WSF needs to worry less about lattes

So I took a ride over to Bainbridge Island yesterday, beautiful day for it too. While waiting for the ferry to arrive I went into the McDonald's on Colman Dock to order a Egg McMuffin with Cheese (guilty pleasure). The woman in front of me ordered one of McDonald's new lattes. Unfortunately for her they couldn't come through. So popular they ran out? No. No market for it in downtown Seattle? Maybe, but no. The reason this woman couldn't get a latte at the McDonald's on Coleman Dock is that they're not allowed to sell them. The Washington State Ferry system only allows one business on the dock to sell lattes and other similar coffee drinks: Caffe Appasianatto. Now I'm sure the lattes at Cafe Appasianatto are just fine (franky, they're probably better but I wouldn't know, not being a latte drinker), but why not let the people decide? What's wrong with a little free-market economics? And how is having more than one business selling lattes going to hurt the ferry system? It's not as if Washington State OWNS Caffe Appasianotto (but perhaps Caffe Appasianatto owns them? hmm? Some research of PDC reports might be in order to see if a little campaign money is involved in this situation). Maybe the Washington State Ferry system should be worrying a little bit more about their aging boats and a little bit less about who's selling lattes.

Today's McCain Speech Impresses

I have to confess to being impressed as hell by McCain this morning. A Speech that clarifying a vision of what he wants to see accomplished within a first term, in the form of a current conjugation is a good idea to begin with, but some specific sections in it were really exceptionally dead on. Namely, the bits I put in red text. The Green text is my absolutely favorite part.

Which one of these can anyone actually not think is a great idea and goal?


-------------------------------------

Thank you. The hectic but repetitive routine of presidential campaigns often seems to consist entirely of back and forth charges between candidates, punctuated by photo ops, debates and the occasional policy speech, followed by another barrage of accusations and counter accusations, formulated into the soundbites preferred by cable news producers. It is a little hypocritical for candidates or reporters to criticize these deficiencies. They are our creation. Campaigns and the media collaborated as architects of the modern presidential campaign, and we deserve equal blame for the regret we feel from time to time over its less than inspirational features. Voters, however, even in this revolutionary communications age, with its 24 hour news cycle, can be forgiven their uncertainty about what the candidates actually hope to achieve if they have the extraordinary privilege of being elected President of the United States. We spend too little time and offer too few specifics on that most important of questions. We make promises, of course, about what kind of policies we would pursue in office. But they often are obscured, mischaracterized and forgotten in the heat and fog of political battle.

Next January, the political leadership of the United States will change significantly. It is important that the candidates who seek to lead the country after the Bush Administration define their objectives and what they plan to achieve not with vague language but with clarity.

So, what I want to do today is take a little time to describe what I would hope to have achieved at the end of my first term as President. I cannot guarantee I will have achieved these things. I am presumptuous enough to think I would be a good President, but not so much that I believe I can govern by command. Should I forget that, Congress will, of course, hasten to remind me. The following are conditions I intend to achieve. And toward that end, I will focus all the powers of the office; every skill and strength I possess; and seize every opportunity to work with members of Congress who put the national interest ahead of partisanship, and any country in the world that shares our hopes for a more peaceful and prosperous world.

By January 2013, America has welcomed home most of the servicemen and women who have sacrificed terribly so that America might be secure in her freedom. The Iraq War has been won. Iraq is a functioning democracy, although still suffering from the lingering effects of decades of tyranny and centuries of sectarian tension. Violence still occurs, but it is spasmodic and much reduced. Civil war has been prevented; militias disbanded; the Iraqi Security Force is professional and competent; al Qaeda in Iraq has been defeated; and the Government of Iraq is capable of imposing its authority in every province of Iraq and defending the integrity of its borders. The United States maintains a military presence there, but a much smaller one, and it does not play a direct combat role.

The threat from a resurgent Taliban in Afghanistan has been greatly reduced but not eliminated. U.S. and NATO forces remain there to help finish the job, and continue operations against the remnants of al Qaeda. The Government of Pakistan has cooperated with the U.S. in successfully adapting the counterinsurgency tactics that worked so well in Iraq and Afghanistan to its lawless tribal areas where al Qaeda fighters are based. The increase in actionable intelligence that the counterinsurgency produced led to the capture or death of Osama bin Laden, and his chief lieutenants. There is no longer any place in the world al Qaeda can consider a safe haven. Increased cooperation between the United States and its allies in the concerted use of military, diplomatic, and economic power and reforms in the intelligence capabilities of the United States has disrupted terrorist networks and exposed plots around the world. There still has not been a major terrorist attack in the United States since September 11, 2001.

