I want to say a few words about this, returning again to some themes that I see as crucial to how things have gone for everyone, not just Westerners, but everyone, yet especially for Westerners.
All societies, it seems, have had social divisions, and distinctions of class, work, and privilege.
In the West, We have had the separation, at least for now, of church, and state.
It was a very long, and a very bitter, still quite bitter, development, and some no doubt still feel, regrettable, development, in human history.
Just how bitter, and how long, hundreds of years, this struggle, this aspect, of other contemporaneous political and military and social struggles, in the West, is hard to even make it go into just a sentence.
We also had an enlightenment, through that period, a broadening and deepening of knowledge, with also an anti religious establishment aspect.
We have had an industrial revolution, and very quickly in historical time, others even more momentous.
We have had relentless technological changes in the past few hundred years.
What have these things meant, for intellectual frameworks?
The intellectual framework changes, similarly to difficulties of 'current history', have been such that they cannot even be properly comprehended, much less described, at the time, going forward.
Some implications have been that people have been more willing to see 'doctrinal', and disciplinary, call it sectarian to set up an 'analogy' (hopefully not too much of a Whig analogy) with protestant segmentations, although other religious segmentations could be used as examples; intellectual sectarian segmentation, as a normal part of growth and differentiation of knowledge, and depth of knowledge, in a multitude of specific fields.
People tend not to see this development, itself, compartmentalization, sectarianism of knowledge, per se, as an issue needing scrutiny.
I want to return to implications of this theme later.
BOOMERBUSTER
OLD CELLO
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
PHENOMENOLOGY AND POPULAR CULTURE
Re Plato's Pop Culture Problem, and Ours Editorial, re Arnold Schwarzenegger and Plato,
I had not read this editorial when this post was first written, but just now saw it. I had even written the commissioner/councillor bit before reading it! Rather a coincidence really, my reference to a video store and nude dancing themes.
The NYT professor comes out, I think, favoring 'freedom' of property and press, regardless of where the chips fall re Plato, or Aeschylus. Doesn't he, more or less, have to? Perhaps I overstate his affiliations with the publication.
Could one ask for any better, more overt, connection between the freedom of the market place, constitutional expression and property rights of pornographers, and the American intellectual establishment?
He claims that Plato had ignored the distinction between the medium and the reality depicted in it. I would have thought, rather, that had been part of Plato's point.
His is really a sophistical defense of freedom of speech, wrapped in a lot of philosophical twaddle.
Could it have been any other way?
Cf. another (phenomenologist existentialist) philosopher, with 'flexible' views: Martin Heidegger, (I don't know whether he was good looking or not, but that is important to Americans),'Anything Goes', with popular culture.
Perhaps a mise en scene for a cartoon, with Andrew Martin, Sartre, Heidegger, this editorial author, and even perhaps Governor Scharzenegger (as an enforcer), would be in order?
Theme music: (IT REALLY SELDOM GETS BETTER THAN THIS, RE PHENOMENOLOGY THEME):
LOST IN A MASQUERADE
Think also, Carnival of Venice
and , oh why not say it,
DON GIOVANNI
I had not read this editorial when this post was first written, but just now saw it. I had even written the commissioner/councillor bit before reading it! Rather a coincidence really, my reference to a video store and nude dancing themes.
The NYT professor comes out, I think, favoring 'freedom' of property and press, regardless of where the chips fall re Plato, or Aeschylus. Doesn't he, more or less, have to? Perhaps I overstate his affiliations with the publication.
Could one ask for any better, more overt, connection between the freedom of the market place, constitutional expression and property rights of pornographers, and the American intellectual establishment?
He claims that Plato had ignored the distinction between the medium and the reality depicted in it. I would have thought, rather, that had been part of Plato's point.
His is really a sophistical defense of freedom of speech, wrapped in a lot of philosophical twaddle.
Could it have been any other way?
Cf. another (phenomenologist existentialist) philosopher, with 'flexible' views: Martin Heidegger, (I don't know whether he was good looking or not, but that is important to Americans),'Anything Goes', with popular culture.
Perhaps a mise en scene for a cartoon, with Andrew Martin, Sartre, Heidegger, this editorial author, and even perhaps Governor Scharzenegger (as an enforcer), would be in order?
Theme music: (IT REALLY SELDOM GETS BETTER THAN THIS, RE PHENOMENOLOGY THEME):
LOST IN A MASQUERADE
Think also, Carnival of Venice
and , oh why not say it,
DON GIOVANNI
RE OFFICE 39 KOREA CHINA
'Strategic trading partners':
China 'unenthusiastic' re sanctions, while it already supplies most of N Korea's luxury goods.
Well, who is taking orders from whom, and why, and how has it ended up that way?
The Casanova hand of the laissez faire market, of course.
Japan a present and previous strategic partner, had been greedily, though covertly (only as far as the average McCarthyite American knew) trading with 'Communist' China in the 50s, while also ravenously trading with the US and Taiwan, and of course with any Western Bloc nation that would do so. In previous posts, I have referred to it as 'Playing Three Sides In The Cold War'.
See also previous posts re Nixon 1972 and Fattening Things Up
.
Game Over.
China 'unenthusiastic' re sanctions, while it already supplies most of N Korea's luxury goods.
Well, who is taking orders from whom, and why, and how has it ended up that way?
The Casanova hand of the laissez faire market, of course.
Japan a present and previous strategic partner, had been greedily, though covertly (only as far as the average McCarthyite American knew) trading with 'Communist' China in the 50s, while also ravenously trading with the US and Taiwan, and of course with any Western Bloc nation that would do so. In previous posts, I have referred to it as 'Playing Three Sides In The Cold War'.
See also previous posts re Nixon 1972 and Fattening Things Up
.
Game Over.
RE NATION BUILDING WORKS EDITORIAL DITTO WOLFOWITZ' REMARKS
Not in Iraq, not after past militarizations of the region.
As Professor Rufus Fears, quoting another learned source,
speaking from thousands of years of human history,
"The Middle East is the graveyard of empires."
We should never have dismembered the Ottoman Empire after WW I, even though they had been gently breathing down Europe's neck for centuries.
But there have been so many geopolitical blunders over there.
As Professor Rufus Fears, quoting another learned source,
speaking from thousands of years of human history,
"The Middle East is the graveyard of empires."
We should never have dismembered the Ottoman Empire after WW I, even though they had been gently breathing down Europe's neck for centuries.
But there have been so many geopolitical blunders over there.
Monday, August 30, 2010
RE CHINA FORTIFIES STATE SECTOR EDITORIAL NYT
Smelling the coffee, here in the US, only about 50 years too late, now.
Who were the 'analysts' predicting the withering away?
Who had claimed they were a 'capitalist' country, now?
Where are they now?
Who were the 'analysts' predicting the withering away?
Who had claimed they were a 'capitalist' country, now?
Where are they now?
Sunday, August 29, 2010
RE COMPLEX FEDERAL AND MANIFOLD STATES' REGULATIONS
Some reasons why America needs reform can be seen in certain technical areas of the law, where federal laws, and individual states' laws, operate on similar topics, with quite complicated, confusing, involved, and uncertain outcomes and results.
One example is environmental laws. Environmental contamination is a hot current topic.
The current Florida Bar Journal has an article dealing with this topic, and with the creation of duties.
(Re private causes of action, if, say, California had similar legislation, might one infer that perhaps the Skipper of 'The Minnow', the pleasure boat on Gilligan's Island, would have had a cause of action, in California, say, for an oil spill off the coast there, resulting in a 'loss of view' for The Minnow's clientele, absent a property right, and absent a showing of negligence? It's complicated, as one might imagine.)
One example is environmental laws. Environmental contamination is a hot current topic.
The current Florida Bar Journal has an article dealing with this topic, and with the creation of duties.
(Re private causes of action, if, say, California had similar legislation, might one infer that perhaps the Skipper of 'The Minnow', the pleasure boat on Gilligan's Island, would have had a cause of action, in California, say, for an oil spill off the coast there, resulting in a 'loss of view' for The Minnow's clientele, absent a property right, and absent a showing of negligence? It's complicated, as one might imagine.)
RE FRANK RICH THE BILLIONAIRES BANKROLLING THE TEA PARTY ARTICLE
Who knew?
Very big 'grass roots'. Of course it had sounded just a little
'too good to be true', as they say.
Very big 'grass roots'. Of course it had sounded just a little
'too good to be true', as they say.
Saturday, August 28, 2010
MISE EN SCENE FOR A CARTOON T BACK HOT DOG STAND LOCAL GOVERNMENT PLATO'S POP CULTURE PROBLEM AND OURS: LOST IN A MASQUERADE
Here is a cartoon showing a county commission or city council meeting, could be anywhere.
This is the kind of thing, only slightly exaggerated, that media can get away with, nowadays, maybe the Commission meeting is a stretch, but hey,
with a Hot Dog Stand attendant doubling as a reporter, in a g string, T back, insisting, under her and her firms' rights, that the commission has no authority, or legitimate power to prevent her from covering the meeting (rather than herself) in her T back attire, because she is a card carrying member of the press, covering moreover a meeting in a public forum, and her free speech rights plus individual maverick free expression rights, will be impaired if she is not allowed to carry on, en deshabille, and government in the sunshine requires that the camera be allowed to shine on her glossy behind, as well as on what the commission members may have to say.
Let's give her another single, but her largest, piece of attire, a 4Beaver Stetson cowgirl hat; sort of flounce the Maverick theme a little, for the press corp.
She announces in medias res, that any commissioners, wanting an extra large dog, in a hot bun, with an extra squirt of mustard, have to come to the back end of the line.
Say, perhaps one of the sitting commissioners is a well known, wealthy, savvy, good looking, nude dance club and video rental store owner. He's also a church going family man; nude dancing and soft porn video rentals are just good businesses.
He also took some philosophy courses recently at night, Sartrean existentialism, mainly.
Any critic of government regulation can get a good hearing, if not a seat at the table.
Re Plato's Pop Culture Problem, and Ours Editorial,
re Arnold Schwarzenegger and Plato,
I had not read this editorial when this post was first written, but just now saw it. I had even written the commissioner bit before reading it! Rather a coincidence really, my reference to a video store and nude dancing themes.
The professor comes out, I think, favoring 'freedom' of property and press, regardless of where the chips fall re Plato, or Aeschulus.
Doesn't he, more or less, have to? Perhaps I overstate his affiliations with the publication.
Could one ask for any better, more overt, connection between the freedom of the market place, constitutional expression and property rights of pornographers, and the American intellectual establishment? Could it have been any other way?
Cf. another (phenomenologist existentialist) philosopher, with 'flexible' views: Martin Heidegger, (I don't know whether he was good looking or not, but that is important to Americans),
'Anything Goes', with popular culture.
Perhaps a mise en scene for a cartoon, with Andrew Martin, Sartre, Heidegger, this editorial author, and even perhaps Governor Scharzenegger (as an enforcer), would be in order?
Theme music: (IT REALLY SELDOM GETS BETTER THAN THIS, RE PHENOMENOLOGY THEME):
LOST IN A MASQUERADE
Think also, Carnival of Venice,
and , oh why not say it,
DON GIOVANNI
This is the kind of thing, only slightly exaggerated, that media can get away with, nowadays, maybe the Commission meeting is a stretch, but hey,
with a Hot Dog Stand attendant doubling as a reporter, in a g string, T back, insisting, under her and her firms' rights, that the commission has no authority, or legitimate power to prevent her from covering the meeting (rather than herself) in her T back attire, because she is a card carrying member of the press, covering moreover a meeting in a public forum, and her free speech rights plus individual maverick free expression rights, will be impaired if she is not allowed to carry on, en deshabille, and government in the sunshine requires that the camera be allowed to shine on her glossy behind, as well as on what the commission members may have to say.
Let's give her another single, but her largest, piece of attire, a 4Beaver Stetson cowgirl hat; sort of flounce the Maverick theme a little, for the press corp.
She announces in medias res, that any commissioners, wanting an extra large dog, in a hot bun, with an extra squirt of mustard, have to come to the back end of the line.
Say, perhaps one of the sitting commissioners is a well known, wealthy, savvy, good looking, nude dance club and video rental store owner. He's also a church going family man; nude dancing and soft porn video rentals are just good businesses.
He also took some philosophy courses recently at night, Sartrean existentialism, mainly.
Any critic of government regulation can get a good hearing, if not a seat at the table.
Re Plato's Pop Culture Problem, and Ours Editorial,
re Arnold Schwarzenegger and Plato,
I had not read this editorial when this post was first written, but just now saw it. I had even written the commissioner bit before reading it! Rather a coincidence really, my reference to a video store and nude dancing themes.
