritrea. You might have heard there is some really bad stuff going down in nearby Somolia right now and the UN has decided it cannot intervene, I think for justifiable reasons. Matt and I had a long discussion about it--look, the UN are not miracle workers, okay?
Fri 14th--WORK, BORING!
Sat 15th (today)--lazy Saturday. We're getting excited about Thanksgiving and Christmas. This year, our friends Gar and Kirst, ie 'Geology Gareth' and his girlfriend Kirsten, are having Xgiving at their place in Cambridge! We're really looking forward to it, and are happy to have passed the love for an American holiday on to the Brits.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Photo of the Week
| From Photo of the Week |
This is a photo of me in a hedge tunnel at Kenwood house. Clearly the tunnel was built for people of mid-nineteenth century height.
Thanks to Mike for the gentle nudge to get this done.
Tuesday, November 04, 2008
Photo of the Week
| From Photo of the Week |
This is the famous escalator through a planet at the Natural History Museum.
From now on we are going to try to do a Photo of the Week, so that we use our camera more and take more nice pictures. All the photos will go into the public album, with the link above, so you can see all at once. Obviously this is just the first one.
The Election From Across The Pond
It's a cliche, but the rest of the world probably cares about the US election as much as Americans do and as much as they care about their own elections. Grace's work told her she could take the day off tomorrow, if she was too tired to come in from staying up all night to watch the election. Two people from my work (neither American) actually are taking the day off tomorrow so they can watch the election tonight. Because of the time difference this is a big commitment. The first exit polls from the East coast will begin to roll in here at midnight and the West coast will come in around 4 in the morning. These people will literally spend the entire night in a pub, watching the results come in. They've even booked a table and sent an invitation around the office (one of two all-night election parties we've been invited to).
Both of London's biggest free newspapers have extensive (multi-page) viewing guides for the election tonight. The London Paper gives you a quick background on 'how the electoral college works' and a full-page map about all the swing states. There's a viewing guide in the corner. The London Lite is my favourite though. It has a feature on American food to eat, to help you get into the spirit. They recommend Hamburgers, BLTs and Nachos and say 'don't forget the obligatory crate of Budweiser, or try a bottle of Californian pinot noir from Medocino County, California.' They also have this very brief description of the Republican and Democratic parties:
'Republicans are essentially the US version of our conservatives - they are Right-wing and want to reduce government spending and lower taxes, even for the rich. The Democrats stand to the Left, want higher taxes for the rich, a cut in taxes for the middle classes and for US troops to withdraw from Iraq eventually.'
In general, I think this election has really elevated the US in people's minds. As the British magazine The Economist says in its most recent edition, "the best thing that can be said for the [American presidential] system is that it is so democratic. In most countries party leaders are chosen by political insiders. In America rank-and-file party members (and some independents) get to choose—and this year they upset all political calculations by rejecting the inevitable Mrs Clinton on the left and choosing the maverick Mr McCain on the right." Consider that, in Britain, Gordon Brown is Prime Minister, despite never facing a national election. Here, everyone votes for their representative to Parliament, and the leader of whichever party has the majority becomes Prime Minister. Regular people have about as much control over who their national leader is as Americans have over who is elected speaker of the house or Senate majority leader.
Of course, this election is not just any election. People are a bit shocked I think at the fact that Barack Obama is the probable president of the US. It upsets so many notions about our country - mostly that we are a racist land ruled by corporate overlords. In my office, some people are, I think, a bit flummoxed by Obama's success. They note that it is difficult for them to imagine an Asian becoming Prime Minister here (people of Asian descent are the largest ethnic minority in Britain). I think of the British singer Morrissey, who released a song just five years ago called "America is not the world." It had these lyrics:
In America, the land of the free, they say
The Land of opportunity, in a just and peaceful way.
But where the president is never black, female or gay,
And until that day,
You've got nothing to say to me,
To help me believe.
Finally, for my job, I naturally read tons of local African newspapers - they are filled with columns praising our system. In Africa, it's hard to imagine an ethnic minority reaching leadership of the country. There is a joke going around in Kenya - Obama's father is from the Luo tribe in Kenya, an ethnic minority that has been subjected to some persecution. The joke is 'a person from the Luo tribe has a better chance of becoming president of the United States than president of Kenya.'
We're not going to any all-night election parties by the way - I have to go to a conference on Nigeria tomorrow, and I don't want to be sleep deprived or hung over while sitting all day in a room listening to people give presentations on financial markets. But, if the election ends up going to Obama, I can't help but be curious about whether the main topic of conversation during breaks will still be Nigeria.
Both of London's biggest free newspapers have extensive (multi-page) viewing guides for the election tonight. The London Paper gives you a quick background on 'how the electoral college works' and a full-page map about all the swing states. There's a viewing guide in the corner. The London Lite is my favourite though. It has a feature on American food to eat, to help you get into the spirit. They recommend Hamburgers, BLTs and Nachos and say 'don't forget the obligatory crate of Budweiser, or try a bottle of Californian pinot noir from Medocino County, California.' They also have this very brief description of the Republican and Democratic parties:
'Republicans are essentially the US version of our conservatives - they are Right-wing and want to reduce government spending and lower taxes, even for the rich. The Democrats stand to the Left, want higher taxes for the rich, a cut in taxes for the middle classes and for US troops to withdraw from Iraq eventually.'
