December 31, 2006

Now they can finally come home, right?

What would the US military do without authoritative websites? From Australia's 'The Age:' US troop deaths in Iraq reach 3,000:

The number of US military deaths in Iraq has reached 3,000 since the 2003 US-led invasion, an authoritative website tracking war deaths says.

Authoritative? Here's what they say about themselves:

This site is maintained by amateurs. We have no affiliation with the government, think tanks, or news organizations. The site is maintained during the early morning hours, late at night, and during lunch breaks.

This site is provided as a free service and is self financed with cost off set by user donations.

On the bright side, it's good to see a blog outfit recognized as a news source. Just wait 'til Three Sources hits the Mainstream!

US Army Specialist Dustin R. Donica of Spring, Texas, rest in peace. Your actions in life were part of something far greater than a macabre, anti-Bush milestone.

But AlexC thinks:

I don't understand this morbid fascination with round numbers and death counts.

Did 2,998 not count?

Did 1,733 not count?

Posted by: AlexC at December 31, 2006 4:39 PM
But TrekMedic251 thinks:

We lost 2500 on the first day storming Iwo Jima. We lost a total of over 7500 during the same campaign.

The Dems are pinning their hopes on this slow, drip-drip-drip of deaths to increase the sheeps' (um,..populace's)unease and fatigue with the GWOT in general.

Posted by: TrekMedic251 at January 1, 2007 1:03 PM

Resolutions

Why write your own? We have an Internet and there will be some out there that are better. Me, I'll take Greg Mankiw's even though they're last year's.

#7: This year I will be modest about what government can do. I know that economic prosperity comes not from government programs but from entrepreneurial inspiration. Adam Smith was right when he said, "Little else is required to carry a state to the highest degree of opulence from the lowest barbarism but peace, easy taxes, and a tolerable administration of justice." As a government official, I am not going to promise more than I can deliver. I am going to focus my attention on these three goals -- peace, easy taxes, and a tolerable administration of justice -- and I am going to trust the creativity of the American people to do the rest.

They're all good; he even comes down on my side of the penny controversy. "When people start leaving a monetary unit at the cash register for the next customer, the unit is too small to be useful."

Maligayang at manigong bagong taon, y'all.

Posted by jk at 2:30 PM

December 30, 2006

[sic] Semper Tyrannis

Wow. The AP is on hand to tell you all you need to know about the late Iraqi dictator, Saddam Hussein. In U.S. tolerated, then villified [sic] Saddam you learn from one Calvin Woodward that Saddam wasn't such a bad guy (well, apart from those atrocities) but that America just has a need to personify its struggles -- especially one with a moustache.

WASHINGTON - When U.S. leaders decided it was time to despise Saddam Hussein, he made the perfect villain.

He was cocky and cunning. He looked dangerous and deranged standing at rallies firing a gun into the air, conduct unbecoming a head of government.

He was Hitler Lite, or as the first President Bush put it, "Hitler revisited," lacking the endless armies, but close enough for U.S. purposes. He had a history of atrocities. His black mustache heightened the aura of menace.


Had Hitler shaved, I'm sure we'd have left him alone. (George Carlin had a great routine: "Stalin had a beard. Teddy Roosevelt had 'whiskers.'")

It just gets worse. The death of a ruthless dictator who has put hundreds of thousands of his countryman to death is such a grand occasion to do a little America bashing. Don't make fun of the AP mispelling in a headline though, you'll anger Joseph Rago and expose yourself as one of those petty bloggers.
villified.bmp


Fractals, Weather, and Climate

I'll stop boring my Keystone state friends with Colorado weather reports, though I'll give a quiet shout out to a Nebraska reader who may be seeing our storm today.

That last foot we were supposed to get today is now predicted to be 2-4" and I doubt we'll get that (always look at the first differential of the forecast -- if they're backing off grab the swim trunks, if they're increasing, fill the car with gas). It seems a puff of air from out West will keep the storm from the mountains and prevent the "upslope" pattern where a storm gets pushed against the hills and drops its load. My toy car will be beached a few more days, but what the TV newscasters call "The Blizzard of 2006: II" has moved out to the eastern plains.

I will aggravate the climate change faithful with this observation, but hear me out. Being a math geek, I remember James Gleick's Chaos. Of the three pop math books I can think of, Chaos was the biggest seller. It introduced much of America to fractals, chaos theory, and the butterfly effect.

Old Chris what's-his-name on Fox31 weather is a smart fellow with a lot of shiny equipment. He was convinced that we were in store for another foot-plus today. One little breeze from the West and it's not to be. The fact is there are too many variables to predict weather. This is obvious to anybody who lives in front of the mountains. They create a chaotic interstice for moving weather that precludes prediction.

"But that is weather, jk. Weather is capricious. Climate is not," the dissenter points out. This is fair although the next sentence about "You #%$^%^ink stupid Republicans!" goes too far.

But what if climate is just as capricious? The really interesting thing about fractals is their repeatability at different scales. Trace a foot of coastline and a mile of coastline and they look the same. A friend had a record of nature sounds which sounded exactly the same at 16, 33 1/3, or 45 RPM. I could never figure that out until I read the Gleick book.

I posit that climate is equally and similarly capricious to weather, if you change the scale of the graph from days to millennia. A moth only lives for a day -- don't you figure the VP Al Gore moths worry about "global darking" when night falls?

But johngalt thinks:

I came back to comment here that it seemed like more fun when we had liberals, err, "centrists" who would take on positions such as these. "We've driven them all off with our brilliant and unassailable counterarguments," thought I.

No, JK had just inadvertently disabled comments!

Posted by: johngalt at December 31, 2006 10:11 PM
But jk thinks:

I aggressively recruit Democrat-leaning bloggers because they don't last very long. I know Silence has a new job and hope he'll wander back when time permits. I might mail him this post.

I hate to post uncharitable thoughts on New Year's Day, but I find it extremely difficult to engage with interested and intelligent folks who do not vote like me. I know they're out there, but the ones I know have little interest in discussion.

Let me know when there are comment problems. The standard ThreeSources comment policy is:

-- You have to type in the dopey password that shows on the comment page. It changes every day.

-- I run a SQL script to close comments on posts that are more than seven days old. I run that when I feel like it. You might find old legal posts around but you can count on seven days of commenting.

-- A Spam filter holds a comment with three or more links until an administrator publishes it. I think AlexC, JohnGalt and I all have rights to approve.

All of these exist -- not to stifle dissent -- but to avoid porn merchants and Viagra peddlers who "Spam-bot" blog comments to increase their search engine ranking.

Mail jk [at] threesources [dot] com if you encounter something outside these rules and I will look at it.

Posted by: jk at January 1, 2007 12:53 PM
But jk thinks:

Mea maxima culpa. I used evil Microsoft T-SQL on a Linux MySQL database and closed comments on the wrong wrong set of posts. Lucky I didn't destroy the entire fabric of space-time...

Posted by: jk at January 2, 2007 1:09 PM

Albums of the Year

Only two days to pick the ThreeSources Album of the Year. Get your nominations in.

ThreeSources friend SugarChuck sends his picks:

  • Marty Stuart's Soul's Chapel. This is an all gospel record featuring our old pal Kenny Vaughn, who I believe is the greatest guitarist I've ever seen. There are no pyrotechnics, just great singing, archetypal tones and an infusion of the spirit of Pop Staples. This is what happens when people that love country music, blues, and gospel make records. No Cashville Gnats here...
  • Roy Clark & Joe Pass Play Hank Williams It might be more of a guitarists only record, but what a great record it is. The simplicity of the Hank tunes demonstrates the genius of Joe Pass in a way that covers of Monk wouldn't, though I would love a Joe Pass plays covers of Monk. [ed: this is hard to get in CD format but iTunes has it.]
  • I am going to throw one more out there and then call it a day. Larry Carlton Sapphire Blue. Amazing. Like Pass playing Hank, Larry playing straight up blues without the west coast syrup dripping all over everything is a gift. He also did a rock record that was darned interesting but the blues one goes to the island.

I will add a few to that list that make a trend:
  • The Little Willies. I have a theory that twice in a decade, a good musician hits the pop charts and, likewise, there are two good TV shows each decade. That theory was based on Norah Jones. The Little Willies features her vocals, great guitar work from Jim Campilongo, and a great take on non-pop country sound. This is a must buy, but if the country genre scares you, buy "Lou Reed" on iTunes and check it out.

  • Van Morrison Pay the Devil. A friend called Van "the only white guy with soul." I don't want to start a flamewar but you can make a good case for that. This is "Van the Man"'s rendition of country and it is haunting.

  • The trend is people playing outside of genre, and specifically taking the country mantle. Many folks are scared off of country by all the bad stuff that comes out on Nashville. My last pick is pop artist Michelle Branch's foray into Country: The Wreckers Stand Still, Look Pretty. This has more of the contemporary Nashville sound and if you "hate country" give one of the others a try. I, naturally, discovered Branch when she did a live performance of "Goodbye to You" at the Bronze on Buffy. She has a haunting voice and style that she brings to the Wreckers.

I know we all agree on music, religion and politics around here. Anybody else see one we've missed?

Happy New Year.

