When I do not have an answer to a question I often will start with what Charles Krauthammer's discussion on a topic. In today's column, Mr. Krauthammer suggests Tehran is about to crack knowing economic sanctions are upon them.
I agree economic sanctions are feared, for reasons Mr. Krauthammer sights, as their shaky reign due to the folks in Iran feel the mullah's control of the country is not best for them. There have been protests in the recent past from namely Iranian students for a revolution.
Mr Krauthammer also says military action would be feared much more than economic sanctions. And why would it not?
If Iran is sweating over the idea the EU, UN or most importantly the US is serious about them not having nuclear capability on any level, this fear comes primarily from the fear of US decision making. Those who cheer loudly for their disdain for the US may or may not have a credible reason for their hatred. They may President Bush for equally as justifiable/unjustified reasons. President Bush has made a name for himself in the international community. He does what he says he is going to do. President Bush is not afraid to make decisions whether they turn out as planned or otherwise. Quoting Charles Krauthammer said, "Mark my words." Unilateralism in the face of arguable complacency may be reason to hate President Bush, but I think it is fear from Iran and jealousy from the EU.
Friday, May 26, 2006
Wednesday, May 17, 2006
Senate Passes Boarder Wall
It was a great day for this country, the Senate passed a border wall bill for 370 miles of triple fence. It passed by more than a 5 to 1 ratio.
Dick Durban from New York said the wall would just hurt relations with Mexico. With this comment I believe he is pandering to a small group of his constituents or possibly just trying to look strong for them, when he has no ideas of his own.
I caught the middle to end of an interview yesterday on Hugh Hewitt's evening radio show... an individual who was being interviewed explained a 3 layer wall would consist of a combination of actual wall structure, long ditches (anti-vehicle crossing) and digital equipment for surveillance.
This individual stated there is not a need for a 2000 mile wall from California to Texas due to many parts of the southern US/Mexico border have geographic barriers such as the Rio Grande River and cliffs which in some places in Texas grow 200 feet just inside the US. Crossing at these points is nearly impossible for an illegal alien, therefore would rarely be attempted. The actual triple fence would be constructed inside and on the flanks of metro areas of border towns.
Three cheers for the Senate and the President!
Dick Durban from New York said the wall would just hurt relations with Mexico. With this comment I believe he is pandering to a small group of his constituents or possibly just trying to look strong for them, when he has no ideas of his own.
I caught the middle to end of an interview yesterday on Hugh Hewitt's evening radio show... an individual who was being interviewed explained a 3 layer wall would consist of a combination of actual wall structure, long ditches (anti-vehicle crossing) and digital equipment for surveillance.
This individual stated there is not a need for a 2000 mile wall from California to Texas due to many parts of the southern US/Mexico border have geographic barriers such as the Rio Grande River and cliffs which in some places in Texas grow 200 feet just inside the US. Crossing at these points is nearly impossible for an illegal alien, therefore would rarely be attempted. The actual triple fence would be constructed inside and on the flanks of metro areas of border towns.
Three cheers for the Senate and the President!
Monday, May 15, 2006
Time Magazine and Image Picking
Time Magazine published there 100 most influential people in the May 8, 2006 issue. Perhaps this not the first year Time has used other influential people to write about Time's chosen 100 influentials. An example is Laura Bush wrote the piece on the first Female President in Africa, Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf. Condoleeza Rice wrote in for Oprah Winfrey, and on the page previous to Oprah was Justice O'Connor on Chief Justice Roberts. I found most of the segments inspiring and not just a few paragraphs of canned ungenious.
One long critique of the May 8, 2005 issue;
George W Bush was front and center, covering the first two pages. James Carney was chosen to write on the President. Was his assessment balanced? A stretched... yes. The first 2/3 was a list of issues the President has handled. Mr Carney feels on all the issues he listed the president has mishandled. MoreThancorn could have written an article with similar content and painted a much different picture of the president. All the issues listed can be argued as current failures, successes or maybe there has not yet been enough time to decide.... these are truly up for debate. In order on page 52; "Hurricane Katrina, high gas prices, the Jack Abramoff scandal, the CIA leak investigation, the Dubai Ports deal, a bulging deficit and above all Iraq. An invasion the President sold as vital to national security is now seen by most Americans as a war of choice-and a bad choice."
The photo of the President is large and black and white. It shows detail which would have been lost in a color photo.
It is a face of a be-wildered President Bush. His photo shows up earlier on the cover, page 22, 31, and twice in the center fold. Bono comes close with possibly 4 pictures in this issue.
An observation could be made for marketing an image for which pictures are chosen to represent people in their articles. For the President capturing him in a whince, a sigh, upset or surprised would always project one image of the President.
Add the above pictures to an arguably negative article and you come away from reading the magazine with an awful feeling about our country and President.
If pictures of the president saluting troops in Iraq, shaking hands with the crowd, dinner with Mrs Bush, or a meeting with his friend Tony Blair were chosen, different image and feeling would have been invoked.
Compare these with three descenters of the president;
Hillary Clinton's segment. The picture, also black and white, softening the lines of a beautiful smile, showing calm and class.
One long critique of the May 8, 2005 issue;
George W Bush was front and center, covering the first two pages. James Carney was chosen to write on the President. Was his assessment balanced? A stretched... yes. The first 2/3 was a list of issues the President has handled. Mr Carney feels on all the issues he listed the president has mishandled. MoreThancorn could have written an article with similar content and painted a much different picture of the president. All the issues listed can be argued as current failures, successes or maybe there has not yet been enough time to decide.... these are truly up for debate. In order on page 52; "Hurricane Katrina, high gas prices, the Jack Abramoff scandal, the CIA leak investigation, the Dubai Ports deal, a bulging deficit and above all Iraq. An invasion the President sold as vital to national security is now seen by most Americans as a war of choice-and a bad choice."
The photo of the President is large and black and white. It shows detail which would have been lost in a color photo.
It is a face of a be-wildered President Bush. His photo shows up earlier on the cover, page 22, 31, and twice in the center fold. Bono comes close with possibly 4 pictures in this issue.
An observation could be made for marketing an image for which pictures are chosen to represent people in their articles. For the President capturing him in a whince, a sigh, upset or surprised would always project one image of the President.
Add the above pictures to an arguably negative article and you come away from reading the magazine with an awful feeling about our country and President.
If pictures of the president saluting troops in Iraq, shaking hands with the crowd, dinner with Mrs Bush, or a meeting with his friend Tony Blair were chosen, different image and feeling would have been invoked.
Compare these with three descenters of the president;
Hillary Clinton's segment. The picture, also black and white, softening the lines of a beautiful smile, showing calm and class.
This picture potrays what I see as expressions and emotions which are not often seen with the Senator from New York. The picture of a powerful Hillary Clinton is not donning the angry face I seen on C-Span. A face of condescending impatience, sometimes lightly filtered anger. The article about Senator Clinton was fare and right on the mark. Balanced, giving credit to her where credit is due; powerful due to her married name and a contender in 2008.
Al Gore is also an angry figure, with yelling and accusation filled speeches against the President. 
(Yelling) "He played on our fears!" Remembering a speech he gave about Iraq in which he was screaming.
He is being shown with a grin ear to ear. A greying and growing-wiser former Vice President. The article is everything one could hope; complimentary, endorsing, inspiring, bigger than himself "And in the meantime, Gore has decided, there's a planet to save" [global warming]. It appears the author of this article, Karen Tumulty, is not hiding her agenda.
Another glaring difference in image is of Hugo Chavez and his article written by a Tim Padgett... The artist draws a rendition of a Hugo rant, some weeks lasting 6-hours. The picture portrays power, aggression and anger to be respected. 
The article contains: "The rise of Venezuela's left wing President Hugo Chavez is a lesson in what can happen when the US disses an entire continent. After 9/11 when most Latin American nations refused to endorse the US invasion of Iraq, President Bush testily turned his back on the region....I sting those who rattle me."
A poor image was painted of the president with suttle picture choice. While those opposed to President Bush received flattoring pictures for their articles. It is my opinion the above pictures bring into question the objectivity of the Time editor.
It appears I have written about 2/3 of my post as negative this Time issue. Because it is not yet a balanced post, I will admit enjoyment in reading Time and would consider buying another issue in the future.
If there is another "got milk?" advertisement with Elizabeth Hurley, I will consider a subscription. Who's thirsty?
Saturday, May 06, 2006
Losing Focus For A Lady
My cycling teammates here in Arizona are 30 and 40 year old teenagers. There is an important race to which the team has planned to make a showing, here in 3 weeks. In the middle of our intensity our charismatic VP sees two young ladies we all know, cycling. They are possibly the best looking individuals to ever pull on a pair of spandex.
The team stops our training mid-stream and fakes two consecutive flat tires as to let Cleopatra (eligible) and Marilyn (married) catch up. As soon as they are within vocal range, we hear Cleo say to Mari "Did they just fake a flat so we would ride with them?"