The United States and its allies have made great progress in advancing nuclear security. Concerted action by the great democracies of the world has persuaded a reluctant Russia and China to cooperate in pressuring Iran to abandon its nuclear ambitions, and North Korea to discontinue its own. The single greatest threat facing the West -- the prospect of nuclear materials in the hands of terrorists -- has been vastly diminished.

The size of the Army and Marine Corps has been significantly increased, and are now better equipped and trained to defend us. Long overdue reforms to the way we acquire weapons programs, including fixed price contracts, have created sufficient savings to pay for a larger military. A substantial increase in veterans educational benefits and improvements in their health care has aided recruitment and retention. The strain on the National Guard and reserve forces has been relieved.

After efforts to pressure the Government in Sudan over Darfur failed again in the U.N. Security Council, the United States, acting in concert with a newly formed League of Democracies, applied stiff diplomatic and economic pressure that caused the government of Sudan to agree to a multinational peacekeeping force, with NATO countries providing logistical and air support, to stop the genocide that had made a mockery of the world's repeated declaration that we would "never again" tolerant such inhumanity. Encouraged by the success, the League is now occupied with using the economic power and prestige of its member states to end other gross abuses of human rights such as the despicable crime of human trafficking.

The United States has experienced several years of robust economic growth, and Americans again have confidence in their economic future. A reduction in the corporate tax rate from the second highest in the world to one on par with our trading partners; the low rate on capital gains; allowing business to deduct in a single year investments in equipment and technology, while eliminating tax loopholes and ending corporate welfare, have spurred innovation and productivity, and encouraged companies to keep their operations and jobs in the United States. The Alternate Minimum Tax is being phased out, with relief provided first to middle income families. Doubling the size of the child exemption has put more disposable income in the hands of taxpayers, further stimulating growth.

Congress has just passed by a single up or down vote a tax reform proposal that offers Americans a choice of continuing to file under the rules of the current complicated and burdensome tax code or use a new, simpler, fairer and flatter tax, with two rates and a generous deduction. Millions of taxpayers are expected to file under the flat tax, and save billions in the cost of preparing their returns.

After exercising my veto several times in my first year in office, Congress has not sent me an appropriations bill containing earmarks for the last three years. A top to bottom review of every federal bureaucracy has yielded great reductions in government spending by identifying programs that serve no important purpose; and instigating far reaching reforms of procurement and operating policies that have for too long extravagantly wasted money for no better purpose than to increase federal payrolls.

New free trade agreements have been ratified and led to substantial increases in both exports and imports. The resulting growth in prosperity in countries from South America to Asia to Africa has greatly strengthened America's security and the global progress of our political ideals. U.S. tariffs on agricultural imports have been eliminated and unneeded farm subsidies are being phased out. The world food crisis has ended, inflation is low, and the quality of life not only in our country, but in some of the most impoverished countries around the world is much improved.

Americans, who through no fault of their own, lost jobs in the global economy they once believed were theirs for life, are assisted by reformed unemployment insurance and worker retraining programs. Older workers who accept lower paying jobs while they acquire new skills are provided assistance to make up a good part of the income they have lost. Community colleges and technical schools all over the country have developed worker retraining programs suited to the specific economic opportunities available in their communities and are helping millions of workers who have lost a job that won't come back find a new one that won't go away.

Public education in the United States is much improved thanks to the competition provided by charter and private schools; the increase of quality teachers through incentives like merit pay and terrific programs that attract to the classroom enthusiastic and innovative teachers from many disciplines, like Teach for America and Troops to Teachers. Educational software and online teaching programs endorsed by qualified non profits are much more widely in use, bringing to the smallest classrooms in America some of the greatest math, English, and science teachers in the country. This revolution in teaching methods has especially benefited rural America. Test scores and graduation rates are rising everywhere in the country.

