Rational Politics

Hazleton, PA and ACLU and Immigration

2007-03-17T14:10:00.000-04:00

In the ongoing long term battle over illegal immigration, many states have taken things into their own hands but more interestingly, counties, cities and towns are taking the law or making laws to handle the situation.

In the case of Hazleton, PA, the city had an influx of immigrants (many of whom were illegal) from the New Jersey/New York area after 9/11. These immigrants sought a better quality of life than what was available in the NJ/NY areas so they moved into parts of PA.

The town claims that at the same time there was a statistical correlation of higher crime rates and that investigating crimes performed by illegal immigrants costs more and is more difficult.

Note: there is little to no controversy about legal immigration when compared to immigration of the illegal type.

It is doubtless that whatever the crime rate or cause, this town is out to get rid of illegal immigrants. The laws they passed were directed to landlords and businesses applying for business licenses. In terms of effectiveness, the policy seems to actually work pretty well because the numbers that have left is considerable. As to how many were legal versus illegal, we'll never know either way unless we check all their papers and it is not as if people won't find THAT idea offensive. The reason that the policy works is very simple. Without jobs and employers willing to risk hiring illegals, illegal immigrants have no reason to be there. If someone had the ability to extend that to a larger area (say the whole country), then illegals would have little reason to cross the border illegally.

Oh, side note - the President went to Mexico and we had to listen to a Mexican official why there should be laws etc to stop Mexicans. The reason that drives me nuts is because they treat their neighbors to the south in a far worse manner.

Illegal Immigrant Gets All The Perks After Trying to Put Border Patrol Agent In Jail

2007-02-20T10:49:00.000-05:00

Not that I believe that David Sipes is totally clean and did not do something wrong but the incentives that the government is giving an illegal immigrant goes beyond reason.

Of course, now that Sipes has won his second case, he is legally not guilty. Note legally.

If they wanted to compensate the illegal immigrant for what was allegedly done to him, just give him some money and send him back. Now, he struts on the streets of America with a "Can't Touch This" attitude.

Amnesty International Finally Consistent For Once?

2006-09-18T13:04:00.000-04:00

It seems that Amnesty International has surprised me for the first time. It actually released an opinion that Hezbollah is guilty of war crimes. It certainly took guts and honesty and I applaud it. I still have my doubts about Amnesty International but I can no longer claim that they are totally biased.

Abu Gharib Torture Resumes

2006-09-12T11:41:00.000-04:00

Gee, when the Americans torture or mistreat prisoners, it makes all the headlines and tv airwaves nonstop for days or weeks and Rumsfeld and Rice and the President all get no breaks. Sure, rules were broken and torture probably happened and inmates did die - and those responsible must answer for it.

My issue here is not the torturers, it is the mass media that seem to be out on a hunting expedition.

Why? That's because most of the mass media has ignored this article.

An independent witness who went into Abu Ghraib this week told The Sunday Telegraph that screams were coming from the cell blocks housing the terrorist suspects. Prisoners released from the jail this week spoke of routine torture of terrorism suspects and on Wednesday, 27 prisoners were hanged in the first mass execution since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein's regime.

Conditions in the rest of the jail were grim, with an overwhelming stench of excrement, prisoners crammed into cells for all but 20 minutes a day, food rations cut to just rice and water and no air conditioning.

So when are they going to go after those responsible for the above?

I guess the media doesn't have to be objective does it? It just have to have an agenda.

George Bush vs Al Gore Presidential Election Lawsuit

2006-09-05T14:59:00.000-04:00

Remember when the Supreme Court had to decide effectively who was the President of the United States back in 2000? It was said that the United States was the laughingstock of the world by not being able to decide who was President of the most powerful nation in the world. Well...

MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - Ruling party conservative Felipe Calderon was finally declared Mexico's president-elect on Tuesday, ending a two-month legal battle over election fraud claims that has plunged the nation into crisis.

Seven judges at Mexico's top electoral court unanimously ruled that the July 2 vote was not rigged and that pro-business candidate Calderon won by a razor-thin margin of about 234,000 votes out of some 41 million cast.

But left-wing candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador vows not to recognize Calderon, 44, as president and protests by leftists are expected to continue, putting Mexico's stability at risk for months to come

I wonder how many of those lauging at the United States back in 2000 were from Mexico. Gee, why is the rest of the world so silent in this case? Shrugging their shoulders and moving on? No big deal? Perhaps some of them might be saying something else about Mexico? Maybe they aren't even surprised. What does that tell you about what the other countries really think about Mexico - even if we already know what they think of the United States.

How To Know You Aren't Hiring an Illegal

2006-08-30T17:15:00.000-04:00

Well, I must be blind but now here is how the average company can
find out whether someone can legally work in the United States. It has been around for a while but it sure hasn't been making the front page news.

It is the BASIC PILOT program from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Here is another story from National Public Radio on the government program. Now if only everyone would be responsible enough to use it when hiring, there would be fewer jobs for the illegals. Of course, there are those that purposely hire illegals because they cost less.

International Law - Does It Really Work?

2006-08-22T19:54:00.000-04:00

There is currently a very unique viewpoint in diplomatic circles being circulated of what international law means and how effective it is. It seems that this opinion is somewhat controversial in some circles simply because if you accept the basis of what it claims then a great deal of political investment goes out through the window.

Let's take a look about what this stand proposes without oversimplifying.

When laws are passed in a nation by the ruling or presiding authority of that country, then the parties affected by that law have to comply or obey that law. Often, that law is national in scope. Sometimes, it is not national in scope and may be local as is the case when you have some model of decentralized governments. In those cases, the local governments have some power over some laws in their part of the country as defined by geographical boundaries. The local governments may prescribe new laws in addition to the national ones just for the parties within their jurisdiction. In some cases, the local laws may even override the national ones.

In the case of the United States, you have state, county and city governments below the national (or federal) government. I will not go into the exact specifics of the American system of government regarding precedence, jurisdiction or power because that is not our purpose here. Suffice it to say that the Constitution is the final law of the land.

There is one thing in common between laws in different countries regardless of whether they are democratic,dictatorships or whatever. That is based on the assumption and truth that breaking the law will generally result in some sort of disincentive to the lawbreaker whether the lawbreaker is an individual, multiple individuals or even a corporation. That disincentive may be jail time, fines, physical or capital punishment or some sort of community work. In other words, laws and regulations are automatically presumed to have teeth so that the affected parties will not ignore them. At a minimum, those punishments will have to be imposed on the lawbreakers so as to retain credibility or to reinforce in the minds of the potential lawbreakers that there may be a good reason not to break that law.

That brings us to the next question. What happens when the law is not enforced? What if no one is brought to justice (whatever form of justice applies in that particular nation or locality) for breaking a law? At first, there may be disbelief from observers but at some point, someone else will also break the law. These incidences may increase to the point that the law is then ignored as long as enforcement is missing. It is as if the law never existed at all. For all intents and purposes, that is the result. This happens at all levels from town ordnances (e.g. jaywalking) to federal laws (e.g. Clean Water Act).

What would happen if we were to extend this model to the international level? What if some country or entity within some country were to break an international law and nothing were to happen to that law breaker? Generally, there might be protests or warnings initially from other countries and in the worst case scenario, sanctions of some kind or another or a trade war would result. In the very rare case, threat of a real shooting war might also be the result but let's put that one aside since it is so rare.

The key here is enforcement on the lawbreaker. Most international laws do not prescribe what the punishment will be and in many cases, due to the way countries value their soverignity, international laws are not officially signed by countries or their representatives or populace, they are just agreements or implied agreements through actions or verbal statements. In other words, there is no real higher authority that exists that has de facto power to create new laws that all countries and their citizens must obey. International law is closer to a gentlemans agreement and a handshake than it is to a court with the power to put you in jail.

Too often treaties, agreements and international body resolutions are interpreted as enforceable law with teeth as disincentives. The truth is that countries sign treaties and make agreements or vote on resolutions when it is convenient and beneficial for them to do so. The other side of that coin is that they withdraw from the treaties or nullify the agreement or ignore the resolution when they want to. Note the fact that India signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and totally broke it. Note that Iraq did not follow the Geneva convention several times when they were battling the Coalition forces. Note that the United States withdrew from the SALT II treaty when it wanted to build a more substantial ABM system. We can go on and on but you get the point.

So, as long as India and Iraq and the United States does not suffer real consequences for these actions, what does that teach us about international law? It tells us that we cannot interpret much of it as law as we know and experience it in our everyday lives. After all, many regimes violate this so called international law when they torture, kill and abuse their own citizens on a non-trivial scale. Some of them are even guilty of crimes against humanity. However, the fact that it goes on shows how toothless or how uncommitted the rest of the world is in enforcing that international law.

So call me a cynic, a law - international or otherwise - doesn't amount to a hill of beans unless someone puts their foot down and enforces it. Otherwise, it is nothing more than something countries use to pretend that they can trust each other with. At the risk of bad grammar, international law ain't.

An Example of Power Corrupting?

2006-08-06T19:36:00.000-04:00

It appears that sometimes those in authority and have direct power over the general citizenry may be tempted to use the law against the citizenry just because they feel like it. Call it selective enforcement as you can see with this case.

In this case the law enforcement authorities were investigating a seperate case. They question the father of the suspect and he basically tells them to get lost - he doesn't want to talk to them as is his civil right. They don't arrest him or anything at that time because he has not broken any laws - just refusing to talk with them. He has a sticker on the side of the house that informs everyone that the location is recorded with video and audio.

At least one of the detectives at his front porch gets rude with him and it all gets caught on tape. The man later files a complaint about that detective and brings the video tape as evidence. They react by filing charges against him for recording a conversation with a law enforcement official.

You tell me if how the law was applied in this case was right or wrong. I wish the ACLU would step in but I don't think they will.

Shanghai Kills 50,000 dogs

2006-08-05T17:33:00.000-04:00

Not sure if this is rational politics or not and not really much can be done about it but if you haven't read it, it appears that a local government in China has decided to kill all the dogs in an area to control rabies. Read any of these stories to get a feel of it. Here's another story.

I am not sure that we can convince that government otherwise but it does seem quite inhuman to do this to all those pets. All it takes for the situation to get worse is for rabies to occur in other major Chinese cities and perhaps we will see the same policy being implemented there. I wonder if this would ever be tolerated in a true democracy.

