Two of the people I most love to read at present are (as you may have gathered or soon will) are Victor Davis Hanson and Mark Steyn. VDH for his perspective and background and his clear writing and Steyn for his brashness, impudence, and erudite remarks.
Steyn's latest: "...the official State Department briefing paper on the European Rapid Reaction Force, the European Constitution, the European negotiations with Iran, etc. ('When these subjects come up, US policy is to nod politely and try not to giggle... "
"...In Prague in 2002, the President told fellow Nato members: "We share common values – the common values of freedom, human rights and democracy." In a post-Communist world, these are vague, unobjectionable generalities to everyone except the head hackers in the Sunni Triangle. It's when you try to flesh them out that it all gets more complicated. The reality is that Europe's very specific troubles – economic, demographic, political – derive from Europe, not America. And, if the member states of the EU are determined to enshrine constitutionally and Continent-wide the "rights" that have proved so disastrous for them as individual nations, there's not a lot America can do about it except stand well clear. Or as Mr Bush put it in his Telegraph interview yesterday: "No, I'm not going to comment [laughter]" – evidently still having trouble with the "no giggling" rule."
Always read all of Mark Steyn as you learn and usually laugh out loud. Like VDH he is published everywhere so here is Steyn's homepage. He bills himself as "The One-Man Content Provider" and actually he is almost.
Sunday, February 20, 2005
Saturday, February 19, 2005
Victor Davis Hanson on the Middle East
Victor Davis Hanson on the Middle East and Reform: "Now in hindsight, few seem to object to the ostracism of Arafat or estrangement from Saudi Arabia. The moral?
As a rule of thumb in matters of the Middle East, be very skeptical of anything that Europe (fearful of terrorists, eager for profits, tired of Jews, scared of their own growing Islamic minorities) and the Arab League (a synonym for the autocratic rule of Sunni Muslim grandees and secular despots) cook up together. If a EU president, a Saudi royal, and a Middle East specialist in the State Department or a professor in an endowed Middle Eastern Studies chair agree that the United States is 'woefully naive,' 'unnecessarily provocative' or 'acting unilaterally,' then assume that we are pretty much on the right side of history and promoting democratic reform. 'Sobriety' and 'working with Arab moderates' is diplo-speak for supporting or abetting an illiberal hierarchy.... "
And, "The American effort to democratize postwar Afghanistan and Iraq has placed a heavy burden on the United States to develop a coherent and consistent policy of supporting reformers throughout the Middle East. We should continue with demands for elections in a Lebanon free of a tyrannical Syria, elevate dissidents in Iran onto the world stage, pressure for change in the Gulf, and say goodbye to Wahhabi Saudi Arabia. If Western elites are really worried about the legitimacy of past elections in Iraq, let them go instead to Lebanon where they can worry first about having any at all, and then later complain about the proper degree of voter participation. The forces of history have been unleashed and we should cease apologizing for the deluge and instead steer the waves in the right direction.
Americans understandably focus on the hot wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Yet just as important are the unsung successes that received little praise, and then have a weird tendency to drift off into the collective global amnesia as if they arose from natural, not American-induced, reform."
Do read it all and all of anything VDH writes. His homepage can be found here.
As a rule of thumb in matters of the Middle East, be very skeptical of anything that Europe (fearful of terrorists, eager for profits, tired of Jews, scared of their own growing Islamic minorities) and the Arab League (a synonym for the autocratic rule of Sunni Muslim grandees and secular despots) cook up together. If a EU president, a Saudi royal, and a Middle East specialist in the State Department or a professor in an endowed Middle Eastern Studies chair agree that the United States is 'woefully naive,' 'unnecessarily provocative' or 'acting unilaterally,' then assume that we are pretty much on the right side of history and promoting democratic reform. 'Sobriety' and 'working with Arab moderates' is diplo-speak for supporting or abetting an illiberal hierarchy.... "
And, "The American effort to democratize postwar Afghanistan and Iraq has placed a heavy burden on the United States to develop a coherent and consistent policy of supporting reformers throughout the Middle East. We should continue with demands for elections in a Lebanon free of a tyrannical Syria, elevate dissidents in Iran onto the world stage, pressure for change in the Gulf, and say goodbye to Wahhabi Saudi Arabia. If Western elites are really worried about the legitimacy of past elections in Iraq, let them go instead to Lebanon where they can worry first about having any at all, and then later complain about the proper degree of voter participation. The forces of history have been unleashed and we should cease apologizing for the deluge and instead steer the waves in the right direction.
Americans understandably focus on the hot wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Yet just as important are the unsung successes that received little praise, and then have a weird tendency to drift off into the collective global amnesia as if they arose from natural, not American-induced, reform."
Do read it all and all of anything VDH writes. His homepage can be found here.
Iwo Jima
Iwo Jima
WSJ: "Sixty years ago today, more than 110,000 Americans and 880 ships began their assault on a small volcanic island in the Pacific, in the climactic battle of the last year of World War II. For the next 36 days Iwo Jima would become the most populous 7 1/2 square miles on the planet, as U.S. Marines and Japanese soldiers fought a battle that would test American resolve even more than D-Day or the Battle of the Bulge had, and that still symbolizes a free society's willingness to make the sacrifice necessary to prevail over evil--a sacrifice as relevant today as it was 60 years ago."
A Little International Economics - Again, Not to Worry about US Trade Deficits
Here are the understandable highlights {with key points in bold from me} from an article in the International Herald Tribune today - U.S. hegemony has a strong foundation: "Would-be Cassandras have found a new threat to U.S. hegemony: overdependence on foreign capital and growing foreign debt."
Despite the pervasiveness of this doomsday prophecy, U.S. hegemony is solidly grounded: It rests on an economy that is continually extending its technological lead, ensuring its continued appeal for foreign investors. The dollar's role as the global monetary standard is not threatened, and the risk to U.S. financial stability posed by large foreign liabilities has been exaggerated. If anything, the world's appetite for U.S. assets bolsters U.S. predominance rather than undermines it.
.
The classic doomsayer argument - that growing foreign indebtedness results from too little savings by Americans - neglects the fact that savings and investment are seriously undervalued in U.S. economic accounts. When you include capital gains, 401(k) retirement plans, and home values, U.S. domestic saving is around 20 percent of GDP, the same as in most other developed economies. And when you consider "intangible" investment (like new-product development and design experimentation) as part of total, the supposed increase in consumer spending as a share of GDP turns out to be a statistical artifact.
.
Indeed, much of the explanation for chronic current account deficits relates to the U.S. economy's strong fundamentals, not fatal structural flaws. Thanks to strong economic growth reinforced by a bias toward imports and a still overvalued currency, American consumers have tended to spend a disproportionate share of their incomes on imports. More important, with the United States expected to grow faster than Europe and Japan over the next decades and wealth growing rapidly in Asia, foreign private investors and central banks will continue to flock to U.S. financial markets. Asian governments must continue to finance U.S. imports of their manufactured goods, since the United States is their largest market and a major source of inward direct investment. And the spread of information technology to new sectors of the U.S. economy will make a revival of U.S.-bound private capital flows likely as well.
.
To be sure, the economy will at some point have to adjust to a decline in the dollar and a rise in interest rates. But these trends will at worst slow the growth of U.S. consumers' standard of living, not undermine the U.S. role as global pacesetter. The dollar will remain dominant in global trade, payments and capital flows, based as it is in a country with safe, well-regulated financial markets. For foreign central banks, U.S. Treasury bonds, government-supported agency bonds and deposits in highly rated banks will remain, for the foreseeable future, the chief sources of liquid reserve assets. And provided U.S. firms maintain their entrepreneurial edge - and despite much anxiety, there is little reason to expect otherwise - global asset managers will continue to want to hold portfolios rich in U.S. corporate stocks and bonds.
.
The real threat to U.S. hegemony, then, is not that the sentiments of foreign investors will make foreign debt unsustainable; it is that protectionism and isolationism at home will put an end to the dynamism, openness and flexibility that power the U.S. economy.
.
(David H. Levey was formerly managing director of Moody’s Sovereign Ratings Service. Stuart S. Brown is a professor of economics and international relations at Syracuse University.) "
Once again I am saying do not listen to the naysayers worried about US Trade Deficits (yet...) Also if you are into this the entire article is interesting and not very technical.
.
Despite the pervasiveness of this doomsday prophecy, U.S. hegemony is solidly grounded: It rests on an economy that is continually extending its technological lead, ensuring its continued appeal for foreign investors. The dollar's role as the global monetary standard is not threatened, and the risk to U.S. financial stability posed by large foreign liabilities has been exaggerated. If anything, the world's appetite for U.S. assets bolsters U.S. predominance rather than undermines it.
.
The classic doomsayer argument - that growing foreign indebtedness results from too little savings by Americans - neglects the fact that savings and investment are seriously undervalued in U.S. economic accounts. When you include capital gains, 401(k) retirement plans, and home values, U.S. domestic saving is around 20 percent of GDP, the same as in most other developed economies. And when you consider "intangible" investment (like new-product development and design experimentation) as part of total, the supposed increase in consumer spending as a share of GDP turns out to be a statistical artifact.
.
Indeed, much of the explanation for chronic current account deficits relates to the U.S. economy's strong fundamentals, not fatal structural flaws. Thanks to strong economic growth reinforced by a bias toward imports and a still overvalued currency, American consumers have tended to spend a disproportionate share of their incomes on imports. More important, with the United States expected to grow faster than Europe and Japan over the next decades and wealth growing rapidly in Asia, foreign private investors and central banks will continue to flock to U.S. financial markets. Asian governments must continue to finance U.S. imports of their manufactured goods, since the United States is their largest market and a major source of inward direct investment. And the spread of information technology to new sectors of the U.S. economy will make a revival of U.S.-bound private capital flows likely as well.
.
To be sure, the economy will at some point have to adjust to a decline in the dollar and a rise in interest rates. But these trends will at worst slow the growth of U.S. consumers' standard of living, not undermine the U.S. role as global pacesetter. The dollar will remain dominant in global trade, payments and capital flows, based as it is in a country with safe, well-regulated financial markets. For foreign central banks, U.S. Treasury bonds, government-supported agency bonds and deposits in highly rated banks will remain, for the foreseeable future, the chief sources of liquid reserve assets. And provided U.S. firms maintain their entrepreneurial edge - and despite much anxiety, there is little reason to expect otherwise - global asset managers will continue to want to hold portfolios rich in U.S. corporate stocks and bonds.
.
The real threat to U.S. hegemony, then, is not that the sentiments of foreign investors will make foreign debt unsustainable; it is that protectionism and isolationism at home will put an end to the dynamism, openness and flexibility that power the U.S. economy.
.
(David H. Levey was formerly managing director of Moody’s Sovereign Ratings Service. Stuart S. Brown is a professor of economics and international relations at Syracuse University.) "
Once again I am saying do not listen to the naysayers worried about US Trade Deficits (yet...) Also if you are into this the entire article is interesting and not very technical.
.
The Yankee or Dixie Quiz
Courtesy of the fine folks at Southern Appeal (a blog I heartily endorse and read regularly) you have to go take The Yankee or Dixie quiz. I scored 87% Dixie. Let me know what you scored and pass the test along.
And More from the Vatican
I found this interesting that a discussion of sainthood even touches on disagreements between Christianity and Islam. The Word From Rome February 18, 2005: "In most cases, processes for beatification involve some degree of uncertainty, since one never knows quite how it will go. Every now and then, however, there's a slam-dunk candidate for whom it's only a matter of time. Such was the case with Mother Teresa when she died in 1997, and such is the case again this week with Carmelite Sr. Maria Lucia of Jesus and of the Sacred Heart, better known as Lucia dos Santos, the last of the three visionaries of Fatima, who died last Sunday.
Lucia passed away on the 13th of the month, the same day in May 1917 that, according to the Fatima tradition, the Virgin Mary began appearing to three small children in this remote site in Portugal. It's a spot named after the wife of Ali, the cousin of the prophet Muhammed, and hence a reminder of the Muslim conquest of the Iberian peninsula. (In some Koranic schools, especially in Shi'ite circles where devotion to Fatima is strong, it's long been believed that Mary, who is also venerated in the Koran, didn't come to Fatima for Christians at all, but for the Muslims). "
If you are interested the rest of the discussion is fascinating as it delves into Pope John Paul II's faith in soon to be Saint Lucia and also the intriguing tale of the relationship between the Visionaries of Fatima and the failed assassination attempt on the Pope
Lucia passed away on the 13th of the month, the same day in May 1917 that, according to the Fatima tradition, the Virgin Mary began appearing to three small children in this remote site in Portugal. It's a spot named after the wife of Ali, the cousin of the prophet Muhammed, and hence a reminder of the Muslim conquest of the Iberian peninsula. (In some Koranic schools, especially in Shi'ite circles where devotion to Fatima is strong, it's long been believed that Mary, who is also venerated in the Koran, didn't come to Fatima for Christians at all, but for the Muslims). "
If you are interested the rest of the discussion is fascinating as it delves into Pope John Paul II's faith in soon to be Saint Lucia and also the intriguing tale of the relationship between the Visionaries of Fatima and the failed assassination attempt on the Pope
Pope John Paul II Meeting Isreali and Palestinian Officials Feb. 25
The Word From Rome February 18, 2005: "The Ministers of Tourism for Israel and the Palestinian National Authority are scheduled for a joint private audience with Pope John Paul II on Friday, Feb. 25. It will be the first time that officials from Israel and the Palestinian Authority have met the pope simultaneously, and will undoubtedly be taken as another sign of a thaw in the Israeli-Palestinian relationship. "
"The two ministers are coming to Rome in large part to ask Christians to resume pilgrimages to the Holy Land, assuring them that the two sides are cooperating to assure tourists safe access to the Holy Sites and easy movement back-and-forth across borders. Due to the violence associated with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, tourism to the region has been in decline for years. As one indicator of that reality, the number of American tourists visiting Israel in 2000, just before the second intifadah, was 539,512, according to TravelAge magazine. In 2003, it was 294,672, a decline of almost 50 percent. A 'photo op' with the pope is thus seen by both sides as an ideal way to lure potential Christian visitors. "
First, this shows the Pontiff is recovering and has His attention on the Mid-East situation. Second, the fact that officials from Isreal and the PA will be in the same room is a positive as well.
"The two ministers are coming to Rome in large part to ask Christians to resume pilgrimages to the Holy Land, assuring them that the two sides are cooperating to assure tourists safe access to the Holy Sites and easy movement back-and-forth across borders. Due to the violence associated with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, tourism to the region has been in decline for years. As one indicator of that reality, the number of American tourists visiting Israel in 2000, just before the second intifadah, was 539,512, according to TravelAge magazine. In 2003, it was 294,672, a decline of almost 50 percent. A 'photo op' with the pope is thus seen by both sides as an ideal way to lure potential Christian visitors. "
First, this shows the Pontiff is recovering and has His attention on the Mid-East situation. Second, the fact that officials from Isreal and the PA will be in the same room is a positive as well.
Rhett, Get That Woman a Julep! or Education: More Dissection of Harvard President Summers
More on the Harvard situation from Kathleen Parker: Truth and consequences:
"Male chauvinist pigs (remember them?) can take a vacation as long as women like MIT biology professor Nancy Hopkins are defending women's intellect. Upon hearing Summers' words, Hopkins told reporters that she felt she was going to be sick. That her 'heart was pounding' and her 'breath was shallow . I just couldn't breathe .'
Rhett, oh Rhett, get that woman a julep, for cryin' out loud. "
And "...girls are far exceeding boys in school at nearly every level. Sixty percent of college students today are female. At the high school level, girls receive 60 percent of the A's, while boys earn 70 percent of the D's and F's..."
"The larger, more compelling concern to educators would seem to be helping boys improve their reading and writing skills so that they can survive in the information age, rather than counting the number of female Ph.D.s in science as some measure of gender equality.Meanwhile, it's too bad Summers felt forced to apologize and that he faces further censure from faculty. When the president of the nation's oldest university has to say he's sorry for saying something true, the opposite of Truth seems the victor."
"Male chauvinist pigs (remember them?) can take a vacation as long as women like MIT biology professor Nancy Hopkins are defending women's intellect. Upon hearing Summers' words, Hopkins told reporters that she felt she was going to be sick. That her 'heart was pounding' and her 'breath was shallow . I just couldn't breathe .'
