I have been a hold my nose voter for Andrew Cuomo basically because the GOP has nominated idiots to run against him who slavishly held to positions that have no place in NY State politics: anti-gun control, anti-immigration, anti-womens' rights, and anti-ObamaCare.
But I was taken aback when Cuomo disbanded his own ethic's commission just when they were starting to reach some conclusions. Fortunately, the Federal Attorney for NY State said "wait-a-minute" by subpoenaing those files. And now comes a news story that reveals what was trying to be buried.
There is some no-name law firm in NYC that handles property tax appeals. And who do they both pay money to and appeal the property tax rates on his property? Why, none other than Sheldon Silver, the king of NYC corruption, although up until now there has been no proof, only strong circumstantial evidence.
I can only hope that this investigation reaches some fruitful end.
Meanwhile, Cuomo's illogical thought process to banning fracking while killing the Moreland Commission shows that his aspirations for higher office should never see the light of day. He is not sufficiently independent of the left wing kooks that can dominate NY State/NYC politics while turning a blind eye and accomodating union and political back office corruption.
Tuesday, December 30, 2014
Tuesday, December 23, 2014
Why An Environmentalist Can Support Fracking
A government cannot plan an economy. There are too many unknowns and moving parts for a top down massive scheme to work efficiently and create a society where most of the people are fundamentally content. That was the failure of Communism.
To afford government services, an economy must be a on a sustainable self-generating upward trajectory. Without that, there is no growth in revenue at reasonable tax rates (and unreasonable tax rates will be counterproductive in reaching this goal) and no ability to afford a safety net, national defense, and sound regulation of places in the economy where widespread social harm can emanate from.
Key to a growing economy is energy. Energy is diverse in both supply and use when you get into specific flows. There is no way to micro-manage this even to the point of the source of the energy (oil, gas, coal, nuclear, wind, water, solar). It is simply too massive and widespread in what it influences. The market must be allowed to operate for this to be done in the most efficient manner possible. And if it is not done efficiently, it reduces the economic health of everybody.
30 years ago, conservative planners would have said we would have very expensive oil today and nuclear might be dominant. Instead, natural gas is rising in importance and bringing massive economic benefits to the U.S. But the anti-fracking crowd says at what price to our environment?
There is no question that bad operators can do a lot of damage to the environment with their fracking. But there are also a lot of wells that have been fracked without doing damage to the water table. The key is making sure there is adequate regulation of these operators and monitoring of the environment around their activities so they will be caught if they take a shortcut with damaging results.
Die Hard environmentalists say that is too much risk. But I counter that have you ever seen a poor or middle class person care more about the environment than maintaining life style. China wouldn't budget on green house gas emissions until well over 50% of the people were on their way to a middle class life style. Cap & Trade is going no where in the U.S. until the people whose life style was damaged by globalization are convinced the economy is going somewhere where their life style will be stable and they become convinced that global warming is both a threat to their life style and something where man kind can still make a difference.
Natural gas releases less greenhouse gases than oil. It's cost efficient growth in market share is both environmentally sound and good for the economy. This could have been planned by anybody even 20 years ago. The technology was just being started and only a few could have even dreamed of what was to come from it. You have to let the market operate while executing the critical important regulation to protect the environment and prevent dangerous excesses from developing.
The anti-pipeline NIMBY's illustrate the danger of such pro-environmental planning success. Without pipelines, the demand for energy creates an economic incentive to use trains. Trains derail, fires and pollution result and people die. Yes, pipelines could explode, but they rarely do. Yes, pipelines can leak, but they are usually small and contained and cleaned up. But there is a train derailment almost every year with massive pollution.
And if your area is not plugged into the global energy system, your economy suffers. I am amazed by the anti-fracking/anti-pipeline sentiment in my home town. My home town has seen it's population decline by 35% over the last 40 years. That has not been good for property values, it has not been good for the quality of the school system, or anything else that requires a concentration of people. People bemoan this, but they are also extremely vocal about not allowing fracking or pipelines. Well, they may end up with a slightly cleaner environment, but people will be poor and life styles will be difficult to maintain. The world marches on and you have to compete efficiently if you want to be relevant and enjoy the economic benefits of being relevant.
My bottom line is only a rich society can afford to be environmentally clean. There is evidence of that all over the world. And if we are to be diligent in improving the environment, we need a strong efficient economy. That is why I support fracking and pipeline development, with the strongest safeguards for water resources.
To afford government services, an economy must be a on a sustainable self-generating upward trajectory. Without that, there is no growth in revenue at reasonable tax rates (and unreasonable tax rates will be counterproductive in reaching this goal) and no ability to afford a safety net, national defense, and sound regulation of places in the economy where widespread social harm can emanate from.
Key to a growing economy is energy. Energy is diverse in both supply and use when you get into specific flows. There is no way to micro-manage this even to the point of the source of the energy (oil, gas, coal, nuclear, wind, water, solar). It is simply too massive and widespread in what it influences. The market must be allowed to operate for this to be done in the most efficient manner possible. And if it is not done efficiently, it reduces the economic health of everybody.
30 years ago, conservative planners would have said we would have very expensive oil today and nuclear might be dominant. Instead, natural gas is rising in importance and bringing massive economic benefits to the U.S. But the anti-fracking crowd says at what price to our environment?
There is no question that bad operators can do a lot of damage to the environment with their fracking. But there are also a lot of wells that have been fracked without doing damage to the water table. The key is making sure there is adequate regulation of these operators and monitoring of the environment around their activities so they will be caught if they take a shortcut with damaging results.
Die Hard environmentalists say that is too much risk. But I counter that have you ever seen a poor or middle class person care more about the environment than maintaining life style. China wouldn't budget on green house gas emissions until well over 50% of the people were on their way to a middle class life style. Cap & Trade is going no where in the U.S. until the people whose life style was damaged by globalization are convinced the economy is going somewhere where their life style will be stable and they become convinced that global warming is both a threat to their life style and something where man kind can still make a difference.
Natural gas releases less greenhouse gases than oil. It's cost efficient growth in market share is both environmentally sound and good for the economy. This could have been planned by anybody even 20 years ago. The technology was just being started and only a few could have even dreamed of what was to come from it. You have to let the market operate while executing the critical important regulation to protect the environment and prevent dangerous excesses from developing.
The anti-pipeline NIMBY's illustrate the danger of such pro-environmental planning success. Without pipelines, the demand for energy creates an economic incentive to use trains. Trains derail, fires and pollution result and people die. Yes, pipelines could explode, but they rarely do. Yes, pipelines can leak, but they are usually small and contained and cleaned up. But there is a train derailment almost every year with massive pollution.
And if your area is not plugged into the global energy system, your economy suffers. I am amazed by the anti-fracking/anti-pipeline sentiment in my home town. My home town has seen it's population decline by 35% over the last 40 years. That has not been good for property values, it has not been good for the quality of the school system, or anything else that requires a concentration of people. People bemoan this, but they are also extremely vocal about not allowing fracking or pipelines. Well, they may end up with a slightly cleaner environment, but people will be poor and life styles will be difficult to maintain. The world marches on and you have to compete efficiently if you want to be relevant and enjoy the economic benefits of being relevant.
My bottom line is only a rich society can afford to be environmentally clean. There is evidence of that all over the world. And if we are to be diligent in improving the environment, we need a strong efficient economy. That is why I support fracking and pipeline development, with the strongest safeguards for water resources.
Sunday, December 21, 2014
Bad Week for GOP Logic
Regular readers know that I prize consistency in logical thought. Certain things are simply sacrosanct as bedrocks of political philosophy. Belief in democratic practice and a market economy and freedom for individual decision making are a cornerstone. I also happen to believe in a modern post industrial safety net, but also recognize that it has to be affordable and have proper incentives within it to motivate people to do the right thing.
Motivating people to do the right thing is after all the original basis for religion.
Why was it a bad week for GOP logic?
Well, it was not too long ago that we had the following quotes from prominent members of the GOP when Putin invaded Crimea.
Mike Rogers (GOP House Intelligent Committee Chairman): "Well I think Putin is playing chess and we are playing with marbles."
Sarah Palin: "People are looking at Putin as one who wrestles with bears and drills for oil. People look at our President as one who wears Mom jeans and equivocates."
Rudy Giuliani: "Putin is what you call a leader."
Now, the West's sanctions and large new sources of energy, combined with some reduced demand for oil because of economic softness and increases use of alternative energy have created economic stress within Russia. Now Russia would not be so sensitive to simply the price of oil if Putin had not focused his entire economic policy around oil and gas exports and the enhancement of his oligarchs at the expense of a more diverse economic model.
I have chortled here that I am happy that Putin is suffering, but he has yet to really suffer in his popularity with his people. They still love him for the most part, even though Russia is capable of so much more in terms of creating economic growth that helps every Russian, and competes effectively in the world economy, without taking over their neighbor's territory that is guaranteed by a treaty signed by Russia and The Ukraine. I am sad for the Russian people. They deserve better leadership, as does the GOP which needs to get over its Putin envy.
Meanwhile, GOP logic also failed in its general response to Obama's change on Cuba policy. The argument that we should wait for Cuba to not be communist or authoritarian would have some merit if we followed similar policies with China, Vietnam, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain and Abu Dhabi. But no GOP leader is advocating trade embargoes against those countries as those countries participation in the global economy has helped our own economic growth and those countries have proven useful in geopolitical issues.
And as for the Castro's torturing political prisoners, just who exactly is leading the charge on preventing Obama from closing Guantanamo and ending our policy of keeping over 100 political prisoners in isolation. If they are criminals, they belong in jail. If not, they should be freed. But the GOP does not allow that to happen and since Guantanamo is in Cuba, who has a front row seat on what America practices, as opposed to what we preach.
I hate spin and I wish the Democrats had campaigned on stuff like this. But they didn't and they deserve what they got. Meanwhile, for the record, Cuomo's relying on the Director of Public Health to make the final decision on fracking is absolutely ridiculous. Public Health is an issue that needs to be examined, but it cannot be the deciding factor. Cuomo has showed himself to be feckless on this issue and once again as a conservative democrat, liberal republican I feel unrepresented in this world.
Motivating people to do the right thing is after all the original basis for religion.
Why was it a bad week for GOP logic?
Well, it was not too long ago that we had the following quotes from prominent members of the GOP when Putin invaded Crimea.
Mike Rogers (GOP House Intelligent Committee Chairman): "Well I think Putin is playing chess and we are playing with marbles."
Sarah Palin: "People are looking at Putin as one who wrestles with bears and drills for oil. People look at our President as one who wears Mom jeans and equivocates."
Rudy Giuliani: "Putin is what you call a leader."
Now, the West's sanctions and large new sources of energy, combined with some reduced demand for oil because of economic softness and increases use of alternative energy have created economic stress within Russia. Now Russia would not be so sensitive to simply the price of oil if Putin had not focused his entire economic policy around oil and gas exports and the enhancement of his oligarchs at the expense of a more diverse economic model.
I have chortled here that I am happy that Putin is suffering, but he has yet to really suffer in his popularity with his people. They still love him for the most part, even though Russia is capable of so much more in terms of creating economic growth that helps every Russian, and competes effectively in the world economy, without taking over their neighbor's territory that is guaranteed by a treaty signed by Russia and The Ukraine. I am sad for the Russian people. They deserve better leadership, as does the GOP which needs to get over its Putin envy.
Meanwhile, GOP logic also failed in its general response to Obama's change on Cuba policy. The argument that we should wait for Cuba to not be communist or authoritarian would have some merit if we followed similar policies with China, Vietnam, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain and Abu Dhabi. But no GOP leader is advocating trade embargoes against those countries as those countries participation in the global economy has helped our own economic growth and those countries have proven useful in geopolitical issues.
And as for the Castro's torturing political prisoners, just who exactly is leading the charge on preventing Obama from closing Guantanamo and ending our policy of keeping over 100 political prisoners in isolation. If they are criminals, they belong in jail. If not, they should be freed. But the GOP does not allow that to happen and since Guantanamo is in Cuba, who has a front row seat on what America practices, as opposed to what we preach.
I hate spin and I wish the Democrats had campaigned on stuff like this. But they didn't and they deserve what they got. Meanwhile, for the record, Cuomo's relying on the Director of Public Health to make the final decision on fracking is absolutely ridiculous. Public Health is an issue that needs to be examined, but it cannot be the deciding factor. Cuomo has showed himself to be feckless on this issue and once again as a conservative democrat, liberal republican I feel unrepresented in this world.
Thursday, December 18, 2014
Cuba, Vietnam and The War on Drugs
While the President's action yesterday wasn't on my radar screen as something that needed doing, it makes sense to me and shows the President is paying attention to things that he should be paying attention to.
Cuba is a ward of Russia and Venezuela. With the plunge in oil prices, those two countries are becoming basket cases. 54 years of keeping Cuba isolated haven't worked because we are the only country in the world who has been trying to keep Cuba isolated. But the U.S. is the country that can do the most to help Cuba without there being any flow of funds from the taxpayer.
Millions of Americans would like to travel to Cuba. Thousands would like to smoke Cuban cigars (JFK ordered 1200 Cuban cigars right before he imposed the embargo and started the policy of isolation). Market economics will bring Cuba forward and force the adaptation of the communist regime to a more modern capitalist model. And I am reasonably sure that as the Castro brothers pass from this world, younger leaders will be pressured to open up the government to the dynamism that the success of Cuban Americans shows is possible for Cuba.
54 years of policy failure sure argues for some change in policy. I would argue that the War on Drugs has been a complete and utter failure, and it is time for some type of legalization that will take the money out of the hands of gangs that cause such violence in inner cities, Mexico, and Central America. It is drug money that now supports the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Success there would be much easier if poppies weren't the primary crop. But the War on Drugs has not yet been a failure for even 50 years as I believe it was started by Richard Nixon and will not reach it's 50th birthday until 2019 or so. So if 54 years is our standard for revisiting failed policies, then it will be another 10 years or so before the War on Drugs is reviewed.
And if we can have diplomatic and trade relations with Vietnam, why shouldn't we have them with Cuba. I really don't see a difference.
Cuba is a ward of Russia and Venezuela. With the plunge in oil prices, those two countries are becoming basket cases. 54 years of keeping Cuba isolated haven't worked because we are the only country in the world who has been trying to keep Cuba isolated. But the U.S. is the country that can do the most to help Cuba without there being any flow of funds from the taxpayer.
Millions of Americans would like to travel to Cuba. Thousands would like to smoke Cuban cigars (JFK ordered 1200 Cuban cigars right before he imposed the embargo and started the policy of isolation). Market economics will bring Cuba forward and force the adaptation of the communist regime to a more modern capitalist model. And I am reasonably sure that as the Castro brothers pass from this world, younger leaders will be pressured to open up the government to the dynamism that the success of Cuban Americans shows is possible for Cuba.
54 years of policy failure sure argues for some change in policy. I would argue that the War on Drugs has been a complete and utter failure, and it is time for some type of legalization that will take the money out of the hands of gangs that cause such violence in inner cities, Mexico, and Central America. It is drug money that now supports the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Success there would be much easier if poppies weren't the primary crop. But the War on Drugs has not yet been a failure for even 50 years as I believe it was started by Richard Nixon and will not reach it's 50th birthday until 2019 or so. So if 54 years is our standard for revisiting failed policies, then it will be another 10 years or so before the War on Drugs is reviewed.
