Rebane's Ruminations
November 2026
S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930  

ARCHIVES


OUR LINKS


YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

  • George Rebane

    – Public service unions are bankrupting cities
    – Pelosi’s shameful conduct
    – Obamacare’s mindbending apologetics
    – iPad is a good start
    – Profiling and air travel security
    – Obama’s job at Harvard

    The evidence that public service unions are a public menace has been clear and abundant for years as I have reported on RR and in The Union.  Now this evidence has become a gusher.  Former union leader Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s office stated flatly that “Unions have priced themselves out of a job.”  Led by LA, untold number of other cities across the land are finding their voices and declaring the disaster that these unions have brought upon the public weal.  Only the most uninformed and/or hard-line progressives still try to circle the wagons around this obviously rapacious bunch.  More in the 1apr10 WSJ’s ‘Cash Poor Cities Take on Unions’.

    Representaive Hank Johnson (D-GA) is a man seriously ill with a form of Hepatitis which makes him obviously unfit for service in the US Congress (see video).  This has been pointed out to Speaker Pelosi for some time now.  But Johnson’s compliant vote on key liberal issues outweighs simple human decency on the political scale that Pelosi uses to inform and guide her actions.  That she still parades him in the public eye on congressional committee hearings is reprehensible.  It is all of a piece with that woman.

    RacialProfiling People of otherwise good intellect on the left seem to have a disconnect when they defend Obamacare.  ‘Yes, it may not be the best healthcare program, but we had to pass something since the status quo is unacceptable.  And since Republicans didn’t fix healthcare on their watch, they have no basis for opposing this legislaton and suggesting their own alternatives.’  Now there is a heap of logic to fill your brainpan.  So what is Obamacare, some kind of spiteful leftwing retribution against America??  But for the sake of argument, accept that Republicans didn’t fix healthcare (although the situation was a bit more complicated than that).  Does this mean that the obviously better ways toward a fix, like addressing the cost of delivery instead of imposing a fraudulent insurance mandate, were now out of consideration?  Apparently so, according to progressive logic.

    Apple’s iPad hit the market yesterday.  Consumer advocate and tech products guru Mossberg gives a good overview of it here.  It came out as the successor to the various ereaders that Amazon, Barnes&Noble, and others brought out over the past year or so.  I prognosticated then that these one tune gizmos that could only deliver ebooks would not last.  Adding to your gizmo count would require that the thing would also do more stuff like surfing, productivity apps, and communicating.  Well, Apple agreed and now we have the iPad that will cause everyone else to change course and provide their own functional upgrades or die.  But I don’t think that the iPad is quite there yet.  For example, as a minimum it needs a cover (from a third party?) and a USB port or two.  In short, my prediction is still that the iPad and its act alikes need to become the successor to the notebook computer.  The notebook is getting slimmer and trimmer by the month, and has no trouble incorporating an ereader.  For the same reason that netbooks (light, limited function web surfing gizmos) are having trouble getting a toehold in the market, so will the iPad and its copies.  But just wait a bit, and they’ll get there.

    [update] My friend Dr Larry Press, who also follows and teaches all this computer and communications stuff, has posted some worthwhile thoughts on the iPad here.

    We now have a new air security system designed to do a better job at catching terrorists on US-bound flights with bombs in their shorts, or stuffed into even more intimate places.  Political correctness has delayed the development of more reliable systems to detect these killers by banning something called ‘profiling’.  Profiling is the popularized pejorative for using effective Bayesian estimation techniques to finger these people by giving more effective attention to the more obvious suspects.  Instead of taking time and effort to randomly spread eagle seventy-something northern Europeans or Chinese or Japanese, Bayesian approaches would have us take a closer look at swarthy middle easterners, southern Asians, and Africans who have a much higher likelihood of being Muslims.  Well, the new system apparently has quietly incorporated these attributes or their near proxies (“nuggets of intelligence”) so as to pass the west’s self-deprecating sniff test.  Short of such common sense improvements, it would be just a matter of time until some TSA worker, pulling on her lubricated gloves, would approach granny at the gate and tell her to ‘bend over and spread them’.  More here.