Energy Archive

2006-07-29T12:26:00.000-04:00

This is just a list of my Energy related postings:

Nuclear Energy Article

Wave Power

Energy Policy or Rather - a Lack of One

Battery Technology - Why It Is More of A Problem Than A Solution

Alternative Energy Local Politics

Nuclear Power Hypocrisy

West Africa Black Rhino Lost

2006-07-29T12:07:00.000-04:00

More than a week ago, I was saddened a bit when I heard of the probability that the West African Black Rhino was extinct. It appears that that has been confirmed.

I don't consider myself an environmentalist and definitely calling me a tree hugger would make me laugh. However, when a larger mammal that most of us have seen in pictures or Discovery Channel or any other wildlife program becomes extinct, it means that all of us has lost something we could easily have related to in some way. We may not all realize it but once it is gone, it is gone.

As for reintroduction of species back into the wild, that is easier said than done and will just as likely meet with failure as success. Sometimes, such reintroduction programs also have unintended consequences as with the
North American Condor.

Miller, Webb and George Allen

2006-06-14T13:54:00.000-04:00

One of the more interesting race is going on will be done in Virginia. The incumbent senator George Allen will be running against democrat James Webb. Perhaps one of the more curious aspects of James weapon being the democratic candidate is the fact that he beat Miller. Miller was the one and the head of the ITAA and organizations are represented high technology companies and lobbied for in one way or another the increase in the number of H1B visas so that companies can bring in more high tech workers and also lower the wages they had to pay all American born talent in software development and other high technology fields. Unfortunately for Miller, some of those votes that ensured that he did not get the nomination came no doubt from high tech workers that did not want to see him as a senator for the United States.

Nuclear Energy Article

2006-04-18T09:00:00.000-04:00

I can't believe that I am reading this:

Look at it this way: More than 600 coal-fired electric plants in the United States produce 36 percent of U.S. emissions -- or nearly 10 percent of global emissions -- of CO2, the primary greenhouse gas responsible for climate change. Nuclear energy is the only large-scale, cost-effective energy source that can reduce these emissions while continuing to satisfy a growing demand for power. And these days it can do so safely.

The shocking thing is who said it.

USDA Mad Cow Explanation

2006-04-04T22:09:00.000-04:00

I occasionally listened to National Public Radio and as you know there are interviews and debates and question and answer sessions on it on occasion.
About two weeks ago there was a program that had the USDA representative and Creekstone Farms on the program but they were not in a debate but we're in a pleasant Q and A session with the host of the program.
It was interesting what the position of the USDA was. They contend that due to the incubation period of mad cow disease that any cow less than 30 months whole cannot ever have a positive test result for mad cow disease. The fact that Japan and some other countries may be testing, and cow disease in old cattle including those less than 30 months old in the USDA's opinion really gives false assurance since the tested animal made later developed the disease if it was allowed to mature to 30 months of age. They also dismiss the two possible cases in Japan that claim to have a positive results in the house more than twenty months old.
If the USDA is correct, then they have a point. Then the question becomes is there any risk of eating a cow that made later developed mad cow disease but currently is below 30 months of age and has a negative test result. I guess we may find out in fifteen years or so which is how long it takes for CJD to appear in humans from consuming such beef. Or does a negative test result from a cow processed now while it is below 30 months of age be safe enough to even if it was going to develop the disease later?
Of course there will always be the skeptics they claim that the USDA is out to protect the beef industry. I personally don't know if that is true but time will tell.

Christian Peacemaker Teams Blind from Ingratitude

2006-03-24T10:10:00.000-05:00

You would think that if someone or some group that is the target of your criticism steps up and risks their lives to rescue you after you've been taken as a hostage by murderous terrorists that you would at least thank them but we get:

Christian Peacemaker Teams has spoken out often against the U.S. and British military presence here. Even after those forces rescued its activists, the organization, in a statement, reiterated its belief that "the illegal occupation of Iraq by Multinational Forces is the root cause of the insecurity which led to this kidnapping and so much pain and suffering in Iraq."

I wonder ... who is showing dedication to duty and love of other human beings and who is showing hate in this case?

Mad Cow Lawsuit

2006-03-24T09:06:00.000-05:00

Creekstone Farms, that is known for producing Black Angus beef that exported to Japan in the past, is now suing the USDA to allow it to test beef.

Yes, you read that correctly - a producer wants to sue a government agency to be allowed to test for a deadly disease in meat. This is an example of why the Democrats are able to point to a Republican administration and say that they are beholden to corporate interests.

Here's a google search (good for a few days) that will bring you the story.

Legal System Observations

2006-03-20T22:34:00.000-05:00

One observation that I heard on NPR radio the other day was that the Moussaoui case showed practicable interesting items. The first was that not only to the good guys have to catch the bad guys but that they still have to work hard and bringing a case together to prosecute the bad guys in the courtroom floor in the united states of America.
It doesn't seem enough that you catch them but you need to do so much more work to make sure that your case is good. In this case of course some lawyer cross the line into illegality and now is terrorist may have his life spared after all. Of course this spring that will satisfy into some of the families who lost their loved ones on September 11th and who truly believe that this man was part of the plot.

Cops Using Steriods

2006-03-20T22:11:00.000-05:00

This one is a little bit outdated but I thought I would talk about it anyway. It seems that back in February AP carried a story about cops using steroids. The danger is that the steroids were not prescribed by doctor - they were self medicating. The problem with this sort of use of steroids by law enforcement whose intentions were probably noble crosses into areas we generally don't think about.
Steroids can make a person aggressive. It can hinder your judgment and you can make mistakes. Now one at least one officer that has taken steroids has said in the article that he wanted to be strong and fast so that he would improve his chances of survival in a violent encounter. I would want to survive too and such encounters. Wouldn't you?
Law enforcement has a responsibility to society that is extremely difficult. It has to make good judgments in many situations. It is granted the power to use deadly force when the situations require it. However, when some minority in the police force decide that they want to take steroids that can affect their judgment and aggressiveness I have to wonder whether it is a good idea for a man trained to use a gun to stop someone with deadly force to be on medication of that type.
The other problem with it is that it's a form of hypocrisy is the cops take drugs illegally or trying to enforce laws regarding illegal trafficking and use of drugs. How will this reflect on them since we teach our children to respect officers?
This is a serious problem and it exists nationwide if you believe the reports.

Red Light Cameras - Love Them or Hate Them

2006-03-17T11:31:00.000-05:00

Here's an article from WaPo about red light cameras and whether they are effective or not. We all have an opinion but the facts speak for themselves I think. That's all I am going to say about this.

Pat Robertson Says Islam is not a Religion of Peace

2006-03-16T23:50:00.000-05:00

OK, Here's the video to see for yourself what Pat Robertson said.

For that matter, and to be fair, Robertson does not necessarily speak for all Protestant Christians. I believe that Franklin Graham has spoken on this topic as well and you can read another Christian leader's opinion on Islam. Robertson is not the end all and be all of Christian perspectives on Islam.

As for myself, I doubt that Robertson would have said this at this time if there was more condemnation of terrorist acts by mainstream Muslims but for whatever reason, it all seems to be rather a mumble of disagreement. Islam has been hijacked is the most popular term from what I have been hearing. The regular Muslim on the street needs to take it back by telling his friends otherwise and saying what needs to be said and doing what needs to be done.

Drug Test Gone Wrong in UK

2006-03-16T10:48:00.000-05:00

You've probably already read or heard about it.

The sad thing about all this is that this is an entirely new drug with no history so the doctors are just as blind as anyone off the street. With 4 stable and 2 critical it appears that this is one drug that probably will end up in medical textbooks. The two in critical condition may die any moment.

Interesting how a drug that has had no effects on cell cultures and animals have such a deliterious effect on a human. If anything, this tells me even more that as we push further into the unknown regions of medical science and utilize drugs and chemicals that have never existed in nature that there needs to be animal and human testing.

I am very sad for those men and their families. I don't have the courage to do what they do. Unfortunately, the fact is that society has a need for animal testing even if it does hurt animals. Society will always choose human life over animal life. Some would even say that animals choose their lives over other animals. Of course, some still call the human species a hairless ape.

Mad Cow Disease - Time for Some Sanity?

2006-03-13T13:24:00.000-05:00

It seems that there may be another case of a Mad Cow infected animal. Although this one did not enter the food chain, there are always a few of us that wonder if any might have.

The scariest sentences in science often begin with the words "There is no evidence that....." Why? The reason is that what those words really mean is that the scientific method requires that any accepted conclusion in the various fields of science be backed by evidence that is scientifically acceptable and meet other stringent requirements. That's how scientific research is conducted. Think about it for a second. That doesn't mean that the hypothesis is false or that the theory cannot happen. All it really means is that whatever research (if any) that produced any results (if appropriate) on the matter either does not meet the stringent requirements of scientific proof or has enough statistical looseness that they cannot conclude with certainty that something can happen.

There are tests for Mad Cow Disease (BSE) with at least four companies that do it. Universities have been researching for low costs tests for years and here is a story from UC - San Francisco and another from Northeastern.

In the UK and Japan, they test every cow that is slaughtered. The US government contends that sample testing and process changes are sufficient to prevent BSE from getting into the food chain. The probable truth here is that the current administration does not want to incur on the meat producers the additional costs of testing every cow. The definite truth is that the test kits costs between $30 to $50. Add that to the 1000 pounds for each cow and you will have to pay 3 to 5 cents more per pound.

I can live with that.

This is not just a statistics question. This is an emotional question. When it comes to food and life, the US public is extremely active and responsive to fears regardless if those same fears are rational or not. The government may be right scientifically and rationally. Their policies may just be good enough. However, when dealing with this sort of perceived danger to personal health, there is a sufficient proportion of the public that prefer 100% testing. It is not as if another few cents per pound is going to have an impact of raising the minimum wage by 5 cents per hour. Everyone can afford another 5 cents per pound for guaranteed peace of mind when buying that beef.

Even if 100% testing is not implemented. At least allow slaughterhouses to perform their own testing and advertise that fact. Let the market forces decide if the overhead of testing for MCD/BSE is worth it. It is sad that the USDA actually refused to allow a farm to test their own cows so that they could export to Japan.

It is time for some sanity.