Health care has become more accessible to more Americans than at any other time in history. Reforms of the insurance market; putting the choice of health care into the hands of American families rather than exclusively with the government or employers; walk in clinics as alternatives to emergency room care; paying for outcome in the treatment of disease rather than individual procedures; and competition in the prescription drug market have begun to wring out the runaway inflation once endemic in our health care system. More small businesses offer their employees health plans. Schools have greatly improved their emphasis on physical education and nutritional content of meals offered in school cafeterias. Obesity rates among the young and the disease they engender are stabilized and beginning to decline. The federal government and states have cooperated in establishing backstop insurance pools that provide coverage to people hard pressed to find insurance elsewhere because of pre-existing illness.

The reduction in the growth of health care costs has begun to relieve some of the pressure on Medicare; encouraging Congress to act in a bipartisan way to extend its solvency for twenty-five years without increasing taxes and raising premiums only for upper income seniors. Their success encouraged a group of congressional leaders from both parties to work with my administration to fix Social Security as well, without reducing benefits to those near retirement. The reforms include some form of personal retirement accounts in safe and reliable index funds, such as have been available to government employees since their retirement plans were made solvent a quarter century ago.

The United States is well on the way to independence from foreign sources of oil; progress that has not only begun to alleviate the environmental threat posed from climate change, but has greatly improved our security as well. A cap and trade system has been implemented, spurring great innovation in the development of green technologies and alternative energy sources. Clean coal technology has advanced considerably with federal assistance. Construction has begun on twenty new nuclear reactors thanks to improved incentives and a streamlined regulatory process.

Scores of judges have been confirmed to the federal district and appellate courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, who understand that they were not sent there to write our laws but to enforce them and make sure they are consistent with the Constitution. They are judges of exceptional character and quality, who enforce and do not make laws, and who respect the values of the people whose rights, laws and property they are sworn to defend.

Border state governors have certified and the American people recognize that after tremendous improvements to border security infrastructure and increases in the border patrol, and vigorous prosecution of companies that employ illegal aliens, our southern border is now secure. Illegal immigrants who broke our laws after they came here have been arrested and deported. Illegal immigration has been finally brought under control, and the American people accepted the practical necessity to institute a temporary worker program and deal humanely with the millions of immigrants who have been in this country illegally.

Voluntary national service has grown in popularity in part because of the educational benefits used as incentives, as well as frequent appeals from the bully pulpit of the White House, but mostly because the young Americans, no less than earlier generations, understand that true happiness is much greater than the pursuit of pleasure, and can only be found by serving causes greater than self-interest. Scores of accomplished private sector leaders have joined the ranks of my administration for a dollar a year and have instituted some of the most innovative reforms of government programs ever known, often in partnership with willing private sector partners. A sense of community, a kinship of ideals, has invigorated public service again.

This is the progress I want us to achieve during my presidency. These are the changes I am running for President to make. I want to leave office knowing that America is safer, freer, and wealthier than when I was elected; that more Americans have more opportunities to pursue their dreams than at any other time in our history; that the world has become less threatening to our interests and more hospitable to our values; and that America has again, as she always has, chosen not to hide from history but to make history.

I am well aware I cannot make any of these changes alone. The powers of the presidency are rightly checked by the other branches of government, and I will not attempt to acquire powers our founders saw fit to grant Congress. I will exercise my veto if I believe legislation passed by Congress is not in the nation's best interests, but I will not subvert the purpose of legislation I have signed by making statements that indicate I will enforce only the parts of it I like. I will respect the responsibilities the Constitution and the American people have granted Congress, and will, as I often have in the past, work with anyone of either party to get things done for our country.

For too long, now, Washington has been consumed by a hyper-partisanship that treats every serious challenge facing us as an opportunity to trade insults; disparage each other's motives; and fight about the next election. For all the problems we face, if you ask Americans what frustrates them most about Washington, they will tell you they don't think we're capable of serving the public interest before our personal and partisan ambitions; that we fight for ourselves and not for them. Americans are sick of it, and they have every right to be. They are sick of the politics of selfishness, stalemate and delay. They despair when every election -- no matter who wins -- always seems to produce four more years of unkept promises and a government that is just a battleground for the next election. Their patience is at an end for politicians who value ambition over principle, and for partisanship that is less a contest of ide as than an uncivil brawl over the spoils of power. They want to change not only the policies and institutions that have failed the American people, but the political culture that produced them. They want to move this country forward and stake our claim on this century as we did in the last. And they want their government to care more about them than preserving the privileges of the powerful.

