I wasn't paying close enough attention yesterday.
Apparently the ceo of google (the owners of blogger!) said something roughly along the lines of if you don't do anything wrong on the net then you shouldn't need privacy... you have nothing to hide.
If that were the case then I guess that fracas back in the 1700's here in what is now the United States of America must have been instigated by criminals if you apply that precept to their insistence on the right to privacy.
Ars Technica has a more in depth article along with the actual quote and context.
I'm hoping that his comment was just being misconstrued and doesn't actually reflect the companies attitude and policies concerning the privacy of people using their services.
Friday, December 11, 2009
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Priorities
"In the days of my youth..."
Let me take you back some forty years ago. The United States had landed on the moon. We had cutting edge technology and some of the sharpest minds on the planet.
Most of our cutting edge technology was either coming from military technology or the space program.
Many people said why don't we spend that money that's going to the space program on things that matter here on earth. Like getting rid of poverty in the U.S., or hunger. Maybe spend it on education.
None of the money pulled away from the space program went to ending poverty, or hunger and let's not even begin to talk about the funding for education in this country.
We now import the bright minds to do the intellectual development work. Well we did when we could still afford to..
It reminds me of the rational that N.Y. State gave for creating a state lottery: the money would go to the education department and help maintain the schools and develop better curriculum. Yeah, like that happened.
Ok, so the few billions that were cut from NASA's budget improved life on earth how? We still have children in this country that go to bed hungry, but now we have even less well educated children.. as well as less well educated adults. So that's two areas that didn't improve.
And let's take a look at the poverty issue in this country. Are we better off now?
Some forty years ago the country turned it's back on exploration and looked inwards, at least economically. Of course the decision was made by politicians and leaders of 'industry'. But the public swallowed the rationale.
And so here we are.
Our last president said Let's go back to the moon.. let's go to mars. But now we don't have the means to do it. And even more laughable is the idea that they'll use slightly beefed up Apollo era designs to do the job.
Shoestring designing and shoestring budgets are a sure way to insure that things will fail. Because the design work will fall not to the best design teams but rather to the cheapest. Nearly every loss of life in the history of nasa can be traced back to that issue.
You get what you pay for. Just look at all the cool weapons systems our military has now. Most of it is 'just in case' weapon systems, some is 'we'll never need it, but it scares the big boys'. and all of it cost billions of dollars. Which of course couldn't be spent on education.. or food programs for the less well off, or a first world style health care system.
But let's go back to that phrase 'you get what you pay for'. It actually works both ways. If the federal state and local governments don't invest in keeping their citizens educated and healthy then that 'resource' begins to degrade. And when you need better quality output you find that it's no longer there and you need to look outside your borders for the talent you used to find everywhere inside your own.
Need a border fence built? Quite a few comedians made jokes about who would actually be doing the construction. And people laughed at those jokes because there was a kernel of truth in them. Need parts for that new cutting edge fighter, those are being made in China. Here's a fun fact. Only five percent of the clothing worn by americans, i.e. U.S. citizens is made in the U.S.A.
So. Welcome to the twenty first century, where this country is fast becoming a client state of countries we used to scorn.
Am I advocating hatred? No, I'm advocating that people should start to pay more attention to what's important for the good of their children and their communities. It's not sitting in front of a television, it's not playing Call of Duty 2.
It's not blindly going through the day and thinking that someone else will handle the hard question and do the right thing.
That has seldom happened in this country, and when it has it was only due to some dire emergency. Most of the time greed has ruled. And maybe a little greed is tolerable. But when the greed takes teachers out of the schools and leaves children hungry something has to change. And there are only a few options.
First Option: less children. With less children the strain on the education system drops, there'd be less hungry children... and eventually a smaller work force. Maybe that would be smart? Less people vying for jobs would mean less people out of work. With less children, there'd be less of a strain on the resources of the country and less goods would be needed to be imported. Our deficit would plummet!
And that scenario would go over like a lead balloon.
Second Option: Intelligent budgeting of monies and resources. By that I mean first take care of the real issues. Education, infrastructure, health care, maintaining the military services at reasonable strengths with the caveat that weapons systems development, (i.e. the wish list), can only be addressed when the needs of the citizens have been met. What's all this got to do with Space and what I opened this commentary with?
Simply this there's always been an excuse why 'we' needed to cut the budget of this or that but there's always been one area where the budget usually grows and grows.
Do we *really* need to put robot mules for the troops before educating the children of this country? Or airborne lasers to shoot down missiles which may one day exist? What ever happened to the aegis system?
Priorities. There's a magic word to conjure with, why not put the people at the top of the Priorities list.
Do that and this country might well be able to afford to go back to the moon, and on to mars. That's if we get past the climate change issue.
Let me take you back some forty years ago. The United States had landed on the moon. We had cutting edge technology and some of the sharpest minds on the planet.
Most of our cutting edge technology was either coming from military technology or the space program.
Many people said why don't we spend that money that's going to the space program on things that matter here on earth. Like getting rid of poverty in the U.S., or hunger. Maybe spend it on education.
None of the money pulled away from the space program went to ending poverty, or hunger and let's not even begin to talk about the funding for education in this country.
We now import the bright minds to do the intellectual development work. Well we did when we could still afford to..
It reminds me of the rational that N.Y. State gave for creating a state lottery: the money would go to the education department and help maintain the schools and develop better curriculum. Yeah, like that happened.
Ok, so the few billions that were cut from NASA's budget improved life on earth how? We still have children in this country that go to bed hungry, but now we have even less well educated children.. as well as less well educated adults. So that's two areas that didn't improve.