The professor comes out, I think, favoring 'freedom' of property and press, regardless of where the chips fall re Plato, or Aeschulus.
Doesn't he, more or less, have to? Perhaps I overstate his affiliations with the publication.
Could one ask for any better, more overt, connection between the freedom of the market place, constitutional expression and property rights of pornographers, and the American intellectual establishment? Could it have been any other way?
Cf. another (phenomenologist existentialist) philosopher, with 'flexible' views: Martin Heidegger, (I don't know whether he was good looking or not, but that is important to Americans),
'Anything Goes', with popular culture.
Perhaps a mise en scene for a cartoon, with Andrew Martin, Sartre, Heidegger, this editorial author, and even perhaps Governor Scharzenegger (as an enforcer), would be in order?
Theme music: (IT REALLY SELDOM GETS BETTER THAN THIS, RE PHENOMENOLOGY THEME):
LOST IN A MASQUERADE
Think also, Carnival of Venice,
and , oh why not say it,
DON GIOVANNI
RE MY ESSAYS This is bull, below, but there's so much of it out there
Reviewing my brief essays, and comparing and contrasting them, with some of the more popular NYT op ed authors out there, I have to say, my posts are really far better (not really), more interesting (iffy), more incisive (only sometimes), and a whole lot funnier (mainly to me), in a sort of belly laugh way, than theirs!
Perhaps it is an editor thing, they have these, say, fat, cigar smoking, gruff editors, up there in New York, believe me I know the types, breathing down on them, (say, 'the hot breath of close scrutiny'), barking things like, 'don't put that issue in play'; 'why cut off your nose to spite your face'; 'leave that whole section out, you fool', things like that.
I almost feel sorry for Brooks and Krugman, Friedman, etc.
Pathetic, really.
Perhaps it is an editor thing, they have these, say, fat, cigar smoking, gruff editors, up there in New York, believe me I know the types, breathing down on them, (say, 'the hot breath of close scrutiny'), barking things like, 'don't put that issue in play'; 'why cut off your nose to spite your face'; 'leave that whole section out, you fool', things like that.
I almost feel sorry for Brooks and Krugman, Friedman, etc.
Pathetic, really.
RE MR PATERSON EDITORIAL SAME OLD MEDIA HYPE TO SELL PAPERS: BUILDING A NATION OF KNOW-NOTHINGS; PROTECT PORNOGRAPHY AND VIOLENCE
Call it, after the later post topic, The Drew Pearson Fallacy:
The decadent American media feeds on federal, state, and local government. It has no higher mission or calling. Once in a while it even says so.
The print and television media have, over decades, in some respects since the beginning really, shown as little interest in taking up hard issues of political reform, of advancing from the political status quo, as have the politicians it covers for its bread and butter.
Just commenting on state (or local) government corruption or mismanagement, and pointing out self fulfilling things like how much time, proportionally, public officials must spend to try to cover up mistakes, while seemingly a good office,
(because officials know that the powerful and adverse media itself has nothing more constructive to do than seek out such things),
(and by implication, how little time, really, has been left over for substantive government administration and nuts and bolts government work),
has been what freedom of the press, and government in the sunshine, have been all about.
The bottom line, it doesn't get Americans 'better government'.
That's the dirty media secret, in all of this, decade in decade out, because better run governments, federal, state, local, or consolidated, that correspondingly would need or countenance less media coverage, and for which less media coverage, rather than more, would be well justified, is the last thing these old media darlings have wanted to hear.
They have been by far the strongest defenders of free press and open government, and have tirelessly lobbied the American people and bullied their politicians, because they have had the most powerful vested interests in such a laissez faire regime.
It is a corporate thing, not a good government thing.
That has been seen most clearly in the difficulties even most conservative Americans, and organizations, have had in instituting even basic protections from pornography, or pervasive violent prurient or obnoxious programming, or aggressive marketing of bad products targeted directly to children rather than to adults, and other things.
Politicians, of all people, are terrified to challenge freedom of press or sunshine laws, even though they, of all people, have long known, been rudely confronted by, and cowtow slavishly, to these truths.
The media even goes so far as to point out things like how successive administrations, in various states, recently NYT editorials re Illinois, long a snake pit of political vice, and here now New York state, fail to improve, over decades, without however drawing larger obvious positive conclusions or suggestions about the systems they cover,...... maybe state governments need radical overhaul, consolidation, a different political set up, whatever.
In this they have inadvertently indicted the media itself, because for what other higher reasons would one investigate, and report, such things, over and over again, decade in decade out, except in some hope, and with some suggestions, for fundamental changes.
Answer: to distract, to entertain, but above all, to appeal to lower interests causing the public to buy newspapers, etc.
They have been deleterious to the general welfare and political edification of Americans; helping keep already relatively weak governments, at all levels, weak, fragmented, unfocussed, and often on the defensive; while rendering media wealthy and powerful(ALTHOUGH DECIDEDLY LESS SO WITH THE RECENT ADVENT OF INTERNET SOURCES OF INFORMATION).
If you look at issues like truth and falsehood, the failure of media to self police, and the weakness of government to chastise it, has lead to the rise of demagogues, who themselves provide fodder for other media to contradict, even on basic facts.
This is a situation the media itself created, pundits like Limbaugh, and Fox News, and fodder of this type is what has always fueled the media.
The rise of these media sources spreading falsehoods, especially on the right, but on both looking back historically, is a natural product of the American media system, not a mere aberration. The fact that false statements and innuendo can flourish, can become the mainstream substance, is a commentary on the bankruptcy of American freedom of speech and press itself.
The Casanova hand of the unfettered, laissez faire, free market for news, yet again.
The decadent American media feeds on federal, state, and local government. It has no higher mission or calling. Once in a while it even says so.
The print and television media have, over decades, in some respects since the beginning really, shown as little interest in taking up hard issues of political reform, of advancing from the political status quo, as have the politicians it covers for its bread and butter.
Just commenting on state (or local) government corruption or mismanagement, and pointing out self fulfilling things like how much time, proportionally, public officials must spend to try to cover up mistakes, while seemingly a good office,
(because officials know that the powerful and adverse media itself has nothing more constructive to do than seek out such things),
(and by implication, how little time, really, has been left over for substantive government administration and nuts and bolts government work),
has been what freedom of the press, and government in the sunshine, have been all about.
The bottom line, it doesn't get Americans 'better government'.
That's the dirty media secret, in all of this, decade in decade out, because better run governments, federal, state, local, or consolidated, that correspondingly would need or countenance less media coverage, and for which less media coverage, rather than more, would be well justified, is the last thing these old media darlings have wanted to hear.
They have been by far the strongest defenders of free press and open government, and have tirelessly lobbied the American people and bullied their politicians, because they have had the most powerful vested interests in such a laissez faire regime.
It is a corporate thing, not a good government thing.
That has been seen most clearly in the difficulties even most conservative Americans, and organizations, have had in instituting even basic protections from pornography, or pervasive violent prurient or obnoxious programming, or aggressive marketing of bad products targeted directly to children rather than to adults, and other things.
Politicians, of all people, are terrified to challenge freedom of press or sunshine laws, even though they, of all people, have long known, been rudely confronted by, and cowtow slavishly, to these truths.
The media even goes so far as to point out things like how successive administrations, in various states, recently NYT editorials re Illinois, long a snake pit of political vice, and here now New York state, fail to improve, over decades, without however drawing larger obvious positive conclusions or suggestions about the systems they cover,...... maybe state governments need radical overhaul, consolidation, a different political set up, whatever.
In this they have inadvertently indicted the media itself, because for what other higher reasons would one investigate, and report, such things, over and over again, decade in decade out, except in some hope, and with some suggestions, for fundamental changes.
Answer: to distract, to entertain, but above all, to appeal to lower interests causing the public to buy newspapers, etc.
They have been deleterious to the general welfare and political edification of Americans; helping keep already relatively weak governments, at all levels, weak, fragmented, unfocussed, and often on the defensive; while rendering media wealthy and powerful(ALTHOUGH DECIDEDLY LESS SO WITH THE RECENT ADVENT OF INTERNET SOURCES OF INFORMATION).
If you look at issues like truth and falsehood, the failure of media to self police, and the weakness of government to chastise it, has lead to the rise of demagogues, who themselves provide fodder for other media to contradict, even on basic facts.
This is a situation the media itself created, pundits like Limbaugh, and Fox News, and fodder of this type is what has always fueled the media.
The rise of these media sources spreading falsehoods, especially on the right, but on both looking back historically, is a natural product of the American media system, not a mere aberration. The fact that false statements and innuendo can flourish, can become the mainstream substance, is a commentary on the bankruptcy of American freedom of speech and press itself.
The Casanova hand of the unfettered, laissez faire, free market for news, yet again.
Friday, August 27, 2010
RE: THIS IS NOT A RECOVERY MISE EN SCENE OFFSHORING ECONOMISTS CASTAWAYS: MS' TRIDENT
Question, Re trying something 'unconventional' re jobs:
Would offshoring some economist jobs to China or India help?
If so, which jobs?
How about this, only those economists who favor less offshoring of other jobs,
should be offshored.
Or, since we can't pick winners, let's let the market decide which kinds of
economists to offshore?
Similarly for all other professions.
Makes a lot of sense really.
How about a preliminary sketch for a cartoon:
MISE EN SCENE:
Show a, how shall I put it, show a scene, say with a stultifera navis, a small sail boat, being embarked at a small pier, vast expanse of ocean stretching to the edge of page, palm trees for calming effect,
depicting only economists, Say Chicago School individuals, Fed folks, and their friends and families, favoring offshoring, being offshored.
"Offshoring" here means being marooned on a small boat drifting toward a foreign shore.
Think perhaps Gilligan's Island, but the 'professors' here are not any where near as handsome as the ones on the show, although have not yet been turned into bonobos for a future cartoon.
I just throw this in, in case there are any contemporary philosophers out there, for whom beauty versus ugliness is a compelling intellectual criterion of judgment.
Theme music: Bali Hai,
THEME MOVIE: South Pacific. What else.
A better alternative, perhaps, just to leave no philosopher's stone unturned, might be to offshore not only economists who favor, or disfavor offshoring, a mere Morton's Fork;
but also those who are undecided or unsure, all three possibilities, what I would call a Ms' Triton, or Trident.
Contrary to the Morton's Fork, however, all three alternatives are good ones.
Would offshoring some economist jobs to China or India help?
If so, which jobs?
How about this, only those economists who favor less offshoring of other jobs,
should be offshored.
Or, since we can't pick winners, let's let the market decide which kinds of
economists to offshore?
Similarly for all other professions.
Makes a lot of sense really.
How about a preliminary sketch for a cartoon:
MISE EN SCENE:
Show a, how shall I put it, show a scene, say with a stultifera navis, a small sail boat, being embarked at a small pier, vast expanse of ocean stretching to the edge of page, palm trees for calming effect,
depicting only economists, Say Chicago School individuals, Fed folks, and their friends and families, favoring offshoring, being offshored.
"Offshoring" here means being marooned on a small boat drifting toward a foreign shore.
Think perhaps Gilligan's Island, but the 'professors' here are not any where near as handsome as the ones on the show, although have not yet been turned into bonobos for a future cartoon.
I just throw this in, in case there are any contemporary philosophers out there, for whom beauty versus ugliness is a compelling intellectual criterion of judgment.
Theme music: Bali Hai,
THEME MOVIE: South Pacific. What else.
A better alternative, perhaps, just to leave no philosopher's stone unturned, might be to offshore not only economists who favor, or disfavor offshoring, a mere Morton's Fork;
but also those who are undecided or unsure, all three possibilities, what I would call a Ms' Triton, or Trident.
Contrary to the Morton's Fork, however, all three alternatives are good ones.
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Thurston Macaire Howell p 14
Midkiff, a Supreme Court case about Hawaiian real estate law, has been touted as a perverse result…. all that Hawaiian land bought by the Japanese….misguided judicial foray into property rights law.
But these are the very judges they exhort to closer scrutiny.
But, isn’t buying and selling land the ‘free’ market at work?
And if foreigners happen to buy it, isn’t that just ‘free trade’ in real estate, like free trade in widely held mortgage-backed securities?
And if free trade has had so called ‘free riders’, what is wrong with that?
Aren’t collateralized securities just a natural development of unfettered innovative financial markets?
If securities specialists game, or free ride, the financial markets, isn’t that just a ‘return to innovation’, so-called entrepreneurship (I learned a few of these fancy words in the home finance game)?
And, hey, what’s wrong in America with gaming a game? Do real property rights, free trade, or market state spokesmen have anything coherent to say about any of this?
One traditional argument against government intervention in industry has been no one can ‘pick winners’, only markets, under the ‘invisible hand’, can.