There are serious issues at stake in this election, and serious differences between the candidates. And we will argue about them, as we should. But it should remain an argument among friends; each of us struggling to hear our conscience, and heed its demands; each of us, despite our differences, united in our great cause, and respectful of the goodness in each other. That is how most Americans treat each other. And it is how they want the people they elect to office to treat each other.

If I am elected President, I will work with anyone who sincerely wants to get this country moving again. I will listen to any idea that is offered in good faith and intended to help solve our problems, not make them worse. I will seek the counsel of members of Congress from both parties in forming government policy before I ask them to support it. I will ask Democrats to serve in my administration. My administration will set a new standard for transparency and accountability. I will hold weekly press conferences. I will regularly brief the American people on the progress our policies have made and the setbacks we have encountered. When we make errors, I will confess them readily, and explain what we intend to do to correct them. I will ask Congress to grant me the privilege of coming before both houses to take questions, and address criticism, much the same as the Prime Minister of Great Britain appears regularly before the House of Commons.

We cannot again leave our problems for another unluckier generation of Americans to fix after they have become even harder to solve. I'm not interested in partisanship that serves no other purpose than to gain a temporary advantage over our opponents. This mindless, paralyzing rancor must come to an end. We belong to different parties, not different countries. We are rivals for the same power. But we are also compatriots. We are fellow Americans, and that shared distinction means more to me than any other association. I intend to prove myself worthy of the office; of our country; and of your respect. I won't judge myself by how many elections I've won. I won't spend one hour of my presidency worrying more about my re-election than keeping my promises to the American people. There is a time to campaign, and a time to govern. If I'm elected President, the era of the permanent campaign will end. The era of problem solving will begin. I promise you, from the day I am sworn into office until the last hour of my presidency, I will work with anyone, of either party, to make this country safe, prosperous and proud. And I won't care who gets the credit.

Thank you.

-John McCain

Socialized Medicine Hazerdous to Your Health

If we want to see the state of socialized healthcare we need look no further than our neighbors to the north where, in provinces like Ontario, private healthcare is illegal and patients there often have to come to the US just to be cared for. The question is, if we go the way of Canada where will anyone go when they have a brain tumor? For more on the story watch video here.

Seattle Finally Starting to "Get It"

Could it be? The era of political correctness to the point of self defeat is finally coming to an end? It seems that some columnists and editorialists are finally calling a spade a spade in exposing the foolishness surrounding the loss of a $13.2 million grant to Seattle Public Schools. I applaud you Danny Westneat, et al. Admitting we have a problem is the first step toward recovery.

May Day Rally

Hundreds of people, many of them likely illegal immigrants, took to the streets yesterday to protest what one man called the unjust law that makes many of these people illegal. (Story here.) He compared people coming here illegally to black people sitting at lunch counters in the 1960's southern US. Excuse me?! There is nothing someone can do to change their skin color (unless you're Michael Jackson, I suppose), nor should they. And while there's nothing someone can do to change what nation they were born in, it's not terribly difficult to immigrate to this wonderful country. Although one of the problems is that it could be easier, not in terms of who we let in. For the most part, the people that cut through all the red tape are going to get in unless there's a really good reason. The problem is the red tape. I've worked in immigration law before and the amount of senseless paperwork and good people that had to jump through too many hoops because of some small barrier that everyone in the situation wished they could have just overlooked was ridiculous.

But I digress, the point is that we do need law and order, not just to keep out the people that would like to do us harm, but because if someone wants to come here and receive the benefits of living here they also need to commit to the responsibilities. That doesn't even take into account the fact that those here illegally are living as second class citizens, working in the shadows for less than minimum wage and subject to abuse with no consquences for those that abuse them.

The worst part about the story are the folks down in Olympia that broke bank windows and graffittied the Capitol Building. Excuse me?! If you are so intent on coming to this country why don't you treat it with some respect? Same goes for those folks who rip down the US flag and raise a Mexican flag in its place.Anyone who wants to come here legally, contribute to our country and pledge allegiance to our flag should be welcome. Those who have such a serious problem with the way things are here, well, you're not welcome.

Cross-posted at my new blog, Two Right Feet.