Rhett, oh Rhett, get that woman a julep, for cryin' out loud. "
And "...girls are far exceeding boys in school at nearly every level. Sixty percent of college students today are female. At the high school level, girls receive 60 percent of the A's, while boys earn 70 percent of the D's and F's..."
"The larger, more compelling concern to educators would seem to be helping boys improve their reading and writing skills so that they can survive in the information age, rather than counting the number of female Ph.D.s in science as some measure of gender equality.Meanwhile, it's too bad Summers felt forced to apologize and that he faces further censure from faculty. When the president of the nation's oldest university has to say he's sorry for saying something true, the opposite of Truth seems the victor."
Flying or On a Blind Date Soon?
New York Post Online Edition: news:
" A Newark Airport security screener is being reassigned after officials said she failed to spot a 5-inch butcher knife in a passenger's pocketbook.
Katrina Bell, 27, of Greensboro, N.C., had cleared security and was waiting to board a flight with her sister on Saturday morning when she discovered she had forgotten to remove the knife from her bag. She had put it there in preparation for a blind date Thursday night, her sister, Tikisha Bell Gowens, 30, told the Star-Ledger. "
" A Newark Airport security screener is being reassigned after officials said she failed to spot a 5-inch butcher knife in a passenger's pocketbook.
Katrina Bell, 27, of Greensboro, N.C., had cleared security and was waiting to board a flight with her sister on Saturday morning when she discovered she had forgotten to remove the knife from her bag. She had put it there in preparation for a blind date Thursday night, her sister, Tikisha Bell Gowens, 30, told the Star-Ledger. "
Thomas Sowell on JFK2 & Form 180
Follow up to the last post ; here is an excerpt from the Sowell column I mentioned and have since found: Thomas Sowell: Tainted media:
" One of Jimmy Carter's first acts as President was to issue an order granting amnesties to draft dodgers who had fled the country during the Vietnam war and also allowing an upgrading of military discharges that had been less than honorable.
There is more to this than simply a strange date on an honorable discharge. The covering memo refers to U.S. Code Title 10, sections 1162 and 1163. Anyone who bothers to read those sections will discover that they are about unusual circumstances for issuing discharges from the military services.
Senator Kerry never signed Form 180 to make all his military records public, as President Bush had done -- and the media didn't press him to do so. Even after Kerry's widely publicized role as a war hero was challenged by numerous men who had served with him in Vietnam, the media remained totally uninterested in checking out his record."
"Maybe there is a perfectly innocent explanation for Senator Kerry's late-dated honorable discharge during the Carter administration. But no explanation has been asked or given, even though there may also be a not so innocent explanation.
What is well known is that, during the Vietnam war, John Kerry went to Paris on his own and engaged in discussions or negotiations with representatives of the country with whom we were at war, even though he was still an officer in the naval reserve.
That raises legal questions about unauthorized personal diplomacy which naval authorities may not have overlooked as generously as the media did, and which could have affected the kind of discharge that Kerry received."
" One of Jimmy Carter's first acts as President was to issue an order granting amnesties to draft dodgers who had fled the country during the Vietnam war and also allowing an upgrading of military discharges that had been less than honorable.
There is more to this than simply a strange date on an honorable discharge. The covering memo refers to U.S. Code Title 10, sections 1162 and 1163. Anyone who bothers to read those sections will discover that they are about unusual circumstances for issuing discharges from the military services.
Senator Kerry never signed Form 180 to make all his military records public, as President Bush had done -- and the media didn't press him to do so. Even after Kerry's widely publicized role as a war hero was challenged by numerous men who had served with him in Vietnam, the media remained totally uninterested in checking out his record."
"Maybe there is a perfectly innocent explanation for Senator Kerry's late-dated honorable discharge during the Carter administration. But no explanation has been asked or given, even though there may also be a not so innocent explanation.
What is well known is that, during the Vietnam war, John Kerry went to Paris on his own and engaged in discussions or negotiations with representatives of the country with whom we were at war, even though he was still an officer in the naval reserve.
That raises legal questions about unauthorized personal diplomacy which naval authorities may not have overlooked as generously as the media did, and which could have affected the kind of discharge that Kerry received."
Kausfiles: "JFK2, We're Just Not That Into You!"
How to get the message to Dems 2004 loser? By Mickey Kaus:
"The 180 Solution: Has John Kerry signed his Form 180--allowing journalists full access to his military records--yet? He told Tim Russert he would! ...'Yes, I will.' ... Not much wiggle room there (though Kerry then seemed to ineptly try to craft an 'only-if-everyone-else-signs-theirs' loophole). ... Maybe Form 180 is the magic answer to the how-to-get-hm-to-go-away dilemma. Something Democrats could unite around!"
Thomas Sowell's last column also made a huge point on Kerry's Form 180. [Update-next post.]
I doubt if we ever see full disclosure of the records as it will clearly show the details of Kerry's original US Army discharge prior to the disclosed discharge during the Carter Administration - years after Kerry left the service and after the Carter pardon of almost all Vietnam related situations.
"The 180 Solution: Has John Kerry signed his Form 180--allowing journalists full access to his military records--yet? He told Tim Russert he would! ...'Yes, I will.' ... Not much wiggle room there (though Kerry then seemed to ineptly try to craft an 'only-if-everyone-else-signs-theirs' loophole). ... Maybe Form 180 is the magic answer to the how-to-get-hm-to-go-away dilemma. Something Democrats could unite around!"
Thomas Sowell's last column also made a huge point on Kerry's Form 180. [Update-next post.]
I doubt if we ever see full disclosure of the records as it will clearly show the details of Kerry's original US Army discharge prior to the disclosed discharge during the Carter Administration - years after Kerry left the service and after the Carter pardon of almost all Vietnam related situations.
Friday, February 18, 2005
Bear Stearns: Economic Bull
David Malpass, Bear Stearns chief economist today:
"Upside Breakout on the Horizon? It's more likely than not."
"Some economy watchers have been looking for a slowdown, but a speed-up is more likely. Right now the U.S. is in the early to middle stages of a long, durable, and relatively fast expansion, one that has positive implications for U.S. and foreign equities (but not for bonds). The growth engines include the dollar's exit from deflationary territory in 2002, low interest rates, the 2003 tax cuts, and the increasing level of U.S. employment."
"Except for the third quarter of 2003 when GDP grew at 7.5 percent, annualized quarterly growth has been between 3.3 percent and 4.5 percent for each quarter since the second quarter of 2003. In all likelihood, growth for the fourth quarter of 2004 (soon to be revised) and the first quarter of 2005 will fall within that range.When the U.S. breaks out of that range, it is more likely to be toward the high side than the low side. The U.S. economy will probably register a 5 percent growth quarter before it turns in a 2.5 percent quarter. Why? Huge levels of liquidity, low inventories, unabated monetary and fiscal stimulus, a solid household balance sheet, robust investment activity, and continued strength at retail are all part of today's economic story. This is the stuff of accelerations, not slowdowns."
"Upside Breakout on the Horizon? It's more likely than not."
"Some economy watchers have been looking for a slowdown, but a speed-up is more likely. Right now the U.S. is in the early to middle stages of a long, durable, and relatively fast expansion, one that has positive implications for U.S. and foreign equities (but not for bonds). The growth engines include the dollar's exit from deflationary territory in 2002, low interest rates, the 2003 tax cuts, and the increasing level of U.S. employment."
"Except for the third quarter of 2003 when GDP grew at 7.5 percent, annualized quarterly growth has been between 3.3 percent and 4.5 percent for each quarter since the second quarter of 2003. In all likelihood, growth for the fourth quarter of 2004 (soon to be revised) and the first quarter of 2005 will fall within that range.When the U.S. breaks out of that range, it is more likely to be toward the high side than the low side. The U.S. economy will probably register a 5 percent growth quarter before it turns in a 2.5 percent quarter. Why? Huge levels of liquidity, low inventories, unabated monetary and fiscal stimulus, a solid household balance sheet, robust investment activity, and continued strength at retail are all part of today's economic story. This is the stuff of accelerations, not slowdowns."
The Success of the 2003 Bush Tax Cuts
William P. Kucewicz on NRO Financial:
"The Bush tax cuts of 2 years ago continue to lay the foundation for a prolonged economic expansion, owing to a conspicuous shift in private expenditures from consumption to investment. The June 2003 tax cuts, in fact, are functioning precisely as promised: boosting GDP to the benefit of all Americans, regardless of income. It's one of the marvels of supply-side fiscal policy. By raising the incentive to invest, marginal tax-rate reductions augment the ratio of financial capital to labor capital, thus raising labor productivity and, in turn, accelerating growth. "
"Democrats, however, aided by a pliant (and largely economically illiterate) Washington press corps, continue to foist the fiction that the Clinton tax hikes produced the 1990s boom by closing the federal budget deficit. This is patent nonsense. For a start, they've got the cause-effect deficit-GDP relationship backwards: The deficit closed because economic growth quickened, not the other way around.GDP growth is clearly more responsive to changes in private investment than personal consumption. Personal consumption expenditures, as a percentage of GDP, have a tendency to rise during economic contractions, while private fixed investment usually shrinks; again confirming the pivotal supply-side role played by investment versus consumption. "
"Truth is, the more after-tax money people have at their disposal, the greater the propensity to save rather than to consume. Much of any increase in real DPI finds its way into nonresidential fixed investment. Increased business investment of course generates further increases in personal income (via enhanced labor productivity and corporate profitability), making even more financing available for business creation and expansion.Lastly, President Bush's envisioned ownership society would stimulate strong and lasting economic expansion. His calls for tax cuts and tax simplification, as well Social Security reform, would enhance the economy's long-term growth prospects by improving the all-important ratio of private investment to personal consumption.In jawboning members of Congress, therefore, the administration's strongest argument for new and permanent tax cuts is that they work. Tax-rate reductions redound to everyone's benefit regardless of income level by raising the incentive to invest and thus accelerating the pace of economic expansion. Yes, a rising tide does lift all boats."
The article is also accompanied with factual quantification and supporting diagrams.
"The Bush tax cuts of 2 years ago continue to lay the foundation for a prolonged economic expansion, owing to a conspicuous shift in private expenditures from consumption to investment. The June 2003 tax cuts, in fact, are functioning precisely as promised: boosting GDP to the benefit of all Americans, regardless of income. It's one of the marvels of supply-side fiscal policy. By raising the incentive to invest, marginal tax-rate reductions augment the ratio of financial capital to labor capital, thus raising labor productivity and, in turn, accelerating growth. "
"Democrats, however, aided by a pliant (and largely economically illiterate) Washington press corps, continue to foist the fiction that the Clinton tax hikes produced the 1990s boom by closing the federal budget deficit. This is patent nonsense. For a start, they've got the cause-effect deficit-GDP relationship backwards: The deficit closed because economic growth quickened, not the other way around.GDP growth is clearly more responsive to changes in private investment than personal consumption. Personal consumption expenditures, as a percentage of GDP, have a tendency to rise during economic contractions, while private fixed investment usually shrinks; again confirming the pivotal supply-side role played by investment versus consumption. "
"Truth is, the more after-tax money people have at their disposal, the greater the propensity to save rather than to consume. Much of any increase in real DPI finds its way into nonresidential fixed investment. Increased business investment of course generates further increases in personal income (via enhanced labor productivity and corporate profitability), making even more financing available for business creation and expansion.Lastly, President Bush's envisioned ownership society would stimulate strong and lasting economic expansion. His calls for tax cuts and tax simplification, as well Social Security reform, would enhance the economy's long-term growth prospects by improving the all-important ratio of private investment to personal consumption.In jawboning members of Congress, therefore, the administration's strongest argument for new and permanent tax cuts is that they work. Tax-rate reductions redound to everyone's benefit regardless of income level by raising the incentive to invest and thus accelerating the pace of economic expansion. Yes, a rising tide does lift all boats."
The article is also accompanied with factual quantification and supporting diagrams.
Senator Burr's Duty of Honor
From John McCaslin:
"If it's his maiden speech in the U.S. Senate, then why is Sen. Richard M. Burr, North Carolina Republican, delivering a 45-minute farewell address?
Actually, Vice President Dick Cheney and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist selected the freshman senator to deliver the traditional reading Friday of George Washington's farewell address. It has been delivered on the floor of the Senate every year, on or near Washington's birthday, since 1896.
When he finishes, Burr will inscribe his name and a few comments in a black, leather-bound book kept by the secretary of the Senate.
And how does the freshman senator feel to join other notable senators to have read the address, including Henry Cabot Lodge in 1898, Henry Cabot Lodge Jr. in 1937, Hubert H. Humphrey in 1956 and Barry Goldwater in 1957?
'The United States Senate is an institution deep in tradition,' he says, 'and I appreciate the opportunity to participate in such an honored part of that tradition.'
Last year's address was delivered by outgoing Sen. John B. Breaux, Louisiana Democrat."
"If it's his maiden speech in the U.S. Senate, then why is Sen. Richard M. Burr, North Carolina Republican, delivering a 45-minute farewell address?
Actually, Vice President Dick Cheney and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist selected the freshman senator to deliver the traditional reading Friday of George Washington's farewell address. It has been delivered on the floor of the Senate every year, on or near Washington's birthday, since 1896.
When he finishes, Burr will inscribe his name and a few comments in a black, leather-bound book kept by the secretary of the Senate.
And how does the freshman senator feel to join other notable senators to have read the address, including Henry Cabot Lodge in 1898, Henry Cabot Lodge Jr. in 1937, Hubert H. Humphrey in 1956 and Barry Goldwater in 1957?
'The United States Senate is an institution deep in tradition,' he says, 'and I appreciate the opportunity to participate in such an honored part of that tradition.'
Last year's address was delivered by outgoing Sen. John B. Breaux, Louisiana Democrat."
Education: America's Separation of Its Mind and Soul
Much debate is going on over Ward Churchill, Lawrence Summers at Harvard, the cost of higher education, NCLB, the lack of conservative freedom in US universities, and overall public policy for education. The best summary statement of the seriousness of the situation so far is today in David Frum's Diary on National Review Online:
"The corruption of the universities is a terrible shame upon the United States and a cause of profound sadness among American conservatives. When we complain about the abuses on campus, it is not out of glee at scoring a point against an ideological opponent, but out of terrible regret that some of the most essential institutions of this great country - the institutions at which learning and inquiry ought to be honored and served - have so often perverted their best natures to serve bad causes.
America suffers from a dangerous separation of its mind and soul. Its elite intellectual institutions are too often hostile to the country's culture and founding values. As the Journal reporters mention, Harvard continues to ban ROTC from campus for fear of offending the university's militant gay lobby; as Samuel Huntington details in his important book, Who We Are, elite institutions like Harvard regard themselves as multinational, multicultural enterprises independent of the nation and the people that created, sustain, and defend them.
This separation serves nobody. It makes places like Harvard effete and irrelevant. I had lunch a little while ago with a representative of another prestigious school. 'We see it as our mission,' he told me, 'to train leaders.' But how can you do that, I asked, when you are instilling your leaders with an ideology that is despised and mistrusted by their potential followers?
At the same time, it badly disserves America to lose the services of places like Harvard. Despite the health and strength of its soul and sinew, a country cannot thrive in a dangerous world with a diseased mind."
Think about how serious this really is for America's future.
"The corruption of the universities is a terrible shame upon the United States and a cause of profound sadness among American conservatives. When we complain about the abuses on campus, it is not out of glee at scoring a point against an ideological opponent, but out of terrible regret that some of the most essential institutions of this great country - the institutions at which learning and inquiry ought to be honored and served - have so often perverted their best natures to serve bad causes.
America suffers from a dangerous separation of its mind and soul. Its elite intellectual institutions are too often hostile to the country's culture and founding values. As the Journal reporters mention, Harvard continues to ban ROTC from campus for fear of offending the university's militant gay lobby; as Samuel Huntington details in his important book, Who We Are, elite institutions like Harvard regard themselves as multinational, multicultural enterprises independent of the nation and the people that created, sustain, and defend them.