Wave Power

2006-03-13T09:42:00.000-05:00

In Hawaii, there seems to be experiments going on to try to utilize wave power as opposed to wind power. See this article that describes one such experiment.

Let's think about this. Wind power requires windmills and associated structures to be built on land and of course, needs the wind - which makes certain parts of the country useless for wind power generation. There are politics also with building windmills as I have detailed before.

Wave power is more consistent and requires the use of the ocean. Barring sea animal rights groups from going out there and destroying the equipment, I can see why there is a preference for it. Waves are more available (generally speaking) and more consistent and these things are not unsightly unless you like being a few miles offshore in your boat a lot of the time. It does have the possible issue of high maintenance costs due to seawater corrosion as any marine engineer can tell you, is pretty fiercesome. A relative once told me that his mom who lived in Hawaii always got samples of new alloys of metals to test from an uncle of his. The uncle asked his mom to put it on the beach. She never did that. She just put it on the verandah of her beach house and send it back in a month or so fully corroded.

Now if you've never owned a beach house, you'll never understand why the house is in perpetual part replacement. Bricks and cement don't tolerate seawater too well. Now I wonder if Trex would do any better. Hmmmm....

India Not Trustworthy on Nuclear Issues

2006-03-08T10:29:00.000-05:00

It seems that President Bush did something that every president since Nixon chose not to. He gave in to India's desire to take the first step to becoming a legitimate nuclear weapon state.

Now, Pakistan will go to the world stage, starting in Asia of course and say "Why not me too? After all, India is recognized" and then not too long after that you can fully expect Iran and North Korea to ask the same question and demand the same respect. the President has opened a Pandora's box that our children will probably regret.

Here is why the Indians cannot be trusted. In the 1950s, they were provided as part of the "Atoms for Peace" program a Canadian nuclear reactor because they promised not to proliferate nuclear weapons. They then proceeded to use that same reactor to manufacture fissible material in violation of that agreement. That material was then used to detonate their first nuclear bomb. The current nuclear material they have also trace back to that first reactor obtained under false promises. Now they want to sign the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty but as a nuclear state, not as a non-nuclear state. What does that tell you?

Taxes Used to Fund Pickets Against American Citizens

2006-03-01T13:45:00.000-05:00

It seems that the illegal immigration situation just got more twisted. There appears to be a tax funded group that is picketing American Citizens (aka Minutemen) at their homes (and maybe their children's schools) in a intimidatory manner in retaliation for the worksite monitoring of possible illegal activities.

Sure is starting to sound like a testosterone test to me.

Days when I am glad

2006-02-27T09:30:00.000-05:00

Living in the United States has its advantages. To use a hyperbolic point (and misquote) from the upcoming movie V is for Vendetta, "The people should not have to be afraid of their government, the government should be afraid of its people."

So, in an irrelevant point, I am commenting on the fact that there was yet another coup attempt in the Phillipines. Of course, coup attempts there don't seem to be as successful or frequent as those in some African countries. In fact, there are more coups historically than elections in some of those very same countries in the last 2 centuries.

Let's look at an oft quoted statement:

The natural state of man is to yearn to be free.

That may be true but when Americans or American presidents quote that they often skip over other questions like:

1. Can all cultures exist/survive within a democratic/free governing system without self-destructing?
2. Are all cultures suitable for experiencing freedom/democracy and at what levels?
3. Can those cultures be modified to be able to experience Western style freedom/democracy and what would it take to change them?
4. If the answer is no to any of the above three questions, what are the implications for America or American leaders?

I am naturally skeptical that any one type of government would work for all countries, all cultures, all races and all situations. That is a hard assumption to accept. The true question is, what is anyone going to do about it if it is true?

Harvard President Resigns

2006-02-22T10:24:00.000-05:00

It seems that Lawrence Summers, the president of Harvard has resigned partially if not wholly due to remarks he made back in January 2005. He was accused of making remarks that sounded like he believed that women had a lack of "intrinsic aptitude" for certain fields.

This reminds me of the time that Alan Greenspan made the statement that the markets had "irrational exuberance". In fact, he never said that about the markets but about asset values and it was a fairly lengthly speech:

Clearly, sustained low inflation implies less uncertainty about the future, and lower risk premiums imply higher prices of stocks and other earning assets. We can see that in the inverse relationship exhibited by price/earnings ratios and the rate of inflation in the past. But how do we know when irrational exuberance has unduly escalated asset values, which then become subject to unexpected and prolonged contractions as they have in Japan over the past decade? And how do we factor that assessment into monetary policy? We as central bankers need not be concerned if a collapsing financial asset bubble does not threaten to impair the real economy, its production, jobs, and price stability. Indeed, the sharp stock market break of 1987 had few negative consequences for the economy. But we should not underestimate or become complacent about the complexity of the interactions of asset markets and the economy. Thus, evaluating shifts in balance sheets generally, and in asset prices particularly, must be an integral part of the development of monetary policy.

Fairly dry reading but you get my point. Yet based on those two words, the media and the markets reacted like a snowball rolling downhill.

So, here's the extract of the lengthy full speech that Summers is still being castigated on:

So my best guess, to provoke you, of what's behind all of this is that the largest phenomenon, by far, is the general clash between people's legitimate family desires and employers' current desire for high power and high intensity, that in the special case of science and engineering, there are issues of intrinsic aptitude, and particularly of the variability of aptitude, and that those considerations are reinforced by what are in fact lesser factors involving socialization and continuing discrimination. I would like nothing better than to be proved wrong, because I would like nothing better than for these problems to be addressable simply by everybody understanding what they are, and working very hard to address them.

Sure sounds like he would like us to consider the possibility of a possibly inherent situation and to prove it right or wrong and then use that knowledge to fix the social situation as a result.

One of Summer's defenders is Steven Pinker. Although I don't necessarily agree with all of his ideas, he has my respect. In an interview with the college newspaper Crimson was this exchange:

CRIMSON: Finally, did you personally find President Summers’ remarks (or what you’ve heard/read of them) to be offensive?

PINKER: Look, the truth cannot be offensive. Perhaps the hypothesis is wrong, but how would we ever find out whether it is wrong if it is “offensive” even to consider it? People who storm out of a meeting at the mention of a hypothesis, or declare it taboo or offensive without providing arguments or evidence, don’t get the concept of a university or free inquiry.

So, the question Pinker is asking us is whether we are going to be intellectually honest enough in an academic environment and elsewhere, to consider the idea that something politically incorrect may be true for the alternative is to stick our heads in the sand and to deny it because we don't like the sound of it. Let's prove it wrong if we hate it. Let's acknowledge it if it is proven true.

Indonesian Behavior

2006-02-20T11:51:00.000-05:00

Not too long ago, when the huge earthquake created the tsunami of 2004 that killed more than 100,000 Indonesians, the United States started relief efforts using resources such as the USS Abraham Lincoln to bring much needed food and water to those in places such as Bandah Aceh. It was said that that effort had won much credibility and appreciation from some muslim countries and Indonesia especially as a result.

That was 14 months ago.

Today, Indonesians decided that the US Embassy in Jakarta, the capital of Indonesia needed to be stormed over the Danish newspaper publication of cartoons.

What do you call someone who is never satisfied with what you have done for them and continues to blame you for things you didn't do?

Beating the System in the Dairy Industry

2006-02-14T09:48:00.000-05:00

I originally saw this in the Wall Street Journal a few day ago but also found it elsewhere. It is basically about an immigrant farmer from Holland that started working in the farm business and now has found an innovative way to actually be an owner-farmer that makes a decent living.

Here's the story. Back in the depression era the supply of milk was unpredictable due to machinations by those that could control it. Laws were passed to minimize that abuse of milk supply power. Over time, that regulation grew into a system whereby only large corporations have that exclusive membership to distribute milk through large regions of the United States. This is not unlike the concentration power that beef processing plants had in this country. The net effect of this concentration is that the small farmer/owner/rancher is squeezed pricewise by the middleman since the middleman controls the gate to the market.

Well, it appears that Mr. Hettinga actually found a way around that gate and is selling directly to retailers and so the retailers get it cheaper. Remember, these middlemen are relying on the laws that passed during the 1930s. There is no longer a need for such laws as the markets are far more efficient now and the economy is definitely not like the 1930s. So now the middlemen and those that are forced to supply to the middlemen are asking that states pass laws against Mr Hettinga who was innovative enough and more efficient than they are.

I say it is time to scrap outdated laws and to outlaw cartels of this sort.

In Support of Denmark's Freedom of Press

2006-02-13T15:58:00.000-05:00

To the Danish Freedom of the Press. Not that some can understand it.

Brigade de l'Argent des Fran�ais: La BAF crash la manif des Islamistes contre les caricatures

2006-02-13T14:07:00.000-05:00

Do you want to see courage that separates the men from the boys? Apparently, a couple of cartoonists in France decided to show some guts and willingness to die for what they believe in in the post: Brigade de l'Argent des Fran�ais: La BAF crash la manif des Islamistes contre les caricatures

Atheist Goes To Court Against Priest

2006-02-13T14:05:00.000-05:00

It seems that atheists in the United States are not the only ones that try to use the legal system against references about religion.

In Italy an atheist sued a priest for saying that Jesus Christ existed. Yes, you can read that sentence again. His claim is that Jesus Christ didn't exist.

Anyway, the short version is that the Italian court threw the case out and now he wants to take it to the EU Court.

Now that he has his moment of fame, if only he would have the guts to say that Mohammed did not exist. Would the result (if he ever dared to say that) reflect more on him or on certain people that claim to be Muslims?

On a related note, the movie Da Vinci Code looks like it is going to be a success at the box office in less than 100 days time when it will be released. There are quite a few protestors already. Folks, this book is sold under the fiction category in the book stores, not history or religion. The author is not James Frey.

Energy Policy Or Rather - the Lack of One

2006-02-13T14:01:00.000-05:00

The State of The Union Speech covered for the first time, the topic that hints of an Energy Policy for the United States. The phrase "addicted to oil" is an euphemism in my opinion. Perhaps the words lifeblood or air supply would be better descriptions.

The first oil crisis was in 1973 and we never developed a National Energy Policy. That was more than three decades ago and every president has chosen to avoid crafting a policy. Even this one avoids one and supplies some $150 million for R&D. This is only a tiny first step - not a national energy policy.

