Over at Popehat, Ken has delivered yet another awe-inspiring post: A Day in the Life of a Defense Lawyer. Enjoy.
Bonus: http://militaryunderdog.com/
Bonus: http://militaryunderdog.com/
"And if an epitaph be my story, I'd have a short one ready for my own: I had a lover's quarrel with the world." -- Robert Frost
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Kevin Poulsen on Credit Card Companies
This month's Metro quotes Kevin Poulsen, who discusses the most pressing credit card issue of our time:
"The financial institutions made a decision that the cost of fraud is acceptable. They decided against replacing the magnetic strip with a chip and a PIN because it would be too expensive."
If you go to Europe, most credit cards have the superior chip-based technology. If you're an American, you ought to be upset--your American credit card companies are treating Europeans better than you.
"The financial institutions made a decision that the cost of fraud is acceptable. They decided against replacing the magnetic strip with a chip and a PIN because it would be too expensive."
If you go to Europe, most credit cards have the superior chip-based technology. If you're an American, you ought to be upset--your American credit card companies are treating Europeans better than you.
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Social Network: Battle of the Sexes, Modern Version
Dating is so difficult. A man usually thinks about exactly how he will be able to support a family. He realizes big city society favors two income couples and wonders whether a woman will continue to work after she has children and/or if he will be able to provide as the sole breadwinner. Women tend to believe the aforementioned issues will resolve themselves.
Bonus I: Jack Gilbert, from "Tear It Down": "We find out the heart only by dismantling what the heart knows...By insisting on love we spoil it, get beyond affection and wade mouth-deep into love...We must unlearn the constellations to see the stars."
Bonus II, Random Stats Edition: according to National Geographic (March 2011),
1) Worldwide, 33% are Christian; 21% Muslim; and 13% Hindu; and
2) Worldwide, nationality-wise, 19% are Chinese; 17% are Indian; and 4% American.
My friend commented that the religious numbers would change significantly if we accounted for just practicing members. That's actually an interesting question--at what point is it irrational to call yourself a member of a religious group if your beliefs differ significantly from the majority's? And who decides the norm or the majority? If you're a Muslim in Indonesia, you will have a much different norm than a Muslim in Saudi Arabia. Same thing if you're an Orthodox Jew or a Reform Jew, or an Evangelical Southern Christian vs. an Italian Catholic. Perhaps that's the beauty of religion--it brings people together who would otherwise have no reason to mix or mingle.
Bonus I: Jack Gilbert, from "Tear It Down": "We find out the heart only by dismantling what the heart knows...By insisting on love we spoil it, get beyond affection and wade mouth-deep into love...We must unlearn the constellations to see the stars."
Bonus II, Random Stats Edition: according to National Geographic (March 2011),
1) Worldwide, 33% are Christian; 21% Muslim; and 13% Hindu; and
2) Worldwide, nationality-wise, 19% are Chinese; 17% are Indian; and 4% American.
My friend commented that the religious numbers would change significantly if we accounted for just practicing members. That's actually an interesting question--at what point is it irrational to call yourself a member of a religious group if your beliefs differ significantly from the majority's? And who decides the norm or the majority? If you're a Muslim in Indonesia, you will have a much different norm than a Muslim in Saudi Arabia. Same thing if you're an Orthodox Jew or a Reform Jew, or an Evangelical Southern Christian vs. an Italian Catholic. Perhaps that's the beauty of religion--it brings people together who would otherwise have no reason to mix or mingle.
Monday, March 7, 2011
President Eisenhower on Unions
Some people are quoting President Eisenhower to express their support of public sector unions. As I've said over and over again, there are major differences between public and private sector unions. To compare them together as a unified, single entity is foolish, and quoting President Eisenhower in support of public sector unions is beyond foolish. Why? It wasn't until John F. Kennedy was president that government workers were allowed to organize--which is after President Eisenhower's presidency.
In any case, here are some interesting excerpts from President Eisenhower's 1955 speech to the AFL/CIO:
The second principle of this American labor philosophy is this: the economic interest of employer and employee is a mutual prosperity. Their economic future is inseparable... The American worker strives for betterment not by destroying his employer and his employer's business, but by understanding his employer's problems of competition, prices, markets. And the American employer can never forget that, since mass production assumes a mass market, good wages and progressive employment practices for his employee are good business...
The Class Struggle Doctrine of Marx was the invention of a lonely refugee scribbling in a dark recess of the British Museum. He abhorred and detested the middle class...[L]abor relations will be managed best when worked out in honest negotiation between employers and unions, without Government's unwarranted interference.
More from President Eisenhower's December 5, 1955 speech here.
