Nuclear Meltdown (5/25/2011)
This past week I counted at least four meltdowns, all covered with vigor, in the media headlines. Probably the most obscure and curious regarding the hype to most Americans was the arrest, indictment, and release of IMF Chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn. Little do many of my countrymen understand regarding monetary policy, let alone the calls for an end to the dollar as the reserve currency by Strauss-Kahn. The second meltdown was the failure of the Gingrich campaign to gain traction. Laughably, the most academic of a possible Republican field of presidential nominees, fell flat before starting. Like Strauss-Kahn, Newt melted down.
Meltdown number three was President Obama extinguishing his fiery return in the polls by crossing middle-east ally Israel with a call to return to territory held 44 years ago. The contradictory nature of Obama is puzzling as a blind-eye is turned toward our own border issues and we idly watch killing of refugees seeking democracy in Syria. But, the President is pro-Hamas supporting the terrorist organization publicly as far back as May 2008. Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu skillfully schooled our President on the fallacies of his position and Obama’s action may be the beginning of his re-election meltdown. Finally, the mainstream pundits could not get enough of the Terminator’s marriage meltdown, number four last week, as revelations exposed infidelity and a love child with a household staff member. Each of these personal meltdowns, in my opinion, is rooted in ego and self-interest.
Sadly though, the most important nuclear meltdown in the world is not garnering any media coverage and is similarly rooted in ego and self-interest. However, this meltdown over the next 30 years will result in many unnecessary deaths and cancers worldwide. On March 11, 2011 the historic earthquake rocked northern Japan, suspiciously damaging nuclear reactors, but denied by Japanese government. A newly released TEPCO report this week contains a disaster timeline stating within 5 hours of the quake fuel rods were exposed and rapidly melting, and within 16 hours Reactor No. 1’s rods had melted down and dropped to the bottom of the reactor. Similar events occurred in Reactors 2 and 3. Today the reactors are continuing to spew radiation and radioactive water is flowing to groundwater and the ocean. Worse than Chernobyl, Fukushima has become the world’s first nuclear meltdown. Curiously, the four men in personal meltdowns garner far more coverage, but every plant, animal, and human being in the Northern hemisphere is now poisoned by the ineptness of a government and power company that chose to hide their failures to protect their egos.
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Wealth Disparity
Wealth Disparity (5/11/2011)
A drive through New Smyrna Beach demonstrates the extreme wealth disparity that can be found anywhere in America or the world. From the mega-wealth of beachside to the barely surviving poor west of U.S. Highway 1 radical contrasts in daily life are found. It is impossible to look away in a small town and not acknowledge differences, to ignore them would be unconscionable. Like New Smyrna, America’s numbers are mind-blowing: the top 1% controls nearly 33% of the wealth in America whereas the bottom 50% has just 2.5% of the wealth.
Don’t misunderstand me. I love nice things, eating out, a beautiful home, new cars, and a big bank account. As a country even our poorest live far better than the middle class does overseas, but such argument is not cause for turning our backs on the needy. Similarly, the populist envy driven by our current President does not justify excessively taxing wage earners, or the ultra-wealthy. The current raging debate has disclosed the failures of our progressive tax system: envy that the “rich” pay much of their tax through a 15% dividend, and sadly uncovering through subsidies and support programs a single mother of three earning $14,000 per year has more disposable income than a similar mother earning $60,000.
We need the successful to succeed, creating jobs, opportunities, and capital for driving the economy. Simultaneously an understanding and empathy must exist for those who need help. I do not have solutions, but must argue the debate is lost in political rhetoric and desire to drive pet projects. Taxing the wealthy at 100% will not provide enough revenue to fix the government spending problem and it certainly will not lift those in need. Milton Friedman argues in the movie, “The One Percent” the increasing wealth gap is justified because it has also lifted the poorest of poor. In earlier lectures Friedman, in characteristic fashion, shows at least that government creates a perverse system starting with bad schools, limits opportunity through minimum wage laws, and creates dependency via welfare programs.
The political debate from both sides focuses on our tax system and protecting special interests, Republicans arguing to keep tax rates low on the rich, Democrats seeking more. Sadly, both sides view 67,000 pages of tax code as the holy grail of government purpose and fail to understand simplifying the tax system and cutting spending will allow market forces to work toward solutions benefitting both rich and poor.
A drive through New Smyrna Beach demonstrates the extreme wealth disparity that can be found anywhere in America or the world. From the mega-wealth of beachside to the barely surviving poor west of U.S. Highway 1 radical contrasts in daily life are found. It is impossible to look away in a small town and not acknowledge differences, to ignore them would be unconscionable. Like New Smyrna, America’s numbers are mind-blowing: the top 1% controls nearly 33% of the wealth in America whereas the bottom 50% has just 2.5% of the wealth.
