It should be possible to calculate America's labor needs and extrapolate immigration requirements based on this calculation. This sounds like a task for the labor department. It would be my guess that any legitimate such calculation would show that we have plenty of high end people. Plenty of people would love to run the Bank of America. It's the low end that needs people. Why have an emotional breakdown over the fact that immigrants legal or illegal fill a real requirement?
It's true that I have been completely unable to see this issue. I want to know what the problem is before I start proposing solutions.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Iran
It's hard to know what to say about this. It strongly resembles the overthrow of the Shah, and is probably run by the same people.
It meets our ideals in a mysterious way. We once held that the power of a government derives from the consent of the governed. What happens if they rise up and say that they do not consent? Do I think this means we are required to go in and rescue them? We have no idea if either side represents anything we would be for.
I think it must mean that large portions of the country don't like what their country has become any more than they liked what the Shah made it. The impression is that extraordinary force is being used to stop entirely peaceful demonstrations. Such forceful suppression of dissent can only mean dictatorship. Why is an Islamic dictator superior to a civil dictatorship? For me it's a meaningless distinction, but it isn't my country.
It isn't my country. We did the same things here when demonstrations we didn't like filled our streets.
It reminds me of the time of the Iraq invasion when I thought seriously of emigrating to Canada. I'd like to live somewhere where the country I lived in didn't think it had to decide about every goddamn thing that went on in the world. It's just not my country.
It meets our ideals in a mysterious way. We once held that the power of a government derives from the consent of the governed. What happens if they rise up and say that they do not consent? Do I think this means we are required to go in and rescue them? We have no idea if either side represents anything we would be for.
I think it must mean that large portions of the country don't like what their country has become any more than they liked what the Shah made it. The impression is that extraordinary force is being used to stop entirely peaceful demonstrations. Such forceful suppression of dissent can only mean dictatorship. Why is an Islamic dictator superior to a civil dictatorship? For me it's a meaningless distinction, but it isn't my country.
It isn't my country. We did the same things here when demonstrations we didn't like filled our streets.
It reminds me of the time of the Iraq invasion when I thought seriously of emigrating to Canada. I'd like to live somewhere where the country I lived in didn't think it had to decide about every goddamn thing that went on in the world. It's just not my country.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Bowing
It certainly does look like Obama is bowing to the King of Saudi Arabia. My question is, Has he been there before? If he met the king before he was president, he may just have been doing what it did before. The president does not bow to anyone.
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Terms of Use
Does anyone ever read the terms of use? I know I don't. I just assume that the terms of use of anything are whatever you say they are. I assume that if I am doing something I'm not supposed to be doing, someone who gives a shit will tell me, and I will say, "Oops. OK. I won't do that any more." I no longer have space in my brain for lawyer talk.
The terms of use for Netflix are
a. I pay you money at regular intervals.
b. You send me dvds one at a time
c. I send them back when I get around to it.
d. Whereon you send me another one.
e. I am authorized to look at them, not copy and sell them.
Why does it have to be more complicated than that?
The terms of use for Netflix are
a. I pay you money at regular intervals.
b. You send me dvds one at a time
c. I send them back when I get around to it.
d. Whereon you send me another one.
e. I am authorized to look at them, not copy and sell them.
Why does it have to be more complicated than that?
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Bonuses
Bonuses are given in February so a company will know how much profit was made in the previous year. A bonus reflects a distribution of portions of these profits. Get it, dim bulbs? No profit--no bonus. This is a handy rule of thumb. Especially when the bonus comes out of public bail out money, which I am withholding judgment on. For the time being.
If you go hugely into debt over the course of a year, and I, Uncle Sam, give you money to tide you over, under absolutely no circumstances whatsoever may you regard this as a profit. You have to earn the profit yourself. Why is this so hard to grasp?
If you go hugely into debt over the course of a year, and I, Uncle Sam, give you money to tide you over, under absolutely no circumstances whatsoever may you regard this as a profit. You have to earn the profit yourself. Why is this so hard to grasp?
Monday, March 9, 2009
Understanding Capitalism
It is the duty of capitalists to spend all their waking moments thinking about how to make as much money as possible. To work properly this must be a completely unfettered activity. Worrying about bad effects isn't really part of the process.
It is the duty of government regulators to examine the activities of capitalists and make judgments about which are in the public interest and which are not. Nothing should be omitted from this examination process. Some activities should be forbidden and others strictly controlled, depending on how they are seen to affect the overall economy through up and down cycles. Particular attention must be paid to down cycles.
As a young person I read Theory of Countervailing Power by Galbraith. If you haven't read it, you should. Thinking you don't need both pieces is just plain dumb.
It is the duty of government regulators to examine the activities of capitalists and make judgments about which are in the public interest and which are not. Nothing should be omitted from this examination process. Some activities should be forbidden and others strictly controlled, depending on how they are seen to affect the overall economy through up and down cycles. Particular attention must be paid to down cycles.
As a young person I read Theory of Countervailing Power by Galbraith. If you haven't read it, you should. Thinking you don't need both pieces is just plain dumb.
Simple path to nuclear disarmament
Step one. I don't really intend to go past step one, but why not take step one and get it over with.
Calculate exactly how many megatons are required to completely destroy all life on earth, and then reduce our own stockpile to that level. Doesn't require negotiating or farting around with other countries. Doesn't require acting all superior and self righteous.
Just do it and get it over with. I understand this would save a ton of money.
Calculate exactly how many megatons are required to completely destroy all life on earth, and then reduce our own stockpile to that level. Doesn't require negotiating or farting around with other countries. Doesn't require acting all superior and self righteous.
Just do it and get it over with. I understand this would save a ton of money.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)