http://www.nationalreview.com/article/421623/gmo-label-movement-loses-ground
Good news I think. Too much of the fear about GMO foods is not grounded in research but in scary thoughts about big agriculture.
Monday, July 27, 2015
Sunday, July 12, 2015
Lessons from Greece
http://www.politico.eu/article/how-the-olympics-rotted-greece/
Like most problems in Greece lately, the issue results from an overtaxed society without the stomach to reign in generous retirement pensions and a lack of new investment. In any society telling the retires that their living wages are about to be cut is political suicide. When the country can't pay it's debts, raise new money or agree with creditors on a more favorable restructure, what remains?
The IOC (International Olympic Committee) didn't help the Greeks by offering them the chance to host the Olympics in the most historic and perfectly suited city, Athens. The birth of Western Civilization and the center of art, philosophy, mathmatics and politics couldn't have found a more appropriate location. Feel good stories are followed sometimes by nightmarish conclusions for citizens of that once great Aegean country. Blaming the IOC is a bit like blaming the liquor store that sold the booze that led to the drunk running a red light and crashing into a ditch. Responsible countries do research on the Olympics and the financial benefits versus costs to their respective cities and try to make it work. Sometimes they get it right and sometimes they get it wrong; voters in Greece are also responsible for the policies they sign on to. Politicians and governments are the result of those collective choices made by citizens who have decided on a national direction in economics, religion, art and culture. The Greeks are to blame here.
There is a lesson here for the United States and our insatiable lust for credit and debt. People in democracies can cost along for a while on interest free debt while business and foreign investment money continues apace. Eventually though the propped up market place collapses and creditors send out a bill. The U.S. government's addition to borrowing money and pushing the debt forward on future citizens is an extension of voters doing the same thing in their own lives. The easy thing to do is blame 'reckless politicians' for their tax and spend misdeeds, but they use debt in the same way most Americans do. Their concern is for the now because now is what is in front of them. There are three things the United States should do to reign in spending. Clamp down dramatically on the regulatory state which makes it difficult for new business to start making money and hiring workers. I heard an idea recently that some wealthy pro-business types would set up a legal fund to defend owners of companies that have been harassed by silly regulation and the cost of compliance. This is a great way to fight back and keep entrepreneurship strong in America.
The second fixable area of spending is to pass some kind of Amendment that keeps the spending by Congress to a portion of the income. Other 'balanced budget' amendments pop-up as a proposal from time to time but the real energy and will to get it done is clearly not there in Washington D.C. The country has a debt ceiling supposedly for this purpose; Congressional leaders vote to raise it every time is comes up for a vote making the purpose of having a ceiling moot. Amendments can't be voted away. Third, simplify the tax code by making it easy for ordinary people to read and figure out. I am no tax expert but the code should reward businesses first, because they provide jobs, and investors second because they keep money in the economy. Filing tax paperwork every year need not be a messy and painful affair for those business owners paying their own salaries. Complicated tax laws have given secondary industries like legal firms and tax accountants too much time to create myriad ways of hiding money and using loopholes to get around crazy high rates. Just simplify the law and watch it fix itself.
I haven't mentioned what programs I would cut or even get rid of altogether. The reality is when governments collect less revenue they have less creative ways to spend it. Too many programs that should have gotten the ax years ago are still with us and they continue to grow like a tumor, continually fed by redistributed wealth. Or put another way, money that could be used for job creation and private venture is being sucked up by wasteful and unnecessary programs. Take away the money and you kill the program. If we don't start making our government smaller we could be facing down creditors like Greece, and forced to choose selling off assets or cutting retiree pay. It isn't a choice America will like any more than Greece.
Like most problems in Greece lately, the issue results from an overtaxed society without the stomach to reign in generous retirement pensions and a lack of new investment. In any society telling the retires that their living wages are about to be cut is political suicide. When the country can't pay it's debts, raise new money or agree with creditors on a more favorable restructure, what remains?
The IOC (International Olympic Committee) didn't help the Greeks by offering them the chance to host the Olympics in the most historic and perfectly suited city, Athens. The birth of Western Civilization and the center of art, philosophy, mathmatics and politics couldn't have found a more appropriate location. Feel good stories are followed sometimes by nightmarish conclusions for citizens of that once great Aegean country. Blaming the IOC is a bit like blaming the liquor store that sold the booze that led to the drunk running a red light and crashing into a ditch. Responsible countries do research on the Olympics and the financial benefits versus costs to their respective cities and try to make it work. Sometimes they get it right and sometimes they get it wrong; voters in Greece are also responsible for the policies they sign on to. Politicians and governments are the result of those collective choices made by citizens who have decided on a national direction in economics, religion, art and culture. The Greeks are to blame here.
