I like the design of these Lowa hiking boots.

The black, rubber-like outline makes the eye go up and down. It apparently helps with support and cuts down on the need for extra padding inside. Or so, the online advertising copy says.

Oh, and I spotted and downloaded this image from REI-OUTLET.

I’ll get to more blog posts soon, too. I’m just juggling a few things at the moment.

Long before Chinese director Zhang Yimou gained international fame for his eye-catching, impressive opening ceremony to the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing, he had a reputation for making epic movies full of soul, grit, dramatic storytelling.

I raise this now because To Live, which was made in 1994, has moments to keep in mind.

As in: What you have might not always be yours. Winners can become losers. Losers can become winners.

Overall, though, appreciation – in my mind – is tops.

The above clip highlights that clearly – with the adult son of a wealthy mansion owner losing everything while gambling. That launched an epic look at China’s history through his eyes and experience.

The main goal, of course, was living.

I’m pairing this movie – and its message – with the fascinating rise of China in the world today.

China’s economic, political and to a certain extent, military rise have turned heads among leaders and ordinary people worldwide. At the World Economic Forum in Davos, observers and participants looked East and not West in some cases, according to The New York Times.

From the article:

For the first time, economists point to Chinese spending — not the U.S. consumer — as the key to a global recovery. China’s gross domestic product could overtake that of the United States within a decade, one report predicted this month, while others speculated about when the renminbi might start to challenge the dollar as the world’s reserve currency. And as developing countries everywhere look for a recipe for faster growth and greater stability than that offered by the now-tattered ‘Washington consensus’ of open markets, floating currencies and free elections, there is growing talk about a ‘Beijing consensus.’

Intriguing.

I mean, in one sense at least in the West among lay people who don’t follow U.S.-Asia relations that much, it could be asked: Wasn’t China, just a decade or so ago, a place where people pedaled their bikes around city streets?

Yes. But now, it’s become the world’s largest automobile market.

My sense is that senior Chinese officials like winning – or accomplishing their goals – these days. So, do leaders from other countries, including the United States.

I also sense that senior Chinese officials like pursuing their goals by their own standards whether or not they are on Chinese soil. Obviously, so do leaders from other countries.

But if leaders and people from other countries play by their own standards – or the ultimate goal of winning in which there will be a loser – friction will rise hard and fast.

On the flipside of this is getting wiped out, or failing.

If there’s one thing I’m certain of regarding Chinese history, senior leaders in that country are very aware of being perceived as weak and getting wiped out.

Invasions, occupations, border disputes, internal rules: China has seen much in its long history. I doubt leaders and people there want to see a replay of them.

Better lives, better homes, nice cars, excellent jobs and educational opportunities, certainly, are part of the modern mix in China.

As my wife and I talked about this idea, she recalled a saying from the Tang Dynasty.

In Mandarin, it’s pronounced (sorry, no tone marks): “Chuang ye nan, shou ye geng nan.”

It translates roughly into: “Getting something is hard. But it’s harder to keep what you have.”

In other words, it’s easy to lose what you have.

That makes the dance of diplomacy so delicate, so indelible, so important.

It also makes awareness and history so much more important.

There also is a question, as my wife reminded me, of how many generations that can actually hold on to financial and economic gains.

There is that saying from the Tang Dynasty. I remember reading political theorists as an undergraduate.

They talked about forms of democracy – representative versus direct – and the republic system which the Founding Fathers backed.

But these philosophers also said something similar: Once you’ve arrived at a democratic model – say representative – you have to take efforts to maintain it, strengthen it and ensure it continues.

That can be difficult, trying but possible.

If you have time, rent Zhang’s movie, To Live. He got it right in this movie.

It has to be one of my favorite movies of all time (that I’ve seen, of course).

I know others will point to ideas attributed to Machiavelli: That the ends justify the means.

Losing – and losing big – is a real possibility in the world. I certainly don’t wish it on anyone.

But playing hard and fast, by your own rules wherever you are, can lead to stumbling – or at least, more friction.

Like I said: My family and I try and appreciate what we have.

Because by winning something – and this extends to leaders in all countries - you might actually be losing much more than you thought.

