America has four car companies again! GM has sold the Saturn franchise to Roger Penske. I never believed it would happen. I’m glad to have the choice in the marketplace.

Technically though this is probably a temporary situation. Once Fiat buys Chrysler, will Chrysler still count as an American car company anymore? The business will take its orders from Turin even if Fiat doesn’t own a controlling percentage of Chrysler shares. Well, maybe it will still be American. Mazda is still Japanese right, even though Ford tells it what to do.

Even though Penske won’t be building cars it does leave some exciting possibilities for the future. GM will provide Saturn vehicles for the first few years, but eventually Penske will contract with other automakers and rebadge their vehicles. What could we have in store? From what I read online, most people expect rebadged Renaults. That idea surprises me because Renault and Nissan are allied, so why would Nissan allow itself to compete against its ally’s cars in the US? I expect Nissan would veto any move by Renault to sell cars to Penske. I hope so anyway. I don’t care for Renault’s lineup (based on UK models). The Laguna coupe is the only exception and I’m still not that excited about it.

I sure as hell don’t want Penske to import the New Kangoo.

I would think Citroen or Peugeot might be a possibility. They’re a large company without any ties to the US. Neither of their lineups interest me either though. Here you can see Citroen and Peugeot in the UK. My heart still skips a beat for the Citroen C5 however. If the C5 Airscape is ever made and sold as a Saturn I’ll sell my ass on the street to get one.

Certainly Fiat is out of the running since they’re taking on Chrysler. That also rules out Alfa Romeo since it’s a part of the Fiat Group. I can’t really think of any other European manufacturers that could possibly supply a US car company. No American is going to buy an AvtoVAZ.

Representing Asia… I think Proton is a strong possibility. They sell in the UK and Australia so they’re familiar with first world safety standards, and they’re a bargain leader. I could see them supplying Penske with one or two compact, fuel-efficient cars; perhaps a small SUV as well. Nothing they make excites me though.

Other than Proton, Asia doesn’t have much to offer Penske. South Korea’s two biggest native manufacturers, Hyundai and Kia, already sell in the US. That leaves SsangYong which is in bankruptcy. I doubt Penske wants to rescue a second failed automaker. Even if he did I don’t recommend he save SsangYong. They manufacture some awkward looking vehicles. Japan doesn’t have any companies that aren’t involved in the US so no sense looking there. That leaves China.

A Chinese manufacturer presents political problems in the US. Penske will have a lot of baggage to deal with in terms of quality questions, safety concerns and a freakout over the loss of US manufacturing to China. The benefit is that Penske has plenty of choice in China - Geely, Great Wall, BYD, Brilliance, Chery, and probably others I can’t think of. I’m sure they would all bend over backwards to crack into the US market. Penske would also provide them with a lot of manufacturing know-how to bring their cars up to US standards. That’s a lot of work for Penske.

Don’t think Penske is going to import cars from several different sources. That would be a collosal headache for maintainance. Dealerships would have to stock parts from so many different companies and train their mechanics on completely different systems. I actually expect Proton to win out. They’re third world cheap but already know how to operate in the first world.

Now we have unemployment the likes of which my generation has never seen. Well we could have seen it but I doubt anyone in my age group was paying attention to unemployment statistics in 1983. Unemployment hit 9.4% today; the worst it has been since August 1983. Most of the media seems to be taking the ‘What, me worry?‘ approach to reporting this fact. Just about every article starts off mentioning the unemployment rate, but then soothes your nerves by talking up the better than expected decline in job losses.

• Job losses slow dramatically says CNN
• US loses just 345,000 jobs in May, raising hopes proclaims Yahoo!
• Jobs Report Is an Upside Surprise declares BusinessWeek

Actually those headlines are pretty damn cheerful, but reality may not turn out to be so. A Barron’s columnist has taken note of some rumors surrounding these unemployment figures. The reduced job loss figure of 345,000 may be an error at the Bureau of Labor Statistics. C’est la vie! We can’t be sure of this trend until we see data for this month, which of course won’t happen until next month.

