by Ugh
I've been neglecting my posting duties so thought I'd put this up.
Having sh1t for brains for President is turning out to not be a good thing. Whoocoodanode! I especially like all the people abandoning him left and right in the past couple months, as if he's somehow changed from the campaign. "That's not the guy I know/knew!" Clearly you weren't paying attention.
Anyway, looking forward to Nuking NK, letting PR go to sh1t, and some completely effed up tax bill they will try to call "reform" and then not be able to pass.
And, just because: Paul Ryan is dumb as a box of rocks.
Open thread.
Paul Ryan may be dumb as a box of rocks in some ways, but he was smart enough to get elected and to become Speaker of the House. It’s a depressing truism that there are various kinds of intelligence, and they’re not all in synch inside any one person’s skin. (Mine included. I am in fact a poster child for the phenomenon.)
One of the many things that’s symbolic of what’s going on in this country is pictures of groups of smug old men [sic] in suits gathered around a microphone looking happy in the service of greed and viciousness.
Paul Ryan may be dumb as a box of rocks in some ways, but he was smart enough to get elected and to become Speaker of the House. It’s a depressing truism that there are various kinds of intelligence, and they’re not all in synch inside any one person’s skin. (Mine included. I am in fact a poster child for the phenomenon.)
One of the many things that’s symbolic of what’s going on in this country is pictures of groups of smug old men [sic] in suits gathered around a microphone looking happy in the service of greed and viciousness.
I don’t mean to suggest that Paul Ryan is old. I was thinking of some of the others…smug, self-important, insulated…
I don’t mean to suggest that Paul Ryan is old. I was thinking of some of the others…smug, self-important, insulated…
I don’t (necessarily) disagree, it’s just that he has this massively undeserved reputation as some kind of policy wonk in the press, and yet at every turn he is lying and/or making dumb statements about policy.
Drives me nuts (in case that wasn’t obvious).
I don’t (necessarily) disagree, it’s just that he has this massively undeserved reputation as some kind of policy wonk in the press, and yet at every turn he is lying and/or making dumb statements about policy.
Drives me nuts (in case that wasn’t obvious).
I don’t disagree with that framing at all.
It’s a lot like Mr. Clickbait having a massively undeserved reputation for being a good businessman. I mean, he’s obviously massively good at something, including passing himself off as a good businessman…
A close family member once informed me, concerning Newt Gingrich, that “at least you gotta admit he’s a really smart guy.”
Well, no, I don’t. He uses a lot of big words, talks fast, and has a very high opinion of himself and is glad to tell you so. But that’s not the same thing.
Funny, that family member sees right through Trump to the filth inside because he once had a boss who was a lot like him. But when it’s outside his own experience, it’s harder to see.
I don’t disagree with that framing at all.
It’s a lot like Mr. Clickbait having a massively undeserved reputation for being a good businessman. I mean, he’s obviously massively good at something, including passing himself off as a good businessman…
A close family member once informed me, concerning Newt Gingrich, that “at least you gotta admit he’s a really smart guy.”
Well, no, I don’t. He uses a lot of big words, talks fast, and has a very high opinion of himself and is glad to tell you so. But that’s not the same thing.
Funny, that family member sees right through Trump to the filth inside because he once had a boss who was a lot like him. But when it’s outside his own experience, it’s harder to see.
Well, no, I don’t. He uses a lot of big words, talks fast, and has a very high opinion of himself and is glad to tell you so. But that’s not the same thing.
This reminds me of something someone once said about Dick Cheney’s (public) core competency, which is that no matter the question he always had an answer that, coming out of his mouth, seemed reasonable and he seemed completely sure of himself in a way that, superficially, was reassuring.
Well, no, I don’t. He uses a lot of big words, talks fast, and has a very high opinion of himself and is glad to tell you so. But that’s not the same thing.
This reminds me of something someone once said about Dick Cheney’s (public) core competency, which is that no matter the question he always had an answer that, coming out of his mouth, seemed reasonable and he seemed completely sure of himself in a way that, superficially, was reassuring.
Funny, that family member sees right through Trump to the filth inside because he once had a boss who was a lot like him.
I had a stepfather a lot like Trump, just drunker and not nearly as rich. But the same sort of bullying, thin-skinned, egomaniacal, narcissistic, big-shot personality. Good times!
Funny, that family member sees right through Trump to the filth inside because he once had a boss who was a lot like him.
I had a stepfather a lot like Trump, just drunker and not nearly as rich. But the same sort of bullying, thin-skinned, egomaniacal, narcissistic, big-shot personality. Good times!
he always had an answer that, coming out of his mouth, seemed reasonable and he seemed completely sure of himself in a way that, superficially, was reassuring.
There seem to be quite a few people in politics like this. I haven’t watched TV for years and I rarely look at video clips online, so mostly I know about people from their bare words or reported actions/positions. But now and then I’ll see a clip of one of these far-right Congresscritters from whose words and positions I’ve concluded that they can’t possibly be from the same species or planet as me. Then I hear them start talking and it’s all framed as ever so reasonable and obvious and calculated toward the greater good, and it starts to make sense that they get elected by people who share a lot of their attitudes in the first place.
The people who don’t ever strike me this way are the ones who make it all about God. There is no disguising the unreasonableness of that framing.
he always had an answer that, coming out of his mouth, seemed reasonable and he seemed completely sure of himself in a way that, superficially, was reassuring.
There seem to be quite a few people in politics like this. I haven’t watched TV for years and I rarely look at video clips online, so mostly I know about people from their bare words or reported actions/positions. But now and then I’ll see a clip of one of these far-right Congresscritters from whose words and positions I’ve concluded that they can’t possibly be from the same species or planet as me. Then I hear them start talking and it’s all framed as ever so reasonable and obvious and calculated toward the greater good, and it starts to make sense that they get elected by people who share a lot of their attitudes in the first place.
The people who don’t ever strike me this way are the ones who make it all about God. There is no disguising the unreasonableness of that framing.
The next Political Economy?
History and Evolution of the Commons …Euro based, lots of other articles, this is a leading edfe left.
Antonio Negri talks of the common a lot.
Not capitalist or privately owned and not state nationalized and managed and not even owned by workers and citizens…just shared. Maybe AI and algorithms will do the grunt work, as it does in P2P and file sharing.
The next Political Economy?
History and Evolution of the Commons …Euro based, lots of other articles, this is a leading edfe left.
Antonio Negri talks of the common a lot.
Not capitalist or privately owned and not state nationalized and managed and not even owned by workers and citizens…just shared. Maybe AI and algorithms will do the grunt work, as it does in P2P and file sharing.
There seem to be quite a few people in politics like this.
Dick Cheney always sounded and appeared as though he was speaking authoritatively, competently, insightfully, seriously, knowledgeably, and whatever other adverb you want to throw into the mix. Meanwhile, he was conman (and I suppose a high-performing dilettante of sorts).
In any case, he was certainly one of those sort of political people.
There seem to be quite a few people in politics like this.
Dick Cheney always sounded and appeared as though he was speaking authoritatively, competently, insightfully, seriously, knowledgeably, and whatever other adverb you want to throw into the mix. Meanwhile, he was conman (and I suppose a high-performing dilettante of sorts).
In any case, he was certainly one of those sort of political people.
The next Political Economy?
amen brother. thanks for the link.
Dick Cheney always sounded and appeared
It’s a skill set.
It’s more than a little disturbing to me the range and number of positions of responsibility that are occupied by people whose primary skill seems to be “excellent bullshit artist”. Not just politics, any field you care to mention.
Maybe life has become so complex, and truly competent knowledge so specialized, that being able to spin up sort-of-plausible, reassuring horseshit ends up being really appealing.
Reagan, Bush (either one,take your pick), Trump. Q.E.D.
Hey, Clinton (Big Dog) and Obama too, if you like. “New Democracy”. “Hope and Change”. Those are fairly gross simplifications, too. Although both of those guys IMO did a really good job of presenting things in something like their full complexity and context. Whatever else you want to say about them, they were both just exceptionally intelligent people.
I miss that.
I do wish people would turn off their TV’s (or their computers) and read a book or two instead. There would probably be less of a market for comforting pandering bullshit.
We live in the world we have, not the world we wish we had.
The next Political Economy?
amen brother. thanks for the link.
Dick Cheney always sounded and appeared
It’s a skill set.
It’s more than a little disturbing to me the range and number of positions of responsibility that are occupied by people whose primary skill seems to be “excellent bullshit artist”. Not just politics, any field you care to mention.
Maybe life has become so complex, and truly competent knowledge so specialized, that being able to spin up sort-of-plausible, reassuring horseshit ends up being really appealing.
Reagan, Bush (either one,take your pick), Trump. Q.E.D.
Hey, Clinton (Big Dog) and Obama too, if you like. “New Democracy”. “Hope and Change”. Those are fairly gross simplifications, too. Although both of those guys IMO did a really good job of presenting things in something like their full complexity and context. Whatever else you want to say about them, they were both just exceptionally intelligent people.
I miss that.
I do wish people would turn off their TV’s (or their computers) and read a book or two instead. There would probably be less of a market for comforting pandering bullshit.
We live in the world we have, not the world we wish we had.
Congressman Ryan represents himself as both a devout Roman Catholic and a devotee of Ayn Rand. The only reason he could be Speaker is that most of the rest of his party is even less coherent than that.
Congressman Ryan represents himself as both a devout Roman Catholic and a devotee of Ayn Rand. The only reason he could be Speaker is that most of the rest of his party is even less coherent than that.
The next Political Economy?
amen brother. thanks for the link.
seconded. good one, bob.
The next Political Economy?
amen brother. thanks for the link.
seconded. good one, bob.
I wanted to read it, but I have to wait until I get home. It’s blocked at work for being an “advocacy group.” Feh…
I wanted to read it, but I have to wait until I get home. It’s blocked at work for being an “advocacy group.” Feh…
Paul Ryan HAS to have the reputation as a policy wonk, and a member of the intelligencia – he’s the closest thing the GOP has.
He might be dumb as a box of rocks, but he’s the best they have, so he’s the GOP Einstein.
Paul Ryan HAS to have the reputation as a policy wonk, and a member of the intelligencia – he’s the closest thing the GOP has.
He might be dumb as a box of rocks, but he’s the best they have, so he’s the GOP Einstein.
Nick –
Yeah, when I first read he is both a devout RC and a Randroid my first reaction was, “awful hard to be both”. I’m sure his St Ayn would consider him to be just another whim-worshiper.
Nick –
Yeah, when I first read he is both a devout RC and a Randroid my first reaction was, “awful hard to be both”. I’m sure his St Ayn would consider him to be just another whim-worshiper.
Just so we don’t lose track of the latest iteration of Trump’s signature ineptitude
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-basic-premise-of-trumps-travel-ban-is-wrong/2017/09/26/7cb868b0-a2d5-11e7-8cfe-d5b912fabc99_story.html?utm_term=.d5108f039135
From that infamous bastion of liberalism . . . the Cato Institute.
Just so we don’t lose track of the latest iteration of Trump’s signature ineptitude
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-basic-premise-of-trumps-travel-ban-is-wrong/2017/09/26/7cb868b0-a2d5-11e7-8cfe-d5b912fabc99_story.html?utm_term=.d5108f039135
From that infamous bastion of liberalism . . . the Cato Institute.
Subhuman, corrupt anti-American republicans:
http://juanitajean.com/ryan-zinke-makes-trump-look-sane/
Another piece of filth spreading corrupt conservative principles, like so much lime in a grave, throughout the U.S. Government:
http://juanitajean.com/cabinet-secretaries-vying-for-wacko-points-to-redeem-at-chucky-cheese/
He’s going to need a safe room too, especially when he’s talking to murderous vermin like the Kochs and the Mercer insects, and in an office I fucking pay for.
In other countries, they are civilized enough to know what needs to be done.
Subhuman, corrupt anti-American republicans:
http://juanitajean.com/ryan-zinke-makes-trump-look-sane/
Another piece of filth spreading corrupt conservative principles, like so much lime in a grave, throughout the U.S. Government:
http://juanitajean.com/cabinet-secretaries-vying-for-wacko-points-to-redeem-at-chucky-cheese/
He’s going to need a safe room too, especially when he’s talking to murderous vermin like the Kochs and the Mercer insects, and in an office I fucking pay for.
In other countries, they are civilized enough to know what needs to be done.
“[Paul Ryan] so he’s the GOP Einstein.”
Ein Stein, more like, in the IQ department.
“[Paul Ryan] so he’s the GOP Einstein.”
Ein Stein, more like, in the IQ department.
Well, since this is an open thread, can I just say I am schadenfreuded out that the Giants totally suck this year, since I ride Caltrain and am afflicted with the company of Giants fans every time there’s a home game. This year, no playoffs, so it all ends this week. And the fans are morose, which makes them quieter and less annoying.
Well, since this is an open thread, can I just say I am schadenfreuded out that the Giants totally suck this year, since I ride Caltrain and am afflicted with the company of Giants fans every time there’s a home game. This year, no playoffs, so it all ends this week. And the fans are morose, which makes them quieter and less annoying.
Also, I had given up watching football what with the Raiders moving, the NFL’s phenomenally s****y handling of the CTE crisis, and their being a bag of dicks wrt the domestic violence scandals, but now I am feeling pretty damn proud of all those players after this weekend. I have hated the 49ers almost as much as the Giants for a long time, but I would like to shake Colin Kaepernick’s hand.
Also, I had given up watching football what with the Raiders moving, the NFL’s phenomenally s****y handling of the CTE crisis, and their being a bag of dicks wrt the domestic violence scandals, but now I am feeling pretty damn proud of all those players after this weekend. I have hated the 49ers almost as much as the Giants for a long time, but I would like to shake Colin Kaepernick’s hand.
Actually, no, Trump’s approval rating has been rising for the past few weeks–I think the hurricanes knocked his dumb tweet of the day off the front pages for a little while. He’s safely above 40% now.
That motion all happened before his past several days of obnoxious behavior, though, so we’ll see what happens now.
Actually, no, Trump’s approval rating has been rising for the past few weeks–I think the hurricanes knocked his dumb tweet of the day off the front pages for a little while. He’s safely above 40% now.
That motion all happened before his past several days of obnoxious behavior, though, so we’ll see what happens now.
In other news, I still have no idea what crime these assistant basketball coaches committed.
On the radio it was portrayed as defrauding the universities they work for by accepting money to steer players to certain advisors, and/or arranging payments to players through third parties – because that would violate NCAA rules potentially causing the schools to have to disgorge funds/give up wins, etc. Plus it somehow matters that these schools receive federal funds.
But…really? Suppose those assistant coaches were just playing the players directly themselves, is that now a criminal violation? Are players accepting such payments engaged in a criminal activity?
This seems to be a stretch to this lawyer, but anyone know more here?
In other news, I still have no idea what crime these assistant basketball coaches committed.
On the radio it was portrayed as defrauding the universities they work for by accepting money to steer players to certain advisors, and/or arranging payments to players through third parties – because that would violate NCAA rules potentially causing the schools to have to disgorge funds/give up wins, etc. Plus it somehow matters that these schools receive federal funds.
But…really? Suppose those assistant coaches were just playing the players directly themselves, is that now a criminal violation? Are players accepting such payments engaged in a criminal activity?
This seems to be a stretch to this lawyer, but anyone know more here?
Ugh-
These schools receive federal funds. The charges are brought under 18 U.S. Code § 666 – Theft or bribery concerning programs receiving Federal funds.
The investment advisors and athletic equipment companies are accused of offering something of value for the purpose of influencing coaches at universities that are subject to 18 USC § 666.
The coaches are accused of solicitation of bribes which is also a violation of 18 USC § 666.
Then you get the usual conspiracy and wire fraud and travel act etc., but the hook is these schools receive federal funds and these coaches are therefore being treated like a federal employee.
Personally, I’m torn. I hate cheating, but I also hate prosecutorial overreach. I also think these kids should be paid something for their time in college if they are in a revenue sport … not to condone those kids (or their parents) who take payments, but just saying the system is really inequitable.
Ugh-
These schools receive federal funds. The charges are brought under 18 U.S. Code § 666 – Theft or bribery concerning programs receiving Federal funds.
The investment advisors and athletic equipment companies are accused of offering something of value for the purpose of influencing coaches at universities that are subject to 18 USC § 666.
The coaches are accused of solicitation of bribes which is also a violation of 18 USC § 666.
Then you get the usual conspiracy and wire fraud and travel act etc., but the hook is these schools receive federal funds and these coaches are therefore being treated like a federal employee.
Personally, I’m torn. I hate cheating, but I also hate prosecutorial overreach. I also think these kids should be paid something for their time in college if they are in a revenue sport … not to condone those kids (or their parents) who take payments, but just saying the system is really inequitable.
Loomis, the only thing tolerable at LGM, visits a grave.
Hey kids, if there are any kids around, West End Blues by Louis Armstrong is beyond any doubt the greatest and most important piece of music in the 20th century. If you don’t have the Hot 5s and 7s in your library and played you are a fail. I listen to everything from the medieval Carmina Burana to Tago Mago and think Armstrong is the best.
2) The link and site above about the common is interesting because of the kinda affirmation it gives to neoliberalism and identity politics. Negri is the key, and you can go on from there reading his cites, but the collective died with Ford’s Red River plant and the USSR. There is no longer any contingent solidarity, affilations are now chosen dynamic transient and multiple. Or soon will be, future is unevenly distributed.
Negri says the loss of the collective creates the common, and as we increasingly fractionate, the commons will grow until we achieve something that feels like anarchy and works like socialism. Kinda like the Internet. IOW, neoliberalism is also dialectical, create the forces for its transcendence.
This is a historical material process, a dialectic.
Loomis, the only thing tolerable at LGM, visits a grave.
Hey kids, if there are any kids around, West End Blues by Louis Armstrong is beyond any doubt the greatest and most important piece of music in the 20th century. If you don’t have the Hot 5s and 7s in your library and played you are a fail. I listen to everything from the medieval Carmina Burana to Tago Mago and think Armstrong is the best.
2) The link and site above about the common is interesting because of the kinda affirmation it gives to neoliberalism and identity politics. Negri is the key, and you can go on from there reading his cites, but the collective died with Ford’s Red River plant and the USSR. There is no longer any contingent solidarity, affilations are now chosen dynamic transient and multiple. Or soon will be, future is unevenly distributed.
Negri says the loss of the collective creates the common, and as we increasingly fractionate, the commons will grow until we achieve something that feels like anarchy and works like socialism. Kinda like the Internet. IOW, neoliberalism is also dialectical, create the forces for its transcendence.
This is a historical material process, a dialectic.
Thanks! More when I’m off this call.
Thanks! More when I’m off this call.
And Dallas, as it always happens, has hit fall like a switch was flipped. Mid 70s to Low 80s with no end in sight, could be until May. This makes the summers bearable.
Gonna exhaust my hyper doggies in all the parks, miles in maybe 10s, eyeing the little and not so little girls with no intent whatsoever.
And Dallas, as it always happens, has hit fall like a switch was flipped. Mid 70s to Low 80s with no end in sight, could be until May. This makes the summers bearable.
Gonna exhaust my hyper doggies in all the parks, miles in maybe 10s, eyeing the little and not so little girls with no intent whatsoever.
the Giants totally suck this year
The A’s haven’t exactly been tearing up the league either. OK, not (quite) as bad as the Giants. But still.
the Giants totally suck this year
The A’s haven’t exactly been tearing up the league either. OK, not (quite) as bad as the Giants. But still.
So the assistant coaches are charged with accepting $$:
intending to be influenced or rewarded in connection with any business, transaction, or series of transactions of such organization, government, or agency
I guess I can see how this might apply to recruiting athletes, but since that’s their job anyway I’m not sure what the harm to the school is, other than speculative harm from possible future sanctions. I suppose they might recruit only specific athletes and leave other possible recruits on the table.
But other things, like “steering” an athlete to a particular agent or shoe firm, how is that part of the “business, transaction, or series of transactions” of the University? I suppose if it’s specifically in the job description, maybe.
It all seems very tenuous.
So the assistant coaches are charged with accepting $$:
intending to be influenced or rewarded in connection with any business, transaction, or series of transactions of such organization, government, or agency
I guess I can see how this might apply to recruiting athletes, but since that’s their job anyway I’m not sure what the harm to the school is, other than speculative harm from possible future sanctions. I suppose they might recruit only specific athletes and leave other possible recruits on the table.
But other things, like “steering” an athlete to a particular agent or shoe firm, how is that part of the “business, transaction, or series of transactions” of the University? I suppose if it’s specifically in the job description, maybe.
It all seems very tenuous.
I agree that it’s tenuous and that’s what prompted my “prosecutorial overreach” comment.
Breaking news: Rick Pitino out at Louisville.
I agree that it’s tenuous and that’s what prompted my “prosecutorial overreach” comment.
Breaking news: Rick Pitino out at Louisville.
Yep. I generally don’t like “better things to do with their time”-type arguments, but 2 years investigating this seems a bit much.
Yep. I generally don’t like “better things to do with their time”-type arguments, but 2 years investigating this seems a bit much.
I’m sick of the distractions every time the Troll”>https://herlanderwalking.wordpress.com/2017/09/27/hes-a-doll-the-trolling-of-america/>Troll in Chief knows he is fucking something up.
I’m sick of the distractions every time the Troll”>https://herlanderwalking.wordpress.com/2017/09/27/hes-a-doll-the-trolling-of-america/>Troll in Chief knows he is fucking something up.
Oops, sorry about the clumsy, screwed up linkage attempt. I wanted to share a photo of the literal Trump Troll doll!
Oops, sorry about the clumsy, screwed up linkage attempt. I wanted to share a photo of the literal Trump Troll doll!
Aha, a chance to test my understanding of cleek’s image posting instructions!
Did it work?
Aha, a chance to test my understanding of cleek’s image posting instructions!
Did it work?
It half worked (only half because I guess I should have somehow miminised the original image in some way?). Thanks, future cleek!
It half worked (only half because I guess I should have somehow miminised the original image in some way?). Thanks, future cleek!
I see you have confirmation of a new barbarian on the Supreme Court….
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/09/neil_gorsuch_showed_his_commitment_to_racial_equality_is_as_strong_as_trump.html
I see you have confirmation of a new barbarian on the Supreme Court….
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/09/neil_gorsuch_showed_his_commitment_to_racial_equality_is_as_strong_as_trump.html
Gorsuch’s and the other conservative Supreme Court Judges’ murder trials will have all-black juries, unless Gorsuch happens to have an unfortunate traffic stop before then with a white cop who kills twice as many white drivers as black.
Gorsuch’s and the other conservative Supreme Court Judges’ murder trials will have all-black juries, unless Gorsuch happens to have an unfortunate traffic stop before then with a white cop who kills twice as many white drivers as black.
Waiting for the Barbarians C P Cavafy
What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum?
The barbarians are due here today.
Why isn’t anything happening in the senate?
Why do the senators sit there without legislating?
Because the barbarians are coming today.
What laws can the senators make now?
Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating.
Why did our emperor get up so early,
and why is he sitting at the city’s main gate
on his throne, in state, wearing the crown?
Because the barbarians are coming today
and the emperor is waiting to receive their leader.
He has even prepared a scroll to give him,
replete with titles, with imposing names.
Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today
wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas?
Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts,
and rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds?
Why are they carrying elegant canes
beautifully worked in silver and gold?
Because the barbarians are coming today
and things like that dazzle the barbarians.
Why don’t our distinguished orators come forward as usual
to make their speeches, say what they have to say?
Because the barbarians are coming today
and they’re bored by rhetoric and public speaking.
Why this sudden restlessness, this confusion?
(How serious people’s faces have become.)
Why are the streets and squares emptying so rapidly,
everyone going home so lost in thought?
Because night has fallen and the barbarians have not come.
And some who have just returned from the border say
there are no barbarians any longer.
And now, what’s going to happen to us without barbarians?
They were, those people, a kind of solution.
Waiting for the Barbarians C P Cavafy
What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum?
The barbarians are due here today.
Why isn’t anything happening in the senate?
Why do the senators sit there without legislating?
Because the barbarians are coming today.
What laws can the senators make now?
Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating.
Why did our emperor get up so early,
and why is he sitting at the city’s main gate
on his throne, in state, wearing the crown?
Because the barbarians are coming today
and the emperor is waiting to receive their leader.
He has even prepared a scroll to give him,
replete with titles, with imposing names.
Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today
wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas?
Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts,
and rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds?
Why are they carrying elegant canes
beautifully worked in silver and gold?
Because the barbarians are coming today
and things like that dazzle the barbarians.
Why don’t our distinguished orators come forward as usual
to make their speeches, say what they have to say?
Because the barbarians are coming today
and they’re bored by rhetoric and public speaking.
Why this sudden restlessness, this confusion?
(How serious people’s faces have become.)
Why are the streets and squares emptying so rapidly,
everyone going home so lost in thought?
Because night has fallen and the barbarians have not come.
And some who have just returned from the border say
there are no barbarians any longer.
And now, what’s going to happen to us without barbarians?
They were, those people, a kind of solution.
In fact, of course, the barbarians are here already…..
In fact, of course, the barbarians are here already…..
And now of course I can’t get barbarians out of my head, so I have to post this (sorry!):
TRANSLATION BY ROY FULLER
Now that the barbarians have got as far as Picra,
And all the new music is written in the twelve tone scale,
And I am anyway approaching my fortieth birthday,
I will dissemble no longer.
I will stop expressing my belief in the rosy
Future of man, and accept the evidence
Of a couple of wretched wars and innumerable
Abortive revolutions.
I will cease to blame the stupidity of the slaves
Upon their masters and nurture, and will say,
Plainly, that they are enemies to culture,
Advancement and cleanliness.
From progressive organisations, from quarterlies
Devoted to daring verse, from membership of
Committees, from letters of various protest
I shall withdraw forthwith.
When they call me reactionary I shall smile
Secure in another dimension. When they say
‘Cinna has ceased to matter’ I shall know
How well I reflect the times.
The ruling class will think I am on their side
And make friendly overtures, but I shall retire
To the side furthest from Picra and write some poems
About the doom of the whole boiling.
Anyone happy in this age and place
Is daft or corrupt. Better to abdicate
From a material and spiritual terrain
Fit only for barbarians
And now of course I can’t get barbarians out of my head, so I have to post this (sorry!):
TRANSLATION BY ROY FULLER
Now that the barbarians have got as far as Picra,
And all the new music is written in the twelve tone scale,
And I am anyway approaching my fortieth birthday,
I will dissemble no longer.
I will stop expressing my belief in the rosy
Future of man, and accept the evidence
Of a couple of wretched wars and innumerable
Abortive revolutions.
I will cease to blame the stupidity of the slaves
Upon their masters and nurture, and will say,
Plainly, that they are enemies to culture,
Advancement and cleanliness.
From progressive organisations, from quarterlies
Devoted to daring verse, from membership of
Committees, from letters of various protest
I shall withdraw forthwith.
When they call me reactionary I shall smile
Secure in another dimension. When they say
‘Cinna has ceased to matter’ I shall know
How well I reflect the times.
The ruling class will think I am on their side
And make friendly overtures, but I shall retire
To the side furthest from Picra and write some poems
About the doom of the whole boiling.
Anyone happy in this age and place
Is daft or corrupt. Better to abdicate
From a material and spiritual terrain
Fit only for barbarians
This looks well worth reading:
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/10/02/pour-one-out-for-ulysses-s-grant
(And will play to my fascination with early US railroads.)
This looks well worth reading:
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/10/02/pour-one-out-for-ulysses-s-grant
(And will play to my fascination with early US railroads.)
wj @12:29: Yeah, but 1) I am an A’s fan and 2) A’s fans don’t ride my train and annoy me (unless they are playing the Giants in SF).
wj @12:29: Yeah, but 1) I am an A’s fan and 2) A’s fans don’t ride my train and annoy me (unless they are playing the Giants in SF).
GftNC @ 5:14pm — Can I just say that is the greatest paean to rough trade ever written? Kthx
GftNC @ 5:14pm — Can I just say that is the greatest paean to rough trade ever written? Kthx
In the immortal words of Axel Foley: HEF!
In the immortal words of Axel Foley: HEF!
This looks well worth reading:
Yes, it was. Not much there about railroads, though. You might enjoy Matthew Josephson’s The Robber Barons.
This looks well worth reading:
Yes, it was. Not much there about railroads, though. You might enjoy Matthew Josephson’s The Robber Barons.
Off topic (and that in an open thread):
I have forgotten the scientific terms that categorize languages as either mainly independent of cultural context (requiring mainly grammar rules and vocabulary to communicate) or extremly dependent on detailed cultural background knowledge (knowing only the words and grammar rules doesn’t allow for even basic communication).
My google- and wiki-fu fails me there, although I know that there are (or were) entries for that.
Can someone/somebody here help me out there?
Off topic (and that in an open thread):
I have forgotten the scientific terms that categorize languages as either mainly independent of cultural context (requiring mainly grammar rules and vocabulary to communicate) or extremly dependent on detailed cultural background knowledge (knowing only the words and grammar rules doesn’t allow for even basic communication).
My google- and wiki-fu fails me there, although I know that there are (or were) entries for that.
Can someone/somebody here help me out there?
Trudeau is right.
Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau agrees that NAFTA does not do enough to establish common labor standards for the North American continent. But he doesn’t think that Trump needs to look quite so far south to find a place that’s undercutting American workers: In 28 U.S. states, so-called “right-to-work” laws inhibit the ability of workers to unionize, thereby holding down wages, and encouraging companies in America’s other 22 states to ship jobs across our nation’s (internal) borders.
These laws undermine organized labor by allowing workers who join a unionized workplace to enjoy the benefits of a collective bargaining agreement without paying dues to the union that negotiated it. This has the effect of encouraging other workers to skirt their dues, which can then drain a union of the funds it needs to survive.
Trudeau has called for a revised NAFTA to prohibit such laws, so as to protect Canadians from losing jobs to cheap American labor.”
Trudeau needs to shut down the Canadian border to goods produced by right-to-work-and-that’s-about-it low wage states.
Canada should deport American dreamers who cause nightmares for the rest of us.
Trudeau is right.
Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau agrees that NAFTA does not do enough to establish common labor standards for the North American continent. But he doesn’t think that Trump needs to look quite so far south to find a place that’s undercutting American workers: In 28 U.S. states, so-called “right-to-work” laws inhibit the ability of workers to unionize, thereby holding down wages, and encouraging companies in America’s other 22 states to ship jobs across our nation’s (internal) borders.
These laws undermine organized labor by allowing workers who join a unionized workplace to enjoy the benefits of a collective bargaining agreement without paying dues to the union that negotiated it. This has the effect of encouraging other workers to skirt their dues, which can then drain a union of the funds it needs to survive.
Trudeau has called for a revised NAFTA to prohibit such laws, so as to protect Canadians from losing jobs to cheap American labor.”
Trudeau needs to shut down the Canadian border to goods produced by right-to-work-and-that’s-about-it low wage states.
Canada should deport American dreamers who cause nightmares for the rest of us.
Hartmut–
As far as I know there are no such terms. I am wondering: is is possible you are generalizing the terms context-free and context-sensitive to pragmatics/sociolinguistics?
Hartmut–
As far as I know there are no such terms. I am wondering: is is possible you are generalizing the terms context-free and context-sensitive to pragmatics/sociolinguistics?
JakeB, I’m glad you said that. Being only an amateur at linguistics (and an out of date one at that), I was waiting for a pro to weigh in. (lj’s probably sleeping…)
But all I can think of for Hartmut’s first category would be…computer languages? Pure invented Esperanto, before it starts getting used by actual humans?
JakeB, I’m glad you said that. Being only an amateur at linguistics (and an out of date one at that), I was waiting for a pro to weigh in. (lj’s probably sleeping…)
But all I can think of for Hartmut’s first category would be…computer languages? Pure invented Esperanto, before it starts getting used by actual humans?
either mainly independent of cultural context (requiring mainly grammar rules and vocabulary to communicate)
Chomsky’s Universal Grammar?
“The basic postulate of UG is that a certain set of structural rules are innate to humans, independent of sensory experience. With more linguistic stimuli received in the course of psychological development, children then adopt specific syntactic rules that conform to UG.”
Maybe also Ferdinand Saussure’s General Linguistics?
There is also Korzybski and Hayakawa General Semantics
Just dropping names you can research. I know nothing.
But I remain an old-fogey structuralist.
either mainly independent of cultural context (requiring mainly grammar rules and vocabulary to communicate)
Chomsky’s Universal Grammar?
“The basic postulate of UG is that a certain set of structural rules are innate to humans, independent of sensory experience. With more linguistic stimuli received in the course of psychological development, children then adopt specific syntactic rules that conform to UG.”
Maybe also Ferdinand Saussure’s General Linguistics?
There is also Korzybski and Hayakawa General Semantics
Just dropping names you can research. I know nothing.
But I remain an old-fogey structuralist.
I have been enjoying calling my conservative workmates ‘snowflakes’ who need their NFL games to be ‘safe places’ where they do not have to confront any ideas and beliefs that they don’t agree with.
Even the Cowboys and Jerry Jones joined in.
I have been enjoying calling my conservative workmates ‘snowflakes’ who need their NFL games to be ‘safe places’ where they do not have to confront any ideas and beliefs that they don’t agree with.
Even the Cowboys and Jerry Jones joined in.
I’ve yet to call anyone a snowflake for that reason, but that same thought did occur to me. Great minds think alike, and so do we.
I’ve yet to call anyone a snowflake for that reason, but that same thought did occur to me. Great minds think alike, and so do we.
JakeB, in that case someone clearly has completely reworked the wiki entries and removed all application to languages used in human (spoken) communication.
I know there were entries with specific terms dealing with those. The most common example are of course idioms that are not self-explaining but those can be mostly avoided in the languages we are most familiar with. But there are languages that consist mainly of structures working that way on the basic level (spoken mostly by ‘primitive’ peoples of course 😉 ). I know that the articles also discussed the possible implications of keeping the language hermetic*, e.g. creating strong ‘us vs. them’ distinctions a priori. Japanese (and Korean) has a reputation in that direction but I think that has more to do with class inside the group of native speakers than with their hermit tendencies.
A non-spoken example would the Chinese-derived writing systems where in theory the pictograms are composed of self-explanatory elements but the composites require a deep cultural knowledge to decipher based just on the meaning of the elements.
*I first thought that would be the term but ‘hermetic language’ deals with a very specific literary topic not the charcter of language itself.
JakeB, in that case someone clearly has completely reworked the wiki entries and removed all application to languages used in human (spoken) communication.
I know there were entries with specific terms dealing with those. The most common example are of course idioms that are not self-explaining but those can be mostly avoided in the languages we are most familiar with. But there are languages that consist mainly of structures working that way on the basic level (spoken mostly by ‘primitive’ peoples of course 😉 ). I know that the articles also discussed the possible implications of keeping the language hermetic*, e.g. creating strong ‘us vs. them’ distinctions a priori. Japanese (and Korean) has a reputation in that direction but I think that has more to do with class inside the group of native speakers than with their hermit tendencies.
A non-spoken example would the Chinese-derived writing systems where in theory the pictograms are composed of self-explanatory elements but the composites require a deep cultural knowledge to decipher based just on the meaning of the elements.
*I first thought that would be the term but ‘hermetic language’ deals with a very specific literary topic not the charcter of language itself.
context-free may be the term you are looking for, but I don’t know of the opposing term. Functional linguistics would stand as the opposite, but I don’t think context-free and functional are opposites.
The most recent kerfluffle has been between Chomsky and Dan Everett
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/04/16/the-interpreter-2
A fun quote regarding Chomsky and his opponents, Elizabeth Bates wrote “functionalism is like Protestantism: it is a group of warring sects which agree only on the rejection of the authority of the Pope.”
For a healthy dose of anti chomskyan fun, I recommend Geoff Pullum’s The Great Eskimo Vocabulary Hoax and Other Irreverent Essays on the Study of Language, especially the one entitled Chomsky on the Enterprise, where Commander Spock has the opportunity to add his voice to an interview with Chomsky. Fun stuff.
context-free may be the term you are looking for, but I don’t know of the opposing term. Functional linguistics would stand as the opposite, but I don’t think context-free and functional are opposites.
The most recent kerfluffle has been between Chomsky and Dan Everett
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/04/16/the-interpreter-2
A fun quote regarding Chomsky and his opponents, Elizabeth Bates wrote “functionalism is like Protestantism: it is a group of warring sects which agree only on the rejection of the authority of the Pope.”
For a healthy dose of anti chomskyan fun, I recommend Geoff Pullum’s The Great Eskimo Vocabulary Hoax and Other Irreverent Essays on the Study of Language, especially the one entitled Chomsky on the Enterprise, where Commander Spock has the opportunity to add his voice to an interview with Chomsky. Fun stuff.
ahh, Hartmut maybe isolating and agglutinative languages?
http://www.glossary.sil.org/term/agglutinative-language
http://www.glossary.sil.org/term/isolating-language
Also fusional and polysynthetic.
ahh, Hartmut maybe isolating and agglutinative languages?
http://www.glossary.sil.org/term/agglutinative-language
http://www.glossary.sil.org/term/isolating-language
Also fusional and polysynthetic.
a bit more
http://www.languagesoftheworld.info/bad-linguistics/agglutinative-folk.html
The idea that languages moved from isolating to agglutinative and then to inflecting was an idea that emerged at the beginning of linguistics.
https://books.google.co.jp/books?id=3xoB_3C5N5QC&pg=PA158&lpg=PA158&dq=agglutinative+primitive&source=bl&ots=joiPYegBBD&sig=dhMce3_FlNytxH_aereVIVwXG64&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjntsXe68jWAhVIxrwKHR9XCyEQ6AEILzAB#v=onepage&q=agglutinative%20primitive&f=false
Humboldt introduced the term agglutinative
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphological_typology
The last bit on that page about Dixon’s theory of language going thru a cycle is interesting, and it notes ‘the Egyptian language as one that has undergone the entire cycle in only about three thousand years”. I like the ‘only’ in that sentence, but given the pace of the world and human tendencies, I don’t think any language or culture has 3000 years any more.
a bit more
http://www.languagesoftheworld.info/bad-linguistics/agglutinative-folk.html
The idea that languages moved from isolating to agglutinative and then to inflecting was an idea that emerged at the beginning of linguistics.
https://books.google.co.jp/books?id=3xoB_3C5N5QC&pg=PA158&lpg=PA158&dq=agglutinative+primitive&source=bl&ots=joiPYegBBD&sig=dhMce3_FlNytxH_aereVIVwXG64&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjntsXe68jWAhVIxrwKHR9XCyEQ6AEILzAB#v=onepage&q=agglutinative%20primitive&f=false
Humboldt introduced the term agglutinative
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphological_typology
The last bit on that page about Dixon’s theory of language going thru a cycle is interesting, and it notes ‘the Egyptian language as one that has undergone the entire cycle in only about three thousand years”. I like the ‘only’ in that sentence, but given the pace of the world and human tendencies, I don’t think any language or culture has 3000 years any more.
LJ, did you ever read Poul Anderson’s _A Midsummer’s Tempest_? A delightful book, whose central conceit is that everything Shakespeare wrote was historically factual (including that the Romans spoke Elizabethean English).
LJ, did you ever read Poul Anderson’s _A Midsummer’s Tempest_? A delightful book, whose central conceit is that everything Shakespeare wrote was historically factual (including that the Romans spoke Elizabethean English).
On the radio it was portrayed as defrauding the universities they work for by accepting money to steer players to certain advisors, and/or arranging payments to players through third parties
I don’t know about the laws here, but taking money to steer players to advisers or agents is pretty bad behavior. These guys are coaches, remember. I think, way back in the Dark Ages, coaches were supposed to be interested in the players’ welfare. Telling a player that John Doe is the agent he wants, because Doe slipped the coach a few grand, would be shameful, if there were such a thing as shame in big-time college sports.
I do think prosecutors overreach, way too often, and the chance of publicity adds to the tendency. I don’t know if that’s the case here, but surely these guys deserve to be fired, and kept away from universities form now on.
On the radio it was portrayed as defrauding the universities they work for by accepting money to steer players to certain advisors, and/or arranging payments to players through third parties
I don’t know about the laws here, but taking money to steer players to advisers or agents is pretty bad behavior. These guys are coaches, remember. I think, way back in the Dark Ages, coaches were supposed to be interested in the players’ welfare. Telling a player that John Doe is the agent he wants, because Doe slipped the coach a few grand, would be shameful, if there were such a thing as shame in big-time college sports.
I do think prosecutors overreach, way too often, and the chance of publicity adds to the tendency. I don’t know if that’s the case here, but surely these guys deserve to be fired, and kept away from universities form now on.
Oh it’s certainly a fireable offense and would/will subject the schools to sanctions by the NCAA, but still seems like some priorities are out of whack at the FBI/DOJ.
Moreover, it’s coming awfully close to writing the NCAA’s horrible amateur rules into law and essentially turning over the NCAA’s (admittedly poor and spotty) rule enforcement mechanism to the government and giving the rules the force of law.
I can guarantee that none of those people thought they were doing anything criminal, even if they knew they would be fired if they were ever found out (with the possible exception of the shoe company guy).
Still wondering what the actual harm to the schools are, as opposed to potential future harm.
Oh it’s certainly a fireable offense and would/will subject the schools to sanctions by the NCAA, but still seems like some priorities are out of whack at the FBI/DOJ.
Moreover, it’s coming awfully close to writing the NCAA’s horrible amateur rules into law and essentially turning over the NCAA’s (admittedly poor and spotty) rule enforcement mechanism to the government and giving the rules the force of law.
I can guarantee that none of those people thought they were doing anything criminal, even if they knew they would be fired if they were ever found out (with the possible exception of the shoe company guy).
Still wondering what the actual harm to the schools are, as opposed to potential future harm.
No, but sounds interesting. I’ve had a hard time reading any fiction in English for the past 10 years or so. I’ve got a number of theories as to why that is, but maybe I’ll try to get it. thx
No, but sounds interesting. I’ve had a hard time reading any fiction in English for the past 10 years or so. I’ve got a number of theories as to why that is, but maybe I’ll try to get it. thx
lj, I think there is a strong overlap of agglutinative and ‘hermetic’ languages but it is by no means a perfect fit. An then there are curious cases like some Amazonian tribal languages that for cultural reasons do not make use of the full options their grammars provide, i.e. there are ways of expressing things fully in accordance with the grammar rules (and seemingly natural to outsiders) that are never used by the native speakers. Classical Latin has a few small elements of that too btw, and those ‘gaps’ were closed mostly in the Middle Ages when the language had no native speakers aynmore. Cicero (and Seneca) struggled with this on occasion but would not come up with the solution that any beginner in Latin would almost automatically employ.
lj, I think there is a strong overlap of agglutinative and ‘hermetic’ languages but it is by no means a perfect fit. An then there are curious cases like some Amazonian tribal languages that for cultural reasons do not make use of the full options their grammars provide, i.e. there are ways of expressing things fully in accordance with the grammar rules (and seemingly natural to outsiders) that are never used by the native speakers. Classical Latin has a few small elements of that too btw, and those ‘gaps’ were closed mostly in the Middle Ages when the language had no native speakers aynmore. Cicero (and Seneca) struggled with this on occasion but would not come up with the solution that any beginner in Latin would almost automatically employ.
America, love it or leave it:
“I’m going to work until I die, if I can, because I need the money,” said Dever, 74,
…
People are living longer, more expensive lives, often without much of a safety net. As a result, record numbers of Americans older than 65 are working — now nearly 1 in 5. That proportion has risen steadily over the past decade, and at a far faster rate than any other age group. Today, 9 million senior citizens work, compared with 4 million in 2000.
While some work by choice rather than need, millions of others are entering their golden years with alarmingly fragile finances. Fundamental changes in the U.S. retirement system have shifted responsibility for saving from the employer to the worker, exacerbating the nation’s rich-poor divide. Two recent recessions devastated personal savings. And at a time when 10,000 baby boomers are turning 65 every day, Social Security benefits have lost about a third of their purchasing power since 2000.
America, love it or leave it:
“I’m going to work until I die, if I can, because I need the money,” said Dever, 74,
…
People are living longer, more expensive lives, often without much of a safety net. As a result, record numbers of Americans older than 65 are working — now nearly 1 in 5. That proportion has risen steadily over the past decade, and at a far faster rate than any other age group. Today, 9 million senior citizens work, compared with 4 million in 2000.
While some work by choice rather than need, millions of others are entering their golden years with alarmingly fragile finances. Fundamental changes in the U.S. retirement system have shifted responsibility for saving from the employer to the worker, exacerbating the nation’s rich-poor divide. Two recent recessions devastated personal savings. And at a time when 10,000 baby boomers are turning 65 every day, Social Security benefits have lost about a third of their purchasing power since 2000.
Ugh,
Still wondering what the actual harm to the schools are, as opposed to potential future harm.
Not clear what the harm to the school is, but there could easily be harm to an athlete steered to an inferior, not to mention plainly dishonest, agent.
Ugh,
Still wondering what the actual harm to the schools are, as opposed to potential future harm.
Not clear what the harm to the school is, but there could easily be harm to an athlete steered to an inferior, not to mention plainly dishonest, agent.
From today’s daily e-mail newsletter by the Economist:
Perhaps China has decided to get serious about turning the screws on North Korea. If their sanctions move past hurting the North Korean population to actually impacting the elite, Kim may be in trouble. Even an absolute dictator needs some number of enforcers to maintain his position.
