Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Le-a
That is awesome! I think the mom has a right to be upset. The pronunciation of the child's name is clearly blatantly obvious.
Office Prank
A funny office prank that doesn't cost any money, and shouldn't get you into too much trouble.
Vista and the Mojave experiment
The Mojave Experiment is a slap in the face to Windows Vista users. Windows Vista has some real problems. Some days, I lose more than an hour of productivity due to the inefficiencies of Windows Vista. I wish rather than spending money to conduct a bogus experiment to convince people that Vista is not as bad as they have heard, that Microsoft would spend money to make Windows Vista better.
A good start, but not enough
This is a good start, but John McCain has got to do more to convince the undecided voters that the economy will do better under his presidency than Obama's:
Furthermore, this probably will not win him any votes, but it is good to see that realizes that the government should not have any financial interest in the banks any longer than is necessary.
I could be wrong, but I doubt that it is a view that is shared by Obama.
Sen. John McCain today proposed $52 billion in tax breaks aimed at reducing the impact of stock market losses on the nation's seniors, providing relief to the unemployed and encouraging savings.
Furthermore, this probably will not win him any votes, but it is good to see that realizes that the government should not have any financial interest in the banks any longer than is necessary.
McCain's made his tax cut proposals as President Bush announced an historic $250 billion plan to have the federal government inject money into the economy by directly investing in private banks.
McCain did not directly comment on the president's announcement. But he warned that as president he would require that government investment end once the private banks and institutions are restructured and healthy.
I could be wrong, but I doubt that it is a view that is shared by Obama.
John Maynard Keynes
Robert Skidelsky, a John Maynard Keynes biographer, writes in the Washington Post:
Furthermore, even though its true that economist have forsaken Keynesian monetary policy, America has had an unbroken string of 70+ years of Keynesian fiscal policy. In fact, small parts of the Keynesian fiscal policy might have been the cause of this financial crisis. Additionally, regardless of whether it was the cause, Keynesian fiscal policy has robbed America of the flexibility it needs to address this problem.
Hopefully, this crisis will be the final nail in the coffin of Keynesian fiscal policy. However, that is unlikely. Instead, America is likely to see a rapid expansion of Keynesian fiscal policy.
Update: Apparently, he is an economist, and a very accomplished one at that. Which makes his defense of Keynes bizarre.
So mainstream theory has no explanation of why things have gone so horribly wrong. To understand how markets can generate their own hurricanes we need to return to John Maynard Keynes.I wonder if this author is an economist, because I do not think he knows what he is talking about. For example, take the following passage:
...Keynes's insights should not be tossed away as old garbage. At the very least we can say that we have no warrant for basing economics on assumptions that are so often discredited by events.The reason that "Keynes's insights" regarding monetary policy were "tossed away like old garbage" was because they were "discredited by events".
Furthermore, even though its true that economist have forsaken Keynesian monetary policy, America has had an unbroken string of 70+ years of Keynesian fiscal policy. In fact, small parts of the Keynesian fiscal policy might have been the cause of this financial crisis. Additionally, regardless of whether it was the cause, Keynesian fiscal policy has robbed America of the flexibility it needs to address this problem.
Hopefully, this crisis will be the final nail in the coffin of Keynesian fiscal policy. However, that is unlikely. Instead, America is likely to see a rapid expansion of Keynesian fiscal policy.
Update: Apparently, he is an economist, and a very accomplished one at that. Which makes his defense of Keynes bizarre.
Sarah Palin Hatred
Have you noticed that the Sarah Palin is not qualified to be VP story rarely gets mentioned anymore? And, when it is mentioned it is only brought up by conservatives. It used to irritate me when a liberal would invariably say that liberals are smarter than conservatives. The next time I hear that, I am going to retort "I do not believe that is true, but I will acknowledge that liberals are smarter than Christopher Buckley, Kathleen Parker, David Frum and David Brooks".
Rich Lowry says Christopher Buckley is not only a fool but a liar as well (or at least that is what I take from his comments).
