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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)