Smart Design in New York City came up with this new concept for surgery gowns - the company used breathable material. Photo source: Smart Design

As a kid, I remember watching television shows in which a surgeon would stand over a patient in the operating room and, well, seem just a tad nervous.

I don’t know if it was a nod to reality – the pressure of performing an operation – or just a made-for-television dramatic moment. But there would be another person next to the surgeon, ready to dab any perspiration when needed.

In real life, it looks like Smart Design of New York City has solved that issue with breathable operating gowns.

The Smart Design crew has many high-profile clients, including Microsoft, Starbucks, Yahoo! and Acer.

Many designs from the creative crowd at this agency are impressive. One involves a power charger for all those people, including myself, with smart phones – including the iPhone, BlackBerry and the like.

It’s a sleek flat, power charger in which you just lay your phone or electronic device on the pad.

Yes: Nice, clean, easy.

No more cords. I don’t know about you but it’s easy for me to trip over cords when I’m in a rush.

Smart Design in New York City also came up with this cordless phone charger for smart phones and other electronic devices. Photo source: Smart Design

Here’s some text about the charger from Smart Design’s Web site:

The revolutionary charging system is centered on two charging mats – one for in home/office and one for travel – and a series of receivers and docks that enable “drop and charge” for devices as diverse as iPhone, BlackBerry, MP3 players, cell phones, headsets, hand held electronic games, digital cameras, and GPS units. Each component has a sleek physical design, but is also simple, intuitive, and easy to operate, eliminating the need for lots of cords or searching for the right adaptor. Innovative features include magnetic alignment so that devices hit their optimal charging spot every time, RFID handshake to maximize energy efficiency for specific devices, audio and visual confirmations to know your device is charging, and auto shut-off to save energy.

Yes, as the cliche goes, the world is a small place.

Smart Design was instrumental in helping Seattle-based Starbucks create the company’s Hear Music Media Bars.

In 2004, I covered the launch of the media bars at a company-sponsored event at one of its coffee houses in the Capitol Hill neighborhood of Seattle.

It’s needless to say.

But design – and thinking – is always an ongoing process: Refine, reposition, renew.

That thinking is always needed, as I suppose is critical analysis that enables progress to flourish. Critical analysis, in and of itself, really is just that.

There has to be an end goal with all of this – a better design, an improved economy, a compelling conclusion, a provocative question, something from which we all can learn.

Or at least, that’s what I think.

As you might have seen from my previous posts, I enjoy design – whether it’s for eyeglasses and an iPod holder, an iconic building in Beijing, a two-wheel toy, cars of the future, a great-looking shelf system, barcodes or upturned eaves. 

And I’ve posted clips from Objectified - a documentary about design - before. Have a look, if you haven’t seen it. 

Years ago, a friend and I were traveling through China and stopped in Xining in the highlands of Qinghai province.

My friend had just taken a long, bumpy ride in a vintage-era Jiefang truck from the mountainous areas of neighboring Sichuan province. It was a brutally-cold winter.

The driver had loaded the truck’s open cargo area with dead yaks – their skins were headed to market. I never asked whether this was permissible. The goal, especially for my friend, was to stay warm.

And, as my friend recalled, a ride in a vehicle out of the mountains was so coveted that people sat on top of the dead yaks for a ride to Xining. 

After we met up, my friend and I went to a market when a Tibetan trader looked at my REI Novara waterproof jacket – it was the type that bicyclists wore, red and similar to this one - felt the material and realized its strength.

Through a translator, he asked whether I wanted to swap – my waterproof REI jacket for his long, fur-lined coat.

I respectfully declined. As I recall, his jacket had yak blood on it – and I probably didn’t want to tackle that at that moment. But at least, he suggested a trade of one jacket for another.

That wasn’t really the case when I received an email on Tuesday from a U.S.-based food supply company to write a blog post about its Web site and its section devoted to supplies for an Asian restaurant.

The request came from a blogger who writes for the company. The writer seemed to be well meaning. I don’t think it’s necessary to name the company or the writer.

