As I reminded my conservative blogger friends who were applauding the latter – 'When the communists show up to protest the Nazis, you’re supposed to pray for an asteroid, not pick a favourite.'
Mao's Great Leap to Famine - NYTimes.com
Political and Public Policy. Political discussions and politics. A discussion and lots of very pointed editorial comments on doings 'round the world; but especially in the USA.
As I reminded my conservative blogger friends who were applauding the latter – 'When the communists show up to protest the Nazis, you’re supposed to pray for an asteroid, not pick a favourite.'
And this anger – again, contrary to the general understanding in Britain – is not new: it goes all the way back to the Bush presidency. It was widely known in Europe that the American Left hated George Bush (and even more, Dick Cheney) because of his military adventurism. What was less understood was that the Right disliked him almost as much for selling the pass over government spending, bailing out the banks, and failing to keep faith with the fundamental Republican principle of containing the power of central government.
Either act like adults charged with the responsible management of this country, instead of drunken teenagers with mom’s credit card, or we will un-elect you at the first opportunity.
Having made my point, I trust, I'll now slip out of my snark suit and share a little secret with you. The real story of bigotry and intolerance is the fact that it lives and thrives on the left. As a gay woman who spent most of her adult life pushing the cart for liberal causes with liberal friends in a liberal city, I found that sexism, racism and homophobia are staples in the liberal world. The huge irony is liberals spend every ounce of energy promoting the notion that they are the banner carriers of individualism and personal freedom, yet the hammer comes down on anyone who dares not to conform to, or who dissents even in part from, the liberal agenda.
When asked by how much has income per person in the United States changed since 1950 (after adjusting for inflation) the median student said an increase of 25%. Actual rate an increase of about 248%, thus the median student was off by a factor of 10.
Pre-kindergarten boys with mental abilities three or four standard deviations above the mean have astonishing talents. But as Terry Neu, an expert on gifted boys, told me, sitting still for an extended period of time is not one of them.
New cancer trend statistics being released today are heartening. Eurekalert headline announcing the new cancer stats reads: "Cancer Deaths Continue to Drop." Which is happily quite true, but actually misses the even more amazing fact that "Cancer Incidence Rates Continue to Drop."
"If Mr. Obama follows Dean Edley’s advice, low-skilled workers’ wages will indeed change – specifically, the wages for many of these workers will fall from their current levels (say, $7.25 per hour) to $0 per hour. Firms seeking government contracts will replace low-skilled workers with machines; hire fewer such workers and work them harder; or use a smaller number of higher-skilled workers to perform tasks previously performed by a larger number of low-skilled workers."
"Coast Guard will no longer post actual mariner examination questions on the NMC website. Effective July 12, 2010, the full set of deck and engineering questions and answers will be removed from the NMC Website"
Berwick is certainly qualified to head a national health care system (for a pro-Berwick piece see the Washington Post). He's also a realist about what that implies. A few years ago he said that sick people tend to be poorer, and poor people tend to be sicker, and if you want an excellent, humane, and rational health care system it is going to be redistributive. It has to be. An excellent national health care system requires redistributing the wealth.
Of course that's true. It's also the last thing Obama wants debated this summer and fall.
"I'll believe it's an emergency when people who say it's an emergency start acting like it's an emergency."
Why does neither the U.S. government nor U.S. energy companies have on hand the cleanup technology available in Europe? Ironically, the superior European technology runs afoul of U.S. environmental rules. The voracious Dutch vessels, for example, continuously suck up vast quantities of oily water, extract most of the oil and then spit overboard vast quantities of nearly oil-free water. Nearly oil-free isn't good enough for the U.S. regulators, who have a standard of 15 parts per million -- if water isn't at least 99.9985% pure, it may not be returned to the Gulf of Mexico.
"There's actually nothing in the story to justify the Times headline writer's claim that Palmetto State Republicans had "biases" to "buck" in order to nominate Haley and Scott, but unbucked biases are not exactly uncommon on major newspaper staffs."
Barack Obama, who has in recent days turned haplessness into an art form, played a masterstroke today, making perhaps the canniest, wiliest, even wisest decision of his generally rudderless presidency. I refer, of course, to his appointment of David Petraeus to the Afghan war command, in place of the Rolling-Stoned Stanley McChrystal. In doing so, Obama has, at a stroke, taken Petraeus out of the 2012 presidential race.
Clearly our government has promised a lot of public medical care, as well as much spending on pensions both for future Social Security recipients and for retired public employees. Few elected officials want to crusade for higher taxes. But our aging population and public medical spending that grows faster than the rest of the economy are nothing new to 2010.