This separation serves nobody. It makes places like Harvard effete and irrelevant. I had lunch a little while ago with a representative of another prestigious school. 'We see it as our mission,' he told me, 'to train leaders.' But how can you do that, I asked, when you are instilling your leaders with an ideology that is despised and mistrusted by their potential followers?
At the same time, it badly disserves America to lose the services of places like Harvard. Despite the health and strength of its soul and sinew, a country cannot thrive in a dangerous world with a diseased mind."
Think about how serious this really is for America's future.
Krugman Attacks Greenspan
Paul Krugman, the former financial advisor to Enron, and the columnist I find to be the worst economic thinker in history, in his latest attack on social security privativation calls Chairman Greenspan a "partisan hack" in his column called Three-Card Maestro:
"On Wednesday Mr. Greenspan endorsed Social Security privatization. "
"...a disturbing thing about Wednesday's hearing was the deference with which Democratic senators treated Mr. Greenspan. They acted as if he were still playing his proper role, acting as a nonpartisan source of economic advice. After the hearing, rather than challenging Mr. Greenspan's testimony, they tried to spin it in their favor.But Mr. Greenspan is no longer entitled to such deference. By repeatedly shilling for whatever the Bush administration wants, he has betrayed the trust placed in Fed chairmen, and deserves to be treated as just another partisan hack. "
The entire world hangs on Dr. Greenspan's every word to Krugman's chagrin.
"On Wednesday Mr. Greenspan endorsed Social Security privatization. "
"...a disturbing thing about Wednesday's hearing was the deference with which Democratic senators treated Mr. Greenspan. They acted as if he were still playing his proper role, acting as a nonpartisan source of economic advice. After the hearing, rather than challenging Mr. Greenspan's testimony, they tried to spin it in their favor.But Mr. Greenspan is no longer entitled to such deference. By repeatedly shilling for whatever the Bush administration wants, he has betrayed the trust placed in Fed chairmen, and deserves to be treated as just another partisan hack. "
The entire world hangs on Dr. Greenspan's every word to Krugman's chagrin.
Thursday, February 17, 2005
Thomas E. Nugent on Economic Technology
NRO Financial:
"Since 1971, there have been three important advances in economic technology that have allowed the U.S. to maintain leadership in economic policy: the removal of the gold standard, a dramatic change in monetary policy, and pro-growth tax-rate reductions. Taken together, they represent the continuing triumph of economic technology. "
"President Bush's second term is likely to be characterized by further changes in fiscal policy that will lower taxes for most Americans and provide additional fiscal-policy stimulus to keep the U.S. economy on a growth track. One risk to a continued strong economy and bull market is the possibility that the majority of liberal politicians, along with some traditionally conservative politicians, fail to recognize the need for deficit spending when the economy is not operating at full capacity.Still, without the advances in economic technology during the last 35 years, we wouldn't be world leaders. The U.S. took the lead in the development and implementation of economic technology and changed the lion's share of world economies for the better. "
Read it all if you can.
"Since 1971, there have been three important advances in economic technology that have allowed the U.S. to maintain leadership in economic policy: the removal of the gold standard, a dramatic change in monetary policy, and pro-growth tax-rate reductions. Taken together, they represent the continuing triumph of economic technology. "
"President Bush's second term is likely to be characterized by further changes in fiscal policy that will lower taxes for most Americans and provide additional fiscal-policy stimulus to keep the U.S. economy on a growth track. One risk to a continued strong economy and bull market is the possibility that the majority of liberal politicians, along with some traditionally conservative politicians, fail to recognize the need for deficit spending when the economy is not operating at full capacity.Still, without the advances in economic technology during the last 35 years, we wouldn't be world leaders. The U.S. took the lead in the development and implementation of economic technology and changed the lion's share of world economies for the better. "
Read it all if you can.
More on Hariri from Fouad Ajami in the WSJ
OpinionJournal - Featured Article:
"It will not do for the Syrians to profess horror at this crime of Hariri's assassination. There is an old tradition, and an old saying, in the hard hill country of Lebanon about killing a man and walking in his funeral procession. The only antidote to this terrible, senseless death, is the eviction of Syria from Lebanon. "
"It would be fitting that the Syrian hegemony in Lebanon consolidated during the first war against Saddam Hussein would be undone in the course of this new campaign in Iraq."
"There is talk nowadays of spreading liberty to Arab lands, changing the ways of the Arabs, putting an end to regimes that harbor terror. The restoration of Lebanon's sovereignty ought to be one way for the Arabs to break with the culture of dictators and police states, and with the time of the car bombs. Hariri sought for his country a businessman's peace. His way was a break with the politics of charisma and ideology that has wrecked the Arab world; he believed in philanthropy and practical work. His vision may not have been stirring. But there was dignity in it, and a reprieve from the time of darkness. "
"It will not do for the Syrians to profess horror at this crime of Hariri's assassination. There is an old tradition, and an old saying, in the hard hill country of Lebanon about killing a man and walking in his funeral procession. The only antidote to this terrible, senseless death, is the eviction of Syria from Lebanon. "
"It would be fitting that the Syrian hegemony in Lebanon consolidated during the first war against Saddam Hussein would be undone in the course of this new campaign in Iraq."
"There is talk nowadays of spreading liberty to Arab lands, changing the ways of the Arabs, putting an end to regimes that harbor terror. The restoration of Lebanon's sovereignty ought to be one way for the Arabs to break with the culture of dictators and police states, and with the time of the car bombs. Hariri sought for his country a businessman's peace. His way was a break with the politics of charisma and ideology that has wrecked the Arab world; he believed in philanthropy and practical work. His vision may not have been stirring. But there was dignity in it, and a reprieve from the time of darkness. "
Freidman with Excellent Column
The headline that Tom Friedman had a good column is not unusual in my opinion. Mr Freidman is certainly left of me but an excellent writer and sometimes absolutely correct. Mr. Hariri's assassination has not received the attention it should in the MSM. A portion of Freidman in The New York Times: 'Hama Rules':
"Rafik Hariri stopped playing by 'Lebanese Rules' - eating any crow the Syrians crammed down Lebanon's throat - and openly challenged Syrian imperialism. If the Lebanese want to be free, they have got to take the lead. They have to summon the same civic courage that Mr. Hariri did and that the Iraqi public did - the courage to look the fascists around them in the eye, call them in the press and in public by their real names, and confront the European Union and the Arab League for their willingness to ignore the Syrian oppression.
Nothing drives a dictatorship like Syria's more crazy than civil disobedience and truth-telling: when people stop being intimidated, stand up for their own freedom and go on strike against their occupiers. The Lebanese can't play by Hama Rules and must stop playing by the old Lebanese Rules. They must start playing by Baghdad Rules.
Baghdad Rules mean the Lebanese giving the Syrian regime - every day, everywhere - the purple finger. "
"Rafik Hariri stopped playing by 'Lebanese Rules' - eating any crow the Syrians crammed down Lebanon's throat - and openly challenged Syrian imperialism. If the Lebanese want to be free, they have got to take the lead. They have to summon the same civic courage that Mr. Hariri did and that the Iraqi public did - the courage to look the fascists around them in the eye, call them in the press and in public by their real names, and confront the European Union and the Arab League for their willingness to ignore the Syrian oppression.
Nothing drives a dictatorship like Syria's more crazy than civil disobedience and truth-telling: when people stop being intimidated, stand up for their own freedom and go on strike against their occupiers. The Lebanese can't play by Hama Rules and must stop playing by the old Lebanese Rules. They must start playing by Baghdad Rules.
Baghdad Rules mean the Lebanese giving the Syrian regime - every day, everywhere - the purple finger. "
Wednesday, February 16, 2005
Washington Post AGREES with Personal Retirement Account Reasoning
Mr. Bush's Personal Accounts (washingtonpost.com):
"It's true that personal accounts, by themselves, would not reduce Social Security's deficit. Mr. Bush's proposal gives workers the option of diverting part of their Social Security taxes into personal accounts; in return, workers who exercise that option accept a cut in future payments from the traditional Social Security system. This exchange is designed to be financially neutral for the government: hence the official comments. But this doesn't mean that personal accounts have no impact on Social Security's solvency. By investing partly in stocks, personal accounts would boost benefits for the average retiree -- and hence make it politically easier to take the tough steps necessary to fix the solvency problem. "
"In short, the equity premium is real even though its precise size is unknowable; it amounts to a strong argument in favor of personal accounts. "
"It's true that personal accounts, by themselves, would not reduce Social Security's deficit. Mr. Bush's proposal gives workers the option of diverting part of their Social Security taxes into personal accounts; in return, workers who exercise that option accept a cut in future payments from the traditional Social Security system. This exchange is designed to be financially neutral for the government: hence the official comments. But this doesn't mean that personal accounts have no impact on Social Security's solvency. By investing partly in stocks, personal accounts would boost benefits for the average retiree -- and hence make it politically easier to take the tough steps necessary to fix the solvency problem. "
"In short, the equity premium is real even though its precise size is unknowable; it amounts to a strong argument in favor of personal accounts. "
Social Security:An Eighth of Every Paycheck
OK, just a couple of blasts from the recent past before I go real time. Check out the Boston Globe Op-ed:
"YOU DON'T have to be a financial wizard to know that Social Security is a lousy investment. Unlike the money you deposit in a bank or salt away in an IRA, you don't own the money you pay into Social Security. You have no legal right to get those dollars back, and when you die you can't pass them on to your heirs. Nor can you use your Social Security account before you retire -- you can't borrow against it and you can't cash it in. You aren't allowed to put the money into a balanced portfolio. You can't even watch as the interest accumulates, since your Social Security nest egg doesn't earn any interest."
"Your nest egg, in fact, doesn't even exist. Because Social Security is financed on a pay-as-you-go system, the dollars withheld from your paycheck today are immediately paid out to retirees. The benefits you receive when you retire will be funded by the payroll taxes then being collected. "
"Social Security wasn't always a sucker's game. As with all Ponzi schemes, players who got in early made out like bandits. For many years, Social Security deductions were minuscule. Until 1949, the combined employer/employee tax rate was only 2 percent, and it was imposed on just the first $3,000 of income, for a maximum payroll tax of just $60 a year. The first Social Security recipient was Ida May Fuller of Ludlow, Vt., who retired in 1940 after having paid a grand total of $44 in payroll taxes. By the time she died in 1975, she had collected $20,933.52 in benefits -- a return on her ''investment' of more than 47,000 percent."
"And a generation later? Today Social Security skims off 12.4 percent of the first $90,000 earned -- one-eighth of every paycheck. There are no exemptions, no deductions. It kicks in from the very first dollar of income. It is the biggest tax the average American household faces -- 80 percent of us pay more in Social Security taxes than we do in income tax.One tiny notch at a time, payroll taxes have been ratcheted up to a level that would have been unthinkable in Franklin Delano Roosevelt's day. No wonder Social Security is so unpopular among the young. It provides no security for their retirement, while impoverishing them in the present. In exchange for an eighth of their earnings today, it guarantees nothing but higher taxes tomorrow. That there are politicians who defend this arrangement wouldn't have surprised FDR. But how shocked he would be that they call themselves Democrats."
"YOU DON'T have to be a financial wizard to know that Social Security is a lousy investment. Unlike the money you deposit in a bank or salt away in an IRA, you don't own the money you pay into Social Security. You have no legal right to get those dollars back, and when you die you can't pass them on to your heirs. Nor can you use your Social Security account before you retire -- you can't borrow against it and you can't cash it in. You aren't allowed to put the money into a balanced portfolio. You can't even watch as the interest accumulates, since your Social Security nest egg doesn't earn any interest."
"Your nest egg, in fact, doesn't even exist. Because Social Security is financed on a pay-as-you-go system, the dollars withheld from your paycheck today are immediately paid out to retirees. The benefits you receive when you retire will be funded by the payroll taxes then being collected. "
"Social Security wasn't always a sucker's game. As with all Ponzi schemes, players who got in early made out like bandits. For many years, Social Security deductions were minuscule. Until 1949, the combined employer/employee tax rate was only 2 percent, and it was imposed on just the first $3,000 of income, for a maximum payroll tax of just $60 a year. The first Social Security recipient was Ida May Fuller of Ludlow, Vt., who retired in 1940 after having paid a grand total of $44 in payroll taxes. By the time she died in 1975, she had collected $20,933.52 in benefits -- a return on her ''investment' of more than 47,000 percent."
"And a generation later? Today Social Security skims off 12.4 percent of the first $90,000 earned -- one-eighth of every paycheck. There are no exemptions, no deductions. It kicks in from the very first dollar of income. It is the biggest tax the average American household faces -- 80 percent of us pay more in Social Security taxes than we do in income tax.One tiny notch at a time, payroll taxes have been ratcheted up to a level that would have been unthinkable in Franklin Delano Roosevelt's day. No wonder Social Security is so unpopular among the young. It provides no security for their retirement, while impoverishing them in the present. In exchange for an eighth of their earnings today, it guarantees nothing but higher taxes tomorrow. That there are politicians who defend this arrangement wouldn't have surprised FDR. But how shocked he would be that they call themselves Democrats."
Finally Back
My "return shortly" was longer than I imagined. To make a long story very short, I sold one monitor which led to other things.... Anyway, I am back. I will not attempt to comment on all that has happened in the meantime knowing you are up to speed but merely resume posting as if the time warp never happened.
Monday, January 24, 2005
Away for a Few Days
I will be away from posting for a few days as I trade out and bring in some equipment and catch up on some other things for a few days. Back soon!
Mark Steyn on the Democrats: "cynicism and delusion"
He's a worldbeater, all right:
"The Democrats' big phrase is 'exit strategy.' Time and again, their senators demanded that Rice tell 'em what the 'exit strategy' for Iraq was. The correct answer is: There isn't one, and there shouldn't be one, and it's a dumb expression. The more polite response came in the president's inaugural address: ''The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands.'' Next week's election in Iraq will go not perfectly but well enough, and in time the number of U.S. troops needed there will be reduced, and in some more time they'll be reduced more dramatically, and one day there'll be none at all, just a small diplomatic presence..."
"...On Sept. 11, the world came unspun: There's no shame in acknowledging, as Condi Rice did last week, that previous policy -- Republican and Democrat -- toward the Middle East is wrong. But there's something silly and immature about a party that, from Kerry to Boxer to Byrd, can't get beyond spin, grandstanding and debater's points....
"If the president's speech yoked idealism and realism, that doesn't leave much for dissenting Dems except their own peculiar combination of cynicism and delusion."
[Bold was mine.] Steyn never pulls any punches.
"The Democrats' big phrase is 'exit strategy.' Time and again, their senators demanded that Rice tell 'em what the 'exit strategy' for Iraq was. The correct answer is: There isn't one, and there shouldn't be one, and it's a dumb expression. The more polite response came in the president's inaugural address: ''The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands.'' Next week's election in Iraq will go not perfectly but well enough, and in time the number of U.S. troops needed there will be reduced, and in some more time they'll be reduced more dramatically, and one day there'll be none at all, just a small diplomatic presence..."
"...On Sept. 11, the world came unspun: There's no shame in acknowledging, as Condi Rice did last week, that previous policy -- Republican and Democrat -- toward the Middle East is wrong. But there's something silly and immature about a party that, from Kerry to Boxer to Byrd, can't get beyond spin, grandstanding and debater's points....
"If the president's speech yoked idealism and realism, that doesn't leave much for dissenting Dems except their own peculiar combination of cynicism and delusion."
[Bold was mine.] Steyn never pulls any punches.
The Economist on George Bush's Second Term
Economist.com George Bush's second term:
"George Bush began his second term with a speech calling for freedom around the world. But for the conservative, radical president, freedom also means big changes to domestic programmes. Can Mr Bush realise his vision of an ownership society?"
"...the president also has a vision of completing the unfinished work of American freedom. For him, this means a society that gives every citizen a stake in the promise and future of our country. It sounds like anodyne stuff, but it has a very specific meaning. In his second term, the president will attempt a radical transformation of some of the mainstays of the American economy, in particular the tax code and the pension system."
