Labor Day is traditionally considered the end of summer as in most places school resumes around then and the weather starts to get cooler.
It used to signal the start of the election season but nowadays that never really ends.
Of course it wasn't really significant for working men and women for most of history, except of course the seasons used to signal the nature of their work, planting, harvesting etc.
As industrialization took over it didn't make much difference since the work stayed basically the same no matter what the season.
However, realizing the country owes its very existence to the workers who built it we dedicated an end of summer holiday to celebrate their accomplishments.
Labor, at least the type of labor we honor this weekend, isn't what it used to be.
Unions have lost much of their influence and while we see low unemployment numbers, the great factories that employed so many are really a thing of the past for most.
Unskilled heavy labor is now done by robots, which is a boon to humanity but most of the financial benefit is for the capitalist and financiers of the world.
It seems ironic that the reduction of work that was in fact back breaking and health threatening is lamented by many.
Skills were always important but now they are essential although laborers are still need for certain things.
We should honor the working men and women who built this country but also understand that the future is different than the past and we need to adjust to it.
Its not gong to return to the past, and the past was not that great, although the hard work and sacrifice of so many gave us the great country we enjoy today.
Friday, August 31, 2018
Thursday, August 30, 2018
American Values
We are seeing an erosion of civil liberties for people in this country because of their country of origin or because of their race.
This isn't accidental, it is an attempt to deny them an equal say about our countries policies and elected officials.
One of the methods widely used is to manipulate voting districts to minimize the impact of voters you don't like. If you simply put them into a single district, you can reduce their representation greatly despite the fact that they comprise a higher percentage of the population.
To do this based on race has been illegal for some time, so they tried to justify it based on party affiliation, which effectively was the same thing in practice and the courts struck it down.
One person one vote, its not a complex concept but it becomes meaningless if you make the vote count less.
We actually see this on the national level as well because of the electoral college and the equal number of senators per state. If you live in one of our mountain states in the West your vote counts a lot more than if you live in a major metropolitan area.
Geography doesn't have political opinions.
We also see a crackdown on Americans of Mexican descent who are in many cases being asked to provide excessive proof of who they are.
People born along the border are being accused of having false birth certificates, without much proof and being denied passports and re-entry into the country.
These are people who were born here, educated here, served in the armed forces, worked here and now many years later have their credential being challenged.
Even if, at the time of their birth, a midwife changed the location on the birth certificate, after all these years they are as American as anyone.
Its part of a crackdown on people of Mexican descent orchestrated by politicians who want to suppress their votes.
They are being accused of a crime on speculation and being asked to prove their innocence as opposed to the Government having to prove their guilt.
That's not the America I grew up in.
This isn't accidental, it is an attempt to deny them an equal say about our countries policies and elected officials.
One of the methods widely used is to manipulate voting districts to minimize the impact of voters you don't like. If you simply put them into a single district, you can reduce their representation greatly despite the fact that they comprise a higher percentage of the population.
To do this based on race has been illegal for some time, so they tried to justify it based on party affiliation, which effectively was the same thing in practice and the courts struck it down.
One person one vote, its not a complex concept but it becomes meaningless if you make the vote count less.
We actually see this on the national level as well because of the electoral college and the equal number of senators per state. If you live in one of our mountain states in the West your vote counts a lot more than if you live in a major metropolitan area.
Geography doesn't have political opinions.
We also see a crackdown on Americans of Mexican descent who are in many cases being asked to provide excessive proof of who they are.
People born along the border are being accused of having false birth certificates, without much proof and being denied passports and re-entry into the country.
These are people who were born here, educated here, served in the armed forces, worked here and now many years later have their credential being challenged.
Even if, at the time of their birth, a midwife changed the location on the birth certificate, after all these years they are as American as anyone.
Its part of a crackdown on people of Mexican descent orchestrated by politicians who want to suppress their votes.
They are being accused of a crime on speculation and being asked to prove their innocence as opposed to the Government having to prove their guilt.
That's not the America I grew up in.
Wednesday, August 29, 2018
All Fluff
I guess one of the things we now have is the early morning inane tweets that the dontard issues.
I think he actually believes the stuff he sends out, but then again maybe he doesn't.
Today he seems to have decided arbitrarily to blame China for hacking e-mails, which were never actually hacked as far as anyone can tell.
Of course to think he would keep track of details is a little like believing he knows what he's doing.
Take North Korea where he was clearly used to score some PR for that dictator when they never intended to do anything but parade the orange haired buffoon on their propaganda.
If you simply give his ego a little stroking he is happy to let you use him to prop up your regime.
He isn't quite so amenable to working with allies who tried the wrong approach, treating him as a partner who you didn't have to coddle.
He wants coddling.
He probably needs it.
Most of his business ventures ended up fading and while he did make some money from his TV show, the rest of his ventures have mixed results.
More flash than cash.
The circumstances that have led him to occupy the presidency are certainly unique and maybe its more than a one time oddity.
I hope not, we need to pick leaders with some substance.
At least I think we do.
I think he actually believes the stuff he sends out, but then again maybe he doesn't.
Today he seems to have decided arbitrarily to blame China for hacking e-mails, which were never actually hacked as far as anyone can tell.
Of course to think he would keep track of details is a little like believing he knows what he's doing.
Take North Korea where he was clearly used to score some PR for that dictator when they never intended to do anything but parade the orange haired buffoon on their propaganda.
If you simply give his ego a little stroking he is happy to let you use him to prop up your regime.
He isn't quite so amenable to working with allies who tried the wrong approach, treating him as a partner who you didn't have to coddle.
He wants coddling.
He probably needs it.
Most of his business ventures ended up fading and while he did make some money from his TV show, the rest of his ventures have mixed results.
More flash than cash.
The circumstances that have led him to occupy the presidency are certainly unique and maybe its more than a one time oddity.
I hope not, we need to pick leaders with some substance.
At least I think we do.
Tuesday, August 28, 2018
Trade and Economics
I was reading an article about the changes in NAFTA we have almost agreed to with Mexico and have to say it was pretty unimpressive.
The changes are mostly superficial although I'm sure they will be heralded as a big change.
NAFTA was always more of a Republican initiative than a Democratic one, although it was signed agreed to during the Clinton administration.
It was always clear that it would be good for certain border regions, and it has, while not as good for our manufacturing union people.
It did bring down overall costs and create lower paying jobs, exactly as predicted.
So if it did what it was expected to do, I suppose it was a success of sorts and from an economics point of view we seem to have more benefits than losses.
Trade simply allows more efficient use of resources and an equalization of living standards over time.
After World War 2 the United States had a period when many of its people enjoyed income and living standards that greatly exceeded the rest of the world.
That wasn't something that could last since it made us a high cost producer.
It lasted as long as it did because our industrial rivals were faced with massive rebuilding which finally allowed them to fully compete with us over time.
Of course we also were faced with "third world' countries which were primarily exporters of agricultural goods and buyers of manufactured ones.
As they developed they have grown into competitive rivals such as China and India but there is good in that since they have greatly increased buying power to go with their new jobs
Trade facilitates this growth and equalization but it happens one way or the other since the economics are clear.
The one thing that is certain is that you have to be in the competition to have any chance at success
Tariffs take you right out of it.
The changes are mostly superficial although I'm sure they will be heralded as a big change.
NAFTA was always more of a Republican initiative than a Democratic one, although it was signed agreed to during the Clinton administration.
It was always clear that it would be good for certain border regions, and it has, while not as good for our manufacturing union people.
It did bring down overall costs and create lower paying jobs, exactly as predicted.
So if it did what it was expected to do, I suppose it was a success of sorts and from an economics point of view we seem to have more benefits than losses.
Trade simply allows more efficient use of resources and an equalization of living standards over time.
After World War 2 the United States had a period when many of its people enjoyed income and living standards that greatly exceeded the rest of the world.
That wasn't something that could last since it made us a high cost producer.
It lasted as long as it did because our industrial rivals were faced with massive rebuilding which finally allowed them to fully compete with us over time.
Of course we also were faced with "third world' countries which were primarily exporters of agricultural goods and buyers of manufactured ones.
As they developed they have grown into competitive rivals such as China and India but there is good in that since they have greatly increased buying power to go with their new jobs
Trade facilitates this growth and equalization but it happens one way or the other since the economics are clear.
The one thing that is certain is that you have to be in the competition to have any chance at success
Tariffs take you right out of it.
Monday, August 27, 2018
Scary
We are seeing how policies without strategy fall short.