In any case, here are some interesting excerpts from President Eisenhower's 1955 speech to the AFL/CIO:
The second principle of this American labor philosophy is this: the economic interest of employer and employee is a mutual prosperity. Their economic future is inseparable... The American worker strives for betterment not by destroying his employer and his employer's business, but by understanding his employer's problems of competition, prices, markets. And the American employer can never forget that, since mass production assumes a mass market, good wages and progressive employment practices for his employee are good business...
The Class Struggle Doctrine of Marx was the invention of a lonely refugee scribbling in a dark recess of the British Museum. He abhorred and detested the middle class...[L]abor relations will be managed best when worked out in honest negotiation between employers and unions, without Government's unwarranted interference.
More from President Eisenhower's December 5, 1955 speech here.
Saturday, March 5, 2011
Motto of an American
I am against unchecked, concentrated power in all forms and permutations. In other words, I am an American who understands the Constitution and Declaration of Independence.
Friday, March 4, 2011
California's Finances, a Retrospective
Below is a snippet from an old November 2009 LAO report--but boy, does it have amazing data. Here is one particularly juicy excerpt:
In General, the Legislature Retains Power Over the Budget. Some observers of the California budget process have asserted that—due to voter–approved propositions, federal law, and court decisions—the state’s budget is unmanageable and basically impossible to balance. In reality, however, the Legislature remains in control of the vast majority of state spending. This is particularly true over the longer term when there is enough time to allow major decisions by the Legislature to be fully implemented. Even in the shorter term, the Legislature generally holds a considerable degree of freedom to adjust state spending. Such decisions are often more restricted by the lack of political consensus as opposed to any structural budgetary constraint.
More here. Voters must realize that almost everything they read from CNN, Fox, or any major media outlet contains some element of bias. In contrast, all states have finance departments that will provide you with the (mostly) unvarnished truth. In California, we have the LAO. For the feds, we have the CBO. Turn off your television, and go forth and read.
In General, the Legislature Retains Power Over the Budget. Some observers of the California budget process have asserted that—due to voter–approved propositions, federal law, and court decisions—the state’s budget is unmanageable and basically impossible to balance. In reality, however, the Legislature remains in control of the vast majority of state spending. This is particularly true over the longer term when there is enough time to allow major decisions by the Legislature to be fully implemented. Even in the shorter term, the Legislature generally holds a considerable degree of freedom to adjust state spending. Such decisions are often more restricted by the lack of political consensus as opposed to any structural budgetary constraint.
More here. Voters must realize that almost everything they read from CNN, Fox, or any major media outlet contains some element of bias. In contrast, all states have finance departments that will provide you with the (mostly) unvarnished truth. In California, we have the LAO. For the feds, we have the CBO. Turn off your television, and go forth and read.
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Emerson on Trade
Ralph Waldo Emerson, from his 1844 lecture, "The Young American":
Trade was the strong man that broke it [feudalism] down, and raised a new and unknown power in its place. It is a new agent in the world, and one of great function; it is a very intellectual force. This displaces physical strength, and installs computation, combination, information, science, in its room. It calls out all force of a certain kind that slumbered in the former dynasties...
Trade goes to make the governments insignificant, and to bring every kind of faculty of every individual that can in any manner serve any person, _on sale_. Instead of a huge Army and Navy, and Executive Departments, it converts Government into an Intelligence-Office, where every man may find what he wishes to buy, and expose what he has to sell, not only produce and manufactures, but art, skill, and intellectual and moral values. This is the good and this the evil of trade, that it would put everything into market, talent, beauty, virtue, and man himself...
The `opposition' papers, so called, are on the same side. They attack the great capitalist, but with the aim to make a capitalist of the poor man. The opposition is against those who have money, from those who wish to have money.
Isn't it fascinating to see the great transcendentalist speak so eloquently about trade?
Trade was the strong man that broke it [feudalism] down, and raised a new and unknown power in its place. It is a new agent in the world, and one of great function; it is a very intellectual force. This displaces physical strength, and installs computation, combination, information, science, in its room. It calls out all force of a certain kind that slumbered in the former dynasties...
Trade goes to make the governments insignificant, and to bring every kind of faculty of every individual that can in any manner serve any person, _on sale_. Instead of a huge Army and Navy, and Executive Departments, it converts Government into an Intelligence-Office, where every man may find what he wishes to buy, and expose what he has to sell, not only produce and manufactures, but art, skill, and intellectual and moral values. This is the good and this the evil of trade, that it would put everything into market, talent, beauty, virtue, and man himself...
The `opposition' papers, so called, are on the same side. They attack the great capitalist, but with the aim to make a capitalist of the poor man. The opposition is against those who have money, from those who wish to have money.
Isn't it fascinating to see the great transcendentalist speak so eloquently about trade?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)