And if we can have diplomatic and trade relations with Vietnam, why shouldn't we have them with Cuba. I really don't see a difference.
Wednesday, December 17, 2014
Obama and Saudi Arabia accomplish what Europe Could Not
The global economy continues to grow, despite the gloom in certain developed economy stock markets. And my regular readers know I was advocating for Europe to wean itself off of Russian energy exports in response to their outlandish policies in the Ukraine.
But low and behold, the combination of slower economic activity in the E.U. and Emerging Markets, combined with the rapid increase in oil production from the U.S., and Africa has led to a surplus of oil in the global market. When Saudi Arabia, the only swing producer in OPEC, said they would not cut production, they drove the speculators, who have added about $20 to the price of oil for years, to sell their positions. The result is $60 a barrel oil.
The positives: Russia is suffering from their own strategy of (i) relying on energy exports rather than creating a diverse economy, (ii) using energy exports as a tool of foreign policy and (iii) mucking around with power politics in the Ukraine, who Russia signed a treaty with guaranteeing borders some 20+ years ago, that Russia has now reneged on unilaterally.
Iran is suffering from it's inability to give up its nuclear ambitions.
Venezuela is suffering from it's inability to manage itself properly.
I have no sympathy for any of these countries. They have conducted themselves improperly and need to straighten themselves out. The only thing any of these countries understand is power politics and they use energy exports to fund that.
The Negatives: Saudi Arabis also understands the power of the market on creating competition for their oil. They know if they keep the price low, both the Canadian Tar Oil Sands and some of the fracking fields will not be economic to keep drilling. The low price will also retard alternative energy and fuel economy incentives.
So don't count on the current price of oil staying where it is for very long. If Russia and Iran straighten up, there is some reduced production in North America, the growth in global GDP will cause the price of oil to rise.
But meanwhile, enjoy watching the power politics on a global basis. It is certainly more entertaining then the War on Global Jihad, which reaches new lows in it's spread of anarchy.
But low and behold, the combination of slower economic activity in the E.U. and Emerging Markets, combined with the rapid increase in oil production from the U.S., and Africa has led to a surplus of oil in the global market. When Saudi Arabia, the only swing producer in OPEC, said they would not cut production, they drove the speculators, who have added about $20 to the price of oil for years, to sell their positions. The result is $60 a barrel oil.
The positives: Russia is suffering from their own strategy of (i) relying on energy exports rather than creating a diverse economy, (ii) using energy exports as a tool of foreign policy and (iii) mucking around with power politics in the Ukraine, who Russia signed a treaty with guaranteeing borders some 20+ years ago, that Russia has now reneged on unilaterally.
Iran is suffering from it's inability to give up its nuclear ambitions.
Venezuela is suffering from it's inability to manage itself properly.
I have no sympathy for any of these countries. They have conducted themselves improperly and need to straighten themselves out. The only thing any of these countries understand is power politics and they use energy exports to fund that.
The Negatives: Saudi Arabis also understands the power of the market on creating competition for their oil. They know if they keep the price low, both the Canadian Tar Oil Sands and some of the fracking fields will not be economic to keep drilling. The low price will also retard alternative energy and fuel economy incentives.
So don't count on the current price of oil staying where it is for very long. If Russia and Iran straighten up, there is some reduced production in North America, the growth in global GDP will cause the price of oil to rise.
But meanwhile, enjoy watching the power politics on a global basis. It is certainly more entertaining then the War on Global Jihad, which reaches new lows in it's spread of anarchy.
Tuesday, December 16, 2014
The Danger of Being Fast and Loose with Statistics
The latest misuse of statistics is that the rise in CO2 levels is good for plants. Somehow, I am sure that while the statistics used to prove this by an economist for the coal industry are true, they are also probably invalid in other ways because statistics can always be manipulated by assumptions that are not valid. Before you know whether a statistic is valid, you need to know if the assumptions are valid. This is why I hate ceteris paribus analysis.
Never-the-less, it means the climate change debate will not go into a positive direction until the baby boomers are dead. For a generation that benefited from the Clean Air and Water Act (and I recall just how bad industry could be before that Act of Congress), it is amazing to me how many baby boomers are climate change deniers and see no reason to curb CO2 emissions at all. This statistical "finding" will not help matters.
Link to WashPo article that alerted me to this
Never-the-less, it means the climate change debate will not go into a positive direction until the baby boomers are dead. For a generation that benefited from the Clean Air and Water Act (and I recall just how bad industry could be before that Act of Congress), it is amazing to me how many baby boomers are climate change deniers and see no reason to curb CO2 emissions at all. This statistical "finding" will not help matters.
Link to WashPo article that alerted me to this
Monday, December 15, 2014
The GOP's Lasting Negative Contribution to the Health Care Debate
You might wonder how I could find a single issue to focus on as the leading negative GOP contribution to the health care debate, but I long ago decided it was Michelle Bachman's hysteria about death panels and today I found a reasoned article on why not having a discussion of cost/benefit in our society ratchets up the cost of health care for us all.
It could be end of life care, it could be care to brain dead people. It could be putting people on a ventilator to keep them alive for a few weeks instead of letting them just pass on today. But these discussions are forbidden by the ACA in an effort to get a few GOP senators to vote for the bill.
Link to article on Cost Effectiveness Discussions are Necessary
It could be end of life care, it could be care to brain dead people. It could be putting people on a ventilator to keep them alive for a few weeks instead of letting them just pass on today. But these discussions are forbidden by the ACA in an effort to get a few GOP senators to vote for the bill.
Link to article on Cost Effectiveness Discussions are Necessary
Sunday, December 14, 2014
World Complexities and the Danger of Partisanship Politics
This is probably not going to be as coherent as I wish because my feelings this a.m. after reading the paper are reflective of how complex society has become. When I was younger, I had a life to lead which included raising a child and achievement at work which provided a focus that no longer exists. I can see that unemployment (even retirement) can sap an element of spirit. Perhaps because money is not available for exotic travel and that is what I enjoy most from a spiritual standpoint. I love a road trip.
I will bring up my thoughts in the order they developed reading the newspaper.
Just on the front page, there was an article of a scorned 4 year old Ebola orphan in Sierre Leone. She just wants someone to love her and distant relatives want nothing to do with her despite her not being contagious. Then there is the story of Denmark rehabilitating former Jihadists on the basis that young men do stupid things, but are not necessarily evil forever. And while I am not a smoker, and realize all smoking will kill you, the lack of regulatory oversight of E-Cigarettes has resulted in some of them vaporizing lead, tin, zinc and other heavy metals/carcinogens into the smoker's lungs. And if that is not testimony, not mention the excesses of 10 years ago in the financial systems as well, that some kinds of regulation are necessary, I don't know what is.
Meanwhile, 2 guys on a motorcycle in Kabul assassinate a Supreme Court Justice. When your enemy looks just like you and believes that anarchy is the solution, you have both a military problem and a political problem. All civil wars require a political solution because you cannot kill everybody who supports the other side in a civil war. That is genocide. So the world and the interaction of different societies in this time of globalization is certainly complex.
So with that all swirling within my brain, I get to an article on Jeb Bush and an article on Our Unrealistic Hopes for Presidents. Jeb is trying to figure out how to win the Republic Presidential nomination without giving up his political policy soul to the Tea Party and its non-compromising beliefs which he disagrees with. But then, I read how it should not have been a surprise that Obama failed to unite us on policy. It's been over 30 years since we had a government that really wasn't partisan. That was a mid-20th century ideal and lord knows the country is more complex today then it was 60 years ago, and that threatens people. People disagree fundamentally about direction, people disagree fundamentally about scope and scale of government. I have my views on that, but to presuppose that compromise is possible is a false hope on my part. That saddens me, but that is reality.
I have written about how I care about a woman's right to control her body, but as a 61 year old male, that is not the most important policy to me. What is important to me, is economic growth to support my investments to fund retirement, a well regulated environment to keep all generations healthy in both a physical and financial sense, and access to affordable health insurance with pre-existing conditions. That will determine how I vote. And I have no sympathy for New England which has high electricity prices because the NIMBY's won't allow natural gas pipelines to be built. NIMBY's are almost always hypocritical at their core because there is no consistent set of policies that can be advocated when you are anti-economic competitiveness and job maintenance/creation.
I do care that I live in a righteous society and I am very sympathetic with the "I Can't Breath" protests. And I do think there is something terribly wrong when unarmed young black men are killed by policeman time after time after time after time. Without better gun control, and a reduction in gang violence (legalize drugs and remove their source of revenue?), I just don't know what a young African American on the edge of economic failure can do to protect themselves other than get on the straight and narrow, a path many young men of all color stray from because they are young men who don't think things through very thoroughly and act on impulse. Impulse self-control growth varies greatly amongst the population.
Link to Ebola Orphan Story
E-Cigarettes Kill too
Taliban Kill without risk
Is Jeb Bush a moderate?
Partisanship is not going away, it is reality
A Stuggle to raise an African American Son
I will bring up my thoughts in the order they developed reading the newspaper.
Just on the front page, there was an article of a scorned 4 year old Ebola orphan in Sierre Leone. She just wants someone to love her and distant relatives want nothing to do with her despite her not being contagious. Then there is the story of Denmark rehabilitating former Jihadists on the basis that young men do stupid things, but are not necessarily evil forever. And while I am not a smoker, and realize all smoking will kill you, the lack of regulatory oversight of E-Cigarettes has resulted in some of them vaporizing lead, tin, zinc and other heavy metals/carcinogens into the smoker's lungs. And if that is not testimony, not mention the excesses of 10 years ago in the financial systems as well, that some kinds of regulation are necessary, I don't know what is.
Meanwhile, 2 guys on a motorcycle in Kabul assassinate a Supreme Court Justice. When your enemy looks just like you and believes that anarchy is the solution, you have both a military problem and a political problem. All civil wars require a political solution because you cannot kill everybody who supports the other side in a civil war. That is genocide. So the world and the interaction of different societies in this time of globalization is certainly complex.
So with that all swirling within my brain, I get to an article on Jeb Bush and an article on Our Unrealistic Hopes for Presidents. Jeb is trying to figure out how to win the Republic Presidential nomination without giving up his political policy soul to the Tea Party and its non-compromising beliefs which he disagrees with. But then, I read how it should not have been a surprise that Obama failed to unite us on policy. It's been over 30 years since we had a government that really wasn't partisan. That was a mid-20th century ideal and lord knows the country is more complex today then it was 60 years ago, and that threatens people. People disagree fundamentally about direction, people disagree fundamentally about scope and scale of government. I have my views on that, but to presuppose that compromise is possible is a false hope on my part. That saddens me, but that is reality.
I have written about how I care about a woman's right to control her body, but as a 61 year old male, that is not the most important policy to me. What is important to me, is economic growth to support my investments to fund retirement, a well regulated environment to keep all generations healthy in both a physical and financial sense, and access to affordable health insurance with pre-existing conditions. That will determine how I vote. And I have no sympathy for New England which has high electricity prices because the NIMBY's won't allow natural gas pipelines to be built. NIMBY's are almost always hypocritical at their core because there is no consistent set of policies that can be advocated when you are anti-economic competitiveness and job maintenance/creation.
I do care that I live in a righteous society and I am very sympathetic with the "I Can't Breath" protests. And I do think there is something terribly wrong when unarmed young black men are killed by policeman time after time after time after time. Without better gun control, and a reduction in gang violence (legalize drugs and remove their source of revenue?), I just don't know what a young African American on the edge of economic failure can do to protect themselves other than get on the straight and narrow, a path many young men of all color stray from because they are young men who don't think things through very thoroughly and act on impulse. Impulse self-control growth varies greatly amongst the population.
Link to Ebola Orphan Story
E-Cigarettes Kill too
Taliban Kill without risk
Is Jeb Bush a moderate?
Partisanship is not going away, it is reality
A Stuggle to raise an African American Son
Thursday, December 11, 2014
George Will on Eric Garner: Criminalized to Death
Mr. Will of course laments the fact that NYC has extraordinarily high taxes on cigarettes, the funds of which are used to pay the medical costs of indigent smokers, while discouraging them from smoking. But he says a few other interesting things.
It is not right for the U.S. with 5% of the world's population to have 25% of its prisoners. Something is terribly wrong with that. His words, not mine.
He also states that the use of solitary confinement is cruel and unusual punishment.
And he laments the overzealous prosecution of "broken window events", which has made NYC much safer since it was started some 20 years ago, but at the expense of a big growth in the prison population.
This is interesting. Is there are growing level of intellectual support on the part of conservatives for drug law reform? I suspect that is not widespread, but George Will is at an age when serious eye disorders can develop and smoking pot has been shown to have medicinal benefits for that, so maybe he is talking his own book. I would not begrudge him that. People should have every medical means to preserve eyesight.
Rudy Guiliani and other believers in "broken windows" policing will no doubt object to George Will's position just as they defend torture despite John McCain's position that torture has no place in America's being.
Not everything we centrists believe in is crazy, anti-american or even anti-economic growth. Efficient economic growth does not singularly exist in a Ann Rynd capitalist model. Even Ann Rynd believed in a woman's right to control her own body. Yet, centrists get no respect from either the GOP or the Democrats these days.
Link to George Will column
It is not right for the U.S. with 5% of the world's population to have 25% of its prisoners. Something is terribly wrong with that. His words, not mine.
He also states that the use of solitary confinement is cruel and unusual punishment.
And he laments the overzealous prosecution of "broken window events", which has made NYC much safer since it was started some 20 years ago, but at the expense of a big growth in the prison population.
This is interesting. Is there are growing level of intellectual support on the part of conservatives for drug law reform? I suspect that is not widespread, but George Will is at an age when serious eye disorders can develop and smoking pot has been shown to have medicinal benefits for that, so maybe he is talking his own book. I would not begrudge him that. People should have every medical means to preserve eyesight.
Rudy Guiliani and other believers in "broken windows" policing will no doubt object to George Will's position just as they defend torture despite John McCain's position that torture has no place in America's being.
Not everything we centrists believe in is crazy, anti-american or even anti-economic growth. Efficient economic growth does not singularly exist in a Ann Rynd capitalist model. Even Ann Rynd believed in a woman's right to control her own body. Yet, centrists get no respect from either the GOP or the Democrats these days.
Link to George Will column
Wednesday, December 10, 2014
Torture
Thomas Friedman and John McCain summarize it better than I ever could.
Link to Friedman column
Democracy's have to adhere to higher standards, no matter the cost.
Link to Friedman column
Democracy's have to adhere to higher standards, no matter the cost.
My Readers In Russia Have Returned
Tell Putin it is more than past time to get the f**k out of the Ukraine. My old fund is out of every long position in Russia, short a few, and unwilling to go long anything in your country. I won't stop at Lukoil gas station (nor should any other intelligent American) and I will drink Swedish vodka, so good-bye Standard Vodka.
It really is too bad the E.U. can't wean itself from GazProm. But at least the Saudi's see it our way and will keep pumping while the Baaken keeps getting fracked. Obama is as conservative as Reagan when it comes to keeping the economic pressure on Russia and Putin doesn't understand finances as a KGB trained person. The fact that this puts pressure on Iran and Venezuela is just a bonus.
This is another example of why Elizabeth Warren's belief that non-finanical types can properly manage an economy is wrong
It really is too bad the E.U. can't wean itself from GazProm. But at least the Saudi's see it our way and will keep pumping while the Baaken keeps getting fracked. Obama is as conservative as Reagan when it comes to keeping the economic pressure on Russia and Putin doesn't understand finances as a KGB trained person. The fact that this puts pressure on Iran and Venezuela is just a bonus.