And let's take a look at the poverty issue in this country. Are we better off now?
Some forty years ago the country turned it's back on exploration and looked inwards, at least economically. Of course the decision was made by politicians and leaders of 'industry'. But the public swallowed the rationale.
And so here we are.
Our last president said Let's go back to the moon.. let's go to mars. But now we don't have the means to do it. And even more laughable is the idea that they'll use slightly beefed up Apollo era designs to do the job.
Shoestring designing and shoestring budgets are a sure way to insure that things will fail. Because the design work will fall not to the best design teams but rather to the cheapest. Nearly every loss of life in the history of nasa can be traced back to that issue.
You get what you pay for. Just look at all the cool weapons systems our military has now. Most of it is 'just in case' weapon systems, some is 'we'll never need it, but it scares the big boys'. and all of it cost billions of dollars. Which of course couldn't be spent on education.. or food programs for the less well off, or a first world style health care system.
But let's go back to that phrase 'you get what you pay for'. It actually works both ways. If the federal state and local governments don't invest in keeping their citizens educated and healthy then that 'resource' begins to degrade. And when you need better quality output you find that it's no longer there and you need to look outside your borders for the talent you used to find everywhere inside your own.
Need a border fence built? Quite a few comedians made jokes about who would actually be doing the construction. And people laughed at those jokes because there was a kernel of truth in them. Need parts for that new cutting edge fighter, those are being made in China. Here's a fun fact. Only five percent of the clothing worn by americans, i.e. U.S. citizens is made in the U.S.A.
So. Welcome to the twenty first century, where this country is fast becoming a client state of countries we used to scorn.
Am I advocating hatred? No, I'm advocating that people should start to pay more attention to what's important for the good of their children and their communities. It's not sitting in front of a television, it's not playing Call of Duty 2.
It's not blindly going through the day and thinking that someone else will handle the hard question and do the right thing.
That has seldom happened in this country, and when it has it was only due to some dire emergency. Most of the time greed has ruled. And maybe a little greed is tolerable. But when the greed takes teachers out of the schools and leaves children hungry something has to change. And there are only a few options.
First Option: less children. With less children the strain on the education system drops, there'd be less hungry children... and eventually a smaller work force. Maybe that would be smart? Less people vying for jobs would mean less people out of work. With less children, there'd be less of a strain on the resources of the country and less goods would be needed to be imported. Our deficit would plummet!
And that scenario would go over like a lead balloon.
Second Option: Intelligent budgeting of monies and resources. By that I mean first take care of the real issues. Education, infrastructure, health care, maintaining the military services at reasonable strengths with the caveat that weapons systems development, (i.e. the wish list), can only be addressed when the needs of the citizens have been met. What's all this got to do with Space and what I opened this commentary with?
Simply this there's always been an excuse why 'we' needed to cut the budget of this or that but there's always been one area where the budget usually grows and grows.
Do we *really* need to put robot mules for the troops before educating the children of this country? Or airborne lasers to shoot down missiles which may one day exist? What ever happened to the aegis system?
Priorities. There's a magic word to conjure with, why not put the people at the top of the Priorities list.
Do that and this country might well be able to afford to go back to the moon, and on to mars. That's if we get past the climate change issue.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Subway searches
As an ex NYC resident I still pay some attention to what goes on there. One thing that caught my eye was a ruing that the NYC police had the right to without warrant or justifiable cause search the possessions of people riding on the subways.
Some background to my main point:
Now way back before the thirteen colonies formed the United States of America the Crown sent soldiers to America to protect the interests of the king and other interests. During their stay colonists were forced to house these soldiers, their personal property, their homes, their correspondence and their person were subject to unqualified search, i.e., searches at the whim of any serving soldier or officer of the king's army.
These were some of the reasons the the colonists gave for seeking independence.
Once the United States were formed they created a constitution which every elected official of a state or the federal government is expected to uphold and defend.
Alright with that as the background I would like first to have the reader consider what uphold and defend actually means when an elected official swears that he or she will do so.
It says that the constitution is very much the heart of the nation and in the same way that we would defend our country so should the articles of the constitution be defended.
With the very breathe and blood. It was simply that important to the nation.
Now other people have wishy-washy ways of diluting that intent and since it wasn't spelled out in cold hard language they can get away with that.. it's what a lawyers do but here's the literal definitions of those two critcal words ion the oath of office:
Up-hold - verb
1. to support or defend, as against opposition or criticism.
De-fend - verb
1. to ward off attack from; guard against assault or injury
2. to maintain by argument, evidence, etc; uphold
Those are pretty clear definitions.
I suppose if the framers had thought spoiled brats would try to find loopholes that they might have written something on the the order of thou shalt not bend, spindle, mutilate or shred the articles.
But that's just an aside. With the background and those two definitions established let's take a look at a one of the Articles of the Bill of Rights which is a part of our nations constitution.
Amendment IV.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
That article says clearly, no blanket grant shall be given to search people or anything belonging to them.
It does not say that if someone looks shifty or shady any agent of a civil government can demand that a citizen allow them to search their person ,(which means the possessions they have with them as well), their documents, or their homes unless they go before a judge and present good reason for the need to search then obtain a warrant that specifies what they are search for and where they wish to search for it.
A thought I had about whether the amendment covers email and text files; don't we speak of the things we write on our computers as documents?
And so I think to myself.. geez the cops in nyc are randomly searching womens hand bags.. peoples backpacks, etc. Am I glad I moved out of there in 2002? Yep, I think so.
But it saddens me beyond words.