Don’t misunderstand me. I love nice things, eating out, a beautiful home, new cars, and a big bank account. As a country even our poorest live far better than the middle class does overseas, but such argument is not cause for turning our backs on the needy. Similarly, the populist envy driven by our current President does not justify excessively taxing wage earners, or the ultra-wealthy. The current raging debate has disclosed the failures of our progressive tax system: envy that the “rich” pay much of their tax through a 15% dividend, and sadly uncovering through subsidies and support programs a single mother of three earning $14,000 per year has more disposable income than a similar mother earning $60,000.
We need the successful to succeed, creating jobs, opportunities, and capital for driving the economy. Simultaneously an understanding and empathy must exist for those who need help. I do not have solutions, but must argue the debate is lost in political rhetoric and desire to drive pet projects. Taxing the wealthy at 100% will not provide enough revenue to fix the government spending problem and it certainly will not lift those in need. Milton Friedman argues in the movie, “The One Percent” the increasing wealth gap is justified because it has also lifted the poorest of poor. In earlier lectures Friedman, in characteristic fashion, shows at least that government creates a perverse system starting with bad schools, limits opportunity through minimum wage laws, and creates dependency via welfare programs.
The political debate from both sides focuses on our tax system and protecting special interests, Republicans arguing to keep tax rates low on the rich, Democrats seeking more. Sadly, both sides view 67,000 pages of tax code as the holy grail of government purpose and fail to understand simplifying the tax system and cutting spending will allow market forces to work toward solutions benefitting both rich and poor.
iTracker
iTracker (5/4/2011)
In the “Daily Mail” on 4/18/2011 I first read hackers in London discovered iPhones are recording and storing specific location data about their users. Initially the major networks and newspapers in America were slow to report this, taking almost 4 days to do so. Humorously Apple’s, Steve Jobs first offered no such information was gathered and certainly without malicious intent. With persistence though, the media found more details and Jobs did acknowledge the data gathering. So what's my beef? As a programmer I do not consider the tracking file an accident and my concern is the potential misuse of the data. Possibly the programmers had good intentions but knowing a data record of individual details exists would be too tempting for use by others.
Let’s consider three examples. First, police in Michigan have been accused of downloading the data during traffic stops, without warrants or arrest in violation of the 4th Amendment. Law enforcement could use the data to pinpoint the whereabouts of a particular individual. Imagine the phone doing detective work for the police by providing when and where he goes. Second, employees are at risk from employers as the employer typically owns the phone; thus the data can be checked to verify the whereabouts of employees to ensure he is working, or where reported during office hours. Third, consider a contested divorce with a vindictive ex-wife. Through Discovery the data file must be made available and the husband’s whereabouts at any time readily known. In my second and third examples the 4th Amendment does not apply, thus anyone with an iPhone has already voluntarily submitted to 24-hour tracking.
My preference is to believe Apple had no malicious intent in mind when the file was created and most likely it was created to improve location data services and their product service offering. However, some have reported this is a requirement under the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and most likely “we the people” allowed this further erosion of our privacy and personal rights to take place based on the premise, “they would never do anything bad and it will help stop crime or save lives.” In my recent column, “Land of the Free” I argued there is no longer bravery among us and we idly standby while our freedoms disappear. Personally, I have deleted the file on my phone and will continue to do so. Maybe it still exists on a server somewhere, but at least I have fought back. My concern is when will anyone else fight back?
In the “Daily Mail” on 4/18/2011 I first read hackers in London discovered iPhones are recording and storing specific location data about their users. Initially the major networks and newspapers in America were slow to report this, taking almost 4 days to do so. Humorously Apple’s, Steve Jobs first offered no such information was gathered and certainly without malicious intent. With persistence though, the media found more details and Jobs did acknowledge the data gathering. So what's my beef? As a programmer I do not consider the tracking file an accident and my concern is the potential misuse of the data. Possibly the programmers had good intentions but knowing a data record of individual details exists would be too tempting for use by others.
Let’s consider three examples. First, police in Michigan have been accused of downloading the data during traffic stops, without warrants or arrest in violation of the 4th Amendment. Law enforcement could use the data to pinpoint the whereabouts of a particular individual. Imagine the phone doing detective work for the police by providing when and where he goes. Second, employees are at risk from employers as the employer typically owns the phone; thus the data can be checked to verify the whereabouts of employees to ensure he is working, or where reported during office hours. Third, consider a contested divorce with a vindictive ex-wife. Through Discovery the data file must be made available and the husband’s whereabouts at any time readily known. In my second and third examples the 4th Amendment does not apply, thus anyone with an iPhone has already voluntarily submitted to 24-hour tracking.
