I’m at work, being lazy, browsing YouTube. So I come across this old ad for the 1962 Chrysler Imperial. Just a few seconds into it, when the car stand rotates to show the Imperial’s profile, without thought I said out loud, “Man alive, that is one gigantic car!” Good thing no one else is in the office.

Chinese cars are greeted in the US with a mix of disdain and fear. Disdain for their copied styling, and piss poor build quality. Fear because we know that won’t last forever. Once Chinese companies can compete on the world stage, we’ll have another set of Asian companies churning out cheap, reliable cars.

Domestic fans have consoled themselves these last few years by telling each other it would be years until the Chinese were ready for the world market. Sure they were coming, but it was still a few years off. Well Geely has created a concept car that serves as a reminder (or warning if you’re of a more negative bent) that “a few years” really means a few years and not some perpetual tomorrowland.

At this year’s Beijing Auto Show we can look forward to the Geely Tiger.

Well I look forward to three out of the four sides of the Tiger. I gotta get it right out in the open. I hate that grille. It’s nothing short of hideous. It’s like a Pontiac grille, which I also hate, but after some tragic radioactive mutation. Monstrous grille notwithstanding, I also dislike a front end that looks like it has a gaping mouth. The Geely Tiger’s front end is that of a fish screaming. Those headlights bulge just a touch too much for my taste too.

This is really a shame to me because as far as I know this is the first effort of a Chinese automaker to do something really original. I’m glad to see they’ve grown up enough to attempt something bold. Now let’s move on to something that looks good.

As I said I like three out of the four sides. Take a look at that profile shot. My favorite part is the break lights. Look how far Geely stretched them up the body. And the chrome accent around them is a beautiful touch! The matching point on the window at the C-pillar is some smart attention to detail. Notice the contour line that starts at the headlight, stretches back along the door and gently merges with the rear fender is so sleek. This car just exudes speed.

Bring this to the US, and change that front end of course, and I would buy it in a second. I’m not even a fan of coupes but I’ll make an exception for this. I’ve always liked the Citroen’s grille. As long as I’m dreaming here, let’s cut and paste that into place. That would be a stunning car. I’d buy it in this black color too. It looks like the car is made of satin in these pictures. I hope these are actual shots of the concept, not renderings. That would make me and baby Jesus cry.

I finally saw I Am Legend’s alternate ending. It really sucked. YouTube has a copy of it, so watch that if you haven’t seen it already.

I can see this from two angles. And remember, how ever you interpret this, it has to be God’s plan because of that butterfly thing.

1. The disease was God’s plan to create a vampire race.

By handing over the girl vampire he was experimenting on, Neville was forced to discover that the vampires have the same feelings and emotions as humans. That was really hammered home when Neville takes that long, hard look at his wall of pictures. He feels like he’s a monster for killing those vampires. He must have brought lots of anguish to Manhattan’s vampire culture. With this realization Neville will never again experiment on vampires. He rides away in search of any surviving humans and leaves the vampires in peace. Vampire Jebus be praised!

2. This was God’s plan to give Neville a new life.

Neville was determined, to put it lightly, to find a cure. Even after his whole world crumbled around him, he refused to flee to relative safety because he thought it would hinder his work. The only way God was going to get him out of Manhattan and back with the remains of civilization was to destroy everything he had built. That Brazilian woman was sent by God to trigger the end. She caused the destruction by leading the vampires to him, but also gave him an escape route.

The alternate ending left everything hanging. Neville knows he found a cure at the end, but does he know how to create it again? All his documentation was destroyed. We don’t even know if there is a survivor colony. I Am Legend 2 may only last five minutes. Neville runs out of gas in Vermont, gets surrounded by local vampires, and gets eaten.

I was disappointed with the theatrical ending when I first saw it, but this alternate ending has given me a new appreciation for it. At least it provides closure for the story.

By the way, why are they able to drive across a bridge to leave Manhattan? Didn’t the Air Force destroy all the bridges in 2009?