But johngalt thinks:

How about this: "Southern Born Killers" by Stuck Mojo. The nomination is primarily for the tracks For The Cause of Allah and Open Season, although Yoko deserves mention.

Caution - explicit lyrics in the 3rd verse of Open Season and the 2nd verse of Yoko.

Audio tracks are here.

Video here.

The lyrics are difficult to follow, at least in the video. They are readable here for Open Season and here for Yoko.

This self-marketed album is also an example of JK's "long tail" since they gave up on trying to earn a living through record labels. (read the story)

Hat tip: Infidel Bloggers Alliance (via Cyrano) who has a remastered version of the video, which includes captioning and other goodies.

Posted by: johngalt at December 31, 2006 10:48 PM
But TrekMedic251 thinks:

A positive vote for The Wreckers here. The only other CDs I bought this year were The Mosquitos "III", Chris Botti's "December" and RHCP's "Stadium Arcadium."

Posted by: TrekMedic251 at January 1, 2007 1:07 PM

December 29, 2006

Ding, Dong, Dead

Reports: Saddam Executed in Baghdad

The New York Times calls this a "rush" to execute the former national leader. By American standards, perhaps. The crimes his neck was stretched for were committed in 1982. He was arrested by US troops on December 13, 2003. It took three years for an Iraqi court to be established and to find him guilty. The Times' real problem here is not the time it took, but the finality of the verdict. "Surely there must be some doubt."

This execution marks a definitive end for the Saddam era. It is a good day for Iraq (and for America, whose finest delivered the tyrant to justice). It is not, however, the turning point for peace and harmony and goodness in the world, nor does it even "automatically create a new and better Iraq." But then, who ever said it would?

Iraq Posted by JohnGalt at 10:40 PM | What do you think? [4]
But AlexC thinks:

I had a number of guests over tonight, Fox was on in the background... nobody cheered, but nobody felt bad either.

It just was.

F that monster.

Posted by: AlexC at December 29, 2006 11:41 PM
But AlexC thinks:

Does YouTube's policy prevent execution video for being posted?

Posted by: AlexC at December 29, 2006 11:42 PM
But jk thinks:

A sovereign Iraqi court tried him -- I believe fairly -- and chose the punishment.

I laughed at the NYTimes "rush" as well. In their defense, the appeal seemed very perfunctory. After the trial had drug on, with many unusual events, a closer look at the procedure might have been warranted.

I will cheer inside. After Nuremburg, Nazism was thoroughly discredited and only a few fringe groups(man, I hate Illinois Nazis) keep it alive. Communism never had the formal purge and persists. I'd like to see Baathism as practiced by Hussein expunged.

Besides, South Park fans know he now enjoys eternal life with his soulmate, Satan.

Posted by: jk at December 30, 2006 11:23 AM
But TrekMedic251 thinks:

Most likely, someone will try to get the execution on YouTube. You can guarantee the handlers will be looking for it. If nothing else, someone may download it before it gets dumped and they'll pass it around some other way.

Posted by: TrekMedic251 at December 30, 2006 11:32 AM

Welcome to the Blogroll

Two I have been visiting everyday:

Greg Mankiw's Blog

Becker-Posner Blog

Posted by jk at 4:47 PM

JK Questions Their Patriotism

A terrible thought occurred to me a few weeks ago. It's not necessarily original but I think it deserves a hard look. And, today, I got the perfect segue to discuss it thanks to Perfesser Reynolds.

A strain of CW says that support for the war in Iraq has dropped because the struggle has been more difficult than anticipated. I have certainly believed this, and I have admitted to war opponents that I thought it would be easier.

But what has changed for the war opponents? We're not rationing gas, holding blackout drills, or conscripting their family.

War opponents are Bush opponents and they are merely being opportunistic. They count the casualties and await macabre, invented benchmarks: "more people have died in Iraq than have hit over .250 in the major leagues!” The problem is not lack of will, the problem is a lack of belief in American exceptionalism.

Instapundit links today to a Dave Kopel piece about long standing tribal conflict between "the Anuak, Nuer, Majangir, Opo and Komo." It's another lugubrious tale of tribal conflict than has gone on for n years, and you cannot help but glaze over, because the story is as common as it is sad. Reynolds links, and closes with this- startling yet true statement:

Nobody has cared, but now that Ethiopia is opposing the Islamists in Somalia with U.S. assistance, we'll no doubt see a sudden surge of "human rights" advocacy on the subject, though the whole disarmament thing might make it politically tricky . . . .

Nobody cares that people are killing each other, until the United States should have a strategic interest in siding with one tribe over another. To oppose the interests of the US, we will suddenly face education on the perfidy of the Ethiopians and the gentle goodness of the Anuak.

I remain in the shrinking population that supports the war because I think we have a far better life to offer and that we will ultimately reap security rewards for our efforts. Aside from the occasional Cindy Sheehan, it strikes me that the people who are doing the sacrificing, as a general rule, are prepared to continue sacrificing to achieve the mission. Those who have "grown weary" will not and never did sacrifice, they just do not believe in what America has to offer.

But johngalt thinks:

What has happened is that by failing to win the war, Bush has given the looney left every opportunity they could hope for to persuade the wishy washy "centrists" that the cost is not worth the reward.

(The only good part of this is that reward is being judged in terms of "American interests" and not "world security." Of course it would have been better for both had the war been conducted by warriors rather than diplomats.)

The looney left is not only uninvested, but counter-interested in American power projection in the mideast and around the globe. The centrists, on the other hand, ARE invested by way of taxpayer funding of the military mission.

Posted by: johngalt at December 29, 2006 10:19 PM
But jk thinks:

Obviously you're right on the tax issue and it seems out of character of me to downplay it. Considering the fungibility, lack of clear accounting and debt structure of the Federal Gub'mint, I question whether this is felt as a sacrifice.

Posted by: jk at December 30, 2006 12:21 PM

December 28, 2006

The Caffeine Curve

caffeine_curve.jpg


Hat-tip: Club for Growth

But TrekMedic251 thinks:

This is why the TrekMedic drinks tea,...hot,...Earl Grey,...make it so.!

Posted by: TrekMedic251 at December 28, 2006 10:11 PM
But dagny thinks:

Captain Picard,

Earl Grey contains plenty of caffeine as well. Not that I should talk, as I drink Chai.

Posted by: dagny at December 29, 2006 12:38 AM
But Charlie on the PA Tpk thinks:

The problem with me: I start my first cup at about 0445... so I'd need a wider curve.

Posted by: Charlie on the PA Tpk at December 29, 2006 10:36 AM
But jk thinks:

So does that shift the whole curve to the left or increase its amplitude?

Posted by: jk at December 29, 2006 1:38 PM
But AlexC thinks:

you people and your chemical dependancies.

the government needs to be involved.

Posted by: AlexC at December 29, 2006 3:11 PM
But TrekMedic251 thinks:

Dagny,..chai on a cold morning works for me, too!

Posted by: TrekMedic251 at December 30, 2006 11:33 AM

Latest Global Warming Strategy: Endangered Species Act

Having heretofore failed to impose a new national global warming tax through all prior strategies, anti-progress envinronmental extremists are turning to an old friend for help: the Endangered Species Act.

Kassie Siegel is the lawyer for the Center for Biological Diversity, a group based in Arizona that took the lead in the lawsuit calling on the department to list the polar bear. She said, “I don't see how even this administration can write this proposal without acknowledging that the primary threat to polar bears is global warming and without acknowledging the science of global warming.”

Translation: "Even the Bush administration now admits that human induced global warming is real science and is the primary threat to polar bears and all the earth's creatures."

Hat tip: NPR radio two nights ago

But jk thinks:

I fear much will ride on the upcoming SCOTUS decision whether CO2 is a pollutant (and you thought Bastiat was being rhetorical when he said you couldn't outlaw breathing).

Posted by: jk at December 28, 2006 4:05 PM

About Giving Money Away

I wince when I hear a politician giving money away. But I am trying to consider, seriously, some policy ideas that may be the best we could expect.

First was Senator Jeff Sessions's $1000 to newborns. He was on Larry Kudlow's TV show early this week pitching this idea. He has been pushing it for sometime but believes it may be more conducive to the 110th Senate.

The idea is to create a government savings account fir every child born after the bill is signed, to fund that account with $1000, paid now not on debt. Then to mandate employers' contributions of 1% of wages to the account and to have the government match it under a certain income level.

"Oh my God!' yells I at the TV. "This is Republicanism in the 21st Century?"

But Mr. Kudlow is -- not only deferential -- supportive. He sees it as a step toward private accounts and an introduction to savings and investing to some lower on the income scale.

Today The Everyday Economist links to an article in the NYTimes by George Mason U. Professor Tyler Cowen. Cowen suggests Universal 401(k) Accounts Would Bring the Poor Into the Ownership Society

The core idea is simple. The federal government creates tax-free retirement accounts for lower-income Americans, supplementing private accounts where they already exist, and matching personal contributions to those accounts. The amount of the match would depend on the income of the family and how much they save.

Cowen wants to fund it by removing $1 from Medicare or Social Security for each dollar applied to matching 401K contributions.

Once you admit that we're not going back to the 19th Century, these giveaways look pretty good. There will be a huge government component in retirement, why not create a viable funding mechanism and wrap it in a positive incentive structure?

