An interesting new college model - Minerva
10 years ago
Thursday, December 31, 2009
What were the five worst decisions ever by the US Supreme Court?
Love 'em or hate 'em the US Supreme Court is that the heart of the American legal system. The big referee in the sky without instant replay. So what do you think are their biggest blunders since they opened shop in 1789?
I would love to hear your list but here are five possibilities:
Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), the Supreme Court ruled that people of African descent imported into the United States and held as slaves, or their descendants—whether or not they were slaves—were not protected by the Constitution and could never be citizens of the United States.
Plessy v. Ferguson, (1896), upheld the constitutionality of racial segregation even in public accommodations , under the doctrine of "seperate but equal".
Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, (1903) declared that the US Congress could unilaterally abrogate treaty obligations between the United States and Native American tribes.
Schenck v. United States, (1919), upheld the Espionage Act of 1917 and concluded that a defendant did not have a First Amendment right to free speech against the draft during World War I.
Korematsu v. United States, (1944) , ruled on Executive Order 9066, which ordered Japanese Americans into internment camps during World War II. The court ruled the order constitutional.
It's a shame that there are so many bad decisions to choose from.
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Shameful segment in American history
One of the shameful chapters of legislation in American history is the Chinese Exclusion Act which blocked most Chinese immigration from 1882 through 1943. It was racist and was driven to a great extent by labor unions (with only one union opposing it). Other workers resented the Chinese because of their incredible work ethic - they were tough to compete against.
It is also a black eye on the reputation of the US Supreme Court. “In U.S. vs Ju Toy (1905), the Supreme Court reaffirmed that the port inspectors and the secretary of commerce had final authority on who could be admitted. Ju Toy's petition was thus barred despite the fact that the district court found that he was an American citizen. The Supreme Court determined that refusing entry at a port does not require due process.”(1)
The saying “America - Built By Immigrants” brings pride to most of us with immigrant ancestors. There is no question that we need to control our borders but this is one of those appalling episodes in our history.
GMAC Assistance?
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/6791332.html
So why is GMAC getting any federal assistance? If they were only a small mortgage lender (like they are) they would have been allowed to go into bankruptcy long ago.
But our federal government has already invested heavily in General Motors. And once you are in for a penny you are “all in” from a government perspective. Once you are an anointed class the subsidies just keep on coming. We would never want to upset a Democratic constituency in Michigan would we?
Why is GM making home loans in the first place? Because they were more heavily subsidized than the auto loan business.
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Predicting the technology future
Arthur C. Clarke, the science fiction writer, identified what he called the "three laws of prediction," reflecting an optimistic view of ingenuity: 1. When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong; 2. The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture past them into the impossible; and 3. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.(1)
Monday, December 28, 2009
Obama’s remarks on renewed barn security measures
Transcript from Obama’s December 28 remarks on renewed barn security measures (better known as “closing the door after the horse has escaped”).
Good morning, everybody. I wanted to take just a few minutes to update the American people on the recent horse escape on Christmas Day, and the steps we're taking to ensure the safety and security of these horses in the future.
The investigation is ongoing. And I spoke again this morning with Attorney General Eric Holder, Secretary of Horseland Security, Janet Napolitano, and my counter-terrorism and Horseland Security adviser, John Brennan. I asked them to continue monitoring the situation to keep the American people and members of Congress informed.
Here's what we know so far: On Christmas Day, the horse got out of the barn. Thanks to the quick and heroic actions of neighbors, the suspect was immediately subdued, and the horse was returned safely to the barn. The suspect is now in custody at the barn and has been charged with attempting to escape.
A full investigation has been launched into this attempted act of evasion and we will not rest until we find all who were involved and hold them accountable.
Now, this was a serious reminder of the dangers that our horses face and the nature of those who encourage their escape. Had the suspect succeeded in escaping, it could have been devastating to family that owned the horse and may have inspired other horses to sneak out of their barns.
The American people should be assured that we are doing everything in our power to keep you and your horses safe and secure during this busy holiday season.
Since I was first notified of this incident, I've ordered the following actions to be taken to protect the American people and their horses.
First, I directed that we take immediate steps to ensure the safety of the public. We made sure that all horses still in the barn were secure and could not escape. We immediately enhanced screening and security procedures for all barns. We added federal horse marshals to barns in the United States. And we're working closely in this country, with federal, state and local law enforcement, and with our international partners.
Second, I've ordered two important reviews, because it's absolutely critical that we learn from this incident and take the necessary measures to prevent future acts of escape.
The first review involves our watch list system, which our government has had in place for many years, to identify known and suspected horses that are likely to run off so that we can prevent their escape from their barns in the United States. Apparently the suspect in the Christmas incident was in this system, but not on a watch list, such as the so-called no-escape list. So I have ordered a thorough review, not only of how information related to the subject was handled, but of the overall watch list system and how it can be strengthened.
The second review will examine all screening policies, technologies and procedures related to horse barns. We need to determine just how the suspect was able to launch this dangerous escape attempt and what additional steps we can take to thwart future attempted escapes.
Third, I've directed my national security team to keep up the pressure on those horses who would flee barns in our country. We do not yet have all the answers about this latest attempt, but those horses who would escape their barns must know that the United States will do more than simply strengthen our defenses. We will continue to use every element of our national power to disrupt, to dismantle and defeat these break out attempts.
Finally, the American people should remain vigilant, but also be confident. Those horses plotting against us seek not only to undermine our security, but also the open society (outside of our horse barns) and the values that we cherish as Americans. This incident, like several that have preceded it, demonstrates that an alert and courageous citizenry are far more resilient than an isolated maverick horse.
As a nation, we will do everything in our power to protect our country. As Americans, we will never give in to fear or division. We will be guided by our hopes, our unity, and our deeply held saddle sores. That's who we are as Americans; that's what our brave men and women in uniform are standing up for as they spend the holidays in harm's way. And we will continue to do everything that we can to keep America and our horses safe in the New Year and beyond.
Thank you very much, everybody.
Good morning, everybody. I wanted to take just a few minutes to update the American people on the recent horse escape on Christmas Day, and the steps we're taking to ensure the safety and security of these horses in the future.
The investigation is ongoing. And I spoke again this morning with Attorney General Eric Holder, Secretary of Horseland Security, Janet Napolitano, and my counter-terrorism and Horseland Security adviser, John Brennan. I asked them to continue monitoring the situation to keep the American people and members of Congress informed.
Here's what we know so far: On Christmas Day, the horse got out of the barn. Thanks to the quick and heroic actions of neighbors, the suspect was immediately subdued, and the horse was returned safely to the barn. The suspect is now in custody at the barn and has been charged with attempting to escape.
A full investigation has been launched into this attempted act of evasion and we will not rest until we find all who were involved and hold them accountable.
Now, this was a serious reminder of the dangers that our horses face and the nature of those who encourage their escape. Had the suspect succeeded in escaping, it could have been devastating to family that owned the horse and may have inspired other horses to sneak out of their barns.
The American people should be assured that we are doing everything in our power to keep you and your horses safe and secure during this busy holiday season.
Since I was first notified of this incident, I've ordered the following actions to be taken to protect the American people and their horses.
First, I directed that we take immediate steps to ensure the safety of the public. We made sure that all horses still in the barn were secure and could not escape. We immediately enhanced screening and security procedures for all barns. We added federal horse marshals to barns in the United States. And we're working closely in this country, with federal, state and local law enforcement, and with our international partners.
Second, I've ordered two important reviews, because it's absolutely critical that we learn from this incident and take the necessary measures to prevent future acts of escape.
The first review involves our watch list system, which our government has had in place for many years, to identify known and suspected horses that are likely to run off so that we can prevent their escape from their barns in the United States. Apparently the suspect in the Christmas incident was in this system, but not on a watch list, such as the so-called no-escape list. So I have ordered a thorough review, not only of how information related to the subject was handled, but of the overall watch list system and how it can be strengthened.
The second review will examine all screening policies, technologies and procedures related to horse barns. We need to determine just how the suspect was able to launch this dangerous escape attempt and what additional steps we can take to thwart future attempted escapes.
Third, I've directed my national security team to keep up the pressure on those horses who would flee barns in our country. We do not yet have all the answers about this latest attempt, but those horses who would escape their barns must know that the United States will do more than simply strengthen our defenses. We will continue to use every element of our national power to disrupt, to dismantle and defeat these break out attempts.
Finally, the American people should remain vigilant, but also be confident. Those horses plotting against us seek not only to undermine our security, but also the open society (outside of our horse barns) and the values that we cherish as Americans. This incident, like several that have preceded it, demonstrates that an alert and courageous citizenry are far more resilient than an isolated maverick horse.