This is another example of why Elizabeth Warren's belief that non-finanical types can properly manage an economy is wrong
Tuesday, December 9, 2014
Elizabeth Warren Just Doesn't Understand Finance
She can spot a wrong, but that doesn't mean you don't have to understand finance to be in the Treasury Department. She said to a bunch of donor's last night (who you would think would understand finance) that the revolving door between Wall Street and the Treasury has to stop.
I don't want someone who doesn't understand finance making financial policy. That is daft.
That sounds like something the Tea Party would come up with.
I won't be voting for her in any primary. And if the liberal wing of the Democrats rise up and nominate a non-centrist, they will be affirming the tendencies of the current Supreme Court for another 20 to 30 years and beyond my life span.
I don't want someone who doesn't understand finance making financial policy. That is daft.
That sounds like something the Tea Party would come up with.
I won't be voting for her in any primary. And if the liberal wing of the Democrats rise up and nominate a non-centrist, they will be affirming the tendencies of the current Supreme Court for another 20 to 30 years and beyond my life span.
Climate Change: One Question for Doubters from Curiosity on Mars & Israel's Proposal to Deny Arab Citizens Rights
The Curiosity Rover is making great progress in finding out stuff about Mars. It doesn't have all the answers, nor is it likely to be able to figure all of them out, but it has pretty much confirmed that Mars once had water and now it has neither water nor much of an atmosphere.
So the question is, if there is the potential for climate change to cause a dissolution of the atmosphere, and humans could do something to prevent that, would you support such initiatives even if they curtailed global growth and your personal wealth?
Link to article on Curiosity
I know that my question is probably without scientific basis, but I still think it is a relevant question from which to begin to establish where science deniers will draw the line on allowing some policy initiatives that combat global warming.
Just like I used to have a point when I would goad a conservative co-worker who was also an oil engineer. I said what a surprise it would be if we found out that the core of the earth was just continuing to manufacture oil and it wasn't all dinosaur and plant matter. We just need to drill deeper and deeper into the mantle to find it. Of course, at some point we would pierce the mantle, generate a volcano flow of unprecedented size perhaps, open the core up to release and causing the collapse of the surface into the core. Basically turning the earth inside out in a violent manner. Needless to say, as a trained oil engineer who real understands how hydro-carbons were created, he thought my thoughts were outlandishly false statements. I guess he could not be a creationist if he understands hydrocarbons formed over billions of years. But I know he is very conservative. Creationists are the real nut cases. I wonder what they think about Curiosity.
RIP Israel if you become an apartheid state by denying Arab citizens equal rights in all respects. And for anyone reading this, I am Jewish and I don't support the settlements, but I do support Israel's right to defend itself. It just has to adhere to a higher moral code than the militant Palestinians do.
So the question is, if there is the potential for climate change to cause a dissolution of the atmosphere, and humans could do something to prevent that, would you support such initiatives even if they curtailed global growth and your personal wealth?
Link to article on Curiosity
I know that my question is probably without scientific basis, but I still think it is a relevant question from which to begin to establish where science deniers will draw the line on allowing some policy initiatives that combat global warming.
Just like I used to have a point when I would goad a conservative co-worker who was also an oil engineer. I said what a surprise it would be if we found out that the core of the earth was just continuing to manufacture oil and it wasn't all dinosaur and plant matter. We just need to drill deeper and deeper into the mantle to find it. Of course, at some point we would pierce the mantle, generate a volcano flow of unprecedented size perhaps, open the core up to release and causing the collapse of the surface into the core. Basically turning the earth inside out in a violent manner. Needless to say, as a trained oil engineer who real understands how hydro-carbons were created, he thought my thoughts were outlandishly false statements. I guess he could not be a creationist if he understands hydrocarbons formed over billions of years. But I know he is very conservative. Creationists are the real nut cases. I wonder what they think about Curiosity.
RIP Israel if you become an apartheid state by denying Arab citizens equal rights in all respects. And for anyone reading this, I am Jewish and I don't support the settlements, but I do support Israel's right to defend itself. It just has to adhere to a higher moral code than the militant Palestinians do.
Monday, December 8, 2014
Musings on TNR, Tea Party and "I Can't Breathe"
On The New Republic, I know journalistic endeavors need to be profitable, and they certainly need to find their way to profits in this digital age. But I fail to see how losing all your writers and editors, and pissing off your existing subscribers who have been loyal to you, is a path to a successful transition. It's kind of like doing a takeover, closing the U.S. factory and moving production to Mexico or China, but in this case, the existing customers have been told we don't care about you, unlike the manufacturer customers who can get the same product at a lower price.
TNR has not communicated with its subscribers and I really don't think they have a plan to do so, so it is really taking a 100 year old concept and starting it as a new company. How do you produce powerful thoughtful policy discussions if you don't have writers and editors who understand all sides of policy and are in touch with the thoughts of think tanks and Capital Hill? How do you get customers to want to click on your website unless they believe you have depth of coverage? How do you convince people you have depth of coverage? I am a subscriber and I don't have a positive answer for any of those 3 questions when it comes to the future TNR.
I click on the New York Times, the Washington Post and Politico because I know they have the depth and expertise to cover the news well. There is a void on powerful thought pieces in those organizations which is why I subscribed to the TNR. But do powerful thought pieces translate into reading on a digital screen? I have my doubts.
I read an article on Kansas showing some small signs of turning around on Forbes website. Forbes website allows you to follow the comments without making one yourself. I thought Forbes would have a better than average quality in its comments section so I clicked on this article's follow comments.
I cannot believe the diatribes that were written. So I guess that will be the last time I follow Forbes comments. But I did gain some insight into the Kansas Tea Party attitudes toward government. One prolific commentator stated he uses tax loopholes to shelter all his income and pay no Federal or State Income tax and he is proud of it. He considers income taxes to be unconstitutional and he considers all of us who pay income taxes to be chumps. His answer to the resulting budget issues is to simply layoff thousands of government workers without regard to national defense, the judicial system, border control, local schools, police, fire. He believes in privatizing everything and doesn't believe the transition would have any effect on GDP or employment.
Now that I have written that, I am speechless. How do you reason with someone like that? They clearly don't understand how the economy works? They clearly don't have any sympathy with the history of local/state/Federal government providing services and the problems that such a dramatic transition would create for millions of citizens. Remember, the reason ObamaCare focused on employers providing health insurance was the desire to not anger the millions of people who get their health insurance through their employers. The biggest problem with ObamaCare is the fact that, on the margin, it encourage employers to hire more part-time people and fewer full-time people. All because everybody needs health insurance and no one wants uncertainty in how they will obtain health insurance. With a vibrant individual health insurance market, and no employer provided health insurance, you would have that. But how do we transition that from where we are to where we need to go?
I might have looked for the answer to that question in a future issue of the TNR, but alas I will not expect to see it.
I ran into a protest of the "I Can't Breath"Crowd at Grand Central last night. They were peaceful but loud. I wanted to join them, but didn't see the point of my risking arrest. So instead, I went up at to a NY State policeman and told him my belief that the lack of gun control causes legitimate fear in policeman, but clearly something was very wrong in the deaths of Mr. Garner and Mr. Brown. He nodded in agreement and I caught my train home.
TNR has not communicated with its subscribers and I really don't think they have a plan to do so, so it is really taking a 100 year old concept and starting it as a new company. How do you produce powerful thoughtful policy discussions if you don't have writers and editors who understand all sides of policy and are in touch with the thoughts of think tanks and Capital Hill? How do you get customers to want to click on your website unless they believe you have depth of coverage? How do you convince people you have depth of coverage? I am a subscriber and I don't have a positive answer for any of those 3 questions when it comes to the future TNR.
I click on the New York Times, the Washington Post and Politico because I know they have the depth and expertise to cover the news well. There is a void on powerful thought pieces in those organizations which is why I subscribed to the TNR. But do powerful thought pieces translate into reading on a digital screen? I have my doubts.
I read an article on Kansas showing some small signs of turning around on Forbes website. Forbes website allows you to follow the comments without making one yourself. I thought Forbes would have a better than average quality in its comments section so I clicked on this article's follow comments.
I cannot believe the diatribes that were written. So I guess that will be the last time I follow Forbes comments. But I did gain some insight into the Kansas Tea Party attitudes toward government. One prolific commentator stated he uses tax loopholes to shelter all his income and pay no Federal or State Income tax and he is proud of it. He considers income taxes to be unconstitutional and he considers all of us who pay income taxes to be chumps. His answer to the resulting budget issues is to simply layoff thousands of government workers without regard to national defense, the judicial system, border control, local schools, police, fire. He believes in privatizing everything and doesn't believe the transition would have any effect on GDP or employment.
Now that I have written that, I am speechless. How do you reason with someone like that? They clearly don't understand how the economy works? They clearly don't have any sympathy with the history of local/state/Federal government providing services and the problems that such a dramatic transition would create for millions of citizens. Remember, the reason ObamaCare focused on employers providing health insurance was the desire to not anger the millions of people who get their health insurance through their employers. The biggest problem with ObamaCare is the fact that, on the margin, it encourage employers to hire more part-time people and fewer full-time people. All because everybody needs health insurance and no one wants uncertainty in how they will obtain health insurance. With a vibrant individual health insurance market, and no employer provided health insurance, you would have that. But how do we transition that from where we are to where we need to go?
I might have looked for the answer to that question in a future issue of the TNR, but alas I will not expect to see it.
I ran into a protest of the "I Can't Breath"Crowd at Grand Central last night. They were peaceful but loud. I wanted to join them, but didn't see the point of my risking arrest. So instead, I went up at to a NY State policeman and told him my belief that the lack of gun control causes legitimate fear in policeman, but clearly something was very wrong in the deaths of Mr. Garner and Mr. Brown. He nodded in agreement and I caught my train home.
Sunday, December 7, 2014
RIP The New Republic & NIMBY's
I was glad to see Ross Douthat was a TNR subscriber. While I know TNR had the reputation of being a liberal magazine, I always found it objective and open to ideas that made sense, which is what I try to do. I like old fashioned reading and the opportunity to read things on trains and in cars without looking at a digital screen. That is where I can focus, reading and concentrating in ways that I cannot do when looking at a screen with instant information on who knows how many topics.
Regular readers know I value compromise seeing advantages of policy coming from the traditional philosophical bases of the Democrats and GOP. That is certainly nonexistent today and for that I am sad. In a real world example of how people need to communicate with their neighbors (and compromise) I offer the story of what is going on in London, England.
The story was about how the urban population of foxes has grown and a sniper has a business killing foxes which are doing damage to neighborhood pets and children. But at the same time, people feel compelled to hire the sniper, neighbors are feeding the foxes. There are now more foxes in London than double decker buses and I certainly have sympathy for parents who want their little children to be able to play in the backyard with their pet without being attacked by a fox. Why don't these two camps discuss this like adults?
While I am anti-NRA, I am not anti-hunter. Hunters don't need automatic weapons to be satisfied hunters. Long live hunting for food and preserving the safety of little children and pets.
As for NIMBY's, the Constitution gas pipeline was approved this past week. This will bring natural gas from PA to the I88 corridor that has until now relied upon propane, heating fuel oil, and electricity for energy to power the economy. It will also, if connections are built on the NE end of the pipeline, bring more natural gas to the Capital District and southern VT.
Since this neck of the woods has suffered from uncompetitive cost of energy and lost employment to places where there is a more competitive cost of energy, you would think Tea Party types around there would support the pipeline. I know the anti-fracking crowd is not logical about this and they simply believe in magic that an economy can survive without a competitive cost of energy. But I thought the Don't Tread on Me Crowd might instinctively understand this. Alas, they don't. They are as anti-pipeline as the tree huggers. (I believe in doing something about global warming, but I also understand you have cut down trees when it makes sense.)
I guess these Tea Party people have bought the GOP free lunch argument. You can have your social security, medicare and national defense without paying any taxes. Just like you can have your old health insurance even with pre-existing conditions if ObamaCare is repealed. And you don't need to have natural gas pipeline access to have a competitive location for manufacturing jobs and you can be angry at the whatever for not having manufacturing jobs. There is no truth in any of that, but you don't hear candidates of either party leading an education effort on the gestalt that goes into creating a competitive location for manufacturing jobs. That is because pandering to NIMBY's has become a tried and true way to win reelection and that is one of the most dangerous developments to our global competitiveness.
Regular readers know I value compromise seeing advantages of policy coming from the traditional philosophical bases of the Democrats and GOP. That is certainly nonexistent today and for that I am sad. In a real world example of how people need to communicate with their neighbors (and compromise) I offer the story of what is going on in London, England.
The story was about how the urban population of foxes has grown and a sniper has a business killing foxes which are doing damage to neighborhood pets and children. But at the same time, people feel compelled to hire the sniper, neighbors are feeding the foxes. There are now more foxes in London than double decker buses and I certainly have sympathy for parents who want their little children to be able to play in the backyard with their pet without being attacked by a fox. Why don't these two camps discuss this like adults?
While I am anti-NRA, I am not anti-hunter. Hunters don't need automatic weapons to be satisfied hunters. Long live hunting for food and preserving the safety of little children and pets.
As for NIMBY's, the Constitution gas pipeline was approved this past week. This will bring natural gas from PA to the I88 corridor that has until now relied upon propane, heating fuel oil, and electricity for energy to power the economy. It will also, if connections are built on the NE end of the pipeline, bring more natural gas to the Capital District and southern VT.
Since this neck of the woods has suffered from uncompetitive cost of energy and lost employment to places where there is a more competitive cost of energy, you would think Tea Party types around there would support the pipeline. I know the anti-fracking crowd is not logical about this and they simply believe in magic that an economy can survive without a competitive cost of energy. But I thought the Don't Tread on Me Crowd might instinctively understand this. Alas, they don't. They are as anti-pipeline as the tree huggers. (I believe in doing something about global warming, but I also understand you have cut down trees when it makes sense.)
I guess these Tea Party people have bought the GOP free lunch argument. You can have your social security, medicare and national defense without paying any taxes. Just like you can have your old health insurance even with pre-existing conditions if ObamaCare is repealed. And you don't need to have natural gas pipeline access to have a competitive location for manufacturing jobs and you can be angry at the whatever for not having manufacturing jobs. There is no truth in any of that, but you don't hear candidates of either party leading an education effort on the gestalt that goes into creating a competitive location for manufacturing jobs. That is because pandering to NIMBY's has become a tried and true way to win reelection and that is one of the most dangerous developments to our global competitiveness.
Saturday, December 6, 2014
Lack of Gun Control is a Cause of Police Violence on Young Black Men
Frank Serpico wrote a column in which recalled a fellow NYC policeman in the 1960's who was slashed by the male half of a domestic dispute and then disarmed him and arrested him while wounded.
What has changed so that police don't respect the lives of people they are arresting?
In no particular order, that policeman was an ex-marine who knew how to fight with his hands. He also had conquered fear as a marine. Many policeman have no military experience and if they do, they learned how to empty an automatic weapon.
2nd, criminals didn't used to have automatic weapons. Now every Tom, Dick & Harry has an automatic weapon, if they want one. The police kill a 12 year old with a plastic looking automatic weapon because they are in fear of running into Tom, Dick or Harry with a real automatic weapon. The police are in fear for their lives and I don't blame them for that.