I think I have figured it out. If you read the Rolling Stone article carefully, you can see that the reporter, Michael Hastings, has woven three stories together. One story is the story of General McChrystal trying to keep up morale in a tough war with his troops thinking he is too worried about civilian casualties and he is forcing them to accept too many risks as consequence. This is also the story of McChrystal feeling under time pressure from Washington. I bet this is the story Hastings pitched to McChrystal's staff and the story McChrystal thought was being reported. It is, indeed, sprinkled throughout the Rolling Stone article, and in this thread McChyrstal is pretty careful about what he says and generally comes off pretty well.
The second story is Hastings's rather tendentious reporting on what McChrystal's enemies and critics say against him -- their complaints, and their doubts about the war. While assessing reporter's motivations is always a dodgy business, I suspect that this is the story Hastings pitched to his editor. The whole thing has the feel of a hungry guy hoping to hunt a big trophy kill: taking down a four-star hero and showing that his war plan (note how Hastings describes the strategy as McChrystal's, not the president's) is fatally flawed and doomed to failure.
If those were the only two stories in the article, people would only be talking about the Rolling Stone cover. The problem for McChrystal is that there is a third story woven through the article. This is the story of McChrystal and his staff on an unexpected layover in Paris when a plane is grounded because of the volcano. This part of the story has a "weekend in Vegas" feel to it. The staff get drunk. The French get dissed. Holbrooke gets dissed. McChrystal and his staff joke about how they would answer a tough question about Vice President Biden's theories about the war. Without having access to Hastings' notes, I can't be sure, but I am willing to wager that 95 percent of the really objectionable material comes from that layover.
This third story was an accident - serendipity for the reporter and a train-wreck for McChrystal. The underlying facts are not surprising or accidental at all. Anyone who has interacted with the military, especially the special ops community from which McChrystal hails, will recognize the swagger. More to the point, we have known for over a year that Obama's national security team is plagued with serious internal bickering and that many of the principals, and especially the staffs, do not like each other. In short, it is not surprising that they talked this way. The only surprising bit is that McChrystal and his staff talked this way in front of a reporter, though less surprising when you factor in the "sailors on unexpected shore leave" aspect.
Now, of course, none of this excuses McChrystal's behavior, nor the more egregious behavior and comments of his staff. There is no "what happens in Paris, stays in Paris exception" to civil-military relations. Clearly, he allowed an unhealthy command climate to percolate and then bubble to the surface in unguarded moments. And it was reckless in the extreme to talk this way in front of a reporter who clearly was on a scalp-hunt...
1. The degree of success usually realized in IA coordination is directly proportionate to the distance from the Beltway.
2. Consensus building is overrated. Successful interagency coordination requires a lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way approach.
3. Personalities trump bureaucracies and formal chains of command. If your initiative isn't progressing due to a certain personality, go around, over, or through them.
4. When an agency rep asks "why is DoD doing that?" it really means -- stay off our turf because you are embarrassing my agency, even though we aren't competent or willing to do what we were chartered/authorized/funded to do.
5. Never forget that DoD is always the 800 pound gorilla in the room. Always.
The Archbishop’s Pentecost letter is the public half of a campaign to rein in the Episcopal Church, The Church of England Newspaper has learned, and follows a private letter delivered to Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori asking her to consider withdrawing from active participation on the Standing Committee of the Anglican Communion.
If you listen to certain politicians and talking heads you might get the impression that the federal fiscal sky is falling. Unfortunately, unlike Chicken Little, they may be right.
The Treasury Department recently issued the 2009 financial report of the United States government. Whereas there is lots of talk in Congress and in the press about the federal budget, the annual report was released to near silence. That’s too bad, not only because the annual report is untainted by creative accounting but also because its message is too important to ignore.
That message is that the sky is indeed falling.
voters consistently say they'd rather cut spending than raise taxes to reduce the deficit. But when you ask them what they want to cut, the only program there is strong support for cutting is foreign aid . . . which is like trying to pay off your credit cards by slashing your chewing gum budget.
Economists Carmen Reinhart of the University of Maryland and Kenneth Rogoff of Harvard University have recently shown that a 90 percent debt-to-GDP ratio usually touches off a crisis.
This year, the debt will reach 63 percent of GDP, a ratio that has ignited crises in smaller wealthy nations. Fiscal crises gripped Canada, Denmark, Sweden, Finland and Ireland when their debts were below where the United States is shortly headed.
