Buh-bye Hillary…

Last night I broke a longstanding rule and watched politics on TV. Senator Obama had received enough votes to clinch the Democratic Nomination.

If you had tuned in without being aware of this fact it would have been easy to assume that Senator Clinton was giving a victory speech instead of conceding defeat. It was certainly long enough…

“For the past seven years, so many people in this country have felt invisible, like your president didn’t even really see you. I have seen the shuttered factories, the jobs shipped overseas, the families struggling to afford gas and groceries, but I’ve also seen unions retraining workers to build energy efficient buildings, innovators designing cars that run on fuel cells and bio-fuels and electricity, cars that get more miles per gallon than ever before, cars that will cut the cost of driving, reduce our reliance on foreign oil and fight global warming.”

What exactly are you trying to say here? The president is far from perfect, but this looks like you are trying to blame him for the bad things while taking credit for the good ones.

“Now the question is, where do we go from here, and given how far we’ve come and where we need to go as a party, it’s a question I don’t take lightly. This has been a long campaign, and I will be making no decisions tonight.”

Decision? What Decision? As best I can tell the “decision” is out of your hands. It has been made for you.

It is my opinion that Senator Clinton should have done this several months ago instead of dragging party and country through this wringer. In my opinion her inability to admit defeat has made the Democratic party into a laughingstock and caused much amusement.

As one wag put it: “Quitters never win, Winners never quit. But those who never win and never quit are called idiots“.

I also watched the Victory speech by Senator Obama. He was far more gracious and statesmanlike than his opponent, and while I don’t agree with his “FedGov-can-fix-everything” politics, I respect his position and achievements.

That a black man an African-American (literally - his Father was African and his mother was American)  could be nominated to run for President is the best proof of the greatness of America that I have seen in a long time.

A letter to my Congressman

Every day, I record the prices at the eight gas stations that I pass en route to work. Once at my destination, I enter those prices into a web site (www.louisvillegasprices.com). I have been doing this for some years. During that time, I have noticed some patterns that I would like to share with you.

The overall trend is 7-14 days of slowly falling, interspersed by lightning price spikes.

In a falling phase, prices generally go down by 1-2 pennies per day. During a falling phase there is diversity in price among the eight stations I pass.

During a spike, the price rises by 15 to 40c. The petrol sitting in the underground tank is suddenly worth more than it was last night. At the end of the spike, everyone is selling at exactly the same price, except for a few stations that lower their prices by exactly penny - presumably this is what they call “competition”.

Here in Louisville, the price also spikes at Derby, The Car show, the Quartet Convention… basically, if the circus is coming to town, prices spike. Apparently they never saw it coming. Again.

I am less bothered by price than I am by volatility, which seems to be getting worse. Some stations have installed LED price signs, presumably so that they can jerk the price around more quickly and more often.

I believe in a free market. I don’t believe that price controls will solve anything, but it is axiomatic to anyone outside of the Petrochemical industry that something is rotten in the States of the Union.

At first I thought that one method to stop them bouncing the price around would be to mandate that they only set their price when they get a delivery (which I am told is every 2-7 days). However, they would simply take a small delivery every day, set their price as before… and nothing would change.

In the short term, one solution is to prevent the stations changing their prices by more than 5c per day. How Congress might choose to enforce that without violating free-market principles is a challenge.

In the medium term, Repealing the Federal Gas Tax and getting the states to agree to repeal their gas taxes would be a start. Auto manufacturers should also be manufacturing smaller more fuel-efficient vehicles instead of marketing SUVs and Trucks. One way to encourage this is to suspend the car-tax breaks on those vehicles (unless they are purchase by a business) and moved those tax breaks to vehicles that make over 40MPG. It’s time we admitted the obvious - SUVs are not trucks, they are passenger vehicles, and not all Trucks are business vehicles.

In the long term, we need to be drilling for oil and building refineries and power stations. Environmentalists will complain; if they want to save the Earth, let them limit or ration their electricity and gasoline. At some point, we will have to make a choice between the environment and progress; we cannot have both. That choice should be made on a State by State basis.

Just a few thoughts.

Stimulating thoughts

Much has been made in the media lately about the so-called “Stimulus Package” that has been passed by both sides of the house. Checks will soon be winging their way to a bank account near you.

