In arduis fidelis. Semper paratus.
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
On break from learning the holes in your head
But we call them "foramen" to be nice.
And I gotta ask, what's up with the roll-on luggage as bookbag? I can understand part time profs using them (office on wheels), but students? I mean it just felt like I was going through O'Hare Airport just now.
And I gotta ask, what's up with the roll-on luggage as bookbag? I can understand part time profs using them (office on wheels), but students? I mean it just felt like I was going through O'Hare Airport just now.
Wednesday's Heinous Linkee-poos
Before I forget for another day, fellow VPXIII ("The Fightin' 13th") Miranda Suri has a new blog. Miranda is seriously fun to know, and she's going to be one of those kick-ass new SF/F writers you'll be hearing about soon.
Jim Hines has a post with contacts and links for "what to do if you're sexually harassed at a SF/F convention. You may remember the complete idiocy of "open source boobs" last year (or whateverthehell they called it). To anybody who wants to put up a fracas, understand there is a difference between what two connecting adults do, and what happens when one person takes advantage of another. While sexual (or any) harassment at a social event is just total douchebagness, when you add in the perceived power differences between an author and a fan, or an editor/publisher and a writer, it becomes a field of land mines. And just as a reminder, setting of land mines is never good for anybody; not the person who triggered it, not the person who set it, and most certainly not for the land mine itself.
Here's a Gallup poll on the differences between the Ds and Rs on compromise. Can't say there's much surprise there, at least from my experience. Heck, you don't have to have my experience, just do a roll of the political conversation from the time of the election.
Speaking of elections, is it me, or is this year full of "newly elected but not sworn in" officials trying to direct the course of the outgoing administrations? Um, yeah. While I would think it's just a "we're chomping at the bit to get started" I'm also taken aback by the presumptiveness of it all. But then, it also feeds into the (false) public perception about who was responsible for TARP.
Here's another "after election" poll. This one on what voters really want (short notes, they'd rather tax the rich than cut Social Security). Of course, before Cassie makes the comment, the PPP poll and PCCC aren't exactly non-partisan players. However, their results to track to other exit polling stats I heard from election day (on various news outlets) and was part of my earlier comment on how it only took 24 hours to go from "we know people were voting 'against' more than 'for'" to "we have a mandate!" (Which, BTW, I continue to hear a ground swelling of the "mandate" echo chamber effect).
Hey, more "non-politcal" links. Maybe I'm having a break through.
Jim Hines has a post with contacts and links for "what to do if you're sexually harassed at a SF/F convention. You may remember the complete idiocy of "open source boobs" last year (or whateverthehell they called it). To anybody who wants to put up a fracas, understand there is a difference between what two connecting adults do, and what happens when one person takes advantage of another. While sexual (or any) harassment at a social event is just total douchebagness, when you add in the perceived power differences between an author and a fan, or an editor/publisher and a writer, it becomes a field of land mines. And just as a reminder, setting of land mines is never good for anybody; not the person who triggered it, not the person who set it, and most certainly not for the land mine itself.
Here's a Gallup poll on the differences between the Ds and Rs on compromise. Can't say there's much surprise there, at least from my experience. Heck, you don't have to have my experience, just do a roll of the political conversation from the time of the election.
Speaking of elections, is it me, or is this year full of "newly elected but not sworn in" officials trying to direct the course of the outgoing administrations? Um, yeah. While I would think it's just a "we're chomping at the bit to get started" I'm also taken aback by the presumptiveness of it all. But then, it also feeds into the (false) public perception about who was responsible for TARP.
Here's another "after election" poll. This one on what voters really want (short notes, they'd rather tax the rich than cut Social Security). Of course, before Cassie makes the comment, the PPP poll and PCCC aren't exactly non-partisan players. However, their results to track to other exit polling stats I heard from election day (on various news outlets) and was part of my earlier comment on how it only took 24 hours to go from "we know people were voting 'against' more than 'for'" to "we have a mandate!" (Which, BTW, I continue to hear a ground swelling of the "mandate" echo chamber effect).
Hey, more "non-politcal" links. Maybe I'm having a break through.
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Tuesday Twofer
Alternative histories of what might have been. That's a fairly long article on the evolution of the Apple Tablet computer (now known as the iPad). I remember those heady days of seeing where computers were going and being jazzed about it. All before computers became the ubiquitous beige boxes that sat on people's desks, frustrating them in trying to get them to work "as promised" and fueling the boom in IT department staffing. It's actually a little of what I had to tackle with Bladesman. Having demolished California and its economy, Silicon Valley never took off, so where did computer development take place? In upstate NY and based around the cell phone (via Motorola and IBM's labs up there). So in my novel, computing looks very different than it does today. (grokked from Dan)
Gazpacho is best served cold. Revenge, however, is a business of applying heat.
