I dream of living in ... a World Without Dictators! I'm a Libertarian Paternalist in Slovakia - Freedom with Responsibility - 10% of income into your own Pension; Tax Loans for education, health, housing; now supporting Employment Maximizing Companies!
Name: Tom Grey
Now a libertarian paternalist - progressive Conservative. I want lots of choices for people, with very responsible oriented defaults. Political, smaller gov't oriented, pro- Christian with tolerance and against changes reducing Christian influence.
Mo'nonymous on Real Life Business L...
Mo'nonymous on Real Life Business L...
3-d Analysis to Election Results
A family video - Grey Squirrels
Bush hate, Jew hate, Success hate
Fantasy Bush speech on Sudan as Genocide
Fantasy Condi speech at the NAACP
Harry Potter, Ender Wiggin, (no) Help for Iraqi People
Kerry's Lie -- the Moral Superiority War
Lessons to be learned from Abu Ghraib and Stanford
Money grubbing hate leads to Jew hate
NATO Human Rights Enforcement Group - HReg
Tax Loans
Tax Loans to Solve Immigration
Three Loves plus a New Heart
Will Iraq become a bloodbath?
zee AEI-Brookings papers on Libertarian Paternalism
today
April 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
un
abortion
africa
aid
blogs
cartoon war
christianity
corruption
darfur
democracy
economics
envy
europe
euston
free press
gas tax
gays
genocide
greys
harry potter
hearts and minds
human rights
immigration
innovation
iran
iraq
islamofascism
israel palestine
jobs
justice
katrina
leftist
maximum employment
media
military
moral hazard
morality
mortgages
music
pajamas media
peace
politics
poverty
property rights
reform
responsibility
secular
singularity ai
supreme court
tax loans
technology
terrorism
torture
troop withdrawal
unreal perfection
vietnam
world cop
wot
visited *loading* times
NYT trash. David Kennedy's call for a military of temporary slaves is disgusting.
I can't stand it. Calls the US Army mercenary, and tries to weasel out of making it an insult -- it is, technically, true.
Mention of irrelevant WW II, no mention of Korea, Vietnam, Lebanon, Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, or Iraq.
He's either an intellectual coward or a mental midget for not mentioning M. Friedman's rebuttal to the mercenary complaint -- the alternative is slave. This is so terrible.
Of course, he doesn't mention that Stanford refuses to allow ROTC courses -- all Federal funding for such colleges should be cut!
He doesn't mention that Rwanda showed the alternative to a US human rights footprint -- genocide allowed. Probably because he was a supporter of Clinton in 1996.
There are two kinds of gov't.
Democracy, by votes.
Or by death squads.
All of the "King's gov't" are gov't by death squad; most wars are about which death squad group will be the gov't.
Most death squad gov't isn't so different than Spain under Franco.
As Iraq becomes a democracy, all the dictatorships around them will have people who can see the diference between their own gov't, and a democratic Iraqi gov't.
The next 10 years will be very interesting. (see neo-neo-con on Muslims against Terrorism)
It is silly to the point of irresponsible journalism to talk about jobs, jobs, jobs, without talking about the unemployment rate.
Here are two basic Free Market (no gov't action) vs Gov't action scenarios, both looking at 100 000 workers growing to 101 000 workers in a 2 year period, with a 6% unemployment rate (6 000 workers looking for jobs).
While the gov't action could be: rice tarrifs; or higher minimum wages; let's say it's support for a factory offering 1000 countable jobs.
2 years after Free Market, 5% unemployment, only 5 000 looking for jobs. After some 16 000 folk changed jobs in the 2 year period. No credit to any gov't official.
2 years after gov't Factory support (and higher taxes to support gov't action):5.5% unemployment, or 5 500 looking for jobs, only some 15 000 changed jobs, including the 1000 working at the new factory. Gov't gets the credit for those 1000, even though the performance is WORSE than if the gov't had done nothing.
Even though the Free Market folk can't count and identify exactly who will be winners in their better alternative, the truth shows up in the unemployment rate.
The right number to look at is the total unemployment rate in the economy. NAFTA was good for America -- compare to the EU! CAFTA will be, too.
There will be dislocations; there will be individual losers; there will be distribution of benefit issues. But the economic pie for Central America will be larger, and the US consumers will have lower prices.
By the way, Africa Aid should focus on creating jobs in Africa, in sustainable wealth creating organizations. Such groups of humans who act peacefully and cooperatively together are called ... companies. The measure of their sustainability is called ... profit. (via Marc)
Marc talks about Castro, and how the left has been slow to condemn the dictator.