On Wednesday night when I finished work, I was unwinding as I always do – watching Kudlow & Company! During an interview an interesting fact flashed on the screen. Since 2000, railroads have spent $10 billion on improving their infrastructure. This means new tracks and wider tunnels and removing grade crossings and all that good stuff. Even better, railroads are planning to spend another $12 billion to continue these upgrades.

This is great news because infrastructure improvements set the pace of future growth. These are private companies spending their billions, not some government make-work program, so you can be sure these improvements are going to be used. Plus every green in the US should be applauding this. At least the greens who don’t hate economic growth. Freight railroads pollute far less than trucks. The more rail gets used, the less energy intense our economy will be.

So why am I bringing this up? I want to show railroads are healthy in America. Our rail freight industry is alive and kicking. So if the commercial rail industry can be so strong, why is America’s passenger rail industry so dead? If I’m only allowed one word to answer, that word would be “Amtrak”, but the full story goes back far longer. The federal government has been undermining rail travel since the turn of the 20th century. It was a deliberate populist effort to weaken unpopular railroad companies. The trouble all began with the Hepburn Act of 1906 which gave the Interstate Commerce Commission the ability to set maximum prices for the railroads. Future decades would see more regulations and higher taxes. The ICC’s power grew and it forced railroad companies to maintain unprofitable rail lines. Labor unions did nothing to help as they clung to antiquated work rules. For instance, although train speeds increased during the first half of the 20th century, unions refused to change the rules regarding the number of miles worked during a day. In 1919 a work day typically lasted 5.5 to 7 hours. Faster speeds but the same number of “work-miles” meant a work day in 1959 lasted 2.5 to 3.75 hours.

Rail was just not competitive with cars and jets. There was far too much overhead to make profits and that meant there was no investment in service. That’s why we had a slow, steady decline in passenger rail. Amtrak, although I see it as holding back passenger rail today, was supposed to be a solution to that decline. It was a polite government takeover. Railroad companies had the choice of buying into Amtrak and being freed from passenger service, by handing over trains and equipment, or maintaining their ICC-directed, money losing passenger service.

Amtrak is a problem now because it has no accountability. A normal business will go bankrupt if it performs lousy. If Amtrak performs lousy, the government gives it a bigger subsidy. Sure the President of Amtrak may get browbeat by Congress, but what else is Congress going to do? Hold back the subsidy and and let Amtrak go bust?

Government ownership of Amtrak will forever cripple passenger rail in America. I can think of two ways to end this. Amtrak can be floated on a stock exchange and left to fend for itself as a private company, or Amtrak can be dismantled and its pieces auctioned off to willing bidders. Floating the stock is probably the quickest way to get this done, but I don’t like it. The shares are likely to be worthless because few people will have faith Amtrak will survive. Congress could help by pledging to give the fledging independent company easy loans or maybe just give it a big lump sum (I’m talking billions) as a parting gift. That would help create demand for the stock. However I don’t like this because it would create a private passenger rail monopoly. In some sense it’s not actually a monopoly because it will still compete with airlines and bus services but it doesn’t sit well with me. It doesn’t leave the door open for Amtrak outsiders to step in and innovate.

My preference is to auction off Amtrak’s assets. Package entire routes – all the trains, stations, equipment, rails that go with it – and auction them off to whoever. Maybe today’s freight companies want to get back into passenger travel. Sell them to foreign companies. Sell them to eccentric billionaires who dream of running a railroad. If no one bids on a route, then it’s abandoned. Strip it of anything that can be sold and have a second auction for the leftover equipment. The idea that all service must be preserved is what killed the private railroads in the first place. If the business isn’t there, you can’t legislate that it appear. Aunt Millie will just have to ride a bus from West Podunk to East Nowhere.