Some background to my main point:
Now way back before the thirteen colonies formed the United States of America the Crown sent soldiers to America to protect the interests of the king and other interests. During their stay colonists were forced to house these soldiers, their personal property, their homes, their correspondence and their person were subject to unqualified search, i.e., searches at the whim of any serving soldier or officer of the king's army.
These were some of the reasons the the colonists gave for seeking independence.
Once the United States were formed they created a constitution which every elected official of a state or the federal government is expected to uphold and defend.
Alright with that as the background I would like first to have the reader consider what uphold and defend actually means when an elected official swears that he or she will do so.
It says that the constitution is very much the heart of the nation and in the same way that we would defend our country so should the articles of the constitution be defended.
With the very breathe and blood. It was simply that important to the nation.
Now other people have wishy-washy ways of diluting that intent and since it wasn't spelled out in cold hard language they can get away with that.. it's what a lawyers do but here's the literal definitions of those two critcal words ion the oath of office:
Up-hold - verb
1. to support or defend, as against opposition or criticism.
De-fend - verb
1. to ward off attack from; guard against assault or injury
2. to maintain by argument, evidence, etc; uphold
Those are pretty clear definitions.
I suppose if the framers had thought spoiled brats would try to find loopholes that they might have written something on the the order of thou shalt not bend, spindle, mutilate or shred the articles.
But that's just an aside. With the background and those two definitions established let's take a look at a one of the Articles of the Bill of Rights which is a part of our nations constitution.
Amendment IV.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
That article says clearly, no blanket grant shall be given to search people or anything belonging to them.
It does not say that if someone looks shifty or shady any agent of a civil government can demand that a citizen allow them to search their person ,(which means the possessions they have with them as well), their documents, or their homes unless they go before a judge and present good reason for the need to search then obtain a warrant that specifies what they are search for and where they wish to search for it.
A thought I had about whether the amendment covers email and text files; don't we speak of the things we write on our computers as documents?
And so I think to myself.. geez the cops in nyc are randomly searching womens hand bags.. peoples backpacks, etc. Am I glad I moved out of there in 2002? Yep, I think so.
But it saddens me beyond words.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Caveat Emptor
I'm going to give some background to this next post before getting to the meat just so that there's absolute clarity regarding the issues involved.
About 2 months ago my honey, (significant other), bought a Toyota Camry from Enterprise Car Sales, (ECS).
The sales person showed us the certification done by 'a qualified independent mechanic' that guaranteed that everything was in good working condition. The carfax looked o.k. too.
They pushed getting an extended warranty that would cover the car "bumper to bumper" excepting normal maintenance such as oil changes. We got that. Inclusive to that warranty was that enterprise would provide a rental car free of charge while the purchased car was in the shop.
Initially she drove locally just to get a feel for the vehicle. Up to that time she had been driving a Dodge Caravan. On the third day she drove on the freeway to work for the first time.. and discovered that when breaking at about sixty m.p.h. the car shuddered badly and that the shudder was transmitted violently up the steering column. She went to play a CD only to discover that the CD player in the car was non functional.
We immediately contacted ECS and spoke to the sales person who stressed that the vehicle had passed inspection and that the extended warranty would cover any problems.
Because her schedule is incredibly hectic it was nearly two months before she had a day where she could drop the vehicle off to have it checked out. Well, first off Enterprise said she'd have to pay for the rental. Then Toyata told her that there was a deductible of two hundred dollars, and even worse that the brake pads and rotors were shot and would need to be replaced/repaired.
The brakes were not covered by the warranty and cost nearly seven hundred dollars.
The CD player was covered but the repairs was less than the deductible.
The Toyata dealerships mechanic affirmed that there was no way that the brakes could possibly have become so degraded in such a short period of time. The condition of the pads and rotors has been documented.
We contacted the dealership with this information and were told we'd be called back on whether or not the would cover the costs of repairs.
It's mid-day of day two and still no return call.
Can you say Better Business Bureau? Can you say State Attorney General?
I can. Better still, ECS should have done some homework on how well connected my sig other is statewide and nationally not to mention locally. I won't toot my own horn.. I annoy some people, but they also know I tell it like it is.
The people she knows love her and know she's bright and shiny, if she asks for help on something like this I feel sorry for the people that tried bending her over a barrel.
About 2 months ago my honey, (significant other), bought a Toyota Camry from Enterprise Car Sales, (ECS).
The sales person showed us the certification done by 'a qualified independent mechanic' that guaranteed that everything was in good working condition. The carfax looked o.k. too.
They pushed getting an extended warranty that would cover the car "bumper to bumper" excepting normal maintenance such as oil changes. We got that. Inclusive to that warranty was that enterprise would provide a rental car free of charge while the purchased car was in the shop.
Initially she drove locally just to get a feel for the vehicle. Up to that time she had been driving a Dodge Caravan. On the third day she drove on the freeway to work for the first time.. and discovered that when breaking at about sixty m.p.h. the car shuddered badly and that the shudder was transmitted violently up the steering column. She went to play a CD only to discover that the CD player in the car was non functional.
We immediately contacted ECS and spoke to the sales person who stressed that the vehicle had passed inspection and that the extended warranty would cover any problems.
Because her schedule is incredibly hectic it was nearly two months before she had a day where she could drop the vehicle off to have it checked out. Well, first off Enterprise said she'd have to pay for the rental. Then Toyata told her that there was a deductible of two hundred dollars, and even worse that the brake pads and rotors were shot and would need to be replaced/repaired.
The brakes were not covered by the warranty and cost nearly seven hundred dollars.
The CD player was covered but the repairs was less than the deductible.