There is a lesson here for the United States and our insatiable lust for credit and debt. People in democracies can cost along for a while on interest free debt while business and foreign investment money continues apace. Eventually though the propped up market place collapses and creditors send out a bill. The U.S. government's addition to borrowing money and pushing the debt forward on future citizens is an extension of voters doing the same thing in their own lives. The easy thing to do is blame 'reckless politicians' for their tax and spend misdeeds, but they use debt in the same way most Americans do. Their concern is for the now because now is what is in front of them. There are three things the United States should do to reign in spending. Clamp down dramatically on the regulatory state which makes it difficult for new business to start making money and hiring workers. I heard an idea recently that some wealthy pro-business types would set up a legal fund to defend owners of companies that have been harassed by silly regulation and the cost of compliance. This is a great way to fight back and keep entrepreneurship strong in America.
The second fixable area of spending is to pass some kind of Amendment that keeps the spending by Congress to a portion of the income. Other 'balanced budget' amendments pop-up as a proposal from time to time but the real energy and will to get it done is clearly not there in Washington D.C. The country has a debt ceiling supposedly for this purpose; Congressional leaders vote to raise it every time is comes up for a vote making the purpose of having a ceiling moot. Amendments can't be voted away. Third, simplify the tax code by making it easy for ordinary people to read and figure out. I am no tax expert but the code should reward businesses first, because they provide jobs, and investors second because they keep money in the economy. Filing tax paperwork every year need not be a messy and painful affair for those business owners paying their own salaries. Complicated tax laws have given secondary industries like legal firms and tax accountants too much time to create myriad ways of hiding money and using loopholes to get around crazy high rates. Just simplify the law and watch it fix itself.
I haven't mentioned what programs I would cut or even get rid of altogether. The reality is when governments collect less revenue they have less creative ways to spend it. Too many programs that should have gotten the ax years ago are still with us and they continue to grow like a tumor, continually fed by redistributed wealth. Or put another way, money that could be used for job creation and private venture is being sucked up by wasteful and unnecessary programs. Take away the money and you kill the program. If we don't start making our government smaller we could be facing down creditors like Greece, and forced to choose selling off assets or cutting retiree pay. It isn't a choice America will like any more than Greece.
Sunday, June 28, 2015
Supreme Madness
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/420417/supreme-court-john-roberts-marriage-health-care-constitutio
A timely lament. Conservatives have seen this type of judicial activism for years, especially the part where judges appointed by Republicans switch sides on key cases. Sandra Day O'Connor comes to mind. It isn't just frustrating because your side lost. It is frustrating to see how laws and interpretation are now a thin veil covering a naked activist push to overturn traditional institutions in America. The fact that judges even cite case law to support or deny their decisions is a quaint relic of a time when judges applied the law and didn't re-write it. Now I'm lamenting...
A timely lament. Conservatives have seen this type of judicial activism for years, especially the part where judges appointed by Republicans switch sides on key cases. Sandra Day O'Connor comes to mind. It isn't just frustrating because your side lost. It is frustrating to see how laws and interpretation are now a thin veil covering a naked activist push to overturn traditional institutions in America. The fact that judges even cite case law to support or deny their decisions is a quaint relic of a time when judges applied the law and didn't re-write it. Now I'm lamenting...
Monday, June 22, 2015
Trade anxiety!
http://fortune.com/2015/06/22/top-fast-track-david-ricardo/
Students in any macro-economic class will have encountered David Ricardo and his theory of comparative advantage, which is pretty much the cornerstone of global trade today. A straightforward theory explaining that when countries 'specialize' in producing whatever they are good at producing, they will trade those goods or services with countries who specialize in something else. Both countries benefit financially when they trade making governments and merchants on both sides of the transaction better off. No serious person refutes Ricardo's theory on the merits today; the dispute on most free-trade issues is over whether or not other countries will abide by the same standards they sign up for in this massive deals that presumable cover everything from agriculture and automobile standards to pay for displaced workers and anti-dumping laws.
As someone who is in favor of free trade, I am sympathetic to concerns most Americans (citizens of other democracy as well) have about the loss of sovereignty in the exercise of the government authority. For example, Greece is a country in the center of a financial disaster due to mismanagement and negligence on the part of former government officials. They are in such a hole that the EU has to put together bail out packages every couple of months to keep them from collapsing into insolvency. Many German and French citizens would love to cut Greece off and let them fix their own mess. Problem is, much of their sovereignty has been tied into by a collective governing body known as the EU, which decides how much money and how often economies like Greece get bailouts and under what conditions. If the Germans took a vote over whether or not to fund insolvent Greece the result would be a definitive NO! But they don't get a vote because they ceded the authority to decide on financial issues to a giant central bank. I don't want this for America; we need to retain the ability to vote out bad deals while maintaining open trade with other countries. It is nearly impossible to satisfy every industry or concerned party in sweeping trade legislation, but diligence must be observed.