Look at China, a competitor at the international level to the United States. They are building 30 nuclear reactors over the next 20 years or so. They have the world's largest dam. What do we have in the United States? No new nuclear reactors. We also have a shortage of refinery plants outside the gulf area. They shut down during hurricanes Katrina and Rita and pushed up prices as a result. We also have upstate New Yorkers protesting against a wind farm being put up that mars their view of nature. We also cannot drill in the Artic National Wildlife Refuge in a responsible fashion. We're giving no thought to the future as a nation and we're selfish in the extreme.

You want to cut gasoline consumption? There is one clear way to do it. That is to encourage and perhaps even mandate telecommuting at some level. When you don't have to drive 30 miles, you save between 1 to 3 gallons. Let's do some hypothetical numbers. Let's say you mandate that 2% of all workers must be telecommuting every business day. Let's say we have 100 million workers. That's 2 million people folks. Let's say they drive an average of 30 miles a day - a rather conservative number. 60 million miles not driven every business day. Lets use 20 miles per gallon and we are looking at 3 million gallons a day savings. Which works out to approximately 14 million barrels of gasoline a year. You decide.

TX Deputy Sheriff's Wife Threatened By Mexicans

2006-02-13T13:56:00.000-05:00

It appears that deputy sherrifs and the wife of another deputy sherrif was threatened with death by drug smugglers and/or Mexican military that were supporting them.

State and federal officials are investigating death threats against Hudspeth County sheriff's deputies and their families that local officials believed are tied to a recent standoff on the Texas-Mexico border.

Chief Deputy Mike Doyal said Wednesday that two deputies and the wife of third officer were warned that they should "stay off the river" or they and their families would be killed.

Unfortunately, the Border Patrol is not equipped nor trained to deal with a potential enemy that has Humvees with mounted 50 caliber machine guns. It really doesn't matter if they were drug smugglers, ex Mexican military or smugglers dressed up as military or corrupt actual military. When a foreign force crosses the borders and threatens your citizens, you cannot pretend that it didn't happen. Now the terrorists know where to go to get help if they want to come into the United States without too many problems. May I suggest that we occasionally make available some well experienced military from Iraq to assist our fine men of the Border Patrol and law enforcement near the border? My I suggest that they be a crew that knows how to use a AH-64 since the opposition is now armed with 50 caliber machine guns.

Battery Technology - Why It Is More of A Problem Than A Solution

2006-02-13T13:55:00.000-05:00

Along with all the talk about hybrid cars and their fuel saving capabilities there seems to be an absense of the full truth. Yes, they save gas and get better mileage. Yes they do cost more. However, from an engineering viewpoint, they leave much to be desired.

The batteries are not fully charged and are kept at about 60% at maximum to prolong the life of the battery. You would get far better mileage if it was fully charged. Secondly, batteries are still big, heavy and bulky and do not hold much charge and that has not changed very much in the last few decades. For all the R&D (or insufficient R&D at that), there hasn't been a quantum leap in battery technology like there has been in other fields. Go to this about.com article if you want to learn more.

That's why some view the hydrogen cell as the solution. I am not holding my breath but at least it is in use in restricted circumstances.

And the Train Keeps Chugging Along

2006-02-11T20:08:00.000-05:00

From msnbc:

A prominent Iranian newspaper said Tuesday it would hold a competition for cartoons on the Holocaust to test whether the West extends the principle of freedom of expression to the Nazi genocide as it did to the caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad.

Hamshahri, one of Iran’s largest papers, made clear the contest is a reaction to European newspapers’ publication of Danish cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad, which have led to demonstrations, boycotts and attacks on European embassies across the Islamic world. Several people have been killed.

OK, so you want to test the West's tolerance of offensive material? Or Israel's? I bet that they won't be burning your embassy in any EU capital. You don't have any in Israel so you can't quite test there. I bet they won't go on the streets to protest your publication of Holocaust cartoons. You do however contradict your own (Iranian) president's claim that the Holocaust never happened. Are you calling him a liar? Of course not.

If anything, these Islamic protesters need to learn how to behave in a mature fashion. For goodness sake, it is the 21st Century.

More on a Similar Theme

2006-02-11T20:06:00.000-05:00

What does it tell you when civilians go on to destroy the company that owned that ferry involved in that tragic sinking in Egypt?

That approximately a thousand lives may have been lost is sad beyone measure. That the company has failed to provide sufficient information is unbelieveable and irresponsible. That they riot and attack the company and a hospital for their right to information and driven by outrage and emotion like their fellow humans protesting the cartoons tell us more about their culture and how they react when they feel that they have been wronged. Never mind explanations. Never mind logic. Never mind the rights of others. The world must revolve around them and their rights are paramount over all others.

The KKK was bad enough but this...

2006-02-11T20:05:00.000-05:00

The KKK was famous for burning crosses and being racist and some would say close to terrorist tactics to promote and enforce their view on the rest of the community.

In a wonderful show of intolerance, some that profess the faith of Islam thought it a wonderful idea to burn a consultate and an embassy over what their free press decided to print. Yes, the cartoons.

According to Islam, they do not appreciate any pictures of Mohammed or any religious historical prophets/dieties that they share in common with Judaism and Christianity. I wonder if that means that a depiction of Christ on the cross would upset them enough to burn a church or two. Oh, wait, they don't have churches in most of those countries do they. So much for tolerance from those Islamic states.

Go to the BBC for a great explanation from an objective viewpoint.

Freedom Folks: Guard The Borders Blogburst

2006-02-11T20:04:00.000-05:00

One post I'd like to note is that of Freedom Folks: Guard The Borders Blogburst. It puts into easy terms the aspect of one of the plethora of techniques that illegal immigrants use to game the system of immigration and essential non-governance and non-enforcement by the United States Immigration authorities.

Unfortunately I have to agree with Congressman Tancredo that the day we have another major terrorist attack in the United States that came through the porous borders to our south and north is the day we will actually take the threat seriously. Instead of Americans just volunteering for the military services you might see Americans volunteering to help seal our borders in such numbers that the Minutemen will appear to be nothing more than a drop in the bucket.

Religious Taboos and Offensive Cartoons

2006-02-11T10:47:00.000-05:00

Just as Christians have beliefs about Jesus and find any suggestion that he may have sinned offensive, the world needs to understand that we too have our beliefs and there are some things that are not acceptable to us no matter what your motivation or reasons are.

We believers have been attacked too often for our way of life and practicing what has been preached to us by our teachers. Some of us have been treated as pariahs because we carry this belief in our hearts and we live it. Many have gone to jail because we do not just profess it but we protect and cherish it. Some of our faithful have died doing their duties as our religion has taught us to do - to share with the world what the real truth is.

It doesn't matter to us even if you attack us yet again for our beliefs. It will only make us stronger and we will work harder to teach you a lesson that we cannot be defeated and we will crush you and your pathetic crusade. It is time for the whole world to realize that some things cannot be beaten out of us and there is a higher power that will expose the infidels for what they really are. We will continue to worship and pray to our god and there is nothing you can do to stop it.

Do not abridge our religion - Freedom of The Press.
------------------------------------------------------
For the impaired, the above is just to make you think.

Side Effect of Immigration

2006-02-11T10:46:00.000-05:00

Here in Virginia, a bill was rejected in the state senate. Basically it was meant to allow one business to sue another if the latter used illegal immigrants.

The bill is dead but the idea is interesting.

If I am an owner of a business and I have competition that is breaking the law and using resources they should not be using and is not legally available to the rest of us, it is obviously not a level playing field. He chooses to break the law by utilizing or obtaining illegal immigrants to work for him. If I choose to obey the law in this competition, I could very well lose in the marketplace and be forced to close down my company and laying off my legal citizen and immigrant employees. I guess there is no justice after all. I guess it teaches our children that staying fair and playing clean doesn't help you win when the other side can cheat and lie their way to success.

SOTU Speech - Middle East

2006-02-11T10:45:00.000-05:00

One of the points made by the President during the speech had to do with our dependence on oil. If you think about the other side of the coin, the middle eastern countries are also dependent on oil. They depend on it for their revenue.
Let's say that in 10 years that the United States reduced oil consumption by 25% through technology. We then give this technology to the rest of the world if they don't already have it. What would that do to countries that depend on oil exports for survival? Is Iran or Saudi Arabia using this money to educate their children and making them productive citizens of the world? Are they generating goods and services to increase their wealth? Will they be exporting any goods and services besides oil? If not, what is going to happen when oil demand drops and prices go down if the President's program actually bears fruit? I can see why these programs would benefit Israel in the long run, can't you?

Death Penalty Debate

2006-01-26T11:10:00.000-05:00

Everyone once in a while the topic of the death penalty grabs the headlines. Perhaps not the national but usually the regional or local. Recently here in Virginia former governor Mark Warner ordered a DNA test for a man executed in 1992.

Roger Keith Coleman was accused and found guilty of raping and murdering his 19-year-old sister in law Wanda McCoy. He protested that he didn't do it and there was much that was never aired that may have proven his innocence. In fact, he was on the cover of Time magazine. For years after his conviction, many sought to prove his innocence because they believed him. Before his execution he said,'An innocent man is going to be murdered tonight.' Retests were demanded. Even after his execution, they still kept it up. Despite what the prosecutors say, I am inclined to believe that they were nervous about any retests.

Recently, the Virginia governor decided to order the tests using new technology not available in 1992 to conduct the DNA tests. The test results confirmed that Roger Keith Coleman was guilty. Jim McCloskey, one of Coleman's champions from the Centurion Ministries upon hearing of the confirmation he said "I now know that I was wrong, and this is a very bitter pill to swallow. However, the truth is the truth."

Pal Thomson, Wanda McCoy's brother put it simply saying "Killers tell lies."

From the Richmond Times Dispatch (Jan 12, 2006):

Don Hill, one of the jurors in the case, said yesterday that the findings came as no surprise to him and that he hopes the second-guessing of the jury will now stop.

"Everybody had an opinion, but the evidence they used to pin him down was just like pinning a tail on a donkey," said Hill.

There will always be those that seek to eradicate the death penalty from this country. In this case they did not find their public reason. They will continue to seek that one single example that the system failed and that an innocent man was executed. When they do, they will trumpet it from the highest towers for all to hear and then demand that the death penalty be scrapped. For now, they claim that it is for justice. They conveniently forget that the murdered and the families of the murdered also seek justice through the death penalty.