By the way, with the way a lot of news outlets are discussing that 345,000 drop in jobs you would think they’re discussing a long term, established trend. Remember though, this is actually a one data point trend, and a single data point is pretty meaningless. Repeat that to yourself the next time you see or hear a report about this fantastic new employment trend we’re in.

Aside from this irrational exuberance, I’ve noticed one question not asked; one key statistic not given today. What’s the funemployment number? I’m positive we can’t have 9.4% sad sacks moping through their days looking for work. The LA Times found some people living it up without a pesky job. Ex-Yahoo Michael Van Gorkom is hanging out at the beach with his new best friend, the margarita. Aubrey Howell’s busiest task has been visiting family since she’s joined the ranks of the funemployed.

I was (f)unemployed once. I graduated college into the Internet recession in 2001, and then moved to Silicon Valley. For seven months I puttered around the apartment I couldn’t afford to live in. In that summer I watched every single episode of the original Battlestar Galactica, and learned Galactica 1980 is unwatchable. I’d spend afternoons driving aimlessly trying to learn the roads of my new home. I look back on that with misery. I ran through my savings and ran up credit card debt trying to feed myself, pay my car loan and pay my rent. How any of these people can feel relaxed and happy when they don’t have an income is beyond my understanding.

So what’s the point of my rambling? The media is carrying water for the White House. We have a job market that is only getting worse, but who in the fourth estate is actually calling out our esteemed leader over it? These mainstream news outlets are sugarcoating today’s bad news with soft headlines. The LA Times is inventing a new term - funemployment - to persuade the millions of newly unemployed people that it’s not so bad. So what if you don’t have penny left to your name. Go hit those batting cages!

The media is a disgrace and the country is going to hell in a handbasket. Same old, same old.

UPDATE: Wow, I thought I was pushing it by saying the news media were protecting Obama from criticism by shielding negative news about unemployment. Then Newsweek’s editor, Evan Thomas, one ups everyone by going on MSNBC to say Obama is “sort of God.” It’s unbelieveable how nakedly pro-Obama these guys are.

A man placed an ad on Craigslist looking for another man to rape his wife while he watched. To be clear, his wife was not into this. This wasn’t a couple trying to spice up their relationship. Now I don’t know if he first tried to get her excited about it and she rejected this idea, or if he hatched this completely in his head.

We’re not that far off from eating babies. Seriously now, does human behavior get any more depraved than this? People have always done horrible things to each other, but what appalls me about this is this guy’s betrayal of his wife. I think it goes without saying that you don’t offer up your friends or family to be raped. I suppose you’re also not supposed to do that to complete strangers too, but if you’re sick enough to do it, you would think you would start with a stranger. Instead this guy offers up his wife, the person he is supposed to be closest to, so he could get a sexual thrill.

Really now, does it get worse than this? I could imagine someone answering back that maybe if the guy offered up his children instead of his wife, but I don’t see that as a great deal different. He would still be torturing his close family to get a cheap thrill.

I’d like someone to ask him what he thought would be the end of result of his action. Did he expect his wife to turn to him at the end and say, “Wow hun! That rape was hot! I’m going to cook you your favorite dinner,” and everything would work out for him? Did he actually think this was totally worth going to jail for?

Stick a fork in the human race. We’re done.

And another special election graces California. I really wish that “divide the state” proposal was on this month’s ballot. It would be perfect placement too because this election is the one where the state legislature gets cowardly and tries to get the public to cosign their budget compromise. I’ve never heard of a special election being needed to pass an annual budget, but hey, California is a trend setter. You other 49 states pay attention.