Rich Lowry says Christopher Buckley is not only a fool but a liar as well (or at least that is what I take from his comments).
eBay versus Amazon
A report on eBay versus Amazon:
eBay's business model is built completely around third party vendors selling products on eBay. In essence, eBay's customers are the people who are selling the products on eBay. The shoppers on eBay are not eBay's customers, instead they are the customers of the third party vendors. John Donahoe's quotes above makes it clear that eBay is unaware of this and treats the shoppers as if they are eBay's customers, and treats the sellers as if they are an unwanted nuisance. Through a combination of arrogance and ignorance, eBay is driving off their seller/customers in the hopes of attracting more shoppers. Well, as eBay drives off its customers, what exactly are those shoppers going to buy?
eBay should be catering to its customers (i.e, the sellers), and attempting to attract more sellers if it wants to grow its business. Now part of attracting more sellers will involve attracting more shoppers and increasing the rate of sales conversion. However, attracting more shoppers should not be done at the expense of making changes that are "unpopular" in the "eBay [seller] ecosystem".
Update: Lest anyone think I am disgruntled former eBay seller who is merely upset that eBay was trying to make it harder on the bad sellers, you are more than welcome to check out my ratings. I think that although I was not perfect, my ratings do show that I was one of the sellers that eBay should have definitely wanted to retain and not drive off.
I used to sell on eBay, and eBay's problems do not stem from Amazon. eBay's problems are all of their own making. eBay is monopolistic bureaucratic corporation that has an incompetent understanding of their own business model. Here are some quotes from the CEO of eBay which displays the arrogant general lack of understanding of who their customers are:Just three years ago, eBay had 30 percent more traffic than Amazon. Today, its total of 84.5 million active users is barely ahead of the 81 million active customer accounts that Amazon reported in June.
Amazon has exceeded eBay in other measures as well. EBay's market capitalization was three times Amazon's in 2005, back when Wall Street loved the fact that it carried no inventory and generated huge profits. This year, eBay's stock has lost over half its value and, in July, Amazon's valuation surpassed eBay's for the first time.
In a series of interviews, Donahoe acknowledged that eBay, based in San Jose, Calif., didn't adapt fast enough to shifting e-commerce winds. He now embraces a turnaround mind-set" and is refocusing its Web marketplace toward shoppers who don't want to waste time in online auctions.
"There are times when I wish we can close this store and just open a new store, but we can't," he said. "We need to make bolder, more aggressive changes to the eBay ecosystem even if they are unpopular."
eBay's business model is built completely around third party vendors selling products on eBay. In essence, eBay's customers are the people who are selling the products on eBay. The shoppers on eBay are not eBay's customers, instead they are the customers of the third party vendors. John Donahoe's quotes above makes it clear that eBay is unaware of this and treats the shoppers as if they are eBay's customers, and treats the sellers as if they are an unwanted nuisance. Through a combination of arrogance and ignorance, eBay is driving off their seller/customers in the hopes of attracting more shoppers. Well, as eBay drives off its customers, what exactly are those shoppers going to buy?
eBay should be catering to its customers (i.e, the sellers), and attempting to attract more sellers if it wants to grow its business. Now part of attracting more sellers will involve attracting more shoppers and increasing the rate of sales conversion. However, attracting more shoppers should not be done at the expense of making changes that are "unpopular" in the "eBay [seller] ecosystem".
Update: Lest anyone think I am disgruntled former eBay seller who is merely upset that eBay was trying to make it harder on the bad sellers, you are more than welcome to check out my ratings. I think that although I was not perfect, my ratings do show that I was one of the sellers that eBay should have definitely wanted to retain and not drive off.
Sarah on ACORN
Good for Sarah:
Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin suggested Tuesday that Barack Obama shares responsibility for recent reports of voter fraud conducted by the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now.Republicans need to learn that if they want the press to fairly cover some issues they have to force them to do it by addressing those issues themselves.
Has Obama already been corrupted?
