All posts by James Daniel

Ukraine – Once again

Politics

Over the weekend, while the ‘fair and open’ election in the Crimea to have the Crimea be annexed into the Russian Federation, I got to listen and read all of the talking bobble-heads tell how it is all the Presidents fault.  I have always been fascinated by the ability of self proclaimed experts to boil down extremely complex and convoluted events into simple ideas expressed in simple sentences.  Or in this case, sound bites.

First, be aware that what I’m going to do now is going to really ‘dis’ all those people out there who find it best to “just blame Obama”.  I am not writing to/for them, I long go learned that there is nothing I can say that will effect people who like blaming the current POTUS for what is going on.  Who I am reaching out to are all those people out there who might be convinced that what is going on in the Ukraine can be solved with simple actions.

Now, lets start with some historical facts….Except since the  1950’s the Crimea has not been a part of the Ukraine.  Historically the Crimea has either not been a part of any of the Russias or been a part of what is sometimes called Great Russia.  With the founding of the USSR the Crimea was first  the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic which was a part of the Russian SFSR.  In 1954 the Crimea was made a part of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. When the USSR fell apart the Crimea eventually ended up a part of the Ukraine.  Got that?  Good, now onto what I want to talk about, the comparison of what is happening now and what was happening in Europe in the late 1930’s.

While there are superficial similarities between then and now it would be a great mistake to draw any close comparisons.  Europe of the 2010’s is not the same as the Europe of the 1030’s.  Just off the bat nether the USA nor Europe are in an economic depression that was gripping both Europe and the USA in the 1930’s.  We need to remember  just what a dominating effect the Great Depression had on all political thought.  To get a nice feel for just how dominating the Great Depression was I recommend “Since Yesterday” by Frederick Lewis Allen.

In any case, if one must draw similarities between the two decades we would be best to draw the closest.  I submit that the correct comparison is the Austrian Anschluss  for what is happening in the Crimea.

Ukraine

International Politics, Politics, , , , , ,

I had planed to write about the 60’s and domestic politics this week but it would seem that Russia and Putin had other ideas.  All I really want to point out is just how silly all of the anti Obama people are acting.  These are the same folks who decried the people who dared questioned the reasons for the 2nd Iraq war.  They told everyone that we should support the President when we were in an ‘international crisis’.  Even one of our own making.  It was the patriotic thing to do, the right thing to do.

Well, now we are in an international crisis that was non of our doing and these same people are telling everyone who will  listen that it is all Pres. Obama’s fault, that he is weak, that he is not acting strong enough with Putin and the Russians.  All this even before we know just what we and our allies in Europe are doing or trying to do.  These same people who have forgotten that G.W. Bush said that he had looked into the eyes of Putin and saw his soul and this was a man we could work with.

I expect that the response to this observation is that GW was talking about himself & the GOP working with Putin, not Obama and the Dems.  I say this, I feel that all Presidents speak for the US in international politics and not for themselves and definitely not for any one political party.  I believe that GW Bush was speaking for the US.

Inclosing I just want to point out that this is a great opportunity for the anti-Obama folks who felt we should to support the President in time of international crisis to tell tell all those folks now attacking the President to sit down, shut-up and let the President do his job with out all there carping.

What we can expect to see in a HRC Presidentcy

Politics, , , ,

220px-Hillary_Clinton_official_Secretary_of_State_portrait_cropYes, it is two plus years till we need to really worry about who should be President but I’ve been hear quite a lot on “Hillary” Clinton running once more.  There is enough, more than enough, time to talk about her qualifications and liabilities.  What I want to talk about here is what we, the country,  can expect to see if she is elected.

I’m not talking about what can be expected from her, her administration, or the Democrats in Congress.  I want to address the reactions from the right.  We’ve had six plus years of the Obama Presidency, the first non-white Presidency and we’ve seen some very strong reactions from the right.  I think it is reasonable to make some extrapolations on their, conservatives, reaction to the first Woman, non-male, President.

First, I expect a strong effort to de-legitimatize her election on the same order as the ‘Birther’ attacks on Obama.  But!  I do not expect any effort to say she is not a citizen, natural born or not.  If the election is close look for people talking about how it was ‘stolen’ by voter ‘fraud’ and machine politics of the cities.  I think this because I see that the GOP has been quite successful in playing to American conservative disdain and horror of anything not Small Town/Rural.  While I expect there will be some misogynistic at work I think it has more to deal with hate & fear of change and the new than of women.  By 2016, the conservative movement will have had to deal with eight years of  new and change and they have had more than enough.  They will be pushing even harder for someone who is ‘just like me’, who represents ‘things as they were and the way they should be’.  I dread what there reaction will be if faced with eight more years of things going/being wrong.