The writer sent me an office address and telephone number. I looked at the company’s Web site and it looks like a legitimate business. It even has its own blog section.

If I wrote such a post about the company’s Asian food supply area on its Web site and sent the URL address, the blogger said I would be entered into a drawing to possibly win a cookware set worth about $1,295.

The person also asked for my feedback on the Web site.

I raise these examples for a basic reason – which I’ve written about before, in the form of The New World of the Free (as in the online world).

On that chilly day in Qinghai, that Tibetan trader offered me the jacket off his back for the one I was wearing.

In the new online world of the 21st century, a blogger whom I never talked with in person asked me to spend my time and skills to review the company’s Web site and its Asian food supply section for – get ready for some capital letters – the CHANCE to win cookware.

I certainly like the new in whatever form it might take. Its potential as a shaper of politics, economics, commerce, culture, art and just basic communication is powerful and attractive.

But I’m kind of an old school person in another sense: I’m willing to operate in a market economy.

I never had a role in the discussion as to whether the United States would be a free market capitalist society. But it is.

I see much strength in this model and am aware of the pitfalls. One of the strengths is that people ought to be paid – by that, I mean with money – for the goods and services they provide to other people.

It’s not really a complicated idea, though there is much history behind it.

Yes, bartering takes place in free markets. People can volunteer their services or donate goods. Or they agree to be rewarded in non-monetary ways.

But most of the time, money changes hands in market economies.

In other words, “chance” does not play a role that money or goods will change hands. There is a contractual obligation that money will circulate in the transaction. This leads to a greater certainty that market economies will continue in the future.

Now, don’t get me wrong.

I strongly support donating goods and volunteering services – especially to organizations committed to serving the public good and helping the overall well being of a community improve.

But it’s hard to agree to an unsolicited pitch from a food supply company – which is charging money to people who want to open restaurants – to write about it for no guarantee of fair compensation.

By the way, did you know that those rolling carts used in Chinese dim sum restaurants can sell for over $1,000 for a basic model and over $3,200 for types with ranges on them?

Think about it this way: My thought about this request would be much different if a larger portion of the free market worked in a way in which other people or companies gave away their services and goods for no cost.

Say, if I could walk into a big-box retail store and hypothetically say: “I’d like to use your goods, at my house for an indefinite period of time, in exchange for the CHANCE of me writing about your company on my blog.”

Or, if I could go to the airport and approach a ticket counter for a flight from Seattle to Paris (or Beijing, Hong Kong or Honolulu) and say: “I’d like something that your company values – a flight on one of your airplanes – for free and I might pay you in the form of a blog post, should I decide to write about the experience, aircraft and customer service.”

I’d be shown the door – quite fast.

I don’t have anything against this food supply company or blogger, who was trying to drum up attention.

I’m sure there are some bloggers in the market place who would think that the offer is suitable and accept the request terms. In this case, supply (labor) and demand (the request) would meet at a given point.

In the past, when I was a journalist, I often received unsolicited emails and phone calls from public relations agencies to cover events or products for certain clients. I understand that.

But also, in the old days and even to an extent these days, the sure-fire way to get your message across (in a free market) would be to purchase an advertisement in the good, old mainstream media. Or even in the New Media.

Or, these days, you can even go around the mainstream media and head to Craig’s List or just go viral with Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. By the way, this food supply company is using Facebook and Twitter to spread the word.

Now, if the United States was founded on the economic idea that autonomous collectives were sustainable and ideal for communities throughout the country, I’d probably have a different response to this email query.

The exchange of money for goods or services would not be such a high priority under this model. Rather, the well-being of the overall community would have higher value.

But this economic model has been tried in other countries before. The results, well, have been mixed and never really found firm roots in the United States.

At least, what the blogger sent me wasn’t spam.

Oh, and by the way, if you’re a blogger and write about this food supply company (because you’ve read this blog post), send me your URL link and I’ll forward it to the business.

And if you win that cookware worth about $1,295, I’ll have to request a commission of 50 percent.

Why? As a referral commission.

That’s only fair. Right?

Using your half, you can post an eBay note to sell your portion of the cookware.