From today’s daily e-mail newsletter by the Economist:
Perhaps China has decided to get serious about turning the screws on North Korea. If their sanctions move past hurting the North Korean population to actually impacting the elite, Kim may be in trouble. Even an absolute dictator needs some number of enforcers to maintain his position.
Take these two from Ugh’s link together:
Two recent recessions devastated personal savings.
and
While most Americans are unprepared for retirement, rich older people are doing better than ever. Among people older than 65, the wealthiest 20 percent own virtually all of the nation’s $25 trillion in retirement accounts, according to the Economic Policy Institute.
and you get this:
Fundamental changes in the U.S. retirement system have shifted responsibility for saving from the employer to the worker, exacerbating the nation’s rich-poor divide.
Some people shorted the futures of others during those recessions and got rich doing it. Apparently, it was all legal.
Take these two from Ugh’s link together:
Two recent recessions devastated personal savings.
and
While most Americans are unprepared for retirement, rich older people are doing better than ever. Among people older than 65, the wealthiest 20 percent own virtually all of the nation’s $25 trillion in retirement accounts, according to the Economic Policy Institute.
and you get this:
Fundamental changes in the U.S. retirement system have shifted responsibility for saving from the employer to the worker, exacerbating the nation’s rich-poor divide.
Some people shorted the futures of others during those recessions and got rich doing it. Apparently, it was all legal.
While some work by choice rather than need, millions of others are entering their golden years with alarmingly fragile finances. Fundamental changes in the U.S. retirement system have shifted responsibility for saving from the employer to the worker, exacerbating the nation’s rich-poor divide.
A problem exacerbated by the tendency of my generation to spend their lives as grasshoppers rather than ants: spending for the present with no thought for the future. An alarming number of quite well paid folks (e.g. IT workers) managed to save very little.
While some work by choice rather than need, millions of others are entering their golden years with alarmingly fragile finances. Fundamental changes in the U.S. retirement system have shifted responsibility for saving from the employer to the worker, exacerbating the nation’s rich-poor divide.
A problem exacerbated by the tendency of my generation to spend their lives as grasshoppers rather than ants: spending for the present with no thought for the future. An alarming number of quite well paid folks (e.g. IT workers) managed to save very little.
We need to lower taxes and slash regulations to unleash the power of investment on our economy because it’s going to help everyday Americans. Isn’t that how it’s been working all along, just on a smaller scale?
We need to lower taxes and slash regulations to unleash the power of investment on our economy because it’s going to help everyday Americans. Isn’t that how it’s been working all along, just on a smaller scale?
401k and IRAs turn out to be mostly a band-aid for the shift away from defined benefit plans that no longer need to be funded.
How many of your for profit employer’s match 401k contributions? Mine does, but it’s a non-profit.
401k and IRAs turn out to be mostly a band-aid for the shift away from defined benefit plans that no longer need to be funded.
How many of your for profit employer’s match 401k contributions? Mine does, but it’s a non-profit.
should add to the end of that first sentence: rather than a viable way to save for retirement for the average American.
should add to the end of that first sentence: rather than a viable way to save for retirement for the average American.
More:
There is no shortage of theories about why modern American life is beset with a stagnant middle class and a lack of good jobs.
…
In his new book, The End of Loyalty: The Rise and Fall of Good Jobs in America, Rick Wartzman offers a different primary culprit: corporate culture.
This culture, Wartzman argues, has “explicitly elevated shareholders above employees.” Looking at issues like the rising disdain for unions, the emergence of Ronald Reagan, and, quite simply, less corporate focus on the common good, Wartzman makes the case that the increasing focus on top salaries and shareholder returns has warped American life.
More:
There is no shortage of theories about why modern American life is beset with a stagnant middle class and a lack of good jobs.
…
In his new book, The End of Loyalty: The Rise and Fall of Good Jobs in America, Rick Wartzman offers a different primary culprit: corporate culture.
This culture, Wartzman argues, has “explicitly elevated shareholders above employees.” Looking at issues like the rising disdain for unions, the emergence of Ronald Reagan, and, quite simply, less corporate focus on the common good, Wartzman makes the case that the increasing focus on top salaries and shareholder returns has warped American life.
How many of your for profit employer’s match 401k contributions? Mine does, but it’s a non-profit.
Mine does, up to a limit specified by % of salary. My company has anachronistically good benefits which are gradually being eroded as (as I see it) part of the exact same process described in the last paragraph of Ugh’s 1:45. It just happened later for us because of quirks of timing, ownership, etc., and maybe more slowly because the essential decency of a company that was always a bit funky hasn’t been baked out of it. (Yet?)
How many of your for profit employer’s match 401k contributions? Mine does, but it’s a non-profit.
Mine does, up to a limit specified by % of salary. My company has anachronistically good benefits which are gradually being eroded as (as I see it) part of the exact same process described in the last paragraph of Ugh’s 1:45. It just happened later for us because of quirks of timing, ownership, etc., and maybe more slowly because the essential decency of a company that was always a bit funky hasn’t been baked out of it. (Yet?)
How many of your for profit employer’s match 401k contributions? Mine does, but it’s a non-profit.
Some matching in 401K’s and SEP IRA’s is not uncommon, but it is usually capped at some paltry figure. You also have to consider the generally rapacious rake-off taken out by the investment firms/fund managers. Even 1% a year over 40 years adds up to a big chunk for basically telling suckers “past performance is no guarantee of future results”.
They ‘effing want it all.
Ted Kennedy once famously asked, “Where does the greed stop?”
It doesn’t.
How many of your for profit employer’s match 401k contributions? Mine does, but it’s a non-profit.
Some matching in 401K’s and SEP IRA’s is not uncommon, but it is usually capped at some paltry figure. You also have to consider the generally rapacious rake-off taken out by the investment firms/fund managers. Even 1% a year over 40 years adds up to a big chunk for basically telling suckers “past performance is no guarantee of future results”.
They ‘effing want it all.
Ted Kennedy once famously asked, “Where does the greed stop?”
It doesn’t.
bobbyp’s 2:12 — another item subsumed under russell’s general observation the other day:
the health care system in this country is no longer about health care. it is about making money, or not spending money.
i.e., it is about money.
in that, it is like every other good and useful thing that has been absorbed by the calculus of commodification.
Just because we haven’t heard about it lately, let’s not forget the efforts that have been made, and will probably be made again, to “privatize” social security, for the exact same reason: so that someone can start skimming profits off it. Or should I say “rapacious rake-offs” off it.
bobbyp’s 2:12 — another item subsumed under russell’s general observation the other day:
the health care system in this country is no longer about health care. it is about making money, or not spending money.
i.e., it is about money.
in that, it is like every other good and useful thing that has been absorbed by the calculus of commodification.
Just because we haven’t heard about it lately, let’s not forget the efforts that have been made, and will probably be made again, to “privatize” social security, for the exact same reason: so that someone can start skimming profits off it. Or should I say “rapacious rake-offs” off it.
“Some of the most admired (and top-earning) companies today include Amazon, Costco, Google, Patagonia, Southwest Airlines, Starbucks, and of course, Whole Foods. Each of these companies is cited by Mackey as those that have embraced its ‘rising consciousness.’ He is convinced that a ‘conscious business energizes and empowers people and engages their best contribution in service of its noble higher purpose. By doing so, a business has a profoundly net positive net impact on the world.'”
In Capitalism, Nice Guys Finish First: Capitalists get a bad rap for being greedy and ruthless, but John Mackey shows another way.
“Some of the most admired (and top-earning) companies today include Amazon, Costco, Google, Patagonia, Southwest Airlines, Starbucks, and of course, Whole Foods. Each of these companies is cited by Mackey as those that have embraced its ‘rising consciousness.’ He is convinced that a ‘conscious business energizes and empowers people and engages their best contribution in service of its noble higher purpose. By doing so, a business has a profoundly net positive net impact on the world.'”
In Capitalism, Nice Guys Finish First: Capitalists get a bad rap for being greedy and ruthless, but John Mackey shows another way.
With the current corporate culture, having a ‘defined benefit plan’ generally means that there’s a pot of money sitting around, just waiting for corporate raiders to grab, via contrived bankruptcy, merger or whatever.
Best to have the whole thing OUT of their greedheads dishonest paws, as the employees of Enron found out the hard way.
With the current corporate culture, having a ‘defined benefit plan’ generally means that there’s a pot of money sitting around, just waiting for corporate raiders to grab, via contrived bankruptcy, merger or whatever.
Best to have the whole thing OUT of their greedheads dishonest paws, as the employees of Enron found out the hard way.
It’s almost like it has been planned this way for 40-plus years.
It’s almost like, instead of the filth rapturing their wealth away to a secret land of the prosperity gospel as they have threatened to do since the Soviet Union planted their agents Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman, Arthur Laffer, and onald rump among us, Galt’s Gulch has been built around us and the padlocks placed on access for all but the filthy few, most of them conservatives who want the rest of the crumbs, too.
Social Security and Medicare will be abolished. There will be no unions in America in fifteen years. They will made illegal as they are in other totalitarian countries around the globe. There will no public education in America in 15 years. There will be no public libraries in America in 15 years.
There will be no access to roads and highways in 15 years if you haven’t the wealth. There will be no access to fresh water or clean air In America unless you possess the wealth. There will no protection of the environment in America. There will no National Parks or State Parks in America.
The law that stipulates all patients must be seen and given meliorative care in hospitals and clinics will be abolished.
Free clinics will be surveilled and taxed to prevent any citizen from getting something for nothing.
Unless you are incorporated, you will not be considered a person under the Constitution. Unless you possess enough wealth above a certain level, the First Amendment for political purposes will be defunct for many of us.
Only money will be heard. These noises we make with our mouths and these scratchings in ink and type will not be heard by deaf political institutions.
The NRA and the Republican party, in a few years, will quietly shift their positions on the Second Amendment. Only those above a certain income and with the correct political views and party registration will be permitted to purchase and possess guns and ammo.
Every day at noon, 365 days a year, a siren will sound across America and all legitimate citizens, those in the one percent, will expect all proles, the rest of us, to stop what we are doing and stand at attention and salute military hardware as it trundles by our houses and places of business and flies overhead in formation.
Any deviation will be noted and accommodation for the deviants will made on the prison island of Puerto Rico.
There will be a prison system far more vast than today to house liberals, gays, blacks, Mexicans, all questionable immigrants, feminists, and women who are pregnant outside of marriage, and those who kneel, unless it is to Mammon.
Only conservative churches will be released from the prohibition of making political contributions. They will seek parishioners, not by promising everlasting life, but by paying them to join via tax-free subsidization by corporations and the likes of the fascist Mercers and the Kochs.
Only conservative republican public bathrooms will be permitted in America. They will not be required to treat their waste however, because their shit don’t stink and their piss will be considered the golden shower elixir of trickle down prosperity in God-fucked America.
The rest of us will have to piss up a rope under massive state surveillance, for a user fee.
There will be only one rope.
The rope will be used to hang us.
This could all be avoided by means unmentionable, but will not, because America is full of shit.
It’s almost like it has been planned this way for 40-plus years.
It’s almost like, instead of the filth rapturing their wealth away to a secret land of the prosperity gospel as they have threatened to do since the Soviet Union planted their agents Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman, Arthur Laffer, and onald rump among us, Galt’s Gulch has been built around us and the padlocks placed on access for all but the filthy few, most of them conservatives who want the rest of the crumbs, too.
Social Security and Medicare will be abolished. There will be no unions in America in fifteen years. They will made illegal as they are in other totalitarian countries around the globe. There will no public education in America in 15 years. There will be no public libraries in America in 15 years.
There will be no access to roads and highways in 15 years if you haven’t the wealth. There will be no access to fresh water or clean air In America unless you possess the wealth. There will no protection of the environment in America. There will no National Parks or State Parks in America.
The law that stipulates all patients must be seen and given meliorative care in hospitals and clinics will be abolished.
Free clinics will be surveilled and taxed to prevent any citizen from getting something for nothing.
Unless you are incorporated, you will not be considered a person under the Constitution. Unless you possess enough wealth above a certain level, the First Amendment for political purposes will be defunct for many of us.
Only money will be heard. These noises we make with our mouths and these scratchings in ink and type will not be heard by deaf political institutions.
The NRA and the Republican party, in a few years, will quietly shift their positions on the Second Amendment. Only those above a certain income and with the correct political views and party registration will be permitted to purchase and possess guns and ammo.
Every day at noon, 365 days a year, a siren will sound across America and all legitimate citizens, those in the one percent, will expect all proles, the rest of us, to stop what we are doing and stand at attention and salute military hardware as it trundles by our houses and places of business and flies overhead in formation.
Any deviation will be noted and accommodation for the deviants will made on the prison island of Puerto Rico.
There will be a prison system far more vast than today to house liberals, gays, blacks, Mexicans, all questionable immigrants, feminists, and women who are pregnant outside of marriage, and those who kneel, unless it is to Mammon.
Only conservative churches will be released from the prohibition of making political contributions. They will seek parishioners, not by promising everlasting life, but by paying them to join via tax-free subsidization by corporations and the likes of the fascist Mercers and the Kochs.
Only conservative republican public bathrooms will be permitted in America. They will not be required to treat their waste however, because their shit don’t stink and their piss will be considered the golden shower elixir of trickle down prosperity in God-fucked America.
The rest of us will have to piss up a rope under massive state surveillance, for a user fee.
There will be only one rope.
The rope will be used to hang us.
This could all be avoided by means unmentionable, but will not, because America is full of shit.
With the current corporate culture, having a ‘defined benefit plan’ generally means that there’s a pot of money sitting around, just waiting for corporate raiders to grab, via contrived bankruptcy, merger or whatever.
Best to have the whole thing OUT of their greedheads dishonest paws, as the employees of Enron found out the hard way.
Yes. But this is not entirely new.
Part of the reason IRA’, 401(k)’s and the like came into being was that defined benefit plans had some serious deficiencies. They were very nice if you spent your career at a stable organization, but if not you had problems. The plans had various vesting requirements, so career-changers lost a lot of accrued unvested benefits, which were generally not portable.
As Snarki says, the plans were always vulnerable to bankruptcy and other events, even including changing the terms. There was a famous case concerning IBM in the 90’s.
The problems with self-directed plans like 401(k)’s are, IMO, twofold.
First, the company matches are often too small, by comparison with what DB plans used to offer. Partly that’s cheapness, partly, maybe, it’s the fact that the DB plans had a significant dropout rate, so pension money was more narrowly distributed. Good for the recipients, not so good for job-changers.
The second is that they expose participants to the vast amount of financial hucksterism, bad advice, and near-thievery that exists in the investment world. People have a chunk of money to manage. It’s important and they’re nervous and often do not have a lot of financial knowledge. So it’s easy to go for the reassuring voice, all the more so when it comes from a big-name outfit, and they end up with mismanaged funds and silly fees.
With the current corporate culture, having a ‘defined benefit plan’ generally means that there’s a pot of money sitting around, just waiting for corporate raiders to grab, via contrived bankruptcy, merger or whatever.
Best to have the whole thing OUT of their greedheads dishonest paws, as the employees of Enron found out the hard way.
Yes. But this is not entirely new.
Part of the reason IRA’, 401(k)’s and the like came into being was that defined benefit plans had some serious deficiencies. They were very nice if you spent your career at a stable organization, but if not you had problems. The plans had various vesting requirements, so career-changers lost a lot of accrued unvested benefits, which were generally not portable.
As Snarki says, the plans were always vulnerable to bankruptcy and other events, even including changing the terms. There was a famous case concerning IBM in the 90’s.
The problems with self-directed plans like 401(k)’s are, IMO, twofold.
First, the company matches are often too small, by comparison with what DB plans used to offer. Partly that’s cheapness, partly, maybe, it’s the fact that the DB plans had a significant dropout rate, so pension money was more narrowly distributed. Good for the recipients, not so good for job-changers.
The second is that they expose participants to the vast amount of financial hucksterism, bad advice, and near-thievery that exists in the investment world. People have a chunk of money to manage. It’s important and they’re nervous and often do not have a lot of financial knowledge. So it’s easy to go for the reassuring voice, all the more so when it comes from a big-name outfit, and they end up with mismanaged funds and silly fees.
Moving on.
Breaking News:
HHS Secretary Tom Price is apparently resigning. Is a matter of his use of his office (and its budget) for personal purposes had gotten just too embarrassing? Or is it just that he was getting too much press compared to the President? (Or even both?)
You decide. The answer makes a difference, because he’s not the only one wasting budget funds on personal travel. Could we be looking at a new Treasury Secretary as well…?
Moving on.
Breaking News:
HHS Secretary Tom Price is apparently resigning. Is a matter of his use of his office (and its budget) for personal purposes had gotten just too embarrassing? Or is it just that he was getting too much press compared to the President? (Or even both?)
You decide. The answer makes a difference, because he’s not the only one wasting budget funds on personal travel. Could we be looking at a new Treasury Secretary as well…?
They were very nice if you spent your career at a stable organization, but if not you had problems. The plans had various vesting requirements, so career-changers lost a lot of accrued unvested benefits, which were generally not portable.
How well I remember. I started work at Bank of Americas. Their retirement plan vested after 10 years. That’s 10 calendar years (each with at least 1000 hours worked). But then, they changed it to anniversary years. The Bank swore that nobody would lose anything as a result. But then I changed jobs. I had 10 calendar years . . . but for my last anniversary year, I was a few hours short of 1000 hours. So, zero vesting. Surprise!
30+ years later, I’m still a bit testy about that.
They were very nice if you spent your career at a stable organization, but if not you had problems. The plans had various vesting requirements, so career-changers lost a lot of accrued unvested benefits, which were generally not portable.
How well I remember. I started work at Bank of Americas. Their retirement plan vested after 10 years. That’s 10 calendar years (each with at least 1000 hours worked). But then, they changed it to anniversary years. The Bank swore that nobody would lose anything as a result. But then I changed jobs. I had 10 calendar years . . . but for my last anniversary year, I was a few hours short of 1000 hours. So, zero vesting. Surprise!
30+ years later, I’m still a bit testy about that.
my wife and I are just finishing a two week holiday in italy. yay us.
from my unscientific and completely anecdotal experience here, which has consisted of talking to people (WTF, it worked for friedman), I conclude that American workers, compared to those of any remotely similar nation, are basically getting screwed on a daily basis.
job security, health insurance, time off, retirement, child care, parental leave. American workers are, by general OECD standards, treated like crap.
keep on genuflecting to those “job creators”. wealth creators, go pound sand.
my wife and I are just finishing a two week holiday in italy. yay us.
from my unscientific and completely anecdotal experience here, which has consisted of talking to people (WTF, it worked for friedman), I conclude that American workers, compared to those of any remotely similar nation, are basically getting screwed on a daily basis.
job security, health insurance, time off, retirement, child care, parental leave. American workers are, by general OECD standards, treated like crap.
keep on genuflecting to those “job creators”. wealth creators, go pound sand.
job security, health insurance, time off, retirement, child care, parental leave. American workers are, by general OECD standards, treated like crap.
I agree with this to an extent. A lot of this has to do with the attitude of workers themselves towards fighting for their own rights. Italians and French strike regularly. Nobody can count on getting on that train. Our folks do not. The people there stand up and fight for certain things. Here they don’t (not lately – they vote for Trump instead).
The reason I said “to an extent” is that if you go to some outlying areas of Italy, not as a tourist, perhaps as a worker of some kind yourself, you will find pretty serious poverty. It’s misery, although their gorgeous culture is some comfort.
Corruption (mafia) rules a lot of Italy. Like this. Close relatives have lived in Italy, and worked there some. Lovely, gorgeous, inspiring place to visit. Living there? Hard.
Did you read Elena Ferrante’s novels? Highly recommend them for so many reasons, poverty included. There was a thread recently. I think I was the only one here, at the time, who had read them.
job security, health insurance, time off, retirement, child care, parental leave. American workers are, by general OECD standards, treated like crap.
I agree with this to an extent. A lot of this has to do with the attitude of workers themselves towards fighting for their own rights. Italians and French strike regularly. Nobody can count on getting on that train. Our folks do not. The people there stand up and fight for certain things. Here they don’t (not lately – they vote for Trump instead).
The reason I said “to an extent” is that if you go to some outlying areas of Italy, not as a tourist, perhaps as a worker of some kind yourself, you will find pretty serious poverty. It’s misery, although their gorgeous culture is some comfort.
Corruption (mafia) rules a lot of Italy. Like this. Close relatives have lived in Italy, and worked there some. Lovely, gorgeous, inspiring place to visit. Living there? Hard.
Did you read Elena Ferrante’s novels? Highly recommend them for so many reasons, poverty included. There was a thread recently. I think I was the only one here, at the time, who had read them.
Friends, my laptop key#oard seems to have eliminated the second letter of the alpha#et. I’m hoping it fixes itself. In the meantime, my comments will either #e awkward, include a # instead of that letter, or whatever. Sorry for this!
Friends, my laptop key#oard seems to have eliminated the second letter of the alpha#et. I’m hoping it fixes itself. In the meantime, my comments will either #e awkward, include a # instead of that letter, or whatever. Sorry for this!
Another thing, just to #e annoying: the literary community around here is all a#out new stuff. Elena Ferrante and Karl Ove Knausgård were vying (in my community) for literary attention. I haven’t yet read Karl Ove Knausgård, although I plan to do that. #ut plenty of people here have tried reading his work, #ut Elena Ferrante? Not so much.
Ferrante’s work isn’t the last word on feminism, #ut it’s incredi#ly informative. Read the series, please. It’s a #it operatic (Italian, no?) #ut so freaking good.
Another thing, just to #e annoying: the literary community around here is all a#out new stuff. Elena Ferrante and Karl Ove Knausgård were vying (in my community) for literary attention. I haven’t yet read Karl Ove Knausgård, although I plan to do that. #ut plenty of people here have tried reading his work, #ut Elena Ferrante? Not so much.
Ferrante’s work isn’t the last word on feminism, #ut it’s incredi#ly informative. Read the series, please. It’s a #it operatic (Italian, no?) #ut so freaking good.
So – open thread and all – Puerto Rico anyone? I’m thinking that PR should have #een on the forefront of everything for the past week.
We’re #arely talking a#out it. #ad for us.
So – open thread and all – Puerto Rico anyone? I’m thinking that PR should have #een on the forefront of everything for the past week.
We’re #arely talking a#out it. #ad for us.
#ad for us.
I guess I meant: “#ad on us.”
#ad for us.
I guess I meant: “#ad on us.”
Tedious but:
B – [alt] 0066
b – [alt] 0098
Tedious but:
B – [alt] 0066
b – [alt] 0098
ºº§§
Thanks,CharlesWT! It’s not working yet, #ut I’ll keep at it.
ºº§§
Thanks,CharlesWT! It’s not working yet, #ut I’ll keep at it.
Hmmm…should work if you hold down the Alt key and type in the numbers.
Hmmm…should work if you hold down the Alt key and type in the numbers.
I checked again. You don’t have to type in the zeros.
I checked again. You don’t have to type in the zeros.
Puerto Rico
Also the Virgin Islands
https://www.balloon-juice.com/2017/09/29/hurricane-marias-aftermath-the-leaks-become-a-flood/
Puerto Ricans are brown people with big debts they owe us surrounded by big water. Ocean water.
The Russians, Cubans, and the Chinese need to move on Puerto Rico.
I mean, the Russians already have their man in the White House, and a few in Congress.
Puerto Rico
Also the Virgin Islands
https://www.balloon-juice.com/2017/09/29/hurricane-marias-aftermath-the-leaks-become-a-flood/
Puerto Ricans are brown people with big debts they owe us surrounded by big water. Ocean water.
The Russians, Cubans, and the Chinese need to move on Puerto Rico.
I mean, the Russians already have their man in the White House, and a few in Congress.
They are coming for all of us:
https://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2017/09/coming-for-resistance.html
filthy, stinking republicans.
rump didn’t even show up for the swearing in of the new FBI Director. Maybe he visited Thad Cochran in the hospital, where rump has insisted seven times in recent days the Confederate is in his sickbed.
They are coming for all of us:
https://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2017/09/coming-for-resistance.html
filthy, stinking republicans.
rump didn’t even show up for the swearing in of the new FBI Director. Maybe he visited Thad Cochran in the hospital, where rump has insisted seven times in recent days the Confederate is in his sickbed.
Maybe Tom Price, and the other thieving, lying republican cabinet secretaries can be hoisted aloft via a weather balloon gondola into the eye of the next hurricane on the way to their next junkets and report back to us.
http://juanitajean.com/welcome-to-third-world-america/
The plane won’t be replaced because some of the data it collects MIGHT be used to justify the deep state liberal conspiracy to remake the entire world economy because of global warming.
Maybe Tom Price, and the other thieving, lying republican cabinet secretaries can be hoisted aloft via a weather balloon gondola into the eye of the next hurricane on the way to their next junkets and report back to us.
http://juanitajean.com/welcome-to-third-world-america/
The plane won’t be replaced because some of the data it collects MIGHT be used to justify the deep state liberal conspiracy to remake the entire world economy because of global warming.
Trump later this afternoon, “Let them eat cholera.” Probably.
Trump later this afternoon, “Let them eat cholera.” Probably.
Powerful excellence:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mU0RfhvYN8s
Or …. as the current inhabitants of the White House and their voters would say:
“Namby-pamby politically correct fake news. Diversity schleversity. This is a white Christian male country. There are very good people writing racist graffiti. There are very good people on the other side NOT writing racist graffiti.”
Powerful excellence:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mU0RfhvYN8s
Or …. as the current inhabitants of the White House and their voters would say:
“Namby-pamby politically correct fake news. Diversity schleversity. This is a white Christian male country. There are very good people writing racist graffiti. There are very good people on the other side NOT writing racist graffiti.”
Tweeted by John Rentoul today, a reminder of the late, great (at least as a journalist/columnist) Bernard Levin, (for those who few who may be interested, Arianna Huffington’s first and greatest love), here talking about John Major’s government, but of course it applies even more appositely to Trump’s:
Tweeted by John Rentoul today, a reminder of the late, great (at least as a journalist/columnist) Bernard Levin, (for those who few who may be interested, Arianna Huffington’s first and greatest love), here talking about John Major’s government, but of course it applies even more appositely to Trump’s:
rewriting that on-point paragraph in rump-speak would entail placing the words “Make America greatly” as lead in to “worm-eaten” and add “very, very” before every wonderful descriptive, like when the top comes off the salt shaker and dumps salt all over your exquisite meal.
“unpardonable’ would be replaced by “pardoned”
add “is that a word? I don’t know if you know that word, I do” directly after “tergiversating” and then he would mock a disabled person, thinking “tergiversating” was a medical term for bodily movements during a Grand Mal seizure.
Paddy Chayefsky would be proud of Levin’s list.
To be fair, which is now a law, Tony Blair was no snowflake. He tergiversated all over the place.
rewriting that on-point paragraph in rump-speak would entail placing the words “Make America greatly” as lead in to “worm-eaten” and add “very, very” before every wonderful descriptive, like when the top comes off the salt shaker and dumps salt all over your exquisite meal.
“unpardonable’ would be replaced by “pardoned”
add “is that a word? I don’t know if you know that word, I do” directly after “tergiversating” and then he would mock a disabled person, thinking “tergiversating” was a medical term for bodily movements during a Grand Mal seizure.
Paddy Chayefsky would be proud of Levin’s list.
To be fair, which is now a law, Tony Blair was no snowflake. He tergiversated all over the place.
H.L. Mencken could use words bigly too:
http://juanitajean.com/downright-moron/
H.L. Mencken could use words bigly too:
http://juanitajean.com/downright-moron/
If I want Hugh Hefner ruined for me, this is how it should be done:
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/09/plutocratic-logic-hefner-apologists
If I want Hugh Hefner ruined for me, this is how it should be done:
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/09/plutocratic-logic-hefner-apologists
Count, I didn’t say anything the first time you mentioned this, but was your opinion of Hef truly such that it’s only just been “ruined”? Maybe you are just being ironic? And I speak as someone who grew up with loads of people (although luckily not my father) reading Playboy, and thinking it worthwhile (the articles!) and sophisticated. And I never questioned it until, I don’t know, the late 70s…
Count, I didn’t say anything the first time you mentioned this, but was your opinion of Hef truly such that it’s only just been “ruined”? Maybe you are just being ironic? And I speak as someone who grew up with loads of people (although luckily not my father) reading Playboy, and thinking it worthwhile (the articles!) and sophisticated. And I never questioned it until, I don’t know, the late 70s…
To the extent that I thought about Hefner, which was hardly at all and WHEN I thought about it him it was the few times when I was 12 years old and my best friend would sneak into his Dad’s bedroom, rummage under his bed, and appear with a stack of them for we boys to peruse during sleepovers, I viewed him as a sort of harmless sideshow, a con, but with the audacity to lounge around and be interviewed in his pajamas and a bathrobe with pretty girls surrounding him … naivete.
Mine.
In the intervening years, dozens and dozens of them, I paid no attention, with the exception of the John Lennon interview back in the 1970s.
Ir always kind of killed me that Playboy was a public company traded on the stock exchange.
So that was the little that was ruined. I’m sorry to hear he was a rather a mean individual. A misogynist. And not an employer who treated many of his employees like human beings, but instead like company assets and objects.
He was tawdry.
Where was OSHA? Where was the EEO?
To the extent that I thought about Hefner, which was hardly at all and WHEN I thought about it him it was the few times when I was 12 years old and my best friend would sneak into his Dad’s bedroom, rummage under his bed, and appear with a stack of them for we boys to peruse during sleepovers, I viewed him as a sort of harmless sideshow, a con, but with the audacity to lounge around and be interviewed in his pajamas and a bathrobe with pretty girls surrounding him … naivete.
Mine.
In the intervening years, dozens and dozens of them, I paid no attention, with the exception of the John Lennon interview back in the 1970s.
Ir always kind of killed me that Playboy was a public company traded on the stock exchange.
So that was the little that was ruined. I’m sorry to hear he was a rather a mean individual. A misogynist. And not an employer who treated many of his employees like human beings, but instead like company assets and objects.
He was tawdry.
Where was OSHA? Where was the EEO?
When we run out of English words to describe rump, use Latin:
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/09/donald-trump-truly-despicable-human
When we run out of English words to describe rump, use Latin:
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/09/donald-trump-truly-despicable-human
Phew.
Although pretty late on the misogyny front, I suppose. However, tawdry is exactly the mot juste. Thanks.
Phew.
Although pretty late on the misogyny front, I suppose. However, tawdry is exactly the mot juste. Thanks.
How it works department
Over at LGM they are defining Hugh Hefner as a “plutocrat” based on Hef being a sexist pig.
This new definition will mean Obama is ok fine great guy even though he is currently making 1.2 million a month giving speeches to banksters (retrieving his delayed bribes) because, hey Obama is not a sexist pig so he is not and does not serve plutocrats.
Easily going to be the first billionaire ex-president.
How it works department
Over at LGM they are defining Hugh Hefner as a “plutocrat” based on Hef being a sexist pig.
This new definition will mean Obama is ok fine great guy even though he is currently making 1.2 million a month giving speeches to banksters (retrieving his delayed bribes) because, hey Obama is not a sexist pig so he is not and does not serve plutocrats.
Easily going to be the first billionaire ex-president.
Well, speaking personally, and while wishing society were structured differently and more equally (as recently discussed) I don’t begrudge him. I hope he and other progressive millionaires and billionaires are strategising about how to try and counter the damage done to the next enrollment period for the ACA by the bastards in the White House, so continuing to try and protect his great project to save millions of non-plutocratic lives.
Well, speaking personally, and while wishing society were structured differently and more equally (as recently discussed) I don’t begrudge him. I hope he and other progressive millionaires and billionaires are strategising about how to try and counter the damage done to the next enrollment period for the ACA by the bastards in the White House, so continuing to try and protect his great project to save millions of non-plutocratic lives.
if you go to some outlying areas of Italy, not as a tourist, perhaps as a worker of some kind yourself, you will find pretty serious poverty. It’s misery
where can I go where I will not find miserable serious poverty?
Corruption (mafia) rules a lot of Italy.
corruption rules a lot of the US, including its congress and executive.
if you want to talk about mafia, specifically, lemme take you to NYC.
Living there? Hard.
the ways in which living in Europe are not so hard.
if you get sick, you can go to the doctor.
if you go to the doctor, you don’t have to worry about bankruptcy.
pretty good schools are generally available to everyone.
professional training or university are generally available to everyone, at modest cost.
if you have a job, your employer cannot in general fire you at will.
if you do lose your job, there is fairly generous support for retraining and job placement.
in Germany specifically, if you have a child, you are entitled to a one year leave, paid at 66% of your salary, with your job guaranteed upon your return.
most folks enjoy 4 to 6 weeks paid vacation per year. if you get sick, it is not deducted from your vacation time.
etc etc etc
what all of this demonstrates is a culture where the people who actually show up and do the things that create value, receive a share in that value, and have a recognized position as meaningful, contributing stakeholders in the enterprise.
they are not considered to be, and are not treated as, a fungible commodity factor of reproduction called “labor”.
if you go to some outlying areas of Italy, not as a tourist, perhaps as a worker of some kind yourself, you will find pretty serious poverty. It’s misery
where can I go where I will not find miserable serious poverty?
Corruption (mafia) rules a lot of Italy.
corruption rules a lot of the US, including its congress and executive.
if you want to talk about mafia, specifically, lemme take you to NYC.
Living there? Hard.
the ways in which living in Europe are not so hard.
if you get sick, you can go to the doctor.
if you go to the doctor, you don’t have to worry about bankruptcy.
pretty good schools are generally available to everyone.
professional training or university are generally available to everyone, at modest cost.
if you have a job, your employer cannot in general fire you at will.
if you do lose your job, there is fairly generous support for retraining and job placement.
in Germany specifically, if you have a child, you are entitled to a one year leave, paid at 66% of your salary, with your job guaranteed upon your return.
most folks enjoy 4 to 6 weeks paid vacation per year. if you get sick, it is not deducted from your vacation time.
etc etc etc
what all of this demonstrates is a culture where the people who actually show up and do the things that create value, receive a share in that value, and have a recognized position as meaningful, contributing stakeholders in the enterprise.
they are not considered to be, and are not treated as, a fungible commodity factor of reproduction called “labor”.
A downside is that lower-income and middle-class taxpayers pay more taxes than in the US.
A downside is that lower-income and middle-class taxpayers pay more taxes than in the US.
Why is paying taxes considered a downside?
Why is paying taxes considered a downside?
“speaking personally, and while wishing society were structured differently and more equally (as recently discussed) I don’t begrudge him”
Begrudge? Like I said, he is receiving his delayed bribes for enhancing and making permanent your “badly structured” oligarchy.
We know why he did it, now how about how. Obama may be our smartest President, even smarter than Carter in political and economic acumen gained at the UI of Chicago.
James Carvile said he wanted to be reborn as the bond market, and I forget who said “Give me control of the money supply an I will control the world.
30% drop in output gap, barely a return to 70s wage rates, big decrease in employment to population, greater premium to education, stock market bubbling, high end real estate boom, permanent stagnation and austerity, no real hope of Keynesian boom…and more that increases the power of the 1%, some on our side, most against…this is not something that happened, but something that was done. And the destruction, division, and demoralization of the Democratic Party was an accomplishment he doesn’t share with Bernanke.
The crumbs the means of survival the social advances he did as a cover especially late in the administration such as the ACA is exactly the plan, keeping surplus labour alive and almost hungry so as to build a stock of servants and near slaves.
Worst President Ever, but hey Trump is racist and sexist so the poors have an enemy. Obama was evil and competent beyond even my imaginings.
“speaking personally, and while wishing society were structured differently and more equally (as recently discussed) I don’t begrudge him”
Begrudge? Like I said, he is receiving his delayed bribes for enhancing and making permanent your “badly structured” oligarchy.
We know why he did it, now how about how. Obama may be our smartest President, even smarter than Carter in political and economic acumen gained at the UI of Chicago.
James Carvile said he wanted to be reborn as the bond market, and I forget who said “Give me control of the money supply an I will control the world.
30% drop in output gap, barely a return to 70s wage rates, big decrease in employment to population, greater premium to education, stock market bubbling, high end real estate boom, permanent stagnation and austerity, no real hope of Keynesian boom…and more that increases the power of the 1%, some on our side, most against…this is not something that happened, but something that was done. And the destruction, division, and demoralization of the Democratic Party was an accomplishment he doesn’t share with Bernanke.
The crumbs the means of survival the social advances he did as a cover especially late in the administration such as the ACA is exactly the plan, keeping surplus labour alive and almost hungry so as to build a stock of servants and near slaves.
Worst President Ever, but hey Trump is racist and sexist so the poors have an enemy. Obama was evil and competent beyond even my imaginings.
Obama was evil? Wow, that’s as different a universe as the (obviously very different from yours otherwise) one that the Trumpsters inhabit.
Obama was evil? Wow, that’s as different a universe as the (obviously very different from yours otherwise) one that the Trumpsters inhabit.
The crumbs the means of survival the social advances he did as a cover especially late in the administration such as the ACA is exactly the plan, keeping surplus labour alive and almost hungry so as to build a stock of servants and near slaves.
“as a cover”? “exactly the plan, keeping surplus labour alive and almost hungry so as to build a stock of servants and near slaves.”?
You can argue that this is the effect, or even in your words “something that was done”, but the idea that this was “the plan”, at least for Obama, is paranoid in the extreme. I have no doubt that your considerable body of knowledge and reading leads you to believe that there is a (international?) cabal of capitalists and bloodsuckers scheming how to feed off and benefit from the labour of the poor, regardless of their suffering (or maybe even in some cases because of it), and maybe there is – russell recently certainly seems to believe this. But to say that Obama had this as his “plan”, with things like the ACA as “cover” seems like a wilful and unhelpful mischaracterisation. There are actual real villains, we don’t have to create them.
The crumbs the means of survival the social advances he did as a cover especially late in the administration such as the ACA is exactly the plan, keeping surplus labour alive and almost hungry so as to build a stock of servants and near slaves.
“as a cover”? “exactly the plan, keeping surplus labour alive and almost hungry so as to build a stock of servants and near slaves.”?
You can argue that this is the effect, or even in your words “something that was done”, but the idea that this was “the plan”, at least for Obama, is paranoid in the extreme. I have no doubt that your considerable body of knowledge and reading leads you to believe that there is a (international?) cabal of capitalists and bloodsuckers scheming how to feed off and benefit from the labour of the poor, regardless of their suffering (or maybe even in some cases because of it), and maybe there is – russell recently certainly seems to believe this. But to say that Obama had this as his “plan”, with things like the ACA as “cover” seems like a wilful and unhelpful mischaracterisation. There are actual real villains, we don’t have to create them.
The trouble with constantly inventing villains and evil conspiracies is that it makes it rather harder to notice when you encounter a real one. Not to mention making it lots harder to convince people when you tell them about a real one.
The trouble with constantly inventing villains and evil conspiracies is that it makes it rather harder to notice when you encounter a real one. Not to mention making it lots harder to convince people when you tell them about a real one.
“The crumbs the means of survival the social advances he did as a cover especially late in the administration such as the ACA is exactly the plan, keeping surplus labour alive and almost hungry so as to build a stock of servants and near slaves.”
This is a tempting statement for me. I get it.
America is a gigantic fish fry in which the fish pay to jump into the frying pan and about all a few Democrats (can do, even if they are faking it) do anymore is set aside a little money to restock the fisheries so the Grizzlies can swipe them with their gigantic paws and eat.
On the other hand, maybe Obama’s social advances, such as they are, were, once ground through the “process”, a way to sneak a little potato salad into America’s carnivorous picnic, while outfitting bridge underpasses with spiked and bumpy pavement so the weary can’t lay their heads down.
For his trouble, he was called a Marxist by the grizzlies (I didn’t catch Obama winking at them), and even by many of the gutted fish, but now he comes off as the shiny lure for the guppies being restocked into the stream in Galt’s Gulch, which is being built around us, not in the far-off getaway of Rand’s fitful nightmare.
They’ll fish with dynamite soon, given current trends.
I’m making myself hungry.
It would make my day and tie up so many loose ends for me if Marty would swoop in and agree with McManus, much as I see the latter’s point, regarding Obama.
“The crumbs the means of survival the social advances he did as a cover especially late in the administration such as the ACA is exactly the plan, keeping surplus labour alive and almost hungry so as to build a stock of servants and near slaves.”
This is a tempting statement for me. I get it.
America is a gigantic fish fry in which the fish pay to jump into the frying pan and about all a few Democrats (can do, even if they are faking it) do anymore is set aside a little money to restock the fisheries so the Grizzlies can swipe them with their gigantic paws and eat.
On the other hand, maybe Obama’s social advances, such as they are, were, once ground through the “process”, a way to sneak a little potato salad into America’s carnivorous picnic, while outfitting bridge underpasses with spiked and bumpy pavement so the weary can’t lay their heads down.
For his trouble, he was called a Marxist by the grizzlies (I didn’t catch Obama winking at them), and even by many of the gutted fish, but now he comes off as the shiny lure for the guppies being restocked into the stream in Galt’s Gulch, which is being built around us, not in the far-off getaway of Rand’s fitful nightmare.
They’ll fish with dynamite soon, given current trends.
I’m making myself hungry.
It would make my day and tie up so many loose ends for me if Marty would swoop in and agree with McManus, much as I see the latter’s point, regarding Obama.
“this is not something that happened, but something that was done.”
As a general rule, referring to the litany preceding it (all of it WAS the plan; the market and its all-or-nothing afficianados, which claim they don’t like planning, planned it), I would stand at attention at a ballgame if that sentence was read by the announcer during the 7th-inning stretch.
“this is not something that happened, but something that was done.”
As a general rule, referring to the litany preceding it (all of it WAS the plan; the market and its all-or-nothing afficianados, which claim they don’t like planning, planned it), I would stand at attention at a ballgame if that sentence was read by the announcer during the 7th-inning stretch.
where can I go where I will not find miserable serious poverty?
I thought you were comparing Italian culture to US culture, and concluding that Italians who are not wealthy are better off than their US counterparts.
corruption rules a lot of the US, including its congress and executive.
if you want to talk about mafia, specifically, lemme take you to NYC.
I think there’s a whole different level there (especially pre-Trump, but let’s pretend that maybe we can get rid of him). It’s probably difficult to quantify.
what all of this demonstrates is a culture where the people who actually show up and do the things that create value, receive a share in that value, and have a recognized position as meaningful, contributing stakeholders in the enterprise.
Hmmm. I would argue that it reflects a culture that (correctly, IMO) sees government as an efficient provider of welfare. The kind of safety net that they have is one that most US people voted for in 2016.
The unemployment rate in Italy is more than twice that of the US. The absolute poverty rate (those unable to purchase a basket of necessary goods and services) there is growing. I’m not sure exactly how to compare the US poverty statistics with that, because it seems that the measures are different, but this is interesting.
I’m not arguing that Italy (or any other place) is a bad place to live, but when making comparisons, it’s probably good to look at the whole picture.
where can I go where I will not find miserable serious poverty?
I thought you were comparing Italian culture to US culture, and concluding that Italians who are not wealthy are better off than their US counterparts.
corruption rules a lot of the US, including its congress and executive.
if you want to talk about mafia, specifically, lemme take you to NYC.
I think there’s a whole different level there (especially pre-Trump, but let’s pretend that maybe we can get rid of him). It’s probably difficult to quantify.
what all of this demonstrates is a culture where the people who actually show up and do the things that create value, receive a share in that value, and have a recognized position as meaningful, contributing stakeholders in the enterprise.
Hmmm. I would argue that it reflects a culture that (correctly, IMO) sees government as an efficient provider of welfare. The kind of safety net that they have is one that most US people voted for in 2016.
The unemployment rate in Italy is more than twice that of the US. The absolute poverty rate (those unable to purchase a basket of necessary goods and services) there is growing. I’m not sure exactly how to compare the US poverty statistics with that, because it seems that the measures are different, but this is interesting.
I’m not arguing that Italy (or any other place) is a bad place to live, but when making comparisons, it’s probably good to look at the whole picture.
“But to say that Obama had this as his “plan”, with things like the ACA as “cover” seems like a wilful and unhelpful mischaracterisation.”
Goes back to Otto von Bismarck as a way to neutralize the socialists, followed a couple generations later by FDR and Keynes and the post-fascist recuperation to be rescinded when unions and the Left were marginalized. Or even Hayek, that ultimate aristocrat.
Or even back as far as “bread and circuses”
It isn’t paranoia or conspiracy theory, it is basic political science. This is why Marxists when they have the courage see liberal, parliamentarians, and reformists as even as worse enemies than oligarchs, because social welfarism is nothing but bourgeois tactics.
Remember, Obama taught and studied at Milton Friedman’s Univ of Chicago. He was a perfect mole.
“But to say that Obama had this as his “plan”, with things like the ACA as “cover” seems like a wilful and unhelpful mischaracterisation.”
Goes back to Otto von Bismarck as a way to neutralize the socialists, followed a couple generations later by FDR and Keynes and the post-fascist recuperation to be rescinded when unions and the Left were marginalized. Or even Hayek, that ultimate aristocrat.
