Getting the country back on track through illegal immigration

I recently received an email from a friend - one of those political email forwards - about immigration and social security. The details of the email can be found here.

I have been thinking about immigration lately and receiving this email and seeing excerpts from last nights Democratic debate energized me to write down my thoughts. The crux of the email is that because illegal immigrants do not pay into social security, they should not be eligible to receive its benefits.

I think a lot of illegal immigrants do actually pay into social security. Almost all agriculture, food service and hospitality businesses require social security cards upon hiring a new employee. The big loophole being discussed in the immigration debate (besides law enforcement at the border) is whether the businesses should be required to verify if the social security card is actually valid - illegal immigrants use fake social security cards to get jobs. Most businesses complain that there is not adequate federal infrastructure to make social security verification cost-effective and therefore want the government to provide an easy verification system before they comply (an aside: how amazing is it that this process is not as simple as logging onto a website considering how technologically advanced the US is with databases and internet infrastructure).

Even still, as a result of the social security card being presented, two things happen: wages meet minimum wage requirements and taxes are paid when payroll is processed. What does not happen is that illegal immigrants usually do not organize into unions and they do not sign up for things like auto and health insurance - - all three of which would bring more parity with them as individuals but would also bring scrutiny to their life and illegal status.

The biggest hole is the cash jobs like gardeners and house-keepers. All of this money is transacted below the radar of the IRS and therefore no money is paid into social security. Typically it is not a business who is hiring the person, but rather someone like me or you who does not have the tax / payroll infrastructure to make it easy for us to report (even though reporting the cost would actually be tax deductible for us).

Our trade deficits and declining dollar are a direct result of our loss of ability to produce tangible products and materials that are marketable around the world. A services based economy does not produce anything tangible and therefore will not produce wealth in the long-term. The whole great lakes region, where I originally hail from, is a micro-example of how the loss of manufacturing power leads to loss / transfer of wealth. If we want to continue being a wealthy country, we need to think about how to produce more raw and finished goods that we can sell to other people around the world... to get it done, we need people who do not mind rolling up their sleeves and doing the dirty work. In other words, the US needs more human capital. Just like scholarships help recruit good people to colleges, social security benefits (and other freebies) is one way to recruit more productive people to our country.

Gamblers appreciate, winners cash flow... why the Facebook deal makes sense for Microsoft

In today's San Francisco Chronicle, the editorial board wrote an editorial entitled, "Facing the money" which had this to day:

"In case you were wondering whether or not we had reached the 'bubble' stage for Web 2.0, consider this: Software juggernaut Microsoft just bought 1.6 percent of social networking portal Facebook. For $240 million... That investment effectively gives Facebook a value of about $15 billion... There's no doubt that [Microsoft] paid way too much for Facebook..."

Did they really pay "way too much?" It depends on your perspective.

1. Everyone is making way too much noise about Microsoft valuing Facebook at $15 billion. Microsoft did not pay $15 billion. They paid only $240 million. That is a 1/62 of the total valuation.
2. Everyone is making way too much noise about how Microsoft only got 1.6% of the company. Percentage ownership matters only if that is your priority. I think only owning 1.6% of the company is directly in alignment with Microsoft's priorities. Remember on October 1, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer told the Times Online, "I think these things [social networks] are going to have some legs, and yet there’s a faddishness, a faddish nature about anything that basically appeals to younger people.” Buying a big stake in a company matters if you expect the stock price or valuation to rise. Clearly, Microsoft thinks that would be a long shot, leading to the next point...
3. So, what was Microsoft's priority? Competitive positioning is one. As the aforementioned Chronicle editorial pointed out, "The beautiful thing about Microsoft's offer is that it wipes out the competition - with a valuation that everyone knows is hyped, Facebook is unlikely to get many more suitors." In other words, Yahoo and Google are on the outside looking in.
   
4. And the other priority is... Cash flow. Read between the lines. What Microsoft really got out of the deal was the right to sell the global advertising inventory on all Facebook properties. Google paid $900 million for the right to do this on MySpace for only three years. Microsoft paid $240 million for the right to do this on Facebook in perpetuity (ie. forever). With Facebook adding 200,000 users per day, according to the Chronicle editorial, Microsoft's AdCenter product just gained a lot of credibility in the market and a big opportunity for increased profits far in excess of the $240 million investment.