If you sell your portion for about $650 cash, that’s actually pretty solid compensation for writing about a food supply company and its Web site.

Speaking of cooking supplies, I thought I’d post some photos of what we have.

My brother-in-law is such a considerate guy that he sent my family this black wok (pictured above and below) from China years ago to make sure that we have something reliable to cook with in the United States.

And my aunt gave us these beautiful bowls, complete with images of a Chinese dragon and phoenix on them.

We appreciate the thoughtfulness and kindness of our relatives.

Oh, yes. Since I’m talking about interesting things in life these days, I leave you with this famous clip from Seinfeld – the one in which George sports a wig.

Yes, I understand the issue of using information for free very well.

The best I can say in this case: My site remains free of advertisements and I post my thoughts to continue my creativity and writing, photography and video skills.

And circular thinking, really, is good.

In the grand scheme of world news, visiting a park really isn’t that significant.

But the weather was a bit warmer and so my family and I stopped off at a park in the Seattle suburbs for a sushi picnic and to play Stomp Rocket, bounce a basketball and to walk around a wetland area.

Of course, my condolences and best wishes go to the people of Haiti and Chile, given the earthquakes that struck there.

On our walk on a path in the wetland area, my family and I spotted ducks, soaring trees and a creek sending water from one point to another.

Life can get busy. But I’m glad that we had a chance to enjoy the outdoors.

Simple moments, as we know, are often the best.

The battery for our digital camera was running low on power. So, I’m also glad that I was able to snap some simple pictures before we left.

Chinese lions are popping up with Lunar New Year celebrations in the United States. This is a LEGO model, made in 2008. While San Francisco police officers have their own lion dance group, this model is not related to their activities. Image source: "Big Daddy" Nelson's Chinese Lion Dance photostream on flickr

I was scanning the online photo gallery at SFGate of Saturday’s Lunar New Year parade in San Francisco when one caption caught my eye.

It sat under a San Francisco Chronicle photograph of a blue-and-gold Chinese dragon making its way down Kearney Street for the city’s annual event.

The caption referred to the “San Francisco Police Department Lion Troupe.”

In 2001, it was the only lion dance group that was associated with a police department in the United States, according to an archived article by reporter Heather Knight.

That’s probably the case today – but please let me know if you’ve heard of any other police agency in the country that has its own Chinese lion dance troupe.

My thought: Check this out.

From Knight’s article:

The group formed in 1988 as a public relations gesture and has since gained members from the Colma Police Department, the U.S. Park Police and other local law enforcement agencies.

She noted that the dragon is 150 feet long.

She also quoted Sgt. Phillip Wong, who was the group leader in 2001:

At first, people look at us and they don’t think we’re police officers….But then they see our T-shirts with our emblems and they say, ‘Oh, you guys are cops?’

The group performs at up to 50 shows each year.

I like it.

If you haven’t seen my recent posts about Lunar New Year – that is, celebrating in Seattle – have a look. I also like Chinese dragons.

And I posted some details about how the lion became popular during Lunar New Year celebrations in China.

Speaking of SFGate, be sure to read the review of “Deep Creek,” a book about a sad slice of Chinese American history. William Wong, my uncle, wrote the review.

UPDATE: I forgot to say. If you like the Chinese lion head made from LEGOs, here’s a link to “Big Daddy” Nelson’s work.

And if you really like LEGOs, have a look at artist Nathan Sawaya’s work – in fact, he’s willing to sit down with you and, well, make you.

In that link, there’s another link – so many, these days – to a Raiders of the Lost Ark clip, of course, done in LEGOs. Sean Kenney is another LEGO artist.

Finally, if you like LEGOs and the Matrix, the movie, and haven’t seen Trinity in plastic brick form, you’re in luck.

Note: This animation does have some violence.

OK, I think I’m going to stop talking about LEGOs – for now.

Um, I spoke too soon. There’s a LEGOs Star Wars movie, too.

If you’d like a more serious topic, I recently typed the word, derivative.

The idea of receiving something for free has been around for centuries. Certainly, I like the idea – and I’m not just talking about the free hug movement.

I mean: Who doesn’t like receiving something – say a new car or clothing - for free?