We miss nothing, but they don't either.
The team stops our training mid-stream and fakes two consecutive flat tires as to let Cleopatra (eligible) and Marilyn (married) catch up. As soon as they are within vocal range, we hear Cleo say to Mari "Did they just fake a flat so we would ride with them?"
We miss nothing, but they don't either.
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
Larry Summers - His Questions Are Unanswered
Remember when Larry Summers, the former President of Harvard University, found himself in the middle of an uproar where he was being attacked by faculty at Harvard?
The speech which was the causation of the unwarranted turmoil can be read in it’s entirety at Underrepresented.
Wikpedia has included this in their information on Larry Summers:
Sex and Intelligence Controversy
In January 2005, Summers suggested at an economic conference that one of the causes of the fewer women than men in science and engineering professorships might be that fewer women than men had the very high levels of "intrinsic aptitude" that such jobs required.
Pressure from faculty and the media continued to where Larry Summers chose to step down from his post at the university.
This post is designed to provoke critical thought, and hopefully for opinions to be drawn, conclusions to be made.
Once the speech is read, below are excerpts which may be the most important parts of the speech which detail the dialogue and which lead to pressure by others on Summers and his eventually resignation.
“…It is after all not the case that the role of women in science is the only example of a group that is significantly underrepresented in an important activity and whose underrepresentation contributes to a shortage of role models for others who are considering being in that group. To take a set of diverse examples, the data will, I am confident, reveal that Catholics are substantially underrepresented in investment banking, which is an enormously high-paying profession in our society; that white men are very substantially underrepresented in the National Basketball Association; and that Jews are very substantially underrepresented in farming and in agriculture. These are all phenomena in which one observes underrepresentation, and I think it's important to try to think systematically and clinically about the reasons for underrepresentation….
There are three broad hypotheses about the sources of the very substantial disparities that this conference's papers document and have been documented before with respect to the presence of women in high-end scientific professions. One is what I would call the-I'll explain each of these in a few moments and comment on how important I think they are-the first is what I call the high-powered job hypothesis. The second is what I would call different availability of aptitude at the high end, and the third is what I would call different socialization and patterns of discrimination in a search….
…And here, you can get a fair distance, it seems to me, looking at a relatively simple hypothesis. It does appear that on many, many different human attributes-height, weight, propensity for criminality, overall IQ, mathematical ability, scientific ability-there is relatively clear evidence that whatever the difference in means-which can be debated-there is a difference in the standard deviation, and variability of a male and a female population. And that is true with respect to attributes that are and are not plausibly, culturally determined. If one supposes, as I think is reasonable, that if one is talking about physicists at a top twenty-five research university, one is not talking about people who are two standard deviations above the mean. And perhaps it's not even talking about somebody who is three standard deviations above the mean. But it's talking about people who are three and a half, four standard deviations above the mean in the one in 5,000, one in 10,000 class. Even small differences in the standard deviation will translate into very large differences in the available pool substantially out. I did a very crude calculation, which I'm sure was wrong and certainly was unsubtle, twenty different ways. I looked at the Xie and Shauman paper-looked at the book, rather-looked at the evidence on the sex ratios in the top 5% of twelfth graders. If you look at those-they're all over the map, depends on which test, whether it's math, or science, and so forth-but 50% women, one woman for every two men, would be a high-end estimate from their estimates….
Below are pieces taken from the Q&A after the speech.
LHS: ...My point was simply that the field of behavioral genetics had a revolution in the last fifteen years, and the principal thrust of that revolution was the discovery that a large number of things that people thought were due to socialization weren't, and were in fact due to more intrinsic human nature, and that set of discoveries, it seemed to me, ought to influence the way one thought about other areas where there was a perception of the importance of socialization. I wasn't at all trying to connect those studies to the particular experiences of women and minorities who were thinking about academic careers.
Q: Raising that particular issue, as a biologist, I neither believe in all genetic or all environment, that in fact behavior in any other country actually develops [unintelligible] interaction of those aspects. And I agree with you, in fact, that it is wrong-headed to just dismiss the biology. But to put too much weight to it is also incredibly wrong-headed, given the fact that had people actually had different kinds of opportunities, and different opportunities for socialization, there is good evidence to indicate in fact that it would have had different outcomes. I cite by way of research the [unintelligible] project in North Carolina, which essentially shows that, where every indicator with regard to mother's education, socioeconomic status, et cetera, would have left a kid in a particular place educationally, that, essentially, they are seeing totally different outcomes with regard to performance, being referred to special education, et cetera, so I think that there is some evidence on that particular side. The other issue is this whole question about objective versus subjective. I think that it is very difficult to have anything that is basically objective, and the work of [unintelligible] I think point out that in a case where you are actually trying to-this case from the Swedish Medical Council, where they were trying to identify very high-powered research opportunities for, I guess it was post-docs by that point, that indicated that essentially that it ended up with larger numbers of men than women. Two of the women who were basically in the affected group were able to utilize the transparency rules that were in place in Sweden, get access to the data, get access to the issues, and in fact, discovered that it was not as objective as everyone claimed, and that in fact, different standards were actually being used for the women as well as for the men, including the men's presence in sort of a central network, the kinds of journals that they had to publish in to be considered at the same level, so I think that there are pieces of research that begin to actually relate to this-yes, there is the need to look more carefully at a lot of these areas. I would-in addition looking at this whole question of the quality of marginal hires-I would also like to look at the quality of class one hires, in terms of seeing who disappoints, and what it was that they happened to be looking at and making judgments on, and then what the people could not deliver. So I think that there is a real great need on both sides to begin to talk about whether or not we can predict. I hate to use a sports metaphor, but I will. This is drawn basically from an example from Claude Steele, where he says, he starts by using free throws as a way of actually determining, who should-you've got to field a basketball team, and you clearly want the people who make ten out of ten, and you say, "Well, I may not want the people who make zero out of ten," but what about the people who make four out of ten. If you use that as the measure, Shaq will be left on the sidelines.
LHS: I understand. I think you're obviously right that there's no absolute objectivity, and you're-there's no question about that. My own instincts actually are that you could go wrong in a number of respects fetishizing objectivity for exactly the reasons that you suggest. There is a very simple and straightforward methodology that was used many years ago in the case of baseball. Somebody wrote a very powerful article about baseball, probably in the seventies, in which they basically said, "Look, it is true that if you look at people's salaries, and you control for their batting averages and their fielding averages and whatnot, whites and blacks are in the same salary once you control. It is also true that there are no black .240 hitters in the major leagues, that the only blacks who are in the major leagues are people who bat over .300-I'm exaggerating-and that is exactly what you'd predict on a model of discrimination, that because there's a natural bias against. And there's an absolute and clear prediction. The prediction is that if there's a discriminated-against group, that if you measure subsequent performance, their subsequent performance will be stronger than that of the non-discriminated-against group. And that's a simple prediction of a theory of discrimination. And it's a testable prediction of a theory of discrimination, and it would be a revolution, and it would be an enormously powerful finding in this field, to demonstrate, and I suspect there are contexts in which that can be demonstrated, but there's a straightforward methodology, it seems to me, for testing exactly that idea. I'm going to run out of time. But, let me take-if people ask very short questions, I will give very short answers.
It is important to point out, this reader believes the ideas presented by Larry Summers were designed solely for provoking critical thinking and then dialogue. The Q&A portion of the speech was fulfilling this, however based on the subsequent attacks by faculty and the media it brought an end to intelligent discussion.
When discussing the “Xie and Shauman paper”, Larry Summers invokes hard hitting questions and then proposes possible theories.
It is interesting to mention, while listening to the radio the last two weeks I was hearing radio commercials sponsored by the Girl Scouts. The first few times I heard these commercials I overlooked or more precisely did not overhear a related theme as to what Larry Summers had been proposing. Paraphrased, the Girl Scout commercial stated, “... by the 8th grade, girls lose interest in science...”
For argument sake and in defense of Mr Summers, this simple radio broadcast speaks volumes of the dialogue Mr Summers was attempting to begin and I feel the legitimacy of his ideas. For the question is still unanswered. Why are there fewer women than men in the top science positions?
The speech which was the causation of the unwarranted turmoil can be read in it’s entirety at Underrepresented.
Wikpedia has included this in their information on Larry Summers:
Sex and Intelligence Controversy
In January 2005, Summers suggested at an economic conference that one of the causes of the fewer women than men in science and engineering professorships might be that fewer women than men had the very high levels of "intrinsic aptitude" that such jobs required.
Pressure from faculty and the media continued to where Larry Summers chose to step down from his post at the university.
This post is designed to provoke critical thought, and hopefully for opinions to be drawn, conclusions to be made.
Once the speech is read, below are excerpts which may be the most important parts of the speech which detail the dialogue and which lead to pressure by others on Summers and his eventually resignation.