[a pro-press commenter says I'm "Missing a big boat" -- ha! The Leftist dominated news-boat is sinking. I won't miss it.]
Orville Schell talks about Vietnam at PressThink.
"But, over the years we messed that war up so badly and were so dishonest with ourselves, that by the time I fled its utter and total madness in the late 60s and vowed never to go back, there weren't more than a handful of correspondets of my acquaintance who were feeling hopeful and positive about the future. That end-game was the result of a long process of facts speaking out over all too much US government propaganda."
I think he means first Johnson's generals, than Nixon's, were WRONG about how soon it would it end. They were sometimes wrong about body counts, but not so much. The generals were TERRIBLY wrong about how long it would take -- but they were RIGHT about how bad the alternative was.
The anti-War folk were WRONG about how "Peace now" would be better.
"too much US gov't propaganda". Ha!
What WAS that "utter and total madness" in the "endgame" ? Genocide.
Evil commies winning, and murdering thousands of unarmed civilians, hundreds of thousands, millions.
Where is that word Mr. Schell? Why can't you admit it: YOU SUPPORTED GENOCIDE.
Isn't that the truth? Didn't each and every press person who wanted the US to leave support the alternative as better than more war?
Johnson lied about the war, Nixon lied about the war -- and the Press lied about the peace, lied about the BAD alternative.
It was not utter madness: read the N. Viet general's accounts. After Tet the goal was to win by Public Relations. What you call madness today was a rational and logical strategy to WIN the war, without winning a battle. Using the Free Press as its useful idiot ally.
The Press helped the commies win, YOU helped; Jay Rosen and Steve Lovelady helped (? -- you WERE anti-War, right?); Cronkite and Rather helped. Jane Fonda and John Kerry helped the commies win.
All provided the Public Relations half-news of Vietnam. The war as "madness," nothing America can do, yada yada, it's "unwinnable."
Because of the N. Vietnam strategy, Vietnam could not be won by America -- but it could have been won by a S. Vietnam funded, equiped, trained, and supported by America. With LONG term support, support that required public relations, support that was opposed and defeated by a press that lied about "madness", when it was really supporting commie victory.
In the same way, Iraq can not be won by America -- only by Iraqis. Only over time, a LONG time. As Bush has quietly said often. [though particular military objectives can be more quickly achieved (and the Bush press position often seems silly.)]
Mr. Schell, you talk about Bush's press and compare it to China. Where are the Hu=Stalin, or Hu=Hitler op-eds in China? Where is the uncensored criticism? What I've read is a) China does NOT allow criticism, and b) Bush and America does allow criticism. A LOT of criticism.
No parallel there.
What is a bit new is that Bush is almost ignoring the Leftist press, allowing almost all legitimate criticisms to be drowned out in a cacaphony of hysterical Bush-hate, Bush-lied, Bush=Hitler nonsense that is so loud and ridiculous that most normal folk turn the political news volumne down low. Real low.
No parallel with the commies.
But when I look at the press coverage of Vietnam, where the LYING, er WRONG press (please, not to mention that genocide word!) advocated US withdrawal, I do find a parallel in press coverage of Iraq.
Iraq coverage is almost all anti-Bush, anti-America, anti-hope, almost all the time. And little discussion of the alternative. No amount of Nixon lies, illegal bombing, or stupid support of corrupt S. Vietnamese officials justifies support for the genocide alternative.
Until Bush critics articulate an alternative program of what should be done, now, in Iraq, their criticism is essentially PR for terrorists.
Iraq will have either democracy or gov't by death squad; the kind that the Palestinian Authority sort of has (with Fatah terrorists murdering and being murdered by Hamas death squads).
The USA put a man on the moon in the 60's -- but did NOT create a stable S. Vietnam. At some unknown, but very high price in US dollars and US soldier lives, the USA could have succeeded. The governments were bad about underestimating the costs, repeatedly.
In Iraq, Bush seems to have learned far more from the Vietnam failure than the press. He's calling for victory, for no timetable and almost no budget ceiling, and letting the Iraqis know it will only be them who create a democratic Iraq, not America. Plenty of troops for Liberation, not enough for Occupation -- no occupation.
Reasonable debate on how best to help Iraq become democratic is almost totally lost by 'Bush lied about WMDs!' so ... anything is better than what he wants. Bah! Implied Unreal Perfection.