Otto von Bismarck once said, “There are two things that you should not see being made; laws and sausages“. Just like sausages that can only honestly be described as a “processed meat food product”, the name “Stimulus Package” is one that defies description.

It is technically defined as a “One-time Tax Credit” on our 2008 taxes. Eligibility is based on taxable income; the “rich” won’t get a check. At the other end of the spectrum are those who will get checks but will pay no taxes in 2008.

So… the rich pay in taxes but get no check, while the poor pay no taxes… and get a check anyway! To quote Timon, “Did I miss something?“

Now we’ve dealt with the what, let’s move on to the why. Why are we being sent checks? Apparently the theory is that we will all run out and spend the money on luxury items and thus “stimulate” the economy.

Will the economy be “stimulated” by this extra money? I doubt it. Many will have spent the money before the check has arrived. Others will use it to pay off debts. Still others will save or invest the money. Some will “blow” the money, to be sure, but the impact on the economy will be minimal and short-lived. The phrase “Bandage on a gunshot wound” comes to mind.

What is most amusing about all this is the underlying assumption; that giving people back some of their taxes will stimulate the economy. If this is true, then it follows that abolishing income tax (and replacing it with a purchase tax like the Fair Tax) would result in an economic boom, “the likes of which the world has never seen”. I happen to agree.

The saddest aspect of this whole affair is what our economy has become. It has stopped being about making, building and selling things, and has become based on how much money we spend on crap we don’t need. That is what the economists mean when they say things like “Consumer Spending is down X% on this time last year“.

The last time something like this happened was a few years ago (wasn’t that an election year? Naah… must be a coincidence). Back then it was called a “tax refund”, and some people did not get one.

I remember having to explain to a relative that the reason that she did not receive a tax refund because she had not paid any Federal Taxes. She was not pleased, which I can well understand; however, the principle is easy enough to figure out: A tax refund given to one who did not pay tax is also known as a bribe.

Enjoy!

Why Content is no longer King

In Act I: Sumner Redstone doesn’t get it, we see an old geezer who came from a movie-theater background to head up Viacom, a movie conglomerate, boldly declare If Content Is King, Copyright Is Its Castle. He actually believes that - Viacom is currently suing YouTube (owned by Google) for Billions of Dollars. This suit has no base, due to Viacom’s fundamental misunderstanding about what Copyright is, and what it isn’t.

What Copyright is, is a limited exclusive right to commercially exploit one’s work. What is isn’t is a semi-permanent right of ownership and the consequent ability to prohibit use of the work in any shape, form or fashion, which is what Redstone and his ilk seem to believe.

YouTube has become immensely popular because it allows people to express themselves by posting their own videos, including mashups - pastiches of material that may include copyrighted work, along with clips, trailers, parodies etc.

While Viacom are obviously welcome to ask YouTube to remove genuine examples of infringement - where, for instance, enough of a work is posted to threaten the Copyright Holder’s right to make money - I have yet to see an example of this. Indeed, Viacom seem to believe that YouTube has to pay them for the right to “Our Stuff”, while failing to realize that YouTube is actually doing them a favor by providing free word-of-mouth.

In Act II: A lawyer who gets it, we see a communications lawyer with a remarkably mature grasp of the situation. The only thing that I would add is that as a result of decades of lobbying by the content industry, Copyright Periods are now way too long. For example, I recently read a book called “The Richest Man in Babylon”, which was written in 1926… and is still under copyright over eight years later.

This is clearly ridiculous. How long they should be depends on the medium. I would suggest Five years for movies and TV shows and twenty-five years for books.

Finally, in Act III: The future of Copyright, we see that the copyright laws are archaic and largely irrelevant in the digital age. Professor Larry Lessig of Stanford University gives a fascinating talk on “How creativity is being strangled by the law“. The fact that this part contains a clip that I personally find offensive just goes to show that everyone has the right to make an ass* of himself in public, which is one of the freedoms we in America hold most dear.

In conclusion, Mr Redstone, content is not king. It never was.

The Customer is king, and always has been.

You sir, and your cohorts seem to have forgotten that. But then, coming from the theater business it is easy for you to keep yourselves in the dark.

I’m just glad that Shakespeare did not patent the three-act play when he had the chance.

* A word that means “Donkey”. Any other use is prohibited, or at least in very poor taste.

The company she keeps…

Many emotions fought one another as I saw this video on Youtube.