But the notion seems more fitting for an autonomous collective (especially one depicted by the British comedy group, Monty Python), where a group of people has agreed to provide labor and services for everyone’s well being with the exchange of money lower on the priority list.

You know, that whole theory versus reality continuum.

But the idea of giving away a good or service can baffle in a free market because there are costs to be covered, people to be paid, money that needs to be circulated.

I’m sure there are days when many of us wish our banks would just tell us: We’d like to give you your mortgage for no cost because, well, homes want to be free (and so do homeowners). 

And, as mainstream journalists and others have witnessed in recent years, the notion of free has boomed in stature, at least in the news, entertainment, sporting and information arenas – thanks to low market barriers to creating online content and the explosion of popular social networking sites.

Nearly anyone with Internet access can enter the online world – which is a boon for free expression, art and creativity.

But a Nielsen study recently reported that 85 percent of people surveyed around the world believe that online content should remain free.

The study’s results of giving away content at no direct charge to the end user underscores the rallying cry and reality of many hackers and others seeking online work for no or low cost: That “information wants to be free.”

As John Tierney wrote in The New York Times last month, that idea is being questioned by some who once backed it.

In numeric terms, and extrapolating a figure based on this Nielsen study, how many people around the globe support free online content?

Try about 5.8 billion people, based on an estimate of the world’s population and the 27,000 people surveyed in 52 countries.

One question that needs to be asked is: How can content producers provide online information for no charge at all?

How can they cover their expenses, even their most basic ones? By other means, such as adding Google advertising code to their sites? Or selling actual merchandise or books?

I don’t know if there’s enough advertising to go around to support all those who need support for their online efforts.

I suppose if people who provide online content for free received their university educations, housing and food at no cost, it would be fair for them, with no wage or salary involved, to produce words, video, photos and sound for Internet users.

If we examine history, we see that some organized societies are able to provide relatively free information – but they do not endorse the free market as the United States does.

Try state-run governments – ones that endorse socialism – as ones that can provide information to its people. I remember learning that subscriptions to the Chinese state-run newspaper, the People’s Daily, once were required for offices and factories in the world’s most populous country.

That still may be the case.

Granted, not everyone read that paper and might have opted for articles in other publications that were livelier. But information was being provided for free – thanks to financial support of the Chinese government.

The French news agency, AFP, has received government money from the French government.

I know the idea of news agencies that receive government money is controversial in the United States, given the birth of the republic and the Constitutional underpinnings that the founding fathers wanted.

Then again, I’ve heard of reports noting that around 40,000 journalists have lost jobs in the United States in recent years, including this dispatch from UNITY.

Now, you might be asking one simple question: How can I – the operator of TofuWatch.com - give information and photographs away for free on a commercial-free blog?

Great question!

Well, writing on a regular basis about topics that interest me keeps me engaged and connected to the outside world. It pushes me to think anew, observe and question - or at least try to do so.

I’m willing to make this tradeoff.

Certainly, covering my costs remains important. But the work done on a commercial-free blog is different than the work that would be done at a full-time job.

If not, what would be the difference between a salaried-job and one providing free labor?

Not much, really.

And what I do for this blog is much different than what I did as a traditional journalist.

Also, as the Nielsen study revealed, people showed a low willingness to pay for blogs.

Instead, they were more inclined to pay for theatrical movies, music and games. Perhaps, I should shift my online skills to these areas.

My sense, though, is that specialized blogs, such as TechFlash and TechCrunch, which deal with market intelligence and analysis – which can be “actionable” as federal officials like saying – can fetch money in the free market.

Bloomberg, the news service, realizes that traders and analysts are willing to pay for the financial and economic content that its army of journalists produces daily.

Now, is this idea of free online information sustainable?

In the short term, the online information pool is large enough – given that people are willing to type up their thoughts (say about tofu) for no charge to either participate in free expression or the promotion of an idea, product or company.

From a consumer’s perspective, I have thought about the idea of a new “American price” – meaning anything lower than before – that might emerge as the country leaves The Great Recession.

And the idea of free – as noted in The New Yorker last year – is a hot topic.