Milton Friedman appreciated the efficiency and incentive of the EITC. I'd love lasseiz faire but this is a good model to settle for.

But dagny thinks:

Sorry JK,

You can't get me on board for this one. First of all it does not appear to be, "universal," 401(k) but low-income only 401(k) paid for by my tax dollars. Suddenly wealth re-distribution is OK as long as it is properly incentivised wealth re-distribution. It will only create yet another giant and inefficient government bureaucracy. I would be on-board for the privatization of social security where some portion of the taxes I pay get saved in my name. I note that the EITC is held up as a similar program with a positive incentive structure. Did you know that EITC fraud has become one of the IRS's largest issues?

Posted by: dagny at December 29, 2006 12:32 AM
But jk thinks:

I really was not expecting to find you on board.

Yes, I have given up on wealth redistribution. It is popular with the electorate and we will have it to some level with certain mechanisms. I will choose to fight the scope and the scale of it and to choose the best mechanisms.

The alternative to this is not lassiez faire, everybody gets to keep their money -- the alternative is a huge tax increase bundled as a raise in the Social Security cap. Said tax increase will prop up the existing defined-benefit plan for a few more years. While the SS budget is still in surplus, it will also give our New Democratic Overlords an injection into general revenue that they can use to do more things you and I won't like.

This is less government intensive than the existing plan, it shifts incentive to saving, and it replaces outmoded defined benefit plans with defined contribution. Not a bad day’s work.

Posted by: jk at December 29, 2006 11:01 AM
But johngalt thinks:

Let's explore some practical realities then:

1. Why are the impoverished poor so lousy at earning money? As 'half sigma' said in comments on the Universal 401K post, "Either (1) instead of working towards acquiring job skills they do drugs and have sex (lack of future time orientation); and/or (2) they just born stupid.

People with the above traits aren't going to be able to effectively manage their retirement savings."

2. Government "management" of "retirement" (how do you retire from the government dole?) savings for these people will work about as well as government management of snowplows, i.e. not as well as private self-interested management.

3. Adding a new entitlement does nothing to limit or restrict existing entitlements, regardless of what line of crap were given at the time of inception.

4. Whatever good may be done by the "positive incentive structure" of an "introduction to savings and investing to some lower on the income scale" is totally dwarfed by the harm of unearned income. (Why work for money when the government gives it away?)

5. No amount of creativity, novelty and charm will alter the fact that entitlement programs don't eliminate poverty, they perpetuate it. Always.

JK abandons the line in the redistribution debate because such is inevitable in our "modern" world. No, it is not. Taxes are inevitable but giving money away is a disease that CAN be cured. It will not be done democratically, but by visionaries. "One man with courage makes a majority."-Andrew Jackson

Posted by: johngalt at December 30, 2006 12:10 PM
But jk thinks:

I expected healthy and intelligent debate from you two on this one and you do not disappoint.

The idea of my giving up when you have not is an interesting point that can be explored but I doubt resolved. Pragmatism vs. purity is a pretty fundamental difference between us. As far as this proposal is concerned, I think it's a good example of pragmatism. I'll address each of your points.

1) The article mentions that some strict rules will be required to prevent withdrawals. This is the safeguard for the hopelessly inept money managers. More important to me, however, is repairing behavior at the margins. Welfare reform did not fix poverty, but it did allow millions to escape the slavery of public repentance and discover the benefits of work and freedom. This could likewise grab millions who don't save now but might discover the benefits with a little nudge from incentives.

2) My street was plowed quite nicely by a government plow. I'm sure it cost more, but the street is plowed. I'll look for something of Sen. Shelby's proposal. The idea is based on the Government workers’ Thrift Plan that provides a menu of choices. It is restricted but includes a personal component.

3) This is a great argument and difficult to counter. My brother-in-law always ends up here on immigration (he's in your camp there). "They'll promise what we want to get what they want but they won't deliver." I reply to both of you that that is legislation. Write it in the damn bill that they have to cut an even amount from other programs. Our New Democratic Overlords believe in PayGo, here it is.

4) You're at McDonalds and foie gras is not on the menu. You can give people a defined benefit when they are old and poor, or you can match their savings and encourage thrift thorough their life, Lassiez faire is not a choice. Sorry sir, we don't have pheasant either, but the Big Mac is quite filling...

5) My point #1: I am not going to fix poverty. Jesus said that couldn't be done (although that was 2000 years before Milton Friedman). But I can improve a lot of lives around the margins.

Won't be done democratically? Put in a good word for me when your people take over, jg. Tell them I was just misguided, make them go easy on me...

Posted by: jk at December 30, 2006 1:37 PM
But johngalt thinks:

Perhaps your suburban street was plowed but many a Denver mayor has lost his job because 70% of Denver streets were not. Want better service? Privatize it. Want your investment accounts to perform to your advantage? Don't hire your congressman to manage it for you. Want another man to do something he doesn't want to because "it's good for him?" Go piss up a rope. (Apologies for crudeness. It was the best metaphor I could remember.)

My point #3 (as well as #4, #5, and tangentially #2) is best addressed in your response to #1: "Welfare reform did not fix poverty, but it did allow millions to escape the slavery of public repentance and discover the benefits of work and freedom."

3) This success was the result of reducing an entitlement, not creating a new one.

4) "Money for nothing" is a cancer on the financial well being of the underclass.

5) How many years did this social experiment in the "war on poverty" last before it was finally reformed?

2) Welfare is a perfect example of government management: It can't make decisions and adapt to maximize results. It just goes on in whatever direction it was imprecisely pointed by congress until things get bad enough that congress makes "reforms."

Which brings us to where I think we agree. We both want to improve financial self-reliance for those who lack it and we both want (I think) to reduce the magnitude of wealth redistribution at every opportunity. The obvious answer is reform and restructuring of Social Security. Privatize it. Self-direct it (mutual funds only). Give nominal federal matching or seed contributions even, if you must, but DON'T let it stand as is, separate from your shiny new entitlement.

Finally, what I meant was that great ideas are not arrived at and embarked upon democratically. Naturally one must have the votes to make it happen. My point was that if you abandon the position that wealth redistribution is wrong in principle then you have virtually no basis on which to prevent its future growth.

Posted by: johngalt at December 31, 2006 12:30 PM
But jk thinks:

I think Welfare Reform is a good model. To make it palatable, it bundled a pile of job training and child-care subsidies. Sadly, we've been reduced to having to buy freedom with sops to socialists. And yet, I think you'll agree it was a huge net plus.

I don't see replacing your private 401K with this. Hence, it is not replacing private management with public management. You'd have to keep a small section of your portfolio in an approved vehicle, but a small T-Bill position isn't going to kill anybody.

You dysphemize it by calling it "a new entitlement." But I say that we have a de facto entitlement of a public pension through Social Security and Medicare. Getting me on board requires Cowan's idea of a dollar-for-dollar reduction from current entitlements to fund this. Same cost, different incentive structure.

I hate to go too far down an icy side road, but the demand for snow removal that cost Mayor McNichols his job ushered in Federico Pena and an era of big government in Denver. Mayors now know that a lot of services are required to keep their job. I don’t see that it has resulted in much private incentive.

Posted by: jk at December 31, 2006 3:58 PM

The Religious Test

I "joined" the New Republic so I could see the blue-on-blue violence of Martin Peretz vs Daily Kos. But now I get their emails every couple of days.

Here's the latest.

    When Massachusetts Mitt Romney announces his bid for the Republican nomination, the race for the White House will suddenly include a Mormon. Romney's presence has led the political theorist Damon Linker to ponder the political implications of Mormonism. Is there any reason to fear a Mormon commander in chief? How should religion enter our calculus for selecting presidents? Linker takes a view that might not seem very politically correct. He argues for taking religion--and its stated beliefs--with the utmost seriousness. Such seriousness would lead a voter to reject an orthodox Mormon presidential candidate. If Romney enters the race, he'll be forced to answer the important questions that Linker poses.

Ugh. Really, haven't we as a country grown beyond this?

Clearly some on the left haven't.

But jk thinks:

I promise you heartbreak and consternation every week from TNR. But it's a fair trade for items like Peretz's Audacity of Hope, Arkansas where he speculates about Senator Clinton's perspective in facing Sen. Obama:

Hillary and Co. prepared for Mark Warner and John Edwards, Bill Richardson and Joe Biden, Tom Vilsack and the really impossible--no, deluded--dreamer John Kerry. She probably had a strategy against Gore, too. She was confident and contemptuous. And then, suddenly, she found herself running against a latter-day Martin Luther King Jr.

Posted by: jk at December 28, 2006 2:13 PM
But johngalt thinks:

More relevantly, why not take the stated beliefs of ALL candidates "with the utmost seriousness?" Why should such an approach be limited only to religious candidates in general, or conservative religious candidates in particular?

Posted by: johngalt at December 28, 2006 2:49 PM
But TrekMedic251 thinks:

First, I hear ya, John.

Second, the Pope didn't take over after JFK,..why should we expect Coke, Pepsi, coffee and tea (there goes that graph, jk!)to be banned if Romney wins?