The upcoming piece of legislation on the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) is supposed to lower tariffs and increase exports of goods and services from the United States. Well...maybe. When looking at upcoming legislation, the best example of future performance is past performance. Unfortunately the nearest example is the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) but I can't find anything resembling a coherent argument for or against the massive overhaul. I know the trade classifications, or rather re-classifications, were updated for the U.S, Canada and Mexico to keep much of the money within the region. Trade classifications are those designations that products crossing international borders must be labeled with. So if Japan sends BMWs to the U.S. on cargo ships, those automobiles would have a corresponding label that fits an automotive description recognized by every country. NAFTA created it's own classification book essentially, that labels products like automobiles created in the U.S different from ones manufactured in Japan. To say the least, it is confusing and messy but I don't really know whether or not it is considered beneficial to the overall economy. I'll keep looking at this as well as the new TPP deal currently being debated in Washington. I am cautiously on board though so far.
Students in any macro-economic class will have encountered David Ricardo and his theory of comparative advantage, which is pretty much the cornerstone of global trade today. A straightforward theory explaining that when countries 'specialize' in producing whatever they are good at producing, they will trade those goods or services with countries who specialize in something else. Both countries benefit financially when they trade making governments and merchants on both sides of the transaction better off. No serious person refutes Ricardo's theory on the merits today; the dispute on most free-trade issues is over whether or not other countries will abide by the same standards they sign up for in this massive deals that presumable cover everything from agriculture and automobile standards to pay for displaced workers and anti-dumping laws.
As someone who is in favor of free trade, I am sympathetic to concerns most Americans (citizens of other democracy as well) have about the loss of sovereignty in the exercise of the government authority. For example, Greece is a country in the center of a financial disaster due to mismanagement and negligence on the part of former government officials. They are in such a hole that the EU has to put together bail out packages every couple of months to keep them from collapsing into insolvency. Many German and French citizens would love to cut Greece off and let them fix their own mess. Problem is, much of their sovereignty has been tied into by a collective governing body known as the EU, which decides how much money and how often economies like Greece get bailouts and under what conditions. If the Germans took a vote over whether or not to fund insolvent Greece the result would be a definitive NO! But they don't get a vote because they ceded the authority to decide on financial issues to a giant central bank. I don't want this for America; we need to retain the ability to vote out bad deals while maintaining open trade with other countries. It is nearly impossible to satisfy every industry or concerned party in sweeping trade legislation, but diligence must be observed.
The upcoming piece of legislation on the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) is supposed to lower tariffs and increase exports of goods and services from the United States. Well...maybe. When looking at upcoming legislation, the best example of future performance is past performance. Unfortunately the nearest example is the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) but I can't find anything resembling a coherent argument for or against the massive overhaul. I know the trade classifications, or rather re-classifications, were updated for the U.S, Canada and Mexico to keep much of the money within the region. Trade classifications are those designations that products crossing international borders must be labeled with. So if Japan sends BMWs to the U.S. on cargo ships, those automobiles would have a corresponding label that fits an automotive description recognized by every country. NAFTA created it's own classification book essentially, that labels products like automobiles created in the U.S different from ones manufactured in Japan. To say the least, it is confusing and messy but I don't really know whether or not it is considered beneficial to the overall economy. I'll keep looking at this as well as the new TPP deal currently being debated in Washington. I am cautiously on board though so far.
Monday, June 15, 2015
Constructing Identity
Truth is not relative. Bruce Jenner and Rachel Dolezal have both
been in the news lately for different ‘identity’ type conflicts within
themselves. Jenner wants to become a women and Dolezal thinks she is black but
is obviously not. The most painful element to all of this 'is she or isn't she
black?' nonsense is the inability of so many in media to state the obvious; she
is white. She is a liar. She is quite possible crazy. The rest of the story
about why she 'identifies' the way she does is dishonest and makes truth relative.
Bruce Jenner becoming a woman because of how he feels is a problem for him, but
when writers don’t discuss it in the light of the truth that a being does not
change fundamental and biological aspects of their humanity because they 'feel'
like it is dangerous. Journalists encourage the victim narrative by writing
syrupy nauseating articles about the individual's 'discovery' or past family
pain that might have led to the transformation. This is the unavoidable weepy interviewing
style that started trickling into stories when Oprah was getting the big stars.