"So the fiscal squeeze will make it hard for Mr Bush to achieve his two biggest goals: reforming the tax code and introducing private accounts into Social Security, the federal pensions programme. Overhauling Social Security will incur big transition costs, even if the move to private accounts is eventually successful. Reforming the tax system need not, in principle, make the deficit worse. But if Mr Bush simplifies the tax code (which is politically popular) he will also have to broaden the tax base (which is not). The prospects for Social Security reform depend on who wins the communications war. "
"The Democrats will have their own communications strategy. In particular, they will raise the spectre of cuts in guaranteed benefits: if the contributions of the young are siphoned off into private accounts, there is no way to promise current levels of benefits to the old without actually making the deficit worse. And the Democrats have experience in demagoguery on entitlement cuts. In the late 1990s, they successfully painted the Republican Congress's plans to slow Medicare growth as throwing Granny out of her wheelchair. Now, the Democrats will say, the Republicans want to snatch the pension from her purse, too.
Despite the risks, Mr Bush will move early and forcefully on Social Security. Less clear are the prospects for reform of the tax code. Breathless conservatives around him want to increase America's dismal savings rate by shifting the tax burden from investment income to consumption. But such a radical overhaul is unlikely, especially if Mr Bush has already expended a great deal of political capital on Social Security. Instead, the president is likely to focus on making his first-term tax cuts permanent and introducing some other changes at the margin. One would be to eliminate the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), originally devised to keep the rich from finding too many loopholes, but now hitting many upper-middle income families. Killing the AMT will require finding money elsewhere. Mr Bush says he wants to cut other deductions and loopholes such as the deduction of state income taxes from federally taxable income. But each loophole has a vocal constituency, both in Congress and among voters.
Mr Bush may feel a wind at his back thanks to his re-election. But he has set himself mammoth tasks."
Read it all if you can for the full slanr from The Economist.
"George Bush began his second term with a speech calling for freedom around the world. But for the conservative, radical president, freedom also means big changes to domestic programmes. Can Mr Bush realise his vision of an ownership society?"
"...the president also has a vision of completing the unfinished work of American freedom. For him, this means a society that gives every citizen a stake in the promise and future of our country. It sounds like anodyne stuff, but it has a very specific meaning. In his second term, the president will attempt a radical transformation of some of the mainstays of the American economy, in particular the tax code and the pension system."
"So the fiscal squeeze will make it hard for Mr Bush to achieve his two biggest goals: reforming the tax code and introducing private accounts into Social Security, the federal pensions programme. Overhauling Social Security will incur big transition costs, even if the move to private accounts is eventually successful. Reforming the tax system need not, in principle, make the deficit worse. But if Mr Bush simplifies the tax code (which is politically popular) he will also have to broaden the tax base (which is not). The prospects for Social Security reform depend on who wins the communications war. "
"The Democrats will have their own communications strategy. In particular, they will raise the spectre of cuts in guaranteed benefits: if the contributions of the young are siphoned off into private accounts, there is no way to promise current levels of benefits to the old without actually making the deficit worse. And the Democrats have experience in demagoguery on entitlement cuts. In the late 1990s, they successfully painted the Republican Congress's plans to slow Medicare growth as throwing Granny out of her wheelchair. Now, the Democrats will say, the Republicans want to snatch the pension from her purse, too.
Despite the risks, Mr Bush will move early and forcefully on Social Security. Less clear are the prospects for reform of the tax code. Breathless conservatives around him want to increase America's dismal savings rate by shifting the tax burden from investment income to consumption. But such a radical overhaul is unlikely, especially if Mr Bush has already expended a great deal of political capital on Social Security. Instead, the president is likely to focus on making his first-term tax cuts permanent and introducing some other changes at the margin. One would be to eliminate the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), originally devised to keep the rich from finding too many loopholes, but now hitting many upper-middle income families. Killing the AMT will require finding money elsewhere. Mr Bush says he wants to cut other deductions and loopholes such as the deduction of state income taxes from federally taxable income. But each loophole has a vocal constituency, both in Congress and among voters.
Mr Bush may feel a wind at his back thanks to his re-election. But he has set himself mammoth tasks."
Read it all if you can for the full slanr from The Economist.
Sunday, January 23, 2005
Bush Ventures Out Into Snow for Alfalfa Club Dinner
"The president and his wife, Laura, braved snow-covered downtown streets in their motorcade to attend to the Alfalfa Club dinner Saturday, an annual event where Washington political and business leaders gather to give humorous speeches."
"The club is named after the alfalfa plant because its roots will range far afield to reach liquid refreshment. Its sole task is holding the annual dinner. "
I never knew.
"The club is named after the alfalfa plant because its roots will range far afield to reach liquid refreshment. Its sole task is holding the annual dinner. "
I never knew.
Friedman's Latest from Paris
Friedman in Europe, Divided We Stand:
"Paris - There's only one thing you can say about the elections in Iraq: They are either going to be the end of the beginning there or the beginning of the end.
Either Iraqis turn out in large numbers to take control of their own future and write their own constitution - and I think they will - or the fascist insurgents there prevent them from doing so,... I've argued the war on terrorism is really a war of ideas within the Muslim world - a war between those who want to wall Islam off from modernity, and defend it with a suicide cult, and those who want to bring Islam into the 21st century and preserve it as a compassionate faith. This war of ideas is not one that the West can fight, only promote. Muslims have to fight it from within. That is what is at stake in the Iraqi elections. This is the first great battle in the post-9/11 war of ideas. "
"I spent Friday morning interviewing two 18-year-old French Muslim girls in the Paris immigrant district of St.-Ouen. (It is about a mile from the school where in March 2003 a French Muslim girl, who had refused the veil and rebuffed the advances of a Muslim boy, was thrown into a garbage can by three Muslim teenagers, who then tossed lighted cigarette butts into the can and closed the lid.) Both girls I interviewed wore veils and one also wore a full Afghan-like head-to-toe covering; one was of Egyptian parents, the other of Tunisian parents, but both were born and raised in France. What did I learn from them? That they got all their news from Al Jazeera TV, because they did not believe French TV, that the person they admired most in the world was Osama bin Laden, because he was defending Islam, that suicide 'martyrdom' was justified because there was no greater glory than dying in defense of Islam, that they saw themselves as Muslims first and French citizens last, and that all their friends felt pretty much the same.
We were not in Kabul. We were standing outside their French public high school - a short ride from the Eiffel Tower. "
"Paris - There's only one thing you can say about the elections in Iraq: They are either going to be the end of the beginning there or the beginning of the end.
Either Iraqis turn out in large numbers to take control of their own future and write their own constitution - and I think they will - or the fascist insurgents there prevent them from doing so,... I've argued the war on terrorism is really a war of ideas within the Muslim world - a war between those who want to wall Islam off from modernity, and defend it with a suicide cult, and those who want to bring Islam into the 21st century and preserve it as a compassionate faith. This war of ideas is not one that the West can fight, only promote. Muslims have to fight it from within. That is what is at stake in the Iraqi elections. This is the first great battle in the post-9/11 war of ideas. "
"I spent Friday morning interviewing two 18-year-old French Muslim girls in the Paris immigrant district of St.-Ouen. (It is about a mile from the school where in March 2003 a French Muslim girl, who had refused the veil and rebuffed the advances of a Muslim boy, was thrown into a garbage can by three Muslim teenagers, who then tossed lighted cigarette butts into the can and closed the lid.) Both girls I interviewed wore veils and one also wore a full Afghan-like head-to-toe covering; one was of Egyptian parents, the other of Tunisian parents, but both were born and raised in France. What did I learn from them? That they got all their news from Al Jazeera TV, because they did not believe French TV, that the person they admired most in the world was Osama bin Laden, because he was defending Islam, that suicide 'martyrdom' was justified because there was no greater glory than dying in defense of Islam, that they saw themselves as Muslims first and French citizens last, and that all their friends felt pretty much the same.
We were not in Kabul. We were standing outside their French public high school - a short ride from the Eiffel Tower. "
Another Critic On Krugman's Column
And from JustOneMinute which takes longer than a minute but is simple actually:
"The Earnest Prof has an unsolved arithmetic problem; perhaps we can help him with it.
...if we take into account realistic estimates of the fees that mutual funds will charge - remember, in Britain those fees reduce workers' nest eggs by 20 to 30 percent - privatization turns into a lose-lose proposition."
"Hmm, since my beer is cold, I know I am not in Britain, so what might a realistic estimate of cumulative fund fees be here in the States? "
"The CBO, in their July 2004 evaluation, assumed account fees of 0.30% per annum on total assets, which seems plausible for the types of comparable funds run by the Federal Thrift Savings Plan. Shall we try a simple calculation to help the Prof?
Suppose we are 20 years old, and our annual contribution will be an even $1,000 for the next 45 years. Let's keep this real simple, and assume we put the first $1,000 in a no-interest checking account with a 0.30% annual fee. This means that my first $1,000 will be charged $3 in the first year. If I had a spreadsheet (I will in a minute) I would reduce the $1,000 balance by that amount and calculate a new, slightly smaller fee for the second year. But for purposes of this estimation, lets just reduce my $1,000 deposit by $3 each year for 45 years. In that case, the total fees charged on my first $1,000 deposit are ($3 x 45) = $135. That is 13.5% of my initial deposit. But wait! I will also make deposits in subsequent years, and none of them will be charged fees over a full 45 year term. Good point. The last deposit will be charged a fee for just one year; taking a quick average of 45 years and 1 year, we can estimate that the average term is 23 years. The average fee is then $3 x 23, or $69. This is roughly 7% of my $1,000 deposit. Seems too easy, doesn't it? Well, with a modest spreadsheet, we can vary the growth rate in the annual deposit, and plug in an annual return on the account balance. Both of these factors make the account balance, and hence the annual fee, get larger. For 0% deposit growth and a 0% account return, the ending ratio, after 45 years, of an account with a 0.30% fee can be compared to a no-fee account."
"The result is a bit lower than our 7% estimate, coming in at 6.3%. For an account with 5% annual deposit growth (that would represent rising wages), and a 15% account return (that would be an astonishing stock market run), the expenses consume 8.5% of the 'no-fee' account. So the 'right' answer is somewhere in the 6% to 8% range. But hold on! Didn't Paul Krugman just ask for a 'reasonable' estimate, and throw out 20% to 30% in Britain as a comparison? Based on the CBO number and some mental math, we came to 7%, which was quickly confirmed by a more elaborate calculation.
Why, oh why is Prof. Krugman off by a factor of 300% to 400%? How can it be that he is misrepresenting the intelligence and hyping his case? You've got me. Possible answers might include: (a) this was too complicated a calculation for a prospective Nobel Laureate; (b) this was an easy calculation but not a helpful result for polemical purposes; or (c) his beer was warm, and all the folks in Princeton speak English, so he thought he was in Britain.
Enjoy the weekend - pick (a), and put yourself up for a Nobel Prize."
"The Earnest Prof has an unsolved arithmetic problem; perhaps we can help him with it.
...if we take into account realistic estimates of the fees that mutual funds will charge - remember, in Britain those fees reduce workers' nest eggs by 20 to 30 percent - privatization turns into a lose-lose proposition."
"Hmm, since my beer is cold, I know I am not in Britain, so what might a realistic estimate of cumulative fund fees be here in the States? "
"The CBO, in their July 2004 evaluation, assumed account fees of 0.30% per annum on total assets, which seems plausible for the types of comparable funds run by the Federal Thrift Savings Plan. Shall we try a simple calculation to help the Prof?
Suppose we are 20 years old, and our annual contribution will be an even $1,000 for the next 45 years. Let's keep this real simple, and assume we put the first $1,000 in a no-interest checking account with a 0.30% annual fee. This means that my first $1,000 will be charged $3 in the first year. If I had a spreadsheet (I will in a minute) I would reduce the $1,000 balance by that amount and calculate a new, slightly smaller fee for the second year. But for purposes of this estimation, lets just reduce my $1,000 deposit by $3 each year for 45 years. In that case, the total fees charged on my first $1,000 deposit are ($3 x 45) = $135. That is 13.5% of my initial deposit. But wait! I will also make deposits in subsequent years, and none of them will be charged fees over a full 45 year term. Good point. The last deposit will be charged a fee for just one year; taking a quick average of 45 years and 1 year, we can estimate that the average term is 23 years. The average fee is then $3 x 23, or $69. This is roughly 7% of my $1,000 deposit. Seems too easy, doesn't it? Well, with a modest spreadsheet, we can vary the growth rate in the annual deposit, and plug in an annual return on the account balance. Both of these factors make the account balance, and hence the annual fee, get larger. For 0% deposit growth and a 0% account return, the ending ratio, after 45 years, of an account with a 0.30% fee can be compared to a no-fee account."
"The result is a bit lower than our 7% estimate, coming in at 6.3%. For an account with 5% annual deposit growth (that would represent rising wages), and a 15% account return (that would be an astonishing stock market run), the expenses consume 8.5% of the 'no-fee' account. So the 'right' answer is somewhere in the 6% to 8% range. But hold on! Didn't Paul Krugman just ask for a 'reasonable' estimate, and throw out 20% to 30% in Britain as a comparison? Based on the CBO number and some mental math, we came to 7%, which was quickly confirmed by a more elaborate calculation.
Why, oh why is Prof. Krugman off by a factor of 300% to 400%? How can it be that he is misrepresenting the intelligence and hyping his case? You've got me. Possible answers might include: (a) this was too complicated a calculation for a prospective Nobel Laureate; (b) this was an easy calculation but not a helpful result for polemical purposes; or (c) his beer was warm, and all the folks in Princeton speak English, so he thought he was in Britain.
Enjoy the weekend - pick (a), and put yourself up for a Nobel Prize."
On Krugman's Latest Rant - Other Opinions
Courtesy of Instapundit from Scrivener.net:
"Yet again Paul Krugman attacks private accounts for Social Security with the claim that returns in stocks will be not high enough and 'risky'."
"And who does Krugman choose to invoke as an authority for his argument? Why, who could be more impressive than the academic world's most noted advocate of stocks as a long-term investment, Prof. Jeremy Siegel of Wharton... That's why even Jeremy Siegel, whose 'Stocks for the Long Run' is often cited by those who favor stocks over bonds, has conceded that 'returns on stocks over bonds won't be as large as in the past.'
But a very high return on stocks over bonds is essential in privatization schemes... Yet wait a minute. With Krugman (not to mention the other NY Times op-eders) you can never trust a quote. Let's do a quick Google search. Yes, here's what Siegel actually said ... 'I agree that returns on stocks over bonds won't be as large as in the past. But I'm more optimistic than Rob. Looking over the next quarter-century, I see a 5%-to-6% return on stocks, adjusted for inflation. I'm pessimistic about real bond returns. I think they're likely to be in the 0%-to-1% range over the next five years, and closer to 3% after that...'
My gosh! In support of his argument that the spread between bond and stock yields must close so that stocks cease to be a more attractive investment than bonds, Krugman quotes Jeremy Siegel arguing exactly the opposite in Forbes, making the case for stocks as a better long-term investment than bonds."
"Yet again Paul Krugman attacks private accounts for Social Security with the claim that returns in stocks will be not high enough and 'risky'."
"And who does Krugman choose to invoke as an authority for his argument? Why, who could be more impressive than the academic world's most noted advocate of stocks as a long-term investment, Prof. Jeremy Siegel of Wharton... That's why even Jeremy Siegel, whose 'Stocks for the Long Run' is often cited by those who favor stocks over bonds, has conceded that 'returns on stocks over bonds won't be as large as in the past.'
But a very high return on stocks over bonds is essential in privatization schemes... Yet wait a minute. With Krugman (not to mention the other NY Times op-eders) you can never trust a quote. Let's do a quick Google search. Yes, here's what Siegel actually said ... 'I agree that returns on stocks over bonds won't be as large as in the past. But I'm more optimistic than Rob. Looking over the next quarter-century, I see a 5%-to-6% return on stocks, adjusted for inflation. I'm pessimistic about real bond returns. I think they're likely to be in the 0%-to-1% range over the next five years, and closer to 3% after that...'
My gosh! In support of his argument that the spread between bond and stock yields must close so that stocks cease to be a more attractive investment than bonds, Krugman quotes Jeremy Siegel arguing exactly the opposite in Forbes, making the case for stocks as a better long-term investment than bonds."
Saturday, January 22, 2005
GWOT -Too Much Information - Is Anything Secret Anymore?