I was beginning to miss Crazy Uncle Pat, good thing Crazy Uncle Bryan has stepped up to the plate. (also sent by Dan)
Gazpacho is best served cold. Revenge, however, is a business of applying heat.
I was beginning to miss Crazy Uncle Pat, good thing Crazy Uncle Bryan has stepped up to the plate. (also sent by Dan)
Tuesday morning, trying to be more hopeful
Here's some views of the morning commute. The cattails came out better than yesterday, but there was less ice this morning. The ability to stop and take a good photo provided curtesy of ODOT, which has somehow forgotten that Labor Day means the end of orange barrel season/
Monday, November 8, 2010
Fed Up with Rick Perry
Well, besides making a point by point critique let's just hit the comment I'm hearing where ever he is promoting his book.
Texas don't need no stinking Federal EPA because with their "flexible permitting process" they've cleaned up Texas' air. So that shows that local (ie. state) control is better.
Really?
Hmm, let me see, just how did Texas' air get to be so bad that you can show such a dramatic improvement? Oh yes, that would have been that same flexible permitting done under the Bush Administration (when he was governor of Texas). So, yeah, you had a lot to improve. And let's see, I wonder if it has anything to do with a shift of refining to Louisiana? Or maybe the collapse of oil production along the panhandle. Or the lost of manufacturing across the border to the Maquiadores, India, China or Vietnam. That those companies moving from California are mostly corporate offices and financial firms (who are not big polluters). No, I'm sure it's all about how having state control helped.
And that state control, looking after state interests, is a better solution.
Because, you know, the midwest states were all over that preventing Sulfur Dioxide from getting into the atmosphere. You know, except they weren't being effected by it, so they didn't care. Of course, SE Canada and the NE of the US were having a hard time with all the acid rain we were sending their way. But screw them, because we have state's rights and they can't force us to do shit. So if Texas sends Louisiana, Alabama, Florida, or Georgia some high level particulates that precipitates in their states, destroying their health, crops, rivers, infrastructure, economy, etc, well, it doesn't matter, because Texas has clean air. Don't you feel better now?
So, state's rights, huh Mr. Perry. Secure your own damn border. After all, the National Guard is commanded by the Governor except in times of war. Surely you don't want us to declare war on Mexico. You know, your major trading partner? So, you want them on the border? I agree with our Sec. of DoHS. Pay for it yourself. You know, with your lower tax rate. After all, you think the 16th Amendment is so terrible.
Texas don't need no stinking Federal EPA because with their "flexible permitting process" they've cleaned up Texas' air. So that shows that local (ie. state) control is better.
Really?
Hmm, let me see, just how did Texas' air get to be so bad that you can show such a dramatic improvement? Oh yes, that would have been that same flexible permitting done under the Bush Administration (when he was governor of Texas). So, yeah, you had a lot to improve. And let's see, I wonder if it has anything to do with a shift of refining to Louisiana? Or maybe the collapse of oil production along the panhandle. Or the lost of manufacturing across the border to the Maquiadores, India, China or Vietnam. That those companies moving from California are mostly corporate offices and financial firms (who are not big polluters). No, I'm sure it's all about how having state control helped.
And that state control, looking after state interests, is a better solution.
Because, you know, the midwest states were all over that preventing Sulfur Dioxide from getting into the atmosphere. You know, except they weren't being effected by it, so they didn't care. Of course, SE Canada and the NE of the US were having a hard time with all the acid rain we were sending their way. But screw them, because we have state's rights and they can't force us to do shit. So if Texas sends Louisiana, Alabama, Florida, or Georgia some high level particulates that precipitates in their states, destroying their health, crops, rivers, infrastructure, economy, etc, well, it doesn't matter, because Texas has clean air. Don't you feel better now?
So, state's rights, huh Mr. Perry. Secure your own damn border. After all, the National Guard is commanded by the Governor except in times of war. Surely you don't want us to declare war on Mexico. You know, your major trading partner? So, you want them on the border? I agree with our Sec. of DoHS. Pay for it yourself. You know, with your lower tax rate. After all, you think the 16th Amendment is so terrible.
Two for a Monday
Dan sends this link to a daring fireball comment on the inequity of pay basically throws America into the banana republic realm of inequities. I think I've talked about (and linked to articles) showing this point (although, not in those terms). So, if you don't want to read the articles, I'll just quote this juicy tidbit:
To point out the inequity, let's restate that the $370,000 is the tax cut, not their income level. At the end of the fireball blurb, he asks how so many can support policies that support so few. The answer is easy. I've linked before to an article on how out of tune with reality most people's perception of pay and income is, and everybody believes they'll be rich someday.