Is it possible that innocent men have been executed? Definitely. After all, when some forms of DNA testing became available, innocent men have been released from jail after being tested. Logically, we can infer that some have been innocent that have been executed.

Should we have DNA testing whenever possible before convicting someone of a crime that carries the death penalty? Sure. We should have testing of all cases prior to the death sentence being carried out. We have the technology now. We owe it not just to the accused, but to the victims and their families and to society that the correct person is punished.

Should the death penalty be taken away as an option? Surely not as there are crimes that morally demand it. What do you do after all to a murderer on a life sentence that kills another in prison? Does the death penalty stop all from committing crimes? Not in all cases and as realists we have to accept that.

We hang horse thieves, not in order that men shall be hanged, but in order that horses shall not be stolen.

Are Americans Really That Brutal in War?

2006-01-24T10:29:00.000-05:00

World War I was supposed to be the war to end all wars. World War II was total. Korea ended in a (current) stalemate and Vietnam ended in defeat. There have been numerous smaller wars in between that involve the United States as well as those that do not. Here for example is the list of dozens of wars on Wikipedia from 1945 through 1989. Care to guess how many there have been without US involvement since then?

The reality of the matter is that war will always be with us and there is no escaping it as long as there is no harmony on the planet. Peaceful nations generally do not start wars - they try diplomacy first. We generally believe that the evil start wars for reasons that we classify simply including greed and power.

Now, the United States is being accused of starting the war for oil and for being the most brutal occupiers of Iraq in history and indiscriminately killing civillians and children either on purpose or through collateral damage.

It is time to put this in perspective.

The year is 1258. The month is January. Hulagu, grandson of Genghis Khan has beseiged the city of Baghdad. Yes, that very same Baghdad. He breaches the walls and his army (estimated to number between 100,000 to 850,000 depending on who you choose to believe) proceed to sack the city for 7 days. The Mongols have this habit of murdering as many civillians as they can and then beheading them and piling the skulls in pyramids as large as you care to imagine - or not. Some sources say that in those 7 days they killed 200,000. Other sources claim 800,000. Some claim more than a million were killed in those 7 days. Can you imagine what it must have been like to see 200,000 killed in a week? Or 800,000 or a million? Let me put it this way - there are less than a million seconds in a week.

The Mongols were absolutely brutal in war.
The Japanese were brutal in war.

Please don't make the statement that American behavior in Iraq in this century is at that same level.

Was Lack of Armor Really to Blame?

2006-01-23T12:43:00.001-05:00

The recent politicization of a report from the Pentagon was extremely unhelpful and potentially deadly in the future. The subject of course was that the report said that more Marines would b alive today if they had had more armor. Some politicians took that and used it to blame those in power or authority to show how the war is poorly managed.

The report did not answer these questions:
1. If they had been wearing more armor from the beginning, could they have died from a lack of mobility and ability to take offensive action?
2. If they had been wearing more armor, would other servicemen have died or been injured from their lack of mobility?

Unfair questions to ask of an analytic report? Perhaps, but definitely real and relevant questions.

Combat is not a computer game. It is real and our servicemen get hurt, lose limbs and die from it. History has shown that many in combat figure out very quickly what works and what doesn't. From the Normandy invasion where some non-com figures out to weld iron rakes to the front of tanks to break through the hedgerows to Greneda, where a young soldier or marine makes a long distance call back stateside to call for supporting fire because the radio got killed, our servicemen are not dumb.

See this story for a first person explanation for why they don't want more heavy body armor.

Kennedy sure knows how to point fingers

2006-01-18T11:28:00.000-05:00

Apparently someone needs to make sure that their own house is not made of glass before launching stones.

According to CNN:

The Massachusetts Democrat, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, grilled Alito during Senate confirmation hearing last week about Alito's ties to the Concerned Alumni of Princeton, an alumni group that opposed the admission of women and minorities at the Ivy League School.

A Washington Times story about Kennedy's Owl Club ties last week sparked criticism from Republicans who branded Kennedy a hypocrite.

Full Story Here.

Hmmmm... Pat Robertson and Ray Nagin believe in the same God?

2006-01-17T13:27:00.000-05:00

First Pat Robertson suggests that God may have given Israeli PM Sharon a stroke for giving away Gaza to the Palestinians and everyone denounces Robertson for even suggesting such a possibility. Now New Orleans mayor Nagin claims that God is upset with America and punishes America with Hurricane Katrina.

Someone tell me what the objection is over Robertson again? Past history or the issue itself? Is God truly capable of punishing individuals in the 21st century? Or does he reserve that for nations only? Can he do one but not the other? Or neither? Is Robertson possibly correct? What about Nagin? Are only one but not the other over the line? You tell me - or better yet, be intellectually honest, you tell yourself first.

Alternative Energy Local Politics

2006-01-17T13:09:00.000-05:00

OK, so we have the anti-nukes that don't want new nuclear reactors to ever be built. We also have those that don't want new refineries to be built even though a lack of that capacity allowed Katrina to cause huge price increases in gasoline that hurt all of us.

Now we have the anti-wind crowd that don't want wind power to be built within sight or sound or imagined effects of where they live. It isn't even on their property and is not in any way illegal. No wonder this county has no energy policy.

Funniest Flip Ever

2006-01-13T10:04:00.000-05:00

Joe Biden, 2004 at Princeton giving a speech:

It's an honor to be here. It would have even been a greater honor to have gone here. I have three children who have merifully have all finally completed undergraduate and graduate school, and I tried to get all three of them to apply here...I committed a serious mistake, Dean. I've learned now, any advice I give...when you become parents, whatever school you want your child to go to, don't mention it. And so I had been pushing Princeton, and this magnificently attractive, intellectually and physically, beautiful young girl, was a sophomore, was showing us around, and I figured we've got a lock now. My son is going to really be interested, and I know Senators aren't supposed to say things like that, but if he hadn't been interested, I would have been worried...

Joe Biden at Judge Alito's hearing:

This is just by way of...you know, why some of us are puzzled, because if I was aware of it, and I didn't even like Princeton...No, I mean I really didn't like Princeton (laughing). Yeah, I was an Irish-Catholic kid who thought it hadn't changed like you concluded it had. I mean, I admit. I have little...you know, one of my real dilemmas is I have two kids who went to Ivy League schools. I'm not sure my grandfather, Finnegan, will ever forgive me for allowing that to happen. But all kidding aside, I wasn't a big Princeton fan.

I'll let you draw your own conclusions.

Assasins Going After BP Agents?

2006-01-11T09:54:00.000-05:00

It seems that the FBI or Homeland Security has come across information that says that MS-13 may be targeting Border Patrol agents for assasination because illegal immigrant smuggling has become tougher due to the Border Patrol being more effective.

San Jose Mercury News has the story.

Is this starting to look less like an illegal immigration wave and more like an illegal immigration war? Take my advice, don't START a war with the U.S. of A - you won't like our response.

Mexicans Shooting at US Border Patrol Over National Boundary

2006-01-10T12:48:00.000-05:00

This story will get you upset because not only does the United States have to put up with 11 to 14 million illegal immigrants with 100,000 or more coming across the border each year, it also has to put with the the "It's OUR RIGHT" attitude that the Mexican government and the illegal immigrants take.

Well, to show that some of them further do not believe that there is even a border, they think it is fine to shoot at Border Patrol agents who are doing their job. No wonder some call this an invasion. First they cross over and if you resist, they shoot at you.

You know, I can just imagine how much those Border Patrol agents that were fired upon might wish for some of their fellow Americans serving in the US Army overseas could have assisted them. Some night vision equipment would have been nice. Oh, since you're used to being shot at, why not sign on as backup? Don't forget to bring the Apache just in case those guys decide to start shooting at us again - especially at night.

Chinese Suicide Bomber

2006-01-09T15:17:00.000-05:00

Not quite in the usual theme of things but even the Chinese have the occasional suicide bomber problem. Not quite a case of a freedom fighter but the level of news suppression or pretense that it didn't happen is quite illuminating.

Go here to see the pictures and read the story.

Interesting View of Racism

2006-01-09T10:17:00.000-05:00

Have you ever been just browsing and come across something someone wrote and it seemed to crystallize something you had thought and felt about often but failed to bring together in a concise coherent manner. It happened to me today and I have to say that this comes pretty close to what I think but not totally. Here it is anyway..

There are really two types of racism.

Real racism is not in the eye of the beholder. Real racism is when you irrationally use the characteristics you believe are true of a "race" to judge a member of that race. It becomes especially destructive when the characteristics believed true are false and derogatory, and especially destructive when it involves judging the value of a person (something not intrinsically wrong in certain contexts... "would I hire this person?" "is that person going to try to kill me?" we make value judgements every day).

This is as close to an emprically verifiable term as you can ever get when dealing with humans, assuming you can get at the inner state of the person.

The second type of racism is in the eye of the beholder, and it has gotten to the point where "That's racist!" is one step shy of "I don't like that!", only much, much meaner. The distinguishing characteristic of this kind of "racism" is that if the accuser can come up with any reason that the accusee might be doing or saying something for a racist reason, regardless of how likely or even how true that reason is, the accusee can be presumed racist, and should therefore be vilified. Fortunately, I think we're very near the point where that accusation will have been so overused that it will be diluted into nearly no effect.

As a homework exercise, estimate the probability that this form of racism will ever be "eliminated", and consider the consequences of your answer.

Often, it's hard to tell which is which. I prefer to cultivate an attitude more like the South Park children than the current attitudes of people who are hypersensitive about the second type of racism. This is the first I've heard that "of course" King Kong is a stand-in for black people. Personally, I thought he was just a giant monster. Since this accusation is a "projection" type accusation, I am inclined to think this is the second kind of "racism."

(Incidentally, the second type of "racism" is not itself really racist. It's just evil, in every sense of the term, especially including how it destroys the one afflicted with it. No apology for that belief.)