The dontard adopted a lot of policies from the talking heads on a particular network, assuming they had some idea of what they were talking about.
The really were more interested in being controversial and getting ratings.
Some of the experts they had on might have had some clue but the network pursues a particular approach designed to attract audience.
They aren't going for the best and the brightest either.
Now this is demagoguery and it strikes a populist tone regardless of the actual facts of the situation.
They cater to people who want strict enforcement of immigration laws ignoring the fact that the situation required certain laborers access to provide cheap labor.
The push for tough foreign policy without considering the fact that the rest of the world has its own opinion and as rich and strong as we are, history proves it won't last if we overextend ourselves.
They promote all sorts of conspiracy theories without much actual proof, fabricating for controversy and a bigger audience.
They are an entertainment network, about on the same level as say the cartoon network.
They just have real life cartoons.
They are certainly entitled to be what they are, it is a free country, but they really can't be taken very seriously most of the time.
They now have found their ideal toddler, who watches and believes.
Scary.
The dontard adopted a lot of policies from the talking heads on a particular network, assuming they had some idea of what they were talking about.
The really were more interested in being controversial and getting ratings.
Some of the experts they had on might have had some clue but the network pursues a particular approach designed to attract audience.
They aren't going for the best and the brightest either.
Now this is demagoguery and it strikes a populist tone regardless of the actual facts of the situation.
They cater to people who want strict enforcement of immigration laws ignoring the fact that the situation required certain laborers access to provide cheap labor.
The push for tough foreign policy without considering the fact that the rest of the world has its own opinion and as rich and strong as we are, history proves it won't last if we overextend ourselves.
They promote all sorts of conspiracy theories without much actual proof, fabricating for controversy and a bigger audience.
They are an entertainment network, about on the same level as say the cartoon network.
They just have real life cartoons.
They are certainly entitled to be what they are, it is a free country, but they really can't be taken very seriously most of the time.
They now have found their ideal toddler, who watches and believes.
Scary.
Sunday, August 26, 2018
A Hero Leaves Us
There was a tie in this country when we were taught to do what was best for the country, not what was best for yourself. Of course we still have many people in uniform who risk everything for the country but in many ways we see that self interest and selfishness have replaced visions of the common good.
John McCain exemplified the notion of service and lived it his entire life.
His loss makes the country a little worse than it was.
I didn't agree with many of his policies but I never doubted that he felt they were the right ones for the country or that he would let blind politics dictate how he acted.
He was a maverick when he got elected and kept his independent spirit alive until the end.
Its sad that he endured captivity and torture during the Vietnam war only to be insulted by a draft dodger who would prefer his heroes not to be captured.
Well you can avoid that risk by shirking service to your country, but having a plane shot down and being captured is in fact heroic and brave.
Honorable service, something that once was common in this country, and still is in our military.
Unfortunately it seems to be getting rare among our politicians.
We have lost one of the remaining few.
John McCain exemplified the notion of service and lived it his entire life.
His loss makes the country a little worse than it was.
I didn't agree with many of his policies but I never doubted that he felt they were the right ones for the country or that he would let blind politics dictate how he acted.
He was a maverick when he got elected and kept his independent spirit alive until the end.
Its sad that he endured captivity and torture during the Vietnam war only to be insulted by a draft dodger who would prefer his heroes not to be captured.
Well you can avoid that risk by shirking service to your country, but having a plane shot down and being captured is in fact heroic and brave.
Honorable service, something that once was common in this country, and still is in our military.
Unfortunately it seems to be getting rare among our politicians.
We have lost one of the remaining few.
Saturday, August 25, 2018
Saturday Musings
All the ridiculous and never ending investigations and allegations against Hillary Clinton never came up with a single charge. Interesting.
Once a house of cards starts to crumble it crumbles pretty fast. Got the National Enquirer and the Doorman involved already.
If you see a lot of rats leaving the ship, it means their feet are getting wet.
The North Korea actions have led to a postponement of talks, sounds a lot like that Nobel Peace Prize is slipping away.
So foreign relations, the climate and trade are all quickly deteriorating. Need new players.
The Dontard in Ohio continues to blame the minority Democratic party for not supporting him? Guess he isn't up on the two party system we have.
He wants to stop prosecutors from flipping suspects to get to bigger fish. Guess he doesn't understand how our criminal justice system works. He should watch episodes of Law and Order.
I'm sorry to disappoint those who think he has some sort of master plan to accomplish whatever it is he is trying to accomplish. He doesn't and he just tries to take care of number one.
If you think he had a brilliant strategy to win the election remember he lost the popular vote and was helped by both the FBI and the Russians to win a few key states by the skin of his teeth. Hillary isn't the best campaigner when you look at it.
The damage he is causing to the environment is actually the worst thing about this period. The Supreme Court might be almost as bad.
The rest can be fixed pretty easily.
Once a house of cards starts to crumble it crumbles pretty fast. Got the National Enquirer and the Doorman involved already.
If you see a lot of rats leaving the ship, it means their feet are getting wet.
The North Korea actions have led to a postponement of talks, sounds a lot like that Nobel Peace Prize is slipping away.
So foreign relations, the climate and trade are all quickly deteriorating. Need new players.
The Dontard in Ohio continues to blame the minority Democratic party for not supporting him? Guess he isn't up on the two party system we have.
He wants to stop prosecutors from flipping suspects to get to bigger fish. Guess he doesn't understand how our criminal justice system works. He should watch episodes of Law and Order.
I'm sorry to disappoint those who think he has some sort of master plan to accomplish whatever it is he is trying to accomplish. He doesn't and he just tries to take care of number one.
If you think he had a brilliant strategy to win the election remember he lost the popular vote and was helped by both the FBI and the Russians to win a few key states by the skin of his teeth. Hillary isn't the best campaigner when you look at it.
The damage he is causing to the environment is actually the worst thing about this period. The Supreme Court might be almost as bad.
The rest can be fixed pretty easily.
Friday, August 24, 2018
Hypocrisy in Action
We've had some shoes drop but we still haven't had the big one drop yet.
The fact that the dontard is a liar and a womanizer is actually not surprise to anyone, or at least hardly anyone.
One the reasons he even got elected were the lies he spread about his opponents both in the primaries and the general election.
Still we are waiting for something akin to a smoking gun and the issue with that is that he has a lot of co-conspirators or at least enablers.
You see so many Republican politicians who even if a bit reluctantly who jumped on the bandwagon, putting personal gain ahead of the countries best interests.
They were overcame any ethical qualms they may have had and even abandoned some long held policies such as free trade in order to win primaries and hold on to their seats, maybe.
Primaries in both parties are a real distortion of the countries wishes since the number of voters is so small and it can be swayed by radical voters who show up to vote.
A small number of people who are adamant about an issue can sway a primary fairly easily nominating someone who is not in fact representative of the majority of that parties members.
The only way to fix that and to fix similar issue in the general election would be to make voting much easier or even mandatory so we actually had people who represented the majority.
You see however efforts at voter suppression by Republicans who know that they represent a small percentage of the electorate, generally the wealthier and whiter ones. They are trying to suppress democracy in order to maintain control over the process.
Its so they can continue to line their pockets and those of their donors while they spend recklessly and reduce taxes to burden the future.
Its the face of greed and evil, but its fine with the evangelicals of this country.
Hypocrisy at its finest.
The fact that the dontard is a liar and a womanizer is actually not surprise to anyone, or at least hardly anyone.
One the reasons he even got elected were the lies he spread about his opponents both in the primaries and the general election.
Still we are waiting for something akin to a smoking gun and the issue with that is that he has a lot of co-conspirators or at least enablers.
You see so many Republican politicians who even if a bit reluctantly who jumped on the bandwagon, putting personal gain ahead of the countries best interests.
They were overcame any ethical qualms they may have had and even abandoned some long held policies such as free trade in order to win primaries and hold on to their seats, maybe.
Primaries in both parties are a real distortion of the countries wishes since the number of voters is so small and it can be swayed by radical voters who show up to vote.
A small number of people who are adamant about an issue can sway a primary fairly easily nominating someone who is not in fact representative of the majority of that parties members.
The only way to fix that and to fix similar issue in the general election would be to make voting much easier or even mandatory so we actually had people who represented the majority.
You see however efforts at voter suppression by Republicans who know that they represent a small percentage of the electorate, generally the wealthier and whiter ones. They are trying to suppress democracy in order to maintain control over the process.