Let’s consider it this way: What other goods and services can be lumped into the “free” category?

Should we start having citizen-chefs begin making delicious food at home, then show up at restaurants and give the edibles away for no cost but with business cards?

I’ve noticed that many people are passionate about public education to the point where they believe they have the best ideas for teachers and principals to follow in classrooms.

Should we have citizen-teachers or citizen-principals – instead of the professionals – offer their services for weeks at a time to help children learn?

Citizen-pilots certainly could keep some airline flight costs down but insurance might increase.

I realize that some in the computer, technology and online worlds have embraced open code and sharing in a manner that is remarkable and reminiscent of information sharing in academia.

I like this idea but these people likely have other ways to support this free sharing of research and knowledge.

But the long term sustainability of giving online content away for free becomes much more problematic.

That also depends on what you want: There will be enough people with Internet access to produce content to post and for it to be consumed.

But the production of quality words, images, art and graphics requires skills, time and expertise – all of which need ample amounts of money to support people and technology.

In other words, the demand for free content will remain high.

But the supply of quality information – if that’s what you seek – will evaporate.

And there is an old adage to keep in mind: You get what you pay for.

There is the thought, though, that if some type of payment is required to access online work, online users will just jump to a site that requires no money but has similar or identical information.

We’ve seen how pay walls have fared in the past. Yes, large, mainstream media companies again are considering the pay model.

That model, though, puts greater pressure on those producing the free content – and when you’re doing it for no cost, there is no long-term incentive to do so on a regular basis for decades.

The tricky thing about this Nielsen survey with the 85 percent number is that it could be argued as a purely democratic response from an adequate sample of the world’s population.

If that’s the case – and countries, such as the United States, believe that democratic results should govern direction – then, people essentially are supporting something roiling and restructuring the mainstream news industry.

In other words, if people around the world are voting with their online clicks for free information and opinion, is fact-driven reportage becoming economically irrelevant and unsupportable, though the news can often be helpful?

Or does the public, in general, already hold the view that mainstream journalists – and I once was one of them – bend facts, chase the sensational and misinterpret that they’re only a washing machine that is permanently stuck on spin cycle?

I have heard people describe journalists in this manner. 

Or it is possible that online content creators take other jobs – similar to actors – to cover expenses but, in their free time, create stunning words, reportage and images for Internet consumers.

I don’t know where the idea of free will head in the coming years.

The tradeoff could be this: People want free content but the market for reported pieces by professionals shrinks. People either accept this market change and rely on fewer traditional news outlets.

The pool of free online information might be large because so many people are producing content.

But the pool of fact-driven, first-hand observed information by a group of professionals who can bring a sense of history about a place to online news becomes smaller.

And if people really never were regular consumers of traditional news – say, they were just enamored with opinion on cable stations or busy with daily life - then, they probably never realize what they’re missing and therefore have no need for mainstream journalism.

Or the pendulum could swing back.

After an absence of news and information outlets that try to honestly help a community improve through regular reportage and investigations of public life, people might be willing to open their wallets in a big way.

On this issue, I’m still waiting to see what unfolds.

On a positive note, I’m happy that my former colleagues at InvestigateWest, an independent journalism group, recently received a grant of $100,000 to support their work.

UPDATE: The Online Journalism Review has this piece about the pros and cons of citizen journalists – or citizen communicators, as some are calling them – and their involvement with mainstream news organizations.

I’ve driven by the glass boxy building that houses PATH – and I believe condos – at 2201 Westlake Ave. a few times in the evenings in recent weeks.

So, I thought I’d see how my basic digital camera would do in capturing the light and dark. Yes, I’m talking about Westlake in Seattle.

I know some people aren’t huge fans of glass boxy buildings. But I like them as part of a city’s landscape – especially in the Pacific Northwest, where natural light is always welcome.

Interestingly enough, I wrote about this building development years ago. Back then, as I recall, an automobile dealer used the plot of land - Land Rover, if my memory serves me correct.

Of course, before that and years ago, it was just a plot of land near Denny Park, Seattle’s first, which opened in 1884.

But consider these two examples and one column, as published in The New York Times.