In general, I think this election has really elevated the US in people's minds. As the British magazine The Economist says in its most recent edition, "the best thing that can be said for the [American presidential] system is that it is so democratic. In most countries party leaders are chosen by political insiders. In America rank-and-file party members (and some independents) get to choose—and this year they upset all political calculations by rejecting the inevitable Mrs Clinton on the left and choosing the maverick Mr McCain on the right." Consider that, in Britain, Gordon Brown is Prime Minister, despite never facing a national election. Here, everyone votes for their representative to Parliament, and the leader of whichever party has the majority becomes Prime Minister. Regular people have about as much control over who their national leader is as Americans have over who is elected speaker of the house or Senate majority leader.
Of course, this election is not just any election. People are a bit shocked I think at the fact that Barack Obama is the probable president of the US. It upsets so many notions about our country - mostly that we are a racist land ruled by corporate overlords. In my office, some people are, I think, a bit flummoxed by Obama's success. They note that it is difficult for them to imagine an Asian becoming Prime Minister here (people of Asian descent are the largest ethnic minority in Britain). I think of the British singer Morrissey, who released a song just five years ago called "America is not the world." It had these lyrics:
In America, the land of the free, they say
The Land of opportunity, in a just and peaceful way.
But where the president is never black, female or gay,
And until that day,
You've got nothing to say to me,
To help me believe.
Finally, for my job, I naturally read tons of local African newspapers - they are filled with columns praising our system. In Africa, it's hard to imagine an ethnic minority reaching leadership of the country. There is a joke going around in Kenya - Obama's father is from the Luo tribe in Kenya, an ethnic minority that has been subjected to some persecution. The joke is 'a person from the Luo tribe has a better chance of becoming president of the United States than president of Kenya.'
We're not going to any all-night election parties by the way - I have to go to a conference on Nigeria tomorrow, and I don't want to be sleep deprived or hung over while sitting all day in a room listening to people give presentations on financial markets. But, if the election ends up going to Obama, I can't help but be curious about whether the main topic of conversation during breaks will still be Nigeria.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
House of Lords Judicial Hearing
When Matt and I lived in Washington D.C. we tried to see a Supreme Court case. We had to wake up very early, take the metro in and stand for 6 hours on cold hard marble, only to realise we weren't going to get in and leave. It was not a good experience.
Also while we were in D.C., we took a tour of the Capital Building. We went through a rigorous security clearance, then taken into the rotunda and told we could be in there, one other room full of statues, or go see the House chamber, the House unfortunately being out of session. It was also distinctly underwhelming.
Today, as part of my general education for my internship, I went to see a case before the highest judicial body in the UK, called the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords. So I went to Westminster, to the Houses of Parliament. It was a very different experience from D.C. There was a security check, but after that, you were pretty much free to wander around--and it's quite a big building!

Eventually I found the hearing rooms and watched the judges and the barristers for a few hours. It was quite dry stuff, but the case was interesting and important for my internship anyway.
The cool things were the actual rooms, which were paneled in beautifully carved wood, brightly polished, and burnt velvet silk wallpapers in jewel-like blue and crimson, and carved bookshelves and old carved wood and marble fireplaces (the Houses of Parliament date to 1840!) It was really a very small room but with a great sense of history and decorum as well. It could also have been a museum, because on the walls were two really wonderful and famous paintings that I read about recently. I had no idea they would be there, but there they were, with plaques underneath reading 'On loan from Her Majesty The Queen'. The other cool thing was that the Barristers were wearing their wigs and robes. The robes are like Cambridge robes Matt wore to formal halls; the wigs are a bit silly, but who knows about these strange British traditions. They are very, very old traditions.

I was supposed to be there to see a hearing on deportation cases, but was misdirected and spent half an hour listening to a proceeding on the eviction of elderly people from care homes! Other than that, it was an interesting experience.
Here's a picture of Matt outside the Houses of Parliament at night, from across the river. They are quite gothic and beautiful from this angle:
Also while we were in D.C., we took a tour of the Capital Building. We went through a rigorous security clearance, then taken into the rotunda and told we could be in there, one other room full of statues, or go see the House chamber, the House unfortunately being out of session. It was also distinctly underwhelming.
Today, as part of my general education for my internship, I went to see a case before the highest judicial body in the UK, called the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords. So I went to Westminster, to the Houses of Parliament. It was a very different experience from D.C. There was a security check, but after that, you were pretty much free to wander around--and it's quite a big building!

Eventually I found the hearing rooms and watched the judges and the barristers for a few hours. It was quite dry stuff, but the case was interesting and important for my internship anyway.
The cool things were the actual rooms, which were paneled in beautifully carved wood, brightly polished, and burnt velvet silk wallpapers in jewel-like blue and crimson, and carved bookshelves and old carved wood and marble fireplaces (the Houses of Parliament date to 1840!) It was really a very small room but with a great sense of history and decorum as well. It could also have been a museum, because on the walls were two really wonderful and famous paintings that I read about recently. I had no idea they would be there, but there they were, with plaques underneath reading 'On loan from Her Majesty The Queen'. The other cool thing was that the Barristers were wearing their wigs and robes. The robes are like Cambridge robes Matt wore to formal halls; the wigs are a bit silly, but who knows about these strange British traditions. They are very, very old traditions.