Its so they can continue to line their pockets and those of their donors while they spend recklessly and reduce taxes to burden the future.
Its the face of greed and evil, but its fine with the evangelicals of this country.
Hypocrisy at its finest.
Thursday, August 23, 2018
Time Will Tell
Another day another tariff. Ho hum.
The impact of the additional taxes are being felt by some and inevitably they will be felt by almost everyone.
These more than offset for individuals any benefit from the corporate tax relief they passed earlier this year.
The only slightly good thing about them is that they will to some extent reduce our annual deficit a bit, although the negative impact on the economy may actually offset that.
Similar to the claim that the positive impact of the tax reductions would pay for itself.
That didn't happen and isn't going to happen, but negative impacts do reduce tax receipts since people lose jobs and have to claim benefits.
We are still creating jobs and the economy is maintain the growth patterns established under the previous administration and what will tip the next recession is still uncertain.
Recessions happen periodically as trends start to reverse, jobs get lost, benefits get claimed and the economy goes negative for a number of quarters.
We have a lot of good things in the economy and to a certain extent, we have already absorbed the major reduction in income caused by the changes in our economy due to technology.
Still they do start out slowly sometimes until they pick up speed and I see a few signs that could be troubling.
Last quarters growth was due to a speed up in imports to avoid tariffs that will reduce future growth, just how much is uncertain.
Tariffs will impact growth.
Our immigration policies impact growth.
Interest rates impact growth.
Is any one of these enough? Maybe, maybe not, could be something else completely.
Time will tell.
The impact of the additional taxes are being felt by some and inevitably they will be felt by almost everyone.
These more than offset for individuals any benefit from the corporate tax relief they passed earlier this year.
The only slightly good thing about them is that they will to some extent reduce our annual deficit a bit, although the negative impact on the economy may actually offset that.
Similar to the claim that the positive impact of the tax reductions would pay for itself.
That didn't happen and isn't going to happen, but negative impacts do reduce tax receipts since people lose jobs and have to claim benefits.
We are still creating jobs and the economy is maintain the growth patterns established under the previous administration and what will tip the next recession is still uncertain.
Recessions happen periodically as trends start to reverse, jobs get lost, benefits get claimed and the economy goes negative for a number of quarters.
We have a lot of good things in the economy and to a certain extent, we have already absorbed the major reduction in income caused by the changes in our economy due to technology.
Still they do start out slowly sometimes until they pick up speed and I see a few signs that could be troubling.
Last quarters growth was due to a speed up in imports to avoid tariffs that will reduce future growth, just how much is uncertain.
Tariffs will impact growth.
Our immigration policies impact growth.
Interest rates impact growth.
Is any one of these enough? Maybe, maybe not, could be something else completely.
Time will tell.
Wednesday, August 22, 2018
The Disruptive Presidency
So its pretty obvious that at the very least the dontard condoned "dirty" tricks in his campaign.
He also was aware of what was going on and to some extent directed it.
Are these criminal activities, it seems like they violate a number of laws and certainly ethics rules, but I'll wait and see if any charges are filed.
Neither of these things are surprising and we are still waiting to see the report related to obstruction and collusion concerning Russian interference.
I don't see the dontard having any integrity so I doubt he will resign and I'm not sure that helps anything since the vice president is a radical evangelical.
However he was the Governor of a mid-sized State so he must have some awareness of how politics works.
I'm not sure any of this will matter to dontard supporters, they support him partly because he is a loose cannon and they want to see things disrupted.
Certainly he has given them that and his administration is still in the first half.
It may very well sway the mid-terms and it may guarantee a Democratic majority, possibly in both houses.
That could lead to a bill of impeachment and a Senate trial where conviction might not be obtainable.
Would be disruptive though.
He also was aware of what was going on and to some extent directed it.
Are these criminal activities, it seems like they violate a number of laws and certainly ethics rules, but I'll wait and see if any charges are filed.
Neither of these things are surprising and we are still waiting to see the report related to obstruction and collusion concerning Russian interference.
I don't see the dontard having any integrity so I doubt he will resign and I'm not sure that helps anything since the vice president is a radical evangelical.
However he was the Governor of a mid-sized State so he must have some awareness of how politics works.
I'm not sure any of this will matter to dontard supporters, they support him partly because he is a loose cannon and they want to see things disrupted.
Certainly he has given them that and his administration is still in the first half.
It may very well sway the mid-terms and it may guarantee a Democratic majority, possibly in both houses.
That could lead to a bill of impeachment and a Senate trial where conviction might not be obtainable.
Would be disruptive though.
Tuesday, August 21, 2018
Hot Tomorrows
I gather some people still don't accept the scientific evidence about climate change or don't think human activities play a part.
The evidence is really beyond reasonable or any doubt so I think that is simply wishful thinking.
Either way why would you not want to stop the abuse we impose on nature every day?
It shouldn't be a political issue, although it has been turned into one.
The main opposition comes from those whose profits are related to polluting the earth and who don't want to cut into profits to stop.
This is similar to the cigarette manufacturers who argued their product wasn't dangerous just to make some extra money.
They mostly got away with it and the victims who suffer from or have died from lung cancer and other ailments are the victims.
In this case we are all going to be the victims of the changing climate with admittedly varying results.
Certainly our coastal communities should be the most concerned but heat waves, fires and droughts might impact many areas as the temperature keeps rising.
We shouldn't be rolling back regulations, we should push harder for clean air and a better tomorrow.
We need forward looking leadership, not ones trying to switch into reverse.
The evidence is really beyond reasonable or any doubt so I think that is simply wishful thinking.
Either way why would you not want to stop the abuse we impose on nature every day?
It shouldn't be a political issue, although it has been turned into one.
The main opposition comes from those whose profits are related to polluting the earth and who don't want to cut into profits to stop.
This is similar to the cigarette manufacturers who argued their product wasn't dangerous just to make some extra money.
They mostly got away with it and the victims who suffer from or have died from lung cancer and other ailments are the victims.
In this case we are all going to be the victims of the changing climate with admittedly varying results.
Certainly our coastal communities should be the most concerned but heat waves, fires and droughts might impact many areas as the temperature keeps rising.
We shouldn't be rolling back regulations, we should push harder for clean air and a better tomorrow.
We need forward looking leadership, not ones trying to switch into reverse.
Monday, August 20, 2018
Economic Progress
One of the big advantages of the global economy has been the reduction in the price of many items.
Especially when compared to performance we are paying significantly less today than we were say 30 years ago.
Of course this Isn't true for every product but certainly for many manufactured and electronic products we have seen this dynamic.
In some products the price we pay has little to do with the cost of production as it includes much more in the way of advertising or branding than the actual manufacturing cost.
We do run deficits with certain countries and a pretty big one with a country like China.
Whether this is a good thing or bad thing from an economics point of view is not relevant, it is the most efficient thing.
It is our responsibility to develop products that offset that deficit and it is probably wrong to look at deficits or surpluses country by country.
Further trade, while influenced by Government policies is not conducted Government to Government but business to business or business to consumer.
When Governments get involved it disrupts the economic forces that make items the least expensive.
Economics tells us that over time it will correct itself.
In fact what we are seeing now is a correction to the artificially high labor costs we had for low skilled jobs in this country.
Those jobs were overpaid and it was more economical to automate or export them.
It reduces the cost we pay while of course it also reduces the income for those people.
In a capitalistic society that is just the way things happen and it has happened many times in the past as economies evolve.
Especially when compared to performance we are paying significantly less today than we were say 30 years ago.
Of course this Isn't true for every product but certainly for many manufactured and electronic products we have seen this dynamic.
In some products the price we pay has little to do with the cost of production as it includes much more in the way of advertising or branding than the actual manufacturing cost.
We do run deficits with certain countries and a pretty big one with a country like China.
Whether this is a good thing or bad thing from an economics point of view is not relevant, it is the most efficient thing.
It is our responsibility to develop products that offset that deficit and it is probably wrong to look at deficits or surpluses country by country.
Further trade, while influenced by Government policies is not conducted Government to Government but business to business or business to consumer.
When Governments get involved it disrupts the economic forces that make items the least expensive.
Economics tells us that over time it will correct itself.
In fact what we are seeing now is a correction to the artificially high labor costs we had for low skilled jobs in this country.
Those jobs were overpaid and it was more economical to automate or export them.
It reduces the cost we pay while of course it also reduces the income for those people.
In a capitalistic society that is just the way things happen and it has happened many times in the past as economies evolve.