Yet some governments, with a little help from other governments like ours, can pick and promote winners (My firm wasn’t one of them! We just got off-shore in time.)
Japan has long picked itself and its exporting industries and cities as winners, and picked America and its industries and cities as losers.
But these are the very judges they exhort to closer scrutiny.
But, isn’t buying and selling land the ‘free’ market at work?
And if foreigners happen to buy it, isn’t that just ‘free trade’ in real estate, like free trade in widely held mortgage-backed securities?
And if free trade has had so called ‘free riders’, what is wrong with that?
Aren’t collateralized securities just a natural development of unfettered innovative financial markets?
If securities specialists game, or free ride, the financial markets, isn’t that just a ‘return to innovation’, so-called entrepreneurship (I learned a few of these fancy words in the home finance game)?
And, hey, what’s wrong in America with gaming a game? Do real property rights, free trade, or market state spokesmen have anything coherent to say about any of this?
One traditional argument against government intervention in industry has been no one can ‘pick winners’, only markets, under the ‘invisible hand’, can.
Yet some governments, with a little help from other governments like ours, can pick and promote winners (My firm wasn’t one of them! We just got off-shore in time.)
Japan has long picked itself and its exporting industries and cities as winners, and picked America and its industries and cities as losers.
RE INTERNATIONAL INSTABILITY
If one were really serious about things like 'possible worlds', given our over extended trading regime and vulnerabilities,
the discussion should really revolve around the need, because of the ineptitude of our trading regime, to take over or control large well developed sectors of the globe, now economically necessary for the average American's subsistence,
not just desert backwaters like Afghanistan or Iraq, in spite of the oil in the Middle East,
thanks to globalization. Sounds like a great source for a big war.
I assume that that discussion has been under way, for some years now, in Washington.
If you want large scale instability, engage in large scale international trade and investment.
the discussion should really revolve around the need, because of the ineptitude of our trading regime, to take over or control large well developed sectors of the globe, now economically necessary for the average American's subsistence,
not just desert backwaters like Afghanistan or Iraq, in spite of the oil in the Middle East,
thanks to globalization. Sounds like a great source for a big war.
I assume that that discussion has been under way, for some years now, in Washington.
If you want large scale instability, engage in large scale international trade and investment.
ANOTHER GREAT FREDERICK REMINGTON CLARK GABLE ECONOMIST MUSTANG CARTOON IDEA
Along the lines of the last cartoon post, re Maverick China Rodeo,
why not another, with the favorite economists' so called 'Free Rider' theme?
Mise en scene:
Let's put the nonchalant, happy, slender, and well coordinated Chinese hog, depicted in the last post, 'in the driver's seat', as a very talented bronco buster, atop a bedraggled, but feebly bucking, Maverick Mustang Executive Uncle Sam?
The caption above:
Economists' Rodeo: Breaking Mustangs In
the caption below:
Free Rider Bronco Buster
An audio reference:
why not another, with the favorite economists' so called 'Free Rider' theme?
Mise en scene:
Let's put the nonchalant, happy, slender, and well coordinated Chinese hog, depicted in the last post, 'in the driver's seat', as a very talented bronco buster, atop a bedraggled, but feebly bucking, Maverick Mustang Executive Uncle Sam?
The caption above:
Economists' Rodeo: Breaking Mustangs In
the caption below:
Free Rider Bronco Buster
An audio reference:
Aaron Copeland: Rodeo, what else?
A video one:
Why not: The Misfits
A bit callous, but this is the 21st Century.
Also, it may hint, suggestively, to some out there,
regarding prior cartoon posts, particularly about ugly versus beautiful philosophers, not a very important issue really;
even 'Marilyn', or 'Gable' bonobos, more important, to many;
Existentialism (a siren song), very important to some;
the pyramid of experts, other cartoon pyramids, obscure to almost anyone;
and other issues re the uses and abuses of scientific experts, obscure to many;
beautiful images, everyone loves them;
and other less 'beautiful' ones.
RE KRUGMAN WHAT ABOUT GERMANY?
Yes, but one wishes, reading this, that he had elaborated, just a little more, re:
"There are a number of reasons that’s foolish..."
as well as just this terse, graphic, comment.
He does point out a few things, in fairness, but not enough to explain the differences well enough.
Saying they export better to China is not a good sign, of good advice, going forward, in my opinion.
That exporting will end, some day, perhaps sooner rather than later, and then what engine of economic prosperity would one be left with, in Germany?
Let's put it this way, for the intellectually challenged out there, imports from China, and other low labor cost sites, and exports to them, facilitating those good imports,
are a little like crack cocaine.
American 'producers', and consumers, certainly Wall Street, various state capitols, and Washington, have been on this 'crack' foreign production, since the early 60s.
Started out innocently enough, with the Marshall Plan, Bretton Woods, but quickly morphed into a whole other market capitalist, economic, state department, series of agendas.
"There are a number of reasons that’s foolish..."
as well as just this terse, graphic, comment.
He does point out a few things, in fairness, but not enough to explain the differences well enough.
Saying they export better to China is not a good sign, of good advice, going forward, in my opinion.
That exporting will end, some day, perhaps sooner rather than later, and then what engine of economic prosperity would one be left with, in Germany?
Let's put it this way, for the intellectually challenged out there, imports from China, and other low labor cost sites, and exports to them, facilitating those good imports,
are a little like crack cocaine.
American 'producers', and consumers, certainly Wall Street, various state capitols, and Washington, have been on this 'crack' foreign production, since the early 60s.
Started out innocently enough, with the Marshall Plan, Bretton Woods, but quickly morphed into a whole other market capitalist, economic, state department, series of agendas.
PROPERTY RIGHTS ADVOCATES' THEME RE EDITORIAL TODAY
This had been the topic (the example) launching the career of the fictional character Thurston Robert Macaire Howell:
In the editorial today, re end of certain housing 'subsidies'(credit),
housing is, quite properly, tied by Mr. Lawler (and others) to employment.
Having 'property rights' in the constitution, or anywhere else, is irrelevant where one can offshore production, or otherwise degrade the quality of wages and work.
Property rights advocates would be inclined to rejoice at the end of a bad old subsidy, no doubt, consistently with their views on less government intervention, creating anomalies in the free market, the better.
As Thurston had said, presciently, in Boca, back in 05 or 06,
re Kelo etc., 'there are property rights,
and then there are BIG PROPERTY RIGHTS' (creditors' rights; banks, finance).
Mr. Lawler: housing healthy only re employment growth.
Re employment growth: Not anytime soon.
In the editorial today, re end of certain housing 'subsidies'(credit),
housing is, quite properly, tied by Mr. Lawler (and others) to employment.
Having 'property rights' in the constitution, or anywhere else, is irrelevant where one can offshore production, or otherwise degrade the quality of wages and work.
Property rights advocates would be inclined to rejoice at the end of a bad old subsidy, no doubt, consistently with their views on less government intervention, creating anomalies in the free market, the better.
As Thurston had said, presciently, in Boca, back in 05 or 06,
re Kelo etc., 'there are property rights,
and then there are BIG PROPERTY RIGHTS' (creditors' rights; banks, finance).
Mr. Lawler: housing healthy only re employment growth.
Re employment growth: Not anytime soon.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
HUAN TRADING PLACES MISE EN SCENE HOG TIED YOU ONLY DIE TWICE
For this image from the editorial today, why not show the Maverick, decked out in his cowboy finery, at the rodeo. A skinny, mustacioed, weathered, but healthy looking Uncle Sam as a cowboy.
The only problem, he is almost face down in the dust of the rodeo field, being unceremoniously hogtied by a dexterous and nonchalant Chinese looking hog.
Why not also do a cinematic reference for this great post, re Japan , and whoever:
Released in 1967, I happened to watch it tonight, for the second time (twice): You Only Live Twice. A lot going on there. Great views of say Kobe, and Tokyo.
The caption above:
The Maverick Trading Places Again:
You Only Die Twice
The caption below:
How He Likes His Management Team
The only problem, he is almost face down in the dust of the rodeo field, being unceremoniously hogtied by a dexterous and nonchalant Chinese looking hog.
Why not also do a cinematic reference for this great post, re Japan , and whoever:
Released in 1967, I happened to watch it tonight, for the second time (twice): You Only Live Twice. A lot going on there. Great views of say Kobe, and Tokyo.
The caption above:
The Maverick Trading Places Again:
You Only Die Twice
The caption below:
How He Likes His Management Team
RE YEN'S LESSONS FOR YUAN
These authors, who occupied the same types of posts occupied by Prestowitz re Japan, think that we should follow the same wise pattern with China that had been followed by Prestowitz and co. with Japan.
Japan, as they recount, expecting a protectionism which should have been considered necessary, but never came, built plants over here for a time. They still produced the higher value added parts in Japan; and so it has gone, a 'boon' for the American worker according to these wise authors which should be duplicated with their wise consulting skills here again with Chinese plants. Great stuff.
Read all about how well that worked, and where it lead, in Trading Places.
Smart shoppers.
Japan, as they recount, expecting a protectionism which should have been considered necessary, but never came, built plants over here for a time. They still produced the higher value added parts in Japan; and so it has gone, a 'boon' for the American worker according to these wise authors which should be duplicated with their wise consulting skills here again with Chinese plants. Great stuff.
Read all about how well that worked, and where it lead, in Trading Places.
Smart shoppers.
RE KNOWING REALITY
As I have discussed in several prior posts, some bigger policy problems we have had have had to do with intellectual compartmentalization of specialized, often scientific, knowledge.
Compartmentalization has facilitated the subordination and manipulation of isolated branches of knowledge. Subordination of and manipulation of specialized knowledge has not been an especially 'new' phenomenon in the 20th Century. Simpler mere repression had been a main tool of the Renaissance papacy, Galileo being an especially prominent example.
As David Kaiser mentioned in passing in Politics and War, european monarchs were quick to turn ostensibly anti-crown enlightenment notions to crowns' advantage, re aristocracy, populace, and dynastic rivals.
Other important issues have to do with notions of scientific progress and method.
A connection between science and progress has not been as obvious a connection as one might suppose, particularly in the 16 and 17th Centuries with respect to church doctrine.
Collingwood has an illuminating discussion of Aristotelianism, Platonism and science in Essay On Metaphysics, XXV "Axioms Of Intuition". Also good on the topic, Butterfield, Origins of Modern Science.
This is perhaps enough references to stuff, for one post.
One more note; see also, if he posts it, my note re Professor Kaiser's post Historical Novels etc, and his passage re the end of scientific knowledge, my comment referring to Fukuyama's book The End Of History And The Last Man, and the Whig interpretation of history.
Compartmentalization has facilitated the subordination and manipulation of isolated branches of knowledge. Subordination of and manipulation of specialized knowledge has not been an especially 'new' phenomenon in the 20th Century. Simpler mere repression had been a main tool of the Renaissance papacy, Galileo being an especially prominent example.
As David Kaiser mentioned in passing in Politics and War, european monarchs were quick to turn ostensibly anti-crown enlightenment notions to crowns' advantage, re aristocracy, populace, and dynastic rivals.
Other important issues have to do with notions of scientific progress and method.
A connection between science and progress has not been as obvious a connection as one might suppose, particularly in the 16 and 17th Centuries with respect to church doctrine.
Collingwood has an illuminating discussion of Aristotelianism, Platonism and science in Essay On Metaphysics, XXV "Axioms Of Intuition". Also good on the topic, Butterfield, Origins of Modern Science.
This is perhaps enough references to stuff, for one post.
One more note; see also, if he posts it, my note re Professor Kaiser's post Historical Novels etc, and his passage re the end of scientific knowledge, my comment referring to Fukuyama's book The End Of History And The Last Man, and the Whig interpretation of history.
RE YEN'S LESSON FOR YUAN EDITORIAL
Has someone been reading my blog? Reinstituting Hawley-Smoot: useless now that the 'production horse has left the barn'.
"So, might it work to instead use tariffs to make American goods more competitive in China? Probably not. The problem is that the United States lacks the domestic industry to make many of the things we currently buy from China."
That is a pathetic, and quite true admission. What if, 'possible worlds', one of their many enemies tries to block sea lanes?
US now really, tradewise, economically, and basic materially, a beached whale.
China, and everyone else who is looking on, many with important interests themselves,
knows this, and knows what power, tantamount to strong military power, it implies over Americans' very existence;
China is more powerful politically here than anyone else; no Chinese can vote here.....but that is the last way anyone buys political power here, anymore.
What would a solution look like?
There is not even a mediocre one.
Industrial policy is unamerican, and at this point rendered moot; but that is what Americans will be forced to fall back on, eventually, probably in the context of war preparation or production, as before, rather than as a peacetime reform initiative.