The Toyata dealerships mechanic affirmed that there was no way that the brakes could possibly have become so degraded in such a short period of time. The condition of the pads and rotors has been documented.
We contacted the dealership with this information and were told we'd be called back on whether or not the would cover the costs of repairs.
It's mid-day of day two and still no return call.
Can you say Better Business Bureau? Can you say State Attorney General?
I can. Better still, ECS should have done some homework on how well connected my sig other is statewide and nationally not to mention locally. I won't toot my own horn.. I annoy some people, but they also know I tell it like it is.
The people she knows love her and know she's bright and shiny, if she asks for help on something like this I feel sorry for the people that tried bending her over a barrel.
Monday, April 27, 2009
Doh! Factor of 10 to the 10th power
Seriously. I was still living in lower Manhattan on 9/11/01 .. this is beyond stupidity.
Do bureaucrats have major portions of their brains excised before being placed in positions where they make decisions like the one mentioned in the link posted below?
If you wanted to create panic and psychological stress in people who had been on site for the afore mentioned event the official responsible for setting up the Statue of Liberty 'photo-op' did everything exactly right.
They need to not be tasked with public relations related activities or anything job operation that might impose their ham fistedness on the public at large. Just an Ex NY'kers personal opinion.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/04/27/low.flying.plane/
Do bureaucrats have major portions of their brains excised before being placed in positions where they make decisions like the one mentioned in the link posted below?
If you wanted to create panic and psychological stress in people who had been on site for the afore mentioned event the official responsible for setting up the Statue of Liberty 'photo-op' did everything exactly right.
They need to not be tasked with public relations related activities or anything job operation that might impose their ham fistedness on the public at large. Just an Ex NY'kers personal opinion.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/04/27/low.flying.plane/
Monday, April 20, 2009
Earth Day and global warming and later on
Well, it's been 39 years since the first Earth Day and issues of dumping pollutants into the water and air supply as well as burying it in the ground are still rampant.
I've given this issue a lot of thought since I first heard about the CO2 issue 41 years ago and have reached a few conclusions.
1: Unless large corporations see immediate profits* from reducing the pollution generated by their operations they will not willingly undertake action to reduce said pollution.
2: Once people become used to a lifestyle that is comfortable they are unwilling to relinquish that lifestyle.
3: The processes of climate change can be likened to a supercargo vessel, once it gets going it's not going to stop on a dime... or a manhole cover.
4: Most of the dialog by scientists monitoring global warming trends focus specifically on the man made elements and chemicals which have accelerated a process the planet normally goes through.
I have seen no instances where they added in the 'natural' forces such as volcanic gases, methane release from oceanic clathrates and melting permafrost although I'm sure someone is probably trying to look at those numbers, (while gnawing their fingernails to the quick).
5: When I first learned of this issue way back when, I learned about the complete natural cycle.. after it gets hot.. it gets really really cold.
Of course that can take centuries but one small fun fact that should be mention is this: we're in what they call an 'inter-glacial' period. In fact according to the dating of ice cores we're actually a bit on the late side to begin a new ice age.
Isn't science fun?
But it gets better.. how do ice ages begin? First you warm up the planet, then melt the ice caps.
If you dump say, all the fresh water frozen on Greenland into the Gulfstream you essentially hit the 'off switch' for the global conveyor current.
It's only in the last decade that it became clear that all ocean currents are tied into one giant heat exchange system.
It's also the main reason we live on mostly ice free continents.
But turn that system off and the places that are getting warmed by the heat carried up from the equator begin to cool, rather rapidly.
Are we having fun yet?
Well hang on, it gets better.
So, there you are living in say.. Chicago or New York City or London or Moscow and the first year after the conveyor goes offline is on the cool side, say the next year the snows stay through too late April, May or possibly depending on the latitude of your city.
And each successive year the winters last just a bit longer. Reflecting heat back into space for every day that snow is on the ground.
Within a relatively short time the 'habitable' zone will begin shrinking southward toward the equator.. and all the creature comforts we humans have invented will be legends told to the survivors. Tales of flying machines and buildings that reached the sky..
First the fire and then the ice. It sounds like something a deranged science fiction writer would pen doesn't it?
*(inside a 5 year time period)
I've given this issue a lot of thought since I first heard about the CO2 issue 41 years ago and have reached a few conclusions.
1: Unless large corporations see immediate profits* from reducing the pollution generated by their operations they will not willingly undertake action to reduce said pollution.
2: Once people become used to a lifestyle that is comfortable they are unwilling to relinquish that lifestyle.
3: The processes of climate change can be likened to a supercargo vessel, once it gets going it's not going to stop on a dime... or a manhole cover.
4: Most of the dialog by scientists monitoring global warming trends focus specifically on the man made elements and chemicals which have accelerated a process the planet normally goes through.
I have seen no instances where they added in the 'natural' forces such as volcanic gases, methane release from oceanic clathrates and melting permafrost although I'm sure someone is probably trying to look at those numbers, (while gnawing their fingernails to the quick).
5: When I first learned of this issue way back when, I learned about the complete natural cycle.. after it gets hot.. it gets really really cold.
Of course that can take centuries but one small fun fact that should be mention is this: we're in what they call an 'inter-glacial' period. In fact according to the dating of ice cores we're actually a bit on the late side to begin a new ice age.
Isn't science fun?
But it gets better.. how do ice ages begin? First you warm up the planet, then melt the ice caps.
If you dump say, all the fresh water frozen on Greenland into the Gulfstream you essentially hit the 'off switch' for the global conveyor current.
It's only in the last decade that it became clear that all ocean currents are tied into one giant heat exchange system.