Sunday, August 19, 2018
More Pollution
Reports are that the current administration is planning on rolling back requirements related to reducing air pollution.
Specifically they are going to allow power plants to pollute more than the current rules allow going forward.
As I understand what they are arguing it is because the current rules were imposed in violation of the authority of the EPA.
Of course it also may benefit some coal mine owners as demand for coal will be reduced less quickly.
To a small extent it may save some coal mining jobs but coal is not the fuel of the future, natural gas is abundant, cleaner and cheaper.
Of course as solar technology improves, we will see it overtake the other methods more and more.
The fact that solar can be installed at the point of use and reduce energy bills mean it will continue to grow in use over time.
Is this attempt to appease some coal mine owners a dangerous thing? Well we have a crisis coming of biblical proportions with climate change. Every thing that makes it worse is a problem, its just a matter of degree.
These are pretty significant impacts based on the projections but of course they are going to play with the numbers and show that emissions will still be going down, just not as much.
As the glaciers melt and flood our coastal cities assuming they haven't been destroyed by hurricanes due to rising ocean temperatures we should consider that argument.
Maybe we just need to remember it while we vote in November.
Specifically they are going to allow power plants to pollute more than the current rules allow going forward.
As I understand what they are arguing it is because the current rules were imposed in violation of the authority of the EPA.
Of course it also may benefit some coal mine owners as demand for coal will be reduced less quickly.
To a small extent it may save some coal mining jobs but coal is not the fuel of the future, natural gas is abundant, cleaner and cheaper.
Of course as solar technology improves, we will see it overtake the other methods more and more.
The fact that solar can be installed at the point of use and reduce energy bills mean it will continue to grow in use over time.
Is this attempt to appease some coal mine owners a dangerous thing? Well we have a crisis coming of biblical proportions with climate change. Every thing that makes it worse is a problem, its just a matter of degree.
These are pretty significant impacts based on the projections but of course they are going to play with the numbers and show that emissions will still be going down, just not as much.
As the glaciers melt and flood our coastal cities assuming they haven't been destroyed by hurricanes due to rising ocean temperatures we should consider that argument.
Maybe we just need to remember it while we vote in November.
Saturday, August 18, 2018
Baby on Board
Air Force one should get one of those Baby on Board signs so everyone knows when they are carrying the dontard.
His recent behavior confirms his immaturity, cancelling clearances on people who have served many administration in the national security area.
Despite anything said to the contrary, you can see it is a sort of vendetta against people who have dared to criticize the dontard.
The actual impact of this is minimal and what impact there is serves to hurt the country as they can no longer be asked to consult on issues they may have needed expertise on.
It has some minor inconvenience and I suppose some potential financial impact but the people involved have significant reputations and whether they have clearances or not will still be asked to comment on policies.
What is more significant is how his behavior, while appealing to his ardent supporters, makes everyone else realize what a mistake he was.
In fairness this was exactly how he acted running for office.
Some thought he would become domesticated once in office.
He didn't.
His recent behavior confirms his immaturity, cancelling clearances on people who have served many administration in the national security area.
Despite anything said to the contrary, you can see it is a sort of vendetta against people who have dared to criticize the dontard.
The actual impact of this is minimal and what impact there is serves to hurt the country as they can no longer be asked to consult on issues they may have needed expertise on.
It has some minor inconvenience and I suppose some potential financial impact but the people involved have significant reputations and whether they have clearances or not will still be asked to comment on policies.
What is more significant is how his behavior, while appealing to his ardent supporters, makes everyone else realize what a mistake he was.
In fairness this was exactly how he acted running for office.
Some thought he would become domesticated once in office.
He didn't.
Friday, August 17, 2018
Parade Lost in the Swamp
Well as Washington keeps getting swampier, the swamp has swallowed up the military parade the dontard wanted.
It was a bad idea in the first place, why pay to bring all those troops and equipment to destroy the streets in Washington when you can get plenty of pictures just visiting military bases.
The swamp in Washington just gets bigger as we see unqualified people doing stupid things.
Of course we have the most unqualified person in charge of it all.
Some still think he is responsible for the improving economy, if it can be said to actually be improving.
The issue with the economy both before the financial crisis and since hasn't always been the number of jobs as much as the quality for certain people.
Technology and the global economy has eliminated the need for many jobs that used to require few skills except the ability to turn up.
Because of previous labor shortages and the efforts of unions over the years many of these jobs paid more than the market could actually justify.
They were easily replaced by technology and the global economy.
The jobs that replaced them pay market rates, which is a lot less than what they used to get.
Its one of the reasons that income per capita has been pretty stagnant as high paying jobs turn into lower paying ones. Of course people with the right skills are in demand and doing quite well.
There isn't going to be a miracle resurgence of low skilled highly paid union jobs in any foreseeable future.
They are also lost in the swamp.
It was a bad idea in the first place, why pay to bring all those troops and equipment to destroy the streets in Washington when you can get plenty of pictures just visiting military bases.
The swamp in Washington just gets bigger as we see unqualified people doing stupid things.
Of course we have the most unqualified person in charge of it all.
Some still think he is responsible for the improving economy, if it can be said to actually be improving.
The issue with the economy both before the financial crisis and since hasn't always been the number of jobs as much as the quality for certain people.
Technology and the global economy has eliminated the need for many jobs that used to require few skills except the ability to turn up.
Because of previous labor shortages and the efforts of unions over the years many of these jobs paid more than the market could actually justify.
They were easily replaced by technology and the global economy.
The jobs that replaced them pay market rates, which is a lot less than what they used to get.
Its one of the reasons that income per capita has been pretty stagnant as high paying jobs turn into lower paying ones. Of course people with the right skills are in demand and doing quite well.
There isn't going to be a miracle resurgence of low skilled highly paid union jobs in any foreseeable future.
They are also lost in the swamp.
Thursday, August 16, 2018
Just a Trickle So Far
Economics is generally a fairly slow process but if you are a small business it speeds up a lot.
Much like how some households live paycheck to paycheck many small businesses live on a similar shoestring, with the significant deadlines being when invoices and payrolls become due.
They count on a certain number of sales and certainly if they can secure longer term contracts they have a bit more comfort.
This of course often mean they have promised to deliver product at a set cost for an extended period, counting on stable pricing and other factors.
As the cost of their raw materials increase due to the tariffs, what was once a profitable arrangement can easily turn into an unprofitable one.
So we see reports of businesses closing plants, laying off employees or deciding to move production offshore to reduce costs.
These reports concern the most vulnerable concerns and as they stumble slightly bigger firms soldier on.
The impact of the trade war is insidious since it both makes your cost higher, it makes your ability to sell to certain countries very difficult.
We are in a global economy and there is a lot of competition.
The tariffs are a disadvantage to our domestic producers even for product they sell domestically, since the prices will go up and demand will go down accordingly.
It isn't very much so far and the dontard lives in a fantasy where steel factories have sprung up in every corner of the country employing millions.
That's not true and any jobs created are once again, just a trickle.
Much like how some households live paycheck to paycheck many small businesses live on a similar shoestring, with the significant deadlines being when invoices and payrolls become due.
They count on a certain number of sales and certainly if they can secure longer term contracts they have a bit more comfort.
This of course often mean they have promised to deliver product at a set cost for an extended period, counting on stable pricing and other factors.
As the cost of their raw materials increase due to the tariffs, what was once a profitable arrangement can easily turn into an unprofitable one.
So we see reports of businesses closing plants, laying off employees or deciding to move production offshore to reduce costs.
These reports concern the most vulnerable concerns and as they stumble slightly bigger firms soldier on.
The impact of the trade war is insidious since it both makes your cost higher, it makes your ability to sell to certain countries very difficult.
We are in a global economy and there is a lot of competition.
The tariffs are a disadvantage to our domestic producers even for product they sell domestically, since the prices will go up and demand will go down accordingly.
It isn't very much so far and the dontard lives in a fantasy where steel factories have sprung up in every corner of the country employing millions.
That's not true and any jobs created are once again, just a trickle.
Wednesday, August 15, 2018
Not Thanksgiving
When you hear Turkey and China you may think about Thanksgiving but in this case its just the increasing trade wars.
Turkey has been added primarily it seems because they failed to comply with a request from the dontard about an arrested minister.
The minister may not be guilty but I have no real way of knowing and generally we allow countries to administer their own laws within their own countries.