The nature of what is top secret and what is in our newspapers continues to evolve downward in terms of national security even during the global war on terror (GWOT) - from the NYT: In Terror Fight, Domestic Roles for U.S. Troops: [The bold marks are mine.]
"Somewhere in the shadows of the White House and the Capitol this week, a small group of super-secret commandos stood ready with state-of-the-art weaponry to swing into action to protect the presidency in ways that have never been fully revealed before. As part of the extraordinary army of 13,000 troops, police officers and federal agents marshaled to secure the inauguration, these elite forces were deployed under a 1997 authorization that was updated and enhanced after the Sept. 11 attacks, but nonetheless departs from how the military has historically been used on American soil.
These commandos, operating under a secret counterterrorism program code-named Power Geyser, were mentioned publicly for the first time this week on a Web site for a new book, 'Code Names: Deciphering U.S. Military Plans, Programs and Operation in the 9/11 World,' (Steerforth Press), by William M. Arkin, a former Army intelligence analyst. The precise number of these Special Operations forces in Washington this week is highly classified, but military officials say the numbers are very small, probably not exceeding a few dozen. The special-missions units belong to the Joint Special Operations Command, a secretive command based at Fort Bragg, N.C., whose elements include the Army unit Delta Force. In the past, the command has also provided support to domestic law enforcement agencies during high-risk events like the Olympics and political party conventions, according to the Web site of GlobalSecurity.org, a research organization in Alexandria, Va...."
"Mr. Arkin's book is a glossary of more than 3,000 code names of past and present operations, programs and weapons systems, with brief descriptions of each. Most involved secret activities, and details of many of the programs could not be immediately confirmed. The book also describes American military operations and assistance programs in scores of countries, from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe.
The murky world of 'special access programs' and other secret military and intelligence activities are covered in the book, too. Some code names describe highly classified research programs, like Thirsty Saber, a program that in the 1990's tried to develop a sensor to replace human reasoning. Others describe military installations in foreign countries, like Poker Bluff I, an electronic-eavesdropping collection station in Honduras in the 1980's. Many involve activities related to the survival of the president and constitutional government.
The book, for instance, describes Site R, one of the undisclosed locations used by Vice President Dick Cheney since the Sept. 11 attacks. Site R is a granite mountain shelter just north of Sabillasville, Md., near the Pennsylvania border. It was built in the early 1950's to withstand a Soviet nuclear attack. Mr. Arkin said that 28 positions in the government were covered in the presidential succession plan, including 15 cabinet members, the speaker of the House and president pro tem of the Senate. A White House spokesman declined to comment on the continuity of government activities cited in the book."
"Somewhere in the shadows of the White House and the Capitol this week, a small group of super-secret commandos stood ready with state-of-the-art weaponry to swing into action to protect the presidency in ways that have never been fully revealed before. As part of the extraordinary army of 13,000 troops, police officers and federal agents marshaled to secure the inauguration, these elite forces were deployed under a 1997 authorization that was updated and enhanced after the Sept. 11 attacks, but nonetheless departs from how the military has historically been used on American soil.
These commandos, operating under a secret counterterrorism program code-named Power Geyser, were mentioned publicly for the first time this week on a Web site for a new book, 'Code Names: Deciphering U.S. Military Plans, Programs and Operation in the 9/11 World,' (Steerforth Press), by William M. Arkin, a former Army intelligence analyst. The precise number of these Special Operations forces in Washington this week is highly classified, but military officials say the numbers are very small, probably not exceeding a few dozen. The special-missions units belong to the Joint Special Operations Command, a secretive command based at Fort Bragg, N.C., whose elements include the Army unit Delta Force. In the past, the command has also provided support to domestic law enforcement agencies during high-risk events like the Olympics and political party conventions, according to the Web site of GlobalSecurity.org, a research organization in Alexandria, Va...."
"Mr. Arkin's book is a glossary of more than 3,000 code names of past and present operations, programs and weapons systems, with brief descriptions of each. Most involved secret activities, and details of many of the programs could not be immediately confirmed. The book also describes American military operations and assistance programs in scores of countries, from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe.
The murky world of 'special access programs' and other secret military and intelligence activities are covered in the book, too. Some code names describe highly classified research programs, like Thirsty Saber, a program that in the 1990's tried to develop a sensor to replace human reasoning. Others describe military installations in foreign countries, like Poker Bluff I, an electronic-eavesdropping collection station in Honduras in the 1980's. Many involve activities related to the survival of the president and constitutional government.
The book, for instance, describes Site R, one of the undisclosed locations used by Vice President Dick Cheney since the Sept. 11 attacks. Site R is a granite mountain shelter just north of Sabillasville, Md., near the Pennsylvania border. It was built in the early 1950's to withstand a Soviet nuclear attack. Mr. Arkin said that 28 positions in the government were covered in the presidential succession plan, including 15 cabinet members, the speaker of the House and president pro tem of the Senate. A White House spokesman declined to comment on the continuity of government activities cited in the book."
William Kristol on The Speech
On Tyranny:
"A social science that cannot speak of tyranny with the same confidence with which medicine speaks, for example, of cancer, cannot understand social phenomena as what they are.
--Leo Strauss, On Tyranny
Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered. Yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict the more glorious the triumph.
--Thomas Paine, The Crisis
INFORMED BY STRAUSS and inspired by Paine, appealing to Lincoln and alluding to Truman, beginning with the Constitution and ending with the Declaration, with Biblical phrases echoing throughout--George W. Bush's Second Inaugural was a powerful and subtle speech.
It will also prove to be a historic speech. Less than three and a half years after 9/11, Bush's Second Inaugural moves American foreign policy beyond the war on terror to the larger struggle against tyranny. It grounds Bush's foreign policy--American foreign policy--in American history and American principles. If actions follow words and success greets his efforts, then President Bush will have ushered in a new era in American foreign policy. "
"...If the critics of the speech who have denounced it as simple-minded were to read it, they would find it sophisticated. They might even find it nuanced.
Still, sophisticated and nuanced as it is, it does proclaim the goal of ending tyranny. And just as Truman's speech shaped policy, so Bush's will. As he implicitly acknowledges, his presidency will be judged not by this speech but by his achievements. The speech, by laying out a clear and compelling path for U.S. foreign policy, will make substantial achievements easier. There will be vigorous debates over how to secure these achievements--debates over defense spending and diplomacy, over particular tactics and operational choices. We will at times differ with the president on some of these matters, as we have at times in the past. But on the fundamental American goal, President Bush has it right--profoundly right."
"A social science that cannot speak of tyranny with the same confidence with which medicine speaks, for example, of cancer, cannot understand social phenomena as what they are.
--Leo Strauss, On Tyranny
Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered. Yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict the more glorious the triumph.
--Thomas Paine, The Crisis
INFORMED BY STRAUSS and inspired by Paine, appealing to Lincoln and alluding to Truman, beginning with the Constitution and ending with the Declaration, with Biblical phrases echoing throughout--George W. Bush's Second Inaugural was a powerful and subtle speech.
It will also prove to be a historic speech. Less than three and a half years after 9/11, Bush's Second Inaugural moves American foreign policy beyond the war on terror to the larger struggle against tyranny. It grounds Bush's foreign policy--American foreign policy--in American history and American principles. If actions follow words and success greets his efforts, then President Bush will have ushered in a new era in American foreign policy. "
"...If the critics of the speech who have denounced it as simple-minded were to read it, they would find it sophisticated. They might even find it nuanced.
Still, sophisticated and nuanced as it is, it does proclaim the goal of ending tyranny. And just as Truman's speech shaped policy, so Bush's will. As he implicitly acknowledges, his presidency will be judged not by this speech but by his achievements. The speech, by laying out a clear and compelling path for U.S. foreign policy, will make substantial achievements easier. There will be vigorous debates over how to secure these achievements--debates over defense spending and diplomacy, over particular tactics and operational choices. We will at times differ with the president on some of these matters, as we have at times in the past. But on the fundamental American goal, President Bush has it right--profoundly right."
David Brooks on The Speech: Ideals and Reality
Brooks, who to me seems to be getting better and better with Ideals and Reality:
"Bush's speech, which is being derided for its vagueness and its supposed detachment from the concrete realities, will still be practical and present in the world, yielding consequences every day. With that speech, President Bush's foreign policy doctrine transcended the war on terror. He laid down a standard against which everything he and his successors do will be judged."
"...Bush's inaugural ideals will also be real in the way they motivate our troops in Iraq. Military Times magazine asked its readers if they think the war in Iraq is worth it. Over 60 percent - and two-thirds of Iraq combat vets - said it was. While many back home have lost faith, our troops fight because their efforts are aligned with the core ideals of this country, articulated by Jefferson, Walt Whitman, Lincoln, F.D.R., Truman, J.F.K., Reagan and now Bush.
Americans are, as George Santayana observed, 'idealists working on matter.' On Thursday in Washington, the ideal and the material were on ample display. And we're reminded once again that this country has grown rich, powerful and effective not because its citizens are smarter or better, but because the ideals bequeathed by the founders are practical and true. "
"Bush's speech, which is being derided for its vagueness and its supposed detachment from the concrete realities, will still be practical and present in the world, yielding consequences every day. With that speech, President Bush's foreign policy doctrine transcended the war on terror. He laid down a standard against which everything he and his successors do will be judged."
"...Bush's inaugural ideals will also be real in the way they motivate our troops in Iraq. Military Times magazine asked its readers if they think the war in Iraq is worth it. Over 60 percent - and two-thirds of Iraq combat vets - said it was. While many back home have lost faith, our troops fight because their efforts are aligned with the core ideals of this country, articulated by Jefferson, Walt Whitman, Lincoln, F.D.R., Truman, J.F.K., Reagan and now Bush.
Americans are, as George Santayana observed, 'idealists working on matter.' On Thursday in Washington, the ideal and the material were on ample display. And we're reminded once again that this country has grown rich, powerful and effective not because its citizens are smarter or better, but because the ideals bequeathed by the founders are practical and true. "
Friday, January 21, 2005
Public Embarrassment for My Great State
N. Carolina Capital Disabled by Inch of Snow :
"An inch of snow crippled North Carolina's capital -- and prompted plenty of finger-pointing -- Thursday "
"It was not until late Wednesday that Gov. Mike Easley (D) declared a state of emergency, allowing him to open two state government buildings in downtown Raleigh as shelters to accommodate drivers. He asked residents to stay home Thursday morning so crews could clear the roads."
This was marked by much laughter in Western North Carolina and I am sure by all people used to snow in the wintertime.
"An inch of snow crippled North Carolina's capital -- and prompted plenty of finger-pointing -- Thursday "
"It was not until late Wednesday that Gov. Mike Easley (D) declared a state of emergency, allowing him to open two state government buildings in downtown Raleigh as shelters to accommodate drivers. He asked residents to stay home Thursday morning so crews could clear the roads."
This was marked by much laughter in Western North Carolina and I am sure by all people used to snow in the wintertime.
One British Opinion on the Inaugural Address
Not all Europeans would agree with this from The Times:
"By contrast, George Washington offered the shortest inaugural address to his fellow countrymen. ... Yet, if inclined, George W. Bush could comfortably beat that record in Washington on Thursday. He might legitimately stand up and state in five blunt words: "I own this town now" and then sit down again. And for the next 18 months or so he indeed will.
"...Mr Bush's personal authority, at least until 2007, may be really exceptional. Only Franklin D. Roosevelt has been equivalently placed in the past 100 years. This might oblige his many vocal critics, who have habitually mocked him, to deliver their own five-word speech this Thursday. It should read: "He is not an idiot."
"By contrast, George Washington offered the shortest inaugural address to his fellow countrymen. ... Yet, if inclined, George W. Bush could comfortably beat that record in Washington on Thursday. He might legitimately stand up and state in five blunt words: "I own this town now" and then sit down again. And for the next 18 months or so he indeed will.
"...Mr Bush's personal authority, at least until 2007, may be really exceptional. Only Franklin D. Roosevelt has been equivalently placed in the past 100 years. This might oblige his many vocal critics, who have habitually mocked him, to deliver their own five-word speech this Thursday. It should read: "He is not an idiot."
LA Weekly: Features: On: A Vision of Our Own
"...today's left remains mired in a reflexive, defeatist negativity that became obvious after the election. The Nation's subscribers sent letters calling Bush voters racists, homophobes, warmongers and yahoos. Peter Beinart wrote a much-bruited New Republic piece saying that the Democrats needed to purge polarizing figures like Michael Moore (as if Karl Rove didn't thank God, er, Beelzebub, every single day for the presence of right-wing firebrands like Rush and Sean). Meanwhile, the blogosphere was filled with 'Fuck the South' e-mails and lazy ruminations on the 'red states,' a cliche that manages to insult one's intelligence and the people it supposedly describes. Much of this was rhetorically disastrous, smacking of contempt for the very people the left is hoping to persuade. Reading such things, I was often reminded of that famous old Brecht poem, 'The Solution,' in which he slyly suggests that if the East German government is unhappy with its citizens' behavior, it ought to dissolve the people and elect another."
The LA Weekly is an interesting alternative to The LA Times.
The LA Weekly is an interesting alternative to The LA Times.
Bill Safire on Bush's 'Freedom Speech'
Safire on Bush's 'Freedom Speech':
"On his way out of the first Cabinet meeting after his re-election, President Bush gave his longtime chief speechwriter the theme for the second Inaugural Address: 'I want this to be the freedom speech.'
In the next month, the writer, Michael Gerson, had a heart attack. With two stents in his arteries, the recovering writer received a call from a president who was careful not to apply any deadline pressure. 'I'm not calling to see if the inaugural speech is O.K.,' Bush said. 'I'm calling to see if the guy writing the inaugural speech is O.K.'"
"...the Texan evoked J.F.K.'s 'survival of liberty' phrase to convey his central message: 'The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands.' Bush repeated that internationalist human-rights idea, with a slight change, in these words: 'The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world.' The change in emphasis was addressed to accommodationists who make 'peace' and 'the peace process' the No. 1 priority of foreign policy. Others of us - formerly known as hardliners, now called Wilsonian idealists - put freedom first, recalling that the U.S. has often had to go to war to gain and preserve it. Bush makes clear that it is human liberty, not peace, that takes precedence, and that it is tyrants who enslave peoples, start wars and provoke revolution. Thus, the spread of freedom is the prerequisite to world peace. It takes guts to take on that peace-freedom priority so starkly. Bush, by retaliatory and pre-emptive decisions in his first term - and by his choice of words and his tall stance in this speech, and despite his unmodulated delivery - now drives his critics batty by exuding a buoyant confidence reminiscent of F.D.R. and Truman. He promised to use America's influence 'confidently in freedom's cause.' He jabbed at today's Thomases: 'Some, I know, have questioned the global appeal of liberty, though this time in history, four decades defined by the swiftest advance of freedom ever seen, is an odd time for doubt.'"
"On his way out of the first Cabinet meeting after his re-election, President Bush gave his longtime chief speechwriter the theme for the second Inaugural Address: 'I want this to be the freedom speech.'
In the next month, the writer, Michael Gerson, had a heart attack. With two stents in his arteries, the recovering writer received a call from a president who was careful not to apply any deadline pressure. 'I'm not calling to see if the inaugural speech is O.K.,' Bush said. 'I'm calling to see if the guy writing the inaugural speech is O.K.'"
"...the Texan evoked J.F.K.'s 'survival of liberty' phrase to convey his central message: 'The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands.' Bush repeated that internationalist human-rights idea, with a slight change, in these words: 'The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world.' The change in emphasis was addressed to accommodationists who make 'peace' and 'the peace process' the No. 1 priority of foreign policy. Others of us - formerly known as hardliners, now called Wilsonian idealists - put freedom first, recalling that the U.S. has often had to go to war to gain and preserve it. Bush makes clear that it is human liberty, not peace, that takes precedence, and that it is tyrants who enslave peoples, start wars and provoke revolution. Thus, the spread of freedom is the prerequisite to world peace. It takes guts to take on that peace-freedom priority so starkly. Bush, by retaliatory and pre-emptive decisions in his first term - and by his choice of words and his tall stance in this speech, and despite his unmodulated delivery - now drives his critics batty by exuding a buoyant confidence reminiscent of F.D.R. and Truman. He promised to use America's influence 'confidently in freedom's cause.' He jabbed at today's Thomases: 'Some, I know, have questioned the global appeal of liberty, though this time in history, four decades defined by the swiftest advance of freedom ever seen, is an odd time for doubt.'"