“…It is after all not the case that the role of women in science is the only example of a group that is significantly underrepresented in an important activity and whose underrepresentation contributes to a shortage of role models for others who are considering being in that group. To take a set of diverse examples, the data will, I am confident, reveal that Catholics are substantially underrepresented in investment banking, which is an enormously high-paying profession in our society; that white men are very substantially underrepresented in the National Basketball Association; and that Jews are very substantially underrepresented in farming and in agriculture. These are all phenomena in which one observes underrepresentation, and I think it's important to try to think systematically and clinically about the reasons for underrepresentation….
There are three broad hypotheses about the sources of the very substantial disparities that this conference's papers document and have been documented before with respect to the presence of women in high-end scientific professions. One is what I would call the-I'll explain each of these in a few moments and comment on how important I think they are-the first is what I call the high-powered job hypothesis. The second is what I would call different availability of aptitude at the high end, and the third is what I would call different socialization and patterns of discrimination in a search….
…And here, you can get a fair distance, it seems to me, looking at a relatively simple hypothesis. It does appear that on many, many different human attributes-height, weight, propensity for criminality, overall IQ, mathematical ability, scientific ability-there is relatively clear evidence that whatever the difference in means-which can be debated-there is a difference in the standard deviation, and variability of a male and a female population. And that is true with respect to attributes that are and are not plausibly, culturally determined. If one supposes, as I think is reasonable, that if one is talking about physicists at a top twenty-five research university, one is not talking about people who are two standard deviations above the mean. And perhaps it's not even talking about somebody who is three standard deviations above the mean. But it's talking about people who are three and a half, four standard deviations above the mean in the one in 5,000, one in 10,000 class. Even small differences in the standard deviation will translate into very large differences in the available pool substantially out. I did a very crude calculation, which I'm sure was wrong and certainly was unsubtle, twenty different ways. I looked at the Xie and Shauman paper-looked at the book, rather-looked at the evidence on the sex ratios in the top 5% of twelfth graders. If you look at those-they're all over the map, depends on which test, whether it's math, or science, and so forth-but 50% women, one woman for every two men, would be a high-end estimate from their estimates….
Below are pieces taken from the Q&A after the speech.
LHS: ...My point was simply that the field of behavioral genetics had a revolution in the last fifteen years, and the principal thrust of that revolution was the discovery that a large number of things that people thought were due to socialization weren't, and were in fact due to more intrinsic human nature, and that set of discoveries, it seemed to me, ought to influence the way one thought about other areas where there was a perception of the importance of socialization. I wasn't at all trying to connect those studies to the particular experiences of women and minorities who were thinking about academic careers.
Q: Raising that particular issue, as a biologist, I neither believe in all genetic or all environment, that in fact behavior in any other country actually develops [unintelligible] interaction of those aspects. And I agree with you, in fact, that it is wrong-headed to just dismiss the biology. But to put too much weight to it is also incredibly wrong-headed, given the fact that had people actually had different kinds of opportunities, and different opportunities for socialization, there is good evidence to indicate in fact that it would have had different outcomes. I cite by way of research the [unintelligible] project in North Carolina, which essentially shows that, where every indicator with regard to mother's education, socioeconomic status, et cetera, would have left a kid in a particular place educationally, that, essentially, they are seeing totally different outcomes with regard to performance, being referred to special education, et cetera, so I think that there is some evidence on that particular side. The other issue is this whole question about objective versus subjective. I think that it is very difficult to have anything that is basically objective, and the work of [unintelligible] I think point out that in a case where you are actually trying to-this case from the Swedish Medical Council, where they were trying to identify very high-powered research opportunities for, I guess it was post-docs by that point, that indicated that essentially that it ended up with larger numbers of men than women. Two of the women who were basically in the affected group were able to utilize the transparency rules that were in place in Sweden, get access to the data, get access to the issues, and in fact, discovered that it was not as objective as everyone claimed, and that in fact, different standards were actually being used for the women as well as for the men, including the men's presence in sort of a central network, the kinds of journals that they had to publish in to be considered at the same level, so I think that there are pieces of research that begin to actually relate to this-yes, there is the need to look more carefully at a lot of these areas. I would-in addition looking at this whole question of the quality of marginal hires-I would also like to look at the quality of class one hires, in terms of seeing who disappoints, and what it was that they happened to be looking at and making judgments on, and then what the people could not deliver. So I think that there is a real great need on both sides to begin to talk about whether or not we can predict. I hate to use a sports metaphor, but I will. This is drawn basically from an example from Claude Steele, where he says, he starts by using free throws as a way of actually determining, who should-you've got to field a basketball team, and you clearly want the people who make ten out of ten, and you say, "Well, I may not want the people who make zero out of ten," but what about the people who make four out of ten. If you use that as the measure, Shaq will be left on the sidelines.
LHS: I understand. I think you're obviously right that there's no absolute objectivity, and you're-there's no question about that. My own instincts actually are that you could go wrong in a number of respects fetishizing objectivity for exactly the reasons that you suggest. There is a very simple and straightforward methodology that was used many years ago in the case of baseball. Somebody wrote a very powerful article about baseball, probably in the seventies, in which they basically said, "Look, it is true that if you look at people's salaries, and you control for their batting averages and their fielding averages and whatnot, whites and blacks are in the same salary once you control. It is also true that there are no black .240 hitters in the major leagues, that the only blacks who are in the major leagues are people who bat over .300-I'm exaggerating-and that is exactly what you'd predict on a model of discrimination, that because there's a natural bias against. And there's an absolute and clear prediction. The prediction is that if there's a discriminated-against group, that if you measure subsequent performance, their subsequent performance will be stronger than that of the non-discriminated-against group. And that's a simple prediction of a theory of discrimination. And it's a testable prediction of a theory of discrimination, and it would be a revolution, and it would be an enormously powerful finding in this field, to demonstrate, and I suspect there are contexts in which that can be demonstrated, but there's a straightforward methodology, it seems to me, for testing exactly that idea. I'm going to run out of time. But, let me take-if people ask very short questions, I will give very short answers.
It is important to point out, this reader believes the ideas presented by Larry Summers were designed solely for provoking critical thinking and then dialogue. The Q&A portion of the speech was fulfilling this, however based on the subsequent attacks by faculty and the media it brought an end to intelligent discussion.
When discussing the “Xie and Shauman paper”, Larry Summers invokes hard hitting questions and then proposes possible theories.
It is interesting to mention, while listening to the radio the last two weeks I was hearing radio commercials sponsored by the Girl Scouts. The first few times I heard these commercials I overlooked or more precisely did not overhear a related theme as to what Larry Summers had been proposing. Paraphrased, the Girl Scout commercial stated, “... by the 8th grade, girls lose interest in science...”
For argument sake and in defense of Mr Summers, this simple radio broadcast speaks volumes of the dialogue Mr Summers was attempting to begin and I feel the legitimacy of his ideas. For the question is still unanswered. Why are there fewer women than men in the top science positions?
Tuesday, May 02, 2006
Bolivia Bungles Oil
Bolivian President, Evo Morales may be portrayed in this New York Times article as a "liberator". At least this is what the caption declares. However it would be interesting to know what all the folks on the street in front of him think. What does the average Bolivian feel is appropriate regarding their oil reserves. Keep the reserves open to (liberlization) foreign investment and development or nationalize (government control) the oil industry?
It is easy for the poor to look for a government fix. This is true for poor in any country including the US. Those who have either fell on hard times, or have learned to be helpless and hopeless may dream about either winning the lottery or receiving a check in the mail from their government. This may be exactly what the Bolivian people asked for en-masse.
A decision to nationalize an industry is the first step in wrecking an economy. Communist USSR did just this with every part of their economy. This contributed to some of the worst poverty the world has seen. The proletarians of Marxist ideals were hundreds of millions of peasant farmers and factory workers + millions of slave laborers. This system does not work. It breeds poverty. While a ruling class of elite beaucrats make all the decisions and live in wealth.
If I could send 1 million history books to Bolivian elementary and high schools, maybe we could save the country in 20 more years.
Bolivia may be doomed to go the same road as Hugo Chavez and his Argentina. A tanking economy and fleeing investors. These countries cannot make it on their own, or even just trading among themselves only.
It is easy for the poor to look for a government fix. This is true for poor in any country including the US. Those who have either fell on hard times, or have learned to be helpless and hopeless may dream about either winning the lottery or receiving a check in the mail from their government. This may be exactly what the Bolivian people asked for en-masse.
A decision to nationalize an industry is the first step in wrecking an economy. Communist USSR did just this with every part of their economy. This contributed to some of the worst poverty the world has seen. The proletarians of Marxist ideals were hundreds of millions of peasant farmers and factory workers + millions of slave laborers. This system does not work. It breeds poverty. While a ruling class of elite beaucrats make all the decisions and live in wealth.
If I could send 1 million history books to Bolivian elementary and high schools, maybe we could save the country in 20 more years.