Posted by: TrekMedic251 at December 28, 2006 10:13 PM
But johngalt thinks:

The real issue here for the progressives who ponder this religion factor is not that religion is contrary to their beliefs, per se. What worries them is that religion endorses values that are more or less invariable. Modify God's law with a healthy dose of "it depends" and you'll find much less hostility from the progressives.

Posted by: johngalt at December 29, 2006 10:34 PM
But dagny thinks:

JG brings up an interesting contrast here. He is correct to point out that the progressives problem with religious politicians is that religion provides more or less invariable values and a system of right and wrong.

I don't have a problem with this as I believe in a value system of right and wrong. However, the problem with, "God's Laws," being the basis for such a system is that God's laws are only available to us on earth as interpreted by some man or other. Here I find I have some sympathy with the progressives. We clearly do not wish to be governed by God's Laws as interpreted by the islamofascists. So tell me, Mr. Romney, what government actions are taken in regards to God's laws as interpreted by a Mormon?

This seems a legitimate question to ask any political candidate.

Posted by: dagny at December 30, 2006 1:00 AM

Holy Precipitation, Batman

Get ready for some more blizzard blogging:

Today: Scattered snow showers with snow becoming steadier and heavier late. Cold. High 33F. Winds NNE at 10 to 20 mph. Chance of snow 80%. Snow accumulating 1 to 3 inches.

Tonight: Periods of snow. Low 21F. Winds N at 10 to 20 mph. Chance of snow 80%. 5 to 8 inches of snow expected.

Tomorrow: Windy. Snow during the morning followed by a few snow showers during the afternoon. Cold. High around 25F. Winds N at 20 to 30 mph. Chance of snow 70%. Snow accumulating 2 to 4 inches.

Tomorrow night: Snow along with gusty winds at times. Low 17F. Winds NNW at 15 to 25 mph. Chance of snow 70%. Significant snow accumulation possible.

Saturday: Snow. Highs in the upper 20s and lows in the upper teens.


Again, troops, I am safe and well provisioned. But I have not been out of the house in a week and a half. They plowed my street yesterday, so now I have a foot of solid ice right at the bottom of the driveway. I actually like it, but this will get old before it goes away.

Posted by jk at 10:31 AM | What do you think? [2]
But AlexC thinks:

Damn. I'd like some snow. It's 51 today. I almost feel like mowing the lawn.

Posted by: AlexC at December 28, 2006 1:30 PM
But johngalt thinks:

We're getting snow now but we got NO rain from May through September.

Posted by: johngalt at December 28, 2006 2:45 PM

December 27, 2006

48 Hours of Wii

It's been, well more than two days, since Christmas morning, and Santa brought us a Nintendo Wii, Rayman Raving Rabbids and an extra controller. (I picked up Madden 07 and another nunchuck controller yesterday).

My wife and I have discovered that we are sadly out of shape as our arms are burning with soreness.

But it's fun.

Easily the best game system I've ever purchased.

Swinging the controller like a tennis racket, baseball bat, bowling ball or boxing gloves adds a dimension to gaming heretofore unexplored. My soon-to-be four year old daughter can really box well.

Rayman makes use of the motion detecting sensors in pretty clever ways. Milking cows, those old-fashioned tilting marble games, shooting plungers, whack-a-mole etc.

Madden Football '07 is pretty sweet. Throwing touchdown passes or kicking fieldgoals is pretty straightforward, though the tackling is a bit more complicated.

Fun.

But jk thinks:

Surely there will be some new, named malady for overuse of the controller. Maybe John Edwards will have a class action suit -- keep your receipts.

Posted by: jk at December 27, 2006 4:11 PM
But AlexC thinks:

Well, Breckboy is busy running for President and making the lame walk again.

Speaking of which, an overzealous at-bat in a home run contest caused me to kick the coffeetable.

With only a sock protecting my toes from the wood.

Posted by: AlexC at December 27, 2006 6:06 PM
But jk thinks:

WHAT? THERE WERE NO WARNING LABELS ON THE DEVICE ADVISING PROPER FOOT PROTECTION? This is clearly not your fault.

Posted by: jk at December 27, 2006 6:46 PM

Soft Landing in Housing?

Larry Kudlow keeps praising the "Goldilocks" economy (not inflationarily hot nor contractionally cool). He attributes it to the 2003 Bush tax cuts and called it "the greatest story never told" through the election cycle.

The only credible data that naysayers can use to contradict is "the burst of the housing bubble." There is always something that will take us back to "Grapes of Wrath" American refugeeism and soup lines. Now it's housing.

So it was good to see better than expected housing numbers. (Paid link, sorry!)

WASHINGTON -- New-home sales bounced back in November, rising more than expected, while inventories fell and the median price climbed.
Sales of single-family homes increased by 3.4% to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1.047 million, the Commerce Department said Wednesday. October sales fell 3.8% to 1.013 million, revised from a previously estimated 3.2% retreat to 1.004 million.
The sales numbers Wednesday were better than Wall Street was looking for. Economists expected a 1.6% increase to an annual rate of 1.020 million in November. The advance in November was the third in six months; sales were up 3.1% in September, up 4.3% in August, down 9.2% in July and down 2.1% during June.


Wage Subsidies

Must read post from Greg Mankiw

But jk thinks:

Larry Kudlow was trying to convince a couple of lefties that the way to help low wage workers is to reduce corporate tax rates.

He is absolutely right, but it is a tough sell to those who think governments set wages. Sen. Kennedy says minimum wage workers have been waiting ten years for a raise. That statement is wrong on so many levels, one doesn't know where to begin.

I'm a big fan of the President, but I will admit here to being tired of "compassionate conservatism." It is classic Bush to come out for a fait accompli minimum wage increase and then try to get some pro growth riders on the bill. Unfortunately, it supports and cements the idea that government has a role in setting wages.

Speaking of Kudlow, Steve Forbes was on last night. Steve in 2008, anybody? We're sorry we didn't listen before.

Posted by: jk at December 27, 2006 11:38 AM

December 26, 2006

The Booming Economy You Don't Hear About

Nope, not here. As Larry Kudlow has been mentioning, a boom in Iraq.

Larry links to an Amir Taheri piece in The New York Post

Four years ago, this was a jumble of rusting quays, abandoned houses and gutted buildings. By the spring of 2003, its population had dwindled to a few dozen, along with hundreds of stray dogs. There was even talk of abandoning it altogether.

Today, however, Um Qasr is back in business as a port with commercial and military functions. Hundreds of families that had left after the first Gulf War in 1991 have returned - joining many more who have come from all over Iraq.

The boom in Um Qasr is part of a broader picture that also includes Basra (the sprawling metropolis of southern Iraq), the Shi'ite "holy" cities of Najaf and Karbala, Mandali on the Iranian border and much of Baghdad.

When the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank reported two years ago that the Iraqi economy was heading for a boom, skeptics dismissed it as misplaced optimism. Now, however, even some of those who opposed the toppling of Saddam Hussein admit that many Iraqis share that optimism.

Newsweek has just hailed the emergence of a booming market economy in Iraq as "the mother of all surprises," noting that "Iraqis are more optimistic about the future than most Americans are."


Of course they're more optimistic. The New York Times doesn't deliver that far.


The D in DAWG

The 2006 Census Estimates are out (It's like Christmas!) and they offer some hints at reapportionment after the 2010 Census.

Club for Growth linked to it because most of the states that stand to gain seats are friendlier to pro-growth economic policy than the states that are losing seats. That seems fair, although I have watched Colorado shift from Red to Purple as it gained seats, so it is difficult to extrapolate. All the same, one must agree that any loss of political power in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts would be a good thing for the republic.

Hurting for blogworthy material in a slow news week, I was struck by the tale it tells of migration to warmer climes: The six states listed as certain to gain seats are Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Nevada, Texas and Utah. A few ski areas notwithstanding, that strikes me as a sunshine list. Certain to lose? Iowa, Pennsylvania (sorry friends), New York, Ohio -- only Louisiana and Missouri buck the trend.

Polidata’s Clark Bensen also observes that Florida (currently with 25 seats) is now poised to replace New York (29 seats) as the third most populous state – and that both states might end up with 27-member delegations when the dust settles after reapportionment.

Sixty years ago, no one would have believed that Florida and New York might one day have House delegations of equal size. In the 1940s, the New York delegation was a 45-member congressional powerhouse while Florida was a puny 6-seat weakling. But between 1942 and 2002, Florida gained 19 seats while New York lost 16.


Back to my tendentious acronymical invention. If Global Warming exists and is Anthropogenic, is it Deleterious? A shift of 20-something house seats shows that warmth has a value. It's been seven days since I left my house, you can call me interested.

But johngalt thinks:

I think you're on to something. My first guess was differential state and local tax burden but a perusal here shows Utah is 9th and Arizona is 21st highest.

Also, if you need to get out and can't please let me know. Zoe and I will swing by with the Power Wagon and get you where you need to go.

Posted by: johngalt at December 26, 2006 3:06 PM
But jk thinks:

Thanks for the kind offer. I could get out if I had to and we are well provisioned. Granola-mobile or not, I missed the old Subaru this week.

Posted by: jk at December 26, 2006 3:28 PM
But AlexC thinks:

So if temperatures are rising, we'd expect to pay less for heating fuel right?