My preference is to believe Apple had no malicious intent in mind when the file was created and most likely it was created to improve location data services and their product service offering. However, some have reported this is a requirement under the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and most likely “we the people” allowed this further erosion of our privacy and personal rights to take place based on the premise, “they would never do anything bad and it will help stop crime or save lives.” In my recent column, “Land of the Free” I argued there is no longer bravery among us and we idly standby while our freedoms disappear. Personally, I have deleted the file on my phone and will continue to do so. Maybe it still exists on a server somewhere, but at least I have fought back. My concern is when will anyone else fight back?
Can I Wear My Shoes Now?
Can I wear my Shoes Now? (5/4/2011)
Sunday night I was on my way home from Atlanta tuned in to CNN when I heard the President planned an unprecedented press conference around 10:40pm. My wife and I speculated on possibilities, “what could be so important?” Jokingly I offered maybe Osama bin Laden was dead, but that certainly was not worth a late night press conference. Of course, if your poll numbers have fallen to historic lows and your re-election campaign was prematurely announced weeks ago then this could be the much needed booster shot.
I argue, “who cares?” Eight or nine years ago the death of Osama bin Laden may have had material impact. For nearly 10 years we have been given the boogeyman of threat, Bin Laden and his minions trying to harm us. Of course, Orwell would not have given up his government boogeyman, Emmanuel Goldstein, because he was the necessary fuel for the government machine. Bin Laden, like Goldstein, is a necessary enemy of the state; serving to distract, unit e and focus the people away from the true issues. Bush brought as bin Laden, a desperate politically troubled president has eliminated him. Reminding us how important it is not to piss off our enemies, the United States is treating Osama bin Laden's body in "accordance with Islamic practice," a White House official says. If this man was our enemy I assert his body be publicly hung in Times Square and treated to a ticker tape parade, unless of course, no body exists and this is a diversion.
So, the real question the next time I board an airplane is, “can I wear my shoes now?” If Bin Laden is dead I assume this means we can pull out of Afghanistan this week and bring our troops home since we spent billions of dollars chasing this idiot through caves, not unlike Bill Murray and the “Caddyshack” gopher. Sadly, the media was quick to report ramped up security efforts, more scanning, and began fear-mongering possible Al Qaeda retaliation attacks. Give me a break, Goldstein (I mean bin Laden) is dead and now the threat level is pushed to imminent. I expect more money will have to be spent to assure Al Qaeda terrorism is minimized. I expect much focus on the White House this week, defining our President as a world-wide hero who saved humanity from an evil man, with the media acting like teen-age girls at a “Teen Beat” cover shoot. Osama bin Laden is dead; can I wear my shoes now?
Sunday night I was on my way home from Atlanta tuned in to CNN when I heard the President planned an unprecedented press conference around 10:40pm. My wife and I speculated on possibilities, “what could be so important?” Jokingly I offered maybe Osama bin Laden was dead, but that certainly was not worth a late night press conference. Of course, if your poll numbers have fallen to historic lows and your re-election campaign was prematurely announced weeks ago then this could be the much needed booster shot.
I argue, “who cares?” Eight or nine years ago the death of Osama bin Laden may have had material impact. For nearly 10 years we have been given the boogeyman of threat, Bin Laden and his minions trying to harm us. Of course, Orwell would not have given up his government boogeyman, Emmanuel Goldstein, because he was the necessary fuel for the government machine. Bin Laden, like Goldstein, is a necessary enemy of the state; serving to distract, unit e and focus the people away from the true issues. Bush brought as bin Laden, a desperate politically troubled president has eliminated him. Reminding us how important it is not to piss off our enemies, the United States is treating Osama bin Laden's body in "accordance with Islamic practice," a White House official says. If this man was our enemy I assert his body be publicly hung in Times Square and treated to a ticker tape parade, unless of course, no body exists and this is a diversion.
So, the real question the next time I board an airplane is, “can I wear my shoes now?” If Bin Laden is dead I assume this means we can pull out of Afghanistan this week and bring our troops home since we spent billions of dollars chasing this idiot through caves, not unlike Bill Murray and the “Caddyshack” gopher. Sadly, the media was quick to report ramped up security efforts, more scanning, and began fear-mongering possible Al Qaeda retaliation attacks. Give me a break, Goldstein (I mean bin Laden) is dead and now the threat level is pushed to imminent. I expect more money will have to be spent to assure Al Qaeda terrorism is minimized. I expect much focus on the White House this week, defining our President as a world-wide hero who saved humanity from an evil man, with the media acting like teen-age girls at a “Teen Beat” cover shoot. Osama bin Laden is dead; can I wear my shoes now?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)