I highlight passages here for one simple reason: I think they’re worth keeping in mind – at least for the future.

As we know, the consequences of not keeping lessons in mind can be devastating, as we’ve seen in the nation’s recent housing crisis which triggered other problems and rippled far and wide.

1. THE BORROWING PRACTICES OF GREECE

Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke testified on Capitol Hill Thursday, saying Goldman Sachs was under investigation for its involvement in helping the government of Greece borrow money, the Times reported.

Greece’s financial picture is so tenuous, the Times noted, that government officials must raise $34 billion in the coming months and its economic stability could cause weaker European nations to collapse.

This financial issue just didn’t pop up last year. It apparently stretches back to around 2000.

From the Times:

Greece has suffered from large deficits for years, and until now it seemed as if big banks would always be there to bail it out. As far back as 2000 and 2001, Goldman helped Athens quietly borrow billions to mask its poor finances by creating derivatives that essentially transformed loans into currency trades that Greece did not have to disclose under European rules.

As I understand this paragraph, this move produced weakness in Greece.

And those words are back (and thanks to the Times for these definitions): Derivatives and credit-default swaps.

Bernanke, as quoted by the Times, told federal lawmakers:

Obviously, using these instruments in a way that intentionally destabilizes a company or a country is counterproductive.

And the Securities and Exchange Commission is assisting federal and government officials in the Greece case by looking at, again according to the Times article:

potential abuses and destabilizing effects related to the use of credit-default swaps and other opaque financial products and practices.

OK. Well, we’re playing some ball, here.

I should note that Goldman Sachs declined to comment to the Times but the article talked about a Feb. 21 presentation in which Goldman Sachs reported:

The Greek government has stated (and we agree) that these transactions were consistent with the Eurostat principles governing their use and application at the time.

I’ve always been fascinated when any organization, company or person uses the words “at the time” – or something similar to that phrase.

I’m not an expert on Eurostat, which is Europe’s statistics body, and its rules at that time. But this is certainly fascinating – and a bit unnerving – to watch.

Then again, we’ve seen the ups and downs of the economy on a rollercoaster in recent years.

2. ONE IDEA CONSIDERED TO SAVE HUMMER

What caught my attention in the failed Hummer deal was one idea to make the plan work.

Sichuan Tengzhong Heavy Industrial Machinery Corp., a Chinese company in Sichuan province, with the help of a Hong Kong investor would take the company known for its boxy, military-style sport utility vehicles off the hands of General Motors.

Again, The New York Times noted that there were reports of questions from Chinese regulators but also that financing – Chinese banks are trying to slow down an overheated lending market – was problematic.

The solution?

Go offshore.

Reported the Times:

(Chinese) regulators have informally agreed not to object if Tengzhong makes the purchase through an offshore subsidiary, said another person knowledgeable about the transaction. But if an offshore subsidiary is used, Hummer would not qualify as a Chinese company after the deal and would not be able to open a low-cost assembly plant in China any time soon to supplement production in the United States. China only allows foreign automakers to set up 50-50 joint ventures with Chinese car companies, and each of these deals also requires individual approval from regulators. While Tengzhong has the cash to pay for the Hummer brand, it needs bank financing to operate the division, redesign vehicles and set up new production facilities in China.

Here’s another noteworthy part that reveals sort of the head-scratching nature of this deal. Keep in mind that Chinese banks weren’t entirely supportive of financing this deal.

So, Tengzhong – according to a Times article a few days ago - decided to approach Western banks for loans to support Hummer:

Tengzhong has been desperately trying to persuade Western banks in the last few days to lend it the money to operate Hummer while keeping it outside China, but has found little enthusiasm so far, this person added.

Um, there’s good reason for that.

First, Hummers are pricey – some models sell for over $60,000. Second, well, gas is expensive these days. Hummers are not known for efficient gas mileage. That adds up – in theory – to low sales.

In December 2009, Hummer only sold 325 vehicles, The Associated Press reported. The high in sales occurred in 2006 when about 71,500 Hummers rolled off the lots and into people’s driveways.