I was supposed to be there to see a hearing on deportation cases, but was misdirected and spent half an hour listening to a proceeding on the eviction of elderly people from care homes! Other than that, it was an interesting experience.
Here's a picture of Matt outside the Houses of Parliament at night, from across the river. They are quite gothic and beautiful from this angle:
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Money

This is how many dollars you can buy with one pound. It's been $2 for £1 most of the time we've been here, but in the last month or two its dropped fast to $1.50 for £1. Someone at work helpfully pointed out that my salary is now worth 25% less!
If things keep going this way, I'm doing my Christmas shopping here!
Also: It started snowing here! With no Halloween or Thanksgiving in this country to divide up the rest of the year, the relentless march of Christmas season is here earlier than ever!
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Ivanov
Matt and I saw a play last weekend called Ivanov by Anton Chekhov, the Russian writer. It was at the Donmar Theatre in Leicester Square, and it starred Kenneth Branagh, the lady in the wheelchair from Notting Hill, Mary Bennet from the BBC Pride and Prejudice miniseries, and a bunch of other people.
The website describes the story thusly:
"Once a man of limitless promise, Ivanov is plunged into debt.
His marriage is in crisis, and his evenings are spent negotiating loans, avoiding love affairs and fighting to resist the small town jealousies and intrigues which threaten to engulf his life.
Kenneth Branagh plays the title role in Chekhov’s explosive portrait of a man plagued with self-doubt and despair which vividly captures the electrifying atmosphere of Russia on the brink of change."
It was really, really good. We had never heard anything about the story before, but caught on quickly and really enjoyed the suspense and excitement. It's a really good story. I didn't really like any of the characters (more like I liked to dislike them) but Matt didn't feel that way.
It was a nice way to spend a Saturday night for once, instead of staying home and watching a movie or working!
We always say we're going to get more 'culture' since we live in London. Now that I'm interning 3 days a week, I'm going to get a part-time job the other two days, so we can do more. It would be nice to get theatre tickets, a gym membership, and to save up for future trips. We are in a saving economic climate right now and I'm sure the bank would appreciate our extra deposits!
The website describes the story thusly:
"Once a man of limitless promise, Ivanov is plunged into debt.
His marriage is in crisis, and his evenings are spent negotiating loans, avoiding love affairs and fighting to resist the small town jealousies and intrigues which threaten to engulf his life.
Kenneth Branagh plays the title role in Chekhov’s explosive portrait of a man plagued with self-doubt and despair which vividly captures the electrifying atmosphere of Russia on the brink of change."
It was really, really good. We had never heard anything about the story before, but caught on quickly and really enjoyed the suspense and excitement. It's a really good story. I didn't really like any of the characters (more like I liked to dislike them) but Matt didn't feel that way.
It was a nice way to spend a Saturday night for once, instead of staying home and watching a movie or working!
We always say we're going to get more 'culture' since we live in London. Now that I'm interning 3 days a week, I'm going to get a part-time job the other two days, so we can do more. It would be nice to get theatre tickets, a gym membership, and to save up for future trips. We are in a saving economic climate right now and I'm sure the bank would appreciate our extra deposits!
Haunted House Of Modern Art
Grace and I went to the newly reopened Saatchi gallery last weekend. It's a free modern art gallery with changing exhibits. It used to be in another building but it's been closed for a year or something while it moves to a brand new space. It just opened a few weeks ago. The whole museum is currently given over to an exhibit called "The Revolution Continues: New Chinese Art."
I got the impression that something foul is going on in the Chinese modern art scene. The majority of the pieces kind of made my stomach churn. Walking through the museum felt a little more like walking through a haunted house. Some kind of ultra-modern minimalist haunted house that tries to scare you with unsettling imagery, rather than people jumping out at you in masks. Here are some pictures - not of the scariest stuff, just some of the stuff that we thought would make a decent photo.

Grace looking up at an installation.

This one is called "Misquito" and it's made from real bones.

No comment on this one.

This one's called "Fallen Angel."
The main attraction was an installation in the basement. It's a bunch of very realistic looking old men in wheelchairs randomly rolling around a room. Check out Grace in this video below.
Anyway, I don't think we'll be going back to the Saatchi until there's a new exhibit up, or if we want more Halloween kicks. But, before I end this post, I've got one more modern art photo of a sculpture I think is genuinely horrifying. This one was in the British Museum, not the Saatchi Gallery, as part of a new exhibit on modern sculptures. I didn't get it at first - it just looks like a bunch of dead animal parts on a stick. But there's a light illuminating them, and eventually I realised you have to look at the shadow on the wall, not the lump of mummified animal bits (apparently, that's what its really made of). Happy Halloween!
I got the impression that something foul is going on in the Chinese modern art scene. The majority of the pieces kind of made my stomach churn. Walking through the museum felt a little more like walking through a haunted house. Some kind of ultra-modern minimalist haunted house that tries to scare you with unsettling imagery, rather than people jumping out at you in masks. Here are some pictures - not of the scariest stuff, just some of the stuff that we thought would make a decent photo.
Grace looking up at an installation.
This one is called "Misquito" and it's made from real bones.
No comment on this one.
This one's called "Fallen Angel."