Posted by: AlexC at December 26, 2006 11:17 PM
But jk thinks:

After you move to Florida, ac, your heating oil bills will be negligible.

Posted by: jk at December 27, 2006 12:40 PM

December 25, 2006

RIP, Godfather

Uhnh!

    James Brown, the undeniable "Godfather of Soul," told friends from his hospital bed that he was looking forward to performing on New Year's Eve, even though he was ill with pneumonia. His heart gave out a few hours later, on Christmas morning.

    The pompadoured dynamo whose classic singles include "Papa's Got A Brand New Bag" and "I Got You (I Feel Good)" died Monday of heart failure, said his agent, Frank Copsidas of Intrigue Music. He was 73.

    "People already know his history, but I would like for them to know he was a man who preached love from the stage," said friend Charles Bobbit, who was with Brown at the hospital. "His thing was 'I never saw a person that I didn't love.' He was a true humanitarian who loved his country."

Music Posted by AlexC at 9:23 PM | What do you think? [1]
But jk thinks:

Extreme Mortman salutes Brown at Nixon's Inauguration party in Say It Loud (I’m Republican And Proud)

Posted by: jk at December 26, 2006 12:14 PM

Merry Christmas

... in Philadelphia it's 42 and raining.

I blame global warming.

    In 1902, the Los Angeles Times reported that the great glaciers were undergoing "their final annihilation" due to rising temperatures. But by 1923, it was the ice that was doing the annihilating: "Scientist says Arctic ice will wipe out Canada," the Chicago Tribune declared on Page 1.

    So it was curtains for the Canadians? Uh, not quite. In 1953, The New York Times announced that "nearly all the great ice sheets are in retreat." Yet no sooner did our neighbors to the north breathe a sigh of relief than it turned out they weren't off the hook after all: "The rapid advance of some glaciers," wrote Lowell Ponte in "The Cooling," his 1976 bestseller, "has threatened human settlements in Alaska, Iceland, Canada, China, and the Soviet Union." And now? "Arctic Ice Is Melting at Record Level, Scientists Say," the Times reported in 2002.

    Over the years, the alarmists have veered from an obsession with lethal global cooling around the turn of the 20th century to lethal global warming a generation later, back to cooling in the 1970s and now to warming once again. You don't have to be a scientist to realize that all these competing narratives of doom can't be true. Or to wonder whether any of them are.

Environment Posted by AlexC at 9:00 PM

Merry Christmas From Dubai

christmas-camel.jpg

Now don't you wish we'd let them buy the ports?

Hat-tip: Insty

Posted by jk at 1:07 PM

December 24, 2006

Go for Two?

I'm glad my beloved Broncos won the game today. They did many things to deserve the victory.

I've got to ask why Cincinnati did not go fir a two point conversion. I was surprised to see the kicker line up for the PAT. They had run at will against eh Broncos all day, and have the most explosive offense in football. Would not a two point try by statistically preferential to kicking the PAT and scoring a field goal before the other team? Snowy field conditions, if anything, would lean me toward a two pint attempt, where the weather favors the offense.

'M I whacked?

Posted by jk at 8:22 PM | What do you think? [1]
But jk thinks:

An emailer says "U R whacked. Play for the overtime win."

I remain intrigued with James Surowecki's claim in "The Wisdom of Crowds" that a more aggressive offensive style of play would be supported by statistics.

The same e-mail suggests that the 99 yard drive might be the start of something historic. I agree and hereby retract my impertinent question of Coach Shanahan when he switched QBs.

If Chuck Norris has a movie role, AlexC, you might consider Shanahan on the Ditka ticket. Coach Shanahan was present at all the big GOP rallies I have attended in the last decade.

Posted by: jk at December 25, 2006 12:50 PM

Defending the Blogosphere

One more wade into l'Affaire Rago. I mentioned that I thought Rago misses the point in his anti-blogging screed (you remember, "Written by fools to be read by imbeciles.")

For the most part, Methinks that the blogosphere hath protested too much. Taranto makes a case that the surfeit of vituperative attacks has done more to prove Rago's point than refute it.

I remain a fan of blogging, although no doubt much of my writing could be used to inculpate Rago's thesis, this sentence included. However, I am a Hayekian at heart and champion the competition of ideas in the free market. I'm also an Army-of-Davidser and a Long-Tailer. I celebrate the removal of barriers to entry in media production and distribution.

Rago fails to recognize the amount of superb writing out there. Dean Barnett offers many counter examples. Some of the best bloggers are professional journalists: Lileks, The Corner, Galley Slaves, and Rago's online editor and defender, James Taranto.

I offer a blog I just discovered: The Becker-Posner Blog maintained by Gary S. Becker, University Professor Department of Economics and Sociology Professor Graduate School of Business The University of Chicago and another intellectual lightweight, Judge Richard Posner, Senior Lecturer in Law at the Chicago School of Law.

I discovered this blog through The Everyday Economist. Josh linked to a discussion on the New York City ban of trans-fats. Posner starts by declaring the information cost of a person educating himself on trans-fats as being too high. Becker rebuts, not only with a freedom and choice argument, but also with suggestions that younger consumers expect pharmaceutical advances to help them before adverse effects materialize, and this gem:

If they value the taste of trans fats in their foods only by 35 cents per meal, the taste cost to consumers of the ban would be $70 million per year. Then the total cost of the ban would equal the benefits from the ban.

I ruin both pieces by paraphrasing. They are intelligent, well thought, and well written. (The Chicago Manual of style suggests the comma after thought, I use it in deference to the two Chicago academics). The comments, like Samizdata's are penetrating and well written. The two pieces and the comments combine to make a more serious and probing discussion of the issue than was presented anywhere by MSM.

Rago has seen some bad writing in the blogosphere. I'm shocked. He conveniently neglects the volume of serious thought and good discussion.

Media and Blogging Posted by jk at 1:08 PM

December 23, 2006

Git a Mac?

After bad mouthing the Mac commercials, my trusty old laptop that I use as a personal computer has died and I suspect a virus. It got real slow a week ago, and now will not boot: ntfs.sys is corrupted.

The OS disks are an image, so I cannot recover my existing files on a repair. As it is truly a personal machine, there is no great loss if I just wipe it clean, but it will take me a day or two to rebuild and reload the applications I like. And there are always a handful of things that are truly lost.

Rats ass. Any email sent after yesterday afternoon is likely lost to the aether.

I develop in the Microsoft world so a Mac would really not be an option. But I won't bad mouth them again -- I'm sure that's what got me last time. "I, for one, welcome our new Cupertino overlords..."

Posted by jk at 5:28 PM | What do you think? [5]
But AlexC thinks:

You can always dual boot the new Intel Macs...

or with Parallels you can run both simultaneously.

;)

Posted by: AlexC at December 23, 2006 7:22 PM
But Ian Hamet thinks:

Linux, man.

Linux, Linux, Linux, Linux, Linux, Linux, Linux, Linux, Linux.

And did I happen to mention Linux?

You can run dual-boot with Windows (or treble(?)-boot, or more if you want), you can launch from a LiveCD or a bootable flash disk... Linux gives you options, man! And it won't hose your personal data.

Posted by: Ian Hamet at December 24, 2006 8:42 AM
But jk thinks:

OS chatter always brings out more passion than religion or politics. Too bad Ian doesn't have an opinion...

I might think about this. I have an old machine I can use while I ponder. I develop on two company provided WIntel boxes, so I could use Linux or Mac as my tertiary platform (a fancy name for the machine I goof off and blog on). If I give up the idea of recovering data from the dead machine, I might load Linux on it.

I have RedHat9 install media lying about. Anybody have kernel recommendations? If my accountant should say new hardware is an option, the Mac would dual boot (and you can break out to a BSD shell as well, right?) Kind of a compromise candidate for all three...A Baker/Hamilton OS... I dunno...

Posted by: jk at December 24, 2006 12:01 PM
But AlexC thinks:

As evidenced above, Linux is the Unix-like OS for fanboys who hate Microsoft. FreeBSD is the Unix-like OS for people who like Unix.

Of course, MacOS is generally underpinned by FreeBSD, but it's only there if you want it.

Coincidentally, I saw this article this morning on Digg.

More PC Buyers Will Be Going Mac in 2007

Posted by: AlexC at December 24, 2006 12:21 PM
But jk thinks:

Fanning the flamewars, brother ac, playing with matches.

I think your link is correct. Several people have asked me about Macs lately. I think they all expected me to try and talk them out of it, fill their heads with cool reason. I disappointed.

At the same time. I was looking at sub-$600 desktops on BestBuy.com. That gets a feller a gig of memory and a 200GB or so hard drive, which would rock for my purposes. The Mac in that price range is 600-800 and only gets you 512MB and an 80GB drive. Add to that some software that I own in Win32 format.

I know the high-end PowerBooks and multi-processor boxes are sweet, I just question how well they complete in the low-mid sector, which is all I need right now.

Posted by: jk at December 24, 2006 2:05 PM

Christmas Extremists

Boy.

    A man used flammable liquid to light himself on fire, apparently to protest a San Joaquin Valley school district's decision to change the names of winter and spring breaks to Christmas and Easter vacation.

    The man, who was not immediately identified, on Friday also set fire to a Christmas tree, an American flag and a revolutionary flag replica, said Fire Captain Garth Milam.