Bolivia may be doomed to go the same road as Hugo Chavez and his Argentina. A tanking economy and fleeing investors. These countries cannot make it on their own, or even just trading among themselves only.
Thursday, April 20, 2006
Chinese President, Falun Gong
While the President of China visited the White House, a member of the press and member of a Falun Gong, stated to President Hu "... you days are numbered..."
Need to research Falun Gong.
Need to research Falun Gong.
Thursday, April 13, 2006
Alarmists and Global Warming
An "alarmist" global warming article published by Reuters, April 11, 2006. The article says the study brings even more proof of the negative effects of global warming. Thousands and even tens of thousands of extinct plant and animal species. This would be due to many species not being able to "escape" to a closer proximity to the poles.
How many plant and animal species went extinct every 100 years prior to the 1940's (prior to massive industrialization globally)?
What if there was global cooling by 1 or 2 degrees over the next 100 years. Would this not cause similar extinctions. Plants and animals would have to cluster around the equators.
I believe animals will adapt quite well. The Armidillo, of which most people probably believe to be a warmer climate creature (Texas is the first state I think of when I think about Armidillos), has been adapting to cooler and cooler climates. Most recently it is adapting to Continental Climates, specifically Indiana. About 6 years ago, the first Armidillo was spotted in southern Indiana, near Evansville. About 5 years ago I saw my first Armidillo road kill in the suburbs of Indianapolis.
Granted, the summers in Indiana are hot and humid, so I believe the Armidillo would enjoy based on it's history, however the winters in Indiana are nothing less than brutal. Temps in the evenings consistently fall into the single digits and teens from typically December through Februrary. January will see a few weeks of negative single and double digits with windchill recorded in -20, -30 or colder.
Global Warming? Why then has Russia this past winter seen record colds country wide? Why has Phoenix, Arizona been unseasonably cool and rainy over the last 4 weeks? Why, when you take a tour of the Hoover Dam near Henderson, NV do the Rangers tell you, "We see typical 9 year drought, rain patterns. It has been the case since the dam was built. They anticipate the end of the southwest's drought in the next year or two.
Global Warming I surmize will be a topic only found in newspaper archives in the relatively near future.
How many plant and animal species went extinct every 100 years prior to the 1940's (prior to massive industrialization globally)?
What if there was global cooling by 1 or 2 degrees over the next 100 years. Would this not cause similar extinctions. Plants and animals would have to cluster around the equators.
I believe animals will adapt quite well. The Armidillo, of which most people probably believe to be a warmer climate creature (Texas is the first state I think of when I think about Armidillos), has been adapting to cooler and cooler climates. Most recently it is adapting to Continental Climates, specifically Indiana. About 6 years ago, the first Armidillo was spotted in southern Indiana, near Evansville. About 5 years ago I saw my first Armidillo road kill in the suburbs of Indianapolis.
Granted, the summers in Indiana are hot and humid, so I believe the Armidillo would enjoy based on it's history, however the winters in Indiana are nothing less than brutal. Temps in the evenings consistently fall into the single digits and teens from typically December through Februrary. January will see a few weeks of negative single and double digits with windchill recorded in -20, -30 or colder.
Global Warming? Why then has Russia this past winter seen record colds country wide? Why has Phoenix, Arizona been unseasonably cool and rainy over the last 4 weeks? Why, when you take a tour of the Hoover Dam near Henderson, NV do the Rangers tell you, "We see typical 9 year drought, rain patterns. It has been the case since the dam was built. They anticipate the end of the southwest's drought in the next year or two.
Global Warming I surmize will be a topic only found in newspaper archives in the relatively near future.
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
EXXON Does Not Believe Global Warming
June 2005, This article was published. Today an MIT professor wrote an article in the Wall Street Journal questioning the legitimacy of Global Warming. Will try to find and link.
The voices of dissent is rising toward man-made temperature rises.
The voices of dissent is rising toward man-made temperature rises.
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
Has Global Warming Cooled?
According to an article written in the London Telegraph by Prof Bob Carter, geologist at James Cook University, Queensland. The temperature of the earth has been nearly stationary over the last 8 years. If measured with utmost accuracy, it has actually cooled slightly.
Monday, April 10, 2006
Quiet Lips Are Not Heard
Are there just as many Americans of Latino and Hispanic descent who disagree with the current rally's?
Today’s Arizona Republic posted an article on the front page. The article’s subject was one of a much different picture painted of the marches around the nation for “immigrant rights.”
In a 180 degree turn from other mass media, the AZ Republic wrote an article “Migrant issue divides Latinos”.
The article states there are Latino’s who oppose amnesty or anything near to it for illegal immigrants.
The articles speaks to a gentleman from the Center for Immigration Studies and a local Phoenix resident. They state many current, legal US citizens who are Latino are having to compete for jobs and houses. This is not the important issue here.
Today’s march in Arizona was expected to be between 50,000-100,000. Like previous marches for these same causes, there would be some who know why they are there and others just wanting to be a part of something without rhyme or reason. The core issues here are;
1) These folks are here by illegal means
2) Two weeks ago they marched with Mexican flags. Then realized it really t’d off legal citizens of the country, so for today’s march, coincidentally every flag was The Stars and Stripes.
3) Many of the illegal aliens are using our health care systems, costing taxpayers billions, most notable in California yet it is without argument a national cost which tax payer Joe is writing the check.
4) Now they march down our city streets protesting, demanding “immigrant rights”.
This country already has immigrant rights. It is called legal citizenship.
These protests in Phoenix today, made traffic more than difficult from before 12 noon to after 6pm for the entire city. The businesses (including restaurants and offices) were effected by this march have lost probably hundreds of thousands of dollars in business and man hours. People trying to get home on the interstate today in Phoenix will be taking longer to do so, this means less time with family. If these 100,000 people were at the rally, then they definitely were not adding to the economic engine from which they have the audacity to demand benefit.
I spoke with my father just a few minutes ago. He coincidentally reinforced the AZ Republic article in his experience this evening with marches in Indianapolis. He was not able to leave work for a half hour due to the rally. He stated it was peaceful. It was just causing disruption.
The AZ Republic bungled the sub-title, "Dissenting voices drowned out by pro-immigrant rallies". What is this really about? Is it not about citizenship for 11 million illegal immigrants?
Whatever your opinion thus far on this issue, read Charles Krauthammer’s opinion.
Today’s Arizona Republic posted an article on the front page. The article’s subject was one of a much different picture painted of the marches around the nation for “immigrant rights.”
In a 180 degree turn from other mass media, the AZ Republic wrote an article “Migrant issue divides Latinos”.
The article states there are Latino’s who oppose amnesty or anything near to it for illegal immigrants.
The articles speaks to a gentleman from the Center for Immigration Studies and a local Phoenix resident. They state many current, legal US citizens who are Latino are having to compete for jobs and houses. This is not the important issue here.
Today’s march in Arizona was expected to be between 50,000-100,000. Like previous marches for these same causes, there would be some who know why they are there and others just wanting to be a part of something without rhyme or reason. The core issues here are;
1) These folks are here by illegal means
2) Two weeks ago they marched with Mexican flags. Then realized it really t’d off legal citizens of the country, so for today’s march, coincidentally every flag was The Stars and Stripes.
3) Many of the illegal aliens are using our health care systems, costing taxpayers billions, most notable in California yet it is without argument a national cost which tax payer Joe is writing the check.
4) Now they march down our city streets protesting, demanding “immigrant rights”.
This country already has immigrant rights. It is called legal citizenship.
These protests in Phoenix today, made traffic more than difficult from before 12 noon to after 6pm for the entire city. The businesses (including restaurants and offices) were effected by this march have lost probably hundreds of thousands of dollars in business and man hours. People trying to get home on the interstate today in Phoenix will be taking longer to do so, this means less time with family. If these 100,000 people were at the rally, then they definitely were not adding to the economic engine from which they have the audacity to demand benefit.
I spoke with my father just a few minutes ago. He coincidentally reinforced the AZ Republic article in his experience this evening with marches in Indianapolis. He was not able to leave work for a half hour due to the rally. He stated it was peaceful. It was just causing disruption.
The AZ Republic bungled the sub-title, "Dissenting voices drowned out by pro-immigrant rallies". What is this really about? Is it not about citizenship for 11 million illegal immigrants?
Whatever your opinion thus far on this issue, read Charles Krauthammer’s opinion.
Monday, April 03, 2006
A Belgian Discussion
On a weekly ride on Saturday morning, the route is always through the “Foothills” neighborhood in Phoenix. It is South of South Mountain. The ride includes a Pecos Road which is a straight, but rolling 7.5 mile road. Typically the group does repeated loops in this area for the Saturday training ride.
On the ride this past April 1 was a Belgian triathlete named Lucky. He was participating in the April 9 Ironman Arizona in Tempe, AZ.