As a nation, we will do everything in our power to protect our country. As Americans, we will never give in to fear or division. We will be guided by our hopes, our unity, and our deeply held saddle sores. That's who we are as Americans; that's what our brave men and women in uniform are standing up for as they spend the holidays in harm's way. And we will continue to do everything that we can to keep America and our horses safe in the New Year and beyond.
Thank you very much, everybody.
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Michigan Forces Business Owners Into Public Sector Unions
Creeping unionism – this WSJ article will really annoy you. The unions sneak in the back door when most people don’t even know that a union is threatening their livelihood. The union dues (which come right out of the small business owners profits) go to pay off the politicians who then support even further mandatory unions. But this one tops the absurd. Day care providers that own their own businesses and work for themselves are forced into a union.
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Do no harm
The basic theme in this article is that government needs to create more jobs. Of course they have been creating state and federal jobs for years – at compensation well above the market (they pay at least 50% more than the private sector). And every time they do this they pay for it with borrowing from our future or taxing the small businessman who is creating “real” jobs.
Government hasn’t the slightest idea how to create a real job. They can add another government bureaucrat but they don’t know anything about encouraging a new engineering process, a new company like Google, Intel, or Oracle.
Government knows how to build a bridge to Nowhere, Alaska or to make Terrorist Relief Act loans that go to Dunkin' Donuts shops in Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Vermont, and Ohio. But government doesn't have any idea how to create a private job that will result in exports outside the US. They will always invest in yesterday’s technology with its built in union support but not the latest invention from the garage workshop with no existing tax or voter base.
So the answer is the old medical philosophy “do no harm”. Our government needs to get out of the way, reduce the penalties for starting a new business and the penalties for hiring a new employee–and then go on their highly paid vacations.
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Public Unions in Detroit
WSJ article about saving the city of Detroit.Excellent article about the new mayor of Detroit trying to get a handle on
Detroit's finances. Inflexible public unions will put another important institution into bankruptcy.
Detroit's finances. Inflexible public unions will put another important institution into bankruptcy.
Saturday, December 19, 2009
California government is out of control!
If California did not have an implied guarantee on their debt from the Federal government , how much money do you think Californians could borrow today? And look what those implied Federal guarantees cost us at Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. The real moral hazard is that the bigger that California’s debt gets the harder it will be for the Federal government to let it default. It is time for the Federal government to step in now and appoint a receiver to run California. The longer it takes, the more it will cost everyone outside of California.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
No good deed goes unpunished.
The controversy about Ben Bernanke being confirmed by the Senate as the Chairman of the Fed is silly. Our government made plenty of mistakes in the housing and mortgage industry (and it still does). The SEC, FDIC, the US Treasury, the banks, their managements and their risk committees all blew it. And so did Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke. But when the …. hit the fan he got in there (along with Hank Paulson) and got us past the emergency. It wasn’t pretty!
The problem was long in the making and will be extraordinarily expensive to solve (my estimate is $7 trillion). But let’s not shoot the messenger. As we talk, Obama is trying to force the banks to make loans they don’t want to make (the same kind of political loan making that lead this mess). In other words loans that will default and more of the same.
Bernanke is far from perfect, but let’s get behind him and spend that pissed off energy getting rid of the senators and congressmen that have made the situation worse – not Ben Bernanke.
Poor UC students are deprived of some of their Christmas decorations
Sacramento Bee articleFour out of the ten University campuses have decided to not spend public funds to decorate the homes of their respective chancellors. Such prudence in helping dig the state out of its financial hole. But why were public dollars ever being used this way? And why are public funds being used today for the other six campuses? Just another example of public spending waste and a lack of priorities - even if we had a strong economy.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
AARP Services Inc. is managed wholly for profit
At present, there are two affiliated organizations: the AARP Foundation which operates on a non-profit basis and AARP Services Inc. which is managed wholly for profit. The AARP Foundation runs programs on: free tax preparation and counseling, work training for older people of low income, training of volunteers on matters concerning the elderly, crime prevention and safe driving. AARP Services Inc. offers: Medicare supplemental health insurance, discounts on prescription drugs and consumer goods, entertainment and travel packages, long-term care insurance and automobile, home and life insurance. perhaps they should be required to use different names?source Wikpedia.org
Monday, December 14, 2009
The Queen's new jet
THE QUEEN'S NEW JET
I don't care who you are ... Democrat, Republican, or Independent ... liberal or conservative ... blue state or red state .... you have to be appalled at the sheer gall of this woman!
|
Sunday, December 13, 2009
The new bridge at the Hoover Dam
THE WIDER VIEW: Taking shape, the new bridge at the Hoover Dam
Creeping closer inch by inch, 900 feet above the mighty Colorado River , the two sides of a $160 million bridge at the Hoover Dam slowly take shape. The bridge will carry a new section of US Route 93 past the bottleneck of the old road which can be seen twisting and winding around and across the dam itself. When complete, it will provide a new link between the states of Nevada and Arizona . In an incredible feat of engineering, the road will be supported on the two massive concrete arches which jut out of the rock face.The arches are made up of 53 individual sections each 24 feet long which have been cast on-site and are being lifted into place using an improvised high-wire crane strung between temporary steel pylons.
The arches will eventually measure more than 1,000 feet across. At the moment, the structure looks like a traditional suspension bridge. But once the arches are complete, the suspending cables on each side will be removed. Extra vertical columns will then be installed on the arches to carry the road.
The bridge has become known as the Hoover Dam bypass, although it is officially called the Mike O'Callaghan-Pat Tillman Memorial Bridge, after a former governor of Nevada and the former NFL Football player from Arizona who joined the US Army and was killed in Afghanistan . Work on the bridge started in 2005 and should finish next year. An
estimated 17,000 cars and trucks will cross it every day. The dam was started in 1931 and used enough concrete to build a road from New York to San Francisco . The stretch of water it created, Lake Mead , is 110 miles long and took six years to fill. The original road was opened at the same time as the famous dam in 1936.
An extra note: The top of the white band of rock in Lake Mead is the old waterline prior to the drought and development in the Las Vegas area. It is over 100 feet above the current water level.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Now is that true?
I got a class picture of our 5th grade class from Blackford in 1963 (if you know what I look like today you will have no problem picking me out then – I think). There were a few folks I still recognized all these years later but I sent a note to my friend and classmate John Bouret asking “Do you remember a guy Robbie (I think it was Robinson or Robertson) - he was a buddy of mine then but then moved away. I do not recognize him in the picture.”
Here is the interesting response I got from John. “I do remember Robbie Williamson. Mr Murphy (our 5th grade teacher) and I were just talking about him yesterday. Well, actually, I brought him up. Mr. Murphy was talking about Robin Williams, (the actor / comedian), which reminded me of the time I was in a track meet up in Marin during the 9th grade. They announced Robin Williams' name over the loudspeaker. Someone was telling me something at the time, so I didn't hear the announcement very well, and thought they had announced Robbie Williamson.(I later found out during an interview with THE Robin Williams that he was on the track team when growing up in Mill Valley). I went over to the registration table to ask if they had announced "Robbie Williamson", and the lady pointed to a funny-looking guy and said, "No - Robin Williams" ! So I went back and rejoined my team; a bit dissapointed...”
It is true.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Time for the Federal Government to take over California government
http://www.sacbee.com/walters/story/2355706.html?storylink=lingospot_top2
This Sacramento Bee article estimates that the California debt and unfunded liabilities may already have reached half a trillion dollars.
And there has been virtually no progress in reducing state expenses and taking other measures to get the spending under control. They are using the “too-big-to-fail” tactic made famous by the big banks and AIG.
The bigger the debt, the bigger the shock waves when California starts defaulting on its obligations – the same emergency we ran into in the financial sector. So the longer California waits to solve its own problems the higher the probability that they eventually get bailed out. The US Government had an implied guarantee of the debt of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae the big mortgage consolidators. When it got bad enough with these two companies, the government had to step in and take over the operations and ended up guaranteeing (and taking losses on) much of the debt. And if it gets bad enough, you know the federal government will be forced to assist California.
One option that is not available to states that is available to the private sector as well as cities and counties is bankruptcy. But bankruptcy by a state was never envisioned (until now) and there have been no provisions written into the Federal bankruptcy law.
The states are required to operate on a balanced budget but this is being conveniently ignored.
So what do we do? As much as I hate big government, it is time for the Federal Government to step in now and take over the business of California government. They should then install a provisional government reporting to the Feds, cut all state salaries, reduce the debt by a one-time write down and guarantee the rest. They should sell state lands and use these proceeds to help fund the whole process. Without strong action now, none of the other states facing similar problems will face their problems either.
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Heck of a Christmas Decoration!
|
Ranger in South Africa
This Ranger is assigned to prevent poaching around the wildlife refuge area of Lanseria, South Africa. The way these animals interact with him is absolutely stunning! The lions seem to know he's there to protect them. His charm works with hyenas and lions too. Hyenas are usually vicious. Check out the pics taken in the river - amazing because lions hate water.