The Road to Serfdom - Economic Math

I'm on a trip to France at the moment, and reading the newspapers here, I came across an article that I think is somewhat relevant to a subject we are sure to deal with in this election year; namely; the economic impact of tax cuts or raising taxes.

Link to the article in the Int. Herald Tribune, which is actually a great source of news, assuming you are not addicted to Natalee Holloway or Britney Spears updates.



So, what I sense is a lack of understanding, from most of our candidates, about the impact on other things, that some of their suggested programs will cause. Nothing exists in a vacuum and everything in economics, affects other things in the economy, especially taxes. What the article describes, is the unintended consequences of the 35 hour work week that the French left was so proud of. In attempting to lower the amount of working hours in a week, from 40 to 35, to ease the supposed strain of working a full five days, the government created conditions that raised inflation, and lowered pay. Why? Well, because the result of lowering the number of hours each worker was available, caused employers to have to adjust their hiring practices accordingly (slight increase in hiring) to cover the unworked hours. But because the move was done in a vacuum, and was not accompanied by a lowering of the restrictions on part time employees, and on short term employees, the employers ended up having to spend more. As a result, they started exporting jobs to Asia or Eastern Europe in greater numbers, and used that leverage to freeze or limit wages increases, all the while inflation was climbing.

My point is this; the simple math of (less hours per employee, causes employer to hire more people, causes a drop in unemployment) does not reflect the REALITY math of the effect it actually has on the economy. Nothing exists in a vacuum.

So, back to out taxes in the US. Ask your average American the question, "If we lower the tax rate, does the government have more or less revenue?" and they will answer, "Less of course." That is because in simple math, the equation looks like;

X(% of tax rate) multiplied by Y(Money of taxpayers) = Z (tax revenue generated)

But again, nothing exists in a vacuum, so the above equation does not compute in the real world. EVERY single time the tax rate has been dropped, the government has seen an increase in revenue (unfortunately cancelled out by increases in spending, usually). How is that possible? Well, the real world, with its cause and effect paradigms, causes several things to happen when the tax rate is lowered.

1. Employers are able to hire more people, which increases the number of people paying taxes, and hence the amount of money of the taxpayers (Y).
2. Less people cheat, because the risk to reward ration decreases, again increasing the pool of money (Y)
3. People spend and invest more, stimulating even more economic activity.

Now, I agree that this is a slightly more complex idea than raise taxes or lower taxes to pay for things, but isn't it the job of politicians to explain this to us during the debate process?

--Julien

A great article on the positive changes in Iraq

Check out this article about police in Baghdad starting to issue tickets for drivers not wearing seatbelts. While it may not seem like much I think these quote from two Iraqi men sums it up.

“It is a symbol of civilization,” said a taxi driver, Ahmed Wahayid, whose 1993 Hyundai Elantra was stuck in a long line of cars waiting to clear a checkpoint. “Western people in Europe and America have it, so we are like them.”

But primarily, General Mraweh sees his job (writing tickets - ed.) as a way to piece together his shattered country.

“If everyone says there are killings, there are massacres, then I will stay powerless at home and this will disable the country,” he said. “But if the grocer goes to work, the merchant goes to work, I go to work, even you go to work, there will be no more killing, and the criminal will be afraid and he will go back to his den like a mouse.”

Free Tibet?

Again, we're seeing people coming out of the woodwork to "Free Tibet". I'm very curious what it is, exactly, that these people want to see happen. I'm assuming that they intend upon removing China from Tibet and restoring the Dalai Lama and his government. This makes me curious about:

1) How do people think that this will come about?

2) Was the prior government an example of justice and equity, or are people being scammed into supporting yet another dictator in exile who knows how to play the media?

For number two, this is a must read. Nothing like seeing that the activists are actually trying to reinstate a brutal theocracy which practiced serfdom/slavery, torture, mutilation, and many other practices which would be considered outrageous by the same activists. If anything, the Chinese may actually be better for the poor of Tibet in some ways. Go figure.