It's also the main reason we live on mostly ice free continents.
But turn that system off and the places that are getting warmed by the heat carried up from the equator begin to cool, rather rapidly.
Are we having fun yet?
Well hang on, it gets better.
So, there you are living in say.. Chicago or New York City or London or Moscow and the first year after the conveyor goes offline is on the cool side, say the next year the snows stay through too late April, May or possibly depending on the latitude of your city.
And each successive year the winters last just a bit longer. Reflecting heat back into space for every day that snow is on the ground.
Within a relatively short time the 'habitable' zone will begin shrinking southward toward the equator.. and all the creature comforts we humans have invented will be legends told to the survivors. Tales of flying machines and buildings that reached the sky..
First the fire and then the ice. It sounds like something a deranged science fiction writer would pen doesn't it?
*(inside a 5 year time period)
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Now?!
Unbelievable.. the party of corporate give-aways and tax cutters extraodinaire, (does anyone remember voodoo economics and which party invented it? Think Reagan.), that party which engineered the financial morass we find ourselves in is now going to be the party of fiscal responsibility?
Wow.
Wait a minute.. where was their fiscal responsibility when they voted for more money for a war where money literally disappeared? A war that sucked hundreds of billions of dollars out of tax payer pockets.
Isn't that the same party that swore the 'market' could and should regulate itself?
Are they going to keep saying government shouldn't get involved now that the rampant greed of people like Madoff have been laid in the light?
Ohh, did they mean regulate like sharks do in a feeding frenzy? Is their philosophy 'Carpe diem, caveat emptor'? I thought that was more a libertarian stance.
The dichotomy between what their party supposedly stands for and what they truly act in favor for seem to be at odds if taken in view of the last 30 years of the party as a whole.
They talk the talk, but somehow it's the CEO that gets the breaks and the average working man or woman find themselves needing 2 jobs where one used to suffice.. if they can find a job.
Talk about hypocrisy, suddenly now that they've been kicked in the figurative family jewels by the voters who actually did give the current president a real majority mandate for change, they're going to 'return to the roots' of their party.
I have an idea.
If they're so patriotic let them pay for their own health care instead of that ultra inexpensive health plan they have courtesy of every working tax payer, (some of whom are undocumented workers. You should say thank you all you congressmen and women whenever you use it). It's a health plan that every blue collar American could only dream of having.
Let them pay for their own travel without getting reimbursed by the tax payer.
And while their at it, why don't they vote to cut their pay by 20% to show some empathy for the squeeze the average worker is feeling.
Fiscal responsibility? Do more with less Mr. and Ms. Republican congress person, not less with more as you have in the past, (anyone want a Bridge to Nowhere?), and the country *might* start believing your are the party of Lincoln again.
But, and here's the kicker, if you helped create a wreck and there are people in dire need of first aid and you start crying that the bandages are too expensive you won't impress anyone with that argument that has half a brain.
Serve the nation or get out of the way.
Wow.
Wait a minute.. where was their fiscal responsibility when they voted for more money for a war where money literally disappeared? A war that sucked hundreds of billions of dollars out of tax payer pockets.
Isn't that the same party that swore the 'market' could and should regulate itself?
Are they going to keep saying government shouldn't get involved now that the rampant greed of people like Madoff have been laid in the light?
Ohh, did they mean regulate like sharks do in a feeding frenzy? Is their philosophy 'Carpe diem, caveat emptor'? I thought that was more a libertarian stance.
The dichotomy between what their party supposedly stands for and what they truly act in favor for seem to be at odds if taken in view of the last 30 years of the party as a whole.
They talk the talk, but somehow it's the CEO that gets the breaks and the average working man or woman find themselves needing 2 jobs where one used to suffice.. if they can find a job.
Talk about hypocrisy, suddenly now that they've been kicked in the figurative family jewels by the voters who actually did give the current president a real majority mandate for change, they're going to 'return to the roots' of their party.
I have an idea.
If they're so patriotic let them pay for their own health care instead of that ultra inexpensive health plan they have courtesy of every working tax payer, (some of whom are undocumented workers. You should say thank you all you congressmen and women whenever you use it). It's a health plan that every blue collar American could only dream of having.
Let them pay for their own travel without getting reimbursed by the tax payer.
And while their at it, why don't they vote to cut their pay by 20% to show some empathy for the squeeze the average worker is feeling.
Fiscal responsibility? Do more with less Mr. and Ms. Republican congress person, not less with more as you have in the past, (anyone want a Bridge to Nowhere?), and the country *might* start believing your are the party of Lincoln again.
But, and here's the kicker, if you helped create a wreck and there are people in dire need of first aid and you start crying that the bandages are too expensive you won't impress anyone with that argument that has half a brain.
Serve the nation or get out of the way.
Thursday, February 05, 2009
Cost Analysis
Find the cost of freedom
Buried in the ground
Mother Earth will swallow you
Lay your body down.... - S. Stills 1970
Buried in the ground
Mother Earth will swallow you
Lay your body down.... - S. Stills 1970
Monday, February 02, 2009
We knew this 30 years ago....
We did know this, and for a while even China was trying to slow the birth rates in their country.. and then the 80's hit and the Me Generation started cranking out kiddies.. and suddenly being aware and responsible for your impact on the planet became passe.
Fun fact: It was never passe. There's a saying" Mankind forgives, nature doesn't. In the real world cause and affect never go away even when you choose to bury your heads in the sand.
It reminds me of costal communities back in the 1990's that were continually whining about beach erosion, as if suddenly the cycle had after millions of years accelerated in less a decade.. what made more sense and is actually the case was that the sea level was on the rise.