Or even back as far as “bread and circuses”
It isn’t paranoia or conspiracy theory, it is basic political science. This is why Marxists when they have the courage see liberal, parliamentarians, and reformists as even as worse enemies than oligarchs, because social welfarism is nothing but bourgeois tactics.
Remember, Obama taught and studied at Milton Friedman’s Univ of Chicago. He was a perfect mole.
I think it is fair to say that Obama thought he could enlist Capital in the Obamacare effort, because Capital and his cigar is the only person that matters in America, and Capital tapped a little cigar ash in his head via lowballing Obama-care pricing, and then ate him.
Starbucks can rid the world of a 10-cent cup of coffee and raise its cost exponentially and Americans can’t get enough, but raise the cost of medical care, after the one-time opening low-balled offer, for the same people and they will call you a Marxist and a Capitalist at the same time.
I think it is fair to say that Obama thought he could enlist Capital in the Obamacare effort, because Capital and his cigar is the only person that matters in America, and Capital tapped a little cigar ash in his head via lowballing Obama-care pricing, and then ate him.
Starbucks can rid the world of a 10-cent cup of coffee and raise its cost exponentially and Americans can’t get enough, but raise the cost of medical care, after the one-time opening low-balled offer, for the same people and they will call you a Marxist and a Capitalist at the same time.
“I’m not arguing that Italy (or any other place) is a bad place to live”
Watched Gomorra just this week, so I know about Italy. Just kidding, good movie though.
Read a little about the deliberately unorganized Northern Italian Five Star Movement, which is only a web site. This is the future of popular resistance, which will have no center.
“I’m not arguing that Italy (or any other place) is a bad place to live”
Watched Gomorra just this week, so I know about Italy. Just kidding, good movie though.
Read a little about the deliberately unorganized Northern Italian Five Star Movement, which is only a web site. This is the future of popular resistance, which will have no center.
A downside is that lower-income and middle-class taxpayers pay more taxes than in the US.
If I need a bag of apples, which have various… oh let’s call them “upsides”… like nutrition, enjoyment, portability, etc., I have to give someone some money to get the apples. (Unless I have my own orchard, in which case I’ve paid for the apples in a different way.)
If I have to pay a higher price for apples that aren’t wormy and rotten, I’ll take it.
I don’t consider that a “downside” either way, I consider that the price of apples.
I don’t consider taxes, or even “higher taxes” a downside either, I consider them the happily (on my part) paid price of a society where people aren’t living in miserable poverty and perpetual insecurity and ignorance.
A downside is that lower-income and middle-class taxpayers pay more taxes than in the US.
If I need a bag of apples, which have various… oh let’s call them “upsides”… like nutrition, enjoyment, portability, etc., I have to give someone some money to get the apples. (Unless I have my own orchard, in which case I’ve paid for the apples in a different way.)
If I have to pay a higher price for apples that aren’t wormy and rotten, I’ll take it.
I don’t consider that a “downside” either way, I consider that the price of apples.
I don’t consider taxes, or even “higher taxes” a downside either, I consider them the happily (on my part) paid price of a society where people aren’t living in miserable poverty and perpetual insecurity and ignorance.
Barcelona:
http://www.eschatonblog.com/2017/10/shit-is-fucked-up-and-bullshit.html
That’s exactly what polling places in this country should and will look like in 2018 and 2020 when Americans stop putting up with republicans stealing the voting franchise from them.
I hope Texas cops are investing in those cool Darth Vader costumes. They’ll need them.
Barcelona:
http://www.eschatonblog.com/2017/10/shit-is-fucked-up-and-bullshit.html
That’s exactly what polling places in this country should and will look like in 2018 and 2020 when Americans stop putting up with republicans stealing the voting franchise from them.
I hope Texas cops are investing in those cool Darth Vader costumes. They’ll need them.
Damn. I just lost a long comment.
It isn’t paranoia or conspiracy theory, it is basic political science. This is why Marxists when they have the courage see liberal,
parliamentarians, and reformists as even as worse enemies than oligarchs, because social welfarism is nothing but bourgeois tactics
I can see that this makes a certain sense in terms of the results, but not necessarily in terms of intention, depending on which actors you are talking about. I understand the argument that intention is irrelevant, results are all that matter, but I think when you decide to personalise it then intention does become relevant, at least in the interests of accuracy and fairness.To say that it was Obama’s intention to keep “surplus labour alive and almost hungry so as to build a stock of servants and near slaves” under cover of his evil plan to make healthcare available to all, seems to me a wilful, and as I said unhelpful, mischaracterisation. This is an argument I would not make if you were talking about the Capitalist System which “assisted” him, as the Count suggests.
My long, lost comment was (of course) better and clearer!
And now for something completely different. For those who are still interested in Carole Cadwalladr’s continuing series on Cambridge Analytica, there has been an interesting development:
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/oct/01/cambridge-analytica-big-data-facebook-trump-voters
There also seems to be an interesting piece later in the paper, trailed at the end of this piece, which I haven’t read yet but have just tried to link. However, for some reason it is doing that thing again of trying to make me register etc to get past a temporary wall. In any case, for those better at this stuff than I (everybody), and without the luxury of the paper edition, the relevant headline is: “Who was fed most junk news in the US election? It was swing-state voters” The subheading goes on “Oxford academics Philip Howard and Bence Kollanyi explain their groundbreaking research which shows how social media affected the presidential race.”
Damn. I just lost a long comment.
It isn’t paranoia or conspiracy theory, it is basic political science. This is why Marxists when they have the courage see liberal,
parliamentarians, and reformists as even as worse enemies than oligarchs, because social welfarism is nothing but bourgeois tactics
I can see that this makes a certain sense in terms of the results, but not necessarily in terms of intention, depending on which actors you are talking about. I understand the argument that intention is irrelevant, results are all that matter, but I think when you decide to personalise it then intention does become relevant, at least in the interests of accuracy and fairness.To say that it was Obama’s intention to keep “surplus labour alive and almost hungry so as to build a stock of servants and near slaves” under cover of his evil plan to make healthcare available to all, seems to me a wilful, and as I said unhelpful, mischaracterisation. This is an argument I would not make if you were talking about the Capitalist System which “assisted” him, as the Count suggests.
My long, lost comment was (of course) better and clearer!
And now for something completely different. For those who are still interested in Carole Cadwalladr’s continuing series on Cambridge Analytica, there has been an interesting development:
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/oct/01/cambridge-analytica-big-data-facebook-trump-voters
There also seems to be an interesting piece later in the paper, trailed at the end of this piece, which I haven’t read yet but have just tried to link. However, for some reason it is doing that thing again of trying to make me register etc to get past a temporary wall. In any case, for those better at this stuff than I (everybody), and without the luxury of the paper edition, the relevant headline is: “Who was fed most junk news in the US election? It was swing-state voters” The subheading goes on “Oxford academics Philip Howard and Bence Kollanyi explain their groundbreaking research which shows how social media affected the presidential race.”
me: I consider them the happily (on my part) paid price
Really, I don’t even want to call taxes a “price.” They’re a contribution, or my share, or something. I have been enormously blessed with social capital — talents that allow me to make a comfortable living; friends and relatives I can turn to at need, and who can turn to me; a great family; so-far-and-mostly, good health. That is all a gift to me from the universe (for lack of time and a pithier word, since I don’t believe in the pithier word). I don’t think what I’ve been given was given to me to hoard for myself alone. Am I always happy with where my taxes go? Most assuredly not. Do I know a better way to make decisions about apportioning them…? Now that would be a conversation, wouldn’t it?
me: I consider them the happily (on my part) paid price
Really, I don’t even want to call taxes a “price.” They’re a contribution, or my share, or something. I have been enormously blessed with social capital — talents that allow me to make a comfortable living; friends and relatives I can turn to at need, and who can turn to me; a great family; so-far-and-mostly, good health. That is all a gift to me from the universe (for lack of time and a pithier word, since I don’t believe in the pithier word). I don’t think what I’ve been given was given to me to hoard for myself alone. Am I always happy with where my taxes go? Most assuredly not. Do I know a better way to make decisions about apportioning them…? Now that would be a conversation, wouldn’t it?
If Obama is evil, then once again we need to make up new words for EVIL:
https://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2017/10/playing-percentages-again-by-bloggersrus.html
It is too soon to talk about using rainy day funds for the rainiest days in centuries.
Republican vermilions love them a wet liberal.
If Obama is evil, then once again we need to make up new words for EVIL:
https://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2017/10/playing-percentages-again-by-bloggersrus.html
It is too soon to talk about using rainy day funds for the rainiest days in centuries.
Republican vermilions love them a wet liberal.
My word, the republican party is a big circus tent with such pathetic, small elephants:
On the one hand, the ultimate tsk-tsking comeuppance for Hefner (could we leave Updike out of this, please):
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/giving-hef-hefner-what-he-deserves/
…. while the other hand, the one they elect, finger-f*cks everything that moves in America
http://juanitajean.com/ok-oklahoma-2/
hooda thunk Oklahoma was such a hotbed of humpdom.
My word, the republican party is a big circus tent with such pathetic, small elephants:
On the one hand, the ultimate tsk-tsking comeuppance for Hefner (could we leave Updike out of this, please):
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/giving-hef-hefner-what-he-deserves/
…. while the other hand, the one they elect, finger-f*cks everything that moves in America
http://juanitajean.com/ok-oklahoma-2/
hooda thunk Oklahoma was such a hotbed of humpdom.
Hefner had a grotto.
Oklahoma is a grotto.
Hefner had a grotto.
Oklahoma is a grotto.
It isn’t paranoia or conspiracy theory, it is basic political science. This is why Marxists when they have the courage see liberal, parliamentarians, and reformists as even as worse enemies than oligarchs, because social welfarism is nothing but bourgeois tactics.
Correct me if I’m missing something. But what you seem to be saying is that any attempt to make things better is evil if it stops short of (your definition of) absolute perfection. Presumably (I confess to extrapolating from others I have encountered of similar mind) because, if things get better, it becomes harder to convince people to risk life and limb in pursuit of perfection.
Have you encountered the idea “Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good!”? It arises from, among other things, the recognition that refusing to accept anything short of perfection only guarantees never getting any better. Because perfection a) never happens, and b) isn’t something you can get general agreement on anyway.
It isn’t paranoia or conspiracy theory, it is basic political science. This is why Marxists when they have the courage see liberal, parliamentarians, and reformists as even as worse enemies than oligarchs, because social welfarism is nothing but bourgeois tactics.
Correct me if I’m missing something. But what you seem to be saying is that any attempt to make things better is evil if it stops short of (your definition of) absolute perfection. Presumably (I confess to extrapolating from others I have encountered of similar mind) because, if things get better, it becomes harder to convince people to risk life and limb in pursuit of perfection.
Have you encountered the idea “Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good!”? It arises from, among other things, the recognition that refusing to accept anything short of perfection only guarantees never getting any better. Because perfection a) never happens, and b) isn’t something you can get general agreement on anyway.
As far as intentions
I and a bunch of other commenters had Obama’s number as far back as winter 2007. Good Dems don’t run on tax cuts and only trust funders like hilzoy thinks that is populist.
We saw him as a liar in August with the telecom bill, but the flip was in October. After the first bailout vote failed, Pelosi had the banksters in the barrel, and Obama rushed back to whip Congress bloody not to save the economy but to make sure Pelosi did not get any serious concessions in return for passage. Obama was indeed between the bankers and the pitchforks, but he wasn’t helping the people devastated by the crash. He was always on the bankers side.
Then he appointed Geithner and reappointed Bernanke and ignored those calling for a huge stimulus and every step after that was on the side of FIRE and Capital. It was pretty obvious.
His post-Presidency is just confirmation. He has done much more harm to the economic Left than any official Republican could ever dream of. And yeah, he knew what he was doing.
(Read an article today (Tim Taylor, economist) about how providing student loans while cutting back on spending for colleges is guaranteed to create an immiserated indebted needy and willing educated sub-proletariat with inadequate credentials and self-loathing. “I got a masters and am living at home and working at Burger King and it’s my own damn fault” generation)
As far as intentions
I and a bunch of other commenters had Obama’s number as far back as winter 2007. Good Dems don’t run on tax cuts and only trust funders like hilzoy thinks that is populist.
We saw him as a liar in August with the telecom bill, but the flip was in October. After the first bailout vote failed, Pelosi had the banksters in the barrel, and Obama rushed back to whip Congress bloody not to save the economy but to make sure Pelosi did not get any serious concessions in return for passage. Obama was indeed between the bankers and the pitchforks, but he wasn’t helping the people devastated by the crash. He was always on the bankers side.
Then he appointed Geithner and reappointed Bernanke and ignored those calling for a huge stimulus and every step after that was on the side of FIRE and Capital. It was pretty obvious.
His post-Presidency is just confirmation. He has done much more harm to the economic Left than any official Republican could ever dream of. And yeah, he knew what he was doing.
(Read an article today (Tim Taylor, economist) about how providing student loans while cutting back on spending for colleges is guaranteed to create an immiserated indebted needy and willing educated sub-proletariat with inadequate credentials and self-loathing. “I got a masters and am living at home and working at Burger King and it’s my own damn fault” generation)
“He was always on the bankers side.”
Hmmm, I think he needed to keep them on his side, kind of like Roosevelt and Churchill needed to keep Stalin on our side, but no matter which, the result was the same.
One day, after the troubles, we will have a truth and reconciliation period in this country.
If I run it, it will be truth and no reconciliation.
Be nice, and go f*ck yourselves.
“He was always on the bankers side.”
Hmmm, I think he needed to keep them on his side, kind of like Roosevelt and Churchill needed to keep Stalin on our side, but no matter which, the result was the same.
One day, after the troubles, we will have a truth and reconciliation period in this country.
If I run it, it will be truth and no reconciliation.
Be nice, and go f*ck yourselves.
I thought you were comparing Italian culture to US culture
I was comparing the position and status of people who work for a living in the US, and that of folks who do so in (broadly) European and perhaps other OECD nations.
They are treated better than we are.
The US is almost certainly a wealthier nation than Italy, and that is reflected in any number of obvious ways. Within the scope of what is feasible within the Italian economy, workers there are treated better than workers here.
We’re closer in relative wealth to German and France. Workers there are *absolutely* treated better than workers here.
Italy is likely a more corrupt economy than ours, by various measures. Lots of people prefer getting paid in cash, lots of things happen outside the formal economy. And in the south, the mafia has a lot of influence.
There are other ways in which even Italy is likely less corrupt than the US, especially as regards what is acceptable practice in the public sphere. Other OECD nations much more so.
The gist of my point is that working people in most OECD countries, notably in non-UK Europe, are far less subject to the whims and interests of capital investors than workers in the US are.
I think the typical structure of corporations there, the traditional and still-recognized and -enforced status of labor, and an simple, basic, overall assumption that people and institutions have obligations toward one another, all reinforce that.
People pay more taxes. In return, people can make certain assumptions about what they can expect in return from their public institutions. America as a kind of brand is very popular there – everybody wears T-shirts with brand marks like Harley Davidson, Vans, and Coca Cola. But most folks I talked to understood and valued the social fabric they lived in, and would not trade it for ours.
Actually, only one guy, a Nigerian guy who shook me down for a couple of Euros in the public parking lot in Gubbio.
“There have been some robberies. My and my companions have been watching cars for people. If you would like to contribute a small amount from the goodness of your heart…”.
That guy expressed that he wished he was in the US.
I thought you were comparing Italian culture to US culture
I was comparing the position and status of people who work for a living in the US, and that of folks who do so in (broadly) European and perhaps other OECD nations.
They are treated better than we are.
The US is almost certainly a wealthier nation than Italy, and that is reflected in any number of obvious ways. Within the scope of what is feasible within the Italian economy, workers there are treated better than workers here.
We’re closer in relative wealth to German and France. Workers there are *absolutely* treated better than workers here.
Italy is likely a more corrupt economy than ours, by various measures. Lots of people prefer getting paid in cash, lots of things happen outside the formal economy. And in the south, the mafia has a lot of influence.
There are other ways in which even Italy is likely less corrupt than the US, especially as regards what is acceptable practice in the public sphere. Other OECD nations much more so.
The gist of my point is that working people in most OECD countries, notably in non-UK Europe, are far less subject to the whims and interests of capital investors than workers in the US are.
I think the typical structure of corporations there, the traditional and still-recognized and -enforced status of labor, and an simple, basic, overall assumption that people and institutions have obligations toward one another, all reinforce that.
People pay more taxes. In return, people can make certain assumptions about what they can expect in return from their public institutions. America as a kind of brand is very popular there – everybody wears T-shirts with brand marks like Harley Davidson, Vans, and Coca Cola. But most folks I talked to understood and valued the social fabric they lived in, and would not trade it for ours.
Actually, only one guy, a Nigerian guy who shook me down for a couple of Euros in the public parking lot in Gubbio.
“There have been some robberies. My and my companions have been watching cars for people. If you would like to contribute a small amount from the goodness of your heart…”.
That guy expressed that he wished he was in the US.
providing student loans while cutting back on spending for colleges is guaranteed to create an immiserated indebted needy and willing educated sub-proletariat with inadequate credentials and self-loathing.
I certainly agree that cutting spending on colleges was a terrible idea. But since colleges, at least here, are state funded, it’s hard to see how a Federal official is to blame.
providing student loans while cutting back on spending for colleges is guaranteed to create an immiserated indebted needy and willing educated sub-proletariat with inadequate credentials and self-loathing.
I certainly agree that cutting spending on colleges was a terrible idea. But since colleges, at least here, are state funded, it’s hard to see how a Federal official is to blame.
“Be nice, and go f*ck yourselves.”
That’s for those not nice ones for whom reconciliation will be unavailable, not the nice humans here.
“Be nice, and go f*ck yourselves.”
That’s for those not nice ones for whom reconciliation will be unavailable, not the nice humans here.
Is hilzoy a trust funder?
Is hilzoy a trust funder?
We’re closer in relative wealth to German and France. Workers there are *absolutely* treated better than workers here.
France, like Germany before it, is looking to roll back some of its pro-labor regulations.
“President Emmanuel Macron’s government has begun its drive to overhaul France’s rigid labour laws, vowing to ‘free up the energy of the workforce’. …France has an unemployment rate of 9.5%, double that of the other big European economies and Mr Macron has vowed to cut it to 7% by 2022.”
France May Finally Reform Its Backward Labor Policies: Macron is copying Germany with pro-market labor reforms.
We’re closer in relative wealth to German and France. Workers there are *absolutely* treated better than workers here.
France, like Germany before it, is looking to roll back some of its pro-labor regulations.
“President Emmanuel Macron’s government has begun its drive to overhaul France’s rigid labour laws, vowing to ‘free up the energy of the workforce’. …France has an unemployment rate of 9.5%, double that of the other big European economies and Mr Macron has vowed to cut it to 7% by 2022.”
France May Finally Reform Its Backward Labor Policies: Macron is copying Germany with pro-market labor reforms.
Is hilzoy a trust funder?
Why should it matter?
I admire hilzoy more than anyone else I’ve run across online.
I’ll leave it at that, lest I fail in the “be respectful” department.
Is hilzoy a trust funder?
Why should it matter?
I admire hilzoy more than anyone else I’ve run across online.
I’ll leave it at that, lest I fail in the “be respectful” department.
P.S. But if you want some background, google will help you.
P.S. But if you want some background, google will help you.
And PPS: GftNC, if I were to fail in being respectful, it wouldn’t be toward you. JFTR.
And PPS: GftNC, if I were to fail in being respectful, it wouldn’t be toward you. JFTR.
As a matter of fact, JanieM, I also admire hilzoy immoderately. She was the reason I started lurking hereabouts, and I mourn her absence here to this day. It was pure curiosity on my part, more to know if bob mcm was just throwing it out as an insult (to denote membership of the plutocratic classes) or whether it had a factual basis.
On the respect front, no worries as the Australians say. I’m pondering a comment on that thread, which distinguishes between being nice, being empathetic, and being respectful. Obviously there are lots of crossovers, but I feel pretty strongly on the subject of respect and everything that flows from it, so I’ll say no more here.
As a matter of fact, JanieM, I also admire hilzoy immoderately. She was the reason I started lurking hereabouts, and I mourn her absence here to this day. It was pure curiosity on my part, more to know if bob mcm was just throwing it out as an insult (to denote membership of the plutocratic classes) or whether it had a factual basis.
On the respect front, no worries as the Australians say. I’m pondering a comment on that thread, which distinguishes between being nice, being empathetic, and being respectful. Obviously there are lots of crossovers, but I feel pretty strongly on the subject of respect and everything that flows from it, so I’ll say no more here.
They are treated better than we are.
Your statement indicates that people passively accept treatment. As I mentioned earlier, people work for that by, for example, striking on a regular basis. People here try to get ahead in other ways, for example, climbing the corporate ladder and voting for “tax cuts”. When you compare “Europe” to the “US”, you’re talking about two large areas, each containing a variety of subgovernments. Comparing “Germany and France” to the US as a whole? Maybe the better comparison is to California and New York. Europe does have a better social safety net –
because of its political history rather than a culturally superior sense of good will.
On the whole, we need to restore and improve our safety net. The majority of the people in the US want to do that, but we have been thwarted by our own historical peculiarities, such as the legacy of slavery that still exists in our electoral system. I don’t believe that “corporatism” is the villain here (much as I agree with the idea that corporations should be more highly regulated, and people should continue to demand better employment concessions).
But most folks I talked to understood and valued the social fabric they lived in, and would not trade it for ours.
Most people feel the same way about their “home”. Most immigrant communities retain aspects of their cultural identity even after coming to the US. Most people from other places miss their own food. Likewise, not all US citizens want to travel abroad. Provincialism is something found worldwide.
Oddly, I like being an American (although I fear that our country is being ruined by our recent refusal to support what’s good in it). I’ve been to Italy a number of times, and have found new things to love on every trip. France too. Elsewhere in Europe too, and Asia. I love to explore other places and meet people who live there, appreciate the landscape, and take part in another culture to the extent that I can. I hope that I can do a lot more of it.
But I value the social fabric of my family and community, and would hesitate to trade it for another. The American expats I know also love their lives, but most haven’t discarded their attachment to the US.
russell, I don’t blame you for admiring Europe – there’s much to admire and to emulate. But I don’t think that comparing the situations of people here and there is straightforward. My opinion is, of course, subject to the damage being done under Republican rule.
They are treated better than we are.
Your statement indicates that people passively accept treatment. As I mentioned earlier, people work for that by, for example, striking on a regular basis. People here try to get ahead in other ways, for example, climbing the corporate ladder and voting for “tax cuts”. When you compare “Europe” to the “US”, you’re talking about two large areas, each containing a variety of subgovernments. Comparing “Germany and France” to the US as a whole? Maybe the better comparison is to California and New York. Europe does have a better social safety net –
because of its political history rather than a culturally superior sense of good will.
On the whole, we need to restore and improve our safety net. The majority of the people in the US want to do that, but we have been thwarted by our own historical peculiarities, such as the legacy of slavery that still exists in our electoral system. I don’t believe that “corporatism” is the villain here (much as I agree with the idea that corporations should be more highly regulated, and people should continue to demand better employment concessions).
But most folks I talked to understood and valued the social fabric they lived in, and would not trade it for ours.
Most people feel the same way about their “home”. Most immigrant communities retain aspects of their cultural identity even after coming to the US. Most people from other places miss their own food. Likewise, not all US citizens want to travel abroad. Provincialism is something found worldwide.
Oddly, I like being an American (although I fear that our country is being ruined by our recent refusal to support what’s good in it). I’ve been to Italy a number of times, and have found new things to love on every trip. France too. Elsewhere in Europe too, and Asia. I love to explore other places and meet people who live there, appreciate the landscape, and take part in another culture to the extent that I can. I hope that I can do a lot more of it.
But I value the social fabric of my family and community, and would hesitate to trade it for another. The American expats I know also love their lives, but most haven’t discarded their attachment to the US.
russell, I don’t blame you for admiring Europe – there’s much to admire and to emulate. But I don’t think that comparing the situations of people here and there is straightforward. My opinion is, of course, subject to the damage being done under Republican rule.
Macron is copying Germany with pro-market labor reforms.
germany is where you get a year at 2/3 pay and a guaranteed return to your previous position if you have a kid.
according to the german couple we had lunch with, the wife of which was enjoying exactly that, for the second time, with child number two.
that’s what “pro-market” means in that context.
everything is relative.
ask any german, french, italian, swiss, or other continental european worker if they’d gor for three weeks max time off per year, with sick time coming out of that, plus they pay for a third of their quite stiff health insurance premium and the first $5k of medical costs are on them. plus fire at will, full stop.
go ahead and ask the question.
in the US, workers are a regrettable expense and cost center.
Macron is copying Germany with pro-market labor reforms.
germany is where you get a year at 2/3 pay and a guaranteed return to your previous position if you have a kid.
according to the german couple we had lunch with, the wife of which was enjoying exactly that, for the second time, with child number two.
that’s what “pro-market” means in that context.
everything is relative.
ask any german, french, italian, swiss, or other continental european worker if they’d gor for three weeks max time off per year, with sick time coming out of that, plus they pay for a third of their quite stiff health insurance premium and the first $5k of medical costs are on them. plus fire at will, full stop.
go ahead and ask the question.
in the US, workers are a regrettable expense and cost center.
wj:”I certainly agree that cutting spending on colleges was a terrible idea. But since colleges, at least here, are state funded, it’s hard to see how a Federal official is to blame.”
There are ways in which Federal officials could HELP, but don’t.
For example, if the IRS decides that “educational nonprofits” have to spend >70% of their tuition income on ‘instruction’ or they’ll lose non-profit status retroactive 5 years or so, it would put a real cap on tuition.
(Right now, ‘tuition’ [the ‘price’ of college] is not set by the cost of providing college, but by what the market will bear. The extra money is blown on fancy admin salaries and building boondoggles. Only because there are no stock-options available. Yes, it’s capitalism. State colleges have learned to play the same game.)
wj:”I certainly agree that cutting spending on colleges was a terrible idea. But since colleges, at least here, are state funded, it’s hard to see how a Federal official is to blame.”
There are ways in which Federal officials could HELP, but don’t.
For example, if the IRS decides that “educational nonprofits” have to spend >70% of their tuition income on ‘instruction’ or they’ll lose non-profit status retroactive 5 years or so, it would put a real cap on tuition.
(Right now, ‘tuition’ [the ‘price’ of college] is not set by the cost of providing college, but by what the market will bear. The extra money is blown on fancy admin salaries and building boondoggles. Only because there are no stock-options available. Yes, it’s capitalism. State colleges have learned to play the same game.)
Europe does have a better social safety net –
because of its political history rather than a culturally superior sense of good will.
my point is that i’m not talking about a safety net, I’m talking about a set of mutual expectations and obligations.
not “what happens when circumstances turn against you”, but what expectations and mutual obligations make “circumstance” less of a factor.
it’s not welfare. it’s an understanding of the relationship between people who work, and the people who employ them.
I don’t think that comparing the situations of people here and there is straightforward
nor do I.
but there are some obvious differences in the culture. i’m pointing one out.
i have no plans to move to europe, i don’t think it’s nirvana. i notice that people who live there enjoy a relationship with their employers that seems, to me, better than what we have.
they pay higher taxes, they deal with more regulations. some stuff is more expensive than it is here. their cars are mostly smaller.
but there is a world of stuff they don’t worry about much – life and death stuff, much of it.
not as a matter of “safety net”, as a matter of a common understanding that some basic, good and useful things need to be available to everyone.
it’s a different attitude, and i find it commendable and worthy of comment.
i do, in fact, see it as a culturally superior sense of good will. the fact that it is expressed politically, and not just as a “safety net”, seems better, to me, than what we do.
Europe does have a better social safety net –
because of its political history rather than a culturally superior sense of good will.
my point is that i’m not talking about a safety net, I’m talking about a set of mutual expectations and obligations.
not “what happens when circumstances turn against you”, but what expectations and mutual obligations make “circumstance” less of a factor.
it’s not welfare. it’s an understanding of the relationship between people who work, and the people who employ them.
I don’t think that comparing the situations of people here and there is straightforward
nor do I.
but there are some obvious differences in the culture. i’m pointing one out.
i have no plans to move to europe, i don’t think it’s nirvana. i notice that people who live there enjoy a relationship with their employers that seems, to me, better than what we have.
they pay higher taxes, they deal with more regulations. some stuff is more expensive than it is here. their cars are mostly smaller.
but there is a world of stuff they don’t worry about much – life and death stuff, much of it.
not as a matter of “safety net”, as a matter of a common understanding that some basic, good and useful things need to be available to everyone.
it’s a different attitude, and i find it commendable and worthy of comment.
i do, in fact, see it as a culturally superior sense of good will. the fact that it is expressed politically, and not just as a “safety net”, seems better, to me, than what we do.
bob macmanus, the Tim Taylor article is the first one on his blog?
http://conversableeconomist.blogspot.jp/
I think that student loan programs are driven by the fact that a college education is now a de facto requirement, plus the general dismissal of jobs that are blue collar. I can see how the systematic weakening of education in general through concepts of charter schools and vouchers and viewing education as a profit opportunity can give rise to this, but student loans happens way downstream. It is also exacerbated by the US tendency to treat education as a locally funded enterprise, which then makes it susceptible to cutbacks and demagogues.
As far as Obama, while I wish he would be more like Jimmy Carter, I think that if he has to be the great white saviour for the US and take a vow of poverty, that strikes me as problematic. Like Trevor Noah said, “The first black president must be the first one to not take money off us? No, no, no, my friend. He can’t be the first of everything.”
As far as Hilzoy goes, I think you are totally off-base. nuff said.
bob macmanus, the Tim Taylor article is the first one on his blog?
http://conversableeconomist.blogspot.jp/
I think that student loan programs are driven by the fact that a college education is now a de facto requirement, plus the general dismissal of jobs that are blue collar. I can see how the systematic weakening of education in general through concepts of charter schools and vouchers and viewing education as a profit opportunity can give rise to this, but student loans happens way downstream. It is also exacerbated by the US tendency to treat education as a locally funded enterprise, which then makes it susceptible to cutbacks and demagogues.
As far as Obama, while I wish he would be more like Jimmy Carter, I think that if he has to be the great white saviour for the US and take a vow of poverty, that strikes me as problematic. Like Trevor Noah said, “The first black president must be the first one to not take money off us? No, no, no, my friend. He can’t be the first of everything.”
As far as Hilzoy goes, I think you are totally off-base. nuff said.
(Right now, ‘tuition’ [the ‘price’ of college] is not set by the cost of providing college, but by what the market will bear.
Harvard’s endowment is large enough that it could provide free tuition for some decades before running out. Not that it should.
(Right now, ‘tuition’ [the ‘price’ of college] is not set by the cost of providing college, but by what the market will bear.
Harvard’s endowment is large enough that it could provide free tuition for some decades before running out. Not that it should.
As far as Hilzoy goes, I think you are totally off-base. nuff said.
Our differences, beyond her Kantianism, go back to Olmsted and exploded like so many places I hung at in the 2008 election. I wasn’t a Clinton supporter, but I also didn’t worship Obama, which made me poison everywhere.
And we seem to be back where we started, that apparently class and wealth don’t matte to some.
As someone who lives with an income barely five figures (of course house and car and all are paid off in retirement) I think that anyone like Obama who seems to need at least an income of a million* a year is not simply to be begrudges but is by definition sick and evil. Anyone above that is a monster. Anyone who vacations on a goddamn private yacht off Tahiti in todays despairing and brutally stratified world is simple despicable. I could not do it.
Class and wealth just don’t matter to y’all, as long as it is the right kind of people with all the right social attitudes. Your are so freaking wrong, and it is this complacency that is creating our world of homocidal and suicidal horrors.
*Obamas got fifty million for their books. Invested safely would easily return a million a year. You want to quibble with these kinds of numbers? Jesus.
As far as Hilzoy goes, I think you are totally off-base. nuff said.
Our differences, beyond her Kantianism, go back to Olmsted and exploded like so many places I hung at in the 2008 election. I wasn’t a Clinton supporter, but I also didn’t worship Obama, which made me poison everywhere.
And we seem to be back where we started, that apparently class and wealth don’t matte to some.
As someone who lives with an income barely five figures (of course house and car and all are paid off in retirement) I think that anyone like Obama who seems to need at least an income of a million* a year is not simply to be begrudges but is by definition sick and evil. Anyone above that is a monster. Anyone who vacations on a goddamn private yacht off Tahiti in todays despairing and brutally stratified world is simple despicable. I could not do it.
Class and wealth just don’t matter to y’all, as long as it is the right kind of people with all the right social attitudes. Your are so freaking wrong, and it is this complacency that is creating our world of homocidal and suicidal horrors.
*Obamas got fifty million for their books. Invested safely would easily return a million a year. You want to quibble with these kinds of numbers? Jesus.
…if he has to be the great white saviour for the US and take a vow of poverty
I have heard this so much about a guy making a million dollars a month, as if there is nothing between despicable wealth and wearing rags in a hovel.
It does not induce respect.
…if he has to be the great white saviour for the US and take a vow of poverty
I have heard this so much about a guy making a million dollars a month, as if there is nothing between despicable wealth and wearing rags in a hovel.
It does not induce respect.
bob mcmanus’ expressed mindset played a major role in Hitler’s rise since the communists had decided that the social democrats were the actual enemy with the Nazis at best in second place. They even made common cause with the Nazis against the social democrats under the assumption that the German people, once the Nazis got into power, would wake up and would start the revolution under communist leadership. This did not even end after WW2. The GDR persecuted social democrats more than any other group while giving (lower tier) Nazis a second chance (not that the FRG had cleaner hands in the latter, admittedly).
Still in 1989 it was an official talking point in GDR schools that the higher standard of living in the FRG just served the purpose of distracting the common people from the fact that they got mercilessly exploited by the evil capitalists. And kids got fired from school and banned from going to university for (as it seemed at the time) life for answering ‘in that case I’d rather take being exploited over the freedom we officially have here.’
bob mcmanus’ expressed mindset played a major role in Hitler’s rise since the communists had decided that the social democrats were the actual enemy with the Nazis at best in second place. They even made common cause with the Nazis against the social democrats under the assumption that the German people, once the Nazis got into power, would wake up and would start the revolution under communist leadership. This did not even end after WW2. The GDR persecuted social democrats more than any other group while giving (lower tier) Nazis a second chance (not that the FRG had cleaner hands in the latter, admittedly).
Still in 1989 it was an official talking point in GDR schools that the higher standard of living in the FRG just served the purpose of distracting the common people from the fact that they got mercilessly exploited by the evil capitalists. And kids got fired from school and banned from going to university for (as it seemed at the time) life for answering ‘in that case I’d rather take being exploited over the freedom we officially have here.’
Yes, and I’m sure he and Michelle can go to Costco to get more savings on their food bill… It will make that million go further. And maybe find some cheap fares if they want to go anywhere.
For the rest of his life, he’s going to be in a bubble. He can’t be a normal person. Given the level of racism in the US, I can’t imagine that he, unlike Jimmy Carter, can go without secret service protection. So to live a lifestyle with at least some intimations of normal life, (plus the fact that he has two daughters) he’ll need a lot more money than most people.
Yes, and I’m sure he and Michelle can go to Costco to get more savings on their food bill… It will make that million go further. And maybe find some cheap fares if they want to go anywhere.
For the rest of his life, he’s going to be in a bubble. He can’t be a normal person. Given the level of racism in the US, I can’t imagine that he, unlike Jimmy Carter, can go without secret service protection. So to live a lifestyle with at least some intimations of normal life, (plus the fact that he has two daughters) he’ll need a lot more money than most people.
I didn’t play in the travel or food threads because I really have no interest in such things, great food in the 3 star restaurant in Nice. That does make me different, out of sync in this world y’all have created.
Gauguin was near broke when he went to Tahiti. This aspirational hedonistic competition for the very fine and special experience has so many dreaming of Tahiti. Or Assam or Rio. Too bad it now costs tens of thousands. Of course we don’t begrudge the cannibals who make it to the income level wherein they can enjoy it. It’s a terrible spiral.
To me forgiving conspicuous extreme luxury (Jesus, poor Obama has daughters? A lot of people raise daughters at less than fifty thousand, and yet Obama is admirable? Listen to yourself) is very much like forgiving lynching or FGM.
That this is the world I live in, around ordinary people who dream of Gatsby livestyles is an unbearable nightmare.
I didn’t play in the travel or food threads because I really have no interest in such things, great food in the 3 star restaurant in Nice. That does make me different, out of sync in this world y’all have created.
Gauguin was near broke when he went to Tahiti. This aspirational hedonistic competition for the very fine and special experience has so many dreaming of Tahiti. Or Assam or Rio. Too bad it now costs tens of thousands. Of course we don’t begrudge the cannibals who make it to the income level wherein they can enjoy it. It’s a terrible spiral.
To me forgiving conspicuous extreme luxury (Jesus, poor Obama has daughters? A lot of people raise daughters at less than fifty thousand, and yet Obama is admirable? Listen to yourself) is very much like forgiving lynching or FGM.
That this is the world I live in, around ordinary people who dream of Gatsby livestyles is an unbearable nightmare.
That this is the world I live in, around ordinary people who dream of Gatsby livestyles is an unbearable nightmare.
“Gatsby livestyles” ??
any chance you don’t actually understand what people think?
That this is the world I live in, around ordinary people who dream of Gatsby livestyles is an unbearable nightmare.
“Gatsby livestyles” ??
any chance you don’t actually understand what people think?
according to the german couple we had lunch with, the wife of which was enjoying exactly that, for the second time, with child number two.
What price“>https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/13/world/europe/angela-merkel-germany-election.html?_r=0″>price do women pay for this in the workplace? Of course, our vacation is less, etc., but how many people do you know who never use up the vacation we have? We have an insane work ethic, but it’s not all top down.
i do, in fact, see it as a culturally superior sense of good will. the fact that it is expressed politically, and not just as a “safety net”, seems better, to me, than what we do.
I like some of the worker protections that they provide but, I don’t think Europe has a culturally superior capacity for generosity. The way it came about has to do with war, social upheaval in reaction to that, rebuilding, etc. But it’s okay with me if you think that Europe somehow has a superior conscience. I can’t prove otherwise if you don’t want to look at history to see the evidence against that theory.
Hartmut, thank you so much for pointing this out:
bob mcmanus’ expressed mindset played a major role in Hitler’s rise since the communists had decided that the social democrats were the actual enemy with the Nazis at best in second place.
In the US now, it’s the bob mcmanuses and the leftist purists who pose the same dangers. It’s heartbreaking to see that they’re still at it in my state election which will be very close.
according to the german couple we had lunch with, the wife of which was enjoying exactly that, for the second time, with child number two.
What price“>https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/13/world/europe/angela-merkel-germany-election.html?_r=0″>price do women pay for this in the workplace? Of course, our vacation is less, etc., but how many people do you know who never use up the vacation we have? We have an insane work ethic, but it’s not all top down.
i do, in fact, see it as a culturally superior sense of good will. the fact that it is expressed politically, and not just as a “safety net”, seems better, to me, than what we do.
I like some of the worker protections that they provide but, I don’t think Europe has a culturally superior capacity for generosity. The way it came about has to do with war, social upheaval in reaction to that, rebuilding, etc. But it’s okay with me if you think that Europe somehow has a superior conscience. I can’t prove otherwise if you don’t want to look at history to see the evidence against that theory.
Hartmut, thank you so much for pointing this out:
bob mcmanus’ expressed mindset played a major role in Hitler’s rise since the communists had decided that the social democrats were the actual enemy with the Nazis at best in second place.
In the US now, it’s the bob mcmanuses and the leftist purists who pose the same dangers. It’s heartbreaking to see that they’re still at it in my state election which will be very close.
“but I also didn’t worship Obama”
Neither did I, nor Hilzoy, not anyone here that I know of.
“which made me poison everywhere.”
Not here, and I wouldn’t care for it of you were.
But I’m kind of relieved to be accused of worshiping Obama by someone other than conservatives. It brackets things for me.
I didn’t care for being accused of “choosing” HRC either for her candidacy, by people who had, what, sixteen choices for their Republican candidate, all execrable in my book, but they chose outright evil and then blamed us for voting for moderately American mainstream corrupt HRC.
And, yes, both Democratic and Republican politicians are tools. I get it.
I want to raise taxes on Barack and Michelle Obama and distribute more of their income for the general good.
So do they. They know they are filthy rich, and like normal humans, they probably feel a bit filthy about it.
They won’t complain either. They won’t call raised taxes theft or threaten to retreat from the world and country with their talents and assets because somehow they have been bullshit dis-incentived from producing, like even conservatives who pay no fucking taxes do.
I would vacation on a private yacht in Tahiti.
Not that I need to, the small hotel I used years ago did me fine.
But I would expect the yacht to have special surtaxes and user fees attached to it which would go directly to Tahitians so they could build something that floats too once rump raises the sea levels and to sustaining their comprehensive healthcare system which they have because they were lucky enough, in that one respect, to be colonized by the French, not fucking Americans like Tom Delay who would see nothing in Tahiti but sweatshop material, natives to be Christianized, and pussy.
I will say that the Obamas are not really liberals. They are moderate, even conservative, in a world that once seemed to make sense.
That’s gone.
But I agree with McManus that we need to make this one gone too.
“but I also didn’t worship Obama”
Neither did I, nor Hilzoy, not anyone here that I know of.
“which made me poison everywhere.”
Not here, and I wouldn’t care for it of you were.
But I’m kind of relieved to be accused of worshiping Obama by someone other than conservatives. It brackets things for me.
I didn’t care for being accused of “choosing” HRC either for her candidacy, by people who had, what, sixteen choices for their Republican candidate, all execrable in my book, but they chose outright evil and then blamed us for voting for moderately American mainstream corrupt HRC.
And, yes, both Democratic and Republican politicians are tools. I get it.
I want to raise taxes on Barack and Michelle Obama and distribute more of their income for the general good.
So do they. They know they are filthy rich, and like normal humans, they probably feel a bit filthy about it.
They won’t complain either. They won’t call raised taxes theft or threaten to retreat from the world and country with their talents and assets because somehow they have been bullshit dis-incentived from producing, like even conservatives who pay no fucking taxes do.
I would vacation on a private yacht in Tahiti.
Not that I need to, the small hotel I used years ago did me fine.
But I would expect the yacht to have special surtaxes and user fees attached to it which would go directly to Tahitians so they could build something that floats too once rump raises the sea levels and to sustaining their comprehensive healthcare system which they have because they were lucky enough, in that one respect, to be colonized by the French, not fucking Americans like Tom Delay who would see nothing in Tahiti but sweatshop material, natives to be Christianized, and pussy.
I will say that the Obamas are not really liberals. They are moderate, even conservative, in a world that once seemed to make sense.
That’s gone.
But I agree with McManus that we need to make this one gone too.
Bob McManus confuses me because he styles himself both a communist and a misanthrope, and I’ve always thought as matter of definition that the one thing you can’t be all by yourself is a “communist”.
Unlike bob mcmanus, I think it’s fine for an Obama (or a Trump, for that matter) to make “a million dollars a month” — as long as it gets taxed appropriately.
“Appropriate” means “progressive all the way up”. There’s no reason on earth to tax the 1,000,001st dollar of annual income at the same flat rate as the 10,000,0001st or the 100,000,001st dollar. I’d set the top marginal tax rate at 99%, kicking in at $1B/year, and laugh at anybody who even hinted that this would be any sort of “drag on the economy”.
The Republican cabal that suffers Trumps gladly doesn’t confuse me at all. They — starting with their erstwhile Chief Intellectual Policy Wonk, Paul Ryan — are complete frauds. On the one hand, they make a shibboleth of “jobs”, and on the other offer a tax “plan” that encourages all Americans who work for a living to quit their “jobs” and turn themselves into LLCs.
The one thing bob is self-evidently correct about is that Americans are — in the aggregate — kinda stoopid. They’ll vote for the most transparent charlatans, as long as said charlatans thump their chests about “the flag” or pound their Bibles and call it “faith”. Throw in “tax cuts”, and you can get Americans — again, in the aggregate — to behave like the man who hung himself because he could not pass up a free noose.
–TP
Bob McManus confuses me because he styles himself both a communist and a misanthrope, and I’ve always thought as matter of definition that the one thing you can’t be all by yourself is a “communist”.
Unlike bob mcmanus, I think it’s fine for an Obama (or a Trump, for that matter) to make “a million dollars a month” — as long as it gets taxed appropriately.
“Appropriate” means “progressive all the way up”. There’s no reason on earth to tax the 1,000,001st dollar of annual income at the same flat rate as the 10,000,0001st or the 100,000,001st dollar. I’d set the top marginal tax rate at 99%, kicking in at $1B/year, and laugh at anybody who even hinted that this would be any sort of “drag on the economy”.
The Republican cabal that suffers Trumps gladly doesn’t confuse me at all. They — starting with their erstwhile Chief Intellectual Policy Wonk, Paul Ryan — are complete frauds. On the one hand, they make a shibboleth of “jobs”, and on the other offer a tax “plan” that encourages all Americans who work for a living to quit their “jobs” and turn themselves into LLCs.
The one thing bob is self-evidently correct about is that Americans are — in the aggregate — kinda stoopid. They’ll vote for the most transparent charlatans, as long as said charlatans thump their chests about “the flag” or pound their Bibles and call it “faith”. Throw in “tax cuts”, and you can get Americans — again, in the aggregate — to behave like the man who hung himself because he could not pass up a free noose.