Krugman Continuing to Rant against Social Security Reform: Anything He Hates Is Universally A Good Thing
Paul Krugman, former advisor to Enron, pseudo-economist, and full time kookin the NYT on Friday:
"Sometimes I do find myself puzzled: why don't privatizers understand that their schemes rest on the peculiar belief that there is a giant free lunch there for the taking?
But then I remember what Upton Sinclair wrote: 'It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.' " [italics mine-WAA]
Krugman obviously likes this quote because it defines his existence with the NYT and his use of his supposed knowledge of economics. As you may can tell I don't like Krugman at all. Period.
"Sometimes I do find myself puzzled: why don't privatizers understand that their schemes rest on the peculiar belief that there is a giant free lunch there for the taking?
But then I remember what Upton Sinclair wrote: 'It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.' " [italics mine-WAA]
Krugman obviously likes this quote because it defines his existence with the NYT and his use of his supposed knowledge of economics. As you may can tell I don't like Krugman at all. Period.
Thursday, January 20, 2005
Tom Friedman: An American in Paris
Friedman, who I do enjoy reading and respect although with whom I may disagree from time to time, had this interesting concluding point written for Inauguration Day in his column An American in Paris:
"Funnily enough, the one country on this side of the ocean that would have elected Mr. Bush is not in Europe, but the Middle East: it's Iran, where many young people apparently hunger for Mr. Bush to remove their despotic leaders, the way he did in Iraq.
An Oxford student who had just returned from research in Iran told me that young Iranians were 'loving anything their government hates,' such as Mr. Bush, 'and hating anything their government loves.' Tehran is festooned in 'Down With America' graffiti, the student said, but when he tried to take pictures of it, the Iranian students he was with urged him not to. They said it was just put there by their government and was not how most Iranians felt.
Iran, he said, is the ultimate 'red state.' Go figure. "
This to me unlike perhaps Mr. Friedman meant his "Go figure" is to me a good thing and perhaps a precursor of the President's speech which is billed to be about FREEDOM.
"Funnily enough, the one country on this side of the ocean that would have elected Mr. Bush is not in Europe, but the Middle East: it's Iran, where many young people apparently hunger for Mr. Bush to remove their despotic leaders, the way he did in Iraq.
An Oxford student who had just returned from research in Iran told me that young Iranians were 'loving anything their government hates,' such as Mr. Bush, 'and hating anything their government loves.' Tehran is festooned in 'Down With America' graffiti, the student said, but when he tried to take pictures of it, the Iranian students he was with urged him not to. They said it was just put there by their government and was not how most Iranians felt.
Iran, he said, is the ultimate 'red state.' Go figure. "
This to me unlike perhaps Mr. Friedman meant his "Go figure" is to me a good thing and perhaps a precursor of the President's speech which is billed to be about FREEDOM.
Stating the Important and the Obvious
"Republicans in Congress do have a new, and rare, opportunity. In Mr. Bush, they have a president willing to use his bully pulpit to promote large and long-term reforms, notably on Social Security, health care, liability law, taxes and the judiciary. Doing even two or three of these would be a major achievement."
-Paul Gigot, WSJ
-Paul Gigot, WSJ
Tuesday, January 18, 2005
Brooks on Democrats, Social Security, and His Diagnosis
David Brooks in the NYT on The Gingrich Democrats:
"There is an essential asymmetry in American politics today. There are three conservatives in this country for every two liberals. A Republican can be quite conservative - like Ronald Reagan or George W. Bush - and still win the White House. But only one Democratic presidential candidate has won over 50 percent of the vote in the past 40 years (Jimmy Carter got 50.1 percent in 1976).
That means Republicans can rely on their core instincts and still win, while Democrats cannot. If you look at the race for Democratic Party chairman, you get the impression this is a party that understands this and will seek out people who see the world differently.
But if you look at the campaign against Social Security reform in Congress, you see a party still believing the old ideas will work if only they are pursued more ruthlessly.
This is a delusion. Newt Gingrich did help Republicans regain the majority. But that doesn't mean his tactics, even in caricature form, will work for the Democrats, whose problems are deeper. The truth is that Democrats probably need a leader who will make liberals feel uncomfortable, the way Clinton did, not someone who will make them feel righteous and good. "
"There is an essential asymmetry in American politics today. There are three conservatives in this country for every two liberals. A Republican can be quite conservative - like Ronald Reagan or George W. Bush - and still win the White House. But only one Democratic presidential candidate has won over 50 percent of the vote in the past 40 years (Jimmy Carter got 50.1 percent in 1976).
That means Republicans can rely on their core instincts and still win, while Democrats cannot. If you look at the race for Democratic Party chairman, you get the impression this is a party that understands this and will seek out people who see the world differently.
But if you look at the campaign against Social Security reform in Congress, you see a party still believing the old ideas will work if only they are pursued more ruthlessly.
This is a delusion. Newt Gingrich did help Republicans regain the majority. But that doesn't mean his tactics, even in caricature form, will work for the Democrats, whose problems are deeper. The truth is that Democrats probably need a leader who will make liberals feel uncomfortable, the way Clinton did, not someone who will make them feel righteous and good. "
Monday, January 17, 2005
Benjamin Franklin's Birthday
Today, January 17 is also Benjamin Franklin's birthday. Were he still alive he would be 299 years old today. Next year will be the 300th and Franklin will be our first founding father to reach that point I think. Happy Birthday, Ben!
Martin Luther King Photographs & Quotes
A wonderful collection of photographs from Time is available:Martin Luther King : "PHOTOGRAPHS BY FLIP SCHULKE/CORBIS" and is worth your time to review and remember.
In addition each photo is accompanied with pertinent quotes from Dr. King and for convenience are below as well (but are more meaningful with the photos):
ON NONVIOLENCE (From Birmingham jail, 1963): 'In your statement, you asserted that our actions, even though peaceful, must be condemned because they precipitate violence. Isn't this like condemning Jesus because his unique God-consciousness and never-ceasing devotion to God's will precipitated the evil act of the Crucifixion?' "
"ON BLACKS IN AMERICA (From Birmingham jail, 1963): 'Before the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth, we were here. Before the pen of Jefferson etched across the pages of history the majestic words of the Declaration of Independence, we were here. If the inexpressible cruelties of slavery could not stop us, the opposition we now face will surely fail. We will win our freedom because the sacred heritage of our nation and the eternal will of God are embodied in our echoing demands.' "
"ON NONCOMFORMITY (1963): 'This hour in history needs a dedicated circle of transformed nonconformists. Dangerous passions of pride, hatred and selfishness are enthroned in our lives; truth lies prostrate on the rugged hills of nameless Calvaries. The saving of our world from pending doom will come, not through the complacent adjustment of the conforming majority, but through the creative maladjustment of a nonconforming minority.' "
"ON BLACK POWER (1967): 'Today's despair is a poor chisel to carve out tomorrow's justice. Black Power is an implicit and often explicit belief in black separatism. Yet behind Black Power's legitimate and necessary concern for group unity and black identity lies the belief that there can be a separate black road to power and fulfillment. Few ideas are more unrealistic. There is no salvation for the Negro through isolation.' "
"ON MARCHING FOR CIVIL RIGHTS (Selma to Montgomery, 1965): 'Like an idea whose time has come, not even the marching of mighty armies can halt us. We are moving to the land of freedom. Let us march to the realization of the American dream. Let us march on segregated housing. Let us march on segregated schools. Let us march on poverty. Let us march on ballot boxes, march on ballot boxes until race baiters disappear from the political arena, until the Wallaces of our nation tremble away in silence.' "
"ON PEACE (1964): 'Sooner or later all the people of the world will have to discover a way to live together in peace and thereby transform this pending cosmic elegy into a creative psalm of brotherhood. I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. This is why right temporarily defeated is stronger than evil triumphant.' "
"ON THE DREAM OF FREEDOM (1963): 'So even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed . . . that all men are created equal. I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice. I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today. And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true.' "
"ON FREEDOM (1963): 'So let freedom ring. From the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire, let freedom ring. From the mighty mountains of New York, let freedom ring. From the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania, let freedom ring. But not only that; let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia. Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi. And when this happens, when we let it ring, we will speed that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual: Free at last, free at last/Thank God Almighty, we're free at last.' "
"ON HIS OWN FUTURE (April 3, 1968): 'We've got some difficult days ahead. But it really doesn't matter with me now. Because I've been to the mountaintop. I won't mind. Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I'm not concerned about that now. I just want to do God's will. And he's allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I've looked over, and I've seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you, but I want you to know tonight that we as a people will get to the Promised Land. So I'm happy tonight. I'm not fearing any man. Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord. ' "
On a personal note, this last speech as troubled me for some time. As you recall, Dr. King was assassinated on April 4, 1968 one day after he said, "...I've been to the mountaintop....I would like to live a long life....But I'm not concerned....I just want to do God's will.... Dr. King was 39 years old when he was murdered the next day.
In addition each photo is accompanied with pertinent quotes from Dr. King and for convenience are below as well (but are more meaningful with the photos):
ON NONVIOLENCE (From Birmingham jail, 1963): 'In your statement, you asserted that our actions, even though peaceful, must be condemned because they precipitate violence. Isn't this like condemning Jesus because his unique God-consciousness and never-ceasing devotion to God's will precipitated the evil act of the Crucifixion?' "
"ON BLACKS IN AMERICA (From Birmingham jail, 1963): 'Before the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth, we were here. Before the pen of Jefferson etched across the pages of history the majestic words of the Declaration of Independence, we were here. If the inexpressible cruelties of slavery could not stop us, the opposition we now face will surely fail. We will win our freedom because the sacred heritage of our nation and the eternal will of God are embodied in our echoing demands.' "
"ON NONCOMFORMITY (1963): 'This hour in history needs a dedicated circle of transformed nonconformists. Dangerous passions of pride, hatred and selfishness are enthroned in our lives; truth lies prostrate on the rugged hills of nameless Calvaries. The saving of our world from pending doom will come, not through the complacent adjustment of the conforming majority, but through the creative maladjustment of a nonconforming minority.' "
"ON BLACK POWER (1967): 'Today's despair is a poor chisel to carve out tomorrow's justice. Black Power is an implicit and often explicit belief in black separatism. Yet behind Black Power's legitimate and necessary concern for group unity and black identity lies the belief that there can be a separate black road to power and fulfillment. Few ideas are more unrealistic. There is no salvation for the Negro through isolation.' "
"ON MARCHING FOR CIVIL RIGHTS (Selma to Montgomery, 1965): 'Like an idea whose time has come, not even the marching of mighty armies can halt us. We are moving to the land of freedom. Let us march to the realization of the American dream. Let us march on segregated housing. Let us march on segregated schools. Let us march on poverty. Let us march on ballot boxes, march on ballot boxes until race baiters disappear from the political arena, until the Wallaces of our nation tremble away in silence.' "
"ON PEACE (1964): 'Sooner or later all the people of the world will have to discover a way to live together in peace and thereby transform this pending cosmic elegy into a creative psalm of brotherhood. I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. This is why right temporarily defeated is stronger than evil triumphant.' "
"ON THE DREAM OF FREEDOM (1963): 'So even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed . . . that all men are created equal. I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice. I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today. And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true.' "
"ON FREEDOM (1963): 'So let freedom ring. From the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire, let freedom ring. From the mighty mountains of New York, let freedom ring. From the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania, let freedom ring. But not only that; let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia. Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi. And when this happens, when we let it ring, we will speed that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual: Free at last, free at last/Thank God Almighty, we're free at last.' "
"ON HIS OWN FUTURE (April 3, 1968): 'We've got some difficult days ahead. But it really doesn't matter with me now. Because I've been to the mountaintop. I won't mind. Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I'm not concerned about that now. I just want to do God's will. And he's allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I've looked over, and I've seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you, but I want you to know tonight that we as a people will get to the Promised Land. So I'm happy tonight. I'm not fearing any man. Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord. ' "
On a personal note, this last speech as troubled me for some time. As you recall, Dr. King was assassinated on April 4, 1968 one day after he said, "...I've been to the mountaintop....I would like to live a long life....But I'm not concerned....I just want to do God's will.... Dr. King was 39 years old when he was murdered the next day.
Martin Luther King, Jr. (Jan 15,1929-April 4,1968)
Martin Luther King, Jr.
On this Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial day I think it is important that we take some time today and think about who he was, what he did, and most importantly why we honor him and why indeed he really is an American hero.
I was only six years old in 1963 when he wrote the "Letter from the Birmingham Jail" yet I remember seeing him on Walter Cronkite's CBS News; I am not sure I realized he was in the jail or if I thought it was another story somebody wrote. I remember clearly growing up in the south that at my house we said Negro and not the other word used a lot in the South of the '50's, '60's, and sadly even today. I remember 1963 mostly for the Kennedy assassination and the Oswald killing because it was on TV so much (the Ruby attack was almost live as I watched.) I remember 1968 for both Dr. King and Bobby Kennedy's assassinations. I remember a lot of civil unrest and riots in US cities both over racial issues and over the Vietnam war.
What particularly strikes me now looking back is how unimportant the racial side of the violence seemed to me at the time. I knew people, especially family, in Vietnam and that was very real to me but racial conflict seemed more distant from my world than the war. I was well read at an early age and had read a lot of history (my history text was "The War Between the States" not "The Civil War") and quite a bit of literature that explained more about black and white relations than my own experience ever could. I knew Martin Luther King was a very good speaker and that he stood up for Negro rights but I had no clue of the "black experience" or however I should refer to it today.
With more knowledge and an appreciation of Dr. King's speeches, writings and particularly the volatile nature of the situation in those times I see what he as a leader accomplished. I can't imagine anyone in today's news doing what he was able to do. Also looking back it is indeed remarkable that he won (deservedly so unlike Pres. Carter but I'll save that for another day.) in 1964 at the age of 35.
Much more in following posts with examples and comments on his major writing, positions, and what it means in this century.
A Boy Named Yahoo!
This a true story and not about a boy named Sue. It's a Boy!:
"BUCHAREST (Reuters) - A Romanian couple named their son Yahoo as a sign of gratitude for meeting over the Internet, a Bucharest newspaper said Thursday.
Daily Libertatea said Cornelia and Nonu Dragoman, both from Transylvania, met and decided they were meant for each other following a three-month relationship over the net.
They married and had a baby this Christmas, whom they decided to name after one of the worldwide web's most popular portals. 'We named him Lucian Yahoo after my father and the net, the main beacon of my life,' Cornelia Dragoman was quoted as saying."
"BUCHAREST (Reuters) - A Romanian couple named their son Yahoo as a sign of gratitude for meeting over the Internet, a Bucharest newspaper said Thursday.
Daily Libertatea said Cornelia and Nonu Dragoman, both from Transylvania, met and decided they were meant for each other following a three-month relationship over the net.
They married and had a baby this Christmas, whom they decided to name after one of the worldwide web's most popular portals. 'We named him Lucian Yahoo after my father and the net, the main beacon of my life,' Cornelia Dragoman was quoted as saying."
The Roosevelts, Kennedys, and Now the Bushes
The Roosevelts, Kennedys, and Now the Bushes:
"By any objective measure, political scholars say, Bush is a name that belongs next to Adams, Kennedy and Roosevelt as a force whose influence spans decades. "
And a great comment from George H.W. Bush: "'Remember when Ann Richards said George Bush was born with a silver foot in his mouth?' he asked writer Hugh Sidey. 'And then when George beat her in his first run for governor, I must say I felt a certain sense of joy that he finally had kind of taken her down, I could go around saying, 'We showed her what she could do with that silver foot, where she could stick that now.' ' "
"By any objective measure, political scholars say, Bush is a name that belongs next to Adams, Kennedy and Roosevelt as a force whose influence spans decades. "
And a great comment from George H.W. Bush: "'Remember when Ann Richards said George Bush was born with a silver foot in his mouth?' he asked writer Hugh Sidey. 'And then when George beat her in his first run for governor, I must say I felt a certain sense of joy that he finally had kind of taken her down, I could go around saying, 'We showed her what she could do with that silver foot, where she could stick that now.' ' "
Bill Safire on Blogs and Cheering "The Depressed Press"
William Safire today in The New York Times: The Depressed Press:
"Despite the recent lapses at CBS and previous mishaps at The Times and USA Today, here's why mainstream journalism has a future.
