Mrs ERJ went to a bridal shower yesterday and my brother who is an accountant was the designated "responsible adult" who volunteered to watch me.
We had a very wide ranging conversation with a heavy emphasis on investing. My brother likes to invest in "Value" plays. Those are companies that are making money the old-fashioned way. They make and distribute goods and services that customers are willing to pay more for than those goods and services cost to produce.
Non-recurring items
The challenge is that special accounting entries for non-recurring items like tax-writeoffs, divestments and the like dominate the gross financial metrics like Price/Earnings ratios. My dear brother is looking for businesses with solid core businesses. He is looking for businesses that make solid profits from normal operations year-after-year.
The non-recurring items are so pervasive and so large that it is hard to see the dog that is being wagged by the tail. That frustrates my brother.
Scrubbing away the accounting fou-fou is a big job and you cannot understand issues unless you can do it. The problem is not limited to the world of financial investments, either.
For example, most intellectuals in New York City would agree that it would be desirable to have every state in the US to urbanize to reduce energy consumption. They might point to the fact that New York State ranks 49th in terms of per-capita energy consumption as support for that argument.
Source |
The devil is in the details
New York State uses very little energy in their industries because finance and media and hospitality use very little energy.
Compare and contrast to Texas, a state that NYC dwellers like to look down upon.
Twenty-three percent of the energy used in industry in the United States is used in Texas. It takes a lot of energy to extract oil and gas from underground, especially off-shore. It takes a lot of energy to refine it and strip the sulfur from it and then to ship it to the end-users.
The spread between the two states narrows considerably if one were to take the energy costs of extracting-and-refining and assign those costs to the point-of-use.
Those costs can be stunningly large if you scrupulously account for every cost. For instance, the US Military determined that once all costs were rolled in, the cost of a gallon of fuel (probably diesel) delivered to a forward operating base in Afghanistan was $600 a gallon.
Life in the city may give the appearance of a small resource foot-print but that illusion is subsidized by expenses in other places: Energy in TX and LA, heavy pesticide use and Cartel violence in Mexico, child-labor in Asia and so on. The moral high-ground they claim is not all that high.
Embedded, difficult to maintain infrastructure
Another complication is that the infrastructure that supports NYC was never designed with ease-of-maintenance in mind. Sewers, water distribution lines, underground wires, subway tunnels, elevators, steel reinforced concrete and the like all have finite lifespans.
Lower population density areas will have higher per-capita infrastructure costs due to longer runs of pipe between residences and more square-feet of pavement, it is two orders of magnitude easier to service that infrastructure at 2500 residents per square-mile than it is at 25,000 residents per square-mile.
Bonus: Update on recovery
I thought I had a relapse yesterday morning.
I am an early morning person and Mrs ERJ is at her best after noon. So I was awake in bed waiting for her alarm to go off.
I had been doing some leg lifts with my broken leg on previous mornings to pass the time. Nothing radical, just a few inches off the surface and just a few reps.
Yesterday morning I was not able to lift my leg. Not an inch. It was pretty distressing.
The problem resolved itself after Mrs ERJ woke up. She reminded me that I had asked her to tuck in the blankets at the foot of the bed. Not only was I fighting gravity, I was also trying to yank the edges of the blankets out from beneath the mattress.
This morning the blankets were not tucked in and leg-lifts went off without a hitch.
Glad to hear you are doing better.
ReplyDeleteThis exactly mirrors my thinking on the "benefits" of urban centers. In point of fact, the modern urban center (to the best of my knowledge, although I need to dig in to this more) is in no way a self sufficient island: it depends on the outer world for energy, food, fuel, water, and even (in some cases) places to put the waste. If all of those costs were truly figured in, it becomes a rather horrendous economic and environmental nightmare.
Who wins a comparison depends on what is included - the "ground rules" as it were.
ReplyDeleteYou also have to make sure both sides are measuring the same thing.
For example, in international statistics the US appears to have worse infant mortality than almost any other country. When you look into the details, every country is measuring something different. Examples include: African countries who only take statistics on babies born in hospitals (the wealthiest 10% of the population), countries in Europe and Asia who only count babies born above a certain fairly high birth weight (ignoring all low birth weight and premature babies), countries who only count premature babies who make it to their full term delivery date...
Good points I haven't thought about in a while. Thanks for the refresher. --ken
ReplyDeleteDon't forget that higher density also makes for more concentrated waste. NYC has HUGE problems with disposing of trash and sewage.
ReplyDelete