The thorniest issue is likely to be the union workers. I’ll admit that I don’t know much about the labor conditions of Amtrak. I’m assuming the workers have unions as strong, if not stronger, than what airline employees have. That will have to change. I doubt it would be feasible for the auction winners to fire all their union workers. Replacing them with non-union workers would be difficult with certain positions. For instance, I doubt you would be able to find replacements for all the engineers but I would think the ticket sellers could easily be replaced with non-union workers for cheap. What I think is key is that the auction winners be given a free hand to deal with labor as they wish. The government should not stipulate contracts be maintained after the auction. This is supposed to be a fresh start after all.

Passenger rail has a future if it’s allowed to grow on its own. The government should regulate safety and nothing more. There’s definitely room in the transportation market. Airports are stretched to their limits. Economically viable railroads could easily siphon off airline traffic. Private companies could provide innovations such as spacious seating, and wifi and cell phone use, to draw customers away. Private capital would also have reason to improve rail lines to allow faster service. The first would be undoubtly be the Northeast Corridor. The complaints about Acela’s lackluster service would get fixed quick because that line is the jewel of the whole rail system.

I never bought into the conventional wisdom that rail doesn’t work in America because people are too spread out. The US certainly has more empty land than Europe or Asia but Americans still need to travel between US cities. If people aren’t traveling why then are airports packed and roads clogged with traffic? Government control is stifling passenger rail in the US. I doubt railroads will be a realistic alternative to cross-country travel, but it’s ideal for regional networks. The lines running from Boston to Washington DC are one example. I would wager a regional Midwestern network centered at Chicago would be profitable. So would a network between San Francisco, LA, Las Vegas and Reno/Tahoe too. However, all of this will remain academic until the government gives up control of Amtrak.

I never thought I’d see a story like this. Michigan counties are seriously looking at replacing paved roads with gravel ones. Repairing asphalt roads cost $100,000 per mile and these county governments are saying they can’t afford that.

This is a giant step backwards. Good quality roads are a cornerstone of civilization. It’s probably the most obvious sign of progress. A hundred years ago getting a paved road in your town was tangible evidence that life was improving. Now Michigan is regressing because counties can’t find the money to maintain these roads. That just seems outrageous to me. Roads should be either number 2 or number 3 on a county’s priorities list. First comes law enforcement. Second should be either infrastructure (roads) or a fire department. There has to be other things in the county budget that could be cut before roads.

What disturbs me even more though is the impulse to raise taxes to cover this. It’s a simple, direct solution but it has far reaching effects. To start with raising taxes, you would have to believe that the government budgets, both state and county, are running at total 100% efficiency. There’s no fat to cut so therefore new taxes are needed to increase revenue. Does anyone really trust that government is completely efficient? I certainly don’t. I feel confident money could be squeezed out of some programs that shouldn’t exist in the first place. If times are really tight, then government should be doing less and directing money to the essential services. Reappropriating money from the budget should be our first impulse, not raising taxes. Besides, Michigan is clearly a state whose economy is suffering. Increasing the tax burden is not going to help with job creation.

Living in the US I never ever see Greek TV. So when two of the blogs I visit daily post commercials from Greek TV, I notice it. First, just watch these two commercials and see if you notice a common theme.

Did you catch it? Yes they’re both ads for the Chevrolet Matiz. Oh and they both feature a really hot girl. Is this typical for Greek TV? I never see anything like this in the US. I guess there was that sleazy Paris Hilton/Carls’ Jr. ad but that was more leeching off Hilton’s celebrity rather than a straight up “sex sells” ad like these two. Not even beer commericals parade women around anymore.

I’m not in advertising so I don’t know if these ads are effective. I’m sure they’re attention getters but do they get the product into your mind? Well after watching I was vaguely aware the ads were for GM but there’s no way I would ever have remembered Chevy Matiz. These ads certainly left me with some desire, but not for the car.

I finally got around to watching I Am Legend. What a depressing movie! I understood the gist of the story going into it, but still it was really a downer. I suppose any movie about the end of civilization is going to be dark. I guess I expected more action. There were a couple of cool scenes but not enough to shake me from my funk.