1. On the challenge from bloggers: The 'platform' - print, TV, Internet, telepathy, whatever - will change, but the public hunger for reliable information will grow. Blogs will compete with op-ed columns for 'views you can use,' and the best will morph out of the pajama game to deliver serious analysis and fresh information, someday prospering with ads and subscriptions. The prospect of profit will bring bloggers in from the meanstream to the mainstream center of comment and local news coverage.
On national or global events, however, the news consumer needs trained reporters on the scene to transmit facts and trustworthy editors to judge significance. In crises, large media gathering-places are needed to respond to a need for national community"
He has several more reasons but he clearly knows the world has changed. Maybe Mr. Safire (whom I really like) will start blogging upon his pending retirement.
"Despite the recent lapses at CBS and previous mishaps at The Times and USA Today, here's why mainstream journalism has a future.
1. On the challenge from bloggers: The 'platform' - print, TV, Internet, telepathy, whatever - will change, but the public hunger for reliable information will grow. Blogs will compete with op-ed columns for 'views you can use,' and the best will morph out of the pajama game to deliver serious analysis and fresh information, someday prospering with ads and subscriptions. The prospect of profit will bring bloggers in from the meanstream to the mainstream center of comment and local news coverage.
On national or global events, however, the news consumer needs trained reporters on the scene to transmit facts and trustworthy editors to judge significance. In crises, large media gathering-places are needed to respond to a need for national community"
He has several more reasons but he clearly knows the world has changed. Maybe Mr. Safire (whom I really like) will start blogging upon his pending retirement.
Saturday, January 15, 2005
Federalism - Not Just For Conservatives Anymore
This from Slate (yes, even conservatives read all sorts of things) The New Blue Federalists - The case for liberal federalism. By Richard Thompson Ford:
"Federalism doesn't suit the typical liberal's self-image, but one of the most persuasive defenders of decentralizing political power was that ultimate object of liberal cosmopolitan admiration (and conservative scorn), a French intellectual: Alexis de Tocqueville argued that the strength and dynamism of American democracy were found in its local communities. He was right: Local and state governments can be more innovative, daring, and proactive in short, more progressive than even the liberal Congresses of distant memory. A growing number of state courts and legislatures have pioneered public-school finance reform, working to ensure that kids from poor neighborhoods are not stuck in inferior schools. Many states have civil rights guarantees that are stronger than those under federal law, especially with respect to sexual orientation discrimination, which federal law does not prohibit. Californians, taking up the slack left by a federal government mired in religious extremism, have just voted to invest $240 million per year of state funding in cutting-edge biotechnology research. In many instances, what progressive states most want from the federal government is that it get out of their way. "
"Federalism doesn't suit the typical liberal's self-image, but one of the most persuasive defenders of decentralizing political power was that ultimate object of liberal cosmopolitan admiration (and conservative scorn), a French intellectual: Alexis de Tocqueville argued that the strength and dynamism of American democracy were found in its local communities. He was right: Local and state governments can be more innovative, daring, and proactive in short, more progressive than even the liberal Congresses of distant memory. A growing number of state courts and legislatures have pioneered public-school finance reform, working to ensure that kids from poor neighborhoods are not stuck in inferior schools. Many states have civil rights guarantees that are stronger than those under federal law, especially with respect to sexual orientation discrimination, which federal law does not prohibit. Californians, taking up the slack left by a federal government mired in religious extremism, have just voted to invest $240 million per year of state funding in cutting-edge biotechnology research. In many instances, what progressive states most want from the federal government is that it get out of their way. "
Friday, January 14, 2005
Victor Davis Hanson on Iraq
Victor Davis Hanson is without doubt the most knowledgeable, clearest, and in my opinion the most brillant thinker and writer in the world today. I read everything of his that I can find and over time much of the rest of the world will be also.
Victor Davis Hanson on Iraq: National Review Online:
"...we in our weariness lament the losses of almost 1,100 combat dead and billions committed to people who appear from 30-second media streams to be singularly ungracious and not our sort of folk. We dwell on unmistakable lapses, never on amazing successes just as we were consumed with Afghanistan in its dark moments, but now ignore its road to success. But never mind all this: The long-term prospects are still as bright as things seem gloomy in the short-term but only if we emulate our grandfathers and press on with the third Middle East election in the last six months."
Please read it all, it is worth the time.
Victor Davis Hanson on Iraq: National Review Online:
"...we in our weariness lament the losses of almost 1,100 combat dead and billions committed to people who appear from 30-second media streams to be singularly ungracious and not our sort of folk. We dwell on unmistakable lapses, never on amazing successes just as we were consumed with Afghanistan in its dark moments, but now ignore its road to success. But never mind all this: The long-term prospects are still as bright as things seem gloomy in the short-term but only if we emulate our grandfathers and press on with the third Middle East election in the last six months."
Please read it all, it is worth the time.
Thursday, January 13, 2005
Favorite Greenspan Quote
Also from The Weekly Standard - Inflation Points:
"FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD CHAIRMAN Alan Greenspan is famous for his ability to use the language with such precision that it ceases to be a means of communication. He once told a congressional committeeman, who congratulated him on the clarity of his response to a question, 'Then I must have misspoken.'"
"FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD CHAIRMAN Alan Greenspan is famous for his ability to use the language with such precision that it ceases to be a means of communication. He once told a congressional committeeman, who congratulated him on the clarity of his response to a question, 'Then I must have misspoken.'"
Michael Chertoff -Homeland Security
From The Weekly Standard - Law, Loyalty, and Terror: "What we can say is that the government's actions after September 11 reflected a consciousness of history and of the historical moment. Excesses of the past were not repeated. A balance was sought and, I hope, achieved.
That balance was struck in the first flush of the emergency. If history shows anything, however, it shows that we must be prepared to review and if necessary recalibrate that balance. We should get about doing so, in the light of the experience of our forebears and the experience of our own time.
We are at a transition point in the evolution of legal doctrine to govern the armed conflict with terror. How history will judge what has been done is for our successors to determine. The triumph is that our successors will be alive and free to determine that history.
[Michael Chertoff, a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, was the head of the Justice Department's Criminal Division from 2001 to 2003. This article is adapted from remarks he delivered October 10 at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill law school.] "
That balance was struck in the first flush of the emergency. If history shows anything, however, it shows that we must be prepared to review and if necessary recalibrate that balance. We should get about doing so, in the light of the experience of our forebears and the experience of our own time.
We are at a transition point in the evolution of legal doctrine to govern the armed conflict with terror. How history will judge what has been done is for our successors to determine. The triumph is that our successors will be alive and free to determine that history.
[Michael Chertoff, a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, was the head of the Justice Department's Criminal Division from 2001 to 2003. This article is adapted from remarks he delivered October 10 at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill law school.] "
Wednesday, January 12, 2005
Fiscal Deficits-Not to Worry
The impact of tax cuts generating more tax revenue is becoming evident as well as our growing robust economy. Courtesy of Instapundit a tidbit I hadn't seen elsewhere on December 2004 results at Latest News and Financial Information Reuters.com:
"WASHINGTON, Jan 7 (Reuters) - The U.S. government ran a $1 billion budget surplus in December, helped by a rise in corporate tax payments, the Congressional Budget Office said in its latest budget report released on Friday. The surplus, which compared with an $18 billion deficit in the previous December, helped create a smaller fiscal deficit for the first three months of the 2005 fiscal year, than in the same quarter of the prior year."
For you math majors that is upward turn of $19 Billion period v period Dec 03 to Dec 04. (Had John Kerry been elected this would have been top fold in most US newspapers). Nevertheless, more unreported good news. As a believer in supply-side economics, lower taxes and higher tax revenues make my heart beat happier.
"WASHINGTON, Jan 7 (Reuters) - The U.S. government ran a $1 billion budget surplus in December, helped by a rise in corporate tax payments, the Congressional Budget Office said in its latest budget report released on Friday. The surplus, which compared with an $18 billion deficit in the previous December, helped create a smaller fiscal deficit for the first three months of the 2005 fiscal year, than in the same quarter of the prior year."
For you math majors that is upward turn of $19 Billion period v period Dec 03 to Dec 04. (Had John Kerry been elected this would have been top fold in most US newspapers). Nevertheless, more unreported good news. As a believer in supply-side economics, lower taxes and higher tax revenues make my heart beat happier.
Tuesday, January 11, 2005
No Learning Point
I advertise humor so it's past time for a touch.
A Mom is driving her little girl to a friend’s house for a play date. “Mommy,” the little girl asks, “how old are you?”“Honey, you are not supposed to ask a lady her age,” the mother warns. “It is not polite.”“Ok,” the little girl says. “How much do you weigh?”“Now really,” the mother says, “these are personal questions, and really none of your business.”Undaunted, the little girl asks, “Why did you and daddy get a divorce?”“That is enough questions, honestly!” The exasperated mother walks away as the two friends begin to play.“My Mom wouldn’t tell me anything,” the little girl says to her friend.“Well,” said the friend, “all you need to do is look at her drivers license. It is like a report card—it has everything on it.” Later that night, the little girl says to her mother, “I know how old you are. You are 32.”The mother is surprised and asks, “How did you find that out?”“I also know that you weigh 140 pounds.” The mother is past surprise and shocked now. “How in heaven’s name did you find that out?”“And,” the little girl says triumphantly, “I know why you and daddy got a divorce.”“Oh really?” the mother asks. “And why’s that?”“Because you got an F in sex.”
A Mom is driving her little girl to a friend’s house for a play date. “Mommy,” the little girl asks, “how old are you?”“Honey, you are not supposed to ask a lady her age,” the mother warns. “It is not polite.”“Ok,” the little girl says. “How much do you weigh?”“Now really,” the mother says, “these are personal questions, and really none of your business.”Undaunted, the little girl asks, “Why did you and daddy get a divorce?”“That is enough questions, honestly!” The exasperated mother walks away as the two friends begin to play.“My Mom wouldn’t tell me anything,” the little girl says to her friend.“Well,” said the friend, “all you need to do is look at her drivers license. It is like a report card—it has everything on it.” Later that night, the little girl says to her mother, “I know how old you are. You are 32.”The mother is surprised and asks, “How did you find that out?”“I also know that you weigh 140 pounds.” The mother is past surprise and shocked now. “How in heaven’s name did you find that out?”“And,” the little girl says triumphantly, “I know why you and daddy got a divorce.”“Oh really?” the mother asks. “And why’s that?”“Because you got an F in sex.”
On World Elections and Management Theory
On my way searching for a leadership quote I wanted to use in another context, I came back upon the following Peter Drucker comment that applies to the Palestinian and Iraqi elections as well as the the business and societal challenges we face today:
"In a few hundred years, when the history of our time is written from a long term perspective, it is likely that the most important event those historians will see is not technology, not the internet, not e-commerce.
It is an unprecedented change in the human condition. For the first time -literally- substantial and rapidly growing numbers of people have choices. For the first time, they will have to manage themselves.
And society is totally unprepared for it."
Thus sayeth Dr. Drucker. (Sorry I don't have a link, it was in my scribbling, the reference is:
Drucker, Peter F., "Managing Knowledge Means Managing Oneself," Leader to Leader, 16 (Spring 2000), pp.8-10.
I don't agree that society is totally unprepared for it but some parts are surely a lot more ready than others.
This certainly applies to present day political events as well as management theory and problem solving through and with other people.
"In a few hundred years, when the history of our time is written from a long term perspective, it is likely that the most important event those historians will see is not technology, not the internet, not e-commerce.
It is an unprecedented change in the human condition. For the first time -literally- substantial and rapidly growing numbers of people have choices. For the first time, they will have to manage themselves.
And society is totally unprepared for it."
Thus sayeth Dr. Drucker. (Sorry I don't have a link, it was in my scribbling, the reference is:
Drucker, Peter F., "Managing Knowledge Means Managing Oneself," Leader to Leader, 16 (Spring 2000), pp.8-10.
I don't agree that society is totally unprepared for it but some parts are surely a lot more ready than others.
This certainly applies to present day political events as well as management theory and problem solving through and with other people.
U.S. Trade Deficits-Not to Worry
I am not overly concerned about US Balance of Payments deficits and in fact I consider it a sign of strength for now. (Admittedly it won't last forever.) NRO Financial had a nice, readable piece yesterday Global Misunderstanding :
"the very definition of a profitable trade is one in which the individual receives more than he gives. Better yet, the best transactions are not those in which $10 is exchanged for $10 of goods, but instead when exports worth $10 attract imports worth $11.
With the above in mind, it's no surprise that rich countries very often run trade deficits. As for surpluses, 19th century economist Bastiat reminded his readers that a sure way to achieve a trade surplus would be for the country desirous of one to simply sink goods marked for export offshore. This would lead to a favorable balance of trade, all the while insuring that imports meant to be exchanged for the sunken exports would not reach the shores of the country seemingly bent on impoverishing itself.
...[T]hose who worry about trade imbalances are revealing a basic misunderstanding about what causes people and countries to exchange goods, and in the process impart wealth to each other. China's supposed flooding of the United States with goods is not a sign of economic weakness on our part, but instead one of strength. If we're flooded with products, it's because we can pay for them. "
This is basic enforcement of the theory of comparative advantage from Adam Smith in 1776 (a very big year) and David Ricardo in the 1820's. (I may as well do another post on this later since I find it exciting, although I suppose one of the few....) Comparative advantage is the heart of economic thinking.
I am not yet worried about fiscal US deficits either because at current they are cyclical not structural. More on that later as I delve into the need to reform Social Security, Medicare (and health care) in order to avoid structural deficits which I do worry about for the future strength of the US economy and country.
"the very definition of a profitable trade is one in which the individual receives more than he gives. Better yet, the best transactions are not those in which $10 is exchanged for $10 of goods, but instead when exports worth $10 attract imports worth $11.
With the above in mind, it's no surprise that rich countries very often run trade deficits. As for surpluses, 19th century economist Bastiat reminded his readers that a sure way to achieve a trade surplus would be for the country desirous of one to simply sink goods marked for export offshore. This would lead to a favorable balance of trade, all the while insuring that imports meant to be exchanged for the sunken exports would not reach the shores of the country seemingly bent on impoverishing itself.
...[T]hose who worry about trade imbalances are revealing a basic misunderstanding about what causes people and countries to exchange goods, and in the process impart wealth to each other. China's supposed flooding of the United States with goods is not a sign of economic weakness on our part, but instead one of strength. If we're flooded with products, it's because we can pay for them. "
This is basic enforcement of the theory of comparative advantage from Adam Smith in 1776 (a very big year) and David Ricardo in the 1820's. (I may as well do another post on this later since I find it exciting, although I suppose one of the few....) Comparative advantage is the heart of economic thinking.
I am not yet worried about fiscal US deficits either because at current they are cyclical not structural. More on that later as I delve into the need to reform Social Security, Medicare (and health care) in order to avoid structural deficits which I do worry about for the future strength of the US economy and country.
The GWOT and Interrogation
Much nonsense has abounded over the treatment of detainees, terrorists, or suspects. The best article to read is City Journal Winter 2005 How to Interrogate Terrorists by Heather Mac Donald:
"The need for rethinking interrogation doctrine in the war on terror will not go away, however. The Islamist enemy is unlike any the military has encountered in the past. If current wisdom on the rules of war prohibits making any distinction between a terrorist and a lawful combatant, then that orthodoxy needs to change."
If you aren't aware of the City Journal you should be as its free on the web and is very well done. As Bill Moyers says, “Even when I disagree with City Journal, I dare not ignore it.” See it here.
"The need for rethinking interrogation doctrine in the war on terror will not go away, however. The Islamist enemy is unlike any the military has encountered in the past. If current wisdom on the rules of war prohibits making any distinction between a terrorist and a lawful combatant, then that orthodoxy needs to change."
If you aren't aware of the City Journal you should be as its free on the web and is very well done. As Bill Moyers says, “Even when I disagree with City Journal, I dare not ignore it.” See it here.