–TP
This is important:
https://www.balloon-juice.com/2017/10/01/further-perversions-in-social-media-the-catalonian-independence-referendum/
All of the usual suspects at work. Including rump filth.
Assange, Snowden, Putin, rump give a rat’s ass about Catalonians.
As soon as rump finds out what a “Catalonia” is (hint: not a mental condition in cats), he’ll be congratulating the Spanish cops and leaders as strong men.
Democrats of all colors will be Catalonians in 2018 and 2020 as the republican party smashes our voting franchise.
We already are, considering that the 2016 election was stolen outright.
This is important:
https://www.balloon-juice.com/2017/10/01/further-perversions-in-social-media-the-catalonian-independence-referendum/
All of the usual suspects at work. Including rump filth.
Assange, Snowden, Putin, rump give a rat’s ass about Catalonians.
As soon as rump finds out what a “Catalonia” is (hint: not a mental condition in cats), he’ll be congratulating the Spanish cops and leaders as strong men.
Democrats of all colors will be Catalonians in 2018 and 2020 as the republican party smashes our voting franchise.
We already are, considering that the 2016 election was stolen outright.
It could be rump will come down on the side of the Catalonians too, to help Putin, Assange, and Drudge further destabilize NATO and the EU.
It could be rump will come down on the side of the Catalonians too, to help Putin, Assange, and Drudge further destabilize NATO and the EU.
to make “a million dollars a month” — as long as it gets taxed appropriately
Thing is back when that million a month was taxed at 90% people stopped trying to make that kind of money. Doesn’t mean they stopped being aspirational, it meant they desired different more social and benevolent goals. There was a kind of leveling, when the kid from a family barely above poverty could be best friends with the kid from the local business family. And stuff was shared, within and between generations, like seventeen family members weekend sleeping on the floor of the 800 sq ft lake cottage. We didn’t need or want one of our own. That would be lonely and much less fun.
“Bob McManus confuses me because he styles himself both a communist and a misanthrope”
Yes, there is a contradiction, a dialectic between believing people have agency and moral responsibility and yet are semi-concious victims of the system. When applied to observations of everyday life, magnanimity can become difficult.
John Steppling an exile visits America
Enough from me. Tired and sad. I’ll cheer up with Godard tonight, back when socialism wasn’t considered the worstest evil evah.
to make “a million dollars a month” — as long as it gets taxed appropriately
Thing is back when that million a month was taxed at 90% people stopped trying to make that kind of money. Doesn’t mean they stopped being aspirational, it meant they desired different more social and benevolent goals. There was a kind of leveling, when the kid from a family barely above poverty could be best friends with the kid from the local business family. And stuff was shared, within and between generations, like seventeen family members weekend sleeping on the floor of the 800 sq ft lake cottage. We didn’t need or want one of our own. That would be lonely and much less fun.
“Bob McManus confuses me because he styles himself both a communist and a misanthrope”
Yes, there is a contradiction, a dialectic between believing people have agency and moral responsibility and yet are semi-concious victims of the system. When applied to observations of everyday life, magnanimity can become difficult.
John Steppling an exile visits America
Enough from me. Tired and sad. I’ll cheer up with Godard tonight, back when socialism wasn’t considered the worstest evil evah.
Less than 5%(13.6 million) of the US population pays more than 2/3rds(68%) of income taxes.
Less than 5%(13.6 million) of the US population pays more than 2/3rds(68%) of income taxes.
“Less than 5%(13.6 million) of the US population pays more than 2/3rds(68%) of income taxes.”
And yet, hardly any of them, none that I know of, carry out their threats to stop producing to make that next marginal dollar.
I agree that all Americans should pay more in taxes.
The top marginal tax rates have been dropped from above 90% going into the 1960s to the low 40 percent range today, with the occasional blip up.
And yet we are told that taxes are higher than ever.
When rump lowers the highest marginal tax rate and does whatever else he plans to do with taxes, there will be no corresponding decrease in complaining about high taxes from the usual taxes.
Merely more demands for more tax cuts.
“Less than 5%(13.6 million) of the US population pays more than 2/3rds(68%) of income taxes.”
And yet, hardly any of them, none that I know of, carry out their threats to stop producing to make that next marginal dollar.
I agree that all Americans should pay more in taxes.
The top marginal tax rates have been dropped from above 90% going into the 1960s to the low 40 percent range today, with the occasional blip up.
And yet we are told that taxes are higher than ever.
When rump lowers the highest marginal tax rate and does whatever else he plans to do with taxes, there will be no corresponding decrease in complaining about high taxes from the usual taxes.
Merely more demands for more tax cuts.
“from the usual suspects”
“from the usual suspects”
Funny how clicking on “Post” highlights all the mistakes we make…
Funny how clicking on “Post” highlights all the mistakes we make…
I’m screen blind when I proof before hitting post.
I’m screen blind when I proof before hitting post.
CharlesWT, the world is a complicated place. Do you really think anything important can be concluded from context-free factoids? They may get you riled up, but all they do for me is remind me of Mark Twain.
Why don’t you give us some context for your statistics? Or even some related statistics?
Maybe you could tell us what percentage of the nation’s annual after-tax income goes to that 5%.
Or what percentage of the country’s wealth that 5% holds.
Why not add in state income tax, sales tax, property tax…? Because that would dilute the point you’re trying to make, right? About the poor, put-upon high earners?
Or maybe you could tell us what percentage of their annual income these various groups pay in the various kinds of taxes in toto, and have a gander at what the amount left over can pay for?
If I get time I’ll dig out a graph and post it. Meanwhile: when I last collected numbers from the CBO, the bottom quintile (about 25MM households) averaged $14,000/yr in after-tax income, and that number had been stagnant for 26 years, while the top earners had skyrocketed.
I go back to russell’s repeated point. He is much more eloquent and clear about it, but I will reframe it in my own way as: pay people a living wage and then maybe they’ll pay some income tax.
Mention has been made of a million dollars a month. Last time I ran the numbers, there were roughly 11,000 households in the top 1% of 1% of households in terms of after-tax income. (That was 2005 data. The CBO then stopped publishing that data in that form, as far as I could tell last time I checked. I figure they probably stopped because Congress didn’t ask for it to be broken down in that way anymore because they didn’t want the rest of us to see it.)
Those 11,000 households averaged two million a month in after tax income. If some evil tax collector had come and taken away a million a month from each of them (so they had to struggle along on only the million a month left to them), and that evil tax collector had divided that $ amongst the bottom quintile, that would have raised the bottom quintile’s average income by more than a third.
(11,000 x 12MM / 25mm = 5280)
(If you’re tempted to quibble about the actual numbers, note that you/CharlesWT cited “population” and I am talking about “households.”)
CharlesWT, the world is a complicated place. Do you really think anything important can be concluded from context-free factoids? They may get you riled up, but all they do for me is remind me of Mark Twain.
Why don’t you give us some context for your statistics? Or even some related statistics?
Maybe you could tell us what percentage of the nation’s annual after-tax income goes to that 5%.
Or what percentage of the country’s wealth that 5% holds.
Why not add in state income tax, sales tax, property tax…? Because that would dilute the point you’re trying to make, right? About the poor, put-upon high earners?
Or maybe you could tell us what percentage of their annual income these various groups pay in the various kinds of taxes in toto, and have a gander at what the amount left over can pay for?
If I get time I’ll dig out a graph and post it. Meanwhile: when I last collected numbers from the CBO, the bottom quintile (about 25MM households) averaged $14,000/yr in after-tax income, and that number had been stagnant for 26 years, while the top earners had skyrocketed.
I go back to russell’s repeated point. He is much more eloquent and clear about it, but I will reframe it in my own way as: pay people a living wage and then maybe they’ll pay some income tax.
Mention has been made of a million dollars a month. Last time I ran the numbers, there were roughly 11,000 households in the top 1% of 1% of households in terms of after-tax income. (That was 2005 data. The CBO then stopped publishing that data in that form, as far as I could tell last time I checked. I figure they probably stopped because Congress didn’t ask for it to be broken down in that way anymore because they didn’t want the rest of us to see it.)
Those 11,000 households averaged two million a month in after tax income. If some evil tax collector had come and taken away a million a month from each of them (so they had to struggle along on only the million a month left to them), and that evil tax collector had divided that $ amongst the bottom quintile, that would have raised the bottom quintile’s average income by more than a third.
(11,000 x 12MM / 25mm = 5280)
(If you’re tempted to quibble about the actual numbers, note that you/CharlesWT cited “population” and I am talking about “households.”)
Mcmanus’ Steppling article is worth a read.
Among the pleasures, by which I mean the curmudgeonly ones, there was this:
“In the hotel in which I stayed, in the breakfast area, which serves also as a bar in the evening, there are SEVEN wide screen TVs on the walls. On one wall they are only a foot or so apart. During non sporting hours they are tuned to news channels. The sound is off, but that is no problem as there is close captioned sub titles at the bottom, as well as a constant scroll of news items. The hotel guests are then bombarded during all meals with a constant sound bite onslaught.”
First, I guess “No TV during meals”, among our credos stressed to our children, is a dead letter.
But, moving on:
Steppling also points out the drum roll he noticed on his visit for was with nuclear Korea, where they have at most one big screen per hotel lobby.
It occurred to me that one day, as the nuclear missiles start to fly and in fact wave at each other as they pass one another in mid-stratosphere, all eight screens, the seven in Buffalo and the one in North Korea will be filled with the ranting face of one or another madmen, and at that moment, both the United States and North Korea will have come to an agreement, with the support of the multi-tasking diners in both countries, that we are precisely the same kinds of people:
mass murderers and cold-blooded killers.
Mcmanus’ Steppling article is worth a read.
Among the pleasures, by which I mean the curmudgeonly ones, there was this:
“In the hotel in which I stayed, in the breakfast area, which serves also as a bar in the evening, there are SEVEN wide screen TVs on the walls. On one wall they are only a foot or so apart. During non sporting hours they are tuned to news channels. The sound is off, but that is no problem as there is close captioned sub titles at the bottom, as well as a constant scroll of news items. The hotel guests are then bombarded during all meals with a constant sound bite onslaught.”
First, I guess “No TV during meals”, among our credos stressed to our children, is a dead letter.
But, moving on:
Steppling also points out the drum roll he noticed on his visit for was with nuclear Korea, where they have at most one big screen per hotel lobby.
It occurred to me that one day, as the nuclear missiles start to fly and in fact wave at each other as they pass one another in mid-stratosphere, all eight screens, the seven in Buffalo and the one in North Korea will be filled with the ranting face of one or another madmen, and at that moment, both the United States and North Korea will have come to an agreement, with the support of the multi-tasking diners in both countries, that we are precisely the same kinds of people:
mass murderers and cold-blooded killers.
“for WAR with North Korea”
“for WAR with North Korea”
“magnanimity can become difficult.”
Just so long as you don’t hold back on the mcmanusanimity.
“magnanimity can become difficult.”
Just so long as you don’t hold back on the mcmanusanimity.
CharlesWT: “Less than 5%(13.6 million) of the US population pays more than 2/3rds(68%) of income taxes.”
This reminds of the old George Carlin joke:
“And now for a partial score, Stanford 36.”
If that 5% of Americans had only 5% of the aggregate income, they would have a valid complaint. If that 5% turns out to have 75% of the income, the rest of us would.
BTW, I can’t help but mount one of my favorite hobby horses again: we tax incomes, not persons. And we rightly big incomes more heavily AT THE MARGIN than small incomes. The persons who have small incomes, today, are in principle just as likely to have large incomes, tomorrow, as today’s put-upon high-income receivers. (“Receivers” is fact; “earners” would be opinion.) In this country, where any boy can grow up to be President — or NOT grow up and be President — and “income mobility” is part of the self-adulatory national mythology, “soak the rich” is not a strategy to oppress any fixed group of persons.
I would thoroughly enjoy meeting anybody, rich or poor, who would turn down a doubling of his income on the grounds that his tax bill would more than double. Or for that matter, anybody who honestly appreciates the flip side: if The Free Market cuts your income in half next year, The Guvmint will obligingly cut your income tax by more than half.
–TP
CharlesWT: “Less than 5%(13.6 million) of the US population pays more than 2/3rds(68%) of income taxes.”
This reminds of the old George Carlin joke:
“And now for a partial score, Stanford 36.”
If that 5% of Americans had only 5% of the aggregate income, they would have a valid complaint. If that 5% turns out to have 75% of the income, the rest of us would.
BTW, I can’t help but mount one of my favorite hobby horses again: we tax incomes, not persons. And we rightly big incomes more heavily AT THE MARGIN than small incomes. The persons who have small incomes, today, are in principle just as likely to have large incomes, tomorrow, as today’s put-upon high-income receivers. (“Receivers” is fact; “earners” would be opinion.) In this country, where any boy can grow up to be President — or NOT grow up and be President — and “income mobility” is part of the self-adulatory national mythology, “soak the rich” is not a strategy to oppress any fixed group of persons.
I would thoroughly enjoy meeting anybody, rich or poor, who would turn down a doubling of his income on the grounds that his tax bill would more than double. Or for that matter, anybody who honestly appreciates the flip side: if The Free Market cuts your income in half next year, The Guvmint will obligingly cut your income tax by more than half.
–TP
There were dozens of marginal tax brackets before, let’s say 1961, with the lower tax brackets taxed much higher all along the scale than today’s lower tax brackets.
It seems the lower taxes go, contra orthodoxy transmitted by TV screens of all sizes, the lower annual GNP and the other measures averages over time, if you graph the correlation since World War II.
Also, contra orthodoxy, the more high marginal players complain about their high marginal tax rates, which are actually lower than they were decades go, but somehow perceived as much higher, the more innovative they become and the more wealth they accumulate.
Among lower marginal players, many of whom hardly pay any income tax, though you certainly won’t find many who will admit it, their incomes have hardly grown at all since the early 1970s.
You’d think with all of that extra striving and producing they are doing, ostensibly because their taxes are so much lower, the lower marginal players would be making a lot more money for their trouble relative to the high marginal players.
But the higher marginal players are rolling in it and the lower marginal players, according to the latest lies, will have an extra $1000 to renovate their hot plates, if they are what ya call lucky in Goldman Sachs parlance.
I don’t recall Milton Friedman explaining these phenomena on his subsidized PBS series.
There were dozens of marginal tax brackets before, let’s say 1961, with the lower tax brackets taxed much higher all along the scale than today’s lower tax brackets.
It seems the lower taxes go, contra orthodoxy transmitted by TV screens of all sizes, the lower annual GNP and the other measures averages over time, if you graph the correlation since World War II.
Also, contra orthodoxy, the more high marginal players complain about their high marginal tax rates, which are actually lower than they were decades go, but somehow perceived as much higher, the more innovative they become and the more wealth they accumulate.
Among lower marginal players, many of whom hardly pay any income tax, though you certainly won’t find many who will admit it, their incomes have hardly grown at all since the early 1970s.
You’d think with all of that extra striving and producing they are doing, ostensibly because their taxes are so much lower, the lower marginal players would be making a lot more money for their trouble relative to the high marginal players.
But the higher marginal players are rolling in it and the lower marginal players, according to the latest lies, will have an extra $1000 to renovate their hot plates, if they are what ya call lucky in Goldman Sachs parlance.
I don’t recall Milton Friedman explaining these phenomena on his subsidized PBS series.
I also look forward to the time when hard work and striving are rewarded by lowering taxes to some minimum and the guy who received the biggest tax cuts tells the woman who received the smallest tax cuts that their hard work and striving will be rewarded by replacing them with an artificial intelligence device of one kind or another, also deductible as a capital improvement.
I also look forward to the time when hard work and striving are rewarded by lowering taxes to some minimum and the guy who received the biggest tax cuts tells the woman who received the smallest tax cuts that their hard work and striving will be rewarded by replacing them with an artificial intelligence device of one kind or another, also deductible as a capital improvement.
“it’s too early” is the new “shut up” …. about everything.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/mnuchin-mulvaney-say-its-too-early-to-criticize-gop-tax-plan-2017-10-01?siteid=bigcharts&dist=bigcharts
“it’s too early” is the new “shut up” …. about everything.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/mnuchin-mulvaney-say-its-too-early-to-criticize-gop-tax-plan-2017-10-01?siteid=bigcharts&dist=bigcharts
“Do you consider clothing a right?” the man asks.
https://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2017/10/ron-johnson-lets-it-all-hang-out.html
Considering the laws against nudity in public that he supports and enforces, yeah, I do, f*ckwad.
Also, I believe Hugh Hefner asked the same question of his “business associates” every morning at the Mansion.
A right to healthcare is slavery, he agrees with Rand Paul.
When the doctor was removing a mole from my back the other week under Medicare, it was like the two of us had been tied to a fence post and whipped mercilessly and then sold at the next slave auction, I tell you.
“Do you consider clothing a right?” the man asks.
https://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2017/10/ron-johnson-lets-it-all-hang-out.html
Considering the laws against nudity in public that he supports and enforces, yeah, I do, f*ckwad.
Also, I believe Hugh Hefner asked the same question of his “business associates” every morning at the Mansion.
A right to healthcare is slavery, he agrees with Rand Paul.
When the doctor was removing a mole from my back the other week under Medicare, it was like the two of us had been tied to a fence post and whipped mercilessly and then sold at the next slave auction, I tell you.
Or for that matter, anybody who honestly appreciates the flip side: if The Free Market cuts your income in half next year, The Guvmint will obligingly cut your income tax by more than half.
I’m going to use this. Thanks, Tony P.
Or for that matter, anybody who honestly appreciates the flip side: if The Free Market cuts your income in half next year, The Guvmint will obligingly cut your income tax by more than half.
I’m going to use this. Thanks, Tony P.
I will say that the Obamas are not really liberals. They are moderate, even conservative, in a world that once seemed to make sense.
It says a lot about how adrift from reality a big chunk of the population is that they can argue that Obama was/is a liberal, let alone a socialist. My take on him is center-right, but if someone wants to argue for center-left, OK. But beyond that range? Just not in the same universe.
I will say that the Obamas are not really liberals. They are moderate, even conservative, in a world that once seemed to make sense.
It says a lot about how adrift from reality a big chunk of the population is that they can argue that Obama was/is a liberal, let alone a socialist. My take on him is center-right, but if someone wants to argue for center-left, OK. But beyond that range? Just not in the same universe.
There were dozens of marginal tax brackets before, let’s say 1961, with the lower tax brackets taxed much higher all along the scale than today’s lower tax brackets.
Count, you have to understand the language here:
When the rich pay higher marginal rates, it’s “theft”. Cutting their taxes is virtuous.
But when the poor pay low rates, they are “takers” and should be despised. Especially by those who revere Reagan, and carefully don’t remember that the Reagan White House celebrated when they managed to cut Federal taxes for the poorest part of the nation to zero (or negative, with the EITC).
There were dozens of marginal tax brackets before, let’s say 1961, with the lower tax brackets taxed much higher all along the scale than today’s lower tax brackets.
Count, you have to understand the language here:
When the rich pay higher marginal rates, it’s “theft”. Cutting their taxes is virtuous.
But when the poor pay low rates, they are “takers” and should be despised. Especially by those who revere Reagan, and carefully don’t remember that the Reagan White House celebrated when they managed to cut Federal taxes for the poorest part of the nation to zero (or negative, with the EITC).
what Obama was/is is cautious and pragmatic and willing to go as left as the politics will allow.
what Obama was/is is cautious and pragmatic and willing to go as left as the politics will allow.
I don’t think Europe has a culturally superior capacity for generosity
neither do I.
I think they have a different, and better, understanding of how workers should be viewed as stakeholders in an enterprise.
i’m sure there are about 100 more “yes, but..” comments to be made about all the things Europe doesn’t have, or do, that we do. I’m not really interested in arguing about Who Is The Best.
people in europe appear, across the board, to be entitled to a package of workplace rights and compensation benefits that is a lot better than what we get.
that’s what I’m saying.
it’s not a question of generosity, and the fact that it’s not a question of generosity is part of my point.
nobody is “being generous” or “kind” to working people in the eurozone. they are treating them as employees, according to their understanding of how employees should be treated.
I’m sure lots of managers there bitch about it. but, they do it, because it’s what is understood to be required.
I don’t think Europe has a culturally superior capacity for generosity
neither do I.
I think they have a different, and better, understanding of how workers should be viewed as stakeholders in an enterprise.
i’m sure there are about 100 more “yes, but..” comments to be made about all the things Europe doesn’t have, or do, that we do. I’m not really interested in arguing about Who Is The Best.
people in europe appear, across the board, to be entitled to a package of workplace rights and compensation benefits that is a lot better than what we get.
that’s what I’m saying.
it’s not a question of generosity, and the fact that it’s not a question of generosity is part of my point.
nobody is “being generous” or “kind” to working people in the eurozone. they are treating them as employees, according to their understanding of how employees should be treated.
I’m sure lots of managers there bitch about it. but, they do it, because it’s what is understood to be required.
Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Netherlands. Happiest countries on Earth.
I think there’s some benefit to living in a country where the overall happiness is high.
They must be doing something right, but I don’t think it’s unfettered Randian capitalism.
Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Netherlands. Happiest countries on Earth.
I think there’s some benefit to living in a country where the overall happiness is high.
They must be doing something right, but I don’t think it’s unfettered Randian capitalism.
Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Netherlands. Happiest countries on Earth.
Whaaa? White people are happy? Whoodathunk?
Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Netherlands. Happiest countries on Earth.
Whaaa? White people are happy? Whoodathunk?
I’m always bemused by all the preoccupation with people at the top of the income/wealth scales.
Time and effort would be better spent on making it easier for people at the lower ends of the scales to improve their lots. Such as:
• Repeal victimless crime laws that make felons out of so many people. A status that ruins their lives and prospects for good jobs. And takes away their vote.
• Reform occupation licensing laws. The laws create very difficult, if not impossible, barriers to entry regardless of ability. And felons are often locked out of licensed occupations.
• Repeal laws that can revoke drivers licenses, but have nothing to do with driving.
• Do something about the pervasive fee and fine farming that occurs in places like the counties in eastern Missouri. Where every wide spot in a road can set up a police and court system and proceed to skin everyone who is unfortunate enough to live there or pass through.
• Repeal the civil asset forfeiture laws which are legalized theft and hits the poor the hardest.
That’s just off the top my head. No doubt there many other things that could be done.
I’m always bemused by all the preoccupation with people at the top of the income/wealth scales.
Time and effort would be better spent on making it easier for people at the lower ends of the scales to improve their lots. Such as:
• Repeal victimless crime laws that make felons out of so many people. A status that ruins their lives and prospects for good jobs. And takes away their vote.
• Reform occupation licensing laws. The laws create very difficult, if not impossible, barriers to entry regardless of ability. And felons are often locked out of licensed occupations.
• Repeal laws that can revoke drivers licenses, but have nothing to do with driving.
• Do something about the pervasive fee and fine farming that occurs in places like the counties in eastern Missouri. Where every wide spot in a road can set up a police and court system and proceed to skin everyone who is unfortunate enough to live there or pass through.
• Repeal the civil asset forfeiture laws which are legalized theft and hits the poor the hardest.
That’s just off the top my head. No doubt there many other things that could be done.
Quoting myself on ObWi from years ago:
Quoting myself on ObWi from years ago:
I agree with some of that, CharlesWT. Marijuana, obviously.
Common cause +!
I agree with some of that, CharlesWT. Marijuana, obviously.
Common cause +!
In 2005, the after-tax income of the lowest quintile was $15,300
But, thanks to technology, it buys a lot more. 25 years ago, the functionality of your smartphone would have cost several million dollars.
of the top 1% of 1% it was $24,286,300, or 1587 times the bottom quintile.
There are a lot more mega and global corporations now. Corporate officers still make about same in proportion to corporation size.
In 2005, the after-tax income of the lowest quintile was $15,300
But, thanks to technology, it buys a lot more. 25 years ago, the functionality of your smartphone would have cost several million dollars.
of the top 1% of 1% it was $24,286,300, or 1587 times the bottom quintile.
There are a lot more mega and global corporations now. Corporate officers still make about same in proportion to corporation size.
But, thanks to technology, it buys a lot more. 25 years ago, the functionality of your smartphone would have cost several million dollars.
Except that now you need a smartphone, because where’s the phonebooth?
I agree with you that the standard of living (with technology) is higher, but so is the basic reasonable income level for people who want to participate in society. It’s all good, but only if people are able to afford the perksl
But, thanks to technology, it buys a lot more. 25 years ago, the functionality of your smartphone would have cost several million dollars.
Except that now you need a smartphone, because where’s the phonebooth?
I agree with you that the standard of living (with technology) is higher, but so is the basic reasonable income level for people who want to participate in society. It’s all good, but only if people are able to afford the perksl
“because it’s what is understood to be required.”
well no, it is what’s required. It is a detriment in lots of ways, it is a positive e in some. It’s simply not as simple as “everybody should get that”.
It ultimately has negative economic impact that’s the trade off. Not for corporation s, for other peep who don’t get jobs.
There is a reason France is trying to weaken the stranglehold of unions, and its not so corporations can make more money. There’s a reason that Sweden has been cutting back on their social programs over the last 15 years. There is a reason Greece is chronically bankrupt.
Canada has 1 yr parental leave at 66%(paid by the government) also. Some reasonably large number of people use that time to double dip under the table. Often, not occasionally, not going back to the job that was held open for a year. It is a complete unknown to the employer who is required to hold the job open. Which essentially means they have an extra employee if that person does come back, because no job can really go undone for a year. But if you hire someone to do it you cant let them go after a year, it is after all not at will employment. It is a ludicrously punitive requirement on employers.
As nice as it sounds, it takes a normal part of people’s lives and transfers the financial obligation to an employer, in a really punitive way.
These policies are not “treating employees as stakeholders in building the business”. They are redistribution policies designed to get politicians elected because, free stuff.
But in the case of almost all these policies the trade-off is someone else doesn’t get a job. Or gets paid less. Even if you can point out a few countries where their current economic state let’s them have low unemployment despite some of these policies, 2008 proved their economies were even more fragile than the US.
Which is a choice, but it is not a given that it’s a better way.
“because it’s what is understood to be required.”
well no, it is what’s required. It is a detriment in lots of ways, it is a positive e in some. It’s simply not as simple as “everybody should get that”.
It ultimately has negative economic impact that’s the trade off. Not for corporation s, for other peep who don’t get jobs.
There is a reason France is trying to weaken the stranglehold of unions, and its not so corporations can make more money. There’s a reason that Sweden has been cutting back on their social programs over the last 15 years. There is a reason Greece is chronically bankrupt.
Canada has 1 yr parental leave at 66%(paid by the government) also. Some reasonably large number of people use that time to double dip under the table. Often, not occasionally, not going back to the job that was held open for a year. It is a complete unknown to the employer who is required to hold the job open. Which essentially means they have an extra employee if that person does come back, because no job can really go undone for a year. But if you hire someone to do it you cant let them go after a year, it is after all not at will employment. It is a ludicrously punitive requirement on employers.
As nice as it sounds, it takes a normal part of people’s lives and transfers the financial obligation to an employer, in a really punitive way.
These policies are not “treating employees as stakeholders in building the business”. They are redistribution policies designed to get politicians elected because, free stuff.
But in the case of almost all these policies the trade-off is someone else doesn’t get a job. Or gets paid less. Even if you can point out a few countries where their current economic state let’s them have low unemployment despite some of these policies, 2008 proved their economies were even more fragile than the US.
Which is a choice, but it is not a given that it’s a better way.
Me: In 2005, the after-tax income of the lowest quintile was $15,300
CharlesWT: But, thanks to technology, it buys a lot more. 25 years ago, the functionality of your smartphone would have cost several million dollars.
OMFJ, I’m sure that’s exciting news for families trying to get by on $15,300 a year.
Or perhaps it’s less exciting than irrelevant to people who know that rent, food, medicine, health insurance, phone plans, transportation, and pretty much every other basic item in the budget costs more than it did 25 years ago, and are up against it every day of the year.
This is a waste of time; I’m done.
Me: In 2005, the after-tax income of the lowest quintile was $15,300
CharlesWT: But, thanks to technology, it buys a lot more. 25 years ago, the functionality of your smartphone would have cost several million dollars.
OMFJ, I’m sure that’s exciting news for families trying to get by on $15,300 a year.
Or perhaps it’s less exciting than irrelevant to people who know that rent, food, medicine, health insurance, phone plans, transportation, and pretty much every other basic item in the budget costs more than it did 25 years ago, and are up against it every day of the year.
This is a waste of time; I’m done.
CharlesWT,
Once again with the partial score BS, huh?
I mean, it’s all well and good to say that thanks to technology a poor person’s $1 buys more than it did 25 years ago, but don’t pretend that the rich person’s $1587 doesn’t also. You can argue that growing disparity of income and wealth is OK because “technology” if you like, but I say that it’s NOT OK because “decency”.
If simple decency doesn’t fire your jets, you ought to consider the effects of concentrated wealth on the politics of (to take a random example) “victimless crime” laws. $1587 goes a whole lot farther than $1 when you want to buy “free speech” designed to persuade average people that they’re getting ripped off by the poor and not by the rich.
And what, exactly, are you implying by “Corporate officers still make about same in proportion to corporation size” that shouldn’t equally apply to corporate peons?
–TP
CharlesWT,
Once again with the partial score BS, huh?
I mean, it’s all well and good to say that thanks to technology a poor person’s $1 buys more than it did 25 years ago, but don’t pretend that the rich person’s $1587 doesn’t also. You can argue that growing disparity of income and wealth is OK because “technology” if you like, but I say that it’s NOT OK because “decency”.
If simple decency doesn’t fire your jets, you ought to consider the effects of concentrated wealth on the politics of (to take a random example) “victimless crime” laws. $1587 goes a whole lot farther than $1 when you want to buy “free speech” designed to persuade average people that they’re getting ripped off by the poor and not by the rich.
And what, exactly, are you implying by “Corporate officers still make about same in proportion to corporation size” that shouldn’t equally apply to corporate peons?
–TP
Or perhaps it’s less exciting than irrelevant to people who know that rent, food, medicine, health insurance, phone plans, transportation, and pretty much every other basic item in the budget costs more than it did 25 years ago,
Some things have gotten cheaper.
Price changes (1996-2016): Selected Consumer Goods and Services
If I’m not mistaken, the income after taxes figures often don’t include government benefits of various kinds.
Or perhaps it’s less exciting than irrelevant to people who know that rent, food, medicine, health insurance, phone plans, transportation, and pretty much every other basic item in the budget costs more than it did 25 years ago,
Some things have gotten cheaper.
Price changes (1996-2016): Selected Consumer Goods and Services
If I’m not mistaken, the income after taxes figures often don’t include government benefits of various kinds.
Never bring a knife to a graphomania fight.
More, unfortunantly, tomorrow
Never bring a knife to a graphomania fight.
More, unfortunantly, tomorrow
You know, it’s not very funny, but 25 years ago I felt the same about John Kasich:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/kasich-hopes-roy-moore-is-not-the-future-of-the-gop
You know, it’s not very funny, but 25 years ago I felt the same about John Kasich:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/kasich-hopes-roy-moore-is-not-the-future-of-the-gop
“If I’m not mistaken, the income after taxes figures often don’t include government benefits of various kinds.”
Neither does yours.
“If I’m not mistaken, the income after taxes figures often don’t include government benefits of various kinds.”
Neither does yours.
“he is currently making 1.2 million a month giving speeches to banksters (retrieving his delayed bribes) . . .
Easily going to be the first billionaire ex-president.”
Just a little over 800 months from now, assuming the market for his speeches doesn’t fade.
Of course after The Revolution comes, math will no longer be necessary.
“he is currently making 1.2 million a month giving speeches to banksters (retrieving his delayed bribes) . . .
Easily going to be the first billionaire ex-president.”
Just a little over 800 months from now, assuming the market for his speeches doesn’t fade.
Of course after The Revolution comes, math will no longer be necessary.
Just a little over 800 months from now
C/mon dr Ngo, was it really necessary to add that his speeches are to bankers, and that he has expressed interest in Silicon Valley venture capital markets?
Of course he will be investing some of his income, and I expect him to be very lucky and successful
These forms of bon mots are the boring quips that disgust me with people, and sometimes respond disproportionately
Just a little over 800 months from now
C/mon dr Ngo, was it really necessary to add that his speeches are to bankers, and that he has expressed interest in Silicon Valley venture capital markets?
Of course he will be investing some of his income, and I expect him to be very lucky and successful
These forms of bon mots are the boring quips that disgust me with people, and sometimes respond disproportionately
It is a detriment in lots of ways, it is a positive e in some.
everything is a detriment in some ways and a positive in others. there is no set of policies that are wihout downsides of one kind or another.
everything is a balancing act.
it is my observation and conviction that the policies that are common in virtually every wealthy industrialized nation other than ours, are preferable to ours. because they do a better job of enabling people whose work creates the value that is the substance of wealth, to participate in and enjoy that value.
working people are treated better. they are not considered, and are not treated as, a fungible input to production.
to a degree greater than what is common here,they are treated as people, rather than a commodity.
the american dogma for the last 40 years has been let the entrepreneurial and investment sectors free, and they will make everyone’s lives better.
well, that is a fucking lie. the lie part is because people keep saying it even though it’s plainly not so, and the fucking lie part is because the people who keep saying it always end up with all the goodies.
i don’t think it necessarily has to be a lie – people could be paid more, could participate in equity ownership or profit sharing, could be retained even when doing so meant top line numbers didn’t meet the projections. it could be true, and pretty easily.
but it’s not true.
europe is not nirvana. no place is perfect, and there is no single reason why things play out one way in one place, and another way in another place.
everybody’s got some kind of issues.
but in this country working people get tossed around like fucking marbles, and are expected to be glad of and grateful for the opportunity to be so treated.
that is f’d up.
and seriously, the next time somebody talks about how smartphones and big tv’s prove that it’s really all good, i’m gonna go puke.
toys ain’t groceries.
It is a detriment in lots of ways, it is a positive e in some.
everything is a detriment in some ways and a positive in others. there is no set of policies that are wihout downsides of one kind or another.
everything is a balancing act.
it is my observation and conviction that the policies that are common in virtually every wealthy industrialized nation other than ours, are preferable to ours. because they do a better job of enabling people whose work creates the value that is the substance of wealth, to participate in and enjoy that value.
working people are treated better. they are not considered, and are not treated as, a fungible input to production.
to a degree greater than what is common here,they are treated as people, rather than a commodity.
the american dogma for the last 40 years has been let the entrepreneurial and investment sectors free, and they will make everyone’s lives better.
well, that is a fucking lie. the lie part is because people keep saying it even though it’s plainly not so, and the fucking lie part is because the people who keep saying it always end up with all the goodies.
i don’t think it necessarily has to be a lie – people could be paid more, could participate in equity ownership or profit sharing, could be retained even when doing so meant top line numbers didn’t meet the projections. it could be true, and pretty easily.
but it’s not true.
europe is not nirvana. no place is perfect, and there is no single reason why things play out one way in one place, and another way in another place.
everybody’s got some kind of issues.
but in this country working people get tossed around like fucking marbles, and are expected to be glad of and grateful for the opportunity to be so treated.
that is f’d up.
and seriously, the next time somebody talks about how smartphones and big tv’s prove that it’s really all good, i’m gonna go puke.
toys ain’t groceries.
First of all, horrible news out of LV. I live within walking distance of Pulse and this brings up horrible memories. Heartbreaking.
@russell … “I think they have a different, and better, understanding of how workers should be viewed as stakeholders in an enterprise.”
One of the reasons I’m all for universal healthcare is to decouple workers from their jobs. The thought of a worker staying in a job they hate just for healthcare (e.g., child with a preexisting condition) is outrageous. In general, I favor allowing workers greater freedom to leave a job if they don’t like the conditions or pay. I think any reasonably obtainable government mandated system that attempts to treat workers as “stakeholders” will only create a fiction that further locks workers into jobs to their detriment.
Owners have extracted excess profits from “loyal” workers for centuries.
There is evidence the employee-owned businesses create better performance and happier workers, but I’m not sure that ESOPs are a panacea as they can create anchors for workers to stay in their current job (many ESOPs have restrictions on selling shares and the shares of smaller firms are not very liquid).
I’m not saying that every worker should be a free agent ready to leave at a drop of a hat. Some folks just don’t like that level of uncertainty in their lives. That’s why the good lord created government jobs. I’m not really kidding. I think we’re better off with a menu of employment options in the economy. From the stable employment-for-life government jobs to extreme free agency we see at Netflix:
http://www.npr.org/2015/09/03/437291792/how-the-architect-of-netflixs-innovative-culture-lost-her-job-to-the-system
First of all, horrible news out of LV. I live within walking distance of Pulse and this brings up horrible memories. Heartbreaking.
@russell … “I think they have a different, and better, understanding of how workers should be viewed as stakeholders in an enterprise.”
One of the reasons I’m all for universal healthcare is to decouple workers from their jobs. The thought of a worker staying in a job they hate just for healthcare (e.g., child with a preexisting condition) is outrageous. In general, I favor allowing workers greater freedom to leave a job if they don’t like the conditions or pay. I think any reasonably obtainable government mandated system that attempts to treat workers as “stakeholders” will only create a fiction that further locks workers into jobs to their detriment.
Owners have extracted excess profits from “loyal” workers for centuries.
There is evidence the employee-owned businesses create better performance and happier workers, but I’m not sure that ESOPs are a panacea as they can create anchors for workers to stay in their current job (many ESOPs have restrictions on selling shares and the shares of smaller firms are not very liquid).
I’m not saying that every worker should be a free agent ready to leave at a drop of a hat. Some folks just don’t like that level of uncertainty in their lives. That’s why the good lord created government jobs. I’m not really kidding. I think we’re better off with a menu of employment options in the economy. From the stable employment-for-life government jobs to extreme free agency we see at Netflix:
http://www.npr.org/2015/09/03/437291792/how-the-architect-of-netflixs-innovative-culture-lost-her-job-to-the-system
@russell: “but in this country working people get tossed around like fucking marbles, and are expected to be glad of and grateful for the opportunity to be so treated.
that is f’d up.”
It’s completely “f’ed up” when we refuse to create a meaningful safety net. I agree with you on that. I’d rather create the safety net and stop pretending that we can obtain a world where workers and owners have a mass love-in.
@russell: “and seriously, the next time somebody talks about how smartphones and big tv’s prove that it’s really all good, i’m gonna go puke.”
I don’t say that “smartphones and big tv’s prove that it’s really all good”, but I have said for years (elsewhere, not here on ObWi) that people with smartphones and big screen TVs don’t revolt. They’ll protest. They’ll bitch and moan. They won’t revolt.
Smartphones and big screen TVs are the modern bread and circuses.
@russell: “but in this country working people get tossed around like fucking marbles, and are expected to be glad of and grateful for the opportunity to be so treated.
that is f’d up.”
It’s completely “f’ed up” when we refuse to create a meaningful safety net. I agree with you on that. I’d rather create the safety net and stop pretending that we can obtain a world where workers and owners have a mass love-in.
@russell: “and seriously, the next time somebody talks about how smartphones and big tv’s prove that it’s really all good, i’m gonna go puke.”
I don’t say that “smartphones and big tv’s prove that it’s really all good”, but I have said for years (elsewhere, not here on ObWi) that people with smartphones and big screen TVs don’t revolt. They’ll protest. They’ll bitch and moan. They won’t revolt.
Smartphones and big screen TVs are the modern bread and circuses.
people with smartphones and big screen TVs don’t revolt. They’ll protest. They’ll bitch and moan. They won’t revolt.
all the countries in the ME who revolted a couple of years back had smartphones.
people with smartphones and big screen TVs don’t revolt. They’ll protest. They’ll bitch and moan. They won’t revolt.
all the countries in the ME who revolted a couple of years back had smartphones.
They didn’t have the TVs. It requires both. In fact, the TVs are probably more important … keeps people at home.
They didn’t have the TVs. It requires both. In fact, the TVs are probably more important … keeps people at home.
“Now you can say that I’ve grown bitter but of this you may be sure
The rich have got their channels in the bedrooms of the poor
And there’s a might judgement coming, but I may be wrong
You see, you hear these funny voices in the Tower of Song.”
“Now you can say that I’ve grown bitter but of this you may be sure
The rich have got their channels in the bedrooms of the poor
And there’s a might judgement coming, but I may be wrong
You see, you hear these funny voices in the Tower of Song.”
“mighty judgement” Goddamit.
“mighty judgement” Goddamit.
First of all, horrible news out of LV.
The NRA will be happy to know that they can reset their It’s Too Soon To Talk About Gun Control clock, and that they can once again accuse sane people of Politicizing The Tragedy.
–TP
First of all, horrible news out of LV.
The NRA will be happy to know that they can reset their It’s Too Soon To Talk About Gun Control clock, and that they can once again accuse sane people of Politicizing The Tragedy.
–TP
Reminds me of the line in this BBC drama about Beethoven (at about 52:00)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtA7m3viB70&t=4124s
“As long as your Viennese has his beer and his sausage, he won’t cause any trouble’
Reminds me of the line in this BBC drama about Beethoven (at about 52:00)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtA7m3viB70&t=4124s
“As long as your Viennese has his beer and his sausage, he won’t cause any trouble’
They didn’t have the TVs. It requires both. In fact, the TVs are probably more important … keeps people at home.
Just the TVs aren’t enough either. You have to have content that people actually want to watch. One of the handicaps of a lot of dictatorships: they broadcast a lot of propaganda and very little entertainment. (Not that I’m sorry they keep making that mistake.)
They didn’t have the TVs. It requires both. In fact, the TVs are probably more important … keeps people at home.
Just the TVs aren’t enough either. You have to have content that people actually want to watch. One of the handicaps of a lot of dictatorships: they broadcast a lot of propaganda and very little entertainment. (Not that I’m sorry they keep making that mistake.)
Las Vegas.
Jesus effing Christ!
Las Vegas.
Jesus effing Christ!
They didn’t have the TVs.
citation required
TVs are cheaper than smart phones.
They didn’t have the TVs.
citation required
TVs are cheaper than smart phones.
I agree with much of Charles WT’s 10:21 pm.
Not 100%, but lots.
I agree with much of Charles WT’s 10:21 pm.
Not 100%, but lots.
One of the reasons I’m all for universal healthcare is to decouple workers from their jobs.
One of the reasons I’m for universal healthcare is so that everyone can go to doctor if they need to.
I’m way, way, way less interested in safety nets, and way, way, way more interested in compensating people who work for a living in ways and quantities that let them have a decent fucking life.
value is created by people doing stuff. the people who do the stuff that creates the value should get a larger share of the value they create than they currently do.
were that to happen, a whole shitload of thorny problems will go away.
That pretty much sums up my economic philosophy.
We could do that, our economy throws off enough wealth to do it, we just don’t do it.
I’ve been around this mulberry tree more or less every other day here on ObWi for the last ten years or so. On one occasion, I commented that here in the US we have insufficient respect for labor.
sapient replied that what we were really talking about was respect for people.
advantage sapient.
the truly sacred things in this country are guns and property. i don’t know in what order, it depends on the day of the week. the rest is commentary.
One of the reasons I’m all for universal healthcare is to decouple workers from their jobs.
One of the reasons I’m for universal healthcare is so that everyone can go to doctor if they need to.
I’m way, way, way less interested in safety nets, and way, way, way more interested in compensating people who work for a living in ways and quantities that let them have a decent fucking life.
value is created by people doing stuff. the people who do the stuff that creates the value should get a larger share of the value they create than they currently do.
were that to happen, a whole shitload of thorny problems will go away.
That pretty much sums up my economic philosophy.
We could do that, our economy throws off enough wealth to do it, we just don’t do it.
I’ve been around this mulberry tree more or less every other day here on ObWi for the last ten years or so. On one occasion, I commented that here in the US we have insufficient respect for labor.
sapient replied that what we were really talking about was respect for people.
advantage sapient.
the truly sacred things in this country are guns and property. i don’t know in what order, it depends on the day of the week. the rest is commentary.
I don’t have a citation and I’m OK if you think my factual basis is incorrect.
I have some experience with Tunisia and outside the super rich, big screen TVs were not common in 2010/2011 during the Arab Spring. I don’t have much (any) experience with the other nations in N. Africa that were involved.
I don’t have a citation and I’m OK if you think my factual basis is incorrect.
I have some experience with Tunisia and outside the super rich, big screen TVs were not common in 2010/2011 during the Arab Spring. I don’t have much (any) experience with the other nations in N. Africa that were involved.
@Countme … “I agree with much of Charles WT’s 10:21 pm.
Not 100%, but lots.”
I would co-sign as well.
@Countme … “I agree with much of Charles WT’s 10:21 pm.
Not 100%, but lots.”
I would co-sign as well.
@russell
“One of the reasons I’m for universal healthcare is so that everyone can go to doctor if they need to.”
I assume this is just snark and I don’t need to agree with this, but in case there is doubt, you have described my primary motivation for universal healthcare. I raised the point of decoupling jobs from healthcare as a secondary issue.
“I’m … way, way, way more interested in compensating people who work for a living in ways and quantities that let them have a decent fucking life.”
I totally agree. I think we don’t get there without giving workers the wherewithal to say “take this job and shove it.” I’m focused on lessening the disparity in negotiating power between workers and owners. You can’t create respect without changing the power dynamic.