He joined the group on about the second lap. It was apparent he was competing in the event due to his specific bike and he had on racing wheels. Typically a cyclist does not do a lot of training on a set of “Zipp” brand wheels, especially if the rear wheel is a “disc”.
After a couple more laps with the group, Lucky and I decided we would continue on for 2 additional hours. As we rode on, we talked about the US and Belgium, comparing and contrasting.
It was interesting to know Belgians like just about everything American; cars, clothes, beer (some), TV shows.
“Lost” and “Pimp My Ride” are popular shows. It was surprising to him to see Digital TV with 200+ stations… he said in Belgium they may have 37 or so.
Lucky also thought was surprised to see so many Hummers. “In Belgium there may be 1 you see in a month.” He said “In the US, you see 10 each day.”
I told him Americans then compare to Belgians regarding goods. Americans typically like most anything made in Europe, wines, clothes, cars... Americans like Belgian beer.
Lucky said it is well known in Belgium, the Americans are close to or already making better beer than Belgians. I told him it is likely America is just changing and using similar recipes as the Belgians and other Europeans… this may be where we learned.. Lucky said though, it is known the Americans are making the beer better now…
Lucky is 33 year old who lives in a more affluent area in Belgium. We were comparing costs of living, taxes etc… He said Belgians pay close to 50% of their income in taxes. He also said the cost of living is pretty high. An average 3 room apartment would probably cost about $600/month. This appeared to be reasonable until he said this is about half of his take home income each month. He works for the Belgian government in some fashion. He said he makes a pretty good living for Belgium.
Belgium has socialized health care. He pays $10/visit to any doctor. Also pays small amount for prescriptions. I told him I pay 28% in federal taxes and combine probably pay 33-35% taxes. We agreed Belgians probably are still paying for their health care through the high tax rate.
He said many Belgians want to go to the US. They believe they can do better here than they are in Belgium. They think if they did something similar in the US as they are in Belgium, they would be more wealthy in the US.
After thinking about this more today, I think the pay may or may not be better for similar work, however the most important difference is two-fold, lower taxes and more choices. Any Belgian who spoke English as well as Lucky could come to American and choose from a seemingly infinite number of jobs.
We also discussed terrorism and the War in Iraq. Lucky said after 9/11, Belgians were probably just as scare as Americans. They all saw how vulnerable any country could be. He said the terrorists are absolutely crazy people. You can not discuss anything with them. They want to die and go to heaven for their religion. He agreed most Muslims are not like this, however enough terrorists are causing all to suffer.
He said he agreed with the decision to go to War in Iraq. He thought it was the right thing to do. He said many Belgians also thought it was the right thing to do. He also brought up how important it was for Belgium and Europe when the US saved them in WWI and WWII. He said it would be such a different world if it were not for the Americans. He says he thinks some people forget this.
He also agreed the US has a good track record. They are not emperialists. The US wants what is best for the US and this just so happens to coincide with what is typically best for all nations.
On the ride this past April 1 was a Belgian triathlete named Lucky. He was participating in the April 9 Ironman Arizona in Tempe, AZ.
He joined the group on about the second lap. It was apparent he was competing in the event due to his specific bike and he had on racing wheels. Typically a cyclist does not do a lot of training on a set of “Zipp” brand wheels, especially if the rear wheel is a “disc”.
After a couple more laps with the group, Lucky and I decided we would continue on for 2 additional hours. As we rode on, we talked about the US and Belgium, comparing and contrasting.
It was interesting to know Belgians like just about everything American; cars, clothes, beer (some), TV shows.
“Lost” and “Pimp My Ride” are popular shows. It was surprising to him to see Digital TV with 200+ stations… he said in Belgium they may have 37 or so.
Lucky also thought was surprised to see so many Hummers. “In Belgium there may be 1 you see in a month.” He said “In the US, you see 10 each day.”
I told him Americans then compare to Belgians regarding goods. Americans typically like most anything made in Europe, wines, clothes, cars... Americans like Belgian beer.
Lucky said it is well known in Belgium, the Americans are close to or already making better beer than Belgians. I told him it is likely America is just changing and using similar recipes as the Belgians and other Europeans… this may be where we learned.. Lucky said though, it is known the Americans are making the beer better now…
Lucky is 33 year old who lives in a more affluent area in Belgium. We were comparing costs of living, taxes etc… He said Belgians pay close to 50% of their income in taxes. He also said the cost of living is pretty high. An average 3 room apartment would probably cost about $600/month. This appeared to be reasonable until he said this is about half of his take home income each month. He works for the Belgian government in some fashion. He said he makes a pretty good living for Belgium.
Belgium has socialized health care. He pays $10/visit to any doctor. Also pays small amount for prescriptions. I told him I pay 28% in federal taxes and combine probably pay 33-35% taxes. We agreed Belgians probably are still paying for their health care through the high tax rate.
He said many Belgians want to go to the US. They believe they can do better here than they are in Belgium. They think if they did something similar in the US as they are in Belgium, they would be more wealthy in the US.
After thinking about this more today, I think the pay may or may not be better for similar work, however the most important difference is two-fold, lower taxes and more choices. Any Belgian who spoke English as well as Lucky could come to American and choose from a seemingly infinite number of jobs.
We also discussed terrorism and the War in Iraq. Lucky said after 9/11, Belgians were probably just as scare as Americans. They all saw how vulnerable any country could be. He said the terrorists are absolutely crazy people. You can not discuss anything with them. They want to die and go to heaven for their religion. He agreed most Muslims are not like this, however enough terrorists are causing all to suffer.
He said he agreed with the decision to go to War in Iraq. He thought it was the right thing to do. He said many Belgians also thought it was the right thing to do. He also brought up how important it was for Belgium and Europe when the US saved them in WWI and WWII. He said it would be such a different world if it were not for the Americans. He says he thinks some people forget this.
He also agreed the US has a good track record. They are not emperialists. The US wants what is best for the US and this just so happens to coincide with what is typically best for all nations.
Tuesday, March 28, 2006
The French Have It All Right?
On each visit to the grocery store, a child seated in the cart, prods their parent to buy a piece of candy. By the time the child is 3 years old the parent may have heard the child's request for candy as many times as the child has been to the grocery store. Each time the child asks, he may do some whining, may play the "cute" card, or a number of other strategies to get the prize.
If the parent stays firm and does not buy the candy, the child will develop an understanding of the candy will not be purchased, this time or anytime.
If the parent decides to give in one day and buys a Lolly-pop for the child, the child wins their first little battle. The child may not understand it to be a battle, but they remember. They will again ask for candy at the next visit to the store. If the parent establishes a pattern of -trip to the grocery store = candy for child-, the habit is formed and the child will expect the candy. If the parent decides on no candy for the next visit, the child may throw a fit.
What is happening in Paris, France right now may be more than one issue coming to a head. However based on the current news stories on the riots; 1 million protestors hit the streets...some riotting and violence... police had to break up with tear gas, water cannon and rubber pellets.. fires are being set... it may or may not continue and worsen as the recent riots in Paris a short time ago.
1/3 of all teachers in France were on strike today. Nearly all transportation; bus, train, plane were shut down due to strikes. The economy may have come to a halt in France.
Why are these protestors angry? A new labor law allowing companies to fire an employee for any reason if the person is;
1) Less than 26 years old and
2) Has been with the company less than 2 years
The French have been spoiled like a child wanting candy, from laws for 35 hour work weeks. The country has seen little or no economic growth for a number of years. The population is stagnant or falling each year. The bill for French social welfare will eventually drive up taxes and drive away the businesses remaining.
Just just week I listened as an associate (we will name her Denise) stating how "Europe" does so many things better than the US. They are more "advanced" in their "thinking" and "socially" and their "health care." Denise also claims to be a champion of hatred toward minorities, bigotry and prejudice. Yet, she advised a small group of us in one discussion, "I don't date American men... they are all too worried about their money... who's going to take it from them... I only have dated foreign born men." So much for not being a champion.
I will make a generalization of her "kind". She supports France and Europes "ideals" blindly. When asked to explain the above: "Europe is more advanced" and "I don't date American men..." she had no defense and repeatedly chose either to ramble or change the subject. The conversation with Denise had no real meaning. It sounded like a sound-bite laden speech at a rally. Rhetoric only, with one person at the mic.
This I believe, is a typical example of the "progressive" supporter. Frankly it is often mindless repeating of monologue spoken by someone else.
Europe is beautiful with history. I have family just outside of Hanover, Germany. It is a great place to vacation. I would love to live there sometime. Only, I do not want to work 5 months of the year to pay my tax bill.
Perhaps they should start being reasonable like Americans. If we get fired, often times we deserved it. Pick yourself off the floor and find another way to feed yourself.
If the parent stays firm and does not buy the candy, the child will develop an understanding of the candy will not be purchased, this time or anytime.