    Now that the constitutionality of Obamacare is being challenged by the Attorneys General of almost half the states, it pays to recall the mentality that is behind this progressive atrocity.  For example, recently President Obama argued on camera that a tax is not really a tax if the government decides that it is ‘for your own good’.  Really??!  And this man was supposed to have taught constitutional law at Harvard?  At least now we have more evidence as to why he has not released any of his writings or course materials from his academic days.  But a legitimate question still begs – on what basis did Harvard hire him to teach something that he obviously knows so little about?

    NooneOwesYou 

  • George Rebane

    Shakedown Taxing fewer people more is the socialist’s stock answer to all of his plans to control and spend.  Fortunately history does not confirm such plans to be correct.  In America today we have two major problems now joining forces to threaten our republic – make the rich pay more, and make them also pay our taxes.  The growing consequences of these policies are surfacing all around us.

    Basically, what’s happening is that our “dependency-creating programs” have now passed the tipping point with the passage of Obamacare.  As the creation of such programs accelerates, its hunger for cash induces short-sighted legislators to extract more out of the wealth producers whose natural response has always been to defend their property.  These people change their earnings into less taxable forms that reduce government revenues.  The opposing dynamics play out over an exploding national debt that every year requires a larger fraction of the federal budget just to pay its interest costs.

    Using government data sources, the Heritage Foundation reports that today our per-capita income from dependence-related programs sits at almost $32,000.  Adjusted for inflation, it has risen 5X in the last fifty years with the biggest rise occurring since 1990.  Bill Beach writes in the 4mar10 issue of Heritage’s The Foundry  –

    The steady growth of dependency creating program, particularly the so-called entitlement programs, and the equally steady shrinking number of taxpayers who have any financial stake in the government threaten rapid growth in mandatory, dependency programs and our very democracy. Are Americans closing in on a tipping point that endangers the workings of their form of government? If citizens can vote ever greater outlays for their income, health, housing, education, and food support; will the growth of government overwhelm the delicate political balances between those citizens who provide the means for helping other citizens in need?  (We all know this as the Peter/Paul Principle – the nemesis of all democracies.)

    Meanwhile, on the income side of the ledger we have about 1% of taxpayers paying 50% of the collected taxes.  The federal government alone grabs almost 25% of GDP, up from an historical 20%.  When the government starts raising tax rates above its historical levels, its revenues have always dropped through the “behavioral responses” of the classes having to pay the most tribute.  A legion of studies cited by Alan Reynolds, senior fellow at Cato, continues to show the truth of this effect which economist Arthur Laffer summarized in his famous curve.  That little graphic has become one of the staples of the socialists’ comedy central who through their derisive laughter still can’t figure out what makes the feds’ take go up and down.

    As Reynolds shows us in ‘The Rich Can’t Pay for ObamaCare’ how Obama and the Dem’s hoped for $1.2 trillion in increased taxes will be whittled to about $670 billion.  The rest of the cost of Obamacare will have to come from more overseas borrowing and/or onshore printing.  All systems in Washington are tuned to create the desired mega-crisis that will be the necessary precursor for transformational change.

  • George Rebane

    Dr Anna Haynes is a True Believer in Anthropogenic Global Warming and its dire consequences for all Mankind.  She has taken great exception to my being an AGW skeptic, and has recorded her distress –

    • On her personal website NC Focus,
    • On her community information website NC Voices,
    • During her requested meetings with me,
    • During an unexpected walk-in at one of my Rotary luncheons,
    • In unsolicited phone calls to our residence during which she has attempted to interrogate me and my wife.

    Recently (27mar10) she launched an attack of unfounded allegations on TechTest, a philanthropic merit scholarship project of the non-profit Sierra Environmental Studies Foundation (sesfoundation.org) of which I am a board member and its Director of Research.  She alleges that the actual purpose of the test is to gather and indoctrinate the participating young scholars to become climate change skeptics.

    She has a longer history of such dealings with my friend and SESF colleague Russ Steele (NC Media Watch).  Additionally, her unfathomable labors have also included Messrs Michael McDaniel (SESF) and Martin Light (CABPRO).  I will let them tell their own stories.