@russell
“One of the reasons I’m for universal healthcare is so that everyone can go to doctor if they need to.”
I assume this is just snark and I don’t need to agree with this, but in case there is doubt, you have described my primary motivation for universal healthcare. I raised the point of decoupling jobs from healthcare as a secondary issue.
“I’m … way, way, way more interested in compensating people who work for a living in ways and quantities that let them have a decent fucking life.”
I totally agree. I think we don’t get there without giving workers the wherewithal to say “take this job and shove it.” I’m focused on lessening the disparity in negotiating power between workers and owners. You can’t create respect without changing the power dynamic.
I can’t take it anymore:
https://www.balloon-juice.com/2017/10/02/you-wont-hear-my-gun-or-the-voices-in-my-head/
Because the the problem with the weapons in Vegas was that they were too noisy. You could hardly hear the music over the gunfire, and THAT was the rude part of the massacre.
It’s as if the cold-blooded killers in our midst are in perfect synchrony (in sync with their cronies) with their legislative and judicial representatives.
Can we pass local laws at least that force shooters to unfurl a banner that reads “Brought to you by the NRA” at least five minutes before shooting is to commence.
Or maybe a small announcement in the local newspaper the day before.
Too much regulation? Yes, yes.
I’m going to stick my finger down my throat and take this week off.
I can’t take it anymore:
https://www.balloon-juice.com/2017/10/02/you-wont-hear-my-gun-or-the-voices-in-my-head/
Because the the problem with the weapons in Vegas was that they were too noisy. You could hardly hear the music over the gunfire, and THAT was the rude part of the massacre.
It’s as if the cold-blooded killers in our midst are in perfect synchrony (in sync with their cronies) with their legislative and judicial representatives.
Can we pass local laws at least that force shooters to unfurl a banner that reads “Brought to you by the NRA” at least five minutes before shooting is to commence.
Or maybe a small announcement in the local newspaper the day before.
Too much regulation? Yes, yes.
I’m going to stick my finger down my throat and take this week off.
I assume this is just snark
No, it wasn’t snark.
One advantage of universal healthcare is that it will loosen the dependence of a given worker on their employer. Which I guess is a good thing, assuming that you construe the relationship of employer to employee to be something like what it typically is here.
Another advantage is that, aside from any negotiating leverage that it grants workers, folks can go to the doctor. Which is, simply, good, apart from any other tactical advantages it grants to workers.
IMO the whole model where employers and workers are in some kind of adversarial relationship is screwed up to begin with. Especially since, in anything larger or more complex than the case where the actual owner is also the operational manager, the “employer” is also an employee.
I assume this is just snark
No, it wasn’t snark.
One advantage of universal healthcare is that it will loosen the dependence of a given worker on their employer. Which I guess is a good thing, assuming that you construe the relationship of employer to employee to be something like what it typically is here.
Another advantage is that, aside from any negotiating leverage that it grants workers, folks can go to the doctor. Which is, simply, good, apart from any other tactical advantages it grants to workers.
IMO the whole model where employers and workers are in some kind of adversarial relationship is screwed up to begin with. Especially since, in anything larger or more complex than the case where the actual owner is also the operational manager, the “employer” is also an employee.
Count, don’t you think the real problem was inadequate muzzle flash? How can our heavily armed NRA members shoot back in everyone’s defense if they can’t locate the shooter? Of course that would require a bit of firearms regulation, but perhaps compromise isn’t impossible in this special case….
Count, don’t you think the real problem was inadequate muzzle flash? How can our heavily armed NRA members shoot back in everyone’s defense if they can’t locate the shooter? Of course that would require a bit of firearms regulation, but perhaps compromise isn’t impossible in this special case….
@russell … “IMO the whole model where employers and workers are in some kind of adversarial relationship is screwed up to begin with. Especially since, in anything larger or more complex than the case where the actual owner is also the operational manager, the “employer” is also an employee.”
I don’t disagree that the adversarial relationship is less than ideal, but I don’t see any realistic path to change that in the majority of cases. It is what it is and the best we can do is treat the symptoms.
@russell … “IMO the whole model where employers and workers are in some kind of adversarial relationship is screwed up to begin with. Especially since, in anything larger or more complex than the case where the actual owner is also the operational manager, the “employer” is also an employee.”
I don’t disagree that the adversarial relationship is less than ideal, but I don’t see any realistic path to change that in the majority of cases. It is what it is and the best we can do is treat the symptoms.
I don’t disagree that the adversarial relationship is less than ideal, but I don’t see any realistic path to change that in the majority of cases.
There are a number of perfectly good alternatives to what we do. Very very very simply, employee ownership and/or employee equity vesting and/or profit sharing are commonly (but not so widely) practiced, and are all supported readily under current US law.
We have the tools, we choose not to use them.
I don’t really know why. My best guess is that folks have generally been brainwashed. And no, that is not snark.
So, carry on, American worker. You’re on your own, and you’d best see that for what it is and act accordingly.
I don’t disagree that the adversarial relationship is less than ideal, but I don’t see any realistic path to change that in the majority of cases.
There are a number of perfectly good alternatives to what we do. Very very very simply, employee ownership and/or employee equity vesting and/or profit sharing are commonly (but not so widely) practiced, and are all supported readily under current US law.
We have the tools, we choose not to use them.
I don’t really know why. My best guess is that folks have generally been brainwashed. And no, that is not snark.
So, carry on, American worker. You’re on your own, and you’d best see that for what it is and act accordingly.
Like I posted above, ESOPs are not a panacea and can have pernicious effects. My wife works for a large company with extensive ESOP participation. The mantra of being all in this together is brought up whenever upper management foists some horrible cost-cutting measure on employees … shareholder value is often enhanced by screwing over employees, but since employees are shareholders, it’s OK!
ESOPs work well when management is committed to treating workers like partners, but they can provide cover for exploitation. I’d rather work for a Netflix than a company that only cares for “their greatest resource” via an ESOP.
Like I posted above, ESOPs are not a panacea and can have pernicious effects. My wife works for a large company with extensive ESOP participation. The mantra of being all in this together is brought up whenever upper management foists some horrible cost-cutting measure on employees … shareholder value is often enhanced by screwing over employees, but since employees are shareholders, it’s OK!
ESOPs work well when management is committed to treating workers like partners, but they can provide cover for exploitation. I’d rather work for a Netflix than a company that only cares for “their greatest resource” via an ESOP.
One advantage of universal healthcare is that it will loosen the dependence of a given worker on their employer. Which I guess is a good thing, assuming that you construe the relationship of employer to employee to be something like what it typically is here.
russell, I don’t disagree at all that we would be better off with protections that are available elsewhere, but think the best way to achieve that is to have them mandated by law which requires political action. Elections have consequences, I’ve been lead to understand.
I had the experience of working for a US corporation that was acquired by a UK-Dutch corporation. During that process, I got to know a lot of British people who did similar work to mine. They had a lot more vacation allowance, but didn’t necessarily use it all, just as we don’t. I don’t know what their maternity or post-partum benefits were like. I didn’t see an appreciable difference in their happiness level, and their management team was every bit as annoying as ours. Probably more so. I didn’t detect any greater generosity of spirit among people who were responsible for the bottom line.
My best guess is that folks have generally been brainwashed.
I can’t disagree with this except to say that some people aren’t terribly unhappy. To the extent that they’re brainwashed into happiness, okay then.
One advantage of universal healthcare is that it will loosen the dependence of a given worker on their employer. Which I guess is a good thing, assuming that you construe the relationship of employer to employee to be something like what it typically is here.
russell, I don’t disagree at all that we would be better off with protections that are available elsewhere, but think the best way to achieve that is to have them mandated by law which requires political action. Elections have consequences, I’ve been lead to understand.
I had the experience of working for a US corporation that was acquired by a UK-Dutch corporation. During that process, I got to know a lot of British people who did similar work to mine. They had a lot more vacation allowance, but didn’t necessarily use it all, just as we don’t. I don’t know what their maternity or post-partum benefits were like. I didn’t see an appreciable difference in their happiness level, and their management team was every bit as annoying as ours. Probably more so. I didn’t detect any greater generosity of spirit among people who were responsible for the bottom line.
My best guess is that folks have generally been brainwashed.
I can’t disagree with this except to say that some people aren’t terribly unhappy. To the extent that they’re brainwashed into happiness, okay then.
ESOPs work well when management is committed to treating workers like partners
Everything works pretty well when management is committed to treating workers like partners.
(I) think the best way to achieve that is to have them mandated by law which requires political action.
Fine with me.
ESOPs work well when management is committed to treating workers like partners
Everything works pretty well when management is committed to treating workers like partners.
(I) think the best way to achieve that is to have them mandated by law which requires political action.
Fine with me.
“I don’t really know why.”
Because the vast majority of people in this country are employed by companies founded, funded and built by some individual who put everything they own on the line financially, worked long hours, took incredible risk to create a company that eventually could afford employees.
The employees didn’t do any of that, from idea to first hire.
Interviewing for a job, negotiating a salary and managing to show up every day to perform the function you were hired to do doesn’t make you a co-owner.
Your concept of the unique value of EVERY employees contribution to a company is completely unrealistic.
Many companies recognize those key employees who do add enterprise value with profit sharing or equity. Those who excel often get bonuses. Although these days most bonus plans become salary increases because employees expect them, so rarely don’t get them.
Things can be improved, but it’s easy to understand why we don’t just make everyone an owner.
“I don’t really know why.”
Because the vast majority of people in this country are employed by companies founded, funded and built by some individual who put everything they own on the line financially, worked long hours, took incredible risk to create a company that eventually could afford employees.
The employees didn’t do any of that, from idea to first hire.
Interviewing for a job, negotiating a salary and managing to show up every day to perform the function you were hired to do doesn’t make you a co-owner.
Your concept of the unique value of EVERY employees contribution to a company is completely unrealistic.
Many companies recognize those key employees who do add enterprise value with profit sharing or equity. Those who excel often get bonuses. Although these days most bonus plans become salary increases because employees expect them, so rarely don’t get them.
Things can be improved, but it’s easy to understand why we don’t just make everyone an owner.
It’s too soon after the Vegas massacre to have another mass murder using NRA murder weapons, without the republican waiting period for talking about Vegas first, meaning never.
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/10/americas-first-mass-shooting-since-vegas
Or maybe it wasn’t soon enough.
The day is young.
America is near death. Place a pillow over its face and hold it there until the corpse stops twitching.
Wanted: CEO for pass-through entity. Must possess extensive murder experience.
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/10/ramon-casiano
Shit is too good for America to be full of it.
See ya next week.
It’s too soon after the Vegas massacre to have another mass murder using NRA murder weapons, without the republican waiting period for talking about Vegas first, meaning never.
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/10/americas-first-mass-shooting-since-vegas
Or maybe it wasn’t soon enough.
The day is young.
America is near death. Place a pillow over its face and hold it there until the corpse stops twitching.
Wanted: CEO for pass-through entity. Must possess extensive murder experience.
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/10/ramon-casiano
Shit is too good for America to be full of it.
See ya next week.
Just think of how much better the shooting in Vegas would have been with the newly legalized silencers that the GOP is pushing for.
Would have made it easier for the fans to hear the music, without the ‘extra’ percussion section, that’s for sure.
The only thing that can protect you from an armed music critic is an armed musician, amirite?
I hear that bagpipes are considered ‘weapons’, also, too.
Just think of how much better the shooting in Vegas would have been with the newly legalized silencers that the GOP is pushing for.
Would have made it easier for the fans to hear the music, without the ‘extra’ percussion section, that’s for sure.
The only thing that can protect you from an armed music critic is an armed musician, amirite?
I hear that bagpipes are considered ‘weapons’, also, too.
Because the vast majority of people in this country are employed by companies founded, funded and built by some individual who put everything they own on the line financially, worked long hours, took incredible risk to create a company that eventually could afford employees.
Yes, the sainted job creators.
Because the vast majority of people in this country are employed by companies founded, funded and built by some individual who put everything they own on the line financially, worked long hours, took incredible risk to create a company that eventually could afford employees.
Yes, the sainted job creators.
I’m also skeptical that “the vast majority of employees” in this country, or anywhere, are employed by companies where the sainted original job creator is still around. How many generations and how many fortunes does it take for the sainted risk-taker’s stake to be diluted?
Also, concerning this:
took incredible risk to create a company that eventually could afford employees.
The employees didn’t do any of that, from idea to first hire.
And the originator wouldn’t get anywhere after that without people willing to get the work done.
Until robots are available, of course.
I’m also skeptical that “the vast majority of employees” in this country, or anywhere, are employed by companies where the sainted original job creator is still around. How many generations and how many fortunes does it take for the sainted risk-taker’s stake to be diluted?
Also, concerning this:
took incredible risk to create a company that eventually could afford employees.
The employees didn’t do any of that, from idea to first hire.
And the originator wouldn’t get anywhere after that without people willing to get the work done.
Until robots are available, of course.
That is some serious Randian bullsh1t.
That is some serious Randian bullsh1t.
I have as much respect for folks who are good entrepreneurs as I do for anyone who has any special gift or ability. Identifying an opportunity, developing a strategy for building a business around it, and maintaining the initiative and focus required to make it a reality, are not things that everyone can do. Most people can’t do them, or at least do them well.
Likewise for managers, likewise for every other skill set that goes into creating and operating a successful enterprise.
My boss did not “give me a job”. My boss cannot do what I do. I have a job because, like the entrepreneur, and the manager, and every other person who works where I work, something needed doing and I knew how to do it.
Getting to the point of being as good as I am at what I happen to do involved quite a bit more than “interviewing for a job, negotiating a salary, and managing to show up every day”. In fact, it involved putting all of the financial resources I could scrape up on the line and working many many long hours to learn enough to get my foot in the door of the field I work in, and then working my damned ass off to earn the opportunity to work on stuff that would take me one inch further. Over and over and over again.
At this point, I’m pretty good at what I do, which is much much broader in scope than just writing freaking code. My boss can’t do what I do, his boss can’t do what I do, and the guy that is the CEO of the company can’t do what I do.
They don’t have the skill set, don’t want to have the skill set, wouldn’t know how to go about getting the skill set.
I have the skill set.
They’re good at what they do. I’m good at what I do. I wouldn’t be able to do what I do without their involvement, because what they do is necessary. They wouldn’t be able to do what they do without my involvement, because what I do is necessary.
People don’t hire other people because they want to hand out jobs like candy. They hire them because they can’t do what they want to do, alone.
People don’t “create jobs” out of thin air, like some kind of entrepreneurial Houdini. Jobs are created when their is a demand for the thing that the job produces. The entrepreneurial skill is recognizing that opportunity and organizing the necessary elements to make it a reality, which is a truly valuable skill.
But that is all it is, one truly valuable skill among many.
I have as much respect for folks who are good entrepreneurs as I do for anyone who has any special gift or ability. Identifying an opportunity, developing a strategy for building a business around it, and maintaining the initiative and focus required to make it a reality, are not things that everyone can do. Most people can’t do them, or at least do them well.
Likewise for managers, likewise for every other skill set that goes into creating and operating a successful enterprise.
My boss did not “give me a job”. My boss cannot do what I do. I have a job because, like the entrepreneur, and the manager, and every other person who works where I work, something needed doing and I knew how to do it.
Getting to the point of being as good as I am at what I happen to do involved quite a bit more than “interviewing for a job, negotiating a salary, and managing to show up every day”. In fact, it involved putting all of the financial resources I could scrape up on the line and working many many long hours to learn enough to get my foot in the door of the field I work in, and then working my damned ass off to earn the opportunity to work on stuff that would take me one inch further. Over and over and over again.
At this point, I’m pretty good at what I do, which is much much broader in scope than just writing freaking code. My boss can’t do what I do, his boss can’t do what I do, and the guy that is the CEO of the company can’t do what I do.
They don’t have the skill set, don’t want to have the skill set, wouldn’t know how to go about getting the skill set.
I have the skill set.
They’re good at what they do. I’m good at what I do. I wouldn’t be able to do what I do without their involvement, because what they do is necessary. They wouldn’t be able to do what they do without my involvement, because what I do is necessary.
People don’t hire other people because they want to hand out jobs like candy. They hire them because they can’t do what they want to do, alone.
People don’t “create jobs” out of thin air, like some kind of entrepreneurial Houdini. Jobs are created when their is a demand for the thing that the job produces. The entrepreneurial skill is recognizing that opportunity and organizing the necessary elements to make it a reality, which is a truly valuable skill.
But that is all it is, one truly valuable skill among many.
To bring it all back home:
I think it’s great that folks in countries like hours have excellent health care, non-meager vacation, and a variety of other fringe benefits that make their lives more enjoyable, productive, and rich.
Gee, I wish we could have more of that. Wouldn’t that be great?
WTF. Tough crowd.
To bring it all back home:
I think it’s great that folks in countries like hours have excellent health care, non-meager vacation, and a variety of other fringe benefits that make their lives more enjoyable, productive, and rich.
Gee, I wish we could have more of that. Wouldn’t that be great?
WTF. Tough crowd.
Gee, I wish we could have more of that. Wouldn’t that be great?
WTF. Tough crowd.
The protections you (and I, and many of us) would like to have are mandated by law in Europe, by the government as part of their social “safety net”. They aren’t a matter of employer generosity or a culture of generosity. They’re a result of citizens demanding them from their politicians. I think that your emphasis on corporate greedheads is misguided, because greedy people exist everywhere.
People in the US keep voting for Republicans, because they believe that they’ll be better off with tax cuts. For a million reasons, I wish people wouldn’t keep doing that, and every day’s news brings more reasons why.
Yes, they’re brainwashed. Tax cuts. It’s their hypnotic mantra.
Gee, I wish we could have more of that. Wouldn’t that be great?
WTF. Tough crowd.
The protections you (and I, and many of us) would like to have are mandated by law in Europe, by the government as part of their social “safety net”. They aren’t a matter of employer generosity or a culture of generosity. They’re a result of citizens demanding them from their politicians. I think that your emphasis on corporate greedheads is misguided, because greedy people exist everywhere.
People in the US keep voting for Republicans, because they believe that they’ll be better off with tax cuts. For a million reasons, I wish people wouldn’t keep doing that, and every day’s news brings more reasons why.
Yes, they’re brainwashed. Tax cuts. It’s their hypnotic mantra.
A few things. First, small business accounts for a huge percentage of hiring companies, only 63 percent of jobs, not a vast majority. Although the vast majority of net new jobs. Look, a link.
http://sbecouncil.org/about-us/facts-and-data/
Second, a huge number of people don’t write, design and architect software. They do things lots of other people do, or could, including the owner. A pretty big challenge is generalizing russell or wj or hsh as the average employee.
Third, being an entrepreneur is more than a skill, in large part it is willing to risk being poor to be wealthy(or some other metric of success).
I was never willing to be an entrepreneur until I was already broke.
Last, ffs does it really matter how long it’s been since that person made the sacrifice to create that business? This argument really irritates me. Someone did and their legacy still belongs to them.
Oh, and, yes all those things would be great. Life would be grand. If you had a job.
A few things. First, small business accounts for a huge percentage of hiring companies, only 63 percent of jobs, not a vast majority. Although the vast majority of net new jobs. Look, a link.
http://sbecouncil.org/about-us/facts-and-data/
Second, a huge number of people don’t write, design and architect software. They do things lots of other people do, or could, including the owner. A pretty big challenge is generalizing russell or wj or hsh as the average employee.
Third, being an entrepreneur is more than a skill, in large part it is willing to risk being poor to be wealthy(or some other metric of success).
I was never willing to be an entrepreneur until I was already broke.
Last, ffs does it really matter how long it’s been since that person made the sacrifice to create that business? This argument really irritates me. Someone did and their legacy still belongs to them.
Oh, and, yes all those things would be great. Life would be grand. If you had a job.
I think that your emphasis on corporate greedheads is misguided
Could be.
As noted above, I observe that working people in other places have, by all appearances, a generally better deal than we do.
Wish we could get some of that here, for our folks.
How that happens, other than a strong personal preference for no shooting, doesn’t much matter to me.
I think that your emphasis on corporate greedheads is misguided
Could be.
As noted above, I observe that working people in other places have, by all appearances, a generally better deal than we do.
Wish we could get some of that here, for our folks.
How that happens, other than a strong personal preference for no shooting, doesn’t much matter to me.
Someone did and their legacy still belongs to them.
What does that have to do with recognizing the proper value that a given employee brings to a business? Or are you suggesting that this has all been sorted out properly and that everyone is getting what is an accurate reflection of the value of their work? Or are you suggesting that none of that matters and that people who start businesses should be able to do whatever they want and employees can just take it or leave it?
Someone did and their legacy still belongs to them.
What does that have to do with recognizing the proper value that a given employee brings to a business? Or are you suggesting that this has all been sorted out properly and that everyone is getting what is an accurate reflection of the value of their work? Or are you suggesting that none of that matters and that people who start businesses should be able to do whatever they want and employees can just take it or leave it?
FWIW, Publix, the largest ESOP in the US.
No layoffs in 86 years. Nice ~10% profit sharing grant per annum. Stick around long enough and you can do OK. They treat their people well – even the freaking baggers – so there’s no reason not to stick around.
Everybody’s making money, everybody’s happy. Groceries aren’t sexy, but everybody’s gotta eat.
It ain’t rocket science.
FWIW, Publix, the largest ESOP in the US.
No layoffs in 86 years. Nice ~10% profit sharing grant per annum. Stick around long enough and you can do OK. They treat their people well – even the freaking baggers – so there’s no reason not to stick around.
Everybody’s making money, everybody’s happy. Groceries aren’t sexy, but everybody’s gotta eat.
It ain’t rocket science.
They do things lots of other people do, or could, including the owner.
But, there’s only one of him. So, he can’t.
Third, being an entrepreneur is more than a skill, in large part it is willing to risk being poor to be wealthy(or some other metric of success).
To me, temperament, including tolerance for risk, is part of the package that an individual brings to life, including the work part of it.
Different people have different talents. Lots of really brilliant entrepreneurs can’t manage their way out of a wet paper bag. Lots of really brilliant entrepreneurs lose interest as soon as things get some traction. They get bored. Lots of really brilliant entrepreneurs have nine truly crappy ideas for every one good one, and they need somebody objective to help them sort it all out.
Everybody brings something of value to the table.
They do things lots of other people do, or could, including the owner.
But, there’s only one of him. So, he can’t.
Third, being an entrepreneur is more than a skill, in large part it is willing to risk being poor to be wealthy(or some other metric of success).
To me, temperament, including tolerance for risk, is part of the package that an individual brings to life, including the work part of it.
Different people have different talents. Lots of really brilliant entrepreneurs can’t manage their way out of a wet paper bag. Lots of really brilliant entrepreneurs lose interest as soon as things get some traction. They get bored. Lots of really brilliant entrepreneurs have nine truly crappy ideas for every one good one, and they need somebody objective to help them sort it all out.
Everybody brings something of value to the table.
I’ve been following this conversation, mainly between russell and sapient but now more widespread, with interest and some amusement.
As usual, I could just say (quite accurately) WRS. But I want to add that in my experience, in the specific example of universal healthcare, the American system seems to be regarded with horror and disbelief by everybody else in the developed West, and today of all days it bears repeating that this attitude is mirrored when people look at the US gun laws. I would say that the general European attitude is “How is it possible that in such a rich, great country, such barbaric arrangements still exist?”
I’ve been following this conversation, mainly between russell and sapient but now more widespread, with interest and some amusement.
As usual, I could just say (quite accurately) WRS. But I want to add that in my experience, in the specific example of universal healthcare, the American system seems to be regarded with horror and disbelief by everybody else in the developed West, and today of all days it bears repeating that this attitude is mirrored when people look at the US gun laws. I would say that the general European attitude is “How is it possible that in such a rich, great country, such barbaric arrangements still exist?”
I would say that the general European attitude is “How is it possible that in such a rich, great country, such barbaric arrangements still exist?”
My specific American attitude is about the same.
I would say that the general European attitude is “How is it possible that in such a rich, great country, such barbaric arrangements still exist?”
My specific American attitude is about the same.
“How is it possible that in such a rich, great country, such barbaric arrangements still exist?”
for every smart, successful or well-intentioned person in the US, there are a dozen deplorable assholes who want nothing more than to be forced to self-righteously make other people suffer.
“How is it possible that in such a rich, great country, such barbaric arrangements still exist?”
for every smart, successful or well-intentioned person in the US, there are a dozen deplorable assholes who want nothing more than to be forced to self-righteously make other people suffer.
Last, ffs does it really matter how long it’s been since that person made the sacrifice to create that business? This argument really irritates me. Someone did and their legacy still belongs to them.
Yes. IMO, it does.
For one thing, in relation to many, many companies, that person is six buyouts ago, and the companies are now owned by companies whose only business is to own other companies. We are not remotely talking about only the original sainted genius hard-working risk-taker raking off the wealth.
But even without the buyout factor, yes, ffs, IMO it does matter how many generations ago it happened. Your argument about the original genius entrepreneur is an explicitly person-based one.
Beyond that, you’re making an inherited wealth argument to go with it. Just to make the implicit explicit.
Last, ffs does it really matter how long it’s been since that person made the sacrifice to create that business? This argument really irritates me. Someone did and their legacy still belongs to them.
Yes. IMO, it does.
For one thing, in relation to many, many companies, that person is six buyouts ago, and the companies are now owned by companies whose only business is to own other companies. We are not remotely talking about only the original sainted genius hard-working risk-taker raking off the wealth.
But even without the buyout factor, yes, ffs, IMO it does matter how many generations ago it happened. Your argument about the original genius entrepreneur is an explicitly person-based one.
Beyond that, you’re making an inherited wealth argument to go with it. Just to make the implicit explicit.
“How is it possible that in such a rich, great country, such barbaric arrangements still exist?”
Tax cuts. SASQ.
“How is it possible that in such a rich, great country, such barbaric arrangements still exist?”
Tax cuts. SASQ.
Finally, being an entrepreneurial genius may be a justification for your getting a bigger slice of the pie than the mere peons, but it doesn’t justify getting such a big slice that other people go hungry. (This is a comment about the system.)
And Marty’s 1:58 wasn’t clear about this, but I wonder what he thinks people should get in return for their work when they are the interchangeable parts, doing work that could be done by almost anyone. You gotta be special to have food security, health care security, security in a decent home….? If you weren’t [because I detest the word “gifted”] blessed by the universe with special talents, you get to be further unblessed by leading a sucky, anxiety-ridden life materially and socially as well? I mean, you have no leverage in the libertarian paradise where everyone shows up and negotiates a wage.
Finally, being an entrepreneurial genius may be a justification for your getting a bigger slice of the pie than the mere peons, but it doesn’t justify getting such a big slice that other people go hungry. (This is a comment about the system.)
And Marty’s 1:58 wasn’t clear about this, but I wonder what he thinks people should get in return for their work when they are the interchangeable parts, doing work that could be done by almost anyone. You gotta be special to have food security, health care security, security in a decent home….? If you weren’t [because I detest the word “gifted”] blessed by the universe with special talents, you get to be further unblessed by leading a sucky, anxiety-ridden life materially and socially as well? I mean, you have no leverage in the libertarian paradise where everyone shows up and negotiates a wage.
Tom Petty! No!
Tom Petty! No!
what … people should get in return for their work when they are the interchangeable parts, doing work that could be done by almost anyone.
There aren’t that many jobs that can be done well by almost anyone. Some, maybe, not many.
A slightly different bar – there are virtually no jobs where it doesn’t matter who does them. I challenge anyone here to name one.
Money is fungible. It’s the most fungible thing on earth. It was invented, specifically, to be a fungible representation of value.
People are not fungible.
what … people should get in return for their work when they are the interchangeable parts, doing work that could be done by almost anyone.
There aren’t that many jobs that can be done well by almost anyone. Some, maybe, not many.
A slightly different bar – there are virtually no jobs where it doesn’t matter who does them. I challenge anyone here to name one.
Money is fungible. It’s the most fungible thing on earth. It was invented, specifically, to be a fungible representation of value.
People are not fungible.
JanieM,
An example. I had an employee, Ron, who was a talented, perhaps gifted, programmer a few decades ago. Amazing RPG programmer who was the lead programmer on a key development team. But he never worked a minute past 5, never a weekend, took lunch every day, took his vacation whenever he pleased, in general placed his hone life at least equal to work.
We were a small company, tough deadlines, late nights, weekends leading up to big rollouts blah blah.
He came in for his annual review and I asked if he would like a bonus or a promotion, he said no. I want to go home at 5 and not worry about it.
For 25 years I used him as the example of an ideal worker in a world of people scrambling to get ahead. He took his salary, delivered the value that paid for and expected nothing extra. I could absolutely count on him to deliver that every time.
I expect people to get paid for what they contribute. Not in a meritocracy kind of way, but in a hard work kind of way.
I think a good 10% bonus pool is usually pretty fair, I haven’t ever worked on a stable company that didn’t have one.
I think people should get and take 3-4 weeks vacation, no matter what job they have.
I think companies that can match 4 to 6% of 401k contributions should. For anyone. And there are already limits on those for higher paid employees.
I think there should be short term disability level (13 weeks) paid parental leave, after that if we wanted to provide 66% for the rest of the year as long term that would be great. But your job isnt guaranteed after 3 months.
I think people should have access to healthcare, working people should through their employer, everyone else through Medicare on a needs basis. I don’t think people with good employer based insurance should be forced to take less good insurance.
I think that covers what I think people should get. If people people want to own the company(Publix) they should get a job at Publix. Those companies exist.
I think people should lead lives at least at a baseline level of dignity and security.
We may disagree on where that baseline is.
As for inherited wealth, a store or laundromat or any of a hundred other businesses that people start and hire 8 people to work don’t lose their risk for the owner over time. Or Wal-Mart, ask JC Penney shareholders.
JanieM,
An example. I had an employee, Ron, who was a talented, perhaps gifted, programmer a few decades ago. Amazing RPG programmer who was the lead programmer on a key development team. But he never worked a minute past 5, never a weekend, took lunch every day, took his vacation whenever he pleased, in general placed his hone life at least equal to work.
We were a small company, tough deadlines, late nights, weekends leading up to big rollouts blah blah.
He came in for his annual review and I asked if he would like a bonus or a promotion, he said no. I want to go home at 5 and not worry about it.
For 25 years I used him as the example of an ideal worker in a world of people scrambling to get ahead. He took his salary, delivered the value that paid for and expected nothing extra. I could absolutely count on him to deliver that every time.
I expect people to get paid for what they contribute. Not in a meritocracy kind of way, but in a hard work kind of way.
I think a good 10% bonus pool is usually pretty fair, I haven’t ever worked on a stable company that didn’t have one.
I think people should get and take 3-4 weeks vacation, no matter what job they have.
I think companies that can match 4 to 6% of 401k contributions should. For anyone. And there are already limits on those for higher paid employees.
I think there should be short term disability level (13 weeks) paid parental leave, after that if we wanted to provide 66% for the rest of the year as long term that would be great. But your job isnt guaranteed after 3 months.
I think people should have access to healthcare, working people should through their employer, everyone else through Medicare on a needs basis. I don’t think people with good employer based insurance should be forced to take less good insurance.
I think that covers what I think people should get. If people people want to own the company(Publix) they should get a job at Publix. Those companies exist.
I think people should lead lives at least at a baseline level of dignity and security.
We may disagree on where that baseline is.
As for inherited wealth, a store or laundromat or any of a hundred other businesses that people start and hire 8 people to work don’t lose their risk for the owner over time. Or Wal-Mart, ask JC Penney shareholders.
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/10/connecting-todays-threads
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/10/connecting-todays-threads
Just so:
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/10/trumps-treasury-department-deleted-research-that-contradicts-republicans-on-tax-reform/
Just so:
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/10/trumps-treasury-department-deleted-research-that-contradicts-republicans-on-tax-reform/
http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/tom-petty-on-past-confederate-flag-use-it-was-downright-stupid-20150714
http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/tom-petty-on-past-confederate-flag-use-it-was-downright-stupid-20150714
I saw a great documentary not that long ago about the circumstances surrounding his album Damn the Torpedoes and his incredible battles with his record label, which showed how staunch he was in standing up for what he believed. I came to his music pretty late, after that documentary, but he was obviously an exceptional, principled person and overall a really cool guy. It’s a loss.
I saw a great documentary not that long ago about the circumstances surrounding his album Damn the Torpedoes and his incredible battles with his record label, which showed how staunch he was in standing up for what he believed. I came to his music pretty late, after that documentary, but he was obviously an exceptional, principled person and overall a really cool guy. It’s a loss.
Marty: I think people should get and take 3-4 weeks vacation, no matter what job they have.
So, how would you vote on a bill to require Job Creators to offer a minimum of 3 weeks vacation to their Job Consumers?
–TP
Marty: I think people should get and take 3-4 weeks vacation, no matter what job they have.
So, how would you vote on a bill to require Job Creators to offer a minimum of 3 weeks vacation to their Job Consumers?
–TP
He came in for his annual review and I asked if he would like a bonus or a promotion, he said no. I want to go home at 5 and not worry about it.
This is an interesting observation. I’m working at a place (a Japanese university) where I am starting to move to, if not to a 24 hour schedule, at least an 18 hour a day schedule. By that, I mean I’m contacting students outside of classroom hours for lots of different reasons, some good, some bad, all unavoidable. I have colleagues who take issue with my ‘being on call’ for students. But given the changes in the way society and the economy are run, I don’t really see an alternative.
It’s great that your guy Ron found a place (I assume he is still there) where he can live the 8 to 5 lifestyle and manage. I also think it is significant that Russell comes from the gig economy, where you don’t turn down opportunities. He’s, as he pointed out, set up his life in a way that allows him to pursue his interests while still keeping groceries on the table. I’m sure you don’t begrudge him that. But I think you can see that we can’t really have one portion of the world be 8 to 5 and the other part operate on 24 hours. If Ron’s company ends up moving to just-in-time scheduling as a way to compete, unless Ron is so talented that he can dictate his conditions, his dream of going home at 5 is gone.
You argue that people who start the ball rolling deserve the lion’s share of rewards. If there were a straight line to these people, I’d be sympathetic, but in most cases, there isn’t. But even if there were, I’d still be a bit hesitant to accord them what you feel is there due. A lot of these people get to where they are because they have personality traits that make them difficult to deal with. They move to the top because they like to bully, demean and belittle people. I don’t think this happens on a conservative/liberal divide, cf Steven Jobs.
I also think that this is hopelessly intertwined with ‘white privilege’. Sorry to bring this up, but I look at some like Kushner and think what got him to where he was. Yes, people don’t ‘lose their risk’, but we should have a society where risk is not lurking behind every corner.
Americans have this mythology about individual effort and how people get ahead if they just want it enough. It’s been beneficial when the country had a huge inferiority complex compared to Europe. But in a networked world, that mythology is getting to be harmful. Failure to realize how people getting to places requires a lot of other people to help in that effort is going to kill the US.
He came in for his annual review and I asked if he would like a bonus or a promotion, he said no. I want to go home at 5 and not worry about it.
This is an interesting observation. I’m working at a place (a Japanese university) where I am starting to move to, if not to a 24 hour schedule, at least an 18 hour a day schedule. By that, I mean I’m contacting students outside of classroom hours for lots of different reasons, some good, some bad, all unavoidable. I have colleagues who take issue with my ‘being on call’ for students. But given the changes in the way society and the economy are run, I don’t really see an alternative.
It’s great that your guy Ron found a place (I assume he is still there) where he can live the 8 to 5 lifestyle and manage. I also think it is significant that Russell comes from the gig economy, where you don’t turn down opportunities. He’s, as he pointed out, set up his life in a way that allows him to pursue his interests while still keeping groceries on the table. I’m sure you don’t begrudge him that. But I think you can see that we can’t really have one portion of the world be 8 to 5 and the other part operate on 24 hours. If Ron’s company ends up moving to just-in-time scheduling as a way to compete, unless Ron is so talented that he can dictate his conditions, his dream of going home at 5 is gone.
You argue that people who start the ball rolling deserve the lion’s share of rewards. If there were a straight line to these people, I’d be sympathetic, but in most cases, there isn’t. But even if there were, I’d still be a bit hesitant to accord them what you feel is there due. A lot of these people get to where they are because they have personality traits that make them difficult to deal with. They move to the top because they like to bully, demean and belittle people. I don’t think this happens on a conservative/liberal divide, cf Steven Jobs.
I also think that this is hopelessly intertwined with ‘white privilege’. Sorry to bring this up, but I look at some like Kushner and think what got him to where he was. Yes, people don’t ‘lose their risk’, but we should have a society where risk is not lurking behind every corner.
Americans have this mythology about individual effort and how people get ahead if they just want it enough. It’s been beneficial when the country had a huge inferiority complex compared to Europe. But in a networked world, that mythology is getting to be harmful. Failure to realize how people getting to places requires a lot of other people to help in that effort is going to kill the US.
You belong among the wildflowers
You belong in a boat out at sea
You belong with your love on your arm
You belong somewhere you feel free
You belong among the wildflowers
You belong in a boat out at sea
You belong with your love on your arm
You belong somewhere you feel free
http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/tom-petty-on-past-confederate-flag-use-it-was-downright-stupid-20150714
Posted by: Countme-a-Demon | October 02, 2017 at 05:49 PM
The song Rebels does a good a job anything of capturing contradictions of southern pride and shame.
http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/tom-petty-on-past-confederate-flag-use-it-was-downright-stupid-20150714
Posted by: Countme-a-Demon | October 02, 2017 at 05:49 PM
The song Rebels does a good a job anything of capturing contradictions of southern pride and shame.
it’s been about 30 years since i worked in a 9-5 shop. i’m not sure there are any anymore. i’m just talking about day job, not music.
there’s always a place for a guy who can bang out good code reliably. i got one of those on my current team, and i’m glad to have him. but these days the bar is mostly higher than good old reliable 8-5. this stuff changes too much, and too frequently, for that to work.
it’s been about 30 years since i worked in a 9-5 shop. i’m not sure there are any anymore. i’m just talking about day job, not music.
there’s always a place for a guy who can bang out good code reliably. i got one of those on my current team, and i’m glad to have him. but these days the bar is mostly higher than good old reliable 8-5. this stuff changes too much, and too frequently, for that to work.
Failure to realize how people getting to places requires a lot of other people to help in that effort is going to kill the US.
what lj said
Failure to realize how people getting to places requires a lot of other people to help in that effort is going to kill the US.
what lj said
“You argue that people who start the ball rolling deserve the lion’s share of rewards. If there were a straight line to these people, I’d be sympathetic, but in most cases, there isn’t”
I appreciate the comments, I think there are still a lot of places Ron could work, probably not in the company that bought the one we worked at.
As for the direct line, I can walk down almost any street in the business area of any town in the US and walk in business after business where you can meet the job creator. I get the sense that it is just hard to imagine 63% of people working for the person who founded the company, or the family member that worked in it their whole life to take it over.
Some of these are multiple generation companies where there are still only 10 employees. But in lots of cases profit sharing goes to key employees.
Even small tech shops often set fairly large bonus pools based on the company achieving certain goals.
The difference is that the company has to achieve the goals.
ISTM, The concept of the job creator has become Zuckerberg or Bezos or Sam Walton. They can be, but companies that size breath employees, In this way, out that way.
“You argue that people who start the ball rolling deserve the lion’s share of rewards. If there were a straight line to these people, I’d be sympathetic, but in most cases, there isn’t”
I appreciate the comments, I think there are still a lot of places Ron could work, probably not in the company that bought the one we worked at.
As for the direct line, I can walk down almost any street in the business area of any town in the US and walk in business after business where you can meet the job creator. I get the sense that it is just hard to imagine 63% of people working for the person who founded the company, or the family member that worked in it their whole life to take it over.
Some of these are multiple generation companies where there are still only 10 employees. But in lots of cases profit sharing goes to key employees.
Even small tech shops often set fairly large bonus pools based on the company achieving certain goals.
The difference is that the company has to achieve the goals.
ISTM, The concept of the job creator has become Zuckerberg or Bezos or Sam Walton. They can be, but companies that size breath employees, In this way, out that way.
The difference is that the company has to achieve the goals.
This is actually true, and for small companies,it means the ability to meet payroll.
That said, I’ve enjoyed working with people who value each other, and who understand mutual sacrifice, and mutual reward.
The difference is that the company has to achieve the goals.
This is actually true, and for small companies,it means the ability to meet payroll.
That said, I’ve enjoyed working with people who value each other, and who understand mutual sacrifice, and mutual reward.
That said, I’ve enjoyed working with people who value each other, and who understand mutual sacrifice, and mutual reward.
I should add: the sacrifice was not terrible, and the rewards were meager.
That said, I’ve enjoyed working with people who value each other, and who understand mutual sacrifice, and mutual reward.
I should add: the sacrifice was not terrible, and the rewards were meager.
Marty, you’ve gone from this:
To this:
To this:
Maybe it’s hard to imagine it because it’s not true; your own link doesn’t support it (your 1:58 comment).
Quoting that link directly:
So the 63% number is related to new jobs only, not total employment.
Then, as to employment in general, your link says:
So fewer than half of private sector employees were in firms with fewer than 500 workers.
A quick search gives 14.6% as the percentage of public sector to total employment in the US in 2008.
The numbers cited add up to about 40% of total US employees in firms with fewer than 500 employees. ((47.8% * (100 – 14.6), and yes, I recognize that we now have three years cited: 2013, 2011, 2008. I am going to assume, because this is a blog and not a dissertation, that the numbers didn’t change all that drastically in that short a time frame.)
Further, we have no way to know who was running those firms, or who owned them, by the time they got big enough to employ 500 people.
So we have gone from “the vast majority,” to an apparent misreading of what 63% referred to in the SBE website, to a max of 40%, for which we have no way of knowing who the employer actually is.
Marty, you’ve gone from this:
To this:
To this:
Maybe it’s hard to imagine it because it’s not true; your own link doesn’t support it (your 1:58 comment).
Quoting that link directly:
So the 63% number is related to new jobs only, not total employment.
Then, as to employment in general, your link says:
So fewer than half of private sector employees were in firms with fewer than 500 workers.
A quick search gives 14.6% as the percentage of public sector to total employment in the US in 2008.
The numbers cited add up to about 40% of total US employees in firms with fewer than 500 employees. ((47.8% * (100 – 14.6), and yes, I recognize that we now have three years cited: 2013, 2011, 2008. I am going to assume, because this is a blog and not a dissertation, that the numbers didn’t change all that drastically in that short a time frame.)
Further, we have no way to know who was running those firms, or who owned them, by the time they got big enough to employ 500 people.
So we have gone from “the vast majority,” to an apparent misreading of what 63% referred to in the SBE website, to a max of 40%, for which we have no way of knowing who the employer actually is.
lj: Failure to realize how people getting to places requires a lot of other people to help in that effort is going to kill the US.
russell: what lj said
Can I now say wrs??
lj: Failure to realize how people getting to places requires a lot of other people to help in that effort is going to kill the US.
russell: what lj said
Can I now say wrs??
Tom Petty is not dead yet. His body apparently is holding on.
The 58 in Las Vegas, the wrong 58, there are 58 in this country much more deserving, are dead and will stay dead.
Tom Petty is not dead yet. His body apparently is holding on.
The 58 in Las Vegas, the wrong 58, there are 58 in this country much more deserving, are dead and will stay dead.
Google and Facebook should be shutdown, before I finish this comment:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/google-facebook-prominently-display-false-information-in-wake-of-las-vegas-massacre-2017-10-02?siteid=bigcharts&dist=bigcharts
The NRA must be designated as a domestic terrorist organization and federal marshals, overpaid, lazy thousands of them, must descend on NRA headquarters, NRA branches, NRA media and internet outlets.
Any, ANY, resistance by the NRA must be met by overwhelming, savage state and societal violence.
Confiscate their weapons and then shoot them with their own weapons if they resist. If you getta chance, abuse them physically when no one is looking.
Continue on to their residences and hideouts.
I’m a middle-aged white man. I fully expect to be surveilled, harassed, monitored, patted down, turned down for cab rides, grimaced at by airport security and pulled aside for extensive anal searches, just like Muslims and blacks, and Mexicans, and immigrants are generalized and stereotyped in this country, because we white males are prime suspects in any mass serial terrorist murders in this country.
It’s what we do. The data day so, but just now being erased from federal databases by, houda thunk, white, middle-aged males and the Ben Carsons who aspire to be them.
Many of our commenters here are middle-aged white males.
We could strike at any time. Probably individually, because we do value the entrepreneurial, killing, exceptional spirit of the free American.
Too much prior planning and cooperation would be considered socialist according to our so serious values, which are universal, don’t ya know.
Beware. Be vigilant.
Be trigger-happy around all middle-aged white American males. Keep the safety off.
Start with the ones in our government.
Google and Facebook should be shutdown, before I finish this comment:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/google-facebook-prominently-display-false-information-in-wake-of-las-vegas-massacre-2017-10-02?siteid=bigcharts&dist=bigcharts
The NRA must be designated as a domestic terrorist organization and federal marshals, overpaid, lazy thousands of them, must descend on NRA headquarters, NRA branches, NRA media and internet outlets.
Any, ANY, resistance by the NRA must be met by overwhelming, savage state and societal violence.
Confiscate their weapons and then shoot them with their own weapons if they resist. If you getta chance, abuse them physically when no one is looking.
Continue on to their residences and hideouts.