But I do think they need to show some restraint when they don't see a gun. That is why I have less sympathy for the killers of Eric Garner and Michael Brown and more sympathy for the rookie NYC cop in Brooklyn whose gun went off accidentally in an unlit stairwell in a housing project.
And I am sorry that there are not more policeman like that ex-marine many years ago. In control of their emotions enough to respect the life of the people they are arresting. I really don't believe the police respect the people they arrest, anymore, and I lay the blame for that on the real risk they face from the widespread availability of automatic weapons.
Of course, the NRA doesn't want to control that and I think, at the heart of that, is preferance on the part of most NRA members to rid the country of non-caucasions. There is a reason most KKK members are also members of the NRA.
What has changed so that police don't respect the lives of people they are arresting?
In no particular order, that policeman was an ex-marine who knew how to fight with his hands. He also had conquered fear as a marine. Many policeman have no military experience and if they do, they learned how to empty an automatic weapon.
2nd, criminals didn't used to have automatic weapons. Now every Tom, Dick & Harry has an automatic weapon, if they want one. The police kill a 12 year old with a plastic looking automatic weapon because they are in fear of running into Tom, Dick or Harry with a real automatic weapon. The police are in fear for their lives and I don't blame them for that.
But I do think they need to show some restraint when they don't see a gun. That is why I have less sympathy for the killers of Eric Garner and Michael Brown and more sympathy for the rookie NYC cop in Brooklyn whose gun went off accidentally in an unlit stairwell in a housing project.
And I am sorry that there are not more policeman like that ex-marine many years ago. In control of their emotions enough to respect the life of the people they are arresting. I really don't believe the police respect the people they arrest, anymore, and I lay the blame for that on the real risk they face from the widespread availability of automatic weapons.
Of course, the NRA doesn't want to control that and I think, at the heart of that, is preferance on the part of most NRA members to rid the country of non-caucasions. There is a reason most KKK members are also members of the NRA.
Friday, December 5, 2014
Doc Radio Just Said It All
We wouldn't be having heated discussions about the cost of health care if people stopped smoking, exercised and had portion control!!!
But I guarantee you that most of the people who smoke, don't exercise and don't exert portion control detest ObamaCare.
But I guarantee you that most of the people who smoke, don't exercise and don't exert portion control detest ObamaCare.
Observation on Health Insurance
Regular readers know that I really do support the concept of a single payer plan, but I accepted the concept of Obama/Romney/HeritageFoundationCare because I cannot imagine how the country could manage the employment problems of moving from private health insurance to medicare for all. After all, there are probably hundreds of thousands of people employed by those private health insurance companies and you can't simply fire them all on 12/31/??.
But, as someone who is in the middle of switching insurance companies for 2015 so I can bring the power of market place competition to bear upon Empire Health Insurance, I have to say the hassle of changing payments (canceling old and starting anew), shopping and researching which Dr's are part of which network leaves me cold and having done it once, I have no desire to do it again next year.
When I was a working stiff, all this just happened. That was a beautiful thing. But I do support the idea of separating obtaining health insurance from employment and what I am dealing with is what we have.
All I can say is, that with my wife on Medicare, there are things to pay attention to with that and it seems to be a breeze compared with what I am doing as an individual too young for Medicare. It is mostly uncertainty and a need to pay attention to details, but I am a professional businessperson, used to this stuff. I hate it and don't really want to do it. What is a less educated person to think and do?
It really confirms my desire for a single payer plan, I just don't know how to manage the transition.
But, as someone who is in the middle of switching insurance companies for 2015 so I can bring the power of market place competition to bear upon Empire Health Insurance, I have to say the hassle of changing payments (canceling old and starting anew), shopping and researching which Dr's are part of which network leaves me cold and having done it once, I have no desire to do it again next year.
When I was a working stiff, all this just happened. That was a beautiful thing. But I do support the idea of separating obtaining health insurance from employment and what I am dealing with is what we have.
All I can say is, that with my wife on Medicare, there are things to pay attention to with that and it seems to be a breeze compared with what I am doing as an individual too young for Medicare. It is mostly uncertainty and a need to pay attention to details, but I am a professional businessperson, used to this stuff. I hate it and don't really want to do it. What is a less educated person to think and do?
It really confirms my desire for a single payer plan, I just don't know how to manage the transition.
Wednesday, December 3, 2014
Why Can't Obama Explain Policy Better?
Thomas Friedman was outlining the difficulty in combating international issues in today's column. He basically agreed with that Obama's efforts that are trying to control the cost the U.S. bears in combatting situations that are fundamentally out of any possible control by the U.S.
He went to bemoan the fact that our foreign policy is frozen in time by 9/11 and our national trauma that has created an all consuming fear of terrorism. He pointed out that in any one year more people in the U.S. are killed by each of the following than by Jihadist Terrror in the U.S.: (i) accidents with dear, (ii) teenagers with guns, and (iii) black male youth by police. Yet, there is no lasting national outcry for controlling dear, guns, or establishing better relations between African-American youth and Police Departments. Yet, our foreign policy is dictated by Osama bin Laden, even though he is dead now.
Friedman wondered why Obama did not explain his foreign policy vision better. I am wondering why he and the Democrats did not explain the benefits of the Affordable Health Care Act better. Substantial majorities of the population support key aspects of Obama/Romney/Heritage FoundationCare. And I am wondering why they didn't explain the benefits of a higher minimum wage for everyone in the economy. And I am wondering how the immigrant community can call him the Deporter in Chief while the Tea Party is mad as hell that he is not deporting enough undocumented people.
For such a great communicator in his campaigns, President Obama is a poor communicator as President. That will probably be the greatest negative mark about his Presidency when history gets around to reviewing it objectively.
He went to bemoan the fact that our foreign policy is frozen in time by 9/11 and our national trauma that has created an all consuming fear of terrorism. He pointed out that in any one year more people in the U.S. are killed by each of the following than by Jihadist Terrror in the U.S.: (i) accidents with dear, (ii) teenagers with guns, and (iii) black male youth by police. Yet, there is no lasting national outcry for controlling dear, guns, or establishing better relations between African-American youth and Police Departments. Yet, our foreign policy is dictated by Osama bin Laden, even though he is dead now.
Friedman wondered why Obama did not explain his foreign policy vision better. I am wondering why he and the Democrats did not explain the benefits of the Affordable Health Care Act better. Substantial majorities of the population support key aspects of Obama/Romney/Heritage FoundationCare. And I am wondering why they didn't explain the benefits of a higher minimum wage for everyone in the economy. And I am wondering how the immigrant community can call him the Deporter in Chief while the Tea Party is mad as hell that he is not deporting enough undocumented people.
For such a great communicator in his campaigns, President Obama is a poor communicator as President. That will probably be the greatest negative mark about his Presidency when history gets around to reviewing it objectively.
Tuesday, December 2, 2014
A Downside to being Retired
The last few days have been slightly traumatic for your correspondent. On Friday, my MacBook Pro, which is only 2 months past it's 2nd birthday, started behaving strangely in terms of accession files and would not shut down unless I forced it to.
The reliability continued to deteriorate over the weekend as I tried using information from the web to fix it and solve the problem. I thought it was a malware problem and was very irritated by that thought. But while awaking Monday a.m., I had the revelation that it could be a hardware failure of some kind.
So, I consulted expert help at the Genius bar at the Apple Store. They ran tests, determined the hardware was fine, but I had corrupted software (whatever permissions are) and ran a fix to repair the permission in the software. Everything looked fine and I went home.
Got home, turned the laptop on. It doesn't work. Make another appointment at the Genius Bar. Drive to White Plains. More tests, reformat the hard drive, reload the hard drive with the operating system. Hard Drive failure.
How does a 2 year old hard drive fail? Well, apparently my frustration driven forced shut downs of the laptop corrupted the hard drive. How does software become corrupted which generated my initial frustration? No answer for that from the genius bar employees. Sh*t happens is basically what they said.
So, now I am typing on a new laptop and this is where not having any current income really hurts. You can't be a modern guy and not have a computer. And computers break and are expensive. I don't have an IT department to tell me not to force shut down the computer receptively because that will harm the hard drive.
Oh, to be 10 years younger and working. I suspect this will not be my only disappointment in being retired as I move through time.
The reliability continued to deteriorate over the weekend as I tried using information from the web to fix it and solve the problem. I thought it was a malware problem and was very irritated by that thought. But while awaking Monday a.m., I had the revelation that it could be a hardware failure of some kind.
So, I consulted expert help at the Genius bar at the Apple Store. They ran tests, determined the hardware was fine, but I had corrupted software (whatever permissions are) and ran a fix to repair the permission in the software. Everything looked fine and I went home.
Got home, turned the laptop on. It doesn't work. Make another appointment at the Genius Bar. Drive to White Plains. More tests, reformat the hard drive, reload the hard drive with the operating system. Hard Drive failure.
How does a 2 year old hard drive fail? Well, apparently my frustration driven forced shut downs of the laptop corrupted the hard drive. How does software become corrupted which generated my initial frustration? No answer for that from the genius bar employees. Sh*t happens is basically what they said.
So, now I am typing on a new laptop and this is where not having any current income really hurts. You can't be a modern guy and not have a computer. And computers break and are expensive. I don't have an IT department to tell me not to force shut down the computer receptively because that will harm the hard drive.
Oh, to be 10 years younger and working. I suspect this will not be my only disappointment in being retired as I move through time.
Sunday, November 30, 2014
Ross Douthat's Insightful Column Today: How Both the GOP and Democrats are failing
This is why it is so important to respect the other side of a political discussion. Shared values exist on both sides of the political spectrum and our system is based upon a predominantly market based capitalism with a roll for government where unbridled capitalism fails and everyone benefits from the laws of large numbers.
But our politicians are lost in the maze of partisanship and catering to bases and no one is being educated about the issues and trade-offs in solutions. Congressional hearings where this has traditionally happened are focused on gotcha politic, partisan angles and bolstering already hardened positions rather an open mind listening to problems and possible solutions.
Douthat's insight today really brings home where we are.
"In the Obama era, though, neither coalition has done a very good job selling such a vision, because neither knows how to deliver on it. (The left doesn’t know how to get wages rising again; the right doesn’t know how to shore up the two-parent family, etc.) Which has left both parties increasingly dependent on identity-politics appeals, with the left mobilizing along lines of race, ethnicity and gender and the right mobilizing around white-Christian-heartland cultural anxieties."
Link to Douthat's whole column
That is why I am so discouraged by the Democrat's post election populism. I am sympathetic with Senator Schumer's belief that the Democrat's need to focus on the middle class, not just the poor, if they are to win elections in red states, but the Democrats also need to defend the propriety of policies that balance both GOP reliance on the market and the need to defend the environment (which didn't used to be a partisan issue and doesn't have to be.) People like clean air and water, but they also like jobs. Globalization is tough for people who become uneconomic because of it. They need help, but they also need to be self-sufficient by cutting expenses and living within their means. And our representative's need to be sympathetic to both points of view.
The Tea Party is wrong when they think government doesn't need to pass laws. The world changes, the economy changes, there is change in the culture and laws need to change to reflect how society wishes to govern itself. The military needs to be funded because the world is a dangerous place and our veterans deserve to be taken care of, and the cost of doing so needs supervision because there are shysters out there who want to take advantage of government programs through fraudulent activities. The GOP designed ObamaCare the way they did because preventive health care is always less expensive for society than the treatment of illnesses and you need everyone in the system at all times because people can get sick at any time and they need to pay into the system to spread the cost fairly across everybody. I don't know why the GOP cannot acknowledge that nor why the Democrats cannot blast it into the debate during elections.
I guess Identity Politics don't allow for difficult messages.
But our politicians are lost in the maze of partisanship and catering to bases and no one is being educated about the issues and trade-offs in solutions. Congressional hearings where this has traditionally happened are focused on gotcha politic, partisan angles and bolstering already hardened positions rather an open mind listening to problems and possible solutions.
Douthat's insight today really brings home where we are.
"In the Obama era, though, neither coalition has done a very good job selling such a vision, because neither knows how to deliver on it. (The left doesn’t know how to get wages rising again; the right doesn’t know how to shore up the two-parent family, etc.) Which has left both parties increasingly dependent on identity-politics appeals, with the left mobilizing along lines of race, ethnicity and gender and the right mobilizing around white-Christian-heartland cultural anxieties."
Link to Douthat's whole column
That is why I am so discouraged by the Democrat's post election populism. I am sympathetic with Senator Schumer's belief that the Democrat's need to focus on the middle class, not just the poor, if they are to win elections in red states, but the Democrats also need to defend the propriety of policies that balance both GOP reliance on the market and the need to defend the environment (which didn't used to be a partisan issue and doesn't have to be.) People like clean air and water, but they also like jobs. Globalization is tough for people who become uneconomic because of it. They need help, but they also need to be self-sufficient by cutting expenses and living within their means. And our representative's need to be sympathetic to both points of view.
The Tea Party is wrong when they think government doesn't need to pass laws. The world changes, the economy changes, there is change in the culture and laws need to change to reflect how society wishes to govern itself. The military needs to be funded because the world is a dangerous place and our veterans deserve to be taken care of, and the cost of doing so needs supervision because there are shysters out there who want to take advantage of government programs through fraudulent activities. The GOP designed ObamaCare the way they did because preventive health care is always less expensive for society than the treatment of illnesses and you need everyone in the system at all times because people can get sick at any time and they need to pay into the system to spread the cost fairly across everybody. I don't know why the GOP cannot acknowledge that nor why the Democrats cannot blast it into the debate during elections.
I guess Identity Politics don't allow for difficult messages.
Friday, November 28, 2014
Idiocy Observed: Neo-conservatives still fighting the Cold War and Liberal Democrats on Economic Expertise
My definition of Idiocy is knee jerk reaction in the name of political themes without thought as to the substance.
So we have neo-conservatives criticizing the Obama Administration for trying to limit our volunteer Army's exposure to situations where we have little hope of success. The Economist ran a thoughtful piece in their 2015 outlook on this issue. I will now quote Edward Carr, their foreign editor.
"Just now the world seems uncommonly hard to manage. Citizens are fed up with elites that govern them: Ukrainians rose up against their country's kleptomaniac nomenklature, student's occupied Central district in Hong Kong and Europe's populists, such as France's National Front and the UK Independence Party, are plotting to overthrow the technocrats in Brussels. The Jihadists of Islamic State threaten to wreck havoc in the Middle East and beyond. Whereas democratic governments seem weak and vacillating, authoritarians are busy arresting their opponents, muzzling their media and invading their neighbors."
"Part of the difficulty the world faces in reacting to these developments is that expectations of what governments can achieve in foreign policy run far ahead of what is feasible. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, American power was untrammeled. Far from declaring victory and going home. America became more involved than ever, across the globe. For while intervention seemed just a question of willpower and shrewd policies. But the past decade has shown up that view as naive. The world is messy. As they say, success in politics is not perfection, it is going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm."
........................
"The charges against Mr. Obama distort his thinking and vastly overstate America's loss of power. The President who ordered special forces into Pakistan to seize Osama bin Ladan is not a defeatist, and the armed forces that carried out that mission have not suddenly become weak. Mr. Obama has put forward the argument that America cannot act alone as the world's policeman: Countries that benefit from open trade and the rule of law have a responsibility to help."