Monday, January 10, 2005
History, Bush & Mideast Elections-Part II
The Washington Post: History Is Likely to Link Bush to Mideast Elections :
"Bush, who keeps a bust of Winston Churchill in the Oval Office and identifies with the wartime British prime minister, has made democracy in the Middle East a signature goal for his administration, rhetorically at least. In November 2003, echoing the idealism of Woodrow Wilson and Ronald Reagan, he called for a 'forward strategy of freedom' that would involve a decades-long effort to promote pluralism in Arab nations. Privately Bush has expressed the belief that success at such an endeavor would be the achievement he would be most remembered for in 50 years.
'I believe democracy can take hold in parts of the world that have been condemned to tyranny,' he told reporters in the Oval Office on Friday. 'And I believe when democracies take hold, it leads to peace. That's been the proven example around the world. Democracies equal peace. And that's what we're trying to advance in this administration.' "
I believe history will regard this as the set of breakthroughs toward resolving the "Clash of Civilizations".
"Bush, who keeps a bust of Winston Churchill in the Oval Office and identifies with the wartime British prime minister, has made democracy in the Middle East a signature goal for his administration, rhetorically at least. In November 2003, echoing the idealism of Woodrow Wilson and Ronald Reagan, he called for a 'forward strategy of freedom' that would involve a decades-long effort to promote pluralism in Arab nations. Privately Bush has expressed the belief that success at such an endeavor would be the achievement he would be most remembered for in 50 years.
'I believe democracy can take hold in parts of the world that have been condemned to tyranny,' he told reporters in the Oval Office on Friday. 'And I believe when democracies take hold, it leads to peace. That's been the proven example around the world. Democracies equal peace. And that's what we're trying to advance in this administration.' "
I believe history will regard this as the set of breakthroughs toward resolving the "Clash of Civilizations".
Bill Kristol on History, Bush and Mideast Elections
Bill Kristol on the importance of elections in Palestine and Iraq:
"'His inauguration is bracketed by two events that are very big, very important for the meaning and success of his presidency,' said William Kristol, chief of staff to former vice president Dan Quayle and now editor of the Weekly Standard. 'No one thinks everything changes the day after the elections. But what some people thought was a naive Wilsonian democracy may turn out to be his real legacy.' "
"'His inauguration is bracketed by two events that are very big, very important for the meaning and success of his presidency,' said William Kristol, chief of staff to former vice president Dan Quayle and now editor of the Weekly Standard. 'No one thinks everything changes the day after the elections. But what some people thought was a naive Wilsonian democracy may turn out to be his real legacy.' "
The Palestinian Election
The election of Abbas indeed offers some hope as reflected in this editorial from The Times of London:
"The Palestinian elections offer a glimmer of hope for peace....Hope, exhilaration and relief are all too rare in the Palestinian territories. But after yesterday's election in the West Bank and Gaza, there was a palpable feeling that something had changed."
As Krauthammer and others have pointed out this will not be a smooth road to peace but let's have hope.
"The Palestinian elections offer a glimmer of hope for peace....Hope, exhilaration and relief are all too rare in the Palestinian territories. But after yesterday's election in the West Bank and Gaza, there was a palpable feeling that something had changed."
As Krauthammer and others have pointed out this will not be a smooth road to peace but let's have hope.
Election Protest Continued
I have to defer to the master of commentary and Mark Steyn 's article:
Election protest shows why Dems don't count:
"...when was the last time you heard a fresh policy from a Democrat? The serious arguments about war, social security, immigration and pretty much everything else are all within factions of the right. The Democrats' only contribution is to insist that someone in Halliburton has figured out a way to get the touch-screen voting machines to make Democrats' votes vanish. Democrats' votes are vanishing because Democrat voters are vanishing because Democrat intellectual energy has all but vanished. Or as Republican Congresswoman Deborah Pryce summed up Thursday's Boxer rebellion: ''Their objection is a front for their lack of ideas.''"
Again, read the whole thing if you dare.
Election protest shows why Dems don't count:
"...when was the last time you heard a fresh policy from a Democrat? The serious arguments about war, social security, immigration and pretty much everything else are all within factions of the right. The Democrats' only contribution is to insist that someone in Halliburton has figured out a way to get the touch-screen voting machines to make Democrats' votes vanish. Democrats' votes are vanishing because Democrat voters are vanishing because Democrat intellectual energy has all but vanished. Or as Republican Congresswoman Deborah Pryce summed up Thursday's Boxer rebellion: ''Their objection is a front for their lack of ideas.''"
Again, read the whole thing if you dare.
The Democrats Election Challenge
I couldn't let the Democrats challenge to the November election go without mention so first: ARGUS HAMILTON:
"Congress was sworn into office in the House and Senate chamber in the United States Capitol building Tuesday. Maybe a hundred people in the gallery watched. The gallery is for onlookers and bystanders but the Democrats have to sit somewhere."
"Congress was sworn into office in the House and Senate chamber in the United States Capitol building Tuesday. Maybe a hundred people in the gallery watched. The gallery is for onlookers and bystanders but the Democrats have to sit somewhere."
The Politics of Disaster
While we are in the disaster mode I can't leave out the politics of the situation. Here's a taste of Mark Steyn's comments in The Australian in Coalition of the giving :
"The path of the tsunamis tracked the arc of the Muslim world, from Sumatra to Somalia; the most devastated country is the world's most populous Muslim nation, and the most devastated part of that country is the one province living under the strictures of sharia.
But, as usual, when disaster strikes it's the Great Satan and his various Little Satans who leap to respond. In the decade before September 11, the US military functioned, more or less exclusively, as a Muslim rapid reaction force coming to the aid of Kuwaiti Muslims, Bosnian Muslims, Somali Muslims and Albanian Muslims. Since then, with the help of its Anglo-Australian allies, it's liberated 50 million Muslims in Afghanistan and Iraq.
That's not how the West's anti-war movements see it. I found myself behind a car the other day bearing the bumper sticker, 'War Is Costly. Peace Is Priceless' which is standard progressive generic autopilot boilerplate, that somehow waging war and doing good are mutually exclusive. But you can't help noticing that when disaster strikes, it's the warmongers who are also the compassion-mongers. Of the top six donor nations to tsunami relief, four are members of George W. Bush's reviled 'coalition of the willing'. " Again, worth a read.
"The path of the tsunamis tracked the arc of the Muslim world, from Sumatra to Somalia; the most devastated country is the world's most populous Muslim nation, and the most devastated part of that country is the one province living under the strictures of sharia.
But, as usual, when disaster strikes it's the Great Satan and his various Little Satans who leap to respond. In the decade before September 11, the US military functioned, more or less exclusively, as a Muslim rapid reaction force coming to the aid of Kuwaiti Muslims, Bosnian Muslims, Somali Muslims and Albanian Muslims. Since then, with the help of its Anglo-Australian allies, it's liberated 50 million Muslims in Afghanistan and Iraq.
That's not how the West's anti-war movements see it. I found myself behind a car the other day bearing the bumper sticker, 'War Is Costly. Peace Is Priceless' which is standard progressive generic autopilot boilerplate, that somehow waging war and doing good are mutually exclusive. But you can't help noticing that when disaster strikes, it's the warmongers who are also the compassion-mongers. Of the top six donor nations to tsunami relief, four are members of George W. Bush's reviled 'coalition of the willing'. " Again, worth a read.
Tsunami Charities
See The Hurley Report for recommendations on charities helping with the tragedy. The two I heartily recommend are Catholic Relief Services and Samaritan's Purse, both addresses can be found at The Hurley Report. One caveat and as President Bush mentioned today, don't forget your normal charitable giving to your church and your other local charities; make the tsunami relief an addition to the causes we must support not a substitution. Thanks.
Bad Things and Innocent People
Many columnists have discussed the religious aspects of the tsunami but the the best so far is, as usual, Bill Safire in the NYT: Read Where Was God?. His concluding remarks:
"Job's lessons for today:
(1) Victims of this cataclysm in no way 'deserved' a fate inflicted by the Leviathanic force of nature.
(2) Questioning God's inscrutable ways has its exemplar in the Bible and need not undermine faith.
(3) Humanity's obligation to ameliorate injustice on earth is being expressed in a surge of generosity that refutes Voltaire's cynicism. "
I regret Mr. Safire's imminent retirement but I doubt we will have heard the last of his wit and wisdom.
"Job's lessons for today:
(1) Victims of this cataclysm in no way 'deserved' a fate inflicted by the Leviathanic force of nature.
(2) Questioning God's inscrutable ways has its exemplar in the Bible and need not undermine faith.
(3) Humanity's obligation to ameliorate injustice on earth is being expressed in a surge of generosity that refutes Voltaire's cynicism. "
I regret Mr. Safire's imminent retirement but I doubt we will have heard the last of his wit and wisdom.
Saturday, January 08, 2005
Perspective on US History and Iraq
From yesterday's Rocky Mountain News: Opinion: "Saturday, for those looking for a cause to celebrate, is the 190th anniversary of the Battle of New Orleans. As the Associated Press reminds us, that battle was, until it was subsumed by the Civil War, a national holiday complete with the usual parades and ceremonies. It marked the improbable defeat of crack British regulars by an outnumbered band of U.S. troops, local militias, frontiersmen, freed slaves and free blacks and even pirates. Unbeknownst to the combatants, the treaty ending the War of 1812 had already been signed, but the victory gave a profound boost to the psyche of a shaky new country that had seen its capital burned less than five months earlier. The victory also propelled the U.S. commander, Andrew Jackson, into politics and ultimately the presidency." Useful to think about given the history of the US, even prior to the Civil War and I think important context for the upcoming Iraqi elections and the current world tumult. Iraq is experiencing upheaval that is not dissimilar to our own past and with our help may become another success story of democracy.
Third World Problem Solving Beyond Amount of US Aid for Tsunami Victims
Per Dr. Sowell's rebuke earlier in the week, about the failure to use DDT to save millions of people in Africa from malaria and the ban due to environmental concerns, Nick Kristof in the NYT today: "I'm thrilled that we're pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into the relief effort, but the tsunami was only a blip in third-world mortality. Mosquitoes kill 20 times more people each year than the tsunami did, and in the long war between humans and mosquitoes it looks as if mosquitoes are winning.
One reason is that the U.S. and other rich countries are siding with the mosquitoes against the world's poor - by opposing the use of DDT.
'It's a colossal tragedy,' says Donald Roberts, a professor of tropical public health at Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences. 'And it's embroiled in environmental politics and incompetent bureaucracies.'"
One reason is that the U.S. and other rich countries are siding with the mosquitoes against the world's poor - by opposing the use of DDT.
'It's a colossal tragedy,' says Donald Roberts, a professor of tropical public health at Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences. 'And it's embroiled in environmental politics and incompetent bureaucracies.'"
Mea Culpa
I haven't posted in the last few days and not due to any great reasons other than I wanted to do various things on my weblog and didn't know how. So I stopped posting until I learned how to do more of what I want to do eventually. (And also I haven't publicized my blog address until I knew a little better what I was doing but am leaving it up for all newcomers to see the learning curve.) I have learned quite a deal in the few days since I started this on 01/01/05, a day that even I can recall as in "I started this 'the first day of '05'...." I will get better with presentations, templates, offers to other sites, conciseness, humor, and so on but I have learned a lot so far and like most things with some work it's not as hard as it appears. My one point of pride so far is that I has found a legitimate bug that the google wizards are (have formally acknowledged a problem, and say they are) working on.
Wednesday, January 05, 2005
Internet Radio
Yes, I do like and listen to internet provided radio streams. For some reason, I think some stations sound better using 'real one player' and some are better on 'windows media player' which makes little sense. My two favorite stations that I listen to when I can are WNCW and KPLU (both '.org'). Try internet radio out when you are playing around with sounds and computers.
Tuesday, January 04, 2005
Inflation Fears for 2005?
The CBS MarketWatch Alert at 2:15pm today was: "Fed fretful over inflation at Dec. 14 meeting." To quote TAP (name of this blog if you have already forgotten) from the day before yesterday in my 2005 financial prediction: "...slightly worried about inflation concerns in middle to 3rd Q of 2005." Believe me I had no inside information just my sense of what is really happening contrary to many negative reports especially prior to the November election. I still would not place any bets on my number prognostications.
Here is the Alert: WASHINGTON (CBS.MW) -- The Federal Open Market Committee was roughly divided into two camps on the outlook for inflation at their closed-door meeting on Dec. 14, according a summary of the meeting released Tuesday. A number of FOMC members were worried that the weaker dollar, higher energy prices and a slowdown in productivity growth may lead to higher prices. But others on the FOMC argued that wages remained under control and that the risk to prices from a weak dollar might be overstated. This is the first time the FOMC has released the minutes from its meetings after a three-week lag. In general, FOMC members were upbeat about the economy, saying that the expansion was "firmly established" and "resilient."
Here is the Alert: WASHINGTON (CBS.MW) -- The Federal Open Market Committee was roughly divided into two camps on the outlook for inflation at their closed-door meeting on Dec. 14, according a summary of the meeting released Tuesday. A number of FOMC members were worried that the weaker dollar, higher energy prices and a slowdown in productivity growth may lead to higher prices. But others on the FOMC argued that wages remained under control and that the risk to prices from a weak dollar might be overstated. This is the first time the FOMC has released the minutes from its meetings after a three-week lag. In general, FOMC members were upbeat about the economy, saying that the expansion was "firmly established" and "resilient."
Monday, January 03, 2005
Quote of the Day
"If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner."
-H. L. Mencken
-H. L. Mencken
Sunday, January 02, 2005
Quote of the Day Headed into First Business Day of 2005
"Ronald Reagan believed that people were basically good and had the right to be free. He believed that bigotry and prejudice were the worst things a person could be guilty of. He believed in the Golden Rule and in the power of prayer. He believed that America was not just a place in the world, but the hope of the world." -George W. Bush giving Ronald Reagan's eulogy.
I believe that too and hope you do as well.
I believe that too and hope you do as well.
Market Predictions for Yr End 2005
People are asking so here goes:
Yr End 2004 Yr End 2005
Dow 10,780 12,300
Nasdaq 2,175 2,800
S&P 1,200 1,400
US GDP Growth 3.9-4.0%? 4.25%
WSJ Prime Rate 5.25% 7.50%
10 Yr T-Bill 4.21% 4.85%
1 Mo. LIBOR 2.42% 3.95%
Fed Discount Rate 3.25% 4.75%
Fed Funds Rate 2.25% 3.75%
I am rather bullish on the US economy, not worried about either trade deficits or what I see as temporary spending deficits, and slightly worried about inflation concerns starting middle to 3rdQ of 2005.
Please do not use this as advice this is just my prediction. I haven't even looked at other forecasts so this is unbiased and perhaps ill-informed. We will find out this time next yr.
Yr End 2004 Yr End 2005
Dow 10,780 12,300
Nasdaq 2,175 2,800
S&P 1,200 1,400
US GDP Growth 3.9-4.0%? 4.25%
WSJ Prime Rate 5.25% 7.50%
10 Yr T-Bill 4.21% 4.85%
1 Mo. LIBOR 2.42% 3.95%
Fed Discount Rate 3.25% 4.75%
Fed Funds Rate 2.25% 3.75%
I am rather bullish on the US economy, not worried about either trade deficits or what I see as temporary spending deficits, and slightly worried about inflation concerns starting middle to 3rdQ of 2005.
Please do not use this as advice this is just my prediction. I haven't even looked at other forecasts so this is unbiased and perhaps ill-informed. We will find out this time next yr.
Middle East Envoy if POTUS
Suggestions for GWB (or my hero as one democrat friend says) I would ask former President Clinton to be the Special Envoy of the US to the Middle East, charged with the Israeli Palestinian problem reporting directly to the President. If WJC declines I would ask Sec Powell to take the role as he leaves State. Next I would ask James Baker. If persons of those stature all decline I would leave it with incoming Sec State Dr. Rice.
Deacs Win in Charlottesville!
WFU Demon Deacons 89- UVA Cavaliers 70. Line was Wake by 2.
No current Wake Forest BB player or coach had ever won in Charlottesville until tonight.
I am pleased.
No current Wake Forest BB player or coach had ever won in Charlottesville until tonight.
I am pleased.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