But hey, calling something beach erosion is less scary.
Let's talk fish then. One thing people always believed is if they stick a net in the ocean they'll pull out the same quantities of fish as their ancestors did generations before them barring seasonal variations.
But back in their ancestors days let's say there were just 100 fishers in the area, come forward to this generation and there are 1000 and they are using nets that don't catch some fish they're using nets that catch most fish. That's not a sustainable cycle.
In nature, normally when a species population reaches a critical point that population would crash after having exceeded it's food supply.
Enter Man the toolmaker. No longer do we have massive die offs from plagues and food shortages except in the poorest of countries or where warfare has disrupted supplies.
Something will give.
Fun fact: It was never passe. There's a saying" Mankind forgives, nature doesn't. In the real world cause and affect never go away even when you choose to bury your heads in the sand.
It reminds me of costal communities back in the 1990's that were continually whining about beach erosion, as if suddenly the cycle had after millions of years accelerated in less a decade.. what made more sense and is actually the case was that the sea level was on the rise.
But hey, calling something beach erosion is less scary.
Let's talk fish then. One thing people always believed is if they stick a net in the ocean they'll pull out the same quantities of fish as their ancestors did generations before them barring seasonal variations.
But back in their ancestors days let's say there were just 100 fishers in the area, come forward to this generation and there are 1000 and they are using nets that don't catch some fish they're using nets that catch most fish. That's not a sustainable cycle.
In nature, normally when a species population reaches a critical point that population would crash after having exceeded it's food supply.
Enter Man the toolmaker. No longer do we have massive die offs from plagues and food shortages except in the poorest of countries or where warfare has disrupted supplies.
Something will give.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Monday, January 19, 2009
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Slime
People responsible for this sort of abuse need to be sent somewhere where lead is flying until they get a clue.. or they catch some.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Protests.. equal time?
Ok, the perennial battle between Palestinians, (who have valid grievances), and Israelis, (who have valid grievances), has erupted again after the cease fire with Hamas ended.
Almost immediately rocket and mortar fire began landing in towns in southern Israel.
For several days the Israelis seemed to hold off on responding except to issue warnings. And then the jets came in and began plastering Hamas's compounds. Nothing new there, right?
Here's the thing though, When Hamas or any other group attacks civilian targets in Israel you never ever see Arab groups protesting those attacks.
On the other hand if Israel responds with it's notoriously heavy handed response, (if you don't comprehend the thinking behind that tactic you need to go back to the time of Golda Mier or read a boook titled Ender's War), there are protests from nearly all corners of the Arab world.
If the people of that region are ever to have peace then both will have to get past the retribution cycle and end the blame game. Easier said than done when most people in the region approach an argument as if it were an art form.
Almost immediately rocket and mortar fire began landing in towns in southern Israel.
For several days the Israelis seemed to hold off on responding except to issue warnings. And then the jets came in and began plastering Hamas's compounds. Nothing new there, right?
Here's the thing though, When Hamas or any other group attacks civilian targets in Israel you never ever see Arab groups protesting those attacks.
On the other hand if Israel responds with it's notoriously heavy handed response, (if you don't comprehend the thinking behind that tactic you need to go back to the time of Golda Mier or read a boook titled Ender's War), there are protests from nearly all corners of the Arab world.
If the people of that region are ever to have peace then both will have to get past the retribution cycle and end the blame game. Easier said than done when most people in the region approach an argument as if it were an art form.
Monday, December 22, 2008
Tunnel Vision
No, it's not a new cool device! It's da Pope!
I wonder if the Vatican is using the lead pipes the Romans were using to pipe water though the city. It's the only explanation I can see for this type of thinking.
I wonder if the Vatican is using the lead pipes the Romans were using to pipe water though the city. It's the only explanation I can see for this type of thinking.
Sunday, December 21, 2008
Monday, December 15, 2008
A picture is worth a thousand words...
And this one captures exactly what seems to be the Senate Republican's stance.
Fiscally Conservative?
Apparently there's a faction of the Republican party that is anything but fiscally responsible.
It used to the democrats that were the friend of big business, and voting Republican meant you opposed that type of collusion. Now the situation has flipped 180 degrees. There may be some real fiscal conservatives in the Republican party, but they are getting harder and harder to find.. it's far easier to find Republican's that talk the talk and are more socially conservative but even there only giving lip service to that ideology.
In the last few days just how much contempt the current president has for the middle class people of our country has come to light. An attempt to rein in the greed found at the top of Wall Street firms and in some banking institutions was eviscerated at the current president's behest.
Why do I say contempt? Very simply it will be every tax payer's dollars that go to provide the money for any bonuses, golden parachutes or pay dividends these executives reap.
Doesn't our president think that these people should be held responsible for the wreckage they've created? No, apparently not.. if your crime is so egregious and your connections so far reaching apparently you can get off scott free for having engineered the failure of your institutions, the bankrupting of hundreds of thousands of people.
Are you responsible for setting in motion events that end up casting millions of people out of work? Not a problem, you're a member of the club, we can't let you suffer. So much for compassion for the people of this country, it looks like that applies to only people above a certain earnings bracket.
It used to the democrats that were the friend of big business, and voting Republican meant you opposed that type of collusion. Now the situation has flipped 180 degrees. There may be some real fiscal conservatives in the Republican party, but they are getting harder and harder to find.. it's far easier to find Republican's that talk the talk and are more socially conservative but even there only giving lip service to that ideology.