By the way, I applaud the authors for their "stones" in writing the last paragraph of the paper, such as:
The conservative emphasis on family, traditional values and gender roles, and prolife anti-abortion sentiments all stress investment in children – for both men and women. Conservative policies mirror the genetic interests of women, writ large. They attempt to promote paternal investment in offspring. Further, they stress investment in conceived offspring – “a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.” In short, Conservative policies support the genetic fitness of women by capitalizing on each pregnancy, reducing male promiscuity, and increasing paternal investment in children. Such policies may impinge on the freedom of parents’ immediate offspring, but they increase the expected number of grandchildren via daughters.
I'm not sure that's true as stated, but it does deserve further debate.
A middle class family of four making $66,370 will be forced to pay $5,243 per year for insurance. After basic necessities, this leaves them with $8,307 in discretionary income — out of which they would have to cover clothing, credit card and other debt, child care and education costs, in addition to $5,882 in annual out-of-pocket medical expenses for which families will be responsible. Many families who are already struggling to get by would be better off saving the $5,243 in insurance costs and paying their medical expenses directly, rather than being forced to by coverage they can’t afford the co-pays on.
Proposed legislation that would require the firing of federal employees with outstanding IRS tax liens drew a lot of criticism at a March 17 hearing on the bill before the House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on the Federal Workforce.
Under the bill, any fed with an outstanding personal tax debt that has triggered a wage or property lien would be subject to termination. Prospective employees with tax liens would similarly be banned from federal employment.
Among those who took shots at the bill, H.R. 4735, was National Treasury Employees Union President Colleen Kelley, who said the bill would deny federal employees the due process rights enjoyed by other taxpayers. Kelley also noted that the issuance of a lien, which under the proposed measure could get a fed fired, is not necessarily a final determination of tax liability.
She also pointed out another obvious shortcoming—if anything, the bill would hinder feds from repaying those back taxes. “We believe that terminating their employment or preventing them from obtaining gainful employment would only serve to worsen their financial situation and lessen their ability to repay,” Kelley said.
J. Ward Morrow, American Federation of Government Employees assistant general counsel for legislation, concurred. “If an individual is unemployed, they will be in default for a far longer period of time and have less incentive to pay any payments,” Morrow said. “To erect a permanent barrier to any federal employment would be counter to the desire to get the debt paid.”
There are also potential technical problems with the proposed bill introduced by Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah. Christopher Rizek, a tax expert and adjunct professor at the Georgetown University Law Center, said that credit and loss carryovers can erase existing tax liabilities. And, in certain instances, he said, litigation over the existence or amount of a tax liability may even be occurring at the time the IRS files an outstanding assessment or tax lien.
To see more, go to: http://tinyurl.com/ylnco4m.
In the original Sudden Acceleration Incident craze that afflicted America in the late eighties, the National Highway Safety Transportation Administration eventually ruled that the problem was "pedal misapplication", aka stepping on the gas when you meant to step on the brake. These incidents were highly correlated with three things: being elderly, being short, and parking (or leaving a parking space). The elderly are more prone to the sort of neuronal misfiring described in yesterday's New York Times. Shorter people have to hunt more for the pedals. And starting up from a complete stop is the most likely time to press the wrong pedal.
1. Being elderly
2. Parking
3. Being short
Millennials could become the chump generation. They could suffer for their elders' economic sins, particularly the failure to confront the predictable costs of baby boomers' retirement. This poses a question. In 2008, Millennials voted 2 to 1 for Barack Obama; in surveys, they say they're more disposed than older Americans to big and activist government. Their ardor for Obama is already cooling. Will higher taxes dim their enthusiasm for government?
Michael Douglas a supporter of nuclear power?The China Syndrome No More? - Political Punch
Yes, the star and producer of The
China Syndrome -- released less than two weeks before the incident at Three Mile Island -- told NPR that he "was against nuclear power for a long time, but have dealt with the realities of global warming, and what the alternatives are....I do support nuclear power now. I wish there were other alternatives, but I don't think there are."
The president is also pushing new nukes -- and a founder of Greenpeace, too.
The Story the New York Times Won't Touch | The Big Money
On February 1, 2010, the Obama Administration submitted its FY2011 budget to Congress, thereby kicking off the year-long budget deliberations for the Federal government, including the key maritime agencies, the Maritime Administration (MARAD), and the Coast Guard.
The Administration’s budget highlights the difficult decisions that have to be made if the deficits are to be brought under control, and if the Administration is to succeed in getting its requested three-year freeze on discretionary spending. The President had fenced off the defense, national security, and VA budgets from this freeze, but this does not mean that the President did not intend to apply a scalpel to programs within these budget areas, including programs housed at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
The President’s budget does not include funding for two new maritime programs that Congress authorized in last year’s Department of Defense Authorization Act (P.L. 111-84), the maritime highway grants program (also called short sea shipping), and the port infrastructure grants program. In fact, these new programs were to be administered by MARAD but are not mentioned in the budget documents. If the maritime and ports community ever want to get these programs funded, they will have to redouble their efforts on the Hill. The American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA) has already lamented the lack of funding for maritime highway grants as well as the decline in funding for port security grants from the $400 million authorized level to the $300 million budget request. (AAPA press release, February 1, 2010, at www.aapa-ports.org.)