Global warming, my $1.02

First off, I want to explain my perspective: I think that the current climate change stuff that we're hearing is yet another form of millenialism/end of the world cult. You'll note that there are all of the aspects of religion: an Eden-like utopia, a fall from grace/original sin vis-a-vis industrialization/capitalism; sins: driving large cars, conspicious consumption; indulgences: carbon credits, even more expensive "hybrid" cars, "whole" foods, "fair" trade. You've also your heros and villains. Worse than this, we've seen both sides of this before. In the 1920's it was global warming. In the 1970's it was global cooling. Clearly what is old is new again, and demonstrates that the current degree of panic is unwarranted.

Next, I want to make it clear that I'm very much a conservationist. I like the outdoors, I like it to be clean and for it to be a nice place for me to go visit with my backpack and camera. I'm all for more efficient power stations, cars, solar and wind power production. I am not for using lies, non predictive models, and phony statistics to try to increase taxes, trash the economy, and otherwise change the economic world as we know it.

And finally, I'm not arguing against climate change. The climate is not -- and never has been -- a static thing. Rather it is a highly dynamic system subject to peroidic
changes. It is my belief that the climate has been changing throughout our history, including in modern times and that it is due for additional (possibly dramatic) changes right now as the sun prepares to change operating modes.

A major component of what people are concerning themselves with is CO2 concentration and warming impact via greenhouse effect. There is a major problem with that, namely that CO2 heat absorbsion has not been correctly accounted for in most models. Better explained here. This is important because bad assumptions result in bad data. Why does this matter? Doubling the amount of CO2 does NOT lead to a doubling of greenhouse efffect from Co2. Once the CO2 band is saturated, you're done. Adding more to the system will not alter the warming impact. One issue with Hug's statement is that he didn't publish the reradiation data, however, this experiment can be readily reproduced if someone can get their hands on an appropriate spectrometer. A friend of mine and I are willing to spend some money on funding this experiment if someone can help us obtain access to an appropriate spectrometer for a price we can afford. Anyhow, backing data for this is here (I paid to read the paper) noting that high atmospheric temperatures have not shown the warming effect that current models require.

Why have I harped so much about CO2? It is the necessary and proper link that people have been using to try to demonstrate that humanity is causing global warming. This is despite the reality that we're responsible for about 3% of atmospheric CO2 if you accept the worst case numbers. So, if CO2 has been saturated, and we add another 3% to the mix, it just didn't make a difference to warming. If CO2 wasn't saturated, then we could merely take the warming effect to the saturation level, which is far less than what people are claiming.Finally, I'll wrap up this portion of my rant with this paper which again shows that CO2 is not a major component in our warming system.

One also needs to take into account the reality that stars are variable. People have been saying this for a long time, and there are strong data showing high degrees of correlation between the sun and our climate. Why is this important? Historically, temperatures have varied in even and odd centuries, with the even ones being warm, odd ones being cold (19th: cold, 20th: warm, etc). The data suggest that either the effect is slow moving, or the oceans act as a large thermal battery resulting in several decades for the effects to take place (e.g. the bottom of the coming "cold" period is likely to be mid 21st century).

Next, something important that folks should be aware of. We'll let the BBC explain this "temperatures have not risen globally since 1998 " You can argue I'm cherry picking the quote, but the data are incontrovertible: temperatures have been flat since 1998; I'm deliberately choosing a source which has bought into the hysteria.

Why is this important? If this guy and all of the other astrophysicists which have been worrying about a new solar minimum are correct, then we're going to wish for global warming. It is much easier for us to technically handle a 1-4 degree C warming
which opens new areas up for food production, reduces the amount of heating we need to sustain life in colder regions. Whereas, a global drop in temperature will require us to more efficiently produce food in a shorter growing season with less arable land, and simultaneously allocate more resources towards heating our residences and workplaces.

This isn't to say I think it will be a catastrophe (we survived the last go 'round with less knowledge and technology), but that I think we're barking up the wrong tree. We should take the trillions of dollars that we're throwing at the climate disaster mongers and instead invest in infrastructure to provide clean and safe drinking water for everyone, passable roads for the areas which lack them, and electrification for the regions lacking it. That, literally, is doable with the same amount of money that the catastrophe people want to spend to "address" global warming.

Global Warming - Hot new opinions from a weather expert.

It was this link to a video that got me thinking I wanted a debate forum for this kind of stuff.

He makes several points that I find interesting, including some background info on Al Gore's infamous Polar Bear photo from his movie. Watch this and post your thoughts in the comment section.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/node/7524#SlideFrame_1