President Pushed Renewal of Unchanged Patriot Act

2006-01-08T16:17:00.000-05:00

The President of the United States just doesn't get it. The Patriot Act as it was originally written does not address the issues that so many Americans find uncomfortable. The hardest thing to believe is that he wants it made permanent AS IS. You would think that he would have gotten the message to compromise on this piece of legislation would have gotten through to him but it apparently hasn't. This President just does not have the political capital to push through this kind of position. His rating is lower than any other president going back to Eisenhower in their 6th year of Presidency. Even Bush #41 and Clinton had higher ratings and he wants to shovel this through the system?

Although I don't necessarily agree with they guy, Sensenbrenner has more and better points than I have on this issue.

The President needs to understand this one quick. I'm starting to wonder if he has the capacity to do so.

Pat Robertson and Hypocrisy?

2006-01-06T09:36:00.000-05:00

Ok, the media seems to love to carry only excerpts so I decided to go googling this is the closest I could find to the full statement:

ROBERTSON: I have said last year that Israel was entering into the most dangerous period of its entire existence as a nation. That is intensifying this year with the loss of Sharon. Sharon was personally a very likeable person. I am sad to see him in this condition. But I think we need to look at the Bible and the Book of Joel. The prophet Joel makes it very clear that God has enmity against those who, quote, "divide my land." God considers this land to be his. You read the Bible, he says, "This is my land." And for any prime minister of Israel who decides he going carve it up and give it away, God says, "No. This is mine." And the same thing -- I had a wonderful meeting with Yitzhak Rabin in 1974. He was tragically assassinated, and it was terrible thing that happened, but nevertheless, he was dead. And now Ariel Sharon, who was again a very likeable person, a delightful person to be with. I prayed with him personally. But here he is at the point of death. He was dividing God's land, and I would say woe unto any prime minister of Israel who takes a similar course to appease the EU, the United Nations or United States of America. God said, "This land belongs to me, you better leave it alone."

DISCLAIMER: Do not assume that I either agree or disagree with Robertson on this matter.

I wish to analyze and highlight the issue(s).

No doubt that there is a huge amount of controversy and criticism over this latest statement by Robertson. Some of the critics have found the Iranian president's statement that "the Holocaust did not happen" far worse and others have not even commented on it but found issues with Robertson's statement.

Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director, issued the following statement:

It is outrageous and shocking, but not surprising, that Pat Robertson once again has suggested that God will punish Israel's leaders for any decision to give up land to the Palestinians. His remarks are un-Christian and a perversion of religion. Unlike Robertson, we don't see God as cruel and vengeful.

Hmmmm.... Since Mr Foxman is speaking for the Anti-Defamation League, I will assume that he is speaking on behalf of some Jewish viewpoint. In this case, we have a representative of that Jewish viwepoint telling a Christian that he has made un-Christian remarks. Bear with me. How does anyone tell a Jew that he is making un-Jewish remarks then? Can it be done in a politically correct way? Can a Buddhist or Hindu or atheist or Native American tell a Jew to stop making un-Jewish remarks? Can a Christian?

As for a cruel or vengeful God, I think lots of us that have even an inkling of what the Old Testament says might disagree with that statement.

More telling perhaps is the fact that there are Jews that believe that God did give them that land that is the Gaza. Some of them used to live there until they were forcibly evicted. They would agree with Robertson's statement. So why can't we focus on the statement itself rather than the skin color or religion or nationality of the speaker?

Airline Industry News: Independence Air Shuts Down

2006-01-03T09:55:00.000-05:00

So you probably heard today that FLYi.com was shutting down. That's Independence Air for the rest of us. A small low cost airline that started two years ago by splitting off from a feeder arrangement with one of the regular larger airlines. They thought they could make it but couldn't.

The fact is that, this shutdown is really a symptom of a far bigger problem within the airline industry.

So, what does this have to do with rationality in politics? The answer is several billion dollars of taxpayers money that was handed over to the airline industry.

Update 1/6/06 - Seems that JetBlue is trying to fill the new market opportunity already. Good move Jetlue.

The story goes back farther then most of us realize. Think dot com boom. Yep, late 1990s. What happened there was that with the huge growth of the internet and with all the IPOs happening on Wall Street, billionaires (albeit some of them temporary) being made overnight. Secondary industries were experiencing some of the effect as well. Remember the words New Economy anyone?

Well, with all the VC money flowing into the tech companies small and otherwise, air travel increased as some of that money was spent flying engineers, salesmen, investors and executives to various meetings. Ticket prices shot up and the airlines didn't have enough planes to meet the increased demand. You've leased all the planes you can and there still aren't enough seats.

So, imagine yourself an airline executive facing all this passenger demand growth and the shareholders are expecting you to make sure that you take advantage of it. What do you do? Simple, you buy more planes. This is the New Economy folks. The old rules no longer apply and we have entered into a new stage of growth for the 21st Century.

The only problem with buying airplanes is that you amortize aircraft purchase costs over decades - a typical number is 20 years. You're going to have to make payments for 20 years. No problem say the airline executives. The New Economy will make that decision a no-brainer. The planes will pay for themselves in a fraction of that time at this rate.

The end result was that the commercial airline industry overexpanded and bought too many planes and had way too much capacity. When the dot com boom busted, the tech industry passengers disappeared. By the time mid 2001 arrived, the airlines were already in unpleasant shape. September 11th happened and you know where the rest of the passengers went.

So why did they do it? Why did the airline execs make those sorts of decisions? The answer lies in the fact that short term growth was happening and the CEOs were looking forward only a quarter or two and wanted to show their shareholders that they were taking full advantage of the passenger growth by generating better numbers revenue and profit wise - even if it meant taking on more debt. They just couldn't leave that money on the table for some other competitor to get. So, they chose to be stars for the moment at great risk for the long term. We make heros of contrarians in the investment markets that are right. The problem was that there was not one executive at a major airline that was willing to be a contrarian during that time. Go take a look at airline exec compensations during the late 1990s.

The major airlines set themselves up for a big problem and it came with a vengence in the form of a terrorist attack and a nationwide no fly zone for several days. Sure, you can make the case that the terrorist attack was not directly their fault but their weakened state was their own creation. There is no way that the natural economic state of air travel at that time could justify the existence of that large a capacity between all the major airlines. The correct level of capability and capacity was much lower. The airlines were all into survival mode to outlast each other in the medium term. The market was fit for a reduction in both capacity and the number of airlines. It should have happened and bankruptcy filings were either in or on the way.

Then the towers were hit and the govenment gave billions of dollars outright to save at least two major airlines and made billions more in loan guarantees. They opted to save jobs that would have gone away naturally and they used taxpayers money to save an industry that was overdue for a natural adjustment. Then they gave more money to those families that lost loved ones so that those families wouldn't sue the airlines into bankruptcy.

They should have left the airlines to succeed or fail on their own. The nation would have been better off if one airline had closed down but instead, the government decided to take extraordinary measures to keep all of them on life support. This is economic interference at an unbelievable scale. It was a political decision - not a sensible one.

Even today, there are too many empty seats and too many planes that are not meeting their monthly loan payments. The price of jet fuel is extrememly high and that can only make a sick industry worse.

Independence Air is only the tip of the iceberg and you can watch the airline industry limp along for the next decade until they decide to bite the bullet and fix the real problems. In the meantime, they still have our billions.

Spielberg's Munich Movie

2005-12-29T09:37:00.000-05:00

I didn't quite expect to have an opinion to share on this but ....

The trailer is extremely powerful. The reviews have only made me want to see it more. The news about the movie and the public's reaction are very interesting.

See the trailer.

Remember, the movie is according to Spielberg, inspired by the true events so don't go taking it as a documentary. It is STILL Hollywood. Schindler's List may have been as close to a historical documentary in a movie format as you are likely to see but this is a different kettle of fish entirely. Both former Mossad and PLO people have said as much as well.

The best thing about this movie is that I am willing to accept that it is good not because it is good as a work of art but because both sides have something to complain about. See another article that puts it into words better than I can.

By the way, calling Spielberg Anti-Semetic as some have done is just one of the most hilarious things I have ever heard.

Iraq War Viewpoints - Good Example of Bias

2005-12-27T17:01:00.000-05:00

I came across something not entirely ontopic but totally irresistable.

Perhaps one of the best blogs in the Iraq war around is Michael Yon's. Today is particularly relevant because he has a great commentary and links to two files demonstrating factually correct and true stories. The more important point here is that you can interpret true facts and situations but by editing and presentation, tell the story you want to tell and have the impact you desire on the viewer.

This is about the best example of what bias can result in. Think about it the next time you watch the news. Check it out.

Nuclear Power Hypocrisy

2005-12-23T17:12:00.000-05:00

It all seems rather ridiculous that there are groups and politicians that oppose any single new nuclear plant being built in the United States. The last nuclear plant that was turned on was in 1996 (Watts Barr, TN). Yet, the only things that we have been putting in to handle the growth are non nuclear power plants. A lot of that has been coal fired plants and we all know that that pollutes the atmosphere and if you want to believe some claims - global warning too.

Yet, I do not see these very same groups oppose or protest China that is going to build up to 30 new power plants in the next two decades. After all, if it is difficult to handle the nuclear waste from a single new American nuclear plant, how much more difficult is it to handle from 30 Chinese nuclear plants? Also keep in mind that China is physically smaller than the United States and with a far larger population thereby resulting in a higher population density.

So, I am waiting for some of these anti nuclear groups to take on the Chinese government's plans. Or is a Chinese life worth less than an American life?

Patriot Act Renewed for Short Term

2005-12-22T11:23:00.000-05:00

It appears that the Patriot Act has been renewed for a few months. The White House seems to have understood the strength of the opposition to a permanent extension to the Patriot Act as it exists that they probably let Bill Frist bring it to the floor for a vote.

As long as concerned citizens regardless of party affiliation continue to raise issues about some parts of the Patriot Act, I suspect that it will never be allowed to become permanent. This is not going to take a compromise with Congress. This is going to take a compromise with the people.

AP has the story.

Spying on Americans Accusation

2005-12-21T12:05:00.000-05:00

I think the media and as a result, the public is missing out some vital information regarding these accusations of using the NSA to supposedly spy on Americans. This is just a heads up as I am currently doing a little bit of research on this and will put something up in the next day or two.

The general belief is that the NSA is used for international spying and the FBI for domestic work. That in a very large sense is correct. However, most of us know that in reality, things are not always so simple. Especially when there are still issues (some technical, some not) regarding information or intelligence sharing between different agencies that serve this country.