Hillary seems to believe that “Lobbyists represent real people”. That is partly true at best, disingenuous at worst.

As best I understand it, lobbyists represent corporations and trade groups. They do not represent voters. And they have money; if they did not, they would not be lobbyists.

Al Capone once said “You can get much further with a kind word and a gun than you can with a kind word alone”.  Lobbyists know that they can get much further with a political opinion and a check than they can with a political opinion alone.

Politicians need money. They need money to finance their political campaigns and their lifestyles. Lobbyists know this. From where I sit, lobbying is an ugly wart on the American political landscape, and an affront to honest people everywhere. It is in effect, legalized bribery.

There are some who say that lobbying is “buying good government”. I don’t believe you. The aim of lobbying is not to solve politicians’ financial problems, it is to make them aware of what you want. The money is simply a way to get in the door.

Here’s an easy way to prove me wrong. Donate your money anonymously. If you are “buying good government” this will be an entirely satisfactory solution. If not, you are seeking recognition… and it’s a bribe.

Shame on you, Hillary, for defending these people. And before you say “everybody’s doing it”, bear in mind that Ron Paul has never taken bribes lobbyists’ money, and he has a far more consistent record than yours. He was against the war in Iraq before he was against the war in Iraq (and before is was fashionable and popular to hold that position), he was against the Patriot act, and unlike Hillary his integrity has never been called into question. I believe that he may be one of the only honest men in Washington.

I close with the following words:

The American people look at their capital and they see a city where the well-connected and the well-protected can work the system, but the interests of ordinary citizens are often left out.

As the new Congress opened its doors, lobbyists were still doing business as usual – the gifts, the trips – all the things that people are concerned about haven’t stopped.

Twice this month you missed opportunities to stop these practices. I know there were other considerations in those votes, but I want to use something that I’ve heard my Republican friends say from time to time: There doesn’t have to be a law for everything.

So tonight I ask you to just stop taking the lobbyists’ perks, just stop.

Who delivered those wise words? President William Jefferson Clinton, in his State of the Union Address, Jan. 24, 1995. And there, dear reader, I rest my case.

Now Reading: Talk to the Hand, by Lynne Truss

Ron Paul for President!

Some years ago, my good friend the CodeWarrior told me about a chap named Ron Paul. A former Libertarian, He has been in and out of Congress since 1978. Ron got more votes than anyone in the 1988 Presidential Election… except George Bush and Michael Dukakis. He then ran for Congress as a Republican, won in 1999, and has held his seat ever since. In the 2004 election, the Democrats did not even bother fielding a candidate to run against him. Two years later he won with 60% of the vote.

What is so special about this guy?

Start by looking at his voting record. Whever a bill comes up for a vote, he looks in the Constitution to see if it is in keeping with that fundamental law. Given the fact that that most are not, and his medical background, he has become nicknamed “Doctor No”.

• In 2006, Paul voted against the Bush administration’s stated position 64 percent of the time, more than any House Republican.
• Ron Paul was one of only 67 Members of Congress to vote against the USA Patriot Act.
• He was one of the few Republicans to vote against the invasion of Iraq. Why? because the Constitution empowers the Congress - not the President - with the decision to declare war. Four years and three thousand lives later, it looks like he may have called this one right.
• He has taken a public stand on illegal immigration that neother mainstream party has the testicular fortitude to take (Democrats want the hispanic votes, Neo-Republicans want the cheap labor).
• He voted in favor of vote on government price negotiations for Medicare drugs: “I don’t vote for price controls, obviously, but if government has to buy something—even if they shouldn’t be buying it!–they have a responsibility to get the best price. But most importantly, we shouldn’t be in that business [of buying drugs].“

So what can we expect if he is elected?

• Withdrawal of Troops from Iraq, along with over 120 other countries where the US has stationed troops.
• Closure of the borders.
• A tough stance on illegal immigration.
• The abolition of “Birthright Citizenship” abuses.
• Dissolution of the Federal Reserve Bank.
• A major re-thinking of the Healthcare System.
• Major changes in the Welfare State.
• Withdrawal from “New-World-Order” organizations such as the UN, NAFTA and CAFTA.
• Termination of most Foreign Aid (also known as “Your Tax Dollars Sent Overseas”).
• Fair Trade - not Subsidised Trade.
• Lower Taxes (after the savings from the above items, this one will be easy)

He has just put together a committee to explore the possibility for a presidential run in 2008.