Chat with Messenger straight from your Hotmail inbox. Check it out =
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Let’s celebrate the shut down of one small governmental agency
Just reported on CBS morning news on Dec 6, 2009.
After more than 50 years and 12,000 sightings the UK shutting down its UFO sighting group for an annual savings of about $70,000. They stated “in over 50 years of UFO reporting, no UFO report has revealed any evidence of a potential threat to the United Kingdom.”
Now we need to celebrate a government organization that actually dissolves – it is such a rare event. And after all it did take this one 50 years to figure out they served no useful purpose. Why don’t we conduct a review of all the Washington DC agencies and perhaps we can find one or two that should be shut down there as well.
Saturday, December 5, 2009
Is Gloria Allred the Queen of Legal Exortion?
Extortion is a criminal offense which occurs when a person unlawfully obtains either money, property or services from a person, entity, or institution, through coercion. Legal extortion is achieving the same thing but within the confines of the law.
It appears that Rachael Uchitel and her attorney Gloria Allred have struck a deal with Tiger Woods. We will never know for sure but the pattern is long established. Everything below is conjecture and I welcome a call from Allred to disabuse me of my theories. I add this caveat because I would prefer to avoid a lawsuit from her like in 1981 when she sued California State Senator John Schmitz for slander for $10 million when he called her a “slick butch lawyeress”. She settled that case for $20,000 and an apology.
If Allred and Uchitel simply called up Tiger and said “If you don’t pay me two million dollars I will release all of your text messages, emails and voice mails to the media.” that would be criminal extortion. Both Uchitel and her attorney could go to jail (like Robert Halderman, the man that is out on $200,000 bail and may spend up to 15 years in prison for alleged extortion against David Letterman).
How does Gloria lawfully obtain payment from the likes of Tiger through coercion without breaking the law? Here is my hypothesis. First she contacts the Tiger camp and tells them that her client has been damaged by Tiger and her client demands compensation. She claims emotional distress, humiliation and fear for Uchitel’s safety. Tiger’s attorneys immediately get to work because they know the unspoken but far more damaging threat is that Allred or her client will go to the media with all the “dirt”. So Tiger’s team and Gloria quickly work out a settlement where Tiger agrees to pay Uchitel a few million dollars in exchange for settling her claims. Just one more thing. These agreements always include a non-disclosure and confidentiality provision that says Uchitel will never reveal anything about her romance with Tiger (especially those graphic text messages).
And by the way, Gloria probably took one third of the settlement to compensate her for protecting the “little guy”. She also managed to garner enough publicity in the process so the next mistress of a philandering sports figure will call Gloria first when she wants to collect millions rather than ending up in prison.
What do you think about extortion? If Robert Halderman is going to spend years in prison, is it right for Uchitel and Allred to profit so handsomely?
Advice from Harold Ramis
“I now tell some students – identify the most talented person in the room and if it is not you go stand next to them.”
Advice from Harold Ramis for aspiring actors explained on the CBS morning show. Ramis is a comedy writer/director/producer/actor famous for co-writing and acting in Stripes and Ghostbusters and writing Animal House and Caddyshack. He met Bill Murray and John Belushi early in his career at 2nd city and recognized their talent instantly.
Friday, December 4, 2009
Thursday, December 3, 2009
General Motors and Chrysler operating like any other government agency!
“General Motors Co. and Chrysler will reconsider decisions to close thousands of dealerships as part of a compromise meant to stave off federal legislation that would require them to keep the showrooms open.”
Soon the Federal Government will be deciding where every Chevrolet dealer sits, where all the ATMS are, which post officse stay open, and where every MRI and emergency clinic resides in the US. All based on politics. The politics will be driven by which congressman screams the loudest and which Senator has recently held out the longest before supporting the party leaders latest bill.
This is no way to make these decisions which should be based on a free market.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Penalties for climate change fraud?
climatechangefraud. article So what are the penalties for this fraud? Makes the recent Wall Street lies and fabrications look minor.
Monday, November 30, 2009
Mr. President - I am OK with you taking your time on some things!
I am not a big fan of Obama’s domestic agenda. But I am fine with him taking his time on deciding on troop levels in Afghanistan. George W rushed into too many decisions after 9/11 and many of them have turned out to be big mistakes. This is an expensive decision (both in lives and dollars) to send more troops overseas. It might work or it might fail but taking a little extra time on considering the options seems like time well spent.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
The Jobless Gender Gap
WSJ articleThe unemployment rate for men is now 11.4% but only 8.8% for women.
What if we replaced unemployment insurance with moving benefits?
When an auto plant shuts down in Detroit, instead of paying families to stay where they are, we should instead help these folks move to where there are better job prospects. The problem is if you hang on in Detroit, the chances are not very good for getting a job anytime soon (with a state unemployment rate of 15.1% in October). But the unemployment rate in Nebraska is only 4.9%. So why not help those that want to move to move in lieu of staying where they are?
Most politicians will hate this idea – especially the state and local officials from the Detroit area. They will argue that they are wooing new jobs into the area, and creating government jobs. If you think they will be successful I have a bridge to sell you.
Has anyone other than our celebrities found a real use for Twitter?
Talk about hype – Twitter has had plenty. There is clearly an advantage to rationing letters in a message to 140 but beyond this benefit where’s the beef? If you are a movie star or sports celebrity maybe you can have some fun with this and a few of your fans will care. But I really don’t want to hear about the challenges of shopping for fresh basal. You get a little of this on Facebook, but much more. To me Facebook is far more interactive and interesting. What do you think?
PS - in an effort to keep exploring I am posting this on my Twitter account as well.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Should Tiger plead an early mea culpa?
All the PR people always tell folks to step up and take your medicine early. If you screwed up and it is a public story, then plea mea culpa early and try to get on with things. Tiger Woods is not taking that approach. He is trying to keep his head down and wait for the story to blow over (although the National Enquirer story about his affair will come out in early December). Now I have a lot of respect for the Public Relations professionals that I have worked with over the years (especially Jackie Gentle, Mark Palmer & Dave Monfried) but this is one of those theories with few statistics and plenty of anecdotal evidence. What do you think?
Should Tiger plead Mea Culpa
All the Public Relations pros (I know) always tell folks to step up and take your medicine early. If you screwed up and it is a public story, then plea mea culpa immediately and try to get on with things. Tiger Woods is not taking that approach. He is trying to keep his head down and wait for the story to blow over (although the National Enquirer story about his affair is rumored to be published in early December). Now I have a lot of respect for the Public Relations professionals that I have worked with over the years (especially Jackie Gentle, Mark Palmer & Dave Monfried) but this is one of those theories with few statistics and plenty of anecdotal evidence. What do you think?
This is a very neat new service - Posterous
You set up an account at Posterous.com. Then you can post to all of your accounts with one simple email. You send an email to post@posterous.com and it recognizes your email address and places your post on more than one site. So you can write something once and then it will post it for example on Facebook, Flickr, your blog site (I use blogger.com) and twitter without you having to post on them one at a time. It works for videos, pictures and text.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Judges given immunity from damages in civil suits
A federal judge has ruled that former judges Michael Conahan and Mark Ciavarella, in Luzerne County, PA are immune from damages in civil suits stemming from the kids-for-cash scandal for actions they took in court, but not for their out-of-court actions.
Please explain this logic to me. If a judge knowingly abuses his judicial role why should he be immune from paying the damages he caused? Why does a crooked judge get this kind of break? I understand the notion of indemnifying them for “honest” mistakes but that is not the case here.
The federal judge ruled that the former judges could be at risk for their administrative actions but not their actions on the bench. But why make the distinction?
Dirty judges are more dangerous than crooked cops or crooked politicians. Nothing will damage our system more than actions like these two.
Please explain this logic to me. If a judge knowingly abuses his judicial role why should he be immune from paying the damages he caused? Why does a crooked judge get this kind of break? I understand the notion of indemnifying them for “honest” mistakes but that is not the case here.
The federal judge ruled that the former judges could be at risk for their administrative actions but not their actions on the bench. But why make the distinction?
Dirty judges are more dangerous than crooked cops or crooked politicians. Nothing will damage our system more than actions like these two.
When government takes over
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/11/20/BA611ANSAB.DTL
When government takes over important services like education and health care, important management and pricing decisions are left to politics rather than good business practice. These protesters at UC Berkeley were fighting to reinstate 38 custodial jobs that were recently cut and to stop the big increases in tuition.
The overriding message here is a sense of entitlement. Entitlement to a job, entitlement for a student to have “staff” clean up their mess and entitlement to a top education at very low price.
When employees at a private company lose their jobs they are usually out the next day looking for their next gig. When customers of private companies think prices are too high they immediately start looking for cheaper alternatives.