"Analytically, that argument has much going for it. Yet, politically, it has failed. When Mr. Obama advertises the limits to America's power, Americans hear defeatism, allies detect wavering American commitment to their security and America's rivals in Moscow and Beijing spot a chance to meddle."
"The lesson for Mr. Obama is that, because foreign policy abhors a vacuum, he has to fill the role of leader. That is what he has begun to do in the Middle East, by forming a coalition against IS.....America gets others to bear a burden not when it steps back, but when it engages the world's problems."
"The lesson of other countries is harder still...........When global economic and political collaboration suffers - all these countries suffer too. If 2015 is to count as a big improvement, America must have help."
While there are lessons in all that for the Democrats, my key takeaway is that America cannot go it alone. Our share of global GDP is declining even as our economic growth continue to be amongst the highest in the world. The cost of global military action is higher than ever and the GOP does not support raising revenues to pay for it, but America does have to lead. The President has problems with the Democratic Left over his middle of the road national security policies. He should be praised by the neo-conservatives and worked with through the traditional process of compromise and cordial discussions. You can't have everything but you have to work with the President and he is open to that on National Security issues. And if you want a bigger defense budget, revenues must be raised to pay for it.
Also, unwanted immigrants are a problem for conservatives all over the world. People all over the world do not desire to live in chaos or fear for safety. Those have vision, wisdom and courage will try to go the closest stable place. While I welcome those people because they are motivated workers and citizens of their new home, they also give the less motivated and less able citizens of the destination country more competition for employment, who in turn want to keep the immigrants out. But if you want to stop people from being motivated to move to your country, you need to work to make their home country more stable and a healthier economy. So for the U.S., that means stabilizing Central America and for Europe, it means stabilizing the Middle East.
Meanwhile, the Democratic Left is going nuts over the nomination of Antonio Weiss to be Under-Secretary of the Treasury for Domestic Policy. Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders and the AFL-CIO are actively working to derail his approval. They ignore 2 key facts: 1st, to be a credible national political party, the Democrats need to have competent people who understand their area of expertise and 2nd, that financiers can be supportive of Democratic policy initiatives while also understanding the appropriateness and need for sound economic policy. By liberal left's standards, I would not be qualified for anything in their world because I worked in the world of finance. But how can anyone be competent at crafting financial policies if they don't understand how finance works. Antonio Weiss is qualified to be an Under-Secretary and should be approved. I will not vote for a Democratic candidate that does not understand that. And that is why I never voted for Bernie Sanders when I was a resident of Vermont. He drove me to vote Republican. Thankfully, NY Democrats understand people who work in finance are not the enemy just because of what they do to make a living. Working in finance is just as honorable as working in any other job.
So we have neo-conservatives criticizing the Obama Administration for trying to limit our volunteer Army's exposure to situations where we have little hope of success. The Economist ran a thoughtful piece in their 2015 outlook on this issue. I will now quote Edward Carr, their foreign editor.
"Just now the world seems uncommonly hard to manage. Citizens are fed up with elites that govern them: Ukrainians rose up against their country's kleptomaniac nomenklature, student's occupied Central district in Hong Kong and Europe's populists, such as France's National Front and the UK Independence Party, are plotting to overthrow the technocrats in Brussels. The Jihadists of Islamic State threaten to wreck havoc in the Middle East and beyond. Whereas democratic governments seem weak and vacillating, authoritarians are busy arresting their opponents, muzzling their media and invading their neighbors."
"Part of the difficulty the world faces in reacting to these developments is that expectations of what governments can achieve in foreign policy run far ahead of what is feasible. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, American power was untrammeled. Far from declaring victory and going home. America became more involved than ever, across the globe. For while intervention seemed just a question of willpower and shrewd policies. But the past decade has shown up that view as naive. The world is messy. As they say, success in politics is not perfection, it is going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm."
........................
"The charges against Mr. Obama distort his thinking and vastly overstate America's loss of power. The President who ordered special forces into Pakistan to seize Osama bin Ladan is not a defeatist, and the armed forces that carried out that mission have not suddenly become weak. Mr. Obama has put forward the argument that America cannot act alone as the world's policeman: Countries that benefit from open trade and the rule of law have a responsibility to help."
"Analytically, that argument has much going for it. Yet, politically, it has failed. When Mr. Obama advertises the limits to America's power, Americans hear defeatism, allies detect wavering American commitment to their security and America's rivals in Moscow and Beijing spot a chance to meddle."
"The lesson for Mr. Obama is that, because foreign policy abhors a vacuum, he has to fill the role of leader. That is what he has begun to do in the Middle East, by forming a coalition against IS.....America gets others to bear a burden not when it steps back, but when it engages the world's problems."
"The lesson of other countries is harder still...........When global economic and political collaboration suffers - all these countries suffer too. If 2015 is to count as a big improvement, America must have help."
While there are lessons in all that for the Democrats, my key takeaway is that America cannot go it alone. Our share of global GDP is declining even as our economic growth continue to be amongst the highest in the world. The cost of global military action is higher than ever and the GOP does not support raising revenues to pay for it, but America does have to lead. The President has problems with the Democratic Left over his middle of the road national security policies. He should be praised by the neo-conservatives and worked with through the traditional process of compromise and cordial discussions. You can't have everything but you have to work with the President and he is open to that on National Security issues. And if you want a bigger defense budget, revenues must be raised to pay for it.
Also, unwanted immigrants are a problem for conservatives all over the world. People all over the world do not desire to live in chaos or fear for safety. Those have vision, wisdom and courage will try to go the closest stable place. While I welcome those people because they are motivated workers and citizens of their new home, they also give the less motivated and less able citizens of the destination country more competition for employment, who in turn want to keep the immigrants out. But if you want to stop people from being motivated to move to your country, you need to work to make their home country more stable and a healthier economy. So for the U.S., that means stabilizing Central America and for Europe, it means stabilizing the Middle East.
Meanwhile, the Democratic Left is going nuts over the nomination of Antonio Weiss to be Under-Secretary of the Treasury for Domestic Policy. Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders and the AFL-CIO are actively working to derail his approval. They ignore 2 key facts: 1st, to be a credible national political party, the Democrats need to have competent people who understand their area of expertise and 2nd, that financiers can be supportive of Democratic policy initiatives while also understanding the appropriateness and need for sound economic policy. By liberal left's standards, I would not be qualified for anything in their world because I worked in the world of finance. But how can anyone be competent at crafting financial policies if they don't understand how finance works. Antonio Weiss is qualified to be an Under-Secretary and should be approved. I will not vote for a Democratic candidate that does not understand that. And that is why I never voted for Bernie Sanders when I was a resident of Vermont. He drove me to vote Republican. Thankfully, NY Democrats understand people who work in finance are not the enemy just because of what they do to make a living. Working in finance is just as honorable as working in any other job.
Monday, November 24, 2014
Climate Change & Voting
83% of Americans think the U.S. should do something to reduce greenhouse gases even if there is an economic cost. Unfortunately, out of 13 national issues that drive voting choice, global warming only comes in 11th so a candidate's position on global warming rarely determines how any one individual will vote.
52% of American think Congress should do more and 46% think the President should do more.
Link to Article
52% of American think Congress should do more and 46% think the President should do more.
Link to Article
Sunday, November 23, 2014
Thank you Grover Norquist
I know 60 Minutes is not beyond exaggeration. But when they say there are a lot of bridges that need replacing, I believe them. Water pollution treatment plants are becoming obsolete.
900 million people travel daily across bridges that are beyond their useful life.
Bridges are going to collapse. 33% of roads are in need of repair and the Federal government Transportation system fund runs out of money next year. and gas taxes which haven't been raised since 1996 are supposed to maintain that fund.
Thank you Grover Norquist.
900 million people travel daily across bridges that are beyond their useful life.
Bridges are going to collapse. 33% of roads are in need of repair and the Federal government Transportation system fund runs out of money next year. and gas taxes which haven't been raised since 1996 are supposed to maintain that fund.
Thank you Grover Norquist.
Vouchers are not sufficient without Regulation
The GOP understandably likes to promote vouchers as a way of providing a safety net while controlling the aggregate cost of public expenditure. I see the appeal. Allow individuals their private choice while making them aware of the cost and forcing them to pay any cost above the value of the voucher. That is a strategy that should provide balance to the system.
We sent our son to private school and paid dearly into the public (property taxes) and private education (tuition) systems in doing so. So I have some sympathy for the use of vouchers to allow people without our means to have access for their kids to the private education system. However, I also have reservations when I read about private schools only teaching creationism as the basis for the existence of life. And these reservations were increased by today's NYT article on what the Hasidic schools of New York are teaching the children while they are getting funding from the public, which by definition reduces the funding available to the public schools.
These Hasidic schools teach little English, science or math. The students come from large families, tend to marry young and have large families. The young man who is the focus of the story is one of 17 children. As a student at the College of Staten Island, he found he did not know a word being used in the classroom. The word was "molecule" He is a product of the NYC Yeshiva schools. The primary language is Yiddish. They study religious education from 8:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Then for 90 minutes they are taught English and Math until they reach the age of 13 (Bar Mitzvah time) when they stop receiving non-religious education.
Why is this deserving of public funding? They are not meeting any standards of equivalency with what the public schools offer (and is needed to function in any modern society) which by the way, is the supposed standard they are to meet to receive public funding.
Where is the supervision of the standard? Don't we who provide $ to pay for public education deserve to know that our $ are being used to provide an education that is supportive of our societies ability to compete in the global economy? Don't we who provide the $ deserve to know that these students will be able to communicate with the rest of the citizens of the city, state, and country?
Vouchers without supervision and regulation are not good public policy.
Link to article
And I can only wonder how Israel deals with this system which is growing there and supports an increasing percentage of the population. These ignorant people are fueling the unending support for settlement expansion and they are exempt from both military service and pay little in taxes to support the system.
If this sounds personal to me, it is. My great grandmother abandoned her husband in Kovel, Russia (now Ukraine) and came to NYC. My great grandfather was a Talmudic scholar and did little else. 3 generations of living in secular society has put me where I am today. A successful U.S. citizen who is lawful, responsible, raised our child well, and funded my retirement. All I ask for is access to affordable health insurance with pre-existing conditions. I was never a leach on society which is what I see these yeshiva's doing with public funding. How can you pretend to be running a decent public school when you don't teach the basic subjects?
We sent our son to private school and paid dearly into the public (property taxes) and private education (tuition) systems in doing so. So I have some sympathy for the use of vouchers to allow people without our means to have access for their kids to the private education system. However, I also have reservations when I read about private schools only teaching creationism as the basis for the existence of life. And these reservations were increased by today's NYT article on what the Hasidic schools of New York are teaching the children while they are getting funding from the public, which by definition reduces the funding available to the public schools.
These Hasidic schools teach little English, science or math. The students come from large families, tend to marry young and have large families. The young man who is the focus of the story is one of 17 children. As a student at the College of Staten Island, he found he did not know a word being used in the classroom. The word was "molecule" He is a product of the NYC Yeshiva schools. The primary language is Yiddish. They study religious education from 8:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Then for 90 minutes they are taught English and Math until they reach the age of 13 (Bar Mitzvah time) when they stop receiving non-religious education.
Why is this deserving of public funding? They are not meeting any standards of equivalency with what the public schools offer (and is needed to function in any modern society) which by the way, is the supposed standard they are to meet to receive public funding.
Where is the supervision of the standard? Don't we who provide $ to pay for public education deserve to know that our $ are being used to provide an education that is supportive of our societies ability to compete in the global economy? Don't we who provide the $ deserve to know that these students will be able to communicate with the rest of the citizens of the city, state, and country?
Vouchers without supervision and regulation are not good public policy.
Link to article
And I can only wonder how Israel deals with this system which is growing there and supports an increasing percentage of the population. These ignorant people are fueling the unending support for settlement expansion and they are exempt from both military service and pay little in taxes to support the system.
If this sounds personal to me, it is. My great grandmother abandoned her husband in Kovel, Russia (now Ukraine) and came to NYC. My great grandfather was a Talmudic scholar and did little else. 3 generations of living in secular society has put me where I am today. A successful U.S. citizen who is lawful, responsible, raised our child well, and funded my retirement. All I ask for is access to affordable health insurance with pre-existing conditions. I was never a leach on society which is what I see these yeshiva's doing with public funding. How can you pretend to be running a decent public school when you don't teach the basic subjects?
Friday, November 21, 2014
A running list of GOP Supporters of an Immigration Reform Bill that is balanced
Readers should feel free to add people in comments and I will add them to the list:
Marco Rubio (Florida US Senator)
Jeb Bush (Former Florida Governor)
John Kasich (Ohio Governor)
Marco Rubio (Florida US Senator)
Jeb Bush (Former Florida Governor)
John Kasich (Ohio Governor)
Thursday, November 20, 2014
Brrrr & other musings
I sure am glad I don't live the south Buffalo suburb's. 7 or 8 feet of snow, plus drifts, is too much for even the avid skier in me. And the geography south of Buffalo is not sufficiently hilly for any good skiing no matter how much snow you have.
So what I am doing tomorrow in the sub-32 degree morning? Trying to squeeze in one last golf round and practice some new stuff I just learned on my videos. Got to get those hips moving before the arms get there while keeping the hands forward.
I hear a pro-Israel radio ad this morning. It got me thinking. I am pro-Israel on every point except for the West Bank Settlements. I'm not always that forthright because the settlements drive me crazy. You can't make peace with someone who has insufficient land for their population. But, I do acknowledge that Israel must do whatever is necessary to preserve the physical safety of its population. And as I blogged a while ago, some 70% of American Jews agree with this. It is just the vocal 30% who say Israel can do no wrong who dominate the conversation from America toward Israel in the Jewish community. The ad was about Iran, and the need to hang tough with them. My brain hurts when I think about that because then we have to think about ISIS, and where ISIS gets it's money (Sunni Turkey buying the oil and rich Qatar's and Saudi's sending $, while Iran/Russia support Assad whose fighting ISIS and ISIS wants to fight the Iranians. Thank goodness the Saudi's are pumping oil so the price plummets and causes cash shortfalls in both Iran and Russia.
I am pro-immigration beyond the pale, but I just don't think by-passing the legislative process is the way to do it, despite the fact that apparently Reagan and Bush I did it this way.
And I am baffled by the strength of NIMBY's in this country. You can't always get what you want. Gotta go now, the Rolling Stones are running through my brain and I need to find my iPod to get some satisfaction.
So what I am doing tomorrow in the sub-32 degree morning? Trying to squeeze in one last golf round and practice some new stuff I just learned on my videos. Got to get those hips moving before the arms get there while keeping the hands forward.
I hear a pro-Israel radio ad this morning. It got me thinking. I am pro-Israel on every point except for the West Bank Settlements. I'm not always that forthright because the settlements drive me crazy. You can't make peace with someone who has insufficient land for their population. But, I do acknowledge that Israel must do whatever is necessary to preserve the physical safety of its population. And as I blogged a while ago, some 70% of American Jews agree with this. It is just the vocal 30% who say Israel can do no wrong who dominate the conversation from America toward Israel in the Jewish community. The ad was about Iran, and the need to hang tough with them. My brain hurts when I think about that because then we have to think about ISIS, and where ISIS gets it's money (Sunni Turkey buying the oil and rich Qatar's and Saudi's sending $, while Iran/Russia support Assad whose fighting ISIS and ISIS wants to fight the Iranians. Thank goodness the Saudi's are pumping oil so the price plummets and causes cash shortfalls in both Iran and Russia.