The main attraction was an installation in the basement. It's a bunch of very realistic looking old men in wheelchairs randomly rolling around a room. Check out Grace in this video below.
Anyway, I don't think we'll be going back to the Saatchi until there's a new exhibit up, or if we want more Halloween kicks. But, before I end this post, I've got one more modern art photo of a sculpture I think is genuinely horrifying. This one was in the British Museum, not the Saatchi Gallery, as part of a new exhibit on modern sculptures. I didn't get it at first - it just looks like a bunch of dead animal parts on a stick. But there's a light illuminating them, and eventually I realised you have to look at the shadow on the wall, not the lump of mummified animal bits (apparently, that's what its really made of). Happy Halloween!
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Credit Crunch Jokes
Want to hear some jokes and gags about the credit crunch/economic meltdown? These are coming out of the City of London, the financial district of probably the center of the financial world, so you have to say at least they have a sense of humor about it all. These are from The London Paper, by the way, not thought up by us.
What's the difference between an investment banker and a pizza?
A pizza can feed a family of four.
What do Wall Street and the Olympics have in common?
Synchronised diving.
The credit crunch is getting bad--
--I lent my brother ten quid (translation: bucks) a few weeks ago and it turns out I'm Britain's largest lender.
I've had terrible problems during the credit crunch--
--but I'm back on my feet now--they've repossessed my car.
What's the definition of optimism?
--A banker who irons five shirts on Sunday.
City stock trader: 'It's worse than a divorce! I've lost half my net worth and I still have a wife!'
What's the capital of Iceland?
--£3.50 (If you haven't heard, Iceland and Ireland are both in a dire financial meltdown.)
A masked man holding up a bank cashier with a gun says: 'I don't want any money! I just want you to start lending to each other!'
What's the difference between an investment banker and a pigeon?
--A pigeon can place a deposit on a Ferrari.
Matt here. At my office they forwarded around some Chuck Norris jokes about the crisis. If you're not in on the Chuck Norris jokes, there are a bunch of jokes around that all center on how awesome Chuck Norris is. For example; there is no 'ctrl' key on Chuck Norris' computer. Chuck Norris is always in control.
Here are some financial crisis ones.
The tears of Chuck Norris would supply enough liquidity to solve the credit crisis. Too bad he never cries.
When the U.S. economy sneezes, the world catches a cold. When Chuck Norris sneezes, the U.S. economy catches pneumonia.
Chuck Norris doesn't supply collateral, only collateral damage.
Chuck Norris trades on fear and greed simultaneously.
Alan Greenspan calls Chuck Norris ``The Maestro.''
Chuck Norris has a trade surplus with China.
What's the difference between an investment banker and a pizza?
A pizza can feed a family of four.
What do Wall Street and the Olympics have in common?
Synchronised diving.
The credit crunch is getting bad--
--I lent my brother ten quid (translation: bucks) a few weeks ago and it turns out I'm Britain's largest lender.
I've had terrible problems during the credit crunch--
--but I'm back on my feet now--they've repossessed my car.
What's the definition of optimism?
--A banker who irons five shirts on Sunday.
City stock trader: 'It's worse than a divorce! I've lost half my net worth and I still have a wife!'
What's the capital of Iceland?
--£3.50 (If you haven't heard, Iceland and Ireland are both in a dire financial meltdown.)
A masked man holding up a bank cashier with a gun says: 'I don't want any money! I just want you to start lending to each other!'
What's the difference between an investment banker and a pigeon?
--A pigeon can place a deposit on a Ferrari.
Matt here. At my office they forwarded around some Chuck Norris jokes about the crisis. If you're not in on the Chuck Norris jokes, there are a bunch of jokes around that all center on how awesome Chuck Norris is. For example; there is no 'ctrl' key on Chuck Norris' computer. Chuck Norris is always in control.
Here are some financial crisis ones.
The tears of Chuck Norris would supply enough liquidity to solve the credit crisis. Too bad he never cries.
When the U.S. economy sneezes, the world catches a cold. When Chuck Norris sneezes, the U.S. economy catches pneumonia.
Chuck Norris doesn't supply collateral, only collateral damage.
Chuck Norris trades on fear and greed simultaneously.
Alan Greenspan calls Chuck Norris ``The Maestro.''
Chuck Norris has a trade surplus with China.
Friday, October 10, 2008
The last few weeks: an update
I know we haven't written in a long time. We have been busy, but not with much to entertain. The few cool things we have done are:
1. We saw The Duchess on Orange Mobile Free Movie Night at our new local cinema, the Odeon Cinema in Holloway which is one of these urban theatres that's got a grand facade, but the theatres are laid out in a warren of underground tunnels and each one is the size of someone's living room. It's okay though, it's the cheapest tickets we've found at £6, so that plus some gummy bears for 1 pence each at the corner shop is a good deal for us.
The Duchess was interesting, if rambling. That's the problem with turning actual biographies into films, the lives are interesting and oftentimes remarkable, but they're just not movie material. There aren't great, grand moments which fit movie archetypes. It's just the story of a life lived--this happened, then this happened, then this happened, etc. I found it to be the same with Miss Potter, and although I didn't see it, Matt agreed about Marie Antoinette. I actually read the biography on which Marie Antoinette was based, and liked it, but again it's not typical movie material. In The Duchess, the 'this happened' etc. was that she continually got the short end of the stick in everything and was probably a very unhappy woman. If it hammered home one point, it was that women in that age no matter what their status or wealth had very, very little choice in how they lived their lives, and that is very sad.