It's being floated around in the twitter-verse, Non-Sequitor nails it. That is, talks about the current talking points (well, shouting points) and shows just how incredibly bad it would be if those talking points were implemented. History, it's a bitch. No wonder the Texas School Board went on a rewriting campaign last year. Also, speaking of rewriting, along a similar vein there's this story that basically shows the point of "only the treacherous suspect treachery." Remember my comment about how a whole bunch of things would only come out after the election? Like how Ohio had the 5th fastest growing economy last year, but Strickland still was pilloried as not doing anything for the economy. Or how employment finally reached a level of "treading water" unlike how the economy was portrayed in the election. And here, I'll admit, the turn around isn't going fast enough, but it's a lie to say it's not there.
The richest 0.1 percent of taxpayers would get a tax cut of $61,000 from President Obama. They would get $370,000 from Republicans, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. And that provides only a modest economic stimulus, because the rich are less likely to spend their tax savings.
To point out the inequity, let's restate that the $370,000 is the tax cut, not their income level. At the end of the fireball blurb, he asks how so many can support policies that support so few. The answer is easy. I've linked before to an article on how out of tune with reality most people's perception of pay and income is, and everybody believes they'll be rich someday.
It's being floated around in the twitter-verse, Non-Sequitor nails it. That is, talks about the current talking points (well, shouting points) and shows just how incredibly bad it would be if those talking points were implemented. History, it's a bitch. No wonder the Texas School Board went on a rewriting campaign last year. Also, speaking of rewriting, along a similar vein there's this story that basically shows the point of "only the treacherous suspect treachery." Remember my comment about how a whole bunch of things would only come out after the election? Like how Ohio had the 5th fastest growing economy last year, but Strickland still was pilloried as not doing anything for the economy. Or how employment finally reached a level of "treading water" unlike how the economy was portrayed in the election. And here, I'll admit, the turn around isn't going fast enough, but it's a lie to say it's not there.
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Sunday Talking Heads
On the "repudiation" - I call bullshit. The people have said, "we're tired of nothing happening, we'll try the other side. Fix it and move faster." With the jobs report this past week, the conservatives will start with an improving economy. Their policies, IMHO, will pretty much stop that in its tracks. There will be some improvement in the next two years, but I doubt with the conservative policies, that we'll get above 2% GDP growth.
There's two arguments going on that are just idiotic on the face of them.
On the tax "increase" (actually, roll back to the Clinton Era rates, which were low compared to the Reagan Era rates). There's a whole bunch of words being thrown around, and it's time to make the argument clear.
If the "richest 1-2%" were actually increasing payrolls, that would be an expense, not net revenue. You are taxed on net (yes, you start with gross on the forms, but then you subtract all the expenses and work you're rate after all those expenses are taken out). So, if you're actually hiring more people, your net taxable income is less. If taxes are low, you have a disincentive to hire (that is, you can bank more of your money, and if you're an S1, that can be money in your pocket). If taxes are higher you have a greater incentive to hire so you can increase your expenses and lower your taxable income.
Of course, if your sole goal is to maximize your income (and here, just to remind everybody we're discussing if you make $10 million a year or $15 million a year), the tax rate going from 28% to 32% won't mean crap in regards to hiring. It does, however, mean a great deal to the person being taxed in regards to their income (if they're able to make that $15 million instead of just $12.5 million).
Second there's the "devolve to the States" (or State's Rights). Yeah. Anybody live in a state that doesn't have their own fiscal problems? About the only one is Texas, and there growth isn't better than anemic (and I'll just point out the hidden costs of that, higher than average poor, lower than average academic performance, and a looming environmental problem). How well do you think the states will do with the added responsibility? Here in Ohio, the incoming republican "wave" is talking about cutting what we already have. If we add more, guess what will happen to your state taxes?
Along with that is the "privatization" call. Really? We've had now 15+ years of experience of privatization that disproves all the arguments for it (lower costs, faster service, greater customer/tax-payor satisfaction). Privatization raised costs (student loans, medicare advantage, IRS processing, food inspections). It increased the time for processing (IRS, food inspections, Medicare). And it lead to greater dissatisfaction (IRS, and do I need to mention the failure of food and product inspections).
In the real world, these ideas don't work. But, I bet if we clap harder this time, they will. Oh. I'm sure they will. Irony, it's what's for dinner.