Military force trade control (enslavement of foreign production workers), not doable.
The big lesson here is politics is really not for blinkered amateurs,
really is a life and death thing, and just voting all the time and watching McNeill Lehrer has not been a good use of the average American's time, going forward.
"So, might it work to instead use tariffs to make American goods more competitive in China? Probably not. The problem is that the United States lacks the domestic industry to make many of the things we currently buy from China."
That is a pathetic, and quite true admission. What if, 'possible worlds', one of their many enemies tries to block sea lanes?
US now really, tradewise, economically, and basic materially, a beached whale.
China, and everyone else who is looking on, many with important interests themselves,
knows this, and knows what power, tantamount to strong military power, it implies over Americans' very existence;
China is more powerful politically here than anyone else; no Chinese can vote here.....but that is the last way anyone buys political power here, anymore.
What would a solution look like?
There is not even a mediocre one.
Industrial policy is unamerican, and at this point rendered moot; but that is what Americans will be forced to fall back on, eventually, probably in the context of war preparation or production, as before, rather than as a peacetime reform initiative.
Military force trade control (enslavement of foreign production workers), not doable.
The big lesson here is politics is really not for blinkered amateurs,
really is a life and death thing, and just voting all the time and watching McNeill Lehrer has not been a good use of the average American's time, going forward.
Monday, August 23, 2010
Thurston Macaire Howell p 12
vanishing ideal. With the ‘mortgage meltdown’, it may happen even faster. Prior to mortgage securitization, and global dispersion, the American real estate market has long been a shared experience.
Yet, globalization is slowing, having fostered trading blocs now ranged against it, because civilizational conflicts signal a trend, perhaps temporary, away from open markets.
With the new global crisis, increased fragility, present from the beginning, of globalized institutions with ‘superinfrastructure’, has also become apparent, and perhaps is one of the best arguments against continuing on this path.
Talk of a new Cold War has shown the notion of ‘Cobdenism,’ (the other aspect of Cobdenism) trade-concessing one’s way to peace, to have been naïve, and economically and militarily catastrophophic.
The best recent analogy to this Cobdenism was the territorial appeasement prior to World War II.
Trading blocs and unions now stand opposed not only to the American laissez faire trade regime and the multinationals which fostered them, but to fundamentalist exclusionist civilizations, in a ‘clash of civilizations’.
Yet, the property rights solution to urban redevelopment problems has been to leave it to so-called free trade.
That was the property rights ‘solution’ a generation ago for zoning, just as it was, following Adam Smith over 200 years ago, the Crown’s solution for the rise of competition from great power enemies, competitors, and colonies.
Yet, globalization is slowing, having fostered trading blocs now ranged against it, because civilizational conflicts signal a trend, perhaps temporary, away from open markets.
With the new global crisis, increased fragility, present from the beginning, of globalized institutions with ‘superinfrastructure’, has also become apparent, and perhaps is one of the best arguments against continuing on this path.
Talk of a new Cold War has shown the notion of ‘Cobdenism,’ (the other aspect of Cobdenism) trade-concessing one’s way to peace, to have been naïve, and economically and militarily catastrophophic.
The best recent analogy to this Cobdenism was the territorial appeasement prior to World War II.
Trading blocs and unions now stand opposed not only to the American laissez faire trade regime and the multinationals which fostered them, but to fundamentalist exclusionist civilizations, in a ‘clash of civilizations’.
Yet, the property rights solution to urban redevelopment problems has been to leave it to so-called free trade.
That was the property rights ‘solution’ a generation ago for zoning, just as it was, following Adam Smith over 200 years ago, the Crown’s solution for the rise of competition from great power enemies, competitors, and colonies.
COMPLEXITY UNCERTAINTY DISCIPLINARY DISARRAY
I recommend David Kaiser's blog, and current topic, to anyone wanting more insights than one can usually find on history and politics.
Especially sharp is his take on both right and left, latter 20 C. abandoning the idea of American society as knowing reality and knowing where it wants to go in the future for its citizens;
leading, I would add, to what can really can only be said to rise to the level of a national, spiritual, not just material, economic, political, strategic, etc., crisis.
A crisis, shall we say, of purpose, in the universe.
Many of the forces playing on the US nation state 'system' have been there for centuries now;
although even they have been transformed, as other players, forces, and events have taken, or left, the stage, or changed added or dropped roles, and/or weight, as well.
As I have alluded, these 'issues', some of them quite old issues, remain unresolved.
He talks about history, and contradictions, at some points.
Mine is not a Marxian contradictions analysis, although I see and appreciate his point.
Certainly there is quite complex 'struggle' or 'struggles', rivalries, positionings say, relative statuses changing and shifting, with many opposed players and elements, to describe somehow.
I see things and forces as moving or acting in more complex ways than contradictions as such; it is perhaps a fine point, but needs mentioning in passing.
For those wanting some complex illustrations of what can go through one's mind re advising US politicians, and others, in this new world of market states (the best spiritual framework Americans can seem to beget) take a look at Bobbitt's The Shield of Achilles. Terror and Consent is maybe narrower, and I haven't gotten through it myself.
Especially sharp is his take on both right and left, latter 20 C. abandoning the idea of American society as knowing reality and knowing where it wants to go in the future for its citizens;
leading, I would add, to what can really can only be said to rise to the level of a national, spiritual, not just material, economic, political, strategic, etc., crisis.
A crisis, shall we say, of purpose, in the universe.
Many of the forces playing on the US nation state 'system' have been there for centuries now;
although even they have been transformed, as other players, forces, and events have taken, or left, the stage, or changed added or dropped roles, and/or weight, as well.
As I have alluded, these 'issues', some of them quite old issues, remain unresolved.
He talks about history, and contradictions, at some points.
Mine is not a Marxian contradictions analysis, although I see and appreciate his point.
Certainly there is quite complex 'struggle' or 'struggles', rivalries, positionings say, relative statuses changing and shifting, with many opposed players and elements, to describe somehow.
I see things and forces as moving or acting in more complex ways than contradictions as such; it is perhaps a fine point, but needs mentioning in passing.
For those wanting some complex illustrations of what can go through one's mind re advising US politicians, and others, in this new world of market states (the best spiritual framework Americans can seem to beget) take a look at Bobbitt's The Shield of Achilles. Terror and Consent is maybe narrower, and I haven't gotten through it myself.
OLD CELLO VENTRAL PIN PLUG ABOVE LARGE PATCH CENTER OF CORNERS
See later post update,
Thursday, November 8, 2018
MY REPAIRMAN CLEANED ALL THE OXIDATION HE THOUGHT HE WAS DOING ME A FAVOR
HE CLEANED OFF THE SO CALLED OXIDATION ON THE SIDES LATER.
THEY ARE STILL DARK WITH SO CALLED AGE IN THIS IMAGE.
OR WAS THE WHOLE INTERIOR SPRAYED WITH BLACK POWDER TO MAKE IT ALL LOOK OLD!
HE ALSO PULLED ALL THE OLD PATCHES OFF, SOME VERY OLD, (MAYBE THESE WERE FAKE OLD TOO) THINKING HE WAS DOING ME ANOTHER FAVOR.....
Monday, August 23, 2010
RE KRUGMAN'S DYSFUNCTIONAL AND CORRUPT POLITICAL CULTURE EDITORIAL: GILLIGANS ISLAND MOTIF
He has struck out into politics per se.
Great move, since economics is way too straitjacketing, in times like this.
He's not spouting myths, such as small businesses and large numbers of clever and resourceful entrepreneur maverick Executives pulling the US out of the depression.
Question is: Why would mostly not-that-wealthy politicians
(barring folks like candidate Greene, in Florida, with his own yacht already, living the American Dream down there)
want to give big tax breaks to only the very wealthiest, knowing the truth might somehow come out?
The prospect of campaign contribution alone aren't enough of an explanation, in that there are plenty of other breaks, concessions, and credits available to these folks already.
How about another explanation, or two, do a sort of 'possible worlds' scenario thing, here, for these elected old darlings:
If you were rats, seeing the handwriting on the wall, and preparing to abandon a sinking stultifera navis, and you saw a few very well provisioned yachts floating nearby, where would you swim, figuratively speaking;
or, another scenario,
through the mist, entre chien et loup,
if you saw with horror that what you had thought were merely yachts, were really gunboats or destroyers, about to commandeer the stultifera navis by force, captained by lackeys of these wealthy individuals, to whom would you be more likely to suck up, fellow passengers on the navis, or the owners of these yachts, or destroyers?
Or would you 'just say no' to these tax breaks, hold your 'course', and
"Damn the torpedoes! Full Speed Ahead."
Say just for a further illustration,
that the stultifera navis is the Minnow,
we are all castaways now,
and the 'Skipper', Congress.
Great move, since economics is way too straitjacketing, in times like this.
He's not spouting myths, such as small businesses and large numbers of clever and resourceful entrepreneur maverick Executives pulling the US out of the depression.
Question is: Why would mostly not-that-wealthy politicians
(barring folks like candidate Greene, in Florida, with his own yacht already, living the American Dream down there)
want to give big tax breaks to only the very wealthiest, knowing the truth might somehow come out?
The prospect of campaign contribution alone aren't enough of an explanation, in that there are plenty of other breaks, concessions, and credits available to these folks already.
How about another explanation, or two, do a sort of 'possible worlds' scenario thing, here, for these elected old darlings:
If you were rats, seeing the handwriting on the wall, and preparing to abandon a sinking stultifera navis, and you saw a few very well provisioned yachts floating nearby, where would you swim, figuratively speaking;
or, another scenario,
through the mist, entre chien et loup,
if you saw with horror that what you had thought were merely yachts, were really gunboats or destroyers, about to commandeer the stultifera navis by force, captained by lackeys of these wealthy individuals, to whom would you be more likely to suck up, fellow passengers on the navis, or the owners of these yachts, or destroyers?
Or would you 'just say no' to these tax breaks, hold your 'course', and
"Damn the torpedoes! Full Speed Ahead."
Say just for a further illustration,
that the stultifera navis is the Minnow,
we are all castaways now,
and the 'Skipper', Congress.
Sunday, August 22, 2010
RE BP SCENARIO POSSIBLE WORLDS PLANNING: MISE EN SCENE
Some commentators have discussed scenario planning, and possible worlds scenarios, which some private companies, notably Shell oil, have come to do, rather than strategic planning, etc.
Governments are encouraged to do more of that, in that not only can one better predict the future, but one can act to affect the course of events according to conclusions reached. Makes a lot of sense.
I think some of you can infer what some of the details of BP possible worlds scenario planning, assuming they also did some, prior to the Gulf Oil spill, must have concluded:
Weak and easily manipulable federal regulators,
eager for a good time,
and willing to look the other way;
good diversification of responsibility among various corporate partners, in case something were to go wrong;
far cry from "North Sea Spill Scenario", failsafe requirements, regulators from more than one country, probably, breathing down our neck , etc.
our operations people tell us they can handle a spill event.
Things like that must have gone on at a big outfit like BP, wouldn't you think.
Governments are encouraged to do more of that, in that not only can one better predict the future, but one can act to affect the course of events according to conclusions reached. Makes a lot of sense.
I think some of you can infer what some of the details of BP possible worlds scenario planning, assuming they also did some, prior to the Gulf Oil spill, must have concluded:
Weak and easily manipulable federal regulators,
eager for a good time,
and willing to look the other way;
good diversification of responsibility among various corporate partners, in case something were to go wrong;
far cry from "North Sea Spill Scenario", failsafe requirements, regulators from more than one country, probably, breathing down our neck , etc.
our operations people tell us they can handle a spill event.
Things like that must have gone on at a big outfit like BP, wouldn't you think.
Saturday, August 21, 2010
RE PROFESSOR CHARLES HILL AND MULTIDISCIPLINARY STUDIES
I happened to hear on NPR today this man, and then watched a recent lecture based on his new book.
It seems he is saying the same thing I have been putting on the blog re terrible problems from lack of broader perspectives cutting across narrow fields.
I am sure he is not the only person saying things like this, but I have been out of the educational loop, with the trial practice legal career, for the past 25 years.
As some of my prior comments show, I have for a long time been especially critical of how various Executive agencies, including State and Defense, have handled commercial and economic matters in connection with foreign relations.
No doubt FSO/Professor Hill's love for literature, and history, prepared him, steeled him, to resist the kinds of commercial and trade policy shenanigans often perpetrated by the State Department he served during this time, and detailed in articles like 'Trading American Interests', in the name of Grand Strategy? No doubt his love of ancient literature, and philosophy, were proof against the siren song of such exchanges, zero-sum games, of strategic usually unilateral market opening concessions and appeasements?