2. Luis Moreno-Ocampo, the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (about which I recently wrote a dissertation), spoke at the London School of Economics and Matt and I went to see him. It was a packed house. His talk was extremely interesting, if difficult to understand at times. He's argentinian/argentine (?) and though he speaks perfect English, it is with a strong latin accent. He has become a new career hero for me, joining Stephen Rapp. The thing that most struck Matt and I about his lecture is that this guy is not a politician. He's a lawyer, and he's a lawyer to the T. His job is to pursue justice and he does not and cannot take politics into consideration in doing his job. I really liked his attitude about it.
3. Poor Matt is sick. He stayed home from work today and slept almost the entire day. It's supposedly just a 24-hour bug he caught from someone at work, so hopefully he'll be on his feet again tomorrow.
4. I went for an interview at Amnesty International UK for a volunteer position, and... I got it! It's a policy volunteer position, so I will be doing research for them about... the human rights implications of counter-terrorism policy in the US and UK. And the FBI has a file on me... now. Anyway, I start Monday and I'm really excited!
That's all the news for now.
Coming next week:
Matt and Grace see Kenneth Branaugh in Chekov's play Ivanov, once again from the nosebleed seats!
1. We saw The Duchess on Orange Mobile Free Movie Night at our new local cinema, the Odeon Cinema in Holloway which is one of these urban theatres that's got a grand facade, but the theatres are laid out in a warren of underground tunnels and each one is the size of someone's living room. It's okay though, it's the cheapest tickets we've found at £6, so that plus some gummy bears for 1 pence each at the corner shop is a good deal for us.
The Duchess was interesting, if rambling. That's the problem with turning actual biographies into films, the lives are interesting and oftentimes remarkable, but they're just not movie material. There aren't great, grand moments which fit movie archetypes. It's just the story of a life lived--this happened, then this happened, then this happened, etc. I found it to be the same with Miss Potter, and although I didn't see it, Matt agreed about Marie Antoinette. I actually read the biography on which Marie Antoinette was based, and liked it, but again it's not typical movie material. In The Duchess, the 'this happened' etc. was that she continually got the short end of the stick in everything and was probably a very unhappy woman. If it hammered home one point, it was that women in that age no matter what their status or wealth had very, very little choice in how they lived their lives, and that is very sad.
2. Luis Moreno-Ocampo, the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (about which I recently wrote a dissertation), spoke at the London School of Economics and Matt and I went to see him. It was a packed house. His talk was extremely interesting, if difficult to understand at times. He's argentinian/argentine (?) and though he speaks perfect English, it is with a strong latin accent. He has become a new career hero for me, joining Stephen Rapp. The thing that most struck Matt and I about his lecture is that this guy is not a politician. He's a lawyer, and he's a lawyer to the T. His job is to pursue justice and he does not and cannot take politics into consideration in doing his job. I really liked his attitude about it.
3. Poor Matt is sick. He stayed home from work today and slept almost the entire day. It's supposedly just a 24-hour bug he caught from someone at work, so hopefully he'll be on his feet again tomorrow.
4. I went for an interview at Amnesty International UK for a volunteer position, and... I got it! It's a policy volunteer position, so I will be doing research for them about... the human rights implications of counter-terrorism policy in the US and UK. And the FBI has a file on me... now. Anyway, I start Monday and I'm really excited!
That's all the news for now.
Coming next week:
Matt and Grace see Kenneth Branaugh in Chekov's play Ivanov, once again from the nosebleed seats!
Spudzillas
Matt and I don't live anywhere near a grocery store, so we've decided to order our groceries online and have them delivered. We did it once in DC and we really liked it. We get two very large deliveries a month of non-perishable boxes and cans of things, and supplement in between with visits to the nearest real grocery store for more fresh and quickly perishable things like milk and bread.
The pros are:
--The convenience of not having to carry huge loads of groceries, especially liquids.
--Always being able to cook pretty much whatever you feel like without having to go to the grocery store first.
--Not having to deal with crowded grocery stores (in the UK everywhere is crowded).
--Having a fully stocked pantry gives you a very warm and comfortable feeling.
--It's relatively inexpensive. If Matt and I went to the nearest grocery store on the bus, the bus trip would cost us £3.60 ($7.20). Having your groceries delivered only costs £4.00 ($8.00), so we're okay paying 40 pence extra.
--It allows us to use the cheapest grocery chain, instead of the more expensive ones which are the only ones nearby. The cheapest seems to be Tesco. If anyone remembers from Ireland, Matt used to live on Tesco Value Brand pizzas, only €0.49 ($0.75). We don't buy those anymore, but Tesco has lots of good cheap staples.
--It's easier to compare prices when you're looking online because they give you unit prices and if something has a cheaper alternative, they suggest it to you.
The cons are also numerous, though far outweighed by the pros. One of the biggest cons of grocery shopping online is that you can't physically see the food item in front of you before you buy it. Sometimes you don't read a label properly or you enter the proper weight or number. A friend of mine said she and her flatmates once accidentally ordered 20 cans of tuna. I once ordered a box of mushrooms three times the size I thought it would be.