The true alternatives: Iraq democracy or death squads. I support democracy. The Press coverage I see seems like PR for death squads.
Jay promotes BlogHer con, for women bloggers.
Wish I could be there, but left Sili Valli 15 years ago, only back once since.
Women wanting men to compete less is probably a better idea than asking women to compete more, but likely fruitless.
It reminds me of sexual promiscuity and irresponsibility. Women had, for generations, wanted men to be more sexually responsible and less promiscuous. With the pill, then legal abortion, and the push for "equality," and the acceptance of changing selves rather than changing the other -- the result was that college women are pushing to have EQUAL sexual promiscuity and irresponsibility as college men.
I think this is, and has been, a big mistake. Especially for women!
Parents with both boy children and girl children usually understand: boys and girls LIKE different things. Just watch a boy take a barbie ... and twist her into a gun shape and start shooting.
Men are also taller than women. -- This added to remind all that such generalizations are about averages, and the more competetive women are more competitive than the less competitive guys (Carly Fiorina? She might be a good addition.)
Hedgehog notes Perry on Multiculturalism, and Tom Friedman on Hate speech and excuse makers.
All too often, the excuse makers include the media.
Muslim services in foreign languages should be taped, and translated, and publically available. The demand that immigrants be tolerant of the socially allowed and legal behavior is sound.
Tolerance of localized intolerance is the problem. Also globally, where there is no World Cop like my proposed Human Rights Enforcement Group to stop the intolerance of dictators.
On Donklephant, Simp's suggestion of more gradual change is good -- all too often reform involves a massive price shock. I recall bread riots in Africa when price controls were eliminated and bread more than doubled in price (Nigeria?)
The EU wants to eliminate subsidies on sugar beet. ALL of them, in one shot.
This is stupid. 10% a year for some years, or 1% per month for many months, are much better gradual changes.
MBNA should go 2.5% for 6 months, 3% for 6 months, 3.5% for 6 months, and then be at 4%. (or go up by .1% each month: 2.1, 2.2....)
The rising interest rates in the US means the big deficit is too big; prolly unemployment is TOO LOW (at about 5%). But the lack of big headlines about unemployment, since it is so good (too pro-Bush), is prolly why the confidence is low. Trade deficits don't matter so much; budget deficits do, and interest rates, and employment. Economy watchers need to keep watching the same important indicators.
As you may or may not already be aware, members of the Watcher's Council hold a vote every week on what they consider to be the most link-worthy pieces of writing around... per the Watcher's instructions, I am submitting one of my own posts for consideration in the upcoming nominations process.
Here is the most recent winning council post, here is the most recent winning non-council post, here is the list of results for the latest vote, and here is the initial posting of all the nominees that were voted on.
My post is "Unwinnable is the Leftist error"
There is also an opening on the Watcher's Council.
AW at Freespeech has a nice Suspected Bombers Will Still be Shot in the Head. Because in the chest is where they have explosives, and the desire is not to detonate.
Do NOT run away from the police. Not anymore.
Roger links to Oriana The Enemy we Treat as Friend:
I've been saying it for four years--that I fight against the Monster that has decided to eliminate us physically and, along with our bodies, to destroy our principles and values. Our civilization. For four years I've been talking about Islamic Nazism; about the war against the West; about the death cult; about European suicide. About a Europe that is no longer Europe, but Eurabia, and that with its feebleness, its inertia, its blindness, its servitude to the enemy is digging its own grave.
Mona Eltahawy in WaPo After London, Tough Questions for Muslims:
Sayed Mohammed Musawi, the head of the World Islamic League in London, insisted "there should be a clear distinction between the suicide bombing of those who are trying to defend themselves from occupiers, which is something different from those who kill civilians, which is a big crime."
Terrorism is ONLY OK against Israel -- that's what the clerics say. (Via Norm and Harry both)
Marcus at Harry's notes a Times article by Gerard Baker:
Above all we should point out that what we are fighting in Iraq is not some brave, popular “insurgency” struggling to free the Arab people from Western and Zionist oppression, but a coalition of some of the most vile individuals who have ever crawled the earth and who happily slaughter Muslim, Christian and Jew alike for their own ends.
That is what we are fighting against in Iraq. If doing that has really increased our vulnerability to attack, it should make us even more determined to prevail.
Norm quotes the PM of Egypt and some statistics on who was murdered in Egypt:
The Sharm hospital official, Abdel Fattah, said 43 foreigners were wounded, including 13 Italians, nine Britons, five Austrians, five Germans, four Spaniards, a Czech, an Israeli Arab, two Saudis, two Kuwaitis and a Qatari national.