In the last few days just how much contempt the current president has for the middle class people of our country has come to light. An attempt to rein in the greed found at the top of Wall Street firms and in some banking institutions was eviscerated at the current president's behest.
Why do I say contempt? Very simply it will be every tax payer's dollars that go to provide the money for any bonuses, golden parachutes or pay dividends these executives reap.
Doesn't our president think that these people should be held responsible for the wreckage they've created? No, apparently not.. if your crime is so egregious and your connections so far reaching apparently you can get off scott free for having engineered the failure of your institutions, the bankrupting of hundreds of thousands of people.
Are you responsible for setting in motion events that end up casting millions of people out of work? Not a problem, you're a member of the club, we can't let you suffer. So much for compassion for the people of this country, it looks like that applies to only people above a certain earnings bracket.
Wednesday, December 03, 2008
Even Worse (Not the Weird Al Yankovic album)
Sometimes your the ball, sometimes your the bat... but are you ever ahead of the curve?
I touched on climate change in my last post.. and today I read this article.
It's always the unanticipated effects that catch you out.
Funnily enough some of the problems like melting permafrost have been considered by some scientists. I see no mention of the methane that will be released when the permafrost melts. It's only a major greenhouse gas.. someone will plug that in soon I'm sure.
Oh, and here's a fun fact: pytoplankton are a major part of the CO2 to oxygen cycle.. kick up the ultraviolet penetrating the earth's atmosphere and you reduce the ability of earth's oceans to take up CO2.
Ever wonder how a mammoth could have been flash frozen even as it was munching green vegetation?
That's been a puzzle to the scientists who were studying it. We may, (relatively), soon be able answer that question. Whether we'll be able to record that information for whoever follows us is another question.
I'm sure there will people that read this and think, "he's a nut job alarmist". To the ostrich's that walk as human beings among us I say this: eat drink and be merry, for in less than a century civilization as you knew it will be gone.
What a legacy....
I touched on climate change in my last post.. and today I read this article.
It's always the unanticipated effects that catch you out.
Funnily enough some of the problems like melting permafrost have been considered by some scientists. I see no mention of the methane that will be released when the permafrost melts. It's only a major greenhouse gas.. someone will plug that in soon I'm sure.
Oh, and here's a fun fact: pytoplankton are a major part of the CO2 to oxygen cycle.. kick up the ultraviolet penetrating the earth's atmosphere and you reduce the ability of earth's oceans to take up CO2.
Ever wonder how a mammoth could have been flash frozen even as it was munching green vegetation?
That's been a puzzle to the scientists who were studying it. We may, (relatively), soon be able answer that question. Whether we'll be able to record that information for whoever follows us is another question.
I'm sure there will people that read this and think, "he's a nut job alarmist". To the ostrich's that walk as human beings among us I say this: eat drink and be merry, for in less than a century civilization as you knew it will be gone.
What a legacy....
Tuesday, December 02, 2008
Greed, Corporate Responsibility, and the American Public
(Or What's Good for GM is Good for America)
As Americans we live with a lot of assumptions. We assume that the government is there to serve us, We assume that the people in big business would not knowingly put out products that are harmful to us, our children and future generations.
I could print up a list of countless examples where all of those assumptions are proven to be erroneous, where the trust is continually be broken. Worse I could cite examples where industries knowingly and falsely deny that their product is harmful to the public.
The Tobacco industry comes to mind. For decades they denied the product was addicted and potentially lethal to the users of their product. In the face of independent scientific and federal studies they brought forth their pet scientists to cloud the issue for decades.
Eventually they caved in and admitted that yes, tobacco can lead to a rather unpleasant death, but they continued to deny that is was addictive.. and then they caved in and admitted it was addictive. Then it's was rumored that they enhanced the addictiveness of certain products. And yet again it came out that in fact they did add chemicals to make them more addictive. And it doesn't just kill the user, oh no.. in the case of the cigarette the user can help kill off the people nearby who happen to be breathing the air the smoke is drifting on.
But it's good for all the farmers that raise the crop, and for the people employed in manufacturing, distributing and advertising the products.
Much as the raising of poppies or coca is in other countries. But the products from poppies and coca are illegal because they're harmful to you. Yeah. Wait.. so I can smoke myself to death.. but anything that might make you feel a buzz is illegal? But what about alcohol? Hmm. Ok, we're diverging from the main track slightly there. But can you spot a trend?
Ok, we all like clean drinking water, clean air, decent food right? Forty years ago climate change was bought to the attention of the federal government by certain concerned scientists. Back then all they were just looking at was CO2 levels, chlorofluorocarbons weren't on the radar and ozone holes weren't even a bad dream.
They basically said, we need to cut back on output or life on this planet is going to get really unpleasant. Their report was met with skepticism. I was 14 when I read about it and the data they had back then was rather compelling, even to a 14 year old*. They hadn't coined a good name for the effects though. What they did do was lay out a line of general projections of what happens when the earth gets too warm.
When other people all around the world began getting similar results and tried getting their governments to pay attention a certain industry got rather upset and bought some scientists of their own that would blow smoke and cloud the issue so that they could continue doing business with no loss of profits.
I'd go so far as to say they bought some politicians, but well then I'd have to lay out substantiation and it would get messy. Besides we all know that you can't buy a public official, right?
But does anyone really doubt that global warming is here now? (Let me clue you in on a little something, it's effects are a lot worse than has been publicly mentioned. A few years ago the Pentagon issued a rather grim assessment of the situation and how it would affect people's ways of life. Be afraid. Or invest in water reclamation systems.
And now we have the global economy meltdown. Yes sir your stock brokerage were out there making sure your investments were safe! And if you believe that now I have a small used planet I'd like to sell you. Cheap.