Still though there were some issues about Will Smith’s life on Manhattan that bothered me. The biggest problem that jumped out to me is gasoline. Gas for his Mustang and SUV didn’t seem to be a problem. Neither was it a problem for that woman from Brazil. I think the writer made the mistake of thinking you can scavenge gasoline from abandoned stations and cars. Not so. Gasoline goes bad. There’s no way any of it would last from 2009 to 2012.

The other problem was Smith’s water supply. City mains water isn’t going to work with no maintenance for three years. While it’s possible for him to rig up a power supply that would pump water through his house, I don’t think there would be any water for him to pump.

The “zombies” have a pretty confusing nature. I think we’re supposed to understand that they feed on normal human blood. So what are they eating for the years that Will Smith is the only person left? Maybe animals but if there are hundreds of thousands of these zombies on Manhattan, I’d be surprised to see wild herds of deer there. It seems more likely they would be hunted to extinction.

That survivor’s colony in Vermont bothers me too. Why aren’t these survivors hunting down the zombies that plague the world? Instead they’re cowering behind those concrete barriers, hoping the problem will go away. There’s no shortage of ammo for them. I’m sure they brought lots when they started the colony, and they’re smart enough to create more. Their smaller numbers are more than made up for by their better technology.

Even with those problems it was still quite watchable. I actually got pretty emotional. That scene, where Smith’s dog was cut and bleeding after he defends him from those zombie dogs, was so hard for me to watch. A good and faithful dog is a special thing, and to see him come to that sad end was rough for me. My eyes actually welled up. If I had to kill my dog, even to save my own life, I don’t know how I could handle it. I think I would probably lose my will to live like Smith did.

The ending really put me off though. Smith suffers for years to create that cure, and because of that butterfly thing we’re clued in that this is apparently God’s plan. But God can’t give the guy a break and save him from the zombie gang? All his dedication is rewarded with death. Way to go God.

Unfortunately Blockbuster didn’t give me the bonus disc so I never got to see that alternate ending the commercials mentioned. I’ll have to hunt that down somewhere online. I hope it’s better than the real ending.

I don’t normally read the New York Times for its automotive news coverage. Today though, Jalopnik linked to an interesting criticism of an upcoming Pontiac vehicle. In case you haven’t heard, GM is bringing over the Holden Ute from Australia and giving it to Pontiac here in the US. It has the front end of a car and a rear end of a pickup truck. If you remember the Chevy El Camino from the 1970′s, that’s it. Because it’s essentially a modern version of that, Jalopnik is pushing hard to get the Pontiac version officially named “El Camino”.

I guess it’s not surprising that the NYT reviewer, Lawrence Ulrich, didn’t like it. To my mind, the NYT seems like the paper of choice for the limousine liberal set. I can’t imagine anyone who works for that paper to like any kind of vehicle that remembles a pickup. Now I can’t fault his criticism of the interior since I haven’t seen it, let alone sat in it.

I do have a problem with his characterization of the new El Camino as a “two-seat, gas-guzzling pickup”. No doubt this machine has a big engine. It’s a modified version of the Corvette’s V8. Yet it’s ridiculous to imply this vehicle has no place today. Even with gas prices around $4 a gallon, people are driving full-size pickup trucks. Many of these people don’t really need that much power, but they buy it because it looks cool. And don’t you dear reader get high and mighty about that. Most automotive purchases are vanity purchases. Few people pick a vehicle for entirely practical purposes, and those people are the ones buying 5 year old Civics. This new El Camino gives potential pickup buyers an attractive alternative instead of dorky small pickups like the Ford Ranger. It’s certainly going to be more efficient than a full-size pickup because it’s going to be lighter. Yet it will still allow a buyer to do some light hauling. Plus, if GM is smart enough to give this thing cylinder deactivation, it will save a ton of gas.