I’m a middle-aged white man. I fully expect to be surveilled, harassed, monitored, patted down, turned down for cab rides, grimaced at by airport security and pulled aside for extensive anal searches, just like Muslims and blacks, and Mexicans, and immigrants are generalized and stereotyped in this country, because we white males are prime suspects in any mass serial terrorist murders in this country.
It’s what we do. The data day so, but just now being erased from federal databases by, houda thunk, white, middle-aged males and the Ben Carsons who aspire to be them.
Many of our commenters here are middle-aged white males.
We could strike at any time. Probably individually, because we do value the entrepreneurial, killing, exceptional spirit of the free American.
Too much prior planning and cooperation would be considered socialist according to our so serious values, which are universal, don’t ya know.
Beware. Be vigilant.
Be trigger-happy around all middle-aged white American males. Keep the safety off.
Start with the ones in our government.
JanieM, I went from vast majority to majority explicitly in my second comment, and provided the link.
Without going back, I think the Small Business stats also pointed out that the 47.8% didn’t include people who work for themselves which accounts for 20+ percent. so I was ok with majority.
JanieM, I went from vast majority to majority explicitly in my second comment, and provided the link.
Without going back, I think the Small Business stats also pointed out that the 47.8% didn’t include people who work for themselves which accounts for 20+ percent. so I was ok with majority.
Count, I can’t speak for anyone but myself, but I am asking you to stop writing about shooting people.
Count, I can’t speak for anyone but myself, but I am asking you to stop writing about shooting people.
I have never worked for a company where management and owners didn’t readily recognize that the employees, at various levels, were essential to the success of the company. Not one.
At this point every company I have worked for/with has, at some point, been put in the position of being unable, not unwilling, to meet some demand or the other by some employee(s) without having to reduce headcount elsewhere.
So no this:
Failure to realize how people getting to places requires a lot of other people to help in that effort is going to kill the US. isn’t close to correct.
I have never worked for a company where management and owners didn’t readily recognize that the employees, at various levels, were essential to the success of the company. Not one.
At this point every company I have worked for/with has, at some point, been put in the position of being unable, not unwilling, to meet some demand or the other by some employee(s) without having to reduce headcount elsewhere.
So no this:
Failure to realize how people getting to places requires a lot of other people to help in that effort is going to kill the US. isn’t close to correct.
Janie, you speak for many.
I’m gone.
Janie, you speak for many.
I’m gone.
I think that people should write whatever they want.
I wish people would quit shooting whoever they want.
I think that people should write whatever they want.
I wish people would quit shooting whoever they want.
I was too late supporting the Count.
Hoping he didn’t mean it.
I was too late supporting the Count.
Hoping he didn’t mean it.
I bear no animus to the fine people here.
I can’t maintain standards in a society with none.
He means it.
I bear no animus to the fine people here.
I can’t maintain standards in a society with none.
He means it.
Doctor Science from September 9:
Here’s russell later in that same thread (starting out quoting sapient)
sapient, if you want to start your own blog and let people fantasize about killing other people, knock yourself out.
Doctor Science from September 9:
Here’s russell later in that same thread (starting out quoting sapient)
sapient, if you want to start your own blog and let people fantasize about killing other people, knock yourself out.
Without going back, I think the Small Business stats also pointed out that the 47.8% didn’t include people who work for themselves which accounts for 20+ percent. so I was ok with majority.
No, they didn’t point that out, I quoted all there was to that section in my comment. And just to make sure, I went to the census bureau link they provided and downloaded the data. Spreadsheets are a wonderful thing.
Without going back, I think the Small Business stats also pointed out that the 47.8% didn’t include people who work for themselves which accounts for 20+ percent. so I was ok with majority.
No, they didn’t point that out, I quoted all there was to that section in my comment. And just to make sure, I went to the census bureau link they provided and downloaded the data. Spreadsheets are a wonderful thing.
And one more thing, Marty, I appreciated your 4:02 p.m. comment.
And one more thing, Marty, I appreciated your 4:02 p.m. comment.
Second, a huge number of people don’t write, design and architect software. They do things lots of other people do, or could, including the owner. A pretty big challenge is generalizing russell or wj or hsh as the average employee.
This really is nonsense. Not literally, but the implication. It’s true that very few people could do what I (or russell or hsh) do. But that is NOT the same as saying that I could do their jobs. In lots of cases, I absolutely could not — not the training, not the aptitude, etc. (Not even counting not the inclination.)
It is all too common, especially in IT, to think what we do is unique . . . but that what other people do is not. Tain’t so. There are doubtless a few jobs left which pretty much anybody could do, with no significant training required. But they are increasingly rare.
In short, an employer hires people for most of the jobs in his company which involve doing stuff that he cannot do himself. Or at least, not do as well. And that’s before you look at the fact that he hasn’t got time (at least if his business is flourishing) to do everything. He hires people because he needs them. Period.
Second, a huge number of people don’t write, design and architect software. They do things lots of other people do, or could, including the owner. A pretty big challenge is generalizing russell or wj or hsh as the average employee.
This really is nonsense. Not literally, but the implication. It’s true that very few people could do what I (or russell or hsh) do. But that is NOT the same as saying that I could do their jobs. In lots of cases, I absolutely could not — not the training, not the aptitude, etc. (Not even counting not the inclination.)
It is all too common, especially in IT, to think what we do is unique . . . but that what other people do is not. Tain’t so. There are doubtless a few jobs left which pretty much anybody could do, with no significant training required. But they are increasingly rare.
In short, an employer hires people for most of the jobs in his company which involve doing stuff that he cannot do himself. Or at least, not do as well. And that’s before you look at the fact that he hasn’t got time (at least if his business is flourishing) to do everything. He hires people because he needs them. Period.
In short, an employer hires people for most of the jobs in his company which involve doing stuff that he cannot do himself.
Employers also hire people to do things they could do much better themselves. But, as you point out, their time is better spent doing what is necessary for the business to succeed.
In short, an employer hires people for most of the jobs in his company which involve doing stuff that he cannot do himself.
Employers also hire people to do things they could do much better themselves. But, as you point out, their time is better spent doing what is necessary for the business to succeed.
I realize we’re long past this point in the thread, but I’m just catching up and was caught by Marty’s comment:
“Last, ffs does it really matter how long it’s been since that person made the sacrifice to create that business? This argument really irritates me. Someone did and their legacy still belongs to them.”
This is EXACTLY the argument used by defenders of the English nobility and aristocracy to justify their continued existence – and ownership of very large chunks of the kingdom’s wealth – generations after their ancestors were rewarded for coming over with William the Conqueror or providing Charles II with a compliant mistress. It’s our legacy, and it still belongs to us!
Sheesh.
I realize we’re long past this point in the thread, but I’m just catching up and was caught by Marty’s comment:
“Last, ffs does it really matter how long it’s been since that person made the sacrifice to create that business? This argument really irritates me. Someone did and their legacy still belongs to them.”
This is EXACTLY the argument used by defenders of the English nobility and aristocracy to justify their continued existence – and ownership of very large chunks of the kingdom’s wealth – generations after their ancestors were rewarded for coming over with William the Conqueror or providing Charles II with a compliant mistress. It’s our legacy, and it still belongs to us!
Sheesh.
I can walk down almost any street in the business area of any town in the US and walk in business after business where you can meet the job creator.
He hires people because he needs them. Period.
Failure to realize how people getting to places requires a lot of other people to help in that effort is going to kill the US.
OK, probably long post. I have a lot of thoughts about all of this, and I want to try to get them down. I think about this stuff a lot, because I actually do agree with LJ that the way we think about the dynamics of business in this country is going to crush us long term.
First, I find the term “job creator”, as commonly used, to be offensive. No person “creates jobs”. Entrepreneurs can be, and should be, given credit for recognizing opportunity, and for “starting the ball rolling” as it were. But the need for something good or service to be created or provided in the first place is what creates the job.
The reason I find it phrase not merely wrong-headed, but actually offensive, is that it valorizes the entrepreneurial role. It argues that the contribution of the entrepreneur is more essential, and of greater value, than that of any of the other participants in the enterprise. IMO that is false, and a disservice to all of the folks whose work creates the value that is the basis of the success of the enterprise.
The reason I think this is actually harmful, a la LJ’s comment, is because the guy that starts the business is normally a significant, if not the only, owner. And under our way of doing things, the money flows to the owners. Workers deserve only their wage, which is determined by market forces, and they have no enduring stake in the enterprise.
Businesses, among other things, represent great big pots of money. That money represents value that was created by the efforts of a lot of people. But only folks in an ownership position have any claim on it.
Which seems weird to me. And which, I think, contributes to a huge degree to the disparities of income, and *especially* wealth, that are basically a plague on this country.
The reason I like things like ESOPs, even given their issues, is because it distributes some of the *wealth* represented by an enterprise to the folks who created it. Which is a different model than the simple, transactional trade-your-time-for-wages model, and is I think more equitable and creates a better result.
We don’t think of ourselves as poor, because we tend to have a lot of stuff, but a lot of people here have very little wealth. Which puts them in a precarious position, and creates the need for the so-called “safety net”. Which, in turn, everybody who isn’t in the position of needing it, resents paying for.
Make people wealthy. Then you don’t need a welfare state, or at least one of the size that we have. If the idea of granting actual equity ownership just seems utterly de trop, do profit sharing.
Give the people who create the value a stake in the wealth that it generates. It wouldn’t be there without them.
As far as risk, and sacrifice, I’ll briefly say that people who are not the guy that started the business also assume risk, and sacrifice, in the course of doing whatever it is that they do. It just comes in different forms. Ask anyone who has, for example, had a company or two or three sold out from under them.
Finally, I note that in current-day America, once you get beyond mom-and-pops, the idea of building an enduring business, that will create a livelihood for lots of people over a long period of time, has become kind of quaint. The model now is spin up an idea to the point where you can attract some investment capital, get things running to the point where you can show profit (or at least wave your hands around and allude to something profit-ish), and then sell.
The time window for this is usually less than 10 years. What happens to the business, the people, the IP, the customers, the vendors, and anyone else with any imaginable stake in the business, is no longer your problem. Time to buy a great big house and light your cigars with $100 bills like Scrooge McDuck.
Ha ha! I kid. Except, no, I don’t.
And not for nothing, but the above process is killing off the mom-and-pops in lots of places.
So, at this point, kind of a money jungle. It’s not healthy. I’m with LJ, the glorification of the entrepreneurial “start-up” myth is killing us.
Make working people wealthy. Not stupid wealthy, just own a home, send your kids to college, go on vacation now and then, don’t have to eat catfood in your golden years wealthy.
Worried about the long term health of entitlement programs? Make working people wealthy. Problem solved.
Worried about the national debt and fiscal health of the nation? Make working people wealthy. They will pay taxes, problem solved.
Worried about the 1,000 forms of social dysfunction that come from ingrained poverty? Make working people wealthy. Problem solved.
Big country, rich country, country with a lotta money. A lot. That’s us, we’re the big kahuna, the top of the heap. Spread it around. Life gets better.
Don’t make granny eat cat food.
That’s all I got for now. I’m still waiting for my body to figure out that it’s living in the Eastern Time Zone, so I’m gonna try to go back to bed now.
I can walk down almost any street in the business area of any town in the US and walk in business after business where you can meet the job creator.
He hires people because he needs them. Period.
Failure to realize how people getting to places requires a lot of other people to help in that effort is going to kill the US.
OK, probably long post. I have a lot of thoughts about all of this, and I want to try to get them down. I think about this stuff a lot, because I actually do agree with LJ that the way we think about the dynamics of business in this country is going to crush us long term.
First, I find the term “job creator”, as commonly used, to be offensive. No person “creates jobs”. Entrepreneurs can be, and should be, given credit for recognizing opportunity, and for “starting the ball rolling” as it were. But the need for something good or service to be created or provided in the first place is what creates the job.
The reason I find it phrase not merely wrong-headed, but actually offensive, is that it valorizes the entrepreneurial role. It argues that the contribution of the entrepreneur is more essential, and of greater value, than that of any of the other participants in the enterprise. IMO that is false, and a disservice to all of the folks whose work creates the value that is the basis of the success of the enterprise.
The reason I think this is actually harmful, a la LJ’s comment, is because the guy that starts the business is normally a significant, if not the only, owner. And under our way of doing things, the money flows to the owners. Workers deserve only their wage, which is determined by market forces, and they have no enduring stake in the enterprise.
Businesses, among other things, represent great big pots of money. That money represents value that was created by the efforts of a lot of people. But only folks in an ownership position have any claim on it.
Which seems weird to me. And which, I think, contributes to a huge degree to the disparities of income, and *especially* wealth, that are basically a plague on this country.
The reason I like things like ESOPs, even given their issues, is because it distributes some of the *wealth* represented by an enterprise to the folks who created it. Which is a different model than the simple, transactional trade-your-time-for-wages model, and is I think more equitable and creates a better result.
We don’t think of ourselves as poor, because we tend to have a lot of stuff, but a lot of people here have very little wealth. Which puts them in a precarious position, and creates the need for the so-called “safety net”. Which, in turn, everybody who isn’t in the position of needing it, resents paying for.
Make people wealthy. Then you don’t need a welfare state, or at least one of the size that we have. If the idea of granting actual equity ownership just seems utterly de trop, do profit sharing.
Give the people who create the value a stake in the wealth that it generates. It wouldn’t be there without them.
As far as risk, and sacrifice, I’ll briefly say that people who are not the guy that started the business also assume risk, and sacrifice, in the course of doing whatever it is that they do. It just comes in different forms. Ask anyone who has, for example, had a company or two or three sold out from under them.
Finally, I note that in current-day America, once you get beyond mom-and-pops, the idea of building an enduring business, that will create a livelihood for lots of people over a long period of time, has become kind of quaint. The model now is spin up an idea to the point where you can attract some investment capital, get things running to the point where you can show profit (or at least wave your hands around and allude to something profit-ish), and then sell.
The time window for this is usually less than 10 years. What happens to the business, the people, the IP, the customers, the vendors, and anyone else with any imaginable stake in the business, is no longer your problem. Time to buy a great big house and light your cigars with $100 bills like Scrooge McDuck.
Ha ha! I kid. Except, no, I don’t.
And not for nothing, but the above process is killing off the mom-and-pops in lots of places.
So, at this point, kind of a money jungle. It’s not healthy. I’m with LJ, the glorification of the entrepreneurial “start-up” myth is killing us.
Make working people wealthy. Not stupid wealthy, just own a home, send your kids to college, go on vacation now and then, don’t have to eat catfood in your golden years wealthy.
Worried about the long term health of entitlement programs? Make working people wealthy. Problem solved.
Worried about the national debt and fiscal health of the nation? Make working people wealthy. They will pay taxes, problem solved.
Worried about the 1,000 forms of social dysfunction that come from ingrained poverty? Make working people wealthy. Problem solved.
Big country, rich country, country with a lotta money. A lot. That’s us, we’re the big kahuna, the top of the heap. Spread it around. Life gets better.
Don’t make granny eat cat food.
That’s all I got for now. I’m still waiting for my body to figure out that it’s living in the Eastern Time Zone, so I’m gonna try to go back to bed now.
Very short answer. Open a store, buy a franchise, start a pool cleaning business, landscaping, pest control. beauty salon. Small business is Mom and Pops, basically the business models change but if you open a restaurant you work 90 hours a week at least and you worry about the rent going up, crop failures forcing you to raise prices. the new restaurant four blocks away. Your very best server does her shift and goes home. these businesses create millions of jobs.
They aren’t all tech vc startups. And almost all those startups hand out equity like candy. So I don’t see the same issues you do.
ESOPs and equity don’t .make a dent in poverty or social programs.
Very short answer. Open a store, buy a franchise, start a pool cleaning business, landscaping, pest control. beauty salon. Small business is Mom and Pops, basically the business models change but if you open a restaurant you work 90 hours a week at least and you worry about the rent going up, crop failures forcing you to raise prices. the new restaurant four blocks away. Your very best server does her shift and goes home. these businesses create millions of jobs.
They aren’t all tech vc startups. And almost all those startups hand out equity like candy. So I don’t see the same issues you do.
ESOPs and equity don’t .make a dent in poverty or social programs.
Tom Petty is not dead yet. His body apparently is holding on.
definitely gone now.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/tom-petty-dead-at-66-rocker-tom-petty-and-heartbreakers/
Tom Petty is not dead yet. His body apparently is holding on.
definitely gone now.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/tom-petty-dead-at-66-rocker-tom-petty-and-heartbreakers/
Very short answer.
yes, i’m not a freaking idiot and I know that not all businesses are tech startups.
I also recognize that the local restaurant is not going to give their best server a slice of the ownership. not unless he or she wants to bring some of his or her own money to the table, and take on a lot more responsibility than just waiting tables and going home.
and yes I know that these businesses create millions of jobs.
my original comment on the topic was my observation that people in other OECD countries enjoy generally better benefits than Americans do. which they by god do. you replied that that had to come at the cost of jobs being created at all. this was based on your own experience, which if I am not mistaken does not involve a restaurant, or a pool cleaning business.
so the rest of my comments followed in that context. you know, the world of Ron, not the world of Marty’s pool cleaning service.
FWIW, the employee ownership model has given a lot of regular folks a reasonable level of wealth, which would have been much harder to achieve otherwise.
also FWIW, it’s not at all uncommon for mom and pop operations to bring employees in on an ownership basis, often as a way to structure their own retirement or just generally to monetize their own sweat equity. or even just to incentivize workers to stick around and build the business.
let the people who have helped you build your thing buy you out. win/win.
last but not least, I actually have personal experience in the world of little neighborhood mom and pops, so I am familiar with the dynamics. I don’t need you to break it all down for me.
if sharing ownership ain’t your thing, fine. maybe just leave it at that.
Very short answer.
yes, i’m not a freaking idiot and I know that not all businesses are tech startups.
I also recognize that the local restaurant is not going to give their best server a slice of the ownership. not unless he or she wants to bring some of his or her own money to the table, and take on a lot more responsibility than just waiting tables and going home.
and yes I know that these businesses create millions of jobs.
my original comment on the topic was my observation that people in other OECD countries enjoy generally better benefits than Americans do. which they by god do. you replied that that had to come at the cost of jobs being created at all. this was based on your own experience, which if I am not mistaken does not involve a restaurant, or a pool cleaning business.
so the rest of my comments followed in that context. you know, the world of Ron, not the world of Marty’s pool cleaning service.
FWIW, the employee ownership model has given a lot of regular folks a reasonable level of wealth, which would have been much harder to achieve otherwise.
also FWIW, it’s not at all uncommon for mom and pop operations to bring employees in on an ownership basis, often as a way to structure their own retirement or just generally to monetize their own sweat equity. or even just to incentivize workers to stick around and build the business.
let the people who have helped you build your thing buy you out. win/win.
last but not least, I actually have personal experience in the world of little neighborhood mom and pops, so I am familiar with the dynamics. I don’t need you to break it all down for me.
if sharing ownership ain’t your thing, fine. maybe just leave it at that.
“I dont need you to break it down for me”
I don’t need you to explain the dynamics of small tech startups to me, or the value of employees, but I thought we were having a discussion.
So nevermind.
“I dont need you to break it down for me”
I don’t need you to explain the dynamics of small tech startups to me, or the value of employees, but I thought we were having a discussion.
So nevermind.
Even if they don’t do ESOP, there’s nothing to inhibit a small company from doing profit sharing. And it’s a great way to motivate employees to do the extra mile to keep the customers happy and coming back.
Even if they don’t do ESOP, there’s nothing to inhibit a small company from doing profit sharing. And it’s a great way to motivate employees to do the extra mile to keep the customers happy and coming back.
The gig is up.
The gig is up.
I’m focused on lessening the disparity in negotiating power between workers and owners. You can’t create respect without changing the power dynamic.
This. Further, you cannot address in a significant way the lopsided distributional outcomes we observe without adopting public policies that bring the employer-employee relationship back into some kind of equitable balance.
I’m focused on lessening the disparity in negotiating power between workers and owners. You can’t create respect without changing the power dynamic.
This. Further, you cannot address in a significant way the lopsided distributional outcomes we observe without adopting public policies that bring the employer-employee relationship back into some kind of equitable balance.
bring the employer-employee relationship back into some kind of equitable balance
as a comment on bobbpy’s link points out, the employer-employee relationship is broken when employees are ‘contractors’. there’s a convenient legal separation between the employee and the company that the work is being done in the name of. the employer gets to pretend the worker isn’t his responsibility and the employee gets to enjoy the freedom to be let go at any time.
it’s bullshit.
nobody is going to give a crap about J. M. Founder’s precious legacy if they’re actually getting paid by ABC Contracting.
bring the employer-employee relationship back into some kind of equitable balance
as a comment on bobbpy’s link points out, the employer-employee relationship is broken when employees are ‘contractors’. there’s a convenient legal separation between the employee and the company that the work is being done in the name of. the employer gets to pretend the worker isn’t his responsibility and the employee gets to enjoy the freedom to be let go at any time.
it’s bullshit.
nobody is going to give a crap about J. M. Founder’s precious legacy if they’re actually getting paid by ABC Contracting.
Wouldn’t it have been nice to have had the opportunity to elect public officials who would have supported employee profit sharing? Or move further towards universal health care? Or mandated more generous family leave?
Wouldn’t it have been nice to have had the opportunity to elect public officials who would have supported employee profit sharing? Or move further towards universal health care? Or mandated more generous family leave?
Here where I live, with the earthquake, was a pretty resilient place. Even though Japan went thru the lost decade, the property values might have bubbled a bit down here, but they didn’t crash. I’m not an economist, but there were a network of so-called mom and pop stores all over the place. A lot of my students came from those parents. Some of them were going to go back and help, others wanted to do other things.
After the earthquake, everything got restarted pretty quickly. You still have trouble getting a hotel room cause we still have workers coming in to rebuild and they need places to stay. But all the supply chains for those mom&pop stores were broken and they don’t have the deep pockets.
On the other hand, we’ve been overrun by chain stores now. Of course, when the earthquake hit, it was relatively easy to tell the trucks to go down south. Convenience stores were the first thing that reopened after the earthquake.
What has happened is that the local economy has been hollowed out. Sure, some lucky duckies might be able to become a franchisee, though the terms usually dictate that most of their money goes back to the headquarters.
All this happens in a society that is a hell of a lot more egalitarian, at least in appearances, when compared to the US. But we are screwed 7 ways to Sunday. The world Marty rhapsodizes about is not there any more. Start a pool cleaning business? Again, I want to be nice, but it is hard to take this seriously. Telling us that Ron, the perfect employee works 40 hours a week, doing his 8 to 5 and then saying gee, you want to get ahead? 90 hour weeks or nothing!
It’s also interesting how health care enters in the mix (yeah, I am going there) Marty, I think you’ve dismissed everything about how the ACA went down. But if you want people to take chances, you have to make sure that they won’t have their life savings eaten up by a medical emergency. This is why all these US entrepreneurial types tend to be 20-30 somethings thinking they will live forever. That makes that entreprenuer mindset one that doesn’t really give a shit if you get old. What do you mean you have trouble with your eyes/knees/back? slacking geezer!
How employment works in the US is profoundly broken. I don’t think it is much better here or in Europe. But placing all these problems on the backs of the workers rather than looking at the system is profoundly misguided. One reason I tolerate McManus, despite his recent outburst of misanthropy, is that at least he sees that the system is the problem. Of course, he wants to break the wheel. You, on the other hand, can’t imagine that the system can do anything wrong. I think you are a lot more wrong than he is.
Here where I live, with the earthquake, was a pretty resilient place. Even though Japan went thru the lost decade, the property values might have bubbled a bit down here, but they didn’t crash. I’m not an economist, but there were a network of so-called mom and pop stores all over the place. A lot of my students came from those parents. Some of them were going to go back and help, others wanted to do other things.
After the earthquake, everything got restarted pretty quickly. You still have trouble getting a hotel room cause we still have workers coming in to rebuild and they need places to stay. But all the supply chains for those mom&pop stores were broken and they don’t have the deep pockets.
On the other hand, we’ve been overrun by chain stores now. Of course, when the earthquake hit, it was relatively easy to tell the trucks to go down south. Convenience stores were the first thing that reopened after the earthquake.
What has happened is that the local economy has been hollowed out. Sure, some lucky duckies might be able to become a franchisee, though the terms usually dictate that most of their money goes back to the headquarters.
All this happens in a society that is a hell of a lot more egalitarian, at least in appearances, when compared to the US. But we are screwed 7 ways to Sunday. The world Marty rhapsodizes about is not there any more. Start a pool cleaning business? Again, I want to be nice, but it is hard to take this seriously. Telling us that Ron, the perfect employee works 40 hours a week, doing his 8 to 5 and then saying gee, you want to get ahead? 90 hour weeks or nothing!
It’s also interesting how health care enters in the mix (yeah, I am going there) Marty, I think you’ve dismissed everything about how the ACA went down. But if you want people to take chances, you have to make sure that they won’t have their life savings eaten up by a medical emergency. This is why all these US entrepreneurial types tend to be 20-30 somethings thinking they will live forever. That makes that entreprenuer mindset one that doesn’t really give a shit if you get old. What do you mean you have trouble with your eyes/knees/back? slacking geezer!
How employment works in the US is profoundly broken. I don’t think it is much better here or in Europe. But placing all these problems on the backs of the workers rather than looking at the system is profoundly misguided. One reason I tolerate McManus, despite his recent outburst of misanthropy, is that at least he sees that the system is the problem. Of course, he wants to break the wheel. You, on the other hand, can’t imagine that the system can do anything wrong. I think you are a lot more wrong than he is.
Perhaps it is worth discussing HOW we get to the ideal we are envisioning. Yes, just writing a legal mandate is an option — bearing in mind how challenging it can be to cover everything, avoid loopholes, etc. But might there be alternatives?
For example, creating incentives for companies to behave as desired. Does that avoid some of the loophole issues? Might not it be easier to sell to the Congress?
Or might it be possible to have some companies demonstrate better results by behaving better. Sort of like the way that wages improved because Henry Ford decided to pay his workers enough to afford his products.
Perhaps it is worth discussing HOW we get to the ideal we are envisioning. Yes, just writing a legal mandate is an option — bearing in mind how challenging it can be to cover everything, avoid loopholes, etc. But might there be alternatives?
For example, creating incentives for companies to behave as desired. Does that avoid some of the loophole issues? Might not it be easier to sell to the Congress?
Or might it be possible to have some companies demonstrate better results by behaving better. Sort of like the way that wages improved because Henry Ford decided to pay his workers enough to afford his products.
How would guaranteed minimum income and universal healthcare affect the power employers have over employees?
How would guaranteed minimum income and universal healthcare affect the power employers have over employees?
For example, creating incentives for companies to behave as desired. Does that avoid some of the loophole issues? Might not it be easier to sell to the Congress?
Sorry to repeat.
Nothing can be “sold” to this Congress. The problem isn’t so much the “system” (unless you mean gerrymandering, the electoral college, Russian interference in the election, etc.). It’s that too many American voters have their heads in a very unpleasant place.
For example, creating incentives for companies to behave as desired. Does that avoid some of the loophole issues? Might not it be easier to sell to the Congress?
Sorry to repeat.
Nothing can be “sold” to this Congress. The problem isn’t so much the “system” (unless you mean gerrymandering, the electoral college, Russian interference in the election, etc.). It’s that too many American voters have their heads in a very unpleasant place.
How would guaranteed minimum income and universal healthcare affect the power employers have over employees?
Employees could “just say no” and still survive?
How would guaranteed minimum income and universal healthcare affect the power employers have over employees?
Employees could “just say no” and still survive?
Sapient, I doubt anyone thought for an instant that this Congress might act on this. But the question remains regarding convincing any Congress on a course of action.
Sapient, I doubt anyone thought for an instant that this Congress might act on this. But the question remains regarding convincing any Congress on a course of action.
I’m with LJ, the glorification of the entrepreneurial “start-up” myth is killing us.
When I was in college, the glamour career path led through med school.
When I worked in college admissions a decade later, the most popular path was computer science, to the extent that that department threatened to gobble up the whole school.
When my son was in college a couple more decades on, it was finance.
Now it’s “start-ups.” It’s like there’s not even any content to the dream anymore except to aim for that buyout moment.
I’m with LJ, the glorification of the entrepreneurial “start-up” myth is killing us.
When I was in college, the glamour career path led through med school.
When I worked in college admissions a decade later, the most popular path was computer science, to the extent that that department threatened to gobble up the whole school.
When my son was in college a couple more decades on, it was finance.
Now it’s “start-ups.” It’s like there’s not even any content to the dream anymore except to aim for that buyout moment.
Employees could “just say no” and still survive?
Yep. Currently we have public policies that are tilted toward creating and maintaining a “weak” labor market, i.e., that creates slack (aka unemployment)and thus puts pressure on wages.
These policies include:
1. Federal government austerity when it comes to spending (deficits!!!!).
2. Trade policies (“free” trade; strong dollar).
3. Federal Reserve policies tilted toward inflation control vs. lowering unemployment (despite what the Federal Reserve Act says).
4. Policies that inhibit and/or act to restrict worker collective bargaining power (“right to work” laws, etc.)
These are not the magical workings of the so-called “free” market. They are consciously adopted public policies that tilt the playing field.
Employees could “just say no” and still survive?
Yep. Currently we have public policies that are tilted toward creating and maintaining a “weak” labor market, i.e., that creates slack (aka unemployment)and thus puts pressure on wages.
These policies include:
1. Federal government austerity when it comes to spending (deficits!!!!).
2. Trade policies (“free” trade; strong dollar).
3. Federal Reserve policies tilted toward inflation control vs. lowering unemployment (despite what the Federal Reserve Act says).
4. Policies that inhibit and/or act to restrict worker collective bargaining power (“right to work” laws, etc.)
These are not the magical workings of the so-called “free” market. They are consciously adopted public policies that tilt the playing field.
As a momentary break from political disagreement/discussion, I just want to note the following about Tom Petty, which I learned watching the documentary about the making of Damn the Torpedoes. When he and the rest of the band decided to strike out from Gainesville for LA, as being the place where they were most likely to make it, in order to get Benmont Tench to come along he had to convince Tench’s father, a judge. If I remember correctly, Benmont already had a place in Law School to go to, so Tom Petty had to convince a judge that his son stood more chance of success in life coming to LA with him, an unknown rocker, than going to law school. He succeeded, and no doubt when looking back Judge Tench must have decided that (at least financially) Petty was right. But can you imagine the powers of persuasion, and force of personality, he must have had in order to succeed? I thought it was a very interesting story, and an insight into Tom Petty, even as a young man.
As a momentary break from political disagreement/discussion, I just want to note the following about Tom Petty, which I learned watching the documentary about the making of Damn the Torpedoes. When he and the rest of the band decided to strike out from Gainesville for LA, as being the place where they were most likely to make it, in order to get Benmont Tench to come along he had to convince Tench’s father, a judge. If I remember correctly, Benmont already had a place in Law School to go to, so Tom Petty had to convince a judge that his son stood more chance of success in life coming to LA with him, an unknown rocker, than going to law school. He succeeded, and no doubt when looking back Judge Tench must have decided that (at least financially) Petty was right. But can you imagine the powers of persuasion, and force of personality, he must have had in order to succeed? I thought it was a very interesting story, and an insight into Tom Petty, even as a young man.
Tench is one of those guys who have played on dozens and dozens of records by big-name musicians – everyone from The Ramones to Neil Diamond.
http://www.allmusic.com/artist/benmont-tench-mn0000789652/credits
Tench is one of those guys who have played on dozens and dozens of records by big-name musicians – everyone from The Ramones to Neil Diamond.
http://www.allmusic.com/artist/benmont-tench-mn0000789652/credits
But can you imagine the powers of persuasion, and force of personality, he must have had…
Since it is an open thread… My great-uncle spent most of his career working for the national office of the YMCA helping individual Ys organize fund raising and line up the root sponsor*. One time I remarked that he must be quite persuasive. He responded by telling the story of a friend of his in college who made an appointment to speak with a wealthy Long Island philanthropist and at the meeting, convinced the philanthropist to pay all the expenses for him (the friend) to go to graduate school for his PhD.
* According to my uncle, a capital construction fund raising drive will meet its goal only if there’s a single sponsor who will put up 50%, two more sponsors who will combine for the next 25%, and then little donations can meet the rest.
But can you imagine the powers of persuasion, and force of personality, he must have had…
Since it is an open thread… My great-uncle spent most of his career working for the national office of the YMCA helping individual Ys organize fund raising and line up the root sponsor*. One time I remarked that he must be quite persuasive. He responded by telling the story of a friend of his in college who made an appointment to speak with a wealthy Long Island philanthropist and at the meeting, convinced the philanthropist to pay all the expenses for him (the friend) to go to graduate school for his PhD.
* According to my uncle, a capital construction fund raising drive will meet its goal only if there’s a single sponsor who will put up 50%, two more sponsors who will combine for the next 25%, and then little donations can meet the rest.
Right. You can see why Petty was determined to have him…
Right. You can see why Petty was determined to have him…
One reason I tolerate McManus, despite his recent outburst of misanthropy, is that at least he sees that the system is the problem. Of course, he wants to break the wheel
What more can I ask? Came around to post an Adorno quote which others have liked. I say misanthropy, but I tend to follow the via negativa or apophasis, IYKWIM.
“The value of a thought is valued by its distance from the continuity of the familiar. It is objectively devalued as this distance is reduced … For the intellectual, inviolable isolation is now the only way of showing some measure of solidarity. All collaboration, all the human worth of social mixing and participation, merely masks a tacit acceptance of inhumanity.” Adorno
That we bear with the unbearable is not always admirable or kind.
PS: Last night, even though Une femme est une femme was just a vehicle and worship of his girlfriend, well ok much more, Anna Karina was at her best and Brialy, Belmondo, and early 60s Paris weren’t bad either. I even found the Aznavour song tolerable.
One reason I tolerate McManus, despite his recent outburst of misanthropy, is that at least he sees that the system is the problem. Of course, he wants to break the wheel
What more can I ask? Came around to post an Adorno quote which others have liked. I say misanthropy, but I tend to follow the via negativa or apophasis, IYKWIM.
“The value of a thought is valued by its distance from the continuity of the familiar. It is objectively devalued as this distance is reduced … For the intellectual, inviolable isolation is now the only way of showing some measure of solidarity. All collaboration, all the human worth of social mixing and participation, merely masks a tacit acceptance of inhumanity.” Adorno
That we bear with the unbearable is not always admirable or kind.
PS: Last night, even though Une femme est une femme was just a vehicle and worship of his girlfriend, well ok much more, Anna Karina was at her best and Brialy, Belmondo, and early 60s Paris weren’t bad either. I even found the Aznavour song tolerable.
IYKWIM
I know what you mean now, having looked it up.
Yes, it’s interesting why being accused of being comparable to apologists for lynching and FGM, or of harbouring aspirations for Gatsby lifestyles, is not more offensive (although it is quite offensive, at least in the short term). As I’ve mentioned before, it reminds me of the Count’s rhetoric, which is to say, something which should not be taken absolutely literally. Also, full of interesting ideas, when they are comprehensible. And, although some may think this crazy, bob mcmanus reminds me sometimes of sapient: you are enablers of (supply the deplorable category) if you don’t condemn and deny in identical terms to the ones I use/or wish used.
We are a strange crew indeed. I hope the Count is not gone for too long.
IYKWIM
I know what you mean now, having looked it up.
Yes, it’s interesting why being accused of being comparable to apologists for lynching and FGM, or of harbouring aspirations for Gatsby lifestyles, is not more offensive (although it is quite offensive, at least in the short term). As I’ve mentioned before, it reminds me of the Count’s rhetoric, which is to say, something which should not be taken absolutely literally. Also, full of interesting ideas, when they are comprehensible. And, although some may think this crazy, bob mcmanus reminds me sometimes of sapient: you are enablers of (supply the deplorable category) if you don’t condemn and deny in identical terms to the ones I use/or wish used.
We are a strange crew indeed. I hope the Count is not gone for too long.
And, although some may think this crazy
Yes. You’re still offended that I called people out for repeating talking points that Putin’s troll army repeated on social media, aimed at the “left” to encourage their disaffection with the democratic party establishment. Just keep consoling yourself that it was all harmless. It’s probably difficult to prove how much damage it did, so you’ll no doubt sleep peacefully.
And, although some may think this crazy
Yes. You’re still offended that I called people out for repeating talking points that Putin’s troll army repeated on social media, aimed at the “left” to encourage their disaffection with the democratic party establishment. Just keep consoling yourself that it was all harmless. It’s probably difficult to prove how much damage it did, so you’ll no doubt sleep peacefully.
although some may think this crazy
I think you’re mixing up Tom Petty with The Cars.
although some may think this crazy
I think you’re mixing up Tom Petty with The Cars.
sapient: QED.
Snarki, I am too ignorant about music to get your joke, but in the words of my old friend, I’m sure it was a jolly good one!
sapient: QED.
Snarki, I am too ignorant about music to get your joke, but in the words of my old friend, I’m sure it was a jolly good one!
At least bob mcmanus admits to misanthropy
IYKWIM
bob mcmanus, interesting that you cite Adorno. I’ve always thought that his philosophical output was shaped by the Holocaust, and the fact that that whole enterprise moved forward in a very logical way, step by step, points to the weakness in our conception of the value of logic. But rather than aim for “inviolable isolation”, which then has us unconcerned about our neighbors (and in our modern world, neighbors now means people on the other side of the world), you need to reconstruct the world and breakdown that isolation. Adorno wants us to turn our eye to our very thought processes and shows that they are often inhumane. In so far as we can rise above that, we try to understand that they are and move on from there.
At least bob mcmanus admits to misanthropy
IYKWIM
bob mcmanus, interesting that you cite Adorno. I’ve always thought that his philosophical output was shaped by the Holocaust, and the fact that that whole enterprise moved forward in a very logical way, step by step, points to the weakness in our conception of the value of logic. But rather than aim for “inviolable isolation”, which then has us unconcerned about our neighbors (and in our modern world, neighbors now means people on the other side of the world), you need to reconstruct the world and breakdown that isolation. Adorno wants us to turn our eye to our very thought processes and shows that they are often inhumane. In so far as we can rise above that, we try to understand that they are and move on from there.
The fine restaurant or very nice vacation spot is only available to…a person…precisely because it is not available to everyone. Not even accounting for income differences needed to be able to pay for the exclusivity. This exclusiveness and casual cruelty is I think part of the appeal, as much for someone in the high five figures as for the billionaire with gold toilets. We like what our money buys, what our labour time buys.
Turner Classics + Complete Criterion is available online now for $11.99 a month. That is affordable for most people. For the most part what I like is available to everyone, and that is a large part of its appeal for me. I grant the time it takes to appreciate some things can be large, but I choose not to sweat for the money and then be driven to conspicuous consumption.
But I have never, and will never, taken a boat down the Rhine. If everybody could, then nobody could. I think it would shame me.
Libraries are dying.
The fine restaurant or very nice vacation spot is only available to…a person…precisely because it is not available to everyone. Not even accounting for income differences needed to be able to pay for the exclusivity. This exclusiveness and casual cruelty is I think part of the appeal, as much for someone in the high five figures as for the billionaire with gold toilets. We like what our money buys, what our labour time buys.
Turner Classics + Complete Criterion is available online now for $11.99 a month. That is affordable for most people. For the most part what I like is available to everyone, and that is a large part of its appeal for me. I grant the time it takes to appreciate some things can be large, but I choose not to sweat for the money and then be driven to conspicuous consumption.
But I have never, and will never, taken a boat down the Rhine. If everybody could, then nobody could. I think it would shame me.
Libraries are dying.
hi bob…it’s nice to know clifton webb movies are available to all (well ‘most’) for a mere $11.99/mo. casually cruel? eye…meet beholder.
🙂
hi bob…it’s nice to know clifton webb movies are available to all (well ‘most’) for a mere $11.99/mo. casually cruel? eye…meet beholder.
🙂
casually cruel? eye…meet beholder
bobbyp, you’re confused. Righteousness is never cruel. By definition.
casually cruel? eye…meet beholder
bobbyp, you’re confused. Righteousness is never cruel. By definition.
This exclusiveness and casual cruelty is I think part of the appeal…. We like what our money buys, what our labour time buys.
….
But I have never, and will never, taken a boat down the Rhine. If everybody could, then nobody could. I think it would shame me.
….
Libraries are dying.
So the problem is that libraries aren’t exclusive? Or you don’t use them because it would shame you? I’m (obviously) not following your train of thought here.
This exclusiveness and casual cruelty is I think part of the appeal…. We like what our money buys, what our labour time buys.
….
But I have never, and will never, taken a boat down the Rhine. If everybody could, then nobody could. I think it would shame me.
….
Libraries are dying.
So the problem is that libraries aren’t exclusive? Or you don’t use them because it would shame you? I’m (obviously) not following your train of thought here.
Is this the same Bob that claimed to have dined in a 3 star restaurant in Nice?
That would be “Michelin Guide” 3 star, yes? If so, I’ve heard that the difference between 2 star and 3 star is about $200/person, while the food is about the same.
I wouldn’t know; I’ve only dined in a ONE star restaurant, ONE time, just to see what it was like; and it was very good, but not so great that I was tempted to try a 2 star.
And no, don’t take a boat down the Rhine. Drive. And the Mosel is better IMO. I like the Mosel wine better too; just slightly drier than semi-sweet, but with a nice fruit overtone. Probably says more about my (lack of) taste, than the wine, so YMMV. Can’t get much of it in the US, for some reason.
Is this the same Bob that claimed to have dined in a 3 star restaurant in Nice?
That would be “Michelin Guide” 3 star, yes? If so, I’ve heard that the difference between 2 star and 3 star is about $200/person, while the food is about the same.
I wouldn’t know; I’ve only dined in a ONE star restaurant, ONE time, just to see what it was like; and it was very good, but not so great that I was tempted to try a 2 star.
And no, don’t take a boat down the Rhine. Drive. And the Mosel is better IMO. I like the Mosel wine better too; just slightly drier than semi-sweet, but with a nice fruit overtone. Probably says more about my (lack of) taste, than the wine, so YMMV. Can’t get much of it in the US, for some reason.
Back up thread Bob McManus said
said something that has been nagging at me:
Somehow, and especially considering our discussion of how corporations don’t pay their workers any more than they must, I’m having trouble with the concept of a “delayed bribe”.
I can see the rationale for paying a politician a bribe. You spend money to get something of value. But after that politician has left office, when he is unlikely to ever hold office again? That’s implying gratitude expressed with money after the fact. By an organization which notoriously doesn’t pay anything to anybody (except owners/shareholders) if it can avoid it.
Why would they do that?
Back up thread Bob McManus said
said something that has been nagging at me:
Somehow, and especially considering our discussion of how corporations don’t pay their workers any more than they must, I’m having trouble with the concept of a “delayed bribe”.
I can see the rationale for paying a politician a bribe. You spend money to get something of value. But after that politician has left office, when he is unlikely to ever hold office again? That’s implying gratitude expressed with money after the fact. By an organization which notoriously doesn’t pay anything to anybody (except owners/shareholders) if it can avoid it.
Why would they do that?
it’s all part of the conspiracy
it’s all part of the conspiracy
in shocking news, the WH is full of actual criminals!
https://www.propublica.org/article/ivanka-donald-trump-jr-close-to-being-charged-felony-fraud
but, yes, Obama making money because he’s widely admired and respected is a problem.
in shocking news, the WH is full of actual criminals!
https://www.propublica.org/article/ivanka-donald-trump-jr-close-to-being-charged-felony-fraud
but, yes, Obama making money because he’s widely admired and respected is a problem.
“Why would they do that?”
Because it’s bad business to become known as a company that doesn’t pay it’s debts.
“Why would they do that?”
Because it’s bad business to become known as a company that doesn’t pay it’s debts.
Why would they do that?
Because, if they don’t, the next guy won’t go along to get along. What they’re “paying” a past president is peanuts compared to what they got from his compliance and can expect to get from the compliance of the next one.
(And why do they pay top execs ridiculous amounts of money, even when they suck?)
I’m not necessarily buying the theory, but it’s not hard to figure out how it works – in theory.
Why would they do that?
Because, if they don’t, the next guy won’t go along to get along. What they’re “paying” a past president is peanuts compared to what they got from his compliance and can expect to get from the compliance of the next one.
(And why do they pay top execs ridiculous amounts of money, even when they suck?)
I’m not necessarily buying the theory, but it’s not hard to figure out how it works – in theory.
Because it’s bad business to become known as a company that doesn’t pay it’s debts.
Riiiiight. After all, we’ve all seen how badly that has hurt Trump.
Because it’s bad business to become known as a company that doesn’t pay it’s debts.
Riiiiight. After all, we’ve all seen how badly that has hurt Trump.
Well, it dies matter who you stiff. But then, maybe it has hurt him, who knows.
It is unlikely he stiffed a firmer President, only Bill could tell you.
Well, it dies matter who you stiff. But then, maybe it has hurt him, who knows.
It is unlikely he stiffed a firmer President, only Bill could tell you.
Yeah, stiffing some guy who paints murals or hangs sheetrock isn’t exactly the same thing, unless you’re operating at their same level in the economic pecking order.