As David Kaiser has pointed out on his blog, August 22, 2010 post, the US has no longer had any historic grand strategy, going forward, for a long time now, since, say, the 60s, and explains that by reference to 19th and 20th century trends, and American intellectual and political history, both left and right, in the mid 20th Century.
That is also seen in inferences from, I believe, or assertions in, perhaps, Bobbitt's Shield of Achilles arguments, the concept of a 'market state' replacing a nation state, and perhaps even the concept of grand strategy resolving itself into Bobbitt's market state possible world scenarios, rather than national or imperial grand strategies as such. I don't really see it panning out in those political terms myself.
Question, what is a market state? As he and I both studied Wittgenstein, I will ask, just for amusement, is it anything like the Duck Rabbit ?
I guess I will have to read Hill's book, but I fear just 'reading the classics', which is what he seems to be saying, won't quite 'solve' modern disciplinary specialization difficulties I have been referring to. It would be a start; we used to have 'core' courses; and electives in more than one field; a so-called liberal arts education which nevertheless included a specialty, or special concentration.
It seems he is saying the same thing I have been putting on the blog re terrible problems from lack of broader perspectives cutting across narrow fields.
I am sure he is not the only person saying things like this, but I have been out of the educational loop, with the trial practice legal career, for the past 25 years.
As some of my prior comments show, I have for a long time been especially critical of how various Executive agencies, including State and Defense, have handled commercial and economic matters in connection with foreign relations.
No doubt FSO/Professor Hill's love for literature, and history, prepared him, steeled him, to resist the kinds of commercial and trade policy shenanigans often perpetrated by the State Department he served during this time, and detailed in articles like 'Trading American Interests', in the name of Grand Strategy? No doubt his love of ancient literature, and philosophy, were proof against the siren song of such exchanges, zero-sum games, of strategic usually unilateral market opening concessions and appeasements?
As David Kaiser has pointed out on his blog, August 22, 2010 post, the US has no longer had any historic grand strategy, going forward, for a long time now, since, say, the 60s, and explains that by reference to 19th and 20th century trends, and American intellectual and political history, both left and right, in the mid 20th Century.
That is also seen in inferences from, I believe, or assertions in, perhaps, Bobbitt's Shield of Achilles arguments, the concept of a 'market state' replacing a nation state, and perhaps even the concept of grand strategy resolving itself into Bobbitt's market state possible world scenarios, rather than national or imperial grand strategies as such. I don't really see it panning out in those political terms myself.
Question, what is a market state? As he and I both studied Wittgenstein, I will ask, just for amusement, is it anything like the Duck Rabbit ?
I guess I will have to read Hill's book, but I fear just 'reading the classics', which is what he seems to be saying, won't quite 'solve' modern disciplinary specialization difficulties I have been referring to. It would be a start; we used to have 'core' courses; and electives in more than one field; a so-called liberal arts education which nevertheless included a specialty, or special concentration.
RE PROFESSOR BOBBITT SHIELD OF ACHILLES POSSIBLE WORLDS
I want to say a few words, at some point, here and there about what Professor Bobbitt prognosticated, 8 or 9 years ago now, concerning possible worlds scenarios.
Private sector companies allegedly do good uncertainty work, better than government. That is a given I think, for Western democracies, but I would point out, most Western firms, not really true (their perennially short time horizons).
Witness also the recent disclosure, as just another example, that HP has cut most of its remaining R & D.
See some reasons why, at eg Bobbitt Shield, p. 725, 'Technology'; esp. paragraph beginning "The capability..."; and the article NYT Aug 22, 2010, today re South China athletic shoe knock off factories.
I am far from sure that places like Japan have not been doing something even more sophisticated re scenario planning for a long time now; perhaps I give them too much credit. No one can predict what actually will occur.
The BP situation may or may not be a good example of what Professor Bobbitt was referring to; certainly they found lax federal regulation, going in, and no doubt factored that into their cost equations, going forward, regarding whether certain failsafe measures were necessary.
I want to refer, in a more general sense, to some of the points made, regarding certain aspects of the analysis, re the Meadow, the Park, and the Garden, the drivers, etc., etc.
Private sector companies allegedly do good uncertainty work, better than government. That is a given I think, for Western democracies, but I would point out, most Western firms, not really true (their perennially short time horizons).
Witness also the recent disclosure, as just another example, that HP has cut most of its remaining R & D.
See some reasons why, at eg Bobbitt Shield, p. 725, 'Technology'; esp. paragraph beginning "The capability..."; and the article NYT Aug 22, 2010, today re South China athletic shoe knock off factories.
I am far from sure that places like Japan have not been doing something even more sophisticated re scenario planning for a long time now; perhaps I give them too much credit. No one can predict what actually will occur.
The BP situation may or may not be a good example of what Professor Bobbitt was referring to; certainly they found lax federal regulation, going in, and no doubt factored that into their cost equations, going forward, regarding whether certain failsafe measures were necessary.
I want to refer, in a more general sense, to some of the points made, regarding certain aspects of the analysis, re the Meadow, the Park, and the Garden, the drivers, etc., etc.
THURSTON ROBERT MACAIRE HOWELL P 12
Multinationals’ political agenda is free trade of everything, especially financial assets, recently including even such things as mortgage backed securities.
What are some implications of globalization and free market forces for real property rights, justice, urban revitalization, home rule, hometown democracy?
Market state ownership interests are mostly in intangibles.
Although multinationals cater to nation, cities, states, and civilizations for particular purposes, they owe no deeper allegiance to any of them, or rather, a little to each. They don’t care much about concepts of justice. fn Bobbitt, Shield
Thus, urban, regional, and national economic competition is a symptom of a “problem of sovereignty,” of fragmentary polities, pawns in a world of more powerful, widely dispersed, private and quasi-private producer entities and regimes.
The term “new robber barons”, in property rights redevelopment literature, alludes to the historical growth phase of American industrialization, and to historical abuses of monopoly power in major domestic industries, at a time when America still had major domestic industries.
But that is not the world in which cash strapped local governments grovel and compete for business sites, ‘the crumbs’ of the world economy, in a declining ‘consumer economy’ ‘zero sum game’.
The local redevelopment agency in the 99 Cent Stores case had called itself, quite rightly, a mere pawn of Costco.
How important are real property rights in market states? Without domestic production, property rights, similarly to urban landscapes, are destined to be “hollowed out.”
Home ownership requires a certain level of wealth, separate and apart from the zeal with which a home ownership ideal happens to be embraced by the common man. With competition for income now global, American home ownership is fast becoming a
What are some implications of globalization and free market forces for real property rights, justice, urban revitalization, home rule, hometown democracy?
Market state ownership interests are mostly in intangibles.
Although multinationals cater to nation, cities, states, and civilizations for particular purposes, they owe no deeper allegiance to any of them, or rather, a little to each. They don’t care much about concepts of justice. fn Bobbitt, Shield
Thus, urban, regional, and national economic competition is a symptom of a “problem of sovereignty,” of fragmentary polities, pawns in a world of more powerful, widely dispersed, private and quasi-private producer entities and regimes.
The term “new robber barons”, in property rights redevelopment literature, alludes to the historical growth phase of American industrialization, and to historical abuses of monopoly power in major domestic industries, at a time when America still had major domestic industries.
But that is not the world in which cash strapped local governments grovel and compete for business sites, ‘the crumbs’ of the world economy, in a declining ‘consumer economy’ ‘zero sum game’.
The local redevelopment agency in the 99 Cent Stores case had called itself, quite rightly, a mere pawn of Costco.
How important are real property rights in market states? Without domestic production, property rights, similarly to urban landscapes, are destined to be “hollowed out.”
Home ownership requires a certain level of wealth, separate and apart from the zeal with which a home ownership ideal happens to be embraced by the common man. With competition for income now global, American home ownership is fast becoming a
A THURSTON MACAIRE HOWELL, WITH YACHT, A REAL ARCHETYPAL MAVERICK EXECUTIVE VERSUS CAREER POLITICIAN FLORIDA PRIMARY
RE NYT EDITORIAL TODAY:
For me, a cartoon on this would really be too easy.
It was almost made for a Philipon such as myself.
So I will let you read some of the previous mises en scene re how I might frame the visual issues.
She has a good point, about the meaning of the American Dream.
Thurston had commented on that in his rant too, re property rights, GI Bill, cities and the suburbs.
For me, a cartoon on this would really be too easy.
It was almost made for a Philipon such as myself.
So I will let you read some of the previous mises en scene re how I might frame the visual issues.
She has a good point, about the meaning of the American Dream.
Thurston had commented on that in his rant too, re property rights, GI Bill, cities and the suburbs.
Friday, August 20, 2010
RE APPEASING THE BOND GODS EDITORIAL: KRUGMAN TURNS OUT TO HAVE CARTOON WRITING POTENTIAL: LETS TALK ENDGAME
I had no idea there was this kind of latent talent lurking beneath the surface.
EVEN THOUGH MY LAST POST DISCUSSED INFLATION/DEFLATION TALK AS RED HERRINGS, AND PREVIOUS POSTS WENT INTO MISES EN SCENE FOR A ILIADIAN MYTHOLOGICAL MORTON'S FORK ODYSSEUAN SITUATION, FOR BERNANKE,
This turn of Krugman's, toward cruder, tribal, paradigms,
reminiscent of discussions one might have had back in London at King's, with Professor Winch, who wrote so insightfully regarding foibles of the then social sciences, and especially sociology and anthropology,
is a welcome breath of fresh air.
Never mind the truth of what he says, of which there no doubt is some, here in America; just let the images take over.
One can refer to old Tarzan films to capture a glimpse of some of those 'rites'.
If you read some accounts of, say, Witchcraft, Oracles, and Magic among the Azande you get a flavor for how witches were handled by the Azande.
Winch wrote an important article, as philosophers' articles go, called "Understanding a Primitive Society", in which he discussed the concept of rationality 'comparatively', so to speak.
Perhaps Krugman will get to an explanation of the tribal 'rationality' of economic human sacrifice, in post industrial societies, and other less fortunate ones.
This was not that far beyond the pale for 'political-economists' of the 19th Century, at the time when these 'disciplines' were considered, quite properly, institutionally closer together.
RE END GAME: One of the lurking problems, for the old, Collingwoodian absolute presupposition 'greatest good for the greatest numbers' is that, with increasing labor saving techniques, ever increasing productivity technology, resource scarcity, smart weapons replacing soldiers, national and civilizational rivalries, etc., the 'greatest numbers' seems likely to be a rapidly shrinking number, globally.
The question then is, where will the sacrificial ax of 'economic tribal rationality' fall hardest, on excess superfluous populations, 'harmful much more than helpful' for future regimes, ('excess labor capacity') seemingly everywhere?
One difficulty, which always seems to lurk in the background, for anyone trying to articulate some more general 'insight' within a nevertheless particular specialized field,
while also, implicitly, inferentially, analogically, anecdotally even, being called upon, somehow, to grapple with some larger framework, perhaps merely illustrative, for understanding the course of 'politics', 'current events', or 'current history', but technically only why things are happening in the way they are in this field, while coming from usually only that one field, often strictly academic,
is the woeful inadequacy of that background to comprehend other entire dimensions lost on members of only one specialized field.
Leaving the endgame discussion:
Mise en scene, a propos Krugman's editorial, why not the Bond Gods as Cyclops?
One could depict the one harrassing Odysseus, who exacts a crewman every time he comes back to the cave, as a great cartoon.
Cyclops were not very smart, eg "'No man' is hurting me," Odysseus' 'name', told to other cyclops re why he was in pain.
Cyclops were also, like the current Bond Gods, as a group, real meanies!
EVEN THOUGH MY LAST POST DISCUSSED INFLATION/DEFLATION TALK AS RED HERRINGS, AND PREVIOUS POSTS WENT INTO MISES EN SCENE FOR A ILIADIAN MYTHOLOGICAL MORTON'S FORK ODYSSEUAN SITUATION, FOR BERNANKE,
This turn of Krugman's, toward cruder, tribal, paradigms,
reminiscent of discussions one might have had back in London at King's, with Professor Winch, who wrote so insightfully regarding foibles of the then social sciences, and especially sociology and anthropology,
is a welcome breath of fresh air.
Never mind the truth of what he says, of which there no doubt is some, here in America; just let the images take over.
One can refer to old Tarzan films to capture a glimpse of some of those 'rites'.
If you read some accounts of, say, Witchcraft, Oracles, and Magic among the Azande you get a flavor for how witches were handled by the Azande.
Winch wrote an important article, as philosophers' articles go, called "Understanding a Primitive Society", in which he discussed the concept of rationality 'comparatively', so to speak.