I am not going to jump on the bandwagon to condemn a President that has a difficult job. There is also some evidence that previous presidents have authorized similiar activities. See this one. So it is entirely possible that some politicians are making a mountain out of a molehill.

No, I have not yet forgotten Franklin's quote:

Those willing to give up a little liberty for a little security deserve neither security nor liberty.

Patriot Games - Patriot Act Renewal

2005-12-19T09:52:00.000-05:00

Have you been following the whole Patriot Act situation lately? It seems that the President wants it to be renewed permanently in its current form. No more changes or adjustments or deletions. No more questions - Just Do It!

Congress or at least parts of it have proposed changes and adjustments and want the time to discuss them amongst themselves and with the White House. They even proposed a 3 month extension to the Patriot Act as it is right now so that they can have the time to fully evaluate it.

I don't blame them - after all, the Patriot Act was passed when passions were still strong and now it is on the table for passage to be permanent. Unfortunately, this is not a NO BRAINER. There are many issues with the Patriot Act. Even conservative politicians and talk show hosts have serious problems with part of it. That's why it is a wise and good thing to discuss it more before making the decisions for our future generations.

There was less debate and concern with Social Security when it was passed and look at the effects and controversy.

The President unfortunately, is not interested in any discussion about it. He brought it to the public's attention and was almost if not angry when he spoke about it on television the other night. He's trying to do an end run around the politicians that serve us - both Republicans and Democrats that are concerned. If Larry Craig is concerned, many that call themselves conservatives should be concerned as well.

The Governator of California tried a similar tactic. The politicians did not like some of his proposals so he put it on the ballot in a referrendum for Californians to decide. They told him "No, Thanks" in as loud a voice as I've heard. The President in my opinion, is making the same mistake in trying to bring this to the citizenry directly. He doesn't seem to understand that it is the citizenry that brought up many of these concerns with the Patriot Act in the first place. Mr President, your political consultants are leading you down the wrong path sir.

So there we have it. A game of brinksmanship to see who blinks first. Are we that afraid of no Patriot Act existing? The White House should really take what they can get and accept adjustments or a temporary extension and not play political games.

Oh, well - maybe I am wrong and Carl Rove is right on this one. Who knows?

World Trade Organization (WTO) not very popular

2005-12-18T23:58:00.000-05:00

Seems like some people like to travel to Hong Kong to make a point - even if it involves getting arrested.

What Could US Mexico Border Fence look like?

2005-12-18T23:23:00.000-05:00

It seems that President Fox of Mexico doesn't like the idea of an actual fence between his northern border and the United States. How dare the good old U.S. of A even think of resisting or impeding illegal border crossings?

Some have asked what a border fence could look like. Well, I decided to look at flickr to see if there were any examples of what the Israelis put up between themselves and areas which they wanted to stop uncontrolled border crossings.

Here's an example.

I have read descriptions in the news media saying that the US-Mexico one will be a double fence with a road in between. Supposedly they have a few miles of it in San Diego already.

Keep in mind that this dual fence system is not meant to be 100% illegal crossing proof. It is meant to make an illegal crossing much more difficult through various effects.

1. Funnel those that don't want to go over to the ends of the fence.
2. Slow down those that choose to go over at this point. Perhaps slow them down enough that they may be detected and detained.
3. Focus detection in the middle area between the fences so that there are less false alarms and thereby make Border Patrol dispatches to detection zones more fruitful and efficient.
4. Increase the costs in time, money and effort for those wishing to cross the border illegally.

You know in some ways, it is starting to sound like the purpose of putting minefields - not that I would advocate minefields for this purpose - but to a military mind, a minefield is to funnel or channel the opposing force or to slow them down.

Here's an article by a law prof ( no guarantees ) with an interesting opinion about border fences.

House Approves Border Fence

2005-12-16T15:48:00.000-05:00

It begins folks.

Whether it will get built is another question but at least passing this bill is quite a shock to me. 700 miles. That's how long it is. More than a 1000 more to go and of course, the Senate and the President. If the anti-illegal-immigration folks would get their act together, maybe, just maybe, this will get through the Senate as well.

You know, when they say that a higher minimum wage will cause people to lose jobs and affect the economy in a huge way it is generally not true. Sure, some businesses don't hire another guy or may even lay off one or two but seldom do they close down the whole show.

Saying that building this fence will cause the closure of companies is the same kind of exaggeration. Unless of course, the majority of their employees are illegal immigrants anyway. In which case, I don't mind a company that has to close because it chooses to flout the law by hiring known illegals. By having less illegal immigrants taking the low paying jobs, the job rates WILL go up if the job really needs to be done. That's basic economics. If the supply is lowered, the price WILL go up until supply matches demand. Of course, demand will go down at a higher price but at least everything will be legal.

Again, I don't expect this to actually get passed AND signed but then.... I have a dream.

Herndon Minutemen Up the Ante on Hiring Illegals

2005-12-13T12:14:00.000-05:00

I was listening to a local radio station today and it seems that the Minutemen in Herndon, VA that I mentioned in an earlier post have been tracking some of the companies that hire or pick up supposedly undocumented (illegal) aliens and their activities.

They have also been reporting these companies to the IRS and the Vriginia Department of Taxation for possible tax evasion issues.

See here and here for news reports.

On a slightly different note, for those of you that are in the United States on a F-1 visa (student visa), be very careful to remain totally legal in any employment situation. You could easily jeopardize not only your continuted stay as a student, but also future opportunities to become a permanent resident (aka legal immigrant) or legal temporary worker. See this posting and this.

American Torture or Not?

2005-12-09T12:15:00.000-05:00

A few campaigns back Ross Perot said in response to something about endangered species. He basically said that making sure that a family did not starve was more important than any endangered species.

Not that I want to argue that point but he was just trying to give a practical perspective.

So, lots of people are up in arms about torture by the American government or military forces huh? Absolutely no torture should be allowed or necessary right? No exceptions whatsoever?

Imagine - and it should not be too difficult:

1. Terrorist drives truck from Canada with WMD (take your pick of bio or chemical or nuke).
2. Terrorist goes to NYC, plants it and leaves.
3. FBI catches him with 10 hours to go on the device. They know he knows and they know it is set to go off soon.

Let's not torture him and let hundreds/thousands/millions of New Yorkers die so that we can claim to have never tortured this guy? Really, is that what you want? Are American Citizens in New York worth less than hands clean of torture?

Loudoun County - Part III

2005-12-09T11:01:00.000-05:00

Even though the development was basically confined to the eastern half of the county, it generally filled in from the eastern side (nearer Washington D.C.) and slowly crept west. As that line of development moved westwards like a slow ocean tide coming in, the property taxes of the farmers in the western half of the county went up.

The really funny thing about all this was that the new couples and families moving into the eastern part of Loudoun county had no clue that they were being used by the Horse Money(tm) folks. They were just happy to get a decent house that was new. Some of the older residents on the east knew better and they started complaining about the increased crowding and traffic.

This went on for a while with the Horse Money caucus agreeing hand in hand with the developers and it went on for years through several changes in the Board of Supervisors. However, one day something big changed. The developers looked ahead into the future and realized that space was running out on the eastern half of the county. Where were they going to build next?

They wanted to buy and develop land. Who wanted to sell land because they couldn' afford it any more? So now, there were 'allies' in the farmers bordering the eastern part of the county. Finally, some of the farmers saw that their solution was to sell their land at a substantial gain, stop paying the property taxes that had been climbing and I am sure some of them wanted to stick it to the Horse Money people that caused this whole thing to start in the first place. If only the Horse Money had left things well alone in the beginning - it wouldn't have gotten this bad this fast.

Of course the Horse Money didn't want the farmers to sell their land to developers! Why, that would mean that suburbia would become their neighbors! People living in the new townhouses could see them riding their fine equines! How unpleasant! How could those farmers do this to us? How could those developers dare to encroach on our area after all that we have done supporting their development in the east? Traitors!

Hong Kong marches for Democracy - what does America do?

2005-12-05T01:10:00.000-05:00

It appears that somewhere up to a quarter million people thought it worthwhile to make a real statement for their aspirations for real democracy. They decided to march on the streets and show their govenment what they wanted. Keep in mind that all the Hong Kong government has to do is cough and nod their head and the tanks will start rolling down those same streets like they did in Tiananmen Square not too many years ago.

Back then, Bush #1 supported the people of China verbally.

Here's another report.

These people understand that they risk imprisonment and worse and they are willing risk it all for democracy. So, what are the both the Republicans and Democrats doing or saying about it? Not a whole lot. The only thing I could find was this.

If the Democrats really want to show how lacking the President is in the leadership department - even in the international matters, they can take this one to the bank and laugh while doing it. Why am I not holding my breath?

Immigration Reform - Illegal Aliens and Jobs for Americans

2005-11-30T22:35:00.000-05:00

The thing I cannot seem to get over is the fact that the United States has immigration laws. Let me restate that. I cannot seem to get over the fact that the United States still has immigration laws. There, that's much better. After all, if you aren't going to enforce them why have them on the books. I am not talking about the impossible, I am talking about the simple and easy. It is so simple and easy that there seems to be a few immigration officials that __actually care enough__ to go out and raid a few locations. See:

October 2003
November 2005

And of course there are a few seemingly legal tactics by citizens that seem to work. See:

June 2005 Minutemen
Herndon, VA

Why categorize these paperless border crossers as having committed something illegal at all when you do nothing about it? If someone robbed a bank, that would be an illegal act. You'd arrest them and do soemthing about it. You don't give them additional rights and privileges. A convict has lost their right to vote unless a judge restores it. Put these illegals into jail - even for a day and take away their right to vote even if they did become legal later.

Another problem I have. We are supposed to be in a free market economy - meaning that government generally does not interfere in the market. Note qualification - generally. The claim that Americans don't want to do certain jobs (even if true) just means that the wages are not high enough to get Americans to take the jobs. Read that last sentence again.

Let the natural market forces decide what levels these wages should be and how many Americans will be willing to do them. Don't let an illegal source of labor be the factor that artificially forces the wages down. Another way to look at is is this:

These jobs will pay more if there are no illegals to fill them. The resulting higher wages will attract more Americans to take them. The wages will continue to go up until the equilibrium point between the supply (American workers) and demand (the employers) is established. It might still be low but it will be higher than with illegal immigrants.