By the way, I wrote about a now-closed Hummer tax break that once gave certain people the chance to write off about $38,000. I also posted a blog entry about Hummer when this deal was first announced.

But back to the topic.

First, it’s amazing – but not completely surprising, I suppose – how there was talk to make the deal work by moving Hummer’s ownership headquarters to a third country but still have it backed by Chinese owners who have cash and loans to operate Hummer in China and worldwide.

But then, the potential new Chinese owners – and a businessperson from Hong Kong – would have to go through all of the Chinese regulatory hoops to formally enter the Chinese market to sell the vehicles to the country’s elite or government officials who want a huge sport utility vehicle similar to what U.S. soldiers drive.

Quite possibly, technology transfer could have occurred. It would not surprise me if Chinese officials were interested in seeing what made the civilian Hummer tick.

The other fascinating part of this story is that the Chinese company, Tengzhong, approached Western banks about getting loans to continue Hummer operations.

This is despite the fact that Western banks have undergone implosions of historic proportions – at least in the United States – and are more risk averse these days in order to make sure that their loans are repaid.

General Motors also was selling the Hummer unit largely because of poor sales. Gas remains expensive these days.

I like circular logic.

But this failed deal has the markings of one neighbor agreeing to buy a nearby house in a depressed market for a rock-bottom price but then deciding to go to that owner’s bank to ask for a loan to buy it – and expecting for the loan request to be approved.

Of course, it would have been different had Chinese banks assumed the risk of the Hummer purchase.

In October, when I first wrote about this deal, I said that this marks a shift in how a fast-growing country with capital – in this case, China – can move up the ladder in the global economy.

I still think that in the case of China – but just in other areas. I didn’t realize this back story had developed until it became public.

It also shows that even with impressive gross domestic product growth in China – at least on paper or in graphs – obstacles can still surface in blocking the completion of a business transaction.

3. U.S. HEALTH CARE FROM A JOURNALIST’S VIEW

Like others in the United States, I appreciate having health care insurance. But the litany of rules and decisions can baffle.

That’s why I appreciate Times columnist Nicholas Kristof’s take on the subject. Funny.

Oh, yes.

Since I raised it in the headline, James Bond often asked for Vodka martinis that were shaken not stirred.

This is a file photo of tofu from last year. Remember: Fresh tofu is always the best.

There is much news to digest these days – if you’re in the market for this type of information.

The U.S. Senate approved legislation to create jobs, Toyota has its automobile safety woes and Federal Reserve Chief Ben Bernanke predicted the economic recovery will, um, be slow.

That Hummer deal - in which a Chinese company would buy the U.S. brand associated with military-like vehicles – has hit an obstacle has fallen through.

And consumer confidence in the United States has dropped after it did relatively better in the past months.

At TofuWatch, confidence is up (in terms relating to soybean cake) because, well, circular logic, albeit it with ventures into new territory, really can never disappoint.

Instead of Marcia, Marcia, Marcia, the mantra here is: tofu, tofu, tofu.

Plus news and observations. Just like a reel-to-reel feedback loop.

By the way, bean curd can be badass, cool, affordable, delicious, record setting and enjoyed by a sign-language gorilla (who likes it with curry).

And now, it’s poetic – in the haiku form.

Out in the Pacific – in Hawaii - Kapolei Library is hosting a Tofu Haiku contest and will announce the winners on Feb. 27, according to a citizen-written article published on the Web site of the Honolulu Advertiser.

Yes, there’s Facebook chatter about the contest for people ages 7 to 17. Aloha Tofu - which includes an online video tour of its factory – and Friends of the Kapolei Library are sponsoring the event.

I’ll add the winning haiku poems when I hear about them.

Fortuantely, the Toronto Vegetarian Association held its own competition in 2007 and even registered the domain name, tofuhaiku.com.

You can read about the winning poems.

Feel free to submit your own Tofu Haiku in the comments section because, well, we can never have enough.

And here are my two favorites.

1. From Matias Blei of Buenos Aires, Argentina:

This tofu is a raft
wandering free
in a soy sauce tsunami

2. From Martin Francisco of Azusa, Calif.:

in my first apartment
a white cube wiggles
bought for a dollar