ESPN even nominated Jenner for the Courage
Award. This essay from Slate however, takes a different approach.
Instead of arguing that Dolezal's ethnicity or race is a matter for her to
decide, he replaces the is-she-or-isn't-she question with a larger explanation
of how black identity is tied to struggle and hardship. This is a textbook bait
and switch tactic meant to steer the debate toward cultural issues that the
left is concerned with. Like an insurance salesman who finds a myriad of ways
to sell plans, the ideologically driven (hopelessly biased) journalist will
turn a prominent news item into promotional material for his own revolution.
Instead of supporting or rejecting this woman on the merits, the reader is fed
bits of social constructs the author has created in which being black equals passing
a litmus test of struggles. Rachel Dolezal is not black and nothing should be
made of how she 'identifies'.
I understand the urge to sympathize with people undergoing
emotional distress or mental instability. Often it takes a celebrity voice or
high profile incident to highlight mental disorders most of us don't see close
up. Temple Grandin showed Americans a creative side to reducing stress among
dairy cows and feeding patterns for other livestock while bringing attention to
autism, something she has dealt with personally. A change in perception can be
beneficial in business, philosophy or education as long as concrete principles
and truths are observed. If Apple inc. decided making a profit was less
important than producing the most visually appealing products and clean
aesthetics they are known for, the enthusiasm would last for a little while but
the money would soon run out. What is needed for Apple is to find a way to
understand the primary truth of business, turning a profit, while not ignoring
creative components that make their business a cutting edge industry. No matter
how much designers may want to ignore costs of production it remains a concrete
principle of creating goods and services. The sympathy for disturbed people
like Jenner and Dolezal runs the gamut from the heart-felt "Tell me what I
can do to help?" to the inconsequential "I've got more important
things to discuss". When society doesn't present a clear understanding of
truth and lies the resulting mush will be relativity in all areas of life, not
just socio-cultural. The more space we carve out for ‘identities’ that have
never been recognized by society as anything other than mental disorders, the
less chance those confused individuals have of being helped. Stop treating
Bruce Jenner like a hero and stop using Rachel Dolezal to advance personal
notions about societal inequalities.
Saturday, June 13, 2015
The Crackdown Continues...
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-26349305
Convicted on corruption charges and leaking state secrets, another of Bo Xilai's acolytes gets sentenced to life in prison. Truthfully the charge could have been anything. Corruption among Communist party apparatchiks is a laughable thing to be investigated for given the regularity of graft. Xi Jinping is gaining legitimacy by showing a restless population that his war on corruption is real. The immediate purpose of the trial is for show and to get rid of powerful leaders outside of president Xi's faction. The larger purpose though is to protect the Communist party and its position as the leader of the world's largest country. Evan Osnos of the New Yorker wrote a great piece on Xi Jinping and his realistic understanding that the party's control is tenuous and must be seen to be acting in the interest of the people. One quick look at the "Arab Spring" from a few years ago proves how quickly populations can overthrow governments. China is hardly Egypt, but stirrings of discontentment have started already in Hong Kong this last year. I am curious to see what happens in the mainland, as well as the government's reaction to it. The next few years will set the tone for the Xi regime.
Convicted on corruption charges and leaking state secrets, another of Bo Xilai's acolytes gets sentenced to life in prison. Truthfully the charge could have been anything. Corruption among Communist party apparatchiks is a laughable thing to be investigated for given the regularity of graft. Xi Jinping is gaining legitimacy by showing a restless population that his war on corruption is real. The immediate purpose of the trial is for show and to get rid of powerful leaders outside of president Xi's faction. The larger purpose though is to protect the Communist party and its position as the leader of the world's largest country. Evan Osnos of the New Yorker wrote a great piece on Xi Jinping and his realistic understanding that the party's control is tenuous and must be seen to be acting in the interest of the people. One quick look at the "Arab Spring" from a few years ago proves how quickly populations can overthrow governments. China is hardly Egypt, but stirrings of discontentment have started already in Hong Kong this last year. I am curious to see what happens in the mainland, as well as the government's reaction to it. The next few years will set the tone for the Xi regime.
Tuesday, June 2, 2015
hollowed out institutions
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/for-american-pundits-china-isnt-a-country-its-a-fantasyland/2015/05/29/24ba60e0-0431-11e5-a428-c984eb077d4e_story.html
Two things that will surprise most Westerners when and if they happen are the corruption of the banking system and the weak nature of the Communist Party. Weak growth in the economy over the next few years will start the crack in the foundation of both institutions.
Two things that will surprise most Westerners when and if they happen are the corruption of the banking system and the weak nature of the Communist Party. Weak growth in the economy over the next few years will start the crack in the foundation of both institutions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)