Put another way, illegal immigrants are stealing higher paying jobs away from American citizens.

The main ones being hurt by not having illegal aliens around are the employers - but then Walmart should be able to afford to deal with contractors that hire legally don't they? After all, they made $10 billion (not million) net income for the year ending Jan 2005.

After the Kathy-Lee Gifford (testimony) + WalMart debacle of child and underpaid labor in Central and South America was exposed on the media, WalMart REQUIRED their suppliers to no longer underpay or use child labor if my memory serves. Why not REQUIRE that your contractors no longer use illegal workers WalMart?

Randall "Duke" Cunningham - From Hero to Criminal

2005-11-29T21:46:00.000-05:00

Seems like lots of places like here are already getting on former Congressman Cunningham's case for his crime.

Normally, I would not want to even mention a corrupt politician case as I am more interested in the politics for the country's sake. However, in this case I decided to deal with it some because of what Randall Cunningham did before and how this changes things.

The Republican's are having a hard enough time as it is and aren't exactly winning the polls. Doing foolish things like this is doing nothing more than handing ammunition to the Democrats and media and saying "Shoot me."

You see, before Randall Cunningham was a congressman, he was a veteran. Not just any veteran but he was one of supposedly only two Vietnam war pilot Aces. As some of you know, the Vietnam war was a horrible one for air force fighter pilots and Naval aviators alike. That was until the Navy created Top Gun. Cunningham trained at Top Gun, graduated and in time shot down five enemy aircraft. His place in history was set. He appeared in news, documentaries and was written about in books like Scream of Eagles by Robert Wilcox. He was a hero.

Now this. Fall from grace anyone?

Why? Why? Why did you do it? You didn't have to.

Cliche time: Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Yes as he said, now he knows shame.

Consolation: At least he knows shame. Others that have passed before have no shame.

I find it hard to feel sorry for you but I do feel sorry for your family and friends and your constitutients. I feel sorry for this nation.

Income Tax Loads - Soaking the Rich?

2005-11-26T09:33:00.000-05:00

The other day I was listening to the radio of a well known conservative talk show host. One caller brought up an interesting topic - the Federal income tax load. The key point he was trying to make was that the higher income taxpayers pay the higher percentage of the Federal income tax load. I decided to do little more research.

I found out that was a common claim and it goes like this (for the year 1997 as an example) :
1. The top 1% of income earners pay 33.2% of the total income tax load.
2. The top 5% pay 51.9% of the total income tax load.
3. The top 10% pay 63.2% of the total income tax load.
4. The top 25% pay 81.7% of the total income tax load.
5. The top 50% pay 95.7% of the total income tax load.
6. The bottom 50% pay only 4.3% of the total income tax load.

The basic claim seems to be true. It sure looks like we are hitting the rich a lot harder than we should. However there are those that like to point out that those numbers give the wrong impression. The counterexample goes as follows:

Imagine a population of 10 people - 9 earning $10,000 and 1 earning $100,000. The breakdown for income would be:

The total amount of income is $190,000.
The bottom 90% of income earners make (90/190)*100 = 47.4% of the total income
The top 10% make 52.6% of the total income.

Let's say the tax rate for the $10,000 earners is 10% and for the $100,000 earner is 20%. Then the tax load will become:

The total amount of taxes is $29,000.
The bottom 90% of taxpayers carry (9/29)*100 = 31% of the tax load.
The top 10% of taxpayers carry 69% of the tax load.

From the percentages alone, it sure looks like the top 10% of earners carry an unfair amount of the tax load. However, their claim is that the top 10% still get to keep $80,000 while the remaining 90% of tax payers still only get to take home $9,000. They are also concluding that the huge disparity of an income difference of 10 times between the high and low income is what causes the numbers to be what they are. Keep in mind that I am using a simplified model here - only one tax. In reality of course, there are far more kinds of taxes with far more complications but I am analyzing the claims being made based on pure numbers alone.

Well, I get the point of the example and it is a good counterpoint. However, would it stand up to further analysis?

The fact is that, the population is not properly represented by an example of 10 people. An example of 100 would be fairer or even 1000 or 10,000. So, I broke out the spreadsheet and made a population of 10,000 that had:

a uniform distribution of incomes from $10,000 at the bottom to $1.4 million at the top.
a tax rate of zero up to $15,000
a tax rate of 5% up to $30,000
a tax rate hike of 1% per $10,000 topping out at 40% from $370,000 on up.

The experimental results were:

The top 1% income earners made an average of $1.45 million
The top 5% income earners made an average of $1.31 million
The top 10% income earners made an average of $1.16 million
The second 10% income earners made an average of $707,000
The third 10% made an average of $429,000
The fourth 10% made an average of $260,000
The fifith 10% made an average of $157,000
The remaining 10% tiles made $96,000 - $58,000 - $35,000 - $21,000 and $13,000 respectively.
The top 1% earners carried 5.53% of the tax load.
The top 5% earners carried 25.1% of the tax load
The top 10% earners carried 44% of the tax load
The second 10% earners carried 27% of the tax load
The third 10% earners carried 16.2% of the tax load
The fourth 10% earners carried 7.25% of the tax load
The fifth 10% earners carried 2.81% of the tax load
The remaining 10% tiles carried 1.12, 0.47, 0.21, 0.10 and 0.014% respectively

What this tells me is that the 11 person example is not a good counterpoint to the initial claim such as that using the 1997 figures above. Looks like we need to look at actual incomes to see how "fair" the initial claim is. We do know that the counterpoint has a real problem though.

Loudoun County - Part II

2005-11-26T09:28:00.000-05:00

So as time passed, they got all those services and stores and new equipment and law enforcement presence. As the County Board of Supervisors approved more and more building permits on the eastern half of the county, some of those living in the western half were afraid of a possible increase in crime due to a larger population in the east. They said that Loudoun County was no longer as safe as before because it was no longer a rural county. Of course, that larger Sheriff's department was ever so useful.

Soon enough came the ultimate in shopping convenience and low cost – Wal-Mart. All they had to do was pop into the Volvos or Land Rovers and take a short drive to the eastern half of the county to go to Wal-Mart. After shopping there they would hop back into their Volvos or Land Rovers and drive back to their nice home in the country. The only minor inconvenience that they have to bear with was a little bit of traffic near Wal-Mart but that was the price of progress. Never mind that the rest of those living in the eastern half of the county had to put up with the traffic every day. It wasn't their problem.

Of course the newcomers to Loudoun County moved into the eastern half because that was where all the building permits were approved and little if any permits were approved in the western half because the official reason was “We need to keep part of the county’s character intact.”

As the eastern half developed property values went up. The first to feel the impact of increased taxes were of the new suburbanites but the farmers that lived near the eastern half of the county. Suddenly, the tax bills will much higher than before due to no fault of their own. Running a farm became more expensive with each year thanks to their neighbors who wanted substantial development to happen in the county.

Loudoun County - Part I

2005-11-22T23:38:00.000-05:00

I remember when Loudoun county was still somewhat rural. Actually, large parts of it are still rural. However in the last couple of years, things have taken not a turn for the worse but have proceeded headlong towards a developer's dream county. Suburban sprawl is not just here but is going everywhere. This county has been one of the fastest growing counties in the entire nation. Efforts have been made to slow down the development or even stopp it but it doesn't seem to matter who is elected to the county Board of Supervisors, development continues unabated although at different rates during different times of the year.

There was a time when most of what you saw were farms and horse ranches/farms. Then thirteen years ago, the first new developments of single family homes and townhouses started popping up. Of course there were contributions made by the developers to the politicians. The real power and the real money then was not in the farms but in what is called in these parts "Horse Money". Some would refer to these individuals and families as elitists. Their money and influence certainly bought a lot. It was well understood what their campaign contributions meant. Generally, their will was done. The farmers didn't mind what was going on because it generally never affected their pockets.

As time passed, these so called elitists wanted a few more comforts of the better populated area. They wanted more stores, newer equipment for their schools, more government services and a better law enforcement presence. Well, it would take money to make it all happen. So, what was the easiest way to get more money? Well, there's a whole bunch of new families on the eastern end of the county that moved in.

Do see where this is all going?

Next Up - Loudoun County - A Short Political History

2005-11-22T13:57:00.000-05:00

Check back soon for my short version of the politics of Loudoun county and how it got to where it is today.

Oh, an interesting new piece of news about part of Loudoun county is that the 32nd district has a new delegate headed for Richmond, David Poisson. He beat incumbent Dick Black in a race in which many would have told you it would have been an upset early. In the later stages however, Poisson's campaign engine made a few good moves and overtook Black.

In fairness, Dick Black's website is here.

Those of you interested in more Virginia politics from a conservative viewpoint can go to Virginia Conservative

Political Topics for the Present

2005-11-21T10:00:00.000-05:00

Before we get going on some of the topics that might be interesting, it would probably be helpful if we were to brush up on what specific words mean. So we have our first Definitions of the Day:

Republican
Democrat
Conservative
Liberal
Third Parties - bet you didn't know there were so many did you?

Some of the topics which I hope to delve into and try to cut through without being sidetracked include:

Taxation
Immigration
Dependence on oil
Pork barrel politics
Lazze faire assumptions
Spin versus logic
The World Bank - what is it anyway?

I fully expect to change my mind as I learn and verify new information and I hope that you will allow me the luxury of objectivity. Perhaps it isn't a luxury at all. Perhaps it is something we all need to have if we are to better ourselves, those around us and our nation.

Introduction

2005-11-18T15:36:00.000-05:00

I think it is time for some critical analysis of some policies that this country is perpetuating. Over the weeks, we will address some of the common misconceptions and challenge conventional thinking about what is true or false as well as discover why some debates go on and on without resolution.

This blog is going to be focused on not one party but both parties as well as third parties and where they stand on the various issues. It is going to be a service for the public and not for any one given viewpoint. If Wikipedia can be objective, I think the general public can appreciate a neutral analysis of the facts as well as an analysis of the responses.

The other focus will be on local politics - particularly the one in Loudoun County in Virginia which is one of the fastest growing counties in the nation. Lots of interesting activity here which do doubt can serve as a lesson for those that will experience population growth (both controlled and uncontrolled)

As such, I do not expect that there will be many fans from those that have chosen parties but I hope that the truth is still worth something when discovered.