But when government provides these services it is very hard to make cuts and to change pricing without a protracted media and political process. This is just another reason to keep the government out of business that can be provided by the private sector – especially health care.
When government takes over important services like education and health care, important management and pricing decisions are left to politics rather than good business practice. These protesters at UC Berkeley were fighting to reinstate 38 custodial jobs that were recently cut and to stop the big increases in tuition.
The overriding message here is a sense of entitlement. Entitlement to a job, entitlement for a student to have “staff” clean up their mess and entitlement to a top education at very low price.
When employees at a private company lose their jobs they are usually out the next day looking for their next gig. When customers of private companies think prices are too high they immediately start looking for cheaper alternatives.
But when government provides these services it is very hard to make cuts and to change pricing without a protracted media and political process. This is just another reason to keep the government out of business that can be provided by the private sector – especially health care.
Monday, November 16, 2009
We finally cancelled our paid AOL service
My wife and I have had AOL for about 13 plus years. We had been meaning to cancel the account and switch to other free email users but never got around to it. Even after AOL starting allowing you to keep your existing AOL email address we set up a couple of other email addresses with Gmail and others but kept on paying AOL their monthly fee.
But yesterday after a bizarre episode I finally got around to cancelling my paid AOL account. They sent us an email to tell us that the credit card that we were using was about to expire and that we had to update the credit card information in order to keep the account current. And they gave us one days notice to accomplish this.
So my wife got online to do this and she called me in. Low and behold in addition to the usual information about our credit card (like, name, account number, expiration date) they wanted the pin number for the credit card (even if we did not have one) and the routing number for the bank issuing the credit card (tell me who knows this).
We didn’t have either of these but finally got around to canceling our paid service and switching over to their free service. I’ll bet we are not the only ones they lost but AOL won’t figure it out until they are completely out of business.
But yesterday after a bizarre episode I finally got around to cancelling my paid AOL account. They sent us an email to tell us that the credit card that we were using was about to expire and that we had to update the credit card information in order to keep the account current. And they gave us one days notice to accomplish this.
So my wife got online to do this and she called me in. Low and behold in addition to the usual information about our credit card (like, name, account number, expiration date) they wanted the pin number for the credit card (even if we did not have one) and the routing number for the bank issuing the credit card (tell me who knows this).
We didn’t have either of these but finally got around to canceling our paid service and switching over to their free service. I’ll bet we are not the only ones they lost but AOL won’t figure it out until they are completely out of business.
Why not have PBS stand on its own without taxpayer support?
Public Television has some very good shows and some very mediocre shows. But why should they be subsidized by taxpayers?
PBS is largely funded by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting which is in turn receives 15% to 20% of its annual operating revenue from the US Government and 25% to 29% from State and local taxes.
When it was founded in 1970, PBS took over from its predecessor the National Educational Television. At that time there were few alternatives to CBS, NBC & ABC. But the world has changed. Now we have CNN, Fox, A&E, the History Channel & the Discovery Channel to name a few alternatives.
For some reason the fact that the PBS stations are largely non-profit gives it a free pass. Why not have PBS stand on its own without taxpayer support?
PBS is largely funded by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting which is in turn receives 15% to 20% of its annual operating revenue from the US Government and 25% to 29% from State and local taxes.
When it was founded in 1970, PBS took over from its predecessor the National Educational Television. At that time there were few alternatives to CBS, NBC & ABC. But the world has changed. Now we have CNN, Fox, A&E, the History Channel & the Discovery Channel to name a few alternatives.
For some reason the fact that the PBS stations are largely non-profit gives it a free pass. Why not have PBS stand on its own without taxpayer support?
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Let's Phase Out Home Ownership Subsidies
Somewhere along the line our politicians decided that homeownership was good for America. Now granted a man or woman that owns a own home seems more likely to take care of their city and invest in the local community than a renter but there are other ways to achieve this goal and I haven’t seen any data to really support this assumption. But owning a home does tend to keep a family from moving even though the jobs have shifted to another part of the country. And clearly all those homeowners that could not afford their homes and have abandoned them recently have not done much to beautify their old neighborhoods.
From the early 1900’s government has been subsidizing home ownership and that subsidy keeps on getting bigger. Voting against home ownership subsidies is almost seen as un-American. It has been an addictive drug for the American economy with virtually no one challenging it.
Now let me say up front that my wife and I have two lovely homes, and far more square footage, and bathrooms than we need. We have participated in this subsidy. But the madness has to stop. We need to find a way to phase out these housing subsidies and push American investment into areas that will strengthen the US economy long term and make us competitive not just a better place to watch Sunday NFL games from the a comfortable television room. And I say this knowing that reducing home ownership subsidies will decrease the value of my two homes.
Here are some ways we subsidize home ownership. We allow you to write off your mortgage interest on not only your first home but your second home as well. We allow you to write off the property taxes not only on your first home but your second home. If you make up to a half a million dollar profit when you and your wife sell your first home then it is tax free. We subsidize and force our banks to make low down payment mortgage loans and then recently we have been giving $8,000 tax credits to first time home buyers. All of these have made buying a home a very good investment (until lately). Almost a no-lose proposition. As a result for decades the price of homes increased far faster than most investments. And these subsidies were a primary driver in the long term increase in home prices.
The logic goes that homes are expensive so we need to subsidize them more, which just leads to them being yet more expensive than they otherwise would be. So then we have to subsidize them even more. In the end, homes end up no more affordable than they would have been without the subsidies. But we end up with far bigger homes, far more homes, a big national debt and a struggling economy.
Owning a second home in Hawaii or Florida has always been more fun than owning IBM stock or investing in a new wafer board technology. But what possible societal reason is there for subsidizing the ownership of second homes? This is not only a middle and upper class subsidy but it sucks out investment dollars from areas like technology, medical device inventions, and agri-business innovation that tend to make the US dollar stronger and lead to long-term job growth. The net result is that our country has invested far too much in housing rather than businesses that would have resulted in exports to other countries and investments that would give us a long term competitive advantage.
So here are some of the results of all of these subsidies. From 1960 through 2007 the average size of a new US home went from about 1200 square feet to about 2700 square feet (a 125% increase). At the same time that homes have been getting bigger the number of housing units (this includes all homes, second homes, condos, mobile homes and apartments) per person went from about .32 housing units per person to about .42 (31% more per person). The net result is that the square footage per person increased by about 190% per person.
Now Washington (and our State governments) are far less likely to reduce these subsidies than to expand them. After all if something isn’t working then do it bigger and better - never question doing away with it. It appears that Washington will expand the $8,000 new home owner tax credit beyond its original expiration date this November and include existing home owners.
This is the problem with subsidies – once we get addicted to them it is almost politically impossible to ever stop them. Think back to our subsidies for tobacco farmers over the years – they were kept in place long after we knew that smoking killed. We get far too much investment in what sounded like a good idea 50 years ago but makes no sense today.
From the early 1900’s government has been subsidizing home ownership and that subsidy keeps on getting bigger. Voting against home ownership subsidies is almost seen as un-American. It has been an addictive drug for the American economy with virtually no one challenging it.
Now let me say up front that my wife and I have two lovely homes, and far more square footage, and bathrooms than we need. We have participated in this subsidy. But the madness has to stop. We need to find a way to phase out these housing subsidies and push American investment into areas that will strengthen the US economy long term and make us competitive not just a better place to watch Sunday NFL games from the a comfortable television room. And I say this knowing that reducing home ownership subsidies will decrease the value of my two homes.
Here are some ways we subsidize home ownership. We allow you to write off your mortgage interest on not only your first home but your second home as well. We allow you to write off the property taxes not only on your first home but your second home. If you make up to a half a million dollar profit when you and your wife sell your first home then it is tax free. We subsidize and force our banks to make low down payment mortgage loans and then recently we have been giving $8,000 tax credits to first time home buyers. All of these have made buying a home a very good investment (until lately). Almost a no-lose proposition. As a result for decades the price of homes increased far faster than most investments. And these subsidies were a primary driver in the long term increase in home prices.
The logic goes that homes are expensive so we need to subsidize them more, which just leads to them being yet more expensive than they otherwise would be. So then we have to subsidize them even more. In the end, homes end up no more affordable than they would have been without the subsidies. But we end up with far bigger homes, far more homes, a big national debt and a struggling economy.
Owning a second home in Hawaii or Florida has always been more fun than owning IBM stock or investing in a new wafer board technology. But what possible societal reason is there for subsidizing the ownership of second homes? This is not only a middle and upper class subsidy but it sucks out investment dollars from areas like technology, medical device inventions, and agri-business innovation that tend to make the US dollar stronger and lead to long-term job growth. The net result is that our country has invested far too much in housing rather than businesses that would have resulted in exports to other countries and investments that would give us a long term competitive advantage.