If the parent decides to give in one day and buys a Lolly-pop for the child, the child wins their first little battle. The child may not understand it to be a battle, but they remember. They will again ask for candy at the next visit to the store. If the parent establishes a pattern of -trip to the grocery store = candy for child-, the habit is formed and the child will expect the candy. If the parent decides on no candy for the next visit, the child may throw a fit.
What is happening in Paris, France right now may be more than one issue coming to a head. However based on the current news stories on the riots; 1 million protestors hit the streets...some riotting and violence... police had to break up with tear gas, water cannon and rubber pellets.. fires are being set... it may or may not continue and worsen as the recent riots in Paris a short time ago.
1/3 of all teachers in France were on strike today. Nearly all transportation; bus, train, plane were shut down due to strikes. The economy may have come to a halt in France.
Why are these protestors angry? A new labor law allowing companies to fire an employee for any reason if the person is;
1) Less than 26 years old and
2) Has been with the company less than 2 years
The French have been spoiled like a child wanting candy, from laws for 35 hour work weeks. The country has seen little or no economic growth for a number of years. The population is stagnant or falling each year. The bill for French social welfare will eventually drive up taxes and drive away the businesses remaining.
Just just week I listened as an associate (we will name her Denise) stating how "Europe" does so many things better than the US. They are more "advanced" in their "thinking" and "socially" and their "health care." Denise also claims to be a champion of hatred toward minorities, bigotry and prejudice. Yet, she advised a small group of us in one discussion, "I don't date American men... they are all too worried about their money... who's going to take it from them... I only have dated foreign born men." So much for not being a champion.
I will make a generalization of her "kind". She supports France and Europes "ideals" blindly. When asked to explain the above: "Europe is more advanced" and "I don't date American men..." she had no defense and repeatedly chose either to ramble or change the subject. The conversation with Denise had no real meaning. It sounded like a sound-bite laden speech at a rally. Rhetoric only, with one person at the mic.
This I believe, is a typical example of the "progressive" supporter. Frankly it is often mindless repeating of monologue spoken by someone else.
Europe is beautiful with history. I have family just outside of Hanover, Germany. It is a great place to vacation. I would love to live there sometime. Only, I do not want to work 5 months of the year to pay my tax bill.
Perhaps they should start being reasonable like Americans. If we get fired, often times we deserved it. Pick yourself off the floor and find another way to feed yourself.
Monday, March 27, 2006
Does Moussai Want Martyrdom?
Today Zacarias Moussaoui confessed to being prevy of the attacks of September 11, 2001 prior to their follow through. According to the FoxNews article this could give him the death penalty.
It is interesting to read, as the Moussaoui's defense attorney attempted to keep him from incriminating himself, Moussaoui confirmed prior facts and actually gave the prosecution additional evidence for their case.
It is interesting to read, as the Moussaoui's defense attorney attempted to keep him from incriminating himself, Moussaoui confirmed prior facts and actually gave the prosecution additional evidence for their case.
Thursday, March 16, 2006
Iran Requests Talks with US, Iraq is Focus
The article by the AP is telling. It starts out possibly misleading, saying Iraq is slipping closer to civil war. It is hard to tell whether the writer of the article is in Iraq or spent any time there. I question the authority to make such a statement.
However the rest of the article is worth reading, twice. Iran has offered to begin talks with the US about Iraq. As the article quotes, this could lead to easing of tensions, and more talks later about Iran's nuclear program.
Let us hope the Iran offer is not a calculated, "give an inch and take it back" ploy as it was with Iraq prior to 2003.
What is even more impressive is Iran as asked to speak directly with the United States and China/Russia both encouraged Iran to do so!
This could be the most important event yet in this year's accumulating history.
However the rest of the article is worth reading, twice. Iran has offered to begin talks with the US about Iraq. As the article quotes, this could lead to easing of tensions, and more talks later about Iran's nuclear program.
Let us hope the Iran offer is not a calculated, "give an inch and take it back" ploy as it was with Iraq prior to 2003.
What is even more impressive is Iran as asked to speak directly with the United States and China/Russia both encouraged Iran to do so!
This could be the most important event yet in this year's accumulating history.
The article by the AP is telling. It starts out possibly misleading, saying Iraq is slipping closer to civil war. It is hard to tell whether the writer of the article is in Iraq or spent any time there. I question the authority to make such a statement.
However the rest of the article is worth reading, twice. Iran has offered to begin talks with the US about Iraq. As the article quotes, this could lead to easing of tensions, and more talks later about Iran's nuclear program.
Let us hope the Iran offer is not a calculated, "give an inch and take it back" ploy as it was with Iraq prior to 2003.
What is even more impressive is Iran as asked to speak directly with the United States and China/Russia both encouraged Iran to do so!
This could be the most important event yet in this year's accumulating history.
However the rest of the article is worth reading, twice. Iran has offered to begin talks with the US about Iraq. As the article quotes, this could lead to easing of tensions, and more talks later about Iran's nuclear program.
Let us hope the Iran offer is not a calculated, "give an inch and take it back" ploy as it was with Iraq prior to 2003.
What is even more impressive is Iran as asked to speak directly with the United States and China/Russia both encouraged Iran to do so!
This could be the most important event yet in this year's accumulating history.
Friday, March 10, 2006
Dubai Ports World - Giving Up Contract
The DP World issue may only be at best a sore spot between the UAE and the United States. I also doubt it will last long. Let us say bad feelings will be around for a few months or a year. Maybe. The UAE is apparently has a good many business savvy folks.
Oil has been the mid-East's bread/butter for some years. They know it will come to an end one day. The closer everyone else comes to using alternative fuels on every car sold, the closer they are to selling oil for $20/barrel.
They know this. We know this. The UAE is trying to "diversify" their portfolio. In the coming years, other mid-East nation governments and/or citizens will likely be doing the same... looking to the United States and other countries for investment opportunities. The UAE is already working on their smooth transition from a nation with most of it's eggs in the oil basket to eggs in a lot of baskets. Good on ya UAE.
OPEC will eventually run dry. The UAE is just leading the way for a changed mid-East.
Then changing economy of the mid-East will be a heavy influence on the democratization of the region. Freer trade may coincide with growing democratic influence.
Oil has been the mid-East's bread/butter for some years. They know it will come to an end one day. The closer everyone else comes to using alternative fuels on every car sold, the closer they are to selling oil for $20/barrel.
They know this. We know this. The UAE is trying to "diversify" their portfolio. In the coming years, other mid-East nation governments and/or citizens will likely be doing the same... looking to the United States and other countries for investment opportunities. The UAE is already working on their smooth transition from a nation with most of it's eggs in the oil basket to eggs in a lot of baskets. Good on ya UAE.
OPEC will eventually run dry. The UAE is just leading the way for a changed mid-East.
Then changing economy of the mid-East will be a heavy influence on the democratization of the region. Freer trade may coincide with growing democratic influence.
Tuesday, March 07, 2006
Freed Up
Sebastian Mallaby says, “Globalization scares people. Security threats scare people.”
Do we need to be “scared” of globalization?
Globalization brings many changes, however a core concern is the following: The company reaps higher profits by laying off all the American workers and hires cheap, overseas labor. Today this scare seems to be morphing into a Chinese flavor. Until now, the post-NAFTA “scare” has come with a Mexican flavor.
There are a number of issues which have risen from this topic. The debatable topics have been;
1) trade deficits
2) unfair competition
3) job cuts
4) trade wars
5) tarriffs
6) protectionism
Every person and nation seems to have an opinion of how to stop the flow of jobs out of the United States. One must pose the most important question? Which economy has been time-tested by providing for it’s citizenry? This economy must have the ability to invent new jobs when others are lost. By using nearly all economic indicators the US economy has proven itself well.
What is happening on the global stage is a “freeing up” of trade. This freeing up of trade is growing the economy and per capita incomes of all participatory nations. According to the American Enterprise Institute, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has brought growing wealth to the three countries involved; Canada, United States and Mexico.
There is always going to be a trade surplus or deficit between any two countries. A trade deficit for one is a surplus for the other. A trade deficit is looked upon in this country with such disdain. Why?
A more wealthy economy will naturally have more expendable income per person than a country which is less wealthy. Because the United States has 260+ million population and the 4th highest per capita income of all nations, this combination allows for the largest buying power of any nation. Are we then predisposed to having trade deficits with other nations?
All economies must start somewhere. Again I say look at the United States economy and how it has progressed. 100 years ago we were heavily agrarian. With the industrial revolution and the invention of internal combustion, this allowed for fewer farmers to care for more land. This freed up more farmers to go to the factories. Factory work is now moving to automation or to third world countries. Once factory workers must find new work. Their sons and daughters then moved into services, chemicals, research and computer related industries. As we vet the factory jobs to other nations we gain more available bodies for technology jobs. The United States will continue to pass some jobs to other nations to free up Americans for the next generation of industry. This vetting will continue no doubt.