The latest mistake is probably the worst I've ever experienced, but if I'm honest, I should have seen it coming. I wanted two sweet potatoes, because neither Matt nor I are too keen on sweet potatoes but I thought they might be good to have around. I ordered two of a variety or brand name called 'Spudzilla' and was shocked when I received TWO of these:



The worst part is the veins all over the outside!!! By the way, that is a normal sized dinner plate and normal sized silverware. So, Matt and I are going to be eating a lot of sweet potato for the next few weeks!
The pros are:
--The convenience of not having to carry huge loads of groceries, especially liquids.
--Always being able to cook pretty much whatever you feel like without having to go to the grocery store first.
--Not having to deal with crowded grocery stores (in the UK everywhere is crowded).
--Having a fully stocked pantry gives you a very warm and comfortable feeling.
--It's relatively inexpensive. If Matt and I went to the nearest grocery store on the bus, the bus trip would cost us £3.60 ($7.20). Having your groceries delivered only costs £4.00 ($8.00), so we're okay paying 40 pence extra.
--It allows us to use the cheapest grocery chain, instead of the more expensive ones which are the only ones nearby. The cheapest seems to be Tesco. If anyone remembers from Ireland, Matt used to live on Tesco Value Brand pizzas, only €0.49 ($0.75). We don't buy those anymore, but Tesco has lots of good cheap staples.
--It's easier to compare prices when you're looking online because they give you unit prices and if something has a cheaper alternative, they suggest it to you.
The cons are also numerous, though far outweighed by the pros. One of the biggest cons of grocery shopping online is that you can't physically see the food item in front of you before you buy it. Sometimes you don't read a label properly or you enter the proper weight or number. A friend of mine said she and her flatmates once accidentally ordered 20 cans of tuna. I once ordered a box of mushrooms three times the size I thought it would be.
The latest mistake is probably the worst I've ever experienced, but if I'm honest, I should have seen it coming. I wanted two sweet potatoes, because neither Matt nor I are too keen on sweet potatoes but I thought they might be good to have around. I ordered two of a variety or brand name called 'Spudzilla' and was shocked when I received TWO of these:
The worst part is the veins all over the outside!!! By the way, that is a normal sized dinner plate and normal sized silverware. So, Matt and I are going to be eating a lot of sweet potato for the next few weeks!
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Lazy Summer Days
Every weekend we say it's going to be the last nice weekend of the summer and then the next weekend is also lovely. (This weekend is seriously supposed to be the last nice weekend though!). Every weekend for the last few weeks Matt and I have participated in a long-time British summer tradition for nice days: lazing about in a park. This involves:
1.) A picnic. The traditional English garden picnic is an elaborate affair. They are very serious here about picnic baskets with real dishes and cups and silverware. Below is not an uncommon sight when a group comes to the park:

Other people will just swing by a grocery shop and pick up some drinks, baguettes, sliced meats and cheeses, and fruit.
Matt and I pretty much slum it. We make peanut butter and jelly sandwiches and bring along Cokes and apples.

Not too bad though. Usually from where we live, it takes about 25 minutes to walk to a good picnic spot in Hampstead Heath. (Hampstead Heath is this huge park in the middle of north London. It's really hilly and has woodland, fields of heath, swimming ponds, etc, etc.)
2.) Hanging out in the park inevitably involves some napping.
Sometimes you try to read, but it's so warm and comfy.
3.) A view. The area where we live in called Highgate, aptly, because it's high up on a hill or ridge from which you can look down into the city and see everything. Hampstead Heath is on the same ridge looking down onto the city center, so you usually get a good view to enjoy.

4.) Last week we decided to wander through upper Hampstead Heath. Most of the major parks in London used to be under private ownership and were given as 'gifts to the nation' so sometimes, they used to be part of estates, and will keeping the estate house in the grounds, usually turned into a museum or private venue for weddings or events. Hampstead Heath used to be part of the estate of Kenwood, and Kenwood House still keeps its fantastic location looking down into the city, surrounded by idyllic ponds, tree-lined avenues and extensively manicured gardens. Luckily that week, it was a free open weekend, so we didn't have to pay admission! It was really, really nice inside as you might expect of a stately home. It had an amazing art collection actually with works by Stubbs, Gainsborough and Rembrandt among others. Here is a picture of the outside as it would have looked riding up in a carriage:

5.) Activity of some sort. Usually this is reading a book, but I got this Stonehenge cross-stitch bookmark kit when we went to Stonehenge and I am cross-stitching it so sometimes I work on that, usually with very little success. Matt sometimes brings along the math stuff he's trying to teach himself in preparation for reading a tough economics book. But today we spent almost three hours at Hampstead Heath, during which we didn't accomplish anything except Matt did one math problem and I sewed 15 stitches. The rest of the time we watched people, rested, talked, and wished we had a dog.
All in all, we've been pretty lazy on weekends, but you must enjoy the weather while you can in Britain. Soon it will be cold and rainy and DARK.
1.) A picnic. The traditional English garden picnic is an elaborate affair. They are very serious here about picnic baskets with real dishes and cups and silverware. Below is not an uncommon sight when a group comes to the park:
Other people will just swing by a grocery shop and pick up some drinks, baguettes, sliced meats and cheeses, and fruit.
