goog

So google shot up today, and apparently it was due to: google’s tremendous drop before, a large short positions on the stock, and google beating estimates. the rise in earnings had people buying the stock. this repurchase probably caused a short squeeze- further raising the stock. just to show how much money you could have made: an april option, that is now in the money, went up 40 dollars a batch. if you bought 2 contracts you would have made $8,000 overnight, but this stuff is boring. This attached blog, however, is not so boring. somehow the blogger was able to put google, crazy college kids, eliot spitzer, “tricycles”, and california into one post:

“Ok, I’m a stupid college student. I shorted 100 shares of Google before close today and don’t know what to do. I just blew all my money and don’t have enough for my margin call tomorrow. I won’t be able to sleep tonight. My parents will KILL me if they hear about this.

So, for those of you who made tons of cash today and live in the Los Angeles area:

I’m willing to sell myself to you tonight. I will even bring my girlfriend so you can have TWO girls. I’m asking for $5,000 for a night you will never forget. You can have both of us anyway you want. You can even do us without a condom (if you aren’t showing any signs of a desease). You can have us all night long until 7:00 am tomorrow.

I need the payment in cash. See my pics. My girlfriend and I are much better than the whore picked up by the NY governer. And we don’t do this for a living, we are safe. Please don’t waste my time with BS. Just post your e-mail address and I’ll get back to you if you can help.”

original yahoo finance post

Port Security II

The Dubai Ports Deal Fiasco: Is Globalization to Blame?

Recently the Dubai Ports deal has garnered a large amount of attention from diverse people ranging from reporter Lou Dobbs to law makers like Hillary Clinton.  Besides the obvious concerns about security this recent event is another example of the debate over the big G.  Globalization has been present throughout history, but it is only in the past two decades has Globalization gained prominence.  So what is globalization, and why does it cause so much friction in society?

According to Jan Aart Scholte, in his book Globalization: A Critical Introduction, globalization is a process which allows connections and interactions between peoples to exist regardless of the physical-territorial-places the person might currently be located.  Scholte’s goes on to say that globalization contributes to a “proliferation of social connections that are…detached from a territorial logic,” (p 47) as results of two factors.  The first factor-compression of the world; leads to the second factor-interactions that transcend the boundaries of the territorial state.  Scholte observes that the space separating people is becoming smaller.  In the past technology like the printing press and centralized governments gave rise to the creation of a national community; technology today has given rise to a quicker and a greater connectiveness building the global community.  The advent of the satellite, internet, and jet plane all has decreased the significance of space and time allowing for the process of globalization.  It is the process of globalization which allows for events like the Dubai Ports deal.  The opportunity cost of large distances has shrunk making lower operating costs a larger factor than the company’s physical location.  But this phenomenon is not new.  Today it is common to see events like outsourcing tech support service jobs. Similarly outsourcing of manufacturing is becoming a main stay as super ocean transporters, GPS and RF tracking tags, and supply chains have pushed the process of globalization allowing for the growth of outsourcing.  In these examples of outsourcing are labeled free trade not a national security threat.

The process of globalization also contributes to the dichotomy between reaction towards the Ports Deal and other forms of outsourcing.  In other industries adaptation and innovation became solutions.  Employees moved to sectors not readily exportable; corporations reconsidered cost cutting measures.  Despite initial opposition, there was eventually acceptance and then innovation.  However, with port operations the main focus is the perceived threat to national security.  The reaction to the Dubai Ports is in many ways like agricultural subsidies for security reasons.  This perception of a foreign threat is a direct result of globalization.  While globalization has allowed McDonalds to proliferate globally it also allows cultures to retain autonomy outside its historical territorial bounds.  This notion seems to hold true for the many unassimilated Muslim population in Europe causing a negative perception in the West of the Islamic culture.

Whether these perceived threats are real or not globalization can create friction.  Acting in two ways globalization allows for the existence of these events, and globalization can contribute to resentment and distrust.  Perhaps it is this perception which triggered a negative response to foreign ownership of ports only after an Arab nation took over the ports. Regardless of accuracy, globalization helps perpetuate the changing perceptions of different cultures and peoples causing friction in the social fabric of nation states trying to reconcile the old notions of national sovereignty with the new dynamics brought on by globalization.

Port Security I

For my first entry I will talk about this episode of Montel Williams I saw recently on day time TV. First let me say I hate talk shows and I suffer greatly when I am home because I do not have cable TV. Normally during day time TV I am switching between game shows, and PBS, but that day Montel did something very interesting- He hosted some news reporters to discuss current issues facing the nation. One issue that was brought up was the Dubai Ports deal, and how the administration really dropped the ball on that one. People defending the president said that it was racist to discriminate against Dubai’s intensions due to the fact they were Arab, while those against it point to the UAE’s dubaious record when it came to terrorism. Personally I feel like both sides have credible arguments and counter arguments. Something I would consider if I was in a situation to make a difference would be: possible backlash from the US’s new ally the UAE or other Arab nations, possible ramifications with free trade, UAE’s record on terrorism…

However, to me the saddest part of the whole deal is the fact that the port management industry in the US is not competitive enough to compete with foreign companies. Whether it is poor management, unreasonable union demands, a little bit of both, or something totally different the fact is that US corporations cannot compete in that market. Even though the situation was diffused when DB World Ports agreed to give up the operations to a domestic company we realize that there are no domestic capable of running the operations. In the end there will probably need to be government support for ports operations! In this global economy it is essential to innovate and remain competitive. Otherwise two things will happen: either the industry gets outsourced like team India Dell Tech support or reservations are raised and the government has to step in. The Port Security II post is an essay I wrote on the situation read it if you have time.