Turkey is, as far as trade goes, pretty insignificant but of course these sort of things tend to take on more significance because of the politics involved.
There is a long list of countries, a growing list, where we are engaged in sanctions or tariffs to enforce a principle or policy.
This list includes our oldest and strongest allies as well as of course some countries we have had ongoing issue with.
Of course the issues with China may have the most significance but its the accumulation that may end up being the Trojan horse.
As more and more countries decide our policies are irrational and arbitrary, compliance to things like sanctions will decrease.
It should also be noted that to the extent that restrictions are put on using American dollars in transaction in sanctioned countries we may be signaling a move to a different currency.
America has been viewed generally as a stable harbor in a sea of financial turbulence, but that perception is likely to change based on some of these unpredictable and erratic policies.
Time will tell.
Turkey has been added primarily it seems because they failed to comply with a request from the dontard about an arrested minister.
The minister may not be guilty but I have no real way of knowing and generally we allow countries to administer their own laws within their own countries.
Turkey is, as far as trade goes, pretty insignificant but of course these sort of things tend to take on more significance because of the politics involved.
There is a long list of countries, a growing list, where we are engaged in sanctions or tariffs to enforce a principle or policy.
This list includes our oldest and strongest allies as well as of course some countries we have had ongoing issue with.
Of course the issues with China may have the most significance but its the accumulation that may end up being the Trojan horse.
As more and more countries decide our policies are irrational and arbitrary, compliance to things like sanctions will decrease.
It should also be noted that to the extent that restrictions are put on using American dollars in transaction in sanctioned countries we may be signaling a move to a different currency.
America has been viewed generally as a stable harbor in a sea of financial turbulence, but that perception is likely to change based on some of these unpredictable and erratic policies.
Time will tell.
Tuesday, August 14, 2018
Keep the Ghettos?
During the last administration a fair housing rule was put into place requiring cities to build subsidized housing in new areas.
In other words, if you had in fact created a Ghetto you were supposed to build in other area to better integrate communities.
This was opposed naturally enough by those communities who argued, among other things, that it would hurt property values to have low income housing built in their middle income neighborhoods.
Admittedly it is a tough question and you have to decide what is the public interest?
Building more and more housing in neighborhoods that are generally poor continues a cycle of bad schools, drugs, gangs, crime and public assistance.
Building in better neighborhoods has historically had varying degrees of success. Long term though public housing has not generally been a great success in improving quality of life.
One of the reasons for that is where it is successful in helping a family improve their income level, they move out, either because they can afford to or because they are no longer eligible.
So the long term residents become those who have the worst problems with a significant turnover.
Now to the extent people did improve their situation and move on, it is a success, having provided a family with a somewhat secure environment they could afford.
The impact on the neighbor hood is however almost always a negative one.
So objection to such housing isn't simply a racist one, although there is always some of that, it is recognition that such housing tends to deteriorate over time.
It is a legitimately difficult situation and maybe something else is needed.
Rolling back the rule may actually allow more housing to be built since many projects ran into significant opposition. Maybe.
In other words, if you had in fact created a Ghetto you were supposed to build in other area to better integrate communities.
This was opposed naturally enough by those communities who argued, among other things, that it would hurt property values to have low income housing built in their middle income neighborhoods.
Admittedly it is a tough question and you have to decide what is the public interest?
Building more and more housing in neighborhoods that are generally poor continues a cycle of bad schools, drugs, gangs, crime and public assistance.
Building in better neighborhoods has historically had varying degrees of success. Long term though public housing has not generally been a great success in improving quality of life.
One of the reasons for that is where it is successful in helping a family improve their income level, they move out, either because they can afford to or because they are no longer eligible.
So the long term residents become those who have the worst problems with a significant turnover.
Now to the extent people did improve their situation and move on, it is a success, having provided a family with a somewhat secure environment they could afford.
The impact on the neighbor hood is however almost always a negative one.
So objection to such housing isn't simply a racist one, although there is always some of that, it is recognition that such housing tends to deteriorate over time.
It is a legitimately difficult situation and maybe something else is needed.
Rolling back the rule may actually allow more housing to be built since many projects ran into significant opposition. Maybe.
Monday, August 13, 2018
More Economics
There are a lot of people in the world and to a company everyone represents some sort of customer, either a current one, or a potential one.
Customers come in many different categories and some have money to spend and others do not.
Customers in the United States generally have had more money to spend than customers in most other countries, although not as much more as they once did.
Businesses ultimately make money by selling their product and if you make it hard to reach the people who live outside this country they will be at a disadvantage.
If you consider our relationship with China you will note that they sell much more here than we sell there despite the fact that they have a population that exceeds ours by a factor of three.
Its not that hard to explain since despite their population advantage we have a much higher per capita income level, so we can buy imported items and to a large extent they can buy less.
At least at this time.
China has a growing economy as do we, but they clearly have more growth potential than we do as they create more higher paying jobs (higher paying for them), This means that the potential customers in China are turning into real customers at a faster and faster pace.
The United States is a much more mature economy so any increase in consumption has to be tied to increases in income.
To engage in a trade war with China at this time provides other countries, say European ones a great opportunity to exploit that growing market and disadvantages us.
Will a certain percentage of goods we import from China start being produced here? Well unless we can find a different lower cost producer some will, but they will cost more, reducing our buying power.
Will the huge potential Chinese consumer market be filled with American goods? Well it not as likely as it was before we started this trade war.
We all will get to pay more and will help our competitors exploit the Chinese market.
Of course we already conceded much of Asia by withdrawing from the Trans Pacific Trade Pact.
Good economics? Not really.
Customers come in many different categories and some have money to spend and others do not.
Customers in the United States generally have had more money to spend than customers in most other countries, although not as much more as they once did.
Businesses ultimately make money by selling their product and if you make it hard to reach the people who live outside this country they will be at a disadvantage.
If you consider our relationship with China you will note that they sell much more here than we sell there despite the fact that they have a population that exceeds ours by a factor of three.
Its not that hard to explain since despite their population advantage we have a much higher per capita income level, so we can buy imported items and to a large extent they can buy less.
At least at this time.
China has a growing economy as do we, but they clearly have more growth potential than we do as they create more higher paying jobs (higher paying for them), This means that the potential customers in China are turning into real customers at a faster and faster pace.
The United States is a much more mature economy so any increase in consumption has to be tied to increases in income.
To engage in a trade war with China at this time provides other countries, say European ones a great opportunity to exploit that growing market and disadvantages us.
Will a certain percentage of goods we import from China start being produced here? Well unless we can find a different lower cost producer some will, but they will cost more, reducing our buying power.
Will the huge potential Chinese consumer market be filled with American goods? Well it not as likely as it was before we started this trade war.
We all will get to pay more and will help our competitors exploit the Chinese market.
Of course we already conceded much of Asia by withdrawing from the Trans Pacific Trade Pact.
Good economics? Not really.
Sunday, August 12, 2018
Thoughts on Politics
Have you noticed how quickly someone can go from being one of the best to a terrible lowlife in the current administration?
We see an all out attack on Omarosa since she is publishing a tell all book that is by all accounts pretty unfavorable to the dontard.
He attacks his sitting Attorney General for not taking his side without question. Guess he has some protection from his many connections in the republican party.
It seems that many sitting republicans expected their constituents to be excited about that tax cut that mostly went to businesses and wealthy people. This is a particularly clueless group so the amount of reduced taxes was barely noticeable and generally the increase in health care premiums more than offset it.
Most people were unimpressed and of course now the tariffs are starting to add up.
There is little being done in Washington that is going to help most Americans. What would of course help them is better schools, affordable college, health care, child care, better jobs, stable retirements, sound senior benefit programs, affordable housing, less pollution and cheaper goods and services.
There are special interests who make a lot of money over how these things work now and that money talks loudly to politicians who need it to run for office. Money over people seems to be the credo of all politicians generally but maybe republicans also drink the Kool-aid they are selling about how less Government regulation will make things better.
It will certainly allow the to make more money and therefore donate more so we see where the influence lies.
We see an all out attack on Omarosa since she is publishing a tell all book that is by all accounts pretty unfavorable to the dontard.
He attacks his sitting Attorney General for not taking his side without question. Guess he has some protection from his many connections in the republican party.
It seems that many sitting republicans expected their constituents to be excited about that tax cut that mostly went to businesses and wealthy people. This is a particularly clueless group so the amount of reduced taxes was barely noticeable and generally the increase in health care premiums more than offset it.