So here are some of the results of all of these subsidies. From 1960 through 2007 the average size of a new US home went from about 1200 square feet to about 2700 square feet (a 125% increase). At the same time that homes have been getting bigger the number of housing units (this includes all homes, second homes, condos, mobile homes and apartments) per person went from about .32 housing units per person to about .42 (31% more per person). The net result is that the square footage per person increased by about 190% per person.
Now Washington (and our State governments) are far less likely to reduce these subsidies than to expand them. After all if something isn’t working then do it bigger and better - never question doing away with it. It appears that Washington will expand the $8,000 new home owner tax credit beyond its original expiration date this November and include existing home owners.
This is the problem with subsidies – once we get addicted to them it is almost politically impossible to ever stop them. Think back to our subsidies for tobacco farmers over the years – they were kept in place long after we knew that smoking killed. We get far too much investment in what sounded like a good idea 50 years ago but makes no sense today.
Monday, October 26, 2009
Police do not want to trouble illegal alliens!
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/10/26/BA381A9A9N.DTL&tsp=1
This story will really annoy you. The San Francisco police have decided to take it easier on drivers that are driving without a driver’s license. Why? Because many of these folks are illegal aliens and the police do not want to trouble them by impounding their cars.
And of course that is the role of the police - to make it easier to remain an illegal alien in the US. Can you point to any other country in the world where it is so easy to stay illegally?
This story will really annoy you. The San Francisco police have decided to take it easier on drivers that are driving without a driver’s license. Why? Because many of these folks are illegal aliens and the police do not want to trouble them by impounding their cars.
And of course that is the role of the police - to make it easier to remain an illegal alien in the US. Can you point to any other country in the world where it is so easy to stay illegally?
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Competing with the New Public Health Insurance Agency will be like competing with the US Postal Service!
A major argument for a public option for health insurance is that it will increase competition. Does anyone really believe this? Let’s look at the track record of the US Postal Service and see how they increase competition.
The USPS is owned by the government and controlled by presidential appointees. Have you noticed that it is illegal to drop a letter that has not gone through the postal system into someone’s mail box. And it has exclusive access to non-urgent letters. It is exempt from state and federal taxes. Congress has delegated to the Postal Service the power to decide whether others may compete with it and the Postal Service has carved out an exception to its monopoly for extremely urgent letters.
The USPS Postal Inspection Service has the power to enforce the USPS monopoly by conducting search and seizure raids on entities they suspect of sending non-urgent mail through overnight delivery competitors. In 1993 the USPIS raided Equifax offices to determine if the mail they were sending through Federal express was truly “extremely urgent”. It was found that it was not and Equifax was fined $30,000.
As a quasi-governmental agency, the USPS has many special privileges including sovereign immunity (which makes it very difficult to sue when they crash into your car), eminent domain powers, exemption from most taxes, powers to negotiate postal treaties with other countries and they cannot be sued under the Sherman Anti-trust act. And they control the minimum pricing of their competitors. A letter must cost at least $3 or twice the applicable first-class rate to qualify as urgent. Does this increase competition?
Once we set up the US Health Insurance Agency what are the chances they will get this kind of special treatment?
Have you noticed that some folks get their mail delivered to their doorsteps while others have to travel miles to a community mail station? Another example of those with the loudest voices getting the most from the public trough – nothing to do with fairness, or cost of service it simply who has a congressman that will scream the loudest.
Does Cliff Clavin from Cheers really represent the average postman? I really don’t know but I do know that very few employees are ever fired from the postal service unless they “Go Postal”. It is very tough to get a job there and many folks would probably be willing to do the work for a far much smaller wage.
Proponents of this special treatment argue that eliminating or reducing the Postal Services’s competitive advantages would impact on their ability to provide affordable universal service. Does this sound familiar? This will be the same argument that is used to give special treatment to the a newly created National Health Insurance Agency.
Rural postal customers are subsidized big time. And the politics of reducing service to a remote area or closing down a remote little-used post office are enormous.
Faxes, emails, phone calls, voice mail, cell service, UPS, FedEx – are some of the competitors to the USPS. Imagine what it really cost us to deliver a letter to the boonies one at a time – and think of the carbon footprint compared to an email.
Special treatment, public employee unions, benefit packages that compensate well above the average wage – and all with bad service to boot. What if you have a letter that is very important but not actually urgent. Would you trust it to the USPS or send it via FedEx? Of course you would go with FedEx and you would be breaking the law.
Why don’t we clean up the favoritism granted to the UPSP before we create another competition killer like a Public Health Care Insurance Agency? We need new models and more competition for health care in America but creating another government “service” is not the answer.
The USPS is owned by the government and controlled by presidential appointees. Have you noticed that it is illegal to drop a letter that has not gone through the postal system into someone’s mail box. And it has exclusive access to non-urgent letters. It is exempt from state and federal taxes. Congress has delegated to the Postal Service the power to decide whether others may compete with it and the Postal Service has carved out an exception to its monopoly for extremely urgent letters.
The USPS Postal Inspection Service has the power to enforce the USPS monopoly by conducting search and seizure raids on entities they suspect of sending non-urgent mail through overnight delivery competitors. In 1993 the USPIS raided Equifax offices to determine if the mail they were sending through Federal express was truly “extremely urgent”. It was found that it was not and Equifax was fined $30,000.
As a quasi-governmental agency, the USPS has many special privileges including sovereign immunity (which makes it very difficult to sue when they crash into your car), eminent domain powers, exemption from most taxes, powers to negotiate postal treaties with other countries and they cannot be sued under the Sherman Anti-trust act. And they control the minimum pricing of their competitors. A letter must cost at least $3 or twice the applicable first-class rate to qualify as urgent. Does this increase competition?
Once we set up the US Health Insurance Agency what are the chances they will get this kind of special treatment?
Have you noticed that some folks get their mail delivered to their doorsteps while others have to travel miles to a community mail station? Another example of those with the loudest voices getting the most from the public trough – nothing to do with fairness, or cost of service it simply who has a congressman that will scream the loudest.
Does Cliff Clavin from Cheers really represent the average postman? I really don’t know but I do know that very few employees are ever fired from the postal service unless they “Go Postal”. It is very tough to get a job there and many folks would probably be willing to do the work for a far much smaller wage.
Proponents of this special treatment argue that eliminating or reducing the Postal Services’s competitive advantages would impact on their ability to provide affordable universal service. Does this sound familiar? This will be the same argument that is used to give special treatment to the a newly created National Health Insurance Agency.
Rural postal customers are subsidized big time. And the politics of reducing service to a remote area or closing down a remote little-used post office are enormous.
Faxes, emails, phone calls, voice mail, cell service, UPS, FedEx – are some of the competitors to the USPS. Imagine what it really cost us to deliver a letter to the boonies one at a time – and think of the carbon footprint compared to an email.
Special treatment, public employee unions, benefit packages that compensate well above the average wage – and all with bad service to boot. What if you have a letter that is very important but not actually urgent. Would you trust it to the USPS or send it via FedEx? Of course you would go with FedEx and you would be breaking the law.
Why don’t we clean up the favoritism granted to the UPSP before we create another competition killer like a Public Health Care Insurance Agency? We need new models and more competition for health care in America but creating another government “service” is not the answer.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Teacher's Unions
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-utla17-2009oct17,0,1149698.story
Interesting article about the Los Angles teacher’s union is resisting change. Is anything new? The talk of unions is always how they will help the employer be more completive in delivering services to the end user (students in this case). Does anyone really believe this klaptrap?
Interesting article about the Los Angles teacher’s union is resisting change. Is anything new? The talk of unions is always how they will help the employer be more completive in delivering services to the end user (students in this case). Does anyone really believe this klaptrap?
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Talk about a public option reducing health care costs misses one major factor – unions!
All the silly talk about a public option reducing health care costs misses one major factor – unions. The only group of US workers that have been increasing union membership is the public sector (city, county and federal). The public plan for offering health care in competition with the private options will surely move towards substantially more unionized positions for both administrative positions and health care professionals than we have today. This will surely increase costs not decrease them.
In the private sector unions tend to drive the unionized business into bankruptcy or out of the country so the union excess is self-correcting. Hence few private jobs are being unionized and the ones that are unionized tend to go away. But government jobs never go away. Even when a state like California needs to cut costs they don’t lay off 20% of their workforce like the private sector would do. Instead they give everyone an unpaid day off every 10 days. On the surface this sounds like they are reducing their labor costs by 10% but when you take into account their benefits, and overhead like office space it has a negligible impact on actually reducing costs.
In California the all-in costs for government employees is about $85,000 per year and for private employees is about $45,000 per year. Frequently they have very similar base wages but when you factor in the benefits packages for public employees like the option for some employees to retire at full pay after just 20 years, and Cadillac heath care plans the cost difference is substantial.