    Seeing the flames, Sheriff's Deputy Lance Ferguson grabbed a fire extinguisher and ran to the man.

    Flames were devouring a Christmas tree next to the Liberty Bell, where public events and demonstrations are common.

    Beside the tree the man stood with an American flag draped around his shoulders and a red gas can over his head.

    Seeing the deputy, the man poured the liquid over his head. He quickly burst into flames when the fumes from the gas met the flames from the tree.


Call me crazy, but I'm sure that the loss of "winter fest" and "spring fest" didn't put him over the top.

But jk thinks:

There's a war on winter fest, ac. You may not notice it out East, but out here some people look nervously at their shoes when I wish them a "Happy Winter Fest." Like I've broken some taboo.

Chilling.

Posted by: jk at December 23, 2006 5:27 PM
But TrekMedic251 thinks:

Sounds to me like another case of Darwinism!

Posted by: TrekMedic251 at December 23, 2006 9:52 PM

Greetings of the Season

From my brother, via email:

For My Democratic Friends:

"Please accept with no obligation, implied or implicit, our best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low-stress, non-addictive, gender-neutral celebration of the winter solstice holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasion and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all. We also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling and medically uncomplicated recognition of the of the generally accepted calendar year 2007, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make America great. Not to imply that America is necessarily greater than any other country nor the only America in the Western Hemisphere. And without regard to the race, creed, color, age, physical ability, religious faith or sexual preference of the wishes. By accepting these greetings you are accepting these terms. This greeting is subject to clarification or withdrawal. It is freely transferable with no alteration to the original greeting. It implies no promise by the wisher to actually implement any of the wishes for herself or himself or others, and is void where prohibited by law and is revocable at the sole discretion of the wisher. This wish is warranted to perform as expected within the usual application of good tidings for a period of one year or until the issuance of a subsequent holiday greeting, whichever comes first, and warranty is limited to replacement of this wish or issuance of a new wish at the sole discretion of the wisher."

For My Republican Friends:

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year

Posted by jk at 12:42 PM | What do you think? [1]
But TrekMedic251 thinks:

LOL,...I passed that along to both my liberal and conservative friends!

BTW - Merry CHRISTmas to AlexC, JK, and John Galt from the TrekSanta!

Posted by: TrekMedic251 at December 23, 2006 9:57 PM

December 22, 2006

Senator Backbone

I thought my hero, Larry Kudlow, was writing an article on oxymorons: "Senator?" "Backbone?"

He writes, instead, on Senator John McCain's courage to push for victory in Iraq against the polls, the CW, and the Baker Surrender Group.

McCain clearly would rather do the right thing in our nation’s interest than the politically correct thing. He is about leadership and character and decisiveness. He seems to have the ability to assess American national-security needs, not just for the next few weeks, but the next few decades. And he is almost single-handedly lifting our war policy towards strength rather than weakness.

McCain is standing tall against the tides of wartime fatigue, the polls, and the conventional Beltway wisdom. Whatever the outcome of the Iraq debate, and even the 2008 presidential election, the senator is behaving in a remarkably brave and steadfast manner at a time when so many of our leaders are shrinking from those crucial public duties.


Kudlow has been hitting the pro-McCain theme hard on his TV show for a couple of weeks. McCain's stand on the war is admirable, and none of the other candidates are wowing me (I'd give Mayor Giuliani a chance).

War is the issue. McCain is likely the candidate. My on again, off again endorsement is now on again.

Politics Posted by jk at 4:28 PM

Now a Word Against Enforcement

Full of Christmas Spirit, I thought I mightn't start a squabble about immigration on December 22. Naaah:

The lead editorial (free link) questions the cost benefit ratio of the immigration raids on the Swift meatpacking plants.

Immigration restrictionists would have us believe that harassing businesses like Swift, the world's second-largest beef and pork processor, helps make America safer. But so far the Swift raids haven't uncovered any al Qaeda cells, merely a bunch of hard-working people trying to feed their families. The operation involved more than 1,000 federal agents in six states. And of Swift's 15,000 or so employees, a grand total of 144 have been charged to date with misidentifying themselves to get hired.

Put another way, 1,000 federal agents that could have been focused on potential terrorists or other dangerous threats were instead focused on a meatpacking company that hires thousands of willing unskilled workers and pays them more than twice the minimum wage with full health benefits after six months. How's that for government efficiency?


I suppose that enforcing the law is its own good and I do not post this to criticize. I post this to rebut those who say that it should be the responsibility of employers to enforce our immigration laws. It seems that Swift tried.
There's a common notion that businesses seek out illegal aliens to employ. So it's also worth noting that since 1997 Swift has voluntarily participated in a government program for vetting new hires known as Basic Pilot. Under this system, the names and Social Security numbers of all job applicants are checked against a federal database. Which is to say that the presence of illegal workers at Swift is not the result of a company's indifference to the rule of law. It's the result of a flawed government system for determining who's eligible to work here. A few years ago Swift's management attempted to go even further than Basic Pilot to screen job applicants, only to be sued by the Justice Department for employment discrimination in 2001.

Full of hope for the season (that's twice he's said "full of it..."), this might be a big plus for having a Democratic 110th Congress.

On Wednesday, Mr. Bush reiterated his position that the most "humane" way to deal with illegal immigration is to combine enforcement with a guest worker program that would address the country's obvious labor shortage. "I want to work with both Republicans and Democrats to get a comprehensive bill to my desk," said the President. "It's in our interest that we do this."

Merry Christmas ThreeSourcers!

Immigration Posted by jk at 4:02 PM

December 21, 2006

Patents Are Killing You

So say the would-be thieves.

    A report by the General Accounting Office concludes that current patent law discourages drug companies from developing new drugs by allowing them to make excessive profits through minor changes to existing pharmaceuticals. While pharmaceutical research and development expenses have increased by 147% since 1993, applications for approval of "new molecular entity" (NME) drugs, or drugs which differ significantly from others already on the market, have risen only 7%. According to the report, the majority of newly developed medicines are so-called "me-too" drugs, which are substantially similar to existing drugs, are less risky than NMEs drugs to develop, and which "offer little in the way of therapeutic breakthroughs."

But jk thinks:

I have read very intelligent commentary on both sides of this issue and I am torn. I've long railed on these pages to allow pharmaceutical firms to make profits. Yet a compelling and nuanced case can be made that Patents ultimately hamper discovery.

Of course, you'll hear no such nuance from Senator Dick Durban, who cannot wait to wave his new gavel at drug companies:

"Commenting on the report, Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) said that existing patent law allows drug companies to drive up their profits at the expense of patients needing innovative treatments. 'The findings in this new GAO report,' said Senator Durbin, 'raise serious questions about the pharmaceutical industry claims that there is a connection between new drug development and the soaring price of drugs already on the market. Most troubling is the notion that pharmaceutical industry profits are coming at the expense of consumers in the form of higher prices and fewer new drugs.'"

I fear for the Republic and its inhabitants...

Posted by: jk at December 21, 2006 5:36 PM

Blizzard Blogging

The last numbers I heard were 33" for boulder and 25" at DIA.

The snow has stopped where I live and it is bright but overcast. My niece was on a plane on the tarmac at SFO yesterday when they stopped the flight (good thing, I'd say). She will be in Saturday night, our Friday Night Christmas plans have been rescheduled for the night of the 25th. All is calm, all is bright.

I have a few more photos I'd like to post but my card reader is not recognizing memory cards.

UPDATE: The skies are blue. That's why you live here -- when you get one of these it does not last too long. By the time I dig out the convertible, it'll be nice enough to take the top down.

UPDATE: (jg) OK, we need some more pictures here.

There is one drift bigger than this one but I didn't get down to it until later when the road was plowed. This one, however, is taller than dagny.

IMG_0608.JPG

The snow drifts were not limited to outside the buildings.

IMG_0618.JPG

IMG_0625.JPG

Of course, there are rewards. Like watching our two year old have the time of her life.

IMG_0628.JPG

Then it was time to plow the driveway. After pushing the pile for about 5 feet it started cascading over the bucket and into my lap.

IMG_0633.JPG

Time to get a bigger tractor!

IMG_0636.JPG

As you can see, utility is much more important than fashion out on the farm. At least that's what I tell myself everytime I put on that chocolate brown snowmobile suit and that goofy stocking cap.

Posted by jk at 3:38 PM | What do you think? [3]
But TrekMedic251 thinks:

Send some of it here to Philly, dammit!

Posted by: TrekMedic251 at December 21, 2006 10:17 PM
But jk thinks:

Well done, thanks for the pix!

Posted by: jk at December 22, 2006 12:00 PM
But TrekMedic251 thinks:

As much as I joke about snow,..please be careful!

Posted by: TrekMedic251 at December 23, 2006 9:58 PM

Equal Treatment Under Law

John Fund, writing in the OpinionJournal Political Diary, says "Life's a Beach" for Sandy Berger.

Yesterday's report by the Inspector General for the National Archives makes it more obvious than ever that Sandy Berger, President Clinton's former National Security Adviser, got off easily in his document-filching case. Mr. Berger pleaded guilty last year to a misdemeanor charge of improperly removing classified material from the Archives. As part of a plea agreement, federal prosecutors asked him to pay a fine of only $10,000; an outraged judge bumped that up to a $50,000 fine.

