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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)