I am pro-immigration beyond the pale, but I just don't think by-passing the legislative process is the way to do it, despite the fact that apparently Reagan and Bush I did it this way.
And I am baffled by the strength of NIMBY's in this country. You can't always get what you want. Gotta go now, the Rolling Stones are running through my brain and I need to find my iPod to get some satisfaction.
Wednesday, November 19, 2014
Cicero
No, I don't mean Cicero, Illinois.
Cicero was a Roman Philosopher, who wrote a book called On Obligations some 2050 years ago. I recently read that after printing the Bible, the next book ever printed on that 1st printing press by Gutenberg was Cicero's On Obligations. Since I am not a big reader of the Bible, having had my fill of the torah when I had to and deciding the Virgin Birth was a hoax, amongst other hoax's, I thought I should read this other very historic and ancient book to see what was in it.
No one can accuse Cicero of succinctness, but the book is only 126 pages which I can summarize here. His thoughts are ones I wish our politicians would remember today, but I am not sure how much some of them read and fewer of them are contemplative or altruistic.
Cicero, as the title clearly shows, was concerned that his son, to whom these words were addressed, had a clear view on how to live a moral life. Paramount to that, was a living a life dedicated to Obligation in the both the physical world and as a tool of moral guidance. Unique to humans, Cicero pointed out the insatiable desire to know the truth as a key to living one's life. While providing for the family's essential needs, it is necessary to promote the cohesion of the community through justice and charity. Cicero also pointed out that benevolence cannot go beyond the means to afford it.
Cicero developed 5 approaches to managing obligations: What is fitting? What is honorable? How should Wealth be used? How should Talent by used? How should conflict in the answers to those 4 questions be resolved? Most importantly he said; "Avoid the conceit of making dogmatic claims by giving a wide berth to rash judgement which is greatly alien to true wisdom." He felt that Orators had the duty to make sure their words were useful in satisfying the goals of a society fulfilling its obligations.
Cicero concluded this book by pointing out that aiming for usefulness was never at odds with being honorable. And a little before the end, although he pre-dated Machiavelli by 1550 years, he hinted that he was well aware of the point of view that power could dictate control, but he felt that such control would not gain the support of the people and those who practiced such belief's without being true to Cicero's views on Obligations were doomed to unhappy endings. Of course, Cicero found himself on the wrong side of Mark Anthony after the death of Julius Caesar and Mark Anthony had him killed. But perhaps, Rome might not have fallen if Cicero's sense of duty and righteousness had been followed more closely by the subsequent leaders of Rome.
An interesting read and now I can say I read the 2nd book ever printed.
NIMBY's Win for the Moment, defeating other NIMBY's
As even a NY Times writer acknowledges, the Keystone Pipeline being built will have a negligible effect on green house gases. Link to Q&A on Keystone Pipeline But what it does offer us an insight into the length that NIMBY's go to arouse fear and anger in the ignorant. Not unlike what the Tea Party does on their perceived personal freedom issues.
One of the most interesting articles yesterday was a story about how the anti-tax crowd are after Senators to vote no on an increase in the cost of Duck shooting licenses because it would be an increase in fee income for the government (i.e. taxes). However, the bill authorizing this increase specifically states that the revenue will go to pay for duck breeding programs that will increase the number of ducks available to shoot, so Duck hunters are actually in favor of this. I didn't know there was a shortage of ducks to shoot, as there is certainly no shortage of Canadian Geese and they are a protected species and one I would like to let my dog chase.
But in any case, I thought the Republicans were in favor of use fees so that only people who use a service have to pay for it, rather than using general tax revenues. This is very personal for me as I was discussing the cost of driving I95, as I did 6 weeks ago, with a friend yesterday. My friend is helping a brother who has cancer remodel his house in Virginia and is driving I95 from Boston to D.C. and back every other week. He figures it costs him about $40 in tolls each way and I believe him. That adds up but at least these roads and bridges are being maintained. This is what the fee for use tax system is all about. It does seem outrageous to pay that much in tolls, but no one wants to be stuck in a traffic jam or lose a tire or two to a vicious pothole (as I did a 2 years ago). And if the government can't fund road maintenance, I guess tolls are the only way to do it. The economy needs the trucks to keep moving.
So anyway, some NIMBY's fought off the Keystone Pipeline for a moment, while other NIMBY's want the trains carrying that same crude to somehow stop. I find exploding trains much scarier than potentially leaking pipelines. And when a train derails, as we know they do with a certain unpredictable regularity, they pollute water because railroad tracks are almost always built next to river beds. You cannot have a functioning economy without energy and to have energy oil and natural gas need to be moved around the country. That requires pipelines.
So build Keystone. Build the natural gas pipeline from Binghamton to Albany. Trains and trucks are much more dangerous.
And if you have NIMBY tendencies, please at least try to be rational and articulate about why you oppose something.
And to the GOP, if I am going to be openminded about this, please be openminded about my desire to do something to control the increasing cost of healthcare in this country. The Affordable Health Care act is a Heritage Foundation designed effort to use the private sector to improve the delivery and cost of health care which now represents 18% of our GDP. The baby boom with drive that higher in their retirement and it needs to be controlled. Wise men designed RomneyCare and it deserves intelligent debate. It does not deserve NIMBY fear mongering.
One of the most interesting articles yesterday was a story about how the anti-tax crowd are after Senators to vote no on an increase in the cost of Duck shooting licenses because it would be an increase in fee income for the government (i.e. taxes). However, the bill authorizing this increase specifically states that the revenue will go to pay for duck breeding programs that will increase the number of ducks available to shoot, so Duck hunters are actually in favor of this. I didn't know there was a shortage of ducks to shoot, as there is certainly no shortage of Canadian Geese and they are a protected species and one I would like to let my dog chase.
But in any case, I thought the Republicans were in favor of use fees so that only people who use a service have to pay for it, rather than using general tax revenues. This is very personal for me as I was discussing the cost of driving I95, as I did 6 weeks ago, with a friend yesterday. My friend is helping a brother who has cancer remodel his house in Virginia and is driving I95 from Boston to D.C. and back every other week. He figures it costs him about $40 in tolls each way and I believe him. That adds up but at least these roads and bridges are being maintained. This is what the fee for use tax system is all about. It does seem outrageous to pay that much in tolls, but no one wants to be stuck in a traffic jam or lose a tire or two to a vicious pothole (as I did a 2 years ago). And if the government can't fund road maintenance, I guess tolls are the only way to do it. The economy needs the trucks to keep moving.
So anyway, some NIMBY's fought off the Keystone Pipeline for a moment, while other NIMBY's want the trains carrying that same crude to somehow stop. I find exploding trains much scarier than potentially leaking pipelines. And when a train derails, as we know they do with a certain unpredictable regularity, they pollute water because railroad tracks are almost always built next to river beds. You cannot have a functioning economy without energy and to have energy oil and natural gas need to be moved around the country. That requires pipelines.
So build Keystone. Build the natural gas pipeline from Binghamton to Albany. Trains and trucks are much more dangerous.
And if you have NIMBY tendencies, please at least try to be rational and articulate about why you oppose something.
And to the GOP, if I am going to be openminded about this, please be openminded about my desire to do something to control the increasing cost of healthcare in this country. The Affordable Health Care act is a Heritage Foundation designed effort to use the private sector to improve the delivery and cost of health care which now represents 18% of our GDP. The baby boom with drive that higher in their retirement and it needs to be controlled. Wise men designed RomneyCare and it deserves intelligent debate. It does not deserve NIMBY fear mongering.
Tuesday, November 18, 2014
Fox News & Professor Gruber
I am waiting for a routine car service at the dealer being subject to whoever controls the TV deciding that Fox News was the thing all these African Americans around me wanted to watch in the extremely Blue county of Westchester, NY.
Anyway, they are having a field day with Professor Gruber who you would have think learned long ago that colorful statements in public about things the country cares about have to be politically correct. But the point I want to make is that Fox News is making hay about ObamaCare having taxes in it.
Well, isn't that what the Supreme Court said when they upheld the Constitutionality of ObamaCare? Isn't that what the Republicans were saying when they opposed ObamaCare? Isn't that what all fees, taxes, excise duties, VAT's, Sales, Property, penalties are at the end of the day.
Yes, they are taxes and we must pay taxes if we are to have a functioning National Defense, a functioning legal system (which by the way is seriously underfunded at the Judicial Process level, our little condo legal dispute has taken over 5 years to wind its way to the point where the next appeal will finally bring our legal victory to completion), a functioning public health system, a functioning State Department, a functioning public education system, a functioning road maintenance and snow plowing system, a functioning fire department, and, yes, Republicans, a functioning safety net for the elderly and poor.
The way Fox News is carrying on, you would get the impression that taxes are unnecessary and we can do with no taxes at all. How is that working out for you KANSAS? And if the GOP was so upfront about everything, why aren't they putting forth their detailed alternative to ObamaCare? Oh wait, it is ObamaCare! or is it voucher's for everyone whereby people will see their co-pay's and deductibles ever increasing! or is it privatization of Social Security and Medicare so that every citizen has to save $1,000,000 over their life time to pay for retirement and end-of-life care and woe to those who don't do that. I know no GOP'er would campaign on Granny and Gramps dying in the gutter, but that is where Fox News would take us. Thank you Rubert Murdoch, you are driving me crazy when I cannot ignore you. I wish I could convince RSL to drop the Wall Street Journal from our newspaper delivery to send you a small message.
Anyway, they are having a field day with Professor Gruber who you would have think learned long ago that colorful statements in public about things the country cares about have to be politically correct. But the point I want to make is that Fox News is making hay about ObamaCare having taxes in it.
Well, isn't that what the Supreme Court said when they upheld the Constitutionality of ObamaCare? Isn't that what the Republicans were saying when they opposed ObamaCare? Isn't that what all fees, taxes, excise duties, VAT's, Sales, Property, penalties are at the end of the day.
Yes, they are taxes and we must pay taxes if we are to have a functioning National Defense, a functioning legal system (which by the way is seriously underfunded at the Judicial Process level, our little condo legal dispute has taken over 5 years to wind its way to the point where the next appeal will finally bring our legal victory to completion), a functioning public health system, a functioning State Department, a functioning public education system, a functioning road maintenance and snow plowing system, a functioning fire department, and, yes, Republicans, a functioning safety net for the elderly and poor.
The way Fox News is carrying on, you would get the impression that taxes are unnecessary and we can do with no taxes at all. How is that working out for you KANSAS? And if the GOP was so upfront about everything, why aren't they putting forth their detailed alternative to ObamaCare? Oh wait, it is ObamaCare! or is it voucher's for everyone whereby people will see their co-pay's and deductibles ever increasing! or is it privatization of Social Security and Medicare so that every citizen has to save $1,000,000 over their life time to pay for retirement and end-of-life care and woe to those who don't do that. I know no GOP'er would campaign on Granny and Gramps dying in the gutter, but that is where Fox News would take us. Thank you Rubert Murdoch, you are driving me crazy when I cannot ignore you. I wish I could convince RSL to drop the Wall Street Journal from our newspaper delivery to send you a small message.
Sunday, November 16, 2014
Why We Are Where We Are: Neo-conservatives, Immigration and Economic Strength
or Sunday musings after reading the paper.
From a book review of Why We Lost "A General's Inside Account of the Iraq & Afghanistan Wars by Daniel Bolger.
"Since there aren't enough soldiers - "having outsourced defense to the willing" the American people stay on the sidelines - the generals asked for more time and more money. This meant sending the same troops back again and again, perhaps a bit better equipped than the last time. With stubbornness supplanting purpose, the military persisted, "in the vain hope that something might somehow improve.""
"Toward what end? Bolger reduces the problem to knowing whom to kill. "Defining the enemy defined the war," he writes. But who is the enemy? Again and again, he poses that question, eventually concluding, whether in frustration or despair, that the enemy is "everyone". But if all the Iraqi's and all Afghans are the enemy, then American failure extends well beyond matters of generalship."
That is a lesson I fear the neo-conservatives have not learned. The Muslim world is going through a tortured self-evaluation that has been long put off now that ISIS is rampaging across a landscape with divided loyalties from the Shia regimes. ISIS is really not all that different from the Wahhabi Islam practiced in Saudi Arabia, a violent, puritanical, non pluralistic government.
From Thomas Friedman's column this morning.
Sunni Islam must defeat ISIS. Shia and Sunni Islam must work together to form the government policies that will encourage young men to believe they have a stake in an orderly society.
Which brings me back to the U.S.A. Since Day 1 of the Obama Administration, Mitch McConnell has made it his stated objective to make the Obama Administration a failure. After 6 years, I think Obama has had enough and decided to spend his last two years fighting back with every power the President has. And it is ironic, that Justice Scalia has spent much of his legal career defending the right of the President to do such things. Justice Scalia believes the constitution authorizes a strong Presidency when it comes to matters of National Defense.
And what is more important in today's world than having a strong economy. Nothing, because economic strength is how we won the Cold War, WWII, and the North, the Civil War. And a working immigration system is key to the United States economy. Freedom in politics and dynamism in the economy draw talented and motivated people to work here. In doing so, they create jobs and kill other jobs. Globalization has created tremendous wealth in the United States but at the same time laid waste to rural industrial America as factories there closed. There is nothing more complicated than the global economy, so I will get to my point. 11 million illegal immigrants cannot be deported without sending the economy into a recession. You cannot shrink the labor force by 4%, shrink the consumption of the U.S. by 3%, shrink the demand for housing by 3% or 4% and not send the economy into a recession. We already have a budget deficit that is too large for this level of employment, need to reduce debt to meet the baby boomer demand on entitlements, and have used up the marginal strength of monetary policy. So, we cannot afford any attacks on economic strength and having a solution to immigration reform is essential. Immigrants are generally younger and help provide a solution to the baby boomer future draw on Medicare and Social Security.
Yet, I do not believe that cutting off negotiation with the GOP on this issue is a sound way to proceed. And despite Justice's Scalia's belief in the power of the Presidency, I think immigration is like abortion, a lasting sound solution can only be created through the legislative process, not the actions of a President, the beneficiaries of which, could see these policies reversed by a future President.
I know President Obama cannot be optimistic that the GOP led Congress will vote for anything he supports, but he has to try that first. Otherwise, we will have both parties following a torch the earth policy and that is not good for the country in any manner.
My only other comment is that usually I follow sports so that I am not too furious about asinine politics, but the NY teams are so awful there is no hope there. I can only hope that Derrick Rose somehow starts not having leg injuries and the Chicago Bulls have a lot of success. Last year, my Alma Mater Dutchmen found hockey success winning the NCAA Division 1 Frozen Four, but this year they are the target of motivated opposition and losing a lot of 1 goal games. Success is fleeting in this competitive world. That is also an apt way to view political/economic policy. The U.S. still has a competitive advantage in the world and I just hope that the Political War in D.C. doesn't squander it permanently. I do believe there is value on almost every issue in taking something from the Democrats and something from the Republicans to solve problems like Immigration, Tax Reform, the access to and cost of health care, putting entitlements on a sound financial footing. These are real problems that effect employment and full employment is how you get a strong economy.
From a book review of Why We Lost "A General's Inside Account of the Iraq & Afghanistan Wars by Daniel Bolger.