So while the market howls at the gaffe Microsoft made, the reality is that Microsoft, in an extremely savvy way, locked in a heckuva a competitive position and an even larger amount of potential revenue for a relatively low price (4/15 of the Google-Myspace deal; 1/4 the Google-AOL $1 billion deal a couple of years ago). AND, they don't need to worry if the financial markets turn on Facebook because they only own 1.6% and user growth, what matters for cash flow, is growing fast enough to give MySpace a run for their money. Very savvy indeed.

Modus College Football Rankings - 10/28/2007

The following are the statistics from this past weekend's Modus Rankings predicitions and this weeks rankings (parentheses denotes statistic from last week).

Modus Rankings Prediction Success Rate: 69% (64%)
Modus Rankings vs. BCS Top 25: -1.48 (-2.28)
Modus Rankings vs. BCS Top 25: -1.90 (-1.10)

The following are this weeks Top 25 Modus College Football Rankings plus rankings of any team within the top 25 last week.

RANK	MODUS Rankings	Last	Change	BCS Rankings	Diff
1	Arizona St.	1	0	Ohio St.	-2
2	Kansas	3	1	Boston College	-2
3	Ohio St.	2	-1	LSU	-2
4	Boston College	4	0	Arizona St.	3
5	LSU	5	0	Oregon	-3
6	Hawaii	6	0	Oklahoma	-3
7	West Virginia	9	2	West Virginia	0
8	Oregon	8	0	Kansas	6
9	Oklahoma	7	-2	Missouri	-3
10	Boise St.	13	3	Georgia	-13
11	Connecticut	15	4	Virginia Tech	-17
12	Missouri	14	2	Michigan	-3
13	Texas	18	5	Connecticut	2
14	Virginia	10	-4	Hawaii	8
15	Michigan	21	6	Texas	2
16	Purdue	27	11	Auburn	-14
17	South Fla.	11	-6	Alabama	-4
18	Southern California	12	-6	South Fla.	1
19	Clemson	30	11	Southern California	1
20	Wisconsin	31	11	Florida	-22
21	Alabama	22	1	Wisconsin	1
22	Troy	38	16	Boise St.	12
23	Georgia	36	13	Virginia	9
24	Wake Forest	33	9	Wake Forest	0
25	New Mexico	37	12	Clemson	6
26	Cincinnati	23	-3
27	BYU	28	1
28	Virginia Tech	16	-12
29	Penn St.	17	-12
30	Auburn	39	9
31	Texas Tech	19	-12
32	Kentucky	20	-12
33	Illinois	44	11
34	Texas A&M	24	-10
35	South Carolina	25	-10

Week 9 College Football Predictions - 10/24/2007

A more competitive week coming up. The following are competition statistics for this week's games based on the most recent Modus Rankings (denotes last week's stat):

• Average Rank Delta of Opponents: 34 (35)
• Median Rank Delta of Opponents: 26 (28)
• Top 25 Opponents: 5 (-) 10% of total
• Opponents within 10 Ranks: 8 (7) 15% of total
• Opponents more than 25 Ranks apart: 28 (30) 53% of total
• Div I-A vs. Div II-A Games: 1 (2) 2% of total

The following are the big interesting games this week (sorted by home team, predicted winners highlighted blue):

Institution	Rank		Opponent	Rank
Arizona St.	1		California	32
Connecticut	15		South Fla.	11
Georgia	36		Florida	29
Oregon	8		Southern California	12
Penn St.	17		Ohio St.	2
Rutgers	26		West Virginia	9
Tennessee	49		South Carolina	25
Texas A&M	24		Kansas	3
Virginia Tech	16		Boston College	4

The remaining predictions are sorted alphabetically by the home team:

Institution	Rank		Opponent	Rank
Arkansas	57		Florida Int'l	119
Arkansas St.	78		Troy	38
Auburn	39		Mississippi	99
Bowling Green	68		Ohio	92
Buffalo	82		Akron	77
Colorado St.	107		Utah	46
East Caro.	69		UAB	103
Eastern Mich.	104		Western Mich.	83
Fla. Atlantic	64		La.-Monroe	97
Florida St.	54		Duke	106
Fresno St.	41		Boise St.	13
Hawaii	6		New Mexico St.	76
Illinois	44		Ball St.	50
Iowa	80		Michigan St.	40
Kansas St.	53		Baylor	89
Kent St.	85		Central Mich.	73
Kentucky	20		Mississippi St.	70
Louisville	65		Pittsburgh	75
Marshall	118		Rice	114
Maryland	60		Clemson	30
Michigan	21		Minnesota	109
Missouri	14		Iowa St.	111
Navy	55		Delaware	nr
Nevada	79		Idaho	113
New Mexico	37		Air Force	35
North Carolina St.	96		Virginia	10
North Texas	112		Middle Tenn. St.	86
Oregon St.	56		Stanford	74
Purdue	27		Northwestern	51
San Diego St.*	101		BYU*	28
Southern Miss.	72		UCF	58
Texas	18		Nebraska	67
Texas Tech	19		Colorado	61
Toledo	90		Northern Ill.	116
Tulane	102		Memphis	84
Tulsa	59		Southern Methodist	110
Utah St.	117		Louisiana Tech	98
UTEP	63		Houston	48
Vanderbilt	62		Miami (Ohio)	71
Wake Forest	33		North Carolina	93
Washington	87		Arizona	100
Washington St.	94		UCLA	34
Wisconsin	31		Indiana	52
Wyoming	45		UNLV	95

* The San Diego St. / BYU game has been postponed.

Special Edition: Arizona State vs. Cal Prediction

For this weekend's big game in Tempe, I predict:
One team, probably ASU, falls behind by 10+ points early but comes back to make it a game in 4th quarter. A costly mistake in the last 7 minutes will make the difference in who wins or loses... but in the end, the loss would have been avoided had the losing coach made a gutsier call earlier in the game.

Mathlete Tunes

Nice: π

YTMND, in doses, can often bring an unexpected smile. YTMND stands for You're The Man Now Dog a reference to a quote by Sean Connery in the 2000 movie Finding Forrester.

Modus College Football Rankings - 10/21/2007

Modus Rankings predicted 64% of outcomes this weekend correctly. The Modus Rankings Top 25 differs from the BCS Rankings Top 25 by an average of -2.28 (Modus Ranks teams 2.28 lower than the same team is ranked in the BCS) which is down from -1.32 last week. The Modus Rankings Top 10 differs from the BCS Rankings Top 10 by an average of -1.1 down from -1.8 last week. The following are this weeks Top 25 Modus College Football Rankings plus rankings of any team within the top 25 last week.

RANK	MODUS	Last	Change		BCS	Diff
1	Arizona St.	1	0		Ohio State	-1
2	Ohio St.	3	1		Boston College	-2
3	Kansas	2	-1		LSU	-2
4	Boston College	5	1		Arizona State	3
5	LSU	6	1		Oregon	-3
6	Hawaii	7	1		Oklahoma	-1
7	Oklahoma	8	1		West Virginia	-2
8	Oregon	10	2		Virginia Tech	-8
9	West Virginia	9	0		Kansas	6
10	Virginia	14	4		South Florida	-1
11	South Fla.	4	-7		Florida	-18
12	USC	16	4		USC	-
13	Boise St.	19	6		Missouri	-1
14	Missouri	18	4		Kentucky	-6
15	Connecticut	21	6		Virginia	5
16	Virginia Tech	20	4		South Carolina	-9
17	Penn St.	23	6		Hawaii	11
18	Texas	24	6		Georgia	-18
19	Texas Tech	11	-8		Texas	1
20	Kentucky	12	-8		Michigan	-1
21	Michigan	27	6		California	-11
22	Alabama	32	10		Auburn	-17
23	Cincinnati	13	-10		Connecticut	8
24	Texas A&M	34	10		Alabama	2
25	South Carolina	15	-10		Penn State	8
26	Rutgers	38	12
27	Purdue	37	10
28	BYU	26	-2
29	Florida	35	6
30	Clemson	46	16
31	Wisconsin	33	2
32	California	17	-15
33	Wake Forest	39	6
34	UCLA	43	9
35	Air Force	41	6
36	Georgia	28	-8
37	New Mexico	44	7
38	Troy	48	10
39	Auburn	22	-17
40	Michigan St.	25	-15