With regard to the low-wage Chinese taking high paying American jobs, let us use an example;
The year is 2006. The Barker family lives in a modest home with an half-acre of yard in suburban Atlanta, Georgia. The Barkers have decided to pay landscapers to mow their lawn.. The first landscaper contacted by phone is Jake. Jake explains his business opened in 2003. They do small to medium sized jobs. Jake quotes $116 for a 2 man crew at 2 hours labor to complete the ½ acre lot. This includes mowing the entire yard, edging the sidewalks and streets. Jake has a list of current and past customers very happy with his work.
Then the Barkers call a competing landscape firm, owned by George George immediately attempts to win the Barkers business. After listening to his pitch, it sounds as though George has similar equipment and capabilities as does Jake’s firm. George also has a list of happy customers, past and present. George is starting his second summer as a landscaper. George quotes $100 for the 2 man, 2 hour, ½ acre job.
Which landscaper will be Barkers hire? I believe most folks would hire George at $100.
Background to above:
Jake is a college graduate. He started his landscape company with two college roommates in 2003. They pooled their funds and opened up their landscaping business. They each earn $14/hour for labor. They must take into account the labor wage + supplies, fuel, wear and tear on the equipment in calculating their job quotes.
George is actually Jorge. Pronounced Hor-hay. George is originally from Columbia. He moved here with his family and needed to find work. He did so until he raised enough money to cover for a few months of wages and expenses for a landscaping company. He found a bank which entrusted him with a small business loan to purchase the equipment. He opened his business last summer, 2005. George does not have a high school education. He hired high school and college students to man his mowers. He pays them $10/hour.
All else equal, if we assume George and his workers do an effective job of mowing lawns, then he will likely maintain their current customer base. If they continue to provide an effective work product they may win new bids in the future as their reputation grows.
In the long term, if Jake’s firm mows lawns equally as well as George, then Jake and his roommates will lose their current customers to George. The eventual demise will be caused directly with either George’s decision to pay lower his labor costs, then making his product less expensive relative to Jake. Jake must then justify to his current customers and future customers why his work is worth $16 more per half acre job. If Jake is unable to justify the high costs, the business will suffer through lost clients moving to George.
Jake and his roommates agree they cannot cut the lawn of their customers any better then George. They also agree they are not willing to accept less than $14/hour in order to make their quotes more competitive.
Jake ends his business venture, sells his equipment and customer leads to George for a modest sum.
George is better off, with double the equipment, more customers and therefore the demand for his work justifying the hiring of 3 more workers. George’s reputation continues to build in the community and his phone begins ringing off the hook
At first look, Jake and his college friends are worse off while George is better off. Jake’s firm was well educated and they understood the risks of starting a business. To their discredit they would not accept lower wages to make their product more competitive. To their credit they have college degrees. They have recouped some of their capital through the sale of their equipment.
They found work at new employers while more funds are accrued for a new venture. They left the landscaping business with a failed firm. However they have gained invaluable business knowledge and this failed venture may have motivated the three to try it again…Next time perhaps in a different industry, better prepared. They were all degreed in computer programming. Maybe it will be in the computer science industry.
Here in lies the battle between American and China. The United States workforce is represented in Jake and China in George. It is obvious landscaping jobs are not being sent to Asia. But this example runs parallels of many industries once wholly contained in the United States. Chip makers, automobile manufacturers, many factory type jobs have left the United States.
The jobs have left due to the ability for Chinese workers to make a product equally as well or with near enough quality to find acceptance with the buying public. The scale tipper is the cost of each product made in China could be a fraction of a similarly US made product. If a company makes an equal product for less, or if they make an adequate product for substantially less, customers will gravitate toward this new supplier.
The important piece to remember; George continues doing what he does well and is satisfied with the income level he is receiving for his work. George hires 3 new students to work for his firm (this replaces the three jobs lost in Jake and his roommates.). Jake and his roommates would not work for less, therefore they are pushed out of an industry of which they are over qualified. They have the education and hopefully the motivation to take another risk in the future. Jake and his roommates were actually “freed up” to do something else. Something which potentially would be more financially lucrative and may require the education and skills they already have attained.
An economy can not have all the scientists and engineers “mowing grass”. Jobs should be filled, and in a free market are filled, by those qualified or accepting of the wage they will earn in a specific job. If they are not happy with the pay or it is not enough of a challenge, then eventually they will free up the job and search for something new.
Of all the nations, the United States should be least “scared” of globalization. Globalization is the free market finding the best use for all workers and resources. Before railroads there were parts of the nation segmented by geography. They could not actively participate in trade and the free market. This isolation changed with transportation improvements. The improvements caused a smaller version of globalization with the United States. If this economy is good for a state and a nation of states, why would it not be good for a world of nations?
The “freeing up” of a workforce to do something else is what drives an economy forward. Globalization is an opportunity for wealth. Wealth for developed and fledgling economies alike. It is a shame the nation is even debating the “China Card”. It is inquisitive and a shame Mr. Mallaby felt he had to spend his research and writing talent on a topic we should already understand.
Desirable Reading
Economics in One Lesson, Henry Hazlitt
Capitalism and Freedom, Milton Friedman
Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith
Google; “Austrian Economics” and “World Fact book”
Do we need to be “scared” of globalization?
Globalization brings many changes, however a core concern is the following: The company reaps higher profits by laying off all the American workers and hires cheap, overseas labor. Today this scare seems to be morphing into a Chinese flavor. Until now, the post-NAFTA “scare” has come with a Mexican flavor.
There are a number of issues which have risen from this topic. The debatable topics have been;
1) trade deficits
2) unfair competition
3) job cuts
4) trade wars
5) tarriffs
6) protectionism
Every person and nation seems to have an opinion of how to stop the flow of jobs out of the United States. One must pose the most important question? Which economy has been time-tested by providing for it’s citizenry? This economy must have the ability to invent new jobs when others are lost. By using nearly all economic indicators the US economy has proven itself well.
What is happening on the global stage is a “freeing up” of trade. This freeing up of trade is growing the economy and per capita incomes of all participatory nations. According to the American Enterprise Institute, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has brought growing wealth to the three countries involved; Canada, United States and Mexico.
There is always going to be a trade surplus or deficit between any two countries. A trade deficit for one is a surplus for the other. A trade deficit is looked upon in this country with such disdain. Why?
A more wealthy economy will naturally have more expendable income per person than a country which is less wealthy. Because the United States has 260+ million population and the 4th highest per capita income of all nations, this combination allows for the largest buying power of any nation. Are we then predisposed to having trade deficits with other nations?
All economies must start somewhere. Again I say look at the United States economy and how it has progressed. 100 years ago we were heavily agrarian. With the industrial revolution and the invention of internal combustion, this allowed for fewer farmers to care for more land. This freed up more farmers to go to the factories. Factory work is now moving to automation or to third world countries. Once factory workers must find new work. Their sons and daughters then moved into services, chemicals, research and computer related industries. As we vet the factory jobs to other nations we gain more available bodies for technology jobs. The United States will continue to pass some jobs to other nations to free up Americans for the next generation of industry. This vetting will continue no doubt.
With regard to the low-wage Chinese taking high paying American jobs, let us use an example;
The year is 2006. The Barker family lives in a modest home with an half-acre of yard in suburban Atlanta, Georgia. The Barkers have decided to pay landscapers to mow their lawn.. The first landscaper contacted by phone is Jake. Jake explains his business opened in 2003. They do small to medium sized jobs. Jake quotes $116 for a 2 man crew at 2 hours labor to complete the ½ acre lot. This includes mowing the entire yard, edging the sidewalks and streets. Jake has a list of current and past customers very happy with his work.
Then the Barkers call a competing landscape firm, owned by George George immediately attempts to win the Barkers business. After listening to his pitch, it sounds as though George has similar equipment and capabilities as does Jake’s firm. George also has a list of happy customers, past and present. George is starting his second summer as a landscaper. George quotes $100 for the 2 man, 2 hour, ½ acre job.
Which landscaper will be Barkers hire? I believe most folks would hire George at $100.
Background to above:
Jake is a college graduate. He started his landscape company with two college roommates in 2003. They pooled their funds and opened up their landscaping business. They each earn $14/hour for labor. They must take into account the labor wage + supplies, fuel, wear and tear on the equipment in calculating their job quotes.
George is actually Jorge. Pronounced Hor-hay. George is originally from Columbia. He moved here with his family and needed to find work. He did so until he raised enough money to cover for a few months of wages and expenses for a landscaping company. He found a bank which entrusted him with a small business loan to purchase the equipment. He opened his business last summer, 2005. George does not have a high school education. He hired high school and college students to man his mowers. He pays them $10/hour.
All else equal, if we assume George and his workers do an effective job of mowing lawns, then he will likely maintain their current customer base. If they continue to provide an effective work product they may win new bids in the future as their reputation grows.