Does this mean I’m not in favor of   a woman being President? No.  Of  Hillary Clinton being President?   Again No.  What I am saying is we must be prepared for the reaction of some of those members of the conservative movement who are ready, willing and able to do what ever is needed to appose anything done by Hillary, just because she is doing it.  We need to be ready for them not to compromise on anything, not because they are bad or evil, but because they are good people who happen to believe that compromise with Hillary (or the left) means ‘compromising with the devil’.  Many feel that they are ‘compromising more than enough’ when they let the left join them in doing something, anything.  We have seen this type of activity and thought for the last few years and we can expect more to come as the 2016 election approaches.

We have been in this same situation many times in our history and I dare say we will be in this situation in the future.  I submit for you consideration that there are a great many similarities between now and the 50’s and 60’s.  Not the causes mind you, but with what is happening, how people are acting and reacting.  The danger this country faces now is the rise of the unscrupulous politician(s).  People like Huey (Kingfish) P. Long  of the 30s or Joe McCarthy of the 50s.  These people can do a great deal of harm before they are brought down.  But more dangerous are the people who honestly believe they are doing what is right, for the best of the country, and who are just dead wrong.  These people can not be brought down, they can only be apposed.  More about them at another time.  For now it is enough for us to deal with the unscrupulous politician.  These people can make a new Clinton Presidency a living hell.

Langone & Pope Francis

Philosophy, Socioeconomic

LangoneAndPopeWhile I just love listening to a Wealthy Man try an scare this Pope with the threat of ending large donations to the Catholic Church I really am more intrigued with all the possibilities this opens up.  Let me be very clear, I am not talking about the relationship between Pope Francis and Catholic Billionaires.  I’m much more interested in starting a set of dialogues over the fundamental philosophy of capitalism and Christianity.

To start off with the apparent amoral position on all economic decisions, as expressed in the statement “It’s just Business”   and the classic Christian position  that all decision made by man must be moral.

Another is the relationship between capitalism and Christianity and Usury and/or greed and/or wealth.

All of these questions go to the root of the socioeconomic philosophy known as capitalism.

So to start this off let us first agree that capitalism is not   synonymous with ‘free market’.  That either one can exists with out the other. I submit for your consideration that ‘Capitalism’ denotes a socioeconomic system and ‘free market’ denotes an economic system and socioeconomic is not economic.

 

A Modest Proposal – With Appologies to Johnathan Swift

Philosophy, Politics, Socioeconomic

A Modest Proposal for Preventing the Children of Poor People From Being a Burthen to Their Parents or Country, and for Making Them Beneficial to the Publick

Jonathan Swift

Inspired by Dr Swift I would like to put forward this modest proposal to help solve both our overclouding of our prisons and our devastating governmental budget deficit.  Consider, if you will, allowing anyone who kills, comets any form of unlawful homicide, to pay to the local, state, and federal government a fine equivalent to the expected taxes to be paid by the person(s) killed.  The benefits to the fiances of the government are immediately obvious to everyone.

The state would not only have a new, non-tax, form of revenue but also the state would no-longer have the expense of incarceration.  To make things even better we could make the alternate penalty, in lieu of cash remuneration to the state, the person convicted would be to be put to death as soon as possible,  to the date of conviction.  If upon conviction the person(s) in question now wishes to pay the state then all of the state’s expenses will be included.  This has the additional benefit of encourage the early, pre-trial, agreement to paying of the state the loss of tax revenue of the decedent(s).

It should be obvious to all that this system has the advantage of discouraging the negligent killing of the most productive members of society by making it prohibitively expensive.  Even more benefit to the government revenues by calculating the fee based upon both the taxes payed in the form of income, investment, and capital gains but also taxes such as sales and property taxes.  We could even include utility taxes just to make things fair.

People in ‘Stand Your Ground’ jurisdiction would be motivated not to act rashly as you would still be held liable for the death of another.  Police would be encourage not to use deadly force.  Doctors, Nurses, EMTs will be fully motivated to act so that the patient does not die.  Also they would be no question of ‘pulling the plug’ on someone as the person or persons would then be easily shown to be responsible for the death.

Another benefit is the creation of a new insurance industry, we would have ‘Death’ insurance to join ‘Life’ insurance.  In the case of ‘Death’ insurance, the buyer would be insured against being held responsible for the death of another.  As this would normally be a very rare occurrence the companies providing the policy would have a very nice profit margin.

The final benefit is society would now have an objective measure of the worth of each member.  No longer would there be any question of an individuals worth.  The worth of everyone would be know, in point of fact it would be in the governments best interest calculate everyone’s worth on a regular basses and for individuals to insure that this valuation is as high as possible.  People worth more would be encouraged to dress in a distinctive way manner that would not be simply or easily copied or imitated by those worth less.  New business would spring up to provide this service to the worthy stimulating the economy and providing gainful employment.

As has been shown here this proposal is a ‘win’ ‘win’ for all.