Matt and I pretty much slum it. We make peanut butter and jelly sandwiches and bring along Cokes and apples.
Not too bad though. Usually from where we live, it takes about 25 minutes to walk to a good picnic spot in Hampstead Heath. (Hampstead Heath is this huge park in the middle of north London. It's really hilly and has woodland, fields of heath, swimming ponds, etc, etc.)
2.) Hanging out in the park inevitably involves some napping.
Sometimes you try to read, but it's so warm and comfy.
3.) A view. The area where we live in called Highgate, aptly, because it's high up on a hill or ridge from which you can look down into the city and see everything. Hampstead Heath is on the same ridge looking down onto the city center, so you usually get a good view to enjoy.
4.) Last week we decided to wander through upper Hampstead Heath. Most of the major parks in London used to be under private ownership and were given as 'gifts to the nation' so sometimes, they used to be part of estates, and will keeping the estate house in the grounds, usually turned into a museum or private venue for weddings or events. Hampstead Heath used to be part of the estate of Kenwood, and Kenwood House still keeps its fantastic location looking down into the city, surrounded by idyllic ponds, tree-lined avenues and extensively manicured gardens. Luckily that week, it was a free open weekend, so we didn't have to pay admission! It was really, really nice inside as you might expect of a stately home. It had an amazing art collection actually with works by Stubbs, Gainsborough and Rembrandt among others. Here is a picture of the outside as it would have looked riding up in a carriage:
5.) Activity of some sort. Usually this is reading a book, but I got this Stonehenge cross-stitch bookmark kit when we went to Stonehenge and I am cross-stitching it so sometimes I work on that, usually with very little success. Matt sometimes brings along the math stuff he's trying to teach himself in preparation for reading a tough economics book. But today we spent almost three hours at Hampstead Heath, during which we didn't accomplish anything except Matt did one math problem and I sewed 15 stitches. The rest of the time we watched people, rested, talked, and wished we had a dog.
All in all, we've been pretty lazy on weekends, but you must enjoy the weather while you can in Britain. Soon it will be cold and rainy and DARK.
Monday, September 22, 2008
On The Economy
This is a rare post about the issues, not Grace and I's lives.
Given my background and my current occupation, I've been following the current economic turmoil in the US, and indeed the world, closely. And I've become extremely concerned about the plan being proposed by US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson (I'm not alone - see this article, for instance). I'm worried that, in our haste to take action against the economic crisis, we're going to vote for a really dangerous plan that we'll come to regret in the coming months and years. Accordingly, I've written my representatives in the Senate and Congress to encourage them to take the time needed to really evaluate this proposal objectively. Paul Krugman has written a good column nicely explaining the problems of the bill, and its worth a read here. I'll lay out my worries here, but if you want to understand the situation or the logic behind the plan I recommend Krugman's article.
1 - Lack of Oversight: The plan contains a clause exempting Paulson from any oversight - from the Judicial or legislative branches of our government - in his conduct in exercising the plan. Since the plan involves at least $700 billion (see concern #2), that is giving an unprecedented amount of power to the Treasury secretary. If the secretary purchases 'toxic' assets from firms (including his former employer, Goldman Sachs) at inflated prices, it would be a subsidy for investment banks funded by the taxpayer, and we would have no recourse. We would likewise have no recourse if we don't agree to the terms he grants, if we don't agree to the contracts he awards to manage the debt, if we don't agree to the level of spending (which could balloon past $700 billion - see below), if he appoints cronies to positions of influence - nothing. Maybe you trust Secretary Paulson. But do you trust Obama? McCain? The race is close and one of them will be in charge of appointing someone in January. They could ask Paulson to stay, but there's no guarantee. Furthermore, while Paulson may be an honest guy doing his best, he's only been in this position for a year and a half and he (or anyone) has never faced a situation like this.
2 - The Cost: As I understand it, the plan lets the Treasury take on $700 billion worth of debt at any one time. For comparison's sake, that amount is more than the cost of the entire Iraq war (which has cost roughly $580 billion over the last five years) or more than the annual budget of the Department of Defense, the Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services combined. It's true that we may be able to sell back that debt to the private sector in a few years and greatly recoup our losses, or perhaps even turn a profit. But it's also true that the terms of the deal allow the Treasury to take on $700 billion worth of debt, sell it to the private sector at a massive loss, then take on a second $700 billion in debt (you just can't have more than $700 billion at any one time as I understand it, but even that might be flexible), sell that on for a loss and so on, accumulating losses to no end. And because of concern #1, we wouldn't be able to do anything about that.
The cost of the bailout is such that you should forget everything you have heard from Barack Obama and John McCain about tax cuts and new spending programs, in my opinion. They will all have to go back to the drawing board, whether or not they want to admit it.
3 - Socialising The Losses: There are other plans in circulation (see this, for example) that do not involve such a massive commitment by the taxpayers. What is our upside in this? Is America really going to pursue an economic system where profits are private but losses are public? There needs to be consequences for the decision makers in these failing firms.