And very few public officials are willing to play hardball with their unions. Since Ronald Reagan fired striking Air Traffic Controllers in 1981 when has a public official fought that hard to keep costs down? Most public officials really don’t want the stress and bad publicity of saying “no” to their unions. There is little personal upside for politicians and these unions include increasingly stronger voting blocks.
In the private sector unions tend to drive the unionized business into bankruptcy or out of the country so the union excess is self-correcting. Hence few private jobs are being unionized and the ones that are unionized tend to go away. But government jobs never go away. Even when a state like California needs to cut costs they don’t lay off 20% of their workforce like the private sector would do. Instead they give everyone an unpaid day off every 10 days. On the surface this sounds like they are reducing their labor costs by 10% but when you take into account their benefits, and overhead like office space it has a negligible impact on actually reducing costs.
In California the all-in costs for government employees is about $85,000 per year and for private employees is about $45,000 per year. Frequently they have very similar base wages but when you factor in the benefits packages for public employees like the option for some employees to retire at full pay after just 20 years, and Cadillac heath care plans the cost difference is substantial.
And very few public officials are willing to play hardball with their unions. Since Ronald Reagan fired striking Air Traffic Controllers in 1981 when has a public official fought that hard to keep costs down? Most public officials really don’t want the stress and bad publicity of saying “no” to their unions. There is little personal upside for politicians and these unions include increasingly stronger voting blocks.
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Obama must have been embarrassed
Obama was inaugurated on Jan 21, 2009 and was subsequently nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize on 2/27/09. Faster than your average bear.
This article http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704429304574467491888455498.html offers an excellent alternative Nobel Peace Prize award (for those of you who might think there were any other more deserving candidates). Unfortunately this award has gotten very political.
In general , accomplishment takes time, hard work, and most importantly results. Hard to achieve this in just 37 days. Obama must have been embarrassed about winning this award. Non-liberals (I hate the term conservative) want to recognize accomplishment, liberals want to award based on "feel good" objectives.
This article http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704429304574467491888455498.html offers an excellent alternative Nobel Peace Prize award (for those of you who might think there were any other more deserving candidates). Unfortunately this award has gotten very political.
In general , accomplishment takes time, hard work, and most importantly results. Hard to achieve this in just 37 days. Obama must have been embarrassed about winning this award. Non-liberals (I hate the term conservative) want to recognize accomplishment, liberals want to award based on "feel good" objectives.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Some writers have trouble with simple math
http://blogs.golf.com/presstent/2009/10/tiger-im-not-a-billionaire.html
Some writers are just idiots. The original article claimed that Woods had earned $1 billion over his career. That is far different than being a billionaire. Has the writer forgotten the concept of income taxes and living expenses (which might be reasonably high for Tiger)?
Some writers are just idiots. The original article claimed that Woods had earned $1 billion over his career. That is far different than being a billionaire. Has the writer forgotten the concept of income taxes and living expenses (which might be reasonably high for Tiger)?
Fool's Gold highly recommended!
Just finished Fool’s Gold by Gillian Tett and highly recommend it. It chronicles the creation of the credit derivative business though the near banking collapse in 2008. It shows how few people really understood these complicated devices and how the risk was shifted around, underestimated and virtually ignored by regulators and bank senior managements.
The derivatives themselves were not the problem – just a tool that was abused. The first hitch is that since there was no clearing of these trades a AAA company like AIG could take on over $500 billion in risk and not have to put up any collateral to cover its losses in the event it had to pay off. A clearing system where the instruments are standardized and every player has to put up margin would go a long way towards solving this problem. This needs to be solved soon.
A second major issue was that loans were sliced and diced in such esoteric ways that no one really knew what they had and the mathematical models radically underestimated the risk (especially the risk that the world might look different than the last several years).
And finally the ratings companies had their heads up their rear ends. What an antiquated system and this is an area that regulators have made no progress on correcting. And no one is correcting the conflicts of interests these companies had and continue to have.
The derivatives themselves were not the problem – just a tool that was abused. The first hitch is that since there was no clearing of these trades a AAA company like AIG could take on over $500 billion in risk and not have to put up any collateral to cover its losses in the event it had to pay off. A clearing system where the instruments are standardized and every player has to put up margin would go a long way towards solving this problem. This needs to be solved soon.
A second major issue was that loans were sliced and diced in such esoteric ways that no one really knew what they had and the mathematical models radically underestimated the risk (especially the risk that the world might look different than the last several years).
And finally the ratings companies had their heads up their rear ends. What an antiquated system and this is an area that regulators have made no progress on correcting. And no one is correcting the conflicts of interests these companies had and continue to have.
Monday, September 28, 2009
Unemployment benefits extended?
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/09/28/BU9419TU0V.DTL
The more you pay people not to work the more they will not work. This is not rocket science. In California the maximum unemployment benefits are already 72 weeks. Let’s spend our time reducing the expenses and the bureaucracy involved in hiring a new employee rather than subsidizing more people taking it easy. The more we subsidize things the more we get of it – very simple math.
The more you pay people not to work the more they will not work. This is not rocket science. In California the maximum unemployment benefits are already 72 weeks. Let’s spend our time reducing the expenses and the bureaucracy involved in hiring a new employee rather than subsidizing more people taking it easy. The more we subsidize things the more we get of it – very simple math.
Friday, September 4, 2009
When a government monopoly (like education) signs a dumb contract
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/08/31/090831fa_fact_brill
Outstanding NewYorker article "The battle over New York's worst teachers".
Please do not think of this as an article about the teaching profesion. Think of this nonsense relative to unions for all government employees (like all those new health workers we are about to get) and how unions mock common sense.
Teaching (like manufacturing cars or brain surgery) can ge done poorly or with excellence. The important question is how does a union environment impact the quality and cost of the service delivered?
In the private sector (the auto industry not withstanding) when managment commits to a dumb contract the company usually goes out of business and the contract becomes a non-issue. But when a government monopoly (like education or air traffic control) signs a dumb contract there are few mechanisms for correcting the mistake and years later the public is still suffering. After all the government monopoly makes it virtually impossible for new entrants to compete.
This is possibly the strongest argument for having government doing less for us rather than more. We all make mistakes but government is incapable of correcting these mistakes.
Outstanding NewYorker article "The battle over New York's worst teachers".
Please do not think of this as an article about the teaching profesion. Think of this nonsense relative to unions for all government employees (like all those new health workers we are about to get) and how unions mock common sense.
Teaching (like manufacturing cars or brain surgery) can ge done poorly or with excellence. The important question is how does a union environment impact the quality and cost of the service delivered?
In the private sector (the auto industry not withstanding) when managment commits to a dumb contract the company usually goes out of business and the contract becomes a non-issue. But when a government monopoly (like education or air traffic control) signs a dumb contract there are few mechanisms for correcting the mistake and years later the public is still suffering. After all the government monopoly makes it virtually impossible for new entrants to compete.
This is possibly the strongest argument for having government doing less for us rather than more. We all make mistakes but government is incapable of correcting these mistakes.
Friday, August 28, 2009
Dominique Dunne vs. the Kennedys
Dominique Dunne died on 8/26/09 at the age of 83 but this was overshadowed by the death of Ted Kennedy a day earlier. Both were Irish Catholics from New England (Dunne from Connecticut and Kennedy from Massachusetts). But these guys really disliked each other.
Dunne’s daughter had been murdered in 1982 and since that time he had devoted much of his energy to reporting on crime stories (primarily from the side of the victims). It was probably about the time that Dunne started reporting on the trials of William Kennedy Smith and Michael Skakel (the nephew of Ethel Kennedy) that the Kennedys started hating him.
I wish that Dunne was in the crime reporting business back in 1969 for the Chappaquiddick “accident”. On the night of July 18, 1969, Kennedy was on Martha's Vineyard's Chappaquiddick Island at a party for a group of young women who had worked on his brother Robert's presidential campaign the year before. Kennedy left the party, with one of the women, 28-year-old Mary Jo Kopechne and accidently drove off Dike Bridge into a tidal channel on Chappaquiddick Island. Kennedy escaped the overturned vehicle, swam to safety and left the scene. He did not call authorities until after Kopechne's body was discovered the following day.
On July 25, Kennedy plead guilty to leaving the scene of an accident and was given a sentence of two months in jail (suspended). That night, he gave a national broadcast in which he said, "I regard as indefensible the fact that I did not report the accident to the police immediately", but denied driving under the influence of alcohol and denied any immoral conduct between him and Kopechne (did she die before he had the chance?).
Do you believe that alcohol was not a factor? Do you think that Kennedy got special treatment because of his political and family connections? If we had had Dominique on the job we might know the answers today.
Dunne’s daughter had been murdered in 1982 and since that time he had devoted much of his energy to reporting on crime stories (primarily from the side of the victims). It was probably about the time that Dunne started reporting on the trials of William Kennedy Smith and Michael Skakel (the nephew of Ethel Kennedy) that the Kennedys started hating him.