Efficiency

General, Socioeconomic

The other day I saw a TV Commercial talking about how much energy is in gasoline, that is, high energy density of gasoline.  What it doesn’t tell you is just how difficult it is to get this energy into a usable form.  The most common way we convert the energy from gasoline is with the one form or another of the “Internal combustion engine” in our cars and such.  Most IC engines used in cars run about 18%-20% (see link), that is the engine generate about 80% waste heat that is not converted into to usable form. Contrast this with the efficiency of your basic electric motor (citation needed).

To really measure and compare engine efficiency we need to include the amount of energy used to create the fuel, including all of the extraction process of all of the raw materials (for now lets ignore the energy expended in making the tools to do the various process’ )  In the case of a gasoline powered IC engine would include, but not limited to, drilling, pumping and refining the fuel.  For  an electric motor this would include, but not limited to, the extraction & processing of the fuel, if any, the electrical power generation.  In an ideal case the amount of energy wasted, used, to transmit the energy from where it is generated to a typical use point should also be included.

Finally, we should also include the amount of energy needed to deal with all of the wast products of the process.  To my knowledge, now disinterested third party, that is someone not connected to any of the parties profiting directly for either the IC engine or electric motor, has done any such analysis or studies.  I would be very interested in hearing about any, wouldn’t you?

 

A Good Question

Philosophy, Politics, , ,

Tonight I heard a very good questioncomputer?: “Why should a person working full time have to live in poverty?”  For myself I feel that the answer is they shouldn’t have to live in poverty.

Now before we go any farther let me make something very clear.  I’m asking the question is “Why should a person, working 40 hours a week, be paid an amount that is less than the poverty line for a single person?”  I’m not even considering those people who are married and their spouce isn’t working.  Nor am I talking about a single parent.  I will leave these people out for later thought.  I’m just dealing with a single person working full time and they are being paid the national minimum wage and the poverty line for where they work is greater than their income.

I have yet hear anyone on the right give me an answer to this question.  Maybe they just haven’t heard if before, no mater how unlikely that might be.  Lets be generous and assume they haven’t and give them the opportunity to address this question.  Here’s your chance.  Please!  Give me an answer, I’d really like to hear it.

Promoting Affluenza

Politics, Socioeconomic

safe_image.phpI don’t think Congressman Jack Kingston (R-Ga) has given much thought to just what lesson all of the kids would be learning if the ones getting  “free lunches” are the only ones having to ‘work’ for their lunch.  If one group of students can pay for their lunches from money given them by their parents but another group has to ‘work’ to earn their lunch just what lesson will be learned?  If the lesson that is to be learned is that TANSTAFUL (there ain’t no such thing as a free lunch) wouldn’t it be better for all of the students work for their lunches in stead of just one group?  Are we not just denying  the wealthy children  this most valuable lesson in life and in the process assisting in promoting affluenza?

Capatialism the Free Market & Christianity

Politics

With the reaction of many of the right wing talk-bobble-heads to this past weeks comments by Pope Francis has brought to the forefront a question I’ve been asking for several years now.  I’ve been asking various and  people I know who make a point of pointing out that they are Christians just where in either the scriptures or other Christian teaching (or Philosophy) that Usury is no longer a sin in their denomination? I should like to point out that even in the link on Usury in Wikipedia talks about unethical or immoral monetary loans and not just making loans for money.

Other than a couple of very very strict Calvinists who equate being successful as the same as being one of the Elect, I have yet to get any citations or references.  Strange.

 

Why the GOP aposses Pres. Obama’s nominations

Politics

Many of the congress watchers know that when the GOP regains control of the Senate that they were sure to change the rules on the filibuster to keep the Democrats from doing exactly what the GOP has been doing since President Obama was first elected.  Specifically using, over using really, the rules on closure to slow down or stop most of Obama’s nominations.  The past few years they have been particularity hostile to Obama’s judicial nominations.  Why this is seems to escape most of the talking heads and beltway pundents.  This being the case here is my 2 cents.

Right now judges on the federal bench number 390 nominated by the Democrats and 390 nominated and somewhere around 90 empty seats.  For most of my life I’ve been listening to the right wing complain about the ‘liberal judicial activism’ and watched the federal courts become more and more conservative activist.  With the 90 empty seats on the bench I think the GOP/Conservative Movement fear that all there work over the last 30+ years is going to be set badly back if Obama & the Democrats get to fill the empty seats.

I also think that the GOP is looking at the demographics.  They are loosing badly in the struggle for newer, younger members to the Democrats and Independents.  This is not the first time in the history of the USA that a political party has seen it’s support wither away.  An the first time, I think, is very close to what is happening now. The “The Midnight Judges” was caused by the up and coming Democratic-Republican Party vs the Federalist Party and the Federalist were wrongly thought to have gone and filled a large number of new judgeships because they wanted to keep control of the judiciary.  They reason I think that this is the best comparison because this marked the start of some of the most vitriolic political era of US history and I think that all of the vitriol spewing forth since the election of President Obama  is quite similar.   I hate to think that the GOP fear of its loss of control of either or both of the Executive & Legislative branches is motivating