For a surprisingly balanced view of the current row, I recommend taking a look at Jay Hancock’s coverage in the Baltimore Sun and his blog.  I cannot add more to what he has already written.  I have to agree completely with the point he makes here:

Stock ownership and board votes are the alpha and omega of substantial control. All corporate law is predicated on the notion that the people who own companies and the boards that supervise them are the controlling entities. This PSC sentence — “Once a proposed transaction includes elements other than acquisition of stock and board designation rights, it no longer is eligible for the (e)(2) exception.” — is Orwellian in its casual assertion of omnipotence. By such logic, if Constellation wanted to give an ice cream party for EDF or another business partner, the PSC could block the deal.

What the PSC did in deciding to wait until September to provide an approval on the EDF-Constellation merger was to disobey the law passed by the General Assembly in 2008 that allowed such a deal.  Moreover, the rather unfriendly action sets the table for O’Malley and the Attorney General to examine the compensation of Constellation CEO Mayo Shattuck.  Personally, I think CEO pay across the board is a bit excessive, but O’Malley’s comments and the actions of the Attorney General set a dangerous precedent for other large and profitable corporations that wish to setup shop in Maryland.  The takeaway here is no business is safe from the Big Brother that is Maryland state government.

Constellation has started to go on the offensive in getting information out about the venture, and they have been doing it across all of the usual mediums.  There’s a Facebook page, a Twitter account, and a new website as well.  At the end of the day, getting this information out in as many mediums as possible is a laudable effort.

The joint venture is needed for the continued viability of Constellation Energy and the future of power generation in Maryland.  FWIW, nuclear power is an excellent solution to our need for energy that reduces a reliance on foreign oil and appeals to clean energy.  This venture is a step in the right direction for both Maryland and Constellation Energy.

The churning of the ongoing financial crisis has truly hit home with what happened last week.  I could speculate on how this happened, but I would be terribly wrong on some points–and violating company policy.  At the end of the day–at this point–Warren Buffett and a subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway have come to the rescue. 

Personally, I think that having Buffett come in speaks volumes to how he views the company.  The unfortunate part of this, though, is the effect this deal has on those folks who worked for the company for a long time.  They have seen the stock they owned as part of their retirement package plummet in value in a matter of 48 hours. 

In any event, it’s business as usual.

Wow.  The government wants me to stimulate the economy with $13.85.  Looks like that will either buy me lunch or a couple of beers.  Needless to say, my stimulating of the economy will be slight.

Two jobs I can think of immediately is working in a coffeehouse or a bar.  Of course, I only have experience on the customer side of the counter in both of these environments. The other position I can think of would be to go work in the computer department of one of the “big box” stores.  Obviously, I have lots of experience  to apply to that position.

Decisions, decisions.  In any event, I need to figure something out and

The counter-offer was for $217,500, with some stipulations that we close on the house by the end of this month. They agreed to the items I pointed out that needed repair as well. Nonetheless, if we look at this new price and the agreed closing assistance, the home actually really sells for $214,500. They also made the offer that if we wanted to go to the original price, they would increase closing assistance to $5,000. At the end of the day, the house sells for $214,500. The house was originally listed at $239,900 in early January.

My agent recommended that we go as high as $216,000, but I am not changing the original offer. For one, my offer is a fair one considering the homes that are selling or have sold in the area. Secondly, the house was purchased for $100,000 last year, and I figure the seller put in $40,000 in rehab work. The house does not have a 1/2 bath, and the house does not come with a washer and dryer. In the kitchen, the countertops are standard laminate, and the refrigerator is not nearly as nice as it could be.

I am also sticking to my original offer given these factors. I don’t want to feel pressured, and if they decline my offer I can go shopping elsewhere. I am certain they will decline the offer I made, so if they do I just go back to looking around. At the end of the day, my negotiating position is better–especially in light of the slowing housing market. I have time on my side, and according to the counter-offer, the seller is looking to move along. My offer stands.

My credit score is not exactly where we would like it to be, although it is not as bad as I thought it would be. It could stand to be higher, though, given that I am probably going to not have a terribly large amount of money to put down. I think I will talk to my grandfather and uncle on that, and maybe I raid my retirement again expressly for this purpose. In some sense, I am robbing my future to pay for the present. Admittedly, though, doing this is going to be beneficial in the long run. The tax benefit alone will certainly help me in the long run, as will the equity in getting rid of some of my other debts. Initially, I can see some of this being a bit tough in the early going, but with some discipline this is doable. Of course, this is presuming I go all out.

In any event, I have an idea of what I can afford. Now, the fun part begins. I can begin looking around at homes.

After dithering for a short time and waiting out a somewhat torrid housing market, the time for me to buy a house is now. I am not paying more in rent than I am paying now, and I do not want to be forced out of my current place due to a change of heart by the potential new owners. I don’t quite know exactly how I am going to pull it off, as I must admit to not having anything squirreled away for this purchase.