David Brooks describes the incident that led him to develop his man crush on Obama:
Update: Stephen Green of Vodka Pundit has a post where he wonders about whether Obama will suppress free speech rights on the internet via the Fairness Doctrine.
I was interviewing Obama a couple years ago, and I'm getting nowhere with the interview, it's late in the night, he's on the phone, walking off the Senate floor, he's cranky. Out of the blue I say, 'Ever read a guy named Reinhold Niebuhr?' And he says, 'Yeah.' So i say, 'What did Niebuhr mean to you?' For the next 20 minutes, he gave me a perfect description of Reinhold Niebuhr's thought, which is a very subtle thought process based on the idea that you have to use power while it corrupts you.A first I thought it sounded good. But, then the following insight dawned on me, Obama's response is an implicit acknowledgement that he has been studying how to use power to achieve his "noble" ends (i.e., liberal policies) before he gets corrupted and uses the powers available to him to commit "ignoble" acts (i.e., oppressing his opponents, stuffing ballot boxes, ignoring laws, etc). Considering that it appears that Obama has already been corrupted by so little actual power, shouldn't America dread giving this man the real power that comes with being President?
Update: Stephen Green of Vodka Pundit has a post where he wonders about whether Obama will suppress free speech rights on the internet via the Fairness Doctrine.
Obama's Cult of Personality
Wikipedia says:
Obama's Cult of Personality:
Textbooks to indoctrinate 8th graders.
A cult of personality... arises when a country's leader uses mass media to create a heroic public image through unquestioning flattery and praise. Cults of personality are often found in dictatorships but can be found in some democracies.and
Generally, personality cults are most common in regimes with totalitarian systems of government, that seek to radically alter or transform society according to evolutionary new ideas. Often, a single leader becomes associated with this revolutionary transformation, and comes to be treated as a benevolent "guide" for the nation, without whom the transformation to a better future cannot occur.
Obama's Cult of Personality:
Textbooks to indoctrinate 8th graders.
Obama, Iraq and the economy.
Mikey Kaus wonders:
To answer his question, in Iraq, very little. In the American economy, a tremendous amount, unfortunately.
One of McCain's problems is that voters aren't paying much attention to Iraq--because it looks from our distant vantage point like the war is finally on a glide path to an honorable U.S. drawdown of troops. How much damage could Obama do?
To answer his question, in Iraq, very little. In the American economy, a tremendous amount, unfortunately.
Fred Barnes' Crystal Ball
Fred Barnes has seen the future, and it is not pretty:
Unfortunately, my crystal ball does not look any better than Fred Barnes.
...the worst case scenario is now a distinct possibility: a Democrat in the White House, a Democratic Senate with a filibuster-proof majority, and a Democratic House with a bolstered majority.
If this scenario unfolds, Washington would become a solidly liberal town
again for the first time in decades. And the prospects of passing the liberal
agenda--nearly all of it--would be bright. Enacting major parts of it would be
even brighter....permit organized labor to unionize the private sector without winning a
certification election by secret ballot.......Democrats might go after.... right-to-work laws....
...killing conservative talk radio--[via] the so-called fairness doctrine--would stand an excellent chance of becoming law....
...Obama would nominate liberals to fill Supreme Court vacancies....
...free trade agreements would become a thing of the past...
...[Obama's] described [his health care plan] as step or two away from a single payer, government-run health system like Canada's....
...Obama has called for increasing the tax rate on capital gains, dividends, and the income of top earners, and raising the cap on payroll taxes. But tax hikes would worsen, not stimulate, a weak economy....
...cap and trade.... would drive up the cost of energy, another downer for the economy....
...a quick troop exit from Iraq and presidential-level talks with anti-American
dictators.
Unfortunately, my crystal ball does not look any better than Fred Barnes.
Better late than never
David Brooks may be getting over his man crush on Obama just in time to help fight the ideological battle against encroaching socialism:
I just hope that it is not too late.