"Since there aren't enough soldiers - "having outsourced defense to the willing" the American people stay on the sidelines - the generals asked for more time and more money. This meant sending the same troops back again and again, perhaps a bit better equipped than the last time. With stubbornness supplanting purpose, the military persisted, "in the vain hope that something might somehow improve.""
"Toward what end? Bolger reduces the problem to knowing whom to kill. "Defining the enemy defined the war," he writes. But who is the enemy? Again and again, he poses that question, eventually concluding, whether in frustration or despair, that the enemy is "everyone". But if all the Iraqi's and all Afghans are the enemy, then American failure extends well beyond matters of generalship."
That is a lesson I fear the neo-conservatives have not learned. The Muslim world is going through a tortured self-evaluation that has been long put off now that ISIS is rampaging across a landscape with divided loyalties from the Shia regimes. ISIS is really not all that different from the Wahhabi Islam practiced in Saudi Arabia, a violent, puritanical, non pluralistic government.
From Thomas Friedman's column this morning.
“People are attracted to moderate religion because they are moderates to begin with,” argues Hamidaddin. “People are attracted to extreme black-and-white religious ideologies” because the warped social and economic context they live in produces an attraction to holistic black-and-white solutions.” (It is one reason Pakistani Muslims tend to be more radical than Indian Muslims.)
Yes, religious reform would help, added Hamidaddin. But “it was the complete deterioration of the economic, security and political situation [in Iraq and Syria] that demanded a clear black-and-white interpretation of the world. It takes the right [government] policies to counteract that.” Sunni Islam must defeat ISIS. Shia and Sunni Islam must work together to form the government policies that will encourage young men to believe they have a stake in an orderly society.
Which brings me back to the U.S.A. Since Day 1 of the Obama Administration, Mitch McConnell has made it his stated objective to make the Obama Administration a failure. After 6 years, I think Obama has had enough and decided to spend his last two years fighting back with every power the President has. And it is ironic, that Justice Scalia has spent much of his legal career defending the right of the President to do such things. Justice Scalia believes the constitution authorizes a strong Presidency when it comes to matters of National Defense.
And what is more important in today's world than having a strong economy. Nothing, because economic strength is how we won the Cold War, WWII, and the North, the Civil War. And a working immigration system is key to the United States economy. Freedom in politics and dynamism in the economy draw talented and motivated people to work here. In doing so, they create jobs and kill other jobs. Globalization has created tremendous wealth in the United States but at the same time laid waste to rural industrial America as factories there closed. There is nothing more complicated than the global economy, so I will get to my point. 11 million illegal immigrants cannot be deported without sending the economy into a recession. You cannot shrink the labor force by 4%, shrink the consumption of the U.S. by 3%, shrink the demand for housing by 3% or 4% and not send the economy into a recession. We already have a budget deficit that is too large for this level of employment, need to reduce debt to meet the baby boomer demand on entitlements, and have used up the marginal strength of monetary policy. So, we cannot afford any attacks on economic strength and having a solution to immigration reform is essential. Immigrants are generally younger and help provide a solution to the baby boomer future draw on Medicare and Social Security.
Yet, I do not believe that cutting off negotiation with the GOP on this issue is a sound way to proceed. And despite Justice's Scalia's belief in the power of the Presidency, I think immigration is like abortion, a lasting sound solution can only be created through the legislative process, not the actions of a President, the beneficiaries of which, could see these policies reversed by a future President.
I know President Obama cannot be optimistic that the GOP led Congress will vote for anything he supports, but he has to try that first. Otherwise, we will have both parties following a torch the earth policy and that is not good for the country in any manner.
My only other comment is that usually I follow sports so that I am not too furious about asinine politics, but the NY teams are so awful there is no hope there. I can only hope that Derrick Rose somehow starts not having leg injuries and the Chicago Bulls have a lot of success. Last year, my Alma Mater Dutchmen found hockey success winning the NCAA Division 1 Frozen Four, but this year they are the target of motivated opposition and losing a lot of 1 goal games. Success is fleeting in this competitive world. That is also an apt way to view political/economic policy. The U.S. still has a competitive advantage in the world and I just hope that the Political War in D.C. doesn't squander it permanently. I do believe there is value on almost every issue in taking something from the Democrats and something from the Republicans to solve problems like Immigration, Tax Reform, the access to and cost of health care, putting entitlements on a sound financial footing. These are real problems that effect employment and full employment is how you get a strong economy.
Thursday, November 13, 2014
The Supreme Court
I have long recognized the importance of Supreme Court appointments, but also have held onto my youthful naivety that the Justices were all wise men who rendered decisions using an open minded belief that the law should be based upon principles and words without prejudgements. Why else would Republican appointed Judges render more liberal decisions and Democratic appointed judges conservative decisions.
But now I have read the biography of John Scalia. This took me a while (I have yet to crack a birthday book and that was nearly 3 months ago), but I finished today. I am no longer naive (although after Citizens United that naivety was pretty much shot). John Scalia dresses up his belief in principle as Originalism in the belief that the Courts should not make determinations that more rightly belong in the legislatures, but the biography and many other conservative and liberal observers of the court are cited in the biography to demonstrate (as Justice Scalia does in his own words as well) that pre-determinations based on political beliefs are pervasive in Supreme Court decisions. Particularly, the important ones.
And furthermore, it is not necessary for these determinations to be consistent. There is a rampant protection of individual rights in any number of ways in these more controversial decisions, but there is also an inconsistent desire to expand individual rights to formerly disadvantage segments of society. Scalia even goes so far as to say, "All men are created equal" is specifically addressed as being white men and it is up to the legislative (not judicial) process to change the law in favor of others. He is not sanctioning discrimination, but rather expressing a desire that courts not be expansive in their use of judicial rulings to determine things that should be determined by legislature. Yet, Scalia, has done exactly that in trumping manufactured individual rights to corporate free speech and delinking the concept of militia from the unfettered right to own a gun for protection. It is clear that the political agenda trumped the legislative intent, so the conservative justices are just as prone to judicial overreach as the liberal justices were in the Warren Court.
Several decades ago, a friend who was an attorney said that Roe v. Wade was a terrible decision because of its judicial activism. He also happened to support a woman's right to choose as a political basis, but felt the court had read into the "Right to Privacy" a right that is not in the words or intent, and that the legislative process had been cut short.
I have two minds on this. One it is not fair to have some medical practice be legal in one state, not legal in others, and only those with money get to travel to the legal state to get their condition treated. On the other hand, abortion rights have poisoned the political waters between the parties and it would have been far better if all this had been revolved in state legislatures than the courts. Then it would be settled and not a live issue.
This is also the reason I think Chief Justice Roberts is inclined to leave ObamaCare alone from the stand point of the Supreme Court. If, unlike Justices Thomas and Scalia who do not read newspapers, Roberts does read the newspaper, Chief Justice Roberts knows that ObamaCare is really RomneyCare and was designed by the Heritage Foundation. It is Republican policy aimed at controlling the growth in the cost of healthcare. That is a political issue, not a judicial issue. It is far too hot a potato for the Supreme Court to say to 10 million people, your health insurance is not legal. So I am cautiously optimistic that the Supreme Court will leave ObamaCare in the hands of the Congress and the President.
I am not optimistic about overturning Citizens United. The 5 conservative justices have made the political decision that corporations are people constitutionally and deserving of unfettered free speech. That will not change until one of those 5 retire and is replaced by judge who recognized the right of a legislature to control campaign spending by requiring disclosure of who is giving what to whom. Since Justice Ginsburg is the next likely retirement and she is a liberal, the timing of that could only turn the balance in the wrong direction, or maintain it, not turn it in a positive one.
And then there is the situation of consistency. No one wants the Supreme Court making a bunch of decisions today only to have them overturned the other way in 10, 20 or 30 years. That is not good either.
I wish the Supreme Court operated the way I thought it did when I was a kid.
But now I have read the biography of John Scalia. This took me a while (I have yet to crack a birthday book and that was nearly 3 months ago), but I finished today. I am no longer naive (although after Citizens United that naivety was pretty much shot). John Scalia dresses up his belief in principle as Originalism in the belief that the Courts should not make determinations that more rightly belong in the legislatures, but the biography and many other conservative and liberal observers of the court are cited in the biography to demonstrate (as Justice Scalia does in his own words as well) that pre-determinations based on political beliefs are pervasive in Supreme Court decisions. Particularly, the important ones.
And furthermore, it is not necessary for these determinations to be consistent. There is a rampant protection of individual rights in any number of ways in these more controversial decisions, but there is also an inconsistent desire to expand individual rights to formerly disadvantage segments of society. Scalia even goes so far as to say, "All men are created equal" is specifically addressed as being white men and it is up to the legislative (not judicial) process to change the law in favor of others. He is not sanctioning discrimination, but rather expressing a desire that courts not be expansive in their use of judicial rulings to determine things that should be determined by legislature. Yet, Scalia, has done exactly that in trumping manufactured individual rights to corporate free speech and delinking the concept of militia from the unfettered right to own a gun for protection. It is clear that the political agenda trumped the legislative intent, so the conservative justices are just as prone to judicial overreach as the liberal justices were in the Warren Court.
Several decades ago, a friend who was an attorney said that Roe v. Wade was a terrible decision because of its judicial activism. He also happened to support a woman's right to choose as a political basis, but felt the court had read into the "Right to Privacy" a right that is not in the words or intent, and that the legislative process had been cut short.
I have two minds on this. One it is not fair to have some medical practice be legal in one state, not legal in others, and only those with money get to travel to the legal state to get their condition treated. On the other hand, abortion rights have poisoned the political waters between the parties and it would have been far better if all this had been revolved in state legislatures than the courts. Then it would be settled and not a live issue.
This is also the reason I think Chief Justice Roberts is inclined to leave ObamaCare alone from the stand point of the Supreme Court. If, unlike Justices Thomas and Scalia who do not read newspapers, Roberts does read the newspaper, Chief Justice Roberts knows that ObamaCare is really RomneyCare and was designed by the Heritage Foundation. It is Republican policy aimed at controlling the growth in the cost of healthcare. That is a political issue, not a judicial issue. It is far too hot a potato for the Supreme Court to say to 10 million people, your health insurance is not legal. So I am cautiously optimistic that the Supreme Court will leave ObamaCare in the hands of the Congress and the President.
I am not optimistic about overturning Citizens United. The 5 conservative justices have made the political decision that corporations are people constitutionally and deserving of unfettered free speech. That will not change until one of those 5 retire and is replaced by judge who recognized the right of a legislature to control campaign spending by requiring disclosure of who is giving what to whom. Since Justice Ginsburg is the next likely retirement and she is a liberal, the timing of that could only turn the balance in the wrong direction, or maintain it, not turn it in a positive one.
And then there is the situation of consistency. No one wants the Supreme Court making a bunch of decisions today only to have them overturned the other way in 10, 20 or 30 years. That is not good either.
I wish the Supreme Court operated the way I thought it did when I was a kid.
Sunday, November 9, 2014
Interesting Thoughts on a Sunday
China announced yesterday a plan to invest something in excess of $100 billion in infrastructure. I hope it includes pollution control spending because the air in China is very dirty. I also contrast that with the U.S. where we can't even fund road maintenance adequately so that bridges don't collapse underneath innocent drivers. (Ok, that hasn't happened in a while, but it will happen again.)
Ross Douthat wrote an interesting column hoping that Marco Rubio and Rand Paul duke it out with a vigorous policy debate. He finds interesting policy proposals within both of their beliefs (as do I on occasion) but is not sure they will cut through the Tea Party obstructionism that propelled both into the Senate. I will say that Rubio did support and sculpt the now dead comprehensive immigration reform that the Senate passed last year and died in the Tea Party House of Representatives. Which is also where comprehensive Tax Reform died. But Rubio is closer to John McCain on foreign policy while Rand Paul is more isolationist than Obama, and I like Obama balance more than either of the other extremes.
Link to Ross Douthat column
Thomas Friedman wrote a column on Makers and Breakers using the internet and focused more on the Makers. But the observation of the Breakers is much more challenging. The internet allows Jihadists to communicate very easily and inspire the potential for anarchy almost anywhere. The government can try but they cannot protect us from this anymore then they can protect us from random acts of teenage gun violence. Sh*t has always happened and it will continue to happen. That is life in a global society of 7 billion people. Policy makers can only control the big impulses, they have no control over the details for every individual. And the individual must be responsible for themselves.
Ultra Conservative Republicans believe that Democrats don't understand that, but you cannot protect the upper class sense of safety if you don't prevent desperation from fostering anarchy in your midst. That is what has happened in Iraq and Syria.
So when we are discussing policy, politicians need to remember that they are there to foster the collective safety of the population by preventing anarchy while allowing the creative forces of capitalism to improve the standard of living for all.
On that front, it is interesting that politicians of both parties are anti-Uber and anti-AirBnB because they compete with regulated interests that contribute money to both parties. So you have local politicians of both parties trying to squash Uber and AirBnb which is really why you need a free press that is open to investigating both parties, not the partisan cable channel model in which one side does no wrong and criticisms of the other party are so constant they have no credibility.
Ross Douthat wrote an interesting column hoping that Marco Rubio and Rand Paul duke it out with a vigorous policy debate. He finds interesting policy proposals within both of their beliefs (as do I on occasion) but is not sure they will cut through the Tea Party obstructionism that propelled both into the Senate. I will say that Rubio did support and sculpt the now dead comprehensive immigration reform that the Senate passed last year and died in the Tea Party House of Representatives. Which is also where comprehensive Tax Reform died. But Rubio is closer to John McCain on foreign policy while Rand Paul is more isolationist than Obama, and I like Obama balance more than either of the other extremes.
Link to Ross Douthat column
Thomas Friedman wrote a column on Makers and Breakers using the internet and focused more on the Makers. But the observation of the Breakers is much more challenging. The internet allows Jihadists to communicate very easily and inspire the potential for anarchy almost anywhere. The government can try but they cannot protect us from this anymore then they can protect us from random acts of teenage gun violence. Sh*t has always happened and it will continue to happen. That is life in a global society of 7 billion people. Policy makers can only control the big impulses, they have no control over the details for every individual. And the individual must be responsible for themselves.
Ultra Conservative Republicans believe that Democrats don't understand that, but you cannot protect the upper class sense of safety if you don't prevent desperation from fostering anarchy in your midst. That is what has happened in Iraq and Syria.
So when we are discussing policy, politicians need to remember that they are there to foster the collective safety of the population by preventing anarchy while allowing the creative forces of capitalism to improve the standard of living for all.
On that front, it is interesting that politicians of both parties are anti-Uber and anti-AirBnB because they compete with regulated interests that contribute money to both parties. So you have local politicians of both parties trying to squash Uber and AirBnb which is really why you need a free press that is open to investigating both parties, not the partisan cable channel model in which one side does no wrong and criticisms of the other party are so constant they have no credibility.
Wednesday, November 5, 2014
Election Musings
Well the GOP swamped the Democrat's, even where the Democrats were reasonably conservative. And so-called independent voters were the reason for the strong GOP support.
What were the possible causes of such a loss of support in the ranks of the independents? It could be the weight of the GOP slander that Obama and his minions in Congress are incompetent, but I don't think that is the root cause. That just motivates the core GOP to get out and vote.
I think the there are two root causes. One is the inevitable disappointment that occurs in middle of a recovery from a credit induced recession. Income stagnation lasts for at least 5 to 10 years after such a burst in the best of times. Throw in globalization, which marches on without hinderance, and the perception that the U.S. could be like Japan, which has had stagnant incomes for 20 years, and you are left with an angry electorate that does not benefit from globalization. They blame Obama for not improving their situation.