Personally though I wouldn’t buy this. I happen to agree with Jalopnik that this vehicle should be named the El Camino (btw, vote El Camino). That brand name has a lot of life in it and GM would be foolish to allow that to languish when this vehicle is for sale. I do feel the need to mention, in my mind, the “El Camino” reputation has a certain sleaziness to it. When I think of that car I imagine picking up a girl in a tubetop who has a fair chance of having herpes. But hey that’s just me.

That said I do also like Ulrich’s suggestion for the “Haulacious”. At first I thought it would make a good name for a specialized trim level. The Pontiac Haulacious El Camino has an awesome sound. Yet I can’t really think of what would make a good trim package that befits the name. I’m not sure there’s room in this segment to build a special high-power tow package.

Then it struck me. There’s another vehicle out there in GM’s stable that would be a great fit! Way back during the Chicago Auto Show, GM unveiled the GMC Denali XT Hybrid concept truck. Wow did I love that thing. I felt really conflicted too because I’m not a truck guy. Yet this concept was so badass it took my breath away. Forget the Denali. That machine should be the GMC Haulacious!

With Eliot Spitzer on our minds it seems appropriate to talk about sins. The Roman Catholic Church has proclaimed seven new “social sins” for our modern world. These seven make it tough for me to pigeonhole the church. There’s some definite leftist economic stuff in there, but there’s also some social conservative stuff too. Then there is the pro-environmental stance. I find it all a bit schizophrenic.

1. Bioethical violations such as birth control

This position isn’t new, and it’s certainly not winning the hearts and minds of today’s progressives. If I understand this right, it seems to condemn genetically modified food as sinful too.

2. Morally dubious’ experiments such as stem cell research

Now this is the 21st century way of reminding us that the RC Church hates science. It doesn’t matter if stem cell research will cure disease or save lives. It doesn’t even matter if no embryos are damaged in the research. We’re just not supposed to know.

3. Drug abuse

Here’s the silver lining. Drug abuse is a sin, not drug use. So if you’re a strung-out meth-head, yeah you’re a sinner. However it seems that God has no problem if you take a little ecstasy at a weekend party.

4. Polluting the environment

I don’t know where this came from. I can’t recall the RC Church ever taking a pro-environmental stance before 2000. I guess this is their new policy to get back into the public’s good graces. Everyone really is going green.

5. Contributing to widening divide between rich and poor

6. Excessive wealth

7. Creating poverty

These last three are really just old time socialism. I don’t see why religion should get involved in economics. I know Jesus had no problem condemning rich people, but I didn’t think it was because they existed. I thought it was a critique of greed and being stingy with charity. Why would God care about what kind of economic system we use anyway? If everything in this world is supposed to be temporary and inconsequential, then how we choose to divide up money shouldn’t matter in the afterlife.

These three sins are pretty vague too. Why is it a sin to contribute to the wealth divide? Is any contribution a sin? If I’m rich, does that mean I’m sinning every time I earn money, even if it’s passive? If my stocks go up today, did I sin? If I sold property at a profit, did I sin? And where is the dividing line? Is everyone who is above the average income considered a sinner or is there some threshold? And what if my actions make the rich richer, but I don’t benefit?

Excessive wealth is now a sin, but what is “excessive”? That’s so vague it’s meaningless. Are the billionaires evil, but not me with a mere $500 million in assets? Do you count paper wealth like stocks or only hard assets? I guess this sin only applies to people right? It seems awfully hypocritical for the Catholic Church to denounce excessive wealth as it sits atop billions of dollars.

Then there is creating poverty. This is just bizarre. Who goes around creating poverty? If I choose to buy cheap coffee, does that cheapness make me a sinner? After all if I insist on low prices for my coffee (or any commodity really), that forces the coffee growers to lower the prices of their beans. I am creating their poverty by refusing to pay more, and apparently that’s a sin. This can apply to all Walmart shoppers too. If you go there to buy your cheap, plastic crap, you’re just going to cause poverty down the chain.