...Democrats will probably be running the government.... What we’re going to see, in short, is the Gingrich revolution in reverse and on steroids. There will be a big increase in spending and deficits. In normal times, moderates could have restrained the zeal on the left. In an economic crisis, not a chance. The over-reach is coming. The backlash is next.
I just hope that it is not too late.
Monday, October 13, 2008
David Frum's obsession with Sarah Palin
David Frum is tired of the abuse he is receiving for denigrating Sarah Palin:
Why is it that the some of the most "intelligent" conservatives (David Frum, Christopher Buckley, David Brooks, etc.) are so blind to how detrimental their obsessive Sarah Palin hatred is to the conservative cause? Readers of the NRO are looking for articles that advance the cause of conservatism. They do not read the NRO for articles that are detrimental to conservatism (numerous other outlets exist to provide those articles). If David Frum can not write articles that advance the cause of conservatism, and if he can not understand how pivotal this election is to the future of American conservatism and how detrimental it is to that cause to create doubts about the wisdom of electing the presumptive leader of the conservative cause, maybe he should not be writing for the NRO.
As one of my correspondents wrote this very morning: 'PLEASE KEEP YOUR REMARKS TO YOURSELF! Nobody but Democrats wants to hear them.' Well he may have a point. Perhaps it is our job at NRO is tell our readers only what they want to hear, without much regard to whether it is true.
Why is it that the some of the most "intelligent" conservatives (David Frum, Christopher Buckley, David Brooks, etc.) are so blind to how detrimental their obsessive Sarah Palin hatred is to the conservative cause? Readers of the NRO are looking for articles that advance the cause of conservatism. They do not read the NRO for articles that are detrimental to conservatism (numerous other outlets exist to provide those articles). If David Frum can not write articles that advance the cause of conservatism, and if he can not understand how pivotal this election is to the future of American conservatism and how detrimental it is to that cause to create doubts about the wisdom of electing the presumptive leader of the conservative cause, maybe he should not be writing for the NRO.
Fear and Hysteria can be rational
I have seen numerous articles (here, here, etc.) bemoaning the perceived fear and hysteria in the American people. In defense of the American people, their actions have been a rational response to the known facts. The known facts are:
- American wealth has been lost.
- Additional wealth remains at risk.
- Through taxes, laws and regulations the government can affect the value of wealth.
- America is in the middle of an election.
- It seems probable that the Democratic Party will come out of the election with unchecked political control.
- The Democratic party believes that economic restrictive laws and regulations, and some high taxes benefit society.
- Taxes, laws and regulations that the Democratic party prefer reduce the value of wealth.
- The Republican party believes in cutting taxes, and easing the economic burden of restrictive laws and regulations.
- Cutting taxes, and easing the economic burden of restrictive laws and regulations increase the value of wealth.
- Just because something is probable does not mean that it is a foregone conclusion.
- People respond to their own self interest.
More wealth destruction from Obama
The AP reports:
If enacted, this policy would make it harder and more costly for banks to foreclose on non paying home owners. By increasing the cost of foreclosure, the policy would reduce the value of the asset. The reduction in the value of the asset would show up as a net loss of wealth for the bank and society as a whole. The intrinsic destruction of wealth is the root cause of America's (and the world's) current financial crisis.
Obama has noble goals, but he can not see that how he would achieve these goals could worsen the root causes of the current financial crisis. The American people need to ask themselves, do they want to help non paying home owners stay in their home, or do they want to stop the cycle of wealth destruction that is leading America to the precipice of economic ruin. Obama and Democrats through noble goals and economic ignorance may very well push America over the edge.
Democratic Barack Obama on Monday... propos[ed] a 90-day moratorium on home foreclosures at some banks....
If enacted, this policy would make it harder and more costly for banks to foreclose on non paying home owners. By increasing the cost of foreclosure, the policy would reduce the value of the asset. The reduction in the value of the asset would show up as a net loss of wealth for the bank and society as a whole. The intrinsic destruction of wealth is the root cause of America's (and the world's) current financial crisis.