    Tonight Dr Haynes called during dinner to pose yet another question – have I or any of my family been compensated for my skepticism of AGW.  As soon as I said ‘no’, she thanked me, hung up, and posted the conversation as a comment here.

    This series of intensifying harassments lasting over a year are most disconcerting.  My lay assessment is that I am dealing with a disturbed person, and therefore I have not responded to her as a peer.  In a recent comment thread I recommended that she seek professional help.  I stand by that recommendation, and hope that she would reconsider her continued confrontations until after getting such help.

  • George Rebane

    USconstitution What is a RIGHT?

    A right is always contrasted with and discussed in relation to the notion of privilege, which is the easier of the two to understand and define.

    PRIVILEGE – The permission to do, be, or have something specific, which permission can be granted to and subsequently withdrawn from one party/agency by another granting party/agency that has the ability to prevent the privileged party from exercising the permission.  Privileges can be granted and withdrawn by individuals, institutions, and states.

    We think of a right as being a permission that is in some sense of a higher order.  A right is always publicized and formalized in some permanent and accessible code.  To dispel any early fuzzy thinking, it is clear that rights are also held by individuals and agencies at the pleasure of a higher granting agency.  For example we don’t think of a right as being granted by one individual to another.  Although rights may also be withdrawn/suspended by the granting agency, such withdrawal is always a formal and publicized step that must be sanctioned by some code in law, or within a specific and broadly known tradition.

    Rights issue from an agency that in some way represents the collective will of a society. Therefore, such an agency is almost always a duly established representative government that describes such rights in its constituting documents and derived law.  This makes it clear that permissions issued by autocracies are always privileges.

    We also recognize that rights do not necessarily travel with the so-favored individual.  A right stops at the border of the domain under the control of the granting agency (a right in America may not be a right in Saudi Arabia and vice versa).  If the underlying permission does ‘have legs’, then it is only through an agreement (e.g. treaty) between the two involved controlling agencies.  And to the extent that on ‘foreign soil’ the permission may be easily withdrawn, there the right always reverts to a privilege.

    Certain special rights (e.g. “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”) are sometimes advertised as being ‘inalienable’ – that is, deriving from a source even higher than the agency granting a broader collection of rights to individuals which includes such inalienable rights.  Inalienability of certain rights is a declaration by the agency’s members (e.g. citizens of a country) that if the agency’s minions attempt to withdraw such rights, then the agency and/or minions become outlaws and the members may legally or, indeed, morally be required to abolish it and reconstitute a new agency that honors such inalienable rights.  (Operationally this amounts to making a distinction between a ‘legal revolution’ and an ‘illegal revolution’.  But we know that all successful revolutions are legal, and all unsuccessful revolutions are deemed illegal insurrections and dealt with accordingly.)

    Finally the permission represented by a right must be persistently enabled by the granting agency to its right holders.  The granting agency must continually and actively expend resources to ensure that the underlying permissions of a right are made possible throughout its domain.  As a collective, the agency cannot be indifferent to one of its subgroups of members denying another subgroup or individual a right without going through a due process specified in the agency’s social code (law, tradition).  This is the key distinguishing feature between right and privilege – one who grants another a privilege is under no moral or legal imperative to assure that the so privileged can or is able to enjoy the underlying permission.

    Searching for the prime distinctions from the foregoing in order to render a succinct definition, we understand that 1) the grantor must be a collectively founded agency with an established and widely accessible social code, and 2) the granting agency must commit itself to and actually carry out the enforcement of the rights that it grants its individual members.  With this we offer the following.

    A RIGHT is a codified permission to do, be, or have that is granted by an agency to its member individuals/agencies who have formed and maintain the granting agency to carry out their collective will in a manner that requires the agency to expend all necessary resources to insure that such granted rights are enjoyed uniformly by all of its franchised members.

    Corollary: To the extent that the granting agency is not able to insure the universal enjoyment of a right within its domain, such right does not exist.