Yeah, stiffing some guy who paints murals or hangs sheetrock isn’t exactly the same thing, unless you’re operating at their same level in the economic pecking order.
bob mcmanus,
I’ve been thinking about your 08.09. It seems to me that:
1. Almost any experience other than mass-media is by definition only available to a few, as opposed to the many. (The parks you walk your dogs in are realistically only available to Dallas residents, and probably to those living within a certain mile radius. Many cities don’t even have parks. You keep dogs. Dog-keeping and feeding is not affordable for everyone.) Why does this amount to “casual cruelty”? Are you saying that the masses resent this limited availability, and therefore consumption of it by anybody constitutes mental cruelty towards them?
2. Since almost all of us here are agreed that current levels of inequality are undesirable, immoral or disgusting, or a combination of all three, then the discussion could be about how to end this. You advocate for violent revolution, some here advocate for HRC type solutions, and there are no doubt many other possible suggestions. In the meantime, how does refraining from consuming experiences that are of only limited availability (restaurants, holidays etc) help to end inequality? If one enjoys the experiences, isn’t refraining from them just virtue-signalling? And if one doesn’t enjoy these experiences, refraining from them seems morally neutral. Is it your position that those who can afford these (to them) enjoyable experiences should refrain from them, and instead donate the money to alleviate the suffering of the masses? I thought philanthropy was irrelevant in your world view. And if philanthropy would make almost no difference, why refrain from the experiences, except as a symbolic, and as I say virtue-signalling, gesture?
3. The demise of libraries in the UK, and from what you say the US too, is an unalloyed evil. I assume that justifications include the availability of all human knowledge on the internet. In my opinion, this should be fought at every possible level, but I cannot see the connection between the closing of libraries and your previous points, except as another example of how unfair the world is.
All of which is to say this: is it your contention that the world and the system are currently so unfair and unequal that enjoyment by comfortably-off people of anything that poor people cannot afford is cruel and unacceptable? In which case, my response is that this is a very extreme view (surprise surprise), adherence to which would not advance the cause of human happiness one bit. Your choice to limit yourself in this way is your own business, but your condemnation of those of us who don’t is unreasonable and in fact ridiculous.
If you are interested enough in my points to answer this, I beg you not to quote political or economic philosophers or historians I have not read, and whose terminology I would find incomprehensible. Surely any argument worth making is worth making in plain, understandable language?
bob mcmanus,
I’ve been thinking about your 08.09. It seems to me that:
1. Almost any experience other than mass-media is by definition only available to a few, as opposed to the many. (The parks you walk your dogs in are realistically only available to Dallas residents, and probably to those living within a certain mile radius. Many cities don’t even have parks. You keep dogs. Dog-keeping and feeding is not affordable for everyone.) Why does this amount to “casual cruelty”? Are you saying that the masses resent this limited availability, and therefore consumption of it by anybody constitutes mental cruelty towards them?
2. Since almost all of us here are agreed that current levels of inequality are undesirable, immoral or disgusting, or a combination of all three, then the discussion could be about how to end this. You advocate for violent revolution, some here advocate for HRC type solutions, and there are no doubt many other possible suggestions. In the meantime, how does refraining from consuming experiences that are of only limited availability (restaurants, holidays etc) help to end inequality? If one enjoys the experiences, isn’t refraining from them just virtue-signalling? And if one doesn’t enjoy these experiences, refraining from them seems morally neutral. Is it your position that those who can afford these (to them) enjoyable experiences should refrain from them, and instead donate the money to alleviate the suffering of the masses? I thought philanthropy was irrelevant in your world view. And if philanthropy would make almost no difference, why refrain from the experiences, except as a symbolic, and as I say virtue-signalling, gesture?
3. The demise of libraries in the UK, and from what you say the US too, is an unalloyed evil. I assume that justifications include the availability of all human knowledge on the internet. In my opinion, this should be fought at every possible level, but I cannot see the connection between the closing of libraries and your previous points, except as another example of how unfair the world is.
All of which is to say this: is it your contention that the world and the system are currently so unfair and unequal that enjoyment by comfortably-off people of anything that poor people cannot afford is cruel and unacceptable? In which case, my response is that this is a very extreme view (surprise surprise), adherence to which would not advance the cause of human happiness one bit. Your choice to limit yourself in this way is your own business, but your condemnation of those of us who don’t is unreasonable and in fact ridiculous.
If you are interested enough in my points to answer this, I beg you not to quote political or economic philosophers or historians I have not read, and whose terminology I would find incomprehensible. Surely any argument worth making is worth making in plain, understandable language?
GftNC, perhaps I can help with the following:
In the works of Burroughs, a predominant concept is the concept of pretextual narrativity. D’Erlette[1] states that we have to choose between predialectic capitalist theory and the postcultural paradigm of context. In a sense, the premise of Marxist capitalism implies that language is part of the stasis of culture, given that truth is equal to culture.
Does that explain it? ;^)
GftNC, perhaps I can help with the following:
In the works of Burroughs, a predominant concept is the concept of pretextual narrativity. D’Erlette[1] states that we have to choose between predialectic capitalist theory and the postcultural paradigm of context. In a sense, the premise of Marxist capitalism implies that language is part of the stasis of culture, given that truth is equal to culture.
Does that explain it? ;^)
hsh: thanks, all clear now!
hsh: thanks, all clear now!
In the works of Ellington, it don’t mean a thing if it ain’t got that swing.
In the works of Ellington, it don’t mean a thing if it ain’t got that swing.
ibid
ibid
GftNC, great comment. I admire your patience and your faithfulness to the rules you outlined in the other thread.
I do mildly wonder why the conspicuous display of intellectual attainments that most people don’t have isn’t as “casually cruel” as the conspicuous consumption of material goods that lots of people don’t have.
But I don’t actually care a whole lot either way.
GftNC, great comment. I admire your patience and your faithfulness to the rules you outlined in the other thread.
I do mildly wonder why the conspicuous display of intellectual attainments that most people don’t have isn’t as “casually cruel” as the conspicuous consumption of material goods that lots of people don’t have.
But I don’t actually care a whole lot either way.
on equal enjoyment…
if there’s one fig and fifty hungry people, should we cut the fig into fifty pieces so that each person gets an equal amount of fig? each person gets 5 calories worth of fig. who does that benefit?
not that i give a fig about philosophy.
on equal enjoyment…
if there’s one fig and fifty hungry people, should we cut the fig into fifty pieces so that each person gets an equal amount of fig? each person gets 5 calories worth of fig. who does that benefit?
not that i give a fig about philosophy.
Send the fig to the Governor of Texas:
Steve Silberman
“Trump denies Puerto Rico request to let hurricane victims use food stamps for prepared hot meals: report http://hill.cm/CJwsSnz pic.twitter.com/ulasVC6tkK”
This is pure evil. And the fact that Trump did grant waivers for Texas and Florida suggests that it’s also racist. https://twitter.com/thehill/status/915302776057548800 …
“suggests”
liberals elide the Truth.
Send the fig to the Governor of Texas:
Steve Silberman
“Trump denies Puerto Rico request to let hurricane victims use food stamps for prepared hot meals: report http://hill.cm/CJwsSnz pic.twitter.com/ulasVC6tkK”
This is pure evil. And the fact that Trump did grant waivers for Texas and Florida suggests that it’s also racist. https://twitter.com/thehill/status/915302776057548800 …
“suggests”
liberals elide the Truth.
I actually appreciate McManus chiming in with the critical theory stuff, I just have a really hard time making sense of it.
For which, I do not blame McManus. Most likely, I simply punched the last of my advanced social theory tickets a long long time ago.
These days just keeping up with tech stuff so I can continue to be employable in some relevant way uses up about all the brain cells I have to spare.
Still in the belly of the beast, am I. Here at chez russell we’re paying the rent every day, and to be honest we’re glad to be able to still keep on doing it.
We all have a sell-by date, and I can sorta-kinda see mine from here. I just wanna get the mortgage paid off before they put me out to pasture.
Every once in a while, though, something in his comments gets through to me, so all in all, I’m cool with it.
I actually appreciate McManus chiming in with the critical theory stuff, I just have a really hard time making sense of it.
For which, I do not blame McManus. Most likely, I simply punched the last of my advanced social theory tickets a long long time ago.
These days just keeping up with tech stuff so I can continue to be employable in some relevant way uses up about all the brain cells I have to spare.
Still in the belly of the beast, am I. Here at chez russell we’re paying the rent every day, and to be honest we’re glad to be able to still keep on doing it.
We all have a sell-by date, and I can sorta-kinda see mine from here. I just wanna get the mortgage paid off before they put me out to pasture.
Every once in a while, though, something in his comments gets through to me, so all in all, I’m cool with it.
Here’s a thought for those dispensing ideological theories. If you truly understand the theory you are pushing, you ought to be able to explain it without incomprehensible jargon. The concepts may be hard to follow. But you should at least be able to explain them in words that the average high school senior could follow.
And frankly, doing so will vastly increase the chances that your ideas will get a receptive hearing. Personally (and I am confident I am not alone on this), when the jargon gets heavy, as it has in a couple of entries here lately, my eyes glaze over and I stop reading and tune out. This is not a formula for convincing anyone. Just sayin’.
Here’s a thought for those dispensing ideological theories. If you truly understand the theory you are pushing, you ought to be able to explain it without incomprehensible jargon. The concepts may be hard to follow. But you should at least be able to explain them in words that the average high school senior could follow.
And frankly, doing so will vastly increase the chances that your ideas will get a receptive hearing. Personally (and I am confident I am not alone on this), when the jargon gets heavy, as it has in a couple of entries here lately, my eyes glaze over and I stop reading and tune out. This is not a formula for convincing anyone. Just sayin’.
I actually appreciate McManus chiming in with the critical theory stuff, I just have a really hard time making sense of it.
and
Every once in a while, though, something in his comments gets through to me, so all in all, I’m cool with it.
Me, too. I post that Postmodernism Generator stuff in good fun. I’m more poking fun at how the stuff looks to my not-hip-to-it eyes than I am at Bob and what he posts.
Don’t get me wrong, some of it does strike me as a sort of mental-masturbation that’s unlikely to result in any measurable, practical progress. But not all of it.
And, really, what the hell do I know, anyway? This kind of obscure, esoteric stuff percolates over time and gets applied in unpredictable ways. It’s like pure math, or even the weird sh1t you see models wearing at fashion shows. Years later some aspect of it becomes a method of, say, tracking the spread of diseases, or can be found on the rack at Walmart.
I actually appreciate McManus chiming in with the critical theory stuff, I just have a really hard time making sense of it.
and
Every once in a while, though, something in his comments gets through to me, so all in all, I’m cool with it.
Me, too. I post that Postmodernism Generator stuff in good fun. I’m more poking fun at how the stuff looks to my not-hip-to-it eyes than I am at Bob and what he posts.
Don’t get me wrong, some of it does strike me as a sort of mental-masturbation that’s unlikely to result in any measurable, practical progress. But not all of it.
And, really, what the hell do I know, anyway? This kind of obscure, esoteric stuff percolates over time and gets applied in unpredictable ways. It’s like pure math, or even the weird sh1t you see models wearing at fashion shows. Years later some aspect of it becomes a method of, say, tracking the spread of diseases, or can be found on the rack at Walmart.
Apropos of nothing…
oddly enough, speaking of critical theory, one of the things i’m trying to wrap my head around right now is how to inculcate critical thinking as a software engineering practice. in a way that makes it sufficiently easy to understand and apply.
I work with lots of really sharp young engineers, but surprisingly enough not many of them know how to problem solve at a basic, pragmatic level. They have really impressive repertoires of technical knowledge, best practice patterns, and coding skills. But they don’t seem to teach the basic skill of breaking down real-world problems in our fine universities.
People call it “thinking outside the box”, but really it’s just thinking. It’s teachable, but it’s tricky to teach, other than via direct one-to-one mentoring.
Software development is really prone to fads, which complicates things. Pattern languages, Agile methods, architecture runways, SOLID principles. It makes me itch.
What is the problem you’re trying to solve.
What are its inherent structure and dynamics.
What value is created by solving it.
How will you know when you’ve solved it.
How will you know when you’ve solved it *well enough*.
What are the hard parts going to be, what are the easy parts going to be.
What parts do know enough about to say we understand it, what parts don’t we know enough about.
How can we find out the stuff we don’t know.
Where are the land mines, the risky bits that will blow it all up.
What do we do about those.
Really basic questions. A good carpenter or plumber is better at this stuff than 90% of software engineers. And the problems that 90% of software engineers have to deal with in their daily work are not significantly more difficult than those faced by good carpenters or plumbers.
In my opinion.
Everybody just wants to write code right away. It’s a really expensive way to explore a problem space.
Want to insure a bright future for the good old USA? Teach people to think.
Apropos of nothing…
oddly enough, speaking of critical theory, one of the things i’m trying to wrap my head around right now is how to inculcate critical thinking as a software engineering practice. in a way that makes it sufficiently easy to understand and apply.
I work with lots of really sharp young engineers, but surprisingly enough not many of them know how to problem solve at a basic, pragmatic level. They have really impressive repertoires of technical knowledge, best practice patterns, and coding skills. But they don’t seem to teach the basic skill of breaking down real-world problems in our fine universities.
People call it “thinking outside the box”, but really it’s just thinking. It’s teachable, but it’s tricky to teach, other than via direct one-to-one mentoring.
Software development is really prone to fads, which complicates things. Pattern languages, Agile methods, architecture runways, SOLID principles. It makes me itch.
What is the problem you’re trying to solve.
What are its inherent structure and dynamics.
What value is created by solving it.
How will you know when you’ve solved it.
How will you know when you’ve solved it *well enough*.
What are the hard parts going to be, what are the easy parts going to be.
What parts do know enough about to say we understand it, what parts don’t we know enough about.
How can we find out the stuff we don’t know.
Where are the land mines, the risky bits that will blow it all up.
What do we do about those.
Really basic questions. A good carpenter or plumber is better at this stuff than 90% of software engineers. And the problems that 90% of software engineers have to deal with in their daily work are not significantly more difficult than those faced by good carpenters or plumbers.
In my opinion.
Everybody just wants to write code right away. It’s a really expensive way to explore a problem space.
Want to insure a bright future for the good old USA? Teach people to think.
Regarding McManus, I love that he is here.
As to the jargon, a friend a long time ago referred to the jargon used by the social sciences as the “social science blues”.
As a result, when I read or hear such like, I translate it into a sort of blues couplet, wherein the second line repeats the first, such as:
“She done tol’ me I gots ta choose between predialectic capitalist theory and the postcultural paradigm of context.
I said, she tol’me, baby, you gots to CHOOSE between predialectic capitalist theory and the postcultural paradigm of context.”
Then, to finish off the verse, I add:
“Alls I know is, baby, love has gone away from me
Jus tell me, lord, which I gotta choose to get yo love back to me”
Education-speak:
“We must teach the whole child”
What does that mean? I don’t know.
Sing it, instead:
“You gotta teach the whole damn chil’.
I said, you got to teach that whole damn chil.
Then one day befo too long that whole chil’
you taught right, will tell you what it means.”
Regarding McManus, I love that he is here.
As to the jargon, a friend a long time ago referred to the jargon used by the social sciences as the “social science blues”.
As a result, when I read or hear such like, I translate it into a sort of blues couplet, wherein the second line repeats the first, such as:
“She done tol’ me I gots ta choose between predialectic capitalist theory and the postcultural paradigm of context.
I said, she tol’me, baby, you gots to CHOOSE between predialectic capitalist theory and the postcultural paradigm of context.”
Then, to finish off the verse, I add:
“Alls I know is, baby, love has gone away from me
Jus tell me, lord, which I gotta choose to get yo love back to me”
Education-speak:
“We must teach the whole child”
What does that mean? I don’t know.
Sing it, instead:
“You gotta teach the whole damn chil’.
I said, you got to teach that whole damn chil.
Then one day befo too long that whole chil’
you taught right, will tell you what it means.”
cleek: if there’s one fig and fifty hungry people …
Joking cleek may be, but THIS is the level at which I can grok “concepts” — the level of specific examples. If somebody wants me to understand a theory in physics or economics or sociology or “management”, I need to map the concept on to at least one particular case before I really get it.
Or, what wj said.
Anyway, it’s that mode of thinking (or what passes for thinking in my head) that leads me to ask questions like:
If alternative A is likely to deliver half a fig to each of 50 hungry people, while alternative B is likely to deliver 30 whole figs to each of 30 people and a quarter fig to each of the other 20, which alternative would you vote for?
Note that A means a Gross Fig Product of 25 figs while B means a GFP of 35 figs. Which is “better” in your ideology is what defines your ideology, AFAIAC.
–TP
cleek: if there’s one fig and fifty hungry people …
Joking cleek may be, but THIS is the level at which I can grok “concepts” — the level of specific examples. If somebody wants me to understand a theory in physics or economics or sociology or “management”, I need to map the concept on to at least one particular case before I really get it.
Or, what wj said.
Anyway, it’s that mode of thinking (or what passes for thinking in my head) that leads me to ask questions like:
If alternative A is likely to deliver half a fig to each of 50 hungry people, while alternative B is likely to deliver 30 whole figs to each of 30 people and a quarter fig to each of the other 20, which alternative would you vote for?
Note that A means a Gross Fig Product of 25 figs while B means a GFP of 35 figs. Which is “better” in your ideology is what defines your ideology, AFAIAC.
–TP
Since this is an open thread, let us all take a moment to give thanks that the fox will be guarding the hen house: “IRS awards multimillion-dollar fraud-prevention contract to Equifax”. Somehow no surprise that it was a no-bid contract….
Since this is an open thread, let us all take a moment to give thanks that the fox will be guarding the hen house: “IRS awards multimillion-dollar fraud-prevention contract to Equifax”. Somehow no surprise that it was a no-bid contract….
if there’s one fig and fifty hungry people …
grow more figs
if there’s one fig and fifty hungry people …
grow more figs
I hope it’s clear that I too value bob mcmanus’s contributions, especially when I can understand them, but even when I can’t I trust and believe that some others of you can.
I do mildly wonder why the conspicuous display of intellectual attainments that most people don’t have isn’t as “casually cruel” as the conspicuous consumption of material goods that lots of people don’t have
JanieM, to tell you the truth, and this is by no means necessarily aimed at bob mcmanus, I believe that very often that kind of conspicuous display (in the same way as the material kind) is actually a manifestation of a sense of inadequacy or inferiority, which has to be constantly kept at bay by showing how superior one is to one’s interlocutors/other people. As I say, I do not aim this at bob mcmanus, whose psychology I do not pretend to understand.
I hope it’s clear that I too value bob mcmanus’s contributions, especially when I can understand them, but even when I can’t I trust and believe that some others of you can.
I do mildly wonder why the conspicuous display of intellectual attainments that most people don’t have isn’t as “casually cruel” as the conspicuous consumption of material goods that lots of people don’t have
JanieM, to tell you the truth, and this is by no means necessarily aimed at bob mcmanus, I believe that very often that kind of conspicuous display (in the same way as the material kind) is actually a manifestation of a sense of inadequacy or inferiority, which has to be constantly kept at bay by showing how superior one is to one’s interlocutors/other people. As I say, I do not aim this at bob mcmanus, whose psychology I do not pretend to understand.
Lisa Romero
Lisa Romero
but surprisingly enough not many of them know how to problem solve at a basic, pragmatic level.
i’m not surprised.
the po-mo stuff here reminds me a lot of software development these days. it never gets simpler, it never gets closer to what CPUs actually do. we just keep adding layer after layer of abstraction.
my company is all about REST, these days. so we all write black boxes in Java which talk to everyone else’s Java black boxes via a web server (FFS! it feels like using FedEx for inter-office mail). and some of those black boxes write Lua which talks to SAS code which uses C to write SQL to talk to equally-complex DBMSs, or Hadoop, or who knows. and it’s all running in a docker image on a VM somewhere.
and kids have to learn all that cruft before they can even write an enterprise-level Hello World (not that there’s a console anywhere to write “Hello World” out to). who has time to work on pragmatic problem solving skills when it takes full-time effort to learn 40 years of paradigms-of-the-week?
but surprisingly enough not many of them know how to problem solve at a basic, pragmatic level.
i’m not surprised.
the po-mo stuff here reminds me a lot of software development these days. it never gets simpler, it never gets closer to what CPUs actually do. we just keep adding layer after layer of abstraction.
my company is all about REST, these days. so we all write black boxes in Java which talk to everyone else’s Java black boxes via a web server (FFS! it feels like using FedEx for inter-office mail). and some of those black boxes write Lua which talks to SAS code which uses C to write SQL to talk to equally-complex DBMSs, or Hadoop, or who knows. and it’s all running in a docker image on a VM somewhere.
and kids have to learn all that cruft before they can even write an enterprise-level Hello World (not that there’s a console anywhere to write “Hello World” out to). who has time to work on pragmatic problem solving skills when it takes full-time effort to learn 40 years of paradigms-of-the-week?
Posted by: cleek_with_a_fake_beard | October 04, 2017 at 01:18 PM reminds me of how our financial systems have come to work. The physical world is obscured by the multitudinous financial arrangements that are necessary for anything to get done on any large-ish scale.
What russell’s talking about isn’t just an IT thing, either. (Not that I think he was implying that it was.) I don’t know how many times I get into a meeting with people who want Something To Be Done. When you ask them what problem, specifically, they are trying to solve, they look at you like you’re wearing a fruit salad on your head.
Posted by: cleek_with_a_fake_beard | October 04, 2017 at 01:18 PM reminds me of how our financial systems have come to work. The physical world is obscured by the multitudinous financial arrangements that are necessary for anything to get done on any large-ish scale.
What russell’s talking about isn’t just an IT thing, either. (Not that I think he was implying that it was.) I don’t know how many times I get into a meeting with people who want Something To Be Done. When you ask them what problem, specifically, they are trying to solve, they look at you like you’re wearing a fruit salad on your head.
What russell’s talking about isn’t just an IT thing, either.
See also public policy.
What russell’s talking about isn’t just an IT thing, either.
See also public policy.
Software development is really prone to fads
How true. How sadly, sadly true. And it has been true for over 40 years to my personal knowledge. A new fad approach would come out. We would all be required to learn it. It would turn out not to be the cure-all management had been sold. We would go back to just getting stuff done. And 6 months or a year later, there would be a new fad.
But they don’t seem to teach the basic skill of breaking down real-world problems in our fine universities.
I used to have a simple approach to finding (never mind teaching) problem-solving skills. I would wander around at lunch, and see who was doing the crossword puzzle. The exact skill was irrelevant, but it indicated a puzzle-solving mindset which was critical to the kind of performance analysis that I needed.
Today, I suppose, I would go with Sudoku. But the concept is the same. The only thing that’s different is that people would tend to be doing the puzzles on their phone or something, making it harder to spot.
I do think that the universities are quite able to teach this skill. After all, engineering schools have been doing it forever. It’s just that the idea of doing so hasn’t been rolled over into the IT departments.
Software development is really prone to fads
How true. How sadly, sadly true. And it has been true for over 40 years to my personal knowledge. A new fad approach would come out. We would all be required to learn it. It would turn out not to be the cure-all management had been sold. We would go back to just getting stuff done. And 6 months or a year later, there would be a new fad.
But they don’t seem to teach the basic skill of breaking down real-world problems in our fine universities.
I used to have a simple approach to finding (never mind teaching) problem-solving skills. I would wander around at lunch, and see who was doing the crossword puzzle. The exact skill was irrelevant, but it indicated a puzzle-solving mindset which was critical to the kind of performance analysis that I needed.
Today, I suppose, I would go with Sudoku. But the concept is the same. The only thing that’s different is that people would tend to be doing the puzzles on their phone or something, making it harder to spot.
I do think that the universities are quite able to teach this skill. After all, engineering schools have been doing it forever. It’s just that the idea of doing so hasn’t been rolled over into the IT departments.
The physical world is obscured by the multitudinous financial arrangements that are necessary for anything to get done on any large-ish scale.
Or even on any small scale. I can’t even count how many passwords I have now for online vendors, banks, retirement accounts, health care-related accounts, employee acounts, etc. And most of them require some kind of second confirming action besides a password (security questions, code sent via text or email or phone).
Or just try making a phone call to a large organization…I’m getting reminders from three directions for doctors appointments now, one of which is a bot phone message that says “Press X” to confirm, but of course if you’re listening to it as voice mail, pressing X does no good. And I found out at the doc’s office that the people who make live phone calls don’t even know about all the other avenues.
The physical world is obscured by the multitudinous financial arrangements that are necessary for anything to get done on any large-ish scale.
Or even on any small scale. I can’t even count how many passwords I have now for online vendors, banks, retirement accounts, health care-related accounts, employee acounts, etc. And most of them require some kind of second confirming action besides a password (security questions, code sent via text or email or phone).
Or just try making a phone call to a large organization…I’m getting reminders from three directions for doctors appointments now, one of which is a bot phone message that says “Press X” to confirm, but of course if you’re listening to it as voice mail, pressing X does no good. And I found out at the doc’s office that the people who make live phone calls don’t even know about all the other avenues.
Speaking of fads, I just got scheduled for a “stay interview” with my immediate supervisor, whom I speak with all the time about whatever it is I feel as though I need to speak with him about, and who speaks with me on the same basis. I guess now we’re doing it “officially.”
Speaking of fads, I just got scheduled for a “stay interview” with my immediate supervisor, whom I speak with all the time about whatever it is I feel as though I need to speak with him about, and who speaks with me on the same basis. I guess now we’re doing it “officially.”
russell, In the late eighties I became a manager in a large company, managing lots of new coders. I crafted a course as part of onboarding them based on my freshman college logic course.
Best thing we ever did. Wonder if that course even exists anymore.
russell, In the late eighties I became a manager in a large company, managing lots of new coders. I crafted a course as part of onboarding them based on my freshman college logic course.
Best thing we ever did. Wonder if that course even exists anymore.
I was checking out at Staples the other day, and what was once at most a three-step, few moments, non-automated thing …. ring up (yeah, ok, that’s automated) item, exchange paper money for item, receive receipt and item in bag, has now turned into a more than too many minutes “process” wherein I have to supply membership or phone number to the credit card swiper and answer via push button various other marketing-oriented and data gathering questions (I’m doing THEIR marketing department work for THEM without being paid), and then an amazingly long time for the receipt, me holding the bag in midair for deposit, as digital signals careen through atmosphere, apparently the long way around, and the cashier holding her hand in mid-air to grab the receipt out of the machine and deposit it in the bag, without either of us making eye contact because both of us just might break into screaming.
I do my best to be unproductive and time-inefficient in my current life, but in more fun ways than that.
America is efficient like stubbing your toe is a miracle.
I was checking out at Staples the other day, and what was once at most a three-step, few moments, non-automated thing …. ring up (yeah, ok, that’s automated) item, exchange paper money for item, receive receipt and item in bag, has now turned into a more than too many minutes “process” wherein I have to supply membership or phone number to the credit card swiper and answer via push button various other marketing-oriented and data gathering questions (I’m doing THEIR marketing department work for THEM without being paid), and then an amazingly long time for the receipt, me holding the bag in midair for deposit, as digital signals careen through atmosphere, apparently the long way around, and the cashier holding her hand in mid-air to grab the receipt out of the machine and deposit it in the bag, without either of us making eye contact because both of us just might break into screaming.
I do my best to be unproductive and time-inefficient in my current life, but in more fun ways than that.
America is efficient like stubbing your toe is a miracle.
I don’t know how many times I get into a meeting with people who want Something To Be Done. When you ask them what problem, specifically, they are trying to solve, they look at you like you’re wearing a fruit salad on your head.
I have a different angle on this. Where I work, people sometimes sit inside closed rooms and dream up projects and deadlines without bothering to get time estimates from the people who will actually be doing the work, and might be expected to know something about it.
Then, when the projects inevitably fall behind, they talk about “bottlenecks” and try to move tasks around to avoid the bottlenecks.
On one occasion when I became a bottleneck, I mdae up a maxim for the managers: “Work takes time.” Maybe they need some classes in basic…physics?
I don’t know how many times I get into a meeting with people who want Something To Be Done. When you ask them what problem, specifically, they are trying to solve, they look at you like you’re wearing a fruit salad on your head.
I have a different angle on this. Where I work, people sometimes sit inside closed rooms and dream up projects and deadlines without bothering to get time estimates from the people who will actually be doing the work, and might be expected to know something about it.
Then, when the projects inevitably fall behind, they talk about “bottlenecks” and try to move tasks around to avoid the bottlenecks.
On one occasion when I became a bottleneck, I mdae up a maxim for the managers: “Work takes time.” Maybe they need some classes in basic…physics?
People call it “thinking outside the box”, but really it’s just thinking. It’s teachable, but it’s tricky to teach, other than via direct one-to-one mentoring.
I can’t say how much I completely agree with the need for this. I’ve seen reports of studies over the years showing how teaching students (high school, and in some cases elementary school) variously chess and philosophy has long term benefits for, among other things, critical thinking. I agree with Marty too, teaching logic (although not too much symbolic logic) would I think achieve the same results. In any case, it is the very definition of a transferrable skill.
People call it “thinking outside the box”, but really it’s just thinking. It’s teachable, but it’s tricky to teach, other than via direct one-to-one mentoring.
I can’t say how much I completely agree with the need for this. I’ve seen reports of studies over the years showing how teaching students (high school, and in some cases elementary school) variously chess and philosophy has long term benefits for, among other things, critical thinking. I agree with Marty too, teaching logic (although not too much symbolic logic) would I think achieve the same results. In any case, it is the very definition of a transferrable skill.
Denise Salmon Burditus
Denise Salmon Burditus
Well shit, I guess I’ll get the afternoon coffee, even though it makes pee every 15 minutes. This may be fun for a troll.
Shorter:Pascal was right about leaving the room, I try not to. Also, Buddha was right about desiring/grasping being the cause of root of all suffering and evil.
I have also tried not to desire or possess, and while not a Trappist by any means, I have never had much that wasn’t in my body, and despaired when falling into accumulation and attachment.
I beg you not to quote political or economic philosophers or historians I have not read, and whose terminology I would find incomprehensible. Surely any argument worth making is worth making in plain, understandable language?
Longer, and it will be long. For a start:
From Frederrick Lordon, Willing Slaves of Capital:Spinoza and Marx on Desire
Note 1:I take this shit seriously.
Note 2: Notice the names, allusions, and references. “Master desire” may be out of Lacan, Zizek uses it a lot. This is the desire(s) we accept to be part of capitalism or any other society. We choose it.
To be continued ad nauseam
Well shit, I guess I’ll get the afternoon coffee, even though it makes pee every 15 minutes. This may be fun for a troll.
Shorter:Pascal was right about leaving the room, I try not to. Also, Buddha was right about desiring/grasping being the cause of root of all suffering and evil.
I have also tried not to desire or possess, and while not a Trappist by any means, I have never had much that wasn’t in my body, and despaired when falling into accumulation and attachment.
I beg you not to quote political or economic philosophers or historians I have not read, and whose terminology I would find incomprehensible. Surely any argument worth making is worth making in plain, understandable language?
Longer, and it will be long. For a start:
From Frederrick Lordon, Willing Slaves of Capital:Spinoza and Marx on Desire
Note 1:I take this shit seriously.
Note 2: Notice the names, allusions, and references. “Master desire” may be out of Lacan, Zizek uses it a lot. This is the desire(s) we accept to be part of capitalism or any other society. We choose it.
To be continued ad nauseam
Count, your story about Staples made me laugh and (not really, but symbolically) cry. I walked out of Staples a year or so ago when the cashier’s sidekick asked me for the sixth time (literally, and after I had let my irritation show after the fifth time) whether I would join their frequent buyer program, or whatever the F it is. I haven’t been back.
Last time I bought something at LL Bean they insisted on having my name. Since I was using a gift card and was caught off guard, I gave it to them. But tomorrow I’m passing through Freeport and I’m going to try the experiment of buying something with cash and seeing if they will even sell me something for cash without demanding my name (the excuse for which is their guarantee, which has gotten unmanageable for them since people do abuse it).
Grrr.
Count, your story about Staples made me laugh and (not really, but symbolically) cry. I walked out of Staples a year or so ago when the cashier’s sidekick asked me for the sixth time (literally, and after I had let my irritation show after the fifth time) whether I would join their frequent buyer program, or whatever the F it is. I haven’t been back.
Last time I bought something at LL Bean they insisted on having my name. Since I was using a gift card and was caught off guard, I gave it to them. But tomorrow I’m passing through Freeport and I’m going to try the experiment of buying something with cash and seeing if they will even sell me something for cash without demanding my name (the excuse for which is their guarantee, which has gotten unmanageable for them since people do abuse it).
Grrr.
Rhonda LeRocque
Rhonda LeRocque
P.S. when I walked out of Staples I left $83 worth of printer ink unpurchased. Fnck’em.
If I were better at keeping my wits about me, I would have asked to see the manager (assuming the idiot who kept badgering me about their program wasn’t the manager in the first place) to tell them that okay, they train (force) their cashiers to ask people to join the program, but they should also train their cashiers in the common courtesy of stopping when they get no for an answer.
P.S. when I walked out of Staples I left $83 worth of printer ink unpurchased. Fnck’em.
If I were better at keeping my wits about me, I would have asked to see the manager (assuming the idiot who kept badgering me about their program wasn’t the manager in the first place) to tell them that okay, they train (force) their cashiers to ask people to join the program, but they should also train their cashiers in the common courtesy of stopping when they get no for an answer.
I font know Count, sounds like an incredibly efficient way to collect mineable marketing data. It is just named incorrectly, “checkout”.
I font know Count, sounds like an incredibly efficient way to collect mineable marketing data. It is just named incorrectly, “checkout”.
me: and seeing if they will even sell me something for cash without demanding my name
Clarification: I expect them to ask for my name, what I’m not sure of is what they’ll do when I refuse to give it, when I’m paying with cash.
me: and seeing if they will even sell me something for cash without demanding my name
Clarification: I expect them to ask for my name, what I’m not sure of is what they’ll do when I refuse to give it, when I’m paying with cash.
I crafted a course as part of onboarding them based on my freshman college logic course.
Well done. I’ll bet you were (are) a good manager.
Enable people to do their best. That’s the gig.
Last time I bought something at LL Bean they insisted on having my name.
“Rufus T Firefly”
Rhonda LeRocque
Tewsbury MA home girl.
Call the names. Those folks deserve to be alive. If they can’t be alive, they at least deserve to be remembered.
I crafted a course as part of onboarding them based on my freshman college logic course.
Well done. I’ll bet you were (are) a good manager.
Enable people to do their best. That’s the gig.
Last time I bought something at LL Bean they insisted on having my name.
“Rufus T Firefly”
Rhonda LeRocque
Tewsbury MA home girl.
Call the names. Those folks deserve to be alive. If they can’t be alive, they at least deserve to be remembered.
Note on note 2
I don’t understand blog commenting style, but I am as deeply suspicious of it as I am of analytic philosophy and liberal capitalism, and think the style is connected to them.
What I read and encounter 8+ hours a day is filled with dropped names, allusions, endnotes, references, and shared jargon/technical language. The “ordinary language” of blog comments strikes as similar to and connected with “common sense and what’s natural.” Like “entrepreneurs deserve more”
Personally I don’t consider myself capable of an original thought or expression, and assume without hesitation that anything I could say has been said much better by someone else, likely many times.
To say:”All suffering comes from grasping.” strikes me as simple theft. It is my responsibility to find those sources, and credit them.
An argument from pure logic and simple reason or personal experience or anecdote about acquaintances seems to me to ahistorical and asocial/individualistic, IOW, anti-communist and liberal capitalist.
Knowledge and wisdom is collective, social, and historical and this should be acknowledged and proclaimed as much as possible.
So I quote and allude not from showing off or to be obscure but to humbly point toward my mentors and superiors, who are legion if not universal. And to proclaim the collective, not personal, local, or tribal, intelligence.
I find what I read as frustrating as how you find my writing, because every page of a Lordon points me to five books I will probably never read, but need to read to fully understand the material*. They are not hostile or intimidating but loving and sharing. To write against their style would be arrogant, ungrateful, and show that I haven’t learned a damn thing.
Wisdom is collective
*I know nothing, I understand nothing, I am nothing, not even a self, all the work has been for nought…except:
Wisdom is collective
(PS:I read 100 times, no 1000 times as many comments as I write. Everybody is a piece of the collective)
Note on note 2
I don’t understand blog commenting style, but I am as deeply suspicious of it as I am of analytic philosophy and liberal capitalism, and think the style is connected to them.
What I read and encounter 8+ hours a day is filled with dropped names, allusions, endnotes, references, and shared jargon/technical language. The “ordinary language” of blog comments strikes as similar to and connected with “common sense and what’s natural.” Like “entrepreneurs deserve more”
Personally I don’t consider myself capable of an original thought or expression, and assume without hesitation that anything I could say has been said much better by someone else, likely many times.
To say:”All suffering comes from grasping.” strikes me as simple theft. It is my responsibility to find those sources, and credit them.
An argument from pure logic and simple reason or personal experience or anecdote about acquaintances seems to me to ahistorical and asocial/individualistic, IOW, anti-communist and liberal capitalist.
Knowledge and wisdom is collective, social, and historical and this should be acknowledged and proclaimed as much as possible.
So I quote and allude not from showing off or to be obscure but to humbly point toward my mentors and superiors, who are legion if not universal. And to proclaim the collective, not personal, local, or tribal, intelligence.
I find what I read as frustrating as how you find my writing, because every page of a Lordon points me to five books I will probably never read, but need to read to fully understand the material*. They are not hostile or intimidating but loving and sharing. To write against their style would be arrogant, ungrateful, and show that I haven’t learned a damn thing.
Wisdom is collective
*I know nothing, I understand nothing, I am nothing, not even a self, all the work has been for nought…except:
Wisdom is collective
(PS:I read 100 times, no 1000 times as many comments as I write. Everybody is a piece of the collective)
Clarification: I expect them to ask for my name, what I’m not sure of is what they’ll do when I refuse to give it, when I’m paying with cash.
I’ve refused to give my name and/or phone number many times at various retailers. I’m reasonably sure they’ll take your money.
My wife, when asked for her phone number, would respond, “It’s unlisted.” As much as you may have been taken off-guard when asked for personal information, that does the same to them. They look confused say something like, “Oh… Okay.”
Clarification: I expect them to ask for my name, what I’m not sure of is what they’ll do when I refuse to give it, when I’m paying with cash.
I’ve refused to give my name and/or phone number many times at various retailers. I’m reasonably sure they’ll take your money.
My wife, when asked for her phone number, would respond, “It’s unlisted.” As much as you may have been taken off-guard when asked for personal information, that does the same to them. They look confused say something like, “Oh… Okay.”
“It’s unlisted” is a good reply. I will try to remember to use it next time, although sometimes I’m in the mood to be more directly confrontational. Not hostile, but just framing myself as not cooperating in the game.
I find it fascinating that everything (“everything”) is linked to phone numbers now, and people just stand in line with a crowd within hearing distance and recite their phone numbers to clerks.
Or I should say associates.
And our phones are an open channel for every scam artist on the planet anyhow, so who am I kidding?
“It’s unlisted” is a good reply. I will try to remember to use it next time, although sometimes I’m in the mood to be more directly confrontational. Not hostile, but just framing myself as not cooperating in the game.
I find it fascinating that everything (“everything”) is linked to phone numbers now, and people just stand in line with a crowd within hearing distance and recite their phone numbers to clerks.
Or I should say associates.
And our phones are an open channel for every scam artist on the planet anyhow, so who am I kidding?
All of which is to say this: is it your contention that the world and the system are currently so unfair and unequal that enjoyment by comfortably-off people of anything that poor people cannot afford is cruel and unacceptable?
Yes. Property is theft, which includes intellectual property (what is in your head) and frankly personal relationships. The Communist Manifesto called for the end of marriage, in 1848.
In which case, my response is that this is a very extreme view (surprise surprise), adherence to which would not advance the cause of human happiness one bit.
Good communists are not Utopians. Our goal is not a perfect world, but the melioration of human suffering, both physical and psychological. And if possible, the prevention of catastrophes and holocausts.
For a few the fulfillment of their intense personal desires, like a gold toilet or trip down the Rhine, is the source of their happiness. But those desires are shared by the many and unattainable for them, causing untold psychological misery, since they under our system blame themselves.
On my better days, it’s Mao pajamas for everyone in the dorm and creches for the children, who are the most horrifyingly private property. I’m hardcore.
Sorry, in a world of limited natural resources and human competition, your personal happiness and fulfillment of your accumulative desires are probably my enemy and target. Socialism/communism is not going to pay for your hundred shoes or collection of rifles.
All of which is to say this: is it your contention that the world and the system are currently so unfair and unequal that enjoyment by comfortably-off people of anything that poor people cannot afford is cruel and unacceptable?
Yes. Property is theft, which includes intellectual property (what is in your head) and frankly personal relationships. The Communist Manifesto called for the end of marriage, in 1848.
In which case, my response is that this is a very extreme view (surprise surprise), adherence to which would not advance the cause of human happiness one bit.
Good communists are not Utopians. Our goal is not a perfect world, but the melioration of human suffering, both physical and psychological. And if possible, the prevention of catastrophes and holocausts.
For a few the fulfillment of their intense personal desires, like a gold toilet or trip down the Rhine, is the source of their happiness. But those desires are shared by the many and unattainable for them, causing untold psychological misery, since they under our system blame themselves.
On my better days, it’s Mao pajamas for everyone in the dorm and creches for the children, who are the most horrifyingly private property. I’m hardcore.
Sorry, in a world of limited natural resources and human competition, your personal happiness and fulfillment of your accumulative desires are probably my enemy and target. Socialism/communism is not going to pay for your hundred shoes or collection of rifles.
Victor Link
Victor Link
Finally, of course, we seek the common/commons, where those hundred shoes and a thousand more are available in the rental shop, temporarily available to anyone. But they would not be private property and would need to be returned like a library book.
What is the psychological and social difference between a library book and an owned copy on you homeshelf? Why do we desire the latter at all?
Profit and possession.
Finally, of course, we seek the common/commons, where those hundred shoes and a thousand more are available in the rental shop, temporarily available to anyone. But they would not be private property and would need to be returned like a library book.
What is the psychological and social difference between a library book and an owned copy on you homeshelf? Why do we desire the latter at all?
Profit and possession.
Charleston Hartfield
Charleston Hartfield
I do mildly wonder why the conspicuous display of intellectual attainments that most people don’t have isn’t as “casually cruel” as the conspicuous consumption of material goods that lots of people don’t have.
A very fair question, and one I do think about, and in fact alluded to above. I surrendered money and accomplishment for time at an early age, because what I wanted required time.
What I didn’t acquire was the power that a “normal life” and credentials provide, and the model of the swami under the tree I hope is not so intimidating. But certainly there are histories of esoteric knowledge being used for power. They usually fall to a sword.
And as a communist, I listen to everyone with their own local knowledges and different voices, and try to help them attain their collective desires rather than my own, as much as I find morally permissable.
Enough.
I do mildly wonder why the conspicuous display of intellectual attainments that most people don’t have isn’t as “casually cruel” as the conspicuous consumption of material goods that lots of people don’t have.
A very fair question, and one I do think about, and in fact alluded to above. I surrendered money and accomplishment for time at an early age, because what I wanted required time.
What I didn’t acquire was the power that a “normal life” and credentials provide, and the model of the swami under the tree I hope is not so intimidating. But certainly there are histories of esoteric knowledge being used for power. They usually fall to a sword.
And as a communist, I listen to everyone with their own local knowledges and different voices, and try to help them attain their collective desires rather than my own, as much as I find morally permissable.
Enough.
What is the psychological and social difference between a library book and an owned copy on you homeshelf?
if i want to access the contents of a book, at any time for any reason, having it on my shelf is far more convenient than having to schedule a visit to town library. and since my town has ~3,000 people, the library probably doesn’t have the book i want.
where those hundred shoes and a thousand more are available in the rental shop,
no, i will not wear rented shoes.
What is the psychological and social difference between a library book and an owned copy on you homeshelf?
if i want to access the contents of a book, at any time for any reason, having it on my shelf is far more convenient than having to schedule a visit to town library. and since my town has ~3,000 people, the library probably doesn’t have the book i want.
where those hundred shoes and a thousand more are available in the rental shop,
no, i will not wear rented shoes.
Chris Hazencomb
Chris Hazencomb
Thank you. Your 02.52 and 02.59 are at least perfectly clear, and make the answers I was preparing to your 02.09 and 02.34 superfluous. I would just add (without, I hope, too much asperity) that my incomprehension of technical terms does not extend to ones such as “intellectual property”.
Thank you. Your 02.52 and 02.59 are at least perfectly clear, and make the answers I was preparing to your 02.09 and 02.34 superfluous. I would just add (without, I hope, too much asperity) that my incomprehension of technical terms does not extend to ones such as “intellectual property”.
What is the psychological and social difference between a library book and an owned copy on you homeshelf? Why do we desire the latter at all?
Tell that to my wife. Too. Many. Books.
I’d actually enjoy owning, or even simply possessing long-term, as little as possible. But that’s not out of any sort of political philosophy. I’m just kind of a minimalist by nature. I don’t know why.
Is there a gene for latent communism?
What is the psychological and social difference between a library book and an owned copy on you homeshelf? Why do we desire the latter at all?
Tell that to my wife. Too. Many. Books.