The second root cause is the failure of Obama to find common ground with the GOP on any front. Now the GOP Congress may not have been willing to find any reasonable middle with Obama on any front, but by giving up and fighting the fight that hard left wanted fought, Obama basically abandoned conservative Democrats in conservative states. If you go through my history of this blog, you will find my skepticism that the GOP were willing to compromise preferring to ruin the Obama Presidency and slow down economic growth in the country in the process. This predominantly relates to infrastructure spending and immigration reform.
So, now the GOP has a decision to make. Compromise with the President or continue being obstructionist only. And the President has a decision to make, compromise with the Congress and make progress on something, or just let the market forces continue to reduce the budget deficit while income remains stagnant and the voters hate Washington for not doing something positive.
Remember this blog is named "Things Get Accomplished in the Middle".
What were the possible causes of such a loss of support in the ranks of the independents? It could be the weight of the GOP slander that Obama and his minions in Congress are incompetent, but I don't think that is the root cause. That just motivates the core GOP to get out and vote.
I think the there are two root causes. One is the inevitable disappointment that occurs in middle of a recovery from a credit induced recession. Income stagnation lasts for at least 5 to 10 years after such a burst in the best of times. Throw in globalization, which marches on without hinderance, and the perception that the U.S. could be like Japan, which has had stagnant incomes for 20 years, and you are left with an angry electorate that does not benefit from globalization. They blame Obama for not improving their situation.
The second root cause is the failure of Obama to find common ground with the GOP on any front. Now the GOP Congress may not have been willing to find any reasonable middle with Obama on any front, but by giving up and fighting the fight that hard left wanted fought, Obama basically abandoned conservative Democrats in conservative states. If you go through my history of this blog, you will find my skepticism that the GOP were willing to compromise preferring to ruin the Obama Presidency and slow down economic growth in the country in the process. This predominantly relates to infrastructure spending and immigration reform.
So, now the GOP has a decision to make. Compromise with the President or continue being obstructionist only. And the President has a decision to make, compromise with the Congress and make progress on something, or just let the market forces continue to reduce the budget deficit while income remains stagnant and the voters hate Washington for not doing something positive.
Remember this blog is named "Things Get Accomplished in the Middle".
Tuesday, November 4, 2014
Roots & Immigration
I am watching Henry Louis Gates Jr's "Finding Your Roots".
Tonight he is showing what the search into 3 prominent Jews revealed about their Roots. No Yiddish Land Jew can look at such at history and not say "There but for the grace of God, go I."
28 Jews were allowed into the U.S. and escaped Nazi Germany because a brave man said they would have jobs when they got here. Alan Dershowitz said a truthful statement about my life: I am here because my great grandparents made brave decisions.
I am here because of brave great-parents and brave grand parents.
Immigration made me and made this country great. We should never ever turn people who want to be here away. They will work harder then any native born person to succeed.
I don't understand why the GOP hates immigrants.
Tonight he is showing what the search into 3 prominent Jews revealed about their Roots. No Yiddish Land Jew can look at such at history and not say "There but for the grace of God, go I."
28 Jews were allowed into the U.S. and escaped Nazi Germany because a brave man said they would have jobs when they got here. Alan Dershowitz said a truthful statement about my life: I am here because my great grandparents made brave decisions.
I am here because of brave great-parents and brave grand parents.
Immigration made me and made this country great. We should never ever turn people who want to be here away. They will work harder then any native born person to succeed.
I don't understand why the GOP hates immigrants.
Jon Stewart Nails a Truth
The GOP doesn't want anyone to check your ID (background checks) when you buy a gun, but they do want to check your ID before you vote.
How many people have been killed by guns randomly vs how many fraudulent votes have determined elections?
Just asking.
How many people have been killed by guns randomly vs how many fraudulent votes have determined elections?
Just asking.
Saturday, November 1, 2014
This is Why NYC Democrats Have to Have GOP Opponents
Uncontested elections lead to corruption, there can be no doubt about that. Proof of that statement has consistently arisen in Sheldon Silver's corrupt running of the NY State Assembly. Sheldon Silver runs the Brooklyn Democratic regime.
The Congressional District for that area is shared with Staten Island. Staten Island represents GOP strength and Brooklyn Democratic strength. The current GOP Congressman is under indictment for tax evasion. You would think any newspaper concerned with clean government would want to endorse the opponent for that corrupt Congressman.
But who do the Brooklyn Democrats nominate as the GOP Congressman's opponent?
I now quote the Daily News Editorial page endorsing the corrupt GOP Congressman.
"In Domenic Recchia, the Democrats have fielded a candidate so dumb, ill-informed, evasive and inarticulate that voting for a thuggish Republican who could wind up in jail makes rational sense."
"Should he be convicted, Congressman Grimm has promised to resign, paving the way for a match between two fresh candidates. All the better."
"Rechhia, a former city councilman, is clueless as to the issues. He accomplished the unprecedented feat of failing to give a single coherent answer when he was interviewed by the Daily News Editorial Board."
"He was equally incoherent in debates. He could not give a straight answer as to whether he supports an increase in the minimum wage."
"When asked about foreign policy credentials, he boasted of having run a student exchange program."
"Unfortunately, Grimm is the only alternative when the mantra must be anyone but Rechhia."
I have seen Recchia's ad's. Even in those scripted scenes he comes across as an idiot.
It is really too bad I don't live on Staten Island. Then I could have volunteered to run against Grimm and probably have won.
The Congressional District for that area is shared with Staten Island. Staten Island represents GOP strength and Brooklyn Democratic strength. The current GOP Congressman is under indictment for tax evasion. You would think any newspaper concerned with clean government would want to endorse the opponent for that corrupt Congressman.
But who do the Brooklyn Democrats nominate as the GOP Congressman's opponent?
I now quote the Daily News Editorial page endorsing the corrupt GOP Congressman.
"In Domenic Recchia, the Democrats have fielded a candidate so dumb, ill-informed, evasive and inarticulate that voting for a thuggish Republican who could wind up in jail makes rational sense."
"Should he be convicted, Congressman Grimm has promised to resign, paving the way for a match between two fresh candidates. All the better."
"Rechhia, a former city councilman, is clueless as to the issues. He accomplished the unprecedented feat of failing to give a single coherent answer when he was interviewed by the Daily News Editorial Board."
"He was equally incoherent in debates. He could not give a straight answer as to whether he supports an increase in the minimum wage."
"When asked about foreign policy credentials, he boasted of having run a student exchange program."
"Unfortunately, Grimm is the only alternative when the mantra must be anyone but Rechhia."
I have seen Recchia's ad's. Even in those scripted scenes he comes across as an idiot.
It is really too bad I don't live on Staten Island. Then I could have volunteered to run against Grimm and probably have won.
Thursday, October 30, 2014
Poll Showing Drop In Support for ObamaCare Principal: You have to wonder
Support for the concept of Universal Healthcare (which is mandated by a Reagan era law that states Hospitals must care for the indigent) has fallen from 66% to 47% of the population by one poll. Of course, I think a poll like this has the same problems that election polls have; minorities and young people and non-landline answerers don't get included.
But it is all we have and must take it at face value.
So 53% of the population believes that poor and middle class people who don't get health insurance at work, should not have access to health insurance. Remember the policy wonks of both parties believe (as do I) that health insurance should be separate from employment and you can't get there without a robust Medicaid subsidy program like the Heritage Foundation/RomneyCare/Obamacare design.
But what is really stunning about what the 53% believe is that they think they can afford health insurance, without an employer subsidy, when the uninsured are getting treated at the E.R. with their costs covered by the hospitals upping the bills for those with insurance. There is no free lunch in health care. Health care providers get paid and health insurers make sufficient payments so the care providers get paid, and we make payments to the health insurance companies so they remain profitable. So we either pay through the tax system supporting their Medicaid subsidy or we pay through higher health insurance premiums.
And it is the supposed direct higher cost of health insurance that makes people so angry about ObamaCare. I suspect most of the complainers haven't had cancer yet and are betting on their diabetes holding off until they are on Medicare, where they definitely do not want anything changed. And Medicare is someplace you definitely need either change or more financial support from somewhere.
I know thoughtful Republicans understand all this, just as GOP Congressman Camp understood the need for Tax Reform. But all the thanks Congressman Camp got was a DOA designation from Boehner and now Camp has retired from Congress.
I wish the same poll had asked whether people support financial stability for Medicare. Because you don't have a financially stable Medicare if you aren't giving the under 65 crowd access to affordable health care/insurance.
But it is all we have and must take it at face value.
So 53% of the population believes that poor and middle class people who don't get health insurance at work, should not have access to health insurance. Remember the policy wonks of both parties believe (as do I) that health insurance should be separate from employment and you can't get there without a robust Medicaid subsidy program like the Heritage Foundation/RomneyCare/Obamacare design.
But what is really stunning about what the 53% believe is that they think they can afford health insurance, without an employer subsidy, when the uninsured are getting treated at the E.R. with their costs covered by the hospitals upping the bills for those with insurance. There is no free lunch in health care. Health care providers get paid and health insurers make sufficient payments so the care providers get paid, and we make payments to the health insurance companies so they remain profitable. So we either pay through the tax system supporting their Medicaid subsidy or we pay through higher health insurance premiums.
And it is the supposed direct higher cost of health insurance that makes people so angry about ObamaCare. I suspect most of the complainers haven't had cancer yet and are betting on their diabetes holding off until they are on Medicare, where they definitely do not want anything changed. And Medicare is someplace you definitely need either change or more financial support from somewhere.
I know thoughtful Republicans understand all this, just as GOP Congressman Camp understood the need for Tax Reform. But all the thanks Congressman Camp got was a DOA designation from Boehner and now Camp has retired from Congress.
I wish the same poll had asked whether people support financial stability for Medicare. Because you don't have a financially stable Medicare if you aren't giving the under 65 crowd access to affordable health care/insurance.
Wednesday, October 29, 2014
Exhausted, but I will Vote
I notice that my readership has migrated. My Russian and Ukrainian readers have disappeared and been replaced by readers in Germany. Since I don't think the Russian/Ukrainian readers were nationalists in the anti-democracy vein, I don't think they were upset by my anti-Putin point-of-view. So I can only hope they have survived the conflict.
What has exhausted me? Reading the same-ol-same-ol about the election and what the GOP are going to do. While I do believe the GOP will control the Senate, we need to wait for the elections to pan out. I don't trust polls because (i) young people don't have landlines, and (ii) who answers their landline when you don't recognize the calling phone number. So a huge slice of the voting public is not getting polled. But will they turn out? That is the key unknown and based upon my survey of my only insight into that segment of society, they will not as they are going on a vacation Sunday for 2 weeks and I don't think they had the foresight to get an absentee ballot.
Fortunately, the only unknown election in NY where they live is Proposition #1 which is an effort to bring some honesty to the gerrymandering drawing in the year 2020. It isn't a great proposition, but it is a step in the right direction and if voted down, who knows what the crooks in Albany will agree to since getting this was like pulling teeth. They will probably just hunker down and let the status quo continue.
Too bad Vermont is so cold. It is too small to gerrymander and they allow death with dignity.
Anyway, Tuesday is only 1 golf round and 2 days of studying away. Then all this will be done and we can go back to gridlock and D.C. animosity. If there is no compromise from the GOP, we will have veto after veto and await 2016. At this point, I am thinking the best candidates are Maryland Governor O'Malley and former Florida Governor Jeb Bush. I have always thought Governors make the best Presidents.
What has exhausted me? Reading the same-ol-same-ol about the election and what the GOP are going to do. While I do believe the GOP will control the Senate, we need to wait for the elections to pan out. I don't trust polls because (i) young people don't have landlines, and (ii) who answers their landline when you don't recognize the calling phone number. So a huge slice of the voting public is not getting polled. But will they turn out? That is the key unknown and based upon my survey of my only insight into that segment of society, they will not as they are going on a vacation Sunday for 2 weeks and I don't think they had the foresight to get an absentee ballot.
Fortunately, the only unknown election in NY where they live is Proposition #1 which is an effort to bring some honesty to the gerrymandering drawing in the year 2020. It isn't a great proposition, but it is a step in the right direction and if voted down, who knows what the crooks in Albany will agree to since getting this was like pulling teeth. They will probably just hunker down and let the status quo continue.
Too bad Vermont is so cold. It is too small to gerrymander and they allow death with dignity.
Anyway, Tuesday is only 1 golf round and 2 days of studying away. Then all this will be done and we can go back to gridlock and D.C. animosity. If there is no compromise from the GOP, we will have veto after veto and await 2016. At this point, I am thinking the best candidates are Maryland Governor O'Malley and former Florida Governor Jeb Bush. I have always thought Governors make the best Presidents.
Monday, October 27, 2014
Juan Williams and I Agree
"As a matter of brazen politics, the Republican strategy of obstruction has worked."
"What a shame."
Saturday, October 25, 2014
Ebola Musings
In the midst of the metro area governors mandating quarantines on Dr's and nurses who return from West Africa, which has received general praise from all quarters, Dr's without Borders responds that this may well discourage Dr's from volunteering to go to West Africa because the total of 6 weeks without income will be too much for them.
Yet, without Dr's volunteering to go to West Africa, Ebola will probably just spread like wild fire through the West African jungle. And the more prevalent it becomes, the greater the risk of mutation (the non-scientist in me thinks). So it really is in our best interest that Dr's go over there to treat people and try and contain the outbreak. It is an example of how foreign aid is in our countries best interest. Something the anti-foriegn aid wing of the GOP and the Democrats forget. Perhaps, our quarantining governors could use some of that cigarette settlement money they aren't spending on anti-smoking programs to compensate these volunteers for their time in quarantine.
Meanwhile, I find out this morning that a bunch of these elections are about punishing legislators who have supported background checks before the purchase of a gun, something 63% or so of adults of both political parties support. That is what is so discouraging about this election. The voters are likely to reward the GOP for achieving their goal of ruining the Presidency of Obama through their obstruction. I hate that obstruction will be rewarded because the Democrats may well respond similarly and the country will not be better off for it. The country is certainly not better off front the GOP unwillingness to compromise.
Voters are angry at the anger that predominates politics but then reward it. That is depressing.
Yet, without Dr's volunteering to go to West Africa, Ebola will probably just spread like wild fire through the West African jungle. And the more prevalent it becomes, the greater the risk of mutation (the non-scientist in me thinks). So it really is in our best interest that Dr's go over there to treat people and try and contain the outbreak. It is an example of how foreign aid is in our countries best interest. Something the anti-foriegn aid wing of the GOP and the Democrats forget. Perhaps, our quarantining governors could use some of that cigarette settlement money they aren't spending on anti-smoking programs to compensate these volunteers for their time in quarantine.
Meanwhile, I find out this morning that a bunch of these elections are about punishing legislators who have supported background checks before the purchase of a gun, something 63% or so of adults of both political parties support. That is what is so discouraging about this election. The voters are likely to reward the GOP for achieving their goal of ruining the Presidency of Obama through their obstruction. I hate that obstruction will be rewarded because the Democrats may well respond similarly and the country will not be better off for it. The country is certainly not better off front the GOP unwillingness to compromise.
Voters are angry at the anger that predominates politics but then reward it. That is depressing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)