To my surprise it looks like there is some real anger brewing among the populace. The five ballot measures needed to pass the compromise budget are polling poorly. I actually had the impression people would blindly accept any budget after the long budget showdown we had a few months ago. Perhaps it has been the events at the federal level that have stirred up some anger, but it looks like Californians want to reject these measures altogether to send a message they’re tired of a state government that never stops growing. Remember a few weeks ago I wrote about California’s epic budget expansion? I guess I’m not the only one to notice an unending trend of higher government spending. Over the last ten years spending has risen 60%, but what has that gotten us? Did it really improve our lives, or didn’t you notice it? Why do you have to pay higher taxes and fees for that?

The prevailing sentiment among us angry taxpayers is that we should reject all five budget measures to send a strong message to the legislature. I agreed with that until I sat down to read the measures in my voter guide. Let’s look at these one-by-one.

Prop 1A: Changes to State Budget Process.

Remember how the legislature assured us all those tax hikes were ONLY for two years? This makes them last four years. It also performs a bunch of complicated adjustments to the rainy day fund, but the short version is that it expands it. Those complicated adjustments are probably just a ploy to give this ballot initiative a meaningless name like “changes to state budget process” instead of “raising your taxes even more”.

Prop 1B: Education Funding. Payment Plan.

This authorizes payments to schools from the rainy day fund starting in 2011. These payments are essentially repayments of budget cuts schools are getting now.

Prop 1C: Lottery Modernization Act.

This proposition would “modernize” the state lottery with higher jackpots and more advertising. Oh and it would also allow the state to issue bonds against future, expected lottery revenues, but pay no attention to that. That’s just a piddling little nothing provision that doesn’t matter at all.

Prop 1D: Protects Children’s Services Funding.

This protects funding for certain children’s services programs by cutting funding to other children’s services programs. Prop 98 established required spending rules for a program called First 5. This prop would permit the legislature to transfer money away from that to fund other social programs.

Prop 1E: Mental Health Services Funding.

This is similar to 1D except this involves mental health programs instead of children’s social services.

Prop 1F: Elected Officials’ Salaries.

This denies any pay raises to the legislature and any constitutional officers in deficit years.

As you can guess 1F is the outlier here. It’s not part of the legislature’s budget plan. Conservative rage is pounding the table over 1A through 1E and as I mentioned there is a ‘vote it all down’ movement brewing. I planned to take part in that as soon as I heard we would have a special election over the budget. Screw the legislature! I wasn’t going to let them pass the buck to me. Once I actually read these propositions I took a more nuanced view. Here’s what I voted on my mail-in ballot and why.

1A: No! I’m not going to vote to allow these idiot politicians to raise my taxes. The cycle of ever higher taxes needs to break somewhere.

1B: No! No! The school system should learn to tighten their belts just like everyone else. Repaying a budget cut is asinine.

1C: No! No! No! A thousand times NO! Borrowing against future lottery receipts is not reform. It’s just more of the borrow and spend policies that have ruined this state’s finances.

1D: Uhmmm, well, yea. I have always hated the many propositions that tie up California’s spending. We elect a legislature but can’t trust them to plan a budget? If you don’t think your representative is able, capable or trustworthy enough to make decisions on spending, stop voting for them. It’s an idiotic situation. I decided to vote yes because I’m happy to undermine this type of spending. Besides, it’s not a new tax. The legislature wants to shift spending from one program to another. I don’t object to that. It’s the sort of decision that legislators exist to make.

1E: Yes here too; Same logic as with 1D.

1F: Hell yes! I can understand the argument that this is pointless populism, but it won’t cause any harm and yet it will send a resounding ’screw you’ to our elected officials.

I guess I’ve failed the purity test so there will be no GOP nominations for me. I’ll be happy to see props 1A through 1C fail, and I wouldn’t mind if 1D and 1E fail too. Right now the polls are in my favor but the ‘yes’ ads are starting on TV. I hope their repetition doesn’t hypnotize the population, but I fear it will. Something needs to be done to stop our tax and spend irresponsibility. The failure of these propositions will force the legislature to go back to work on the state budget. Either they will have to accept the blame for raising taxes again, or actually make serious budget cuts.

Or perhaps we can call it Coastalvania?