There's two arguments going on that are just idiotic on the face of them.
On the tax "increase" (actually, roll back to the Clinton Era rates, which were low compared to the Reagan Era rates). There's a whole bunch of words being thrown around, and it's time to make the argument clear.
If the "richest 1-2%" were actually increasing payrolls, that would be an expense, not net revenue. You are taxed on net (yes, you start with gross on the forms, but then you subtract all the expenses and work you're rate after all those expenses are taken out). So, if you're actually hiring more people, your net taxable income is less. If taxes are low, you have a disincentive to hire (that is, you can bank more of your money, and if you're an S1, that can be money in your pocket). If taxes are higher you have a greater incentive to hire so you can increase your expenses and lower your taxable income.
Of course, if your sole goal is to maximize your income (and here, just to remind everybody we're discussing if you make $10 million a year or $15 million a year), the tax rate going from 28% to 32% won't mean crap in regards to hiring. It does, however, mean a great deal to the person being taxed in regards to their income (if they're able to make that $15 million instead of just $12.5 million).
Second there's the "devolve to the States" (or State's Rights). Yeah. Anybody live in a state that doesn't have their own fiscal problems? About the only one is Texas, and there growth isn't better than anemic (and I'll just point out the hidden costs of that, higher than average poor, lower than average academic performance, and a looming environmental problem). How well do you think the states will do with the added responsibility? Here in Ohio, the incoming republican "wave" is talking about cutting what we already have. If we add more, guess what will happen to your state taxes?
Along with that is the "privatization" call. Really? We've had now 15+ years of experience of privatization that disproves all the arguments for it (lower costs, faster service, greater customer/tax-payor satisfaction). Privatization raised costs (student loans, medicare advantage, IRS processing, food inspections). It increased the time for processing (IRS, food inspections, Medicare). And it lead to greater dissatisfaction (IRS, and do I need to mention the failure of food and product inspections).
In the real world, these ideas don't work. But, I bet if we clap harder this time, they will. Oh. I'm sure they will. Irony, it's what's for dinner.
Saturday, November 6, 2010
Weekend in the rain
Spent the day packing up the Halloween stuff and getting it into the storage shed. Also emptied out the rain barrels and put them away for the winter. All while dodging the rain drops. While I needed to clean up the yard and my leaf blower is rated for "wet leaves," I don't think they meant, "leaves wet from 3 days of rain, and it's still raining."
This week ended with finding out I need to be in Virginia the full week before classes. Joy. If it were one week later, I could probably work out to take the test early. But being the last week I miss the last two classes, the review, the practical review, and the last lab/paper chase.
Finished some paperwork. Slept in first. Got some things done that needed to be done and had been waiting for a few weeks.
All in all, a product Saturday, even without some writing. Although last night I got up around 2am and wrote two pages (long hand) of a story in my head.
This week ended with finding out I need to be in Virginia the full week before classes. Joy. If it were one week later, I could probably work out to take the test early. But being the last week I miss the last two classes, the review, the practical review, and the last lab/paper chase.
Finished some paperwork. Slept in first. Got some things done that needed to be done and had been waiting for a few weeks.
All in all, a product Saturday, even without some writing. Although last night I got up around 2am and wrote two pages (long hand) of a story in my head.
Friday, November 5, 2010
Golden Morning
Not this morning. This morning was early enough the sun hadn't risen by the time I was in to the office. This was yesterday.
And just in time for the annual screwing up of everybody's clock, and to make sure I get to commute through deer country during dusk and dawn yet again.
And just in time for the annual screwing up of everybody's clock, and to make sure I get to commute through deer country during dusk and dawn yet again.
Linkee-poo nods to Jay Lake (mostly)
The Fantasy Novelist's Exam. Bwahahaha! (or what's known in SF circles as "cliche lists"). (grokked from Jay Lake).
Here's another article on just how weird our world is. With bacterial colonization and the revelation that our gut is home to over 40,000 species of bacteria. (grokked from Jay Lake).
An actual historian talking about the historical context of our founding documents and their supposed Biblical origins. Just checked again, nope, bicameral legislatures, executive and judicial branches still not supported by Bible (they were more of a monarchy model in biblical times). The Myths We Tell Ourselves™ takes another hit. (grokked from Jay Lake).
Some labor history in a letter from Wm. Frazier resigning form the Labor Relations Board (in the late 70s). Food for thought. (grokked from Jay Lake).