Perhaps Krugman will get to an explanation of the tribal 'rationality' of economic human sacrifice, in post industrial societies, and other less fortunate ones.
This was not that far beyond the pale for 'political-economists' of the 19th Century, at the time when these 'disciplines' were considered, quite properly, institutionally closer together.
RE END GAME: One of the lurking problems, for the old, Collingwoodian absolute presupposition 'greatest good for the greatest numbers' is that, with increasing labor saving techniques, ever increasing productivity technology, resource scarcity, smart weapons replacing soldiers, national and civilizational rivalries, etc., the 'greatest numbers' seems likely to be a rapidly shrinking number, globally.
The question then is, where will the sacrificial ax of 'economic tribal rationality' fall hardest, on excess superfluous populations, 'harmful much more than helpful' for future regimes, ('excess labor capacity') seemingly everywhere?
One difficulty, which always seems to lurk in the background, for anyone trying to articulate some more general 'insight' within a nevertheless particular specialized field,
while also, implicitly, inferentially, analogically, anecdotally even, being called upon, somehow, to grapple with some larger framework, perhaps merely illustrative, for understanding the course of 'politics', 'current events', or 'current history', but technically only why things are happening in the way they are in this field, while coming from usually only that one field, often strictly academic,
is the woeful inadequacy of that background to comprehend other entire dimensions lost on members of only one specialized field.
Leaving the endgame discussion:
Mise en scene, a propos Krugman's editorial, why not the Bond Gods as Cyclops?
One could depict the one harrassing Odysseus, who exacts a crewman every time he comes back to the cave, as a great cartoon.
Cyclops were not very smart, eg "'No man' is hurting me," Odysseus' 'name', told to other cyclops re why he was in pain.
Cyclops were also, like the current Bond Gods, as a group, real meanies!
Thursday, August 19, 2010
INFLATION AND DEFLATION BOTH ECONOMIST RED HERRINGS
I should point out,
that, when you are gradually, inch by monthly inch, slowly, annually, becoming a third world economy, trading down, down, to cheaper and cheaper produced goods, to the bottom;
reducing prices, down, down, to cheaper and cheaper priced goods,
to the bottom, you tend,
almost by inertia,
to steer a path, because you have to,
between little blips of inflation, or deflation,
sort of looking for a daily, weekly, monthly, yearly, perpetual 'soft landing',
at the 'greatest good for the greatest numbers' airfield (let's not call it an airport).
That is what the US 'economy' if one can speak about such a thing, has been doing.
That is why we haven't had much 'overt' inflation, because we have been buying, and producing offshore more cheaply, goods made offshore.
That also is why we haven't had deflation, because their offshore costs were less, for a little while, and printing fiat money to buy them, so long as the money is accepted, wards off symptoms of deflation.
Keeping prices, and wages, gradually 'trickling down' (a different idiom: UNPROSPERITY TRICKLING DOWN) more or less together,
WHERE'S THE BEEF?
Krugman has put his finger on it, domestic jobs, that is the 'sticky wicket' in the whole sordid process, inasmuch as more and more work, of whatever kind, goes offshore, there remain fewer jobs, of any kind, to fund purchase of those cheaper offshore goods.
The other aspect of the situation, re currencies, aside from inflation/deflation, is that these producing countries have begun to realize that US currency is really backed by nothing anymore, no productivity, no specie, nothing.
One takes it, as a medium of exchange, largely hoping to prop up temporarily (self interest) the stultifera navis, and/or to get something of real value from third parties (the old eurodollar situation now globalized).
The Bretton Woods system, flawed from the outset, gold standard even abandoned by US in '71-72(?), a prescription for market sloth, and manipulations of all kinds.
It is not that complicated, really.
that, when you are gradually, inch by monthly inch, slowly, annually, becoming a third world economy, trading down, down, to cheaper and cheaper produced goods, to the bottom;
reducing prices, down, down, to cheaper and cheaper priced goods,
to the bottom, you tend,
almost by inertia,
to steer a path, because you have to,
between little blips of inflation, or deflation,
sort of looking for a daily, weekly, monthly, yearly, perpetual 'soft landing',
at the 'greatest good for the greatest numbers' airfield (let's not call it an airport).
That is what the US 'economy' if one can speak about such a thing, has been doing.
That is why we haven't had much 'overt' inflation, because we have been buying, and producing offshore more cheaply, goods made offshore.
That also is why we haven't had deflation, because their offshore costs were less, for a little while, and printing fiat money to buy them, so long as the money is accepted, wards off symptoms of deflation.
Keeping prices, and wages, gradually 'trickling down' (a different idiom: UNPROSPERITY TRICKLING DOWN) more or less together,
WHERE'S THE BEEF?
Krugman has put his finger on it, domestic jobs, that is the 'sticky wicket' in the whole sordid process, inasmuch as more and more work, of whatever kind, goes offshore, there remain fewer jobs, of any kind, to fund purchase of those cheaper offshore goods.
The other aspect of the situation, re currencies, aside from inflation/deflation, is that these producing countries have begun to realize that US currency is really backed by nothing anymore, no productivity, no specie, nothing.
One takes it, as a medium of exchange, largely hoping to prop up temporarily (self interest) the stultifera navis, and/or to get something of real value from third parties (the old eurodollar situation now globalized).
The Bretton Woods system, flawed from the outset, gold standard even abandoned by US in '71-72(?), a prescription for market sloth, and manipulations of all kinds.
It is not that complicated, really.
RE OUR NEW EMPIRE
Re David Kaiser's current post, and his perceptive comments on the British Empire in the 19th Century, I suggest also, although it's an enormous subject, an old article, by Sir Michael Howard, Empires, Nations, and Wars, delivered as the Yigal Allon Memorial Lecture, University of Tel Aviv, March 1982.
RE CHINA ANOTHER STRATEGIC PARTNER AT NUMBER 2 ECONOMY EDGING OUT JAPAN
How do you think Japan feels about that?
(Though they have long had large interests over there, themselves. See previous post, "Playing Three Sides In The Cold War", something like that.
In that sense, what does the number really mean?)
(Though they have long had large interests over there, themselves. See previous post, "Playing Three Sides In The Cold War", something like that.
In that sense, what does the number really mean?)
RE JURORS' COMMENTS AND EDITORIAL
Several salient points here. Some have to do with the jury system itself, others with complexity in legal systems needing drastic reform.
Because he was a governor, a lot of illustrative comments might be made about how such a political entity, a state like Illinois, would compete as a nation state in a world market, using exactions of campaign contributions.
Both domestic and foreign entities,
with neither a stake, nor a vision, nor responsibility for either the smaller Illinois, or the national 'domestic' economy's 'general welfare',
have long been eager to pay for narrow self serving influence, at all levels, of the system, where influence has been advantageous, and don't have the minor scruples illustrated here.
SEE, FOR EXAMPLE, ANOTHER EDITORIAL, ALSO COINCIDENTALLY, TODAY:
"ILLINOIS UNCONVINCED CORRUPTION CULTURE WILL FADE".
How is that for an American 'State's Rights' Banner?
Since the federal government also has not been (was not constitutionally tasked to) protecting local or national populations economically, (except what has been artificially carved out by the Commerce Clause, etc.) one might reasonably ask,
What's the difference?
Well. That is why I have alluded to reforms needed, 160 years too late really, at that level, too.
One cannot simply devolve onto each of the states responsibilities the fed has failed to carry out.
The Civil War, really a step in the wrong direction; merely preserving the Union, the fragmented status quo ante, not really enough, going forward.
Call it another 'Morton's Fork'.
One needs a more 'strategic' nation state to compete, and to survive disorder.
Back in the 18th Century, it did not so much matter, so long as one was protected by a larger empire.
Because he was a governor, a lot of illustrative comments might be made about how such a political entity, a state like Illinois, would compete as a nation state in a world market, using exactions of campaign contributions.
Both domestic and foreign entities,
with neither a stake, nor a vision, nor responsibility for either the smaller Illinois, or the national 'domestic' economy's 'general welfare',
have long been eager to pay for narrow self serving influence, at all levels, of the system, where influence has been advantageous, and don't have the minor scruples illustrated here.
SEE, FOR EXAMPLE, ANOTHER EDITORIAL, ALSO COINCIDENTALLY, TODAY:
"ILLINOIS UNCONVINCED CORRUPTION CULTURE WILL FADE".
How is that for an American 'State's Rights' Banner?
Since the federal government also has not been (was not constitutionally tasked to) protecting local or national populations economically, (except what has been artificially carved out by the Commerce Clause, etc.) one might reasonably ask,
What's the difference?
Well. That is why I have alluded to reforms needed, 160 years too late really, at that level, too.
One cannot simply devolve onto each of the states responsibilities the fed has failed to carry out.
The Civil War, really a step in the wrong direction; merely preserving the Union, the fragmented status quo ante, not really enough, going forward.
Call it another 'Morton's Fork'.
One needs a more 'strategic' nation state to compete, and to survive disorder.
Back in the 18th Century, it did not so much matter, so long as one was protected by a larger empire.
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
RE: Scott Turow's article Blagojevich and Legal Bribery
Great stuff. Great state of Illinois (one of 50).
How about 'state's rights', for citizens especially there?
Sound really good?
Illinois is accustomed to a long (as American history goes) history of sordid political misbehavior.
That is how Americans are accustomed to view their government.
Funny, they tend to view the private sector, whose entities, regardless of party, make often wrongful (not any longer in our system a bright line), and invariably self serving, political contributions,
as the 'good guys', unless they pick just one decision to influence,
in which case they become bad guys, (unless a jury pardon), and go to jail.
Implicitly, also, a comment perhaps on the jury system, itself?
Great topic for a Robert Macaire type cartoon.
How about 'state's rights', for citizens especially there?
Sound really good?
Illinois is accustomed to a long (as American history goes) history of sordid political misbehavior.
That is how Americans are accustomed to view their government.
Funny, they tend to view the private sector, whose entities, regardless of party, make often wrongful (not any longer in our system a bright line), and invariably self serving, political contributions,
as the 'good guys', unless they pick just one decision to influence,
in which case they become bad guys, (unless a jury pardon), and go to jail.
Implicitly, also, a comment perhaps on the jury system, itself?
Great topic for a Robert Macaire type cartoon.
Re Friedman's Really Unusually Uncertain Editorial mise en scene
See the previous cartoon, re uncle Sam, in bed, with 'consumption', being tended, by 2 economists. That was not enough economists, or enough patients.
Mise en Scene: Now he can get an additional electroshock 'stimulus', not merely the old transfusion, from a third expert, a 'structural economist' medical tech, as well.
Next to Sam, in bed, is an equally bedraggled 'Uncle EU'.
One expert to another, jesturing to EU:
"This one isn't going anywhere either; he has 'Integration ALS'.
These 2 aren't going anywhere.
They're done for.
Were one to contemplate another cartoon mise en scene,
I would point out that we now have enough economists for a 'pyramid of experts' using only diverse economists as bonobos in that zig zag column, or other equally hilarious configuration.
Mise en Scene: Now he can get an additional electroshock 'stimulus', not merely the old transfusion, from a third expert, a 'structural economist' medical tech, as well.
Next to Sam, in bed, is an equally bedraggled 'Uncle EU'.
One expert to another, jesturing to EU:
"This one isn't going anywhere either; he has 'Integration ALS'.
These 2 aren't going anywhere.
They're done for.
Were one to contemplate another cartoon mise en scene,
I would point out that we now have enough economists for a 'pyramid of experts' using only diverse economists as bonobos in that zig zag column, or other equally hilarious configuration.
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
A 'HOBSON'S CHOICE': PRIVATE VERSUS PUBLIC ENTERPRISE
Actually a 'Morton's Fork', but who understands the fine distinctions? (See the famous Tarzan, Edgar Rice Burroughs litigation, for a judicial example.)
Americans have often been told, usually by politicians, who need to pay back private corporate political supporters, that a good way to handle such and such a problem is to return it to the private sector, or to give a tax break, incentive, or credit, etc., to the private sector, which is more efficient and virtuous than government.
On the other hand, Americans have been told by other politicians, who are catering to a different but equally deluded patronage, that a certain initiative needs to be undertaken by government, that a new government agency, department, or blue ribbon committee, is necessary or merely very beneficial in this case.
Americans need to be advised that American, federal, state, and local, publicly administered programs are generally matched in ineffeciency, ineptitude, and corruption, by American private sector business enterprises, small, medium, and MNC sized, regardless of the private industry or sector. There are well founded reasons for this, based on the history of the structures and relations between the public and private sectors. Aug 17, 2010
Americans have often been told, usually by politicians, who need to pay back private corporate political supporters, that a good way to handle such and such a problem is to return it to the private sector, or to give a tax break, incentive, or credit, etc., to the private sector, which is more efficient and virtuous than government.