Maybe this sin applies to a situation where corporate executives move a manufacturing plant from one place to another. The town that loses the factory becomes poor, which would be the sin, but I guess creating new jobs in another town doesn’t cancel that out. Are those people in the new town, who fill these jobs, sinners? By accepting the jobs they are impoverishing another town after all.

The vagueness of these statements give away their real purpose. These aren’t really new sins but rather a public relations exercise for the Catholic Church. The sex scandals that pop up in the press every few years have taken their toll on the institution. This list is just a way for the church to try and generate some positive feelings about themselves. The first three aren’t really breaking new ground, but the last four are just pandering. It’s supposed to fool people into thinking the Catholic Church is fighting for the little guy. Thinking about this makes me even happier to be an atheist.

Today Eliot Spitzer, Governor of New York, admitted to using a super-expensive escort service. I’m sorry but there’s no way any woman is worth $4300. Maybe you could make the argument that at that price you’re also buying silence, but I think there are enough $500 to $1000 hookers out there that will keep quiet. None of that matters though when a federal wiretap records you making an appointment for sex.

I watched Spitzer step up to the podium and give that placid speech. He made no comment of substance and utterly avoided mentioning what the “private matter” was. Seeing Spitzer’s wife behind him as he spoke was far more interesting. To my eyes, she looked so distraught. I wouldn’t be surprised to hear she was crying before she stepped out in front of the media. I wonder if she first heard about this scandal just earlier that day.

But as I said, Spitzer’s speech had no meat in it. He didn’t confront the charges directly. More importantly he didn’t speak about whether he was leaving office. The consensus is that he must because he has no credibility, but Spitzer is a fighter by nature. I’d say he’s playing for time to see if this story will die down. He’s not the sort of guy to tuck his tail and resign from office. If the press keeps hammering at him over the next few days, they may help get him to quit, but it ultimately will be because other NY State Democrats push him out.

Yes the prudent thing for him is to keep his head down and say nothing, but I would like to see Spitzer go on the offensive. When I was listening to his bland announcement, I was reminded of McGreevey’s I am a Gay American speech. I wish Spitzer had followed in that strident tone. McGreevey practically dared people to criticize him. Of course he also resigned in that speech, so Spitzer can’t follow it exactly but there are some points he should pick up. Here is the speech I hope Spitzer will give the next time he’s forced to answer to the press.

Throughout my life, I have grappled with my own identity. I often felt ambivalent about myself, and that left me conflicted.

Thanks to the values impressed upon me by my family and my community, I worked hard to earn my piece of the American dream. I married a beautiful woman, Silda, and together we raised three wonderful daughters. My life was blessed with an extraordinary family and a successful career.

Yet, from as long ago as my youth, I acknowledged some feelings that set me apart from others. Because of my resolve, and also thinking I was choosing the greater good, I forced upon myself what I thought was an acceptable reality. But in every person’s life a moment comes where one must look into one’s soul and decide who they really are. Thanks to the US Department of Justice, that moment has come for me.

And so my truth is that I am a horny American. I enjoy the company of prostitutes. I have struggled with this fact, but I can no longer deny it is part of who I am. I realize this truth brings anguish to my beloved family, and for them I would rather have this moment pass. Yet it cannot, because the FBI won’t keep quiet.

I understand that my nature as a sex enthusiast, if kept secret, leaves the Governor’s office vulnerable to threats of disclosure. So I will remove these threats by telling you directly; Nevermind that a federal investigation was going to let this information out soon anyway.

With this issue now out in the open, I see no impediment to my exercising the full weight of my office. In fact now that this has been brought to light, I believe I would be more forthright in fulfilling my constitutional duties, free from the fears of maintaining this secret. I look forward to getting back to Albany and tackling the issues that truly worry New Yorkers.

One quick aside, Kristen I look forward to our appointment this evening. Silda, I’ll be home late again.

Thank you. I will not be taking questions.