In all these instances a small group of people made unholy amounts of money while the effects of that lay waste to the lives and the planet they live on. Here's the thing I don't get.. these people have children too. Don't they give a damn about the quality of life their descendants will inherit? Apparently not. Maybe they plan on living in sealed self sufficient bio-domes.
You'd assume that people wouldn't do something as shortsighted as the people behind the decisions that have led to these various debacles. But the proof is in the results.
Apparently it's all about how many credit points you're worth not whether you leave the world a better place than you found it.
Sadly most people are too busy trying to keep their heads above water in an arbitrarily created socio-economic system to really reign in the nut cases that endanger their futures. And it doesn't matter what economic system you look at you always have these fruit cakes grabbing the reigns eventually and heading the horses for a cliff.
I don't have a solution. Throughout history there have been people that proposed alternate modes of behavior and if they didn't get killed for their efforts they were co-opted.
It would be nice if people woke up and held people that make decisions that effect the entire planet responsible for their actions. Just desserts. Then perhaps the greed impulse would start to automatically get restrained. Picture it.
It's just a thought and I know it'll never happen.. but I can dream... for now.
* I started telling everyone I knew about it, friends and acquaintances. 40 years ago if you went around spouting scenarios that see human civilization scraped off the face of the earth you quickly got a label as 'the weird guy'. Now it's fashionable, go figure. I'm comfortable being 'the weird guy' though.
As Americans we live with a lot of assumptions. We assume that the government is there to serve us, We assume that the people in big business would not knowingly put out products that are harmful to us, our children and future generations.
I could print up a list of countless examples where all of those assumptions are proven to be erroneous, where the trust is continually be broken. Worse I could cite examples where industries knowingly and falsely deny that their product is harmful to the public.
The Tobacco industry comes to mind. For decades they denied the product was addicted and potentially lethal to the users of their product. In the face of independent scientific and federal studies they brought forth their pet scientists to cloud the issue for decades.
Eventually they caved in and admitted that yes, tobacco can lead to a rather unpleasant death, but they continued to deny that is was addictive.. and then they caved in and admitted it was addictive. Then it's was rumored that they enhanced the addictiveness of certain products. And yet again it came out that in fact they did add chemicals to make them more addictive. And it doesn't just kill the user, oh no.. in the case of the cigarette the user can help kill off the people nearby who happen to be breathing the air the smoke is drifting on.
But it's good for all the farmers that raise the crop, and for the people employed in manufacturing, distributing and advertising the products.
Much as the raising of poppies or coca is in other countries. But the products from poppies and coca are illegal because they're harmful to you. Yeah. Wait.. so I can smoke myself to death.. but anything that might make you feel a buzz is illegal? But what about alcohol? Hmm. Ok, we're diverging from the main track slightly there. But can you spot a trend?
Ok, we all like clean drinking water, clean air, decent food right? Forty years ago climate change was bought to the attention of the federal government by certain concerned scientists. Back then all they were just looking at was CO2 levels, chlorofluorocarbons weren't on the radar and ozone holes weren't even a bad dream.
They basically said, we need to cut back on output or life on this planet is going to get really unpleasant. Their report was met with skepticism. I was 14 when I read about it and the data they had back then was rather compelling, even to a 14 year old*. They hadn't coined a good name for the effects though. What they did do was lay out a line of general projections of what happens when the earth gets too warm.
When other people all around the world began getting similar results and tried getting their governments to pay attention a certain industry got rather upset and bought some scientists of their own that would blow smoke and cloud the issue so that they could continue doing business with no loss of profits.
I'd go so far as to say they bought some politicians, but well then I'd have to lay out substantiation and it would get messy. Besides we all know that you can't buy a public official, right?
But does anyone really doubt that global warming is here now? (Let me clue you in on a little something, it's effects are a lot worse than has been publicly mentioned. A few years ago the Pentagon issued a rather grim assessment of the situation and how it would affect people's ways of life. Be afraid. Or invest in water reclamation systems.
And now we have the global economy meltdown. Yes sir your stock brokerage were out there making sure your investments were safe! And if you believe that now I have a small used planet I'd like to sell you. Cheap.
In all these instances a small group of people made unholy amounts of money while the effects of that lay waste to the lives and the planet they live on. Here's the thing I don't get.. these people have children too. Don't they give a damn about the quality of life their descendants will inherit? Apparently not. Maybe they plan on living in sealed self sufficient bio-domes.
You'd assume that people wouldn't do something as shortsighted as the people behind the decisions that have led to these various debacles. But the proof is in the results.
Apparently it's all about how many credit points you're worth not whether you leave the world a better place than you found it.
Sadly most people are too busy trying to keep their heads above water in an arbitrarily created socio-economic system to really reign in the nut cases that endanger their futures. And it doesn't matter what economic system you look at you always have these fruit cakes grabbing the reigns eventually and heading the horses for a cliff.
I don't have a solution. Throughout history there have been people that proposed alternate modes of behavior and if they didn't get killed for their efforts they were co-opted.
It would be nice if people woke up and held people that make decisions that effect the entire planet responsible for their actions. Just desserts. Then perhaps the greed impulse would start to automatically get restrained. Picture it.
It's just a thought and I know it'll never happen.. but I can dream... for now.
* I started telling everyone I knew about it, friends and acquaintances. 40 years ago if you went around spouting scenarios that see human civilization scraped off the face of the earth you quickly got a label as 'the weird guy'. Now it's fashionable, go figure. I'm comfortable being 'the weird guy' though.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)