California is one of the biggest states in the US and I guess with that size comes a lot of proposals to divvy up the state. I just read about a new proposal in the Economist that would divide California along thirteen coastal counties; from Marin to Los Angeles. Those thirteen would become an unnamed new state, and the rest would remain California. Most of the past proposals would divide the state along north-south sections. This is the first I’ve seen that does it into east-west sections.

So what potentially will go? In the proposal brought forth by Citizens for Saving California Farming Industries, or their catchier name - Downsize California, this would include thirteen coastal counties: Marin, San Francisco, Contra Costa, Alameda, San Mateo, Santa Clara, San Benito, Santa Cruz, Monterrey, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Ventura, and Los Angeles. Those counties have 18 million people, leaving California with 18.5 million. That’s a remarkably even split.

Coastalania is the most liberal and urban parts of California. That right there tells you why this movement is brewing. It’s the classic conflict between urban and rural ways of life. This secession movement really didn’t exist until Proposition 2 in the 2008 election. That proposition banned “tight” (probably as defined by some regulation) confinement for chickens, veal calves and pigs. It was a direct attack on how farmers see fit to run their farms and smacked of clueless liberals issuing more regulations from atop their pedestal. So the farmers became angry and began a secession movement.

It seems like a good idea to me. We’ll all be a lot happier separate from each other. Imagine if this coastal state already existed. It would easily be the bluest blue state in the US. I’d call it a one-party state for the Democrats, but honestly I bet the new state would get divided between Democrats and Greens. Imagine the progressive causes that the state could embrace. There would be no opposition to the state issuing laws banning oil and gas drilling off the coast. The new state could legislate the fishing industry out of existence. Gay marriage would be a lock. It would almost certainly pass some kind of universal health care law assuming that fails in the US Congress. The new legislature could declare the entire state to be a sanctuary for illegal immigrants. Oh and marijuana would instantly be made legal. Basically every pet liberal cause would come into force. Democrats should latch on to this plan because it will guarantee them two senators (or at least a friendly Green senator) in Congress forever. On the other side, downsized California will not become a Republican bulwark. Yes that place will start out redder, but with a stream of Mexican immigrants leaning Democrat, it will shortly be a purple state again.

What could this place really be named though? Coastalania is too ridiculous. I’d hate for some lame name like Pacifica to get considered, but I bet that would be one of the front runners. Maybe the old time baby boomers would want to name it Kennedy for their idol JFK. Personally I would like to see a name with some roots to the region. For instance, San Francisco’s original name was Yerba Buena. I think that would make a fine name for a state. We could also name it Fremont, after John Fremont who was at the vanguard of rebellion against Mexico. Nah, who am I kidding. No one here would support the name of a American army officer. It’s more likely the new state would be named for Che Guevara. Maybe we should just stick to a variation on California. How about Azul California, since this state will be primarily a seaside community?

If this proposal makes it on the ballot in 2012, I’m definitely voting yes. A clean break will be good for all of us.

Is today Earth Day? I always thought it was on April 20th, which struck me as an odd choice because that’s Weed Day and Hitler’s birthday. Well, I suppose the association with pot makes some sense. Apparently though, April 22 is Earth Day this year. Not sure why. I’m pretty confused.

But in keeping with the day let’s salute Gaia with a circle of idiots!

Just seeing this makes me lose all respect for the human race. Seriously, that’s not exaggeration. I feel like humanity is irredeemable. It pushes me beyond frustration to think that these people believe what they’re doing matters. A tree can’t understand English! They will never understand that you love them. The trees don’t love you either just so you know.

May the sun explode and wipe us all out. It’ll be no great loss.

Our president is “to challenge government agencies to cut costs,” in the words of Reuters. That makes a fantastic headline. Instead of being the profilgate spender, Obama is casting himself as a budget watchdog. If you take a moment to read the article you’ll see he’s calling on his cabinet to find $100 million in cuts. That’s $100 million out of $3.5 trillion. Put another way that’s $100 million out of $3,500,000 million.