The Democrats offer more of the same - higher taxes, socialized healthcare (without answering the question: “Who pays for this?”), withdrawal from Iraq (a no-brainer, at this point). In spite of the promises that will be made, there is no real change here.

The Republicans have got nothing. Their reputations as “The War and imperialism party” (ill-deserved), and “the Corporations’ Friends” (somewhat less ill-deserved) have left them shattered and divided. Part of the reason is that the GOP have lost touch with their original vision of small government, low taxes, states’ rights and constitutional rule. In my opinion, only a return to their roots will capture the vision of the voters.

I have no illusions that his chances are slim, but I hope that he wins.

The gloves are off

I watched the president’s speech last night.

And I can’t remember the last time I was so bored.

Strange that a man who can hold my attention for an entire State of the Union address had me wandering off after less than five minutes.

I guess I had expected more. I had expected to see a little more contrition, perhaps a smattering of humility. What I got was a whole lot of strategy and war plans.

I was annoyed to see the familiar game of presidential buzzword bingo, as “Terrorism”, “September 11th”, “Al Quaeda” and “Democracy” and “War on Terror” were trotted out like thoroughbreds before the big race.

There were a few new words added this time round - was a lot of “bipartisan” action - as if, with a democrat-controlled Congress, he has any choice - along with “sectarian”. I have heard this word used to describe the troubles in Ulster (for those of you who failed Geography, that’s in Ireland), but this is the first time I have heard this word used in connection with Iraq. Expect to hear more of that one in the future.

I don’t need to know what or how or when. I want to know why.

Yes, a new strategy is needed in Iraq. We’ve known that for some time. But do we - and by extension, the bad guys - really need to know the details? Do they need to know how many additional soldiers are being committed and where they will be?

What was missing? Here are my suggestions:

“We got spanked in the November elections. It is obvious that you are trying to tell me something.“

“Now we just need to finish the job and let the Iraqis get on with it. So the gloves are coming off.”

As an aside, I have often wondered how many of our leaders have “skin in the game” - how many of them have siblings and children out there on the front line. Very few, I suspect.

What I was most impressed about was that the President pronounced “Iran” correctly (”ear-raan” not “I-ran”); but someone needs to teach the leader of the free world how to correctly pronounce the word “Nuclear”

It’s not that hard.

 

Now Reading: Brave New Ballot by Avi Rubin

QED

Here’s the scoop: The Pope makes some remarks about the violent nature of Islam. A bunch of muslims with guns are so incensed by this unfair portrayal of their religion that they shoot an elderly nun four times in the back.

Congratulations, boys… that sure showed them… NOT!

Let’s see if any high-ranking muslim clerics issues an edict or a fatwa against these gunmen to bring them to justice. Because we all know that if the victim had been one of them, they would be screaming for blood…

… but only if it were the blood of an infidel.

95 Theses of Geek Activism

Many years ago, a chap named Martin Luther (not to be confused with Martin Luther King, Jr.) posted his 95 Theses on the door of Wittenburg Cathedral… and at a stroke, started the reformation and birthed the Protestant Church.

More recently, another fellow has posted his 95 Theses of Geek Activism on the door of the Internet. Some are humanitarian, some are political. Some I agree with, some I don’t. Technically there’s not really 95 of them, due to repetition. And they are not all “Theses”. But the idea is a good one, and deserves respect. Here are a few of my favourites:

• Trusted computers must not be trusted.
• Fair use is a good thing.
• Data mining will not stop terror.
• Except for extreme cases, the government should not be in the business of parenting our children.
• Security is a trade-off- what are you willing to give up?
• DRM only keeps an honest user honest.

Recommended reading for Geeks… and those who are trying to understand them.

The other side of the story

“Considered felons by the government, these migrants fear detention, rape and robbery. Police and soldiers hunt them down at railroads, bus stations and fleabag hotels. Sometimes they are deported; more often officers simply take their money“

Who are these poor unfortunates? Would you believe Central American migrants in Mexico?

“And though Mexico demands humane treatment for its citizens who migrate to the U.S., regardless of their legal status, Mexico provides few protections for migrants on its own soil“

Funny how this story never made it into the news…

Memo to El Presidente: Practice what you preach!