Slacktivist with an interesting take on the Tea Party's origins (started by an article on HuffPo, which, BTW, I don't read). The more I see and dig deeper, the more I see those social conservatives driving the Tea Party (from the back or the driver's seat is yet to be seen). Also part of why the TP explicitly avoids talking about social issues, but help nominate all very deeply social conservatives for office. (grokked from Jay Lake).
Hey, remember all those dire warning about voter fraud and "stealing" elections so popular in the weeks leading up to the election. Yeah, not so much with the reality. Of course, the "it only didn't happen because they knew we were watching" excuse making has already started. Here's an NPR story on it (hopefully they'll post the transcript so you can read about how one of the "watch" groups is asking for the list of voters in minority districts to "verify" their citizenship - sounds innocuous, but then so did making people pay a tax or take a test before voting, until, you know, most people realized it was just ingrained harassment).
I've talked a lot about the Myths We Tell Ourselves™, mostly on the political front (see above). Here's a blogpost about the social/sexual front (that article is about transgendered individuals and sexual identity and has some concepts that some people may find unsettling, the post is about exactly that). There's plenty of those myths about sexuality especially. Besides the effect of Trans Erasure (the societal process of sticking your fingers in your ears going "lalalala" when someone's physical sexuality doesn't match up to their sexual identity). Here's an NPR story on transgendered children and the pressure to identify with the dangly (or not) parts we have. There's a whole slew of articles I can point to showing how people who are trans are forced into our Myths because our society can't accept that there's more than 2 options. And that's without adding in the bisexuals in our society. But I wanted to point out some examples of how those MWTO are destructive to individuals and society. It's really a pernicious problem.
And it just doesn't pertain to sexuality. Growing up in the 70s with divorced parents wasn't fun (it wasn't the "norm" like it is now). So many questions about the morality of the parents (mostly my Mom), and the dire predictions of how my brother and I would be when we grew up. The only reason do don't hear (much of) that anymore is that many kids have parents who are divorced. Saying those things is no longer safe. And it's something you can't "force" people back to "normality" with the comments, because divorce is now the "normality."
Here's another article on just how weird our world is. With bacterial colonization and the revelation that our gut is home to over 40,000 species of bacteria. (grokked from Jay Lake).
An actual historian talking about the historical context of our founding documents and their supposed Biblical origins. Just checked again, nope, bicameral legislatures, executive and judicial branches still not supported by Bible (they were more of a monarchy model in biblical times). The Myths We Tell Ourselves™ takes another hit. (grokked from Jay Lake).
Some labor history in a letter from Wm. Frazier resigning form the Labor Relations Board (in the late 70s). Food for thought. (grokked from Jay Lake).
Slacktivist with an interesting take on the Tea Party's origins (started by an article on HuffPo, which, BTW, I don't read). The more I see and dig deeper, the more I see those social conservatives driving the Tea Party (from the back or the driver's seat is yet to be seen). Also part of why the TP explicitly avoids talking about social issues, but help nominate all very deeply social conservatives for office. (grokked from Jay Lake).
Hey, remember all those dire warning about voter fraud and "stealing" elections so popular in the weeks leading up to the election. Yeah, not so much with the reality. Of course, the "it only didn't happen because they knew we were watching" excuse making has already started. Here's an NPR story on it (hopefully they'll post the transcript so you can read about how one of the "watch" groups is asking for the list of voters in minority districts to "verify" their citizenship - sounds innocuous, but then so did making people pay a tax or take a test before voting, until, you know, most people realized it was just ingrained harassment).
I've talked a lot about the Myths We Tell Ourselves™, mostly on the political front (see above). Here's a blogpost about the social/sexual front (that article is about transgendered individuals and sexual identity and has some concepts that some people may find unsettling, the post is about exactly that). There's plenty of those myths about sexuality especially. Besides the effect of Trans Erasure (the societal process of sticking your fingers in your ears going "lalalala" when someone's physical sexuality doesn't match up to their sexual identity). Here's an NPR story on transgendered children and the pressure to identify with the dangly (or not) parts we have. There's a whole slew of articles I can point to showing how people who are trans are forced into our Myths because our society can't accept that there's more than 2 options. And that's without adding in the bisexuals in our society. But I wanted to point out some examples of how those MWTO are destructive to individuals and society. It's really a pernicious problem.
And it just doesn't pertain to sexuality. Growing up in the 70s with divorced parents wasn't fun (it wasn't the "norm" like it is now). So many questions about the morality of the parents (mostly my Mom), and the dire predictions of how my brother and I would be when we grew up. The only reason do don't hear (much of) that anymore is that many kids have parents who are divorced. Saying those things is no longer safe. And it's something you can't "force" people back to "normality" with the comments, because divorce is now the "normality."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)