    Sustainable Rights.  Not all sets of rights are operationally sustainable either because their scope is too broad, or they are members of a mutually inconsistent or insufficient set.  America’s Founders did not explicitly address this problem in their post-revolutionary labors.  However, their student and French economic philosopher Frédéric Bastiat (cf. The Law) recognized the need to identify a seminal set of rights which must be granted/included to provide the minimum structure upon which succeeding rights could be built upon in a reasonable manner that makes the whole set of rights sustainable.  This fundamental structure consists of three interlinked rights called the Bastiat Triangle.  In his words –

    Each of us has a natural right — from God — to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two. For what are our faculties but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but an extension of our faculties?

    [13apr10 update] Using different words we can summarize the main points of the following operational definitions:

    PRIVILEGE –
    1. is a permission to do, be, or have that does not have to be formally codified;
    2. is granted by party/agency that can legally prevent the exercise of the permission.
    3. is intended to be granted and withdrawn with minimal or no due process; and
    4. its grantor has no obligation to enable exercise of permission;

    RIGHT –
    1. is a codified permission to do, be, or have;
    2. is granted by an agency that can legally enable and prevent the exercise of the permission;
    3. is granted to specified agency members to carry out an expression of collective will;
    4. is intended to be permanent and granted equally to all specified members;
    5. its grantor has the explicit obligation to expend all required resources to enable exercise of the permission within its jurisdiction; and
    6. is in effect only to the extent that its grantor enables its exercise.

    [The above is adapted from materials I developed for a critical thinking course for journalists and media producers that I taught at California State University in the late 1990s.  Rights and privileges are perhaps some of the most important, overused, and least understood ideas in our society.  The objective here is to offer consistent and compact operational definitions for these ideas.  If some object to these definitions, then new labels must be fashioned and communicated that will serve these definitions.  This is because the above definitions are experienced daily by us all, and are therefore existential to our social order.  The added purpose of this posting is as an accessible reference for future discussions that require operational definitions of a right and a privilege.]

  • George Rebane

    Many people were enticed to support Obamacare over the past year by the examples of socialized healthcare in England and Canada.  Recently UN’s International Health Organization has contributed its information to the ongoing debate.  Now that Obamacare is the law of the land, we may yet hope to achieve parity with our role models.  According to the IHO –

    Percentage of men and women who survived a cancer five years after diagnosis:
    U.S.   65%
    England     46%
    Canada     42%

    Percentage of patients diagnosed with diabetes who received treatment within six months:
    U.S.  93%
    England    15%
    Canada     43%

    Percentage of seniors needing hip replacement who received it within six months:
    U.S.   90%
    England    15%
    Canada     43%

    Percentage referred to a medical specialist who sees one within one month:
    U.S.   77%
    England    40%
    Canada     43%

    Number of MRI scanners (a prime diagnostic tool) per million people:
    U.S. 71
    England     14
    Canada     18

    Percentage of seniors (65+), with low income, who say they are in "excellent health":
    U.S. 12%
    England    2%
    Canada    6%

    H/T to a soCal RR reader for the above.  For a broader view of what the nation faces with Obamacare, please consider 'Our Long National Nightmare is Just Beginning' this morning from The Heritage Foundation.

  • George Rebane

    Some of our local environmentally sensitive and concerned voices were disappointed in the level of participation in last night’s politically correct Earth Hour.  As a public service for those folks, RR is publishing a space photo of one of several nations around the globe that take saving energy real seriously.  As you can see, the Dear Leader has his people turn off lights all across the country to highlight his concern for the environment, and differentiate it from his more insensitive kinfolk in the south.  And to think that these dedicated people do this every single night of the year.  The lonely little bright dot in the north is Pyongyang where the people’s leadership never sleeps.

    TheKoreas 

    Many of the progressive bent here are waiting for the day when America can put on such a non-display.  Last year the online edition of Pravda predicted (here) our path to a more sensitive and comprehensive observance of Earth Day along with the dispensing of other frills our society has introduced over the last two centuries of licentious liberty.  But, of course, we don’t have to believe any of this.

    H/Ts to the RR readers for nudging this post.