On the other hand, Americans have been told by other politicians, who are catering to a different but equally deluded patronage, that a certain initiative needs to be undertaken by government, that a new government agency, department, or blue ribbon committee, is necessary or merely very beneficial in this case.
Americans need to be advised that American, federal, state, and local, publicly administered programs are generally matched in ineffeciency, ineptitude, and corruption, by American private sector business enterprises, small, medium, and MNC sized, regardless of the private industry or sector. There are well founded reasons for this, based on the history of the structures and relations between the public and private sectors. Aug 17, 2010
RE NO EXIT EDITORIAL AND A VIDEO REFERENCE
Re published comments between President Obama, VP Biden, and Gen. Petreaus, re 18 months, etc., this is the kind of melodramatic scene, for which more of the same, I recommend the wonderful British series, "Yes, Minister", later "Yes, Prime Minister', say The Skeleton In The Cupboard, or The Bed of Nails, or The Moral Dimension to capture what goes on there. That cast, especially Nigel Hawthorne did a wonderful job. Margaret Thatcher herself was quite a devotee, apparently. Maggie and I share that.
Say, perhaps Sarah Palin also liked it, as she had a television personna herself,is conservative, savvy, etc. Maybe Sarah and I can be said to share that, too!
Maggie and Sarah, too!
Say, perhaps Sarah Palin also liked it, as she had a television personna herself,is conservative, savvy, etc. Maybe Sarah and I can be said to share that, too!
Maggie and Sarah, too!
Monday, August 16, 2010
South China Sea Gauntlet: DR NO
Give me a break. "China's claims to various islands bogus". Nothing more ridiculous and myopic could possibly be imagined.
Where do US thinkers think things have been going now, since the Nixon shock?
What do they think will happen now?
'Good developing nation corporate citizens' are already a thing of the rapidly receding past.
US MNCs and State Dept folks have been going along apparently in this dream world now for decades, thinking that they can just negotiate a 'new deal' if need be.
Last night, I don't know why, I watched again Dr No.
Where do US thinkers think things have been going now, since the Nixon shock?
What do they think will happen now?
'Good developing nation corporate citizens' are already a thing of the rapidly receding past.
US MNCs and State Dept folks have been going along apparently in this dream world now for decades, thinking that they can just negotiate a 'new deal' if need be.
Last night, I don't know why, I watched again Dr No.
RE KRUGMAN'S EDITORIAL ON SOCIAL SECURITY
He's branching out from economics, it seems, into ever broader social spokesperson efforts.
What choice does one really have?
Social Security is a tip, though a sore, and a melting, and a throbbing tip, of an iceberg.
A nation's 'social security', in the larger sense, is based inevitably, for modern societies, mainly on a steady stream of wages, and on natural and man made resources securely at a nation's disposal; not on profits as such, wherever they are reaped.
That is why developmental states have used trade as a lever to raise their wages, wealth, and social security.
In the language of sports, to try to dumb it down sufficiently for unsuspecting readers who stumble across this site, and also to give them a metaphor from their favorite field, sports, developmental states have been winning a game the US did not even realize it was going to be forced to play.
This is another thing Krugman has rightly, but about 30 or 40 years too late, been railing against in editorials, jobs. His problems, and ours, is that just dumbly talking about, say, WPA type make work jobs, or some other make work scheme, thrown together, rather than a a ramified industrial policy which others have long had,is not going to do that much, except put a little gruel temporarily on the table.
Military, or imperial, plunder, or enslavement, are not the most secure sources for social security, but have sometimes been resorted to, in history, not always with wholesome results.
David Kaiser pointed out, for example, in Politics and War, that the 30 Years War enriched some, mostly German, captains, at the bitter end;
but, would you want to try to get social security that way; say, not stop fighting unless and until you are paid off?
See other posts on this blog.
What choice does one really have?
Social Security is a tip, though a sore, and a melting, and a throbbing tip, of an iceberg.
A nation's 'social security', in the larger sense, is based inevitably, for modern societies, mainly on a steady stream of wages, and on natural and man made resources securely at a nation's disposal; not on profits as such, wherever they are reaped.
That is why developmental states have used trade as a lever to raise their wages, wealth, and social security.
In the language of sports, to try to dumb it down sufficiently for unsuspecting readers who stumble across this site, and also to give them a metaphor from their favorite field, sports, developmental states have been winning a game the US did not even realize it was going to be forced to play.
This is another thing Krugman has rightly, but about 30 or 40 years too late, been railing against in editorials, jobs. His problems, and ours, is that just dumbly talking about, say, WPA type make work jobs, or some other make work scheme, thrown together, rather than a a ramified industrial policy which others have long had,is not going to do that much, except put a little gruel temporarily on the table.
Military, or imperial, plunder, or enslavement, are not the most secure sources for social security, but have sometimes been resorted to, in history, not always with wholesome results.
David Kaiser pointed out, for example, in Politics and War, that the 30 Years War enriched some, mostly German, captains, at the bitter end;
but, would you want to try to get social security that way; say, not stop fighting unless and until you are paid off?
See other posts on this blog.
Sunday, August 15, 2010
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
OXYMORON MAVERICK ECONOMIST CARTOON MISE EN SCENE
Picture a bull (maverick) riding a bear (Economist). They are both very large, and enraged.
This team together should read Oxymoron, but the bull alone should read 'Oxy' and the bear alone 'Moron'. They should suggest to existing readers (of whom there are none), that this team is a take-off on the Maverick Executive mounted atop the Economist in previous cartoons.
They are in the midst of a race course coming directly toward the viewer, ala Manet's painting of the scene for example, with horses and jockeys on either side, near the finish line at lower periphery and one side edge of scene.
This race should also resemble a charge of jockeys in a more than normally violent competition with one another to reach the finish line first.
Elizabeth Butler nee Thompson's famous painting, Scotland for Ever (Attack of the Scottish Highlanders) a scene from the Battle of Waterloo, might also be referred to, for the dramatic element, but it brings the action a little too close.
Further, there should be some elements of 'dirty tricks' among these jockeys, and bull/bear, and riders, against each other, a sort of war of all against all, which is not present in Butler's painting, or Manet's.
(Additionally, for the really inspired persons out there, Sir Michael Howard put this image, Butler's painting, on the earlier cover of the PB edition of his monograph, War In European History, a highly recommended short work.)
The teams might be identifiable by some country initials, European ones, only the few biggest players identifiable in the foreground.
In the background, the edge of a stadium. In the immediate foreshortened upper corner, a large looming hand, only, holding aloft a flag stick. The flag, not the hand, reads "The Invisible Hand".
The caption above, 'EU at Longchamp: Picking Winners'.
The caption below: 'Laissez Faire Church Service'
This team together should read Oxymoron, but the bull alone should read 'Oxy' and the bear alone 'Moron'. They should suggest to existing readers (of whom there are none), that this team is a take-off on the Maverick Executive mounted atop the Economist in previous cartoons.
They are in the midst of a race course coming directly toward the viewer, ala Manet's painting of the scene for example, with horses and jockeys on either side, near the finish line at lower periphery and one side edge of scene.
This race should also resemble a charge of jockeys in a more than normally violent competition with one another to reach the finish line first.
Elizabeth Butler nee Thompson's famous painting, Scotland for Ever (Attack of the Scottish Highlanders) a scene from the Battle of Waterloo, might also be referred to, for the dramatic element, but it brings the action a little too close.
Further, there should be some elements of 'dirty tricks' among these jockeys, and bull/bear, and riders, against each other, a sort of war of all against all, which is not present in Butler's painting, or Manet's.
(Additionally, for the really inspired persons out there, Sir Michael Howard put this image, Butler's painting, on the earlier cover of the PB edition of his monograph, War In European History, a highly recommended short work.)
The teams might be identifiable by some country initials, European ones, only the few biggest players identifiable in the foreground.
In the background, the edge of a stadium. In the immediate foreshortened upper corner, a large looming hand, only, holding aloft a flag stick. The flag, not the hand, reads "The Invisible Hand".
The caption above, 'EU at Longchamp: Picking Winners'.
The caption below: 'Laissez Faire Church Service'
RE PREVIOUS PATENTS ARTICLE POST R & D AT HP AND MR HURD the back story article
This is more like it.
'Dumbly cutting costs'.
That makes some sense.
Yet, with the system we have got, and the way intellectual property is appropriated, used to say 'liberated', who can blame someone for thinking R & D spending doesn't help ' longterm competitiveness ' (oxymoron) that much, anymore?
'Dumbly cutting costs'.
That makes some sense.
Yet, with the system we have got, and the way intellectual property is appropriated, used to say 'liberated', who can blame someone for thinking R & D spending doesn't help ' longterm competitiveness ' (oxymoron) that much, anymore?
Saturday, August 14, 2010
RE GAC AND THE GREAT GULF AMERICAN REAL ESTATE MARKET
Just a few words, of a journalistic sort, regarding my charming uncle, the late R J Thomas.
He had been a lieutenant colonel in WW II apparently, so he was not really a slouch, as individuals go.
After the war he hooked up with an outfit out of Allentown Pennsylvania, known as General Acceptance Corporation. Apparently he held several high executive posts with GAC, including Director of Personnel, and others which my mother, (the only knowledgeable family left) remembers. I recall getting a ride in their corporate jet back in the 60s; we actually flew over Washington I believe, en route to Florida. They lived in a split (4) level, in a fancy subdivision outside Allentown, surrounded by corn fields. He used to have a rather full glass of scotch with his rather large cigar.
He was so talented that he could swizzle the ice cubes, floating at the top of the glass with the index finger of the hand itself holding the glass, while of course gesturing with the cigar in the other hand, at the same time.
He used to go around the house in the early morning in full length pajamas and a fancy silk lapelled and cuffed smoking jacket, with cigar, looking very much like Winston Churchill, as well as Robert Macaire. They were all three rather plump.
GAC became a holding company, and had investments and subsidiaries of all kinds, all across the country. My uncle worked closely with the son of the founder, a young Yale graduate, after the war.
They were not, early on, into real estate, but had made some name for themselves as a diversified 'turn around' holding company.
They eventually acquired Gulf American Land Development Corporation, a very large, fraudulent, land sales organization, run by the Rosen brothers, out of Miami, who had come down from Baltimore, which in effect became a subsidiary, GAC Properties.
This entity continued the fraudulent practices of its predecessor while now a part of my uncle's holding company.
Needless to say, it did not turn out well for any of them.
Previous real estate posts contain references to articles on the land deals they conducted, in many states, until they went bankrupt in the 70s.
The story is really emblematic of both corporate America, and regulatory America, together.
He had been a lieutenant colonel in WW II apparently, so he was not really a slouch, as individuals go.
After the war he hooked up with an outfit out of Allentown Pennsylvania, known as General Acceptance Corporation. Apparently he held several high executive posts with GAC, including Director of Personnel, and others which my mother, (the only knowledgeable family left) remembers. I recall getting a ride in their corporate jet back in the 60s; we actually flew over Washington I believe, en route to Florida. They lived in a split (4) level, in a fancy subdivision outside Allentown, surrounded by corn fields. He used to have a rather full glass of scotch with his rather large cigar.
He was so talented that he could swizzle the ice cubes, floating at the top of the glass with the index finger of the hand itself holding the glass, while of course gesturing with the cigar in the other hand, at the same time.
He used to go around the house in the early morning in full length pajamas and a fancy silk lapelled and cuffed smoking jacket, with cigar, looking very much like Winston Churchill, as well as Robert Macaire. They were all three rather plump.
GAC became a holding company, and had investments and subsidiaries of all kinds, all across the country. My uncle worked closely with the son of the founder, a young Yale graduate, after the war.
They were not, early on, into real estate, but had made some name for themselves as a diversified 'turn around' holding company.
They eventually acquired Gulf American Land Development Corporation, a very large, fraudulent, land sales organization, run by the Rosen brothers, out of Miami, who had come down from Baltimore, which in effect became a subsidiary, GAC Properties.
This entity continued the fraudulent practices of its predecessor while now a part of my uncle's holding company.
Needless to say, it did not turn out well for any of them.
Previous real estate posts contain references to articles on the land deals they conducted, in many states, until they went bankrupt in the 70s.
The story is really emblematic of both corporate America, and regulatory America, together.
GENETICALLY MODIFIED BEETS: REGULATION BY LITIGATION
FOOD SECURITY........................
QUESTION: GIVEN HOW THINGS HAVE GONE WITH THE DEPENDABILITY OF THE LAISSEZ FAIRE PRIVATE SECTOR, HOW DOES ANYONE FEEL ABOUT LEAVING IT (food security) IN, SAY, MONSANTO'S, OR SOME OTHER COMPANY'S HANDS, GOING FORWARD?