Economics professor Greg Mankiw puts the proposed cut in even clearer terms.

[I]magine that the head of a household with annual spending of $100,000 called everyone in the family together to deal with a $34,000 budget shortfall. How much would he or she announce that spending had be cut? By $3 over the course of the year–approximately the cost of one latte at Starbucks. The other $33,997? We can put that on the family credit card and worry about it next year.

Such bold action. Obama’s really going to tame that budget. In all seriousness, that’s not the point of this exercise. What will happen is that each cabinet department will cut tiny amounts from hundreds of programs. It will all be inconsequential sums but it will give Democrat pundits an important talking point. When they go on cable news or the Sunday morning public affairs shows, they can then say, “President Obama has cut thousands of government programs. He’s a fiscal hawk.”

My only guess on the timing is that the Tea Parties must have spooked the White House. Why else bother with creating the illusion of caring about the budget?

Ron Paul finally has one good idea. We have a piracy problem in the world, but combating it with a professional navy is expensive work. So we can turn to an old, forgotten power as a solution: the Letter of Marque. It’s right in Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution.

The basic idea is that Congress will empower privateers to capture pirates and destroy their vessels. It gets more complicated when you have to work out the bounty payouts and deposits. Generally speaking though Paul’s plan is to leave pirate hunting to private citizens. I frickin’ love the idea, but then again I think all pirates should be executed. There’s bound to be a fair number of people who disagree with me. It’s a Ron Paul idea so it will go nowhere, but damn, I just have to give credit where it’s due.

I saw this video this morning and man did I have to cringe while watching it. It’s South Carolina Congressman Gresham Barrett being lambasted by the crowd at the Tax Day Tea Party in Greenville, South Carolina. It’s merciless. People turned their backs to him. There was one guy who shouted “Go Home” during Barrett’s whole speech. Everyone in that crowded booed for 5 minutes straight.

What did Barrett do to desire this ire? He voted in favor of funding the $700 billion TARP program. Supposedly he’s going to run for South Carolina governor. I can’t see that contest ending well for him.

I am just a hopeless pessimist. Here I sit worrying about the state of the country and the world. Why? Well a few things come to mind: the imminent bankruptcy of GM and Chrysler, pirates off the Horn of Africa, China expressing concern over our debt levels, budget cuts to the missile shield, an ever rising unemployment rate, a media in bed with the White House, a war in Afghanistan getting worse. There’s probably more if I think real hard. However all of this proves I’m just an idiot who can’t see the forest for the trees because George F. Will has identified the real worry; the one, single snowball that rolled into the avalanche that is destroying society - jeans.

Yes, George Will took time to castigate the lazy, slovenly Americans who persist in wearing denim everywhere. Because really, what other problems are there?

Actually I planned to write a much longer post about Will’s fashion don’ts column, but then I read this post on Lileks. I can’t top that. If I try, I’ll fail and probably end up ripping off a lot of that good material in the process. Here’s an excerpt to whet your appetite.

We can gather much from this, aside from the fact that the tea was tepid when served that morning, which always puts one in a querulous humour. We can assume he hasn’t seen more than two seconds of “King of the Hill,” a very clever show that’s firmly on the side of the folk who share his instincts and understands their culture far better than Mr. Will does. (Hank Hill is a man haunted by Oughts of all sorts, constantly parsing the demands of modern life with the Oughts that arise from being a middle-aged Texan father who deals with propane. And propane accessories.) The self-contented sneer against animation suggests no disrespect for the thing itself, but rather the moving drawings aimed at adults. They should content themselves with the amusing engravings in Punch, which stay in one place and do not excite the blood.

Read the whole post. It’s smart, wry and hilarious.

Tenuously related, and also quite funny is this old SNL clip about George Will I saw today on Ace of Spades. I actually remember watching this on TV as a kid when it was brand new. I shouldn’t have found it all that funny back then, but I was a weird child who loved to watch This Week with David Brinkley, so it really struck a chord with me.