  • George Rebane

    Today the fourth annual merit scholarship TechTest was given in the Science Lecture Hall of Nevada Union High School.  The test was administered by NUHS physics teacher Mr John McDaniel who also heads the TechTest academic committee.   I visited the lecture hall this morning and took the nearby pictures.  Mr McDaniel told me that this year 24 students from Nevada County were competing for the scholarships which will total a little north of $15,000.

     TT2010  

    As you can see, the students looked, shall we say, engaged in their labors.  This year the four-hour exam had eight problems of various weights.  I have had the privilege of writing the TechTests, which is a rewarding effort in itself.  Test problem ideas occur throughout the year, sometimes in the craziest ways.  For example, this winter as I was closing our driveway gate, I gave it a pull and, without looking back, walked briskly to the latch point expecting to get there before the gate hit me.  I lost, and sported a badly bruised Achilles tendon for about three months.  But that little incident inspired this year’s toughest test problem.

    After coming up with about ten to twelve problems, I work each of them out with the clock running.  If I can’t solve them in a 20-30 minute interval, I either edit the problem or toss it.  The completed test, along with the solution key, is then made pretty and submitted to Mr McDaniel, who then reviews the questions and solutions.

    The exams will again be graded by NUHS science and math teachers under the supervision of Mr McDaniel who will then send the results to the test’s sponsor, the Sierra Environmental Studies Foundation (SESF).  Later this spring the entire TT2010 exam along with the solution key will join the previous years’ exams on www.sesfoundation.org.  For you techies out there, it might be fun to download one of the pdfs, pour yourself a full measure of your favorite adult beverage, look at your watch (but not the solutions), and have at it.  No handicap allowed for the adult beverage.

    TechTest2010 results will be posted after the annual TechTest awards breakfast that is usually held in May.  The scholarship checks will be presented to the students during the annual NUHS scholarship awards night.  The SESF TechTest scholarship fund is made up of 501c3 tax deductible contributions solicited from local residents, businesses, and SESF members.   You may want to join them.

  • George Rebane

    GMpodcar 

    Wired reports that Segway technology has now found its way into a new line of small urban people movers – well OK, call them cars or podcars.  To me the most amazing thing about them is that they are being introduced by General Motors, and in China to boot.  Don’t know much about their total energy consumption. I would also like to see some results of traffic modeling with a downtown packed full of these gizmos.  Just increasing the density of small vehicles doesn’t mean that things will move better since each vehicle still has a human agent making decisions on when/where to change lanes, turn, slow down, stop, … .  If they can be automatically hooked into computer controlled ‘trains’, then things could be really looking up.  In any event, these electrically driven pods really look cool and could be just the thing for zipping around town.  Read more and see more pictures here.

  • George Rebane

    Castro Socialists and communists the world over are overjoyed with America taking a major step in their direction, and away from individual liberty and free markets.   Our ‘Shining City on a Hill’ has been the perennial burr under the blanket for collectivist states ranging over the entire authoritarian spectrum from the EU to North Korea.  Their citizens always compared their own countries to America and, of course, found them wanting.  This requires their dear leaders and ruling elites to keep up a constant propaganda barrage that says ‘no no, they’re a lot worse off than they look from a distance’ to defend their failures at governance.  Meanwhile, their populations keep agitating for a better life, and many risk their all in their attempts to copy or come.

    Yesterday, communist Cuba’s iconic revolutionary and founder, Fidel Castro, was able to slip a congratulatory message to Obama and the Democrats into his usual harangue against the US.  At bedtime last night AP reported – 

    “We consider health reform to have been an important battle and a success of his [Obama’s] government,” Castro wrote in an essay published in state media, adding that it would strengthen the president’s hand against lobbyists and “mercenaries.”

    Of course, our local socialists have been pointing to Cuba’s nationalized healthcare for years as part of their message that communism isn’t all that bad, and we should at least start putting our toe into the water.  So you can imagine the joy worldwide, now that we too have jumped ass deep into this collectivist swamp.  ‘They’re starting to turn out the lights in the Shining City, and soon they’ll be like us.’

No comments on Ruminations – 2apr2010 (updated)