Most people were unimpressed and of course now the tariffs are starting to add up.
There is little being done in Washington that is going to help most Americans. What would of course help them is better schools, affordable college, health care, child care, better jobs, stable retirements, sound senior benefit programs, affordable housing, less pollution and cheaper goods and services.
There are special interests who make a lot of money over how these things work now and that money talks loudly to politicians who need it to run for office. Money over people seems to be the credo of all politicians generally but maybe republicans also drink the Kool-aid they are selling about how less Government regulation will make things better.
It will certainly allow the to make more money and therefore donate more so we see where the influence lies.
Saturday, August 11, 2018
Protest?
It remains to be seen how the gathering today in Washington DC and other places ends up.
These are people who are inherently both racist and supporters of the current administration who are trying to promote racial purity.
Good luck with that since most DNA tests show very little actual racial purity exists.
In fact the idea of race is probably problematic from a scientific view, we are simply talking about degrees of pigmentation, but this isn't a very intellectual gathering.
Of course skin color is proof of natural selection since it provides some advantage in areas with more sun and disadvantages where the sun is less prevalent.
Much of our views on race were really decided by a short period of history when certain European countries expanded their reach in search of trade and profits and ended up colonizing much of the world.
The reasons they were able to do this have to do with their history of conflict and some technological advances they had made.
The United States exists on land that was once owned by native Americans who we displaced in large part via biological terror. The introduction of Western diseases led to a plague in both Americas that left large areas vulnerable to colonization. Of course the people who settled here were mostly not involved in that, they were simply looking for a better life.
Is there something special about people with European ancestry?
Maybe its just their egos.
These are people who are inherently both racist and supporters of the current administration who are trying to promote racial purity.
Good luck with that since most DNA tests show very little actual racial purity exists.
In fact the idea of race is probably problematic from a scientific view, we are simply talking about degrees of pigmentation, but this isn't a very intellectual gathering.
Of course skin color is proof of natural selection since it provides some advantage in areas with more sun and disadvantages where the sun is less prevalent.
Much of our views on race were really decided by a short period of history when certain European countries expanded their reach in search of trade and profits and ended up colonizing much of the world.
The reasons they were able to do this have to do with their history of conflict and some technological advances they had made.
The United States exists on land that was once owned by native Americans who we displaced in large part via biological terror. The introduction of Western diseases led to a plague in both Americas that left large areas vulnerable to colonization. Of course the people who settled here were mostly not involved in that, they were simply looking for a better life.
Is there something special about people with European ancestry?
Maybe its just their egos.
Friday, August 10, 2018
Painful Thoughts
The National Security team knowing they have an unstable leader, were able to negotiate a NATO agreement without him.
I admire their dedication but it doesn't mean he still won't do something that causes problems.
He wanders about with half formed opinions and few actually facts making decisions that impact the whole world.
He appeals to a certain group of Americans who are simply inward focused and feeling a bit victimized.
These are the white working class Americans who are having trouble with the changes in American society and economics.
They used to be pretty much assured of a decent job and lifestyle as long as they stayed out of trouble.
They are to a large extent people who helped build this country, at least for the period that their families have been here, but many are the descendants of immigrants from the late 19th century and early 20th century.
They are children and grandchildren of our World War 2 heroes and grew up during a period when you could finish high school, maybe serve in the military, and then get a good job in a plant or as a policeman or fireman.
They could get married, buy a house, raise a family and effectively enjoy the American dream, bought for them by their immigrant ancestors.
It started to unravel as technology and globalization eliminate the unskilled jobs and the world started demanding they learn skills or get a college degree.
They want to reverse progress and go back to the state of affairs that in all honesty treated them like robots or automatons. It isn't going to happen but they don't want to have to think.
They really don't and why should they, you can still be presient.
I admire their dedication but it doesn't mean he still won't do something that causes problems.
He wanders about with half formed opinions and few actually facts making decisions that impact the whole world.
He appeals to a certain group of Americans who are simply inward focused and feeling a bit victimized.
These are the white working class Americans who are having trouble with the changes in American society and economics.
They used to be pretty much assured of a decent job and lifestyle as long as they stayed out of trouble.
They are to a large extent people who helped build this country, at least for the period that their families have been here, but many are the descendants of immigrants from the late 19th century and early 20th century.
They are children and grandchildren of our World War 2 heroes and grew up during a period when you could finish high school, maybe serve in the military, and then get a good job in a plant or as a policeman or fireman.
They could get married, buy a house, raise a family and effectively enjoy the American dream, bought for them by their immigrant ancestors.
It started to unravel as technology and globalization eliminate the unskilled jobs and the world started demanding they learn skills or get a college degree.
They want to reverse progress and go back to the state of affairs that in all honesty treated them like robots or automatons. It isn't going to happen but they don't want to have to think.
They really don't and why should they, you can still be presient.
Thursday, August 9, 2018
Economics will win
The trade war is progressing and one thing is clear, no one will win.
In fact the public is pretty much guaranteed to lose with higher prices on more and more things.
The idea that some increase in jobs will make that worthwhile is problematic considering that we have very little surplus labor to fill those jobs.
Reversing the economic forces that takes production to the most efficient supplier is a major component of capitalism and competition and the attempt to interfere in economic forces is unlikely to succeed.
Still we see action and retaliations escalating and we are also seeing some of the fallout as companies lose profits and sales and costs rise.
The one industry which was most in favor of this was the steel industry and the price of steel has risen dramatically.
American producers freed from competitive forces have raised prices on items already in production.
This is just additional profits and higher prices will by the laws of economics reduce demand, reducing jobs in general.
In fact as prices go up for other items the reduced demand will have exactly the opposite impact that the dontard expected.
No surprise there.
In fact the public is pretty much guaranteed to lose with higher prices on more and more things.
The idea that some increase in jobs will make that worthwhile is problematic considering that we have very little surplus labor to fill those jobs.
Reversing the economic forces that takes production to the most efficient supplier is a major component of capitalism and competition and the attempt to interfere in economic forces is unlikely to succeed.
Still we see action and retaliations escalating and we are also seeing some of the fallout as companies lose profits and sales and costs rise.
The one industry which was most in favor of this was the steel industry and the price of steel has risen dramatically.
American producers freed from competitive forces have raised prices on items already in production.
This is just additional profits and higher prices will by the laws of economics reduce demand, reducing jobs in general.
In fact as prices go up for other items the reduced demand will have exactly the opposite impact that the dontard expected.
No surprise there.
Wednesday, August 8, 2018
Close One
The special election in Ohio is still too close to call officially, although it appears the Republican is likely to prevail, although not certain.
That was what everyone expected at the start but they didn't originally think it would even be close, but it ended in almost a dead heat.
Its even possible that the rally by the dontard got a few thousand extra votes which would be the margin of victory if it holds.
No matter, they get to do it again in November, along with all the other congressional races.
You can't really say what is going to happen until it actually happens, 2016 showed us that, but all the signs so far point to a Democratic resurgence.
There is almost always a gain in the midterm after a Presidential election by the losing party, the question is how much. It looks like it might be very big indeed.
Considering the damage done by the dontard's policies to equality and decency, it is important that the message needs to be clear, Americans are not going into a shell and reversing the progress in human rights we have made in this country.
We recognize the right of everyone to enjoy the fundamental rights this country was founded on.
We need to reject the hate.
That was what everyone expected at the start but they didn't originally think it would even be close, but it ended in almost a dead heat.
Its even possible that the rally by the dontard got a few thousand extra votes which would be the margin of victory if it holds.
No matter, they get to do it again in November, along with all the other congressional races.
You can't really say what is going to happen until it actually happens, 2016 showed us that, but all the signs so far point to a Democratic resurgence.
There is almost always a gain in the midterm after a Presidential election by the losing party, the question is how much. It looks like it might be very big indeed.
Considering the damage done by the dontard's policies to equality and decency, it is important that the message needs to be clear, Americans are not going into a shell and reversing the progress in human rights we have made in this country.
We recognize the right of everyone to enjoy the fundamental rights this country was founded on.
We need to reject the hate.
Tuesday, August 7, 2018
Immigration
This is a country that was built by immigrants and which still needs immigrants to grow and prosper.
Immigrants come here for all sorts of reasons, some who are professional people come to make much more money in say our medical system then they could at home, others because of a particular job but the majority come here with limited skills hoping to build a better life for themselves and their children.
Some of course flee oppression or war and come here for a safe refuge.