When I originally thought about buying a couple of years ago, I was hemming and hawing about buying after moving out of a living arrangement with my then girlfriend. I wound up not buying, as the housing market at that time was starting to reach a rather supernova-like temperature in Federal Hill and South Baltimore. Admittedly, I was not looking to move out of my neighborhood.

This time, I am a bit more amenable to moving away from the neighborhood. I will admit I will miss it, but at the same time most of the housing prices in that area are simply not manageable for a single person not making something approaching or over a six figure salary. Unless something changes soon–and that’s not happening–I do not see myself affording the neighborhood unless I stretch myself for a home in the $250k to $275k range. Thus, my thoughts on potential neighborhoods is breaking down in this fashion:

I must admit I am not looking for a place that is lavishly rehabbed, however I really do not want to move into a complete fixer-upper. Maybe something where work can be done at the margins. Of course, if one can get a good rehab at a decent cost, it might be worth jumping on it. Additionally, living in the suburbs is out of the question. I like what the city offers me now, and I think I would be utterly bored out of my mind living anywhere but in an urban environment. I can still have the perks that the suburbs offers within a short driving distance.

I am going to talk to one of my friends today who recommended his mortgage guy, and I might talk to a couple of other friends of mine. The bottom line is that I plan to be a homeowner come hell or high-water by the end of the summer, and I am going to do whatever it takes to make it happen. I am certainly not going to rush into anything, but at the same time I think it is time for me to take this step. Besides, how awesome would it be to invite people over to stately Thomas Manor?

Ms. Schwab was my former dean when I was in graduate school at the University of Maryland School of Public Policy. When I first began my professional career, she was my first boss. When I was a research assistant for one of my professors–interestingly enough on a IIE Policy Analysis called Renewing Fast-Track Legislation–she drove me back from the reception on Capitol Hill. When I departed that position, I did not leave it on the best of terms. As a matter of fact, my letter of resignation included a note on my frustrations with the position and the administration. Looking back, I think a large part of my frustrations were born out of my history there as a student. As such, many administrators had a hard time looking beyond my recent past.

In any event, I wish her the best of luck. I know in the last few years as she moved out of the Dean’s chair at the School, she was looking to get a job within the Administration. This goes back to her history on the Hill, so here’s hoping she goes on to do good things.

The book can best be summarized as an examination on the effect that globalization has had on the world–making the world much flatter than it has ever been. In some sense, one can say that Friedman sees the current revolution as the “Flattening Revolution”–a change much akin to the Industrial Revolution. Needless to say, Friedman goes onto say that the flattening of the world is a good thing, and he proceeds to identify ways in which the flattening effects should be embraced. The flattening of the world should not be a call to raise barriers to slow its progress.

I found the book to be a rather large simplification of economic globalization. For the uninitiated, this book is a wonderful introduction to the effect that the removal of barriers to trade and labor have in the arena of international economics. Friedman has a tendency to go on ad nauseum about the various examples of what he sees as the successful results of recognizing the flattening of the world. I would have to argue, however, that his flatteners are merely technological innovations that have resulted in increased worker productivity. Additionally, I would also argue that outsourcing is merely another example of the flow of labor unimpeded by barriers to its flow. Any student of international economics can easily explain this phenomenon. Another issue I had with the book is how Friedman explains his informal theory of how any two nations with McDonalds have never come to war with one another–he reshapes this theory in this book as the Dell Theory of Conflict Prevention–essentially, those countries who may be long-time nemeses will not engage in hostile acts as a result of their participation in and benefit derived from being part of a global supply chain. Now, I have heard this notion before in various economics classes through college and grad school, but it was never attributed to Tom Friedman.
One of the more interesting components that Friedman addresses is the recognition of the flattening effects and how to embrace these effects. Friedman points out that outsourcing is not in itself a bad thing. Instead, he advises, that we should take advantage of the outsourcing. For example, he argues that China is a wonderful place to act as the research arm of various multinational corporations–given their rather large pool of talent.
Friedman also recognizes that the flattening of the world has only had an effect on certain areas of the globe. While India and China have certainly benefitted from it, there are only certain regions of both countries that have been successful byproducts of this effect. The other key is to be able to extend that flattening to areas of those countries that need it.

Another interesting argument he makes is that there are certain efforts attempting to undermine the flattening of the globe. Islamic terrorism–or as he calls it Islamo-Leninism–is a large part of this. While this is true, terrorism is just one example of transnational threats that will undermine globalization. I think he is right to identify a source of Islamic terrorism as the notion of an educated elite, however that only explains part of the rise in such groups. Much like any revolutionary movement–such as that of colonial America or pre-Napoleonic France–these movements result from the a perceived injustice. Friedman is correct, though, in seizing upon the notion that the existence of this threat should not be the reason that globalization–flattening–be stopped in its tracks.

If you are looking at a good introduction of what is occurring in the global marketplace, this is not a bad book to read at all. It is an easy read, but Friedman likes to take his examples a bit further than I would like. Nonetheless, I recommend this book for the uninitiated. If you have any background or more than a passing interest in this subject matter, please find something else to read that is much more in-depth.