I want to stress that I think a massive government intervention is probably necessary, and taxpayers may need to shell up $700 billion or more to save the economy, in the end. But this plan is not the best one available, and the last thing I feel comfortable doing is giving the Bush administration more executive power. Fortunately, I think our representatives are looking out for us. Senator Chris Dodd, for example, has circulated a plan which is getting better reviews from the economists I read and trust. Think about writing your representatives and telling them not to rush into anything that is going to be another Bush fiasco with a price tag in the hundreds of billions.
UPDATE (submitted by Grace this time): Krugman (or as Matt and I call him, The Krug) is talking a lot more about this proposal and strongly advocates that in return for taking on this toxic debt and giving private companies (which have wilfully and negligently bankrupted themselves) cold hard cash for it, the American taxpayer should be given an equity stake on the off chance that maybe we can recover some of our losses. He says for him it is an absolute deal or no deal point. Read his ideas about it here.
FURTHER UPDATE: What does everyone else think? Feel free to sound off under comments.
EVEN FURTHER UPDATE: I've just learned that the Fed and the Treasury plan to buy these toxic assets NOT AT MARKET VALUE but at what they WOULD be worth, basically, if they were not toxic--ie the full value that they would have if those bad loans were fully and faithfully paid back. I'm sorry but that one makes no sense to me (Grace), maybe Matt or one of you can explain it.
Given my background and my current occupation, I've been following the current economic turmoil in the US, and indeed the world, closely. And I've become extremely concerned about the plan being proposed by US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson (I'm not alone - see this article, for instance). I'm worried that, in our haste to take action against the economic crisis, we're going to vote for a really dangerous plan that we'll come to regret in the coming months and years. Accordingly, I've written my representatives in the Senate and Congress to encourage them to take the time needed to really evaluate this proposal objectively. Paul Krugman has written a good column nicely explaining the problems of the bill, and its worth a read here. I'll lay out my worries here, but if you want to understand the situation or the logic behind the plan I recommend Krugman's article.
1 - Lack of Oversight: The plan contains a clause exempting Paulson from any oversight - from the Judicial or legislative branches of our government - in his conduct in exercising the plan. Since the plan involves at least $700 billion (see concern #2), that is giving an unprecedented amount of power to the Treasury secretary. If the secretary purchases 'toxic' assets from firms (including his former employer, Goldman Sachs) at inflated prices, it would be a subsidy for investment banks funded by the taxpayer, and we would have no recourse. We would likewise have no recourse if we don't agree to the terms he grants, if we don't agree to the contracts he awards to manage the debt, if we don't agree to the level of spending (which could balloon past $700 billion - see below), if he appoints cronies to positions of influence - nothing. Maybe you trust Secretary Paulson. But do you trust Obama? McCain? The race is close and one of them will be in charge of appointing someone in January. They could ask Paulson to stay, but there's no guarantee. Furthermore, while Paulson may be an honest guy doing his best, he's only been in this position for a year and a half and he (or anyone) has never faced a situation like this.
2 - The Cost: As I understand it, the plan lets the Treasury take on $700 billion worth of debt at any one time. For comparison's sake, that amount is more than the cost of the entire Iraq war (which has cost roughly $580 billion over the last five years) or more than the annual budget of the Department of Defense, the Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services combined. It's true that we may be able to sell back that debt to the private sector in a few years and greatly recoup our losses, or perhaps even turn a profit. But it's also true that the terms of the deal allow the Treasury to take on $700 billion worth of debt, sell it to the private sector at a massive loss, then take on a second $700 billion in debt (you just can't have more than $700 billion at any one time as I understand it, but even that might be flexible), sell that on for a loss and so on, accumulating losses to no end. And because of concern #1, we wouldn't be able to do anything about that.
The cost of the bailout is such that you should forget everything you have heard from Barack Obama and John McCain about tax cuts and new spending programs, in my opinion. They will all have to go back to the drawing board, whether or not they want to admit it.
3 - Socialising The Losses: There are other plans in circulation (see this, for example) that do not involve such a massive commitment by the taxpayers. What is our upside in this? Is America really going to pursue an economic system where profits are private but losses are public? There needs to be consequences for the decision makers in these failing firms.
I want to stress that I think a massive government intervention is probably necessary, and taxpayers may need to shell up $700 billion or more to save the economy, in the end. But this plan is not the best one available, and the last thing I feel comfortable doing is giving the Bush administration more executive power. Fortunately, I think our representatives are looking out for us. Senator Chris Dodd, for example, has circulated a plan which is getting better reviews from the economists I read and trust. Think about writing your representatives and telling them not to rush into anything that is going to be another Bush fiasco with a price tag in the hundreds of billions.
UPDATE (submitted by Grace this time): Krugman (or as Matt and I call him, The Krug) is talking a lot more about this proposal and strongly advocates that in return for taking on this toxic debt and giving private companies (which have wilfully and negligently bankrupted themselves) cold hard cash for it, the American taxpayer should be given an equity stake on the off chance that maybe we can recover some of our losses. He says for him it is an absolute deal or no deal point. Read his ideas about it here.
FURTHER UPDATE: What does everyone else think? Feel free to sound off under comments.
EVEN FURTHER UPDATE: I've just learned that the Fed and the Treasury plan to buy these toxic assets NOT AT MARKET VALUE but at what they WOULD be worth, basically, if they were not toxic--ie the full value that they would have if those bad loans were fully and faithfully paid back. I'm sorry but that one makes no sense to me (Grace), maybe Matt or one of you can explain it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)