I wish that Dunne was in the crime reporting business back in 1969 for the Chappaquiddick “accident”. On the night of July 18, 1969, Kennedy was on Martha's Vineyard's Chappaquiddick Island at a party for a group of young women who had worked on his brother Robert's presidential campaign the year before. Kennedy left the party, with one of the women, 28-year-old Mary Jo Kopechne and accidently drove off Dike Bridge into a tidal channel on Chappaquiddick Island. Kennedy escaped the overturned vehicle, swam to safety and left the scene. He did not call authorities until after Kopechne's body was discovered the following day.
On July 25, Kennedy plead guilty to leaving the scene of an accident and was given a sentence of two months in jail (suspended). That night, he gave a national broadcast in which he said, "I regard as indefensible the fact that I did not report the accident to the police immediately", but denied driving under the influence of alcohol and denied any immoral conduct between him and Kopechne (did she die before he had the chance?).
Do you believe that alcohol was not a factor? Do you think that Kennedy got special treatment because of his political and family connections? If we had had Dominique on the job we might know the answers today.
Monday, August 24, 2009
Homeless World Cup
Can you believe this? We heard about this and could and thought they were joking.
“The Homeless World Cup is an annual, international football tournament, uniting teams of people who are homeless and excluded to take a once in a lifetime opportunity to represent their country and change their lives forever. It has triggered and supports grass roots football projects in over 60 nations working with over 25,000 homeless and excluded people throughout the year.“
Might the funds be better used for better health care, mosquito nets or water filtration systems for these people?
“The Homeless World Cup is an annual, international football tournament, uniting teams of people who are homeless and excluded to take a once in a lifetime opportunity to represent their country and change their lives forever. It has triggered and supports grass roots football projects in over 60 nations working with over 25,000 homeless and excluded people throughout the year.“
Might the funds be better used for better health care, mosquito nets or water filtration systems for these people?
"The VA lost my health records"
I heard this from a veteran today – “I am currently rated at a 20% disability by the VA. I am appealing their decision because they could not find my medical records.” So perhaps Washington should improve the VA health care system, and work on making it a little more efficient before they try and take on the rest of us.
Sunday, August 23, 2009
Doing business with Al Qaeda
Sign in the front of a Petaluma, California business.
"We would rather do business with 1,000 Al Qaeda Terrorists
than one single American."
This sign was prominently displayed in the window of a
business in Petaluma.
You are probably outraged at the thought of such an
inflammatory statement. But we pride ourselves on being a
society that holds Freedom of Speech as perhaps our greatest
liberty. And after all, it IS just a sign. You may ask what
kind of business would dare post such a sign?
Answer: A Funeral Home
"We would rather do business with 1,000 Al Qaeda Terrorists
than one single American."
This sign was prominently displayed in the window of a
business in Petaluma.
You are probably outraged at the thought of such an
inflammatory statement. But we pride ourselves on being a
society that holds Freedom of Speech as perhaps our greatest
liberty. And after all, it IS just a sign. You may ask what
kind of business would dare post such a sign?
Answer: A Funeral Home
Interesting piece by Mark Cuban
http://blogmaverick.com/2009/08/22/the-irony-of-the-video-business/
Mark Cuban always has an intersting perspective.
Mark Cuban always has an intersting perspective.
Monday, August 10, 2009
If the US Government can't make the USPS work how do they expect to suceed at Health Care?
http://money.cnn.com/2009/08/03/news/companies/usps_postal_service_privatize.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2009080410
Before we turn over more of our health care system to the Federal government why don't we first clean up some of our current messes like the US Postal Service. If we can't make this monopoly work how do we expect to manage something as complex as health care for 330+ million Americans and illegal alliens?
Excellent article in Fortune.
Before we turn over more of our health care system to the Federal government why don't we first clean up some of our current messes like the US Postal Service. If we can't make this monopoly work how do we expect to manage something as complex as health care for 330+ million Americans and illegal alliens?
Excellent article in Fortune.
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Australia busy subsidizing their auto industry
From Melbourne, Australia Aug 10, 2009. The Australian government has been hard at work subsidizing their auto-makers in the country with a $200 million (Aus) credit line for local auto makers.
Politicians the world over are subsidizing the old-world industry of car making. Not much is going anywhere to new industries because small entrepreneurial firms have virtually no union jobs.
The big problem is there is too much auto production capacity world-wide and cars last far longer than they used to. In a world unencumbered by strong politician-union ties many of these plants would be allowed to shut down and these auto workers would find a new line of work just like when the buggy companies lost out to the new auto companies in the early 20th century. But instead these plants world-wide will be subsidized as if the auto industry in a strategic gateway into a strong economy tomorrow. Wrong!
Politicians the world over are subsidizing the old-world industry of car making. Not much is going anywhere to new industries because small entrepreneurial firms have virtually no union jobs.
The big problem is there is too much auto production capacity world-wide and cars last far longer than they used to. In a world unencumbered by strong politician-union ties many of these plants would be allowed to shut down and these auto workers would find a new line of work just like when the buggy companies lost out to the new auto companies in the early 20th century. But instead these plants world-wide will be subsidized as if the auto industry in a strategic gateway into a strong economy tomorrow. Wrong!
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Brothel Stimulus Program Discussed
It’s been a one-two sucker punch. First high gas prices squeezed away business, then the recession has threatened to put the final nail in the coffin. On the heels of the recent “cash for clunkers” program, several of the roughly 25 legal brothels in Nevada (which employ about 300 prostitutes) are hoping for a similar program.
Like all stimulus packages, this proposal promises to aid numerous layers of businesses and individuals tied to the prostitution industry. There is a real multiplier effect for each prostitute that is fully employed. For each sex professional, there is a manager/madame, a gynecologist, state health inspectors, and of course higherer condom and Viagra sales. In addition, each successful sex worker contributes to the maintenance of the “ranches”, along with related real estate (and other taxes), utilities, and improvement projects. And of course a fully employed prostitute can afford to trade in her old “beater” and get a new car as well.
While the “clunkers” program offered up “to $4,500 for each clunker turned in for a new, more efficient car, proponents of the Brothel Stimulus program argue that a government rebate of as little as $25 per pop would do the trick (forgive the pun) for brothels.
US Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is from Nevada and as the former head of the Nevada Gambling Commission he knows his vice. And his state doesn’t have a single automobile plant, so Nevada has been left out in the cold. It’s about time that Nevada got it's share of the “booty”.
Like all stimulus packages, this proposal promises to aid numerous layers of businesses and individuals tied to the prostitution industry. There is a real multiplier effect for each prostitute that is fully employed. For each sex professional, there is a manager/madame, a gynecologist, state health inspectors, and of course higherer condom and Viagra sales. In addition, each successful sex worker contributes to the maintenance of the “ranches”, along with related real estate (and other taxes), utilities, and improvement projects. And of course a fully employed prostitute can afford to trade in her old “beater” and get a new car as well.
While the “clunkers” program offered up “to $4,500 for each clunker turned in for a new, more efficient car, proponents of the Brothel Stimulus program argue that a government rebate of as little as $25 per pop would do the trick (forgive the pun) for brothels.
US Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is from Nevada and as the former head of the Nevada Gambling Commission he knows his vice. And his state doesn’t have a single automobile plant, so Nevada has been left out in the cold. It’s about time that Nevada got it's share of the “booty”.
Saturday, August 1, 2009
Friday, July 24, 2009
New Jersey Corruption
The charges just announced about the arrests of mayors and rabbis in New Jersey point out that the "Soprano State" appears to be the most corrupt in the nation. More than 130 public officials have pleaded guilty or have been convicted of corruption since 2001.
I don't like big centralized federal government but if there was ever a role for the FBI - rooting out this corruption at the city, county and state level is an absolute necessity.
I don't like big centralized federal government but if there was ever a role for the FBI - rooting out this corruption at the city, county and state level is an absolute necessity.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Good for Jimmy Carter
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/07/20/jimmy-carter-leaves-church-over-treatment-of-women/?icid=main|main|dl1|link3|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.politicsdaily.com%2F2009%2F07%2F20%2Fjimmy-carter-leaves-church-over-treatment-of-women%2F
Good for Jimmy Carter. Too many churches including the Roman Catholic and Muslim religions treat women as second class citizens.
I disagree with the former President on plenty of things but he is setting a great example on this one.
Good for Jimmy Carter. Too many churches including the Roman Catholic and Muslim religions treat women as second class citizens.
I disagree with the former President on plenty of things but he is setting a great example on this one.
This Professor is a Genius
A friend sent this to me........
This Professor is a Genius
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had once failed an entire class.
--------------------------------------------
That class had insisted that Obama's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.
The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's plan".
All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A.
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy.
As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little. The second test average was a D! No one was happy.
When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.
The scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.
All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.
Could not be any simpler than that.
This Professor is a Genius
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had once failed an entire class.
--------------------------------------------
That class had insisted that Obama's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.
The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's plan".
All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A.
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy.
As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little. The second test average was a D! No one was happy.
When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.
The scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.
All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.
Could not be any simpler than that.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Another egregious example of public pensions gone wrong.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/07/21/BUN618S39O.DTL&tsp=1
This article discusses the recently retired Moraga-Orinda fire chief who at 51 receives an annual pension of $241,000. The chief correctly points out that he did not negotiate or design the pension program – he simply took advantage of it. The formula was so poorly constructed that when he cashed in vacation and got some other pay in his last few years that it boosted his annual pension from a mere $185,000 to $241,000. And at the age of 51 his life expectancy has got to be another 40 years.
These deals were already made and I do not suggest changing deals already promised but is there any chance we can stop this stupidity going forward?
Let’s close down all public pensions now. Lock in the benefits already promised and replace them with defined contribution plans rather than these dinosaur pension programs! Stop paying our government employees so much more than the private sector!
This article discusses the recently retired Moraga-Orinda fire chief who at 51 receives an annual pension of $241,000. The chief correctly points out that he did not negotiate or design the pension program – he simply took advantage of it. The formula was so poorly constructed that when he cashed in vacation and got some other pay in his last few years that it boosted his annual pension from a mere $185,000 to $241,000. And at the age of 51 his life expectancy has got to be another 40 years.
These deals were already made and I do not suggest changing deals already promised but is there any chance we can stop this stupidity going forward?
Let’s close down all public pensions now. Lock in the benefits already promised and replace them with defined contribution plans rather than these dinosaur pension programs! Stop paying our government employees so much more than the private sector!
Monday, July 20, 2009
New federal rules for home loans
http://www.latimes.com/classified/realestate/news/la-fi-harney19-2009jul19,0,1179820.story an article about the new federal rules for home loans.
Government is almost always working like a committee designing a horse; it usually comes up with something resembling a camel.
For some reason our politicians are blaming the lack of disclosure for home loans on our mortgage mess. Are you kidding me? Have you bought a new home or taken out a mortgage lately? I would be surprised if there weren’t at least 80 pages of documents to be reviewed and disclosures to understand. Do we need more disclosures?
Do you think most people read and understand the information they already recieve? Not! So instead of trying to simplify the documents and disclosures for the important considerations, the new regulations that go into effect will probably add another 20 pages of disclosures all written in legalize and written in a way that many of us do not understand.
There are only two things that most people care about when they buy their new home:
1) What is the money down?
2) How much a month is it going to cost me?
Borrowers also need to understand if they can pay the loan off early without penalty, if the interest rate is variable and if so what the formula is and how high can it go? And what happens to the home if the borrower can no longer afford the payments and defaults on the loan? But very few borrowers get that far and another 20 pages of documents is not going to get them that understanding.
A big problem we had was that too many borrowers were lying to the banks about their income on their loan applications. But none of the politicians want to talk about this dishonesty. The politicians and media would rather bludgeon the banks and the mortgage companies (who also did plenty of damage) but were not the only culprits in this ongoing drama.
Let’s ask our politicians for more honesty, more simplicity and to get out of lives. And please why not simplify and clean up a few of our existing messes before they create more.
Government is almost always working like a committee designing a horse; it usually comes up with something resembling a camel.
For some reason our politicians are blaming the lack of disclosure for home loans on our mortgage mess. Are you kidding me? Have you bought a new home or taken out a mortgage lately? I would be surprised if there weren’t at least 80 pages of documents to be reviewed and disclosures to understand. Do we need more disclosures?
Do you think most people read and understand the information they already recieve? Not! So instead of trying to simplify the documents and disclosures for the important considerations, the new regulations that go into effect will probably add another 20 pages of disclosures all written in legalize and written in a way that many of us do not understand.
There are only two things that most people care about when they buy their new home:
1) What is the money down?
2) How much a month is it going to cost me?
Borrowers also need to understand if they can pay the loan off early without penalty, if the interest rate is variable and if so what the formula is and how high can it go? And what happens to the home if the borrower can no longer afford the payments and defaults on the loan? But very few borrowers get that far and another 20 pages of documents is not going to get them that understanding.
A big problem we had was that too many borrowers were lying to the banks about their income on their loan applications. But none of the politicians want to talk about this dishonesty. The politicians and media would rather bludgeon the banks and the mortgage companies (who also did plenty of damage) but were not the only culprits in this ongoing drama.
Let’s ask our politicians for more honesty, more simplicity and to get out of lives. And please why not simplify and clean up a few of our existing messes before they create more.
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Rationing Health Care
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/19/magazine/19healthcare-t.html?pagewanted=1&em
Interesting column about rationing health care in the US. It presupposes that we will soon have our government playing a far bigger role in rationing our health care – not a bad assumption.
The trouble is turning over these life or death decisions to government. There are plenty of tradeoffs and the calculus is just too difficult for your average politician to manage in a reaonsable way.
Interesting column about rationing health care in the US. It presupposes that we will soon have our government playing a far bigger role in rationing our health care – not a bad assumption.
The trouble is turning over these life or death decisions to government. There are plenty of tradeoffs and the calculus is just too difficult for your average politician to manage in a reaonsable way.
Public employee pensions
http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/matierandross/
This article talks about all the City of San Francisco retirees making more than $100,000 per year. A problem that is widespread throughout our country.
Pensions and social security promises at the city, county, state and federal governments are the silent killer of our future economy. Just like a family living the good life on their credit cards and home equity loans until the debt catches up with them.
Pensions and our Social Security system are a way that politicians avoid confronting costs today and push the problem onto future generations. Pensions are also a great way for the public sector to pay themselves substantially over market and hide it from the public for a decade or two.
The private sector (other than our foolish auto industry) has moved aggressively to replace defined-benefit pension programs with 401K and equivalent programs. By doing so the companies know today what their costs actually are and the responsibility for managing the investment going forward lies with the employee.
These public pension programs typically pay the retiree based on their last few years income. So given the formulas, the employees predictably “game” the system as you and I would do. They work extra overtime and they work hard to get promotions their last couple of years because they know that every dollar they earn in the last couple years pays back multiple times.
Is it any surprise that the average private employee in California today earns about $45,000 per year (including benefits) compared to the average public employee earning about $85,000?
Not only could this problem easily bankrupt many local governments, the US government (though the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation) guarantees nearly 44 million Americans and 29,400 pension plans. What are the chances that our government is charging and setting aside enough to cover all the future problems? Somewhere between slim and none. Another unfunded liability for our Federal government.
Pension programs in the private sector used to be the rule. But they installed new 401k programs, froze the benefits and changed for the better. Do you hear any discussion of government at any level making this fundamental change?
This article talks about all the City of San Francisco retirees making more than $100,000 per year. A problem that is widespread throughout our country.
Pensions and social security promises at the city, county, state and federal governments are the silent killer of our future economy. Just like a family living the good life on their credit cards and home equity loans until the debt catches up with them.
Pensions and our Social Security system are a way that politicians avoid confronting costs today and push the problem onto future generations. Pensions are also a great way for the public sector to pay themselves substantially over market and hide it from the public for a decade or two.
The private sector (other than our foolish auto industry) has moved aggressively to replace defined-benefit pension programs with 401K and equivalent programs. By doing so the companies know today what their costs actually are and the responsibility for managing the investment going forward lies with the employee.
These public pension programs typically pay the retiree based on their last few years income. So given the formulas, the employees predictably “game” the system as you and I would do. They work extra overtime and they work hard to get promotions their last couple of years because they know that every dollar they earn in the last couple years pays back multiple times.
Is it any surprise that the average private employee in California today earns about $45,000 per year (including benefits) compared to the average public employee earning about $85,000?
Not only could this problem easily bankrupt many local governments, the US government (though the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation) guarantees nearly 44 million Americans and 29,400 pension plans. What are the chances that our government is charging and setting aside enough to cover all the future problems? Somewhere between slim and none. Another unfunded liability for our Federal government.
Pension programs in the private sector used to be the rule. But they installed new 401k programs, froze the benefits and changed for the better. Do you hear any discussion of government at any level making this fundamental change?
Saturday, July 18, 2009
New home construction starts increase
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/07/18/BU9L18QSTU.DTL&type=business
Most of the media broadcasts with optimism when new home contstruction increases like it just did (see link to article). But why? The US does not need more homes. Folks are forgetting simple supply and demand concepts. The more homes we build the less they are worth (all other things being equal).
As a country we need to find other things to build and create than new homes. Building homes today may create more contstruction jobs in the short-term but what do we have when the new homes are completed - an even greater surplus of homes than we have now.
When we find ourselfes in a hole, let's stop digging!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