Obama has noble goals, but he can not see that how he would achieve these goals could worsen the root causes of the current financial crisis. The American people need to ask themselves, do they want to help non paying home owners stay in their home, or do they want to stop the cycle of wealth destruction that is leading America to the precipice of economic ruin. Obama and Democrats through noble goals and economic ignorance may very well push America over the edge.
Thank you John McCain
Jake Tapper reports:
John McCain, my friend, thank you for getting my hopes up that you were actually going to attempt to explain to the American people why conservative policies are better than liberal policies for the economy.
On Saturday, advisers to Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., told the Politico's Mike Allen and Jonathan Martin that McCain was "considering additional economic measures aimed directly at the middle class that are likely to be rolled out this week...
Late Sunday, McCain decided no new economic proposals would be forthcoming after all.
John McCain, my friend, thank you for getting my hopes up that you were actually going to attempt to explain to the American people why conservative policies are better than liberal policies for the economy.
Spread the Wealth
Obama is going to spread the wealth. Oh joy indeed. Happy days are here.
It sounds good in practice, but generally, when people try to spread the wealth, they spread poverty instead.
Someone should tell Obama that American wealth is currently in the process of being destroyed, and more is at risk of being destroyed. Furthermore, the mere suggestion that the government may take wealth increases the risk to holding assets which might be confiscated. The increased risk devalues those assets. In essence, wealth is destroyed simply by increasing the expectation that the risk to holding those assets has increased.
In this case, the asset in question is expected future income. Obama is making it clear that he intends to make it less profitable for the wealthy to engage in the work necessary to produce that future income. This decreases their incentive to engage in this work. It also decreases the incentive for the wealthy to consume today based upon the reduced income they expect to generate in the future.
Obama is already making America poorer. I am betting it will only get worse.
It sounds good in practice, but generally, when people try to spread the wealth, they spread poverty instead.
Someone should tell Obama that American wealth is currently in the process of being destroyed, and more is at risk of being destroyed. Furthermore, the mere suggestion that the government may take wealth increases the risk to holding assets which might be confiscated. The increased risk devalues those assets. In essence, wealth is destroyed simply by increasing the expectation that the risk to holding those assets has increased.
In this case, the asset in question is expected future income. Obama is making it clear that he intends to make it less profitable for the wealthy to engage in the work necessary to produce that future income. This decreases their incentive to engage in this work. It also decreases the incentive for the wealthy to consume today based upon the reduced income they expect to generate in the future.
Obama is already making America poorer. I am betting it will only get worse.
Populism and Conservatism
Gregory Rodriguez writes:
That is nonsense. American stability has been destroyed by 70 plus years of corrupting government influences in the economy that resulted in the current financial crisis. The lack of stability may get worse not better. It will almost certainly get worse if Democrats gain unchecked political control and increase rather than decrease the corrupting influences of the government on the economy. Conservatives have never believed in an order and a tradition of government control over the economy.
Hence, Sarah Palin's "populism" is in line with what conservatives have been advocating for 70 plus years. The only difference is that the financial crisis has increased the urgency with which conservatives must act to save the wealth and prosperity of America.
...[Sarah Palin's] take-no-prisoners populism is inherently radical; it's at odds not only with McCain's "I'm safe, he's an unknown" strategy but with the very things that conservatism claims to be about: stability, order and tradition.
That is nonsense. American stability has been destroyed by 70 plus years of corrupting government influences in the economy that resulted in the current financial crisis. The lack of stability may get worse not better. It will almost certainly get worse if Democrats gain unchecked political control and increase rather than decrease the corrupting influences of the government on the economy. Conservatives have never believed in an order and a tradition of government control over the economy.
Hence, Sarah Palin's "populism" is in line with what conservatives have been advocating for 70 plus years. The only difference is that the financial crisis has increased the urgency with which conservatives must act to save the wealth and prosperity of America.
Subscribe to:
Comment Feed (RSS)
