Author Archives: Jason

About Jason

Jason R. Koepke is Founder and Data Strategist at GNT LLC, a risk-analysis and data strategy firm that provides analytical and technical services to the public and private sectors. His work and research has been featured in the academic, financial, and technical industries.

Be Your Own Pet, Black Lips, and The Points at Black Cat

As planned, I missed the first two bands, only because opening acts are no longer worth it for me (plus, I am seeing four to six shows this week); I leave watching usually-bad performances for the younger generation.

Speaking of younger generation, Be Your Own Pet rocked. The onstage energy and (minimum) humorous banter made this show worth seeing, even if they only played for at most 45 minutes (and with no encore! I love these guys!). The crowd was a bit beligerant for some reason, but oh well; DC crowds are known for their oddities, although this is mainly their non-dancing and depressed attitudes. Overall, it reminded me of punk/rock shows where people were excited to watch and bands excited to perform, a combination that usually happens on a smaller or more local scale.

Surprisingly, this show was not packed and did not sell out. I had bought my ticket in advanced because I assumed the hipster community would come out in force for this Thurston Moore-approved, Pitchfork-lauded group. Not so.

Besides being an extremely good show–and one that will be considered for, but not win, my show of the year–it also brought to mine the occasionally used “maturity” aspect of a band. Normally, describing a band as “mature” happens when the band has become old and no longer rocks like they once did. Used like this, the term is fairly lame as it is not helpful, but that’s the way of the music critic.

Regardless, BYOP, despite being an excellent band and putting on an excellent show, is a useful example in highlighting what should be meant by a band being mature. For example, none of the equipment was set up when I arrived (although this could some sort of snafu, as they started out their set telling Baltimore to go fuck themselves; i.e., perhaps they played Baltimore the other night and something happened that caused them to be late). And one of my pet peeves, which BYOP did, was discuss the set list on stage and in between songs; it is great to tweak or add songs based on the show, but a band needs to know what’s what and not make the audience wait (especially when you are only playing a 45 minute set!). There are a couple other minor examples of this but none are as significant.

Over time, the band will probably “mature” into a properly performing group, although hopefully without “maturing” into not rocking.

Ratatat, Envelopes, Panther at Black Cat

A band like Ratatat makes you really think. One of the questions I have is why do they have such bad bands open for them? Both Panther, a lone gent, and Envelope, a four piece with three guitars, are part of that re-energized thread of rock where effort is uncool (and I don’t mean unkool). They, and their fans I suppose, are content with mediocre songs, mediocre talent, and–the worst part–a half-ass attitude that provides those classical music critics of DIY legitimate grounds for attack. At least Envelopes are consistent with lines such as “We don’t care” that are repeated for most of the song.

Another question Ratatat raises is why don’t more young white people like hip hop? True, the proper question is why doesn’t everyone like hip hop, but that’s a different conversation. Here we have a band that blends a wide variety of music (metal, prog rock, jam band, ambient, electronica) while maintaining a core (instrumental) hip hop sound. This is exactly the type of bands that should be attracting anti-hip hoppers and converting them into die hard underground heads.

In the end, they performed a great show with tracks from both albums (they only have two, right?). The sound was good, stage presence solid (including Slash-like guitar playing and sounds), and show rocking–in spite of the overwelming number of youngin’s.

Bush Administration’s Pro-Environment Foreign Policy

Odd that I have not seen any other articles, discussions, or references to this:

The New York Times

October 2, 2006
U.S. to Cut Guatemala’s Debt for Not Cutting Trees
By MARC LACEY

MEXICO CITY, Oct. 1 — The United States government has joined with two environmental groups in a debt-for-nature swap, which will forgive about 20 percent of Guatemala’s $108 million in foreign debt to Washington in an effort to help threatened tropical forests there, American and conservation officials said late last week.

In a deal to be announced Monday in Guatemala City, the government of Guatemala has agreed, in exchange for the debt forgiveness, to invest $24.4 million over the next 15 years in conservation work in four nature regions.

This is the largest amount of debt that has been forgiven by the United States under the Tropical Forest Conservation Act, which was enacted in 1998. So far, 10 countries, from the Philippines to Peru, have had part of their debt forgiven in exchange for forest protection efforts.

“You can’t just come in as the U.S. and say it’s important to protect those forests,” Claudia A. McMurray, assistant secretary of state for oceans, environment and science, said in an interview. “You have to give these countries alternatives.”

In the latest deal, the United States government contributed about $15 million toward the cancellation of Guatemala’s debt, said Clay Lowery, assistant secretary of the Treasury for international affairs. The groups Conservation International and the Nature Conservancy each contributed an additional $1 million. Those funds, and the interest they will generate, will be enough to erase more than $20 million in debt and interest, officials said.

“This is a huge deal for Guatemala,” John Beavers, who helped to negotiate the deal for the Nature Conservancy, said in a telephone interview from Guatemala City. “We hope it helps to drive the conservation area in Guatemala.”

The country has struggled in recent years to control illegal logging and drug trafficking in its natural areas. Soldiers are deployed in some areas to stem the destruction.

There is also a legal threat to Guatemala’s parks. A business confederation has filed a suit contending that the law establishing the protected areas is unconstitutional, because it did not receive a two-thirds majority when the legislature approved it almost 20 years ago.

The bulk of the money generated by the debt forgiveness will go to private organizations working to preserve the country’s nature areas. A $4.9 million conservation trust fund will also be set up to generate interest income for future grants.

The money will be spent in four of Guatemala’s premier reserves, which include tropical and subtropical forests and coastal mangrove areas. The areas are home to many rare and endangered species.

“The areas protected in this agreement lie in the heart of Mayan civilization, and they are home to jaguars, scarlet macaws, harpy eagles and countless other species,” Steven J. McCormick, president of the Nature Conservancy, said in a statement.

The protected areas are the Cuchumatanes region, the Maya Biosphere Reserve, the Motagua/Polochic System and the Western Highlands volcanic chain.

To qualify for the program, Guatemala had to meet a series of political and economic criteria. Eligible countries must have democratically elected governments and a suitable economic reform program in place, and they must cooperate with the United States on drug enforcement and counterterrorism efforts.

An agreement under the program with Belize set aside 23,000 acres of new forest preserves and has helped to manage an additional 270,000 acres. One of two deals in Panama helped preserve the Chagres River Basin, which is a major source of water for the Panama Canal.