Modus College Football Predictions - 10/20/2007

This week the games are going to be less competitive than last week. The following are competition statistics for this week's games (denotes last week's stat):

• Average Rank Delta of Opponents: 35 (36)
• Median Rank Delta of Opponents: 28 (27)
• Opponents within 10 Ranks: 7 (9)
• Opponents more than 25 Ranks apart: 30 (30)
• Div I-A vs. Div II-A Games: 2 (1)

The following predictions are sorted alphabetically by the home team.

Institution	Rank		Opponent	Rank		Prediction
Air Force	41		Wyoming	29		Wyoming
Alabama	32		Tennessee	31		Tennessee
Arizona	95		Stanford	84		Stanford
Baylor	81		Texas	24		Texas
BYU	26		Eastern Wash.	nr		BYU
Clemson	46		Central Mich.	66		Clemson
Colorado	50		Kansas	2		Kansas
Connecticut	21		Louisville	57		Connecticut
East Caro.	59		North Carolina St.	106		East Caro.
Florida St.	40		Miami (Fla.)	60		Florida St.
Fresno St.	51		San Jose St.	83		Fresno St.
Georgia Tech	53		Army	82		Georgia Tech
Illinois	30		Michigan	27		Michigan
Indiana	42		Penn St.	23		Penn St.
Iowa St.	110		Oklahoma	8		Oklahoma
Kent St.	78		Bowling Green	75		Bowling Green
Kentucky	12		Florida	35		Kentucky
La.-Lafayette	115		Fla. Atlantic	71		Fla. Atlantic
La.-Monroe	104		Florida Int'l	119		La.-Monroe
Louisiana Tech	92		Boise St.	19		Boise St.
LSU	6		Auburn	22		LSU
Marshall	118		Southern Miss.	73		Southern Miss.
Maryland	49		Virginia	14		Virginia
Middle Tenn. St.	99		Arkansas St.	70		Arkansas St.
Minnesota	102		North Dakota St.	nr		Minnesota
Mississippi	91		Arkansas	68		Arkansas
Missouri	18		Texas Tech	11		Texas Tech
Navy	45		Wake Forest	39		Wake Forest
Nebraska	54		Texas A&M	34		Texas A&M
New Mexico St.	87		Idaho	111		New Mexico St.
Northwestern	64		Eastern Mich.	101		Northwestern
Notre Dame	105		USC	16		USC
Ohio St.	3		Michigan St.	25		Ohio St.
Oklahoma St.	55		Kansas St.	36		Kansas St.
Pittsburgh	88		Cincinnati	13		Cincinnati
Purdue	37		Iowa	74		Purdue
Rice	113		Memphis	98		Memphis
Rutgers	38		South Fla.	4		South Fla.
San Diego St.	96		New Mexico	44		New Mexico
South Carolina	15		Vanderbilt	72		South Carolina
Southern Methodist	107		Tulane	108		Southern Methodist
Syracuse	112		Buffalo	77		Buffalo
TCU	56		Utah	58		TCU
Temple	93		Miami (Ohio)	65		Miami (Ohio)
Toledo	100		Ohio	85		Ohio
Troy	48		North Texas	109		Troy
UAB	97		Houston	67		Houston
UCF	69		Tulsa	47		Tulsa
UCLA	43		California	17		California
UNLV	89		Colorado St.	116		UNLV
Utah St.	117		Nevada	86		Nevada
Washington	80		Oregon	10		Oregon
West Virginia	9		Mississippi St.	63		West Virginia
Western Mich.	79		Ball St.	61		Ball St.
Wisconsin	33		Northern Ill.	114		Wisconsin

*Note: All predictions are based on rankings after last week's games. As a result, you will see some of the predictions of games already played that do not match the outcome (South Fla predicted over Rutgers).