They have to make all those quick profits, like the car makers (GM) post earlier today, or Wall Street will give them a spanking!
Multimillionaire executives can take this 'whipping boy' status pretty well, because they get all that money.
Re whipping boy status, that might be a great mise en scene for a cartoon someday!
QUESTION: GIVEN HOW THINGS HAVE GONE WITH THE DEPENDABILITY OF THE LAISSEZ FAIRE PRIVATE SECTOR, HOW DOES ANYONE FEEL ABOUT LEAVING IT (food security) IN, SAY, MONSANTO'S, OR SOME OTHER COMPANY'S HANDS, GOING FORWARD?
They have to make all those quick profits, like the car makers (GM) post earlier today, or Wall Street will give them a spanking!
Multimillionaire executives can take this 'whipping boy' status pretty well, because they get all that money.
Re whipping boy status, that might be a great mise en scene for a cartoon someday!
RE FREEDOM OF RELIGION AND THE MOSQUE
Rather than mouth current religious ideas, one has to look at the context of the original decisions, hundreds of years ago, and their context, given a weak heterogeneity of religious exiles and colonists here for other reasons, and the hundreds of years of religious wars they and their ancestors had lived;
religious 'tolerance' was what modern political people were reduced to because the alternative was often, even among the multiplicity of purely western Christian sectarians, not survivable.
And contrast it with what even an ideal scenario might have looked like, back then;
and contrast that with the dramatic political and religious changes America has gone through;
and contrast that with the dramatic changes the world around the US has gone through, and has come to look like, politically and religiously;
and contrast that with the history of Islam, and its relations with Western Europe,
to begin to decide how to proceed.
The conflicts between the orthodox and muslims, in Eastern Europe, does not bode well for religious 'toleration' between Islam and the US, going forward.
Certain types of religious belief are compatible, loosely, or at least reconciled, after a long struggle, with separation of church and state; others are not.
Why invite disaster?
How many mosques are there in, eg, Japan?
Two: Fukuoka, and Kobe. Until 09, there was only one, Kobe, apparently.
religious 'tolerance' was what modern political people were reduced to because the alternative was often, even among the multiplicity of purely western Christian sectarians, not survivable.
And contrast it with what even an ideal scenario might have looked like, back then;
and contrast that with the dramatic political and religious changes America has gone through;
and contrast that with the dramatic changes the world around the US has gone through, and has come to look like, politically and religiously;
and contrast that with the history of Islam, and its relations with Western Europe,
to begin to decide how to proceed.
The conflicts between the orthodox and muslims, in Eastern Europe, does not bode well for religious 'toleration' between Islam and the US, going forward.
Certain types of religious belief are compatible, loosely, or at least reconciled, after a long struggle, with separation of church and state; others are not.
Why invite disaster?
How many mosques are there in, eg, Japan?
Two: Fukuoka, and Kobe. Until 09, there was only one, Kobe, apparently.
RE A PUBLISHING MIRACLE DETROIT TURNED AROUND OVERNIGHT
No big political or economic changes having been accomplished, except to lay off, pare down, bail out, and bankruptcy, the industry.
Now pundits say they are producing for the long term, turning a profit, yet no real Wall Street changes of attitude re the short term approach to their, and all others', securities. No big changes in their basic 'competitiveness', etc.
How can this be, you might ask?
Answer: A publishing miracle, much like Medjugorje, or something like that, a religious miracle, a sighting.
Now pundits say they are producing for the long term, turning a profit, yet no real Wall Street changes of attitude re the short term approach to their, and all others', securities. No big changes in their basic 'competitiveness', etc.
How can this be, you might ask?
Answer: A publishing miracle, much like Medjugorje, or something like that, a religious miracle, a sighting.
RE EDITORIAL RE GERMANY ECONOMIC GROWTH
The PPP must be a different animal, over there.
Maybe it also has to do with only having 16, instead of, say, 50, states?
Remember Ben Hur?
How many horses pulled Judah Ben Hur's chariot against Messala?
Question:
Isn't even 16 still way too many, going forward?
Not that a small number is, by itself, necessarily dispositive; there are notable counterexamples with only one. (France has only one state, with multilocal reps to parliament.)
Put it this way, a necessary but not sufficient condition for dominance, is constitutional elimination of a multitude of semi independent, 'dynastic' in their way, checks-or-balances-driven, regional states.
Most uninformed, and conservative, often liberal too, Americans
(it hardly matters, middle of the roaders too, they are all more or less uninformed)
want to go 'back' (1776) to 'states' rights'.
Question:
If that were so good, why then not counties', 'the Crown' no longer a 'threat', or say, individual cities', rights, as paramount, as even better?
Why not then direct democracy referenda, to eliminate the bad, old, big, state governments, keeping good local free market citizens down and back?
Otherwise, those good, hard working, laissez faire individuals would undoubtedly flourish, in the global marketplace without bad state or federal government constraints.
Coincidentally, there are hundreds of local, city/city, city/county, or county/county, etc., 'rivalries' around the country, mainly torrents in teacups, that have been mainly good only to distract their denizens from bigger picture political and economic problems, and to enrich the pockets of local print media.
I won't name any names. I was going to say something like, 'you know who you are'.
But, unfortunately, you probably don't.
Often, these local rivalries are driven, behind the scenes, by rivalries between big regional or national power, telecomm, or media, or whatever, providers, usually well endowed private companies. Often a sign of this situation is the naming rights exercised by these powerful entities, so that locals know that good corporate citizens are all around, helping them.
Maybe it also has to do with only having 16, instead of, say, 50, states?
Remember Ben Hur?
How many horses pulled Judah Ben Hur's chariot against Messala?
Question:
Isn't even 16 still way too many, going forward?
Not that a small number is, by itself, necessarily dispositive; there are notable counterexamples with only one. (France has only one state, with multilocal reps to parliament.)
Put it this way, a necessary but not sufficient condition for dominance, is constitutional elimination of a multitude of semi independent, 'dynastic' in their way, checks-or-balances-driven, regional states.
Most uninformed, and conservative, often liberal too, Americans
(it hardly matters, middle of the roaders too, they are all more or less uninformed)
want to go 'back' (1776) to 'states' rights'.
Question:
If that were so good, why then not counties', 'the Crown' no longer a 'threat', or say, individual cities', rights, as paramount, as even better?
Why not then direct democracy referenda, to eliminate the bad, old, big, state governments, keeping good local free market citizens down and back?
Otherwise, those good, hard working, laissez faire individuals would undoubtedly flourish, in the global marketplace without bad state or federal government constraints.
Coincidentally, there are hundreds of local, city/city, city/county, or county/county, etc., 'rivalries' around the country, mainly torrents in teacups, that have been mainly good only to distract their denizens from bigger picture political and economic problems, and to enrich the pockets of local print media.
I won't name any names. I was going to say something like, 'you know who you are'.
But, unfortunately, you probably don't.
Often, these local rivalries are driven, behind the scenes, by rivalries between big regional or national power, telecomm, or media, or whatever, providers, usually well endowed private companies. Often a sign of this situation is the naming rights exercised by these powerful entities, so that locals know that good corporate citizens are all around, helping them.
Friday, August 13, 2010
RE SOME ECONOMISTS, WITH MAVERICK ENTREPRENEUR EXECUTIVE QUARTERBACKS IN THE SADDLE: SARATOGA CARTOON HORSE SEASON: TEAM PLAY
RE THE ARTICLE, NYT,
"IN SARATOGA SPRINGS, CATERING TO THE HORSE SET"
We won't worry about the food issue right now..........
MISE EN SCENE FOR A CARTOON
PRELIMINARY SKETCH:
THE MAVERICK in competition AT SARATOGA
Why not show a cartoon, a propos "the Season", with a few of our favorite cartoon individuals, cavorting ensemble AT SARATOGA?
The BP CEO was embarrassed on his yachting outing 'while Rome Burned' so to speak, why not, also, this?
Let's say that the EQUINE 'economist' is doing all the, ostensibly, 'heavy lifting', even though his 'quarterback' RIDER, so to speak, and quite ironically, is none other than the inimitable "Maverick Executive", say, whip in hand?
The Maverick might also look rather 'Presidential', and the trusty steed might resemble, say, Bernanke, or even Krugman, for the moment, a little.
I am going to have to leave the fleshing out of some of these hilarious concepts for future posts, but I am sure you can already see,
just as at the end of say, Casablanca, Rick (the Maverick Executive Entrepreneur) and Louis (The Economist Horse), cantering leisurely off into the rainy distance,
'I can see this is the beginning of a beautiful relationship'.
One might also wish to quote Laslow's famous line, "Welcome back to the fight,..." but that is not on the cards........
"IN SARATOGA SPRINGS, CATERING TO THE HORSE SET"
We won't worry about the food issue right now..........
MISE EN SCENE FOR A CARTOON
PRELIMINARY SKETCH:
THE MAVERICK in competition AT SARATOGA
Why not show a cartoon, a propos "the Season", with a few of our favorite cartoon individuals, cavorting ensemble AT SARATOGA?
The BP CEO was embarrassed on his yachting outing 'while Rome Burned' so to speak, why not, also, this?
Let's say that the EQUINE 'economist' is doing all the, ostensibly, 'heavy lifting', even though his 'quarterback' RIDER, so to speak, and quite ironically, is none other than the inimitable "Maverick Executive", say, whip in hand?
The Maverick might also look rather 'Presidential', and the trusty steed might resemble, say, Bernanke, or even Krugman, for the moment, a little.
I am going to have to leave the fleshing out of some of these hilarious concepts for future posts, but I am sure you can already see,
just as at the end of say, Casablanca, Rick (the Maverick Executive Entrepreneur) and Louis (The Economist Horse), cantering leisurely off into the rainy distance,
'I can see this is the beginning of a beautiful relationship'.
One might also wish to quote Laslow's famous line, "Welcome back to the fight,..." but that is not on the cards........
THE FED RED HERRING Scylla Charybdis CARTOON
Krugman seems to make some important points.
Nevertheless, speaking of eg Japan, here's a mise en scene for a Bernanke cartoon:
Bernanke is Odysseus, navigating his stultifera navis , a small sail boat, between two rocky cliffs, but they aren't merely cliffs on either side, they are enormous high mountain ranges marked China, Japan, Korea, India, Mexico, Indonesia.
Scylla/Inflation sits at the nearest precipice to the little craft on one side, reaching down with tentacles dangerously close to Odysseus, the craft tipping dangerously and almost smaller than Bernanke himself, at center, bottom.
Just to the other side of the craft from Scylla, a large whirlpool CHARYBDIS, marked also DEFLATION, mountains rising up on that side of the illustration to the edges of the paper, the craft almost being sucked down into it the whirlpool.
Huge trees growing on the mountains, all mountains each labelled also, as well as countries' names mentioned, "MERELY EXCESS CAPACITY".
The caption above:
STRUCTURAL PROBLEMS
THE CAPTION BELOW:
STRATEGIC PARTNERS ALL IN THIS TOGETHER
One might also point out, as Japan scholars (not me!) have long mentioned, it is a fundamental mistake to try to compare Japan and the US, even on so, apparently, 'fundamental' (not) a level, as that of 'economics' (pseudo discipline). SAY APPLES AND ORANGES, pace Posen.
Nevertheless, speaking of eg Japan, here's a mise en scene for a Bernanke cartoon:
Bernanke is Odysseus, navigating his stultifera navis , a small sail boat, between two rocky cliffs, but they aren't merely cliffs on either side, they are enormous high mountain ranges marked China, Japan, Korea, India, Mexico, Indonesia.
Scylla/Inflation sits at the nearest precipice to the little craft on one side, reaching down with tentacles dangerously close to Odysseus, the craft tipping dangerously and almost smaller than Bernanke himself, at center, bottom.
Just to the other side of the craft from Scylla, a large whirlpool CHARYBDIS, marked also DEFLATION, mountains rising up on that side of the illustration to the edges of the paper, the craft almost being sucked down into it the whirlpool.
Huge trees growing on the mountains, all mountains each labelled also, as well as countries' names mentioned, "MERELY EXCESS CAPACITY".
The caption above:
STRUCTURAL PROBLEMS
THE CAPTION BELOW:
STRATEGIC PARTNERS ALL IN THIS TOGETHER
One might also point out, as Japan scholars (not me!) have long mentioned, it is a fundamental mistake to try to compare Japan and the US, even on so, apparently, 'fundamental' (not) a level, as that of 'economics' (pseudo discipline). SAY APPLES AND ORANGES, pace Posen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)