There are of course some who try to come here for sinister reasons, either as terrorists or possibly spies for a foreign power or members of a criminal group who we should of course try to identify and prevent.
There's an old adage about throwing out the baby with the bathwater and clearly the current administration attitude towards immigrants leans to that approach.
They are now interpreting our laws in a way that is going to make it harder to obtain a green card or become a citizen.
Our rules generally require applicants to be self sufficient, and it makes sense we wouldn't want to have people who came here and simply depended on Government assistance.
But consider a scenario where someone comes here, gets a job and at some point gets laid off, collects the unemployment insurance he paid into for a few weeks before he lands another job.
Years later his application for citizenship and his green card status are questioned because he had accepted public support.
Or someone who complies with the ACA and signed up for the insurance and qualified for a Government subsidy under the rules. His status could also be doubtful.
These are hard working people, struggling to support their families but despite their clean records and desire to be good citizens we are looking for anyway to deny them and possibly force them out of the country.
It is shameful. It denies our history and our promise written on the Statue of Liberty.
Immigrants come here for all sorts of reasons, some who are professional people come to make much more money in say our medical system then they could at home, others because of a particular job but the majority come here with limited skills hoping to build a better life for themselves and their children.
Some of course flee oppression or war and come here for a safe refuge.
There are of course some who try to come here for sinister reasons, either as terrorists or possibly spies for a foreign power or members of a criminal group who we should of course try to identify and prevent.
There's an old adage about throwing out the baby with the bathwater and clearly the current administration attitude towards immigrants leans to that approach.
They are now interpreting our laws in a way that is going to make it harder to obtain a green card or become a citizen.
Our rules generally require applicants to be self sufficient, and it makes sense we wouldn't want to have people who came here and simply depended on Government assistance.
But consider a scenario where someone comes here, gets a job and at some point gets laid off, collects the unemployment insurance he paid into for a few weeks before he lands another job.
Years later his application for citizenship and his green card status are questioned because he had accepted public support.
Or someone who complies with the ACA and signed up for the insurance and qualified for a Government subsidy under the rules. His status could also be doubtful.
These are hard working people, struggling to support their families but despite their clean records and desire to be good citizens we are looking for anyway to deny them and possibly force them out of the country.
It is shameful. It denies our history and our promise written on the Statue of Liberty.
Monday, August 6, 2018
Ignoring History
If you were to go back in time about 10 years or a little more you would have possibly noticed many Americans living off the rising equity in their homes. In fact this trend had become so prevalent that even the chairmen of the fed seemed to suggest it at one point.
Homes were the stable foundation of the American dream and it was widely believed that they would only increase in value.
Of course it was a house of cards where the whole structure was supported by easy credit and lower than market interest rates. It seemed like easy money and it allowed consumers to convert home equity into new cars, new appliances, college tuition with the expectation that they would be able to pay everything with the growth in equity, not the income from their jobs.
Construction was booming, credit was easy, and life was good.
Until it wasn't and when it turned ugly it really turned ugly.
Interest rates rose a bit, demand slumped a bit and suddenly house prices took a dip. It didn't seem like a big deal at first, of course the housing market has some corrections, but the bubble was fully inflated with no slack available.
As teaser rates expired and suddenly what was owed was more than could be refinanced we started to see foreclosures and mortgage defaults.
This led to defaults in bonds that were based on complicated derivatives but which were ultimately dependent on the worst sub-prime mortgages.
Large financial institutions had obligations they couldn't meet, credit got tight, construction and buying ground to a halt and we saw a potential depression that would rival the great one of the 30s.
We managed to avoid that using easy money and some economic stimulus to boost the economy while adding some regulations to try to avoid a similar situation in the future.
It worked but the easy money and stimulus were supposed to be short term remedies not a way of life.
Still the economy recovered at a slower pace than it had in some previous recessions but it recovered and some long term trends in the American economic structure hindered it a bit.
We now are trying to recreate the period of unsupportable growth via tax stimuli and allowing the financial institutions to resume their reckless practices.
We see the national deficit and debt increasing at record paces, but the one thing that is still true as always.
If you ignore history, you are doomed to repeat it.
Homes were the stable foundation of the American dream and it was widely believed that they would only increase in value.
Of course it was a house of cards where the whole structure was supported by easy credit and lower than market interest rates. It seemed like easy money and it allowed consumers to convert home equity into new cars, new appliances, college tuition with the expectation that they would be able to pay everything with the growth in equity, not the income from their jobs.
Construction was booming, credit was easy, and life was good.
Until it wasn't and when it turned ugly it really turned ugly.
Interest rates rose a bit, demand slumped a bit and suddenly house prices took a dip. It didn't seem like a big deal at first, of course the housing market has some corrections, but the bubble was fully inflated with no slack available.
As teaser rates expired and suddenly what was owed was more than could be refinanced we started to see foreclosures and mortgage defaults.
This led to defaults in bonds that were based on complicated derivatives but which were ultimately dependent on the worst sub-prime mortgages.
Large financial institutions had obligations they couldn't meet, credit got tight, construction and buying ground to a halt and we saw a potential depression that would rival the great one of the 30s.
We managed to avoid that using easy money and some economic stimulus to boost the economy while adding some regulations to try to avoid a similar situation in the future.
It worked but the easy money and stimulus were supposed to be short term remedies not a way of life.
Still the economy recovered at a slower pace than it had in some previous recessions but it recovered and some long term trends in the American economic structure hindered it a bit.
We now are trying to recreate the period of unsupportable growth via tax stimuli and allowing the financial institutions to resume their reckless practices.
We see the national deficit and debt increasing at record paces, but the one thing that is still true as always.
If you ignore history, you are doomed to repeat it.
Sunday, August 5, 2018
Sunday Thoughts
Last night the dontard displayed his racist tendencies again in an attack on Maxine Waters. He can certainly disagree with her, but his comments had clear racist overtones, catering to his basest instincts and is base.
He keeps taking credit for the economy which has simply continued the Obama trends although with higher deficits and developing headwinds. He lives in a fantasy world of new steel mills and coal mines.
He is now in a feud with his major donor base who oppose his tariffs. His base is mostly so called republicans, but its a party that is very different nowadays, defined by anti abortion, pro gun, anti immigrant, anti government and minority suppression. His support among that group is not going to waver.
The good news is that most Americans do not share those views. The bad news is that many progressive people don't feel like their vote means anything.
A lot of people in this country are clearly disillusioned with politics as usual. The political establishments are controlled by the old politicians although we are seeing some changes happening. We need a clear progressive agenda and strong progressive candidates who will fight for things like universal heath care, secure pensions, income equality, equal opportunity and equal education.
People who have been successful are entitled to enjoy the good things in life, but everyone is entitled to have equal access to health, education and equality.
They need to be strongly in support of a clean environment and less pollution of all types, with efforts to reduce and reverse environmental damage.
We have shown we can do this as many of our waterways and the air we breathe have improved greatly since the clean air and water act.
Progress to a future where we have a sustainable society where people can achieve based on hard work and merit and our neediest are not ignored is the goal.
Its simple enough, treat everyone equally.
He keeps taking credit for the economy which has simply continued the Obama trends although with higher deficits and developing headwinds. He lives in a fantasy world of new steel mills and coal mines.
He is now in a feud with his major donor base who oppose his tariffs. His base is mostly so called republicans, but its a party that is very different nowadays, defined by anti abortion, pro gun, anti immigrant, anti government and minority suppression. His support among that group is not going to waver.
The good news is that most Americans do not share those views. The bad news is that many progressive people don't feel like their vote means anything.
A lot of people in this country are clearly disillusioned with politics as usual. The political establishments are controlled by the old politicians although we are seeing some changes happening. We need a clear progressive agenda and strong progressive candidates who will fight for things like universal heath care, secure pensions, income equality, equal opportunity and equal education.
People who have been successful are entitled to enjoy the good things in life, but everyone is entitled to have equal access to health, education and equality.
They need to be strongly in support of a clean environment and less pollution of all types, with efforts to reduce and reverse environmental damage.
We have shown we can do this as many of our waterways and the air we breathe have improved greatly since the clean air and water act.
Progress to a future where we have a sustainable society where people can achieve based on hard work and merit and our neediest are not ignored is the goal.
Its simple enough, treat everyone equally.
Saturday, August 4, 2018
Fuel Economy Standards
Using more gasoline to power your car without any extra performance simply costs money and contributes to air pollution.
It does of course benefit oil producers who get to sell you more oil and make more profit.
