How should we interpret Warren Buffet’s plan to invest in Goldman Sachs?

I’ll admit I am way out of my area of expertise on this. I prefer to remain as ignorant of the goings-on of Wall Street as possible. But since Wall Street has made itself significantly more relevant to the day-to-day lives of average Americans over the past week or two, I’ve been paying more attention.

Needless to say (well, maybe not, since I’m saying it), I’m not incredibly enthusiastic about the plan to give $700 billion from the taxpayers to these fail(ed/ing) investment banks. It’s probably a better way to spend the money than the war in Iraq, but not by much. It certainly puts some perspective on Washington’s reluctance to invest in things that would actually improve the lives of the people who are footing the bill (roads, schools, healthcare, etc.).

Here’s something else that puts some perspective on it: according to an article in today’s New York Times, Warren Buffet, investor extraordinaire, is planning to invest $5 billion, via his Berkshire Hathaway company (which clearly has not wasted the money on its website), in Goldman Sachs, one of the ailing investment banks. Now as I see it, Buffet is trying to help salvage the situation, and (being a smart capitalist) he’s also making an investment he believes will pay off for his company. But I think there’s something deeper and perhaps even more altruistic than simply providing a cushion for Wall Street CEOs who are fearful that their golden parachutes might not fully deploy.

Buffet’s move looks, to me, like a lesson by example to other ultra-rich investors: you might just be able to fix this problem yourselves, without dragging the rest of us down with a poorly-reasoned public bailout, the effects of which remain to be seen but are likely to be even more disastrous and long-lasting than the crisis they’re designed to avert.

Update: Then again, never mind.

OK, maybe she does look like Peggy Hill

There’ve been several suggestions of other famous women, both real and fictional, that Sarah Palin resembles, and she’s been spoofed by a few of them, including Tina Fey and Gina Gershon.

One of the comparisons I just didn’t get was Peggy Hill. Yes, that Peggy Hill. But now that I’ve seen the caricature of Palin in the September 22 issue of the New Yorker, it makes a little more sense.

Now John McCain as Cotton Hill, that I can see.

At last you can satisfy your ravenous appetite for room34.com RSS feeds

I’ve just set up a brand new page of RSS feeds. Now you have a choice of not just the plain vanilla (no, make that a “kamikaze” Mr. Misty* from Dairy Queen) feed with everything in it, but a separate feed for every category of Blather in the known universe (if the extent of the “known universe” is this website).

Check it out!

*I’m no longer the Dairy Queen aficionado I was in my youth, but there’s one a few blocks from my house and we occasionally take the kids there in the summer. I’ve noticed this strange thing lately on the menu called “Arctic Rush.” Never having been a Mr. Misty fan myself, I didn’t notice it had disappeared from the menu, and apparently it has just been renamed. Personally I think “Arctic Rush” sounds lame… something an inferior competitor would come with. Burger King, perhaps, or McDonalds. Except then it would be the “Arctic McRush with Cheese” or something.

Obama’s electoral college challenge

This interactive tool from the LA Times reveals the daunting challenge Barack Obama faces in this election. It lets you paint the electoral map based on which candidate you expect to win each state. Remember, the popular vote doesn’t matter: in the end, 270 electoral votes are the only thing that can make someone president.

This tool defaults to Republican, Democrat, or toss-up, based upon the 2004 election results. Any state with a margin of victory of 8 points or less in that year is considered a toss-up. This is somewhat disingenuous, as it doesn’t take into account current trends and polls (for what they’re worth). But it’s as good a place to start as any and it seems to line up pretty well with what we’re seeing in the polls (for what they’re worth) this year.

I took the challenge, and went with my best guesses for those toss-up states: I painted Washington, Oregon, Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, New Jersey and Delaware “Democrat Blue” and Nevada, Missouri and Florida “Republican Red.” That left three states in play: Colorado, New Mexico, and Ohio. Ohio is a 20-vote powder keg in this election. If McCain wins Ohio (along with the other three states that I think are fairly safe for him), and Obama prevails in the entire, aggressive slate of ten states I assigned to him, Obama still must win Colorado and New Mexico to (just barely) win the election. Ouch.