As for the rest of the MARAD budget, it reflects an overall decline of more than $10 million in discretionary spending from the FY2010 enacted levels. However, this does include a total of $100 million for the Merchant Marine Academy at King’s Point, New York, including $31 million for capital improvements at this aging academy. The state maritime academies take a relatively small hit in the President’s budget, reduced from $18 million to $15 million. The Administration continues to zero fund the title XI loan guarantee program to finance commercial shipbuilding at U.S. shipyards (aside from $3.7 million to administer existing loans).
Jobs legislation is moving on a parallel track to the budget, and is expected to be finished well before the FY2011 appropriations bills are enacted. In the Jobs for Main Street Act, 2010, passed by the House in 2009, $100 million is authorized for title XI loan guarantees. As of this writing, the Senate has not yet decided what to include in its Jobs bill, or bills as the case may be.
The MARAD budget also zeroes out any new funds for the Small Shipyard Grant Program that was funded at $100 million in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (popularly called the stimulus bill). The grant program received $15 million in the FY2010 enacted budget. This small, but very popular, grants program has not met with the favor of the Administration and will have to be encouraged from Capitol Hill if it is to remain on the books and actively helping small U.S. yards.
Finally, the Obama budget requests $174 million for the Maritime Security Program (MSP) which defrays the cost of keeping 90 ships under the U.S. flag for deployment in times of war and national emergency. This is a decline of $13 million from the FY2010 enacted budget for MSP.
The FY2011 budget request for the Coast Guard (now housed in DHS) reflects what sources at DHS have called “difficult tradeoffs” between men and women and machine. (Reported in CQ.com on February 1, 2010.) The President’s budget places a priority on recapitalization of the Coast Guard’s aging assets, such as cutters, aircraft, boats, and C4ISR. A total of $538 million is allocated to construct the 5th National Security Cutter and $240 million to construct four more Fast Response Cutters. But, the cost for procuring these assets is a reduction of 1,100 personnel billets.
The personnel cuts are taken by decommissioning five Maritime Safety and Security Teams (MSSTs) and deploying the remaining seven MSSTs regionally to protect the most critical U.S. ports. Other reductions are derived from discontinuing two seasonal Coast Guard Air Facilities at Muskegon, MI, and Waukegan, IL. Finally, a reduction in several hundred billets is associated with decommissioning four High Endurance Cutters being replaced by the new National Security Cutters.
We have already heard complaints from Republican Members of Congress who are displeased with the Coast Guard cuts. For example, Congressman Hal Rogers (R-KY), Ranking Member of the House Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee, has called these reductions in “the ranks of our brave Coast Guard personnel” both “dangerous [and] indefensible”. (See www.halrogers.house.gov.)
It remains to be seen whether Democratic Members of Congress will toe the Administration’s line or continue to support their favorite programs and agencies. If the programs can be justified on national security lines and on the basis of creating more jobs for American workers, Congress will probably side with national security and jobs.
"...materials that were released this morning do not provide sufficient detail on all of the provisions. Therefore, CBO cannot provide a cost estimate for the proposal..."
From Dr Arnold Kling: "The theory is that there is a discrepancy between trends in knowledge and power. Power in the United States is remarkably concentrated. We are creating increasingly specialized knowledge, which means that the information needed to make good decisions is located outside of Washington, D.C. And yet we have a central government attempting to do for 300 million people what governments in places like Singapore, Hong Kong, Denmark, and Switzerland do for many fewer people.
I do not wish to contend that government is better in those countries than in the U.S. But if there were scale efficiencies in government services beyond the level of 10 million people, then we would expect governments in small countries to be much, much worse than in the U.S. The fact that Singapore, Hong Kong, Denmark, and Switzerland function at all is proof that a 300-million scale polity is not necessary to run an effective social insurance system, an effective education system, etc."
"Governments of rich countries are borrowing so much that it's conceivable that one day the twin assumptions underlying their burgeoning debt (that lenders will continue to lend and that governments will continue to pay) might collapse. What happens then?"
Conservatives won this round in the culture wars, not merely because most of the facts broke their way, but because their grievance is one that a certain species of liberal never seems to grasp. Whether the issue is abortion, evolution or recycling, these liberal patricians are forever astonished to discover that the professions and institutions and attitudes that they revere are seen by others as arrogance and affectation.