He's also got a Drive Out the Trash UN evaluation of Mugabe in Zimbabwe:
The UN's 98-page report concluded that 2.4 million people had been affected, of whom 700,000 had lost their homes or livelihoods or both, in a humanitarian crisis of "immense proportions"
Mugabe needs to be faced with regime change.
Mark Steyn on being Mugged by reality? and the multi-cultis:
That's the great thing about multiculturalism: it doesn't involve knowing anything about other cultures - like, say, the capital of Bhutan or the principal exports of Malaysia, the sort of stuff the old imperialist wallahs used to be well up on. Instead, it just involves feeling warm and fluffy, making bliss out of ignorance.
Antimedia (Media Lies) disses Atrios on not second guessing the cops wrongly killing the Brazillian, but then saying the issue is the "shoot first, ask questions later" cheerleaders. I wish Anti-M would have included the fact that the suspect was running away. Running away from the police is a crime. Maybe it makes sense in Brazil; maybe it used to make sense in the UK. It is a crime -- Jean Charles was guilty. It's not a crime that should come with a death sentence -- but he's not innocent.
Stephen (Vodkapundit) gets it right. Run from the police and you're guilty. He notes the NYT spin against fighting terrorists. He links to Reuel Marc Gerecht on Europe's homegrown Islamists.
Samizdata is Looking for a Muslim Martin Luther -- that's what Islam needs.
Kate (Outside the Beltway) has a letter from Thailand: "in Thailand over 800 people have been killed this year in the southern provinces next to Malaysia, " -- and the BBC, and media, are silent.
And CafeContra selling coffee is great! (via Glenn)
He was supposed to be murdered by Voldemort. The OBJECT which Voldemort might well have been planning to use may well be left in Godric's Hollow.
If Voldemort used Nagini as the 6th, he has no need for the object. But it won't be Harry -- but Harry might well find it.
And what Harry will find among his folks' belongings might include a note to Lily from Severus -- who might have helped her do so well at Potions.
Here are my initial predictions/ thoughts about the book before and after:
Template by Splinder.com | header image credit: Markus Gann © www.begann.de
Orville Schell has a couple long screeds about Vietnam, and the lies of the gov't that made the press sick of it, and then how he left the "madness".
He's wrong about so much, as I discuss Iraq is Vietnam -- in Press Coverage. http://tomgrey.motime.com/1122535603#477838
(Look at my OldTigger photos to see me and my Slovak wife)
I supported a policy of winning in Vietnam, though didn't quite accept my grandmother's idea of nuking Hanoi. In retrospect, had the USA done that, and achieved peace with a divided Vietnam and NO commie takeover in Cambodia, far fewer lives would have been lost.
The anti-War folk supported a policy of "US OUT NOW" -- implicitly that "anything is better." What they got was genocide. I think SE Asian genocide is worse than 10 more years of war effort/ nation building, and a doubled amount of budget spent; and I think any true humanitarian who cares about poor people should feel similar.
The anti-War folk who refuse responsibility for genocide are terrible. They say if their policy is followed, but bad results follow, the bad results are excused for other reasons (butterfly chaos theory. Bah). The Left mostly excused Stalin and Mao for these reasons, in comparison to the demonization of Hitler.
[Being a non-Jew under Hitler was almost certainly more comfy than living under Stalin in 34-44; or under Mao 1950-60]
Good intentions towards (Unreal) Perfection excuse a hellish reality. Bah. The Left needs more comparisons of realistic alternative results, and look at policies most likely to get better net results.
I support democracy in Iraq; and right now that means military regime change -- and I accept that Bush's military is gonna kill some innocent people, and even torture. I don't like it, I want it to be a goal to be kept small, but winning must remain most important. And if the military blows it, the appropriate commanding officer gets discipline (Gen. Karpinski was fired; she's now Col.)
On Cuba, Castro needs to go; but sanctions prolly need to go, too. The Leftist problem with sanctions is that they want some "country to country" punishment LESS than war. Trade sanctions seem to fit that bill. This is silly. It hurts the normal people, but not the gov't -- and it increases the power of the dictator to blame the problems on America.
Even "most favored nation" trade status shouldn't exist, and the USA should buy from anybody and everybody willing to sell. Any sanctions should be sanctions against the officials (no visas, no conferences, etc.) of the bad gov't, not trade. But the rich and powerful, here and there, don't like sanctions on the rich and powerful.