In the long term, if Jake’s firm mows lawns equally as well as George, then Jake and his roommates will lose their current customers to George. The eventual demise will be caused directly with either George’s decision to pay lower his labor costs, then making his product less expensive relative to Jake. Jake must then justify to his current customers and future customers why his work is worth $16 more per half acre job. If Jake is unable to justify the high costs, the business will suffer through lost clients moving to George.
Jake and his roommates agree they cannot cut the lawn of their customers any better then George. They also agree they are not willing to accept less than $14/hour in order to make their quotes more competitive.
Jake ends his business venture, sells his equipment and customer leads to George for a modest sum.
George is better off, with double the equipment, more customers and therefore the demand for his work justifying the hiring of 3 more workers. George’s reputation continues to build in the community and his phone begins ringing off the hook
At first look, Jake and his college friends are worse off while George is better off. Jake’s firm was well educated and they understood the risks of starting a business. To their discredit they would not accept lower wages to make their product more competitive. To their credit they have college degrees. They have recouped some of their capital through the sale of their equipment.
They found work at new employers while more funds are accrued for a new venture. They left the landscaping business with a failed firm. However they have gained invaluable business knowledge and this failed venture may have motivated the three to try it again…Next time perhaps in a different industry, better prepared. They were all degreed in computer programming. Maybe it will be in the computer science industry.
Here in lies the battle between American and China. The United States workforce is represented in Jake and China in George. It is obvious landscaping jobs are not being sent to Asia. But this example runs parallels of many industries once wholly contained in the United States. Chip makers, automobile manufacturers, many factory type jobs have left the United States.
The jobs have left due to the ability for Chinese workers to make a product equally as well or with near enough quality to find acceptance with the buying public. The scale tipper is the cost of each product made in China could be a fraction of a similarly US made product. If a company makes an equal product for less, or if they make an adequate product for substantially less, customers will gravitate toward this new supplier.
The important piece to remember; George continues doing what he does well and is satisfied with the income level he is receiving for his work. George hires 3 new students to work for his firm (this replaces the three jobs lost in Jake and his roommates.). Jake and his roommates would not work for less, therefore they are pushed out of an industry of which they are over qualified. They have the education and hopefully the motivation to take another risk in the future. Jake and his roommates were actually “freed up” to do something else. Something which potentially would be more financially lucrative and may require the education and skills they already have attained.
An economy can not have all the scientists and engineers “mowing grass”. Jobs should be filled, and in a free market are filled, by those qualified or accepting of the wage they will earn in a specific job. If they are not happy with the pay or it is not enough of a challenge, then eventually they will free up the job and search for something new.
Of all the nations, the United States should be least “scared” of globalization. Globalization is the free market finding the best use for all workers and resources. Before railroads there were parts of the nation segmented by geography. They could not actively participate in trade and the free market. This isolation changed with transportation improvements. The improvements caused a smaller version of globalization with the United States. If this economy is good for a state and a nation of states, why would it not be good for a world of nations?
The “freeing up” of a workforce to do something else is what drives an economy forward. Globalization is an opportunity for wealth. Wealth for developed and fledgling economies alike. It is a shame the nation is even debating the “China Card”. It is inquisitive and a shame Mr. Mallaby felt he had to spend his research and writing talent on a topic we should already understand.
Desirable Reading
Economics in One Lesson, Henry Hazlitt
Capitalism and Freedom, Milton Friedman
Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith
Google; “Austrian Economics” and “World Fact book”
Friday, March 03, 2006
Patriot Guard Riders at Soldiers Funerals
The following three articles are from The Indianapolis Star, PodcastingNews and MSNBC respectively. They help describe the details of a group picketing at the funerals of fallen US soldiers killed in Iraq. According to the reports they are chanting hateful slogans at the funerals and interrupting funerals.
This organization his housed under the roof of Westboro Baptist Church, however they appear to show no Christian traits. It needs to be made clear, this church has no affiliation with any larger orgnized Christian Church. Not even the Baptist church. Per an article on Beliefnet, the church is headed by Rev. Fred Phelps and members are mainly made up of Rev Phelps extended family.
The members of this church have also arrived at recent funerals of the Sago miners killed in West Virginia. There to the Westboro group yelled profanities, applauded the miners deaths and held up signs reading, "Thank God for Dead Miners." (from article 4 below)
Also in the Beliefnet article, there have been a group of motorcycle riders called the
Patriot Guard Riders (articles; 1, 2, 3, 4, PGR History) who have chapters in 49 states and number more then 5,000 nationally. They just need an Alaskan Chapter leader. Click here to see who the Chapter leader is in your state. These riders are traveling to soldier's funerals upon request or approval of the family to drown out the sinful cheers of Westboro and Mr. Phelps. The Patriot Guard Riders keep their bikes running during the funeral and cheer "U-S-A" and other supportive slogans alongside residence of the local communities.
Patriot Guard Riders are heroes! Member names mentioned in articles;
Don Woodrick
Bob Swanson -"The mission of the Patriot Guard Riders is twofold. One is to show respect for the fallen heroes and their families. The second is to shield the mourning family from any interruptions."
March 2006
Indianapolis Star
PodCastingNews.com
August 2005
MSNBC
Additionally, there have also been other activities just prior to the soldier’s funerals.
Coinciding with the funerals, typically a few days before the fallen soldier’s family is called by unknown parties and they say things such as “I am glad your son is dead.” “God makes IED’s.” The phone calls are also accompanied by vandalism to the family’s houses. Sometimes the houses are egged.
The phone calls and vandalism have not been proven to be the same group, however it is obvious either the members are doing the vandalism themselves or they are arranging/inspiring others to do the work for them.
The organization is part of the Westboro Baptist Church in Kansas. Their website, GodHatesFags, is part of their formula to get their message heard. This church has been on watch lists of many states and are known to be a “hate” group.
The Westboro group has come to the conclusion all US Soldiers are homosexuals. Because the group hates homosexuals, they are apparently compelled to bring the above hate and sadness to funerals of US soldiers and their families.
The next funeral they are attending is Monday, March 6, 2005 in Kokomo Indiana for Sgt Jones.
Per sources in the Kokomo Police Department, there may be a number of Vietnam Veterans who are organizing to attend the funeral and interrupt the protests at the Sgt Jones funeral.
Legistlators in Indiana have also passed a law which does not allow these protests to occur within 500 feet of the funeral.
This organization his housed under the roof of Westboro Baptist Church, however they appear to show no Christian traits. It needs to be made clear, this church has no affiliation with any larger orgnized Christian Church. Not even the Baptist church. Per an article on Beliefnet, the church is headed by Rev. Fred Phelps and members are mainly made up of Rev Phelps extended family.
The members of this church have also arrived at recent funerals of the Sago miners killed in West Virginia. There to the Westboro group yelled profanities, applauded the miners deaths and held up signs reading, "Thank God for Dead Miners." (from article 4 below)
Also in the Beliefnet article, there have been a group of motorcycle riders called the
Patriot Guard Riders (articles; 1, 2, 3, 4, PGR History) who have chapters in 49 states and number more then 5,000 nationally. They just need an Alaskan Chapter leader. Click here to see who the Chapter leader is in your state. These riders are traveling to soldier's funerals upon request or approval of the family to drown out the sinful cheers of Westboro and Mr. Phelps. The Patriot Guard Riders keep their bikes running during the funeral and cheer "U-S-A" and other supportive slogans alongside residence of the local communities.
Patriot Guard Riders are heroes! Member names mentioned in articles;
Don Woodrick
Bob Swanson -"The mission of the Patriot Guard Riders is twofold. One is to show respect for the fallen heroes and their families. The second is to shield the mourning family from any interruptions."
March 2006
Indianapolis Star
PodCastingNews.com
August 2005
MSNBC
Additionally, there have also been other activities just prior to the soldier’s funerals.
Coinciding with the funerals, typically a few days before the fallen soldier’s family is called by unknown parties and they say things such as “I am glad your son is dead.” “God makes IED’s.” The phone calls are also accompanied by vandalism to the family’s houses. Sometimes the houses are egged.
The phone calls and vandalism have not been proven to be the same group, however it is obvious either the members are doing the vandalism themselves or they are arranging/inspiring others to do the work for them.
The organization is part of the Westboro Baptist Church in Kansas. Their website, GodHatesFags, is part of their formula to get their message heard. This church has been on watch lists of many states and are known to be a “hate” group.
The Westboro group has come to the conclusion all US Soldiers are homosexuals. Because the group hates homosexuals, they are apparently compelled to bring the above hate and sadness to funerals of US soldiers and their families.
The next funeral they are attending is Monday, March 6, 2005 in Kokomo Indiana for Sgt Jones.
Per sources in the Kokomo Police Department, there may be a number of Vietnam Veterans who are organizing to attend the funeral and interrupt the protests at the Sgt Jones funeral.
Legistlators in Indiana have also passed a law which does not allow these protests to occur within 500 feet of the funeral.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