I’d actually enjoy owning, or even simply possessing long-term, as little as possible. But that’s not out of any sort of political philosophy. I’m just kind of a minimalist by nature. I don’t know why.
Is there a gene for latent communism?
Shifting gears, I wonder what people here think of this:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/opinions/i-used-to-think-gun-control-was-the-answer-my-research-told-me-otherwise/2017/10/03/d33edca6-a851-11e7-92d1-58c702d2d975_story.html
I’m still rubbing my chin over it.
Shifting gears, I wonder what people here think of this:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/opinions/i-used-to-think-gun-control-was-the-answer-my-research-told-me-otherwise/2017/10/03/d33edca6-a851-11e7-92d1-58c702d2d975_story.html
I’m still rubbing my chin over it.
For myself(conceptually), the distance away from true contentment has always been measured by the number of keys on my key ring. Each key represents an obligation or risk.
It is odd sometimes for me to take the capitalist and conservative views. I drive a twelve year old car, I have no mortgage, my most valuable possession monetarily is a 1980ish model guitar and a stamp collection where collecting was abandoned in 1972, and and 6 55″ tv’s. And no debt. But very little savings left.
Left to be alone I would be fine with what I have, but there are 14 keys on my key ring, not counting the tbree I simply can’t remember what they are for.
2 House, 2 apt(400 sq ft), car, 2 office keys, 3 mailbox keys, 2 for clients offices and a couple for kids houses.
I could have easily decided to take the road bob has, but collected keys instead.
For myself(conceptually), the distance away from true contentment has always been measured by the number of keys on my key ring. Each key represents an obligation or risk.
It is odd sometimes for me to take the capitalist and conservative views. I drive a twelve year old car, I have no mortgage, my most valuable possession monetarily is a 1980ish model guitar and a stamp collection where collecting was abandoned in 1972, and and 6 55″ tv’s. And no debt. But very little savings left.
Left to be alone I would be fine with what I have, but there are 14 keys on my key ring, not counting the tbree I simply can’t remember what they are for.
2 House, 2 apt(400 sq ft), car, 2 office keys, 3 mailbox keys, 2 for clients offices and a couple for kids houses.
I could have easily decided to take the road bob has, but collected keys instead.
I wonder what people here think of this
In general I’m fine with it. I think all of the suggestions she makes are great, and I’m all in favor of evidence-based policy.
I have two points of disagreement:
I think limits on magazine size are useful. There are kids from the Newtown school alive today because the shooter had to reload, and the Gabrielle Giffords shooter was prevented from doing further harm because folks in the crowd were able to overpower him when he stopped to reload.
Maybe in ideal conditions expert shooters can swap magazines in a nano-second. In real life, shooters are often clumsy.
Pick a reasonable number. 8 rounds, 10, 12. That should be enough. Yes, there are already magazines out there that hold more. Don’t make any more.
The second thing is bump stocks. If someone can tell me the legitimate reason for making a semi-automatic fire like an automatic, feel free to bring it. To me, it’s a complete and total public safety hazard.
Get rid of them.
I would also be open to restricting personal ownership of double-digit numbers of firearms to people who are willing to register as collectors. The dude brought 23 firearms – 10 suitcases full – to the hotel with him, and that wasn’t his complete collection.
Yes, there are people who are, legitimately, collectors, and who own in some cases hundreds of firearms. Fine with me. Let the rest of us know you got ’em.
There are people out there – lots of people – who stockpile personal arsenals against the day that they are going to have to shoot (a) cops or (b) their neighbors.
Those folks are nuts. Nothing against the law about being nuts, I just want to know if you’re nuts, and you have fifty AR-15’s in the basement.
In any case, the bottom line is that Americans are violent people. We apparently find it entertaining.
Absolutely agreed that some kind of community outreach to isolated individuals, especially men and especially older men, would reduce gun suicides, which are the largest number of gun deaths.
And absolutely agreed that more effective local policing and outreach for gang activity would reduce homicides among younger men.
And absolutely agreed that women under threat of violence should have access to shelter and police protection.
Americans participate in a vivid violent fantasy life. Sports, movies, computer games, you name it.
We’re violent.
I wonder what people here think of this
In general I’m fine with it. I think all of the suggestions she makes are great, and I’m all in favor of evidence-based policy.
I have two points of disagreement:
I think limits on magazine size are useful. There are kids from the Newtown school alive today because the shooter had to reload, and the Gabrielle Giffords shooter was prevented from doing further harm because folks in the crowd were able to overpower him when he stopped to reload.
Maybe in ideal conditions expert shooters can swap magazines in a nano-second. In real life, shooters are often clumsy.
Pick a reasonable number. 8 rounds, 10, 12. That should be enough. Yes, there are already magazines out there that hold more. Don’t make any more.
The second thing is bump stocks. If someone can tell me the legitimate reason for making a semi-automatic fire like an automatic, feel free to bring it. To me, it’s a complete and total public safety hazard.
Get rid of them.
I would also be open to restricting personal ownership of double-digit numbers of firearms to people who are willing to register as collectors. The dude brought 23 firearms – 10 suitcases full – to the hotel with him, and that wasn’t his complete collection.
Yes, there are people who are, legitimately, collectors, and who own in some cases hundreds of firearms. Fine with me. Let the rest of us know you got ’em.
There are people out there – lots of people – who stockpile personal arsenals against the day that they are going to have to shoot (a) cops or (b) their neighbors.
Those folks are nuts. Nothing against the law about being nuts, I just want to know if you’re nuts, and you have fifty AR-15’s in the basement.
In any case, the bottom line is that Americans are violent people. We apparently find it entertaining.
Absolutely agreed that some kind of community outreach to isolated individuals, especially men and especially older men, would reduce gun suicides, which are the largest number of gun deaths.
And absolutely agreed that more effective local policing and outreach for gang activity would reduce homicides among younger men.
And absolutely agreed that women under threat of violence should have access to shelter and police protection.
Americans participate in a vivid violent fantasy life. Sports, movies, computer games, you name it.
We’re violent.
Radio Shack used to badger cash customers, just trying to buy a fncking battery, for name/address etc, so some poor dweeb could go in back and type it into a TRS-80 for junkmail spamming purposes.
Some companies just never learn. If they ask for a (US) phone number, give them 555-xxxx (where ‘xxxx’ is any digits you want). They all go to ‘information’, any area code.
Radio Shack used to badger cash customers, just trying to buy a fncking battery, for name/address etc, so some poor dweeb could go in back and type it into a TRS-80 for junkmail spamming purposes.
Some companies just never learn. If they ask for a (US) phone number, give them 555-xxxx (where ‘xxxx’ is any digits you want). They all go to ‘information’, any area code.
I’m pondering, but I think I agree with every word in russell’s 3:46
I’m pondering, but I think I agree with every word in russell’s 3:46
Marty @ 3:39 – beautiful comment.
Marty @ 3:39 – beautiful comment.
Me: I do mildly wonder why the conspicuous display of intellectual attainments that most people don’t have isn’t as “casually cruel” as the conspicuous consumption of material goods that lots of people don’t have.
bob mcmanus today:
A very fair question, and one I do think about…as a communist, I listen to everyone with their own local knowledges and different voices, and try to help them attain their collective desires rather than my own, as much as I find morally permissable.
bob mcmanus on Sept. 27:
Hey kids, if there are any kids around, West End Blues by Louis Armstrong is beyond any doubt the greatest and most important piece of music in the 20th century. If you don’t have the Hot 5s and 7s in your library and played you are a fail. I listen to everything from the medieval Carmina Burana to Tago Mago and think Armstrong is the best. [my emphasis – jm]
Was the latter just a joke then, or performance art?
Me: I do mildly wonder why the conspicuous display of intellectual attainments that most people don’t have isn’t as “casually cruel” as the conspicuous consumption of material goods that lots of people don’t have.
bob mcmanus today:
A very fair question, and one I do think about…as a communist, I listen to everyone with their own local knowledges and different voices, and try to help them attain their collective desires rather than my own, as much as I find morally permissable.
bob mcmanus on Sept. 27:
Hey kids, if there are any kids around, West End Blues by Louis Armstrong is beyond any doubt the greatest and most important piece of music in the 20th century. If you don’t have the Hot 5s and 7s in your library and played you are a fail. I listen to everything from the medieval Carmina Burana to Tago Mago and think Armstrong is the best. [my emphasis – jm]
Was the latter just a joke then, or performance art?
ban them all.
ok, i’ll compromise: i’m willing to go Originalist.
ban everything but the modern day muskets and flintlock pistols. those are dangerous to load. so how about: single-shot guns only. bolt-action.
i’ll even give you double-barrel shotguns because you never know when you’ll be set upon by a covey of angry quail and there’s a chance the first blast of bird shot won’t kill them all.
but seriously, we have a public health epidemic in the US right now. we’ve tried doing nothing, and it hasn’t helped. and now it’s time to halt the sickness. drastic measures are needed. if we eventually recover, we can talk about bringing back the deadlier guns. no, i don’t care about the second amendment. it wasn’t written with these weapons or this society in mind. and there is no valid reason that we should be held hostage by laws that don’t apply to the actual world we live in.
ban them all.
ok, i’ll compromise: i’m willing to go Originalist.
ban everything but the modern day muskets and flintlock pistols. those are dangerous to load. so how about: single-shot guns only. bolt-action.
i’ll even give you double-barrel shotguns because you never know when you’ll be set upon by a covey of angry quail and there’s a chance the first blast of bird shot won’t kill them all.
but seriously, we have a public health epidemic in the US right now. we’ve tried doing nothing, and it hasn’t helped. and now it’s time to halt the sickness. drastic measures are needed. if we eventually recover, we can talk about bringing back the deadlier guns. no, i don’t care about the second amendment. it wasn’t written with these weapons or this society in mind. and there is no valid reason that we should be held hostage by laws that don’t apply to the actual world we live in.
Vermont Public Radio did (or maybe is still doing) a “Gunshots Series”. I heard parts of it when I drove to and from Canada in August — very interesting, especially statistics about the increased likelihood of suicide in homes where there are guns, even for the non-gun-owning household members.
IIRC there’s a program to give away gun safes and another to give away gun locks, and esp. for the safes there’s a waiting list. People know they should have them but can’t afford them or don’t want to spend the $.
Vermont Public Radio did (or maybe is still doing) a “Gunshots Series”. I heard parts of it when I drove to and from Canada in August — very interesting, especially statistics about the increased likelihood of suicide in homes where there are guns, even for the non-gun-owning household members.
IIRC there’s a program to give away gun safes and another to give away gun locks, and esp. for the safes there’s a waiting list. People know they should have them but can’t afford them or don’t want to spend the $.
Since it’s an open thread, just to get this out: Provisional analysis of the effects of Trump’s proposed tax cuts on Mainers.
Not that anyone is likely to be surprised.
Since it’s an open thread, just to get this out: Provisional analysis of the effects of Trump’s proposed tax cuts on Mainers.
Not that anyone is likely to be surprised.
i’m willing to go Originalist.
If you want to go originalist, the rule should be:
If you’re in a militia, organized by and under the direction of local civil authority, per laws and policies set by the US Congress, you have a Constitutional right to keep and bear a firearm.
However, there area about as many firearms in private hands as their are people in our great land, and I don’t see a practical way to roll that back. The horse is out of the barn.
So, if we can keep from shooting each other, I’m good.
In all good faith, it is my opinion that the 2nd A is as relevant as the 3rd.
The institution it refers to, and which it was intended to preserve, no longer exists in any way the founders would recognize.
Somewhere, Brett Bellmore is having an aneurysm.
i’m willing to go Originalist.
If you want to go originalist, the rule should be:
If you’re in a militia, organized by and under the direction of local civil authority, per laws and policies set by the US Congress, you have a Constitutional right to keep and bear a firearm.
However, there area about as many firearms in private hands as their are people in our great land, and I don’t see a practical way to roll that back. The horse is out of the barn.
So, if we can keep from shooting each other, I’m good.
In all good faith, it is my opinion that the 2nd A is as relevant as the 3rd.
The institution it refers to, and which it was intended to preserve, no longer exists in any way the founders would recognize.
Somewhere, Brett Bellmore is having an aneurysm.
I don’t see a practical way to roll that back.
make the presence of guns in the house an insurance liability with a high possibility of loss-of-coverage for violations. put a hefty, nearly-prohibitive, tax on sales of guns and ammunition. use proceeds from that tax to fund a no-questions-asked gun buyback program.
it might take a generation, but it would work. after the original owner passed, kids and grandkids might rather have the cash than deal with the insurance and safety risks.
we could do it if we wanted to.
I don’t see a practical way to roll that back.
make the presence of guns in the house an insurance liability with a high possibility of loss-of-coverage for violations. put a hefty, nearly-prohibitive, tax on sales of guns and ammunition. use proceeds from that tax to fund a no-questions-asked gun buyback program.
it might take a generation, but it would work. after the original owner passed, kids and grandkids might rather have the cash than deal with the insurance and safety risks.
we could do it if we wanted to.
Crikey, JanieM @ 03.54, you take up the baton just when I decided a) that the inconsistencies were a perfect illustration of bob mcm’s statement of how much he dislikes and disapproves of logic, and b) that there was no point in going further, particularly in the face of his claim that he had taken as his model “the swami under the tree”. Unlike political/economic/social theory, I am perfectly familiar with Buddhist philosophy, and the desire to escape from the endless cycle of desire-attachment-suffering, and suffice to say unless bob mcm is claiming to be a boddhisatva his idea of himself is eccentric, to put it in the most generous possible terms.
Crikey, JanieM @ 03.54, you take up the baton just when I decided a) that the inconsistencies were a perfect illustration of bob mcm’s statement of how much he dislikes and disapproves of logic, and b) that there was no point in going further, particularly in the face of his claim that he had taken as his model “the swami under the tree”. Unlike political/economic/social theory, I am perfectly familiar with Buddhist philosophy, and the desire to escape from the endless cycle of desire-attachment-suffering, and suffice to say unless bob mcm is claiming to be a boddhisatva his idea of himself is eccentric, to put it in the most generous possible terms.
[ by ‘violations’ i mean lying about the presence of a gun which is then involved in an incident ]
[ by ‘violations’ i mean lying about the presence of a gun which is then involved in an incident ]
GftNC, I am setting the baton back down at this point in any case. Life is too short.
Also, I’ve got family coming tomorrow for five days, so I will be blessedly distracted, and hopefully that will bring my attention to these discussions back to a healthier and more manageable level.
GftNC, I am setting the baton back down at this point in any case. Life is too short.
Also, I’ve got family coming tomorrow for five days, so I will be blessedly distracted, and hopefully that will bring my attention to these discussions back to a healthier and more manageable level.
Enjoy your family visit, JanieM, I hope we see you back here soon.
Enjoy your family visit, JanieM, I hope we see you back here soon.
I don’t see a practical way to roll that back.
make the presence of guns in the house an insurance liability
I stand corrected. Thanks cleek.
I don’t see a practical way to roll that back.
make the presence of guns in the house an insurance liability
I stand corrected. Thanks cleek.
Was the latter just a joke then, or performance art?
A bit of a joke or exaggeration of course. Adorno is famous for not liking jazz, and I suppose there are lots of people who don’t like music by black artists. Not that I am saying you necessarily fall into that category.
I see the ladies are demanding ostracism, which has often been the case where I visit.
Was the latter just a joke then, or performance art?
A bit of a joke or exaggeration of course. Adorno is famous for not liking jazz, and I suppose there are lots of people who don’t like music by black artists. Not that I am saying you necessarily fall into that category.
I see the ladies are demanding ostracism, which has often been the case where I visit.
Adorno is famous for not liking jazz
He’s dead to me.
Adorno is famous for not liking jazz
He’s dead to me.
bob mcm’s statement of how much he dislikes and disapproves of logic
That is not what I said, and I would prefer honest interlocutors to quote me when responding.
bob mcm’s statement of how much he dislikes and disapproves of logic
That is not what I said, and I would prefer honest interlocutors to quote me when responding.
I see the ladies are demanding ostracism, which has often been the case where I visit.
I would prefer honest interlocutors to quote me when responding.
As to the latter, me too. Can you quote anyone demanding ostracism? Or demanding anything, for that matter?
I see the ladies are demanding ostracism, which has often been the case where I visit.
I would prefer honest interlocutors to quote me when responding.
As to the latter, me too. Can you quote anyone demanding ostracism? Or demanding anything, for that matter?
Actually, I don’t care if people quote me or not, but I would rather not be misrepresented or lied about.
Actually, I don’t care if people quote me or not, but I would rather not be misrepresented or lied about.
The ladies, eh? I don’t see anybody calling for ostracism. Honest interlocutor?
An argument from pure logic and simple reason or personal experience or anecdote about acquaintances seems to me to ahistorical and asocial/individualistic, IOW, anti-communist and liberal capitalist.
I think we all know how you feel about arguments which are anti-communist and liberal capitalist.
The ladies, eh? I don’t see anybody calling for ostracism. Honest interlocutor?
An argument from pure logic and simple reason or personal experience or anecdote about acquaintances seems to me to ahistorical and asocial/individualistic, IOW, anti-communist and liberal capitalist.
I think we all know how you feel about arguments which are anti-communist and liberal capitalist.
bob, you make yourself … upleasant … in a way that seems quite deliberate and calculated, epatering le bourgeois ad nauseam, and then act the victim (and lie) when someone says they’re going to (in my case) return to ignoring you. Play the victim all you want, but surely you can’t pretend that you’re surprised or that you didn’t in part deliberately provoke the reaction you got.
And that’s the last from me.
bob, you make yourself … upleasant … in a way that seems quite deliberate and calculated, epatering le bourgeois ad nauseam, and then act the victim (and lie) when someone says they’re going to (in my case) return to ignoring you. Play the victim all you want, but surely you can’t pretend that you’re surprised or that you didn’t in part deliberately provoke the reaction you got.
And that’s the last from me.
Well guys, as you know from personal experience you will have no problem welcoming and being friendly someone the women in your life find intolerable. Direct demands are seldom explicit, though other means of communication are common.
GftNC 5:08: Carol Gilligan took the first step toward the 3rd wave, picking and choosing what parts of patriarchal roles were to be retained as instrumentally useful.
I grew up arguing with women in a complete absence of male models. Women usually despise me at sight, while men find me amusing. I do not seek to please and flatter.
Well guys, as you know from personal experience you will have no problem welcoming and being friendly someone the women in your life find intolerable. Direct demands are seldom explicit, though other means of communication are common.
GftNC 5:08: Carol Gilligan took the first step toward the 3rd wave, picking and choosing what parts of patriarchal roles were to be retained as instrumentally useful.
I grew up arguing with women in a complete absence of male models. Women usually despise me at sight, while men find me amusing. I do not seek to please and flatter.
As perfect a response, in every way, as one could have set out to devise if one had it in mind to illustrate mysogyny, dishonesty, and victimhood in one short post. Bravo!
As perfect a response, in every way, as one could have set out to devise if one had it in mind to illustrate mysogyny, dishonesty, and victimhood in one short post. Bravo!
Back to the world of computer work:
wj: I do think that the universities are quite able to teach this skill. After all, engineering schools have been doing it forever. It’s just that the idea of doing so hasn’t been rolled over into the IT departments.
Engineering isn’t the only discipline that tries to teach this skill. I give you The Beer Game.
I’m so old I learned to program before “Hello World” was the standard starting point. Either that or I’m so old I’ve forgotten it.
My first exposure to programming was in an NSF summer program for high school kids in 1967. Then I learned Fortran as an undergrad. I’m so old it was punch cards, there was no console (at least for us peons) to write “Hello World” to.
After various professional and educational wanderings, I worked for many years as a “programmer” (yes, that was the label). The companies I worked for were small, and I started so long ago that I did the whole gamut of what would now be a number of jobs: writing specs, coding, testing, writing manuals, training users…. Back in the Wild West days, you might say. I was never trained to do any of it, beyond the Fortran course and one other (which I’ll get back to).
Now I am a kind of “fill in the blanks” person at the company I’ve worked for (early on, when my kids were small, as a very part-time contractor) since 1986. I’m sliding toward retirement while doing a variety of things, but none of them straightforward coding any longer, unless fancy Excel macros count. Mostly I’m a bridge between old worlds and new, especially in relation to databases and how they embody solutions to problems.
I get frustrated with “coders” for the reasons russell, cleek, wj, and hsh have mentioned. When this first started happening I was surprised that people who could write programs could also be so blockheaded, because when I started doing it, I think it was precisely the people who were naturally good at problem-solving who took to computers. I myself have had a hard time learning to “write” specs for other people, because so much of my understanding of a problem and how to solve it is intuitive. I have to slow down, break it down, make it explicit, and it’s a frustrating process. I wasn’t trained to write code, but I did it pretty well for a long time. I’m also not trained to write specs for coders, and I’m not so naturally good at that.
Weird.
Anyhow, my only other formal training was Stu Madnick’s “Systems Programming” course at MIT, which I took when I was about thirty, after I had been programming for a living for several years already. When I was an undergrad, the course was notorious as “6.251” in the MIT numbering system, renowned as one of the hardest courses at the Institute. Course 6 is Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, but in the intervening years between about 1970 and about 1980, Madnick had had some kind of disagreement with EECS and moved himself over to the Sloan School. So “Systems Programming” was no longer 6.251 (EECS), it was 15.251 (Management).
Which, to bring it back full circle, is the environment where they use The Beer Game as an intro to problem-solving.
I think of business school as an empty credential, but maybe I shouldn’t be so hasty.
(I did very well in 15.251 as a thirty-year-old working person. Which only goes to prove that college is wasted on the young. 😉
Back to the world of computer work:
wj: I do think that the universities are quite able to teach this skill. After all, engineering schools have been doing it forever. It’s just that the idea of doing so hasn’t been rolled over into the IT departments.
Engineering isn’t the only discipline that tries to teach this skill. I give you The Beer Game.
I’m so old I learned to program before “Hello World” was the standard starting point. Either that or I’m so old I’ve forgotten it.
My first exposure to programming was in an NSF summer program for high school kids in 1967. Then I learned Fortran as an undergrad. I’m so old it was punch cards, there was no console (at least for us peons) to write “Hello World” to.
After various professional and educational wanderings, I worked for many years as a “programmer” (yes, that was the label). The companies I worked for were small, and I started so long ago that I did the whole gamut of what would now be a number of jobs: writing specs, coding, testing, writing manuals, training users…. Back in the Wild West days, you might say. I was never trained to do any of it, beyond the Fortran course and one other (which I’ll get back to).
Now I am a kind of “fill in the blanks” person at the company I’ve worked for (early on, when my kids were small, as a very part-time contractor) since 1986. I’m sliding toward retirement while doing a variety of things, but none of them straightforward coding any longer, unless fancy Excel macros count. Mostly I’m a bridge between old worlds and new, especially in relation to databases and how they embody solutions to problems.
I get frustrated with “coders” for the reasons russell, cleek, wj, and hsh have mentioned. When this first started happening I was surprised that people who could write programs could also be so blockheaded, because when I started doing it, I think it was precisely the people who were naturally good at problem-solving who took to computers. I myself have had a hard time learning to “write” specs for other people, because so much of my understanding of a problem and how to solve it is intuitive. I have to slow down, break it down, make it explicit, and it’s a frustrating process. I wasn’t trained to write code, but I did it pretty well for a long time. I’m also not trained to write specs for coders, and I’m not so naturally good at that.
Weird.
Anyhow, my only other formal training was Stu Madnick’s “Systems Programming” course at MIT, which I took when I was about thirty, after I had been programming for a living for several years already. When I was an undergrad, the course was notorious as “6.251” in the MIT numbering system, renowned as one of the hardest courses at the Institute. Course 6 is Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, but in the intervening years between about 1970 and about 1980, Madnick had had some kind of disagreement with EECS and moved himself over to the Sloan School. So “Systems Programming” was no longer 6.251 (EECS), it was 15.251 (Management).
Which, to bring it back full circle, is the environment where they use The Beer Game as an intro to problem-solving.
I think of business school as an empty credential, but maybe I shouldn’t be so hasty.
(I did very well in 15.251 as a thirty-year-old working person. Which only goes to prove that college is wasted on the young. 😉
MIT footnote: MIT can be wonderful and it can be brutal. Some people thrive there, others struggle. But one way I summarize it in elevator speech for is that it is heaven on earth for people who love solvable problems.
Unfortunately, a lot of people who are really really good at solving solvable problems imagine that there isn’t any other kind.
That’s one of the reasons russell is one of my idols…he knows that there are solvable ones and the other kind. (And please don’t tell him that jazz does nothing for me.)
MIT footnote: MIT can be wonderful and it can be brutal. Some people thrive there, others struggle. But one way I summarize it in elevator speech for is that it is heaven on earth for people who love solvable problems.
Unfortunately, a lot of people who are really really good at solving solvable problems imagine that there isn’t any other kind.
That’s one of the reasons russell is one of my idols…he knows that there are solvable ones and the other kind. (And please don’t tell him that jazz does nothing for me.)
And please don’t tell him that jazz does nothing for me.)
I would consider this as a potentially solvable problem..
And please don’t tell him that jazz does nothing for me.)
I would consider this as a potentially solvable problem..
Btw, this is my favorite thread ever. Thanks JanieM and russell.
Btw, this is my favorite thread ever. Thanks JanieM and russell.
I’ll requote the bolded parts of the Lordon:
“when they understand that the truly good is what one must wish for others to possess at the same time as oneself.”
“which can therefore be genuinely produced and enjoyed in common, namely, rid of the capturing efforts of individual desires that the passionate life otherwise keeps recreating”
…and let others apply it to the historical patriarchal gendered roles. There are reasons women are a minority in socialist circles.
Of course, misanthropy, asceticism, and celibacy have very commonly been interpreted as misogyny, as if the essence of “woman” is desiring and being desired. Why the hell should priests marry anyway?
I don’t put full blame elsewhere, part of my life has been dedicated to being undesirable and unattractive. Many people do take that as a personal insult. Re-gender that and think about it.
Most men I’ve met are mere tools: dildoes, sperm and money banks, and magic mirrors. They are allowed to play intellectual games and die in wars. Never had any use for them.
8 years of Berkeley and I am asked to simplify my language. I can recognize a gross opening insult when I read one and chose to respond in kind.
I’ll requote the bolded parts of the Lordon:
“when they understand that the truly good is what one must wish for others to possess at the same time as oneself.”
“which can therefore be genuinely produced and enjoyed in common, namely, rid of the capturing efforts of individual desires that the passionate life otherwise keeps recreating”
…and let others apply it to the historical patriarchal gendered roles. There are reasons women are a minority in socialist circles.
Of course, misanthropy, asceticism, and celibacy have very commonly been interpreted as misogyny, as if the essence of “woman” is desiring and being desired. Why the hell should priests marry anyway?
I don’t put full blame elsewhere, part of my life has been dedicated to being undesirable and unattractive. Many people do take that as a personal insult. Re-gender that and think about it.
Most men I’ve met are mere tools: dildoes, sperm and money banks, and magic mirrors. They are allowed to play intellectual games and die in wars. Never had any use for them.
8 years of Berkeley and I am asked to simplify my language. I can recognize a gross opening insult when I read one and chose to respond in kind.
Unfortunately, a lot of people who are really really good at solving solvable problems imagine that there isn’t any other kind
I think this is profoundly true, and a source of great trouble in the world. Not to say that an insoluble problem cannot be changed somewhat for the better, but that’s a different thing.
Unfortunately, a lot of people who are really really good at solving solvable problems imagine that there isn’t any other kind
I think this is profoundly true, and a source of great trouble in the world. Not to say that an insoluble problem cannot be changed somewhat for the better, but that’s a different thing.
Utterly OT, but this is an open thread (?), here’s a rather amusing account of the very uncomfortable to watch, disastrous speech by the UK’s (probably soon to be ex) PM:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/oct/04/boris-lion-king-to-theresa-may-p45-malarial-week-tory-conference
Utterly OT, but this is an open thread (?), here’s a rather amusing account of the very uncomfortable to watch, disastrous speech by the UK’s (probably soon to be ex) PM:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/oct/04/boris-lion-king-to-theresa-may-p45-malarial-week-tory-conference
Marty, thanks in return. I should have mentioned you in my list of people who had talked about training software people in problem-solving.
As to the solvable problem of learning to appreciate jazz…maybe. Under russell’s guidance, who knows what could happen.
Meanwhile, I am biting my pixelated tongue on a screed about music. Maybe it can be a post for another time. As shorthand for now: maybe jazz is unsolvability made creative, whereas I like simple-minded (i.e. solvable) folk music chords. I think I quoted Woody Guthrie here, or somewhere, recently about playing whole songs in G and D and “back to greasy G.” That’s about the size of it for me.
Marty, thanks in return. I should have mentioned you in my list of people who had talked about training software people in problem-solving.
As to the solvable problem of learning to appreciate jazz…maybe. Under russell’s guidance, who knows what could happen.
Meanwhile, I am biting my pixelated tongue on a screed about music. Maybe it can be a post for another time. As shorthand for now: maybe jazz is unsolvability made creative, whereas I like simple-minded (i.e. solvable) folk music chords. I think I quoted Woody Guthrie here, or somewhere, recently about playing whole songs in G and D and “back to greasy G.” That’s about the size of it for me.
P.S. I also meant to say that cleek’s 1:18 is a classic for the ages.
P.S. I also meant to say that cleek’s 1:18 is a classic for the ages.
JanieM, I love folk, my playlists are full of singer/songwriters, Kris Kristofferson wrote most of my favorite songs of all time.
One of my early jobs was to service fire extinguishers, which meant we had large co2 bottles and I provided smoke for a few concerts, one was Weather Report, so I watched from nackstage and was happy when I could take my bottles and go home.
Fast forward a few decades and I saw Pat Metheny at a pretty small venue in NYC, it struck me that I was able to feel the structure underlying what was going on. So I quit listening for the song. It was really moving.
Then of course there is Rickie Lee Jones and Leon Russell,who led me there from elsewhere, and a whole history of jazz where the song defies rhythm, but is awesome nonetheless.
All to say I was a latecomer to jazz really and only have scratched the surface.
So I understand.
JanieM, I love folk, my playlists are full of singer/songwriters, Kris Kristofferson wrote most of my favorite songs of all time.
One of my early jobs was to service fire extinguishers, which meant we had large co2 bottles and I provided smoke for a few concerts, one was Weather Report, so I watched from nackstage and was happy when I could take my bottles and go home.
Fast forward a few decades and I saw Pat Metheny at a pretty small venue in NYC, it struck me that I was able to feel the structure underlying what was going on. So I quit listening for the song. It was really moving.
Then of course there is Rickie Lee Jones and Leon Russell,who led me there from elsewhere, and a whole history of jazz where the song defies rhythm, but is awesome nonetheless.
All to say I was a latecomer to jazz really and only have scratched the surface.
So I understand.
I am biting my pixelated tongue on a screed about music
I would love to read that.
I am biting my pixelated tongue on a screed about music
I would love to read that.
Me too
Me too
I was able to feel the structure underlying what was going on. So I quit listening for the song
There ya go.
I like jazz, I know more about jazz than the average layman, I’ve studied it and worked hard at it but not consistently enough or long enough to be a player. On vibes, anyway, on drum kit I can hang at a pretty good amateur level.
But what I know and understand about it is actually pretty small.
My elevator pitch about what jazz is, is this:
Jazz is a style (or a spectrum of styles), and it’s also a way of making music. Nowadays the spectrum of styles is so broad that it’s mostly a way of making music.
As a way of making music, the way jazz works is this: given some musical material – a song, a rhythm, a pattern of chord changes, whatever – a group of players explore that material in real time. And the process of exploration is conversational, so that what one guy plays may be a response to what someone else plays.
What do you think of this chord?
I like it, but I think I will add these notes to it.
Oh, I like that! How about this?
And so on.
If you think of it as a conversation, it makes more sense.
One problem with jazz is that a lot of players like to show off. Which is annoying. It can take lot of work to learn, and there’s often a kind of macho thing where players want to show you all their chops, all the time.
It’s off-putting.
It can take a long time to learn what not to play, and to recognize when you’ve said enough.
I was able to feel the structure underlying what was going on. So I quit listening for the song
There ya go.
I like jazz, I know more about jazz than the average layman, I’ve studied it and worked hard at it but not consistently enough or long enough to be a player. On vibes, anyway, on drum kit I can hang at a pretty good amateur level.
But what I know and understand about it is actually pretty small.
My elevator pitch about what jazz is, is this:
Jazz is a style (or a spectrum of styles), and it’s also a way of making music. Nowadays the spectrum of styles is so broad that it’s mostly a way of making music.
As a way of making music, the way jazz works is this: given some musical material – a song, a rhythm, a pattern of chord changes, whatever – a group of players explore that material in real time. And the process of exploration is conversational, so that what one guy plays may be a response to what someone else plays.
What do you think of this chord?
I like it, but I think I will add these notes to it.
Oh, I like that! How about this?
And so on.
If you think of it as a conversation, it makes more sense.
One problem with jazz is that a lot of players like to show off. Which is annoying. It can take lot of work to learn, and there’s often a kind of macho thing where players want to show you all their chops, all the time.
It’s off-putting.
It can take a long time to learn what not to play, and to recognize when you’ve said enough.
this seems like a good place to mention that my dear wife got me the super-bonus expanded ultimate obsessive edition of Kind Of Blue for my birthday last week.
i don’t even come close to knowing how to play the stuff on there. but what that they do on that record – more than anyone else does on any other jazz record i have – is to make so much of what they play sound natural and simple and organic. it feels, to me, like all of that is within my reach if i just got the right people in the right mood in the right room. but that’s the magic. it took the greatest players of that era to make what i could never play – even if i spent my whole life trying – sound simple.
this seems like a good place to mention that my dear wife got me the super-bonus expanded ultimate obsessive edition of Kind Of Blue for my birthday last week.
i don’t even come close to knowing how to play the stuff on there. but what that they do on that record – more than anyone else does on any other jazz record i have – is to make so much of what they play sound natural and simple and organic. it feels, to me, like all of that is within my reach if i just got the right people in the right mood in the right room. but that’s the magic. it took the greatest players of that era to make what i could never play – even if i spent my whole life trying – sound simple.
Property is theft, which includes intellectual property (what is in your head) and frankly personal relationships. The Communist Manifesto called for the end of marriage, in 1848.
This always seems like total BS. But then, I have limited patience with the “the world owes me a living” mindset. Not because I object to supporting those in need, but because I see no reason to support those who simply refuse to exert themselves.
And especially, to characterize marriage as theft seems to me to require both experience of a very unhappy marriage and lack of experience of a happy one. I can only feel enormous sympathy for anyone who has been so afflicted.
Property is theft, which includes intellectual property (what is in your head) and frankly personal relationships. The Communist Manifesto called for the end of marriage, in 1848.
This always seems like total BS. But then, I have limited patience with the “the world owes me a living” mindset. Not because I object to supporting those in need, but because I see no reason to support those who simply refuse to exert themselves.
And especially, to characterize marriage as theft seems to me to require both experience of a very unhappy marriage and lack of experience of a happy one. I can only feel enormous sympathy for anyone who has been so afflicted.
If you think of it as a conversation, it makes more sense.
I love listening to jazz. Also classical music. I like all genres of music, actually, but find jazz (and some 20th classical) to be immediately meaningful, especially live.
Some music (for me) needs to be heard over and over again before it means something to me. Often, jazz is just a conversation I want to hear before it happens, anticipating the next comment.
I feel like I missed appreciating Tom Petty and Prince. I liked them both, and saw Tom Petty in concert, but the time when they were becoming well known was a time that I was very isolated, and dealing with that by studying classical music (and piano). I’m not good at talking about music and literature, but it’s so vital to me. And still so mysteriously so.
In mourning the fact that I didn’t really feel that I knew Tom Petty and Prince well enough, I was going on a youtube tear, and found this. Yes, Prince was showing off (is that what you meant, russell?) But holy moly for anyone witnessing it.
Many rock musicians who came to the fore prior to 1975 or so, when I lost the rock and roll thread, I loved (including Steve Winwood, whom I saw in concert with Eric Clapton a few years ago – unforgettable performance in London). Maybe I’ll spend some time trying to catch up.
If you think of it as a conversation, it makes more sense.
I love listening to jazz. Also classical music. I like all genres of music, actually, but find jazz (and some 20th classical) to be immediately meaningful, especially live.
Some music (for me) needs to be heard over and over again before it means something to me. Often, jazz is just a conversation I want to hear before it happens, anticipating the next comment.
I feel like I missed appreciating Tom Petty and Prince. I liked them both, and saw Tom Petty in concert, but the time when they were becoming well known was a time that I was very isolated, and dealing with that by studying classical music (and piano). I’m not good at talking about music and literature, but it’s so vital to me. And still so mysteriously so.
In mourning the fact that I didn’t really feel that I knew Tom Petty and Prince well enough, I was going on a youtube tear, and found this. Yes, Prince was showing off (is that what you meant, russell?) But holy moly for anyone witnessing it.
Many rock musicians who came to the fore prior to 1975 or so, when I lost the rock and roll thread, I loved (including Steve Winwood, whom I saw in concert with Eric Clapton a few years ago – unforgettable performance in London). Maybe I’ll spend some time trying to catch up.
I knew what video you linked before I opened it, sapient. I was never all that into Prince, but I thought it was pretty obvious that he was a musical genius.
I knew what video you linked before I opened it, sapient. I was never all that into Prince, but I thought it was pretty obvious that he was a musical genius.
Yeah, hsh. But with what russell said, I’m wondering what those other rather good guitarists were thinking, as the audience was thinking Whoa! Sometimes virtuosity has to leave behind virtue.
Yeah, hsh. But with what russell said, I’m wondering what those other rather good guitarists were thinking, as the audience was thinking Whoa! Sometimes virtuosity has to leave behind virtue.
Prince and Whitney Houston are two musicians I got more acquainted with only after they died. I had seen the video sapient linked after Prince died, and showing off or not, one thing that shines through is what a blast they were all having playing together.
Another musician I didn’t know until relatively recently, and who thankfully is still with us, is Mark Knopfler. With him I’ve had the odd experience of watching a lot of YouTube video and getting acquainted with him first as an older guy (he’s just a little older than I am), and only then going back to his Dire Straits days and seeing him as the skinny kid that he was.
Whitney Houston singing the national anthem. Her voice is otherworldly, I just can’t believe it.
“Going Home“, the theme song from Local Hero, for which Knopfler did the music, is an all-time favorite. For a while there was a YouTube clip with the last few minutes of the movie, plus the credits, and that music. Then it was blocked for copyright reasons. As was my favorite clip of him doing “Done with Bonaparte” with Emmylou Harris. There are still a lot of renditions of both songs available, but I have to actually watch the movie now to get the full effect of “Going Home.”
I’ve also watched some documentary video about/with Knopfler. He’s interesting when he’s talking, too.
Prince and Whitney Houston are two musicians I got more acquainted with only after they died. I had seen the video sapient linked after Prince died, and showing off or not, one thing that shines through is what a blast they were all having playing together.
Another musician I didn’t know until relatively recently, and who thankfully is still with us, is Mark Knopfler. With him I’ve had the odd experience of watching a lot of YouTube video and getting acquainted with him first as an older guy (he’s just a little older than I am), and only then going back to his Dire Straits days and seeing him as the skinny kid that he was.
Whitney Houston singing the national anthem. Her voice is otherworldly, I just can’t believe it.
“Going Home“, the theme song from Local Hero, for which Knopfler did the music, is an all-time favorite. For a while there was a YouTube clip with the last few minutes of the movie, plus the credits, and that music. Then it was blocked for copyright reasons. As was my favorite clip of him doing “Done with Bonaparte” with Emmylou Harris. There are still a lot of renditions of both songs available, but I have to actually watch the movie now to get the full effect of “Going Home.”
I’ve also watched some documentary video about/with Knopfler. He’s interesting when he’s talking, too.
One of the things I’vee always liked about Clapton is he was incredibly good at knowing what not to play. Prince was an incredible musician, Zappa before him. I agree Knopler is also. Reznor was so much better than NIN showed.
Stop. I can list a lot of them. But to recognize Tom Petty, all the famous people of his generation wanted to play with him. Like everyone wants to do a duet with EmmyLou.
One of the things I’vee always liked about Clapton is he was incredibly good at knowing what not to play. Prince was an incredible musician, Zappa before him. I agree Knopler is also. Reznor was so much better than NIN showed.
Stop. I can list a lot of them. But to recognize Tom Petty, all the famous people of his generation wanted to play with him. Like everyone wants to do a duet with EmmyLou.
It can take a long time to learn what not to play, and to recognise when you’ve said enough
A truer word was never spoken. You are wise beyond your years, russell, no matter what their span.
It can take a long time to learn what not to play, and to recognise when you’ve said enough
A truer word was never spoken. You are wise beyond your years, russell, no matter what their span.
Prince was showing off (is that what you meant, russell?)
I believe the technical term in this case is “lighting a fire under everybody’s @ss”. just a remarkable, incendiary performance.
Prince was showing off (is that what you meant, russell?)
I believe the technical term in this case is “lighting a fire under everybody’s @ss”. just a remarkable, incendiary performance.
You are wise beyond your years, russell
you are extremely kind. to the degree that this is anything like so, it’s only because I ran out of ways to be stupid.
You are wise beyond your years, russell
you are extremely kind. to the degree that this is anything like so, it’s only because I ran out of ways to be stupid.
When I watched sapient’s Prince et al clip, I looked at the young guy next to Tom Petty, and thought, “Who is that?”, shortly followed by “Oh, it’s George”. It took me more than a few seconds to work out that this George was the young George, like in the Berlin years, and the other guys were all (sorry!) middle-aged. Presumably, it’s George’s son. An amazing resemblance. And yes, a wonderful thing to watch a bunch of great musicians having a blast, and a musical genius letting rip.
When I watched sapient’s Prince et al clip, I looked at the young guy next to Tom Petty, and thought, “Who is that?”, shortly followed by “Oh, it’s George”. It took me more than a few seconds to work out that this George was the young George, like in the Berlin years, and the other guys were all (sorry!) middle-aged. Presumably, it’s George’s son. An amazing resemblance. And yes, a wonderful thing to watch a bunch of great musicians having a blast, and a musical genius letting rip.
that’s dhani harrison, george’s son.
that’s dhani harrison, george’s son.
On the subject of riverboats and fancy restaurants:
Imagine a world in which everyone in the USA was paid about the same mean income. Average annual wages are a little over $60,000, so there would be enough to allow some spending on luxuries. Some people would choose to spend money on a larger house, some on fine dining, some on riverboat trips, some on enjoying jazz music…
My point is that income equality in the USA need not be the end of luxury goods. It just means that they go to the people who most appreciate them.
However, if everyone in the USA were paid the global mean income, something like $3000, things would look rather different (even after adjustment to purchasing power parity).
Proponents of income equality often seem to want it in one country only.
On the subject of riverboats and fancy restaurants:
Imagine a world in which everyone in the USA was paid about the same mean income. Average annual wages are a little over $60,000, so there would be enough to allow some spending on luxuries. Some people would choose to spend money on a larger house, some on fine dining, some on riverboat trips, some on enjoying jazz music…
My point is that income equality in the USA need not be the end of luxury goods. It just means that they go to the people who most appreciate them.
However, if everyone in the USA were paid the global mean income, something like $3000, things would look rather different (even after adjustment to purchasing power parity).
Proponents of income equality often seem to want it in one country only.
Harrison’s son organized a tribute concert recently, called George Fest – lots of big name musicians playing George’s music. interesting stuff.
most of it’s on YouTube.
just to tie in with Tom Petty, here’s a bit of it where they did a Wilbury’s tune.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xP1k_kpfyEo
Harrison’s son organized a tribute concert recently, called George Fest – lots of big name musicians playing George’s music. interesting stuff.
most of it’s on YouTube.
just to tie in with Tom Petty, here’s a bit of it where they did a Wilbury’s tune.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xP1k_kpfyEo
Calla Medig
Calla Medig
if everyone in the USA were paid the global mean income, something like $3000, things would look rather different
not disputing your basic point, which I agree with.
but if everyone in the USA were looking at a cost of living something like the global mean, things would also look rather different.
personally, I’d settle for real estate prices at the national US mean.
if everyone in the USA were paid the global mean income, something like $3000, things would look rather different
not disputing your basic point, which I agree with.
but if everyone in the USA were looking at a cost of living something like the global mean, things would also look rather different.
personally, I’d settle for real estate prices at the national US mean.
personally, I’d settle for real estate prices at the national US mean.
There are definitely some folks who own huge tracks of (minimal usable) range land in Nevada who would be positively ecstatic at the prospect of selling their land at the national US mean price per acre! Ditto most of Utah, Wyoming, etc., etc.
personally, I’d settle for real estate prices at the national US mean.
There are definitely some folks who own huge tracks of (minimal usable) range land in Nevada who would be positively ecstatic at the prospect of selling their land at the national US mean price per acre! Ditto most of Utah, Wyoming, etc., etc.
cleek: just got in and got a chance to look at that GeorgeFest link – it’s great, thanks for bringing the whole thing to our attention. I loved the first Wilburys album, what a treat. I’ll look for more from that gig.
cleek: just got in and got a chance to look at that GeorgeFest link – it’s great, thanks for bringing the whole thing to our attention. I loved the first Wilburys album, what a treat. I’ll look for more from that gig.
Those names make me feel so sad.
Those names make me feel so sad.