It's now clear Mr. Berger is lucky to have stayed out of jail. The Inspector General's report found that the paper he stole outlined the government's knowledge of terrorist threats in the U.S. in the final months of the Clinton administration -- documents of some interest to the 9/11 Commission that Mr. Berger was preparing to testify before. He admitted to investigators that he later retrieved the documents from their hiding place and brought them to his office, where he tore some up and placed them in the trash.

Mr. Berger originally maintained his actions were "an honest mistake" rather than an attempt to cover up aspects of the Clinton administration's counterterrorism efforts. But Rep. Tom Davis, the outgoing chairman of the House Government Reform Committee, told C-SPAN this morning that Mr. Berger may have taken working documents for which no copies exist. "There is absolutely no way to determine if Berger swiped any of these original documents. Consequently, there is no way to ever know if the 9/11 Commission received all required materials," Mr. Davis said. Mr. Davis ended with this tantalizing hint: "More is coming on this, and the committee will be issuing its own findings in this soon."

Scooter Libby, the former top aide to Vice President Cheney who is now facing felony counts for supposedly lying to federal investigators in the Valerie Plame non-case, must be bemused at how the worm turns in Washington. Sometimes the tale of who is vigorously prosecuted and who is dealt with leniently is the most perplexing Beltway ethics story of all.

Yesterday's report by the Inspector General for the National Archives makes it more obvious than ever that Sandy Berger, President Clinton's former National Security Adviser, got off easily in his document-filching case. Mr. Berger pleaded guilty last year to a misdemeanor charge of improperly removing classified material from the Archives. As part of a plea agreement, federal prosecutors asked him to pay a fine of only $10,000; an outraged judge bumped that up to a $50,000 fine.

It's now clear Mr. Berger is lucky to have stayed out of jail. The Inspector General's report found that the paper he stole outlined the government's knowledge of terrorist threats in the U.S. in the final months of the Clinton administration -- documents of some interest to the 9/11 Commission that Mr. Berger was preparing to testify before. He admitted to investigators that he later retrieved the documents from their hiding place and brought them to his office, where he tore some up and placed them in the trash.

Mr. Berger originally maintained his actions were "an honest mistake" rather than an attempt to cover up aspects of the Clinton administration's counterterrorism efforts. But Rep. Tom Davis, the outgoing chairman of the House Government Reform Committee, told C-SPAN this morning that Mr. Berger may have taken working documents for which no copies exist. "There is absolutely no way to determine if Berger swiped any of these original documents. Consequently, there is no way to ever know if the 9/11 Commission received all required materials," Mr. Davis said. Mr. Davis ended with this tantalizing hint: "More is coming on this, and the committee will be issuing its own findings in this soon."

Scooter Libby, the former top aide to Vice President Cheney who is now facing felony counts for supposedly lying to federal investigators in the Valerie Plame non-case, must be bemused at how the worm turns in Washington. Sometimes the tale of who is vigorously prosecuted and who is dealt with leniently is the most perplexing Beltway ethics story of all.


Prosecutorial discretion vs. prosecutorial overreach. It's been said before, but imagine the uproar if Condi Rice has been caught stealing and destroying documents. President Clinton was said to have laughed when he heard about this. And some think he did not take security seriously...

Posted by jk at 3:30 PM

December 20, 2006

The Sartre Cookbook

This is the funniest thing I have seen on the Internet in, umm, forever.

The Jean Paul Sartre Cookbook.

I would have nothing kind to say about Sartre, except that he inspired Joss Whedon to create my favorite TV villain of all time. Jubal Early, the existentialist bounty hunter in the Firefly episode "Objects in Space" comes from Whedon's love of the Sartre book "Nausea." I think that's one of two that I have read. Sadly, it inspired nothing so grandiose.

Hat-tip: Insty.

On the web Posted by jk at 4:13 PM

VP Gore Must be holding a rally







We are expecting 10" of global warming and it looks like we are most of the way there.

My place of employment has officially closed down for the day. I have worked there on and off for 18 years and cannot remember ever "officially" closing. They just sent people home and locked the doors.

‘Course, that’s a warm day at Sugarchuck’s…

The view is out my home offiice window. The streelight is the corner of my driveway, and the shadow is a house across a plain old suburban street.


UPDATE: a couple more pix...




UPDATE: Fights cancelled, roads closed...

UPDATE: (jg) Did I hear somebody say glacier?

I have no idea how much snow we've received so far. Do I measure it here?

IMG_0567.JPG

Or here?

IMG_0566.JPG

Or maybe here, next to the hay baling machine. We'll just call it a "Goregasmic" amount.

IMG_0569.JPG

(Apologies for the grainy pics. I'll take more tomorrow in the daylight. It took me over 9 hours to get home from work today.)

Posted by jk at 3:27 PM | What do you think? [3]
But mdmhvonpa thinks:

It's the dunred Great (White) Conservative Conspiracy trying to make Gore look stupid (like he needs the help) by starting a mini-ice age with their Haliburton Weather Machine.

I'm kinda hoping that we get some glaciers in NYC.

Posted by: mdmhvonpa at December 20, 2006 11:01 PM
But jk thinks:

33" in Boulder last I heard.

Posted by: jk at December 21, 2006 10:29 AM
But AlexC thinks:

Holy crap! Tell me you have a snowblower.

Posted by: AlexC at December 21, 2006 4:38 PM

Chris Matthews

Hugh Hewitt blasted Matt Damon's performance on Hardball last night.

I expect nothing but vapid blather from another celebrity, I was struck by Matthews:

MATTHEWS: Do you think guys like Cheney—I love to pronounce his name correctly, by the way. Do you think guys like—it‘s like a Dickensian name, Cheney. Do you think he knew he was saying stuff that wouldn‘t turn out to be true, or was he just mad dogged to fight the war?

DAMON: I‘d like to see him under oath.

MATTHEWS: I would, too. I‘d like to see him with you.

(APPLAUSE)

MATTHEWS: Do you think if you waterboarded Cheney, like in the movie, that you‘d get a different truth out of him?


Wow. Torturing the Vice President. Even worse, pronouncing his name in a nefarious manner. I'll bet the Vice President is distraught.

I was the world's biggest Hardball Fan, I bought two of his books, and, in case it comes up in a Trivia game, I was the first caller when he debuted "You Play Hardball," soliciting viewer statements (Tucker Carlson tried this as well).

But Matthew's, pari passu Andrew Sullivan, dropped from the top to the bottom by letting bad ideas take over his emotions.


UPDATE: ALa at Blonde Sagacity has video. Left out of the transcript: Matthews's calling DeNiro "ballsy" for taking on the CIA in a film. Oooh ya, that's pretty brave. Rodeo Drive is littered with the carcasses of big film directors who dared to take on the establishment.

But TrekMedic251 thinks:

jk,..I take it the movie doesn't paint the CIA in a very favorable light?

Posted by: TrekMedic251 at December 21, 2006 10:20 PM

Fool to Imbeciles: Get a Life

I sometimes have to look hard for something on the Wall Street Journal Editorial Page with which I disagree.

Sometimes, it's easy. Assistant Features Editor Joseph Rago lets loose at bloggers today.

Every conceivable belief is on the scene, but the collective prose, by and large, is homogeneous: A tone of careless informality prevails; posts oscillate between the uselessly brief and the uselessly logorrheic; complexity and complication are eschewed; the humor is cringe-making, with irony present only in its conspicuous absence; arguments are solipsistic; writers traffic more in pronouncement than persuasion . . .

And those would be the nice bits.

Blogs are a long-tail phenomenon, and Rago misses it. There are n million blogs out there and n - 0.05 are bad. Finding a circle of interesting blogs widens your worldview considerably.

I read Rago's employer's page second thing every day, subscribe to four print magazines and a couple digital-only. I agree that blogs should respect the foundation and infrastructure that the MSM provides. Yet I cannot imagine a day without hitting at least half of the blogroll.

Rago will be vilified by the blogosphere for this. I mentioned I read the WSJ second thing every day. First is DayByDay, and today Chris takes a whack at Rago.

But Chris Muir thinks:

I need a Life! I need a Life!

Posted by: Chris Muir at December 20, 2006 2:24 PM
But jk thinks:

Much better than life, you are a star my friend!

Posted by: jk at December 20, 2006 3:50 PM

Your Problem

Now he's your problem, Denver.

Sports Posted by AlexC at 12:01 AM | What do you think? [1]
But jk thinks:

Actually, the Nuggets have a reputation for not being all choirboys. I imagine he will fit in when the rest of the team gets back from suspension.

I'll confess I don't follow basketball but it seems that a big name player might do the franchise good.

Posted by: jk at December 20, 2006 10:30 AM

December 19, 2006

Peace in Our Time (Again)

LMAO!

(tip to HotAir)

But TrekMedic251 thinks:

That'll be cross-posted by the end of the week!

Posted by: TrekMedic251 at December 19, 2006 9:47 PM
But johngalt thinks:

This is far too close to the truth to be funny. "50 million dead" may be a slight exaggeration, but only slight.

Posted by: johngalt at December 20, 2006 12:47 AM

A Blogger in Need

heh.