Vehicles use the public roadways and pollute the air we all breathe, whether we drive one or not.
Requiring these vehicles, no matter what weight class to improve fuel economy has been something that protects the air, protects consumers, encourages auto research.
It reduces the demand for oil, reducing air pollution and reducing oil demand, thereby lowering prices.
So on one hand we have public benefit, earth benefit, consumer benefit.
On the other hand we have oil profits.
We know what side the current administration is on, they eliminated future targets.
These were not targets that the auto industry opposed, it was clearly within their technological ability.
They may not bother now since it will save some research and design effort.
How much will this decision impact the climate?
Well as a percentage, not all that much, but it has a negative impact when we should be reducing the amount of carbon we emit.
Will it prop up oil prices and allow the oil companies to make more money?
Yes, it will.
It does of course benefit oil producers who get to sell you more oil and make more profit.
Vehicles use the public roadways and pollute the air we all breathe, whether we drive one or not.
Requiring these vehicles, no matter what weight class to improve fuel economy has been something that protects the air, protects consumers, encourages auto research.
It reduces the demand for oil, reducing air pollution and reducing oil demand, thereby lowering prices.
So on one hand we have public benefit, earth benefit, consumer benefit.
On the other hand we have oil profits.
We know what side the current administration is on, they eliminated future targets.
These were not targets that the auto industry opposed, it was clearly within their technological ability.
They may not bother now since it will save some research and design effort.
How much will this decision impact the climate?
Well as a percentage, not all that much, but it has a negative impact when we should be reducing the amount of carbon we emit.
Will it prop up oil prices and allow the oil companies to make more money?
Yes, it will.
Friday, August 3, 2018
Socialism
Socialism has been one of the most abused words in the English language, partly because it has become closely associated with communism.
However the simplest definition of socialism is the idea that society as a whole should be the primary concern of our policies.
Capitalism, another word for individualism, focuses on the benefit to the individual instead of the group.
It should also be noted that it doesn't have to be an all or nothing situation.
Every society and Government has to be concerned with society as a whole, or it wouldn't function.
The interests of the individual and the interests of society are not generally in conflict, however at times they are.
Generally it involves control of resources and how those resources are distributed.
In general we are a country that believe in capitalism in that we respect individual property and the right to amass wealth.
The general argument here is that it promotes progress and therefore ultimately better opportunities for all.
Wealth is in fact a proven motivator, but of course on might wonder if it is the only one.
The other issue concerns social welfare, a non-economic form of socialism.
Should health care be provided to all or just a few?
We see great disparities in wealth in this country and we see great disparities in quality of life.
Should some of our elderly be forced to scrape by, eating cat food to save a few pennies, unable to afford medication or should society take care of them?
Many of us who support economic rewards also feel that we need to improve our social welfare programs.
Its recognition that all people are created equal, although not so much in America.
However the simplest definition of socialism is the idea that society as a whole should be the primary concern of our policies.
Capitalism, another word for individualism, focuses on the benefit to the individual instead of the group.
It should also be noted that it doesn't have to be an all or nothing situation.
Every society and Government has to be concerned with society as a whole, or it wouldn't function.
The interests of the individual and the interests of society are not generally in conflict, however at times they are.
Generally it involves control of resources and how those resources are distributed.
In general we are a country that believe in capitalism in that we respect individual property and the right to amass wealth.
The general argument here is that it promotes progress and therefore ultimately better opportunities for all.
Wealth is in fact a proven motivator, but of course on might wonder if it is the only one.
The other issue concerns social welfare, a non-economic form of socialism.
Should health care be provided to all or just a few?
We see great disparities in wealth in this country and we see great disparities in quality of life.
Should some of our elderly be forced to scrape by, eating cat food to save a few pennies, unable to afford medication or should society take care of them?
Many of us who support economic rewards also feel that we need to improve our social welfare programs.
Its recognition that all people are created equal, although not so much in America.
Thursday, August 2, 2018
Digging up the Past
We live in a world where people are eager to dig up anything they can about certain people, or rather targets.
We always did this sort of thing on political candidates, its called vetting, but now we find a more random sort of research, although the amount of work required usually involves picking targets.
If you are in the public spotlight and for any number of reasons someone targets you, every thing you ever said on social media is likely to be scrutinized looking for anything that could be construed negatively.
Now, suppose someone has been somewhat active on social media and has posted hundreds or maybe even thousands of times. If 99.99% of those are non-offensive but that .01% is bad enough, you can face a public scandal and have to explain yourself, even if the yourself your explaining was years ago.
There is no consideration of the fact that this person may have posted something when he was angry, tired, inebriated, or any other factor, there is the post, standing alone accusing the poster of inappropriate behavior.
Of course everyone has become more aware of social media now but years ago people treated it a little bit like private chat, or didn't consider long term consequences.
Of course some posts are worse than others, but we are don't seem to be particularly discriminating when we see these posts exposed.
We live in a world where digging up dirt can get rewarded, or at least get some attention, and everybody is under a movable spotlight.
There are actual bad people out there saying and doing bad things without trying to condemn someone for that one tweet sent out when they were pissed off years ago.
We always did this sort of thing on political candidates, its called vetting, but now we find a more random sort of research, although the amount of work required usually involves picking targets.
If you are in the public spotlight and for any number of reasons someone targets you, every thing you ever said on social media is likely to be scrutinized looking for anything that could be construed negatively.
Now, suppose someone has been somewhat active on social media and has posted hundreds or maybe even thousands of times. If 99.99% of those are non-offensive but that .01% is bad enough, you can face a public scandal and have to explain yourself, even if the yourself your explaining was years ago.
There is no consideration of the fact that this person may have posted something when he was angry, tired, inebriated, or any other factor, there is the post, standing alone accusing the poster of inappropriate behavior.
Of course everyone has become more aware of social media now but years ago people treated it a little bit like private chat, or didn't consider long term consequences.
Of course some posts are worse than others, but we are don't seem to be particularly discriminating when we see these posts exposed.
We live in a world where digging up dirt can get rewarded, or at least get some attention, and everybody is under a movable spotlight.
There are actual bad people out there saying and doing bad things without trying to condemn someone for that one tweet sent out when they were pissed off years ago.
Wednesday, August 1, 2018
No Pay Health Insurance
They are going to offer people short term health insurance that doesn't cover very much to lure them away from the ACA.
Since we've eliminated the individual mandate, the people signing up for these will likely be actually looking for insurance, and depending on the individual policies they might get a bit of catastrophic coverage.
We know however that these plans will be offered by companies that are really interested in making quick profits, not providing meaningful coverage, so it going to be buyer's beware.
Policies like these were one of the things that was wrong with the health insurance industry so of course we are bringing them back.
They generally provide coverage in a very limited range, high deductibles and no free preventive care and low coverage maximums.
Of course anyone opting for these plans is effectively gambling and for some people they may actually be worthwhile.
It has a bigger consequence for the overall insurance pool since the best way to reduce premiums for everyone is to include everyone in the pool.
As we carve out young healthy people, we will see premiums rise as it increases the overall risk of he remaining plans.
Since much of this increase is paid by the Government subsidies, it impacts our taxes, or our deficit in a more indirect way.
Until we join the rest of the civilized world in providing all our people with adequate, complete health care we will see strategies like these played out.
Competition is medical services has been proven time and again to not work, and we see a system where profits are more important than health.
That's simply wrong.
Since we've eliminated the individual mandate, the people signing up for these will likely be actually looking for insurance, and depending on the individual policies they might get a bit of catastrophic coverage.
We know however that these plans will be offered by companies that are really interested in making quick profits, not providing meaningful coverage, so it going to be buyer's beware.
Policies like these were one of the things that was wrong with the health insurance industry so of course we are bringing them back.
They generally provide coverage in a very limited range, high deductibles and no free preventive care and low coverage maximums.
Of course anyone opting for these plans is effectively gambling and for some people they may actually be worthwhile.
It has a bigger consequence for the overall insurance pool since the best way to reduce premiums for everyone is to include everyone in the pool.
As we carve out young healthy people, we will see premiums rise as it increases the overall risk of he remaining plans.
Since much of this increase is paid by the Government subsidies, it impacts our taxes, or our deficit in a more indirect way.
Until we join the rest of the civilized world in providing all our people with adequate, complete health care we will see strategies like these played out.
Competition is medical services has been proven time and again to not work, and we see a system where profits are more important than health.
That's simply wrong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)