But jk thinks:

Well, I'm too far away, and i cannot imagine AlexC mackin' on a fruitcake eater.

Posted by: jk at December 19, 2006 3:03 PM
But AlexC thinks:

Accentuate the positives, my friend.

Posted by: AlexC at December 20, 2006 12:03 AM

Fruitcake ...

... or vomit?

What's your preference?

I'm more partial to the vomit, myself.

On the web Posted by AlexC at 12:05 PM

Person of the Year

Some people are upset about my selection as Times' Person of the Year

    For Time's Man of the Year, now Person of the Year, is the figure who, for good or evil, dominates the news. Yet this year Time could not bring itself to name the obvious choice. Instead, it chose you and me, all of us citizens of the digital democracy who create on the Worldwide Web. Why the copout?

    Perhaps it was Ahmadinejad's hosting of a conference of Holocaust skeptics, including David Duke, that caused Time to recoil. Perhaps it was fear that the face of the Iranian president on the cover of Time would repel the American people and be death for sales.

    Surely that was the reasoning behind Time's refusal to name Osama bin Laden in 2001, choosing Rudy Giuliani instead, though history is unlikely to conclude that Rudy, his crowded hour notwithstanding, was the central figure of that annus horribilis.

    Richard Stengel, editor of Time, as much as concedes he could not bring himself to choose by the traditional standard, if that meant choosing Ahmadinejad: "It just felt to me a little off selecting him."

    Understandably. But the refusal to select Ahmadinejad reveals an unwillingness to confront hard truths. For putting his face on Time's cover would have done a useful service, jolting America to a painful realization. Not only George Bush, but the United States, its Arab allies and Israel, had a dreadful year, as Iran emerged as first beneficiary of a war fought by this country at a cost of 25,000 dead and wounded.

Iran Posted by AlexC at 12:54 AM | What do you think? [1]
But johngalt thinks:

Richard Stengel will never be featured on Stephen Colbert's "Profiles in Balls."

Posted by: johngalt at December 19, 2006 3:03 PM

December 18, 2006

Air Quality

Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

    More than a dozen states sued the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today to lower soot levels from smokestacks and exhaust pipes, a move the state officials argue would save thousands of lives.

    The states argue that the Bush administration is ignoring science and its own experts in refusing to slightly reduce the allowed threshold for soot. The "fine particulate matter" in soot contributes to premature death, chronic respiratory disease and asthma attacks, said New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer. The pollution also leads to more hospital admissions and other public health costs, he said.

    Officials from Pennsylvania, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and the District of Columbia joined New York in the action filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington.

    "It is unfortunate that this coalition of states must resort to legal action to get the EPA to do its job — protect the environment and the public health," said Spitzer, the Democratic governor-elect.


EPA lied, people died.
    The states want to reduce the current limit of 15 micrograms of soot allowed per cubic foot of air. States say even a reduction of 1 microgram would save as many as 11,000 lives. They don't agree on a specific amount to cut the limit.

It's not clear how much the states want to lower it. But if one is good enough, why not five?

I mean there's lives at stake here.

How about 10?

But johngalt thinks:

Do I hear 15? I read that John Kerry promised that, if elected president, he will reduce the allowable level of soot in industrial air emissions by TWENTY MICROGRAMS per cubic foot from its current level.

Posted by: johngalt at December 19, 2006 3:09 PM

That Horrible Economy

Breaking news from the Wall Street Journal: "Oracle reported its profit rose 21% and sales climbed 26% to $4.16 billion as the software giant continued to reap the benefits of its acquisition spree. License sales of its flagship database software rose 9% to $867 million, while license sales of Oracle's applications unit jumped 28% to $340 million."

Who owns tech shares? Everybody's all in Gold to weather the coming depression. The housing bubble's gonna burst any day now, and those guys who are long Oracle are going to be crying in their (domestic) beer.


Immigration Counters

Wow. JohnGalt almost had me. He provided a link to immigrationcounters.com.

Man, that's mighty damn official looking.

But then, I came across this page -- and I still think I'm right.

Posted by jk at 5:07 PM | What do you think? [2]
But johngalt thinks:

Clever and creative, but it's just a start. You still need to add a link to your data sources. Be sure to include authoritative sounding outlets like the Pew Hispanic center, Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security, Government Accounting Office... stuff like that.

I assume that "Teachers Salaries" refers to salaries of only the new teachers hired. They must be illegal (err, "undocumented) immigrants too since they're working for just under $4K per year.

These numbers can be argued to make some sort of economic sense as long as one ignores WHOSE money is spent on those teacher's salaries. (And social services, and prison costs, and bankrupt hospitals, and ...)

Posted by: johngalt at December 19, 2006 3:22 PM
But jk thinks:

If they are renting a house, they are paying property taxes and paying those teachers' salaries.

I estimated the per annum remuneration of a teacher based on the complaints of my relatives in the profession, do they indeed make more?

Posted by: jk at December 19, 2006 4:07 PM

Coming to Review Corner in 2008

hedcut_jolie_angelina.jpg
The woodcut artists at the Wall Street Journal get lucky every seven years and get to do Angelina Jolie instead of an incoming cabinet secretary or septuagenarian senator.

In OpinionJournal Political Diary, John Fund reports that the Atlas Shrugged movie is coming along: He titles the piece "Porn for College Republicans."

It was published almost 50 years ago, and has sold millions of copies. But only now is Ayn Rand's controversial individualist novel "Atlas Shrugged" about to become a movie starring Angelina Jolie.

Ed Hudgins, editor of the New Individualist, tells me that the screenplay adapting the 1,100-page epic novel is only a couple weeks away from completion. Production is set to begin next year with the release of the film in 2008.

Mr. Hudgins says fans of Atlas should be pleased that the adaptation is being authored by Randall Wallace, the scriptwriter for "Braveheart," Mel Gibson's epic tale of Scottish freedom fighters. "I was fascinated by Rand's book. It was original and provocative," Mr. Wallace told Daily Variety.

For her part, Ms. Jolie has told friends that she finds the character of Dagny Taggart the most powerful female role she can imagine playing. While Ms. Jolie adheres to conventional liberal politics, she is nonetheless a big fan of Rand's sweeping story-telling abilities.

Originally, the plan of producers Howard and Karen Baldwin was to follow the example of the makers of J.R.R. Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings," and adapt Rand's sprawling work into a three-part movie. But they were finally convinced that the story should be seen at one sitting, albeit at great length. I guess that means that the speech by anti-collectivist hero John Galt -- which runs to 72 pages in the novel -- will have to be trimmed just a bit.


Posted by jk at 2:55 PM | What do you think? [1]
But johngalt thinks:

Glad to hear they abandoned the three-part approach. As for my speech, its essence can be presented in two minutes of monologue, but I suggest it be drawn out to three to give it the weight it deserves.

There are many other critical scenes that must be included: Street corner encounters, cafeteria conversations, idle trains on empty tracks, steam locos in tunnels designed for diesels, dollar signs, exploits of Francisco and Ragnar, lectures by retired professors, flaming oil wells, deserted industrial towns, neglected machine tools, racous worker meetings, aircraft chase scenes, jackbooted thugs and smarmy politicians. High hopes, friend. High hopes.

Posted by: johngalt at December 19, 2006 3:36 PM

An Underutilized Business Model

Hugh Hewitt links to a publishers' site that carries an article How Magazines Can Survive

The cable TV business combines a multitude of huge and small media aggregators together in a solo purchased package to the consumer. My suggestion is to mirror the package deals of this medium. This will work excellently for both print and online. It uses the power and accountability of the online digital business with flexibility and creativity. And it can offer many creative business models within the plan.

In the new model, we offer our customers a choice at all times. There's a "basic plan" publishing package offers the local newspaper and two magazines of your choice to be received in either digital format, printed format or both. The next step up offers the local newspaper and four magazines of your choice from a comprehensive list of offerings. We keep offering tiers of participation up until you get to the "platinum plan" that delivers the customer everything ever printed.


I think this is a perfect model for magazines and online content. The idea of including print versions in interesting, but more interesting to me is the idea of supporting an aggregation of online media and commentary on a subscription model.

I remain intrigued as well by employing this model in digital delivery of TV shows. Instead of 99 cents a show, sell a bundle that encourages a user to fork over 12.99 a month but to get more shows than he or she wants (like cable).

This brings the long tail to TV shows and will someday provide a market for a Firefly to circumvent network idiocy and be supported by its fan base.

Media and Blogging Posted by jk at 1:52 PM

A Sharanskyite Approach to North Korea

There's no reason to believe that North Korea would not fall as the Soviet Bloc nations did. The country is poor and isolated and should be susceptible to internal pressure.

To atone for my downbeat post yesterday, I offer the story of Pastor Buck, who rescues people from NK Communism.

OpinionJournal - Featured Article

Pastor Buck is a rescuer. It's a job title that applies to a courageous few--mostly Americans and South Koreans and predominantly Christians--who operate the underground railroad that ferries North Korean refugees out of China to South Korea, and now, thanks to 2004 legislation, to the U.S. Mr. Buck, an American from Seattle, says he has rescued more than 100 refugees and helped support another 1,000 who are still on the run. For this "crime"--China's policy is to